Web auditing in any place on the planet http://timecops.net/english.html
The
Technical Bulletins
of
Dianetics and Scientology
by
L. Ron Hubbard
FOUNDER OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY
Volume
XVI
1980-1984
Download Volume XVI https://yadi.sk/i/Nej2seYwzkqAC
___________________________________________________________________
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
HCOB 23 July R Confessional Repair List—LCRE 119
HCOB 25 July RA Course Supervisor Correction 126
List Word List
HCOB 29 July Criminals and Psychiatry 128
HCOB 30 July The Nature of a Being 131
HCOB 2 Sept. Repair Correction List Words 133
HCOB 11 Sept. L4BRB Word List 135
HCOB 16 Sept.R PTS RD Correction List Word 137
List
HCOB 17 Sept.R I L3RH Word List 139
NED Series 20R
HCOB 17 Sept.RA II Green Form Word List 141
HCOB 28 Sept.R III Confessional Repair List—LCRE 144
Words List
HCOB 6 Oct. I General Staff Confessional List 146
Confessional Form 2R
HCOB 6 Oct. II Supervisor Confessional List 151
Confessional Form 4R
HCOB 23 Oct.R II Chart of Abilities Gained for 156
Lower Levels and Expanded
Lower Grades
HCOB 4 Nov. I PRD Confessional List 160
Confessional Form 10RA
HCOB S Nov. I Returning Tours Confessional 165
Confessional Form 9RA
HCOB 8 Nov.R C/S Series 53RM Long Form 169
Word List
HCOB 12 Nov.R I Case Supervisor Correction List 171
HCOB 12 Nov. II Registrar and Sales Personnel 180
Confessional List
Confessional Form 6RA
HCOB 18 Nov.R I Auditor Correction List Auditor 187
Recovery Word List
HCOB 18 Nov.R II Case Supervisor Correction List 189
Word List
HCOB 23 Nov. Case Supervisor Confessional 191
Confessional Form 8RA
HCOB 2 Dec. Floating Needle and TA Position 200
Modified
HCOB 19 Dec.R Rehab Tech 202
HCOB 21 Dec.RA The Scientology Drug Rundown 215
HCOB 23 Dec.R I Executive Correction List 225
HCOB 23 Dec.R II Executive Correction List Word 235
List
HCOB 25 Dec. I LRH Communicator Confessional 237
List
Confessional Form 12R
HCOB 25 Dec. II Flag Rep Confessional List 244
Confessional Form 11R
1981
HCOB 29 Jan.RA I FES Checklists and Summary 251
Auditor Admin Series 24RB
HCOB 29 Jan. II HC Outpoint-Pluspoint Lists RB 271
Words List
HCOB 13 Feb.R Dictionaries 273
Word Clearing Series 67R
HCOB 26 Mar.R II Expanded Green Form 40RF 278
Word List
HCOB 31 Mar.R "Heavy Drug History" Defined 280
HCOB I Apr.R II Interviews 283
HCOB 10 Apr.R Reach and Withdraw 289
HCOB 4 May RA Study Green Form 296
Study Series 10RA
HCOB 5 May R Study Green Form Word List 310
HCOB 23 July Pregnancy and Auditing 313
HCOB 29 July R I Full Assist Checklists for Injuries 314
and Illnesses
HCOB 15 Sept. The Criminal Mind 337
HCOB 6 Oct. Tech Films and Verbal Tech 341
HCOB 7 Oct.R Method 3 Word Clearing 343
Word Clearing Series 31RD
HCOB 8 Oct.R III Word Clearing Method 2 347
Word Clearing Series 6RB
Tape Course Series 9RA
HCOB 12 Nov.RD Grade Chart Streamlined for 352
Lower Grades
HCOB 13 Nov. What Tone 40 Is 359
HCOB 15 Nov.R The Sunshine Rundown 362
HCOB 29 Nov. Dianetics and Scientology Compared 363
to Nineteenth Century Practices
HCOB 5 Dec.R Setting Up and Using a Reel-to- 364
Reel Tape Player
Tape Course Series 7R
HCOB 12 Dec. The Theory of the New Grade 370
Chart
HCOB 14 Dec. The State of Clear 372
HCOB 15 Dec. New Grade Chart Pc/-Pre-OT 374
Programing
HCOB 17 Dec. Post Purpose Clearing Revived 375
HCOB 26 Dec. Post Purpose Clearing for 377
Management Teams and
Executives
1982
HCOB l9 Jan. II High School Indoctrination 381
HCOB 15 Feb. Freedom of Speech 384
HCOB 17 Feb. Prejudice 385
HCOB 20 Feb. Overts 386
HCOB 6 Mar.R Confessional Tech Policies 387
HCOB 8 Mar.R Confessionals and the 389
No-Interference Zone
HCOB 10 Mar. Confessionals—Ethics Reports 391
Required
Book Mar. Understanding the E-Meter 394
HCOB 20 Mar.R Standards 395
HCOB 25 Mar.R Objectives Not Biting 396
HCOB 31 Mar.R Basic Study Missed Withhold 398
Study Series 11R
Word Clearing Series 68R
HCOB 11 Apr. Sec Checking Implants 399
HCOB 13 Apr. Still Needle and Confessionals 402
HCOB 16 Apr. More on PTS Handling 403
HCOB 26 Apr. The Criminal Mind and 405
the Psychs
HCOB 6 May The Cause of Crime 407
HCOB 10 May OT Levels 408
HCOB 11 July I Questionable Auditing 409
Repair List
HCOB 11 July II Questionable Auditing 413
HCOB 10 Aug. OT Maxims 414
HCOB 25 Aug. The Joy of Creating 416
Art Series 10
HCOB 26 Aug. Pain and Sex 417
HCOB 28 Sept. Mixing Rundowns and Repairs 419
C/S Series 115
HCOB 13 Oct. Ethics and the C/S 423
C/S Series 116
HCOB 27 Dec. Training and OT 427
1983
HCOB 8 Mar. Handling PTS Situations 431
HCOB 12 Apr. List of Keeping Scientology 433 Working Series
HCOB 3 May Who or What Is a "C/S"? 435
C/S Series 117
HCOB 7 Aug. Robotic TRs 440
HCOB 8 Aug. I Cycling through TRs on a 442
Professional TR Course
HCOB 19 Aug. OT III Course Posh-Up 444
HCOB 27 Aug. Words and Associations 445
Word Clearing Series 69
HCOB 10 Sept. PTSness and Disconnection 446
HCOB 23 Oct. Sec Checking: Note 450
1984
HCOB 3 Jan. III Radiation and Liquids 453
Purif RD Series 7
HCOB 10 Jan. The Use of Demonstration 454
Study Series 12
HCOB 16 Jan.RA I The Happiness Rundown 457
HRD Series 1RA
HCOB 16 Jan. II Repair of Past Cramming 460
Cramming Series 17
HCOB 17 Jan. Happiness Rundown Basics 461
HRD Series 2
HCOB 18 Jan. How to Audit the HRD 464
HRD Series 3
HCOB 19 Jan. Happiness Rundown 469
Command Sheets
HRD Series 4
HCOB 20 Jan. HRD Precepts Assessment List 516
HRD Series 4-1
HCOB 21 Jan.R I Happiness Rundown Repair 519
List (HRL)
HRD Series 5R
HCOB 21 Jan.RA II C/Sing the Happiness Rundown 524
HRD Series 6RA
HCOB 21 Jan.R III Delivery of the Happiness 528
Rundown to Clears and OTs
HRD Series 7R
HCOB 23 Jan. Drug Rundowns and Radiation 529
HCOB 27 Jan. FSM Breakthrough, New FSM 530
TRs—Controlling a Conversation
HCOB 1 Feb. How to View Art 534
Art Series 11
HCOB 25 Feb. Depth Perspective 537
Art Series 13
HCOB 26 Feb. Color 539
Art Series 14
HCOB 26 Feb. II Art and Integration 542
Art Series 15
Marketing Series 20
HCOB 28 Feb. Pretended PTS 547
C/S Series 118
HCOB 2 Mar.R O/W Write-Ups 550
HCOB 10 Mar. I Message 555
Art Series 16
HCOB 10 Mar. II Oils Can Go Rancid 556
Purif RD Series 8
HCOB 27 Mar. Stalled Dianetic Clear: Solved 558
C/S Series 119
HCOB 5 June R False Purpose Rundown 562
FPRD Series 1R
HCOB 6 June I Rock Slams, More About 564
HCOB 6 June II "Murder Routine" 565
HCOB 6 June III Missed Withhold Handling 566
HCOB 6 June R IV The "Lost Tech" of Handling 567
Overts and Evil Purposes
FPRD Series 2R
HCOB 7 June The Prior Confusion: New Tech 570
Breakthrough
FPRD Series 3
HCOB 8 June Clearing Justifications 572
FPRD Series 4
HCOB 9 June R Auditing the False Purpose 574
Rundown
FPRD Series 5R
HCOB 10 June False Purpose Rundown 582
Commands
FPRD Series 6
HCOB 11 June C/Sing the False Purpose 583
Rundown
FPRD Series 7
HCOB 12 June False Purpose Rundown 588
Auditor Errors
FPRD Series 8
HCOB 13 June R False Purpose Rundown 591
Correction List
FPRD Series 9R
HCOB 14 June False Purpose Rundown 603
Basic Form
FPRD Series 10-A
HCOB 15 June II False Purpose Rundown—Info 608
for Orgs and Missions
HCOB 17 June Evil Purposes and False PR 609
C/S Series 118-1
Books Sept. The Purification Rundown 610
Delivery Manual and Purification:
An Illustrated Answer to Drugs
HCOB 8 Nov.R Security Checker Beingness 611
HCOB 22 Nov. False Purpose Rundown 613
Correction List Word List
FPRD Series 9-1
Subject Index 615
1980
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JANUARY 1980RA
REVISED 8 AUGUST 1983
Remimeo
All Staff
BPI
Purification Rundown Series 3
PURIFICATION RUNDOWN AND ATOMIC WAR
(This data is released as a record of researches and results noted. It cannot be construed as a recommendation of medical treatment or medication and it is undertaken or delivered by anyone on his own responsibility. It is a contribution to scientific thought.)
Refs:
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB Purif RD Series 1R
Rev. 21.4.83 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
PAB 74, 6 Mar. 56 OFFICE IN IRELAND
Ahility 47, ca. mid-May 1957, THE RADIATION PICTURE AND
SCIENTOLOGY
HCOB 3 June 57 EXPLANATION OF
ABERRATIVE CHARACTER OF
RADIATION
PAB 119, 1 Sept. 57 THE BIG AUDITING PROBLEM
HCOB 27 Dec. 65 VITAMINS
Book: All About Radiation
I want Scientologists to live through World War III.
Atomic war has been more or less neglected as a news subject since the late 50s. But that doesn’t make it any less a threat. All it takes is one psychopath politician with access to the war-peace button. And today there are a dozen atomic-armed nations.
Further, the increased use of atomic power for electrical supply (without also developing proper tech and safeguards in its use) poses a nonmilitary threat.
And the deterioration of the upper atmosphere of the planet, by jets and pollutants, is year by year letting more and more sun radiation through to the planetary surface.
Radiation causes a cumulative effect. And, like an engram, has earliersimilars back to a basic engram. The more one is exposed to radiation, the less resistance he has and the more effect the radiation has on him. In other words, a build-up occurs.
The primary purpose of the Purification Rundown is to handle drugs and toxic substances accumulated in the body, and according to the success stories pouring in, it certainly does that.
One of the parts of the Purification Rundown is niacin. The discoveries I made with this vitamin in the 50s began with its apparent effect on radiation exposure. At that time there was a lot of bomb testing and general radiation exposure and we had lots and lots of preclears who had been subjected to atomic tests, atomic accidents and, in at least one case, to materials that had been part of an old atomic explosion. We were engaged in salvaging these people and we succeeded.
As radiation is cumulative, once one has gotten rid of the cumulative effect of it, one would be far less subject to new blasts of it. In other words, once a basic has been run out or handled, new incidents of a similar kind become very minor. While one is not made wholly immune to new incidents, he is far less affected by them.
Completely aside from the physical resurgence experienced in the Purification Rundown when properly and fully done, there is this side-benefit of lessening the consequences of future radiation exposure.
Bombarded by radiation from atomic plant fallout, from lessened atmosphere protection, people today are far more subject to being victims in the time of atomic war. The cumulative effect of radiation has set them up to a rapid demise in the face of heavy atomic fallout.
That brings us to the interesting probability that those who have had a full and competent Purification Rundown will survive where others not so fortunate won’t.
And that poses the interesting possibility that only Scientologists will be functioning in areas experiencing heavy fallout in an atomic war.
Also, they’ll know how to recover from a new exposure—another short use of niacin. And a bit of auditing, of course.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JANUARY 1980
Remimeo
ART SERlES 9
To do a montage, shot or work of art that talks one must:
1. Figure out what your message is.
2. Decide to communicate the message.
3. Put things or arrangements in that contribute to the message.
4. Take out or exclude things or arrangements which don’t contribute to it.
It also helps to know what is meant by “message.” (Definition: Message is a unit communication of a significance.)
It also helps to know the definition of “montage,” which is a series of shots with one message.
One should also know the definition of a shot and should understand that a short cut or glimpse of something is just a blip or some frames as opposed to a scene or a “picture,” and there is really a missing word for this in the English language.
A scene is a picture with a message in its own right.
A shot is anything and it has no message in its own right and doesn’t talk unless connected to other shots or scenes.
One should also know what is a sequence and what is an action sequence.
A sequence is a series of scenes related by location or general subject. In films or a photo story it is comparable to a chapter in a book.
An action sequence is often fast cut to give the appearance of rapid movement and will never be a montage, as each picture in it is a scene and therefore has its own message.
Individual shots in a montage have little meaning in themselves individually but when cut together deliver a single message.
By confusing an action sequence and a montage or a montage shot and a scene, one gets very little audience reaction and after all, that’s the name of the game.
Doing things for self-satisfaction is for professors who can’t.
All of this comes under the heading of integration. Integration consists of uniting the similar.
If you try to unite the totally dissimilar and unrelated, you don’t have integration and you don’t have art. You have chaos.
The principle of integration applies to all editing and composition in all fields.
The above 1, 2, 3 and 4 is a formula that helps one to achieve clear aesthetic communication of art.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 FEBRUARY 1980R
REVISED 18 OCTOBER 1986
Remimeo
All Registrars
All Case Supervisors (Also issued as HCO PL
All Auditors 11 Feb 80R, same title)
All Ethics Officers
Dept of Special Affairs
Purification Rundown Series 12
ILLEGAL PCs, ACCEPTANCE OF
ADDITION REGARDING PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB/PL 6 Dec. 76RB ILLEGAL PCS, ACCEPTANCE OF
Rev. 8.4.88 HIGH CRIME BULLETIN
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RC Purif RD Series 1
Rev. 31.7.85 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
The Church policy concerning illegal pcs, HCOB/PL 6 Dec. 76RB, ILLEGAL PCs, ACCEPTANCE OF, HIGH CRIME BULLETIN, applies to the Purification Rundown just as it does to all processing services.
While cases who have been damaged by psychiatry could possibly benefit from the Purification Rundown, it would have to be administered under clinical conditions and medical supervision and at the signed responsibility of those responsible for the case. Such cases could not be included in the general normal run of persons undergoing the Purification Rundown.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 14 FEBRUARY 1980R
REVISED 31 JULY 1985
Remimeo
All Orgs
All Missions (Note All mineral and vitamin research was done
C/S Hats under medical supervision.)
Purif Admin
l/C Hats
Purification Rundown Series 4
RESEARCH DATA ON NUTRITIONAL VITAMIN INCREASES
ON THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB Purif RD Series 1
Rev. 21.4.83 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
HCOB 3 Jan. 80RA Purif RD Series 3
Rev. 8.8.83 PURIFICATION RUNDOWN AND
ATOMIC WAR
HCOB 3 Jan. 84 Purif RD Series 7
RADIATION AND LIQUIDS
(This data is released as a record of researches and results noted. It cannot be construed as a recommendation of medical treatment or medication and it is undertaken by anyone on his own responsibility.)
The basic bulletin on the Purification Rundown (HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB, Purif RD Series 1, THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM) contains, as a record of researches and results, the approximate daily amounts of the various vitamins and minerals on which most persons are started on the rundown.
These beginning dosages are listed below:
NIACIN: 100 mg (or less, depending upon
individual tolerance at the start).
VITAMIN A: approximately 5000 IU.
VITAMIN D: approximately 400 IU.
VITAMIN C: approximately 250-1000 mg, depending upon individual
tolerance.
VITAMIN E: approximately 800 IU.
VITAMIN B1: 250-500 mg.
VITAMIN B approximately 2 tablets per day,
COMPLEX: containing the same amounts of B2 and B6.
CAL-MAG: at least one glass daily, and a multi-mineral tablet con taining a balanced combination of multi-minerals.
Vitamin B Complex: The vitamin B-complex tablet that was used in the original Purification Rundown research was one which contained:
B1 — 50 mg. Folic Acid — 100 mcg.
B2 — 50 mg. Biotin — 50 mcg.
B6 — 50 mg. Choline — 50 mg.
B12 — 50 mcg. Niacinamide — 50 mg.
Pantothenic Acid — 50 mg. Inositol — 50 mg.
PABA — 50 mg.
all in a base of lecithin, parsley, rice bran, watercress and alfalfa.
The same tablet or one with similar content is still used very successfully in delivering the Purification Rundown.
(Special Note on Niacinamide: The majority of vitamin B-complex tablets on the market include niacinamide in small amounts, which is the substance invented by someone to keep an individual from turning on a niacin flush. Therefore, as such, niacinamide is worthless. The likelihood is that this amount of niacinamide in a B-complex tablet acts only upon the niacin content in that specific tablet to eliminate any flush caused by its own niacin content. Results from the piloting of the rundown, where plenty of niacin flush was experienced on different dosages of niacin itself [in combination with the flanking vitamins and minerals], indicate that the inclusion of niacinamide in the B complex had little if any effect upon the flush that resulted from the additional dosages of niacin taken. However, where a B-complex tablet can be found that includes niacin rather than niacinamide, that would be the preferable tablet to use. It is also possible to have a B-complex tablet especially made up that includes actual niacin, INSTEAD OF niacinamide, in amounts equal to the Bl and B6 amounts, particularly if one is ordering it in fairly large amounts. Note: Where a B-complex tablet that includes niacin is used, this adds that much more to the daily niacin intake and this must be taken into consideration when increasing niacin and B-complex dosages.)
Mineral Tablet: The multi-mineral tablet used contains the following mineral amounts per each 9 tablets. In other words, one tablet would provide only l/g of the following mineral amounts:
500 mg calcium
250 mg magnesium
18 mg iron
15 mg zinc
4 mg manganese
2 mg copper
45 mg potassium (protein complex)
.225 mg iodine (kelp).
In the tablet used, the minerals, except the potassium and the iodine, are “chelated”* (bonded with) super amino acids* in a base of selenium, yeast, DNA, RNA, ginseng, alfalfa leaf flour, parsley, watercress and cabbage.
*chelation: is taken from a Greek word meaning “claw.” It is a process by which minerals are held, as if by a claw, by amino acids. This bonding of a mineral with an amino acid exists in nature as a necessary step for the mineral to be absorbed and used by the body. Thus, with this step already provided, the mineral is more easily absorbed and used.
*amino acids: to define them very simply, are basic organic compounds which are essential to the body’s breakdown and absorption of foods.
In the original Purification Rundown research, multi-mineral dosages were started at 1 to 2 tablets daily. Then, as the niacin and other vitamins were increased in proportion to each other, the mineral dosages were increased accordingly in increments of 2 to 3 tablets, 4 to 5 tablets and 5 to 6 tablets.
FURTHER RESEARCH HAS SINCE INDICATED THAT, DUE TO THE LARGE AMOUNTS OF MINERALS LOST IN SWEATING IN THE SAUNA, HIGHER DOSAGES OF MINERALS GIVE MOST OPTIMUM RESULTS. (Ref: HCOB 3 Jan. 84, Purif RD Series 7, RADIATION AND LIQUIDS)
PROPORTIONATE VITAMIN/MINERAL INCREASES
The tables below provide the most current research data on approximately how the vitamins and minerals have been increased, in ratio, when the niacin was increased as the person progressed on the rundown.
The dosages in these tables show the variations of individual tolerances encountered and the ranges of increase which have proven most effective in the majority of cases.
VITAMIN TABLE
This table shows proportionate vitamin increases at various stages of the Rundown.
Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage
1 2 3 4 5
NIACIN 100 to 500 to 1500 to 2500 to 3500 to
400 1400 2400 3400 5000
mg. mg. mg. mg. mg.
VITAMIN A 5000 to 20,000 30,000 50,000 50,000
10,000 IU IU IU IU
IU
VITAMIN D 400 800 1200 2000 2000
IU IU IU IU IU
VITAMIN C 250 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 5 to
1000 3 gm. 4 gm. 5 gm. 6 gm.
mg.
VITAMIN E 800 1200 1600 2000 2400
IU IU IU IU IU
VITAMIN B 2 3 4 5 6
COMPLEX tablets tablets tablets tablets tablets
VITAMIN B, 350 to 400 to 450 to 750 to 800 to
600 650 700 1250 1300
mg. mg. mg. mg. mg.
MINERAL TABLE
The following table shows the approximate mineral amounts which appear to give best results at the various stages of vitamin increase.
Stage Stage Stage Stage Stage
1 2 3 4 5
(All figures in milligrams except those for Cal-Mag)
CALCIUM 500 to 1000 to 1500 to 2000 to 2500 to
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
MAGNESIUM 250 to 500 to 750 to 1000 to 1250 to
500 750 1000 1250 IS00
IRON 18-36 36-54 54-72 72-90 90-108
ZINC 15-30 30-45 45-60 60-75 75-90
MANGANESE 4-8 8-12 12-16 16-20 20-24
COPPER 2-4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12
POTASSIUM 45-90 90-135 135-180 180-225 225-270
IODINE .225 to .450 to .675 to .900 to 1.125 to
.450 .675 .900 1.125 1.350
CAL-MAG 1 - 11/2 1 - 2 1 - 2 2 - 3 2 - 3
glasses glasses glasses glasses glasses
____________
(Note: The number of mineral tablets to be taken would depend upon the strength of the particular tablet used. The importance is that one gets the necessary amounts of the minerals. It has been found that large tablets may not be as easily broken down and absorbed into the body as smaller tablets may be. Thus, one might not get the same amount of minerals from a large tablet as from several smaller tablets even though the large tablet might contain the same amount of minerals.)
HOW TO READ THE TABLES
As a clarification, first of all, the figures on these tables designating points of increase (stages l, 2, 3, 4 and 5) do NOT refer to the first, second, third, fourth and fifth days of the rundown. They refer to approximate “stages” of vitamin and mineral increase (in relation to the niacin increase) that an individual goes through on the rundown.
On the vitamin table, under stage 1, the first figure given for each vitamin shows the usual starting dosage of that vitamin used for most individuals. The range then shown under stage l indicates how these starting dosages may be increased within a few days or within a week or so, depending upon the niacin reaction the person is experiencing.
On the mineral table. under stage 1, the first column of figures (reading downward) gives the usual starting mineral dosages for most individuals. The range under stage 1 shows the possible rate of mineral increase during this first phase of the rundown.
The same applies to the increments shown at stages 2, 3, 4 and 5 on both tables.
EXAMPLE:
Person A starts the rundown on 100 mg of niacin plus the other beginning increments of vitamins, per the vitamin table. His beginning increments of minerals, per the mineral table, are approximately: calcium 500 mg; magnesium 250 mg; iron 18 mg; zinc 15 mg; manganese 4 mg; copper 2 mg; potassium 45 mg and iodine .225 mg.
He continues with these daily dosages until the niacin effects have diminished—in his case this occurs on, let us say, the third day of the rundown. At that point his niacin dosage is increased to 200 mg daily, with the other daily vitamins and minerals increased proportionately, and he continues on those dosages until the niacin effects have diminished. Progressing in this way, by the seventh day of the rundown his vitamin and mineral dosages have been increased up to the levels given in stage 2 of the tables. After the ninth day, his vitamins and minerals may have been increased all the way up to stage 3 as shown on the tables. And he continues in this way all the way up through the levels of dosages at stage 5.
This varies from one individual to the next.
Person B, for example, starts on 100 mg of niacin and the accompanying vitamin and mineral dosages, and may then require a week or more to work up to the levels of vitamin and mineral dosages shown at stage 2. He may then move rapidly through stage 2, take another week to move through stage 3 and actually complete the rundown at some point on stage 4.
There is no rote pattern to be followed. It is totally a matter of standardly applying the data given as to when the niacin should be increased. (Ref: HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB, Rev. 21.4.83, Purif RD Series 1, THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM) That is the factor that may vary widely from one individual to the next.
The tables above, however, show the guidelines which were followed, per the most recent research, for increasing the vitamin and mineral increments proportionately at the times the niacin was increased.
ADDITIONAL NOTES ON VITAMINS AND MINERALS
It should be stressed here that individual tolerances were and always must be taken into consideration in each case. Quantities of vitamin C especially would need to be carefully increased according to the person’s tolerance of it, as too much vitamin C can result in stomach upsets or diarrhea for some people.
Additionally, vitamins and minerals should NOT be taken on an empty stomach, as they could cause stomach burn. They should be taken after meals or, if taken between meals, with yogurt.
Most multiple mineral formulas include the major mineral elements required by the body but not all of the trace minerals.
“Trace” minerals are those minerals which have been found essential to maintaining life, even though they are found in the body in very small—i.e., “trace”—amounts.
The main trace minerals currently include cobalt, copper, iodine, manganese, molybdenum, zinc, selenium and chromium. Tin was also added as an essential trace mineral as late as 1970.
Nutritional researchists are the first to admit that the work in this field is very far from complete, and there will undoubtedly be other trace minerals added to the list as such research is continued.
Currently, also, there are fairly wide differences of opinion among nutritionists as to the minimum daily requirements of the various minerals and especially the trace minerals.
Minerals are found in a wide variety of foods. Natural foods, undamaged by processing, are the best sources of minerals as they exist in unprocessed foods in the combinations in which they are most effective. But minerals can also be lacking in foods grown in mineral-depleted soil. Additionally, of course, there is no one food that supplies them all.
Therefore, it may be necessary to use more than one type of multi-mineral tablet to ensure one is getting all of the minerals, including the trace minerals, that are required by the body.
Note: These vitamin and mineral tables do not include any additional vitamins or minerals which might be needed in cases of specific deficiencies an individual might have. Any such particular deficiency would need to be determined by a medical doctor and remedied with the additional vitamin or mineral dosages recommended.
____________
Four of the more informative books on the subject of nutritional vitamins and minerals are the following by Adelle Davis: Let’s Get Well, Let’s Eat Right to Keep Fit, Let’s Cook It Right and Let’s Have Healthy Children.
____________
The additional research data released in this issue is not to be construed as a recommendation of medical treatment or medication. It is given here as a record of food supplements in the form of nutritional vitamins and minerals which appeared to be effective in the piloting and development of the Purification Rundown.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Compilation assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 FEBRUARY 1980
Remimeo
Purification Rundown Series 6
THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN:
PREGNANCY AND BREAST-FEEDING
Refs:
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RA Purif RD Series 1
Rev. 4.12.79 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
Book: Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health
Pregnant women should not be routed onto the Purification Rundown.
During pregnancy there is a certain amount of fluid exchange between the mother and the fetus, via the placenta. It has been found that on the Purification Rundown, toxins which might have been lying dormant in the body are released and eliminated via sweat-out. In the case of pregnancy, some of these toxins, instead of being eliminated, could be transmitted to the fetus in a flow of fluids from the mother to the unborn child. There is no reason to risk the possibility of subjecting the unborn child to the effects of such toxins which, even if present but remaining dormant, might not otherwise reach him.
Similarly, mothers who are breast-feeding their babies should not do the Purification Rundown until the baby is no longer being breast-fed, as any toxins released during the rundown could be imparted to the baby in the mother’s milk.
The Purification Rundown would be done by the mother after the birth of the child and after any final medical check which pronounced the mother in good health, and, in the case of breast-feeding, when the baby had been completely weaned and was on his own formula.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MARCH 1980
Remimeo
DIETS, COMMENTS UPON
(Nothing in this HCOB should be interpreted as prescribing or recommending dieting or diets. It is a summary of personal opinions reached after research into the field.)
Locating and remedying deficiencies and excesses in vitamins, minerals, enzymes, sugar, protein, oil and fats, carbohydrates and bulk fiber, as well as other dietary elements, is the keynote of dieting. No special substance or food or abstinence from it is a whole answer.
Diet should be considered a subject where one seeks a balance of body support elements and determines quantity.
The problem of weight is resolved by counting daily calories of consumption of the diet as a whole. This is the only contemporary successful method which proves itself. Fasting, magic foods eaten to the exclusion of others, dozens of dietary fads alike tend to be more harmful than beneficial.
At times, personal allergies have to be taken into account. In some persons, disease or illness has to be allowed for. But in both cases the artificial creation of deficiencies in vitamins, minerals and other elements must be guarded against and made up for in some other way.
When large dosages of certain vitamins, minerals or foodstuffs are given, an artificial deficiency can apparently be created in others not given. Increase of some elements, just by the fact of being increased, demands increases in others. When intake of some elements is markedly increased, balance must be maintained by proportionately increasing others. A vitamin or mineral does not work alone—it must be accompanied by other elements with which it combines to do its work. It will even rob bones, muscles and tissue to obtain the missing elements. Artificial deficiencies can be so created.
Any vital substance on which body support depends, when too reduced or omitted from consumption, can be depended upon to result in a nonoptimum physical condition.
When very obvious, it becomes a “disease.” And when less obvious and even undetected, it becomes a “not feeling good.”
There is a distinct possibility (after mental and spiritual factors) that the largest distinctive contributive factor in aging is the composite of cumulative deficiencies.
Predisposition to other types of illness is in many instances occasioned by these deficiencies even when the precipitation is viral or bacterial.
Prolongation of illness is guaranteed when deficiencies remain present and unremedied.
A lot of people probably go on drugs because they feel so terrible due to dietary deficiencies. And drugs, themselves, cause wholesale vitamin and mineral deficiencies, which then progressively worsen. Recovery from drugs requires a full repair of these deficiencies.
The bugbear is that man does not know what man’s optimum diet really is. And another difficulty arises in that not all essential elements to life support have been isolated.
Improvement in these two areas of research is what will produce greater longevity and better health for man, barring mental factors, which of course we have now isolated and resolved.
As we are dealing with a being in an organism, our work is impeded by man’s slow progress in biochemical and physiological spheres and the attendant authoritarianisms and fadisms which always arise around uncodified or littleknown subjects.
The most useful published, popular compilations on the subject of diets and biochemistry to date were done by the late Adelle Davis in her four books: Let’s Get Well; Let’s Eat Right to Keep Fit; Let’s Cook It Right and Let’s Have Healthy Children.
An improperly fed and cared for body is a kind of trap. And as long as one is pushing a body around, he should make a sincere attempt, without becoming its slave, to provide it with the fuel, care and exercise required to keep it functioning.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 MARCH 1980RA
REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Remimeo
C/Ses
Qual/Tech
Auditors
Cramming Officers
Supervisors
C/S Series 109RA
Purification Rundown Series 11
CONDITIONAL STEP AFTER
THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RC Purif RD Series 1
Rev. 31.7.85 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
HCOB 16 Oct. 78 REPAIR CORRECTION LIST
HCOB 24 Nov. 73RF I C/S Series 53RM LF
Rev. 26.7.86 HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S
HCOB 24 Nov. 73RE II C/S Series 53RM SF
Rev. 26.7.86 SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S
HCOB 2 June 78RB CRAMMING REPAIR ASSESSMENT LIST
Rev. 31.3.82
Deposits of drugs and biochemical substances in the body can prevent or inhibit case gain. They can also impede learning. The Purification Rundown is now a very early step on the Grade Chart so that a person can get the most possible gains from his later auditing.
Where a person has had case actions, repair, cramming or hatting before doing the Purification Rundown, he may not have benefited from these actions to the extent he could have, due to the effects of unhandled drugs. A person who has had extensive repair, little gain on auditing actions or trouble in cramming or hatting before doing the Purification Rundown may need a sort-out on those previous actions once the Purification Rundown is complete so that any errors can be handled. (The majority of such preclears would be drug cases who received auditing or cramming actions before the release of the Purification Rundown in early 1980.)
In such a case it may be necessary to:
1. CORRECT ANY FAILED AUDITING REPAIR HE WAS GIVEN BEFORE THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN.
2. REPAIR AND COMPLETE ANY FAILED AUDITING PROCESS HE WAS GIVEN BEFORE THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN.
3. REPAIR ANY FAILED CRAMMING, CORRECTION OR ESTO ACTIONS HE WAS GIVEN BEFORE OR DURING THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN.
These steps are not necessarily done in the sequence laid out above, and they are not actions that would be done on every pc. Not every pc will need them. However, they are steps that should be considered by the C/S in programing a pc who has had auditing or cramming prior to doing the Purification Rundown.
Any needed repair should be programed standardly per the C/S Series HCOBs, in particular the following:
HCOB 10 June 71 I C/S Series 44R
PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS
HCOB 24 Nov. 73RE II C/S Series 53RM SF
Rev. 26.7.86 SHORT HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S
HCOB 15 Sept. 71 C/S Series 60
THE WORST TANGLE
HCOB 20 Apr. 72 II C/S Series 78
PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY
AND W/C ERROR CORRECTION
HCOB 28 Sept. 82 C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1980
TRs Courses
Q&A, THE REAL DEFINITION
There are several definitions for the term “Q&A.”
In Scientologese it is often used to mean “undecisive; not making up one’s mind.”
Q stands for “Question.” A stands for “Answer.” In “perfect duplication” the answer to a question would be the question.
The real definition as it applies to TRs is “The Question proceeding from the last Answer.”
Example:
Question: How are you?
Answer: I’m fine.
Question: How fine?
Answer: My stomach hurts.
Question: When did your stomach begin hurting?
Answer: About four.
Question: Where were you at four? -
etc., etc.
The above example is a grievous auditing fault. As each question is based on the last answer, it is called “Q and A.” It could also be called “Q based on last A.”
It never completes any cycle. It tangles pcs up. It violates TR 3. Don’t do it.
I trust the above handles any confusion on this subject.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 APRIL 1980
Remimeo
Cl IV Auditors and Above
Acad Supers and Above
AUDITOR BEINGNESS
Refs:
HCOB 16 Aug. 71R II TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED
Rev. 5.7.78
HCOB 24 Dec. 79R TRs BASICS RESURRECTED
Rev. 19.6.86
HCOB 26 Apr. 71 I TRs AND COGNITIONS
HCOB 10 June 79 Art Series 8
A PROFESSIONAL
The data in this bulletin is for use by a student auditor or an auditor only after he has been thoroughly trained and drilled in TRs, including Upper Indoc TRs, and after he has been trained in metering.
When one is free of uncertainties on the technical basics of his profession and has mastered the mechanics of those technical basics, he can move up into another strata and assume the full beingness of a professional in his field.
So an auditor applies the auditor beingness step after he has acquired a good mastery of his basics, TRs and metering. To do otherwise would be out-gradient, out-sequence and would rarely, if ever, be successful.
_____________
BEINGNESS, correctly defined, is: THE RESULT OF HAVING ASSUMED AN IDENTITY.
ATTITUDE IS: THE OPINION ONE HOLDS OR THE BEHAVIOR ONE EXPRESSES TOWARD SOME PERSON, SPACE, THING OR SYMBOL AS A RESULT OF THE CONCEPT HE HAS OF IT.
TRs reflect an auditor’s attitude.
And what is back of attitude? It is certainty and beingness.
Your beingness and attitude toward the pc are the things which your TRs measure. If you as an auditor simply go into a robotic imitation of a tone level or attitude or identity, you aren’t there at all. It will be apparent in your TRs.
It is the beingness which comes first and that gets reflected in your attitude and your attitude, in turn, is then reflected in your TRs.
And what directly influences beingness? Certainty. Before one can assume the beingness of an auditor he must have certainty on the materials of auditing. That means certainty on TRs and certainty on the meter and his own metering.
The importance of all these factors is based on the fact that they, each one, immediately and directly affect the pc’s “in-sessionness.”
TRs AND METERING: THE TWO FOREMOST ACTIONS
There is a very good reason why you do TRs and metering as your two foremost actions. It has to do with the pc being “in-session.”
Any auditor worthy of the title has the goal of his pc achieving case gain. Toward that end, the first aim of the auditor is to put the pc in-session. Until and unless that happens, nothing else is going to happen in the way of case gain for the pc.
With your TRs in, the pc is confident that he is being listened to and that he is getting the attention that is desirable for the resolution of his case. Therefore he’s willing to talk to you.
If your metering is very exact and you’re not leaving the pc up in the air or plowed in with misreads or false reads, he has confidence in what you’re saying because what you say reads is what he feels. There’s a coordination there.
So between these two things we get the definition of “in-session” for a pc which is: INTERESTED IN OWN CASE AND WILLING TO TALK TO THE AUDITOR.
If your TRs are rough and your metering is bad, you won’t get that reaction in a pc and you won’t get enough case gain to bother with.
THE BASIC THING THAT MONITORS CASE GAIN IS: PC INTERESTED IN OWN CASE AND WILLING TO TALK TO THE AUDITOR.
Without that, you won’t get any case gain on a pc. With it, given that he is audited on the correct processes, the pc’s case progress is assured.
TRs AND IN-SESSIONNESS
There is some interesting data which points up this matter of TRs and in-sessionness.
Back in the days before we had TRs I had a funny phenomenon occurring. I would audit somebody in London, then go away and time would march on. I’d come back, pick up the same pc and find him at the exact point where I’d left him, even though he had been audited by a lot of other auditors. That would be 6 or 8 months and lots of auditing hours later. It would be explained away with, “Well, of course, Ron is a good auditor,” and naturally they were saying that. Actually, that would be quite a critical thing to say about the other auditors as, while we didn’t have pc programs then, we did have processes that advanced a pc’s case. That being true, how did it happen that that pc stayed parked right where I had left him? The answer is elementary. When I was auditing him, he was interested in his own case and willing to talk to the auditor. That was all.
The phenomenon was pronounced and it showed up in other ways. Every now and then I would arrive at the London Org and people would come in from the surrounding cities or areas and hang around in the hall. I was moving around the org a lot and as I would move out into the hall someone would rush up to me and tell me an awful tale of woe. This person’s husband had just left her, or that person had just gone through a bankruptcy or something horrible. They would give me these stories and I would acknowledge them and then start to say something about what we might do about it. But they didn’t listen any further to what I was saying after the acknowledgment; at that point they would go off and seem perfectly happy.
It didn’t just happen once; it was rather a consistent phenomenon. I never did anything to solve any of those problems, and they were legion—there were hordes of them. Very peculiar. I began wondering what exactly this phenomenon was and the HCO Area Secretary at the time volunteered: “They just want you to know about it and that makes them feel better.” But the truth of the matter was that it was simply TR 2.
They were willing to talk to me about their troubles and I was concerned, I was interested in them, and I did acknowledge that it was a rough scene, etc. And apparently that was adequate to convey to them that they had now talked about their troubles and been heard, and that was it. Somebody was willing to listen to them and acknowledge and that, apparently, would blow it. That’s TR 2.
I am not holding myself up here as the last word in TRs. The whole point I am making is the fact that if your TRs were good enough you could almost bypass processes and get a surface level of case gain. You wouldn’t get anything in depth but you would get a surface level of case gain.
The phenomenon described above has been going on for a long time. It’s been going on since the earliest days of Christianity and I’m sure the Christians picked it up from somebody before that. It’s a basic mechanism so somebody picked up this confessional idea somewhere along the line. It’s very far from the only mechanism there is in the mind, but it in itself was good enough to carry the Roman Catholic Church through hundreds of years over the out-TRs of those father confessors. (There is no way that confront and TR 0 could be construed as in when the father confessor goes into his box, pulls the curtain and then listens to a confessional.)
Also, anything that Freudian analysis ever had to offer depends exclusively upon this same mechanism—the person feeling that he has been listened to. But there is not a psychoanalyst in the business who ever heard of TR 2. You want to know how someone being analyzed can sit there and talk for hours and hours on the same subject? Obviously the psychoanalyst’s TR 2 is out because he’s making the pc overrun. And all the psychiatrists know how to do is give the person another pound of tranquilizers or electric shock. That is lousy TR 2. It is not even a substitute.
Some years ago I didn’t even know TRs existed, that they were anything special or could be broken down into anything. But in Phoenix, Arizona, when I was giving live demonstrations on closed circuit TV for students, one staff member came out very, very excited about a discovery he had made. His discovery was:
“You acknowledge what the pc says!” There apparently wasn’t another auditor the length and breadth of the world who was doing that, so I decided I had better study this. It led into, over the years, a very deep analysis of the cycle of communication. Apparently nobody had ever analyzed this before but there is a very full analysis of cycles of communication now and the bulk of it is contained in the early Saint Hill lectures.
You are now studying the near ultimate of this strata of auditing.
The whole point here is: If your TRs were good enough you would be known as a great auditor without doing a single thing. I’m not advising that you shouldn’t do another single thing but I want to point up that just this factor alone—good TRs—makes people feel better. It becomes safe to talk to the auditor and they become willing to talk to the auditor with confidence they will be listened to and acknowledged.
It comes down to the definition of “in-session”: interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor. That definition of in-session is such that I can C/S and spot, even from fragmentary worksheets, whether or not the pc is in-session. When I am first C/Sing on a new line, that is really all I look for. If it’s out, I mend it. When I’ve got it mended, then we can begin to get someplace.
If you’ve got thousands of years of background history where they were getting along without knowing a blasted thing about TRs and it still had a workability, you can see where you could get if you really knew your TRs.
The potential is there and it is up to every auditor to realize it.
METERING AND IN-SESSIONNESS
The pc’s in-sessionness is going to be influenced by your understanding of the meter and your metering. When you have confidence in the meter and your metering ability, you build greater confidence on the part of the pc.
First, it’s got to be real to you as an auditor that the meter has something to do with the being you have it attached to, that it does connect up with that person’s bank and that the meter works. It is important for the pc to realize that too.
There is a drill which makes this real to both auditor and pc. It’s called the pinch test.
Whenever I have a new meter to test, I put someone on the cans, give him an R-factor on what I’m going to do, and then I just reach over and pinch the person. Then I ask him to recall the pinch and when he does I see a meter read occur. I know then whether that meter works or not.
The theory behind this is quite simple. Life has the ability to register an impingement and to retain it or reduplicate it. Life has that ability and that is all the meter measures. So, when you do a pinch test you’ll see the meter read. You can actually see the meter read before you pinch if you reach up and then don’t pinch. It is simply a matter of reactions.
The meter is measuring reactions to impingements in life. That is all there is to it. In a pinch test it is measuring the reaction to the impingement of the pinch.
There is another datum that can be stated here to make it even clearer to an auditor how the meter connects up with the pc’s bank. The E-Meter is an interlocking device with the electrons of the bank. With the bank you have a sheet of energy there and it is made out of electricity. When you pass a current of electricity near the thing, it is going to monitor that current of electricity and that is what shows up on the meter.
The auditor who understands that datum will have certainty on the fact that when the meter reads it is reading on something.
If the meter reads when you ask about “ARC break,” it is reading either on the fact that the pc has an ARC break or that he is startled to be asked if he has an ARC break when he really has a problem, but it is reading on something. You don’t just walk on by it.
This is what I had to teach Class VIIIs: that you check Suppress and False when all is not running well. Because for a meter to read something must exist for it to read on. And normally it is exactly what you said. You said “Do fish fly?” and it read. There is something there. An accurate meter does not idly read.
Your knowledge of the meter and your skill with a good operating meter has to be such that you have certainty on this and can’t be given a sales talk and sold on the idea that “There’s nothing there, really; it just happened to read.”
Without that certainty it goes off the rails. Instead of asking “What was that withhold?” and really cleaning it up, you’ll say, “Well, maybe . . . All right, maybe it was in some past life or something so let’s go on to the next question....” NO! There goes your pc out of session. That’s it. He can’t be interested in his own case now. His own case has just been alter-ised.
Without certainty on the fact that when the meter reads it reads on something, you’re going to waffle on what you ask the pc. That will deteriorate your beingness and your attitude and put the pc out of session.
An auditor must also be a technician on meter interpretation.
He observes the meter reaction; that’s an observation. After observation there is a point of interpretation.
Those are two different steps. You have to get observation down pat before you get into interpretation. So sandwiched in between your auditing question and interpretation is observation.
What the auditor must not miss is his observation of the needle on the dial, that it moves and that it reacts and that it does so because it is connected to the pc. So there is a point of action in there which is observation.
An auditor determines to find out something. That is an interrogation. It is followed by an observation, and that is followed by an interpretation.
You’ve got to single out the observation as to what it is, and then the interpretation as to what it is, and the causation that makes the meter read as to what it is. You will then have these things unstuck and separated out from each other.
There is nothing complicated about any of this unless someone makes it complicated. You can have a million interpretations and one truth. What makes the road hard to travel is that the interpretations (or alter-ises) are, every one of them, liable to be given the same importance as the truth. There can be an infinity of “facts” and only one truth, so that one truth gets lost like a drop of water in the ocean. Which is the drop of water? I’ll tell you what the drop of water is: It is the point of observation. And part of that observation is the fact that the meter is connected to the pc and the pc does have a bank. It then becomes clear that the meter reads because there is something there for it to read on.
So there is an area of confidence in the meter for the auditor which contributes to his auditor beingness. This results in greater confidence on the part of the pc which, in turn, contributes to the pc’s ability to be in-session.
BEINGNESS AND ATTITUDE
Once you have acquired certainty on your TRs and metering, the next step is beingness.
This can give rise to an infinity of questions: “What is this ‘beingness’?” “How do I assume a beingness?” “Is it an artificial beingness I’m wearing?” “Do I need to adopt a different beingness?”
It is NOT a matter of a listing question, such as “What am I being?” It is something you simply have to work out for yourself; there isn’t anybody who can do it for you.
In sorting this out, one can get into such matters as interesting and interested. It should help to realize there is nothing worse than an interesting auditor. It’s a wrong beingness.
If you’re disturbed by having to sit on a hard chair as an auditor, it will color your beingness. It will color your attitude. If your confront of evil is very low, it will show up especially on your TR 0 and will cause you to do all sorts of oddball things with your TRs.
What does confront of evil have to do with beingness? Well, what being can confront evil? It is not necessarily an evil being. Let us say a pc comes in and says, “I have just strangled a dog and took a great deal of pleasure in it,” and you say “WHAT???!!!” You are never going to get him in the kind of shape where he doesn’t go around strangling dogs. Why? Because he has just learned that he shouldn’t talk to the auditor.
Whatever you’re doing as an auditor, if you’re doing it through a colored beingness you’ve got a misattitude and your pc becomes unwilling. You start developing session withholds in the pc. These will be innocent withholds, such as “I don’t have any interest in that but I won’t tell him so,” or “I didn’t really think that read....”
They will most likely be innocent withholds, but you now have a pc who isn’t in there pitching. And that’s the point at which the session deteriorates.
If you’re not sure of your beingness, if you haven’t decided upon your beingness, if your beingness is wobbly, then your attitude toward the pc will be uncertain and wobbly. And your attitude toward the pc will then color your TRs. In that case you can ask “Do fish fly?” until hell freezes over and drill and drill and drill continuously and religiously. And you are not going to get anywhere until you get your beingness and your attitude settled.
What IS auditor beingness? Well, what are you being as you sit in the auditing chair auditing the pc? Are you a beingness somebody would be willing to talk to? The general attitude connected with your TRs is what signals this.
Your beingness as an auditor is something you yourself must DECIDE upon. It’s a step to be taken when you are certain of your auditing basics. It could be done in minutes or it could require hours or days. But if you take a look at all of this data and apply it, you actually could simply decide “What is my beingness as an auditor?” and “Exactly what is my attitude toward pcs?” and your beingness as an auditor might suddenly go click. Your attitude then will fall comfortably into place, and that will be reflected in your TRs.
These are the skills you need to acquire. But it is basic simplicities you are after, as I have described them here.
I’ve given you an analysis of the scene that hasn’t been stated quite this way before. It begins with certainty on technical basics, TRs and metering. It’s then a matter of assuming an auditor beingness which comes across in your attitude. At that point your TRs, already well drilled, can be brought up easily to a point of flawlessness.
And from there it’s a short step to your pcs, each and every one, interested in own case and willing to talk to the auditor.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 APRIL 1980R
REVISED 18 OCTOBER 1986
Remimeo
Exam Hat
Tech/Qual (Also issued as HCO PL 13 Oct. 68RA,
All Auditors Rev. 18.10.86, same title)
PC EXAMINER
Cancels and Replaces:
HCOB 21 Apr. 80 EXAMINER
HCO PL 13 Oct. 68 EXAMINER
HCO PL 13 Oct. 68R EXAMINER
Rev. 21.4.80
HCO PL 11 Dec. 68 ADDENDUM TO HCO PL
13 OCT. 1968, EXAMINER
HCO PL 26 Jan. 70II EXAMINER AND FLOATING NEEDLE
BPL 26 Jan. 70II EXAMINER AND FLOATING NEEDLE
BPL 26 Jan. 70R III EXAMINER AND FLOATING NEEDLE
Rev. 20.7.75
Refs:
HCO PL 5 Aug. 65 RELEASE CHECKOUTS
HCO PL 11 Apr. 70II REVIEW COMPLETE?
HCOB 11 Nov. 73 PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE
HCO PL 8 Sept. 70 RA EXAMINER’S 24-HOUR RULE
Rev. 24.10.75
HCO PL 13 Jan. 71 EXAM 24-HOUR RULE,
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
HCO PL 8 Mar. 71 EXAMINER’S FORM
A metered examination is given to the preclear after each session or if the pc wants to make any statement concerning his case. Exams are also done after actions such as Word Clearing, Post Purpose Clearing, Crashing Mis-U Finding and False Data Stripping.
The whole duty of the Examiner is to note the TA and needle behavior of the pc.
This duty is done muzzled. No talk or chatter.
The pc comes in. The Examiner smiles, indicates for the pc to sit down.
The Examiner hands the pc the cans.
The Examiner notes the TA and the needle and looks up at the pc for his statement.
When the pc says what he wants to say, the Examiner says, “Thank you very much,” and he indicates an F/N or floating TA if he sees one.
The Examiner then indicates with an arm gesture the way out.
This is the whole drill.
To do or say anything else can invalidate the pc and/or lose the F/N he or she got in session. You don’t as an Examiner care about anything except TA, needle behavior, statement and pc indicators. The pc will tell you what he wants to. You don’t have to ask for it.
If the pc makes some remark or asks a question directed at the Examiner, the Examiner can and should politely acknowledge the pc. (Example: Pc says, “How are you today?” and Examiner replies, “Fine, thank you.”) But the Examiner does not originate any comm during an after-session exam.
The whole idea is that the Examiner must never invalidate or evaluate for the pc by word, attitude or expression.
ADMINISTRATION
Part of the Examiner’s duty is to keep in accurate and useful admin on all examinations. An Examiner’s log must be kept for each exam. It is not necessary to copy the Exam Report. It is necessary to note who, what for, when, meter phenomena and where sent.
The Examiner is to inform the Qual Sec and Senior C/S of all non-F/N exams and sickness reports.
Also, the Examiner must originate an out-tech report, with a copy to the Qual Sec, on each after-session exam where there is no F/N, VGIs.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 22 APRIL 1980R
REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Remimeo
Auditors
Surveyors
Examiners
Ethics Officers
ASSESSMENT DRILLS
Refs:
HCOB 6 Dec. 73 C/S Series 90
THE PRIMARY FAILURE
HCOB 28 Feb. 71 C/S Series 24
METERING READING ITEMS
HCOB 15 Oct. 73RC C/S Series 87RC
Rev. 26.7.86 NULLING AND F/Ning
PREPARED LISTS
HCOB 22 July 78 ASSESSMENT TRs
Book: The Book of E.-Meter Drills
According to HCOB 6 Dec. 73, the make or break point of an auditor was his ability to get reads on a prepared list. This depended upon (a) his TR 1 and (b) his metering.
In 1978 this was further studied, and in HCOB 22 July 78, ASSESSMENT TRs, it was found that correct voice pitches had everything to do with assessment.
I have just developed drills which improve this ability to make lists read and to improve an auditor’s auditing in general.
These drills will also be found to have great value to people who do surveys, to Examiners and to Ethics Officers.
LEVELS OF USAGE
There are three levels of usage of these drills:
1. AUDITOR TRAINING: A student auditor must become expert in the handling of prepared lists. Training the student to make a list read is the first usage level for the Assessment Drills. The prerequisites for this level of use are a Professional TRs Course, Upper Indoc TRs and the drills of the E-Meter Drills book.
Before starting the Assessment Drills, the auditor should review his E-Meter drills and practice E-Meter Drill 27, E-Meter Drill CR0000-4 and, if found necessary, E-Meter Drill CR0000-3. It is called to attention that E-Meter Drill 5 of The Book of E-Meter Drills has been replaced with E-Meter Drill 5RA and, if not done, should be done. Being able to see and read and operate an E-Meter has everything to do with getting reads off a prepared list. Where an auditor misses, it is simply that he has not adequately done the drills in The Book of E-Meter Drills and has not practiced up to a point of full, easy familiarity with the E-Meter.
The point of being able to make lists read is pointless unless the auditor can set up, handle and read an E-Meter. But the skill is easily acquired.
2. SURVEYORS, ETHICS OFFICERS, EXAMINERS (and others not yet trained as auditors): The Assessment Drills are extremely valuable tools for those whose duties involve asking and getting answers to questions, as in surveying and doing interviews. Where the skill of asking questions well is needed, but E-Meter training hasn’t yet been completed, the prerequisite to doing the Assessment Drills would be successful completion of TRs 0-4 and 6-9. Such a student would not do any of the Assessment Drills calling for use of the meter.
3. AUDITOR CORRECTION: Sometimes a C/S needs to handle an auditor who is having trouble getting prepared lists to read and in such a case the Assessment Drills are the answer. So the third use level is simply a C/S ordering an auditor through Assessment Drills, where his lists are suspect. One is presupposing here that the auditor has already done the necessary courses as in 1 above.
ASSESSMENT TRAINING DRILLS
The following drills have the letter Q after them to mean that they are used for QUESTIONS. The Q is followed by a number to show that they are drilled in that sequence.
In these Q drills, the practice of twinning and any other TR tech normal to TRs is followed.
TR 1-Q1
NUMBER: TR 1-Q1
NAME: Pitch of the Statement and Question.
POSITION: Coach sitting at the keyboard of a piano or organ or any useable instrument, student standing beside instrument.
PURPOSE: To establish the pitch differences of statements and questions.
DATA:
TRAINING PROCEDURE: If the student is a girl, the coach asks her to say “apple” as a statement. The coach then strikes the C above middle C (as given in the data above) and then the G above middle C. If the student is a man, the coach asks him to say “apple” as a statement and then strikes middle C and then the F below middle C. This is repeated—saying “apple” and striking the two notes until the pitch of a statement can be duplicated by the student.
(In the event the student has a voice pitch at variance with these notes, other notes can be found and used by the coach so long as the higher note is first and the second note is four or five whole notes below the first note. It must sound like a statement with the higher, then lower note.) Once the student has grasped this and can duplicate it, have the student use other two-syllable words (or single-syllable words preceded by an article), using these notes of the statement. Then, using these two notes, have the student make up sentences as statements, the bulk of the sentence said at the pitch of the higher note, but the end of the sentence at the pitch of the lower note. Once the student has this down and can easily do it and it sounds natural and he is satisfied that it does, go on to the question step.
The coach has the student say “apple” as a question. Then the coach (for a male student) strikes the F below middle C and then middle C. For a woman the coach strikes the A above middle C and then the D an octave above middle C. (In case this does not agree with the voice pitch of the student, the coach must work it out providing only that the upper note is three or four whole notes above the lower note. It must sound natural and must sound like a question.) The coach has the student say “apple” as a question and then strikes the lower and higher note until the student can duplicate it. Now take other two-syllable words (or single-syllable words preceded by an article) and have the student say these as a question, following each one with the two instrument notes, lower to higher. When the student can do this, is satisfied that it sounds natural and doesn’t have to think about doing it, go.on to the next step. Here the student makes up banal questions. The first part of the question is said at the lower note and the last part is said at the higher note. At each question, the coach strikes the lower note and then the upper note. When this sounds natural and the student does not have to think to do it and is satisfied with it, the drill is ended.
END PHENOMENA: A person who can state statements and questions that sound like statements or questions.
HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard, April 1980, while doing the script for the soon-to-be-produced training film “Tone 40 Assessment.”
TR 1-Q2
NUMBER: TR 1-Q2
NAME: Walkabout Questions.
POSITION: There is no coach. Two students separate and walk around their neighborhood and then meet and compare notes. The object is to detect personal habits in questioning.
PURPOSE: To enlighten the student as to his own communication habits and people’s reactions to his questions.
COMMANDS: The most common everyday social questions such as “How’s it going?” “Do you like the weather?” etc., appropriate to the activities and circumstances of the person. Only one or two questions to a separate person. The questions must be banal, social and ordinary, but they must be questions.
TRAINING STRESS: The two students agree on the areas they will cover and the time they will meet again. They then go off individually, not together. The student pauses next to people encountered and asks a social question, listens to his OWN voice tones and notes the reaction of the person asked. In this drill the student does not necessarily try to use TR l-Q1 but is just himself, speaking as he would normally speak. The students then meet and compare notes and discuss what they have discovered about themselves on the subject of asking questions. If they have not learned or observed anything, the drill must be repeated.
END PHENOMENA: A person who has detected any habits he has in handling pitch of voice in asking questions so that he can cure these in subsequent drills.
HISTORY: Recommended by L. Ron Hubbard in February 1978 in the pilot for HCOB 22 July 78, ASSESSMENT TRs. Developed into a TR in April 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard.
TR 1-Q3
NUMBER: TR 1-Q3
NAME: Single Word Question.
POSITION: Student and coach facing each other with a table in between them. The E-Meter is not used. The Book of E-Meter Drills used by student and another copy by coach.
PURPOSE: To be able to ask questions using a single word read from a list.
COMMANDS: The coach uses the usual TR directions of “Start,” “Flunk,” “That’s it.” The student uses single words from the prepared lists of The Book of E-Meter Drills.
TRAINING STRESS: To get the student to use the pitch of his voice to deliver a question consisting of a single word. It must sound like a question per TR 1-Q1 and use similar pitches to TR 1-Q1. The student is flunked for out-TR 1, for keeping his eyes glued to the list, for sounding unnatural. The student is also flunked for slow or comm-laggy delivery or pauses. The coach designates the list to be used, changes lists. When the student can do this easily, a second part of the drill is entered and the coach begins to use the Preclear Origination Sheet so as to interrupt the student and make him combine his questions with TR 4. In this case, the student acknowledges appropriately, uses “I will repeat the question,” and does so.
END PHENOMENA: The ability to ask single-word questions that will be responded to as questions and to be able to handle pc origins while doing so.
HISTORY: Developed in April 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard.
TR 1-Q4A
NUMBER: TR 1-Q4A (For meter-trained students only)
NAME: Whole Sentence Questions.
POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other across a table. The E-Meter is set up and used. Copies of The Book of E-Meter Drills are used.
PURPOSE: To train the student to ask whole questions that sound like questions, read an E-Meter and handle a session at the same time.
COMMANDS: The usual coach commands of TR drills. The prepared lists in The Book of E-Meter Drills; the questions in these drills are reworded so that the item occurs as the last word. Example: List 2 of The Book of E-Meter Drills states that the assessment question is “Which tree do you like best?” This is converted, for each question, to “Do you like ?” Prepared List 4 is converted to “Do you dislike ?” etc. A whole sentence is used in every case.
TRAINING STRESS: The usual TR commands are used by the coach. E-Meter Drill 5RA must be used to start. Any TR errors or metering errors may be flunked, but special attention is paid to the student’s ability to ask a question that sounds like a question (in accordance with TR 1-Q1) and that sounds natural. The drill has three parts. In the first part, although the coach is on the meter, the ability to ask the question is concentrated upon. The second part concentrates upon the student’s ability to look at the written questions and then ask the coach directly without undue comm lag or hesitation. The third part is to do the first two parts and read the meter (in accordance with E-Meter Drills 27 and CR0000-4 which may have to be reviewed if flubby) and to keep session admin, all smoothly and accurately. If a question arises about meter accuracy, a third person who can read a meter or a video tape is employed to ensure that the student is actually not missing or dubbing in reads.
END PHENOMENA: A person who can do all the necessary actions of asking questions from a prepared list and run a session smoothly without errors or confusions and be confident he can.
HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in April 1980.
TR 1-Q4B
NUMBER: TR 1-Q4B (For nonmeter-trained students only)
NAME: Whole Sentence Questions (nonmetered).
POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other across a table, if that is the position the student would take when using this tech on post. If the student would do his post activities standing up (as in doing a survey), then that is the position used for the drill. The E-Meter is not used in this drill, but the tools of the student’s post, such as a clipboard and survey forms, for a surveyor, are set up and used. Copies of The Book of E-Meter Drills are used.
PURPOSE: To train the student to ask whole questions that sound like questions, handle any admin he might have to handle in an interview (or while doing a survey, etc.) and carry on the interview at the same time.
COMMANDS: The usual coach commands of TR drills. The prepared lists in The Book of E-Meter Drills; the questions in these drills are reworded so that the item occurs as the last word. Example: List 2 of The Book of E-Meter Drills states that the assessment question is “Which tree do you like best?” This is converted, for each question, to “Do you like ?” Prepared List 4 is converted to “Do you dislike ?” etc. A whole sentence is used in every case.
TRAINING STRESS: Special attention is paid to the student’s ability to ask a question that sounds like a question in accordance to TR 1-Q1 and that sounds natural. The drill has three parts:
1. In the first part the ability to ask the question is concentrated upon.
2. The second part concentrates upon the student’s ability to look at the written question and then ask the coach directly without undue comm lag or hesitation.
3. The third part is to do the first two parts and keep interview admin, all smoothly and accurately, as well as keep the interview going.
END PHENOMENA: A person who can do all the necessary actions of asking questions from a prepared list and run an interview smoothly without errors or confusions and be confident he can.
TR 8-Q
NUMBER: TR 8-Q
NAME: Tone 40 Assessment.
POSITION: Same as TR 8 where the student is in one chair facing another chair on which sits an ashtray, the coach sitting beside the student in a third chair. A square, four-cornered ashtray is used.
PURPOSE: To deliver the THOUGHT of a question into an exact position, wide or narrow at decision, that is a question, with or without words.
COMMANDS: For the first part of the drill: “Are you an ashtray?” “Are you made of glass?” “Are you sitting there?” Second part of drill: Same questions silently. Third part of drill: “Are you a corner?” to each corner of the ashtray, verbal and with intention at the same time. Fourth part of drill: Any applicable question, verbal and with intention at the same time, put broad and narrow at choice into the ashtray, exact parts of it and the surroundings.
TRAINING STRESS: The coach uses usual TR coaching commands. There are four stages to the drill. The first stage is to land a verbal command into the ashtray. The second stage is to put the question with full intention silently into the ashtray. The third stage is to put verbal command and silent intention at the same time into exact parts of the ashtray. The fourth stage is to put any applicable question both verbally and with intention into any narrow or any broad portion of the ashtray or its surrounds at choice and at will. The coach puts out his finger or his hands to indicate various spots and locations in space around the ashtray. The coach also makes the student put thoughts precisely into areas, some narrow and some wide, above the student’s head and behind his back by putting his finger or hands in those places. (Coach doesn’t touch student’s body.) At the conclusion of the whole drill imagine the ashtray saying, “Yes, yes, yes, yes” in an avalanche of “yeses” to balance the flow (in actual life, people, pcs and meters do respond and return the flow).
END PHENOMENA: The ability to land a question with full intention into an exact target area, broad or narrow, at will and effectively, whether verbally or silently.
HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in April 1980 as an extension of all earlier work on intention and Tone 40, as now applied to questions and assessments.
TR 4/8-Q1
NUMBER: TR 4/8-Q1 (TR 4 for Pc Origin, TR 8 Intention and Q for Question, 1 for first part)
NAME: Tone 40 Assessment Prepared List Session Drill.
POSITION: Student and coach sitting across from each other at a table, E-Meter set up and in use, session admin, using prepared lists.
PURPOSE: To train a student to do all the actions necessary to a full, smooth, accurate session using prepared lists and to do Tone 40 Assessment of them.
COMMANDS: Coach commands are the usual TR commands of “Start,” “Flunk,” “That’s it.” For the student, all commands relating to starting a session, giving an R-factor, assessing a prepared list, keeping the admin, indicating any item found and ending a session. The Book of E-Meter Drills for prepared lists as in TR 1-Q4. Origins for coach as per the Preclear Origination Sheet of that book. “Squeeze the cans.” “Take a deep breath and let it out.” “This is the session.” “We are going to assess a prepared list.” (Assessment.) “Your item is .” (Indicate any F/N.) “End of Assessment.” “End of Session.”
TRAINING STRESS: Permit the student to continue to his first error; then have him drill and correct that error and continue. Finally, to conclude, let the student go through the entire sequence of the drill beginning to end three times without error or flunk for a final pass. It is expected that the student will not flub any TRs or metering or session patter. Metering may be finally verified by a third student or video. All assessing must be in proper Tone 40 with full intention exactly placed. The student must not wait to see if the meter read but catch the read of the last question as he starts the next one. His vision may shift from list to pc but at all times must embrace list, meter and pc.
(This drill also would be the one used for tape or video passes as it includes all elements of metering and TRs.)
END PHENOMENA: A person who can do a flawless and productive assessment session, Tone 40.
HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard, April 1980.
TR 4/8-Q2
NUMBER: TR 4/8-Q2
NAME: Listing and Nulling Tone 40 Assessment.
POSITION: Same as TR 4/8-Q1.
PURPOSE: To teach a student to do the action of Listing and Nulling with all metering and admin, using Tone 40 Assessment.
COMMANDS: The usual coach TR commands. Two copies of The Book ofE-Meter Drills. A prepared list is chosen by the coach and both use the same prepared list. The student reads the question and asks it and the coach reads the replies from the same list but in his own copy. The student must write down the answers in a proper session worksheet and note and write down any reads. (An F/N terminates the listing if it occurs.) The coach need not use the whole list of replies but only half a dozen chosen at random. The sequence of commands is the same as TR 4/8-Q1 except that the R-factor is “ We are going to list a question.” And, if no item F/Ns and no significant read has occurred, the additional action of nulling the list is undertaken with the command “I will now assess the list.”
TRAINING STRESS: THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING, HCOB 1 Aug. 68, apply in full as these are very important laws and ignoring them can result in severe ARC breaks, not so much in this drill, but in actual sessions. The coach may also require Suppress and Invalidate buttons be put in on the whole list. All errors, omissions, hesitations and lapses from Tone 40 on the part of the student are flunked. Coach similarly to TR 4/8-Q1. Pass when the student can do it flawlessly three consecutive times. (This drill may be used for internship tapes and videos for assessing and metering passes.)
END PHENOMENA: A person able to do a flawless L&N list as the session or as part of a session, with all TRs in, with perfect metering and proper admin and using Tone 40 in his listing and assessing.
HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in April 1980.
SUMMARY
The purpose of these drills is to train the student to ask questions that will get answers and to assess prepared lists that will get accurate reads. If a student doing these drills has difficulty, it will be traced to false data, misunderstood words or not having passed earlier TRs, including Upper Indoc, or his metering drills as contained in The Book of E-Meter Drills. If a satisfactory result is not obtained, the faults in the above items should be located and remedied and these drills repeated. If any earlier omissions are found and repaired and if these drills are honestly done, heightened success as an auditor (or a Surveyor or Examiner or Ethics Officer) is assured.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 APRIL 1980R
REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Remimeo
PREPARED LISTS, THEIR VALUE
AND PURPOSE
No matter how complicated or confusing the environment is getting, if you have a stable datum of exact action it can see you through.
The prepared list provides the auditor with a stable action when a session or case is confusing and can bring things under control.
The idea of such lists and their development are original to Dianetics and Scientology. They are made possible because these subjects embrace the full extent of thought, the spirit and actual and potential aberration. Thousands of hours of research and development have gone into these lists. Thousands of case histories have been reviewed and condensed to make the lists possible. They are, in themselves, a considerable tour de force.
They have often meant the difference between a failed case and a spectacular result. Just as they are important, a knowledge of them and skill in their use is vital to auditing success.
HISTORY
Probably the oldest “prepared list” is the White Form (now called the ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET—HCOB 24 June 78R). This provided a series of questions which would give one the background of the preclear. It dates from 1950. By it one can get the probable this-life areas of the preclear’s heaviest charge. Done on a meter, it provides a case entrance.
Self Analysis was written in 1951. It contains processing lists a preclear could run on himself.
Group Auditing materials of the middle 50s contained lists of commands which were run on groups.
The “Joburg” of 1961 is probably the next historical point. It was a list of the possible withholds a preclear might have. It was called the “Joburg” because it was developed in Johannesburg, South Africa.
The “L1” was probably next. The original gave a list of session rudiments which might have gone out and enabled the auditor to get the session rudiments back in. It is still in use as “L1C” or “List One C.”
The “Green Form” was developed in the early 60s so that Qual Review at Saint Hill would have a tool to analyze a case.
Correction lists for various auditing actions began to appear. These corrected an action in progress that had gone awry.
In 1973, the famous “C/S 53” (meaning “Case Supervisor Series 53”) was devised and continued to be improved and reissued.
Today there are dozens of prepared lists. There is even a prepared list to repair prepared lists in general.
THEORY OF PREPARED LISTS
A prepared list is an assembly of the majority of things which can be wrong in a case, an auditing action or a session.
Such lists are quite remarkable, actually. Only a thorough knowledge of aberration makes such a list possible. When you look over the extent of prepared lists, you will see that they contain a grasp of the subject of aberration never before available.
USE
While an auditor is expected to have studied and mastered all this theory, it is a bit much to expect that in the confusion of a case or session gone wrong he will be able to spot instantly, without help, exactly WHAT has gone wrong. Prepared lists, where they exist, and his E-Meter will sort this out for him. All the auditor has to have is a general insight that something is going wrong, know in general what is being handled in the case, know what list to use and then, with good TRs and metering, do an assessment of the prepared list. Usually the trouble will come right, since the exact point will have been located. It is sometimes enough to merely indicate the point found to discharge it somewhat. One can F/N what is found or one can go into very wide, extensive handling. The point is, the use of the prepared list has spotted the trouble. What is demanded of the auditor or C/S is WHICH prepared list to use, but this is determined by what has been going on.
TYPES OF PREPARED LISTS
There are four general types of prepared lists. These are:
A. An ANALYSIS list. This is a type of prepared list which analyzes a case broadly or analyzes a session. The purpose of it is to find out what to address in the case in order to program it. The White Form, the Green Form and the C/S 53 can all be used for this purpose. There are other such lists and there is even a prepared list to debug production.
B. A direct AUDITING list. Prepared lists exist which deliver direct auditing commands or questions which, run on the pc, produce an auditing result. The lists of Self Analysis and the various Confessional lists form this type of prepared list.
C. A CORRECTION list. This type of list corrects an ongoing action. Examples are the Word Clearing Correction List, the Int Rundown Correction List, the Dianetic Correction List. There is a bit of a gray area in this type of list
as one can also use some of them for analysis as in the case of a Course Supervisor Correction List or a Student Correction List. The C/S 53 can also serve as a correction list. The real difference is what the list is being used for—to analyze to find out what to program or start or to correct something already in progress.
D. DRILL lists. These are used in training as dummy lists to get an auditor used to handling the meter and prepared lists. Such lists are contained in The Book of E-Meter Drills.
METHOD OF HANDLING
There are three methods of handling prepared lists, depending on the type of list.
There is simply the method of asking the questions in sequence and getting the answer from the preclear. This would apply to a White Form or to auditing prepared lists as in Self Analysis or in Group Auditing. Very few lists are handled in this way.
The second way is called “Method 3” wherein the list is assessed on a meter, and when a read is noted, the meter-reading question is taken up with the preclear and F/Ned. Method 3 is covered in HCOB 3 July 71, AUDITING BY LISTS.
The third way is called “Method 5.” This type of assessment assesses the whole prepared list rapidly, without getting the preclear to talk, and the reads are then noted. The largest read or reads are then taken up and F/Ned. Method 5 is covered in HCOB 3 July 71, AUDITING BY LISTS.
When using a correction list on an OT III or above, the auditor must know and apply the tech given in HCOB 4 July 79, HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs. This HCOB concerns the handling of reading questions and applies regardless of the method of assessment used.
TRs AND METERING
Whether or not a prepared list reads depends upon the auditor’s TRs and metering. At one time or another Case Supervisors have had a great deal of trouble with this. Accuracy as to what really read was greatly in question. This came to view on Flag in the early 70s when prepared lists that had been assessed by Class IV trainees were then reassessed, same list, same pc, shortly after the first list assessment, by Class XIIs. Totally different results were found—lists on which few or no reads were obtained by the Class IV trainees were found to be very live by the Class XIIs. The difference of quality of TRs and metering were what made the difference with the prepared list response. HCOB 22 Apr. 80R, ASSESSMENT DRILLS, contains the drills which remedy this. It is the TRs and metering of the auditor that makes a prepared list reliable, not the list itself.
C/S SERIES 53
The champion list of all time is the C/S 53. On one page any general thing that can be aberrated in a thetan has been assembled. There are two forms of it—Short Form for preclears who know the terms and Long Form for preclears who are unindoctrinated (they are the same lists but the Short Form is a single word and the Long Form is a full question).
A Director of Processing giving a D of P interview can use one of these and obtain enough material to enormously help a Case Supervisor. It is not the only D of P interview action but it is very helpful when used.
An auditor can debug a program or a session with it.
It can analyze a case for programing and it can also be used to correct a program or to correct a session.
Originally, it was developed to handle high and low tone arm cases, and although it still says this, it also says it can “correct case outnesses.” And today, this is its greatest use.
PRIORITY of handling outnesses is a vital part of C/S 53. The first three groups of items—A (Interiorization outnesses), B (List errors) and C (Rudiments) —give the necessary order of handling. If Int is reading, nothing else can be handled until it is. List errors take the next priority. Then rudiments. If one were to try to repair a case out of sequence, a mess could occur. So this prepared list also gives the sequence in which outnesses must be handled.
It is always done Method 5, whether it is being assessed once through or taken to an F/Ning assessment. It is never done Method 3. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 78R, C/S SERIES 53, USE OF)
The main fault in using a C/S 53 is overuse—an auditor reaching for it when he gets in trouble instead of improving the auditor’ s own TRs, metering or knowledge of programing in the first place.
But the C/S 53 is one of the most valuable tools an auditor or a Case Supervisor has.
GENERAL CASE HANDLING
The prepared lists of all types place in the hands of the Case Supervisor and the auditor a procedure by which a case can be analyzed and programed.
Some auditing can be done direct from prepared lists.
Actions can be corrected from prepared lists.
WORD CLEARING PREPARED LISTS
It can happen that a prepared list gets stalled on misunderstood words.
For many prepared lists there are also full Word Clearing lists which can be done on the pc.
At one time it was thought that before one did a list one should ALWAYS word clear it. However, this has the liability that a pc who is in one kind of trouble can’t sit still until a full Word Clearing action is done.
The amount of trouble which came from prepared lists came more from assessing and metering errors than it did from misunderstood words.
When one is using a prepared list on a pc who has never had it word cleared, it is usually enough to check that the read isn’t coming from a Mis-U.
Early in a pc’s auditing, about the time he gets a C/S-1, the more critical prepared lists should be word cleared and the fact noted in his folder. But when one is doing this Word Clearing, tone arm action or significant reads should also be noted. One is liable to think he is word clearing whereas he is actually assessing.
True, there are a lot of tech words on a prepared list that the pc isn’t likely to know. Unfortunately, the discoveries of Scientology exceed common language and require terms of their own. But a pc catches on to this quite rapidly. They are new ideas to him (even though he has been living with them all the eons of his existence). When the word is cleared, the idea is also thrown into action. So it is important to note meter reads and tone arm action when clearing the words of prepared lists.
No hard and fast rules can be drawn on this point of word clearing prepared lists. If you have already word cleared the key words of a key prepared list before you need it, thank your stars. Otherwise, carry on and hope.
SUMMARY
A Case Supervisor and an auditor owe it to themselves to have a good command of this subject of prepared lists. There are many issues on the subject. There are dozens of prepared lists.
Knowing what prepared lists exist is a vital step for a Case Supervisor and auditor. Knowing what each is used for is equally important. Knowing which lists have Word Clearing lists already prepared is of assistance.
One has to know enough general tech in order to select what prepared list to use.
The ability to assess, as it applies to TRs and metering, is extremely important in using prepared lists.
When it comes to analyzing, auditing and correcting cases and actions, the prepared lists are a jewel box that glitters with potential success.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MAY 1980
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
All Auditors
C/Ses
PC INDICATORS
Refs:
HCOB 3 May 62R ARC BREAKS, MISSED WITHHOLDS
Rev. 5.9.78
HCOB 28 Dec. 63 INDICATORS, PART ONE:
GOOD INDICATORS
HCOB 29 July 64 GOOD INDICATORS AT LOWER LEVELS
HCOB 7 May 69R V FLOATING NEEDLE
Rev. 15.7.77
HCOB 21 July 78 WHAT IS A FLOATING NEEDLE?
HCOB 16 June 70 C/S Series 6
WHAT THE C/S IS DOING
HCOB 23 May 71R VIII RECOGNITION OF RIGHTNESS
Rev. 4.12.74 OF THE BEING
HCOB 22 Sept. 71 C/S Series 61
THE THREE GOLDEN RULES OF
THE C/S, HANDLING AUDITORS
HCOB 25 Sept. 71RB TONE SCALE IN FULL
Rev. 1.4.78
HCOB 18 Sept. 67 SCALES
HCO PL 8 Mar. 71 Auditor Admin Series 11
EXAMINER’S FORM
HCOB 18 Mar. 74R E-METERS, SENSITIVITY ERRORS
Rev. 22.2.79
HCOB 10 Nov. 87 Auditor Admin Series 20RA
MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS
______________
In this new issue, bad indicators have been reviewed and reorganized, and an entirely new list of good indicators has been introduced.
INDICATORS: DEFINITION AND USE
INDICATE: To direct attention to; point to or point out; show.
—Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language
INDICATOR: A person or thing that indicates.
—Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language
AN “INDICATOR” IS A CONDITION OR CIRCUMSTANCE ARISING IN A SESSION (OR BEFORE OR AFTER IT FOR THAT MATTER) WHICH INDICATES WHETHER THE SESSION (OR CASE) IS RUNNING WELL OR BADLY. IT IS SOMETHING ONE OBSERVES.
OBNOSIS means observing the obvious. It is something you do with your eyes. And your meter.
Indicators are used to program the case. Good indicators mean keep it going. Bad indicators mean correction must be done.
You have to be able to SEE them, KNOW what they are and write them down in the worksheets when they occur.
BAD INDICATORS
1. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc not moving up the Tone Scale in an intensive or during a program.
2. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc’s chronic tone unchanging despite one or more intensives.
3. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc’s chronic tone dropping despite intensives.
4. WORKSHEETS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc not wanting more auditing.
5. WORKSHEETS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc protesting another session.
6. EXAM REPORTS. OBNOSIS. Pc looking worse after session.
7. WORKSHEETS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc doesn’t seem to have time to get audited.
8. WORKSHEETS. METER. Pc not able to locate incidents easily.
9. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. Pc less certain about things than he/she was formerly.
10. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. WORKSHEETS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc not doing as well in life as he/she was.
11. METER. WORKSHEETS. Pc’s somatics don’t seem to blow or erase.
12. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. ETHICS REPORTS. Pc in ethics trouble after last auditing.
13. WORKSHEETS. METER. Pc protesting auditing actions.
14. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. Pc wandering all over the track, unable to stay with an incident to handle.
15. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. OBNOSIS. Pc misemotional at session end.
16. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc demanding unusual solutions.
17. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc trying to explain condition to auditor or others, either verbally or by writing notes.
18. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc continuing to complain of somatics after they have been run.
19. WORKSHEETS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc self-auditing after session.
20. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc dependence on medicine not lessening.
21. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc continuing other practices.
22. OBNOSIS. EXAM REPORTS. Skin tone dull.
23. OBNOSIS. EXAM REPORTS. Eyes dull.
24. OBNOSIS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc lethargic.
25. TONE SCALE. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. OBNOSIS. Pc not becoming more cheerful under auditing.
26. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc wanting special auditing.
27. METER. WORKSHEETS. No tone arm action on running incidents or getting audited.
28. WORKSHEETS. Pc not cogniting.
29. OBNOSIS. WORKSHEETS. Pc dispersed.
30. OBNOSIS. METER. WORKSHEETS. Pc overwhelmed.
31. OBNOSIS. WORKSHEETS. Pc bored with auditing.
32. OBNOSIS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc not available for sessions.
33. OBNOSIS. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc tired.
34. OBNOSIS. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc has attention on auditor.
35. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. Pc not wanting to run process or incident.
36. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc taking drugs or excessive alcohol.
37. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc not sure auditing works for him/her.
38. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. WORKSHEETS. Pc not handling environment more easily.
39. MEDICAL OFFICER REPORTS. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc ill after last session. (Usually a list error.)
40. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. OBNOSIS. Pc critical of auditor or organizations. (Means missed withholds.)
41. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. Pc dopey or boiling off.
42. GRADE CHART. Pc not going up to the next grade or level.
43. METER. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc has dirty needle.
44. METER. WORKSHEETS. Pc gets no reads on the meter or has a stuck needle.
45. METER. WORKSHEETS. Despite corrections for false TA, the pc has a chronic high TA.
46. METER. WORKSHEETS. Despite corrections for low TA, pc has a chronic low TA.
47. METER. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. No F/Ns.
48. METER. WORKSHEETS. No change of meter characteristic.
49. EXAM REPORTS. No change in Exam Reports.
50. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. OBNOSIS. WORKSHEETS. No change.
(Note: There is additional data on indicators in HCOB 3 May 62R, ARC BREAKS, MISSED WITHHOLDS, where indicators concern missed withholds.)
GOOD INDICATORS
1. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. Pc willing to talk to the auditor.
2. WORKSHEETS. OBNOSIS. While in session, pc interested in own case.
3. METER. WORKSHEETS. A good read on the breath test shows pc is eating and sleeping well.
4. WORKSHEETS. Rudiments, session to session, easier to get in and stay in.
5. OBNOSIS. TONE SCALE. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc cheerful.
6. METER. WORKSHEETS. Needle F/Ning at session start.
7. METER. Tone arm moving in the range of 3.0 to 2.0.
8. METER. Needle moving easily as pc does the process.
9. METER. WORKSHEETS. Blowdowns occur on right items and cognitions.
10. METER. Tone arm counter showing normal or better TA for the session.
11. METER. WORKSHEETS. Change of characteristic in meter behavior every few sessions.
12. METER. WORKSHEETS. Tone arm blows down on cognitions.
13. METER. WORKSHEETS. Cognitions and F/Ns go together.
14. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Somatics vanish in processing.
15. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc blowing somatics and aberrations more easily.
16. WORKSHEETS. METER. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc responses associated with what is being run.
17. TONE SCALE. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc moves on the Tone Scale.
18. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc understanding self better.
19. OBNOSIS. EXAM REPORTS. Eyes are brighter.
20. OBNOSIS. EXAM REPORTS. Improved skin tone.
21. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Ears pop more open.
22. WORKSHEETS. Pc cogniting.
23. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Life problems lessening.
24. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc getting through the program okay with wins.
25. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc’s havingness in life and livingness is improving.
26. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION. Pc getting case gain.
27. EXAM REPORTS. Change of characteristic of Exam Reports.
28. WORKSHEETS. MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS. Pc wanting more auditing.
29. GRADE CHART. SUCCESS STORIES. WORKSHEETS. EXAM REPORTS. Pc going on up the Grade Chart not quickied and winning.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 MAY 1980
Remimeo
DRUGS AND OBJECTIVE PROCESSES
DRUGS AND THE BACKTRACK
There was a discovery about a decade ago that drug withdrawal symptoms could be eased by Objective Processes. Such processes as the CCHs, 8-C, remedies of havingness and even TRs were found to aid a person in coming off drugs and became part of standard routines to accomplish this.
In 1973 another observation was made, that the current civilization seemed to be regressing. “Regression” means a “return to earlier or more infantile behavior patterns.” Men’s shoe styles had become little-boy shoe styles; the most popular women singers were singing lullabies; cars were being treated like toys and abused rather than maintained. More recently it was observed that life attitudes had become less responsible, that “playing” took a higher value, that productivity was declining steeply, that people seemed to require more and more care by the state—and all of these things seemed to indicate that people were getting stuck at or going back to childhood or infancy.
There is another observation: people taking drugs tend to go backtrack. Sometimes, when seeking to get a druggie to run engrams, he will balk and adversely react; apparently he has already hit the backtrack while on “trips” and it terrified him.
On such evidences one could construct a theory that drugs tend to throw people out of present time and park them on the backtrack. Experiments of the late forties did show that certain drugs and gases did throw people backtrack and into engrams. The “visions” that turn on under the influence of such a drug as peyote or when inhaling volcanic gases are probably simply the restimulation of backtrack. (It should be noted in passing that inducing engrams with drugs and gases in the hope of running them out does NOT work—one only runs them IN.) So it can workably be assumed that drugs do throw people out of present time.
OBJECTIVE PROCESSES
The thing that characterizes OBJECTIVE Processes is that they bring about interaction between the individual and the existing physical universe. This is different than SUBJECTIVE Processes in that these interact between the individual and his past or himself.
Objective Processes do several things: they remedy havingness; they locate the person in his environment; they establish direct communication with the auditor; and last but not least, they bring a person to present time.
“Present time” is a very important factor in mental and spiritual sanity and ability. A human being can be stuck in literally thousands of different past moments. His behavior and attitudes are influenced by such past incidents and experiences. As a matter of fact, a person can be totally regressed and can be in an incident of the past to the entire exclusion of present time.
As an example, if you were to walk through an insane asylum and say, to each patient you met, “Come up to present time,” as an authoritative command, you would get a small percentage of complete recoveries. In one instance when this was done, those on whom this had been done got up in “group session” that night and volunteered how glad they were to be here. What would have happened is that the person would have come out of his past-track incident or incidents and would have moved up to present time and sanity. While this process is not a “sure cure” for all insane, it does demonstrate the point. Those on whom it did not work can be supposed to have been just too mired down in their backtrack.
Drugs, of course, do not only regress a person. They do other things. And amongst these is a communication dulling. This is best observed when drugs are seen to reduce pain. This is simply a communication shut-off. Drugs can also temporarily stimulate (before they ruin them) body glands and produce momentary feelings of well-being. Part of this is probably a communication shut-off from the bank. Drugs can also speed up the burning of reserves of vitamins; alcohol probably burns up rapidly all reserves of vitamin B1; other drugs also burn up all available niacin and C. This speeded burn-up can also bring about a temporary feeling of well-being. But when the reserves are gone, the delusions called delirium tremens (D.T.’s) and withdrawal symptoms are nightmares indeed. But this again is simply the bank caving in on someone, and he is now parked back on the track, not only with the nightmare but with the incidents in the past which caused them.
CONCLUSION
Objective Processes, properly chosen and run, bring the person gradually more and more into present time.
As the process is orienting the person in the present time of the physical universe and as this present time is not threatening, he has a time point and a location point from which to sort out his confusions. His attention has been pulled out of his bank and has been placed on the physical universe around him.
Because it is the backtrack that is causing his aberration, putting his attention on the physical universe tends to de-aberrate him.
The backtrack contains mass, and taking his attention off of this backtrack mass tends to lose it for him. But the masses around him in the physical universe substitute for the track mass and he receives a remedy of havingness.
Objective Processes are not in themselves a total answer; a certain amount of Subjective Processes must be run to remove the reasons he is being called back into the past. Vitamin, mineral and nutrition reserves must also be replaced or the body also pulls him in and affects him.
This tells you as well why “mest work” and exercise have a de-aberrating effect upon a person. They are a sort of Objective Process in themselves even though they do not replace Objectives.
Objectives also bypass misunderstood words and significances. This makes them runnable with a minimum of Word Clearing and error.
Having an idea of why Objective Processes work assists one in applying them. One can see the person change masses, become located, and above that come bit by bit more and more into present time.
It is not that the physical universe itself is therapeutic. It is that it provides a single reference point including time, location and mass.
Without Objectives, no being is likely to recover in his infinity of future.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 18 MAY 1980R
REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Class I Auditors
and Above
Academy Level I
START-CHANGE-STOP
COMMANDS
Refs:
The Journal of Scientology, Issue 7-G, Nov. 52
PAB 85, 22 May 56 THE PARTS OF MAN
PAB 87, 5 June 56 SCIENTOLOGY PROCESSING
Tape: 5608C56 “Start, Change and Stop”
HCOB 20 Aug. 56 HGC PROCEDURE OF AUG. 20
HCO PROCESSING SHEET OF
20 SEPTEMBER 1956
PAB 97, 1 Oct. 56 START-CHANGE-STOP
Booklet: Control and the Mechanics of SCS
PAB 106, 15 Feb. 57 GOOD PROCESSES
Scientology: Clear Procedure, Issue One, Dec. 57
HCOB 28 July 58 CLEAR PROCEDURE
HCOB 15 Oct. 58 ACC CLEAR PROCEDURE
PAB 149, 1 Dec. 58 DUMMY AUDITING
HCOB 3 Feb. 59 FLATTENING A PROCESS
HCOB 2 Feb. 61 UK CASES DIFFERENT
HCOB 14 May 62 CASE REPAIR
HCOB 5 May 65 APPLICATION—MORE ON THE
APPLICATION OF SCIENTOLOGY
TO CHILDREN
Technical Training Film TR 8: “Start, Change and Stop,”
as shown on Academy Level I and above.
Start, Change and Stop is the anatomy of control.
Running Start, Change and Stop on an individual brings aboul a greater self-determinism. The process Start-Change-Stop (SCS) has two parts:
1. START-CHANGE-STOP ON AN OBJECT, and
2. START-CHANGE-STOP ON A BODY.
SCS ON AN OBJECT
SCS ON AN OBJECT is run on a gradient by first using a small object, such as a paper clip. Each stage—Start, Change and then Stop—is first run to a flat point, meaning that the preclear has had a win or has carried out at least 3 consecutive sets of commands with no change in his motions or attitude. When Start, Change and Stop are flat with the first object, the auditor uses a larger object (such as a brick, a beach ball, etc.) until the process is flat with that object. The auditor then goes to a larger object, and so on, until the EP is reached.
These are the commands for SCS ON AN OBJECT:
START:
1. “I AM GOING TO ASK YOU TO START THE (indicated obiect) AND WHEN I TELL YOU TO START, YOU START THE IN THAT DIRECTION. (Auditor indicates a direction with his hand.) DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
2. “START.”
3. “DID YOU START THE ?”
(Repeat commands 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, etc., until START has been run to a flat point.)
CHANGE:
1. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘A.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “A” with a piece of marked tape on the table or a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
2. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘B.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “B” with a piece of marked tape on the table or a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
3. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘C.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “C” with a piece of marked tape on the table or a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
4. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘D.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “D” with a piece of marked tape on the table or a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
5. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO CHANGE THE (indicated object), I WANT YOU TO CHANGE THE ‘S POSITION FROM ‘A’ TO ‘B.’ DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
6. “CHANGE.”
7. “DID YOU CHANGE THE ?”
8. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO CHANGE THE , I WANT YOU TO CHANGE THE ‘S POSITION FROM ‘B’ TO ‘C.’ DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
9. “CHANGE.”
10. “DID YOU CHANGE THE ?”
11. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO CHANGE THE , I WANT YOU TO CHANGE THE ‘S POSITION FROM ‘C’ TO ‘D.’ DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
12. “CHANGE.”
13. “DID YOU CHANGE THE ?”
(Repeat commands 1-13, 1-13, etc., until CHANGE has been run to a flat point.)
(Note: When the commands 1-13 are repeated, the locations of the designated spots do not have to be the same each time as this can make the process too much like duplication and bring the preclear to predict the process too easily and do it machinewise.)
STOP:
1. “I AM GOING TO TELL YOU TO GET THE (indicated obiect) MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.” (Auditor indicates direction with his hand.) “SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE I WILL TELL YOU TO STOP. THEN YOU STOP THE . DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
2. “GET THE MOVING.”
3. “STOP!”
4. “DID YOU STOP THE ?”
(Repeat commands 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., until STOP on that object has been run to a flat point.)
These three steps (Start, Change, Stop) are done in that order and then repeated. It will be discovered that once Stop has been flattened, Start is now unflattened and can be flattened all over again by running it anew. Similarly, Change will be found to be unflat and again Stop will be found to be unflat. Thus, one runs Start and one runs Change and then one runs Stop, in that order, over and over and over again until all three are flat and the pc has a cognition and very good indicators. (An F/N will also be present if the pc is put on the meter. Ref: HCOB 20 Feb. 70, FLOATING NEEDLES AND END PHENOMENA) The pc might go exterior before all three stages (Start, Change, Stop) have been run, and if this occurs, the auditor should end off the SCS ON AN OBJECT process at that point.
SCS ON A BODY
The second part of Start-Change-Stop is “SCS ON A BODY.”
There are four stages to SCS ON A BODY: START, CHANGE, STOP and STOP SUPREME.
These are the commands for SCS ON A BODY:
START:
1. “I AM GOING TO ASK YOU TO START THE BODY. I AM NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO STOP.”
2. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO START THE BODY, START THE BODY. OKAY?”
3. “START!”
4. “DID YOU START THE BODY?”
(Repeat commands 1, 2, 3, 4, l, 2, 3, 4, etc., until START has been run to a flat point.)
CHANGE:
1. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘A.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “A” with a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
2. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘B.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “B” with a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
3. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘C.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “C” with a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
4. “THIS SPOT WE ARE GOING TO CALL ‘D.’ “ (Auditor indicates spot “D” with a marked piece of paper on the floor or a chalkmark or an imaginary spot as appropriate.)
5. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO CHANGE THE BODY, I WANT YOU TO CHANGE THE BODY’S POSITION FROM ‘A’ TO ‘B.’ DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
6. “CHANGE.”
7. “DID YOU CHANGE THE BODY?”
8. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO CHANGE THE BODY, I WANT YOU- TO CHANGE THE BODY’S POSITION FROM ‘B’ TO ‘C.’ DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
9. “CHANGE.”
10. “DID YOU CHANGE THE BODY? “
11. “WHEN I ASK YOU TO CHANGE THE BODY, I WANT YOU TO CHANGE THE BODY’S POSITION FROM ‘C’ TO ‘D.’ DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?”
12. “CHANGE.”
13. “DID YOU CHANGE THE BODY?”
(Repeat commands 1-13, 1-13, etc., until CHANGE has been run to a flat point.)
(Note: When the commands 1-13 are repeated, the locations of the designated spots do not have to be the same each time as this can make the process too much like duplication and bring the preclear to predict the process too easily and do it machinewise.)
STOP:
1. “I AM GOING TO TELL YOU TO GET THE BODY MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.” (Auditor indicates direction with his hand.) “THEN AT SOME POINT ALONG THE LINE I WILL TELL YOU TO STOP. WHEN I DO, I WANT YOU TO STOP THE BODY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?”
2. “GET THE BODY MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION.”
3. “STOP! “
4. “DID YOU STOP THE BODY?”
(Repeat commands 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., until STOP has been run to a flat point.)
These three steps (Start, Change, Stop) are done in that order and then repeated. It will be found that once Stop has been flattened, Start is now unflattened and can be flattened all over again by running it anew. Similarly, Change will be found to be unflat and again Stop will be found to be unflat. Thus, one runs Start and one runs Change and then one runs Stop, in that order, over and over and over again until all three appear to be flat.
One should not then suppose that the whole of Start-Change-Stop is flat since he still has STOP SUPREME to run.
STOP SUPREME:
1. “I’M GOING TO ASK YOU TO GET THE BODY MOVING. AND AT SOME POINT I AM GOING TO TELL YOU TO STOP. AND WHEN I DO, I WANT YOU TO STOP THE BODY AS FAST AS YOU CAN AND HOLD IT AS STILL AS YOU CAN. OKAY?”
2. “GET THE BODY MOVING.”
3. “STOP! “
4. “DID YOU DO IT?”
(Repeat commands 1, 2, 3, 4, l, 2, 3, 4, etc., until STOP SUPREME has been run to a flat point.)
The auditor would now run Start again on the body and so on until neither Start, Change, Stop nor Stop Supreme produces change and the pc has a cognition and very good indicators. (An F/N will also be present if the pc is put on the meter. Ref: HCOB 20 Feb. 70, FLOATING NEEDLES AND END PHENOMENA) The pc might go exterior before all four stages (Start, Change, Stop, Stop Supreme) have been run, and if this occurs, the auditor should end off the SCS ON A BODY process at that point.
The auditor always acknowledges the pc for every execution of an auditing command.
Whenever the pc is standing to execute a command, the auditor is standing next to the pc. The auditor should guide the pc around slightly—not by touching him very much, but occasionally attracting his attention with a tap on the elbow. This puts a reality there and brings about greater ARC in the session.
SCS can be run very sloppily by some auditors who do not have very much experience with it. The only way to err on running SCS is in the direction of imprecision and bad ARC. ARC does not mean nonconfronting. It is perfectly easy to be precise with high ARC.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MAY 1980
Remimeo
All Staff
All Orgs
All Missions
C/Ses MOs, MLOs
Purif I/C
Tech/Qual
Purification Rundown Series 5
PURIFICATION RUNDOWN CASE DATA
Refs:
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB Purif RD Series 1
Rev. 21.4.83 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
HCOB 30 Dec. 79 Purif RD Series 2
HOW TO BUILD A SAUNA
HCOB 3 Jan. 80RA Purif RD Series 3
Rev. 8.8.83 PURIFICATION RUNDOWN AND
ATOMIC WAR
HCO PL 6 Dec. 76R ILLEGAL PCs, ACCEPTANCE
Rev. 27.5.80 OF—HIGH CRIME PL
HCOB 14 Feb. 80R Purif RD Series 4
Rev. 31.7.85 RESEARCH DATA ON
NUTRITIONAL VITAMIN
INCREASES ON THE
PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
HCOB 29 Feb. 80 Purif RD Series 6
THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN:
PREGNANCY AND BREAST
FEEDING
HCOB 7 Mar. 80 DIET, COMMENTS UPON
The Purification Rundown is undertaken by those who wish to free themselves from the restimulative effects of drug residues and biochemical factors which would otherwise prevent or inhibit them from making the spiritual improvement which is possible with Dianetic and Scientology processing.
From the floods of highly enthusiastic letters and reports of glowing results that continue to roll in, it accomplishes this with resounding benefit and successes that are even beyond the original expectations.
Since the initial release of the research data, those who have completed the rundown number well up in the thousands. Along with the numerous accounts received of wins and changes and gain have come requests for more data on some aspects of the rundown.
To satisfy these requests, several Case Supervisors who were doing case supervision of the Purification Rundown and a number of people who were on or had completed the program were interviewed so as to obtain more information for your use in handling the rundown.
In all, 6 Case Supervisors from 5 major areas and a total of 120 persons from those areas were carefully surveyed. Their data is given in this HCOB, along with additional data from unsolicited reports, where the information was verified by folder study.
These summarized findings are based on results from a wide spectrum of cases, including those with heavy, medium or light street-drug history, those with history of medical drugs in varying degrees and some few with minimal drugs of any kind reported.
This information is not intended to take the place of individual medical advices given to persons by their doctors in doing the rundown.
1. WHAT IS THE OPTIMUM DAILY LENGTH OF TIME ON THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN FOR MOST PEOPLE?
From the many cases interviewed and from C/S data, 5 hours exercise and sauna daily has been found to be ideal for the majority of people on the Purification Rundown. The rundown apparently works like a bomb when the highest percentage of this time is spent in the sauna and a lesser percentage in running. (Example: A good ratio has been found to be approximately 20 to 30 minutes of running to get the circulation up and the remainder of the time in the sauna for a total of 5 hours.)
Not everyone has gone immediately onto a full 5-hour stint right from the start (and some have successfully done the entire program on a shorter daily schedule, as covered later in this issue). In both the running and the sauna, where the right gradient was applied, particularly when beginning the program, it went very smoothly. Age and current physical condition and stamina can all enter into it. Among the many surveyed were those who required a few days to work up to 5 hours daily, but once there, it proved to be the optimum daily period for them, as it has for so many people.
Additionally, on such a schedule the Purification Rundown can and has been completed effectively in the shortest possible amount of time.
Most people approached the 5-hour daily program eagerly and enthusiastically. Some were found apt to plunge in a bit out-gradiently at the start, and this was handled by having them work up gradually lo where they could run 20 to 30 minutes without strain and take the sauna time at the rate they could handle it, especially to begin with.
One area reported a few people staying in the sauna too long with no break and turning on headaches and other unnecessary reactions that way. The purpose should not be to see how long one can stay in the sauna for any one stretch of time, and this had to be clarified with several such enthusiasts. What worked best was when the person had a good sweat going and had been in the sauna sweating for a while, then coming out, getting some fresh air and space and cooling off, as needed, and going right back in for more sweating. When plenty of liquids (many people take water jugs into the sauna), enough salt or potassium or Bioplasma were used, the sauna time went very well.
These are some of the points which were found to get and keep the person winning.
2. CAN THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN BE SATISFACTORILY COMPLETED ON LESS THAN 5 HOURS DAILY?
This has been piloted where circumstances honestly prevented some persons from doing the rundown 5 hours daily. It was found that the rundown can be completed effectively by a good many cases on less than 5 hours per day, provided the person is getting benefit and change on the shorter schedule.
The shorter schedules ranged from 4 hours down to a minimum of 21/2 hours daily, always with a higher percentage of time spent in the sauna than in running.
The absolute minimum daily period found to give good return on the rundown was 21/2 hours total running and sauna time. This period would then be spent as follows: approximately 20 to 30 minutes of running and the remaining 2 hours or so in the sauna.
The same gradients applied when the person was on or starting on a 21/2 hour daily schedule as on any other schedule.
C/S approval would be obtained for the person to do the rundown on this shorter schedule, as there are other factors that enter into it. Any medical advice or order for the person to be on the shorter schedule would, of course, need to be followed.
The rundown can and in most cases has taken longer to complete on a shortened daily schedule, but survey results show that it can be done successfully by a good many people at a minimum of 21/2 hours daily provided all other points of the rundown are standardly maintained.
3. DOES THE EXTENT OF A PERSON’S DRUG HISTORY SEEM TO BE A FACTOR IN HOW MUCH TIME WOULD BE SPENT DAILY ON THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN?
Per all the research and survey data thus far; the extent of drug history is definitely a factor in determining how much time daily an individual would spend on the rundown.
Beyond any doubt, the survey showed that those with heavy or even mediumly heavy drug histories benefited most from the 5-hour daily schedule. This can apply to persons with heavy medical-drug histories as well as to those who have had heavy street drugs.
There are reports on record of persons with heavy drug histories who, though they had done fairly well at the beginning of the rundown on 21/2 hours a day (some phenomena turning on and blowing), did not begin to turn on restimulation of actual “trips” and blow through them until they got onto a 5-hour daily schedule.
Others reported that if something turned on while in the sauna, they made it a point to stick carefully to the sauna time (taking short breaks as necessary for water, salt or potassium or to cool off) until the manifestation blew, and they then came out feeling good and refreshed. These same persons reported that if they short-cut the sauna time because something uncomfortable had turned on they came out feeling bad or dull and it would then take longer to blow through the manifestation.
Even some people with very light drug histories reported feeling calmer and more uptone after a stint in the sauna which was long enough to permit them to get through any restim or discomfort that had turned on.
There is everything to be said for putting a person on a schedule which will permit him to handle these factors, and it was found particularly important that those with heavy or mediumly heavy drug histories were scheduled properly so that they were able to get full return from the action and wind up with the EP.
4. WHO DETERMINES WHAT DAILY LENGTH OF TIME THE PERSON SHOULD BE ON ON THE RUNDOWN?
On any question as to daily schedule, the C/S would adjudicate as to the daily time period for the individual.
In any case where the person was doing the rundown on a special medical program, the C/S would ensure any doctor’s orders regarding schedule were adhered to.
The C/S’s first consideration would be what is going to give the person the most gain. Wherever possible the person would do 5 hours daily and most people have done this. In instances where a shorter daily schedule was actually required for best results on some individuals, the schedule was adjusted per C/S adjudication.
In cases where persons honestly had limited time, these were considered for the minimum 21/2 -hour daily time period, as it would have been altered importance to deny them the rundown otherwise. But it was necessary to ensure that each person could and did make progress on the shorter daily schedule as he continued it and, if not, getting him onto the proper regimen.
Some who started at 21/2 hours daily later requested to move up to the 5-hour period, and there have been cases where persons on the shorter schedule were getting heavy restimulation of drugs which they could not handle on the shorter period, and when switched to the 5-hour period by the C/S, they did remarkably better. This can occur, apparently, with street-drug or medical-drug users and is something for the C/S to bear in mind. The heavier drug cases were, where possible, put on the 5-hour schedule to begin with.
Again, per the survey data, correct gradient was the watchword here, as in all aspects of the Purification Rundown.
The C/Sing of cases on the rundown would not be done rotely but always done on an individual basis with the individual never pushed further or faster than he could go. (To do otherwise would be a violation of the tech of the rundown and a violation of the tech on gradients.)
The successful action has been to get the person on a schedule where he is winning and able to handle what comes up and then ensure he gets in that amount of time each day and preferably at the same time each day.
Regularity of schedule plays a big part in completing the rundown smoothly and effectively with all the benefit to be had.
5. WHAT REACTIONS HAVE BEEN NOTED WHEN PARTS OF THE RUNDOWN WERE SKIMPED OR WHEN THE RUNDOWN WAS DONE IRREGULARLY?
LIMITED GAIN PER HOUR
One of the factors examined closely in the course of this survey was whether or not there was a common sauna time-limit for most people (within the 5 hours) after which the person got tired and the individual got less return for the remainder of the period.
In those cases where the rundown was being carried out very standardly, there were no reports of such tiredness setting in before the 5 hours were up which were due to length of time spent in the sauna. (Some of these cases reported they experienced tiredness as part of a restimulation of drug reactions, etc., but they were able to spot it as such and blow through it within the 5-hour period. )
However, there were 24 reports from individuals stating they did get tired in the sauna well within the 5 hours and got limited or no benefit from it beyond that tiring point. The daily time limits for gain reported by these 24 cases varied widely from person to person, the reported limits ranging from 4 hours down to 21/2 hours or less. The individual’s drug history did not seem to be a factor, as the reports came from persons whose drug histories ranged from heavy down to few or no drugs, medical or otherwise.
These 24 cases were looked into carefully, and when all the pertinent data was examined (some of it obtained by metered interview), what showed up were departures from the standard procedure as given in the Purification Rundown HCOBs.
The departures found were (in order of frequency):
a. Not enough sleep;
b. Insufficient salt or potassium or Bioplasma taken while in the sauna or before running, OR a combination of (a) and (b);
c. Dropped out vitamins that day, skimping on vitamins or taking vitamins sporadically;
d. An undetected and/or unhandled vitamin deficiency.
In one case out of the 24 the person was found to be anemic and he should not have put himself onto the program. This was handled by getting the person onto a special medical program to be carried out under medical supervision before the rundown could be completed.
Correction of the other cases brought about smoother progress and much improved results.
At best, any one of the above-listed outnesses or omissions could result in the person tiring too quickly, experiencing unnecessary discomfort, getting limited gain per hour and prolonging the rundown unnecessarily. The apparency would be that the rundown was not working when in actual fact it was not being applied standardly.
Where a person on any schedule reports he is tiring at a certain point and getting little or no benefit per hour spent beyond that point, one would need to determine if an adjustment of the daily time period was needed. But, as has been found, additionally and always one would carefully examine exactly what the person was doing on each section of the rundown and get any outnesses rectified.
Regardless of whether the person is on the maximum or minimum daily schedule, departures from other aspects of the procedure would decrease the benefits until these departures were handled.
SLEEP
In the 24 cases mentioned above and in some other cases reporting problems on the rundown, by far the most common outness found was lack of sufficient sleep.
This is covered in the original bulletin under the section on a properly ordered personal schedule. However, it should be reemphasized here that adequate sleep has been found to be a vital factor in the correct application of this rundown. People function best when they are sufficiently rested.
Some tiredness has not been uncommon at certain intervals during the course of the rundown, even when the procedure was being carried out standardly. It can occur when the person first goes onto the program and needs to build up to the full daily time period on a gradient. It can also occur as part of the restimulation in connection with medical- or street-drug residues or as part of restim of an old illness, etc., any of which the person might run through while on this program. There are many cases on record of persons on the rundown turning on and blowing through periods of tiredness or fatigue connected with past illness and/or medical or drug experiences and coming through them far brighter and more energetic.
But it must be borne in mind that the Purification Rundown can be strenuous. Trying to do it on too little sleep would be a severe violation. A person observably needs enough sleep in order to cope with the changes he is undergoing. Per C/S reports, where this has been violated the person has often wound up having a rough time of it. Quite apart from any mere tiredness, any reactions which are there to be restimulated by drug residuals can (due to insufficient sleep) produce unnecessary and nonoptimum reactions.
Adequate sleep while on the Purification Rundown has proven to be every bit as important as it is when one is on a routine auditing program and is part of a properly ordered personal schedule. One obviously can’t expect to make the gains possible on the Purification Rundown unless this point is in.
And one must be okay medically to go onto the rundown in the first place.
SAUNA VENTILATION
Correct ventilation of the sauna is covered in HCOB 30 Dec. 79, HOW TO BUILD A SAUNA, and it is reiterated here as a must.
Improper sauna ventilation is reported as a contributive factor in a person tiring too quickly. It reportedly can bring on lassitude (weariness of body or mind from harsh climate), air hunger or any number of other symptoms which some persons have, in error, attributed to other causes. This has in some cases prolonged the rundown or given the appearance of the rundown being unflat when actually it was complete.
Those immediately responsible for delivering the Purification Rundown, as well as the executives of the org, are responsible for ensuring the sauna has been constructed and is being operated standardly with a sufficient oxygen supply for the number of persons using it. This also ties in with correctly staggering the scheduling of people for the sauna. One wouldn’t jam too many people in the sauna at once, from the standpoint of ordinary comfort as well as sufficient oxygen supply.
OVERHEATING AND SALT DEPLETION
An R-factor on the effects of overheating was found to be essential for a person beginning the rundown, as well as basic hatting on how to handle this on an emergency basis should it occur.
The symptoms of overheating and/or salt or potassium depletion—dizziness, feeling faint, weakness, clammy skin, becoming overheated, etc.—are taken up in HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB, Purif RD Series 1, THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM.
Beginning persons would need hatting on these points so as not to confuse these symptoms with the manifestations that can turn on when restimulation in connection with drug residuals is occurring. It is common knowledge and a matter of good common sense that overheating and/or salt or potassium depletion can be prevented by sufficient salt, potassium or Bioplasma intake and by cooling off periodically as necessary during the sauna period. But where these symptoms occurred, they would be handled and not considered something the person must “go through.”
Additionally, if perspiration ceases while in the sauna—the body suddenly stops sweating and the skin becomes hot and dry—it’s an indicator that needs immediate handling. This is a clamping down on the part of the body, a resistance to expelling, and it is the first sign of a heatstroke.
The Standard First Aid Personal Safety booklet put out by the American National Red Cross covers the symptoms of heat exhaustion/heatstroke and the immediate aid to be given for such.
One would get the person out of the sauna at once and cool him off with a cold or cool shower or sponging, or start with a lukewarm shower and gradually make it cooler. Fluids and salt, potassium or Bioplasma would be given.
This reference would be kept on hand, readily available, in the sauna location.
Hatting on all the above points would be included in the R-factor the person is given when he begins the rundown. Salt or potassium depletion as a chronic condition would be handled in liaison with the person’s doctor.
NUTRITION
What showed up throughout the survey data was the importance of the daily nutritional vitamins, minerals, oil, Cal-Mag and vegetables and the role that these nutritional elements play in handling, on the Purification Rundown, the traumatic effects of the restimulation of drugs, as covered in some detail in the original bulletin.
In each area it was observed that dropping out any of these supplements while on the program, skimping on them or taking them only sporadically, contrary to the program as approved by the person’s doctor, could create or intensify deficiencies which would then throw a curve into the rundown that would show up in any number of ways—tiring quickly, lack of energy, upset stomach, nausea, a general “not feeling good” or actually getting sick in some way, to name a few.
Any omissions of these standard elements were found to interfere with the progress and purpose of the rundown, which is to free up the individual for spiritual improvement by handling the restimulative effects of accumulated residual drugs and toxins.
With the increase in numbers of those doing the rundown, many more persons are now reported to have successfully completed it under close supervision on the nutritional vitamin and mineral increases, including niacin, within the ranges given in the original research data published in HCOB 14 Feb. 80R, Rev. 31.7.85, Purif RD Series 4, RESEARCH DATA ON NUTRITIONAL VITAMIN INCREASES ON THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN, with approval for such supplements from a medical doctor.
Many areas report it has also been helpful to have a good familiarity with the Adelle Davis books on nutrition and diet, as listed by title in HCOB 7 Mar. 80, DIETS, COMMENTS UPON.
Where individual tolerances were taken into consideration under medical supervision and any vitamin imbalance or deficiency handled under medical supervision, as stipulated in the bulletins on the rundown, these ranges as published in the issues on the original research were reported to be highly workable for most.
In areas where the rundown has been successfully delivered, the person’s originations regarding his tolerance for or reactions to certain vitamins were never ignored. These would always be looked into and a correct solution worked out in alignment with the data in the original bulletin, with the assistance of the Medical Liaison Officer in liaison with the doctor or between the individual and his doctor.
In reported cases where the person was having some difficulty and some nutrient imbalance was the actual cause of the upset, where the vitamins and minerals were properly adjusted as above there was invariably improvement. But it was necessary to first determine that the person actually was taking the vitamins and other nutritional elements he was supposedly taking and in what amounts or if he was taking them only sporadically.
It is the responsibility of the person who has undertaken to do the rundown to keep those overseeing the rundown well informed as to his daily actions and the results. It is also his responsibility to see his doctor where any irregularity or upset indicates such. Naturally, it is also his option to see his doctor at any point he wishes on his progress on the rundown.
From all the reported data, it is not unusual at certain points of the rundown for some to protest a bit at the large quantities of vitamins taken. The protest is not in regard to results or benefits but simply in regard to the quantities to get down. While the niacin was always taken all at one time, in several areas it was found most viable to take the remainder of the vitamins at various intervals during the day, after meals or with snacks. One medical doctor has suggested that absorption of the needed nutrients is better accomplished in this way. The exception to this would be where one or more of the vitamins or minerals had been specifically suggested by the MD to be taken at certain set intervals.
Also reported was the datum that there is a hidden factor to look for if a person is having difficulty, and that is the person is not eating but is going along mainly on something like vitamins and niacin and yogurt alone. Or he has made some other major change in his eating habits. This was found in one area and totally explained why the person was having trouble on the rundown.
Departures such as this were found quite often to come about as the result of exchange of verbal data among persons doing the rundown, so this line was watched to ensure the procedure was being followed as given, not someone else’s version of it or some experimentation of it on his own.
SCHEDULE IRREGULARITIES
Probably the biggest single factor found in keeping the person progressing smoothly on through to successful completion of the program was regularity of the actions. That included regularity of the timed schedule, nutrition, sleep and the whole works.
Where any one part of the procedure was being done erratically, it would throw the other parts out or give that apparency, and the effect could sometimes be quite puzzling to the C/S or to the person’s doctor and others assisting in the administration of the program.
Per C/S observation and other survey data, where people who had otherwise been doing well began skipping a day here or there, skimping or cutting down on the daily purification time or missing sleep, it usually resulted in upset of some degree. They began to report “feeling bad” or feeling “sickish” or actually getting sick following some irregularity or disruption of the routine. Where this occurred, the discomfort or upset was more severe among those with heavier drug histories.
A possible explanation of this is that the process has been interrupted and one is getting a backlogging of the drug and other toxic effects rather than a routine release of these at the same rate as when the person was on schedule.
Therefore, the person could be subject to a piling up of the restimulative effects of these at a rate not easily handled by him, and this could be further compounded by any continuation of an erratic schedule.
The handling was to get the person onto or back onto a proper and predictable daily regimen and maintain it through to completion of the rundown.
What was stressed here was that in this, as well as all parts of the Purification Rundown, it is a matter of the person following the normal and generally accepted rules for good health. He would then be in the best possible shape to attain the lasting spiritual benefits which are available to him. This is, of course, the sole and ultimate objective of the Purification Rundown.
DETERMINING AND HANDLING WHAT WAS WRONG
Here are some of the more successful actions reported from an area with high Purification Rundown completions.
Any bad indicators, odd or strange indicators, upset, etc., would be always picked up and handled at once.
If the person was in some heavy restimulation and just wanted to get through it without interruption, he was not forced or badgered but permitted to go through it easily and gradually at his own rate and he would then come out the other side all right. Per reports, most people know when they are in a drug restimulation and will tell you.
In a case where the cause of upset wasn’t immediately obvious, the Purif I/C or D of P would simply sit down with the person and talk it over to find out what was going on.
What worked very well was to have the individual himself read over all points of the rundown as contained in the issues and he himself would then very often spot and point out where he went off the rails. And in most cases he would prove to be right. It was very often found to be a matter of something having been altered or added or dropped out and this would be resolved by getting him back on the correct regimen and doing it by the book.
If it didn’t appear to resolve, no guesswork or experimentation was done. The person would be sent to his doctor for a medical check and any necessary adjustment of his regimen.
In summary, it has been found that there are any number of ways in which one can depart from the correct procedure and the effects of one such departure can be similar to or appear to be similar to those of another, which can make some cases look complicated indeed, and unnecessarily so. So it has also been found that it is vital to indoctrinate the person on the standard actions of the rundown at the outset and then do everything possible to preserve that standardness throughout.
6. ON THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN, HAS IT BEEN FOUND THAT THE “ALL BLEND” OIL MUST BE TAKEN “STRAIGHT” OR CAN IT BE MIXED WITH SOME OTHER FOOD?
Per survey data, some individuals had reported difficulty taking the “All Blend” oil by itself, usually due more to the texture than to the actual taste.
The handling, as there seemed to be no reason why the oil could not be taken in orange juice or mixed with some other food of the person’s choice and taken that way, was to have many people on the rundown do just that, with good result. Others simply took the oil straight. (An exception, in taking the oil mixed with other food, is that you would not cook food in the oil and consider that the “All Blend” oil ration for the day!)
As the oil will coat the stomach and intestinal walls for a certain period, which can prevent the full assimilation of other nutrients, especially the watersoluble vitamins, one doctor has suggested that it is probably best taken before going to bed or at least at a different mealtime than when the vitamins and minerals are taken.
Regarding the amount of oil to be taken, this did vary with the individual. However, a medical doctor who is also a Scientology auditor and Purification Rundown C/S and who has handled numerous people on the rundown has reported that the most standard oil dosage found to be required thus far by most persons he has handled on the rundown is between 2 and 4 tablespoonfuls a day. Others (particularly some 250-pounders he has on the rundown) are on considerably more oil than this. The recommendation of this medical doctor is that on any oil dosage one would reduce the intake if the oil showed up in a bowel movement or in the body sweat, as in such case there is an excess of oil which is not being put to use but simply expelled.
7. HAVE THERE BEEN ANY REPORTS OF A DIFFERENCE IN RESULTS WHEN NIACIN IS TAKEN IN POWDER FORM INSTEAD OF IN TABLET FORM?
Per reports thus far, this seems to vary among different individuals.
The observation of one medical doctor supervising the rundown is that these variances are not unusual.
Some persons have reported more immediate and/or intense results when niacin was taken in powder form. This difference was most often reported by persons who had reached the higher dosages, had little or no results from a large, highly compressed tablet and then switched to the same dosage in powder form and got more intense results.
However, at least two people report that they got results when taking 100, 200, 300 and 400 mg of niacin in tablets of 100 mg each; then, when 500 mg were taken in a single 500 mg tablet, nothing occurred. However, next day, when 500 mg were taken in 5 tablets of 100 mg each, results were obtained at the 500 mg dosage.
Still others reported effective results from niacin tablets of any dosage, including the larger tablets of higher dosage.
What has been done in one area is to use tablets of 100 mg niacin each until the 1000 mg niacin dosage is reached and to use niacin in powder form thereafter. Where this is done, or where niacin in powder form is used exclusively, the measurement was and would need to be exactly done.
The label on a powdered niacin container should carry instructions as to how to measure the powder content. With the brands that have been used, one teaspoon provides 3000 mg of pure niacin. Note that this is per the English system of weights and measures. One would need to use the standard measuring teaspoon. In areas of the world where the metric system is used (and where “teaspoon” sizes vary), an amount equivalent to a standard teaspoon measurement would be 4.9 ml.
8. WHAT HAS BEEN OBSERVED TO BE THE MOST SUCCESSFUL GRADIENT GENERALLY IN INCREASING NIACIN ON THE RUNDOWN?
Within the boundaries of the medical doctor’s advice for the individual, the most workable gradient in the majority of cases observed was generally found to be starting the person on 100 mg of niacin and increasing it in increments of 100 mg until the person was up to 1000 mg daily. A steeper gradient was then used as one went up to higher dosages. It was found that many persons could take increases of from 300 to 500 mg at one time when they reached the higher dosage ranges. Note that this does not refer to a daily increase, necessarily, but refers to the gradient in which the dosage was upped when an increased dosage was indicated.
Any increase was always based on individual tolerance, and there were exceptions to the “generally successful gradient” described above in every area surveyed. Certain individuals would and did require moving up on a lesser gradient according to their tolerances and according to individual medical advices.
On the other hand, in some instances a “grinding” phenomenon was observed where the individual:
a. held to a certain niacin dosage of, say, 500 mg day after day until nothing whatsoever was happening
or
b. held to an increase of only 100 mg at a time in the higher ranges of niacin, even though he was getting only brief, mild results, was very able to tolerate these effects and felt he could handle a steeper gradient.
By “grinding” phenomenon is meant an effect similar to running an engram late on the chain over and over without going earlier and the person getting irritated and frustrated with the rundown and feeling he is not making the progress he could be making.
In these instances, it was observed that when the persons who could progress at a faster rate with larger niacin increases (always with the other vitamins and minerals increased in correct ratio and by individual tolerance) did so, they went smoothly along on the rundown, handling what did crop up.
In all surveyed areas, when to introduce an increase in niacin was found to be as important as the amount of increase.
When niacin was increased:
a. after the effect of a certain dosage had diminished (not vanished totally)
and
b. when any other manifestations and restimulation which had turned on at that dosage had blown or diminished (as covered in the procedure given in the original bulletin),
good progress was made on the rundown on a one-for-one basis, providing all other points were standardly in.
In other words, it was recognized that there would very likely be various reactions and restimulations (as covered in the original bulletin) all of which would need to be taken into consideration when niacin amounts were increased.
When this was done correctly, excellent results were obtained. Questions arising on such increase were handled according to the person’s individual medical approval to do the rundown and further individual medical advices as needed.
It should be mentioned here that, along with this survey data, reports have been received of persons found taking niacin quietly on their own without being on the Purification Rundown and without being under any supervision, medical or otherwise, just to see what it would handle. This is not advised in any HCOB. It could result in artificially created deficiencies or in things turning on which are not then properly run out. Also, where a pc being audited was at the same time experimenting on his own with niacin dosages, it could present some puzzling aspects of the case to the Case Supervisor and could throw a curve into the C/Sing or programing.
The Purification Rundown has been carefully researched and piloted. It is concerned with freeing up the individual for future spiritual improvement. As such it is a programed action carried out daily under C/S supervision and with medical approval for the individual to be on the rundown and medical advices given as required. There is no issue which advises or advocates a person experimenting with it on his own.
9. HAS ANYONE COMPLETED THE RUNDOWN TO FULL END PHENOMENA BEFORE REACHING 5000 MG OF NIACIN?
Per the original research and all reported survey data, there are a number of people who have completed the rundown to full end phenomena on dosages under 5000 mg of niacin. Others have gone as high as that dosage before completing.
Apparently, in some areas there was, earlier on, some misinterpretation of the Purification Rundown HCOBs to the effect that one would be required to work up to a point where a 5000 mg niacin dosage produced no effect in order to achieve the EP—which is not the case. There is no statement in any HCOB to this effect.
The end phenomena is reached when the individual is free of the restimulative presence of residuals of past drugs and other toxic substances. He will no longer be feeling the effects of these impurities going into restimulation and there is a marked resurgence of overall spiritual well-being.
The fact of having a heavy drug history does not necessarily prolong the rundown. It can do so but it is not true in all cases. More important than anything else is keeping all points of the rundown in standardly, maintaining a wellbalanced personal schedule with enough rest and nutrients, and getting as much exercise and sauna as possible on a routine daily basis.
On such a schedule, persons of varying drug histories—some heavy, some light—have completed the rundown in 18 to 20 days at 5 hours a day, reaching the EP at amounts of niacin which differed with different individuals. Some have done so in less time.
From reports based on direct observation, apparently what can happen in some cases (not all) is that the residuals of past drugs and other chemicals (sometimes every drug or medicine the person has taken) can restimulate and turn on heavily in the first week or 10 days of the rundown at lower dosages of, say, up to 1000 mg niacin. It doesn’t always happen in an orderly fashion and it can be severe, but the person will handle these drug residuals, blow through any accompanying manifestations, and after that it can go totally flat with no effects showing up on the higher amounts of niacin. Others will turn on these effects in a more graduated sequence, one following the other, and it can take longer.
From the original research and piloting of the rundown, and from the reports of those currently delivering it and the personal reports from those who have completed or are on it, one can expect any variety of manifestations to crop up, not all of them comfortable by any means.
Where the person was on a sensible and well-kept schedule, with all other parts of the rundown fully in, these manifestations would deintensify and blow without undue discomfort or hang-up. As the toxic substances became active, he would experience their restimulative effects and come through these periods with nice wins. One would then see a gradual brightening of the person as he progressed.
Reported also was the fact that sometimes, especially on the lower niacin dosages, one could get a person coming through some drug experience with such a sense of relief and release and such a big win that he would report he had completed when he actually had more to do. Or a person would have an auditingtype cognition or a whole string of such cognitions and mistake that for the EP. These, of course, are excellent wins but not necessarily the end phenomena. Big wins can be expected during the course of the rundown, but in cases where the person was discontinued on the strength of such a win before all the toxic residuals had been handled, the person would come up with more to be done and would have to be returned to the rundown to complete it. One must be able to recognize the difference between a good win and the actual EP.
In all those areas surveyed, where a person was progressing well on the program he could be observed to be becoming more uptone and aware. He would start reporting exactly what was going on, what drug was turning on, what impurities and restimulations he was running out. He could usually tell if he had hit a tolerance level on a certain vitamin. All of these are valid reactions throughout the run. As the person would release and blow through whatever was there to turn on, the manifestations became less day by day, and he would reach a point where no further manifestations were coming up. He would look and feel remarkably better, brighter and more alert; he would have come through good wins and he would often know and state that he
felt free of impurities and their associated restimulative effects and originate on his own that he had done it. With all those indicators one could be pretty sure he had done it.
The amount of vitamin and mineral nutrients, exercise and sweat-out it has taken and will take to accomplish this on the Purification Rundown is an individual matter.
There is no hard-and-fast rule laid down anywhere that says a person must work up to 5000 mg niacin before he is complete.
10. WHAT IS THE “WIND DOWN” THAT FOLLOWS PURIFICATION RUNDOWN COMPLETION?
There is no such thing, unless one would give that term to the action of coming down off heavy vitamin and other nutrient dosages on a steep gradient, rather than abruptly, following Purification Rundown completion, as suggested in the original bulletin (HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB).
In one area it was found that this section of the bulletin was being misinterpreted to mean one gradiently did less of all the elements of the Purification Rundown—i.e., less sauna, less exercise, less vitamins, etc., each day—and this was being called a “wind down.” This is not stated in any of the HCOBs and is not a valid action.
The suggestion that is made is that one doesn’t abruptly simply cease the extra nutrients he has been taking but comes down from high dosages on a steep gradient to what would be a moderate daily normal requirement for him, per medical advices. And that along with this some moderate daily exercise will help him maintain good health.
Continuing all the elements of the Purification Rundown would amount to continuing the rundown itself past the point of valid completion and, further, would delay the person getting onto the auditing he is programed for as his next step.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON END PHENOMENA AND NIACIN
Certain additional questions have arisen regarding the end phenomena of the rundown in relation to niacin which should be taken up here so that the data is broadly known.
The first of these is:
11. CAN THE RUNDOWN BE CONSIDERED FLAT IF THE PERSON SEEMS TO HAVE REACHED THE EP AND IS GETTING NO MORE MANIFESTATIONS TURNING ON OR NO OTHER CHANGE OCCURRING BUT STILL GETS A SLIGHT RESULT FROM 5000 MG NIACIN?
The person could very well be complete, but there are several factors to be looked at regarding this point.
The person could be hung up on some outness in the early stages of the rundown which would show up on a full review of his Purification Rundown history. One could do a full inspection of his folder, particularly in the area of minerals and vitamins, what effect they had, were these dosages standard and kept in the proper balance, was the rundown administered standardly and done regularly. The person could be interviewed as well, and you might find some outness such as he doesn’t like vegetables, he never eats vegetables, etc., etc. So parts of the rundown could have been violated and this could be showing up in the manifestation described above. It may be that he has some deficiency which has been bypassed and thus some sort of hang-up was created. There is the possibility that if the rundown hasn’t been done properly throughout, one could get such a hang-up. And with that there’s a possibility of some deficiency alongside it which won’t allow a complete discharge. A medical check would be done if the folder shows irregularities to determine if this is the case and, if so, to get it remedied. Getting any such deficiency remedied and getting all points ofthe rundown in standardly would bring it to successful completion in a case
where such outnesses have existed.
There is also the possibility that the person simply has more to do on the rundown.
And there is the possibility, and this may be by far the most common, that the person has reached the EP and is in overrun.
If he has done the rundown standardly and has reached the end phenomena as described earlier in this bulletin and in HCOB 6 Feb. 78RB, the chances are he is complete on the rundown despite the fact he is still getting some slight result from 5000 mg of niacin.
It is possible to overrun the Purification Rundown if one is not well aware of what is to be looked for in the end phenomena. There have been cases of overrun where the person was continued for some weeks at 5000 mg (5 grams) of niacin with nothing more turning on than a slight effect. And there have been cases of overrun that occurred at less than 5000 mg of niacin.
The possibility exists here that if the point of completion of the rundown is reached and bypassed the person could begin to dramatize a niacin flush. It would be like any other bypassed condition, such as a bypassed F/N. The condition tends to hang up because it is not acknowledged or signalized to have ended. This is simply an educated guess as to how this could occur, but it is also borne out by careful study of several cases on record where bypass of the EP and overrun did take place.
After the person has been on the regimen for some time, has come through good changes and is handing you the indicators of the EP, carrying him on the rundown for 6 or 7 days with no further effects at any dosage is really an overrun. In some of these cases it appears that 5000 mg niacin isn’t doing anything that 3500 mg of niacin didn’t do.
To repeat, the end phenomena can and has been reached on 5000 mg of niacin and on dosages of lower than 5000 mg. Once the drug and chemical residuals are handled, they’re handled. The person will feel the difference.
Upping the dosage does not necessarily find more to be handled. And continuing the person past the EP can hang the whole thing up and produce a slight effect as a dramatization, either sporadically or each time the niacin is taken.
This can then become confusing to the person himself and to the C/S. If the overrun is continued, you’ll see the person begin to go downtone, even if only slightly. His indicators become a bit less bright, he may become disheartened. He may now be efforting to produce some result that isn’t there to be had and begin to feel the action is interminable. Certainly the person will appear less enthusiastic about the whole procedure and may begin to protest it. The picture now looks as if the rundown is unflat whereas what has happened is that he achieved the EP, reached a point where he felt great, was getting no further manifestation of any kind (if even for only a day) and the fact was not acknowledged but bypassed. Overrun phenomena then sets in.
C/Ses report there have been a few cases who “rabbited” (wanted to run away from continuing the rundown to its EP because it was uncomfortable or out of other considerations) and insisted they were complete after a very few days at low niacin dosage when little or nothing had yet turned on. But these cases were few and easily detected and handled by bringing them to a better understanding of the rundown and its purpose and what it does. In two such cases where the persons were allowed to attest after too brief and skimpy a run, they both went into drug restimulation which should and would have been handled routinely on the rundown. After full review of these cases, with medical participation, they were put back on the rundown and completed it properly.
Judging from reports, including the many personal reports received, by far the majority are eager beavers who can’t wait to turn on something on the rundown and blow through it. They report drugs, medicines, anesthetics, alcohol, restimulation of various biochemical reactions, somatics or other manifestations turning on and blowing, and they report them all enthusiastically and with great relief and look for more! Such cases will often know and tell you when they’ve honestly reached the EP.
One C/S also reported he had had cases on his lines where the person from all indications was complete and stated he was complete but wanted to continue a bit longer “just to make sure.” Allowed to go on, these cases promptly got into overrun phenomena, went downtone and were getting no change. In each case, when all was checked out, it was found the EP had been reached at the point the person stated he was complete. So it appears that on the Purification Rundown, just as in other rundowns, it doesn’t do to continue past a valid EP. Should it happen, it is handled simply by having the person spot when he did complete and acknowledging it.
What also showed up in the survey data was the rare bird who would try to handle his whole case on the rundown and who looked for some result above and beyond the EP of this rundown. Such a case would need to be given a very thorough R-factor on the rundown and be carefully C/Sed, with medical liaison as necessary, throughout.
It was found important to make real the fact that all that is being looked for here is the person free of the restimulative effects of past drug and toxic residuals so that the person can then be audited with optimum gain and spiritual enlightenment.
It is up to the Case Supervisor to know each case, to be familiar with the progress of each case, to keep the medical liaison lines in, and to know well the indicators to expect when the end phenomena has been reached so that it can be acknowledged and validated.
Another question that has come up with some frequency is:
12. WHAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR A PERSON WHO HAS GENUINELY COMPLETED THE RUNDOWN WITH NO NIACIN REACTION AT 5000 MG (OR LESS) THEN GETTING A REACTION LATER AT LOWER NIACIN DOSAGES?
Such a reaction, where the person has actually done the rundown standardly to its end phenomena, does not mean the rundown is unflat.
To understand this reaction one needs a good understanding of the bank and how it works. The specifics of what has happened in these instances can be quite variable, but what you are looking at here in general is that there has been an environmental shift or change which produced another type of bank key-in.
To begin with, we are living in a two-pole, a two-terminal universe. (Ref: HCOB 8 June 63R, Rev. 3.10.77, THE TIME TRACK AND ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS, BULLETIN 2: HANDLING THE TIME TRACK) It takes a two-terminal situation to hang something up.
On the Purification Rundown we are looking at two things: one, the actual drugs and toxic residuals in the body (and medical autopsies have shown that they are there) and two, the bank mock-up or facsimile of the drugs, drug residuals and their effects.
These two conditions are hung up—one of them playing against the other, in perfect balance. What the person is feeling is the two conditions, one of them the actual presence of the drug residuals, the other the bank mock-up of them. The thetan can actually, via his bank, mock up a perfect synthesis or a counterfeit of drugs. So you are getting two reactions here, one of them a total counterfeit but no less real to the person, nevertheless. The counterfeit is just bank restimulating and, oddly enough, the bank can approximate practically every drug there is under the sun. The bank can also approximate the effects of radiation and it will look just exactly like a physiologically caused effect.
I don’t think the bank can necessarily key in a physiological reaction where an actual physical basis for such has not existed somewhere on the person’s track. It can deform or change positions or rates of metabolism. It can change endocrine conditions and therefore can change various bodily conditions. And it is true that a thetan can mock up a facsimile strongly enough so that it hurts.
Probably the reason why the Purification Rundown works is that it handles the one side of it and thus fixes the person up so that the other side, the bank facsimile side of it, is no longer restimulative or in constant restimulation. It’s as simple as that.
What, amongst other things, is happening on the Purification Rundown is that you cause an upset of this perfect balance and suddenly this balance goes b-z-z-z-t! The balance isn’t there anymore so you don’t get the cross-reaction anymore.
But it takes auditing to totally erase the bank. In other words, while the balance has been upset, all of the bank facsimiles are not gone. They’re not keying in and they’re not being reinforced by the presence of drug residuals but they’re not necessarily blown.
A thetan can mock up anything. Thus, as the person is coming down off the rundown on gradient niacin and other vitamin dosages, he can hit an area where some factor in the environment can cause the facsimile to go into restimulation again. You can get a bank reaction which, so far as anyone could tell, would be absolutely identical to what the physiological reaction would be.
It doesn’t mean there are still accumulated residuals. It is that the bank or facsimile side of this two-terminal hang-up isn’t necessarily flat. It was flat for that period of time. Now the person drops back, moves into another environment, another period of time, probably goes out in the sun and gets himself a nice sunburn or something of this sort, and his bank cross-reacts.
That is the basic theory behind this type of manifestation.
Upon completion of the Purification Rundown, the person is now in good shape to receive auditing and get optimum gain from it. Auditing is what handles the bank. When the Purification Rundown is completed and the person has fully flattened Objectives, the Drug Rundown is his next step, and it is on the Drug Rundown that one handles the mental and spiritual reactions from drugs. An OT would (after OT III) be given the OT Drug Rundown. Or if the person is on NED for OTs, he would receive the NED for OTs Drug Rundown.
Thus, we are not looking at an endless run on the Purification Rundown. We’re seeking simply to handle the drug deposits and toxic residues in their restimulation and reinforcement of the bank, and vice versa. And by breaking up the balance of these two and handling the one side of it on the Purification Rundown, we are freeing up the person to handle the other side of it, the bank facsimile side of it, in auditing—and successfully.
With these factors handled, the individual is now ready for all the spiritual gain that can be achieved in his future processing.
_______________
If these summarized findings are of interest and helpful to those in the many, many areas where the Purification Rundown is being delivered, I am pleased to be able to give you this data.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by LRH
Technical Research
and Compilations
The Purification Rundown has as its sole purpose the handling of the restimulative effects of drugs and toxic residuals on a spiritual being. The Purification Rundown is a spiritual activity based on and administered according to the doctrine and practices of the religion of Scientology as set forth in the writings of L. Ron Hubbard and adopted by the Church. No part of the rundown is intended as the diagnosis, prescription for or treatment of any bodily or physical condition or ill. The Church is not responsible for the handling of any bodily or physical condition or ill, it being the responsibility of the individual to seek the competent medical advice and treatment of his doctor in such matters.
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 MAY 1980RA
REVISED 20 APRIL 1990
Remimeo
All Orgs
All Divisions
C/Ses
Co-audit Supervisor’s
Course
Co-auditors
Co-audit Series 1RA
CO-AUDIT DEFINED
Refs:
HCOB 29 May 80RA Co-audit Series 2RA
Rev. 20.4.90 CO-AUDITS: HOW TO RUN THEM
HCOB 30 May 80RA Co-audit Series 3RA
Rev. 21.4.90 SUPERVISING CO-AUDIT TRs
HCOB 31 May 80RA Co-audit Series 4RA
Rev. 21.4.90 STAFF CO-AUDITS
________________
The term “co-auditing” is an abbreviation for “cooperative auditing.”
A CO-AUDIT IS: A TEAM OF ANY TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE HELPING EACH OTHER REACH A BETTER LIFE WITH SCIENTOLOGY OR DIANETICS PROCESSING.
It is a cooperative action toward a very worthwhile goal.
The co-audit is an early Scientology and Dianetics innovation.
It was the bright idea used in the early days to. get auditing done in more volume and on a broader scale than would ever have been possible on a one-for-one basis at that time. It was also a means of training the many who were demanding training in this new technology, and providing them with the opportunity to get their own cases handled while at the same time giving them a subjective reality on the processes they were delivering to others.
It was then and is today a very valuable tool.
Co-audits are our quickest and most economical way of restoring vitality and purpose to the society, something I know all Scientologists are working with me to achieve.
Co-audits can handle the many, staff and public alike, who are reaching for those auditing actions meant to bring them up through the next levels toward Clearing and who are willing to bootstrap their way up through these levels.
THE PURPOSE OF A CO-AUDIT IS TO GET CO-AUDITORS UP THE GRADE CHART.
Co-auditing is not a limited activity. Any pair of Scientologists who have the interest and desire to help each other up the Grade Chart can co-audit.
CO-AUDITING OF SPECIFIC RUNDOWNS
Rundown co-audits are especially designed co-audit packages set up to permit co-audit team members, regardless of their training or lack of it, to audit each other through the full steps of a specific rundown.
Included in a rundown co-audit would be any and all study and training steps needed to prepare co-auditors to successfully audit each other to the full EP of that specific rundown.
The Method One Co-audit is one example of a specific rundown co-audit. The checksheet for this co-audit (HCO PL 25 Sept. 79R III) provides the technical theory and practical steps necessary to enable two co-auditors to take each other through Method One Word Clearing to full completion and EP of the action. It is a very popular action, easy to do, and gives tremendous case wins. It does not require professional auditor or word clearer training; one can simply do the Hubbard Method One Co-audit Course Checksheet with a twin.
Other co-audit packages on specific rundowns may be released from time to time. These rundown co-audit packages would be carefully planned and tailored to include the minimal but correct and necessary training gradients for delivery to public as well as staff.
This does not mean that, in the absence of such a package for a specific rundown, co-auditing could not be done. Auditors trained in the skills of a level or a particular rundown could co-audit that rundown, provided they are at that level pc-wise and training-wise. The co-audit would need to be organized and be properly supervised and C/Sed throughout, but the organization could be as minimal as providing a set-up for one such co-audit team.
PROFESSIONAL CO-AUDITS
A professional co-audit is a co-audit between auditors trained on the skills of a level who are auditing each other on that level. (A nonprofessional co-audit is one designed for co-auditors who have not had professional auditor training.)
Professional co-audits have long been a favored and highly successful method whereby Scientologists can move up the auditing and training sides of the Bridge.
Professional co-audits are for auditors who are doing the Professional Training Route and for auditors who have completed their training but haven’t themselves moved up the Grades.
Academy and Saint Hill Special Briefing Course students could and should co-audit and get themselves up the Grade Chart as they go, in pace with their training.
Professional co-auditing can be done following each auditor training course. It can also be done on special co-audits set up by orgs so that these auditors can continue to co-audit under the supervision of org tech terminals and use org facilities.
Such co-audits for public students would be charged for at a nominal rate and would include C/Sing, etc. A student can get all of his Grades and New Era Dianetics auditing on these co-audits.
NOTE
Orgs do not have the license to offer public nonprofessional co-audits on Grade 0-IV processing or on NED (New Era Dianetics).
Training courses are already very much streamlined.
Any public interested in co-auditing the Grades and New Era Dianetics should be routed onto the Academy Levels and the NED Course where they can rapidly complete their study and get onto the professional co-audits.
Thus an org’s concentration as far as public co-audits go would be on Div 6 co-audits, any specific rundown co-audit packages and professional co-audits on the Grades and New Era Dianetics.
STAFF CO-AUDITS
Staff co-audits are by far the most advantageous method for an org to ensure its staff get and stay in good case shape and move on up the Bridge.
A well-run staff co-audit is the answer to the problem of how an org gets all its staff audited.
The staff co-audit can be arranged to be done by trained staff auditors (teamed with each other) and/or untrained staff (teamed with each other).
It can include any processing from the beginning of the Grade Chart up through New Era Dianetics as well as processing on special rundowns designed for co-audit purposes.
In the case of untrained staff co-auditing, this would ideally begin with the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course. As part of the co-audit, the staff member would first be trained on TRs for co-audit level and Upper Indocs and then co-audit with his twin on a full battery of Objectives, as directed by the C/S.
Following this, the untrained staff co-auditors would need to be gradiently programed and C/Sed and taken step-by-step through the next Grade Chart action on a”read-it, drill-it, do-it” basis.
“Read-it, drill-it, do-it” means:
1. The co-auditors twin up and study and check each other out on the basic issues and skills for the process or Grade to be audited.
2. They drill the actual actions involved in running the process, under tight supervision of a trained Co-audit Supervisor.
3. They then audit each other on the process to EP, under the tight guidance of a trained Co-audit Supervisor.
Do you want to see an immediate upsurge in staff morale, activity level and enthusiasm? Establish a staff co-audit!
GUIDING FACTOR
The Grade Chart is the guiding factor in any co-audit. One doesn’t audit a pc on processes or rundowns above his Grade in violation of the Grade Chart, regardless of where the auditing is done or whether it is an HGC type of action or a co-audit action. On any co-audit, the process to be run is determined by the C/S and he uses the Grade Chart as the basic pc program in each individual case.
HCO PL 23 July 69, AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, and HCOB 21 Dec. 79, AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, CRAMMING ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, provide the guidelines for pairing up co-auditors of comparable case level and training level.
SUMMARY
Co-audits are for use. They spark immediate interest. They quickly bring people up to doingness. There is no better exchange for the auditing one gets than to deliver it to another and that in itself produces gain. They are the fastest, most satisfying method of getting lots of auditing delivered, of making lots of Releases and providing actual auditing experience.
If you want to turn your org scene into one of a bustling beehive of activity, get your co-audits established and running. It is within the means of any org to do so.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 MAY 1980RA
REVISED 20 APRIL 1990
Remimeo
All Orgs
Tech/Qual
Co-audit Supervisor
Courses
Supervisors
C/Ses
Co-audit Series 2RA
CO -AUDITS: HOW TO RUN T HEM
One of the simple secrets of a successful co-audit is administration.
Without smooth workable lines and hatted terminals on those lines who really know their business and run a snap and pop operation no org or mission can expect to succeed with its co-audits.
However, where lines and terminals are in and functioning smoothly, rapidly, routinely, you’ll have a high volume of co-auditors, many released pcs routing on to their next services, an active, uptone course room and new public banging on the door demanding co-audit courses.
It’s a very simple matter to run a highly successful co-audit. The key to that success is standard administration.
Any co-audit course, whether it is a specific rundown co-audit package, a professional co-audit on the Grades or NED or other type of co-audit, follows the principles and guidelines laid out in this issue.
CO-AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
Any fair-sized co-audit course, if one is to set it up to succeed, will require at least:
A Co-audit Supervisor—to supervise co-auditing actions. The Co-audit Supervisor must be tech trained to a level which enables him to handle the materials being co-audited.
Course Supervisors—for the theory and practical sections of co-audits where some preparatory training is done.
In a small org or mission these posts might be covered by one person, but it is not optimum.
Add to this: (a) a C/S to case supervise the co-auditing sessions and (b) a Course Admin (who might be able to service more than one co-audit), and one would have an ideal scene, personnelwise, for a co-audit set up to deliver in volume and expand.
CO-AUDIT THEORY
Refs:
HCO PL 2 Dec. 62 SUPERVISOR’S STABLE DATA
HCO PL 24 Oct. 68 SUPERVISOR KNOW-HOW
RUNNING THE CLASS
HCOB 25 June 71R Word Clearing Series 3R
Rev. 25.11.74 BARRIERS TO STUDY
Anyone dealing with the administration and supervision of a co-audit course must realize first and foremost that it is not a study course. It is not a study activity. It is a doingness activity. Students are there to do the actions of auditing, not to learn theory. This must be the Supervisors’ orientation toward the course.
The students enrolling on the course are going to be eager beavers and the Course Supervisors must have the attitude of contributing to the enthusiasm the students will bring to the course. The students will be there to move further along the Bridge and this is what the Supervisors must make sure happens.
Auditing, auditing, auditing is what is stressed and that is what is delivered.
On a professional co-audit, the co-auditors will already have been trained in the theory and skills of the level they are auditing.
On a rundown co-audit package, co-auditors will often have no previous technical training. New co-auditors do have to learn what they will be applying but this has been cut down to the bare bones essentials. They are given mainly the “How” and only enough of the “Why” to make their co-audit actions meaningful.
The student is not being trained here to think with his materials. He is being trained to exactly apply the auditing procedure rat-tat-tat. If the pc does “A,” the auditor is trained to respond with “B.” And auditor and pc alike soon learn that this produces results.
Also, for all their eagerness these students will not necessarily have done a Student Hat so they will be operating without the benefit of a command of study tech.
For these reasons, the Supervisors must be particularly good at spotting and handling the manifestations of misunderstood words and manifestations of skipped gradients. The third barrier to study, lack of mass, probably won’t be as prevalent on a co-audit as on a straight study course, but might possibly occur on any of the co-audit’s theory sections. Not being trained in study tech, the students will not necessarily be able to spot these things. The Supervisors must be alert for them and handle them when they occur.
TWINNING AND COURSE ATTITUDE
Ref:
HCOB 21 Aug. 79 TWINNING
HCO PL 23 July 69 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES
HCOB 21 Aug. 79, TWINNING, is applied to the letter on co-audits. Nowhere is this tech more applicable than on a co-audit course.
Twinning also enhances the atmosphere the Supervisors must establish on the course.
CO-AUDITORS ARE TWINNED ACCORDING TO COMPARABLE CASE AND TRAINING LEVEL. People who intend to co-audit and Co-audit Supervisors must be alerted to the fact that you don’t twin up mis-matched co-audit teams—e.g., a lower level pc with a NOTs pc, etc. This is fully covered in the above references.
Once twinned, co-auditors should not be musical chaired.
It is important that the Co-audit Supervisor twin students correctly. Properly twinned co-auditors will fly along while poorly twinned ones will generate problems, and where there is a big difference in ability, create an out-exchange situation in which the faster twin is always coaching the slower one to get him to catch up.
A co-audit course is a team activity. It is a jump-in-and-do-it activity and the Supervisors establish this as the operating tone of the course from the first day. The activity level of the course is very high.
The Co-audit Course Supervisors would exemplify this attitude by being human dynamos in the course room and this would rub off on the students.
The Co-audit Supervisor’s activity level must be high because he deals heavily in individual attention to each student, co-auditor and pc. He must maintain a high level of ARC with each student. He must always be approachable by the students and stay in good comm with them.
The students will not be perfect students and this makes individual attention for students a prime Supervisor duty.
THE COURSE ROOM/THE CO-AUDITING ROOM
The Course Supervisor(s) and the Co-audit Supervisor(s) have different and distinct zones of operation on a co-audit course.
Ideally, the course is divided into a study section, a practical section and a co-audit section. These would exist in separate rooms, each with its own Supervisor(s) in order to provide the best possible study and auditing environments.
Where the above is not possible, the theory part of the co-audit course would be done in one room with the Theory Supervisor and the practical and coauditing part of the course would be done in another room, with the Co-audit Supervisor.
The theory and practical sections are not put together in the same room.
The theory course room, practical course room and co-audit course room would be as near as possible to one another in the org. It is, after all, one course!
In the co-audit room, the auditing tables would be set up with the auditors sitting with their backs toward the center of the room and the pcs facing inwards toward the center.
In this way, the Co-audit Supervisor can monitor each session from the center with a minimum of walking about.
NEW STUDENTS
When a new student enrolls he is greeted and welcomed by the Course Supervisor (and the Co-audit Supervisor if available). Right then and there the student gets indoctrinated with the idea that this is a gung-ho activity, that the students help each other out and take responsibility for one another. He is also informed about twinning and given the datum that the better the auditing he delivers the better will be the auditing he receives. This is factually true and has been proven over the years. He is informed that it is to his advantage and best interests to become as competent an auditor as possible.
BEGINNING MUSTER
The co-audit course begins on schedule with a roll call of both the students on theory and the co-auditor teams (who are mustered in the study room). Roll call is done this way so that there is only one roll book and accurate 8-C can be run.
Tight scheduling must be maintained in both theory and co-audit room. Every minute counts if these students and co-auditors are to get the most out of their scheduled periods.
Immediately after the initial muster the two teams split up—students on theory sections to their seats in the study area; co-auditors to their sessions in the co-audit room.
RUNNING THE COURSE
All points of HCO PL 16 Mar. 71R, WHAT IS A COURSE? must be in on any co-audit course. HCOB/PL 30 Oct. 78R, COURSES—THEIR IDEAL SCENE, must also be in.
A standard roll book, routine roll call each period, student graphs, a Progress Board, are all used. The materials that will be needed on the course must be readily available. (This includes auditor admin materials.)
The course and the co-audit are both run with good stiff control and ARC.
The Supervisor gets right onto targeting students for the period after the beginning muster. He then works to ensure every pair of students makes or surpasses their targets.
If there are a lot of checkouts for him to do, it is best to have a sign-up sheet at the front of the room. This puts order into the activity and makes it predictable for the students. On a course of any size at all, a sign-up sheet is a necessity to keep things from falling into chaos.
Heaven forbid that the Course Supervisor would ever be caught at his desk during course hours! No! He would be out moving about the course room, ensuring the students studying their course packs were learning the data and that the students drilling had their drills down cold. He’d be watching for students manifesting MUs and jumping in to handle when he spotted one.
He gives students studying their packs spot checks to ensure they are getting what they are studying. If they aren’t, he gets the MU found. If he can’t get it located quickly, he sends the student to the course Word Clearer or, lacking one or when extensive word clearing is needed, to Qual for word clearing.
On practical checkouts the Supervisor cannot really afford to turn it into a coaching session and get stuck with one pair of students at the expense of everyone else in the class. Either the student being checked out has the drill down or he doesn’t. If he does, great; pass. If he doesn’t, the Supervisor issues the student a pink sheet with the errors noted and what he has to do to correct it so the student will pass on the next checkout.
Pink sheets are handled in the course/co-audit room, by the student coauditor’s twin or the Supervisor. Only if the student became hopelessly bogged would he be sent to Cramming.
The Supervisor would give every student individual attention and wouldn’t get stuck with any one pair of students for too long a period.
He would be moving from team to team, seeing how they were doing, checking out their drilling, correcting outnesses when he saw them, always encouraging them and establishing the reality that they can audit successfully.
He would use every bit of supervisor tech at his disposal to get students through their drilling and onto the co-audit. And quickly. The student reads the material, drills it and he does it. One, two, three.
HANDLING TRs AND OBJECTIVES CO-AUDIT STUDENTS
Many students on the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course will be fresh off the Purification Rundown, without having done a Student Hat or any other Scientology course. But putting someone through an Objectives co-audit does not require any education to speak of; the Supervisor simply demands that the student reads his course materials, drills the exact actions and then does them on his twin.
For example, I have done this at as shallow a level of getting two staff members and making them run Op Pro by Dup on each other, 35 hours given and received. They didn’t have any coaching to amount to a hill of beans, but they did it with excellent results.
A Supervisor would not allow a TRs and Objectives Co-audit student to spend time clearing words within definitions of words. The Course Supervisor would rapidly get the misunderstood word handled, the student through the materials and onto doing the TR or action.
There may also be circumstances where the co-auditor may need to refer back to his materials during a session to get the process commands straight. This does not mean the session is bogged requiring Supervisor intervention. A coauditor is free to look at the commands if he needs to while running a process, and that he does so does not imply that the session needs to be stopped so he can drill the process further before continuing.
The Co-audit Supervisor must keep in mind that he is not trying to get the student to do anything by study; he’s trying to get him to do something by actual action in the auditing chair.
RUNNING THE CO-AUDIT
The Co-audit Supervisor’s job is to ensure that auditing occurs and that it is successful auditing and that the pcs make the expected gains on their auditing.
Before the co-audit class starts, when the folders have come out from the C/S, the Co-audit Sup checks each one, notes what the pc needs and puts the folder in its proper stack (to Co-auditor, D of P, Declare, Co-audit Sup handling, Ethics, MO, Review, etc.). He then battle plans his day to get all the actions done in the proper sequence. For example, he would plan to do pc A’s D of P interview, get pc B to the MO, get pc C into session with his co-auditor, make sure pc D’s MAA interview gets done by the MAA, etc. In this way he assures that the pcs make the fastest progress possible. He doesn’t want to spend time on these administrative cycles once there are sessions going, so he gets them planned out before course.
After roll call and muster at the start of class the Co-audit Supervisor gets right down to 8-Cing co-audit teams into session. He passes out the folders from the C/S and handles any questions or uncertainties the auditor may have about the C/S instructions. He does this by reference to course materials and not by verbal tech. He then arranges the co-audit teams in the auditing area and gets the sessions going.
The Co-audit Sup must budget his time wisely so that maximum co-audit production can occur. If one twin needed ruds to start a session and another twin needed a D of P interview but would not be going right into session after it, the Sup would do the ruds first and get those twins into session. Then he would do the D of P interview.
Once the sessions have started, he is there observing the sessions.
He acts as a monitor for each co-audit session.
He ensures that if it’s muzzled co-auditing that is to be done, the co-auditor remains muzzled giving only command and acknowledgment.
He is there to help out if a co-auditor gets into something he can’t handle. If a co-auditor gets into trouble, he alerts the Co-audit Supervisor by putting his hand out behind him. The Co-audit Supervisor comes over and, getting in comm with both the auditor and pc, finds out what is happening. This is done with good TRs and all points of the Auditor’s Code in. The Co-audit Supervisor would put in a good R-factor to the pc about what was going on and include the pc in any discussion. The pc may say he spotted why he had done something and that he felt really good at that point and that would be the bug right there— overrun. In a metered session the Co-audit Supervisor might have to look over the worksheets to find out where the session went amiss. Once he finds the goof, he shows the auditor what to do to remedy it per source references, and gives the pc another R-factor about what the auditor will do.
The Co-audit Supervisor has to know his tech cold and be able to figure out at a glance what is wrong with a session and instruct the co-auditor (with the proper source reference) what to do to put it right.
At no time does he criticize or belittle the auditor, or in any way lower the auditor’s altitude in the session. The Co-audit Supervisor doesn’t violate Auditor’s Code clause 20 by explaining or justifying any auditor mistakes to the pc. Nor does he invalidate the pc or evaluate for the pc and tell him what is going on with his case. The Supervisor steps in only to isolate the bug, get any BPC found and indicated and get the auditor to resume the session.
If the cause of the session difficulty isn’t apparent, the Co-audit Supervisor would R-factor both pc and auditor that he is going to put the pc on the meter (if he isn’t already) and find what’s bugging the session. (The Co-audit Supervisor would keep copies of the appropriate correction lists on his clipboard and readily available.) He makes it clear that he is not taking over auditing the pc; he is simply finding the session bug. He takes the auditor’s chair and, using the prepared correction list for the co-audit materials, he assesses the list by the appropriate method. If the co-auditor is trained to handle the read (or reads), the Supervisor instructs the co-auditor on what to do to handle it (according to the list instructions) and gets the co-auditor back in the chair and running the session.
Should the Co-audit Supervisor find that what reads on the list is something that the co-auditor is not trained to handle but which the Supervisor is qualified to handle (such as an out-rud, overrun, etc.), the Supervisor may handle it then and there providing it would not keep him away from supervising his other co-auditors for too long a period of time. As soon as the pc’s BPC is handled to F/N and VGIs the Supervisor turns the session back over to the co-auditor.
If the trouble is something which would require more extensive handling, such as an Int Rundown or review auditing of some sort or if the Co-audit Supervisor is not qualified to handle the charge found on the prepared list, he would indicate the charge found to the pc and R-factor him that the folder must go back to the C/S for instructions. He would then turn the session back over to the auditor to end it.
Needless to say, the Co-audit Supervisor must guard against:
1. Verbal tech, and
2. Any kind of case evaluation or invalidation going on on a co-audit course. He must come down hard especially on any person who is trying to belittle pcs or co-auditors or invalidate the case wins or case problems or case oddities of any pc. Such offenders must be gotten out of the space and sent straight to Ethics. (Ref: HCO PL 1 July 65, ETHICS CHITS)
INTERRUPTING SESSIONS
The Supervisor must be able to quickly recognize any bad indicator and must stay on the alert for them. If he notices some-thing going wrong in a session he doesn’t have to wait until the auditor puts out his hand for help but can gently step in and handle.
The Co-audit Supervisor must, however, give the auditor sufficient opportunity to spot that something is wrong with the session. If the Supervisor interrupts sessions all the time and bypasses the auditor, the auditor may stop taking responsibility for the pc and the session because “if anything was wrong with the session the Supervisor would jump in and take over.” The auditor might decide he doesn’t have to concern himself with how his pc is doing because “the Supervisor will do all of that.”
The goal in all of this is to get a win for the co-audit team and get the pc through his auditing.
RULE
The rule to follow in handling session difficulties is:
IF THE CO-AUDITOR CAN HANDLE IT, HE HANDLES IT.
The Co-audit Supervisor always maintains an encouraging attitude, good TRs and the certainty that the auditor will pull off the session. He never expects the auditor to do anything above his training level, but he does expect him to successfully audit what he has been trained to do.
The Co-audit Supervisor never steals the co-auditor’s hat but only borrows it for very short periods of time and even then doesn’t exclude the co-auditor from the proceedings. He doesn’t allow himself to become the auditor no matter how much the pc may seem to demand it or how rattled the auditor may appear at having made some goof. With ARC and certainty he isolates the bug in the session, gets the co-auditor to straighten it out or straightens it out himself and gets the co-auditor to continue the session.
CAUTION
The Co-audit Supervisor must be sure not to become the pc’s auditor completely because then the pc is likely to reactively create more trouble in order to get further attention.
If at all possible, the co-auditor must handle the session and bring his pc through it. Coming through a rough session to a win is a tremendous morale booster and nothing will more raise an auditor’s confidence in the tech and his ability to apply it.
AUDITORS DO NOT LEAVE THEIR PCS
The Co-audit Supervisor never assists an auditor who has left the auditing chair or walked off from his pc to get the Co-audit Supervisor to help. Should an auditor leave his pc to seek assistance, the Co-audit Supervisor firmly, but with ARC, tells the auditor to go back to his pc and put his hand out behind him. The Supervisor then assists that auditor as soon as he possibly can.
Permitting a co-auditor to leave his pc violates the Auditor’s Code clause 10, “I promise never to walk off from a preclear in session,” is bad form and adds unnecessary randomity to the co-audit room. Co-auditors must be R-factored about this procedure before they begin auditing.
SESSION ADMIN
The Co-audit Supervisor monitors the sessions until the last one is finished. He gets the auditors to write up their sessions correctly and legibly for their pcs’ folders. The Supervisor is responsible for the quality of the co-auditors’ admin and must see that the folder admin is correctly done.
The Co-audit Supervisor also keeps a logbook in which each co-auditor logs the number of hours he audits daily. In this way both the co-auditors and the Co-audit Supervisor have a ready record of the total number of hours co-audited for the week.
Any co-auditors who finish their sessions early and have their admin done and folders turned in before the end of the class period can spend the remaining course time helping out by drilling with other students or drill themselves, etc.
When the last session is over for the course period and the co-auditors have written up their sessions, the Co-audit Supervisor ensures the Course Admin gets the folders over to the C/S office. The Co-audit Sup should make it a point to attend the end-of-class muster and should ensure that his co-auditors are also there.
However, sessions that were still in progress at the end of the course period would not be ended for these musters, nor would the Co-audit Supervisor leave any sessions in progress to attend the musters.
MUTUAL OUT-RUDS
The theory of mutual out-ruds is covered in HCOB 17 Feb. 74, C/S Series. 91, MUTUAL OUT-RUDS. Mutual out-ruds can stack up on courses and the Supervisors must be sharp in recognizing indicators in a pair of students with out-ruds on the rest of the group, and get them handled.
A co-audit team withdrawn or out of comm with the rest of the class could be a mutual ARC break or withholds. A pair going around looking overly concerned or hunted likely have a mutual problem. Two students joking or being snide obviously have withholds from the group.
Now these things could also stem from something misunderstood in their training and the Supervisor must detect this and handle by finding the MUs and straightening out the student’s drilling and procedure. Whatever the cause, the Supervisor must not let mutual out-ruds go unhandled and the C/S must order checks for mutual out-ruds when necessary to keep a co-audit team’s ruds in on each other and on the group. Failing to do this can cost dearly in terms of lost gains for pcs.
Mutual out-ethics must be spotted and handled as well. (Ref: HCOB 13 Oct. 82, C/S Series 116, ETHICS AND THE C/S)
BLOWY STUDENTS
Students who are blowy or who have blown must be recovered and handled. They must first be checked for BPC in their sessions and out-tech on their cases and then checked over for MUs and overts and withholds as co-auditors.
Since they are engaged in both receiving and giving auditing, both aspects must be thoroughly checked. When the session BPC is found or the out-Int handled or the O/Ws pulled such blowy feelings will cease.
The blown student’s twin is responsible for recovering his course partner per HCOB 21 Aug. 79, TWINNING.
REMEDIES
As mentioned before, students on the co-audit will be eager beavers but may be unhatted on study tech and will need help over any rough spots they may encounter.
The Supervisors have to know and use their available tools to guide the student through such impasses.
On the study portion of the course, the Course Supervisor has to be able to spot a student with an MU a mile off and handle it rapidly and with ARC. If he cannot locate the MU or bug easily he utilizes the course Word Clearer. If the student is really plowed in, it is a job for Qual. Don’t let the bogged student stagnate on course and don’t ever buy any confused “it-can’t-be-dones.” We’ve had co-audits for over 30 years in Dianetics and Scientology and the co-audit courses have always been very, very successful.
The lack of mass phenomena won’t be as likely to occur here as on a theory course because of the amount of practical prior to the auditing section but it must be handled and remedied quickly if it does occur.
The most frequently observed manifestation on the drills section will very likely be the skipped gradient. (Ref: HCOB 25 June 71R, BARRIERS TO STUDY) If the student is having trouble with a drill he’s come up on too steep a gradient. The remedy is to cut back to the action or drill where he was doing well, where he understood it and was not confused. Find out what he missed right at the tail end of that action or drill, because that’s where he thought he had it down pat and went on and right there he skipped a gradient. Clear up what he missed at that.point and bring him forward again, on the right gradient, to where he was having trouble. Now he will be able to do the drill because he truly understands the earlier gradient.
The badly bogged student probably needs a trip to Qual for handling. In such cases the bogged student’s twin goes too. For one half of a co-audit team to get so plowed under means it is very likely that something is awry with the other half of the team. Qual would check both students and probably have to straighten both out.
The Co-audit Supervisor would mainly be remedying bogged sessions. It may sometimes occur that the Co-audit Supervisor notices something out with a session while watching, before the auditor puts out his hand or is even aware something is wrong. The Supervisor wouldn’t let the session fall completely to pieces even though the co-auditor hadn’t asked for help. Neither would he just jump in without giving the co-auditor ample opportunity to handle the session difficulties himself.
After determining what was wrong, the Supervisor would place his hand gently on the auditor’s shoulder and get in comm with the pc and auditor. Without eval or inval he would instruct the auditor with the appropriate source reference on how to correct the situation.
For example, in a Dianetics co-audit the Supervisor notices that the pc’s TA has been going up and up while being run on a somatic chain, but the auditor isn’t checking for an earlier incident. The Supervisor would place his hand on the auditor’s shoulder gently, R-factor the pc that he wanted to interject something into the session and then suggest to the auditor that he try checking for an earlier incident or earlier beginning. Then he sees to it the auditor does so and gets on with the session.
It is important to let the co-audit teams know what the Co-audit Supervisor’s purpose is. He is there to run the class, oversee the sessions and ensure that the pcs achieve the greatest gains possible from their auditing. He is not there to run the session or audit the pc. The co-auditors do the auditing.
RED TAG SESSIONS
In the event of a session that red tags at exams it must be repaired within 24 hours per C/S Series 86RE, THE RED TAG LINE.
Occasionally a pc will red tag at exams after the session. When this happens, the Supervisor does not take a condemnatory attitude towards the auditor. And he certainly does not let the auditor rabbit from further auditing even if the pc must go to Qual for a review session.
Normally, the co-audit team will audit on a turnabout basis. On Monday Joe audits Bill for the first part of the class time and then Bill audits Joe for the second part of the class period, etc. Or on Monday Joe audits Bill, on Tuesday Bill audits Joe and so on. In the event of a red-tagged session the pc would need to be handled until repaired and the red tag removed. It is optimum for all concerned that the co-auditor be instructed on how to handle the goofed session and repair it himself if this is feasible. However a review session in Qual may be needed. That is up to the C/S who should keep in mind that this is not an HGC operation and that the co-auditor handles his pc except in dire circumstances.
Sending the pc to Review would only be done if the session bug couldn’t be spotted in the worksheets or by observation or if a Scientology auditor was needed to fly the ruds or do a Date/Locate, handle Int, etc.
If the co-auditor can handle it and it is within the scope of the co-audit materials, he would take the pc right in the next day and handle it. He may need to do a bit of drilling on his procedure first but would still go back in there and handle his pc. This keeps the members of the co-audit team taking responsibility for each other. Of course, the red tag session must be repaired in 24 hours no matter who does it. This rule is invariable.
STATS
The Course Supervisor’s stats are:
1. Student Points.
2. Number of students moved through the theory and onto the auditing portion of the course that week.
The Co-audit Supervisor has the stats of:
1. Co-audited WDAH.
2. Co-audit course completions.
The Co-audit student/auditor has the stats of:
1. Student Points.
2. Number of co-audited WDAHs.
(Note: The 24-hour rule for repair of any flubbed/red-tagged session applies. The penalty for violation of the 24-hour rule is loss of a day’s stats for the division. [Ref: HCO PL 8 Sept. 70RA, EXAMINER’S 24-HOUR RULE])
I have given you the essentials for a successful co-audit.
For any co-audit, following the instructions in this issue will give you a bustling, high morale co-audit course with shiny completions rolling out the other side and further up the Bridge.
Co-audits throw the gates to the Bridge wide, wide open. They enable orgs to deliver far more auditing hours to more public and staff than anyone ever dreamed possible. And it’s economical for the orgs and public, too.
Scientology is in an international boom, Supervisor, and I am counting on you to do your part in keeping the boom going.
While we now have thousands making daily progress up the Bridge, we have the line-up to handle millions. Millions of Clears and OTs.
Do your job well and we’ll have wins all around.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 30 MAY 1980RA
REVISED 21 APRIL 1990
Co-audit Courses
Tech/Qual
Co-audit Series 3RA
SUPERVISING CO-AUDIT TRs
Ref:
LRH Technical Training Film number TR Fifteen,
“The Different TR Courses and Their Criticism”
Between Dept 17 TRs courses for brand-new people, which are fairly permissive, and professional auditor TRs, which result in the smooth, flawless comm cycle required of a professional auditor, we have Co-audit TRs.
These are the TRs given to those who are not yet on the professional training route but who are training to give and receive auditing on a co-audit basis on rundowns and other co-audits designed for the nonprofessional.
They are the same drills, TRs 0-4, that are done on the Professional TR Course. But on Co-audit TRs you are not trying to make a professional auditor.
You give the co-auditor a chance to get his feet wet, to get a taste of what’s expected of him on TR drills and to get some experience with them. You coach and supervise him to some good wins, to where he gets the hang of it, and you leave it at that.
The way to accomplish this is to start him on an easy gradient and have him cycle through the TRs, getting a bit stiffer each time he cycles through.
He would cycle through TRs 0-4 first, until he had achieved some confidence with those TRs.
He would then go onto Upper Indoc TRs 6-9, cycling through them and getting a bit stiffer each time through, until he had achieved some confidence with TRs 6-9.
Thus, the steps in training a person on Co-audit TRs would include, as a minimum:
1. Drilling TRs 0-4 (as listed in HCOB 16 Aug. 71R II, TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED) by cycling through these on a gradient and stiffening the gradient each time through, until the person has achieved confidence in his ability to use them:
OT TR 0
TR 0
TR 0 BB
TR 1
TR 2
TR 21/2
TR 3
TR 4
2. Drilling Upper Indoc TRs (per HCOB 7 May 68R, UPPER INDOC TRs), again cycling through these on an increasing gradient until the person has achieved confidence in his ability to use them:
TR 6
TR 7
TR 8
TR 9
If the student is having trouble and really flubbing on a certain TR, he might want to spend a bit more time on that one. But do not let him get stuck on trying to master one TR. The fault will be in an earlier TR or in the theory study of his course materials where something was not grasped or learned fully enough.
You want him up to being able to apply his TRs passably in a co-audit session with a terminal of comparable case level and training to his own. That doesn’t mean your coaching or supervision is any less spot on. It doesn’t mean the co-auditor doesn’t give it the best he’s got or that he’s permitted to be sloppy or chop up pcs. It does mean that you don’t demand of a person on a nonprofessional co-audit the same polish, the same expertise you’re going to demand of a student on an auditor training course who will need to perfect his comm cycle to the point where he can handle any case, any pc, any situation confidently and with ease.
Don’t confuse these two levels of TRs.
Don’t let your professional auditors-in-training get by with anything less than perfect TRs. But with the person who’s there to bootstrap his way through, giving and getting some auditing any way he can, realize you’re not out to make a professional auditor of him—yet.
Get him to the point where he can handle a session as a co-auditor. When he’s had some wins at that, when he’s discovered just what can be accomplished in auditing sessions, he’ll probably be reaching for professional auditor training. And that’s when you give him professional auditor TRs, done the hard way.
Meantime, for beginning co-auditors, keep Co-audit TRs in their own sphere.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MAY 1980RA
REVISED 21 APRIL 1990
All Orgs
All Staff
and Execs
Qual Sec
SSO
Co-audits
Co-audit Series 4RA
STAFF CO-AUDITS
Refs:
HCO PL 20 July 70 CASES AND MORALE OF STAFF
HCO PL 14 Dec. 70 Personnel Series 14
Org Series 19
GROUP SANITY
HCO PL 17 June 63 STAFF CLEARING PROGRAM
HCO PL 21 Oct. 62 AUDITING SUPERVISOR AND AUDITING
INSTRUCTORS, DUTIES OF
HCOB 7 Apr. 60 A NEW SUMMARY OF AUDITING
HCOB 21 Aug. 79 TWINNING
HCO PL 22 May 76 STAFF SECTION OFFICER HAT
HCO PL 30 Nov. 76R ONLY SSO CAN TIP
Rev. 25.4.79
HCO PL 29 Oct. 79 SSO RESPONSIBILITY FOR
STANDARD STAFF COURSES
HCO PL 23 July 69 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES
Tape: 7109C05 “A Talk on a Basic Qual”
Co-audit Series HCOBs
Org staffs are made up of individuals. The better the case shape of each individual staff member, the more viable the org.
If an org is going to prosper, its staff must be getting audited, making case gain and actively progressing on the Grade Chart. Failure to use the tech on one’s own staff is one of the fastest ways to allow the tech to go out or slip into disuse or become alter-ised.
Staff need a reality on the tech they deliver—not just those technically trained who do the actual delivery but those working in admin capacities as well.
And quite apart from the fact that inattention to staff cases will result in a failing org and dwindling viability and potential, is the fact that staff members should have the benefit of the tech they are handling and making available to others.
How does an org get all its staff audited? Every org should have Staff Staff Auditors as provided on the org board. Not all orgs do have them, but where they do, these auditors serve a needed function and are valuable.
So how does an org get all its staff audited? The answer of course is STAFF CO-AUDITS .
We have had co-audit tech since the early days and it’s high time we revitalized it and put it into active use as one of an org’s standard functions.
To create an immediate upsurge in staff morale, activity level and enthusiasm all you have to do is establish a going staff co-audit. It takes only some good planning and a bit of determination. Among staff, the need and the want and the interest are there. If you want to prove it, just fan that interest a bit and watch what happens!
HOW TO ORGANIZE A STAFF CO-AUDIT
Qual is responsible for staff cases. A staff co-audit would be organized and set up in Qual, in the Department of Personnel Enhancement under the SSO.
The first actions of the Qual Sec and SSO would be to work out the barebones essentials for a co-audit and get a Supervisor selected.
An org of any size will require a single-hatted Co-audit Supervisor and this had better be someone who knows how to audit and can run good 8-C or he won’t be able to handle the entire scene or individual co-audit teams when they run into trouble.
In a small org where there’s no one available to be the Co-audit Supervisor, the SSO holds the hat from above. And if there’s no SSO posted, it’s the responsibility of the Qual Sec to get a staff co-audit set up and running.
But regardless of who does the initial planning and setup, there’s got to be a trained Co-audit Supervisor in attendance at all scheduled co-audit times who is actively running the show. And he will need at least some part-time help.
A staff co-audit doesn’t eliminate the need for Staff Staff Auditors. Staff Staff Auditors are very much a part of the Qual org board, and even with a staff co-audit running they would still need to handle individual cases and would also be used as Review Auditors for the co-audit.
If the org has no Staff C/S, C/Ses will need to be set up. These can be assigned from trained staff who volunteer or are selected to help out on this basis after production hours.
Get some space allocated, arrange for any needed furniture, chairs, tables, adequate paper, etc., and most important of all—the needed tech materials. Don’t let lack of equipment be a bug. In one successful co-audit a couple of years ago and in early co-audits as well, staff audited with a meter on one knee and a clipboard on the other! Not ideal but where it’s necessary it can be done and can even add to the esprit de corps. It’s a matter of what it takes to get the job done.
Set up a schedule that will accommodate the majority of staff. Two scheduled co-audit periods may have to be arranged so as not to disrupt regular production. This would be done in liaison with other execs.
As soon as the general plan is established, hold a rousing good staff muster and let the entire staff know what’s going to be done. The staff co-audit is for everyone—the trained and the untrained.
The original maxim holds true: any two people can do it. The untrained will simply need tighter guidance in order to carry it off. Get some real enthusiasm generated and you’ll find you have no shortage of volunteers to help with the initial setup. The way to get a staff co-audit rolling is to make it an all-hands action.
The rest of the planning and execution takes shape from there. It includes:
1. Review of all staff cases and staff folders made ready for C/Sing. Get the staff cases sorted out as to category, as covered in HCO PL 20 July 70, CASES AND MORALE OF STAFF. Where staff cases have been neglected you may need a corps of FESers to begin with to get all the folders FESed so the C/S can operate with full data.
2. Get the folders programed and C/Sed.
3. Arrange that any staff who need medical treatment, PTS handling or ethics handling are handled on a priority basis so they can get onto the co-audit as soon as possible. This gets done simultaneously with getting the co-audit into operation.
4. While all this is going on, the Co-audit Supervisor or the SSO, or both, get themselves trained up and boned up on all the tech on co-audits and how to run them.
5. Set up the necessary admin lines and lines for folders to and from the C/S.
6. Get the staff who can start immediately twinned up according to comparable training and case level per HCO PL 23 July 69, AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, and HCOB 21 Aug. 79, TWINNING. Note: lt’s not ideal to twin up family members or marital teams, if it can be arranged otherwise. There is a greater possibility of mutual out-ruds between such teams, as well as the possibility of overts or withholds from each other, which could result in unnecessary difficulty on the co-audit. Twin them up with other partners and it will very likely go more smoothly. Additionally, don’t break up any successful existing co-audit teams when setting up the co-audit. Keep these maintained.
7. START the staff co-audit and keep it rolling.
WHAT IS RUN ON A STAFF CO-AUDIT
All programing and C/Sing of cases for a staff co-audit is done against the Grade Chart.
On a staff co-audit you have two main zones of activity—co-auditing for the trained and the untrained.
In the first group you’ll have staff with different levels of training and in both groups you’ll have different levels of cases.
Where twinning is concerned, the two groups are handled separately.
Those in the trained group are twinned with others in the trained group, taking training and processing levels into consideration. Those in the untrained group are twinned with others in the untrained group, taking case levels and study speed into consideration.
From there it’s a matter of what needs to be run to get the person on or up the Grade Chart.
While the co-auditing is all done in one room, it will save wear and tear on the Co-audit Sup to have the trained staff seated together in one section and the untrained staff together in another section nearby. This way he can more easily keep an eye on the new green auditors and pcs who will require the most attention. But he does not neglect one group for the other. (It is not mandatory for professionally trained co-auditors to be closely supervised in the classroom while they are in session. They normally can be trusted to audit in a separate auditing room if the pc prefers this to the classroom co-auditing setup.)
Ideally, all staff would do the following if they have not already completed these steps:
1. The Purification Rundown (not an audited action).
2. TRs and Objectives (as taught on the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course).
3. A Scientology Drug Rundown (or a NED Drug Rundown, if the person has completed his Grades and is ready for NED.)
4. Method One Word Clearing (as taught on the Hubbard Method One Word Clearing Co-audit Checksheet).
This is a matter for the C/S to determine according to individual cases.
Those who are complete on the above opening steps for all cases would then be programed for their next Grade Chart action, whatever that might be.
TRAINED CO-AUDlTORS: Trained personnel are expected to apply the skills of the highest level they were trained in if that is what is required for the pc. Some of them may need redrilling on certain actions or study of new bulletins that have come out since they were trained.
When a team of trained staff co-auditors have audited each other to release on a grade or grades up to the level of any formal training they’ve had, they can move onto auditing at the next higher level, either:
A. on a nonprofessional co-audit by taking it on a read-it, drill-it, do-it basis, or
B. on a professional co-audit by getting fully trained on that level before resuming their co-audit.
UNTRAINED CO-AUDITORS: The TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course provides an excellent starting point for new, beginning co-auditors.
Should you have an untrained staff member who has already had Objectives as a pc he could still get trained to audit Objectives on a read-it, drill-it, do-it basis, and deliver them to his twin.
Meanwhile, the twin can get checked out on any actions his co-auditor might need (Post Purpose Clearing, Word Clearing, etc.) and deliver any such actions, in order to keep his exchange in.
Untrained staff co-auditors will need some basic definitions to begin with— auditor, preclear, session, etc. Then teach them the comm cycle and get them through Co-audit TRs. Do not make it a long runway. You want them in there co-auditing and they can be polished up as they go.
Muzzled auditing is the keynote for the beginning co-auditor. It is simple enough for a co-auditor to do and it lends itself perfectly to the early Grade Chart processes as well.
If the untrained co-auditor remains muzzled there’s very little trouble he can get into. But he will hit some trouble spots somewhere along the line and he’ll need to be bailed out by the Co-audit Supervisor, set straight and given a boost to keep going. The attitude is always that he can do it.
Untrained staff co-audit teams who are kept at it can get each other through TRs and Objectives, a Scientology Drug Rundown, ARC Straightwire, Grades 0-IV processes and NED, training and auditing on a read-it, drill-it, do-it basis as they go. They won’t be fully classed auditors but the experience will be invaluable, the gains can be tremendous and it shouldn’t take much to get them classified after that.
RESPONSIBILITY OF CO-AUDITORS: The entirety of the Twinning HCOB (HCOB 21 Aug. 79) applies to co-audit teams. That and the Auditor’s Code make up the co-auditor’s bible. Co-auditors are responsible for getting each other through. They do twin checkouts, find and handle each other’s misunderstoods, drill their materials until they’re confident, and deliver the tech to each other. For the untrained, it’s a read-it, drill-it, do-it operation and it makes auditors. A co-auditor is responsible for the quality of the auditing he gives and receives. You’ll find most staff eager to meet the challenge.
HOW A STAFF CO-AUDIT IS RUN
All the tech on how to run a co-audit in HCOB 29 May 80RA, Co-audit Series 2RA, and other co-audit HCOBs applies to a staff co-audit.
Any Staff Co-audit Supervisor must know this tech well and keep it fully applied.
Put a good auditor onto handling the staff co-audit because he’ll need to be able to handle all levels of cases, bail any of them out at any time and run good 8-C on the entire room.
He’s got to be able to jump in and handle ruds if needed, spot bad indicators, find and indicate bypassed charge, assess lists, give D of P interviews, correct co-auditors and keep all the sessions moving. He’s alert and on the move, with an eye on every session in progress.
For a co-audit of any size (and most staff co-audits will be large) he’ll need an assistant. The assistant can be assigned to the post or arranged for on a volunteer basis, but the Co-audit Supervisor should be given backup he can rely on.
Running a large co-audit in a common room can be a noisy business, and there will be distraction for pc and auditor alike. But it can be done, preclears become used to it, auditing does get delivered, and it makes a far better auditor when one learns his trade under co-audit circumstances.
Don’t expect it all to go smoothly, because it won’t. There’s plenty of randomity on any co-audit but there’s apt to be more of it on a staff co-audit because of the different case and training levels involved. The Co-audit Supervisor holds it all together and keeps the co-auditors auditing.
Staff co-audits are tightly scheduled and tightly controlled. There’s a roll book kept, with a roll call for each scheduled period, graphs are kept and all points of WHAT IS A COURSE? PL must be well in.
Correction is done by pink sheets which are handled in the co-audit room. Should that not always be workable, the person could be sent to the Cramming Officer. But he must be handled swiftly so co-auditing is not held up.
If a staff member simply is not making gains on the co-audit, even with debugging from the Co-audit Supervisor, he would be turned over to a Staff Staff Auditor, an intern or a Review Auditor for auditing and returned to the co-audit when he can make it.
Red tags on a staff co-audit, as in any other auditing, must be handled within 24 hours.
The Co-audit Supervisor rolls up his sleeves and makes sure it all gets done. And his job is made easier as it goes along by an enthusiastic and winning staff.
___________
Let’s pump some new life into org staffs everywhere with staff co-audits that get people up the Grade Chart. You have all the tech you need to do it. Everybody wins, and the boost in staff morale, in staff spirit and staff effectiveness will be quite astounding.
It’s the way to make fully qualified staff members. And you’ll be making auditors at the same time!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
RESEARCH & DISCOVERY SERIES
VOLUMES
by L. Ron Hubbard
Volume 1 published June 1980
In the late 70s an ambitious and exciting project was begun: the transcription and publication of all of Ron's recorded technical lectures and demonstrations. In June of 1980 the project's first product was announced with the release of Research and Discovery Series Volume 1. Only the first of what will be approximately 100 such volumes to be produced, this handsome and substantial volume contains complete transcriptions of Ron's earliest lectures on Dianetics technology and demonstrations of its use, given in the days following the first publication of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.
The lectures themselves are supplemented with notes on where Ron was and what he was doing at the time, to further illuminate the track of research and development.
Of incalculable value and importance, this series of books contains the only running record of Ron's years of research into the mind and life—a complete chronology of his search for truth and the development and refinement of the only technology in this universe capable of freeing man.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JUNE 1980
Remimeo
Class VIIIs (Also HCO PL 14 Oct. 68RA, Rev. 19.6.80.)
All Auditors
(Cancels HCO PL of 14 Oct. 68R)
THE AUDITOR’S CODE
The pledge of practitioners of pastoral counseling.
Required to be signed by the holders of or before the issuance of certificates for the certificates to be valid.
____________
I hereby promise as an auditor to follow the Auditor’s Code.
1. I promise not to evaluate for the preclear or tell him what he should think about his case in session.
2. I promise not to invalidate the preclear’s case or gains in or out of session.
3. I promise to administer only standard tech to a preclear in the standard way.
4. I promise to keep all auditing appointments once made.
5. I promise not to process a preclear who has not had sufficient rest and who is physically tired.
6. I promise not to process a preclear who is improperly fed or hungry.
7. I promise not to permit a frequent change of auditors.
8. I promise not to sympathize with a preclear but to-be effective.
9. I promise not to let the preclear end session on his own determinism but to finish off those cycles I have begun.
10. I promise never to walk off from a preclear in session.
11. I promise never to get angry with a preclear in session.
12. I promise to run every major case action to a floating needle.
13. I promise never to run any one action beyond its floating needle.
14. I promise to grant beingness to the preclear in session.
15. I promise not to mix the processes of Scientology with other practices except when the preclear is physically ill and only medical means will serve.
16. I promise to maintain communication with the preclear and not to cut his comm or permit him to overrun in session.
17. I promise not to enter comments, expressions or enturbulence into a session that distract a preclear from his case.
18. I promise to continue to give the preclear the process or auditing command when needed in the session.
19. I promise not to let a preclear run a wrongly understood command.
20. I promise not to explain, justify or make excuses in session for any auditor mistakes whether real or imagined.
21. I promise to estimate the current case state of a preclear only by standard case supervision data and not to diverge because of some imagined difference in the case.
22. I promise never to use the secrets of a preclear divulged in session for punishment or personal gain.
23. I promise to never falsify worksheets of sessions.
24. I promise to see that any fee received for processing is refunded following the policies of the Claims Verification Board, if the preclear is dissatisfied and demands it within three months after the processing, the only condition being that he may not again be processed or trained.
25. I promise not to advocate Dianetics or Scientology only to cure illness or only to treat the insane, knowing well they were intended for spiritual gain.
26. I promise to cooperate fully with the authorized organizations of Dianetics and Scientology in safeguarding the ethical use and practice of those subjects.
27. I promise to refuse to permit any being to be physically injured, violently damaged, operated on or killed in the name of “mental treatment.”
28. I promise not to permit sexual liberties or violations of patients.
29. I promise to refuse to admit to the ranks of practitioners any being who is nsane.
___________________________
Auditor
___________________________
Date
_________________________ ___________________________
Witness Place
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JUNE 1980
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
L1C WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 19 Mar. 71, LIST-1C—L1C.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the LlC is actually assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6R, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE L1C
A, acknowledged, action, actions, affinity, an, attention, auditing.
Been, before.
Command, communication, confusing, continued, cut.
Data, decision, did, disappointed, done.
Earlier, emotion, engram, error, evaluated, exterior.
For.
Given, go, goal, grasped.
Has, have, haven’t, help.
Ignored, in, incident, interrupted, invalidated.
Known.
Listing, long.
Made, meaning, missed, misunderstanding, misunderstood.
No, not.
Occurred, of, other, overrun.
Perception, prevented, problem.
Reality, reason, refusal, refused, rejected, rejection, restimulated.
Said, shift, short, similar, situation, some, someone, something, startled, sudden.
Than, the, there, too.
Understood, unnecessary, upset.
Was, what, withhold, willingness, word, wrong.
You.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JUNE 1980
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
INT RD CORRECTION LIST WORDS
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 29 Oct. 71RA, Int RD Series 12, INT RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST REVISED.
The auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
These words need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if they were correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared these words on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6R, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM INT RD CORRECTION LIST
A, about, action, afraid, after, against, already, an, and, another, anything, anywhere, ARC break, are, assessed, assessment, audited, auditor.
Back, badly, be, because, been, begin, being, being in, being stuck in, body, button, bypassed, bypassed charge.
Can’t, cause, caused, chain, charge, clear, cleared, concept, concerned, concerning, confused, continues, correction.
Damage, Dianetic, Dianetics, did, didn’t, different, do, done, during.
Earlier, else, End of Endless Int Repair RD, engram, engrams, errors, exterior.
Failed, feel, find, first, flat, flow, for.
Get, go, going, going in.
Had, handling, has, have.
If, in, incident, instead, Int, Int RD, interiorization, into, is, it, item.
Jails, just.
Leaving, left, letting, list, long.
Misrun, misunderstood, move.
Neglected, no, not.
Of, okay, on, one, or, other, others, out, out-list, over, overdone, overrepaired, overrun, overt.
Part, past, perfectly, place, post, practice, problem, push.
Read, recall, religion, repair, reviewed, run, rundown, running.
Scientology, secondary, several, should, some, something, stuck, subject.
Than, that, the, there, things, thinking, this, time, times, to, trying.
Understand, unflat, unnecessary.
Wanted, was, we, were, what, when, who, will, win, with, withhold, word, wording, worried, would, wrong.
You, your, yourself.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1980RA
REVISED 25 OCTOBER 1983
Remimeo
All Auditors
C/Ses
Academy Levels
Tech/Qual
CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES PROCESSES
Refs:
HCOB 12 June 70 C/S Series 2
PROGRAMING OF CASES
HCO PL 17 June 70RB KSW Series 5R
Rev. 25.10.83 TECHNICAL DEGRADES
HCOB 19 Apr. 72 KSW Series 8
C/S Series 77
“QUICKIE” DEFINED
HCOB 3 Dec. 78 UNREADING FLOWS
HCOB 27 May 70R UNREADING QUESTIONS AND ITEMS
Rev. 3.12.78
HCOB 8 June 61 E-METER WATCHING
HCOB 7 May 69 IV THE FIVE GAEs
HCOB 22 Apr. 80 ASSESSMENT DRILLS
(The original version of HCOB 23 June 80 incorrectly stated that an auditor was not to check the processes of a grade for read before running them. That HCOB was then cancelled on 25 Feb. 82 and it remains cancelled. The person who had originally approved—and even taken part in writing—this incorrect and illegally issued HCOB later sought to cover these actions by “discovering the error,” attributing it to someone else, and “calling it to my attention.” With this re-revision, all earlier text written by others has simply been removed and further HCOB references have been added to the list above.)
EACH GRADE PROCESS THAT IS RUN ON A METER MUST BE CHECKED FOR A READ BEFORE IT IS RUN, AND IF NOT READING, IT IS NOT RUN AT THAT TIME.
This rule applies to subjective grade processes. It does not apply to processes that are not run on a meter such as Objective Processes or assists (except for metered assist actions of a subjective nature).
Actually, a process that “doesn’t read” stems from one of three sources: (a) the process is not charged; (b) the process is invalidated or suppressed; or (c) ruds are out in session.
Factually, pc interest also plays a part in this.
I think quickying came from (1) auditors trying to push past the existing or persistent F/Ns or (2) auditors with TRs so poor that the pc was not in session.
Nearly all grade processes and flows will read on pcs in that Grade Chart area unless the above two conditions are present.
One also doesn’t make a big production of checking, as it distracts the pc. There is a system, one of many, one can use. One can say “The next process is (state wording of the auditing question)” and see if it reads. This does not take more than a glance. If no read but, more likely, if it isn’t charged, an F/N or smoothly null needle, one hardly pauses and one adds “but are you interested in it?” Pc will consider it, and if not charged and pc in session, it will F/N or F/N more widely.
If charged, the pc would ordinarily put his attention on it and you’d get a fall or just a stopped F/N followed by a fall on the interest part of the question.
It takes pretty smooth auditing to do this and not miss. So if in doubt, one can again check the question. But never hound or harass a pc about it. Inexpert checking questions for read can result in a harassed pc and drive him out of session, so this auditing action, like any other, requires smooth auditing.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1980RA
Remimeo Issue II
C/Ses REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Auditors
Word Clearers
Tech/Qual
WORD CLEARING
CORRECTION LIST WORDS
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 27 Nov. 78RA, Rev. 17.10.85, Word Clearing Series 35RH, WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
These words need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if they were correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared these words on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE WORD CLEARING CORRECTION LIST
A, about, action, actual, already, an, any, apply.
Basic, been, being, but, by, bypassed, bypassed charge.
Cans, case, charge, clear, cleared, clearing, confused, couldn’t, courses.
Defined, definition, definitions, demo, dictionary, did, didn’t, difficult, distracted, do, done, during.
Earlier, else, enough, evaluation.
Fail, family, feel, find, first, F/N (noun and verb), F/Ns, forgetting, fully.
Get, going, good.
Hands, has, have, hear, him, hopeless.
Improper, in, indicated, invalidated, invalidation, is, it.
Just.
Keep, kept, knew, knowingness.
List, look, look up.
Make, missed, misunderstood, misunderstoods.
Need, not, nothing.
Of, on, or, other, out-ruds, over, overrun, overwhelmed.
Past, place, protest, protesting, puzzled.
Read, reading, really, regard, in regard to, rid.
Said, school, Scientology, sentences, should, similar, sized, some, something, specialized, still, studied, study, subject, subjects.
Technical, tell, than, that, the, them, there, these, tired, to, training, try.
Understand, understood, unreading, use, using.
Was, wasn’t, were, what, when, which, why, win, with, withhold, word, word cleared, Word Clearer, Word Clearing, words, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JUNE 1980RA
REVISED 18 OCTOBER 1986
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
STUDENT CORRECTION LIST WORDS
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 27 Mar. 72RD, STUDENT CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the student (as the pc) before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the student’s (pc’s) auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the student’s pc folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE STUDENT CORRECTION LIST
A, abbreviations, able, about, acceptable, admin, afraid, after, alcohol, all, already, an, and, another, any, applicable, application, ARC break, ARC broken, are, as, attest, available.
Bad, basic, be, been, behavior, being, breaking, but, by.
Can’t, case, causing, change, checksheet, class, clay demos, clear, clearing, cold, committed, completion, complicated, concerning, confused, consideration, correction, course, courses, cramming.
Data, decided, define, definitions, demo kit, demos, determinism, Dianetics, dictionaries, dictionary, did, didn’t, diet, difficult, disagreements, disinterested, distracted, distracting, distraction, do, doesn’t, doing, done, don’t, drugs, duress.
Earlier, eat, else, enough, environment, errors, ever, evil, eyesight.
Failed, falsely, falsify, fellow, find, finish, finishing, first, follow, for, found, frequent, from, fully, fun.
Getting, given, going, gone, gradient, guide.
Had, hadn’t, harm, has, hasn’t, hat, have, haven’t, hear, help, him, hit, hot, how.
Ill, in, incomplete, interpreted, interruptions, invalidated, invalidation, is, it.
Know.
Lack, language, learned, life, lighting, like, list, listen, listening, looking up, lose.
Made, manual, many, mass, materials, mean, medicine, memory, method, Method One, Method 3, missing, misunderstood, misunderstoods, mixing, more.
Native, need, never, no, noisy, not.
Of, on, or, other, others, out-2D, over, overt, overts, own.
Pack, packs, part, participate, past, personal, physically, poor, practical, practice, prerequisites, printed, problem, PTS, purpose.
Rather, read, really, reason, refused, remember, restim, room, rushed.
Said, same, Scientology, section, seeking, self, set, should, shouldn’t, similar, skipped, small, smoke, some, somebody, someone, something, source, speak, stats, status, student, student’s, students, studied, studies, study, studying, subject, Supervisor, Supervisors, supposed, system.
Tapes, targets, tech, terms, the, there, think, this, threat, time, tired, to, told, too, trick, trouble, troubled, twin, typographical.
Under, understanding, unreal, up, upset, use, using.
Ventilation, verbal.
Want, was, were, weren’t, what, when, why, win, with, withheld, withhold, withholds, without, won’t, word, words, work, would, wrong.
You, your, yourself, you’ve.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1980RA
REVISED 26 MAY 1988
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
STUDENT REHABILITATION LIST WORDS
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 15 Nov. 74R, STUDENT REHABILITATION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the student (as the pc) before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on the student (pc). (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the student (pc).
These words need only be cleared once in the student’s (pc’s) auditing if they were correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared these words on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the student’s pc folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE STUDENT REHABILITATION LIST
A, about, added, advice, after, alcohol, already, an, and, apply, ARC, ARC breaks, at, attestation, audit, auditing, available.
Bad, best, booted, by.
Came, certificates, checksheet, clear, clearing, coaching, confused, couldn’t, course, courses.
Dictionary, didn’t, disagreements, dispute, do, downgraded, drugs, duress.
Each, earlier, eat, else, enough, error, ethics, evaluation, eyesight, exam, examination.
Failed, false, family, fees, find, flunked, for, forced, from, fully.
Gave, get, getting, given, God, going.
Had, hadn’t, have, having, HCOBs, help.
In, interference, interpreted, interruptions, invalidation.
Kept, knew, known.
Lied, list, live, lots.
Mad, made, master, materials, meter, method, Method One, missed withhold, missing, misunderstood, misunderstoods, money.
Never, no, nobody, not.
Of, off, often, on, or, other, out, out-ethics, out-Int, out-2D, over.
Passed, past, pay, people, personal, physical, place, players, practical, prevented, problem, problems, PTS.
Quotas.
Reason, reasons, Registrars, restim, resulting, rules.
Scientology, service, set, similar, simply, sleep, some, someone, something, stated, stopped, student, studied, study, studying, subject, Supervisor.
Taking, tape, tape players, tapes, tech, terms, than, that, the, there, things, this, to, told, too, trouble, TRs, twin, 2D.
Under, understand, understood, unreal, use.
Verbal, violated.
Was, were, weren’t, when, why, with, withhold, word, word clearing, words, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research and
Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JULY 1980R
REVISED 5 NOVEMBER 1982
Remimeo
All HCOs
Tech Sec (Also issued as HCO PL
Ds of Ts same date, same title)
Supervisors
Ethics Officers
Cramming Officers
Students
All Staff
All Hats
THE BASICS OF ETHICS
Refs:
Dianetic Auditor’s Bulletin PREVENTIVE DIANETICS
Vol I, No. 12, June 51 (Section on Morals and Ethics)
PAB 40, 26 Nov. 54 THE CODE OF HONOR
Book: Science of Survival Chapter 21, “Ethic Level”
HCO PL 9 July 80 ETHICS, JUSTICE AND THE DYNAMICS
Ethics and Justice Pack in The Volunteer Minister’s Handbook
HCO PL 1 Sept. 65 VII ETHICS PROTECTION
HCO PL 29 Apr. 65 III ETHICS—REVIEW
HCOB 27 May 60 II DEAR SCIENTOLOGIST
HCO PL 12 Apr. 65 JUSTICE
HCO PL 11 May 65 ETHICS OFFICER HAT
HCO PL 6 Mar. 66 REWARDS AND PENALTIES,
HOW TO HANDLE PERSONNEL AND
ETHICS MATTERS
HCO PL 29 Dec. 66 HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE OF ETHICS
HCO PL 18 June 68 ETHICS
HCO PL 4 Oct. 68 ETHICS PRESENCE
Rev. 10.7.80
HCO PL 7 Dec. 69 ETHICS, THE DESIGN OF
HCO PL 7 Dec. 69II THE ETHICS OFFICER,
HIS CHARACTER
HCO PL 24 Feb. 69 JUSTICE
HCO PL 7 Sept. 63 COMMITTEES OF EVIDENCE
SCIENTOLOGY JURISPRUDENCE,
ADMINISTRATION OF
HCO PL 17 Mar. 65III ADMINISTERING JUSTICE
HCO PL 24 Feb. 72 INJUSTICE
Throughout the ages, man has struggled with the subjects of right and wrong and ethics and justice.
The dictionary defines ethics as “the study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others.”
The same dictionary defines justice as “conformity to moral right, or to reason, truth or fact,” or “the administration of law.”
As you can see, these terms have become confused.
All philosophies from time immemorial have involved themselves with these subjects. And they never solved them.
That they have been solved in Dianetics and Scientology is a breakthrough of magnitude. The solution lay, first, in their separation. From there it could go forward to a workable technology for each.
ETHICS consists simply of the actions an individual takes on himself. It is a personal thing. When one is ethical or “has his ethics in,” it is by his own determinism and is done by himself.
JUSTICE is the action taken on the individual by the group when he fails to take these actions himself.
HISTORY
These subjects are, actually, the basis of all philosophy. But in any study of the history of philosophy it is plain that they have puzzled philosophers for a long tlme.
The early Greek followers of Pythagoras (Greek philosopher of the sixth century B.C.) tried to apply their mathematical theories to the subject of human conduct and ethics. Some time later, Socrates (Greek philosopher and teacher, 470?399 B.C.) tackled the subject. He demonstrated that all those who were claiming to show people how to live were unable to defend their views or even define the terms they were using. He argued that we must know what courage, and justice, law and government are before we can be brave or good citizens or just or good rulers. This was fine, but he then refused to provide definitions. He said that all sin was ignorance but did not take the necessary actions to rid man of his ignorance.
Socrates’ pupil, Plato (Greek philosopher, 427?-347 B.C.) adhered to his master’s theories but insisted that these definitions could only be defined by pure reason. This meant that one had to isolate oneself from life in some ivory tower and figure it all out—not very useful to the man in the street.
Aristotle (Greek philosopher, 384-322 B.C.) also got involved with ethics. He explained unethical behavior by saying-that man’s rationality became overruled by his desire.
This chain continued down the ages. Philosopher after philosopher tried to resolve the subjects of ethics and justice.
Unfortunately, until now, there has been no workable solution, as evidenced by the declining ethical level of society.
So you see it is no small breakthrough that has been made in this subject in the last 30 years or so. We have defined the terms, which Socrates omitted to do, and we have a workable technology that anyone can use to help get himself out of the mud. The natural laws behind this subject have been found and made available for all to use.
ETHICS
Ethics is so native to the individual that when it goes off the rails he will always seek to overcome his own lack of ethics.
He knows he has an ethics blind spot the moment he develops it. At that moment he starts trying to put ethics in on himself, and to the degree that he can envision long-term survival concepts, he may be successful, even though lacking the actual tech of ethics.
All too often, however, the bank is triggered by an out-ethics situation; and if the individual has no tech with which to handle it analytically, his “handling” is to mock up motivators. In other words, he tends to believe or pretend that something was done to him that prompted or justified his out-ethics action, and at that point he starts downhill.
It is not his attempt to get his ethics in that does him in. It is the automaticity of the bank which kicks in on him and his use of a bank mechanism at this point which sends him down the chute. When that happens, nobody puts him down the chute harder, really, than he does himself.
And, once on the way down, without the basic technology of ethics, he has no way of climbing back up the chute—he just caves himself in directly and deliberately. And even though he has a lot of complexities in his life, and he has other people doing him in, it all starts with his lack of knowledge of the technology of ethics.
This, basically, is one of the primary tools he uses to dig himself out.
BASIC NATURE OF MAN
No matter how criminal an individual is, he will be trying, one way or another, to put ethics in on himself.
This explains why Hitler invited the world to destroy Germany. He had the whole war won before September 1939, before he declared war. The Allies were giving him everything he wanted; he had one of the finest intelligence organizations that ever walked; he had Germany well on the way to getting her colonies back and the idiot declared war! And he just caved himself and Germany right in. His brilliance was going at a mad rate in one direction and his native sense of ethics was causing him to cave himself in at a mad rate in the other direction.
The individual who lacks any ethics technology is unable to put in ethics on himself and restrain himself from contrasurvival actions, so he caves himself in. And the individual is not going to come alive unless he gets hold of the basic tech of ethics and applies it to himself and others. He may find it a little unpalatable at first, but when you’re dying of malaria you don’t usually complain about the taste of the quinine: you may not like it, but you sure drink it.
JUSTICE
When the individual fails to put in his own ethics, the group takes action against him and this is called justice.
I have found that man cannot be trusted with justice. The truth is, man cannot really be trusted with “punishment.” With it he does not really seek discipline; he wreaks injustice. He dramatizes his inability to get his own ethics in by trying to get others to get their ethics in: I invite you to examine what laughingly passes for “justice” in our current society.
Many governments are so touchy about their divine rightness in judicial matters that you hardly open your mouth before they burst into uncontrolled violence. Getting into police hands is a catastrophe in its own right in many places, even when one is merely the plaintiff, much less the accused. Thus, social disturbance is at maximum in such areas.
When the tech of ethics isn’t known, justice becomes an end-all in itself. And that just degenerates into a sadism. Governments, because they don’t understand ethics, have “ethics committees,” but these are all worded in the framework of justice. They are even violating the derivation of the word ethics. They write justice over into ethics continuously with medical ethics committees, psychological ethics committees, congressional committees, etc. These are all on the basis of justice because they don’t really know what ethics is. They call it ethics but they initiate justice actions and they punish people and make it harder for them to get their own ethics in.
Proper justice is expected and has definite use. When a state of discipline does not exist, the whole group caves in. It has been noted continually that the failure of a group began with a lack of or loss of discipline. Without it the group and its members die. But you must understand ethics and justice.
The individual can be trusted with ethics, and when he is taught to put his own ethics in, justice no longer becomes the all-important subject that it is made out to be.
BREAKTHROUGH
The breakthrough in Scientology is that we do have the basic technology of ethics. For the first time man can learn how to put his own ethics in and climb back up the chute.
This is a brand-new discovery; before Scientology it had never before seen the light of day, anywhere. It marks a turning point in the history of philosophy. The individual can learn this technology, learn to apply it to his life and can then put his own ethics in, change conditions and start heading upwards toward survival under his own steam.
I hope you will learn to use this technology very well for your own sake, for the sake of those around you and for the sake of the future of this culture as a whole.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JULY 1980R
REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors,
Class II
and Above
CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST—LCRE
This HCOB cancels and replaces all of the following:
HCOB 30 July 70 CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST L-CR
HCOB 8 Dec. 72 INTEGRITY PROCESSING REPAIR LIST L1R
HCOB 8 Dec. 72R INTEGRITY PROCESSING REPAIR LIST L1R
Rev. 12.2.73
BTB 8 Dec. 72R INTEGRITY PROCESSING REPAIR LIST L1R
BTB 8 Dec. 72RA INTEGRITY PROCESSING AND O/Ws
REPAIR LIST—L1RA
BTB 8 Dec. 72RB CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST LCRB
BTB 8 Dec. 72RC CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST LCRC
HCOB 23 July 80 CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST LCRD
This is the prepared list to use for repairing a Confessional, whether done as auditing or as an HCO Confessional. It is also for use in handling BPC from other O/W actions such as O/W write-ups.
If, after a Confessional or O/W write-up, the person red tags at the Examiner or if he gets sick or upset or falls on his head, this list is assessed and handled to straighten the matter GUt. The repair action would be a 24-hour repair priorlty.
If there is a bog during a Confessional action, the auditor would first check for missed withholds, false reads and ARC breaks, in that order, and handle what he found. (Ref: HCOB 30 Nov. 78R, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE) If this does not resolve the difficulty, one should use the LCRE.
The list is usually assessed Method 3, but may be assessed Method 5 in the case of a severe pc upset or as directed by the C/S.
The list should be used with a prefix which acts as a time limiter, such as “In this session,_____ ?” or “On your O/W write-up,_____?”
PRECLEAR: DATE:_______________
AUDITOR: ______________________________________
1. OUT-INT? _________
(If you get a valid read, not a false or protest read, indicate it. If the pc has had an Int RD or End of Endless Int RD previously, assess and handle the Int RD Correction List. If the pc has not had previous Int handling or if the Int RD Correction List does not fully resolve the situation, do an Int RD or, on a Clear or OT, the End of Endless Int RD.
If you are not qualified to deliver the Int RD or the End of Endless Int RD, end off for a qualified auditor to handle.)
2. LIST ERROR? _________
(Indicate. If Class III or above, find out what list and repair with L4BRA. If not Class III, end off for handling by a Class III or above.)
3. WRONG ITEM? _________
(Handle as in #2.)
4. WAS THERE AN ARC BREAK? _________
(ARCU, CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
5. WAS THERE A PROBLEM? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
6. WAS A WITHHOLD MISSED? _________
(Pull it getting who nearly found out, etc., E/S to F/N.)
7. DID YOU TELL PART OF A WITHHOLD BUT NOT THE REST? _________
(Get all of the withhold, flatten it E/S to F/N.)
8. DID YOU MISDIRECT THE AUDITOR? _________
(Handle as an overt, E/S to F/N. Flatten any unflat Confessional chain uncovered.)
9. DID YOU AVOID TELLING ONE OVERT BY GIVING A DIFFERENT ONE? _________
(Pull the overt the pc avoided telling, E/S to F/N.)
10. WERE YOU WAITING FOR A MORE SPECIFICALLY WORDED QUESTION? _________
(Find out what Sec Check question the pc was waiting for and get it answered, to F/N.)
11. DID THE AUDITOR FAIL TO FIND OUT SOMETHING ABOUT YOU? _________
(Handle as a missed withhold, E/S to F/N.)
12. DID YOU FAIL TO ANSWER A SEC CHECK QUESTION? _________
(Find out which question and handle to F/N.)
13. DID YOU DELIBERATELY NOT ANSWER A SEC CHECK QUESTION? _________
(Find out what question and handle to F/N.)
14. DID YOU WITHHOLD SAYING SOMETHING FOR FEAR OF GETTING INTO ETHICS TROUBLE? _________
(Handle to F/N as per Sec Checking procedure.)
15. DID YOU TRY TO LESSEN AN OVERT? _________
(Find out how he tried to lessen the overt and complete its handling to F/N.)
16. HAS AN OVERT BEEN JUSTIFIED? _________
(Pull the justifications off the overt, then complete to F/N.)
17. WAS THERE SOME OTHER WAY YOU JUSTIFIED THE OVERT? _________
(Pull the justifications off the overt, then complete its handling to F/N.)
18. WORRIED ABOUT REPUTATION? _________
(Clean it up with 2WC E/S to F/N.)
19. ARE THERE OPINIONS YOU DON’T DARE SAY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
20. WAS THERE AN EARLIER OVERT UNDISCLOSED? _________
(Pull it E/S to F/N.)
21. WAS A CHAIN OF OVERTS NOT TAKEN BACK TO BASIC? _________
(Take it back to basic.)
22. WAS AN OVERT TOO LATE ON THE CHAIN? _________
(Get the earlier overt and take the chain to F/N.)
23. JUMPED TO A DIFFERENT OVERT CHAIN? _________
(Reorient to the original chain and take it to F/N. Then flatten the chain the pc jumped to, if reading.)
24. ARE YOU WITHHOLDING ANYTHING? _________
(Get what it is, E/S to F/N.)
25. DID YOU TELL A HALF-TRUTH? _________
(Get all of the withhold, handle E/S to F/N.)
26. WAS THERE SOMETHING THE AUDITOR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT YOU THAT HE DIDN’T? _________
(Get what. Pull it E/S to F/N.)
27. WAS THERE AN UNDISCLOSED OUT-ETHICS SITUATION? _________
(Get it off as a missed W/H, E/S to F/N.)
28. HAS A CRIME BEEN COVERED UP? _________
(Pull it, E/S to F/N.)
29. WAS THERE MORE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOWN ABOUT SOME OVERT? _________
(Get it all, E/S to F/N.)
30. WAS THERE A QUESTION THAT THE AUDITOR SAID DIDN’T READ THAT SHOULD HAVE? _________
(Find out what question and get in Suppress and Inval on it. Then handle it to F/N.)
31. DID THE AUDITOR CALL AN F/N WHEN YOU DIDN’T FEEL YOU WERE F/Ning? _________
(Find the point and get in Suppress on it, and complete the action to F/N.)
32. DID YOU TELL A LIE? _________
(Handle as a W/H, to F/N.)
33. WAS A QUESTION LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Find out which one, indicate it and handle to F/N.)
34. WAS AN F/N OVERRUN? _________
(Find out on what Sec Check question or overt chain and rehab. )
35. WAS AN F/N MISSED? _________
(Find out on what Sec Check question or overt chain and rehab.)
36. DID SOMEONE DEMAND A W/H YOU DIDN’T HAVE? _________
(Indicate it if so. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
37. HAD YOU TOLD ALL? _________
(Indicate it if so. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
38. WAS AN OVERT PROTESTED? _________
(Get what it was and get in Protest button on it. Fully clean up the overt to F/N.)
39. WAS THERE A WITHHOLD THAT KEPT COMING UP? _________
(Get who wouldn’t accept it or said it still read. Indicate it was a false read. 2WC the concern to F/N.)
40. DID YOU HAVE TO GET THE SAME WITHHOLD OFF MORE THAN ONCE? _________
(Handle as in #39.)
41. DID SOMEONE SAY YOU HAD A WITHHOLD WHEN YOU DIDN’T? _________
(Indicate it, 2WC E/S to F/N. For auditors trained to D/L, date to blow and locate to blow the first instance of the pc being told he had that W/H when he didn’t.)
42. DID SOMEONE SAY OR SEEM TO INFER THAT SOMETHING READ WHEN IT DIDN’T? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. For auditors trained to D/L, date to blow and locate to blow the first instance of the pc being told that.)
43. WAS THERE AN OVERT OR WITHHOLD THAT WASN’T ACCEPTED? _________
(Get what. Get who wouldn’t accept it. Get off any protest and inval, and clean it up E/S to F/N.)
44. DID SOMEONE INVALIDATE YOU FOR GETTING OFF A WITHHOLD? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
45. DID SOMEONE PUNISH YOU FOR GETTING OFF A WITHHOLD? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
46. WAS THERE A FALSE ACCUSATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
47. NOT YOUR OVERT? _________
(Indicate it. If it doesn’t F/N on indication, take it E/S to F/N.)
48. WERE YOU NOT HONEST WITH THE AUDITOR? _________
(Handle as a missed withhold, E/S to F/N.)
49. DID YOU HAVE AN INTENTION TO MAKE OTHERS WRONG? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program the case for full service fac handling and False Purpose Rundown.)
50. WAS THERE A COMPUTATION YOU USED TO MAKE YOURSELF RIGHT AND OTHERS WRONG? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program for full service fac handling.)
51. FALSELY VILIFYING SOMEONE TO COVER UP AN EVIL PURPOSE? _________
(Get it off as an overt E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program the case for False Purpose Rundown.)
52. WAS THERE AN EVIL PURPOSE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program the case for False Purpose Rundown.)
53. WAS SOME BAD INTENTION NOT DISCOVERED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program the case for False Purpose Rundown.)
54. WAS SOME HIDDEN EVIL IMPULSE NOT REVEALED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program the case for False Purpose Rundown.)
55. WAS THERE SOME NONSURVIVAL CONSIDERATION YOU DIDN’T MENTION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program the case for False Purpose Rundown.)
56. WERE YOU PRETENDING TO BE PTS TO AVOID TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOME OUT-ETHICS SITUATION? _________
(Handle as a withhold to F/N. Pull any overts.) (C/S to program the case for False Purpose Rundown.)
57. DID THE AUDITOR NOT HEAR OR ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT YOU SAID? _________
(Indicate the BPC. Get what the auditor missed and clean it up E/S to F/N.)
58. DID THE AUDITOR GET ANGRY AT YOU? _________
(If this happened, indicate it is illegal to do so. 2WC E/S to F/N. Clean up any ARC break to F/N.) (C/S to program for a QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST, HCOB 11 July 82 I.)
59. WERE THERE AUDITOR’S CODE BREAKS? _________
(Get what. Indicate it was illegal and 2WC E/S to F/N.) (C/S to program for a QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST, HCOB 11 July 82 I.)
60. WERE YOU AFRAID OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
61. WAS THERE AN INJUSTICE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
62. WAS THERE A BETRAYAL? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
63. WAS ANYTHING SUPPRESSED? _________
(Clean it up E/S to F/N.)
64. WAS ANYTHING INVALIDATED? _________
(Clean it up E/S to F/N.)
65. WAS ANYTHING FALSIFIED? _________
(Clean it up as a W/H E/S to F/N.)
66. WAS ANYTHING PROTESTED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
67. WAS THERE ANY EVALUATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
68 . WAS SOMETHING MISUNDERSTOOD? _________
(Clean it up, clearing any MU words each to F/N.)
69. WERE YOU TIRED OR HUNGRY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
70. HAD YOU RECENTLY TAKEN DRUGS? MEDICINE? ALCOHOL? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Note for C/S.)
71. WERE YOU BEING SEC CHECKED ON A WRONG AREA? _________
(2WC to F/N, getting the area or subject pc feels he should be sec checked on and noting these for the C/S.)
72. WAS THERE SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? _________
(If so and it doesn’t clean up on 2WC, GF M5 and handle.)
73. HAS THE UPSET BEEN HANDLED? _________
(2WC. If so, indicate it to F/N.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JULY 1980RA
REVISED 12 JULY 1988
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
COURSE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 27 Mar. 72RA II, COURSE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words in session on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE COURSE SUPERVISOR
CORRECTION LIST
A, ability, about, afraid, after, already, an, and, another, answer, any, anyway, apply, ARC break, are, as, at, attained, available.
Be, been, being, believe, bog, bogged, bound, bulletins, by.
Can, cannot, can’t, case, certain, class, clearing, competence, condition, conflict, confront, confronted, connection, consequences, consider, control, correction, course, course room, courses, covered, cramming, cross.
Debug, demos, destructive, did, didn’t, disagreements, do, does, dog, doing, done, don’t, double, doubt, drugs, duress, during.
Else, encountered, enough, ethics, evil, experimenting.
Fail, falsify, feel, find, fixed, F/Ning, for, forced, found, from, fully.
Get, getting, give, giving, good, graduated, graduates.
Had, handle, handled, has, hasn’t, hatted, have, he, helped, helping, here, how, hung up.
Ideas, if, important, in, incomplete, incorrectly, instead, intention, interesting, interpreting, interrupting, is, issues, it.
Knew, know, knowledgeable.
Lack, leaving, left, less, like, list, losses, lots.
Make, many, materials, messed up, Method 9 Word Clearing, methods, misemotion, missing, misunderstoods, more.
Native, neglecting, never, new, no, not.
Of, on, or, order, orders, other, others, out, out-Int, out-list, outnesses, over, overt, overwhelmed, own.
Past, patience, people, physically, policy, popular, post, powerful, preventing, problem, product, prove, purpose.
Questions.
Rather, really, reason, received, refer, regulated, responsible, right.
Said, should, shouldn’t, situations, so, some, somebody, someone, something, staff, started, statistic, stats, status, student, students, student’s, students’, studied, study, study tech, subject, supervise, supervised, supervising, supervision, Supervisor, Supervisor’s, suppressive.
Teach, teaching, tech, than, that, the, their, them; there, think, third partying, time, tired, to, told, too, trouble, TRs, trying.
Unable, understand, unwell, upset, use, using.
Verbal.
Want, was, were, what, when, who, why, will, with, withhold, word, Word Clearing tech, words, work, worked, working, works, worth, would, wrong.
You, your, yourself.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JULY 1980
Remimeo
CRIMINALS AND PSYCHIATRY
Almost every modern horror crime was committed by a known criminal who had been in and out of the hands of psychiatrists and psychologists, often many times.
There is no particular reason to enumerate endless case histories of this; they occur too frequently in news accounts and the newspaper morgues are thick with them. And as such stories develop, it is found that the perpetrator had a long history, some even from childhood, of psychiatric and psychological treatment.
Such a record of failure does not seem to come to the attention of legislators, and these continue to pour floods of money into the coffers of the psychiatrists, psychologists and their organizations. The public at large, by survey, seems to be aware of this state of affairs, if not the whole facts: the only real customers the psychiatrist and psychologist have are the governments—the public does not of its own volition go to them.
The most charitable look at this would be that the psychologists and psychiatrists are simply incompetent. But other more sinister implications can be drawn.
Developed in the latter part of the nineteenth century, they appeared on the militaristic scene of a rearming and conquest-minded Germany. At that time, the archcriminal Bismarck was laying the groundwork for the slaughters of World War I and World War II. It fitted with the philosophy of militarism that man was an animal and that there was neither soul nor morality standing in the way of the wholesale murder of war.
Up until that time the Church had some influence upon the state and possibly some power in restraining bestiality and savagely insane conduct, but small as it might have been, it was incompatible with the unholy ambitions of the militarists. That man was only an animal after all, soulless and entitled to no decency, was bound to be a popular doctrine. That insanity consisted of urges to harm others would have been a very unpopular idea to government heads who had nothing else in mind. And so the notion that insanity was a physical disease was taken up avidly.
The basic tenet of psychology is that man is just an animal. The basic tenet of psychiatry is that insanity is a physical disease. Neither has any proof that these tenets are correct. That man can be reduced to animalistic behavior does not prove that that is his true basic nature. That some physical diseases also produce mental aberration does not prove that any “mental illness” has bacteria or virus and indeed none have ever been isolated.
The instigators, patrons and supporters of these two subjects classify fully and demonstrably as criminals.
If the crimes committed by a government in one single day were committed by an individual, that individual would be promptly put in a cell and probably even a padded cell.
Unfortunately, positions of power and authority attract to themselves beings who, all too often, need that altitude to exercise their lust for covertly or overtly harming others. Government positions are well suited to this use; they are also all too often held to be above any law. Some of the most notorious criminals in history have operated from government positions. This becomes statistically impressive when one counts the strewn corpses.
Looking this over (and it is amply documented in any history book or newspaper) one can begin to make some kind of sense out of it. Spawned by an insanely militaristic government, psychiatry and psychology find avid support from oppressive and domineering governments. The employer of these people c]assifies, even in the most generous view, as criminal. Thus, it cannot be much wondered at that these subjects have no real success or even interest in detecting and handling criminals.
One cannot go so far as to say that psychiatry and psychology knowingly create criminals or actively plan and implant their patients to commit crimes, even though it might look this way in some cases. Rather, these subjects are false subjects, based on false principles which are well suited to the demands and ambitions of their empioyers. Their technology is incapable of detecting, much less helping, the criminal. It is even doubtful if their employers, the governments, would tolerate a subject which could detect and resolve criminality—for who would be the first ones detected? Some amongst the governments, of course. No, the wolf would only favor a jury of wolves to judge the crime of killing sheep. That is why you see governments flooding out money for psychologists in schools and psychiatrists in government departments.
With a complete, government-supported monopoly in the field of the mind, potential criminals will go right on remaining undetected until they injure or slaughter citizens and, having done so, become unrelieved or even confirmed in their habit patterns in the hands of psychiatrists and psychologists and re-released upon the world to further injure and slaughter citizens.
The credence and power of psychiatry and psychology are waning. It hit its zenith about 1960; then it seemed their word was law and that they could harm, injure and kill patients without restraint. The appearance of an actual technology of the mind—Dianetics and Scientology—has played no small part in acting as a restraint. At one time they were well on their way to turning every baby into a future robot for the manipulation of the state and every society into a madhouse of crime and immorality. The world is still suffering from the effects of that domination.
There is no real reason why, using the proper technology, the criminal cannot be detected and also reformed. One might also, by the use of False Data Stripping, redeem a psychologist or psychiatrist—though this would be made difficult by the fact that he achieves all his power and money from the state which might have quite different purposes for him.
The world is turning, things change. And there may come a day when the mad dogs of the world are not given over to the charge of mad dogs. But that.will be to the degree that you successfully carry forward Dianetics and Scientology.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JULY 1980
Remimeo
THE NATURE OF A BEING
When one is associating with or attempting to guide or handle a person, it is necessary to know something of the nature of a being.
If a being were a single unit, separated from all other beings, conditions and current influences, the task of understanding him would be relatively simple and philosophers would have had it all worked out long before Dianetics and Scientology.
A single-unit being responds to the most elementary and simple rules and laws you will find in Dianetics and Scientology: affinity, reality, communication and understanding; the time track; mental image pictures; the earlier incident holding the later in place; responses to matter, energy, space, time, form, as well as force; and the Axioms. On this you can rest assured. And one might even wonder why we need all the additional bulletins and cautions and provisions and lectures.
The fact of the matter is that when one addresses a person, a human being “in the flesh,” one is not addressing a simple being.
Possibly an example will illustrate this: I had just finished giving a congress and a staff member had made some appointments for me to see people who wanted to talk to me. And, in a conference room, I was suddenly confronted by a woman who was demonstrably and actively insane. She was incoherent; she was being “pursued”; she was utterly agitated. Well, I was not then and never was in the business of treating the insane. Yet here was a situation which had to be handled if only to maintain social calm. In those days there were many techniques for exteriorizing people and so I used one of them, putting her back of her head. Promptly she went sane, calmly reviewed her problem with her husband, sensibly made up her mind what she was going to do to properly resolve the matter, thanked me and departed. For a brief time she had temporarily become a single-unit being.
I have not given the example as a lesson in what to do in such cases, for exteriorization techniques are not reliable. But only to illustrate the complexity of people.
What you see as a human being, a person, is not a single-unit being.
In the first place, there is the matter of valence. A person can be himself or he can be under the belief that he is another person or thing entirely. This removes him a step from being a simple being.
Then there is the matter of being in a body. A body is a very complex contrivance, quite remarkable, quite complicated. And it is also quite subject to its own distortions.
There are also the entities (as discussed in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, pages 84-90, and also The History of Man, pages 13-14, 43, 75-77). These follow all the rules and laws and phenomena of single beings.
And then there is the matter of influences of other people around this human being.
From a single, simple being there is a progressive complication setting in as one adds all these other factors.
The single, simple being, without any further associations, can be out of valence even miles away from other contacts.
It is the aggregate of all these factors which you address when you seek to guide or handle the usual human being.
This is also why Objective Processes are so effective—they get many of these factors all going in the same direction for once.
None of this is to say that it is impossible to handle all this. Far from it. But it does tell one why all the additional precautions (like don’t overrun, like careful session procedures) are there in all those materials.
But mainly it tells you that full recoveries seldom happen fast and that cases require an awful lot of work and often for a very long time.
And like the woman at the congress, one sometimes gets a sudden nearmagical result. The trouble with that one was that she soon went back into her head and became again a composite, even though she now did have a sane plan of action to follow.
Results, if you follow the rules and laws carefully and with good heart, can be obtained. And you, knowing your business, can obtain them.
But don’t become discouraged if it all doesn’t happen fast and if it takes a long time. When you are handling a human being, you are handling a composite.
We did not construct the human mind or human body. We did not put the universe there to involve, oppress or complicate life. We are working with the end product of an awful lot of trials and tribulations.
If we were working with single beings, it would be a nothing to do. We are not. We are working with a complexity and we can do an awful lot, far more than anyone could do before us. And our work with life has effects and influences far beyond our auditing tables. It took vast, vast numbers of years and eons for life to get that involved and complicated. Be glad that it doesn’t take even a tiny fraction of that to dig it out and smooth it out with Dianetics and Scientology.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 2 SEPTEMBER 1980
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
Tech/Qual
REPAIR CORRECTION LIST WORDS
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 16 Oct. 78, REPAIR CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
These words need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if they were correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6R, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE REPAIR CORRECTION LIST
A, action, an, and, anyway, asked, assessed, assessment, attesting, audited, auditing, auditor.
Bad, be, been, being, by, bypassed, bypassed charge.
Case, charge, chart, complete, could, cycle.
Declare, did, didn’t, do, done.
Ever, exterior.
Fail, false read, feel, felt, F/N, F/Ned, F/Ning, from.
Get, get on with, given, going, gone, grade, Grade Chart.
Had, handle, handled, has, have, high, high TA, how.
In, indicate, Int RD, is, it, item.
Just.
Kept, knew.
List, lists, low, low TA.
Many, messed up, misassessed, missed.
No, not.
Often, on, one, other, out-list, overrepair, overrun.
Prepared, prepared list, prepared lists, prevented.
Read, really, repair, repaired, repairs, rundown.
See, should, some, something.
TA, take up, tell, the, there, think, time, to, told, too, TRs.
Unnecessary, up.
Want, was, wasn’t, were, what, when, while, win, with, would, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 SEPTEMBER 1980
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
L4BRB WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 15 Dec. 68RB, L4BRB FOR ASSESSMENT OF ALL LISTING ERRORS.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the L4BRB is actually assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc ‘ s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 77, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE L4BRB
A, abandoned, accepted, acknowledge, action, already, amazed, an, and, another, answer, ARC break, ashamed, asserted, auditor.
Because, been, before, being, by, bypassed, bypassed charge.
Carried, carried on, cause, charge, correct, correction, couldn’t.
Denied, did, didn’t, different, do, done.
Earlier, else, else’s, errors, evaluated, exterior.
Fail, first, forced, found, from.
Given, gone.
Had, handled, has, have.
In, incomplete, interest, invalidated, is, it, item, items.
Kind.
List, listed, listing, long.
Made, meaningless, missed.
No, not, nothing, nulling.
Of, off, on, only, or, other, out, overrun, overt.
Past, place, in the first place, point, previously, process, protest, protested, PTP, pushed, put.
Question.
React, release, restimulated, right.
Said, session, some, somebody, someone, suggest, suggested.
Taken, that, the, there, this, thought, to, too.
Under, understand, understood, unnecessary, upset.
Volunteered.
Want, was, way, were, what, when, while, withheld, withhold, word, wrong.
You, your, yours, yourself.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 16 SEPTEMBER 1980R
REVISED 4 JULY 1988
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
PTS RD CORRECTION LIST
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 16 Apr. 72R, PTS RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words in session on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE PTS RD CORRECTION LIST
A, about, achieved, additional, after, agree, all, all right, an, and, another, anyway, are, attest, audited, auditing, auditor.
Bad, be, been, believe, but, by.
Can’t, caused, communication, complete, completely, condition.
Decided, detected, didn’t, disagrees, disclosed, does, doing, don’t.
Earlier, else, engram, errors, ever, everything, exterior.
Feel, feelings, first.
Gains, given, group.
Handle, handled, has, have, hold.
Ill, in, incomplete, Int Rundown, is, it.
Know.
Lies, like, list, lost.
Messed up, middle, misunderstood, more.
Not, now.
Of, okay, on, only, onto, or.
People, person, physically, place, protested, PTS, PTS Rundown.
Really, rundown.
Said, Scientology, situation, someone, something, still, suppressive.
Than, that, the, there, this, to, told.
Understand, upset.
Want, was, wasn’t, went, were, weren’t, what, when, who, whole, with, words, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue I
NED Auditors REVISED 8 APRIL 1988
C/Ses
New Era Dianetics Series 20-1
L3RH WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 11 Apr. 71RE, NED Series 20, L3RH, DIANETICS AND INT RD REPAIR LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the L3RH is assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted on the Yellow Sheet in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE L3RH
A, abandoned, accept, alcohol, all, already, an, and, another, ARC break, assessed, at, attain, audited, auditor.
Basic, be, because, been, beginning, black, by, bypassed.
Chain, chains, changed, changing, charge, charged, Clear, cognition, command, commands, completed, confused, constantly, could.
Date, death, declare, demand, Dianetic, did, different, distracted, drugs, duration, durations.
Earlier, else, engrams, erased, erasing, expressed, exterior.
False, first, flows, flubbed, F/N, for, found, from.
Get, giving, go, gone, goof, gotten.
Handled, has, have, heavily, held up.
Implant, in, incident, incidents, incorrect, indicated, Int, interest, interrupted, invalidated, invisible, it, item.
Jump, just.
Late, left, let, list.
Mass, medicine, messed up, misrun, missed, misunderstood, misworded, more.
No, nobody, not, nothing.
Of, on, one, or, original, originally, over.
Past, persistent, picture, pictures, place, postulate, preassessment, pressure, prevented, problem, protesting.
Read, real, really, reason, refuse, resent, restimulated, run, rundown, running.
Said, same, say, saying, see, sequence, should, similar, simply, skipped, solid, some, something, soon, state, still, stop, stopped, stuck, suppressed.
Than, that, the, there, thing, this, through, time, tired, to, too, trouble, twice, two.
Unnecessary, upset.
Was, went, were, what, when, while, with, withhold, wording, would, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1980RA
Remimeo Issue II
C/Ses REVISED 28 JUNE 1990
Auditors
Tech/Qual
GREEN FORM WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
HCO PL 7 Apr. 70RE GREEN FORM
Rev. 27.6.88
These are the words from HCO PL 7 Apr. 70RE, GREEN FORM.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the Green Form is actually assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
This word list need only be cleared once in.the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE GREEN FORM
A, about, against, alcohol, altering, an, any, anything, ARC break, are, arrested, aspirin, audited, auditing, auditor.
Bad, be, because, been, breaks, by, bypassed, bypassed charge.
Can’t, Clear, code, coming, comm cycle, committed, confidential, connected, copies, could, crime, crimes, criminal, cured.
Dangers, data, debts, demanded, Dianetic Clear, do, doing, drugs, drunk.
Else, engram, enough, environment, environmental, erased, error, evaluated, exactly, experimenting, exterior.
Food, for, from.
Get, gone, group.
Had, handled, handwritten, happen, has, hasn’t, have, here, hidden standard, hungry.
If, ignored, in, Int Rundown, invalidated, is, it.
Kept, know, knowledge.
Left, list.
Matching, materials, menace, mentioned, messed up, missed.
Nonstandard, not.
Of, or, orgs, originations, overrepaired, overrun, overt.
Person, physically, picture, present time problem, process, PT.
Record, release, restimulation, review, rushed.
Scientology, self-auditing, sleep, solve, someone, something, study, sufficient, suppressed, suppressive.
Taken, taped, tech, that, the, there, this, tired, to, tranquilizers, trying, typed.
Unflat, unnecessary, unpaid, up, upsetting.
Was, what, which, with, withhold, worked, works, would, wrong.
You, your.
ADDITIONAL WORDS FROM RESISTIVE CASES PREASSESSMENT
After, and, antagonistic, attained, attested.
Before, being.
Committing, continuously.
Doesn’t, don’t.
Earlier, engrams, evil purpose.
Former. Grades.
Ill.
Misunderstoods.
Never.
On, out, overts, overwhelmed.
Part, practices, pretending, prior.
Rudiments, run.
Same, secrets, seeking, seriously.
Therapy, thrill, training.
Valence. Want, went.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 SEPTEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue III
C/Ses REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Auditors
Tech/Qual
CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST—LCRE
WORDS LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 23 July 80R, CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST—LCRE .
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6R, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST—LCRE
A, about, accepted, accusation, acknowledge, afraid, alcohol, all, an, and, angry, answer, any, anything, ARC break, are, area, at, auditor, Auditor’s Code, avoid.
Back, bad, basic, be, been, being, betrayal, breaks, but, by.
Call, chain, coming, coming up, computation, consideration, cover up, covered up, crime.
Dare, deliberately, demand, did, didn’t, different, discovered, don’t, drugs.
Earlier, else, error, ethics, evaluation, evil, evil impulse, evil purpose.
F/N, F/Ning, fail, false, falsely, falsified, fear, feel, find out, for.
Get, getting, giving.
Had, half-truth, handled, happen, has, have, he, hear, hidden, honest, hungry.
Impulse, infer, injustice, intention, into, invalidate, invalidated, it, item.
Jumped, justified.
Kept, known.
Late, left, lessen, lie, list.
Make, medicine, mention, might, misdirect, missed, misunderstood, more.
Nonsurvival, not.
Of, off, on, once, one, opinions, or, other, others, out-ethics, out-Int, overrun, overt, overts.
Part, pretending, problem, protested, PTS, punish.
Question.
Read, recently, reputation, responsibility, rest, revealed, right.
Said, same, say, saying, Sec Check, sec checked, seem, should, situation, some, someone, something, specifically, suppressed.
Taken, taking, tell, telling, than, that, the, there, tired, to, told, too, trouble, try.
Undisclosed, unflat, upset, used.
Vilifying.
Waiting, was, wasn’t, way, were, what, when, with, withhold, withholding, worded, worried, wrong.
You, your, yourself.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 OCTOBER 1980
Remimeo Issue I
HCO
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 2R
GENERAL STAFF CONFESSIONAL LIST
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
Anyone doing a Confessional must have done or be on a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. HAVE YOU EVER STOLEN ANYTHING FROM A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION? ________
2. ARE YOU HERE ONLY TO GET FREE PROCESSING? ________
3. DO YOU INTEND TO LEAVE THIS ORGANIZATION ONCE TRAINED? ________
4. HAVE YOU AUDITED OUTSIDE PCs FOR MONEY WHILE A MEMBER OF THIS ORG? ________
5. HAVE YOU EVER FED AN ORG PC TO AN OUTSIDE AUDITOR? ________
6. HAVE YOU EVER BROKEN A CONTRACT WITH AN ORG? ________
7. HAVE YOU EVER SHIFTED THE BLAME TO AN INNOCENT STAFF MEMBER? ________
8. AS A STAFF MEMBER, HAVE YOU FAILED TO KEEP THE ORG SCHEDULE? ________
9. HAVE YOU OFFERED OR DELIVERED FREE SERVICES? ________
10. HAVE YOU ACCEPTED SERVICES FROM AN ORGANIZATION WITHOUT BEING INVOICED? ________
11. HAVE YOU EVER ADVISED ANYONE AGAINST JOINING STAFF OF A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION OR THE SEA ORG? ________
12. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN SCIENTOLOGY MATERIALS TO A GROUP OPPOSED TO SCIENTOLOGY? ________
13. HAVE YOU EVER SAID DISCREDITABLE THINGS TO THE PRESS OR PUBLIC CONCERNING SCIENTOLOGY? ________
14. AS A STAFF MEMBER HAVE YOU FAILED TO REGULARLY ATTEND STAFF STUDY OR TAKE YOUR ENHANCEMENT TIME? ________
15. HAVE YOU EVER REFUSED TO COMPLY WITH LEGAL ORDERS FROM A SENIOR? ________
16. HAVE YOU EVER FALSE REPORTED AS A STAFF MEMBER? ________
17. HAVE YOU FALSIFIED A STATISTIC? ________
18. HAVE YOU EVER FOLLOWED AN ORDER YOU KNEW TO BE OFF-POLICY? ________
19. HAVE YOU GIVEN FALSE EVIDENCE TO AN ETHICS BODY? ________
20. HAVE YOU EVER OBSTRUCTED AN ETHICS INVESTIGATION? ________
21. HAVE YOU WITHHELD DATA TO PROTECT YOURSELF OR ANOTHER? ________
22. HAVE YOU EVER THIRD-PARTIED A STAFF MEMBER? ________
23. HAVE YOU EVER LIED TO A STAFF MEMBER? ________
24. HAVE YOU FEIGNED ILLNESS TO AVOID WORK? ________
25. HAVE YOU FAILED TO PAY BACK LOANS YOU ACTUALLY OWE? ________
26. HAVE YOU CAUSED UPSET TO A PUBLIC PC OR STUDENT? ________
27. AS A STAFF MEMBER, HAVE YOU COMMITTED A PROBLEM? ________
28. AS A STAFF MEMBER, HAVE YOU EVER DEVISED A SOLUTION WHICH THEN BECAME A PROBLEM? ________
29. HAVE YOU EVER HAD CASE ON POST? ________
30. HAVE YOU PREVENTED A FELLOW STAFF MEMBER FROM WEARING HIS HAT? ________
31. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING TO GET ANOTHER REMOVED FROM POST FOR YOUR OWN PERSONAL GAIN? ________
32. HAVE YOU EVER ENGAGED IN A POWER PUSH AGAINST A SENIOR EXECUTIVE? ________
33. HAVE YOU EVER USED A SCIENTOLOGY POSITION TO OBTAIN UNUSUAL FAVORS? ________
34. HAVE YOU EVER PERSONALLY ACCEPTED A COMMISSION, PERCENTAGE, BRIBE OR GIFT FOR GIVING ANY FIRM OR PERSON THIS ORGANIZATION’S BUSINESS? ________
35. HAVE YOU ENGAGED IN ANY SORT OF 2D ACTIVITIES WITH PUBLIC STUDENTS OR PCs? ________
36. HAVE YOU LIVED OR SLEPT WITH ANYONE OTHER THAN YOUR LEGAL SPOUSE? ________
37. HAVE YOU CREATED A NEW 2D RELATIONSHIP WHILE LEGALLY MARRIED TO ANOTHER PERSON? ________
38. HAVE YOU EVER ADVISED ANYONE AGAINST FOLLOWING POLICY? ________
39. HAVE YOU PREVENTED ANOTHER FROM LEARNING HIS POST? ________
40. HAVE YOU PREVENTED ANOTHER FROM STUDYING OR TRAINING? ________
41. HAVE YOU EVER SLOWED THINGS DOWN JUST BECAUSE YOUR SENIORS WANTED THEM SPEEDED UP? ________
42. DO YOU EVER PRIVATELY LAUGH AT THE ANTICS OF YOUR SUPERIORS? ________
43. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING TO GET ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER IN BAD REPUTE? ________
44. HAVE YOU EVER DAMAGED ORG PROPERTY? ________
45. HAVE YOU WASTED ORG SUPPLIES? ________
46. HAVE YOU JUGGLED ORG ACCOUNTS? ________
47. AS A STAFF MEMBER HAVE YOU PRODUCED ANY OVERT PRODUCTS? ________
48. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN OUT DATA WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO HCO BULLETINS OR POLICY LETTERS? ________
49. HAVE YOU EVER PRETENDED TO QUOTE HCOBs OR PLs WITHOUT SHOWING THE ACTUAL ISSUE? ________
50. HAVE YOU EVER PREVENTED TECH OR POLICY FROM BEING KNOWN OR CORRECTLY USED? ________
51. HAVE YOU EVER JUST PRETENDED TO WORK? ________
52. HAVE YOU TAKEN CREDIT FOR THE WORK DONE BY ANOTHER? ________
53. HAVE YOU MALIGNED ANOTHER TO ENHANCE YOUR OWN REPUTATION? ________
54. HAVE YOU CAUSED OR CONTRIBUTED TO AN ORG MUTINY? ________
55. HAVE YOU SPENT POST TIME ON MATTERS NOT RELATED TO YOUR POST OR ORG BUSINESS? ________
56. HAVE YOU ENCOURAGED ANOTHER TO BLOW? ________
57. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING TO DAMAGE THE REPUTE OF A SENIOR SCIENTOLOGY ORG? ________
58. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING TO DAMAGE THE REPUTE OF THE SEA ORG? ________
59. HAVE YOU DISCOURAGED ORG PCs OR STUDENTS FROM ADVANCING TO A SENIOR ORG? ________
60. HAVE YOU EVER LIED TO A PUBLIC PC OR STUDENT? ________
61. HAVE YOU EVER LIED TO A POTENTIAL PC OR STUDENT? ________
62. HAVE YOU EVER WITHHELD THAT YOU HAD A PTS A SITUATION WITH A PARENT OR RELATIVE? ________
63. HAVE YOU FALSELY REPORTED TO A SEA ORG MISSIONAIRE? ________
64. HAVE YOU EVER FALSE REPORTED TO FLAG? ________
65. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED COMPLIANCE TO AN ORDER OR TARGET WHICH WAS NOT FULLY DONE? ________
66. HAVE YOU KNOWINGLY VIOLATED POLICY? ________
67. HAVE YOU BLAMED ANOTHER FOR NOT DOING YOUR JOB? ________
68. DO YOU THINK IT REALLY DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU DO A GOOD JOB OR NOT? ________
69. AS A STAFF MEMBER, HAVE YOU EVER TAKEN BOOKS, PACKS, PENS, SMALL AMOUNTS OF MONEY OR OTHER ARTICLES WHICH DID NOT BELONG TO YOU? ________
70. ARE YOU HERE PURPOSELY TO UPSET OR DAMAGE SCIENTOLOGY? ________
71. WHILE ON STAFF OF A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION, HAVE YOU COMMITTED ANY CIVIL CRIME? ________
72. IS THERE SOMETHING AN ETHICS OFFICER SHOULDN’T KNOW ABOUT YOU? ________
73. HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING YOU WOULDN’T LIKE LRH TO KNOW ABOUT? ________
74. AS A STAFF MEMBER HAVE YOU COMMITTED SOME OVERT THAT HASN’T BEEN REVEALED? ________
75. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALFTRUTH? ________
76. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? ________
77. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? ________
78. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? ________
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 OCTOBER 1980
Issue II
Remimeo
HCO
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 4R
SUPERVISOR CONFESSIONAL LIST
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
Anyone doing a Confessional must have done or be on a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN A STUDENT VERBAL DATA? ________
2. HAVE YOU TAUGHT A COURSE WITHOUT A CHECKSHEET? ________
3. HAVE YOU GIVEN STUDENTS CHECKSHEETS OTHER THAN THOSE OFFICIALLY APPROVED? ________
4. HAVE YOU DELETED MATERIALS FROM AN APPROVED CHECKSHEET? ________
5. HAVE YOU FAILED TO PROVIDE COURSE MATERIALS? ________
6. HAVE YOU FAILED TO UPDATE AND CORRECT CHECKSHEETS BEFORE ISSUING TO NEW STUDENTS? ________
7. HAVE YOU PERMITTED A STUDENT TO FALSELY ATTEST? ________
8. HAVE YOU ATTESTED TO A STUDENT’S COURSE COMPLETION WITHOUT VERIFYING HIS ABILITY TO APPLY THE MATERIALS? ________
9. HAVE YOU EVER PERMITTED A STUDENT TO BLOW? ________
10. HAVE YOU FAILED TO REMAIN IN GOOD ARC WITH YOUR STUDENTS? ________
11. HAVE YOU EVER ADVISED ANYONE NOT TO TAKE SERVICES AT A SCIENTOLOGY ORG? ________
12. HAVE YOU BLAMED OTHERS FOR POOR COURSE ATTENDANCE? ________
13. HAVE YOU EVER BECOME EMOTIONALLY OR SEXUALLY INVOLVED WITH A STUDENT? ________
14. HAVE YOU FALSIFIED STATISTICS? ________
15. HAVE YOU EVER GOTTEN ANGRY WITH A STUDENT? ________
16. HAVE YOU EVER INTERRUPTED A STUDENT WHO WAS DOING WELL? ________
17. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO HANDLE A BOGGED STUDENT? ________
18. HAVE YOU EVER MADE A STUDENT REDO CHECKOUTS, DRILLS OR PRACTICALS TO BOOST STATS? ________
19. HAVE YOU EVER LIED TO, DECEIVED OR MISDIRECTED A STUDENT CONCERNING SCIENTOLOGY? ________
20. HAVE YOU EVER LIED TO A STUDENT? ________
21. AS A SUPERVISOR, HAVE YOU EVER LEFT A COURSE UNATTENDED? ________
22. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO REFER A STUDENT TO THE MATERIALS? ________
23. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO KEEP A COURSE EXACTLY ON SCHEDULE? ________
24. HAVE YOU FAILED TO APPLY WORD CLEARING TECH? ________
25. WHEN WORD CLEARING STUDENTS, HAVE YOU IGNORED READS? ________
26. HAVE YOU PRETENDED YOU CAN READ A METER? ________
27. HAVE YOU GRADUATED SOMEONE YOU HAD MISGIVINGS ABOUT? ________
28. HAVE YOU EVER USED SUPERVISOR STATUS TO OBTAIN UNUSUAL FAVORS? ________
29. HAVE YOU PASSED A STUDENT JUST TO BE KIND? ________
30. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN A CHECKOUT ON MATERIALS YOU WERE UNCERTAIN OF? ________
31. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO CORRECT A STUDENT’S MISTAKES? ________
32. HAVE YOU EVER BECOME COMPLACENT ABOUT THE EXISTING SCENE IN YOUR COURSE ROOM? ________
33. HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING YOU WOULDN’T LIKE YOUR STUDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT? ________
34. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO APPLY STUDY TECH? ________
35. ARE YOU PRETENDING THAT YOU KNOW STUDY TECH? ________
36. HAVE YOU DONE ADMIN OR OTHER DUTIES DURING COURSE TIME? ________
37. HAVE YOU EVER PERMITTED ANYONE TO COME INTO THE COURSE ROOM AND BOTHER STUDENTS FOR ANY REASON? ________
38. HAVE YOU EVER PERMITTED A STUDENT TO ENTURBULATE A CLASS? ________
39. HAVE YOU EVER OFFLOADED STUDENTS INSTEAD OF HANDLING THEM? ________
40. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO RECOVER A BLOWN STUDENT? ________
41. HAVE YOU EVER USED YOUR POSITION AS A SUPERVISOR TO PROCURE STUDENTS FOR ANOTHER GROUP? ________
42. HAVE YOU EVER DISCUSSED OR TALKED ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL PROBLEMS OR CASE TO A STUDENT? ________
43. HAVE YOU EVER SUBJECTED A STUDENT TO RIDICULE? ________
44. HAVE YOU C/Sed STUDENT SESSIONS WHEN NOT QUALIFIED TO DO SO? ________
45. HAVE YOU EVER FLUNKED A STUDENT WHO REALLY KNEW THE DATA? ________
46. IS THERE SOMETHING A STUDENT MIGHT FIND OUT ABOUT YOU? ________
47. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO GIVE PRAISE TO A STUDENT WHEN DUE? ________
48. HAVE YOU EVER RUN A SLOW COURSE? ________
49. HAVE YOU BLAMED OTHERS FOR POOR COURSE ENROLLMENTS? ________
50. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SPOT A STUDENT’S DOPE-OFF, GLEE OR OTHER MANIFESTATION OF MISUNDERSTOODS AND GET THEM CLEANED UP? ________
51. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO USE SUPERVISOR TWOWAY COMM WHEN NEEDED? ________
52. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO APPLY ETHICS TECH WHEN NEEDED? ________
53. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED A STUDENT RATHER THAN HIS MISTAKE? ________
54. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED QUICKIED DRILLING ON CHECKSHEET DRILLS? ________
55. HAVE YOU CLAIMED FALSE BONUSES? ________
56. HAVE YOU NOT STUDIED YOUR HAT? ________
57. HAVE YOU PRETENDED QUALIFICATIONS NOT ATTAINED? ________
58. HAVE YOU PERSONALLY STUDIED PAST MISUNDERSTOODS? ________
59. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED STUDY TECH? ________
60. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED SCIENTOLOGY MATERIALS? ________
61. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO MUSTER YOUR STUDENTS PRECISELY ON TIME, NOTE ABSENCES AND TAKE ACTION? ________
62. AS A SUPERVISOR, HAVE YOU PERMITTED STUDENTS TO GOOF OFF DURING COURSE HOURS? ________
63. HAVE YOU PERMITTED STUDENTS TO EAT OR SMOKE IN THE COURSE ROOM? ________
64. AS A SUPERVISOR HAVE YOU EVER STOOD AROUND OR SAT AT YOUR DESK NOT ACTIVELY HANDLING STUDENTS? ________
65. HAVE YOU FAILED TO GET STUDENTS THROUGH THEIR COURSE AND GRADUATED? ________
66. AS A SUPERVISOR HAVE YOU PRODUCED ANY OVERT PRODUCTS? ________
67. HAVE YOU EVER CONDONED OUT-TECH? ________
68. AS A SUPERVISOR HAVE YOU EVER DONE ANYTHING YOU WOULDN’T WANT LRH TO KNOW ABOUT? ________
69. CONCERNING STUDY OR SUPERVISION, HAVE YOU COMMITTED ANY OVERT THAT HASN’T BEEN REVEALED? ________
70. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALFTRUTH? ________
71. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? ________
72. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? ________
73. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? ________
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 OCTOBER 1980R
REVISED 16 NOVEMBER 1987
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Execs
C/Ses (Also issued as HCO PL, same title, same date)
KOTs
Auditors
Reges
Examiners
Qual Secs
HCO
C&A
CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED
FOR LOWER LEVELS AND
EXPANDED LOWER GRADES
Refs:
CLASSIFICATION, GRADATION AND AWARENESS CHART
HCOB 11 Nov. 73 PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE
HCOB 12 Dec. 81 THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART
LRH ED 107 Int ORDERS TO DIVISIONS FOR
IMMEDIATE COMPLIANCE
Expanded Grades are attested to by the pc declaring the full statement of the Ability Gained for all four flows.
The chart given below lists the Ability Gained for each of the lower levels, the four flows of the Expanded Grades 0-IV and for New Era Dianetics.
It is used by the Examiner when a pc is sent to “Declare?” The Examiner has the pc read the entire statement for the Ability Gained for that grade (including all four flows) or level and must accept only the pc declaring the full statement for the Ability Gained.
Declare procedure is done exactly ,as stated in HCOB 11 Nov. 73, PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE.
LEVEL ABILITY GAINED
GROUP PROCESSES Awareness that change is available.
LIFE REPAIR Awareness of truth and the way to personal
freedom.
PURIFICATION RUNDOWN Freedom from the restimulative effects of drug
residuals and other toxins.
OBJECTIVES Oriented in the present time of the physical
universe.
SCIENTOLOGY Released from harmful effects of drugs, medi
DRUG RUNDOWN cine or alcohol.
EXPANDED ARC Knows he/she won’t get worse.
STRAIGHTWIRE
EXPANDED GRADE 0
COMMUNICATIONS
RELEASE
FLOW 1: Willing for others to communicate to him on any subject. No longer resisting communication from others on unpleasant or unwanted subjects.
FLOW 2: Ability to communicate freely with anyone on any subject. Free from or no longer bothered by communication difficulties. No longer withdrawn or reticent. Likes to outflow.
FLOW 3: Willing for others to communicate freely to others about anything.
FLOW 0: Willingness to permit oneself to communicate freely about anything.
EXPANDED GRADE I
PROBLEMS RELEASE
FLOW 1: No longer worried about problems others have been to self. Able to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish. Has no problems.
FLOW 2: No longer worried about problems he has been to others. Feels free about any problems others may have with him and can recognize source of them.
FLOW 3: Free from worry about others’ problems with or about others, and can recognize source of them.
FLOW 0: Free from worry about problems with self and can recognize the source of them.
EXPANDED GRADE II
RELIEF RELEASE
FLOW 1: Freedom from things others have done to one in the past. Willing for others to be cause over him.
FLOW 2: Relief from the hostilities and sufferings of life. Ability to be at cause without fear of hurting others.
FLOW 3: Willing to have others be cause over others without feeling the need to intervene for fear of their doing harm.
FLOW 0: Relief from hostilities and sufferings imposed by self upon self.
EXPANDED GRADE III
FREEDOM RELEASE
FLOW 1: Freedom from upsets of the past. Ability to face the future. Ability to experience sudden change without becoming upset.
FLOW 2: Can grant others the beingness to be the way they are and choose their own reality. No longer feels need to change people to make them more acceptable to self. Able to cause changes in another’ s life without ill effects.
FLOW 3: Freedom from the need to prevent or become involved in the change and interchange occurring amongst others.
FLOW 0: Freedom from upsets of the past one has imposed upon oneself and ability to cause changes in one’s own life without ill effects.
EXPANDED GRADE IV
ABILITY RELEASE
FLOW 1: Free from and able to tolerate others’ fixed ideas, justifications and make-guilty of self. Free of need to respond in a like manner.
FLOW 2: Moving out of fixed conditions into ability to do new things. Ability to face life without need to justify own actions or defend self from others. Loss of make-guilty mechanisms and demand for sympathy. Can be right or wrong.
FLOW 3: Can tolerate fixed conditions of others in regard to others. Freedom from involvement in others’ efforts to justify, make guilty, dominate or be defensive about their actions against others.
FLOW 0: Ability to face life without need to make self wrong. Loss of make-self-guilty mechanisms and self-invalidation.
NEW ERA DIANETICS Freedom from harmful effects of drugs, alcohol
DRUG RUNDOWN and medicine and free from the need to take
them.
NEW ERA DIANETICS A well and happy preclear.
CASE COMPLETION
For a person who attains
the State of Clear on NED
and is sent to Examiner
following the Clear
Certainty RD: A being who no longer has his own reactive
mind.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 4 NOVEMBER 1980
Remimeo Issue I
HCO
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 10RA
PRD CONFESSIONAL LIST
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
Anyone doing a Confessional must be on or have done a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
This Confessional list is for use on persons who have attested to the PRD but continue to have study difficulties or don’t attend study or don’t apply study tech. It can also be used on students having difficulty while on the PRD but does not replace the use of Word Clearing Correction Lists, Study Correction Lists, PCRD or any aspect of standard supervision.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. HAVE YOU FAILED TO USE STUDY TECH? ________
2. DID YOU HAVE SOME OTHER PURPOSE FOR DOING THE PRD? ________
3. DID YOU TAKE THE PRD FOR STATUS ONLY? ________
4. HAVE YOU TRIED TO BE BETTER THAN OR BEAT SOMEONE ELSE ON COURSE? ________
5. HAVE YOU QUICKIED THE PRD? ________
6. DID YOU FAIL TO CLEAR EVERY DEFINITION IN EACH WORD ON THE WORD LISTS? ________
7. DID YOU FAIL TO USE ALL THE MEANINGS IN SENTENCES UNTIL YOU HAD A CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF EACH DEFINITION? ________
8. DID YOU SKIP CLEARING THE DERIVATIONS OR IDIOMS OR ANY NEEDED TECHNICAL TERMS? ________
9. DID YOU TRY TO RUSH THROUGH THE PRD? ________
10. DID YOU USE A DINKY DICTIONARY? ________
11. HAVE YOU GONE BY AN AREA OF STUDY YOU KNEW YOU HAD CONFUSIONS ON AND DIDN’T CLEAR IT UP? ________
12. HAVE YOU FAILED TO USE STUDY TECH SINCE THE PRD? ________
13. HAVE YOU EVER ALTERISED OR MISADVISED OTHERS ON THE USE OF STUDY TECH? ________
14. HAVE YOU EVER DRIFTED OFF WHILE LISTENING TO A TAPE? ________
15. HAVE YOU FAILED TO USE A DEMO KIT WHEN YOU NEEDED TO? ________
16. HAVE YOU GIVEN A NONSTANDARD CHECKOUT? ________
17. HAVE YOU GIVEN ANOTHER STUDENT A FALSE PASS? ________
18. HAVE YOU CHEATED ON THE PRD EXAM? ________
19. HAVE YOU DISCUSSED THE PRD EXAM WITH ANYONE OUTSIDE THE QUAL DIV? ________
20. WERE YOU STUDYING OVER WITHHOLDS? ________
21. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRD WHICH YOU DON’T LIKE AND THINK SHOULD BE CHANGED? ________
22. HAVE YOU ATTESTED TO THE PRD WITHOUT HAVING FULLY ACHIEVED THE END PRODUCT OF SUPERLITERACY? ________
23. HAVE YOU ATTESTED TO SUPER-LITERACY WITHOUT HAVING FULLY DONE THE PRD CHECKSHEET? ________
24. DID YOU WITHHOLD ANY SUBJECTS FROM YOUR AUDITOR ON METHOD 1 WORD CLEARING? ________
25. DURING METHOD 1, DID YOU FAIL TO FULLY CLEAR A MISUNDERSTOOD WORD? ________
26. WERE YOU JUST PUSHED FOR STUDENT POINTS BY THE SUPERVISOR? ________
If so ask: WHO EXACTLY HAVE YOU MADE GUILTY OF THIS? ________
27. WERE YOU LESS THAN 100% HONEST ABOUT YOUR STUDIES WHILE ON THE PRD? ________
If so ask: WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF YOUR DISHONESTY? ________
28. DID YOU SKIP WORDS ON THE WORD LISTS? ________
29. DID YOU BRUSH OFF ANY WORDS OR DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AS “UNIMPORTANT” AND, THEREFORE, NOT FULLY CLEAR EACH WORD? ________
30. DID YOU ATTEST TO THE PRD WHEN YOU KNEW YOU HAD UNCERTAINTIES ON THE MATERIALS? ________
31. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED YOURSELF TO BE RUSHED THROUGH YOUR MATERIALS SO YOU COULD BE COUNTED AS A STAT? ________
If so ask: WHO EXACTLY HAVE YOU MADE GUILTY OF THIS? ________
32. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRD OR THE ACADEMY OR SCIENTOLOGY THAT YOU ARE MAKING ALLOWANCES FOR? ________
33. HAVE YOU SECRETLY VIOLATED ANY COURSE RULE OR REGULATION? ________
34. HAVE YOU BEEN THINKING UNKIND OR CRITICAL THOUGHTS ABOUT L. RON HUBBARD? ________
YOUR SUPERVISOR? ________
OTHER STUDENTS? ________
STAFF MEMBERS? ________
35. HAVE YOU CRITICIZED THE PRD, YOUR SUPERVISORS OR THE D OF T TO OTHERS? ________
36. HAVE YOU EVER FALSELY SIGNED OFF ITEMS ON A CHECKSHEET? ________
37. HAVE YOU INCORRECTLY WORD CLEARED ANOTHER STUDENT? ________
38. HAVE YOU PRETENDED NOT TO BE BOGGED ON STUDY WHEN YOU REALLY WERE? ________
39. HAVE YOU EVER FELT THAT YOU WERE GIVEN AN INCORRECT TARGET ON COURSE? ________
If so ask: WHO EXACTLY HAVE YOU MADE GUILTY OF THIS? ________
40. HAVE YOU EVER BLUFFED YOUR WAY THROUGH A CHECKOUT? ________
41. HAVE YOU ACCEPTED A NONSTANDARD CHECKOUT SO YOU COULD GET ON WITH IT? ________
42. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF COURSE HOURS WHICH YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE? ________
43. HAVE YOU WITHHELD ASKING A QUESTION BECAUSE YOU WERE AFRAID IT WOULD SOUND STUPID? ________
44. HAVE YOU BEEN KEEPING OTHER STUDENTS FROM DOING THEIR WORK? ________
45. ARE YOU UPSET BY MY QUESTIONS? ________
46. HAVE YOU BEEN SUCH A PROBLEM TO YOUR SUPERVISOR THAT YOU’VE BEEN ROBBING OTHER STUDENTS OF THEIR FAIR SHARE OF THE SUPERVISOR’S TIME? ________
47. IS THERE ANYONE TO WHOM YOU MAKE A REGULAR PRACTICE OF DISCREDITING SCIENTOLOGY, ITS ORGANIZATIONS OR ITS PERSONNEL? ________
48. HAVE YOU EVER USED A DEMO KIT TO KEEP THE SUPERVISOR OFF YOUR BACK? ________
49. HAVE YOU EVER, WHILE ON COURSE, FELT THAT YOU WOULD NOT ACHIEVE YOUR GOALS, BY REASON OF POOR SUPERVISING OR POOR COACHING OR TWINNING? ________
If so ask: WHO EXACTLY HAVE YOU MADE GUILTY OF THIS? ________
50. HAVE YOU PREVENTED ANYONE, INCLUDING SUPERVISORS, FROM ACHIEVING GOALS CONCERNING YOU, OR OTHERS, IN SCIENTOLOGY? ________
51. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN CRITICAL OF SCIENTOLOGY TERMINOLOGY? ________
52. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THESE QUESTIONS? ________
53. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALFTRUTH? ________
54. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? ________
55. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? ________
56. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? ________
Give the pc the Proclamation of Forgiveness:
BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME, ANY OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS YOU HAVE FULLY AND TRUTHFULLY TOLD ME ARE FORGIVEN BY SCIENTOLOGISTS.
On any adverse reaction to the Proclamation of Forgiveness, get the rest of the withhold or repair the withhold session. (Ref: HCOB 10 Nov. 78RA, PROCLAMATION: POWER TO FORGIVE)
(Note: If this is being done as an HCO Confessional, the Proclamation of Forgiveness is omitted.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 5 NOVEMBER 1980
Remimeo
Tours Orgs
FOLOs
HCOs
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 9RA
RETURNING TOURS CONFESSIONAL
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
This Confessional is for use in cleaning up all Tours personnel upon their return from all tours.
Anyone doing a Confessional must be on or have done a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. WHILE ON TOUR DID YOU COLLECT ANY MONEY YOU HAVEN’T HANDED OVER TO THE ORG? ________
2. HAVE YOU SPENT ORG FUNDS EXTRAVAGANTLY? ________
3. WHILE ON TOUR DID YOU HAVE ANY OUT-2D? ________
4. HAVE YOU FALSIFIED ANY RECORDS? ________
5. DID YOU GO OFF-SCHEDULE WHILE ON TOUR AND WASTE TIME? ________
6. HAVE YOU MADE UNAUTHORIZED DEALS TO GET THE GI UP? ________
7. HAVE YOU PROMISED SOMETHING YOU WERE UNCERTAIN THE ORG COULD DELIVER JUST TO GET A SALE? ________
8. DID YOU MAKE ANOTHER ORG OR REGISTRAR WRONG IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A SALE? ________
9. DID YOU FAIL TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISSEMINATE SCIENTOLOGY? ________
10. DID YOU DO ANYTHING THAT WOULD HINDER A PERSON’S PROGRESS THROUGH SCIENTOLOGY? ________
11. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWINGLY REGGED AN ILLEGAL PC FOR AUDITING? ________
12. HAVE YOU MISUSED SPECIAL PACKAGE DEALS AUTHORIZED BY FLAG? ________
13. DID YOU TRY TO OBTAIN A SALE BY PROMISING RETURN OF FEES? ________
14. DID YOU KNOWINGLY TAKE CHECKS THAT WEREN’T ANY GOOD? ________
15. HAVE YOU KNOWINGLY REPORTED POSTULATE CHECKS AS GOOD? ________
16. HAVE YOU INVOICED CHECKS WHICH WERE NOT GOOD AT THE TIME OF INVOICING? ________
17. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED PEOPLE YOU THOUGHT DIDN’T HAVE MUCH MONEY? ________
18. HAVE YOU EVER ENCOURAGED OR AIDED A PROSPECT IN FALSE REPORTING TO A BANK OR OTHER LOAN AGENCY TO OBTAIN A LOAN? ________
19. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN A PROFESSIONAL DISCOUNT TO AN AUDITOR WHOSE CERT WAS NOT VALID AND IN FULL FORCE? ________
20. HAVE YOU SOLD COURSES TO PUBLIC THEY DO NOT INTEND TO TAKE, JUST SO THEY COULD RECEIVE AUDITING AT A DISCOUNTED PRICE? ________
21. DID YOU DO ANYTHING TO CAUSE AN UPSET FOR A PUBLIC INDIVIDUAL? ________
22. DID YOU DO ANYTHING TO CAUSE AN UPSET FOR ANOTHER ORG? ________
23. HAVE YOU TRIED TO OBTAIN SALES BY CRITICIZING ANOTHER ORG OR MISSION? ________
24. WERE YOU CRITICAL OF THE ORG OR ITS EXECUTIVES TO THE PUBLIC? ________
25. DID YOU RIP OFF MISSION PUBLIC OR PUBLIC FROM ANOTHER ORG? ________
26. HAVE YOU COUNTED MONEY ON ONE WEEK’S GI THAT WAS NOT REALLY RECEIVED TILL A LATER WEEK? ________
27. DID YOU FAIL TO FOLLOW UP ON A CYCLE THAT YOU COULD HAVE CLOSED? ________
28. DID YOU FAIL TO COORDINATE YOUR ACTIONS WITH ANOTHER TOUR IN THE AREA? ________
29. DID YOU FAIL TO ENSURE AN FSM WAS PROPERLY NOTED ON ANY CYCLE? ________
30. DID YOU TAKE A REG CYCLE AWAY FROM ONE ORG AND GIVE IT TO ANOTHER? ________
31. HAVE YOU EVER TAKEN ANOTHER REG’S SALE? ________
32. WERE YOU REGGING ONLY FOR SERVICES AT A HIGHER ORG OR FLAG AND NEGLECTING THE LOWER BRIDGE? ________
33. HAVE YOU EVER LIED TO A PROSPECT? ________
34. HAVE YOU FAILED TO REPAIR AN UPSET WITH A PROSPECT? ________
35. HAVE YOU MADE A SALE THAT WAS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PROSPECT? ________
36. HAVE YOU SOUGHT OUT WEALTHY PUBLIC AND SOLD THEM SERVICES THEY DID NOT NECESSARILY NEED OR REGGED THEM FOR “DONATIONS” WHICH WERE NOT REALLY FOR ANY ORG SERVICE? ________
37. HAVE YOU EVER PERSUADED A PROSPECT TO PAY FOR SERVICES WITH MONEY WHICH DID NOT BELONG TO HIM BUT BELONGED TO SOMEONE ELSE? ________
38. HAVE YOU PERSUADED OR ENCOURAGED A PROSPECT
TO BORROW MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES? ________
39. DID YOU PROMISE SPECIAL FAVORS TO A PROSPECT TO GET A SALE? ________
40. HAVE YOU MADE LOANS OR TRANSFERS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER WITHOUT THAT PERSON’S PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND PERMISSION? ________
41. HAVE YOU EVER COUNTED PUBLIC TRANSFERRING FROM ANOTHER ORG AS A PAID START BEFORE ENSURING THE TRANSFER WAS VALID? ________
42. HAVE YOU PROMOTED A TRANSFER TO HELP MAKE A SALE? ________
43. HAVE YOU MADE FALSE BONUS CLAIMS? ________
44. HAVE YOU ACCEPTED A BONUS YOU DIDN’T EARN? ________
45. HAVE YOU COLLECTED COMMISSIONS OR BONUSES ON REG CYCLES WHERE CHECKS BOUNCED OR PCs TURNED OUT TO BE ILLEGAL? ________
46. DO YOU STILL INTEND NOT TO REPAY THE ORG FOR ANY BONUSES/COMMISSIONS YOU HAVE FALSELY CLAIMED? ________
47. HAVE YOU RELIED ON GIMMICKS, NEW SERVICES OR SPECIAL OFFERS TO MAKE GI RATHER THAN KNOWING AND FULLY USING STANDARD REG TECH? ________
48. HAVE YOU REFUSED TO HELP ANOTHER CLOSE A SALE? ________
49. HAVE YOU TAKEN ANOTHER REG’S PROSPECTS? ________
50. HAVE YOU FAILED TO CLOSE AN IMPORTANT SALE? ________
51. WHILE ON TOUR DID YOU MAKE YOURSELF UNAVAILABLE TO TAKE CALLS FROM THE ORG? ________
52. HAVE YOU BEEN OPERATING OVER UNKNOWN OR MISUNDERSTOOD POLICY? ________
53. DID ANYTHING HAPPEN THAT YOU WOULDN’T WANT YOUR SENIOR TO FIND OUT ABOUT? ________
54. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALFTRUTH? ________
55. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? ________
56. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? ________
57. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? ________
Give the pc the Proclamation of Forgiveness:
BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME, ANY OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS YOU HAVE FULLY AND TRUTHFULLY TOLD ME ARE FORGIVEN BY SCIENTOLOGISTS.
On any adverse reaction to the Proclamation of Forgiveness, get the rest of the withhold or repair the withhold session. (Ref: HCO PL 10 Nov. 78RA, PROCLAMATION: POWER TO FORGIVE)
Note: If this is being done as an HCO Confessional, the Proclamation of Forgiveness should be omitted.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 NOVEMBER 1980R
REVISED 26 JULY 1986
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
C/S SERIES 53RM LONG FORM
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 24 Nov. 73RF, C/S Series 53RM LF (Long Form), HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words in session on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM C/S SERIES 53RM LONG FORM
A, action, actions, alcohol, all, an, another, any, anything, ARC break, are, at, attacked, audited, auditing, auditor.
Bad, been, being, between, black, by.
Can, cans, can’t, committed, couldn’t, cream.
Date, deadness, Dianetic Clear, did, didn’t, do, doing, done, don’t, drugs, drunk, dry.
Else, engram, engrams, errors, evaluation, exam, Examiner, exams, experienced.
False, faulty, feel, felt, F/Ns, for, forced, found.
Get, given, giving, go, going, gone, grip.
Had, hands, has, have, havingness, hear, high.
Ignored, ill, in, incidents, incomplete, indication, interiorized, interrupted, into, invalidation, invisible, involved, is, isn’t, it, item, items.
Keeps, kept, kicked.
Like, list, location, long, look, loosen, loss, lost, low, LSD.
Medicine, meter, mind, missed, misunderstood, misunderstoods, more.
Not, nothing.
Of, off, on, once, other, out, out-rudiments, over, overlisted, overrepaired, overrun, overts, overwhelming.
Past, physically, point, pot, practice, problem, protesting, PTS, pulled, put, puzzled.
Read, reading, reads, really, release, repairing, reports, restimulation, run, rushed.
Sad, said, same, saying, see, session, sessions, sized, smoked, some, someone, something, sort, spaces, stops, study, suppressed.
TA, taken, than, that, the, there, thing, tired, to, too, trapped, twice.
Unconsciousness, understand, upset, used, using.
Wait, want, was, we, well, went, were, wet, what, when, Why, with, withhold, withholding, word, Word Clearing, wrong.
You, your, you’re.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue I
Auditors REVISED 12 JULY 1988
C/Ses
Tech/Qual
Qual Sec
CASE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST
This list is designed to clean up any BPC a C/S may have on his post and locate the individual reasons he has for not fully applying C/S tech.
The list is assessed Method 3 or Method 5, as directed by the C/S. (Refs: HCOB 28 May 70, CORRECTION LISTS, USE OF; HCOB 20 Dec. 71, C/S Series 72, USE OF CORRECTION LISTS; HCOB 10 June 71 I, C/S Series 44R, C/S RULES, PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS)
Under some of the questions there are two separate sets of handling instructions. Where this is the case, the handling given in the first set of parentheses is the one the auditor does directly in the session. The instructions in the second set of parentheses are used by the C/S in programing out the actions to be done to complete the pc’s handling, after all the reading items on the list have been F/Ned.
There is a form attached to this list on which the C/S notes corrective actions to be taken. The C/S fills out the form by carefully reviewing what was found in F/Ning the questions which read and then listing out the steps to be done to correct the situations found. Actions ordered by the C/S can include such things as cramming, retread or retrain of earlier courses, drilling, TIPing and standard ethics handlings including Security Checking. The completed form is routed to the Dir of Correction, who sees that the handlings get done. Any case actions needed to complete the person’s handling would be included as part of his auditing program.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. OUT INT? ________
(Check to make sure the read on Int is a valid read and not a protest or false read. If it is valid, indicate it. If the pc is not Clear or OT, give him a standard Int RD per Int RD Series 2. If he is Clear or OT and has not had an Int RD, give him the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int RD Series 4RA. If the pc has had an Int RD or End of Endless Int Repair RD, do an Int RD Correction List [HCOB 29 Oct. 71RA]. If Int correction has already been done on the pc get an FES of the Int RD and its corrections. If you are not qualified to audit or repair Int, turn the pc over to a qualified auditor. When all errors are corrected the C/S may order the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int RD Series 4RB, as applicable.)
2. OUT-LIST? ________
(L4BRA and handle.)
3. WRONG WHY? ________
(L4BRA and handle.)
4. WRONG ETHICS CONDITION? ________
(L4BRA and handle.)
5. TOLD YOU WERE PTS WHEN YOU WEREN’T? ________
(L4BRA and handle.)
6. AS A C/S IS THERE AN ARC BREAK? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
7. UPSET WITH A PC? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
8. UPSET WITH AN AUDITOR? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
9. UPSET WITH AN EXEC? ________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
10. AS A C/S DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
11. PROBLEMS WITH PCs? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for the 2WCs in HCOB 15 July 71 II, C/S Series 50, C/S CASE GAIN.)
12. PROBLEMS WITH AUDITORS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for the 2WCs in HCOB 15 July 71 II, C/S Series 50, C/S CASE GAIN.)
13. AS A C/S HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? ________
(Pull it E/S to F/N.)
14. WITHHOLDS ABOUT PCs? ________
(Pull them E/S to F/N.)
15. WITHHOLDS ABOUT AUDITORS? ________
(Pull them E/S to F/N.)
16. OVERTS ON PCs? ________
(Pull them E/S to F/N.)
17. OVERTS ON AUDITORS? ________
(Pull them E/S to F/N.)
18. PTS TO SOMEONE IN THE ENVIRONMENT? ________
(2WC to F/N.)
19. WERE THERE NO EXAM REPORTS? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
20. UNHANDLED RED TAGS? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
21. FALSE COMPLETIONS? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
22. SOME SORT OF OUT-ETHICS? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
23. OUT-2D? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
24. ARE YOU ON DRUGS? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
25. ARE YOU ON MEDICINE? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
26. ARE YOU ON ALCOHOL? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
27. ADMIN LINES OUT? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
28. TROUBLE WITH TECH SERVICES? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
29. OVERLOADED? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
30. OVERWHELMED? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
31. NO HELP FROM A D OF P? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
32. ILLEGIBLE WORKSHEETS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
33. PERMITTING OFF-LINE CASE ACTIONS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
34. WRONG C/Ses? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
35. FAULTY PROGRAMS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
36. OUT-ADMIN? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
37. MISSING DATA? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
38. WITHHOLDING DATA? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for Vital Info RD, False Purpose RD.)
39. IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR POST, DO YOU HAVE AN EVIL PURPOSE OR DESTRUCTIVE INTENTION? ________
(Get what the evil purpose or destructive intention is and handle with Steps A-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for False Purpose RD including Exec and Staff Member Form.)
40. LOSSES ON PCs? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N. L1C as needed.)
41. BOOTED OFF POST? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
42. LOSSES ON AUDITORS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N. L1C as needed.)
43. C/S Q AND A? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
44. TROUBLE WITH WRITING PROGRAMS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
45. OVERREPAIRING PCs? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
46. TROUBLE GETTING COMPLIANCE? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
47. FLUBBY AUDITORS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
48. COULDN’T HELP A PC? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
49. AN EARLIER TIME YOU FAILED TO HELP? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
50. COULDN’T SOLVE IT? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
51. TROUBLE WITH STUDY? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
52. MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS IN DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY? ________
(Find and clear them each to F/N. WCCL if needed.)
53. AN EARLIER-SIMILAR SUBJECT IN DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY WAS MISUNDERSTOOD? ________
(2WC—find what subject and what word in that subject was misunderstood. Clear it to F/N. WCCL if necessary.)
54. PERMITTING REGISTRARS TO C/S? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
55. YOUR TRAINING WAS INADEQUATE? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
56. YOU RUSHED THROUGH COURSES? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
57. SEEKING STATUS? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
58. PRETENDING TO KNOW? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
59. DISAGREEMENTS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for Disagreement Check per HCOB 22 Mar. 72RA, DISAGREEMENT CHECK.)
60. HIDDEN DATA LINE? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
61. EARLIER PRACTICE? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for Exp GF 40.)
62. EVALUATION OF AN AUDITOR OR PC? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
63. INVALIDATION OF AN AUDIIOR OR PC? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
64. HOPEFUL C/Sing? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
65. AFRAID TO C/S? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
66. DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO? ________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
67. TAKING INSTRUCTIONS FROM EXECS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
68. COULDN’T GET PAID? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
69. PREVENTED FROM C/Sing? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
70. INTERRUPTIONS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
71. “DOG CASES”? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for handling per HCOB 15 June 72, C/S Series 80, “DOG PCs” and for C/S Confessional and/or False Purpose RD, as applicable.)
72. GOT DESPERATE? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
73. MOONLIGHTING? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
74. DON’T LIKE CERTAIN AUDITORS? ________
(Find out which auditors he doesn’t like [not L&N]. Pull overts and withholds on each reading auditor E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for C/S Confessional and/or False Purpose RD.)
75. DON’T LIKE CERTAIN PCs? ________
(Find out which pcs he doesn’t like [not L&N]. Pull overts and withholds on each reading pc E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for C/S Confessional and/or False Purpose RD.)
76. NOT GETTING ANY CRAMMING? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
77. CRAMMING DOESN’T WORK? ________
(Assess and handle Cramming Repair List.)
78. MISSING WITHHOLDS ON OTHERS BY FAILING TO WRITE CRAMMING ORDERS OR ETHICS CHITS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
79. SOMETHING WRONG WITH A DEBUG? ________
(Assess and handle Product Debug Repair List.)
80. ENCOUNTERED SITUATIONS NOT COVERED IN THE MATERIALS? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
81. TECH DOESN’T WORK FOR YOU? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
82. TECH DOESN’T WORK ON YOU? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
83. PAST ETHICS CONDITION MESSED UP? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for handling per HCO PL 19 Dec. 82 II, REPAIRING PAST ETHICS CONDITIONS.)
84. ETHICS CONDITION LEFT INCOMPLETE? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for handling per HCO PL 19 Dec. 82 II, REPAIRING PAST ETHICS CONDITIONS, or complete the incomplete formula per HCO PL 3 Aug. 85, COMPLETING CONDITIONS FORMULAS, as applicable.)
85. NOT GETTING ENOUGH SLEEP? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Handling of the person’s schedule to be worked out in liaison with his senior.)
86. NOT EATING? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
87. PHYSICALLY ILL? ________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
88. RESTIM? ________
(C/S 53 to F/Ning.)
89. TROUBLE WITH YOUR CASE? ________
(C/S 53 to F/Ning.)
90. SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? ________
(2WC what and if no joy GF M5 and handle.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HCOB12.11.80RI
Rev. 12.7.88
Attachment
CASE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST
ADDITIONAL ACTIONS REQUIRED
TO: DIR CORRECTION DATE:_______________
FROM: CASE SUPERVISOR ____________________________________________
RE: PC_______________________________________________________________
The following hatting and Qual correction actions were found to be needed on this C/S in assessing and handling a Case Supervisor Correction List. These actions are in addition to auditing actions found needed in handling the list, which are being included in the pc’s programing.
PART A: The following additional training actions are to be done on this C/S as part of a standard TIP.
1. Done ________
2. Done ________
3. Done ________
4. Done ________
5. Done ________
PART B: The following corrective actions are also to be done on this C/S.
1. Done ________
2. Done ________
3. Done ________
4. Done ________
5. Done ________
________________________________
C/S
Handlings
completed: ________________________________
Dir Correction
________________________________
Date
ROUTE THIS FORM TO THE PERSON’S PC FOLDER WHEN COMPLETED.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER 1980
Remimeo Issue II
HCO
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 6RA
REGISTRAR AND SALES PERSONNEL
CONFESSIONAL LIST
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
This is a Confessional for use in cleaning up overts and withholds on Registrars and sales personnel.
Anyone doing a Confessional must be on or have completed a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. HAVE YOU EVER STOLEN MONEY? _________
2. HAVE YOU EVER SOLD ANYTHING THAT BELONGED TO SOMEONE ELSE? _________
3. HAVE YOU EVER FORCED ANOTHER INTO BUYING SOMETHING HE DIDN’T WANT? _________
4. HAVE YOU EVER USED THREATS AS A MEANS OF OBTAINING MONEY? _________
5. HAVE YOU EVER BRIBED SOMEONE TO OBTAIN MONEY? _________
6. HAVE YOU EVER ACCEPTED A BRIBE? _________
7. HAVE YOU EVER BLACKMAILED ANYBODY? _________
8. HAVE YOU EVER FORGED A SIGNATURE, CHECK OR DOCUMENT? _________
9. HAVE YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER WRITE A CHECK FOR MONEY HE DIDN’T HAVE? _________
10. HAVE YOU EVER FALSELY PRESENTED A SERVICE OR PRODUCT IN ORDER TO MAKE A SALE? _________
11. HAVE YOU EVER LIED IN ORDER TO CLOSE A SALE? _________
12. HAVE YOU EVER PROMISED SPECIAL FAVORS TO A PROSPECT TO GET A SALE? _________
13. HAVE YOU EVER GONE OUT-2D TO GET A SALE? _________
14. HAVE YOU EVER MADE A SALE THAT WAS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PROSPECT? _________
15. HAVE YOU EVER SOUGHT OUT WEALTHY PUBLIC AND SOLD THEM SERVICES THEY DID NOT NECESSARILY NEED OR REGGED THEM FOR “DONATIONS” WHICH WERE NOT REALLY FOR ANY ORG SERVICE? _________
16. HAVE YOU PERSUADED A PROSPECT TO PAY FOR SERVICES WITH MONEY WHICH DID NOT BELONG TO HIM, THEREBY CREATING A PTS A SITUATION FOR THE PROSPECT? _________
17. HAVE YOU PERSUADED OR ENCOURAGED A PROSPECT TO BORROW MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES? _________
18. HAVE YOU EVER ARGUED WITH A PROSPECT? _________
19. HAVE YOU EVER MADE A PROSPECT WRONG? _________
20. HAVE YOU EVER ARC BROKEN A PROSPECT? _________
21. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN A PROSPECT MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS OR TERMS? _________
22. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO REPAIR AN UPSET WITH A PROSPECT? _________
23. DID YOU EVER FAIL TO SEE THAT A PROSPECT ACTUALLY RECEIVED WHAT YOU SOLD HIM? _________
24. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN NEGLIGENT IN CLOSING A SALE? _________
25. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO CLOSE AN IMPORTANT SALE? _________
26. AS A REG, HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISSEMINATE SCIENTOLOGY? _________
27. HAVE YOU EVER HINDERED A PERSON’S PROGRESS THROUGH SCIENTOLOGY? _________
28. HAVE YOU EVER COUNTED MONEY ON ONE WEEK’S GI THAT WAS NOT REALLY RECEIVED UNTIL A LATER WEEK? _________
29. HAVE YOU EVER REFUSED TO HELP ANOTHER REG CLOSE A SALE? _________
30. HAVE YOU EVER MADE FALSE BONUS CLAIMS? _________
31. HAVE YOU EVER ACCEPTED A BONUS YOU DIDN’T EARN? _________
32. HAVE YOU COLLECTED COMMISSIONS OR BONUSES ON REG CYCLES WHERE CHECKS BOUNCED OR PCs TURNED OUT TO BE ILLEGAL, AND KEPT THE COMMISSIONS/BONUSES ANYWAY? _________
33. DO YOU STILL INTEND NOT TO REPAY THE ORG FOR ANY BONUSES/COMMISSIONS YOU HAVE FALSELY CLAIMED? _________
34. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED FALSE STATS? _________
35. HAVE YOU CHARGED MORE THAN THE CORRECT PRICE? _________
36. HAVE YOU CHARGED LESS THAN THE CORRECT PlRICE OR FEE? _________
37. HAVE YOU EVER UNDERCUT ANOTHER ORG’S PRICES? _________
38. HAVE YOU EVER MISUSED SPECIAL PACKAGE DEALS AUTHORIZED BY FLAG? _________
39. HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO OBTAIN SALES BY CRITICIZING ANOTHER ORG OR MISSION? _________
40. AS A REG, HAVE YOU EVER RIPPED OFF MISSION PUBLIC OR PUBLIC FROM A LOWER ORG? _________
41. HAVE YOU EVER MADE LOANS OR TRANSFERS ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER WITHOUT THAT PERSON’S PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND PERMISSION? _________
42. HAVE YOU EVER DEBITED SOMEONE’S ACCOUNT WITHOUT THAT PERSON’S PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND PERMISSION? _________
43. HAVE YOU EVER RECEIVED COMMISSIONS OR BONUSES FROM ILLEGALLY DEBITING SOMEONE’S ACCOUNT? _________
44. HAVE YOU COUNTED PUBLIC TRANSFERRING FROM ANOTHER ORG AS A PAID START BEFORE ENSURING THE TRANSFER WAS VALID? _________
45. HAVE YOU PROMOTED A TRANSFER TO HELP MAKE A SALE? _________
46. HAVE YOU EVER TAKEN ANOTHER PERSON’S SALE? _________
47. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO INVOICE MONIES RECEIVED FOR SERVICES? _________
48. HAVE YOU EVER ENCOURAGED OR AIDED A PROSPECT IN FALSE REPORTING TO A BANK OR OTHER LOAN AGENCY TO OBTAIN A LOAN? _________
49. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN A PROFESSIONAL DISCOUNT TO AN AUDITOR WHOSE CERT WAS NOT VALID AND IN FULL FORCE? _________
50. HAVE YOU GONE MUTUAL OUT-RUDS WITH THE PUBLIC ABOUT PRICES? _________
51. HAVE YOU SOLD COURSES TO PUBLIC THAT THEY DO NOT INTEND TO TAKE JUST SO THEY COULD RECEIVE AUDITING AT A DISCOUNTED PRICE? _________
52. HAVE YOU EVER COMMITTED THE ORG TO DELIVER FREE OR CUT-RATE SERVICES? _________
53. HAVE YOU EVER PROMISED SOMETHING YOU WERE UNCERTAIN THE ORG COULD DELIVER, JUST TO GET A SALE? _________
54. HAVE YOU EVER MADE UNAUTHORIZED DEALS TO GET THE GI UP? _________
55. HAVE YOU EVER PROMISED A RETURN OF FEES IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A SALE? _________
56. HAVE YOU EVER ACCEPTED A CHECK THAT YOU KNEW WASN’T GOOD? _________
57. HAVE YOU EVER INVOICED MONEY OR CHECKS WHICH WERE NOT GOOD AT THE TIME OF INVOICING? _________
58. HAVE YOU EVER PERMITTED CHECKS THAT WEREN’T GOOD TO BE COUNTED ON THE ORG’S INCOME? _________
59. AS A REG, HAVE YOU CONCENTRATED ON SELLING BOOKS IN ORDER TO GET BOOK BONUSES, WHILE NEGLECTING TO SELL MAJOR SERVICES? _________
60. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED PEOPLE YOU THOUGHT DIDN’T HAVE MUCH MONEY? _________
61. DO YOU REG FOR “THIS WEEK’S GI” ONLY? _________
62. HAVE YOU KNOWINGLY TAKEN MONEY FOR SOMETHING THAT COULD NOT BE DELIVERED? _________
63. HAVE YOU EVER MADE SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS WHICH LATER CAUSED AN UPSET FOR THE PROSPECT OR ORG? _________
64. HAVE YOU EVER COMMITTED THE HGC TO SERVICING A PC WITHOUT FIRST GETTING A TECH ESTIMATE AND D OF P OKAY? _________
65. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWINGLY REGGED AN ILLEGAL PC FOR AUDITING? _________
66. HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO PERSUADE TECHNICAL STAFF OR ORG EXECS TO ACCEPT AN ILLEGAL PC ONTO AUDITING LINES? _________
67. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED SCIENTOLOGY SERVICES TO THE PUBLIC? _________
68. HAVE YOU EVER TAKEN ANOTHER REG’S PROSPECTS? _________
69. HAVE YOU EVER MADE ANOTHER ORG OR REGISTRAR WRONG IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A SALE? _________
70. HAVE YOU EVER HELD ONTO ANOTHER ORG’S INCOME? _________
71. HAVE YOU EVER COUNTED MONEY PAID FOR TRANSFER TO ANOTHER ORG AS YOUR ORG’S INCOME? _________
72. HAVE YOU EVER HELD ONTO ANOTHER ORG’S CUSTOMER? _________
73. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO KEEP COMPLETE REGISTRAR AND SALES RECORDS? _________
74. HAVE YOU RELIED ON GIMMICKS, NEW SERVICES OR SPECIAL OFFERS TO MAKE GI RATHER THAN KNOWING AND FULLY USING STANDARD REG TECH? _________
75. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO KEEP YOURSELF INFORMED OF WHAT THE ORG CAN DELIVER? _________
76. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO KEEP YOURSELF INFORMED OF THE RESULTS BEING OBTAINED IN TECH? _________
77. HAVE YOU FAILED TO CLEAN UP YOUR OWN MISUNDERSTOODS ON ORG SERVICES? _________
78. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO GET YOURSELF ADEQUATELY BRIEFED ON NEW SERVICES YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO SELL OR PACKAGES YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO USE? _________
79. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO DO REG DRILLS WHEN NEEDED? _________
80. AS A REG, HAVE YOU EVER AVOIDED OR REFUSED CORRECTION? _________
81. HAVE YOU EVER CRITICIZED THE ORG OR ORG EXECUTIVES TO THE PUBLIC? _________
82. HAVE YOU DONE OTHER THINGS WHEN YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BE SELLING? _________
83. HAVE YOU ONLY PRETENDED TO KNOW YOUR PRODUCT? _________
84. HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO MAKE AN ORG BECOME INSOLVENT? _________
85. HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO HANDLE A SENIOR BY KEEPING SALES LOW? _________
86. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING TO UNDERMINE THE REPUTATION OF ANOTHER? _________
87. HAVE YOU EVER HARMED DIANETICS OR SCIENTOLOGY? _________
88. HAVE YOU BEEN SECRETLY SELLING FOR ANOTHER ORG? _________
89. HAVE YOU EVER USED A SALES POSITION TO BUILD UP A PRIVATE PRACTICE? _________
90. WAS IT AN OVERT TO SELL? _________
91. HAVE YOU COMMITTED ANY OVERTS AGAINST L. RON HUBBARD? _________
92. HAVE YOU EXTRAVAGANTLY SPENT ORG FUNDS IN ORDER TO CLOSE A SALE? _________
93. HAVE YOU MISUSED ORG FUNDS? _________
94. HAVE YOU EVER USED THE ORG’S PHONES FOR PERSONAL CALLS? _________
95. HAVE YOU EVER BROKEN AN APPOINTMENT? _________
96. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS AGAINST A CERTAIN TYPE OF PROSPECT? _________
97. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING THAT A PROSPECT SHOULDN’T FIND OUT ABOUT? _________
98. DO YOU HAVE ANY OVERTS AGAINST MONEY? _________
99. DO YOU HAVE ANY OVERTS AGAINST TRAINING? _________
100. DO YOU HAVE ANY OVERTS AGAINST PROCESSING? _________
101. DO YOU HAVE ANY OVERTS AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY? _________
102. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ANY HALFTRUTHS? _________
103. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? _________
104. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? _________
105. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? _________
Give the pc the Proclamation of Forgiveness:
BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME, ANY OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS YOU HAVE FULLY AND TRUTHFULLY TOLD ME ARE FORGIVEN BY SCIENTOLOGISTS.
On any adverse reaction to the Proclamation of Forgiveness, get the rest of the withhold or repair the withhold session. (Ref: HCO PL 10 Nov. 78RA, PROCLAMATION: POWER TO FORGIVE)
Note: If this is being done as an HCO Confessional, the Proclamation of Forgiveness is omitted.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 18 NOVEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue I
C/Ses REVISED 12 JULY 1988
Auditors
Tech/Qual
AUDITOR CORRECTION LIST
AUDITOR RECOVERY
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 27 Mar. 72RC III, AUDITOR CORRECTION LIST, AUDITOR RECOVERY.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words in session on an org pc. (Ref. HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE AUDITOR CORRECTION LIST
A, about, afraid, all, an, and, answered, any, ARC break, as, assessment, at, audit, audited, auditing, auditor, auditor’s, avoiding.
Bad, be, been, bonuses, breaking.
Call, called, can’t, case, cases, chair, circumstances, code, coffee shop auditing, collected, commands, condition, confidential, connection, couldn’t, courses, cramming, C/S, C/Sing.
Desperate, destructive, Dianetics, didn’t, disagreements, discussing, disinterested, do, doesn’t, D of P, dog cases, doubt, down, drilling, drills.
Earlier, else, E-Meter, enough, environment, ethics, evaluation, evil, exec, eyesight.
Failed, failures, false, falsely, falsified, favors, FES, flubbed, F/N, F/Ned, folder, for, forced, from.
Gain, gave, get, getting, given, got.
Had, has, have, help, HGC, hung up.
In, inadequate, incomplete, in-session, intention, invalidated, invalidation, it.
Left, level, list, L&N, losses, lower.
Master, messed up, meter, missed, misunderstood, moonlighting.
Never, no, nobody, nonstandard, not.
Of, off, on, one, or, org, out-ethics, out-Int, out-list, outside, out-2D, overt, overts, own.
Paid, passed, past, pc, pc’ s, pcs, pcs’, place, practice, prevented, problem, problems, process, processes, program, PTS, purpose.
Question.
Rabbited, read, reads, recognize, restim, retrain, retrained, road, R/S, run, rushed.
Said, Scientology, seeking, senior (adj.), should, similar, situation, solutions, solve, some, someone, something, sort, special, squirreling, star-rate, status, student, studying, subject, sure.
TA, taken, tech, technical, Tech Sec, Tech Services, terms, the, there, through, time, to, told, training, tried, trouble, TRs, TR 0, TR 1, TR 2, TR 2l/2, TR 3, TR 4.
Under, understand, understanding, unsessionable, unusual, upset, using.
Want, warranted, was, wasn’t, were, weren’t, when, why, with, withhold, withholds, without, words, work, worksheet, worried, write, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 18 NOVEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue II
C/Ses REVISED 12 JULY 1988
Auditors
Tech/Qual
CASE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79 I Word Clearing Series 64
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 12 Nov. 80R I, CASE SUPERVISOR CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words in session on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE CASE SUPERVISOR
CORRECTION LIST
A, about, actions, admin, afraid, alcohol, an, and, any, ARC break, are, as, at, auditor, auditors.
Been, booted, by.
Case, certain, chits, completions, compliance, condition, connection, couldn’t, courses, covered, cramming, C/S, C/Ses, C/Sing.
Data, debug, desperate, destructive, Dianetics, disagreements, do, doesn’t, D of P, dog cases, don’t, doubt, drugs.
Earlier, eating, else, encountered, enough, environment, ethics, evaluation, evil,
Failed, failing, false, faulty, flubby, for, from.
Get, getting, got.
Has, have, help, hidden, hopeful, hung up.
Ill, illegible, in, inadequate, incomplete, instructions, intention, interruptions, invalidation, is, it.
Know.
Left, like, line, lines, losses.
Materials, medicine, messed up, missed, missing, misunderstood, moonlighting.
No, not.
Of, off, off-line, on, or, orders, others, out, out-admin, out-ethics, out-Int, outlist, out-2D, overloaded, overrepairing, overts, overwhelmed.
Paid, past, pc, pcs, permitting, physically, post, practice, pretending, prevented, problem, problems, programs, PTS, purpose.
Q and A.
Red tags, registrars, reports, restim, rushed.
Scientology, seeking, similar, situations, sleep, solve, some, someone, something, sort, status, study, subject.
Taking, tech, Tech Services, the, there, through, time, to, told, training, trouble.
Unhandled, upset.
Was, were, weren’t, what, when, why, with, withhold, withholding, withholds, words, work, worksheets, write, writing, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 NOVEMBER 1980
Remimeo
HCO
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 8RA
CASE SUPERVISOR CONFESSIONAL
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
Anyone doing a Confessional must have done or be on a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_______________
ORG: DATE:____________________
1. HAVE YOU EVER EVALUATED THE MEANING OF TECHNICAL MATERIALS FOR AN AUDITOR? ________
2. HAVE YOU EVER TOLD AN AUDITOR HOW HE SHOULD AUDIT? ________
3. HAVE YOU EVER PRETENDED TO QUOTE HCOBs OR PLs WITHOUT SHOWING THE ACTUAL ISSUE? ________
4. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO REFER AN AUDITOR TO AN HCOB, BOOK OR TAPE? ________
5. HAVE YOU ALTERED THE CONTENT OF AN HCOB OR PL IN ANY WAY? ________
6. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed FOR A PROCESS WHICH YOU’D SEEN BUT WAS NEVER PUBLISHED? ________
7. HAVE YOU EVER ACCEPTED VERBAL TECH FROM ANYONE? ________
8. HAVE YOU EVER MISUSED OR ALTERED TECH? ________
9. HAVE YOU GIVEN OUT INSTRUCTIONS TO AN AUDITOR THAT WERE CONTRARY TO HCOBs OR PLs? ________
10. HAVE YOU TOLERATED OUT-ADMIN IN PC FOLDERS? ________
11. HAVE YOU EVER OKAYED AN AUDITOR’S C/S WHEN YOU REALLY COULDN’T TELL WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LAST SESSION? ________
12. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A CASE WHEN THE FOLDER SUMMARY WAS CONFUSING OR OUT-OF-DATE? ________
13. HAVE YOU EVER GONE ON C/Sing A CASE WHEN AN FES SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE? ________
14. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO GET FAMILIAR WITH A CASE BEFORE C/Sing IT? ________
15. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A FOLDER FROM JUST A GLIB STUDY OF THE LAST SESSION’S ADMIN? ________
16. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN UP TRYING TO CORRECT AN AUDITOR’S HANDWRITING? ________
17. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A CASE WITHOUT EXAM REPORTS? ________
18. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEE THAT PC PROGRAMS WERE ACTUALLY COMPLETED? ________
19. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED A PC TO BE AUDITED WITHOUT THE FOLDER BEING C/Sed? ________
20. HAVE YOU EVER JUST PATCHED UP A PC AND THEN DROPPED HIM? ________
21. HAVE YOU PERMITTED A FREQUENT CHANGE OF AUDITORS ON A CASE? ________
22. HAVE YOU EVER LET RED TAGS REMAIN UNHANDLED FOR MORE THAN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS? ________
23. HAVE YOU C/Sed A RED-TAGGED SESSION WITHOUT FIRST FINDING OUT WHAT REALLY WENT WRONG? ________
24. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed AN ILL PC WITHOUT FINDING AND HANDLING THE TECH REASON? ________
25. HAVE YOU EVER NOT HANDLED MIS-C/Sing OR MISAUDITING ON A CASE? ________
26. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED THE CASES OF EXECS? ________
27. HAVE YOU EVER LET STAFF CASES GO UNHANDLED? ________
28. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEND AN AUDIIOR TO CRAMMING WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? ________
29. AS A C/S, HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO HANDLE AUDITORS YOU WERE C/Sing FOR WHO HAD OUT TRs OR OUT-METERING? ________
30. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN A WELL DONE TO AN AUDITOR WHEN THE SESSION REALLY WASN’T? ________
31. HAVE YOU NOT STUDIED YOUR C/S HAT? ________
32. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed WHILE YOUR HIGH-CRIME CHECKOUTS WERE BACKLOGGED? ________
33. HAVE YOU BEEN SPENDING C/Sing TIME DOING SOMETHING ELSE? ________
34. HAVE YOU EVER BACKLOGGED OR REFUSED TO DO CRAMMING ORDERS THAT HAD BEEN WRITTEN ON YOU? ________
35. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO INSIST THAT AUDITORS YOU WERE C/Sing FOR KEPT UP THEIR HIGHCRIME CHECKOUTS? ________
36. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO KEEP UP INSPECTIONS OF THE TECH AND QUAL LINES PER C/S SERIES 57? ________
37. HAVE YOU EVER PUSHED QUALITY AND NEGLECTED QUANTITY? ________
38. HAVE YOU EVER PUSHED QUANTITY AND NEGLECTED QUALITY? ________
39. IS THERE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTION YOU ARE AFRAID TO ASK FOR FEAR IT WOULD MAKE YOU LOOK INCOMPETENT OR STUPID? ________
40. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed OVER TECH MISUNDERSTOODS? ________
41. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO GET GOOD RESULTS ON A CASE? ________
42. HAVE YOU EVER CONTINUED TO C/S A CASE THAT BAFFLED YOU WITHOUT SEEKING HELP FROM A SENIOR TECH TERMINAL? ________
43. HAVE YOU EVER “GONE ON HOPING” WHILE C/Sing A CASE? ________
44. HAVE YOU EVER SENT A PC TO ETHICS WHEN THE REAL CAUSE OF THE TROUBLE WAS OUT-TECH? ________
45. HAVE YOU EVER Q-AND-Aed WITH A PC WHEN C/Sing? ________
46. HAVE YOU EVER Q-AND-Aed WITH AN AUDITOR WHEN C/Sing? ________
47. AS A C/S, HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO HOLD YOUR POSITION ON SOMETHING? ________
48. HAVE YOU EVER BECOME INVOLVED 2D-WISE WITH A PC YOU WERE C/Sing? ________
49. HAVE YOU EVER LET A SENIOR EXEC TELL YOU HOW 1o PROGRAM A PC? ________
50. HAVE YOU EVER LET A REGISTRAR TELL YOU HOW TO PROGRAM A PC? ________
51. HAVE YOU EVER LET PERSONAL OPINION SWAY YOU IN C/Sing A PC’S CASE? ________
52. HAVE YOU EVER TALKED WITH A PC AND THEN C/Sed HIS CASE FROM THAT TALK? ________
53. HAVE YOU EVER AGREED WITH AN AUDITOR THAT THE PC WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SESSION GOING WRONG? ________
54. HAVE YOU EVER WRITTEN A C/S BASED ON SOME IDEA OR OPINION INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING THE C/S SERIES? ________
55. HAVE YOU EVER NOT WRITTEN A CRAMMING ORDER WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? ________
56. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO USE ETHICS OR JUSTICE ON SOMEONE THAT WAS BEING HARMFUL OR DESTRUCTIVE ON TECH OR QUAL LINES? ________
57. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO USE ETHICS ON AN AUDIIoR WHEN IT WAS NEEDED? ________
58. HAVE YOU EVER NOT HANDLED AN EXAMINER WHO FALSELY REPORTED? ________
59. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO USE ETHICS ON A PC WHEN IT WAS NEEDED? ________
60. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO TAKE ACTION WHEN JUSTICE WAS MISAPPLIED ON AN AUDITOR OR OTHER TECH PERSONNEL? ________
61. HAVE YOU ACCEPTED ANY ILLEGAL PC FOR PROCESSING? ________
62. HAVE YOU EVER INCORRECTLY LABELED A PC “ILLEGAL”? ________
63. HAVE YOU EVER USED THE SNR C/S TO FRONT FOR YOU? ________
64. HAVE YOU EVER COVERED UP ERRORS IN YOUR C/Sing? ________
65. HAVE YOU EVER BLAMED YOUR ERRORS ON ANOTHER C/S OR AUDITOR? ________
66. HAVE YOU EVER BLAMED A PC? ________
67. HAVE YOU EVER MADE A C/S WRONG? ________
68. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed BADLY? ________
69. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS OF OMISSION ON A SNR C/S? ________
70. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS OF COMMISSION ON A SNR C/S? ________
71. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS OF OMISSION ON LRH? ________
72. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS OF COMMISSION ON LRH? ________
73. HAVE YOU EVER NOT BOTHERED TO SEE THAT AUDITORS WERE PROPERLY TRAINED? ________
74. AS A C/S, HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO ENSURE THE AUDITORS UNDER YOU WERE IN GOOD CASE SHAPE? ________
75. HAVE YOU EVER CONDONED OR BEEN INVOLVED IN A TTC RIP-OFF? ________
76. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO HELP ESTABLISH A TTC? ________
77. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED AN AUDITOR’S INTENTIONS? ________
78. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED AN AUDITOR’S FUTURE? ________
79. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED AN AUDITOR’S POTENTIAL? ________
80. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED OR HARASSED AN AUDITOR WHEN NO TECHNICAL GOOF HAD OCCURRED? ________
81. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED OR HARASSED AN AUDITOR FOR DOING A CORRECT ACTION? ________
82. HAVE YOU FAILED TO RECOGNIZE AND ACKNOWLEDGE A TECHNICALLY PERFECT SESSION? ________
83. HAVE YOU EVER INVALIDATED AN AUDITOR’S WILLINGNESS TO AUDIT? ________
84. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO STRENGTHEN AN AUDITOR’S WILLINGNESS TO AUDIT? ________
85. HAVE YOU EVER LET AN AUDITOR GIVE UP AUDITING AND NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT? ________
86. HAVE YOU EVER SNOOPED THROUGH A PC FOLDER FOR PERSONAL INTERESTS? ________
87. HAVE YOU EVER HAD A PC GET EXTRA EXAMS JUST TO GET AN F/N AFTER SESSION? ________
88. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed WHILE NOT HAVING READ THE BASIC BOOKS OR C/S SERIES? ________
89. HAVE YOU EVER RUN A PROCESS YOU WEREN’T QUALIFIED TO RUN? ________
90. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed FOR AN AUDITOR TO RUN A PROCESS THAT WAS ABOVE HIS TRAINING LEVEL? ________
91. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed SOLO FOLDERS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO? ________
92. HAVE YOU EVER DELIVERED PROCESSES WHICH WERE UNAUTHORIZED FOR THE ORG YOU WERE AT? ________
93. HAVE YOU EVER DONE ILLEGAL SOLO SESSIONS ON YOURSELF? ________
94. HAVE YOU EVER READ YOUR OWN CASE FOLDER? ________
95. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed YOUR OWN CASE? ________
96. HAVE YOU EVER GUESSED AT OR FALSELY REPORTED THE F/N VGI PERCENTAGE? ________
97. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed FOR AN ACTION AND THEN, AFTER THE FOLDER WAS SENT TO THE AUDITOR, HAD DOUBTS IF IT WAS THE CORRECT ACTION? ________
98. HAVE YOU EVER SENT A PC TO DECLARE WHEN YOU KNEW OR HAD DOUBTS IF HE’D MADE IT? ________
99. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A PC FOR HIGHER GRADES HOPING THAT WOULD HANDLE THE PC? ________
100. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A PC TO ATTEST TO A GRADE WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF THE FULL ABILITY GAINED HAVING BEEN ACHIEVED? ________
101. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed FOR A MULTIPLE DECLARE? ________
102. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A PC TO DECLARE OR ATTEST TO STATES BEING ASSERTED JUST TO AVOID UPSETTING THE PC? ________
103. HAVE YOU C/Sed A PC TO ATTEST TO PROCESSES OR A GRADE RUN IN A FORMER LIFE ALTHOUGH THE PC COULD NOT RECALL THE PROCESSES AND NO RELEASE POINT COULD BE FOUND? ________
104. HAVE YOU EVER LET A PC ATTEST TO CLEAR WHEN HE HADN’T MADE IT? ________
105. HAVE YOU EVER WRITTEN A C/S TO “2WC A PROCESS TO EP”? ________
106. HAVE YOU EVER LET AN AUDITOR GET AN F/N BY 2WC OR DISCUSSION OF A LEVEL OR PROCESS AND CALL THAT THE EP? ________
107. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A PC TO DECLARE OR ATTEST TO STATES BEING ASSERTED BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO? ________
108. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed A PC TO ATTEST TO STATES BEING ASSERTED BECAUSE YOU FELT YOU HAD TO “VALIDATE THE PC”? ________
109. AS A PC, HAVE YOU FALSELY ATTESTED TO GRADES, LEVELS OR STATES? ________
110. HAVE YOU EVER OVERESTIMATED A PC’S TRUE CASE LEVEL? ________
111. HAVE YOU EVER UNDERESTIMATED A PC’S TRUE CASE LEVEL? ________
112. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEE THAT A PC FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE AUDITING PROCEDURE? ________
113. HAVE YOU EVER C/Sed FOR MAJOR ACTIONS TO REPAIR A CASE? ________
114. HAVE YOU EVER ILLEGALLY AUDITED PCs OUTSIDE AN ORG? ________
115. HAVE YOU EVER ILLEGALLY C/Sed CASE FOLDERS OUTSIDE AN ORG? ________
116. HAVE YOU EVER BROKEN YOUR CONTRACT WITH AN ORG? ________
117. HAVE YOU EVER DISCLOSED CLASS VIII COURSE DATA? ________
118. HAVE YOU EVER DISCLOSED DATA FROM A CONFIDENTIAL PROCESS? ________
119. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN INSECURE WITH CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS? ________
120. HAVE YOU EVER XEROXED OR COPIED CONFIDENTIAL MATERIALS? ________
121. HAVE YOU EVER REFUSED TO C/S A CASE? ________
122. HAVE YOU EVER REFUSED TO C/S FOR AN AUDITOR? ________
123. HAVE YOU EVER REFUSED TO C/S FOR AN ORG? ________
124. HAVE YOU EVER THREATENED TO QUIT YOUR POST AS C/S? ________
125. HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED GIVING UP C/Sing? ________
126. HAVE YOU EVER LEFT A TECH POST TO ESCAPE FROM SOMETHING? ________
127. HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED LEAVING A TECH POST TO ESCAPE FROM SOMETHING? ________
128. HAVE YOU EVER ADVISED SOMEONE AGAINST GETTING AUDITING AT SOME ORG? ________
129. AS A C/S, HAVE YOU EVER FALSELY OR INACCURATELY REPRESENTED ANYTHING? ________
130. REGARDING YOUR C/Sing, IS THERE ANYTHING WHICH SHOULDN’T BE KNOWN? ________
131. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THE AUDITORS YOU C/S FOR WHICH SHOULD NOT BE KNOWN? ________
132. IS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT THE TECH DELIVERY AT AN ORG OR MISSION WHERE YOU’VE C/Sed WHICH SHOULDN’T BE KNOWN? ________
133. HAVE YOU COMMITTED A TECH OVERT NOT COVERED IN THESE QUESTIONS? ________
134. IS THERE ANY QUESTION ABOUT YOUR C/Sing WHICH YOU WOULD HATE TO BE ASKED? ________
135. DO YOU STILL HAVE ATTENTION ON ONE OF THESE QUESTIONS? ________
136. IS THERE ANOTHER QUESTION I SHOULD HAVE ASKED YOU? ________
137. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALFTRUTH? ________
138. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? ________
139. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? ________
140. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? ________
Give the pc the Proclamation of Forgiveness:
BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME, ANY OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS YOU HAVE FULLY AND TRUTHFULLY TOLD ME ARE FORGIVEN BY SCIENTOLOGISTS.
On any adverse reaction to the Proclamation of Forgiveness, get the rest of the withhold or repair the withhold session. (Ref: HCOB 10 Nov. 78RA, PROCLAMATION: POWER TO FORGIVE)
Note: If this is being done as an HCO Confessional, the Proclamation of Forgiveness is omitted.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 2 DECEMBER 1980
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
All Levels
All Auditors
All Supervisors
All Internships
All C/Ses
Tech Checksheets
Examiners
Ethics Officers
FLOATING NEEDLE AND TA POSITION
MODIFIED
This bulletin carries further the data given in
HCOB 10 Dec. 76RB C/S Series 99RB
Rev. 25.5.80 SCIENTOLOGY F/N AND TA POSITION
and modifies but does not cancel all HCOBs that mention having to have the TA between 2.0 and 3.0 before the F/N can be considered valid, including:
HCOB 21 Oct. 68R FLOATING NEEDLE
Rev. 9.7 77
HCOB 7 May 69R V FLOATING NEEDLE
Rev. 15.7.77
HCOB 21 Apr. 71RC C/S Series 36RC
Rev. 25.7.78 DIANETICS
HCOB 24 Oct. 71RA FALSE TA
Rev. 25.5.80
HCOB 15 Feb. 72R FALSE TA ADDITION 2
Rev. 26.1.77
HCOB 23 Nov. 73RB DRY AND WET HANDS MAKE
Rev. 25.5.80 FALSE TA
HCOB 8 June 70 LOW TA HANDLING
HCOB 13 June 70 II HUBBARD CONSULTANT STUDY
STRESS ANALYSIS
___________
Some recent tests I conducted have shown that a floating needle is a floating needle regardless of tone arm position.
This changes an earlier belief that, in order to be valid, the tone arm had to be between 2.0 and 3.0 for it to be called a floating needle.
Carefully examining dozens of F/Ns which occurred with the TA well above 3.0 and looking for any troubles with the case following calling the F/N an F/N, I found that there were no adverse consequences.
Therefore, it can be safely assumed that a floating needle is a floating needle regardless of where the tone arm position may be. It should be called, indicated and written as an F/N, with the TA noted.
Palm moisture, pc grip and other factors alter the TA position but not the F/N. The auditor must also be prepared to handle and handle false TA and nothing in this finding changes handling.
Tone arm positions register the relative mass of the case and nothing in this finding changes that. There are low TA cases and high TA cases and the state of the TA remains important and all data regarding TA positions are valid.
An ARC break needle (an F/N accompanied by bad indicators) remains an ARC break needle and nothing in this finding changes that. It must be handled. (One ordinarily checks for an ARC break in this case.)
This finding about TA position and F/Ns has been corrected earlier. This present issue carries it further, based on very thorough recent testing. There are apparently no liabilities of any kind in calling high and low TA F/Ns F/Ns.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 DECEMBER 1980R
REVISED 16 NOVEMBER 1987
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Academies
Class III
Auditors
and above
REHAB TECH
Refs:
HCOB 30 June 65 RELEASE, REHABILITATION OF,
FORMER RELEASES AND THETAN
EXTERIORS
HCOB 21 July 65 RELEASE REHABILITATION
HCOB 2 Aug. 65 RELEASE GOOFS
HCOB 11 Feb. 66R FREE NEEDLES, HOW TO GET THEM ON A PC
Rev. 22.2.79
HCOB 26 Aug. 68 REHAB AND CORRECTION
HCOB 5 Dec. 71 END PHENOMENAS
HCOB 15 Nov. 78 DATING AND LOCATING
E-Meter Instruction Film 4, “How the E-Meter Works”
This bulletin is a condensation of the tech I first developed in 1965 on the subject of rehabs and release.
While there is considerably more data on these subjects in the Technical Volumes and on the Class VIII tapes, this issue sets forth the key data and presents the methods for rehabbing in one consolidated issue for the first time.
DEFINITIONS:
“Rehab” is a shortened version of “rehabilitate,” which means: to restore to a former capacity or condition.
“Release” is the term for what occurs when a person separates from his reactive mind or some part of it or when he separates from some mass.
In Scientology we use the term “rehabilitate” most commonly to mean: restoring a state of release previously attained by the pc.
RELEASES
Scientology processes can be categorized as follows:
1. Those processes which direct the preclear’ s attention to the mental masses in his reactive mind in order to enable him to separate out from them.
2. Those processes which are aimed at increasing the preclear’s abilities.
Both types of processes lead to release.
Both types of processes are necessary to bring a person up the levels of awareness and up each step of the Grade Chart to OT.
When you take a thetan out of a mass, that’s a release.
When you erase the mass and leave the thetan there, that’s an erasure. Erasure is a different phenomenon from release.
In auditing, when the pc spots something in the bank he disconnects from the bank to a greater or lesser degree. That is a release. Or when the pc becomes free of a difficulty or personal “block” or inability stemming from the mind, that is a release.
A person can and does go release many times in the course of his auditing. He may go release many times while being run on the processes of a grade before he attains the ability of that grade.
The Grades Releases are covered fully in HCOB 22 Sept. 65, RELEASE GRADATION, NEW LEVELS OF RELEASE, in HCOB 27 Sept. 65, RELEASE GRADATION, ADDITIONAL DATA, and on the Grade Chart itself. Further data can be found in HCOB/HCO PL 23 Oct. 80R II, CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED FOR LOWER LEVELS AND EXPANDED LOWER GRADES .
Oddly enough, the idea of release can translate through to the pc to include releases in life too. For example, a person was in prison and then was let out. This might well read as a release if he was asked about former releases, and it would be okay. One sees how this can be in view of the basic concept of release, e.g., when you take a person out of a mass—any mass—that is a release.
So “release” points in life such as the above are valid and, though one doesn’t ask for them specifically, should they come up during a former release Rehab on a pc, they are to be handled.
However, the auditor must understand that such a release in no way means that a person is a release on a process or on one of the grades! Prison might be a problem to someone but getting out doesn’t make him a Problems Release! Don’t misconstrue one for the other and declare someone a Grades Release at some level because he had a release in life.
Actually, one can go release on any subject and theoretically one could rehab any release a pc had. The exact subjects a pc must be released on in order to make it up the Bridge are those listed on the Grade Chart.
OVERRUN
Overrun occurs when the thetan considers that something has gone on too long or happened too often.
When the person begins to feel this way about something, he begins to protest it and try to stop it. This tends to make things more solid and builds up mass in the mind. People who are very intent on stopping things in life appear solid and massy.
In auditing, an overrun means the preclear came out of the bank and then went back into it again. For instance, the pc released on the process “From where could you communicate to your dog?” but the auditor continued the process after he should have indicated the F/N and gone on to something else. By continuing, the auditor throws the pc back into the bank again and wrecks the release state.
An overrun in auditing can also mean that the pc gained an ability to do something and the auditor continued the process or grade past the point where the ability had been regained. By pushing on, the ability can get invalidated. In both cases the person’s attention goes back onto his case and hangs up. The person can feel the mass of it again.
In life when something is overrun, the person begins to accumulate protests and upsets about the thing or activity he feels overrun on. His attention tends to stick on it. This also builds up mass.
An overrun, whether it occurred in auditing or in life, is handled in auditing using the tech of rehabbing.
THEORY OF REHABBING
The theory of rehabs is based on the following stable datum: This particular universe is built by twos. One cannot know a datum unless there is another datum to compare it to. This fact can also be seen to operate in the field of the mind. (Ref: Logic 8, Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics)
Thus, in rehabbing a release point one is getting the pc to view one datum (a time of release from a mass) as compared to another datum (a time he was stuck in the mass) and when this is done the pc moves out of the mass once again. That is the simplicity of what occurs.
To expand on the mechanics involved, it can be described as follows:
When a person has been overrun, he is trying to stop the mass or thing he has gone back into. The other side to that is the time or times he was released from it. These are opposites: the “plus” of the mass and the “minus” of the time the mass wasn’t there. This idea of opposites tends to hang things up.
The idea then behind handling an overrun is to unstabilize this plus-minus pair by getting the pc to clearly spot the “minus” side of it. When this happens, the “plus” side goes.
When the pc’s attention is directed to the points when he was released from the mass, he ceases to try and stop the mass and it goes. The release state then rehabilitates.
So the mechanism being worked with here is that the mass connected with an overrun can be knocked out by spotting the release connected with it. It is a very simple principle which has important uses in auditing.
TYPES OF REHABS
There are three types of rehab procedures for use in rehabbing releases.
The earliest is Rehab 1965 Style. This is followed by Rehab by Counting which I developed in 1968. Later on, in 1971, I developed the Date/Locate procedure.
Each of the three has its uses depending on what it is one is trying to rehab.
One does a Rehab 65 Style when one is rehabbing a specific point, such as the point a specific former release was attained.
A Rehab by Counting is done when, for instance, a process appears overrun in session or when one is rehabbing “releases” such as on drugs on the Scientology Drug Rundown, or at any time something is likely to have a number of releases connected with it.
A Date/Locate is used when one wants to directly spot the exact time and location of a specific incident and thus blow the mass connected with it. (Date/ Locate is used on the last step of the Clear Certainty Rundown to determine the exact point a person went Clear. The Date/Locate procedure has many other uses in other types of auditing as well, but in rehabbing its most frequent use is on the Clear Certainty Rundown, per the above.)
INDOCTRINATING THE PC
The procedure for doing a rehab is quite simple when one understands the theory of it and makes sure the pc does too.
Before doing any rehab or Date/Locate, clear the terms and procedure with the pc so that he understands. Use the data in this issue to clear the theory of release and rehabs, and to clear the procedure to be used—Rehab 65 Style or Rehab by Counting. Use data in HCOB 15 Nov. 78, DATING AND LOCATING, in indoctrinating the pc to the Date/Locate theory and procedure. All the terms and steps of the procedure are covered in that issue.
The better the pc understands what is going on the smoother it will go. Do not skimp this indoctrination step. Any auditing efforts can go up in smoke if one tries to audit the pc over misunderstoods.
1. Clear the terms below with the pc, using demos and consulting the pc’s understanding.
A.. RELEASE: (1) A person who has been able to back out of his bank. The bank is still there but the person isn’t sunk into it with all its somatics and depressions. (2) When the pc disconnects from the mass in his bank, that is a Release. When this happens, the pc disconnects from the bank to a greater or lesser degree. (3) A person who has become free of a difficulty or personal “block” stemming from the mind. (4) When you take a thetan out of a mass, that is a Release.
B. REHABILITATE: to restore to a former capacity or condition. In auditing, this means to do the series of actions in session which result in regaining a state of release for the pc. Abbreviated “Rehab.”
C. KEY-IN: the action of some part of the reactive mind moving in on the person. A key-in occurs when the environment around the awake but fatigued or distressed individual is similar to some part of the reactive mind. Since the reactive mind operates on the equation A=A=A, the present time environment becomes identified with the contents of a particular portion of the bank and so it activates and exerts its influence on the person.
D. KEY-OUT: the action of the reactive mind or some portion of it dropping out of restimulation on the pc.
E. GRADE: a series of processes culminating in an exact ability attained, examined and attested to by the pc. (See the Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart for the complete explanation of the different grades.) Auditing processes result in a release. The auditing processes of a grade, when done, result in the pc attaining the specific ability of that grade.
2. Clear “overrun” with the pc, using the section “Overrun” in this issue. Have the pc demo an overrun in auditing and in life.
3. Clear with the pc the stable datum on which rehabbing is based (under “Theory of Rehabbing” in this issue). Have him demo it (using a demo kit) as needed to ensure he’s got it.
4. Using a demo kit, clear with the pc the simple mechanics of rehabbing (spotting the release connected with a mass). Ref: Section on “Theory of Rehabbing” in this issue.
5. Go over with the pc each step of the procedure to be used (Rehab 65 Style or Rehab by Counting or Date/Locate, if needed). Clear any words regarding these procedures, which have not previously been cleared in the pc’s auditing. Use a demo kit as needed.
6. Cover meter dating with the pc so he understands its purpose and how it is done. Use E-Meter Drill 22 to explain it. Ensure the pc understands you don’t want him dependent on the meter but that you will help him, using the meter, if necessary. (Ref: HCOB 4 Aug. 63, E-METER ERRORS, COMMUNICATION CYCLE ERROR)
Be sure the pc understands the simple basics of rehabbing with no questions or confusions or misunderstood terms, before you begin any rehab.
Additionally, when doing any type of rehab session it is important to ensure the pc’s ruds are in before starting.
REHABPROCEDURES
PROCEDURE FOR REHAB 65 STYLE
I. Determine what is going to be rehabbed. This might be a release on a process, some other type of former release, or the ability of a grade attained by the pc.
A. For a process, use the question:
“Were you released on (process)?”
a. Clear the question on the pc first, omitting the name of the actual process.
b. Then check the question (including the name of the actual process) on the meter.
c. If no read on the question, check Suppress and Invalidate.
d. If the pc says he was released but no read on the question, check Suppress or Invalidate. If pc is assertive or protesty about having been released, check Asserted and/or Protest.
B. Rehabbing Grades: Data on using 65 Style to rehab grades is covered in the “Rehabbing Grades” section of this issue.
C. Rehabbing Former Releases: Data on using 65 Style to rehab former releases is covered in the “Rehabbing Former Releases” section of this issue.
II. When it has been determined that the pc was released on the process or that the ability gained for a grade had been attained, one proceeds by first finding out when this occurred, per step 1 below, and then continues with the remainder of the rehab steps:
1. Loosely locate the session or time in which it occurred. (Note: This may have to be meter dated if the pc is unable to locate when it happened. For this reason, any auditor doing rehabs must be adept at E-Meter Drill 22, “E-Meter Hidden Date, This Life.” Also, see HCOB 2 Aug. 65, RELEASE GOOFS, point 4, Meter Misuse.)
You simply want to determine when. The pc may give you the year, month and day of the release, he may describe it by significance (“The moment I thought to myself, ‘That’s why I wrecked the car!’“), or he may spot when it occurred by location (“It occurred when I was in session for the first time with Joe in his new auditing room”). The reference for this is HCOB 8 June 63, THE TIME TRACK AND ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS, BULLETIN 2, HANDLING THE TIME TRACK.
NOTE: The indicators which tell you that the release is rehabilitated are an F/N on the meter and VGIs on the pc. If this occurs on any step of the rehab procedure, simply indicate the F/N and gently end off on that rehab action.
2. Get in Suppress, Invalidate buttons on the session or time.
3. Get in “Unacknowledged” or “What was unacknowledged.”
4. Indicate anything found to the pc as bypassed charge.
5. Find the key-in that was keyed out in that time or session. (The person went release because something keyed out in that time or session.)
6. When this is found and recognized by the pc, the pc will recover the release and the process or grade will be rehabilitated.
7. If this does not happen, find out what keyed in (at some point after the release) that ended the release state and get it loosely located as in step l.
8. Repeat steps 2 to 6 on it.
9. CONDlTIONAL: If, when the above is done, the release still has not rehabbed, get the pc to itsa alternately the point of key-out when the pc released and the point of key-in afterwards, one after the other. (Use the meter to guide the pc, if necessary, by asking “What’s that?” when you see a fall on the needle.) This isn’t an alternate/repetitive question— “What was keyed out then?”/”What was keyed in then?”—but a use of these and any such wording, one after the other, as itsa invitations until the release is regained and F/N, VGIs obtained.
CHECKING FOR EPs
If one wants to check if the pc has reached the EP of a process or if one suspects that the EP may have been reached out of session, one can check, “Did anything occur?” per HCOB 5 Dec. 71, END PHENOMENAS, and if the EP has been reached it can be rehabbed using the Rehab 65 Style. One would never ask leading questions or feed the EP to the pc in such situations. Simply check if anything occurred.
PROCEDURE FOR REHAB BY COUNTING
1. Establish there is something to be rehabbed. (Naturally, you can’t rehab a release if there isn’t one. You couldn’t rehab a process if the pc had never run it.)
The question would vary depending on the situation being rehabbed.
a. If it looks (due to overrun phenomena) as though a process has been overrun in session, one could ask, “Have we bypassed a release point on this process?”
b. For rehabbing releases on drugs on the Scientology Drug Rundown, one would check, “Did you go release on (______)?”
2. If there is a release, the question should read. If no read, check Suppress and Invalidate. There must be a read either on checking the question or on the pc’s origination that there is a release there, before proceeding with the rehab.
3. If no read but the pc says he was released, check if the release has been Suppressed or Invalidated. If the pc is asserting release or being protesty about it, check Asserted and/or Protest.
4. Sometimes the pc will F/N simply on spotting he was released. This can be quite common especially when the pc’s ruds are in and the auditor’s TRs are smooth. An F/N with good indicators tells you that the rehab is complete and the mass has keyed out or the state has been rehabilitated.
5. If no F/N on spotting there was a release, ask the pc how many times he was released. Get him to count the number of times and when he gets it he will F/N.
6. Sometimes the pc can’t get the number and the auditor can then use the meter to count how many times and get it that way. He can ask the pc if he has some idea of the approximate number of times and then use “More than ?”/”Less than ?” He uses the tech of E-Meter Drill 22 to establish the general range of number of times. He would then count to the pc. (“Were you released on ( ) 10 times? 11? 12?” etc.) The correct number of times will read and, when indicated, will F/N.
Rehab by Counting is a simple procedure but it can get messed up by an uncertain attitude on the part of the auditor or by rough auditor TRs, so be sure you are confident and well drilled.
BRIDGING FROM REHAB BY COUNTING
TO 65 STYLE
If, even with the ruds in, doing a Rehab by Counting doesn’t F/N, one can bridge over into a Rehab 65 Style and rehab it that way. Doing a Rehab 65 Style will clean up any bypassed charge on the release and allow it to rehab.
If on the Rehab by Counting the pc had said he was released several times, one would have to find the primary release point (the one “that is most real to him,” or when he “had the biggest win,” etc.) in order to do the Rehab 65 Style steps on that release point. Handled smoothly in this way, you will be able to rehabilitate the release, with F/N, VGIs.
DATE/LOCATE PROCEDURE
The Date/Locate procedure is very thoroughly covered in HCOB 15 Nov. 78, DATING AND LOCATING, and thus is not repeated here. It is based upon the fundamental principles of rehab tech, but the additional theory and full Date/ Locate procedure contained in HCOB 15 Nov. 78 must be understood and drilled well, before it is done on any pc.
ADDITIONAL DATA ON SPECIFIC
USES OF REHAB PROCEDURES
If one is to handle rehabs, he must know the fine differences involved in the application of rehab tech to each type of thing to be rehabbed.
For example, the rehabbing of grades and the rehabbing of former releases differ from each other and they also differ slightly in some of their steps from the rehabbing of specific processes as covered earlier in this issue.
For this reason each is taken up separately here in its own section.
REHABBING GRADES
The rehabilitation of any grade is done on the basis of actual auditing having been done to the end product of the specific ability gained for the grade on all flows. (Note: Pcs should be quadded up by the time they receive their grades.)
One does not rehab a grade by checking “Did anything occur?” or “Were you released on Grade ?” Of course something would have occurred on the grade and the pc would have released each time a process or a flow on a process of the grade F/Ned. This is not what you’re looking for.
The end phenomena of a grade is the attainment of an ability by the pc which he did not previously have. Each level of the Grade Chart results in a specific ability gained by the pc when he does that particular grade. These are expressed on the Grade Chart in the “Ability Gained” column.
The specific ability for each of the four flows of a grade is listed in HCOB/ HCO PL 23 Oct. 80R II, CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED FOR LOWER LEVELS AND EXPANDED LOWER GRADES. These are what you are interested in finding out and rehabbing, if they have been attained.
You want to determine that the pc has gained the ability for each flow of the grade when you are rehabbing. It’s not: Did he get his Grade 0 ability? It’s: Is he willing for others to communicate to him on any subject? Does he no longer resist communication from others on unpleasant or unwanted subjects? Yes? Good, he’s made it on Flow 1 of Grade 0.
Does he have the ability to communicate freely with anyone on any subject? Is he free from or no longer bothered by communication difficulties, and no longer withdrawn or reticent? Does he like to outflow? If so, he’s attained the ability on Flow 2 of Grade 0.
One checks each flow of a grade for the ability of that flow in this way. If the pc says he can’t, or if he reads on the meter as being unable to communicate freely to others, for example, then you know he is not complete on that grade. He would need to have an FES done at least as far back as the beginning of that grade and any errors found corrected, and then more processes for that grade run on all flows until the ability gained had been genuinely attained. Further data about handling the pc who hasn’t made a grade is contained in C/S Series 4.
A Dianetics pc who couldn’t honestly say he was a well and happy human being would need more somatic items run out R3RA.
One would never try to rehab a grade the pc had never really been run on or, for instance, Q-and-A with a pc who asserted he was a Grade 2 Release because he went to confession as a youth. The abilities gained of the grades are attained only by auditing on the various processes of each grade. The results of well-run grades are light-years above anything that other fields or practices can offer, so don’t sell them short by omitting or quickying. them.
The procedure, then, for rehabbing a grade is as follows:
1. Establish from folder study that the pc has run the processes of the grade on all flows in the first place. There should be some evidence in the folder that the pc has attained the grade, whether previously declared or not. He should have run enough processes for this to be evident.
2. Show the pc (with pc on the meter) the written statement of the ability gained for Flow 1 of the grade, and have him read it. (Ref: HCOB/HCO PL 23 Oct. 80R II, CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED FOR LOWER LEVELS AND EXPANDED LOWER GRADES)
3. Then check with the pc as to whether he has attained (or “can do”) the ability for that flow of the grade, as stated in HCOB/HCO PL 23 Oct. 80R II.
4. If he has attained it, rehab it by Rehab 65 Style.
5. Repeat steps 2 and 3 on the ability gained for each of the--remaining flows (Flows 2, 3 and 0) of the grade.
6. If the pc has attained the ability on each flow of the grade, he is a valid Release on that grade.
7. If the pc doesn’t have the ability gained for one or more of the flows of the grade, he doesn’t have the abilities of the grade. The processes (and the flows) he ran on it would have to be FESed to locate any errors. The errors found would have to be corrected and any unflat process flattened. Also, any missed processes for that grade would need to be run until the pc really had the ability gained for each flow of the grade.
REHABBING FORMER RELEASES
Rehabbing former releases came into being in 1965 and was done most frequently in that year and the years immediately following it, after the grades had been established. At that time it was necessary to clear up and get acknowledged the former releases a pc may have had during his processing in the previous years, and to determine that he had been released on each grade before he went onto Power and Clearing.
It is still a very valid tech that is used when needed.
It may in some instances be done, at the adjudication of the C/S, where a case is having trouble or is bogged and the C/S suspects from folder study that the case may be hung up on former release points.
In genning the pc in to this action, ensure he understands what is being looked for. Although one uses Rehab 65 Style, the action is not the same as rehabbing a grade or even exactly the same as rehabbing a process. Here you are looking for times in the pc’s auditing history, recent or distant, when he felt good in sessions. This would not necessarily have to be a specific EP of a process the pc ran or the EP of a particular grade. Rehabbing former releases is not limited by reference to any specific process or grade. Also, when the pc is asked about an earlier release, he may offer up a time he felt released from something in life. If so, this would be checked and handled just as any other release point, as in this action you are going to rehab any and all validly reading release points the pc may offer. When a former release is found, it is rehabbed by the 65 Style.
The procedure for rehabbing former releases is:
1. Ensure the pc’s ruds are in and that he has been through steps 1-6 of the section “Indoctrinating the Pc,” in this issue.
2. Have the pc demo the idea of former releases as it applies to auditing and to life until he’s got it.
3. R-factor the pc that you are going to rehab any former releases he may have had.
4. Clear the question: “Have you been released earlier?” Then check the question.
5. If you get a read on clearing or checking the question, find out what the release was on.
a. If no read on the question when cleared or checked, check Suppress and Invalidate.
b. If pc says he was released earlier but no read on the question when cleared or checked, check Suppress or Invalidate. If the pc is assertive or protesty about having been released, check Asserted and/or Protest.
6. When it has been determined that the pc has been released earlier, one then proceeds per step 1 of Rehab 65 Style instructions until one gets an F/N and rehabilitation of the former release.
7. One then checks for any other former releases by checking, “Is there another time you were released earlier?” and handles per steps 5 and 6 above.
8. Repeat step 7 as long as the pc has former releases to rehab.
9. Conditional: If on steps 5a or 5b the meter doesn’t read or ceases reading even after Suppress, Invalidate, Asserted and/or Protest are checked, or if an ARC break needle turns on while doing the rehabs, one checks for and handles any ARC breaks which may be present in the session or connected with the thing you are trying to rehab.
After handling any ARC breaks, recheck for former releases and handle until the auditor, pc and meter are in agreement that any former releases have been rehabbed and that there are no ARC breaks preventing any former release from reading. It may be necessary to also check and handle the other rudiments (PTP and Missed Withholds) to ensure there is nothing preventing any former release from reading.
10. Conditional: If the pc has a big win in rehabbing former releases, one would let him have his win and end the session. When sessions are resumed, one would then check for and handle any remaining former releases.
When all the pc’s former releases have been rehabbed, the action is complete.
ADVICE TO AUDITORS AND C/Ses ON REHABS
Meter Dependence
In using the meter on a rehab of any sort, one does not want to get into a situation where the pc is made dependent on the meter for obtaining data. One uses the meter in a rehab only when the pc is unable to come up with the data needed. In getting the number of times released on a process, for instance, the auditor would get the pc to establish the number of times released and only if the pc could not get it would the auditor use the meter to find the number of times released. This all comes under increasing the pc’s certainty of his data and is best expressed in HCOB 4 Aug. 63, E-METER ERRORS, COMMUNICATION CYCLE ERROR.
RELEASE REHAB BLOCKS
There are three main reasons why a release rehab on a subject or action might hang up:
1. Out-ruds
2. The pc was never released on it in the first place
3. There is something earlier on the track which was similar to it. (For example, in rehabbing a drug, the pc may have been released on a similar drug back on the track.)
1. Out-ruds: When a rehab is not going to an F/N, you will usually find that it is being done over an out-rud. This can be (a) an out-rud on the subject of the rehab or (b) an out-rud in the rehab session itself.
While you are rehabbing, you watch the pc to make sure his good indicators remain in because you could get an ARC break needle on it and not notice it. An ARC break needle is easy to establish because you’ve got bad indicators with it.
Where you have bad indicators with an ARC break needle, just put in the ruds on the subject.
EXAMPLE: The auditor is rehabbing releases in the taking of ether and it won’t F/N. The auditor could ask, “In the taking of ether was there any ARC break?” One can put in the ARC break, Problem and Missed Withhold ruds, if they are reading.
The out-ruds might have occurred before the point of release, and this can be checked for as well.
The actual mechanism which you’re using is: If it won’t rehab and the F/N is an ARC break needle, then there’s trouble afoot of some kind or another. Just put in the ruds on the subject.
If there is roughness in the rehab session, an ARC break needle could occur. If so, get the ruds in on the session and complete the rehab.
2. The pc was never released on it in the first place: A release rehab on a subject or action might hang up because the person never did go release on it. In other words, the F/N does not rehab because it did not happen in the first place. If it is a process or grade, the handling would be to run it to EP.
3. Earlier-similar: Sooner or later you are going to find someone who won’t release during a rehab on a specific subject or action. The overrun is so overrun that the releases are no longer available in it.
You can put in the ruds in connection with that subject or action (or the session if that is needed). But if it just won’t rehab at all, there is still a way you can handle it: Ask the pc if there was anything earlier on the track that was similar to the subject or action.
EXAMPLE:
Auditor: “Well, did you take anything earlier on the track that was similar to kerosene?”
Pc: “Oh, yes, yes. We used to take balderdash in the old days, I just remembered. Yes.” (F/N)
Auditor: “Thank you. Your needle is floating.”
Rehabs are very simple to do provided the auditor’s comm cycle is not rough or distracting and both he and the pc understand what is being done on a rehab and how the procedures go. The action is one of destimulation not restimulation. It is done with a light touch and is a smooth action. One doesn’t get into forcing the pc on a rehab.
Drilling the different rehab procedures must be a part of any high-crime checkout on this bulletin so that the auditor can confidently handle any situation that might arise during a rehab.
The best way to run a session is to be so sharp as an auditor that you never let the pc overrun in the first place. But should this occur or should you inherit a pc that another auditor has overrun, or should life and livingness knock out a release state, this issue lays out the steps for restoring any type of release.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 DECEMBER 1980RA
REVISED 23 APRIL 1991
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Class III Auditors
and Above
Scn DRD Co-audit
Course
THE SCIENTOLOGY DRUG RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB 30 June 65 RELEASE, REHABILITATION OF FORMER
RELEASES AND THETAN EXTERIORS
HCOB 21 July AD 15 RELEASE REHABILITATION
HCOB 7 Nov. 65 RELEASE REHABILITATION ERROR
HCOB 19 Dec. 80R REHAB TECH
Rev. 16.11.87
HCOB 30 June 62 ARC PROCESS
I have just finalized a new rundown concerning the handling of drugs. It is called the Scientology Drug Rundown and it uses Scientology auditing techniques to handle drugs on Dianetic Clears who, of course, cannot be run on engrams and the New Era Dianetics Drug Rundown. This rundown will make for smoother gains up the Grades and OT levels for the Dianetic Clear because it will handle any charge on the case on the subject of drugs. And in some instances it could mean the difference between a case that is resistive and rocky and a case that flies in auditing.
THEORY
It is very important to handle the effects of drugs, medicine and alcohol on a case. In the 60s drug use became widespread in the culture and it was then that I discovered the need to audit out drugs as a first action on pcs. Drugs make it difficult to get stable auditing gains. In fact, a drug history makes one a resistive case in many instances until the drugs are handled.
This requires both an objective and a subjective handling. The Purification Rundown and TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course are objective handlings; they don’t involve or directly address the person’s own thinkingness to accomplish the intended results. These rundowns work wonders when done correctly.
Normally, the subjective handling consists of the New Era Dianetics Drug Rundown, wherein the pc’s engrams and mental pictures concerning drugs are erased. The total package, then, is made up of objective and subjective handlings. Both are necessary to effect the proper result. The objective handlings (Purification Rundown and TRs and Objectives Co-audit) won’t do the whole job by themselves.
The case which has gone Clear prior to receiving a NED Drug Rundown has had no means of handling the subjective aspects of drugs until now. You must not run engrams on a Clear, so the problem we were faced with solving was: how do you handle a case’s charge on drugs if you can’t run engrams on him?
Well, I’ve put together a lineup which solves this problem simply and effectively—the Scientology Drug Rundown. It accomplishes a necessary release of charge on drugs, and thus helps to remove drugs as a case factor for Dianetic Clears and allows them to get the maximum gains out of the Grades and OT levels. The Scientology Drug Rundown also runs with enormous benefit on preclears after the Purification RD and the TRs and Objectives Co-audit, as covered in HCOB 12 Nov. 81RD, GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES.
THE LINEUP
The Scientology Drug Rundown handles charge on drugs with the following tools:
1. Rehabbing chemical releases on drugs, which unsticks the person from masses pulled in during drug experiences or “trips.”
2. Recalls on drugs to handle the charge on drugs and drug incidents.
3. Further Objective Processing to extrovert the person after the charge is handled.
REHABS OF RELEASES ON DRUGS
Definition: RELEASE—When the preclear disconnects from the bank that is a Release. When you take a thetan out of a mass that is a Release. This is not the same as getting rid of the mass which is called erasure. There are many releases which normally occur in auditing. The Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart, displayed in any org, explains these in detail.
Definition: REHAB (Short for REHABILITATION)—When the person was originally released he had become aware of something that caused the Reactive mind to destimulate at that point or become weak. This is a Release. When the sudden point of awareness is again found, the Release state can be regained or rehabilitated. The procedure of regaining a former Release state is called a rehab.
Some years ago I made the discovery that drugs can give a person the sensation of releasing from the bank while pulling in mass on the person at the same time. This is one of the factors which makes drugs as deadly as they are.
When such “chemical releases” are located and rehabbed, the person becomes unstuck from mass pulled in during “trips.” This is covered in HCOB 23 Sept. 68, DRUGS AND TRIPPERS.
Drug rehabs were part of the original Class VIII Drug Rundown and are now reinstated as the first step of the Scientology Drug Rundown.
RECALL PROCESSING
One of the oldest methods of processing we have in Dianetics and Scientology is the Recall Process. It has been a mainstay of auditing techniques since 1951. It has a new application now on the Scientology Drug Rundown.
The charge a Dianetic Clear has on drugs can be released by running charged drugs using simple Recall techniques. On the Scientology Drug Rundown this is done after the drug rehabs.
OBJECTIVE PROCESSING
In order to extrovert the pc’s attention after the Recalls, one runs some Objective Processing. This isn’t a long parade of processes. It is just intended to get the pc extroverted and in PT.
AUDITOR REQUIREMENTS
In order to deliver the Scientology Drug Rundown, any auditor must:
1. Be at least a Provisional Class III Auditor.
2. Have high crimed this issue and drilled the procedure until he can attest he knows it cold.
3. Have high crimed HCOB 19 Dec. 80R, REHAB TECH, and thoroughly drilled the rehab procedures until expert.
(Note: The rundown can also be delivered by an unclassed auditor on a properly supervised co-audit.)
PRECLEAR PREREQUISITES
The Scientology Drug Rundown is for cases who have gone Clear before having completed a New Era Dianetics Drug Rundown. I discovered in 1978 that we had been far more successful in making Clears than anybody had guessed. A number of these Clears had attained the state prior to getting their drugs run out using Dianetics. Also, some went Clear while on the Drug Rundown itself and were left with charge connected with drugs. So the prerequisites for someone receiving the Scientology Drug Rundown are:
1. Is Dianetic Clear (but NOT in the Non-Interference Zone. See HCOB 23 Dec. 71RB, C/S Series 73, THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA CLARIFIED AND RE-ENFORCED).
2. Has not had a full NED Drug Rundown or was on it when Dianetic Clear was attained and so has charged drugs unrun.
3. Has done a successful Purification Rundown.
4. Has done the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course or a full, thorough program of Objectives.
Note: A case not yet Clear may receive the rundown after points 3 and 4.
It will be pointless to run someone on the Scientology Drug Rundown without points 3 and 4 above well in, so don’t do it.
PROCEDURE
Preliminary Steps:
1. Fly the pc’s ruds so he is F/N, VGIs before starting the rundown.
1A. CONDITIONAL STEP: If the pc has never had an Original Assessment Sheet done on him, do one per HCOB 24 June 78RA, NED Series SRA, ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET. Even though the pc is not going to be run on Dianetics, the Original Assessment Sheet must be done if he has never before had one in his auditing. This will provide the C/S, the D of P and the auditor with essential data on the case.
2. From the pc, get a list of each drug, medicine or alcohol he has taken this lifetime if one doesn’t already exist in the folder. Note the read the item gives at the exact end of the pc’s statement of the item. If a drug list already exists, it may be used and a new list need not be made.
3. Clear the terms “release” and “rehab” and the rehab procedure with the pc if these have not been cleared previously. Use HCOB 19 Dec. 80R, REHAB TECH. Make sure the pc has a good grasp of what rehabs are and how they fit into the Scientology Drug Rundown procedure as explained on page 2 of this issue.
A. Drug Rehabs:
1. R-factor the pc that you will now begin rehabbing releases on drugs.
2. Clear the question “Did you go release on _____?” and let the pc know you will fill in the blank with an item (drug) off the drug list and that this is the question you will use to check for releases on each drug.
3. Take the first drug off the list and check the question with the pc, noting any instant read.
Note: Each drug will be checked for release whether or not the drug read when listed. You are looking for periods when the pc felt released while he was under the influence of the drug and this is not dependent on whether the drug is reading in PT. To repeat, each drug on the list is checked for release, reading or not.
4. If the question reads and the pc was released, find out how many times he was released and it will F/N. Don’t go at this too strenuously. It is a light action and the pc may F/N just on spotting that he had felt released on the drug.
5. If no read on the question but the pc says he did go release, check Suppressed or Invalidated. (The Assert or Protest buttons may be checked if the pc is assertive or protesty about having gone release.)
6. If the question reads but the pc says he didn’t go release, the read is False or Protest. Find which and handle.
7. If no read on the question, check Suppress and Invalidate. If still no read, leave off trying to rehab it. Instead, do Step 8.
8. If the pc didn’t go release on the drug (or if there is an ARC break F/N while rehabbing it), put in ruds on the drug by checking and handling the following questions:
a. “IN TAKING (drug) WAS THERE AN ARC BREAK?”
ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.
b. “IN TAKING (drug) WAS THERE A PROBLEM?”
Itsa E/S to F/N.
c. “IN TAKING (drug) WAS A WITHHOLD MISSED?”
Pull it E/S to F/N.
An out-rud can obscure a release, so after the ruds have been put in on the drug, recheck for a release. If still no release, that’s it. Drop it and go on to the next drug.
9. Occasionally a rehab won’t go to F/N even though the pc did release on the drug. If this occurs put in ruds on the period before the release using the following questions:
a. “BEFORE THE RELEASE ON (drug) WAS THERE AN ARC BREAK?”
b. “BEFORE THE RELEASE ON (drug) WAS THERE A PROBLEM?”
c. “BEFORE THE RELEASE ON (drug) WAS A WITHHOLD MISSED?”
With the ruds in, continue the rehab.
10. If you get a release that just won’t rehab, clear the following question and ask the pc, “DID YOU TAKE ANYTHING EARLIER ON THE TRACK THAT WAS SIMILAR TO (drug)?” (When you find and rehab that earlier drug, the one which wouldn’t rehab also releases, so there is no need to go back to the one which was hung up.)
11. Repeat Steps 3-10 as necessary for each remaining drug, medicine or alcohol on the drug list. Each item is checked for release whether it is reading or not. Of course, the rehab question itself must read before you proceed with any rehab steps.
12. When all the drugs on the list have been checked you can ask the pc if there are any other drugs he would like to add to the drug list. If so, add them, being sure to catch any read. Then, on any added items do Steps 3-10 until all items on the list have been handled.
These steps comprise the first part of the Scientology Drug Rundown.
B. Recalls on Drugs:
On this part of the rundown each reading drug on the drug list is run out using Recall Processing. PC INTEREST IS NOT CHECKED. If the item reads, run it.
O. CONDITIONAL: If the drug list used is one which already existed in the folder before the person went Clear the list would have to be reassessed at this point to see which items were reading in PT. It is possible that charge on some of the items would have keyed out or blown when the person went Clear and if the list were not assessed in PT, items might get run which do not have available charge. (Items added by the pc on Step 12 of the Drug Rehabs section of this RD are validly reading if they read when the pc listed them.)
1. Taking the item with the largest read (sF or better), run it in the commands below. (Clear a flow before running it for the first time.)
Note: A flow must read before it is run as covered in HCOB 3 Dec. 78, UNREADING FLOWS.
Flow 1: “RECALL A TIME YOU TOOK/HAD (drug being run).”
Run it repetitively to F/N, Cog, VGIs.
Flow 2: “RECALL A TIME YOU GAVE ANOTHER (drug being run).”
To F/N, Cog, VGIs.
Flow 3: “RECALL A TIME ANOTHER GAVE ANOTHER OR OTHERS (drug being run).”
To F/N, Cog, VGIs.
Flow 0: “RECALL A TIME YOU GAVE YOURSELF (drug being run).”
To F/N, Cog, VGIs. (Quad pcs only.)
Note: Ensure the pc tells you what he has recalled. A pc may just recall the time and not tell you about it unless you ask him “What was it?” or some such question.
2. When the first reading drug selected has been run to EP on each reading flow take the next best reading drug off the list and run it as covered in Step 1.
3. Repeat Steps 1 and 2 until all reading drugs have been run.
4. Reassess the items on the list which didn’t read on first assessment. Run any now-reading items as per Step 1. Use the Suppress and Invalidate buttons as needed.
5. Repeat the reassessment of any unreading items (using Suppress and Invalidate as needed) until all reading items have been run.
When all reading items have been run, the Recalls on Drugs portion of the rundown is completed.
C. Objective Process:
The final step of the Scientology Drug Rundown consists of running the pc on an Objective Process. The purpose of this is to extrovert his attention after it has been introverted while doing the subjective parts of the rundown. Almost any Objective Process would do, so long as it had not been run before.
Which Objective Process gets run is not so important as the point that something must be run to extrovert the person’s attention. It can be a process as simple as Reach and Withdraw on the environment per HCOB 10 Apr. 81R, REACH AND WITHDRAW. Whichever process is run it would be taken to a point where the pc was cheerful, fully extroverted and in present time.
This completes the rundown.
ABILITY GAINED AND EP
The Ability Gained of the rundown is “Released from harmful effects of drugs, medicine or alcohol.” Doing each step of the Scientology Drug Rundown fully will achieve that EP on any pc who is fully set up for it in the first place.
There are gains to be had from this rundown which might not be expected from such a seemingly simple set of actions. Run a pc or two on the rundown and you’ll see what I’m talking about.
One thing which you may observe on pcs is a point of sudden resurgence during or near the end of the rundown. At this point, the pc comes up to PT and out of drug masses or ceases to be introverted and becomes extroverted (both of the above are the same thing—the phenomenon of the person having been parked down the track due to drugs and then snapping up to PT). This is significant and shows that the EP of the rundown has been obtained.
Depending on the pc, this resurgence may happen suddenly, accompanied by a big cog, dial-wide F/N and VVGIs, in which case, one would be safe to end off the Recall steps of the rundown. Any charge on drugs will have moved off. So you can run an Objective Process next and that would complete the rundown.
On other cases, the resurgence may not be as sudden, i.e., it will happen gradually with the pc rolling happily along, having his wins and cogs and feeling better session after session. He may remark that he is feeling more in PT and this is to be expected. In these cases, one continues handling reading drugs and reassesses the drug list as needed to ensure that all charged drugs and flows are run to EP. By the time this is done and the pc has run the ending Objective Process, if the auditing has been standard he will have come up to PT and out of drug masses just the same as the pc who achieves this as a big win and sudden resurgence. The end product is the same in both cases.
It is very important, however, that the Recall step is not ended simply because the pc has a good win which is mistaken for the EP. To do this could result in the auditor and C/S being accused of taking part in a very disreputable activity—quickying. And nobody wants to be hung with that kind of reputation!
If there is any question as to whether a big win the pc has had represents the resurgence being looked for, continue the rundown after the pc has had his win. You will be safe in doing this. No one thus far has shown evidence of overrun when continuing the rundown past the point of a big win (after the persistent F/N dies down, of course) and in completing the steps of the rundown. (As a note, that possibility does exist though, if the pc’s big win also happened to be the EP. Should this occur and the pc begin to manifest overrun of the rundown—and not simply overrun of a process or drug—then the EP is rehabbed and the rundown completed with the Objective Process.)
If no point of resurgence occurs in the pc, then something is amiss with the auditing the pc has received. An FES would have to be done to locate the errors and they would have to be repaired. The FES may have to only go back a few sessions or the whole case may need to be FESed.
TIPS
Pcs often have big wins on these Recall Flows, followed by persistent F/Ns. When this happens it is wise to let the pc have his win so you don’t miss a reading drug or flow because of the F/N.
Occasionally the pc may run a flow that runs much longer and deeper than other flows.
Don’t be surprised if drug manifestations turn on while running certain drugs—they blow when the process is taken to EP. And don’t mistake the euphoria of a drug incident in restim for the EP of a flow.
It is not unusual for a pc to go through a revivification on this rundown. This isn’t anything to puzzle over though, as it is simply something which may occur on this rundown. If it does occur, don’t stop the process. Carry on and the pc will come through it.
SPECIAL NOTE
Occasionally, a pc goes Clear in the middle of the NED Drug Rundown. In such a case, the correct thing to do is a verification and rehabilitation of the attainment of the state to full EP and resurgence, per the Clear Certainty Rundown. After this is done, the Scientology Drug RD Recall steps are done on the remaining unhandled drugs which are now reading. You would have to reassess the unhandled portion of the drug list before doing any Recalls to ascertain which drugs would now get run. The drug rehabs would not need to be done on these cases.
PREVIOUSLY RUN DRUGS
Once in a while a C/S will run across a Dianetic Clear who, despite having had a Drug Rundown still has unhandled charge, incidents and masses in connection with drugs. Possible reasons for this are: drug residues left in the body which prevented auditing gains; lack of a full set of Objectives as contained on the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course thoroughly done each one to EP; or poorly done or quickied auditing on the Drug Rundown itself.
Such a case might be obvious from an FES of the Drug Rundown the person had. Where such things as no Objectives run or “run to EP in 3 minutes,” drug items unrun because the pc had “no interest” in the item (which usually means the person was no longer interested in taking the drug), reading items left unrun or items not run to full EP, are obvious from folder study, the C/S may find that the case would need the Scientology Drug Rundown. This would particularly apply to Dianetic Clears who still manifested heavily the effects of drugs whether in auditing, on post or in life. (Ref: HCOB 8 Jan. 69, DRUGS AND “INSANITY” —NONCOMPLIANCE AND ALTER-IS applies in particular, but all the 1969 HCOBs on drugs as well as later issues would also apply and help the C/S decide whether the case is one which would benefit from the Scientology Drug Rundown.)
The point here is that a case that has gone Dianetic Clear and had a poorly done Drug Rundown could possibly hang up on auditing on the Expanded Lower Grades because of unhandled charge on drugs.
If this proved to be the case through folder study and other indicators the basic handling would be:
1. Purification Rundown
2. TRs and Objectives Co-audit
3. End of Endless Drug Rundowns Repair List
4. Scientology Drug Rundown.
This battery of actions would handle any lingering unhandled drug charge or manifestations on a Dianetic Clear due to botched earlier drug handling.
CAUTIONS AND REMEDIES
Never run Recalls on the same drug twice. Never run unreading drugs or flows. To do so may drop the pre-OT into more charge than one can easily get him out of. Should such happen and not resolve by the usual means (rehabbing the overrun, indicating an uncharged drug or flow was taken up and shouldn’t have been or L1C on the session) the auditor can assess an L3RG and indicate any reads to key out the charge. No engram running would be done.
One should take care not to Q-and-A off the rundown into handling some other case manifestation or hidden standard. The purpose of the rundown is to handle drug charge, enabling the pc to make case gain in his subsequent auditing (where other aspects of the case would be handled).
An auditor can mistakenly let the pc itsa on and on if his TR 2 and session control are not in. This cuts down the effectiveness of the rundown. If the auditor doesn’t control this (without ARC breaking the pc however) he can run the pc’s havingness down and plow him in.
One must not audit this rundown (or any other for that matter? over out-ruds. If this has occurred, the action to take is to fly the pc’s ruds checking for “audited over” (“Have you been audited over ____?”) or an L1C on the recent session or sessions.
Should the rundown be messed up it can be repaired with the End of Endless Drug Rundowns Repair List.
SUMMARY
We now have a method for handling drugs on a person with unhandled drugs who, because he has gone Clear, should not be run on engrams, as well as for handling drug charge on persons not yet at the level of New Era Dianetics. It is essential to handle drugs as covered in this issue. Otherwise one is placing the person in jeopardy of wasting his auditing on the Grades as it will have been done over the bypassed charge of unhandled drug incidents.
Once a pre-OT has attained OT III any remaining effects from drugs can be terminatedly handled on the OT Drug Rundown.
Using this simple procedure we can ensure that anyone attains all the gains possible in his Grade Chart auditing, quite in addition to the relief and expansion one experiences when freed from drug influences, as will occur on this new rundown.
We now have the means by which the effects of drugs can be effectively handled for anyone at any position on the Bridge.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 DECEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue I
Auditors REVISED 12 JULY 1988
C/Ses
Execs
Tech/Qual
EXECUTIVE CORRECTION LIST
The Executive Correction List is designed to help locate the individual reasons an executive has for not applying standard administrative tech and policy.
It can be used to handle charge in the area of being an exec or difficulties as an exec. It could also be used to help a failed exec clean up his charge.
The list is assessed Method 3 or Method 5, as directed by the C/S. (Ref: HCOB 28 May 70, CORRECTION LISTS, USE OF; HCOB 20 Dec. 71, C/S Series 72, USE OF CORRECTION LISTS; HCOB 10 June 71 I, C/S Series 44R, PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS)
Under some of the questions there are two separate sets of handling instructions. Where this is the case, the handling given in the first set of parentheses is the one the auditor does directly in the session. The instructions in the second set of parentheses are used by the C/S in programing out the actions to be done to complete the pc’s handling, after all the reading items on the list have been F/Ned.
There is a form attached to this list on which the C/S notes corrective actions to be taken. The C/S fills out the form by carefully reviewing what was found in F/Ning the questions which read and then listing out the steps to be done to correct the situations found. Actions ordered by the C/S can include such things as cramming, retread or retrain of earlier courses, drilling, TIPing and standard ethics handlings including Security Checking. The completed form is routed to the Dir of Correction, who sees that the handlings get done. Any case actions needed to complete the person’s handling would be included as part of his auditing program.
PC’S NAME: DATE:_____________________
AUDITOR:________________________________
1. OUT INT?
(Check to make sure the read on Int is a valid read and not a protest or false read. If it is valid, indicate it. If the pc is not Clear or OT, give him a standard Int RD per Int RD Series 2. If he is Clear or OT and has not had an Int RD, give him the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int RD Series 4RA. If the pc has had an Int RD or End of Endless Int Repair RD, do an Int RD Correction List [HCOB 29 Oct. 71RA]. If Int correction has already been done on the pc, get an FES of the Int RD and its corrections. If you are not qualified to audit or repair Int, turn the pc over to a qualified auditor. When all errors are corrected, the C/S may order the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int RD Series 4RA, as applicable.)
2. OUT-LIST? _________
(L4BRA and handle.)
3. GIVEN A WRONG WHY? _________
(L4BRA and handle.)
4. GIVEN A WRONG WHY FOR EXEC FAILURES? _________
(L4BRA and handle.)
5. CRAMMING GAVE A WRONG WHY? _________
(L4BRA and handle.)
6. WRONG ETHICS CONDITION? _________
(L4BRA and handle.)
7. TOLD YOU WERE PTS AND YOU WEREN’T? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. L4BRA if any trouble.)
8. AS AN EXEC DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK? _________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
9. UPSET WITH A STAFF MEMBER? ANOTHER EXEC?
SENIOR EXEC? _________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N on each reading upset.)
10. AS AN EXEC DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
11. PROBLEMS WITH OTHER STAFF MEMBERS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
12. AS AN EXEC HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? _________
(Pull it, E/S to F/N.)
13. WITHHOLDS FROM STAFF? _________
(Pull them, E/S to F/N.)
14. OVERTS ON STAFF? _________
(Pull them, E/S to F/N.)
15. OVERTS ON YOUR POST? _________
(Pull them, E/S to F/N.)
16. COUNTER INTENTION? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
17. SOME SORT OF OUT-ETHICS? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
18. DISAFFECTED? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
19. HAVE YOU ORIGINATED OR FORWARDED BLACK PR? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
20. OUT-EXCHANGE? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.) (Program for Exchange by Dynamics per HCO PL 4 Apr. 72, ETHICS.)
21. LAZY? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.) (Program for Exec Confessional and/or False Purpose RD, as applicable. )
22. INACTIVE? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.) (Program for Exec Confessional and/or False Purpose RD, as applicable.)
23. IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR POST, DO YOU HAVE AN EVIL PURPOSE OR DESTRUCTIVE INTENTION? _________
(Get what the evil purpose or destructive intention is and handle with steps A-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for False Purpose RD, including Exec and Staff Member Form.)
24. OUT-2D? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
25. OUT-2D WITH PUBLIC? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
26. DO YOU HAVE OPINIONS YOU DON’T DARE SAY? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
27. DOING OTHER THINGS ON POST TIME? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
28. FALSE REPORTED? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
29. FALSIFIED A STAT? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
30. COLLECTED FALSE BONUSES? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
31. COULDN’T GET PAID? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
32. GRANTING SPECIAL FAVORS? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
33. RECEIVING SPECIAL FAVORS? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
34. MOONLIGHTING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
35. PTS TO SOMEONE IN THE ENVIRONMENT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
36. ARE YOU CONNECTED TO SOMEONE HOSTILE TO DIANETICS OR SCIENTOLOGY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
37. PTS STAFF MEMBERS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
38. PAST ETHICS CONDITION MESSED UP? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for handling per HCO PL 19 Dec. 82 II, REPAIRING PAST ETHICS CONDITIONS.)
39. ETHICS CONDITION LEFT INCOMPLETE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for handling per HCO PL 19 Dec. 82 II, REPAIRING PAST ETHICS CONDITIONS, or complete the incomplete formula per HCO PL 3 Aug. 85, COMPLETING CONDITIONS FORMULAS, as applicable.)
40. DON’T KNOW WHAT TO DO? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
41. LOSSES AS AN EXEC? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. L1C as needed.)
42. COULDN’T HELP? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
43. AN EARLIER TIME YOU FAILED TO HELP? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
44. COULDN’T SOLVE IT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
45. SELDOM REFER TO POLICY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
46. UNHATTED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
47. DON’T HAVE A HAT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
48. DON’T STUDY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
49. TROUBLE WITH STUDY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
50. FAILED AS A STUDENT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
51. BLOWN STUDY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
52. OFF COURSE TO HANDLE POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
53. WAS YOUR TRAINING INADEQUATE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
54. RUSHED THROUGH COURSES? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
55. INCOMPLETE COURSES? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
56. FALSE ATTEST? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
57. MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS IN DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY? _________
(Find and clear them, each to F/N. WCCL if necessary.)
58. AN EARLIER SIMILAR SUBJECT WAS MISUNDERSTOOD? _________
(2WC—find what subject and what word in that subject was misunderstood. Clear it to F/N. WCCL if necessary.)
59. SEEKING STATUS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
60. ARE YOU PRETENDING? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
61. DISAGREEMENTS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for Disagreement Check per HCOB 22 Mar. 72RA, DISAGREEMENT CHECK.)
62. EARLIER PRACTICE IN YOUR ROAD? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
63. MISSING DATA? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
64. WITHHOLDING DATA? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for Vital Info RD, False Purpose RD.)
65. HERE FOR ANOTHER PURPOSE? _________
(Pull it, E/S to F/N.)
66. EVALUATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
67. INVALIDATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
68. DISINTERESTED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N, handle any out-ruds.)
69. HAVE YOU COMPROMISED YOUR OWN REALITY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
70. COULDN’T GET YOUR ORDERS COMPLIED WITH? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
71. TROUBLE HANDLING PERSONNEL? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
72. TROUBLE GETTING POLICY FOLLOWED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
73. NEGLECTING A BOGGED AREA? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N, watch for any out-rud and handle.)
74. TROUBLE COMMUNICATING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
75. 2D TROUBLES CAUSING CONFLICT ON POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
76. DIFFICULTY COMPLETING A CYCLE OF ACTION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
77. AFRAID TO GIVE ORDERS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
78. OUT OF COMM? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N, watch for any out-rud and handle.)
79. IS YOUR AREA UNDERMANNED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
80. ARE YOU CONSTANTLY HIT BY BAD NEWS AND DISASTERS ON YOUR LINES? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
81. CONSTANTLY HAVING TO COPE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
82. CONSTANTLY PHASE ONEing YOUR AREA? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
83. COMPULSIVELY BYPASSING OTHERS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Program for compulsive bypasser handling per HCO PL 22 Mar. 85, FULL DANGER CONDITION HANDLING.)
84. OVERLOADED ON POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
85. CONFUSED BY TOO MANY THINGS TO DO? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
86. OVERWHELMED ON POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
87. NO BACK-UP? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
88. FAILED PURPOSE? _________
(Indicate it. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
89. NO HELP FROM YOUR SENIOR? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
90. Q AND A? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
91. AFRAID TO USE ETHICS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
92. ARE YOU AFRAID OF THE PUBLIC? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
93. MISUSE OF ETHICS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N, watch for any out-rud and handle.)
94. ARE YOU PROTECTING YOUR STATUS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
95. USING DURESS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
96. DOING SOMETHING OTHER THAN YOUR HAT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N, watch for any out-rud and handle.)
97. AS AN EXECUTIVE, HAVE YOU DECIDED YOU WON’T MAKE IT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
98. WERE YOU TAKEN OFF POST UNJUSTLY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
99. ARE YOU NOT REALLY ON POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
100. ARE YOU TRYING TO LEAVE POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
101. ARE YOU EXPECTING TO BE REMOVED FROM POST? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
102. SHOULD YOU BE SOMEWHERE ELSE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
103. DON’T YOU LIKE THE STAFF YOU WORK WITH? _________
(Find out which staff he doesn’t like [not L&N]. Pull overts and withholds on each reading person E/S to F/N.) (If needed, program for False Purpose RD.)
104. THIRD PARTYING STAFF? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
105. USING UNUSUAL SOLUTIONS? _________
(Handle as a W/H, E/S to F/N.)
106. POLICY DOESN’T WORK FOR YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
107. TECH DOESN’T WORK ON YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
108. FAILED DEBUGS? _________
(Assess and handle Product Debug Repair List.)
109. DEBUGS DIDN’T WORK? _________
(Assess and handle Product Debug Repair List.)
110. THINGS GOT WORSE AFTER A DEBUG? _________
(Assess and handle Product Debug Repair List.)
111. FELT BAD AFTER CRAMMING? _________
(Assess and handle Cramming Repair List.)
112. FAILED CRAMMING? _________
(Assess and handle Cramming Repair List.)
113. CRAMMING DOESN’T WORK? _________
(Assess and handle Cramming Repair List.)
114. DON’T GET AUDITING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
115. TAKEN OFF AUDITING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
116. ARE THERE STOPS? _________
(Find out what. Clean up any protest E/S to F/N.)
117. ARE YOU ON DRUGS? MEDICINE? ALCOHOL? _________
(2WC to F/N.)
118. ATTENTION FIXED ON SOMETHING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
119. NOT GETTING ENOUGH SLEEP? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Handling of the person’s schedule to be worked out in liaison with his senior.)
120. NOT EATING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
121. ARE YOU PHYSICALLY ILL? _________
(2WC to find what. Note BD item. 2WC to F/N.)
122. RESTIM? _________
(Assess and handle a C/S 53 to F/Ning.)
123. TROUBLE WITH YOUR OWN CASE? _________
(Assess and handle C/S 53 to F/Ning.)
124. IS THERE NOTHING WRONG? _________
(Get pc to tell you about it briefly. If correct, then indicate to F/N. Go E/S and indicate it if no F/N at first.)
125. SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? _________
(2WC what and, if no joy, GF M5 and handle.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HCOB 23.12.80R I
Rev. 12.7.88
Attachment
EXECUTIVE CORRECTION LIST
ADDITIONAL ACTIONS REQUIRED
TO: DIR CORRECTION DATE:_______________
FROM: CASE SUPERVISOR ____________________________________________
RE: PC ______________________________________________________________
The following hatting and Qual correction actions were found to be needed on this executive in assessing and handling an Executive Correction List. These actions are in addition to auditing actions found needed in handling the list, which are being included in the pc’s programing.
PART A: The following additional training actions are to be done on this exec as part of a standard TIP.
1. Done _________
2. Done _________
3. Done _________
4. Done _________
5. Done _________
PART B: The following corrective actions are also to be done on this exec.
1. Done _________
2. Done _________
3. Done _________
4. Done _________
5. Done _________
___________________________
C/S
Handlings
completed:___________________________
Dir Correction
___________________________
Date
ROUTE THIS FORM TO THE PERSON’S PC FOLDER WHEN COMPLETED.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 DECEMBER 1980R
Remimeo Issue II
C/Ses REVISED 12 JULY 1988
Auditors
Tech/Qual
EXECUTIVE CORRECTION LIST
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79RA I Word Clearing Series 64RA
Rev. 30.7.83 THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 23 Dec. 80R I, EXECUTIVE CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the list is actually assessed on him, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words in session on an org pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE EXECUTIVE CORRECTION LIST
A, action, afraid, after, alcohol, an, and, another, ARC break, are, area, as, at, attention, attest, auditing.
Back-up, bad, be, been, black PR, blown, bogged, bonuses, by, bypassing.
Case, causing, collected, comm, communicating, completing, complied, compromised, compulsively, condition, conflict, confused, connected, connection, constantly, cope, couldn’t, counter-intention, course, courses, cramming, cycle.
Dare, data, debug, debugs, decided, destructive, Dianetics, didn’t, difficulty, disaffected, disagreements, disasters, disinterested, do, doesn’t, doing, don’t, doubt, drugs, duress.
Earlier, eating, else, enough, environment, ethics, evaluation, evil, exec, executive, expecting.
Failed, failures, false, false reported, falsified, favors, felt, fixed, followed, for, forwarded, from.
Gave, get, getting, give, given, got, granting.
Handle, handling, has, hat, have, having, help, here, hit, hostile, hung up.
Ill, in, inactive, inadequate, incomplete, intention, invalidation, is, it.
Know.
Lazy, leave, left, like, lines, losses.
Make, many, medicine, member, members, messed up, missed, missing, misunderstood, misuse, moonlighting.
Neglecting. news, no, not, nothing.
Of, off, on, opinions, or, orders, originated, other, others, out, out-ethics, outexchange, out-Int, out-list, out-2D, overloaded, overts, overwhelmed, own.
Paid, past, personnel, Phase One-ing, physically, policy, post, practice, pretending, problem, problems, protecting, PTS, public, purpose.
Q and A.
Reality, really, receiving, refer, removed, reported, restim, road, rushed.
Say, Scientology, seeking, seldom, senior, should, similar, sleep, solutions, solve, some, someone, something, somewhere, sort, special, staff, stat, status, stops, student, study, subject.
Taken, tech, than, the, there, things, third partying, through, time, to, told, too, training, trouble, troubles, trying, 2D.
Undermanned, unhatted, unjustly, unusual, upset, use, using.
Was, were, weren’t, what, why, with, withhold, withholding, withholds, won’t, words, work, worse, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 DECEMBER 1980
Remimeo
LC N/W Estab Flag
Cont LRH Comms
Tech/Qual
HCO
Confessional Form 12R
LRH COMMUNICATOR CONFESSIONAL LIST
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
Anyone doing a Confessional must be on or have done a Confessional course or internship in the handling of Confessionals.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_____________________
ORG: DATE:__________________________
1. HAVE YOU JOINED THE LRH COMM NETWORK UNDER FALSE PRETENSE?? _________
2. DO YOU HAVE ANY INTENTION OF BLOWING FROM THE LRH COMM NETWORK? _________
3. HAVE YOU EVER NOT COMPLETED A PROGRAM YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
4. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO DEBUG A PROGRAM OR TARGET WHEN IT WAS STALLED? _________
5. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO USE AN LRH COMM CORRECTION FORM WHEN YOU KNEW IT WAS NECESSARY? _________
6. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO GET A FLUBBING STAFF MEMBER CORRECTED SO HE COULD COMPLY? _________
7. HAVE YOU EVER JUST DONE EASY TARGETS ON A PROGRAM? _________
8. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO DO “RECEIPT AND DUPLICATION” ON A NEW PROGRAM OR ORDER? _________
9. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO SEE THAT STAFF MEMBERS DID “RECEIPT AND DUPLICATION” ON A NEW PROGRAM OR ORDER? _________
10. HAVE YOU COUNTED COMPLIANCES ON PROGRAMS OR ORDERS THAT YOU HAVE NOT CLAY DEMOED? _________
11. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED IY) ENSURE THAT YOU OR A STAFF MEMBER COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD A PROGRAM OR ORDER? _________
12. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO ENSURE THAT ALL STAFF WHO SHOULD HAVE COPIES OF PROGRAMS ACTUALLY HAVE THEM? _________
13. WAS THERE SOME PROGRAM YOU DIDN’T LIKE, SO DIDN’T PUSH IT? _________
14. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO EXECUTE A PROGRAM OR TARGET YOU KNEW WAS VITAL TO ORG ESTABLISHMENT? _________
15. HAVE YOU EVER HOBBYHORSED A LESSER PRIORITY PROGRAM JUST TO GET YOUR STATS UP? _________
16. HAVE YOU CHANGED THE PROGRAM PRIORITIES? _________
17. HAVE YOU EVER JUST PUSHED A STAT INSTEAD OF GETTING IN A PROGRAM TO HANDLE THE AREA? _________
18. HAVE YOU EVER SENT A COMPLIANCE REPORT WITHOUT CHECKING TO MAKE SURE THE ORDER WAS FULLY DONE? _________
19. HAVE YOU EVER COME TO A CONCLUSION WITHOUT PERSONAL OBSERVATION OF THE AREA OR SCENE? _________
20. HAVE YOU REPORTED COMPLIANCE TO TARGETS AND PROGRAMS WHICH FAILED TO STAY IN, AS THEY WERE NOT FULL, HONEST DONES? _________
21. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED AN ORDER OR TARGET AS DONE YET FAILED TO SEND A COMPLIANCE REPORT? _________
22. HAVE YOU EVER FALSELY REPORTED JUST TO MAKE YOURSELF LOOK GOOD? _________
23. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO IMMEDIATELY AND FULLY REPORT URGENT SITUATIONS IN YOUR ORG OR AREA? _________
24. HAVE YOU EVER NOT REPORTED SOMETHING WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
25. HAVE YOU EVER SENT UP A REPORT SLANTED TO MAKE SOMEONE LOOK BAD? _________
26. HAVE YOU EVER SENT UP A REPORT SLANTED TO MAKE SOMEONE LOOK GOOD? _________
27. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO WRITE A REPORT ON SOMEBODY BECAUSE HE WAS YOUR FRIEND? _________
28. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED ON SOMEONE JUST TO GET EVEN? _________
29. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO REPORT ON SOMEBODY BECAUSE YOU WERE AFRAID OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN? _________
30. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO REPORT CROSS ORDERS OR LOCAL ARBITRARIES? _________
31. HAVE YOU WITHHELD VITAL INFORMATION? _________
32. HAVE YOU EVER GONE AHEAD AND IMPLEMENTED AN ORDER YOU FELT WAS DESTRUCTIVE OR ILLEGAL? _________
33. HAVE YOU EVER ISSUED A DESTRUCTIVE ORDER? _________
34. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO COMPLY WITH A VALID ORDER FROM YOUR SENIORS? _________
35. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO ANSWER A TELEX OR DESPATCH FROM YOUR SENIORS? _________
36. HAVE YOU EVER QUERIED A PROGRAM OR ORDER JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T WANT TO CONFRONT IT? _________
37. HAVE YOU EVER SUSPECTED THAT A STAT WAS FALSE AND FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND REPORT IT? _________
38. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN THAT A STAT WAS FALSE AND FAILED TO HANDLE AND REPORT IT? _________
39. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN THE WHY FOR A-DOWN STAT AND FAILED TO ACT ON IT? _________
40. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED YOUR HATTING, TRAINING OR PROCESSING? _________
41. DO YOU HAVE ANY TECH UNCERTAINTIES OR CONFUSIONS? _________
42. DO YOU HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS ON POST THAT HAVE NOT BEEN CLEARED UP? _________
43. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO COMPLETE A CRAMMING ORDER? _________
44. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN OUT DATA WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO HCOBs OR HCO PLs? _________
45. HAVE YOU EVER TWISTED THE MEANING OF A POLICY LETTER? _________
46. HAVE YOU EVER PRETENDED TO QUOTE HCOBs OR HCO PLs WITHOUT SHOWING THE ACTUAL ISSUE? _________
47. HAVE YOU EVER TOLD ANOTHER WHAT LRH MEANT IN AN HCOB OR HCO PL? _________
48. HAVE YOU EVER PREVENTED TECH OR POLICY FROM BEING KNOWN OR CORRECTLY USED? _________
49. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED LRH EDs, HCOBs OR HCO PLs GO UNDISTRIBUTED TO EVERY STAFF MEMBER IN THE ORG REGULARLY AND ON TIME? _________
50. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN ABOUT AN OFF-POLICY SITUATION AND FAILED TO CORRECT IT? _________
51. HAVE YOU EVER CONTRIBUTED TO AN OFF-POLICY SITUATION? _________
52. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO ENFORCE LRH POLICY YOU KNEW WAS NEEDED? _________
53. HAVE YOU FAILED TO GET IN LRH HCOBs YOU KNEW WERE OUT? _________
54. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO CRAM OR RETREAD A TECH TEKMINAL WHEN YOU KNEW HIS TECH WAS OUT? _________
55. HAVE YOU EVER BACKED OFF FROM TECH AREAS BECAUSE YOU WEREN’T TECH TRAINED? _________
56. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEE THAT THE DUTIES OF A KOT WERE CARRIED OUT? _________
57. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO ENSURE COURSES AND INTERNSHIPS WERE BEING RUN STANDARDLY? _________
58. HAVE YOU EVER LET QUICKIE OR SQUIRREL PROCESSING GO UNHANDLED? _________
59. HAVE YOU EVER GOTTEN INTO CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER NETWORK? _________
60. HAVE YOU EVER WORN ANOTHER HAT COVERTLY? _________
61. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO KEEP YOUR ADMIN UP-TODATE? _________
62. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO APPLY YOUR CORRECT POST CONDITION? _________
63. HAVE YOU FAILED TO KEEP UP-TO-DATE DAILY AND WEEKLY STAT GRAPHS? _________
64. HAVE YOU EVER GUESSED YOUR STAT RATHER THAN CALCULATE IT ACCURATELY? _________
65. HAVE YOU EVER DONE THE SAME TARGETS WEEK AFTER WEEK JUST TO GET A STAT? _________
66. HAVE YOU EVER FALSIFIED A STAT? _________
67. HAVE YOU FVER FAILED TO TAKE A PENALTY STAT FOR A REJECTED COMPLIANCE? _________
68. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEND A STAT CORRECTION UP LINES WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
69. HAVE YOU EVER KEPT YOUR STATS DOWN ON PURPOSE? _________
70. HAVE YOU EVER CAUSED THE DISESTABLISHMENT OF A SECTION, UNIT, DEPARTMENT OR DIVISION? _________
71. HAVE YOU ALLOWED OTHERS TO UNMOCK A WORKING INSTALLATION? _________
72. HAVE YOU ILLEGALLY TRANSFERRED PERSONNEL? _________
73. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED ANOTHER TO TRANSFER A STAFF MEMBER WITHOUT A PROPERLY APPROVED CSW? _________
74. HAVE YOU EVER USED ETHICS HARSHLY OR ILLEGALLY? _________
75. HAVE YOU EVER PERMITTED ANOTHER TO APPLY HARSH OR ILLEGAL ETHICS? _________
76. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO APPLY ETHICS AT ALL? _________
77. HAVE YOU CONTRIBUTED TO AN OUT-ETHICS ACT OR SITUATION? _________
78. HAVE YOU EVER ASSIGNED A LOWER CONDITION TO AN UPSTAT STAFF MEMBER OR AREA? _________
79. HAVE YOU EVER BACKED OFF FROM ASSIGNING AN ETHICS CONDITION TO A STAFF MEMBER? _________
80. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN LATE OR ABSENT FROM POST WITHOUT YOUR SENIOR’S OKAY? _________
81. HAVE YOU EVER BRUSHED OFF AN INVESTIGATION AND NOT PULLED ALL THE STRINGS? _________
82. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO USE PERSONAL CONTACT WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
83. HAVE YOU EVER Q-AND-Aed WITH GETTING A TARGET OR PROGRAM DONE? _________
84. HAVE YOU EVER HAD BACKOFF FROM AN EXEC OR STAFF MEMBER? _________
85. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO CORRECT AN EXEC OR STAFF MEMBER WHOSE OMISSIONS OR COMMISSIONS ENDANGERED THE ORG, ITS STATS OR ITS STAFF? _________
86. HAVE YOU EVER NATTERED ABOUT A STAFF MEMBER OR EXEC? _________
87. HAVE YOU FAILED TO SEE THAT THE ORG WAS WELL ESTABLISHED? _________
88. HAVE YOU FAILED TO SEE THAT HCO WAS WELL ESTABLISHED? _________
89. HAVE YOU ALLOWED EXEC POSTS TO GO UNFILLED OR BE IMPROPERLY FILLED? _________
90. HAVE YOU FAILED TO SEE THAT HCO IS FUNCTIONING AND IS EFFECTIVE? _________
91. HAVE YOU ALLOWED STAFF BLOWS TO GO UNHANDLED? _________
92. HAVE YOU EVER JUST PUSHED QSH? _________
93. HAVE YOU EVER MISUSED YOUR AUTHORITY? _________
94. HAVE YOU EVER APPROVED PROMO THAT WAS OF POOR QUALITY OR OFF-POLICY? _________
95. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO CHECK THE QUALITY OF PROMO BEING PRINTED? _________
96. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED PROMO TO BE PRINTED WITHOUT ISSUE AUTHORITY? _________
97. HAVE YOU EVER MISUSED YOUR POSITION AS ISSUE AUTHORITY? _________
98. HAVE YOU EVER GRANTED ISSUE AUTHORITY IN EXCHANGE FOR SOME SPECIAL FAVOR? _________
99. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED YOUR ISSUE AUTHORITY HAT? _________
100. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN SOMETHING ISSUE AUTHORITY WITHOUT REALLY STUDYING IT? _________
101. HAVE YOU FAILED TO SET UP A PROPER OFFICE FOR LRH? _________
102. HAVE YOU EVER ALLOWED LRH’S OFFICE TO BE DIMANTLED? _________
103. HAVE YOU EVER PERMITTED LRH’S OFFICE TO BE MISUSED? _________
104. HAVE YOU FAILED TO PUT STAFF OR PUBLIC IN COMM WITH RON? _________
105. HAVE YOU STALEDATED SO #1 LETTERS? _________
106. HAVE YOU STALEDATED OR DELAYED ANY LRH TRAFFIC? _________
107. HAVE YOU EVER SENT DEV-T TO LRH? _________
108. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO UPHOLD LRH’S IMAGE? _________
109. HAVE YOU EVER THIRD-PARTIED OR BELITTLED LRH TO ORG STAFF OR PUBLIC? _________
110. HAVE YOU EVER SHOWN UP FOR POST SLOPPILY DRESSED OR BADLY GROOMED? _________
111. HAVE YOU EVER MISREPRESENTED LRH? _________
112. HAVE YOU EVER LIED ABOUT LRH OR HIS FAMILY? _________
113. HAVE YOU EVER DONE ANYTHING WHILE BEING AN LRH COMM WHICH YOU’D BE ASHAMED TO REPORT? _________
114. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU WOULDN’T WANT YOUR SENIORS TO KNOW ABOUT? _________
115. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU WOULDN’T WANT LRH TO KNOW ABOUT? _________
116. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALF- TRUTH? _________
117. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? _________
118. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? _________
119. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL?
Give the pc the Proclamation of Forgiveness:
BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME, ANY OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS YOU HAVE FULLY AND TRUTHFULLY TOLD ME ARE FORGIVEN BY SCIENTOLOGISTS.
On any adverse reaction to the Proclamation of Forgiveness, get the rest of the withhold or repair the withhold session. (Ref: HCO PL 10 Nov. 78RA I, PROCLAMATION: POWER TO FORGIVE ADDITION)
(Note: If this is being done as an HCO Confessional, the Pr-oclamation of Forgiveness is omitted.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 DECEMBER 1980
Remimeo
FFR
Cont FRs
Tech/Qual
Confessional Form 11R
FLAG REP CONFESSIONAL LIST
Ref:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
Anyone doing a Confessional must be on or have done a Confessional course or internship.
The procedure for doing a Confessional is contained in HCOB 30 Nov. 78, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE.
When applying Confessional tech correctly, you are helping the individual to face up to his responsibilities in his group and the society and putting him back into communication with his fellow man, his family and the world at large.
AUDITOR: PRECLEAR:_____________________
ORG: DATE:__________________________
1. HAVE YOU JOINED THE FLAG REP NETWORK UNDER FALSE PRETENSES? _________
2. DO YOU HAVE ANY INTENTION OF BLOWING FROM THE FR NETWORK? _________
3. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO COMPLETE A PROGRAM THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
4. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO DEBUG A PROGRAM OR TARGET WHEN IT WAS STALLED? _________
5. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO GET A FLUBBING STAFF MEMBER CORRECTED SO HE COULD COMPLY? _________
6. HAVE YOU EVER DONE JUST THE EASY TARGETS ON A PROGRAM? _________
7. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO DO “RECEIPT AND DUPLICATION” ON A NEW PROGRAM? _________
8. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO SEE THAT STAFF MEMBERS DO “RECEIPT AND DUPLICATION” ON A NEW PROGRAM? _________
9. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEE THAT YOU OR A STAFF MEMBER COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD A PROGRAM? _________
10. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO ENSURE THAT ALL STAFF WHO SHOULD, HAVE COPIES OF THEIR PROGRAMS? _________
11. WAS THERE SOME PROGRAM YOU DIDN’T LIKE, SO YOU DIDN’T PUSH IT? _________
12. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO EXECUTE A PROGRAM OR TARGET THAT YOU KNEW WAS VITAL TO ORG EXPANSION? _________
13. HAVE YOU EVER PUSHED A TARGET OR PROGRAM WHICH WAS NOT COORDINATED WITH ACTIONS OTHER EXECS WERE PUSHING IN THE SAME AREA? _________
14. HAVE YOU EVER HOBBYHORSED A LESSER-PRIORITY PROGRAM JUST TO GET YOUR STATS UP? _________
15. HAVE YOU CHANGED PROGRAM PRIORITIES AS SET FROM FLAG? _________
16. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED COMPLIANCE BASED ON A STAFF MEMBER’S ATTEST WITHOUT FULL PERSONAL INSPECTION? _________
17. HAVE YOU REPORTED COMPLIANCE TO TARGETS AND PROGRAMS WHICH FAILED TO STAY IN, AS THEY WERE NOT FULL, HONEST DONES? _________
18. HAVE YOU EVER SENT A COMPLIANCE REPORT WITHOUT CHECKING TO MAKE SURE THE ORDER WAS FULLY DONE? _________
19. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED AN ORDER OR TARGET AS DONE YET FAILED TO SEND A COMPLIANCE REPORT? _________
20. HAVE YOU EVER LISTENED TO OTHERS FOR DATA RATHER THAN LOOKED YOURSELF? _________
21. HAVE YOU EVER FALSELY REPORTED JUST TO MAKE YOURSELF LOOK GOOD? _________
22. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO IMMEDIATELY AND FULLY REPORT URGENT SITUATIONS IN YOUR ORG OR AREA? _________
23. HAVE YOU EVER NOT REPORTED SOMETHING WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
24. HAVE YOU EVER WITHHELD VITAL INFORMATION? _________
25. HAVE YOU EVER SENT UP A REPORT SLANTED TO MAKE SOMEONE LOOK BAD? _________
26. HAVE YOU EVER SENT UP A REPORT SLANTED TO MAKE SOMEONE LOOK GOOD? _________
27. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO REPORT ON SOMEBODY BECAUSE HE WAS YOUR FRIEND? _________
28. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO REPORT SOMETHING BECAUSE YOU WERE AFRAID OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN? _________
29. HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED ON A STAFF MEMBER JUST TO GET EVEN? _________
30. HAVE YOU EVER SENT UP A VAGUE OR GENERAL REPORT? _________
31. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO REPORT ON CROSS ORDERS OR LOCAL ARBITRARIES? _________
32. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO ANSWER A TELEX OR DESPATCH FROM FLAG OR ONE OF YOUR SENIORS? _________
33. HAVE YOU EVER GONE AHEAD AND EXECUTED AN ORDER YOU FELT WAS DESTRUCTIVE OR ILLEGAL? _________
34. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN ILLEGAL ORDERS? _________
35. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO COMPLY WITH A VALID ORDER FROM FLAG OR FROM YOUR SENIORS? _________
36. HAVE YOU EVER QUERIED A PROGRAM OR ORDER JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T WANT TO CONFRONT IT? _________
37. HAVE YOU EVER SUSPECTED THAT A STAT WAS FALSE AND FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND REPORT IT? _________
38. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN A STAT WAS FALSE AND FAILED TO HANDLE AND REPORT IT? _________
39. HAVE YOU EVER JUST PUSHED A STAT? _________
40. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN THE WHY FOR A DOWN STAT AND FAILED TO ACT ON IT? _________
41. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO KEEP YOUR LOG SCRUPULOUSLY UP-TO-DATE? _________
42. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO APPLY YOUR CORRECT POST CONDITION? _________
43. HAVE YOU FAILED TO KEEP UP-TO-DATE DAILY AND WEEKLY STAT GRAPHS? _________
44. HAVE YOU EVER GUESSED YOUR STAT RATHER THAN CALCULATE IT ACCURATELY? _________
45. HAVE YOU EVER WRITTEN A LOT OF SMALL REPORTS JUST TO GET A STATISTIC? _________
46. HAVE YOU EVER DONE THE SAME TARGETS WEEK AFTER WEEK JUST TO GET A STATISTIC? _________
47. HAVE YOU EVER FALSIFIED A STAT? _________
48. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO TAKE A PENALTY STAT FOR A REJECTED COMPLIANCE? _________
49. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO SEND A STAT CORRECTION UP LINES WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
50. HAVE YOU EVER KEPT YOUR STATS DOWN ON PURPOSE? _________
51. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED YOUR HATTING, TRAINING OR PROCESSING? _________
52. DO YOU HAVE MISUNDERSTOODS ON POST THAT HAVE NOT BEEN CLEARED UP? _________
53. HAVE YOU NEGLECTED TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THE BULLETINS ON HOW TO COUNT PAID COMPS? _________
54. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO COMPLETE A CRAMMING ORDER? _________
55. HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN OUT DATA WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO HCOBs OR HCO PLs? _________
56. HAVE YOU EVER PRETENDED TO QUOTE HCOBs OR HCO PLs WITHOUT SHOWING THE ACTUAL ISSUE? _________
57. HAVE YOU EVER TOLD ANOTHER WHAT LRH MEANS IN AN HCOB OR PL? _________
58. HAVE YOU EVER GOTTEN INTO CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER NETWORK? _________
59. HAVE YOU WORN ANOTHER HAT COVERTLY? _________
60. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN LATE OR ABSENT FROM POST WITHOUT YOUR SENIOR’S OKAY? _________
61. HAVE YOU EVER ASKED STAFF MEMBERS FOR DATA RATHER THAN GOING TO THE ACTUAL RECORDS AND COLLECTING AND VERIFYING THE DATA PERSONALLY? _________
62. HAVE YOU EVER FAILED TO BRIEF STAFF OR EXECS ON FLAG PROGRAMS OR INTENTIONS? _________
63. HAVE YOU SPENT TOO MUCH TIME AT YOUR DESK INSTEAD OF BEING OUT IN THE ORG INSPECTING OR GETTING COMPLIANCE? _________
64. HAVE YOU EVER HOBBYHORSED ONLY CERTAIN AREAS OF AN ORG? _________
65. HAVE YOU EVER BRUSHED OFF AN INVESTIGATION AND NOT PULLED ALL THE STRINGS THOROUGHLY? _________
66. HAVE YOU EVER Q-AND-Aed WITH GETTING A TARGET DONE? _________
67. HAVE YOU EVER NEGLECTED TO USE PERSONAL CONTACT WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE? _________
68. HAVE YOU EVER BACKED OFF FROM AN EXEC OR STAFF MEMBER? _________
69. HAVE YOU EVER BACKED OFF FROM HANDLING A STAFF MEMBER OR EXEC WHO WAS NATTERING ABOUT FLAG, FOLO OR ANY SENIOR MANAGEMENT TERMINAL? _________
70. HAVE YOU EVER BACKED OFF FROM ASSIGNING AN ETHICS CONDITION TO A STAFF MEMBER OR AN EXEC? _________
71. HAVE YOU EVER NATTERED ABOUT A STAFF MEMBER OR EXEC? _________
72. HAVE YOU EVER THIRD-PARTIED OR BELITTLED YOUR SENIOR OR SENIOR MANAGEMENT TERMINALS TO ORG STAFF? _________
73. HAVE YOU EVER AGREED WITH ANOTHER’S FALSE REPORTS OR ENTHETA CONCERNING FLAG? _________
74. HAVE YOU EVER DONE ANYTHING TO HARM FLAG REPUTE? _________
75. HAVE YOU EVER SHOWN UP FOR POST SLOPPILY DRESSED OR BADLY GROOMED? _________
76. HAVE YOU EVER DONE ANYTHING WHILE A FLAG REP WHICH YOU’D BE ASHAMED TO REPORT? _________
77. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALF-TRUTH? _________
78. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? _________
79. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS A WITHHOLD BEEN MISSED? _________
80. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD ALL? _________
Give the pc the Proclamation of Forgiveness:
BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME, ANY OVERTS AND WITHHOLDS YOU HAVE FULLY AND TRUTHFULLY TOLD ME ARE FORGIVEN BY SCIENTOLOGISTS.
On any adverse reaction to the Proclamation of Forgiveness, get the rest of the withhold or repair the withhold session. (Ref: HCOB 10 Nov. 78R-1, PROCLAMATION: POWER TO FORGIVE ADDITION)
Note: If this is being done as an HCO Confessional, the Proclamation of Forgiveness is omitted.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
1981
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JANUARY 1981RA
Remimeo Issue I
FESers REVISED 9 APRIL 1991
C/Ses
Auditor Admin Series 24RB
FES CHECKLISTS AND SUMMARY
Ref:
HCOB 24 Jan. 77 TECH CORRECTION ROUNDUP
In order to program a pc for optimum progress up the Grade Chart, a Case Supervisor must have an accurate picture of the full state of case of any pc. The C/S must know of any errors on such things as Int, L&N, drug handling, missed levels, etc., and thus relies on the FESer to provide him with a clear, summarized view of a case.
There are several FES checklists which exist for use by C/Ses to ensure full setups have been done for the major levels. These checklists are filled out by FESers and used by the C/S in programing the case.
FES checklists for starting or continuing New Era Dianetics, Expanded Grades and the False Purpose Rundown are attached to this HCOB. Copies of this HCOB for Flag have an additional FES checklist attached for starting or continuing L10, 11 or 12. These are “Flag Only” rundowns.
The appropriate FES checklist is filled out before starting the major action. Each requisite is checked off on the list to ensure they have all been met. The completed checklist is then attached to the inside left cover of the pc folder.
These checklists, properly used, will prevent pcs from being audited on skipped gradients and will ensure pcs are being fully set up for their next level.
FES SUMMARY
In addition to these checklists, an FES Summary form is also attached to this HCOB.
This is an additional tool for C/S use.
The purpose of the FES Summary is to provide the C/S with a list of key items he needs to know to properly program a case.
The FES Summary is filled out by the FESer and it is stapled to the top of the completed FES. Whenever a new FES is done or updated, the summary is also redone or updated.
Items on the summary which are important to handle and should be brought to the attention of the C/S are marked or circled in red. The dates when actions were completed or repaired would be filled in on the summary form as well. The C/S can then easily refer to the FES or Folder Summary to get the exact details as needed.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HCOB 29.1.81RA I
Rev. 9.4.91
ATTACHMENT 1
FES SUMMARY
(Staple to top of completed FES.)
PC NAME DATE _______________
TOTAL NUMBER OF FOLDERS?________________________________________
ANY FOLDERS MISSING?
CURRENT CASE LEVEL?
SECURITY DATA:
PSYCHIATRIC OR INSTITUTIONAL HISTORY?
EVIDENCE OF ELECTRIC SHOCK, INSULIN OR ANY OTHER SORT OF SHOCK THERAPY?
BRAIN SURGERY OF ANY KIND?
TERMINALLY ILL?
CRIMINAL HISTORY?
ANY INDICATIONS PERSON MIGHT BE A PLANT?
SUICIDE ATTEMPTS, SUICIDE THREATS OR EVIDENCE OF PC HAVING SERIOUSLY CONTEMPLATED SUICIDE?
EVIDENCE THAT PERSON IS PTS TYPE III (Ref: HCOB 24 Nov. 65, SEARCH AND DISCOVERY) OR IS MENTALLY RETARDED OR IS A LUNATIC (Ref: HCO PL 30 Nov. 71, BLIND REGISTRATION)?
IS PC MEMBER OR EX-MEMBER OF OR IN THE FAMILY OF SOMEONE IN THE MEDIA, POLICE SPY ORGANIZATIONS, GOVERNMENT SPY ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE FBI OR ANY OTHER FEDERAL OR NATIONAL AGENCY IN ANY COUNTRY WHETHER ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT BY HCO OR NOT?
UNDER HCO INVESTIGATION OR HANDLING?
PAST OR PRESENT CONNECTIONS TO A SUPPRESSIVE PERSON OR GROUP?
IS THIS PC AN ILLEGAL PC?
(Ref: HCOBs and HCO PLs regarding illegal pcs)
PTS DATA
ANY EVIDENCE OF A PTS SITUATION?
WHAT TYPE?
PHYSICALLY ILL OR INJURED?
ANY ROLLER COASTER OR LOSS OF GAINS?
WAS A PTS C/S-1 EVER DONE? WHEN?
HAS THE PC DONE THE PTS/SP COURSE? WHEN?
PTS INTERVIEWS OK?
S&Ds OK?
ANY SIGN OF WRONG PTS ITEMS?
WAS A PTS RD DONE? WHEN?
IF SO, WAS IT SUCCESSFUL?
WAS A SUPPRESSED PERSON RD DONE? WHEN?
IF SO, WAS IT SUCCESSFUL?
IS THE PTS SIT FULLY HANDLED?
PRETENDED PTS? WHAT INDICATORS?
FALSE PTS? WHAT INDICATORS?
ETHICS DATA
DOES PC HAVE A RECURRING OUT-ETHICS SITUATION?
DRUGS
(Note: This is filled out fully regardless of case level of pc.)
HAS PC TAKEN DRUGS? (HALLUCINOGENIC, STREET OR MEDICAL)
WHICH?
HAS PC AN ALCOHOL HISTORY?
DOES PC HAVE A HEAVY DRUG OR ALCOHOL HISTORY?
HAS PC SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED THE PURIF? WHEN?
OBJECTIVES? WHAT?
WHEN?
OBJECTIVE TABLE DONE AND ATTACHED?
SCN DRD WAS RUN TO FULL EP? WHEN?
ANY DRUG OR ALCOHOL REVERSION? WHEN?
DETAILS
INT DATA
ANY SIGNS OF OUT INT?
INT RD DONE? WHEN?
CORRECTED? WHEN?
END OF ENDLESS INT RD?
INT TABLE DONE? INT FES DONE AND ATTACHED?
LIST DATA
ANY SIGNS OF OUT-LISTS? WRONG WHYS?
GIVE DETAILS:
2WCs THAT ACT LIKE A LIST?
HAVE LISTS BEEN CULLED, VERIFIED AND CORRECTED?
WHEN?
GRADES
HAS PC HAD A COMPLETE SCN C/S-1?
DOES PC UNDERSTAND WHAT AUDITING IS ALL ABOUT?
LIFE REPAIR DONE IF NEEDED? WHEN?
PC HAS ACHIEVED THE FULL ABILITIES GAINED OF EACH OF THE FOLLOWING GRADES: (Ref: HCO PL 23 Oct. 80R II, CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED FOR LOWER LEVELS AND EXPANDED LOWER GRADES) FILL IN DATE ATTESTED.
ARC SW: SINGLE TRIPLE QUAD
SINGLE EXP TRIPLE EXP QUAD EXP
GRADE 0: SINGLE TRIPLE QUAD
SINGLE EXP TRIPLE EXP QUAD EXP
GRADE 1: SINGLE TRIPLE QUAD
SINGLE EXP TRIPLE EXP QUAD EXP
GRADE 2: SINGLE TRIPLE QUAD
SINGLE EXP TRIPLE EXP QUAD EXP
GRADE 3: SINGLE TRIPLE QUAD
SINGLE EXP TRIPLE EXP QUAD EXP
GRADE 4: SINGLE TRIPLE QUAD
SINGLE EXP TRIPLE EXP QUAD EXP
ANY EVIDENCE OF OUT-GRADES? LIST SPECIFICS
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
FORM WHEN? EP?
WAS PC SET UP FOR FPRD PER HCOB 11 June 84, C/Sing THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN? (If not, what was missing.)
DID PC COMPLETE FPRD PGM? WHEN?
EP OF PROGRAM?
NEW ERA DIANETICS/DIANETICS
(Note: This is filled out fully regardless of case level of pc.)
HAS PC HAD A COMPLETE DIANETIC C/S-1?
DIANETICS WAS RUN:
SINGLE FLOW ______ TRIPLE FLOW ______ QUAD FLOW
ARE THERE UNRUN FLOWS OR UNHANDLED BOGGED FLOWS?
DN DRD WAS RUN TO FULL EP? WHEN?
ANY UNRUN NO-INTEREST ITEMS ON DRD?
DRUG LIST F/Ned? WHEN?
END OF ENDLESS DRD REPAIR LIST DONE? WHEN?
ANY NED RUNDOWNS PER NED SERIES 16RA DONE?
WHICH ONE(S)?
ANY BOGGED OR INCOMPLETE NED RDs?
CAN RUN R3RA EASILY?
CAN FIND, RUN AND ERASE ENGRAMS?
CAN RUN WHOLE TRACK?
EXPANDED DIANETICS
SINGLE FLOW ______ TRIPLE FLOW ______ QUAD FLOW
LIST ANY EXDN RUNDOWNS DONE:
ANY BOGGED OR INCOMPLETE EXDN RUNDOWNS?
ANY R/Ses OR EVIL PURPS FOUND WHICH WERE NOT PREVIOUSLY CULLED AND RUN?
POWER
POWER (GRADE V): SINGLE _____ TRIPLE_____ QUAD _____
POWER PLUS (GRADE VA): SINGLE _____ TRIPLE_____ QUAD _____
R6EW
SINGLE _____ TRIPLE _____ QUAD _____
ARE THERE ANY UNRUN FLOWS OR UNHANDLED BOGGED FLOWS ON ANY OF THE ABOVE? (GRADES, FPRD, DIANETICS, EXDN, POWER OR R6EW)
CLEAR DATA
DID CLEARING COURSE AND ACHIEVED FULL EP?
DIANETIC CLEAR?
CLEAR CERTAINTY RUNDOWN:
HAS CASE HAD A STANDARD CCRD? WHEN?
WAS CASE PROPERLY SET UP FOR CCRD?
IF HASN’T HAD CCRD, HAS HAD A DCSI? WHEN?
HAS HAD PROPER EVIDENCES OF CLEAR?
WHERE IN FOLDER?
HAD FULL EP OF REHABILITATION OF DN CLEAR? WHEN?
ANY EVIDENCE OF DN CLEAR OUTNESS?
DN CLEAR OUTNESS FULLY HANDLED?
PC MANIFESTING NEED FOR CCRD?
IF CCRD/DCSI DETERMINED PC NOT CLEAR, IS PC FULLY SATISFIED WITH THIS AND NO ATTENTION ON WHETHER CLEAR OR NOT?
HAS PC FALSELY ATTESTED TO CLEAR?
IF YES, HAVE CERTIFICATES FOR THESE BEEN CANCELLED?
HAS PC BEEN ASSERTING THAT HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR?
SUNSHINE RUNDOWN
HAS PC DONE THE SUNSHINE RUNDOWN TO EP?
SOLO AUDITOR TRAINING
HAS THE SOLO AUDITOR COURSE PART ONE BEEN DONE?
HAS THE SOLO AUDITOR COURSE PART TWO BEEN DONE?
OT PREPARATION
C/S 53 EXP GF 40
OTHER ACTIONS DONE AS PART OF OT PREPS:
OT ELIGIBILITY
DOES PC HAVE A VALID “ELIGIBLE FOR OT LEVELS” CHIT?
IF ELIGIBILITY CHECK NOT PASSED, DOES PC HAVE AN ELIGIBILITY PROGRAM?
PRE-OT LEVELS
HAS ACHIEVED THE FULL EP ON EACH OF THE FOLLOWING (ALSO FILL IN DATE ATTESTED):
NEW OT I
OT I
OT II
OT III
OT VII
OT III EXP
NEW OT IV (OT Drug Rundown)
OT IV
NEW OT V (Audited NOTs)
OT V
NEW OT VI (Solo NOTs Auditing Course)
OT VI
NEW OT VII (Solo NOTs)
OT LEVELS
NEW OT VIII (Truth Revealed)
NEW OT IX (Orders of Magnitude)
NEW OT X (Character)
NEW OT XI (Operating)
NEW OT XII (Future)
NEW OT XIII
NEW OT XIV
NEW OT XV
HUBBARD KEY TO LIFE COURSE
KTL CLAY TABLE AUDITING DONE? WHEN?
IF SO, WAS IT TAKEN TO FULL EP?
HUBBARD LIFE ORIENTATION COURSE
LOC CLAY TABLE AUDITING DONE? WHEN?
IF SO, WAS IT TAKEN TO FULL EP?
SUPER POWER
HAS HAD SUPER POWER? WHEN?
ANY RUNDOWNS NOT TAKEN TO FULL EP?
NOTE ANY OTHER MAJOR RUNDOWNS PC MAY HAVE HAD, AND WHETHER OR NOT THESE WERE TAKEN TO FULL EP (HRD, METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING, ETC.):
NOTE WITH FULL DETAILS ANY QUICKIED AND/OR FALSELY DECLARED RD OR LEVEL:
FURTHER CASE DATA
DOES PC GET TA ACTION? HOW MUCH PER HOUR?
IF PC DOES NOT GET TA ACTION IN PT, HAS ANYTHING PRODUCED TA IN THE PAST?
WHAT?
WHEN WAS LAST TIME TA ACTION WAS GOTTEN?
MAKES CASE GAIN?
COMPLAINS OF NO GAIN?
IS PC COMPLAINING ABOUT AUDITING?
SOMETHING PC FEELS HASN’T BEEN HANDLED?
ANY CHRONIC SOMATICS?
ANY RECURRING PHYSICAL PROBLEMS?
IS PC DISSATISFIED WITH ANY LEVEL?
ANY RECURRING ITEMS, TERMINALS OR CONDITIONS?
ANY UNCHANGING CHARACTERISTIC?
HIDDEN STANDARD?
EARLIER PRACTICES?
HAD EXP GF 40? WHEN?TO F/Ning?
WHAT ITEMS HANDLED?
IF PC HAD LX LISTS HANDLED, WERE THEY TAKEN TO THEIR EP?
WHEN?
DOES PC HAVE FREQUENT OUT-RUDS?
WHAT TERMINALS ARE INVOLVED?
HAS PC R/Sed?GIVE DETAILS:
HAS PC R/Sed ON SUBJECTS CONNECTED TO SCN (LIST 1)?
WERE ALL MECHANICAL FACTORS CHECKED AT TIME OF REPORTED R/S(es)?
HAVE R/Ses BEEN FULLY HANDLED (and if so by what means)?
TA IN NORMAL RANGE?
HAS HIGH TA? HAS LOW TA?
HAS HAD FALSE TA HANDLING? WHAT?
DID IT HANDLE TA PROBLEMS?
HAS HAD C/S 53RM TO F/Ning LIST? WHEN?
DID C/S 53RM HANDLE TA PROBLEMS/CASE OUTNESSES?
HAS PC HAD C/S 37R?
HAS PC HAD C/S SERIES 99RB?
HAS PC F/Ned WHAT HE WAS ASKED? (C/S SERIES 89)?
DOES PC HAVE BPC ON PREPARED LISTS?
DOES PC COMPLAIN OF OVERREPAIR?
IF SO, HAS PC HAD REPAIR CORRECTION LIST?TO GOOD RESULT?
CAN GO BACKTRACK EASILY?
HAS HAD PAST TRACK REMEDIES?
CAN FIND AND RUN FLOW 2’s (OVERTS)?
DOES PC RESPOND TO CONFESSIONAL TECH?
GETS OFF O/Ws?
HAS HAD “NO OVERTS” REMEDIES?
IF PC HAS HAD “NO OVERTS” REMEDIES, DID IT RESOLVE THE CONDITION?
ANY EVIDENCE OF QUICKIE LEVELS?
IS PC A HEAVILY CHARGED CASE WHO F/Ns EASILY BUT RUNS LITTLE? (If yes, give details)
DOES PC ASSERT UNREAL OR FALSE CASE STATES?
ANY MAJOR ACTIONS RUN TWICE?
IS PC IN THE MIDDLE OF ANY MAJOR ACTION(S)?
HAVE ANY MAJOR ACTIONS BEEN LEFT INCOMPLETE OR NOT TAKEN TO FULL EP?
IS PC READING HEAVILY ON PAST GRADES OR ACTIONS OR THEIR SUBJECT MATTER?
ANY POINTS WHERE PC WAS DOING REALLY WELL AND THEN BOGGED?
WAS THIS HANDLED?
IS PC CURRENTLY DOING WELL WITH NO COMPLAINTS?
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
HAS THE HANDLING COLUMN OF THE FES BEEN UPDATED TO PT?
FESer’s Signature FESer’s Training Level
HCOB 29.1.81RA I
Rev. 9.4.91
ATTACHMENT 2
FES CHECKLIST FOR
STARTING OR CONTINUING EXPANDED GRADES
(Attach to the inside left cover of the folder.)
PC’S NAME DATE
PC’S CASE LEVEL
1. Pc is not in the middle of another major action. _________
2. TA is in normal range or has been handled in full. _________
3. No trouble with Int or Int has been fully handled. _________
4. Lists (L&N lists, including Why Finding, etc.) okay or have been
properly corrected. _________
5. Pc is not PTS or has been fully handled. _________
6. Pc has had a full and complete Scn C/S-1 and understands auditing. _________
7. Life Repair complete if needed. _________
8. Purif RD fully done. _________
9. Full Objectives done. _________
10. Scn DRD fully complete. _________
11. Pc has been fully Tripled or Quaded and does not have unrun flows. _________
12. Pc is not in Non-Interference Area. _________
13. Resistiveness fully handled with GF 40X if needed.
14. Each prior grade has been run to full EP on all flows with good
Success Stories: _________
ARC SW: Triple ____ Quad ____ Exp Triple ____ Exp Quad ____
GRADE 0: Triple ____ Quad ____ Exp Triple ____ Exp Quad ____
GRADE 1: Triple ____ Quad ____ Exp Triple ____ Exp Quad ____
GRADE 2: Triple ____ Quad ____ Exp Triple ____ Exp Quad ____
GRADE 3: Triple ____ Quad ____ Exp Triple ____ Exp Quad ____
GRADE 4: Triple ____ Quad ____ Exp Triple ____ Exp Quad ____
15. Pc is not complaining about past auditing. _________
16. By D of P interview, pc is happy with his gains and not still wanting
something handled. Is not reading on past grades. _________
17. Not currently ill or in ethics trouble. _________
FESer’s Signature FESer’s Training Level
HCOB 29.1.81RA I
Rev. 9.4.91
ATTACHMENT 3
FES CHECKLIST FOR
STARTING OR CONTINUING NEW ERA DIANETICS
(Attach to the inside left cover of the folder.)
PC’S NAME DATE
PC’S CASE LEVEL
1. Life Repair complete if needed. _________
2. Purif RD fully done. _________
3. Full Objectives done. _________
4. Scientology Drug Rundown done and very complete. _________
5. Grades done. _________
6. Pc has been checked for having received any Dianetics or
Scientology processing in a past life. (Ref: HCOB 5 Dec. 85R,
C/S Series 123R, HANDLING OF PAST LIFE AUDITING) _________
7. No indication of PTSness or PTSness fully handled. _________
8. Pc is not in the middle of another major action. _________
9. TA is in normal range or has been handled in full. _________
10. No trouble with Int or Int has been fully handled. _________
11. Lists (L&N lists, including Why Finding, etc.) okay or have
been properly corrected. _________
12. Pc has had a full and complete Dn C/S-1 and understands
auditing and Dianetics. _________
13. NED Drug RD done and very complete. _________
14. Runs Dianetics well including past lives or has had this remedied. _________
15. Can find, run and erase engrams or has had this remedied. _________
16. Runs R3RA in valence. _________
17. Is not stuck in former therapies or earlier practices or has had
them run out R3RA. _________
18. Does not have unrun Dianetic flows or bogged and unhandled
Dianetic chains. _________
19. Pc has been run on Triples if a Triple pc, or on Quads if a Quad pc. _________
20. Pc is not complaining about past auditing. _________
21. Pc can find and run Flow 2 (overts). _________
22. Not currently ill or in ethics trouble. _________
23. Person is not Clear or OT. _________
24. If CCRD done, it has been completed and per CCRD pc is not
yet Clear and has no attention on whether or not he is Clear. _________
FESer’s Signature FESer’s Training Level
HCOB 29.1.81RA I
Rev. 9.4.91
ATTACHMENT 4
FES CHECKLIST FOR
STARTING OR CONTINUING FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
(Attach to the inside left cover of the folder.)
PC’S NAME DATE
PC’S CASE LEVEL
1. No trouble with Int or Int has been fully handled. _________
2. Lists (L&N lists, Why Finding, etc.) okay or have been properly
corrected. _________
3. Purif RD fully done. _________
4. Full Objectives done. _________
5. Pc has had a full and complete Scn C/S-1 and understands
auditing. _________
6. Scn DRD fully complete if needed. _________
7. NED DRD, if needed, went to EP and is very complete. _________
8. If pc has had NED, runs it well including past lives or has
had this remedied. _________
9. Pc responds to Confessional tech. _________
10. Any flubbed Confessional has been fully repaired. _________
11. Resistiveness including out of valence fully handled with
GF 40X to F/Ning list if needed. _________
12. Pc is not in the middle of any major action which should be
completed before starting FPRD. _________
13. Pc is not currently in ethics trouble or in the middle of any
ethics/ justice handling which must be completed before
FPRD auditing is started/continued. _________
14. Has pc R/Sed? _________
15. Has pc R/Sed on subjects connected to Scn (List 1)? _________
16. Were all mechanical factors checked at time of R/S(es)? _________
17. If pc has R/Sed, are these valid R/Ses? _________
18. Has pc had any other auditing actions to handle his R/S(es)? _________
What? _________
FESer’s Signature FESer’s Training Level
HCOB 29.1.81RA I
Rev. 9.4.91
ATTACHMENT 5
-FLAG ONLY-
FES CHECKLIST FOR
STARTING OR CONTINUING L10, L11 OR L12
(Attach to the inside left cover of the folder.)
PC’S NAME DATE
PC’S CASE LEVEL
1. Pc is not in the middle of another major action. _________
2. TA is in normal range or has been corrected. _________
3. No trouble with Int or Int has been fully handled. _________
4. Lists (L&N lists, including Why Finding, etc.) okay or
have been properly corrected. _________
5. Pc has not had 37R in the field. _________
6. Pc is not PTS or has been fully handled. _________
7. Pc is not in the Non-Interference Area. _________
8. Pc has had a full and complete Scn C/S-1 and understands
auditing. _________
9. Life Repair complete if needed. _________
10. Purif RD complete. _________
11. Full Objectives done. _________
12. C/S 54RB fully done. _________
13. NED or Scn Drug RD very, very complete. _________
14. Fully complete on the NED full Pc Program Outline, per
NED Series 16RA, to full Grade Chart EP. _________
15. If full NED program has not been done, person is Clear
and has attested to Clear, after having had the CCRD and
Sunshine RD. _________
16. Pc is not manifesting need for CCRD or correction of it. _________
17. Pc has been fully Tripled or Quaded and does not have
unrun Dn flows or Scn flows. _________
18. Has had a complete GF 40X done to F/Ning list, and
engrams handled (by R3RA if a pc, or if a pre-OT by
Recalls or as otherwise indicated). _________
19. Has had a full set of Expanded Grades each to full EP on
all flows with good Success Story. Triple ( ) Quad ( )
a. ARC SW _________
b. Grade 0 _________
c. Grade 1 _________
d. Grade 2 _________
e. Grade 3 _________
f. Grade 4 _________
20. Power, if run, went to full EP. _________
21. Preclear is at one of the points as listed in HCOB 14
Feb. 1975R, L10, L11 AND L12 PREREQUISITES.
(Mark which, as appropriate.) _________
a. After Grade IV Expanded. _________
b. After Grade IV Expanded and NED Case Completion
(on a pc who did not go Clear on NED). _________
c. After Dianetic Clear and Sunshine RD and before
starting New OT I. _________
d. After completing OT III. _________
e. After completing New OT IV, OT Drug Rundown,
and before starting New OT V, audited NOTs. _________
f. After completing New OT VIII, Truth Revealed. _________
g. After completing any individual OT level above
New OT VIII. (Note which level) _________
22. Pc is not complaining about past auditing. _________
23. Has not got a psychotic OCA. _________
24. Does not have items, terminals and conditions recurring
throughout the folders. _________
25. Is not still trying to get something handled.
No hidden standard. _________
26. Is not a “No Overts” case or has had this remedied. _________
27. No evidence of unusual needle behavior or no TA. _________
28. Has pc R/Sed? _________
29. Has pc R/Sed on subjects connected to Scn (List 1)? _________
30. Were all mechanical factors checked at time of R/S(es)? _________
31. If pc has R/Sed and R/Ses were true R/Ses, have they been
fully handled and if so by what means? _________
32. Is not currently ill or in ethics trouble. _________
33. By D of P interview, pc is happy with his gains and past
auditing and does not still want something handled or
waiting for a certain thing to happen. Is not reading on his
past levels. _________
34. Any previous Ls run were to full EP. _________
FESer’s Signature FESer’s Training Level
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JANUARY 1981
Remimeo Issue II
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
HGCs
Cramming Officers
Word Clearers
HC OUTPOINT-PLUSPOINT LISTS RB
WORDS LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79RA I Word Clearing Series 64RA
Rev. 30.7.83 THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 28 Aug. 70RB, HC OUTPOINT-PLUSPOINT LISTS RB.
An auditor must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc Method 5. He clears the words before assessing the lists on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it is correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: Auditor Admin Series 6R, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM HC OUTPOINT-PLUSPOINT LISTS RB
A, about, acceptable, action, actions, added, adequate, agreement, align, alignment, alike, all, altered, an, and, answer, any, applicable, are, associated, assumed, at, authority.
Be, being, believable.
Changed, circumstance, circumstances, classes, condensed, conflicting, contrary, correct, correctly, counted, credible.
Data, datum, decreased, delusion, differences, different, direction, done, dropped.
Endless, energy, event, events, everything, exact, example, expected.
Fact, facts, factual, false, feeling, fixed, form, forms, from.
Goal, grouped.
Hallucination.
Idea, ideas, identical, identities, impossible, importance, important, in, inapplicable, incorrect, insignificant, intention, into, invented, is.
Knew, knowing, known.
Less, life, located, location, locations.
Matching, matter, missing, more.
Not.
Object, objects, objective, obviously, occurrence, of, omitted, order, origin, others, out, over.
Particles, past, people, person, place, places, plausible, possible, proper.
Reality, really, relative, right, rightness, rushed.
Same, scene, sensation, sequence, similar, similarities, situation, something, source, space, spaces.
Target, telling, terminal, terminals, than, that, the, things, time, timed, times, to, too, two, true, truth, truthful, twisted.
Unbelievable, unexpected, unimportant.
Value, valued.
Waiting, was, wasn’t, way, well, what, which, wrong.
You, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 FEBRUARY 1981R
REVISED 25 JULY 1987
Remimeo
Student Hat
Supervisors
Word Clearers
Cramming Officers
Auditors
C/Ses
Tech/Qual
Word Clearing Series 67R
DICTIONARIES
Refs:
HCOB 17 Sept. 71 Word Clearing Series 24
LIBRARY
HCOB 19 June 72 Word Clearing Series 37
DINKY DICTIONARIES
HCOB 23 Mar. 78RA Word Clearing Series 59RA
Rev. 14.11.79 CLEARING WORDS
HCOB 17 July 79RA I Word Clearing Series 64RA
Rev. 30.7.83 THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD
DEFINED
A DICTIONARY is a book containing the words of a language (or a specific subject) usually arranged in alphabetical order, which gives information about the meanings of the words, their pronunciations, origins, etc.
Dictionaries are vital and important tools in studying or learning any subject. However, current dictionaries vary in accuracy and usefulness and many of these modern dictionaries are virtually useless and can actually confuse a person due to their false and omitted definitions and grammatical and other errors. So the dictionary that a student chooses to use is important and can actually make a difference in his success as a student.
As dictionaries are such an important factor in the learning and application of Scientology (or any subject for that matter), I thought I had better recommend some dictionaries that have been found to be the best of those currently available.
_________
Webster’s New World Dictionary for Young Readers:
This is a very simple American dictionary. It is available in most bookstores and is published by New World Dictionaries/Simon & Schuster. It is a hardbound volume and does not contain derivations. When using this dictionary, a student must be sure to clear the derivations in a larger dictionary. The definitions in this dictionary are quite good.
Oxford American Dictionary:
This is a very good American dictionary, simpler than the college dictionaries yet more advanced than the beginning dictionary listed above. It does not list
derivations of the words. It is quite an excellent dictionary and very popular with students who want to use an intermediate dictionary.
It is published in paperback by Avon Books and in hardback by Oxford University Press.
Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, Student Edition:
This is an intermediate-level American dictionary which includes derivations. It is published by New World Dictionaries/Simon & Schuster and is available in most bookstores.
The Random House College Dictionary:
This is a college dictionary and somewhat of a higher gradient than the dictionaries listed above. This is a one-volume American dictionary published in the US by Random House, Inc., and in Canada by Random House of Canada, Limited.
This Random House dictionary contains a large number of slang definitions and idioms and also gives good derivations.
The Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, College Edition:
This is an American college dictionary published by New World Dictionaries/ Simon & Schuster. It is a one-volume dictionary and gives most of the slang definitions and idioms. It also has good derivations.
The Concise Oxford Dictionary:
This is a very concise English dictionary but is not a simple or beginner’s dictionary. It is a small, one-volume dictionary. It uses a lot of abbreviations which may take some getting used to, but once the abbreviations are mastered students find this dictionary as easy to use as any other similarly advanced dictionary. It is less complicated in its definitions than the usual college dictionary and has the added benefit that the definitions given are well stated—in other words, it does not give the same definition reworded into several different definitions, the way some dictionaries do.
This dictionary is printed in Great Britain and the United States by the Oxford University Press.
The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary:
This is a two-volume English dictionary and is a shorter version of The Oxford English Dictionary. It is quite up-to-date and is an ideal dictionary for fairly literate students. Even if not used regularly, it makes a very good reference dictionary. The definitions given in the Oxford dictionaries are usually more accurate and give a better idea of the meaning of the word than any other dictionary.
This Oxford dictionary is also printed by the Oxford University Press.
The Oxford English Dictionary:
This is by far the largest English dictionary and is actually the principal dictionary of the English language. It consists of twelve volumes and several supplementary volumes. (There is a Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary in which the exact text of The Oxford English Dictionary is duplicated in very small print which is read through a magnifying glass. Reduced in this manner the whole thing fits into two volumes.)
For many students this dictionary may be too comprehensive to use on a regular basis. (For some students huge dictionaries can be confusing as the words they use in their definitions are often too big or too rare and make one chase through twenty new words to get the meaning of the original.)
Although many students will not use this as their only dictionary, it is a must for every course room and will be found useful in clearing certain words, verifying data from other dictionaries, etc. It is a valuable reference dictionary and is sometimes the only dictionary that correctly defines a particular word.
These Oxfords are also printed by the Oxford University Press. If your local bookstore does not stock them, they will be able to order them for you.
___________
From the dictionaries recommended here, a student should be able to find one that suits him. Whatever dictionary one chooses, it should be the correct gradient for him. For instance, you wouldn’t give a foreign language student, who barely knows English, the big Oxford to use in his studies!
DINKY DICTIONARIES
A dinky dictionary is a dictionary that gives you definitions inadequate for a real understanding of the word. Entire definitions are sometimes found to be missing from such dictionaries. “Dinky dictionaries”. are the kind you can fit in your pocket. They are usually paperback and sold at magazine counters in drugstores and grocery stores. Don’t use a dinky dictionary.
DICTIONARIES AND A PERSON’S OWN LANGUAGE
English dictionaries and American dictionaries differ in some of their definitions, as the Americans (USA) and English (Britain) define some words differently.
An English dictionary will have different applications of words that are specifically English (British). These usages won’t necessarily be found in American dictionaries, as they are not part of the American English language. Different dictionaries have things in them which are unique to that language.
The Oxford English Dictionary is a good example of an English dictionary for the English.
For the most part a student’s dictionary should correspond to his own language. This does not mean that an American shouldn’t use a British dictionary (or vice versa), but if he does, he should be aware of the above and check words in a dictionary of his own language as needed.
FALSE AND OMITTED DEFINITIONS
It has been found that some dictionaries leave out definitions and may even contain false definitions. If, when using a dictionary, a student comes across what he suspects to be a false definition, there is a handling that can be done. The first thing would be to ensure there are no misunderstoods in the definition in question, and then he should consult another dictionary and check its definition for the word being cleared. This may require more than one dictionary. In this way any false definitions can be resolved.
Other dictionaries, encyclopedias and textbooks should be on hand for reference.
If a student runs into an omitted definition or a suspected omitted definition, then other dictionaries or reference books should be consulted and the omitted definition found and cleared.
DERIVATIONS
A derivation is a statement of the origin of a word.
Words originated somewhere and meant something originally. Through the ages they have sometimes become altered in meaning.
Derivations are important in getting a full understanding of words. By understanding the origin of a word, one will have a far greater grasp of the concept of that word. Students find that they are greatly assisted in understanding a word fully and conceptually if they know the word’s derivation.
A student must always clear the derivation of any word he looks up.
It will commonly be found that a student does not know how to read the derivations of the words in most dictionaries. The most common error they make is not understanding that when there is a word in the derivation which is fully capitalized it means that that word appears elsewhere in the dictionary and probably contains more information about the derivation. (For example, the derivation of “thermometer” is given in one dictionary as “THERMO + METER.” Looking at the derivation of “thermo” it says it is from the Greek word therme, meaning heat. And the derivation of “meter” is given as coming from the French metre, which is from the Latin metrum, which is itself from the Greek metron meaning measure.) By understanding and using these fully capitalized words, a student can get a full picture of a word’s derivation.
If a student has trouble with derivations, it is most likely because of the above plus a misunderstood word or symbol in the derivation. These points can be cleared up quite easily where they are giving difficulty.
An excellent dictionary of derivations is The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology, also printed by the Oxford University Press.
We have long known the importance of clearing words and it stands to reason that the dictionary one uses to do this would also be quite important.
I trust this data will be of use.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 MARCH 1981R
Remimeo Issue II
C/Ses REVISED 4 JULY 1988
Auditors
Tech/Qual
EXPANDED GREEN FORM 40RF
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79RA I Word Clearing Series 64RA
Rev. 30.7.83 THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 30 June 71 RD, EXPANDED GREEN FORM 40RF.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the Expanded Green Form 40RF is actually assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)
The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE EXPANDED GREEN FORM 40RF
A, about, acted, after, alcohol, an, and, another, antagonistic, anxious, any, anything, ARC, ARC break, ARC breaks, are, arm, as, asked, attain, attained, attainments, attested, audited, auditing, auditor.
Be, because, been, before, being, beliefs, benefits, between, body, bones, break, breaks, broken, by, bypassed.
Cast, change, clear, committing, communication, concerned, condition, connected, connections, continue, continuous, continuously, crime, curious, current, currently.
Damaged, decay, dental, Dianetic, Dianetic Clear, Dianetics, disabled, disclosed, disease, dislike, do, doing, done, don’t, doubts, drug, drugs, drunk.
Earlier, Eastern, electric, electronic, else, engrams, environment, erase, ever, evil, exercise, exercises.
Fail, failed, falsely, family, fixed, F/Ns, for, former, from.
Gains, going, goofing, grade, grades.
Had, harming, has, have, held, here, hidden, hold, hostile, hypnosis, hypnotism.
Ideas, ill, illnesses, implanted, implanting, impulse, in, incomplete, indicated, indoctrinations, infectious, intention, is, it.
Job.
Keep, keep on, knowing.
Levels, life, lifetime, lose, lying.
Make, many, medical, medicine, meditation, mental, mentally, meter, missing, misunderstoods.
Never, no, not.
Of, on, one, or, OT, other, others, out, over, overt, overts, overwhelmed.
Pain, pain-drug-hypnosis, part, parts, people, persisting, person, physically, post, power, practiced, practices, practicing, pretending, prior, problem, problems, protesting, psychiatric, psychiatrist, psychology, PTS, purpose, purposes.
R6EW, really, reasons, receive, refusing, religions, removed, restimulated, right, rites, rudiments, run.
Same, scientific, Scientologist, Scientology, secrets, seeking, self-auditing, sent, seriously, service facsimiles, session, sessions, shock, some, someone, spells, spiritual, suppressed.
Take, taken, taken part in, talking, techniques, the, them, then, therapy, there, this, thought, thrill, to, tone, tone arm, tooth, training, trouble.
Unannounced, understanding, unflat, unrevealed.
Valence, victim.
Want, went, what, wins, witchcraft, with, withhold, wrong.
Yoga, you, your.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research and
Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MARCH 1981R
REVISED 25 APRIL 1990
Remimeo
All Auditors
All C/Ses
Tech/Qual
“HEAVY DRUG HISTORY” DEFINED
Refs:
HCOB 28 Aug. 68 II DRUGS
HCOB 29 Aug. 68 DRUG DATA
HCOB 8 Jan. 69 DRUGS AND “INSANITY”
NONCOMPLIANCE AND ALTER-IS
HCOB 25 Oct. 71 DRUG DRYING OUT
HCOB 17 Oct. 69RB DRUGS, ASPIRIN AND TRANQUILIZERS
Rev. 8.4.88
HCOB 31 May 77 LSD YEARS AFTER THEY
HAVE “COME OFF OF” LSD
HCOB 23 Sept. 68 DRUGS AND TRIPPERS
HCOB 12 Nov. 81RD GRADE CHART STREAMLINED
Rev. 20.4.90 FOR LOWER GRADES
HCOB 25 Nov. 71 II RESISTIVE CASES FORMER THERAPY
HCOB 15 July 71RD III C/S Series 48RE
Rev. 8.4.88 NED Series 9RC
DRUG HANDLING
HCOB 6 Feb. 78RD Purif RD Series lR
Rev. 27.3.90 THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
REPLACES THE SWEAT PROGRAM
____________
People who have been on drugs do not make case gain until the drugs are handled. We have known that since 1968.
Therefore, it’s a mistake to try to do mental or spiritual handling on somebody who has been heavily on drugs.
The operating rule is mental actions and even biophysical actions do not work in the presence of drugs.
Drugs are the big stopper. Drug residues absolutely stop any mental help. They also stop a person’s life!
But what is meant by a “heavy drug history?”
A “heavy drug history” can mean either of two things—that a person has a history of having taken heavy drugs, or that the person’s drug history is “heavy.”?
By heavy drugs is meant: LSD, angel dust and other heavy street or medical drugs. It is a matter of the TYPE of drug consumed.
By heavy history of taking drugs is meant: someone who has taken drugs in sufficient volume to have brought about a biochemical situation physically. It is a matter of the FREQUENCY and VOLUME of drug consumption.
The definition of a heavy drug history encompasses both the type of drug used and the frequency and volume of consumption. Someone with a heavy drug history is:
A. A PERSON WHO HAS A HISTORY OF TAKING HEAVY DRUGS
and/or
B. A PERSON WHO HAS TAKEN DRUGS IN SUFFICIENT VOLUME TO HAVE BROUGHT ABOUT A BIOCHEMICAL SITUATION PHYSICALLY.
HEAVY DRUGS
Heavy drugs, to mention a few, are: LSD, angel dust, tranquilizers, opium, cocaine, marijuana, peyote, amphetamines, etc. There are thousands of trade names and slang terms for these drugs.
One of these drugs, marijuana, while pushed as “mild,” does stay in the system and the end result, apparently, is brain atrophy. The first drug case I ran into was a marijuana case. The case did not move until we started directly handling drugs.
And don’t get the idea that medical and street drugs are two different things as they aren’t really. They both require the same treatment: the Purification Rundown. Some medical drugs can be quite destructive. Medical doctors make heavy drug cases by pouring people full of morphine and other heavy drugs. In fact, the first drug addicts society had in any quantity were medical doctors (and nurses) because they had access to drugs.
Psychiatrists take people and put them on drugs and so fix them so they will never make any case gain. The psychiatrists’ “cure” is to make the person incurable. Psychiatrists and psychologists have even been pushing drugs into the school system with kids shoved into drugs all the way down to kindergarten level.
Medical and psychiatric drugs are every bit as dynamite to case gain as street drugs.
It is vital that a C/S keeps himself up-to-date, as new drugs that are developed might be even heavier and more destructive than those listed above. (Ref: HCOB 17 Sept. 68, ETHNICS)
HEAVY HISTORY OF TAKING DRUGS
Research done into the field of drugs as far back as 1950 found that the key factor in relation to the effects of drugs and chemical compounds was QUANTITY of consumption. Pharmacopoeias just classify something as a stimulant. They say, “Opium is a soporific and heroin is a stimulant.” But, for example, if you give somebody a tiny amount of opium, he becomes stimulated. If you give him a little more, he goes to sleep. If you give him a little more, he kicks the bucket.
That is true of each and every chemical compound which has a decided effect upon the body. Each compound falls into three classes based on volume of consumption: stimulant, depressant and poison.
A NOTE ON ALCOHOL
Alcohol is not a mind altering drug but it is a biochemical altering drug. Alcohol doesn’t do anything to the mind, it does something to the nerves. By quickly and rapidly soaking up all the B1 in the body, it makes the nerves incapable of functioning properly.
Therefore, a person can’t coordinate his body. Alcohol in small quantities is a stimulant and in large quantities is a depressant.
The definition of an alcoholic is he can’t have just one drink. If he has one drink, he has to have another. He’s addicted. One of the factors is, he has to have a full glass in front of him. If it gets empty, it has to be refilled.
Alcoholics are in a state of total unrelenting hostility toward everything around them. They will do people in without even mentioning it.
Alcohol is a drug, and as such a person’s history of alcohol consumption (quantity and frequency) would have to be reviewed against the definitions covered above when determining a heavy drug history case.
PRENATAL DRUG CASES
Children of mothers who were drug addicts while pregnant can be born as drug addicts. Children of mothers who took drugs while pregnant are prenatal drug cases. This possibility should not be overlooked by a C/S who runs into a case that appears to have no heavy drug history but who manifests the symptoms of someone who has taken drugs as covered in the HCOBs listed in the reference section of this issue.
SUMMARY
The definition of a “heavy drug history” as described above can mean either a history of having taken heavy drugs or that the person’s drug history is heavy.
This data is important for C/Ses, auditors and any other persons who handle drug cases.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Compilation assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 1 APRIL 1981R
Remimeo Issue II
Exec Hats REVISED 17 JANUARY 1991
Dissem
Qual (Also issued as an HCO PL,
Registrar Hat same date, same title)
DofPHat
C/S Hat
Div 6
Chaplain Hat
Ethics Off/MAA
INTERVIEWS
Refs:
HCO PL 13 Sept. 70 II Org Series I
BASIC ORGANIZATION
HCO PL 10 July 65 LINES AND TERMINALS ROUTING
Interviews play a vital part in the correct routing and smooth flow of pcs and students on org lines.
Depending on how needed interviews are assigned and carried out, org lines and therefore org products can be slowed or impeded or they can be speeded up and made to flow more smoothly, with real products as a result.
TYPES OF INTERVIEWS
This issue lists the main types of interviews used in an org, and defines their use, to clearly label and differentiate between them. It summates the most used interviews but in no way replaces full hatting for one’s post.
REGISTRAR INTERVIEW: The purpose of the Registrar interview is to sign prospective students and pcs up for org services, get them to pay for the services and get them routed onto the services. The Reg also signs up students and pcs for further services when they have completed the services they signed up for. The concern of the Registrar is to move pcs and students up the Bridge. He does this by caring about the person and not being reasonable about stops or barriers but caring enough to get him through the stops or barriers to get the service that’s going to rehabilitate him. He gets the public person fully paid and on to service.
The Registrar must be familiar with the tech the org delivers and be kept informed of the results being obtained. Registrars must not assign hours or C/S for the case, and they mustn’t promise that such and such a rundown will be done, because they are not tech terminals and they can be wrong.
Example Registrar interview: “I think I went Dianetic Clear.” “Well, that’s good. You just sign here on the dotted line and these invoices will go to the Tech Division and they will take care of you.” End of interview! The way you end his itsa is you put a pen in his hand. That’s the proper ack.
Another example Registrar interview: Joe Blow walks in to the Registrar and
says, “Ted brought me down here and I’m supposed to sign up for some more auditing. I don’t want to buy any more auditing here.” “Oh, my goodness, what you had better have is a D of P interview so we can get data on this.” The folder would go to the C/S and the C/S would tell the D of P what had to be found out.
The Registrar also signs up pcs conditionally, pending acceptance by Tech, takes the money and sees that the pc is then routed to Tech for a Technical Estimate. The reason for getting a Tech Estimate is to get the pc to buy enough intensives to get him some place.
When the pc is accepted by Tech, and the Tech Estimate is received, the Registrar signs the pc up for the estimated number of intensives; he gets payment for them or for the first one or two, but in any case has the person sign up for the remaining intensives, to be taken when paid for. (Refs: HCO PL 30 Nov. 71, BLIND REGISTRATION; HCO PL 19 Aug. 60, REGISTRAR LOST LINE)
Another Registrar action which increases the income is interviewing students and selling them professional auditing.
The Registrar must also be on the routing form for outgoing preclears and students and interview them without fail for further services. He can usually get them to take more services.
HGC PC TECHNICAL ESTIMATE INTERVIEW: The HGC Pc Technical Estimate interview is done to obtain necessary data from the applicant so that an accurate estimate can be made of the number of hours or intensives the person will need to get results from his auditing.
The routing is to Registrar, to Testing, then to Tech Estimator and back to the Registrar. The routing form should then of course take the pc to Tech Services who handles the folders and the scheduling.
The HGC Pc Technical Estimate is done by the D of P or a qualified technical terminal. It is not a metered interview. It consists of a lot of questions such as, “What do you want to accomplish with auditing?” Lots of questions about state of case, amount of time it has taken to do previous auditing cycles, etc. The Tech Estimator has the current OCA, IQ and Aptitude tests to hand. Part of his estimation includes a meter check (per HCO PL 26 Aug. 65RB, ETHICS E-METER CHECK) which estimates state of case.
The Tech Estimator must be able to rapidly spot the preclear on the Chart of Human Evaluation. He does this using tests and by getting the prospective pc talking about himself. With all of this data, he estimates the number of hours needed for a pc to get results.
The Registrar is sent a copy of the Tech Estimate which states:
I RECOMMEND THAT THIS APPLICANT (ONE OF THE FOLLOWING):
A. Buy (number of) intensives.
B. Be refused auditing by the org on the basis of HCO PL 6 Dec. 76RB, ILLEGAL PCs, ACCEPTANCE OF, HIGH CRIME PL.
D OF P INTERVIEW: Briefly, a D of P interview is an interview given to a preclear by the Director of Processing.
There are two main types of D of P interviews:
1. To get data for the C/S which is not otherwise available to him for C/Sing and programing the case.
A D of P interview is used when the C/S suspects that additives are being put into the session or that there are other outside factors on his auditing or admin lines that are influencing the pc’s case gain. This is the primary use of the D of P interview and consists of having the D of P ask the pc something like: “What did the auditor say to you in session?” “Exactly what happened in that session?” “What did the auditor do?”
These interviews are ordered by the C/S to obtain data he cannot otherwise obtain and when he suspects hidden matter in the session which is not covered in the worksheets; when the C/S doesn’t know- what’s wrong with the case but strongly suspects he isn’t being told all.
A D of P interview is not done to find out what the pc thinks is wrong with his case. It is done in order to get data and is not auditing. There is no attempt to audit during a D of P interview. Where a preclear is feeling bad or doesn’t want more auditing, it’s “When did all this start up?” “When you first came in, what did you want?” “What did you expect to have happen?” or, “When did you start feeling bad?” It’s a “when” question to get a lot of data.
Some orgs have used a pat set of questions or a printed D of P interview form, but this is not a D of P interview by definition and does not give the C/S the data he really needs to program the case.
Overuse of D of P interviews can tie up the D of P and cut down the delivery of auditing to pcs. A C/S should be able to study the case, and get an FES done or do one. He will not learn what he needs to know about the pc’s case by substituting a D of P interview for his work. To do a D of P interview to unravel a case actually defeats the purpose of FESing and the C/S. The C/S has specific tools he would order an auditor to use to crack a case, such as the Green Form, C/S 53, etc. This is all part of normal C/Sing and auditing lines. That’s not a D of P interview.
Similarly, an arrival D of P interview is just a substitute for an FES. And a leaving D of P interview would only be done when the pc did not write a success story or wrote a poor one. They are not a routine function of a D of P by any means.
Unnecessary D of P interviews are just lazy C/Sing.
2. To give the pc an R-factor on what is going on in order to dispel a mystery for him.
The second type of D of P interview is basically to put in an R-factor with the pc. The D of P lets the pc talk about what has been going on, finds out what the pc is in mystery about and explains it. The D of P does not explain tech to him. He explains what is happening to the pc. A good D of P can straighten it out fast.
The D of P is actually the I/C of all pcs when they are in the org and he can originate a D of P interview such as when bad indicators are observed or the pc is hung up or curious.
D of P interviews are always done on the meter, and while it is not auditing, the D of P must have his TRs in, must have a Qual Okay to Operate an E-Meter and must be able to meter accurately. While a D of P interview is not done to get case gain, one normally tries to end the interview on an F/N.
QUAL CONSULTANT INTERVIEW: The Qual Consultation is a service provided by Qual and is described in HCOB 10 Feb. 71, TECH VOLUME AND TWOWAY COMM. It consists of a metered interview and two-way comm and letting the person talk about his troubles and listening.
This type of interview can be done on a person who is not really on auditing lines, or he is somewhere around auditing lines and you see he is fouled up. It is not limited to pcs but can be done on very slow or dropped-out students as well.
SOLO CONSULTANT INTERVIEW AT AN AO: The duties of a Solo OT Review Consultant are to personally handle pre-OT Solo jams rapidly with metered twoway comm.
A Solo line does not run like a C/S Series 25 HGC line. It is a highly alert personalized line that picks up the pre-OTs who aren’t soloing well or who are bugged and gets them wheeling. Usually it’s something simple, only discovered by asking the pre-OT and handling in a metered interview. Cramming cycles on auditing are a common result. A C/S can’t see that the green pre-OT forgets to turn on his meter!
It is a smooth way to get happy pre-OTs.
ETHICS OFFICER/MAA INTERVIEWS: An ethics interview is an interview done by the Ethics Officer or the MAA on a student, preclear or staff member. He uses Confessionals, conditions, investigation tech and PTS/SP tech in order to get ethics in in his org or area so that Scientology can be done.
The Ethics Officer acts on indicators and has a primary responsibility to keep trouble from blowing up on org lines—he is supposed to catch things before they blow up. An Ethics Officer has to know what the scene is and be able to act. With no nonsense. He is there to get ethics in so that tech can go in.
Often the job of the Ethics Officer entails an ethics interview to find out what the exact situation is with an individual and get it handled.
An example would be someone who is goofing and in trouble for not completing cycles of action. The Ethics Officer, upon checking the ethics files of this person, interviewing him and learning that this was the situation, would know that the probability is that the ethics handling needed is for going past misunderstoods in their work. With ethics in, the person could be word cleared, the MUs found and he would then be able to complete the cycle of action.
A key tool of the Ethics Officer is the ethics conditions and their formulas, as contained in the book Introduction to Scientology Ethics. Where a person has earlier undone or messed up ethics conditions, this can act as a serious block to getting ethics in and would require handling with HCO PL 19 Dec. 82R II, REPAIRING PAST ETHICS CONDITIONS.
Another vital tool of the Ethics Officer is getting a person freed of his overts and withholds. A person manifesting O/Ws (natter, blowy, critical of the organization, etc.) must have those O/Ws pulled. An important part of an Ethics Officer’s job is hearing Confessionals and he must get meter trained and be able to do Confessionals where needed. Another way to get O/Ws cleaned up is to make the person write up all his overts and withholds and turn them in to the Ethics Officer (who would also ensure that end ruds were done).
An Ethics Officer never spends any time sitting and arguing with someone. He simply puts the person on a meter and assesses a Trouble Area Questionnaire. (Ref: HCO PL 9 Apr. 72R, CORRECT DANGER CONDITION HANDLING)
PTS interviews are a frequent duty of the Ethics Officer and he must be fully trained in the complete tech of handling PTSness contained in the PTS/SP Course.
If a pc is midauditing, the Ethics Officer or MAA should check with the pc’s C/S before doing a PTS interview or Trouble Area Questionnaire. (Ref: HCOB 13 Oct. 82, C/S Series 116, ETHICS AND THE C/S)
Full worksheets are always kept for any PTS interview and are sent to the pc folder. A copy of any ethics interview is also sent to the person’s pc or student folder.
CHAPLAIN INTERVIEW: A Chaplain interview is for those persons who feel wronged, ARC broken public who have fallen off the Bridge or are about to and people whose burdens appear to be too great.
If they feel they cannot be heard anywhere else-they always have recourse to the Chaplain. They mainly want to be heard and acknowledged. Half the time or more one does nothing, but one does listen.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/COMMANDING OFFICER INTERVIEW: When someone has completed a service and is leaving the org, the CO/ED interviews the person before he routes out of the org, to ensure he is a good product. This interview consists of the CO/ED congratulating the student or preclear, checking his indicators and chatting briefly with him on his future plans. If all okay, the CO/ED gives his approval that the person may go. If not satisfied, the student or pc would be routed to Qual to get straightened out, with the R-factor that he doesn’t have permission to go because the CO/ED is not satisfied with the technical results.
Another way that this line can be handled is for the CO/ED to see the final success story of the public person to give final approval for the person to leave the org. No public routes out of the org without the CO or ED’s okay and a sign must be posted which makes this clear to the public.
This type of interview or seeing the final success story enables the CO/ED to check the product of the org. The person has gone through the lines and should have completed with a good success story.
HOST INTERVIEW: On Flag and in some other orgs, there is a Host whose duty it is to see to the well-being and good servicing of the public.
The purpose of the initial Host interview is to welcome the person arriving for services, brief him and orient him to the scene and provide him at once with a stable terminal who is interested in his welfare and will be a terminal for him throughout his stay. The Host lets the person know that if there is anything wrong that he should come and see him.
This interview is not done on a meter and there is no set patter or procedure which the Host uses.
The Host interviews pcs and students as needful to ensure they are being serviced and to ensure any service outness is handled by the proper terminals.
Returning persons are similarly welcomed, rebriefed and brought up to date on any changes in services or new facilities.
_________
While these are by no means all the types of interviews an org uses, they are the main interviews given on an org’s service lines.
Standardly done interviews can make all the difference in an org’s lines and viability. The result will be an increase in quantity and quality of the valuable final products of the org.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 APRIL 1981R
REVISED 7 AUGUST 1983
Remimeo
Auditors
Supervisors
C/Ses
REACH AND WITHDRAW
Refs:
PAB 7, mid-Aug. 1953 SIX STEPS TO BETTER BEINGNESS
Tape: 6307C25 ”Comm Cycles in Auditing”
HCOB 14 Aug. 63 LECTURE GRAPHS
Book: The Phoenix Lectures
Reach and Withdraw is a very simple but extremely powerful method of getting a person familiarized and in communication with things so that he can be more at cause over and in control of them.
One would not expect a person to be at cause over or to have much control or understanding of or skill in something with which he was not familiar. The keynote of familiarity is communication.
Reaching and withdrawing are two very fundamental actions in this universe, and Reach and Withdraw is actually a breakthrough from advanced technology.
Life itself is composed of reaching and withdrawing.
Communication is actually based on reach and withdraw.
A person is out of communication with something because he is withdrawing from it and is not about to reach out to or contact any part of it.
If a person cannot reach and withdraw from a thing, he will be the effect of that thing.
A person who cannot reach and withdraw has no space. Everything is caved in on him. And this is awfully true in these druggie contemporary times.
If a person can reach for something and withdraw from it, he could be said to be in communication with that thing.
To be in communication with something is to be at cause over it.
By REACH we mean touching or taking hold of. It is defined as “to get to,” “come to” and/or “arrive at.”
By WITHDRAW we mean move back from, let go.
A highly effective action called “Reach and Withdraw” has been developed to bring a person into communication with and more at cause over objects, people, spaces, boundaries and situations.
It also extroverts a person from something he tends to be introverted into.
USES
Reach and Withdraw has a variety of different uses.
It can be run as a drill on a student, staff member or any person in-order to familiarize him with the objects and spaces and boundaries of his work or study area.
It is also used in session, as in assists, etc.
Reach and Withdraw is a very broad tool and whether used on a staff member, student or pc will have far-reaching effects.
Reach and Withdraw is very easy to run.
Anyone can run Reach and Withdraw who has been checked out on the theory and procedure as contained in this HCOB.
THEORY
In Reach and Withdraw you are doing connection with Associative Restimulators.
An Associative Restimulator is something in the environment of an individual that he has confused with an actual restimulator.
Restimulators are the direct approximations (in the environment of the individual) of the content of engrams. They can be words, voice tones, people, objects, spaces, etc.
The person has confused the objects, forms and spaces in his environment with those of incidents in his past.
A = A = A enters in and you get a whole dangerous environment to the individual. Some areas are more restimulative than others, because they contain objects which directly restimulate past engrams.
When a person runs Reach and Withdraw on his space or area, he knocks out the Associative Restimulators in that area. The whole place is not restimulative to his past. It might just be the desk. Or it might be the air vent.
You don’t know what it is and he doesn’t know what it is, but you’ll get it and you’ll run Reach and Withdraw on it, and when you hit it, that thing will cease to be an Associative Restimulator or Restimulator and he’ll get a cognition.
In other words, the objects, forms and spaces of earlier incidents go back into the past and those in the present cease to be restimulators and he comes into present time, boom!
When you run Reach and Withdraw on a pilot, making him reach and withdraw from an airplane and its various parts, you’re getting rid of all the joysticks that went into his stomach 200,000 years ago and the propeller that cut his head off on Arcturus and all that sort of thing.
These things get peeled off and actually go into the past and cease to trouble the person when he perceives a similar object, form or space in the present.
This is why Reach and Withdraw works.
REACH AND WITHDRAW ON POST AND WORK AREAS
In the physical universe, communication with objects, forms, spaces and boundaries is best established by actual physical contact.
Reach and Withdraw is a valuable tool to use to get a person into good communication with his work environment, especially the tools and objects he uses.
A pilot would do Reach and Withdraw on all the objects and spaces of his airplane, his hangar, the earth; a secretary would do Reach and Withdraw on her typewriter, her chair, walls, spaces, her desk, etc.
Reach and Withdraw is also used for the same purpose as part of debug tech. It is run after a Crashing Mis-U has been found and cleared in order to refamiliarize and get a person into communication with his production area.
Feeling comfortable with the tools of one’s trade is a very important step in getting out products. One can increase the amount of production tremendously with this drill.
It is not kindergarten tech: A flight surgeon, trained by us, ran Reach and Withdraw on his squadron and for one whole year there was not one single accident, not even so much as the touch of a wing tip to a wing tip. It is probably the only squadron in history that went a whole year without even a minor accident and there was no accident at the end of that year either, we simply stopped keeping records of it.
REACH AND WITHDRAW ON THE COURSE ROOM
Any student in any course room can be run on Reach and Withdraw.
Reach and Withdraw on the course room environment gets the student into communication with the course room and the people and materials he will be working with. It tends to handle any back-off the student may have.
Reach and Withdraw can be run on anything or anyone in the course room, paper, books, dictionaries, a student, a Supervisor and the course room and its spaces.
Reach and Withdraw is run on the above to a win for the student. The student will now be more in communication with and feel more comfortable in his study environment.
REACH AND WITHDRAW IN AUDITING
Reach and Withdraw in auditing has long been used to bring about an increase of sanity—it has both mental and physical uses.
It is used to get a preclear into communication with anything that may be troubling him, be it a person, a situation, an area or a part of the body. It also serves to separate him from terminals and situations so that he is not compulsive towards them.
Reach and Withdraw can be used to restore communication to a sick or injured body part, and is often used this way in assists.
It is also used in repairs and assists of all kinds to restore a pc’s communication and cause level, as covered in HCOB 13 June 70, C/S Series 3, SESSION PRIORITIES, REPAIR PGMS AND THEIR PRIORITY.
CASE SUPERVISOR OKAY
It is not necessary to obtain Case Supervisor okay to run Reach and Withdraw as a drill in the course room. However, it is required that any Reach and Withdraw be followed by sending the student to the Examiner. The Exam Form is sent to the C/S in the person’s pc folder along with a full write-up of what occurred on the drill, time started and ended, wins, etc. (Ref: HCOB 8 Mar. 71R, C/S Series 29R, CASE ACTIONS, OFF-LINE)
COMMANDS AND PROCEDURE
The commands for Reach and Withdraw are:
1. “REACH THAT _______.”
2. “WITHDRAW FROM THAT ________.”
The following commands may be substituted if the wording is more appropriate to the particular person, place or thing being addressed:
1. “TOUCH THAT________.”
2. “LET GO OF THAT________.”
A person, place or thing is named in the blank and the commands are given alternately (1, 2, 1, 2, and so on) repetitively, with an acknowledgment given after the execution of each command.
It is done on that one thing until the person has a minor win or three consecutive sets of commands with no change in the pc’s motions or attitude. Then another person, place or thing is chosen and the commands are taken to a win on that item, and so on.
The words “reach” and “withdraw” are defined for the person using only the definitions given on page 1 of this HCOB.
The person running Reach and Withdraw on another always points to the object (or person, space, etc.) each time he gives a command so there will be no mistake made by the person doing it.
When being run as a drill on work or study areas, different items are chosen and the action is done on each one until the person is in good communication with his general environment or specific area that is being addressed.
In choosing objects, one usually progresses from the smaller to the larger objects available, touching different parts of each one in turn to a minor win of some sort on that object or three sets of commands with no change. One can also include walls and floors and other parts of the environment.
One doesn’t keep the person reaching and withdrawing endlessly from the same part of anything that is being used but goes to different points and parts of an object being touched. If you keep him reaching for the same point on an object or just the general object time after time, you are actually running a duplication process, not Reach and Withdraw, and Reach and Withdraw is not to be confused with Op Pro by Dup.
The person would be taken to a win or three sets of commands with no change on that one object or space (not on each different part of it that he is reaching and withdrawing from).
The reason why we have to have the three sets of commands with no-change rule is that the person isn’t on the meter and we have to depend on the person running the action to know when he hits a no-change. The object being used at the moment may not be of interest to the person or he may have no aberration on it. Yet he is working right there next to something that is extremely restimulative to him and his attention keeps being pulled onto it. So he can actually be quite distracted if Reach and Withdraw isn’t run on the three sets of commands of no change rule. It also prevents an endless grind on Reach and Withdraw.
So when the person has a minor win or does three sets of commands with no change, go onto the next object or space.
The person administering Reach and Withdraw walks around with the person doing the action, ensuring that he actually does get in physical contact with the points or areas of objects, spaces and boundaries.
We used to run Reach and Withdraw on ship stewards by having them walk into the dining room and walk out of the dining room over and over. This is used when you’re running Reach and Withdraw on a room or a space rather than an object. Of course, we also ran them on the other objects connected with their duties.
END PHENOMENA
The end phenomena of Reach and Withdraw is a win or cognition accompanied by good indicators on the whole area being addressed.
Reach and Withdraw would not be run past a major win on the area.
In auditing, Reach and Withdraw is run to a cognition accompanied by an F/N and very good indicators.
RUNNING REACH AND WITHDRAW
Auditors and other people running Reach and Withdraw have encountered some interesting phenomena, occasional difficulty and some astounding wins.
Some of these are given here to supply additional reality and data on Reach and Withdraw.
Phenomena
A person being run on Reach and Withdraw will often begin by being very careful and slow and exhibit back-off from touching the thing. He may not want to touch it at all. This flattens as the action is continued.
There is a large variance in how long the action will run before the EP is reached. Sometimes it is very fast, sometimes it runs for quite a while before the person hits the EP.
Occasionally, the person will begin to do the process on automatic—he just goes on circuit and carries out the commands, but it isn’t really him doing it. If this should occur, one can simply ask, “How is it going?” or “What’s happening?” and ack his answer and continue the process.
Pictures or incidents show up or turn on and then blow off. This is perfectly all right—in fact it is usual. One would simply continue running the action to EP.
People will go through a cycle of interiorizing into the object or space and then after a while they exteriorize from it.
They may get very interested in the object and all of its detail and parts.
These are not all of the manifestations that will be encountered. But it gives one a good idea of what to expect.
Difficulties
Obviously, anyone running Reach and Withdraw must stay in excellent communication with and be aware of the person he is running it on, so as not to miss a win or three sets of no-change commands. The person might not voice the win if he isn’t in sufficient communication with the person doing the action on him. One must take care not to overrun a person on Reach and Withdraw.
Sometimes the person doing the action will try to take over control of the action and choose what he will be run on and for how long. This is an indicator that the person running it is not controlling him well enough.
Some people like to touch and feel the thing when they reach for it, not just give it a light tap. One must be alert to this and not prematurely acknowledge as it may cause an upset.
Overrunning this action will cause difficulty. This has been a problem particularly when the person is supposed to run Reach and Withdraw on a series of items (as in Reach and Withdraw on the course room). The person may hit the EP of the whole action on the second item, yet it is continued to be run on other items past the EP. One runs Reach and Withdraw to its stated EP and that’s the end of it. Don’t go rote and plow the person in. When he’s had his win and is brightly in present time and feels good about the environment, end off.
Grogginess and anaten may turn on, but actually this is perfectly fine and the person would simply be continued on the action and he’ll come out of it.
Reach and Withdraw is a very simple action and if it is run per this HCOB one shouldn’t get into difficulty.
Wins
The most common wins people have on Reach and Withdraw are increased perception, renewed communication and coming into PT on the area addressed.
Sometimes a person will realize he has had a picture there instead of the object and when Reach and Withdraw is run, just as given above, the picture blows and he is there in PT with the object for the first time. I)on’t get involved with the picture, continue Reach and Withdraw.
All sorts of pictures and incidents can turn on and blow during this action.
Reach and Withdraw run on equipment has produced some amazing results.
It increases the person’s ability to use the equipment by increasing his familiarity and ARC for it.
One person was run on Reach and Withdraw on a large piece of equipment he was having trouble installing. The installation seemed hopelessly bugged. During the Reach and Withdraw he realized that a large cable necessary to hook up the machine was totally disconnected! He’d never even seen the cable before.
Reach and Withdraw has also handled a person’s accident proneness with equipment.
Often a person will go exterior when run on Reach and Withdraw on a large area or object.
Reach and Withdraw on a sick or injured pc has keyed out engrams and greatly speeded recovery.
One pc was suffering from a mysterious, but rather severe, pain in a body part. He was run on Reach and Withdraw on that body part and realized the source of the pain and blew the somatic totally.
The wins and gains available from Reach and Withdraw are actually limitless.
__________
Reach and Withdraw is very easy to do. It is enjoyable for both the person administering it and the person receiving it and has very valuable results.
If a person is going to do anything—study a subject, learn to drive a car, start a new job or post, attain a high level of production, be at cause over the things he deals with or simply survive better—Reach and Withdraw on objects, people, situations, spaces and boundaries will greatly assist one’s control, familiarity, cause level and understanding.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MAY 1981RA
REVISED 27 JUNE 1988
Remimeo
Class V Grad
Auditor Checksheet
C/Ses
Class V Grad and
above Auditors
and C/Ses
Tech/Qual
Study Series 10RA
STUDY GREEN FORM
Refs:
HCOB 2 July 78 NED Series II
DIANETIC STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE
HCOB 23 Nov. 69RB III STUDENT RESCUE INTENSIVE
Rev. 4.9.78
The Study Green Form is an analysis list which locates and indicates the handling of troubles with the subject of study, largely independent of or in addition to misunderstood words.
This list is used when a person cannot be hatted or trained. It is a major action that is programed for by the C/S in order to find and handle what is wrong with a person’s case studywise. It can also be used to cure the rebel or revolutionary student.
It will be found, on some pcs, that the subject of study has become so charged that the very idea of study itself has become traumatic. When a person becomes very misemotional about study, has persisting study troubles that do not clean up or when there are other indicators of study-connected engrams, the person should be given a Study Green Form followed by a Student Rescue Intensive.
The end phenomena of the Study Green Form is a person who knows he can study.
(Note: The Study Green Form should not be confused with the Word Clearing Correction List or other student lists such as the Student Correction List or the Student Rehabilitation List. Each of these lists has a distinct purpose as covered in HCOB 24 Oct. 76RA, C/S Series 96RA, DELIVERY REPAIR LISTS.)
Assess this list Method 3 or 5. (Refs: HCOB 28 May 70, CORRECTION LISTS, USE OF; HCOB 20 Dec. 71, C/S Series 72, USE OF CORRECTION LISTS; HCOB 10 June 71 I, C/S Series 44R, PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS)
If the pc has a big win, end off the session and let him have his win. When he is off his win, the list is then resumed and completed through to the end unless the EP of “person knows he can study” has been reached. Otherwise, it is completed all the way through to the end, in all cases. It is reassessed if necessary.
1. HAVE YOU GONE EXTERIOR IN AUDITING? _________
(Check to make sure the read is a valid read and not a protest or false read. If it is valid, indicate it. If the pc is not Clear or OT, give him a standard Int RD per Int RD Series 2. If he is Clear or OT and has not had an Int RD, give him the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int Series 4RA. If the pc has had an Int RD or End of Endless Int Repair RD, do an Int RD Correction List [HCOB 29 Oct. 71RA]. If Int correction has already been done on the pc, get an FES of the Int RD and its corrections. If you are not qualified to audit or repair Int, turn the pc over to a qualified auditor. When all errors are corrected, the C/S may order the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int Series 4RA, as applicable.)
2. HAS YOUR INT HANDLING BEEN MESSED UP? _________
(Assess and handle an Int RD Correction List. If Int correction has already been done on the pc, get an FES of the Int RD and its corrections. When all errors are corrected, the C/S may order the End of Endless Int Repair RD per Int Series 4RA.)
3. HAS THERE BEEN A LIST ERROR? _________
(Find out which list and handle with an L4BRA.)
4. ON STUDY HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN A WRONG WHY? _________
(L4BRA and handle.)
5. ON STUDY DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK? _________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
6. ON STUDY DO YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK OF LONG DURATION? _________
(ARCU CDEINR E/S to F/N.)
7. ON STUDY DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
8. ON STUDY ARE YOU WITHHOLDING ANYTHING? _________
(Get what, if discreditable find out who missed it. E/S to F/N.)
9. DID YOU EVER KNOWINGLY GO BY MISUNDERSTOOD WORDS? _________
(Handle as a withhold E/S to F/N. Clear any misunderstoods found, each to F/N.)
10. DO YOU HAVE A MISSED WITHHOLD OF GOING PAST MISUNDERSTOODS? _________
(Pull the missed withhold E/S to F/N. Then clear each misunderstood he went past, each word to F/N.)
11. HAVE YOU HAD EARLY BAD AUDITING? _________
(L1C Method 3 on early auditing.)
12. WAS WORD CLEARING DONE IN THE MIDDLE OF ANOTHER INCOMPLETE AUDITING CYCLE? _________
(2WC to F/N. Get which cycle pc is on and by folder inspection evaluate which one needs to be completed first— make sure it is fully noted on the pc’s program to complete word clearing if the other action is handled first.)
13. DO YOU HAVE AN INCOMPLETE TRs COURSE? _________
(2WC to F/N. Pgm to complete TRs course.)
14. ON STUDY HAVE YOU HAD TROUBLE WITH CLEARING WORDS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N. WCCL if needed. Pgm for Method 1 W/C or repair/flattening of it if already done.)
15. ON STUDY IS THERE BYPASSED CHARGE ON WORD CLEARING? _________
(WCCL and handle.)
16. DO YOU HAVE TROUBLE WITH WORDS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N. WCCL if needed. Pgm for Method 1 W/C or repair/flattening of it if already done.)
17. DO YOU HAVE MISUNDERSIoODS FROM YOUR EARLIER SCHOOLING? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N. WCCL if needed. Pgm for Method 1 W/C or repair/flattening of it if already done.)
18. ON STUDY HAS YOUR WORD CLEARING BEEN MESSED UP? _________
(WCCL and handle.)
19. DON’T YOU WANT TO STUDY? _________
(Find out if there was a time when he did want to study and someone invalidated this and clean it up. Otherwise ask, “Tell me about why you don’t want to study,” and 2WC to F/N.)
20. HAS THERE BEEN NO AUDITING ON THE SUBJECT OF STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
21. HAVE YOU BEEN MADE TO STUDY BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE DEMANDED IT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
22. HAVE YOU HAD TO STUDY WHEN YOU DIDN’T WANT TO? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
23. ON STUDY HAS THERE BEEN AN INJUSTICE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
24. HAS ETHICS ACTION EVER BEEN TAKEN ON YOU FOR NOT APPLYING STUDY TECH? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
25. SHOULD ETHICS ACTION HAVE BEEN TAKEN ON YOU FOR FAILING TO APPLY STUDY TECH? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
26. HAVE YOU BEEN THREATENED INTO STUDYING? _________
(Triple or Quad Recalls on being threatened into studying.
F1: Recall a time you were threatened into studying.
F2: Recall a time you threatened another into studying.
F3: Recall a time others threatened others into studying.
F0: Recall a time you threatened yourself into studying.)
27. HAVE YOU BEEN PUNISHED INTO STUDYING? _________
(Triple or Quad Recalls on being threatened into studying.
F1: Recall a time you were threatened into studying.
F2: Recall a time you threatened another into studying.
F3: Recall a time others threatened others into studying.
F0: Recall a time you threatened yourself into studying.)
28. IS THERE PAIN CONNECTED WITH STUDY? _________
(Triple or Quad Recalls on pain connected to study.
F1: Recall a time pain was connected to study.
F2: Recall a time you caused another to have pain connected with study.
F3: Recall a time others caused others to have pain connected with study.
F0: Recall a time you caused yourself to have pain connected with study.)
29. HAVE YOU BEEN MADE TO STUDY WHEN YOU HAD NO WILLINGNESS TO KNOW? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
30. HAVE YOU BEEN MADE TO FEEL BAD ABOUT DOING POORLY IN STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
31. HAVE YOU BEEN ASHAMED OF YOUR SCHOOL GRADES? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
32. HAVE YOU BEEN MADE TO FEEL LIKE A SOCIAL OUTCAST BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T DO WELL IN SCHOOL? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
33. HAVE YOU BEEN PUSHED TO GET GOOD GRADES? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
34. HAVE YOU BEEN ASHAMED OF NOT FINISHING HIGH SCHOOL? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
35. WERE YOU MADE TO THINK YOU’D FAILED BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T GO TO COLLEGE (UNIVERSITY)? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
36. HAS SOMEONE TOLD YOU YOU WERE A BAD STUDENT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
37. HAVE YOU BEEN RIDICULED IN FRONT OF OTHER STUDENTS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
38. HAS THERE BEEN NO ONE TO SUPERVISE YOUR STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
39. ON STUDY HAS NO ONE SHOWN ANY INTEREST IN YOUR PROGRESS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
40. HAVE YOU HAD BAD STUDY SUPERVISION? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
41. ON STUDY HAVE YOU HAD BAD COACHING? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
42. ON STUDY HAVE YOU BEEN INVALIDATED? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
43. HAVE YOU KNOWN IT WOULD NEVER DO ANY GOOD TO STUDY? _________
(Find out if there was a time when he felt it did matter if he studied and someone invalidated this. If so, clean it up. Otherwise ask, “Tell me about why it would never do any good to study,” and 2WC to F/N.)
44. ON STUDY HAVE YOU INVALIDATED YOURSELF? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
45. HAS SOMEONE TOLD YOU THAT YOU DON’T KNOW HOW TO STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
46. HAVE YOU BEEN FLUNKED WHEN YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN? _________
(Indicate. Rehab the point when he knew he had it.)
47. ON STUDY HAD YOU MADE IT AND SOMEONE SAID YOU HADN’T? _________
(Indicate. Rehab the point when he made it.)
48. HAS SOMEONE INVALIDATED WHAT YOU STUDIED? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
49. ON STUDY HAVE YOU BEEN MADE TO FEEL STUPID ABOUT A SUBJECT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
50. HAVE YOU BEEN MADE WRONG BY A TEACHER? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
51. ON STUDY HAS SOMEONE TRIED TO CORRECT YOU WHEN THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
52. HAVE YOU BEEN PREVENTED FROM STUDYING? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
53. HAVE OTHERS PREVENTED YOU FROM KNOWING? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
54. HAVE YOU BEEN REPRIMANDED FOR WANTING TO KNOW? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
55. WERE YOU NOT ALLOWED TO OBSERVE, UNDERSTAND AND DO? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
56. COULDN’T YOU STUDY BECAUSE OF THE DEMANDS OF A JOB OR POST? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
57. WAS THERE NO TIME TO STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
58. HAS THERE BEEN SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE STUDY ENVIRONMENT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
59. HAVE YOU BEEN DISTURBED WHILE STUDYING? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
60. ON STUDY WAS SOMEONE MAD AT YOU? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
61. ON STUDY IS THERE AN ENGRAM IN RESTIMULATION? _________
(Indicate. Assess an L3RH and handle.) (On Clears or above, simply indicate the item. If no F/N, assess an L3RH but do no more than indicate the reading item[s]. Do NOT run any Dianetics.)
62. DO YOU HAVE AN ENGRAM MATCHING PRESENT TIME STUDY? _________
(If so, run it out Narrative R3RA Triple or Quad.) (On Clears or above, simply indicate the item. If no F/N, assess an L3RH but do no more than indicate the reading item[s]. Do NOT run any Dianetics.)
63. HAVE YOU BEEN OVERWHELMED ON STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
64. HAVE YOU BEEN CONNECTED TO SOMEONE WHO DIDN’T WANT YOU TO LEARN? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
65. HAVE YOU BEEN MADE TO FEEL A SUBJECT WAS DANGEROUS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
66. DOESN’T STUDY TECH WORK ON YOU? _________
(Find out what didn’t work and correct it to F/N VGIs and a win.)
67. ON STUDY IS THERE SOMETHING YOU’RE CONFUSED ABOUT? _________
(Find out what it is and clear it up to F/N and VGIs.)
68. ON STUDY HAVE YOU GONE PAST MISUNDERSTOODS? _________
(Assess a WCCL and handle.)
69. HAVE YOU FAILED TO USE STUDY TECH? _________
(2WC to find out what he hasn’t used. Itsa E/S itsa to F/N, then clear up any misunderstoods that have come up.)
70. ON STUDY WERE THERE NO DICTIONARIES? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
71. ON STUDY WERE THE DICTIONARIES INADEQUATE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
72. ON STUDY WERE THE DICTIONARIES INCOMPREHENSIBLE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
73. ON STUDY HAVE MATERIALS CONTAINED INCORRECT DATA? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
74. DID MATERIALS YOU TRIED TO STUDY CONTAIN OMITTED DATA? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
75. ON STUDY WERE YOU GIVEN NO TEXT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
76. ON STUDY WERE YOU GIVEN A FALSE TEXT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
77. HAVE YOU BEEN UNABLE TO FIND THE DATA YOU WANTED IN TEXTBOOKS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
78. HAS THE DATA IN BOOKS BEEN INCOMPREHENSIBLE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
79. HAVE YOU WANTED TO LEARN SOMETHING BUT YOU COULDN’T GET IT OUT OF A TEXTBOOK? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
80. HAVE YOU STUDIED SOMETHING THAT WAS FALSE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
81. HAVE THERE BEEN DISAGREEMENTS WITH DATA? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
82. ON STUDY HAS ANYONE TAUGHT OR GIVEN YOU FALSE DATA? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
83. ON STUDY HAVE YOU RECEIVED VERBAL DATA? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
84. HAS SOMEONE MADE YOU STUDY IMPROPERLY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
85. ON STUDY HAVE YOU BEEN MADE 1o DO THINGS WRONG? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
86. ON STUDY HAVE YOU BEEN PREVENTED FROM USING YOUR OWN JUDGMENT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
87. HAVE THERE BEEN ARBITRARY RULES ABOUT HOW YOU STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
88. WAS THERE NO REASON FOR LEARNING SOMETHING? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
89. IS THERE ANY REASON YOU SHOULD REMAIN IGNORANT? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
90. IS KNOWLEDGE OF NO VALUE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
91. IS THERE SOMETHING OTHERS SHOULDN’T KNOW? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
92. HAVE YOU EVER WILLFULLY KEPT YOURSELF FROM BEING INFORMED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
93. HAVE YOU HAD TO STUDY SOMETHING YOU WOULD NEVER NEED TO APPLY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
94. COULDN’T YOU GET RESULTS WITH WHAT YOU LEARNED? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
95. HAVE YOU STUDIED ONLY TO PASS AN EXAM? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
96. HAVE YOU NEVER APPLIED WHAT YOU LEARNED? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
97. HAVE YOU STUDIED FOR SOME OTHER REASON? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
98. WAS THERE NO CHOICE ABOUT WHAT YOU STUDIED? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
99. DID YOU HAVE TO STUDY WHEN YOU WANTED TO DO SOMETHING ELSE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
100. HAVE YOU HAD TO STUDY SOMETHING YOU HAD NO INTEREST IN? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
101. HAVE YOU HAD TO STUDY A SUBJECT THAT WAS OF NO USE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
102. DO YOU GET ANGRY AT THINGS YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
103. HAVE YOU HAD TO LEARN TOO MANY THINGS BEFORE YOU COULD LEARN WHAT YOU WANTED TO? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
104. DID SOMETHING SEEM TOO DIFFICULT TO LEARN? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
105. HAVE YOU HAD TO STUDY TOO MUCH TOO FAST? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
106. WERE YOU ASKED TO DO THINGS YOU COULDN’T STUDY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
107. WERE YOU ASKED TO LEARN THE WHOLE SUBJECT AT ONCE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
108. DID SOMEONE EXPECT YOU TO KNOW IT ALL AT ONCE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
109. DO YOU LEARN SLOWLY BUT YOU’VE BEEN MADE IY) STUDY FAST? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
110. DO YOU LEARN FAST BUT YOU’VE BEEN MADE TO STUDY SLOWLY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
111. WERE YOU A FAST STUDY AND PEOPLE SAID YOU WERE SLOW? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
112. HAVE THE BASICS OF A SUBJECT BEEN OMITTED? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
113. HAVE STUDY MATERIALS BEEN UNAVAILABLE? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
114. WAS IT ALL DOINGNESS AND NO REASON WHY? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
115. HAS IT BEEN ALL SIGNIFICANCE AND NO DOINGNESS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
116. ON STUDY WAS A GRADIENT TOO STEEP? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
117. ON STUDY DID YOU SKIP A GRADIENT? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
118. HAVE YOU HAD TO CONTINUE STUDYING WHEN YOU ALREADY KNEW IT? _________
(Indicate. Rehab the point where he knew it.)
119. ON STUDY HAS THERE BEEN A WRONG EMPHASIS? _________
(Itsa E/S itsa to F/N.)
120. DO YOU HAVE OVERTS AGAINST STUDY? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
121. HAVE YOU COMMITTED OVERTS BY REASON OF STUDY? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
122. HAVE YOU COMMITTED CRIMES IN SCHOOL? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
123. DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING IN STUDY THAT YOU FELT BAD ABOUT? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
124. ON STUDY DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD WHICH YOU JUSTIFIED? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
125. HAVE YOU VIOLATED STUDENT RULES? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
126. HAVE YOU GIVEN VERBAL DATA OR DEFINITIONS TO OTHERS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
127. HAVE YOU COMMITTED OVERTS ON A TEACHER OR SUPERVISOR? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
128. HAVE YOU BEEN CRITICAL OF STUDY OR TEACHERS BEHIND THEIR BACKS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
129. HAVE YOU CAUSED AN UPSET IN A COURSE ROOM? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
130. HAVE YOU LIED TO A TEACHER OR SUPERVISOR? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
131. HAVE YOU MADE TROUBLE FOR A TEACHER OR SUPERVISOR? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
132. HAVE YOU REFUSED TO LET OTHERS HELP YOU LEARN? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
133. HAVE YOU COMMITTED OVERTS ON STUDENTS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
134. HAVE YOU MADE ANOTHER FEEL STUPID? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
135. HAVE YOU MADE OTHERS FEEL ASHAMED OF THEIR SCHOOL GRADES? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
136. HAVE YOU DAMAGED STUDY MATERIALS OR BOOKS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
137. HAVE YOU STOLEN STUDY MATERIALS OR BOOKS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
138. DO YOU HAVE UNPAID DEBTS FOR COURSES YOU’VE TAKEN? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
139. HAVE YOU OMITTED DOING PARTS OF A CHECKSHEET OR COURSE? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
140. HAVE YOU PASSED A CHECKSHEET, TEST OR EXAM FALSELY? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
141. DID YOU BRIBE ANYONE IN ANY WAY TO PASS YOU? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
142. ON STUDY HAVE YOU CHEATED? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
143. ON STUDY HAVE YOU TAKEN CREDIT FOR SOMETHING YOU DIDN’T DO? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
144. ON STUDY HAVE YOU FAILED TO DO HOMEWORK OR ASSIGNMENTS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
145. HAVE YOU FALSIFIED YOUR STUDY STATS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
146. HAVE YOU FALSELY ATTESTED TO COURSE COMPLETIONS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
147. HAVE YOU PRETENDED YOU’VE STUDIED WHEN YOU HAVEN’T? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
148. HAVE YOU STUDIED BUT NOT INTENDED TO LEARN? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
149. WHILE ON STUDY HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING ELSE INSTEAD? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
150. DID YOU STUDY OR STAY IN SCHOOL TO AVOID HAVING TO DO SOMETHING ELSE? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
151. ON STUDY HAVE YOU NOT PAID ATTENTION? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
152. HAVE YOU SKIPPED GOING TO STUDY? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
153. HAVE YOU NOT GONE TO SCHOOL WHEN YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
154. HAVE YOU FALSELY ATTESTED TO COURSE PREREQUISITES? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
155. HAVE YOU PRETENDED TO HAVE STUDIED THINGS YOU HADN’T? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
156. HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING THAT MAKES YOU NOT DESERVE STUDY? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
157. HAVE YOU STUDIED SOMETHING SO THAT YOU COULD DO HARM? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
158. HAVE YOU PRETENDED TO KNOW A SUBJECT? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
159. HAVE YOU ALTERED STUDY TECH? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
160. HAVE YOU CONVINCED OTHERS IT WAS USELESS TO STUDY? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
161. HAVE YOU TURNED STUDENTS AGAINST THEIR TEACHERS? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
162. DID YOU EVER THINK OF STARTING A STUDENT REVOLT? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
163. HAVE YOU TRIED TO GET OTHER STUDENTS TO REVOLT? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
164. HAVE YOU GONE TO SCHOOL JUST TO MAKE TROUBLE? _________
(Get what he did, who missed it, E/S to F/N.)
165. DO YOU HAVE EYESTRAIN OR BAD EYESIGHT? _________
(2WC to F/N. Note for C/S.)
166. ON STUDY DO YOU HAVE TROUBLE WITH YOUR HEARING? _________
(2WC to F/N. Note for C/S.)
167. IN STUDY HAS SOMETHING BEEN OVERRUN? _________
(Find out what and rehab.)
168. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG WITH STUDY IN THE FIRST PLACE? _________
(Indicate. If no F/N, rehab or date/locate.)
169. IS THIS LIST AN UNNECESSARY ACTION? _________
(Indicate. If no F/N, rehab or date/locate.)
170. HAVE YOU EVER FELT YOU COULD STUDY? _________
(Rehab this point.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1981R
REVISED 4 JULY 1988
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Tech/Qual
STUDY GREEN FORM
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79RA I Word Clearing Series 64RA
Rev. 30.7.83 THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 4 May 81RA, STUDY GREEN FORM.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the STUDY GREEN FORM is actually assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The staff auditor or intern must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time.
The fact of having cleared this word list on the pc must be noted in the appropriate place in the pc’s folder. (Ref: HCOB 30 Oct. 87, Auditor Admin Series 6RA, THE YELLOW SHEET)
WORDS FROM THE STUDY GREEN FORM
A, about, accepted, actions against, all, allowed, already, altered, an, and, angry, another, any, anyone, anything, applied, apply, arbitrary, ARC break, are, ashamed, asked, assignments, at, attention, attested, auditing, avoid.
Backs, bad, basics, be, because, been, before, behind, being, books, bribe, but, by, bypassed charge.
Caused, cheated, checksheet, choice, clean up, clearing, coaching, college, committed, completions, confused, connected, contained, continue, convinced, correct, correction, could, couldn’t, course, course room, courses, credit, crimes, critical, cycle.
Damaged, dangerous, data, debts, definitions, demanded, demands, deserve, dictionaries, did, didn’t, difficult, disagreements, disturbed, do, doesn’t, doing, doingness, done, don’t, duration.
Earlier, early, else, emphasis, engram, environment, error, ethics, ever, exam, expect, exterior, eyesight, eyestrain.
Failed, failing, false, false data, falsely, falsified, fast, feel, felt, find, finishing, first, flunked, for, from, front.
Get, given, go, going, gone, good, grades, gradient.
Had, hadn’t, handling, harm, has, have, haven’t, having, hearing, help, high school, homework, how.
Ignorant, improperly, in, inadequate, incomplete, incomprehensible, incorrect, informed, injustice, instead, Int, intended, interest, into, invalidate, invalidated, is, it.
Job, judgment, just, justified.
Kept, knew, know, knowing, knowingly, knowledge, known.
Learn, learned, learning, let, lied, like, list, long.
Mad, made, make, makes, many, matching, materials, messed up, middle, missed withhold, misunderstood, misunderstoods, much.
Need, never, no, not, nothing.
Observe, of, omitted, on, once, one, only, or, order, other, others, out, outcast, overrun, overts, overwhelmed, own.
Paid, pain, parts, pass, passed, past, place, poorly, post, prerequisites, present time, pretended, prevented, problem, progress, punished, pushed.
Reason, recall, received, refused, remain, reprimanded, restimulation, results, revolt, ridiculed, rules.
Said, school, schooling, seem, should, shouldn’t, shown, significance, skip, skipped, slowly, smarter, so, social, some, someone, something, starting, stats, stay, steep, stolen, student, students, studied, study, studying, study tech, stupid, subject, supervise, Supervisor, supervision, supposed.
Taken, taught, teacher, teachers, test, text, textbook, textbooks, than, that, the, their, there, things, think, this, threatened, time, to, told, too, tried, trouble, TRs, turned.
Unable, unavailable, understand, university, unnecessary, unpaid, upset, use, useless, using.
Value, verbal data, violated.
Want, wanted, wanting, was, way, well, were, what, when, which, while, who, whole, why, willfully, willingness, with, withholding, word, word clearing, words, work, would, wrong.
You, you’d, your, you’re, yourself, you’ve.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JULY 1981
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
Registrars
PREGNANCY AND AUDITING
Pregnant mothers are not to be audited or audit, for the sixth month on up, on Power and up on the Grade Chart.
It is very common for pregnant mothers to be audited and to audit on Dianetics and is in fact vital.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Snr C/S FLB
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JULY 1981R
REVISED 13 APRIL 1991
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
Tech/Qual
FULL ASSIST CHECKLISTS
FOR INJURIES AND ILLNESSES
Refs:
Ability 73 ca. May 1958 ”Assists in Scientology”
HCOB 27 July 69 ANTIBIOTICS
HCOB 5 July 71RB C/S Series 49RB
Rev. 20.9.78 ASSISTS
HCOB 11 July 73RB ASSIST SUMMARY
Rev. 21.9.78
HCOB 23 July 71R ASSISTS
Rev. 16.7.78
HCOB 21 Oct. 71 ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY
HCOB 7 Apr. 72RA TOUCH ASSISTS, CORRECT ONES
Rev. 25.8.87
HCOB 24 July 69R SERIOUSLY ILL PCs
Rev. 24.7.78
HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
Rev. 26.7.86
HCOB 2 Apr. 69 RADIANETIC ASSISTS
Rev. 28.7.78
HCOB 16 Aug. 69R HANDLING ILLNESS IN SCIENTOLOGY
Rev. 25.9.78
HCOB 15 Nov. 78 DATING AND LOCATING
HCOB 15 July 70R UNRESOLVED PAINS
Rev. 17.7.78
HCOB 23 Dec. 71RB Solo C/S Series 10RB
Rev. 2.8.90 C/S Series 73RB
THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
CLARIFIED AND REINFORCED
HCOB 12 Mar. 69 II PHYSICALLY ILL PCs AND PRE-OTs
HCOB 4 Sept. 68 ”Don’t force a pc..”
HCOB 13 June 70 C/S Series 3
SESSION PRIORITIES
REPAIR PGMs AND THEIR PRIORITY
HCOB 29 Mar. 75RA ANTIBIOTICS, ADMINISTERING OF
Rev. 24.3.85
HCOB 12 Nov. 64 Word Clearing Series 26
DEFINITION PROCESSES
Tape: 5406C17 “Assists”
Tape: 5608C “Chronic Somatics”
Tape: 5905C21 “Clearing, Processes—Special Cases”
Tape: 6110C03 “The Prior Confusion”
Book: Dianetics 55!
IMPORTANT NOTE: DIANETICS IS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS, OTs AND DIANETIC CLEARS, PER HCOB 12 SEPT. 78R, DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTs.
There is a tremendous amount that can be done mentally and spiritually by an auditor to assist someone who is sick or hurt. We have known for years in Dianetics and Scientology that the tech of assists is very powerful and can work miracles when correctly applied.
The purpose of this bulletin is to lay out the available technology on assists for handling the ill or injured.
The processes presented in this issue are in checklist form, which will greatly aid the C/S and auditor in drawing up and executing a proper assist program.
USING THE CHECKLISTS
In 1974 I developed the system of using a preliminary assessment of the pc’s condition and checklists as aids to programing and C/Sing the case.
Attached to this bulletin are separate checklists which list symptoms for both injuries and illnesses and corresponding handling sheets which list out the many assist actions and their references one uses to handle either.
To use a checklist:
1. Look up the symptom or symptoms the pc may have on the appropriate preliminary assessment sheet (injury or illness). Below each symptom are listed many possible handlings.
2. Look up the handlings on the appropriate handling sheet.
3. Use these handlings and their references in C/Sing and programing the case.
4. Draw up the program and C/S.
5. The C/S can then circle the actions to be done on the handling sheet and number them in sequence. The handling sheet can be kept in the folder and signed off as each step is done.
6. Audit the pc regularly until the illness, injury or condition is handled.
C/Sing AND PROGRAMING
The Assist Summary bulletins were never intended to be used as a rote sequence of handling assists, which vary based on the circumstances of the pc.
It could be a serious mistake to simply robotically copy down in order the handlings listed for the pc’s symptoms and then audit them on the pc.
One reason for this is that the case levels of people differ. An OT with a sprained ankle would be handled differently than a Dianetic pc with one.
Also, injuries and illnesses are two separate subjects and are handled differently.
Therefore, data has to be gotten where available, from medical reports, session reports, interviews and exam statements, and the C/S has to understand the case before him and program and C/S accordingly.
ANY ASSIST ACTION MUST BE SUITED TO THAT PC’S CASE AND CURRENT CONDITION.
CAUTION
The injured or ill person is overwhelmed easily. One must beware of keying the person in.
The operating basis is to take it easy on the pc and try not to run anything too heavy on him. Going earlier-similar on two-way comms should be avoided as due to his condition E/S tends to make the ill or injured pc dive back to the year zero. This is more than a sick person can stand up to.
Along with this, NEVER MISS AN F/N ON A SICK PERSON.
NOTE ON HIGH-CRIMING REFERENCES
It well behooves any auditor or C/S to get his high-crime checkouts in PT for the assist actions listed in this bulletin. The circumstances requiring assists often crop up unexpectedly and a well-prepared auditor will be more successful than an unprepared one.
One would always do whatever one could to help a person in difficulty regardless. Still, it is a matter of technical integrity and professional pride that one would get his high-crime checkouts in PT for assist actions to his class.
___________
Factually, there is no group but ourselves which possesses a body of technology to effectively assist the spiritual condition of the ill or injured person. Our knowledge in this area is considerable.
So don’t skimp on your study and drilling of these procedures and the theory behind them. You can do much to relieve the misery suffered by the ill or injured.
With full understanding and application of assists you may appear to others to be a miracle worker.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HCOB 29.7.81R
ATTACHMENT #1
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT FOR INJURIES
PC: DATE:_______________
1. SYMPTOM: INJURED AND HAS DONE A BUNK.
HANDLINGS: 1, 3, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
2. SYMPTOM: SEVERELY INJURED AND CLOSE TO DEATH.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
3. SYMPTOM: HAS HAD AN ELECTRIC SHOCK.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 7, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
4. SYMPTOM: SEVERELY INJURED AND BLEEDING/BROKEN BONES.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
5. SYMPTOM: INJURED AND IN A COMA.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
6. SYMPTOM: IN OR WAS IN A STATE OF SHOCK.
HANDLINGS: 1, 7, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
7. SYMPTOM: INJURED AND UNCONSCIOUS.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
8. SYMPTOM: INJURED AND IN PAIN.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
9. SYMPTOM: INJURED WITH EXTREME DISCOMFORT.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
10. SYMPTOM: INJURED WITH AN INFECTION/TEMPERATURE.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2 (Antibiotics), 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
11. SYMPTOM: INJURED AND TAKING DRUGS.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
12. SYMPTOM: INJURED WITH LITTLE/NO DISCOMFORT.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 21, 22, 24, (Other processes between 8 and 39 may be used as needed), 40, 41, 42, 43, 44.
13. SYMPTOM: INJURY NOT HEALING.
HANDLINGS: 24, 25, 32, 33, 36, 40? 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47.
14. SYMPTOM: INJURED AFTER OR WHILE INCOMPLETE ON AN AUDITING ACTION.
HANDLINGS: Handle with appropriate handlings depending on the injury. Then do #48 from handling sheet as soon as possible.
15. SYMPTOM: OLD INJURY RECURRING OR RESTIMULATED.
HANDLINGS: 21, 22, 23, 24, 33, 36, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45.
16. SYMPTOM: INJURED AND IN THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA.
HANDLING: 52, then other appropriate handlings depending on the injury.
17. SYMPTOM: HIGH OR LOW TA.
HANDLING: 51.
18. SYMPTOM: REPEATING INJURIES OR ACCIDENTS (ACCIDENT PRONE).
HANDLING: 53, as soon as injury handlings are complete.
19. SYMPTOM: PC CAN’T RECALL RECENT ENGRAM.
HANDLINGS: 24 until pc recalls engram. Then 21, 23 and complete 24. Then proceed as above based on current symptoms.
20. SYMPTOM: CHILD INJURED AND IN PAIN.
HANDLINGS: 1, 2, 49, 8, 9, 10, 50.
PREGNANCY
SYMPTOM: GOING TO GIVE BIRTH OR HAS GIVEN BIRTH.
HANDLINGS: 2, 55, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 19, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34.
HCOB 29.7.81R
ATTACHMENT #2
HANDLING SHEET FOR INJURIES
1. FIRST AID AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
Where you are giving an assist to one person, you put things in the environment into an orderly state as the first step, unless you are trying to stop a pumping artery—but here you would use first aid. You should understand that first aid always precedes an assist. You should look the situation over from the standpoint of how much first aid is required.
You may often have to find some method of controlling, handling and directing personnel who get in your way before you can render an assist. You might just as well realize that an assist requires that you control the entire environment and personnel associated with the assist if necessary.
A good example of an assist would be when somebody is washing dishes in the kitchen. There is a horrendous crash and the person comes down all over the sink, hits the floor; as she is going down, she grabs the butcher knife as it falls. You go in and say, “Well, let me fix that up.” One of the first things you would have to do is to wind some bandage around the hand to stop the bleeding. Part of the first aid would be to pick up the dishes and put them back on the sink, sweep the pieces together into a more orderly semblance. This is the first symptom of control. IRef: HCOB 21 Oct. 71, ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY)
(This could include getting some assistance to ease discomfort, such as Epsom-salt baths, liniment, changing bandages, etc.)
2. MEDlCAL TREATMENT
An assist is not a substitute for medical attention and does not attempt to cure injuries requiring medical aid. First, call the doctor. Then assist the person as you can. (Ref: Ability 73, “Assists in Scientology”)
Medical examination and diagnosis should be sought where needed, and where treatment is routinely successful, medical treatment should be obtained. As an assist can at times cover up an actual injury or broken bone, no chances should be taken, especially if the condition does not easily respond. In other words, where something is merely thought to be a slight sprain, to be on the safe side an X-ray should be obtained, particularly if it does not at once respond. An assist is not a substitute for medical treatment but is complementary to it. It is even doubtful if full healing can be accomplished by medical treatment alone and it is certain that an assist greatly speeds recovery. In short, one should realize that physical healing does not take into account the being and the repercussion on the spiritual beingness of the person. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
3. lF A PERSON HAS DONE A BUNK
The preclear may do a compulsive exteriorization, “do a bunk,” and drop his body limp in the chair and give from that body no sign that he is hearing any of the auditing commands given by the auditor. One such case was pleaded with for half an hour by an auditor along the lines that the preclear should remember her husband, should think of her children, should come back and live for the
sake of her friends, and found no response from the preclear. Finally the auditor said, “Think of your poor auditor,” at which moment the preclear promptly returned. (Ref: Dianetics 55! Chapter XVI, “Exteriorization”)
4. UNCONSClOUS OR IN A COMA
“YOU MAKE THAT BODY SIT ON THAT CHAIR.” (or “LIE ON THAT BED.”) (Ref: Tape: 5905C21 Clearing, Processes—Special Cases)
5. UNCONSCIOUS OR IN A COMA
Touch patient’s hand to parts of the bed with “FEEL THAT (object).” (Ref: HCOB 27 July 69, ANTIBIOTICS)
6. UNCONSCIOUS OR IN A COMA
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. (Ref: HCOB 5 July 71RB, C/S Series 49RB, ASSISTS)
7. SHOCK OR CATATONIA
“HERE. WHAT WORD DID I SAY TO YOU?” “HERE. WHAT WORD DID I SAY TO YOU?” The auditor keeps this up until all of a sudden the pc says, “You said ‘Here.’ “ Then, “REACH DOWN NOW AND FIND THE FLOOR WITH YOUR HAND. PRESS IT.” (Ref: Tape: 5406C17 “Assists”)
8. CONTACT ASSIST
Where possible and where indicated, until the person has reestablished his communication with the physical universe site. To F/N. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 5 July 71RB, C/S Series 49RB, ASSISTS; HCOB 2 Apr. 69RA, DIANETIC ASSISTS)
9. TOUCH ASSIST
Until the person has reestablished communication with the physical part or parts affected. To F/N. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 21 Oct. 71, ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY; HCOB 7 Apr. 72RA, TOUCH ASSISTS, CORRECT ONES)
10. HAVINGNESS
Running HAVINGNESS in every assist session is vital. This not only remedies havingness but also brings the preclear to present time. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 7 Aug. 78, HAVINGNESS FINDING AND RUNNING THE PC’S HAVINGNESS PE2OCESS; HCOB 6 Oct. 60R, THIRTY-SIX NEW PRESESSIONS)
11. REACH AND WITHDRAW
Run Reach and Withdraw from the affected area. (Ref: HCOB 24 July 69R, SERIOUSLY ILL PCs)
Reach and Withdraw can also be done on other body parts not affected, the environment, the body itself, the location where an injury occurred, the thing that injured the pc (e.g., the knife that cut him). To EP of F/N, GIs. (Ref: HCOB 10 April 81R, REACH AND WITHDRAW)
12. HELLO AND OK
“HELLO” AND “OKAY.” (Ref: PAB 123, THE REALITY SCALE)
13. WHERE DID IT HAPPEN?
“WHERE DID IT HAPPEN?” “WHERE ARE YOU NOW?” (Ref: Ability 110, TECHNIQUES OF CHILD PROCESSING)
14. COMMUNICATION
“FROM WHERE COULD YOU COMMUNICATE TO A (body part)?” To F/N, Cog, VGIs. (Ref: HCOB 25 Sept. 59, HAS COAUDIT)
15. LOOK AT THAT______
“LOOK AT THAT (object).” “DECIDE THE INJURY CANNOT HAVE IT.” EP: Pain gone, cog, F/N. (Ref: Ability 73, ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY)
16. KEEP IT FROM GOING AWAY
“KEEP IT FROM GOING AWAY.” (Ref: Ability 73, ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY)
17. INJURY (IMPACT)
“WHERE AREN’T YOU BEING _____ (e.g., ‘hit’)?” Making sure he gets these places with great certainty. As a result you will get yourself quite a reduction in case. (Run to F/N, Cog, VGIs.) (Ref: Tape: 5406C17, “Assists”)
18. PURPOSE
Ask the pc, “GIVE ME ANOTHER PURPOSE FOR A (e.g., bad ear).” He already assumes he’s given you one. He’s got a bad ear. You could ask him for a few more purposes. Have him dream up a few more purposes and he’ll feel much better. (Ref: Tape: 5608C “Chronic Somatics”)
19. RUDIMENTS
Fly rudiments as follows:
HANDLE ANY ARC BREAK that might have existed at the time (a) with the environment, (b) with another, (c) with others, (d) with himself, (e) with the body part or the body and (f) with any failure to recover at once. Each to F/N.
HANDLE ANY PROBLEM the person may have had (a) at the time of illness or injury, (b) subsequently due to his or her condition. Each to F/N.
HANDLE ANY WITHHOLD (a) the person might have had at the time, (b) any subsequent withhold and (c) any having to withhold the body from work or others or the environment due to being physically unable to approach it. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
20. L1C
L1C “CONCERNING THE ILLNESS______” or “CONCERNING THE INJURY/ACCIDENT______.” Can also do LlC on the injured member. (Ref: HCOB 23 July 71R, ASSISTS)
21. NARRATIVE R3RA
RUN THE INCIDENT ITSELF Narrative R3RA Quad to erasure and full EP. Interest is checked. It is understood here that Flow 1 was the physical incident itself, not necessarily something done to the person but as something that happened to him or her. (Ref: HCOB 26 June 78RA II, NED Series 6RA, ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS; HCOB 28 July 71RB, C/S Series 54RB, NED Series 8RA, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
22. DATE/LOCATE
DATE/LOCATE THE INJURY. (Ref: HCOB 15 Nov. 78, DATING AND LOCATING)
23. SECONDARY
HANDLE ANY SECONDARY, which is to say emotional reactions, stresses or shocks before, during or after the situation. Narrative Secondaries are run R3RA Narrative Quad. Interest is checked. It is important to get the earliest beginning of the incident and to continue to check for earlier beginning each run through. (Ref: HCOB 26 June 78RA II, NED Series 6RA, ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS; HCOB 28 June 78RA, NED Series 7RA, R3RA COMMANDS; HCOB 28 July 71RB, C/S Series 54RB, NED Series 8RA, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON; HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
24. PREASSESSMENT
PREASSESS THE INCIDENT and take to a full Dianetic EP all somatics connected with the incident in which the pc is interested. (Ref: HCOB 18 June 78R, NED Series 4R, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM, and the issues referenced in 23 above) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
25. L3RH
Check if the area was audited before on R3RA. If so, L3RH to F/N list on it. (Ref: HCOB 11 April 71RE, NED Series 20, L3RH, DIANETICS AND INT RD REPAIR LIST)
26. SERVICE FACSIMILE
If pc has a service fac or evil purpose behind it, R3RA Quad. (Ref: HCOB 22 June 78RA, NED Series 2RA, NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE.) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears and OTs.
27. POSTULATE TWO-WAY COMM
POSTULATE TWO-WAY COMM. To F/N. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
28. PRIOR CONFUSION TWO-WAY COMM
By two-way comm see if a confusion existed prior to the accident, injury or illness. To F/N. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
29. MYSTERY POINT
Two-way comm any mysterious aspect of the incident to F/N Cog VGIs. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
30. TWO-WAY COMM AGREEMENT
Get any agreement the person may have had in or with the incident. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
31. PROTEST
Two-way comm any protest in the incident. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
32. PREDICTION
Two-way comm (a) how long he/she expects to take to recover, (b) get the person to tell you any predictions others have made about it. Two-way comm it to an F/N Cog VGIs. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
33. FIXED PICTURE (BEFORE/AFTER)
Where an injured or ill pc is so stuck that he has a fixed picture that does not move, one can jar it loose by asking him to recall a time before the incident and then asking him to recall a time after it. This will “jar the engram loose” and change the stuck point. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
34. SOMETHING/NOTHING
Have the numb, painful or injured area say, “THERE IS SOMETHING HERE, THERE IS NOTHING HERE,” having it then say, “THERE IS SOMETHING THERE, THERE IS NOTHING THERE,” having the preclear say about the area, “THERE IS SOMETHING THERE, THERE IS NOTHING THERE,” and then the preclear about himself, “THERE IS SOMETHING HERE, THERE IS NOTHING HERE.” This makes a complete bracket. Run to pain gone, cog, F/N. (Ref: The Journal of Scientology 16-G, THIS IS SCIENTOLOGY, THE SCIENCE OF CERTAINTY)
35. INJURED AND WAS IN A SMALL ROOM FOR A LONG TIME
The gradient scale of taking people into larger and larger spaces was an early one. An individual has been lying in this small room. He’s very ill. He’s been lying in this small room for days and days and weeks and weeks and you’re going to process him. Just get him into a little bit larger space. The tremendous tiredness he will experience is just giving him a little more space and a greater remoteness of wall. You take him out of his room into a larger room, he will start to experience tiredness. If you did that every day and you gave him a little more space every day and gradiently scaled him up the line a little bit more and a little bit more, the individual would snap out of it. It’s quite interesting because what you’re doing is giving him a gradient scale of larger spaces to confront. Just don’t give it to him with such steep doses that he finds them unconfrontable and you’ve got it made. (Ref: Tape: 5904C28 “Theory of Processes”)
36. WAS AUDITED WHILE ON DRUGS
Where a person is injured, given a Contact or Touch Assist and then medical examination and treatment, he is given the remainder as soon as he is able to be audited. The drug “five days” does not need to apply. But where the person has been given an assist over drugs, one must later come back to the case when he is off drugs and run the drug part out or at least make sure that nothing was submerged by the drugs. It is not uncommon for a person to be oblivious to certain parts of a treatment or operation at the time of initial auditing, only to have a missing piece of the incident pop up days, months or even years later. THIS is the reason injuries or operations occasionally seem to persist despite a full assist: A piece of it was left unhandled due to a drugged condition during the operation; such bits may come off unexpectedly in routine auditing on some other apparently disrelated chain. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 15 July 71RD III, C/S Series 48RE, NED Series 9RC, DRUG HANDLING; and HCOB 19 May 69RB, DRUG AND ALCOHOL CASES—PRIOR ASSESSING)
37. SPOT THE SPOT
“SPOT THE SPOT WHERE THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED,” “SPOT A SPOT IN THE ROOM.” Run alternate-repetitive. (Ref: 5410C13, “Retraining Unit: The Assist”)
38. RUDIMENTS BEFORE THE INJURY
Fly ruds before the illness or injury. (Can be done Quad.) (Ref: HCOB 24 July 69R, SERIOUSLY ILL PCS)
39. PREPCHECK PRIOR CONFUSION
PREPCHECK THE PRIOR CONFUSION TO THE ILLNESS OR THE ACCIDENT/INJURY. Note: Do not prepcheck the illness itself or accident/ injury itself. (Ref: HCOB 9 Nov. 61, THE PROBLEMS INTENSIVE—USE OF THE PRIOR CONFUSION; HCOB 7 Sept. 78R, MODERN REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING. Also, Tape: 6110C03, “The Prior Confusion”)
40. PTS C/S-1
The PTS C/S-1, given in HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA III, EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD HANDLING: PTS C/S-l, must be done before any other PTS handling is begun. (Ref: HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING)
41. SUPPRESSIVE PRESENCE
Two-way comm any suppressive or invalidative presence that may have caused a mistake to be made or the accident to occur. To F/N Cog VGIs. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
42. PTS INTERVIEW
A metered PTS interview per HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I, C/S Series 79, PTS INTERVIEWS, or a “10 August Handling” per HCOB 10 Aug. 73, PTS HANDLING, done by an auditor in session or an MAA, D of P or SSO will, in most cases, assist the person to spot the antagonistic or SP element. Once spotted, the potential trouble source can be assisted in working out a handling for that terminal. (Ref: HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING)
43. S&Ds
Three S&Ds per HCOB 16 Aug. 69R, HANDLING ILLNESS IN SCIENTOLOGY.
44. RUDIMENTS ON ANTAGONISTIC TERMINAL
RUDIMENTS. Flying ruds and overts triple or quad flow on the antagonistic terminal is often done to “get ruds in” and enable the pc to better confront the PTS situation he is faced with. This would, of course, be done only in session by a qualified auditor when so ordered by the Case Supervisor. (Ref: HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING)
45. UNRESOLVED PAINS
Where you can’t fully repair a crippled left leg, don’t be surprised to find it was the right leg that was hurt. You audit the left leg somatic in vain. If you do, start auditing somatics in the OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BODY. This is also true for toothaches. Look at the pc’s mouth. Has the RIGHT upper molar ever been pulled or injured? Yes. That’s how the left molar began to decay. The right upper molar was pulled. The pain (especially under the painkiller on the right side only) backed up and stopped on the opposite side. Eventually, the left upper molar, under that stress, a year or ten later, caves in and aches. (Ref: HCOB 15 July 70R, UNRESOLVED PAINS)
46. L&N, VERIFY/CORRECT
Check if any L&N done in connection with the area, verify or correct the lists. NOTHING PRODUCES AS MUCH CASE UPSET AS A WRONG LIST ITEM OR A WRONG LIST. Nothing else produces such a sharp deterioration in a case or even illness. (Ref: HCOB 20 Apr. 72 II, C/S Series 78, PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND W/C ERROR CORRECTION)
47. NOTHING WORKING
“TELL ME SOMETHING WORSE THAN A (body part)” until it is no longer a problem to the pc. (Ref: HCOB 23 Feb. 61, PT PROBLEM AND GOALS)
48. INJURY DURINGIAFTER AUDITING
Repair the earlier auditing with the appropriate correction list and/or GF M5 as soon as possible. It can occur that a pc gets ill after being audited where the “auditing” is out-tech. When this occurs or is suspected, a Green Form should be assessed only by an auditor who can meter and whose TR 1 gets reads. The GF reads are then handled. Out-Interiorization, bad lists, missed W/Hs, ARC breaks and incomplete or flubbed engrams are the commonest errors. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
49. INJURED CHILD
“WHERE DID IT HAPPEN?” “WHERE ARE YOU NOW?” (Ref: Ability 110, TECHNIQUES OF CHILD PROCESSING)
50. CHILD WITH PHYSICAL DEFECT OR PSYCHOSOMATIC ILL
“FEEL MY ARM,” “THANK YOU,” “FEEL YOUR ARM,” “THANK YOU” and so on, using common body parts. (Ref: Ability 110, TECHNIQUES OF CHILD PROCESSING)
51. HIGH OR LOW TA
A C/S 53RL should be used to get the TA under control during assists if it cannot be gotten down. It must be done by an auditor who knows how to meter and can get reads. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY) Note: Additional references applicable to this situation are HCOB 10 Dec. 76RB, C/S Series 99RB, SCIENTOLOGY F/N AND TA POSITION, and HCOB 2 Dec. 80, FLOATING NEEDLE AND TA POSITION MODIFIED.)
52. INJURED AND IN NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
Assess and handle the correction list for the Advanced Course level he is on or just completed as soon as possible. (Ref: HCOB 23 Dec. 71RB, Solo C/S Series 10RB, C/S Series 73RB, THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA— CLARIFIED AND REINFORCED)
53. ACCIDENT PRONE
Run a full battery of Objectives (CCHs, SCS, SOP 8-C, Op Pro by Dup, etc.) or put the person through the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course. (Ref: HCOB 12 June 70, C/S Series 2, PROGRAMING OF CASES)
54. TIREDNESS
Do a purpose list as follows: WHAT PURPOSE HAS BEEN BLUNTED? You can also use “abandoned” if it reads better. Tiredness is technically BLUNTED PURPOSE. The most effective way to handle this is by overt-motivator engram. (Ref: HCOB 8 Sept. 71R, CASE SUPERVISOR ACTIONS, HCOB 15 Sept. 68R, TIREDNESS)
55. PREGNANCY
A pregnant woman should have a full Preassessment done on birth and babies before delivery. Immediately after delivery, the incident itself should be run out Narrative R3RA Quad and preassessed if necessary. (Ref: HCOB 15 Jan. 70, THE USES OF AUDITING; HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
Note: Pregnant women are not to be audited or audit for the sixth month on up, from Power on up the Grade Chart. It is very common for pregnant mothers to be audited and to audit on New Era Dianetics and is in fact vital. Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
HCOB 29.7.81R
ATTACHMENT #3
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT FOR ILLNESSES
PC: DATE:_______________
1. SYMPTOM: ILL AND HAS DONE A BUNK.
HANDLINGS: C, B, A, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
2. SYMPTOM: SEVERELY ILL AND CLOSE TO DEATH.
HANDLINGS: A, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
3. SYMPTOM: SEVERELY ILL.
HANDLINGS: A, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
4. SYMPTOM: ILL AND IN A COMA/UNCONSCIOUS.
HANDLINGS: A, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
5. SYMPTOM: ILL AND IN A STATE OF SHOCK (OR WAS).
HANDLINGS: A, G, D, E, F, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EEj FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
6. SYMPTOM: ILL AND IN PAIN/EXTREME DISCOMFORT.
HANDLINGS: A, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, 00, PP, QQ-
7. SYMPTOM: ILL WITH AN INFECTION/TEMPERATURE.
HANDLINGS: A (Antibiotics), MM, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
8. SYMPTOM: ILL AND TAKING DRUGS.
HANDLINGS: A, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, 00, PP, QQ
9. SYMPTOM: ILL WITH LITTLE/NO DISCOMFORT.
HANDLINGS: A, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF, GG, HH, II, JJ, KK, LL, NN, OO, PP, QQ.
10. SYMPTOM: ILLNESS NOT HEALING.
HANDLINGS: X, FF, HH, NN, OO, PP, QQ, RR, SS, TT.
11. SYMPTOM: ILL DURING/AFTER AUDITING.
HANDLING: UU.
12. SYMPTOM: AN OLD ILLNESS RECURRING (CHRONICALLY ILL).
HANDLINGS: X, HH, NN, OO, PP, QQ, RR, SS, TT, AAA.
13. SYMPTOM: ILL AND IN NOINTERFERENCE AREA.
HANDLING: YY, then other appropriate handlings depending on the illness.
14. SYMPTOM: HIGH OR LOW TA.
HANDLING: XX.
15. SYMPTOM: NOTHING WORKS.
HANDLING: TT.
16. SYMPTOM: CHILD WITH PHYSICAL DEFECT OR PSYCHOSOMATIC ILL.
HANDLINGS: A, VV, I, K.
17. SYMPTOM: TIREDNESS.
HANDLING: ZZ.
HCOB 29.7.81R
ATTACHMENT #4
HANDLING SHEET FOR ILLNESSES
A. MEDICAL TREATMENT
An assist is not a substitute for medical attention and does not attempt to cure injuries requiring medical aid. First, call the doctor. Then assist the person as you can. (Ref: Ability 73, “Assists in Scientology”)
Medical examination and diagnosis should be sought where needed, and where treatment is routinely successful, medical treatment should be obtained. As an assist can at times cover up an actual injury or broken bone, no chances should be taken, especially if the condition does not easily respond. In other words, where something is merely thought to be a slight sprain, to be on the safe side an X-ray should be obtained, particularly if it does not at once respond. An assist is not a substitute for medical treatment but is complementary to it. It is even doubtful if full healing can be accomplished by medical treatment alone and it is certain that an assist greatly speeds recovery. In short, one should realize that physical healing does not take into account the being and the repercussion on the spiritual beingness of the person. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
B. FIRST AID AND ENVMONMENTAL CONTROL
Where you are giving an assist to one person, you put things in the environment into an orderly state as the first step, unless you are trying to stop a pumping artery—but here you would use first aid. You should understand that first aid always precedes an assist. You should look the situation over from the standpoint of how much first aid is required.
You may often have to find some method of controlling, handling and directing personnel who get in your way before you can render an assist. You might just as well realize that an assist requires that you control the entire environment and personnel associated with the assist if necessary.
A good example of an assist would be when somebody is washing dishes in the kitchen. There is a horrendous crash and the person comes down all over the sink, hits the floor; as she is going down, she grabs the butcher knife as it falls. You go in and say, “Well, let me fix that up.” One of the first things you would have to do is to wind some bandage around the hand to stop the bleeding. Part of the first aid would be to pick up the dishes and put them back on the sink, sweep the pieces together into a more orderly semblance. This is the first symptom of control. (Ref: HCOB 21 Oct. 71, ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY)
(This could include getting some assistance to ease discomfort, such as Epsom-salt baths, liniment, changing bandages, etc.)
C. PERSON HAS DONE A BUNK
The preclear may do a compulsive exteriorization, “do a bunk,” and drop his body limp in the chair and give from that body no sign that he is hearing any of the auditing commands given by the auditor. One such case was pleaded with for half an hour by an auditor along the lines that the preclear should remember her husband, should think of her children, should come back and live for the sake of her friends, and found no response from the preclear. Finally the auditor said, “Think of your poor auditor,” at which moment the preclear promptly returned. (Ref: Dianetics 55! Chapter XVI, “Exteriorization”)
D. UNCONSCIOUS OR IN A COMA
“YOU MAKE THAT BODY SIT ON THAT CHAIR.” (or “LIE ON THAT BED.”) (Ref: Tape: 5905C21 “Clearing, Processes—Special Cases)
E. UNCONSCIOUS OR IN A COMA
Touch patient’s hand to parts of the bed with “FEEL THAT (object).” (Ref: HCOB 27 July 69, ANTIBIOTICS)
F. UNCONSCIOUS OR IN A COMA
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. (Ref: HCOB 5 July 71RB, C/S Series 49RB, ASSISTS)
G. SHOCK OR CATATONIA
“HERE. WHAT WORD DID I SAY TO YOU?” “HERE. WHAT WORD DID I SAY TO YOU?” The auditor keeps this up until all of a sudden the pc says, “You said ‘Here.’ “ Then, “REACH DOWN NOW AND FIND THE FLOOR WITH YOUR HAND. PRESS IT.” (Ref: Tape: 5406C17 “Assists”)
H. CONTACT ASSIST
Where possible and where indicated, until the person has reestablished his communication with the physical universe site. To F/N. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 5 July 71RB, C/S Series 49RB, ASSISTS; HCOB 2 Apr. 69RA, DIANETIC ASSISTS)
I . TOUCH ASSIST
Until the person has reestablished communication with the physical part or parts affected. To F/N. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 21 Oct. 71, ASSISTS IN SCIENTOLOGY; HCOB 7 Apr. 72RA, TOUCH ASSISTS, CORRECT ONES)
J. HAVINGNESS
Running HAVINGNESS in every assist session is vital. This not only remedies havingness but also brings the preclear to present time. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 7 Aug. 78, HAVINGNESS FINDING AND RUNNING THE PC’S HAVINGNESS PROCESS; HCOB 6 Oct. 60R, THIRTY-SIX NEW PRESESSIONS)
K. ATTENTION
He is explaining his illness by saying he needs attention and he is using it as a service fac of some sort or another, and you will find out this very often gives up if you give him attention. Well, there are various ways to give him attention. Get him a nurse, get him a doctor, put him in a special room, put him on arduously, awfully hard to maintain schedules.
You take a pink pill at twenty minutes after the hour, three and one-half blue pills forty-five minutes past the hour, and then every hour on the hour take seven green ones, but skip every odd-numbered hour. Attention then is given to it and he gets the idea it is being as-ised. This makes him feel stronger and he will start to as-is it himself and very often gets well simply by giving him attention. There are various mechanisms to do so. (Ref: Tape: 5905C21 “Clearing, Processes—Special Cases”)
L. REACH AND WITHDRAW
Run Reach and Withdraw from the affected area. (Ref: HCOB 24 July 69R, SERIOUSLY ILL PCs)
Reach and Withdraw can also be done on other body parts not affected, the environment, the body itself, the location where an injury occurred, the thing that injured the pc (e.g., the knife that cut him). To EP of F/N, GIs. (Ref: HCOB 10 April 81R, REACH AND WITHDRAW)
M. HELLO AND OK
“HELLO” AND “OKAY.” (Ref: PAB No. 123, THE REALITY SCALE)
N. COMMUNICATION
“FROM WHERE COULD YOU COMMUNICATE TO A (body part)?” To F/N, Cog, VGIs. (Ref: HCOB 25 Sept. 59, HAS CO-AUDIT)
O. HOLD IT STILL
Run “HOLD IT STILL” on body parts until somatics blow. (Ref: Tape: 5702C08 “The General Use of Procedure”)
P. OTHER ILLNESSES
“WHAT OTHER ILLNESSES COULD YOU HAVE?” Run repetitively to F/N, Cog, VGIs. (Ref: Tape: 5608C “Chronic Somatics”)
Q. PURPOSE
Ask the pc, “GIVE ME ANOTHER PURPOSE FOR A (e.g., bad ear).” He already assumes he’s given you one. He’s got a bad ear. You could ask him for a few more purposes. Have him dream up a few more purposes and he’ll feel much better. (Ref: Tape: 5608C “Chronic Somatics”)
R. SOMEBODY ELSE HAD THAT CONDITION
“CAN YOU RECALL A TIME WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE HAD THAT CONDITION?” “CAN YOU RECALL A TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED TO HAVE THAT CONDITION?” To F/N, GIs. (Ref: Ability Magazine Major 4, STRAIGHTWIRE—A MANUAL OF OPERATION)
S. RUDIMENTS
Fly rudiments as follows:
HANDLE ANY ARC BREAK that might have existed at the time (a) with the environment, (b) with another, (c) with others, (d) with himself, (e) with the body part or the body and (f) with any failure to recover at once. Each to F/N.
HANDLE ANY PROBLEM the person may have had (a) at the time of illness or injury, (b) subsequently due to his or her condition. Each to F/N.
HANDLE ANY WITHHOLD (a) the person might have had at the time, (b) any subsequent withhold and (c) any having to withhold the body from work or others or the environment due to being physically unable to approach it. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
T. L1C
L1C “CONCERNING THE ILLNESS______” or “CONCERNING THE INJURY/ACCIDENT_____.” Can also do L1C on the injured member. (Ref: HCOB 23 July 71R, ASSISTS)
U. PREPCHECK
ASSESS FOR AREA OF ILLNESS and prepcheck on the area. Also one can prepcheck the body itself. (Ref: HCOB 24 July 69R, SERIOUSLY ILL PCs)
V. NARRATIlVE R3RA
RUN THE INCIDENT ITSELF Narrative R3RA Quad to erasure and full EP. Interest is checked. It is understood here that Flow 1 was the physical incident itself, not necessarily something done to the person but as something that happened to him or her. (Ref: HCOB 26 June 78RA II, NED Series 6RA, ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS; HCOB 28 July 71RB, C/S Series 54RB, NED Series 8RA, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
W. SECONDARY
HANDLE ANY SECONDARY, which is to say emotional reactions, stresses or shocks before, during or after the situation. Narrative Secondaries are run R3RA Narrative Quad. Interest is checked. It is important to get the earliest beginning of the incident and to continue to check for earlier beginning each run through. (Ref: HCOB 26 June 78RA II, NED Series 6RA, ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS; HCOB 28 June 78RA, NED Series 7RA, R3RA COMMANDS; HCOB 28 July 71RB, C/S Series 54RB, NED Series 8RA, DIANETICS, BEGINNING A PC ON; HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
X. PREASSESSMENT
PREASSESS THE INCIDENT and take to a full Dianetic EP all somatics connected with the incident in which the pc is interested. (Ref: HCOB 18 June 78R, NED Series 4R, ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE ITEM, and the issues referenced in W above) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears or OTs.
Y. L3RH
Check if the area was audited before on R3RA. If so, L3RH to F/N list on it. (Ref: HCOB 11 April 71RE, NED Series 20, L3RH, DIANETICS AND INT RD REPAIR LIST)
Z. SERVICE FACSIMILE
If pc has a service fac or evil purpose behind it, R3RA Quad. (Ref: HCOB 22 June 78RA, NED Series 2RA, NEW ERA DIANETICS FULL PC PROGRAM OUTLINE.) Note: Dianetics is not run on Clears and OTs.
AA. POSTULATE TWO-WAY COMM
POSTULATE TWO-WAY COMM. To F/N. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
BB. PRIOR CONFUSION TWO-WAY COMM
By two-way comm see if a confusion existed prior to the accident, injury or illness. To F/N. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11- July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
CC. MYSTERY POINT
Two-way comm any mysterious aspect of the incident to F/N, Cog, VGIs. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
DD. TWO-WAY COMM AGREEMENT
Get any agreement the person may have had in or with the incident. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
EE. PROTEST
Two-way comm any protest in the incident. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
FF. PREDICTION
Two-way comm (a) how long he/she expects to take to recover, (b) get the person to tell you any predictions others have made about it. Two-way comm it to an F/N, Cog, VGIs. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
GG. LOSSES
Two-way comm anything the pc may have lost, to F/N. Not E/S. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY; HCOB 29 Mar. 65, ARC BREAKS)
HH. FIXED PlCTURE (BEFORE/AFTER)
Where an injured or ill pc is so stuck that he has a fixed picture that does not move, one can jar it loose by asking him to recall a time before the incident and then asking him to recall a time after it. This will “jar the engram loose” and change the stuck point. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
II. SOMETHING/NOTHING
Have the numb, painful or injured area say, “THERE IS SOMETHING HERE, THERE IS NOTHING HERE,” having it then say, “THERE IS SOMETHING THERE, THERE IS NOTHING THERE,” having the preclear say about the area, “THERE IS SOMETHING THERE, THERE IS NOTHING THERE,” and then the preclear about himself, “THERE IS SOMETHING HERE, THERE IS NOTHING HERE.” This makes a complete bracket. Run to pain gone, cog, F/N. (Ref: The Journal of Scientology 16-G, THIS IS SCIENTOLOGY, THE SCIENCE OF CERTAINTY)
JJ. ILL AND WAS IN A SMALL ROOM FOR A LONG TIME
The gradient scale of taking people into larger and larger spaces was an early one. An individual has been lying in this small room. He’s very ill. He’s been lying in this small room for days and days and weeks and weeks and you’re going to process him. Just get him into a little bit larger space. The tremendous tiredness he will experience is just giving him a little more space and a greater remoteness of wall. You take him out of his room into a larger room, he will start to experience tiredness. If you did that every day and you gave him a little more space every day and gradiently scaled him up the line a little bit more and a little bit more, the individual would snap out of it. It’s quite interesting because what you’re doing is giving him a gradient scale of larger spaces to confront. Just don’t give it to him with such steep doses that he finds them unconfrontable and you’ve got it made. (Ref: Tape: 5904C28 “Theory of Processes”)
KK. RUDS BEFORE THE ILLNESS
Fly ruds before the illness or injury. (Can be done Quad.) (Ref: HCOB 24 July 69R, SERIOUSLY ILL PCS)
LL. PREPCHECK PRIOR CONFUSION
PREPCHECK THE PRIOR CONFUSION TO THE ILLNESS OR THE ACCIDENT/INJURY. Note: Do not prepcheck the illness itself or accident/injury itself. (Ref: HCOB 9 Nov. 61, THE PROBLEMS INTENSIVE—USE OF THE PRIOR CONFUSION; HCOB 7 Sept. 78R, MODERN REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING. Also, Tape: 6110C03, “The Prior Confusion”)
MM. HIGH TEMPERATURE
When illness is accompanied by temperature, antibiotics is usually the first thought. Then fly all ruds and do a Temperature Assist, Version A or Version B. (Ref: HCOB 23 July 71R, ASSISTS; HCOB 24 Aug. 71 II, ASSISTS ADDITION; HCOB 29 Mar. 75RA, ANTIBIOTICS, ADMINISTERING OF)
NN. PTS C/S-I
The PTS C/S-1, given in HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA III, EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD HANDLING: PTS C/S-1, must be done before any other PTS handling is begun. (Ref: HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING)
OO. PTS INTERVIEW
A metered PTS interview per HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I, C/S Series 79, PTS INTERVIEWS, or a “10 August Handling” per HCOB 10 Aug. 73, PTS HANDLING, done by an auditor in session or an MAA, D of P or SSO will, in most cases, assist the person to spot the antagonistic or SP element. Once spotted, the potential trouble source can be assisted in working out a handling for that terminal. (Ref: HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING)
PP. S&Ds
Three S&Ds per HCOB 16 Aug. 69R, HANDLING ILLNESS IN SCIENTOLOGY.
QQ. RUDIMENTS ON THE ANTAGONISTIC TERMINAL
Flying ruds and overts triple or quad flow on the antagonistic terminal is often done to “get ruds in” and enable the pc to better confront the PTS situation he is faced with. This would, of course, be done only in session by a qualified auditor when so ordered by the Case Supervisor. (Ref: HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING)
RR. UNRESOLVED PAINS
Where you can’t fully repair a crippled left leg, don’t be surprised to find it was the right leg that was hurt. You audit the left leg somatic in vain. If you do, start auditing somatics in the OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE BODY.
This is also true for toothaches. Look at the pc’s mouth. Has the RIGHT upper molar ever been pulled or injured? Yes. That’s how the left molar began to decay. The right upper molar was pulled. The pain (especially under the painkiller on the right side only) backed up and stopped on the opposite side. Eventually, the left upper molar, under that stress, a year or ten later, caves in and aches. (Ref: HCOB 15 July 70R, UNRESOLVED PAINS)
SS. L&N, VERIFY/CORRECT
Check if any L&N done in connection with the area, verify or correct the lists. NOTHING PRODUCES AS MUCH CASE UPSET AS A WRONG LIST ITEM OR A WRONG LIST. Nothing else produces such a sharp deterioration in a case or even illness. (Ref: HCOB 20 Apr. 72 II, C/S Series 78, PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND W/C ERROR CORRECTION)
TT. NOTHING WORKING
“TELL ME SOMETHING WORSE THAN A (body part)” until it is no longer a problem to the pc. (Ref: HCOB 23 Feb 1961, PT PROBLEM AND GOALS)
UU. ILLNESS DURING/AFTER AUDITING
Repair the earlier auditing with the appropriate correction list and/or GF M5 as soon as possible.
It can occur that a pc gets ill after being audited where the “auditing” is out-tech. When this occurs or is suspected, a Green Form should be assessed only by an auditor who can meter and whose TR 1 gets reads. The GF reads are then handled. Out-Interiorization, bad lists, missed W/Hs, ARC breaks and incomplete or flubbed engrams are the commonest errors. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY)
VV. CHILD WITH PHYSICAL DEFECT OR PSYCHOSOMATIC ILL
“FEEL MY ARM,” “THANK YOU,” “FEEL YOUR ARM,” “THANK YOU,” and so on, using common body parts. (Ref: Ability 110, TECHNIQUES OF CHILD PROCESSING)
XX. HIGH OR LOW TA
A C/S 53RL should be used to get the TA under control during assists if it cannot be gotten down. It must be done by an auditor who knows how to meter and can get reads. (Ref: HCOB 11 July 73RB, ASSIST SUMMARY) Note: Additional references applicable to this situation are HCOB 10 Dec. 76RB, C/S Series 99RB, SCIENTOLOGY F/N AND TA POSITION, and HCOB 2 Dec. 80, FLOATING NEEDLE AND TA POSITION MODIFIED. )
YY. ILL AND IN NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
Assess and handle the correction list for the Advanced Course level he is on or just completed as soon as possible. (Ref: HCOB 23 Dec. 71RB, Solo C/S Series 10RB, C/S Series 73RB, THE NOINTERFERENCE AREA —CLARIFIED AND REINFORCED)
ZZ. TIREDNESS
Do a purpose list as follows: WHAT PURPOSE HAS BEEN BLUNTED? You can also use “abandoned” if it reads better. Tiredness is technically BLUNTED PURPOSE. The most effective way to handle this is by overtmotivator engram. (Ref: HCOB 8 Sept. 71R, CASE SUPERVISOR ACTIONS, HCOB 15 Sept. 68R, TIREDNESS)
AAA. CHRONICALLY ILL
In addition to other handling from the checklist, program the pc for Expanded Dianetics (Ref: HCOB 15 Apr. 72RA Expanded Dianetics Series 1RA)
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1981
Remimeo
THE CRIMINAL MIND
Definition: A criminal is one who is motivated by evil intentions and who has committed so many harmful overt acts that he considers such activities ordinary.
There is a datum of value in detecting overts and withholds in criminal individuals:
THE CRIMINAL ACCUSES OTHERS OF THINGS WHICH HE HIMSELF IS DOING.
As an example, the psychiatrist accuses others engaged in mental practice of harming others or worsening their condition, yet the majority of psychiatrists maim and kill their patients and, by record, in all history have only worsened mental conditions. After all, that’s what they seem to be paid to do by the government.
The psychologist accuses others of misrepresenting what they do and lobbies in legislature continually to outlaw others on the accusation of misrepresenting but there is no psychologist who doesn’t know that he himself is a fake, can accomplish nothing of value and that his certificates aren’t even worth the printing ink. The psychologist goes further: He educates little children in all the schools to believe all men are soulless animals and criminals so that when the possible day of reckoning comes and the psychologist is exposed for what he is, the population will not be the least bit surprised and will consider the psychologist is “normal.”
The psychologist accuses others of sexual irregularities when this is, actually, his entire profession.
Jack the Ripper of English fame who gruesomely murdered prostitutes now turns out to have been a medical doctor and was undoubtedly of enormous assistance to the police in pointing out “the real murderer.”
The FBI agent or executive accuses others of graft and even sets up “abscams” to manufacture the crime. But an FBI agent regularly pockets money supposed to be paid to informers and then screams to protect informer sources that do not exist.
The FBI agent is terrified of being infiltrated and accuses others of it when, as standard practice, he infiltrates groups, manufactures evidence and then gets others charged for crimes his own plants have committed.
The FBI acts like a terrorist group posing as law enforcement officers. Their targets seem to be legislators and Congress and public individuals who might someday have power over public opinion, such as Martin Luther King, Jr.
From all this we get another datum:
THE CRIMINAL MIND RELENTLESSLY SEEKS TO DESTROY ANYONE IT IMAGINES MIGHT EXPOSE IT.
You have to be very alert when criminals are around.
J. Edgar Hoover, who organized the present FBI and is still deified by it— they have his name in huge, brass letters on Washington, DC’s biggest thoroughfare—and that town doesn’t even have the names of former presidents up in lights—has been shown by subsequent records to have been a blackmailer and traitor to his country. He carefully, personally sat on the information for four months that Pearl Harbor was going to happen. Right up to the US entrance into World War II, he was autographing his photo for pals in the deadly German SS. He even sacked an FBI agent (Tureau) who dared to catch some German spies.
Doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists and the government form a tight clique. Only the government would support such people as the public hates them.
From all this we get another datum:
INDIVIDUALS WITH CRIMINAL MINDS TEND TO BAND TOGETHER SINCE THE PRESENCE OF OTHER CRIMINALS ABOUT THEM TENDS TO PROVE THEIR OWN DISTORTED IDEAS OF MAN IN GENERAL.
It is not true that where any person accuses another of a crime the accuser is always guilty of the crime or that type of crime. But it is true that when a criminal is doing the accusing it is more than probable that the criminal is disclosing his own type of crime.
Apparently they add it up this way: “If I accuse him of robbing, then it would be assumed by others that I have not robbed a bank.” By loudly voicing a condemnation of a crime, the criminal, with a crooked think, supposes people will now suppose he is above bank robbery and won’t suspect him.
Groups like psychologists who declare as fact that all men are criminals are of course just dramatizing their own inclinations.
People assume that others have their own case. The psychologist pushes his own case off on the whole world.
Anyone researching in the mind should be very aware of this point and be sure not to do it. Subjective reality seems to them to be the only reality there is, for such people are too introverted to really know the minds and motivations of others.
When working with the criminal, one can get a very good idea of that person’s own mental state by getting him to say what other people want and do or are guilty of.
It is inconceivable to the criminal that anyone could possibly be decent or honest or do a selfless act. It would do no good whatever to try to convince him, for he knows all men are like himself.
Thus, one gets another datum of value:
THE CRIMINAL ONLY SEES OTHERS AS HE HIMSELF IS.
One of the reasons he does this, of course, is to justify injuring others. Because everyone else is useless, worthless, criminal, an animal and insane, why then, he reasons, it is perfectly all right to injure them.
Thus, we come to another datum:
THE CRIMINAL IS NOT MUCH BENEFITED BY THE GIVING OFF OF CURRENT WITHHOLDS AND IS NOT LIKELY TO REFORM BECAUSE OF THIS.
One, therefore, has to get down to the basic evil intentions, as in Expanded Dianetics.
There is another approach in that same area of technology which is finding what act the person really can take responsibility for. It is a gradient approach.
The criminal is basically so subjective that an auditor will find, in the short run, that improving the reality of such a person is needful before any effective, overall improvement is obtained through pulling withholds.
Thus, TRs and 8-C and even ARC Straightwire are indicated as first steps. If these are done, and as responsibility rises, expect that overts could begin to pop up almost of their own accord.
It is interesting that if a criminal were to face up suddenly to the enormity of his crimes he would go into degradation and self-destruction. Thus, a gradient scale is definitely indicated.
As the person has more R (reality), he can take more responsibility and only then with pulling withholds can he have any real benefit.
This HCOB is simply some data on the criminal mind that might help.
At the very least it should give some understanding of why some individuals insist with such apparent conviction that all men are evil, why all men are insane, why all men are criminals.
And it also tells you how silly it is to try to argue with them. Who’s there?
The criminal mind is a bitter and unsavory subject. The percentage of criminals is relatively small but the majority of grief and turmoil in the world caused by criminals is a majority percent. Thus, the criminal mind is a subject one cannot avoid in research as it is a major factor in the distortion of a culture.
It is a mind like any other mind but it has gone wrong. It is motivated by evil intentions which, even if idiotic, are greater than the possessor’s ability to reason. The criminal, even when he seems most clever, is really very, very stupid. The evil intentions get dramatized by senseless overt acts which are then withheld, and the final result is a person who is more dead than alive and who faces a future so agonizing that any person would shudder at it. The criminal, in fact, has forfeited his life and any meaning to it even when he remains “uncaught” and “unpunished,” for in the long run, he has caught himself and punishes himself for all eternity. No common judge can give a sentence as stiff as that.
They know down deep that this is true and that is why they scream with such ferocity that men have no souls. They can’t confront the smallest part of what awaits them.
When you understand what the criminal mind consists of, you can also understand how ghastly must be the feelings or lack of them with which the criminal has to live within himself and for all his days forever. He is more to be pitied than punished. Neither bold nor brave, for all his pretense, he is really just a panicky, whimpering coward inside. When he bares his breast against the bullets, he does so with the actual hope that he will be killed. But of course that doesn’t save him. He’s got an eternity of it left to go. And his scoff of any such data hides the whimper, for he knows, deep down, it’s true.
Thus, we have another datum:
THE CRIMINAL, NO MATTER WHAT HARM HE IS DOING TO OTHERS, IS ALSO SEEKING TO DESTROY HIMSELF. HE IS IN PROTEST AGAINST HIS OWN SURVIVAL.
If you have to work with criminals in pastoring, recognize what you are working with. He can be helped—if he will let you near him.
Fortunately, there are still a lot of decent people left in the world.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 OCTOBER 1981
All Orgs
Course (Also issued as an HCO PL
Supervisors of the same date and title)
Film
Supervisors
C/Ses
Ds of T
Cramming Officers
Students
Tech/Qual
HCO
URGENT—IMPORTANT
TECH FILMS AND VERBAL TECH
Refs:
HCOB/PL 9 Feb. 79 HOW TO DEFEAT VERBAL TECH
HCOB/PL 15 Feb. 79 VERBAL TECH: PENALTIES
HCOB 29 Aug. 81 Cramming Series 16
CRAMMING AND VERBAL TECH
HCO PL 16 Apr. 65 THE “HIDDEN DATA LINE”
HCOB 23 Oct. 75 TECHNICAL QUERIES
___________
With the release of the Technical Training Films, the policies forbidding verbal tech must be extended to apply to any Technical Training Film as well as to HCO Bulletins, Policy Letters, books, tapes or other source references.
HCOB/HCO PL 15 Feb. 79, VERBAL TECH: PENALTIES, defines verbal tech as follows:
GIVING OUT DATA WHICH IS CONTRARY TO HCO BULLETINS OR POLICY LETTERS, OR OBSTRUCTING THEIR USE OR APPLICATION, CORRUPTING THEIR INTENT, ALTERING THEIR CONTENT IN ANY WAY, INTERPRETING THEM VERBALLY OR OTHERWISE FOR ANOTHER, OR PRETENDING TO QUOTE THEM WITHOUT SHOWING THE ACTUAL ISSUE.
The above definition applies equally to the Technical Training Films, and to it is added:
GIVING OUT TECHNICAL DATA VERBALLY OR OTHERWISE FROM A TECHNICAL FILM, OR ANY DISCUSSION, INTERPRETATION OR QUOTING OF THE TECHNICAL CONTENT OF A TECHNICAL FILM WITHOUT HAVING THE FILM VIEWED BY THE PERSON OR PERSONS CONCERNED SHALL CONSTITUTE VERBAL TECH.
Violations of this policy letter must be dealt with per HCOB/PL 15 Feb. 79, VERBAL TECH: PENALTIES, and HCOB 29 Aug. 81, Cramming Series 16, CRAMMING AND VERBAL TECH.
This policy letter is not to be used to curb enthusiasm or prevent word-ofmouth promotion of these vital films.
It is to be fully understood and applied in terms of the following maxim:
THE TECH OF ANY TECHNICAL TRAINING FILM IS IMPARTED BY THE FILM ITSELF, NOT BY ANY DISCUSSION OF IT.
____________
This issue is to be prominently displayed in all course rooms for those courses to which Technical Training Films are assigned, as well as in the film viewing area itself.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by LRH
Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 7 OCTOBER 1981R
REVISED 30 AUGUST 1983
Remimeo
All Students
All Supervisors
All Word Clearers
All Cramming
Officers
Tech/Qual
Word Clearing Series 31RD
METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING
Cancels:
BTB 7 Feb. 72 II Word Clearing Series 31
METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING
BY THE STUDENT’S TWIN
BTB 7 Feb. 72R II Word Clearing Series 31R
Rev. 29.7.74 METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING
BY THE STUDENT’S TWIN
BTB 7 Feb. 72RA II Word Clearing Series 31RA
Rev. 19.12.74 METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING
BTB 7 Feb. 72RB II Word Clearing Series 31RB
Rev. 1.1.78 METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING
HCOB 7 Oct. 81 Word Clearing Series 31RC
METHOD 3 WORD CLEARING
(This HCO Bulletin is based on my 1971 and 1972 technical notes on Word Clearing. It was originally compiled and released as an HCOB in 1972 with my approval. The original bulletin was later reissued as a BTB. Two subsequent revisions of the BTB and a later 1981 conversion of the issue to an HCOB were never approved or seen by me. Therefore, this HCOB, as revised in 1983, (a) incorporates all of the data in the original issue, (b) updates it to align with HCOB 21 Aug. 79, TWINNING, and to include additional data on Word Clearing tech and additional references.)
Refs:
Tape: 6407C09 Study Tape 2
“Studying—Data Assimilation”
Tape: 6408C06 Study Tape 4
“Study—Gradients and
Nomenclature”
Tape: 6510C14 ”Briefing of Review Auditors”
HCO PL 24 Oct. 68 IV SUPERVISOR KNOW-HOW
TIPS IN HANDLING STUDENTS
HCOB 26 June 71R II Word Clearing Series 4R
Rev. 30.11.74 SUPERVISOR TWO-WAY COMM AND
THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD
HCOB 27 June 71R Word Clearing Series SR
Rev. 2.12.74 SUPERVISOR TWO-WAY COMM
EXPLAINED
HCOB 31 Aug. 71R Word Clearing Series 16R
CONFUSED IDEAS
HCOB 4 Sept. 71 II Word Clearing Series 19
ALTERATIONS
HCO PL 24 Sept. 64 INSTRUCTION AND EXAMINATION:
RAISING THE STANDARD OF
HCOB 10 Mar. 65 WORDS, MISUNDERSTOOD GOOFS
HCOB 23 Mar. 78RA Word Clearing Series 59RA
Rev. 14.11.79 CLEARING WORDS
DEFINITION
Method 3 Word Clearing is the method of finding a student’s misunderstood word by having him look earlier in the text than where he is having trouble for a word he doesn’t understand.
____________
An F/Ning student is one who is tearing along successfully in his studies. One must know how to keep a student F/Ning. This is the responsibility of the Supervisor and the student himself. On any course where students are twinned, it is also the responsibility of the twin.
A student who uses study tech will look up each word he comes to that he doesn’t understand and will never leave a word behind him that he doesn’t know the meaning of.
If he runs into trouble, the student himself, the Supervisor (or the twin) would handle anything that slowed or interfered with the student’s F/N. This is often most simply done with Method 3 Word Clearing.
Students don’t put themselves or each other on a meter to locate a misunderstood word. They use Method 3 procedure, as described below. It doesn’t require a meter (though the Supervisor or Word Clearer may meter a student to find his misunderstood word should it become necessary). Method 3 does, however, require a good understanding of the following theory and procedure.
Using dope-off as the only detection of misunderstoods is operating at below F/N level. The F/N went off long before the student reached the point of dopeoff, so waiting for dope-off to occur before handling is waiting too long. As soon as the student’s study stats drop for half a day or he isn’t quite so “bright” as he was fifteen minutes ago is the time to look for the misunderstood word. It’s not a misunderstood phrase or idea or concept but a misunderstood WORD. This always occurs before the subject itself is not understood.
METHOD 3 STYLE WORD CLEARING PROCEDURE
1. The student is not flying along and is not so “bright” as he was or he may exhibit just plain lack of enthusiasm or be taking too long on the checksheet or be yawning or disinterested or doodling or daydreaming, etc.
2. The student must then look earlier in the text for a misunderstood word. There is one always; there are no exceptions. It may be that the misunderstood word is two pages or more back, but it is always earlier in the text than where the student is now.
3. The word is found. The student recognizes it in looking back for it. Or, if the student can’t find it, one can take words from the text that could be the misunderstood word and ask “What does mean?” to see if the student gives the correct definition.
4. The student looks up the word found in a dictionary and clears it per HCOB 23 Mar. 78RA, W/C Series 59RA, CLEARING WORDS. He uses it verbally several times in sentences of his own composition until he has obviously demonstrated he understands the word by the composition of his sentences.
5. The student now reads the text that contained the misunderstood word. If he is not now “bright,” eager to get on with it, back uptone, etc., then there is another misunderstood word earlier in the text. This is found by repeating steps 2-5.
6. When the student is bright, uptone, etc., (an F/Ning student), he is told to come forward, studying the text from where the misunderstood word was to the area of the subject he did not understand (where step 1 began).
The student will now be enthusiastic with his study of the subject, and that is the end result of Method 3. (The result won’t be achieved if a misunderstood word was missed or if there is an earlier misunderstood word in the text. If so, repeat steps 2-5.) If the student is now enthusiastic, have him continue with studying.
Students do NOT have to be word cleared Method 2 on the total of any course. However, should it happen that the word cannot be found with Method 3, then it would be permissible to use one or more of the other methods of Word Clearing to get the word found.
____________
Good Word Clearing is a system of backtracking. You have to look earlier than the point where the student became dull or confused and you’ll find that there’s a word that he doesn’t understand somewhere before the trouble started. If he doesn’t brighten up when the word is found and cleared, there will be a misunderstood word even before that one.
This will be very clear to you if you understand that IF IT IS NOT RESOLVING, THE THING THE STUDENT IS APPARENTLY HAVING TROUBLE WITH IS NOT THE THING THE STUDENT IS HAVING TROUBLE WITH. Otherwise, it would resolve, wouldn’t it? If he knew what he didn’t understand, he could resolve it himself. So to talk to him about what he thinks he doesn’t understand just gets nowhere. The trouble is earlier.
ZEROING IN ON THE WORD
The formula is to find out where the student wasn’t having any trouble and find out where the student is now having trouble and the misunderstood word will be in between. It will be at the tag end of where he wasn’t having trouble. (See Tape 6408C06, Study Tape 4, “Study—Gradients and Nomenclature,” and HCO PL 24 Oct. 68 IV, SUPERVISOR KNOW-HOW, TIPS IN HANDLING STUDENTS . )
Method 3 is tremendously effective when done as described herein. So get a good reality on it and become expert in its use. Use it to keep Scientology working.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Original compilation assisted by
Training and Services Bureau Flag
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 OCTOBER 1981R
Issue III
REVISED 16 JANUARY 1989
Remimeo
Word Clearers
Supervisors
Cramming Officers
Tech/Qual
Word Clearing Series 6RB
Tape Course Series 9RA
WORD CLEARING METHOD 2
Method 2 utilizes the E-Meter to locate misunderstood words that may not be detectable otherwise. It is a very thorough form of Word Clearing.
Method 2 Word Clearing is only done on an individual who has received Method 1 Word Clearing to completion.
There are two ways in which Method 2 Word Clearing can be used:
1. As a routine method of Word Clearing in Qual or in the course room to handle bogs, confusions, misapplications, misunderstandings, etc., or as part of a cramming order or checksheet requirement. This does not require any C/S okay.
2. On a large body of data. This is often done after it has already been studied, to clean up any misunderstoods in that body of data. It can be done on such things as a staff member’s hat, the materials of an auditor’s level of training, the C/S Series, one’s first Scientology materials, etc. This action is usually part of a program such as a retread program or part of someone’s TIP. It does require C/S okay before the action can be begun.
The Word Clearer doing the Method 2 must be trained in the use of the E-Meter and instant reads.
Method 2 is not attempted if the student’s TA is either high or low. The Word Clearer would ensure that there is no false TA, using the False TA Checklist. If the TA remains high or low and is not false, the student would be sent to Review for handling.
METHOD 2 PROCEDURE
a. On Written Materials
The student is put on the meter and the Word Clearer (or Supervisor) gives him the R-factor, “I am not auditing you.”
The student is told that if he comes to a word or phrase he doesn’t understand he should tell the Word Clearer so that the misunderstood can be cleared.
The student should be encouraged to find and clear misunderstood words himself and should not become dependent on the meter.
The Word Clearer has the student read aloud to him starting at the very top of the first page.
The Word Clearer watches the meter carefully. As soon as the needle reads (sF, F, LF, LFBD), the Word Clearer stops the student, asks, “What was the word you just read?” finds the word that read and gets it looked up in a good dictionary, whether the student says he knows the meaning or not. If it is a technical word or term in the subject being addressed, it is looked up in a glossary or technical dictionary. (Note: In using various glossaries and technical dictionaries, care must be taken to find a dictionary definition that is on the correct gradient for the student.)
The Word Clearer first clears the word for himself, then the word is cleared on the student per HCOB 23 Mar. 78RB, Word Clearing Series 59RB, CLEARING WORDS. The dictionary is handled by the Word Clearer; the student does not let go of the cans.
Each word cleared is taken to F/N. The Word Clearer then has the student reread the sentence that contains the word that was misunderstood. The Word Clearer must ensure that the student understands the section of the text that contains the word. If the student does not originate this fact, the Word Clearer should ask the student what that part of the text means. He wouldn’t let the student continue reading if the student did not comprehend what he just read.
If the student doesn’t understand something about what he just read, then there will be another misunderstood word, probably earlier in the text, in which case the Word Clearer would have the student go to an earlier point in the text and start reading.
Only when he fully understands the section of the text that contains the word that was misunderstood does the student continue reading.
The student continues reading aloud to the end of the last page of the materials being covered. Any further reads of the meter are handled as above.
At the end of the Word Clearing session, send the student to the Examiner.
b. On Tapes
This is done exactly as in Method 2 on written materials except that the student listens to the tape with headphones on while the Word Clearer watches the meter for a read.
The Word Clearer operates the controls of the tape player while the student listens. The Word Clearer does not listen to the tape himself.
As soon as the needle reads, the Word Clearer stops the machine and asks the student, “What was the word you just heard?” (Note: It is important that the tape player is stopped at the exact moment that the meter reads, otherwise the Word Clearer may be asking the student for a word three or four words later than the
reading word. On some machines it is fastest to rest the thumb or a finger on the pause button while the tape is playing, using the pause button to immediately stop the machine when a read occurs.
The most ideal setup for Method 2 on tapes is to have a foot pedal that the Word Clearer uses to operate the tape player with. This then frees up the Word Clearer’s hands.)
If the student can’t spot the word, the Word Clearer helps him find it by replaying the last short section of tape. If the student still can’t tell him what the word is, the tape is replayed from an even earlier point.
As soon as the meter reads, the Word Clearer stops the machine and gets the word from the student. The word is then cleared as in Method 2 on written materials.
HANDLING THE BOGGED OR NON-F/Ning STUDENT
Method 2 can be done on a student in trouble to get him F/Ning again, to handle a bog, confusion, etc.
The student is put on the meter and is given the proper R-factors as covered in Method 2 on written materials, above.
He is asked at what point in his materials he started having difficulty.
The Word Clearer takes the student back to a point earlier than where the student started having trouble and has the student read aloud to him.
The Word Clearer watches the meter and handles all reads as described in Method 2 on written materials, above.
The materials are so covered up to the point where he was having trouble.
If the difficulty does not resolve, the Word Clearer has the student start reading from an even earlier point in the material. It may go back to an earlier issue, tape, earlier course or even an earlier subject. (Ref: Tape 6408C06 SHSBC-34, Study Tape 4, STUDY—GRADIENTS AND NOMENCLATURE, and Tape 6510C14 SHSBC-68, BRIEFING OF REVIEW AUDITORS)
End off when the difficulty has been resolved and the student is once again bright and F/Ning, and send the student to the Examiner.
METHOD 2 ON LARGE BODIES OF DATA
This requires C/S okay to ensure that the student is not in the middle of an auditing action or process or in the need of a repair, etc. (Note: Method 2 on just an issue or two, such as for a cramming order, would not need C/S okay, but any large amount of Method 2 work would.)
The Word Clearer starts the student at the very top of the first page of the materials and the whole of the materials are covered by Method 2. All reading words are cleared including any words originated by the student as misunderstood.
Done on one’s first Scientology materials (first materials read or first tape heard), it uncovers basic misunderstoods on Scientology. Done on one’s hat or other material, it handles the basic reason behind post failures or difficulty with any material.
The EP is a continuous F/N on the materials being word cleared.
COMPREHENSION
Ref:
HCOB 30 Jan. 73RE Word Clearing Series 46RE
Rev. 16.5.84 METHOD 9 WORD CLEARING
THE RIGHT WAY
Glibness is often trained into students by the current educational methods, as students are taught to read aloud without understanding what they are reading. Understanding is actually considered to be something separate from reading.
Therefore the Word Clearer must see that the student understands that he should be comprehending the materials as he reads them.
And if a student starts reading a section without comprehension (goes blank, robotic) or if any other manifestations of misunderstoods appear, then the Word Clearer should have the student go back to the last point in the materials when he was doing well and reading with comprehension. The student would then come forward from there and the misunderstood word or symbol should be found and cleared.
After all, the reason Method 2 is being done is to bring about a comprehension of the materials.
CAUTIONS
The most common source of trouble in Method 2 Word Clearing is in the Word Clearer not knowing his meter reads and either missing actual reads or incorrectly calling reads, such as calling the right swing of an F/N a read. The remedy for this of course is for the Word Clearer to get his misunderstoods off on the subject of the E-Meter and its needle manifestations and to redo the drills in The Book of E-Meter Drills until his metering is flawless.
Method 2 can fail if the Word Clearer does not locate the earlier material that contains the misunderstood word. This is remedied by word clearing the Word Clearer on the Study Tapes, especially Study Tape 4, STUDY— GRADIENTS AND NOMENCLATURE, and word clearing him on Tape 6510C14 SHSBC-68, BRIEFING OF REVIEW AUDITORS.
A bog or the lack of a good result on Method 2 is handled by giving the student a Word Clearing Correction List (HCOB 27 Nov. 78RB, Word Clearing Series 35RI).
(Note: Just because a student has had a Word Clearing Correction List does not now mean that that’s the end of the Method 2. The purpose of the Word Clearing Correction List is to pick up the errors made in Word Clearing. It in no way replaces Method 2 and actually getting the misunderstoods found and cleared. When the student has been cleaned up with the WCCL, he is returned to Method 2 Word Clearing so any remaining misunderstood words can be found and cleared.)
Method 2 is simple to do and will produce astonishing results, provided the Word Clearer knows his study tech and his metering well.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER 1981RD
REVISED 20 APRIL 1990
Remimeo
All C/Ses
All Auditors
Tech/Qual
Registrars
Dissem
Orgs and Missions URGENT—IMPORTANT
The Auditor
BPI
GRADE CHART STREAMLINED
FOR LOWER GRADES
Refs:
HCOB 12 Dec. 81 THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE
CHART
HCOB 14 Dec. 81 THE STATE OF CLEAR
HCOB/PL 25 Sept. 79RB Word Clearing Series 34
Rev. 1.7.85 METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING
Book: The Way to Happiness
Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart
I recently reworked the Grade Chart in the interest of greater gain for the pc. I forwarded the notes for issue and they were added to by others. Some of the additions were done because of an unnecessary confusion on the state of Clear: They have no bearing on this new Grade Chart and so have been deleted. I’-NO additional HCOBs have been written by me, HCOB 12 Dec. 81, THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART, and HCOB 14 Dec. 81, THE STATE OF CLEAR. This new Grade Chart as follows is for use at once. A full new Grade Chart will be issued later.
NEW GRADE CHART
0. Introductory and Assist actions as commonly used in orgs and by auditors on new pcs.
1. PURIFICATION RD.
2. OBJECTIVES as required.
3. SCIENTOLOGY DRUG RD. (OPTIONAL, only for those who need it per the sections in this HCOB on DRDs and PROGRAMING; HCOB 31 May 77, LSD, YEARS AFTER THEY HAVE “COME OFF OF” LSD; HCOB 28 Aug. 68 II, DRUGS; and HCOB 23 Sept. 68, DRUGS AND TRIPPERS . )
4. EXPANDED ARC STRAIGHTWIRE GRADE (Quad).
5. EXPANDED GRADE 0 (Quad).
6. EXPANDED GRADE I (Quad).
7. EXPANDED GRADE II (Quad).
8. EXPANDED GRADE III (Quad).
9. EXPANDED GRADE IV (Quad).
10. NED DRUG RD.
11. NED.
12. If goes Clear on NED, CLEAR CERTAINTY RUNDOWN.
13. SUNSHINE RUNDOWN if goes Clear on NED.
13A. If not cleared on NED goes to an AO for Clearing Course.
14. SOLO AUDITOR COURSE whether Clear or not (or Class 0-IV Academy courses, prior to Solo Auditor Course).
INTRODUCTORY AND ASSIST ACTIONS
It is quite common for auditors and orgs to give introductory or demonstration sessions. There are several of these: They have been issued under various names including “Life Repair.” They should not be excluded from the Chart. Group Processing comes under this category, despite the real gains it can give.
Division 6s often have counseling services which, although they can be done at any time, should be mentioned at this level.
Assists are, quite often, the first auditing a pc gets and while most assists can be done at any time (excluding R3R or NED on Clears or above) they should not be omitted.
OPTIONAL OR CONDITIONAL STEPS
Objectives
During the period of coming off drugs, Objectives are needed. For pcs who cannot follow commands, Objectives are needed. Purification in many cases has to be accompanied with auditing on Objectives to permit withdrawal.
Purification, on a heavy druggie, should be followed by Objectives.
This is a matter of C/S programing. The C/S should estimate the case and use or omit Objectives as indicated on an individual programing basis.
Registrars are forbidden to C/S and when the Purification is done (or when they sell it) simply state that it should be accompanied or followed by personal auditing. And Reges should sell intensives.
The Reg can show the Grade Chart and say where it goes but should state— must state—that what is given is up to the C/S.
A low OCA, right or left, indicates a need of Objectives.
This means that C/Ses can either program the case for Objectives (optional) or straight onto Scn Drug RD (optional) or Expanded Straightwire (not optional) and lower grades (not optional) and NED DRD (not optional) and NED.
The TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course serves to give the preclear a full battery of Objective Processes as well as case gain from doing TRs 0-9 and the experience and wins of auditing another.
Scientology DRD or NED DRD
The programing and delivery of drug rundowns is done per the section on programing included in this bulletin, and with full use of the data contained in the following key HCOBs and the issues they reference:
HCOB 15 July 71RDIII C/S Series 48RE
Rev. 8.4.88 NED Series 9RC
DRUG HANDLING
HCOB 21 Dec. 80R THE SCIENTOLOGY DRUG RUNDOWN
Rev. 20.4.90
HCOB 31 May 77 LSD, YEARS AFTER THEY HAVE
“COME OFF OF” LSD
HCOB 28 Aug. 68 II DRUGS
HCOB 23 Sept. 68 DRUGS AND TRIPPERS
Green Form 40 Expanded
Programing and use of the Green Form 40 Expanded as an optional or conditional step in handling cases is covered in:
HCOB 8 Dec. 78R II GREEN FORM AND EXPANDED GREEN
Rev. 27.6.88 FORM 40RF, USE OF
Happiness RD
The Happiness RD can be fitted—according to the case—before or after lower grades, before or after NED, or before or after Clear. BUT to get OPTIMUM results from it, as clearly proven by pilot, is just before lower grades and after Objectives. So that is where it really belongs on the Grade Chart and where it would be done by most of those moving up the Bridge. And people whohaven’t had Purification or any needed drug handling and Objectives don’t do too well on it.
It should not be run, of course, in the Non-Interference Zone. It even works brilliantly on OTs!
The Happiness RD is the most popular RD. But it won’t run, of course, on a person who needs a Purification. And it won’t run on someone who needs Objectives before he can follow auditing commands at all. A C/S has to know what any RD is supposed to do.
Method One Word Clearing
Method One is strongly recommended for students, auditors and anyone who wants to recover his past education and increase his ability to study.
Ideally it would be done after Objectives and before the NED Drug RD or NED, although it can be done at any point on the Grade Chart and on all cases, including Clears and OTs.
There is one exception to this: It is NOT delivered to those in the Non-Interference Zone (THAT ZONE BETWEEN THE START OF NEW OT I AND THE COMPLETION OF OT III, FOR THOSE WHO WENT CLEAR ON NED, OR FROM THE BEGINNING OF R6EW TO THE COMPLETION OF OT III, FOR THOSE WHO DID NOT GO CLEAR ON NED).
As an HGC audited action, Method One is delivered in orgs and missions. The Method One Co-audit may be done at orgs.
Method One is necessary in order to be a fast flow student, and is required before doing Academy training or OEC, per:
HCOB/PL 25 Sept. 79RB Word Clearing Series 34
Rev. 1.7.85 METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING
PTS RDs and PTS Handlings
The data under this section heading which appeared in the earlier versions of this HCOB was written by another. It included false, misleading statements which lead to only “patch-up” (quickie) type PTS handlings or no PTS handling being done at all in some orgs and areas.
Specifically, the former statement that PTS RDs and handlings are done only “to a point where the PTS condition will no longer block case progress or cause roller coaster” infers that this is the EP of all PTS RDs or handlings, which is a false datum.
A second statement limited delivery of the PTS RD, which contains R3RA, to those at the level of NED on the Grade Chart.
The various actions and rundowns for handling PTSness, with their EPs, are covered in the following key issues:
HCOB 27 July 76 PTS RUNDOWN AND VITAL
INFO RD POSITION CORRECTED
HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
Rev. 26.7.86
HCOB 31 Dec. 78RAIII EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL
Rev. 21.3.89 TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP
TOWARD HANDLING: PTS C/S-1
HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79
PTS INTERVIEWS
HCO PL 27 Oct. 64R POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING,
Rev. 15.11.87 INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE
HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING
Rev.10.9.83
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
HCOB 8 Mar. 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
HCOB 10 Sept. 83 PTSness AND DISCONNECTION
HCOB 24 Nov. 65 SEARCH AND DISCOVERY
HCOB 9 Dec. 71RD PTS RUNDOWN, AUDITED
Rev. 28.3.89
HCOB 17 Apr. 72R C/S Series 76R
Rev. 20.12.83 C/Sing A PTS RUNDOWN
HCOB 29 Dec. 78R THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN,
Rev. 20.12.83 A MAGICAL NEW RUNDOWN
HCOB 30 Dec. 78R SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN
Rev. 6.1.79 PROBLEMS PROCESSES
HCOB 24 Jan. 77 TECH CORRECTION ROUNDUP
HCOB 6 Aug. 65 QUALIFICATIONS TECHNICAL ACTIONS
These rundowns and handlings are not assigned to a specific point on the Grade Chart as they are used when a PTS condition is encountered. C/Ses, auditors, HCOs and Quals must be fully conversant with these and must ensure their correct use in handling PTSness terminatedly when it occurs.
Int Rundowns
The INTERIORIZATION RD or the END OF ENDLESS INT RD are the remedies used to stabilize a pc after exteriorization and permit him to be audited further. Programing and handling is done per the following issues:
HCOB 4 Jan. 71R Int RD Series 2
Rev. 24.9.78 EXTERIORIZATION AND HIGH TA
HCOB 24 Sept. 78RB I Int RD Series 4RB
Rev. 4.2.89 THE END OF ENDLESS INT
REPAIR RUNDOWN
HCOB 17 Dec. 71RB Int RD Series 15
Rev. 24.9.78 C/S Series 23RB
INTERIORIZATION SUMMARY
which gives a full list of references on the subject.
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED
Anyone who is Clear should be actively moving on up to the next higher levels on the Grade Chart. If this is not happening, if the Clear is moving very slowly or stopped in his progress, HCOB 27 Mar. 84, C/S Series 119, STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED, provides a full array of handlings that may be done to assist the Clear to get unstuck from any point of possible hang-up. Not the least of the actions are Sec Checking and the handling of false purposes. Any of the services provided would be C/Sed for by a Case Supervisor qualified to handle Clears, and none of the actions C/Sed would include NED or any form of Dianetics, as Dianetics is not to be run on Clears.
An org with stalled Clears in its field should be making full use of this technology in order to assist the individual Clear himself and, as well, to unjam the flow in the area for which the org is responsible.
PROGRAMING
Cases divide up into four general groups:
Case 1: ON DRUGS, will go through withdrawal—Needs Objectives and Purification at same time. Then up the Chart.
Case 2: HAS BEEN ON DRUGS. OCA BELOW CENTER LINE ON RIGHT OR LEFT. Needs Purification, Objectives before can respond well to think processes or auditing commands. Then up full Chart. Happiness RD before NED.
Case 3: NO HEAVY DRUGS. OCA MIDDLE RANGE. Purification, Objectives, Expanded Straightwire, Lower Grades, Happiness RD, NED on up.
Case 4: OCA ALL IN THE UPPER HALF OF GRAPH. NO HEAVY DRUG HISTORY. Purification optional, ARC Straightwire, Expanded Lower Grades, Happiness RD, NED, etc.
Public in this last case group who have read The Way to Happiness can come in and go right onto the Happiness Rundown and on up the Bridge. (This is one of the major routes for public into the org.)
Reges must not sell the pc a program. A Reg sells auditing. Person wants a certain rundown—Reg only has to say, “Good, you’ll get it,” and the C/S, informed, can put it on the program in its proper place.
Refunds came from nondelivery or misprograming. As all cases are not in the same state, one cannot run them all on the same program. A raw pc can have every RD there is but not in a sequence that will not match his case.
Pcs will turn up who have had a Happiness RD in a mission who need Objectives. Pcs will turn up who have had intro services or assists. One simply notes it and doesn’t repeat or overrun those processes. Pcs will turn up who need repair of earlier auditing. Pcs will appear who have had Book One auditing. Each needs his own program. That is all the business of the C/S, not the Reg.
The Reg can tell the pc all about this RD or that but must always say “I am here to be sure you obtain enough hours so you can receive what you want. It is up to the Technical staff to give your case individual programing. We know where you want to go, the C/S will be told and we are here to help you get there. Not all cases are the same and the Tech staff will tailor your program to fit you. The rundown you have requested will be on that program. We want you to get the maximum obtainable benefit from it and that is done by preparation. If you cooperate, we will do the best we can.”
__________
If you show them the routes you can stress individual programing. Every pc likes individual attention. The honest fact is that a Grade Chart can give only the big pattern one should travel. How to get the pc up it is between the C/S and the pc’s individual case.
There is no Royal Road that has an exact starting point for every pc. There is a series of wins that people can attain and these are in a proper sequence of case levels. A Grade Chart is the sequence for all cases but cases start at different points when they begin to ascend it. And so a C/S has to use it that way.
__________
ALTERNATE CLEAR ROUTE
Please note that at (12) on the above list provision begins to be made for those who do not go Clear on NED. The Clear Certainty Rundown is not given to someone who has not gone Clear on NED. (13) the Sunshine Rundown, is also not given to those who do not go Clear on NED. Instead of these two (12 and 13), the person can go on to an Advanced Org for his Clearing Course.
But, please note, whether a person goes Clear on NED or not, it is planned that he can begin his Solo Auditor’s Course (necessary for OT steps) in his home org. Part I of the Solo Auditor’s Course can be begun right after the Sunshine Rundown or not having gone Clear; and Part II, completing it, can be done in an SH or AO.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 NOVEMBER 1981
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Div VI
Missions
Group Auditors
Group Auditor Courses
Assessment Drills
Course
WHAT TONE 40 IS
“Tone 40” refers to the highest tone (40) shown on the scale of the various tone levels for a thetan. (Ref: HCOB 25 Sept. 71RB Rev. 1.4.78, TONE SCALE IN FULL)
The term “Tone 40” as we use it to describe an action is most simply defined as:
AN EXECUTION OF INTENTION.
(Execution in this context means: to carry out, to accomplish; to fulfill. Intention = an idea that one is going to accomplish—do—something; it is positive direction of an idea. An intention is not words, nor is it dependent upon words.)
To define it more comprehensively:
Tone 40 is a positive postulate with no counter-thought expected, anticipated or anything else; that is, total control.
It can also be defined as giving a command and just knowing that it will be executed despite any contrary appearances. In other words, Tone 40 is positive postulating.
A Tone 40 intention includes nothing else—no counter-intention specifically. (Counter-intention is any intention which counters an intention.) Any emotion is misemotion at Tone 40.
For one to achieve a Tone 40 intention, he must have a reality on space; otherwise he has no place in which to create an intention. Actually at Tone 40 one has unlimited space at will. That doesn’t mean “the greatest space” (which would happen at about Tone 20 or 22). It means space at will.
One must have a reality on objects and other beings; otherwise he has no terminal in which to create an intention.
He must have a reality that he can create an effect in a given space, and he must be able to create this effect with no liability.
And, as executing a Tone 40 intention is, in essence, total control, confront enters into it. The ability to control is largely dependent upon the ability to confront.
TONE 40 AUDITING
Tone 40 auditing is defined as: Positive, knowing, predictable control by a known source of control toward the pc’s willingness to be at cause concerning his body and his attention.
All Tone 40 auditing is done completely in present time, without remembering or anticipating. One observes and handles in present time.
A Tone 40 acknowledgment totally ends the cycle of action and totally ends the creation of the intention. In other words, it ends the cycle completely and also acknowledges everything both auditor and pc have done, whether it was a Tone 40 action, execution of command or bank reaction. A true Tone 40 acknowledgment ends all preceding action.
There are three parts of man: thetan, mind, body.
You cannot damage a thetan by exercising Tone 40 control over him.
The above is a brief summation of stable data concerning Tone 40. There is considerably more data on this subject to be studied and known, including drills on the use of Tone 40 intention, to be found in the full works of Scientology. The following is a list of some of the main references on the subject:
Book: Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics
Book: Science of Survival
Book: Advanced Procedure and Axioms
Technical Volumes, especially Vols I, II and III
HCOB 25 Sept. 71RB, Rev. 1.4.78, THE TONE SCALE IN FULL
PAB (Professional Auditor’s Bulletin) Numbers: 133, 134, 135, 137, 147, 151, 152, 153, 154
Secretarial to the Executive Director, 20 Apr. 59, UPPER INDOC HAT MATERIAL
HCOB 8 Apr. 57, GROUP AUDITING
HCOB 11 June 57, TRAINING AND CCH PROCESSES
HCOB 2 Apr. 58, ARC IN COMM COURSE
HCOB 15 Oct. AD 8, ACC CLEAR PROCEDURE
HCOB 23 Aug. 65, ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY
HCOB 1 Dec. 65, CCHs
HCOB 7 May 68, UPPER INDOC TRs
HCOB 22 Apr. 80, ASSESSMENT DRILLS
Tape 5707C25, “Scales” (Effect Scale)
__________
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 NOVEMBER 1981R
REVISED 18 DECEMBER 1988
BPI
THE SUNSHINE RUNDOWN
The Sunshine Rundown is a bright new rundown which adds extra shine to the state of Clear. It is the next step on the Grade Chart after the Clear Certainty Rundown (or after the Clearing Course for persons on the Alternate Clear Route). It is done by all Clears directly after they attest to having attained the state of Clear.
By doing the Sunshine Rundown the person is becoming self-determined.
The rundown is done by the Clear himself and is usually completed in one session. Solo auditor training is not needed in order to audit the Sunshine Rundown. The confidential instructions are easily followed, even by those with no previous tech training.
The Sunshine Rundown is available at Class IV and higher orgs.
New Clears, already shining and bright, will be shinier and brighter still after the Sunshine Rundown—and ready to continue on their next step up the Bridge to OT. The next step for a person completing the Sunshine Rundown is the Hubbard Solo Auditor Course Part 1 or, for those who did the Alternate Clear Route and have already completed their Solo auditor training, New OT I.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 29 NOVEMBER 1981
Remimeo
DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY
COMPARED TO NINETEENTH CENTURY PRACTICES
A comparison between Dianetics and Scientology and psychology and psychiatry is nonsense.
The two nineteenth century subjects, psychology and psychiatry, do not achieve ANY good results. On the contrary, they are destructive beyond belief. They make crackpots, sexpots and vegetables when they do not outright kill.
The greatest crime of our times is the use of psychology and psychiatry to teach little children in schools with them and manufacture crime and a whole world of immorality and unhappiness.
The character of the governments themselves is established by their tolerance and use of psychology and psychiatry. In no human race of any civilized repute has any law condoned broad mayhem and murder of their populations. Yet under modern governments psychology and psychiatry not only have carte blanche but also get insistence on their use.
Murderers flock to murderers, according to old sages. The governments only smile at the brand of Cain upon their heads.
Is this a civilized world we’re living in?
I’m afraid it only will be when Dianetics and Scientology can bring wisdom enough to man to blunt his furious efforts to do himself in.
So laugh in people’s faces if they compare Dianetics and Scientology to the “orthodox mental subjects.” They are insulting you.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 5 DECEMBER 1981R
REVISED 7 OCTOBER 1984
Remimeo
Students
Supervisors
Course Admins
Tape Course Series 7R
SETTING UP AND USING
A REEL-TO-REEL TAPE PLAYER
Ref:
HCO PL 6 May 71 AUDIENCE ALERTNESS AND
TAPE PLAYERS
Years ago I found that student comprehension and tape playing quality went hand in hand. I made some experiments with this and I found that on bad quality equipment most of the students went to sleep, but as the quality of the equipment improved, their comprehension also improved. And that students got the best grades on high-quality equipment.
The tape player must be of high quality to reproduce the sound without adding to or distorting what is on the tape. Poor-quality sound is difficult and annoying to listen to and causes misunderstoods by preventing the listener from hearing exactly what is said. The poorer the equipment, the poorer the comprehension. The better the equipment, the better the comprehension.
This also applies to the headphones. Course tapes must always be listened to through high-quality, high-fidelity headphones. This permits the listener to be undisturbed by other noises in the area, as well as prevents others from being disturbed by the tape being played. High-fidelity headphones permit the listener to have his undivided attention on the tape and produce a pleasant and easy-to-listen-to sound which closely duplicates what is spoken on the tape.
This does not in any way replace misunderstood word tech nor does it change or add to the three barriers to study (Ref: HCOB 25 June 71R, Word Clearing Series 3R, BARRIERS TO STUDY) as the tech for handling student difficulties on tapes. If a student dopes off on a tape or doesn’t understand, find the misunderstood word and get it cleared. Don’t buy “Well, the equipment is bad so of course he is doping off.” Get the student handled with standard study tech and then ask, “Why was this student permitted to listen on poor equipment in the first place?”
THE TAPE PLAYER CONTROLS
In an Academy you may find both tape players and tape recorders. A tape recorder is a machine that records sound onto tape and also can play back the sound. A tape player is a machine that only plays back the sound that is already recorded on tape.
Tape recorders should, in effect, be converted to tape players by having the “record” button removed or sealed up so that it cannot be used. It will erase the tape and lose the valuable materials on the tape if pushed accidentally by the student.
Tape recorders and tape players come in many makes and models. The controls and switches are arranged in various places and the machines are of various styles.
Following is a description of the basic controls of a tape player. The arrangement of these controls will vary from machine to machine but their functions will be the same on most machines.
1. On/off switch or power switch.
2. Volume control (often in combination with the on/off switch).
3. Tone control (omitted on some machines).
The tape controls of a tape player are usually in the form of a switch which is turned to various positions or in the form of a series of buttons:
SWITCH TYPE CONTROLS:
BUTTON CONTROLS:
4. PLAY (sometimes called FORWARD): Press this button or turn the switch to this position to play the tape.
5. FAST FORWARD: Rapidly runs the tape forward without playing the tape.
6. REWIND: Rapidly runs the tape back without playing the tape.
7. STOP: Stops the tape. Always stop the tape before fast forwarding or rewinding the tape. Also bring the tape to a complete stop after fast forwarding or rewinding the tape before playing the tape.
8. PAUSE: Use to temporarily pause a tape that is being played. On a machine with a pause button, press the pause button to hold the tape; press the button again to release it. On a machine that has a switch with a pause position, turn the switch to the pause position to pause the tape then back to “play” to play the tape.
9. FOOT PEDAL: This is exactly the same as the pause button in function except that it is operated by the foot. Academy tape players must have a foot pedal so the student can have his hands free to look up words, take notes, demonstrate something with his demo kit, etc. (Most tape players do not have foot pedals, but they can and should be installed on tape machines that don’t already have them.)
CAUTION: If you are using a tape recorder that has a RECORD BUTTON, never press this button, as it will erase the section of tape being played while the record button is pressed. (The record button is used when recording something onto a tape. But when it is used with a prerecorded tape, it will also erase any section of that tape that is played.) The record button is usually red.
SETTING UP THE TAPE PLAYER
1. The tape player is set on a steady bench, table or platform at a comfortable height so the student can easily operate the controls, take notes, etc.
2. The tape player should be set up so that the student is facing the Course Supervisor, rather than having his back to the Supervisor. This enables the Supervisor to see how the student is doing and he can easily spot if the student has gone dull or sleepy from a misunderstood word.
3. The tape machine is plugged in and switched on to check if the power is on and that the machine is operating.
4. Plug in the headphones.
5. Plug in the foot pedal and position it on the floor so that it can comfortably be reached by the foot.
6. The tape is put on the tape player and the colored leader is threaded around the tape guides and playing head and in between the capstan and rubber pinch roller as shown in the following diagram.
Be sure not to twist the tape as it is threaded past the head and guides. The tape should come off the reel flat and lie flat against the guides and should go onto the empty reel without a single twist.
7. Set the speed at which the tape will be played at the correct speed for the tape. (The usual speeds for a tape player are 7 1/2, 3 3/4, or 1 7/8 inches per second or their equivalent, 19, 9.5, or 4.8 cm per second.) Most of the tapes you will play are played at 3 3/4 inches per second (9.5 cm per second).
8. Run the tape to the beginning of the lecture and set the tape counter at zero (unless your machine is not equipped with a tape counter).
9. Play the tape. Adjust the volume and tone controls as needed, while playing the tape. Bad tone settings can cause students to go by words they don’t understand and so dope off while listening to a tape.
POINTS ON THE USE OF THE TAPE PLAYER
a. To rewind a tape or to fast forward it, always press the stop button first. And after rewinding the tape or fast forwarding it, press the stop button and wait for the tape to stop before pressing the play button. Suddenly jerking the tape forward or back can cause it to break or stretch or the tape can even come off the reel and get caught in between the side of the reel and the wound tape.
b. The magnets inside headphones can erase part or all of a tape so never leave headphones lying near a tape.
c. Keep dirt and dust away from the tape machine and when not in use replace the cover on the tape machine.
d. Handle a tape gently. Don’t do anything that would cause it to become stretched, tangled or broken. Be sure to place the tape in its correct box when done and don’t permit loose ends to protrude from the tape box.
e. Don’t leave long loose ends sticking out from a reel when playing a tape. These could get caught in the machine.
f. After the tape has been played, store it in its box without rewinding it. Rewinding the tape serves no purpose and fast winding causes the tape to be wound rather sloppily. This can cause the tape to distort. Tapes store better and last longer when wound at playing speed.
g. Never put a piece of paper or anything else into the tape to register your place. Use the tape counter to find your place.
h. Always switch the tape player off when not in use, even on short breaks. This lets the machine cool off and helps to prevent it from overheating.
i. At the first sign of any fault with the tape player or a tape, report it to the Course Admin or your Supervisor.
j. Never twist or knot the headphone cord, as this may lead to inner wire breakage.
k. If a word or phrase cannot be discerned, call the Supervisor or check a good transcript, if one is available. You must look up any misunderstood word in a dictionary.
l. If the sound becomes blurred or of poor quality, ask the Course Admin to clean the playing head across which the tape moves. The playing head must be cleaned regularly as it picks up some of the coating from the tape, which results in a blurred, poor quality sound.
m. If you cannot clearly hear the tape or the quality of the recording is poor, tell the Course Admin or your Supervisor. The playing head may need to be cleaned or the tape player may need to be demagnetized. You may also have a bad tape. Don’t jeopardize your comprehension of the materials by listening to a lecture through poor equipment. Get it handled or switch to a better machine.
n. Consult the instruction book or manual if you need additional information on the particular tape player or tape recorder that you are using.
o. If a student has trouble running the tape player or has difficulty with it, he should be run on Reach and Withdraw on the tape player by another student as a drill per HCOB 10 Apr. 81R, REACH AND WITHDRAW. He should also be word cleared on this HCOB, and also the tape player manual if needed.
TAPE COURSES
(Tape courses are courses that are taught in languages other than English where the materials have been translated and recorded on tape.)
1. Mark the tape-counter reading of each item on the checksheet as you come to that item on the tape. This gives you a reference by which you can find any item later on.
2. If a word or phrase cannot be discerned the student should call the Supervisor. The Supervisor listens to the tape, and if he can’t distinguish what is being said, he gets hold of the English text and locates the word or phrase and using a good foreign language dictionary translates the word or phrase for the student. It is the responsibility of the Supervisor to see that any misunderstood word is cleared up.
3. If a student bogs or can’t understand something on a translated tape, he is first word cleared. If the confusion does not resolve, the translated tape is compared to the English material and if found to be a translation error the Supervisor or Word Clearer makes a note of the translation error by entering it on a card which is then kept in the tape box for that tape. He also sends a report to the nearest Continental Translations Unit.
The vast majority of the technology of Dianetics and Scientology is recorded on tape. Use good equipment and use it properly so that you can hear these materials in their utmost clarity.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Compilation assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 DECEMBER 1981
All C/Ses
All Auditors
Tech/Qual
Registrars
Dissem
Execs
Orgs and
Missions
The Auditor
BPI
THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART
The effectiveness of auditing, according to records and results, tests and hours in session, has increased enormously in the past thirty-four years (194781). This is due to research—a casual estimate of the time I have put in on this approaches now a hundred-thousand hours and half a century. In that time, as could be expected, there have been breakthroughs and breakthroughs, and it can be expected that, because of these, the lineup from time to time would change. It is probably remarkable that the Grade Chart has not changed more than it has.
Improvements in auditor training as well as technical revelations have contributed to these refinements.
In the final analysis, it is the individual who receives the benefits from this. Increased percentage of results, shortened time to obtain them, more stable gains, broader application.
But it probably has not occurred to anyone that for the past thirty-two years, I have been researching DOWNWARDS. That’s right. Remember that I myself was producing results thirty-two years ago. So what has been happening?
As broader and broader numbers of people were being addressed, more and more types of cases had to be handled.
Meanwhile, the society itself was going downhill. Outside the perimeter of Dianetics and Scientology, the level of cases was DECLINING. More and more problems were being generated by the Establishment for its population: The psychologists were let loose on the schools and educational levels began to collapse; the doctors and psychologists and psychiatrists began to flood drugs into the culture; assisted by the FBI, crime statistics began to go out the roof; crushed by tax people, the economy began to generate more and more problems for the individual; the psychiatrist stepped up his program of injuring people and then compounded the Establishment-tolerated felony of covering up his crimes by drugging his patient and keeping it a secret from him that he had been electricshocked; soldiers began to be brainwashed, not just by the enemy but by their own governments. No need to go on, even if there are hundreds more, for this is not a rabble-rouse; it is just a brief comment on the society’s decline, and because members of that society were being audited as they came in and because each year the average case found was rougher than last year’s cases, it affected the line-up of the Grade Chart. 1949 is not 1981.
The key word of all this is UNDERCUT. In research, whatever other considerations existed, there was always the necessity to go into a lower UNDERCUT of the cases.
Book One, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, contains the bulk of the elements and philosophy that we use today.
Of course, there have been MANY breakthroughs that were not downwards, but upwards. However, the bulk of work has been devoted to finding where current cases were at and undercutting them to get positive results.
Don’t be unduly alarmed by what I am saying about the social decline as it may influence Dianetics and Scientology: We are WAY out ahead of it. As the society went down, our percentages of successful handlings were going up and up. And this shift in the Grade Chart is part of a program to keep it so.
The main change in the new Grade Chart is that Dianetics and Scientology have been switched around. One gets his Scientology, per this chart, before he gets his Dianetics.
Chronologically, then, Dianetics came before Scientology; and it would seem natural that one would give Dianetics to a pc before he gave him Scientology auditing. But wait, Scientology ARC Straightwire and grades were developed as an undercut to Dianetics.
It was Dianetics that made the first Clears. Scientology grades do not make Clears, even though they sometimes exteriorize a person.
So this has now been made real on the new Grade Chart. Lower Scientology grades have been placed below NED.
There are other technical reasons for this change: The pc usually needs a lot of work on his life, his relationships to his environment today before he has an easy time confronting his bank as in NED. By giving him Scientology first, things are made much easier for him when he sails into NED and when he goes Clear.
The Scientology lower grades unburden an awful lot of bank and environment when properly applied to a cooperative pc and can give him wins, wins, wins in his normal life.
This makes, too, for a happier end result.
In most cases, it shouldn’t add to time in session, but on the contrary, can shorten it up.
Also, there should be no particular reason to give lower grades after a person has gone Clear if his life problems have already been unburdened.
What is happening, with this new Grade Chart, is that one is correcting the relative positions of NED and Scientology lower grades.
I trust we can look forward now to even more Clears coming off the line.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 14 DECEMBER 1981
All C/Ses
All Auditors
Tech/Qual
Registrars
Dissem
Orgs and
Missions
The Auditor
BPI
THE STATE OF CLEAR
There has been some confusion lately on exactly what is the state of Clear.
The confusion was introduced by a statement, not mine, that the state of Clear had harmonics, which is to say there were different states of Clear.
This is not true. Although it is quite impossible to obtain an absolute in this universe, the state of Clear is, actually, about as close as one can come to it.
I have given some time to it, lately, and have come up with a definition which fits all cases. It is as follows:
A CLEAR IS A BEING WHO NO LONGER HAS HIS OWN REACTIVE MIND.
The only exception, very, very, very rare, is one who didn’t have a reactive mind in the first place.
The Book One definition of Clear is valid.
I believe I know what has been happening that caused the confusion.
Without invalidating the case gain of anyone (and NED for quite some time now has been making true and valid Clears) - a few pcs and technical personnel have been mistaking the state of RELEASE for that of CLEAR.
You see, there are an awful lot of gains that can be made with auditing. Few people, walking on the street, have any idea whatever of how much better they can get. It is really a question of how much better is better.
A person hits a floating TA that simply won’t turn off, his wife and girl friend ooh and aah on how much better he looks, he hasn’t kicked the cat for days and is no longer coughing. He says, “By golly, I must be Clear!” even though he really can’t pass the test. So the technical people, seeing him glow, say, “I don’t want to invalidate this guy,” and they let him declare and he goes to an SH or AO and falls on his head when he starts to climb the next ten light-years to OT. He was just a RELEASE.
There are MANY levels of release. It means simply that one has lost a fixation or an aberration of one kind or another. One should get a reality on the light-years of gain obtainable between the guy on the street and the state of Clear.
It’s simply that we are too good at making Releases today.
So I looked over this problem and found an outness in the lineup which I have described more fully in HCOB 12 Dec. 81, THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART.
There has just been a change in the Grade Chart (HCOB 12 Nov. 81 which has been reissued as HCOB 12 Nov. 81R, Rev. 14.12.81, to correct an error in it where someone else redefined Clear).
This change in the Grade Chart will go far to handling personal misconceptions. Scientology lower grades can produce an abundance of wins. These releases go far to straightening out one’s environment and life and set one up to have, most usually, a far easier run of it in New Era Dianetics.
Scientology lower grades sometimes exteriorize a person but to date, to my knowledge, have never produced a Clear: That was not their purpose.
Remember that with Dianetics Book One techniques I could produce Clears. But it took decades of development of auditor training skills and precise statements of processes to bring it up to where others could. That point has now been with us for some time in developed training technology and New Era Dianetics.
We are making Clears today with NED, make no mistake about it. But it should prove even easier to do so once the pc’s own life and environment have been straightened out with all those releases available lower on the new chart.
There is even another chance at Clear if the person misses it in NED. He still can go on to an SH for his Solo Auditor’s Course and an AO for the old Clearing Course. It is even being worked out now so that he can begin his Solo Auditor’s Course right in his local org—he’ll need it to go on to OT.
A tiny percentage of people, who haven’t made it, want to declare themselves Clear as a status symbol, but when they try to go on to OT, it catches up with them, and in any event can be handled. The releases, given good auditing and a cooperative pc, are there to be had, and in cases that have not been wiped out by the psychs or who can be gotten into communication by an auditor and cooperate, the state of Clear is there to be had.
And it is just as worthwhile as it ever was.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1981
Remimeo
NEW GRADE CHART PC/PRE-OT PROGRAMING
Do NOT take people in progress of following the old Grade Chart off in the middle of an action and put them on the new chart. Example: Someone half through NED taken off and put on Scientology Grades. Complete the major action of the program before any change of the action on the pc or pre-OT.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 DECEMBER 1981
Remimeo
POST PURPOSE CLEARING REVIVED
Ref:
HCOB 4 Aug. 71R POST PURPOSE CLEARING
Rev. 26.11.74
Recently some new technology, known as Deoppression, was developed for and is being used on orgs. (Deop is part of mission tech and is the subject of Flag Orders.)
There is a piece of good technology that has fallen out of use: It is Post Purpose Clearing. It is quite successful in raising the general tone level and production of orgs. All by itself it produces an increase in production.
It should be undertaken, for sure, after a Deoppression of an org is done. And, factually, it should be done in any case.
The tech of it is contained in the reference HCOB. But to that HCOB could be added additional steps.
PPC 12A. One asks, “What is your intention toward your post?” One takes this to F/N.
PPC 12B. One asks, “What is your post product?” One takes this to F/N.
PPC 12C. is done, “What is your intention in getting out that product?” To F/N.
PPC 12D. “What volume of product do you intend to get out?” To F/N.
PPC 12E. “What degree of quality do you intend your products to have?” To F/N.
PPC 13 and PPC 14 are as given in the reference HCOB.
There is an added note to Post Purpose Clearing. It probably accidentally got swept aside when some Quals abused What, How and Why in questions and got org staff snarled up because these were listing questions. Qual was arbitrarily forbidden to use such listing questions and this may have influenced this action of Post Purpose Clearing, so necessary to orgs, and the tech got lost. The result has been, in some cases, confused and unproductive staffs.
Also, some seniors, not knowing how their own departments or divisions were supposed to run, tended to knock off hats and put people on posts doing the wrong things, resulting in a “Hey, you” org board.
The remedies for these two errors are quite plain.
1. When any step results in a BD F/N result, indicate it to the pc. In case of any bog, treat the two-way comm pc statements as though they were L&N items. Any bog can be repaired with an L4B.
2. In the case of executives and seniors, clear them on the various posts over which they have command, using the OEC volumes for reference. This will tend to make them hold the form of the org.
Various outnesses will be found by any Qual attempting to do this on an org. They may discover, for instance, that the org has no hats: But this should not stop them, although it should be remedied fast as well.
By adding the intention step, Qual is certainly going to collide with a few rock slams regarding products or the org. But this is all to the good: we don’t want rock slammers messing up products or the org. Any plants or people of evil intentions will show up, though PPC is not intended as an ethics cycle.
PPC is an organizing step and should not be used to stop production. But, at the same time, it should not be forbidden because it is an organizing step.
The speed with which a PPC can be done is not forever. At PPC 2, if the person is set up to have one as in this step, the PPC should, for most posts, simply sail along like a June breeze. With a VGIs at the end.
QUAL’S OBJECT IN GETTING THIS DONE ON A STAFF AND NEW STAFF MEMBERS IS TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF PRODUCTION OF THE ORG AND TO INCREASE THE PRODUCTION OF THE ORG.
It is quite true that the pay of the org depends upon the individual quality and volume productivity of each individual org member. A PPC well done throughout an org inevitably should raise, by making a better org, org income and pay.
Remember that orgs which have had the highest stats were those orgs which ran closest to OEC policy. This is an historical fact, borne out time after time. So in all Post Purpose Clearing, your main reference is green-on-white, the policy letters, and these should be handy and referred to in any case where the duties of the staff member are unclear.
It will also come about that you are handling someone who holds two or three posts. In that case, clear all of them but add a step PPC 12F, “Is there any conflict with your other hats and posts?” If it reads, “What are the conflicts?” and “How are you going to resolve that?”
All cautions and directions in the reference HCOB apply in doing any Post Purpose Clearing.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 DECEMBER 1981
Remimeo
POST PURPOSE CLEARING
FOR MANAGEMENT TEAMS AND EXECUTIVES
Refs:
HCOB 17 Dec. 81 POST PURPOSE CLEARING REVIVED
HCOB 4 Aug. 71R POST PURPOSE CLEARING
Rev. 26.11.74
The two necessary ideas a management team or executive must have:
1. That a long-term view, as well as immediate remedies, is vital.
2. That an increase in stats and betterment of organization health is desirable.
Management staff members or executives who do not have these concepts or intentions have no business on a management team or on post as these two basics are why they are there.
A member of management or an exec can always short-sightedly operate for a quick profit (i.e., get lots of service sold but none delivered; buy a cheap machine that will look good on an FP but will break down in a month; do a fast, bad job to get up stats and then involve others for months trying to handle the botch; falsely reassure seniors that all is well when, in a short time, a crash will expose them; operate on short-term stats and ignore the gradual drift down over the months).
When only short-term views are taken, disaster is being courted.
A betterment of the organization and its prosperity has to be intended by management or an executive in order to bring it about. When a management team or an executive has other-intentioned items at work, they harm or destroy not only the organization but also themselves (i.e., not have to work so hard; be powerful personally; get even with others; have more time for the family; keep up with my golf; live better; wear better clothes; escape the Ethics Officer; and, of course, simply intending to do the place and staff in).
Upper-echelon intentions bring about the state of the division, org or network not only in the present but in the future. If they intend to make things go right, they will, of course, observe their area and study successful policies and actions of proven worth and apply them.
The state of stats, long term, of an executive or management team gives a definite revelation of their real intentions.
SUMMARY
Where any management team or executive is failing, it will be found that their view is very short term and they are other-intentioned on post.
In management and executive Post Purpose Clearing, one has to keep these two things in view.
A good manager or executive works hard hour by hour to keep the show on the road but always with a long-term view as well. And he intends that org and staff will prosper.
The auditor in Post Purpose Clearing will get a lot of glib answers. The stats, the honest ones, and the true long-term performance of the executive, measured by the health of his zone of responsibility, tell the tale and should be consulted when in doubt.
The Post Purpose Clearing auditor must be sure these two principles above are really the case and, if not, handle the executive so that they are.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
1982
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1982
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Level 1,
NED, SHSBC
Checksheets
Upper Indoc TRs
Checksheets
HIGH SCHOOL INDOCTRINATION
(Excerpted from the ACC Preparatory Manual
for Advanced Students in Scientology.)
Refs:
HCOB 4 Oct. 56 HIGH SCHOOL INDOCTRINATION
PAB 152, 15 Jan. 59 THE FIVE LEVELS OF
INDOCTRINATION
HCOB 7 May 68 UPPER INDOC TRs
The following chapter on High School Indoctrination has been excerpted from the ACC Manual and published in HCOB form to ensure its data is easily available to students on Upper Indoc TRs.
There are five levels of auditor indoctrination, five levels of skill in which he must be versed. One of these is High School Indoctrination.
Every auditor has, from time to time, found himself in difficult and peculiar circumstances while auditing a preclear. How about the pc who makes a perfectly frank sexual pass at you? What about the time you said, “Walk over to the wall?” and the preclear looked at you intently and asked, “Are you a Theta Clear?” Then there’s the pc who sits down, presumably to be audited, and launches forth: “Oh, what a pretty tie you’re wearing today. I got one just like it for my husband—except it’s green instead of blue, the one I got for him, I mean. And it was supposed to be three-fifty, but I got it at wholesale for two-ninety-five because I know the owner of the store. I went to his daughter’s wedding last week. My niece was supposed to be a bridesmaid, but right at the last minute . . .” Nonstop. Or perhaps you’ve run into a “Tone Twenty”: “Do I see that wall? Why, I can see right through the wall! I can see the entire MEST universe, any time at all. Right now the solar system looks about the size of a printed period to me.” Unreality, unreality, unreality.
So what did you do? Did you get a trifle tensed up when the pc started to paw you affectionately? Did you get a little brusque, as you scraped him or her off with a putty knife? Did you get decoyed into a discussion of the history of your case and current state of exteriorization by the chap who wanted to know if you were Clear? A little huffy, maybe? And what about the preclear who talks, and talks, and talks, and talks? Ever sat there wondering, “Is this a ‘preclear origination’? Should I acknowledge? Should I ignore it? Is there any way of gagging her till I can get ‘Locate the ceiling’ out? Maybe she’s blowing locks. Or is this her present time problem? And if so, which of the sixteen items she’s covered in the last three minutes is it?”
Perhaps you’ve got the obsessive talker taped but how do you make out with the fake Tone Twenty? A little baffled about how to have him find a wall without bringing forth torrents of anguished protest? “You’re invalidating me! You ought to be running me on 8-0. You’re just trying to stick me in my head because you’re a Black Five yourself. All my theta perceptics just turned off ! “ What do you do then?
Well, here comes the United States Cavalry to the aid of the stopped, badgered and harassed auditor. It’s called High School Indoctrination. And it should never happen to Homo sapiens; he’d never survive it. Auditors, fortunately, are sterner stuff than Homo sap. They come out of it, bright as a dollar, crying “Bring on the lions!”
Here’s how it goes. An instructor, who will act as preclear, leads a studentauditor to a large, secluded room. As soon as the words “Start of session” are out of his mouth, the instructor-preclear may drop to the floor in a dead faint, burst into a wild grief charge, bolt for the door or balk like a donkey with a glazed, blank stare. Or perhaps he may just stroke the student-auditor’s hair, murmuring, “You’re awfully cute, really. Why don’t we drop this pretense . . .” Whatever the instructor-preclear elects to do by way of randomity. If the studentauditor bogs utterly, a soft-hearted instructor-preclear might say “End of session” and give him a couple of tips. Tougher instructor-preclears frown on this and believe in letting the student-auditor work his own way out of the situation, though he plow through 76,000,000,000,000 years of track, year by year, to accomplish it.
The instructor-preclear may run from manic enthusiasm to deepest apathy in a fraction of a second, and if the student-auditor doesn’t instantly detect the change in “case level” and handle it properly, he will be hearing from the instructorpreclear. One of the more lmsettling things the instructor-preclear does is to behave like a nice, sane, high-toned preclear for minutes at a stretch. The student-auditor knows this state of affairs can’t last for long. He will get thoroughly tensed up, expecting from instant to instant the next horrid outburst. It’s like marching a lighted firecracker around the room. When the strain becomes obvious, the instructor-preclear will say “End of session.” And he may say “What are you all tensed up for? Relax. Start of session.” Three seconds later, he’s throwing an epileptic fit on the floor, complete with froth.
There is a second step of High School Indoc which is run seated. By this time the student-auditor has a fair certainty that he can cope with a preclear’s going out of control on a general physical level. The seated form takes a more insidious turn. Some very simple process, Locational, or “Look at me. Who am I?” is used. The instructor-preclear will go out of control much more subtly. He will try to get the student-auditor to change the process, on one pretext or another. The nastiest thing to most student-auditors on seated Indoc is an avalanche of highly personal criticism and button pushing aimed directly at the student-auditor. When he winces noticeably, the instructor-preclear pursues the same topic to the bitter end. “Your hands smell funny. Don’t you ever wash them? There’s a lot of dirt under the nails, too. Careful you don’t scratch me and start an infection.” Or, perhaps, “If Scientology’s so good, what are you still wearing glasses for?” In other words, the instructor-preclear opens up with both barrels on anything he suspects the student-auditor might actually be a little sensitive about. When a student-auditor has survived this phase of High School Indoc and discovers that he can still give an auditing command and see that it is executed, he has achieved a nearly unshakable poise and composure!
It may sound inhuman, but it’s not out of reach. Students are arriving at this goal every day—students who mumbled and students who fidgeted. Students who couldn’t confront or control a pc and ran a process on the nth level of abstraction. (You know, they were “running 8-C on a preclear for an hour,” not having this preclear walk over to that wall, right now.) They can make every minute of a session count now, because everything they do in session is AUDITING. This is the routine expectancy for a present day ACC graduate. It can be taught to anyone who is willing to learn it.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 FEBRUARY 1982
(Released on 20 October 1986)
Remimeo
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
You can say what you please but what you say does not have to please.
Just be careful not too many people get unpleased.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 FEBRUARY 1982
(Released on 20 October 1986)
Remimeo
PREJUDICE
A fixed, unqualified opinion, usually based on unhappy experience, substituting itself for reason.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 20 FEBRUARY 1982
(Released on 20 October 1986)
Remimeo
OVERTS
Perhaps people commit overts because it is the only thing they can consider they have themselves done.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 10 DECEMBER 1988
Remimeo
All Orgs
All Staff (Also issued as an HCO PL,
ExecutiveS same date and title)
Ethics Officers
Auditors
C/Ses
Supervisors UR GENT
D of T
HCO
Tech/Qual
CONFESSIONAL TECH POLICIES
(Adds to and amends HCOB/PL 28 Nov. 78,
AUDITORS WHO MISS WITHHOLDS, PENALTY)
Recent investigations into failures of executives and staff to produce constructive products (and who produced no products and overt products), into case failures and into training failures, all revealed the following common denominator: missed withholds (including offenses of a criminal nature and high crimes against Scientology, its churches and members and against standard tech and policy) and the omission of Confessional technology.
EXECUTIVES AND CONFESSIONAL TECH
Any executive found to be discouraging or forbidding Confessionals or refusing to permit the tech to be applied or omitting the application of it or dismissing persons who seek to get tech or policy in is subject to immediate suspension from post, is to receive a Confessional and a Comm Ev on a charge of: NONCOOPERATION WITH ENFORCING CONFESSIONAL TECHNOLOGY.
By issuing an order to omit Confessionals or that could be applied as such or failing to keep the tech in or refusing to have a Confessional, the person has at that moment just by that act, automatically suspended himself from post and his orders would not apply. It is thereafter only subject to HCO Board of Review.
It is a high crime for an executive to penalize auditors, C/Ses, Tech/Qual or Ethics Officers for following HCOBs or HCO PLs, especially when it is due to the executive’s withholds. (It is also a high crime to falsely charge an executive with the above.)
MINISTERS AND CONFESSIONAL TECH
A pastor or minister who refuses to hear the Confessionals of persons or who recommends or urges persons not to hear Confessionals or who omits to hear Confessionals can be suspended at once as a minister until he himself has received a Confessional and refusing, remains suspended until reinstated by an HCO Board of Review.
Such a person is subject to being declared and expulsion from the Church.
ETHICS OFFICERS AND CONFESSIONAL TECH
Ethics Officers must be ministers and the failure of an Ethics Officer to train himself to hear Confessionals subjects him to post removal and Comm Ev.
CASE SUPERVISION AND TRAINING
AND CONFESSIONAL TECH
On any failed case or training failure (tech or admin training) a Confessional is required on those responsible (i.e., auditor, C/S, Supers, Word Clearers, D of T or other Tech/Qual personnel involved).
A failed-case pc or failed student is also required to receive a Confessional as it has long been known that no case gain in auditing or in training is due to continuous overts and withholds.
Any Solo auditor who red-tags is sent to Review and Cramming and any Solo C/S and Solo Course Super whose pcs or students are red-tagging must be given a Confessional.
Any minister whose pcs are red-tagging, get sick after auditing, blow or are dissatisfied with their results or lack gains, must be given a Confessional.
REPORTS
Anyone who refuses a Confessional or who refuses to answer a reading question should be turned over to the Ethics Officer, and the Inspector General Network notified then and there. Such a refusal also subjects the person to being brought before a Court of Ethics on a charge of NO REPORT. (Refs: HCO PL 19 Apr. 65, ETHICS: TRAINING AND PROCESSING REGULATIONS; HCOB 4 Apr. 65, ARC BREAKS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS; and HCOB 7 Jan. 85, HCO CONFESSIONALS)
Any anti-Scientology overts or intentions disclosed are to be reported to the Ethics Officer and the Inspector General Network. (Refs: HCO PL 10 Mar. 82, CONFESSIONALS—ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED, and HCO PL 22 July 82, KNOWLEDGE REPORTS)
PENANCES
A minister who misses withholds on a parishioner is required to receive Confessionals himself (including a “Joburg” Confessional and an Auditor Confessional) and if repeated is subject to Comm Ev.
A parishioner who knowingly withholds during a Confessional is also subject to being named an interested party at the minister’s Comm Ev.
A parishioner who knowingly withholds during an HCO Confessional is subject to double penances.
The charge (in addition to any other charges) is: NONCOOPERATION WITH ENFORCING CONFESSIONAL TECHNOLOGY.
BENEFITS
Those who apply Confessional technology are highly valued and produce great gains for their pcs and produce an improved environment generally.
Confessional technology and its application is essential to the attainment of spiritual freedom, heightened responsibility and causativeness and the betterment of conditions.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 24 APRIL 1983
FSO and AOs:
Case Supervisors
Auditors
Tech/Qual
MAAs
CONFESSIONALS AND THE
NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE
Refs:
HCOB 23 Dec. 71 Solo C/S Series 10
C/S Series 73
THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
HCOB 7 Sept. 64 II PTPs, OVERTS AND ARC BREAKS
HCOB 13 Sept. 65R OUT-TECH AND HOW TO GET IT IN
HCOB 29 Sept. 65 II THE CONTINUING OVERT ACT
HCOB 3 May 62R ARC BREAKS, MISSED WITHHOLDS
HCO PL 23 Feb. 70 QUALITY OF SERVICE
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCOB 28 Sept. 82 C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
_________
It has long been known that people do not make gains when audited over undisclosed overts and withholds and that a withhold missed in auditing can cause quite an adverse reaction.
Because it has not previously been specified whether Confessionals could be done during the Non-Interference Zone, it tended to leave the matter open to interpretation, and a common interpretation has been that one must not do any kind of Confessional or O/W pulling during the Non-Interference Zone.
But what about a case who is out-ethics and not making progress due to continuous overts and withholds or, even worse, undisclosed overts or crimes against Scientology? Such a case won’t make any progress until these are gotten off.
A person who is NCG, nattery, critical or otherwise exhibiting O/Ws or out-ethics must be handled so that he can make case gains. And must not be continued in auditing until this is done.
This applies to pre-OTs as well as pcs and specifically also applies to pre-OTs on OT III; on New OT IV, OT Drug Rundown; on New OT V, Audited NOTs; on New OT VII, Solo NOTs—the same as it applies to any other grade or OT section.
It is a CRIME to let a pre-OT get onto an OT section in that condition in the first place. And it is also a CRIME to continue the error and not remedy the matter right away.
CAUTION
A pre-OT who is running well and making case gain should not be interrupted.
And, where a person in the Non-Interference Zone does need O/Ws pulled, the auditor must first obtain a C/S okay.
SUMMARY
By following these lines, you will save some pre-OTs who otherwise would not make it at all!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1982
Remimeo
All Staff (Also issued as an HCO PL, same date.)
Ethics Officers
Auditors
Case Supervisors
CONFESSIONALS—ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED
Refs:
HCO PL 2 Apr. 65 FALSE REPORTS
HCO PL 1 May 65 STAFF MEMBER REPORTS
HCO PL 17 June 65 STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES
HCO PL 7 Mar. 65R III OFFENSES AND PENALTIES
Rev. 24.10.75
HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA SUPPRESSIVE ACTS,
SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY
AND SCIENTOLOGISTS
HCO PL 5 Mar. 68JOB ENDANGERMENT CHITS
HCO PL 24 Feb. 69 JUSTICE
It has recently been noticed that there was an omission on the part of ministers doing Confessionals: They were not writing reports to Ethics on matters relating to the offenses of others that were revealed during a Confessional. Doing so is required per HCO PL 17 June 65, STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES and is implicit in HCO PL 2 Apr. 65, FALSE REPORTS and in HCO PL 1 May 65, STAFF MEMBER REPORTS.
Apparently this was due to a failure to differentiate between a pc “getting off” only other people’s withholds and a pc revealing knowledge of another’s overt or crime against Scientology, its organizations or Scientologists.
A person who only talks about others’ overts or withholds is often withholding an overt of his own or engaging in a black PR campaign.
But a person who has knowledge of another’s overts or crimes against Scientology should have made out an ethics report himself and having failed to do so, would have a withhold of knowing about another’s offense and not having reported it, even if it were only suspected.
There are various reasons why a person might withhold from reporting the offenses of another: similar overts or withholds of one’s own; fear of consequences or retaliation from the person being reported on; not having all the facts and so only suspecting the offense and not being certain enough, are among more common reasons.
None of these are valid because a staff member can only be disciplined for making a knowing false report or for a no-report. And if the matter is only suspected, the report should say so and it is the Ethics Officer’s hat to investigate and determine the facts.
Thus, when a minister discovers that a pc has knowledge of an overt or crime against Scientology or against the codes of the Church but has not reported the matter to Ethics, this shouid be handled as a withhold and must be the subject of an ethics report. This applies both to HCO Confessionals and to any other session.
OFFENSES AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY OR ITS CODES BY ANOTHER PERSON THAN THE PC, MUST BE REPORTED TO ETHICS FOR INVESTIGATION (EVEN IF ONLY SUSPECTED OR WHEN FULL FACTS ARE NOT KNOWN).
This is important because persons who get off their own overts have a higher responsibility level than those who don’t and these last, who don’t get off their overts, are sometimes only detectable and handleable by the reports of others.
The more serious the ethics offense, the more necessary and vital it is that such reports be made. Failure to make such a report can result in the pc (or staff member) being named as an accessory or at least being charged with condoning the offense.
There is another side to this. Some pcs, viciously, can begin a black PR campaign against another by “getting off the other’s withholds” which are false.
Some people, unfortunately, can be very wily and spread all sorts of rumors or trouble in this way. Doing so is the very lifeblood of such criminal organizations as the FBI and Interpol.
So the minister reporting all overts reported by the pc serves a triple purpose:
A. It catches actual crimes by others which might otherwise remain undetected
B. It gets rid of withholds from the pc which he knows he should have reported and
C. It gives evidence of a black PR campaign in progress against principal people of Scientology and executives.
The use that the Ethics Officer puts these reports to is very precise.
They are:
In the case of (A) he can at once investigate and sec check the others named and get ethics in.
In the case of (C) he can order a full rollback of the rumor or report and usually catch a real tiger operating in an org or area with black PR designed to paralyze the place.
So the reports are VERY valuable.
An honest executive would be very foolish to discourage these from being filed and even more foolish not to make sure they get fully followed up and investigated. Doing this is a heavy blow to criminals and to the enemy who seek to stop Scientology.
For instance, finance crimes cannot occur without collaboration or someone noticing.
Black PR with its false reports is covering up real withholds and overts, which, remaining undetected, can cave the whole place in.
A person can be helped by Scientology only when he has clean hands with it. One cannot be helped by it when he has overts against it, its principal names or organizations.
So this policy assists greatly, not only in protecting execs but in saving people. It must NOT be looked on as a way to victimize anyone. It is an instrument of salvage.
And on an organizational strata, no org can prosper when its staff has overts. Recent investigation has shown that below EVERY outness in an org or down stat there lay heavy withholds and overts. The many should not be penalized by the criminal few.
By following these policies, ethics investigations will be speeded, statistics raised and a much cleaner, happier and more productive environment will be achieved. Only the guilty will ever protest such reports and that, too, is an indicator for urgent action.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
UNDERSTANDING THE E-METER
by L. Ron Hubbard
Published March 1982
When Ron published Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health in 1950, he put a simple, workable technology of making people well and happy within the reach of millions.
As the technology of auditing advanced, it became clear that a reliable means of measuring thought and the preclear’s state of case was needed. It was to answer this need that the first Electrometer was produced, following Ron’s exact specifications. With advance after advance in precision, sensitivity and simplicity of operation, the E-Meter was refined to produce the superlative instruments of today.
But for all of the advances in its inner workings, the basic principles on which the meter operates have never changed. With clear and concise text and illustrations, Understanding The E-Meter describes and illustrates these principles, from the basics of the composition of the physical universe and the nature of the thetan, to exactly what the E-Meter measures and how.
In 1988, with the release of the Hubbard Professional Mark Super VII E-Meter, a new edition of Understanding The E-Meter was released. This beautiful new book features the state-of-the-art Mark Super VII and includes a photographic history of the meter from the very first models to the most modern.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 20 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 12 APRIL 1988
Remimeo
STANDARDS
A favorite trick is to use one set of standards to condemn an action disrelated to them.
Tribe A that hates women condemns Tribe B for being nice to them.
A man attacked by mad dogs is condemned by the SPCA for being mean to animals.
An older generation, raised to believe a girl’s place is in the home, objects to a daughter going out to earn a living. They would object even if she were starving !
Anyone can always be criticized for something—it all depends on what standards the critic uses.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 16 APRIL 1990
Remimeo
C/Ses
Auditors
Co-audit Supervisors
OBJECTIVES NOT BITING
Refs:
Tape: 5511C08 “Six Levels of Processing,
Issue 5, Level 2”
Tape: 5610C16 “Mimicry, Duplication, Ability”
HCOB 19 Mar. 78 QUICKIE OBJECTIVES
This bulletin contains important data for auditors and C/Ses on the running of Objective Processes.
Once in a while an auditor will run an Objective Process on a preclear and the process will not produce any change.
There are two reasons why this occurs:
1. the process was already flat, or
2. the process was too high for the preclear.
It has been known since the early days of Dianetics that if an auditor runs a process that is over the pc’s head, the pc will not make gain on the process. It exceeds his reality.
Some pcs, for instance, can run Opening Procedure by Duplication with great ease, back and forth, back and forth, but the process doesn’t have any effect on the pc and doesn’t do anything to him. It is over his head. The pc doesn’t really participate in the session, he doesn’t notice anything and he is actually avoiding the whole process.
An auditor therefore has to know that an Objective Process can be quickied on a pc by running a process that is too steep a gradient for that case. The auditor mistakes the pc glibly skating across the top of the process for the process being flat, and so he ends off running it before it reaches EP, thereby quickying it.
Pcs who run Objective Processes in such a fashion need lower gradient Objectives run on them first before tackling steeper gradient processes.
Not all cases being run on Objectives require lower gradient processes by a long ways. But we have long known that it is often necessary to undercut a case to reach the case’s level of reality, at which point the case will run a process and gain from it. Most cases do just fine when run standardly on a routine battery of Objectives as contained on a TRs and Objectives Co-audit. But a C/S does have to know when a pc is being run above his case level and there are precise and exact indicators that tell the C/S this.
WHEN TO UNDERCUT
In 1955, London, I gave a dissertation on Objectives not biting in the second lecture of the Hubbard Professional Course (Tape 5511C08). The main points were as follows:
A. When a pc is being run on too high a process, the auditor is running the process on a machine; no matter how brightly the pc may answer, the process is being run on a machine.
B. If you are running the pc too high, there are two things missing: communication lag and cognition; the pc will trot like a well-trained horse through the whole process, without any communication lag, without any cognitions.
After you have listened to such a case for a while and he has not developed a communication lag and he has not gotten a cognition on the process of any kind whatsoever, realize you were processing him too high.
When you get the pc running at the right level, the first process that develops a communication lag will also develop a cognition on his part, and you will start to get change in the preclear. But if he just skates across the top of the bank, you will never get any change in the preclear.
Thus we have the rule:
AN OBJECTIVE PROCESS THAT PRODUCES A COMMUNICATION LAG, WILL PRODUCE A COGNITION; A PROCESS THAT DOES NOT DEVELOP A COMMUNICATION LAG, WILL NOT PRODUCE A COGNITION.
Auditors must use these guidelines in running Objective Processes. C/Ses must be alert for the indicators that Objective Processes are not biting because the pc is being run above his head, and correct the pc’s program by adding other Objectives that are at the pc’s level.
Tapes, bulletins and other issues from the 1950s abound with Objective Processes, many of which are of a low gradient. A partial list, by no means all, of references containing such processes is:
PAB 20, mid-Feb. 54 TWO ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS:
THE NON-PERSISTENCE CASE AND
RIDGE RUNNING
PAB 44, 21 Jan. 55 TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION IN ACTION
Operational Bulletin 1 ”The following auditing commands . . .”
20 Oct. 55
Operational Bulletin 4 SIX LEVELS OF PROCESSING
11 Nov. 55 ISSUE 5
HCO Training Bulletin ”The following procedure . . .”
6 Feb. 57
Book: (Dec. 57) Scientology: Clear Procedure, Issue One
HCOB 28 Sept. 59 TECHNICAL NOTES ON CHILD
PROCESSING
Objective Processing, when done right, produces fantastic gains. Make sure your pcs get these gains.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 31 MARCH 1982R
REVISED 29 DECEMBER 1988
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Supervisors
STO Hat
SSO Hat
Ethics Officers
Study Series 11R
Word Clearing Series 68R
BASIC STUDY MISSED WITHHOLD
I think I have spotted the basic missed withhold on study which may underlie why many execs don’t study. They go by MISUNDERSTOODS all the time in their work!
It is probably the missed withhold of going past MUs and of course those MUs won’t then clean up because they are also a missed withhold.
So, probably, a reason MUs don’t clean up is that they are also a missed withhold.
The remedy is to get off the missed withhold of having gone past MUs, handling it earlier-similar to F/N (per HCOB 11 Aug. 78 I, RUDIMENTS, DEFINITIONS AND PATTER). Then locate the misunderstood words and clear each to F/N.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
(The end of auditors missing withholds while sec checking!)
An implant is an enforced command or series of commands installed in the reactive mind below the awareness level of the individual to cause him to react or behave in a prearranged way without his “knowing it.”
There are several methods of implanting.
IMPOSED SILENCE: The simplest and most common implant—and its lightest but not least deadly form—is the command to withhold. Implants could be said to be “methods of preventing knowledge or communication” and this can extend to the point of the person himself denying himself the data. The commonest “imposed silence” is probably the threatened child—an “if you tell, you will be punished.” Or simply ordering him not to tell. This tends to occlude his own memory and can be classified as an implant.
HYPNOTISM: This is without physical duress. Western hypnotism is effective on only about 22% of the people on whom it is attempted. It requires some cooperation from the subject and he often can tell you he has been hypnotized, even when he cannot tell you the content of the implant at once. It can be exposed and erased rather easily when found, often by simple recall of the content. Psychiatrists and psychologists use it and they are not very expert.
DRUGS: These are often used, by psychiatrists and psychologists, in connection with or independent of hypnotism to increase the percentage of effectiveness and to deepen the effect. Anyone who has been given psychiatric drugs—or street drugs—can be suspected of also having been implanted. For most of the drugs alone produce a trance state and environmental incidents can “go in” as an implant. The intensity of a received engram is increased when the subject is on drugs. For example, an auto accident, on a drugged person, makes a heavier engram than if he were not on drugs. Any druggie who has also been in the hands of psychiatrists or psychologists can also be suspected of having been implanted by them. Anyone psychiatrists or psychologists have given drugs to directly is a definite suspect of having been implanted by them.
ELECTRIC SHOCK: Although they pretend it is the shock that is the “therapy” (their word for mayhem and murder), an electric shock was usually just a method of implanting the “patient.” The criminals usually accompany the shock with hypnotic suggestions to the unconscious person before, during and after shock. This is why persons who have been “electric-shocked” sometimes go out and commit crimes. It could be concluded they have been told to do so while being shocked. (There is no therapeutic reason for shocking anyone and there are no authentic cases on record of anyone having been cured of anything by shock.)
DRUGS AND SHOCK: It is stated by psychiatrists and psychologists that they have to drug patients before they shock them to prevent them from breaking their teeth and spines from the convulsions. This is a lie. The reason they shock patients (with electricity or insulin or other means) is, by their own texts, to produce a convulsion. (They do this because the Greeks did it, no other reason; and the Greeks did it because a convulsion is “evidence” the person has been visited by a god.) The real reason psychiatrists and psychologists give drugs before shock is to hide from the patient he has been shocked and to deepen the implant. One can find people who do not know they have been shocked—think they only have been drugged. Yet below that drugged state one can find, with careful search, one or a hundred vicious shocks and implants.
PAIN—DRUG—HYPNOSIS: Using administered pain, drugs and hypnotism, the psychiatrist, psychologist and other criminals, such as CIA or other government agents, seek to cause victims to become robots and commit crimes or act in an irrational way. “PDH” is the psychiatrists’ gift to the police state. PDH is not very effective but it is very damaging to the person.
BRAINWASHING: This is a wrong-use term to describe implanting by deprivation and physical and mental duress. It is said to be based on the Pavlov dog experiments (but was not developed by Pavlov). The theory is that when a victim is subjected to enough punishment, he will forget his former allegiances and can be “reeducated” politically. Despite the usual advertising lies of psychiatry and psychology (criminals seldom tell the truth), the workability of “brainwashing” is laughable. Dianetics can undo “brainwashing” rather rapidly when detected. To call the remedy for brainwashing “brainwashing” merely shows public ignorance of what “brainwashing” is.
NONEXISTENT IMPLANTS: Part of the criminal tricks of implanting is to give the person an “implant” that doesn’t happen. The motions are all gone through but the content is blank. It introverts the person and sometimes makes him pull implants up from his past where they may exist.
NEEDLE BEHAVIOR
When encountering an implant in a session, an auditor may be baffled by not getting any reads on it. BUT there IS a needle manifestation that no implant, no matter how buried, can escape.
New research on this subject has revealed that
IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IMPLANT THE NEEDLE CAN GO STILL.
This is because of the hidden and withhold character of the implant.
One runs into a track area where “nothing registers on the meter.” Things which should register do not. Example: The question “How old were you then?” would ordinarily get some sort of read. In the presence of an implant, it does not.
The needle simply goes very still and unreacting. It is different than the normal needle reaction of the same pc.
The pc, too, can begin to go vague and unresponsive, very introverted and not reacting. But with or without this pc reaction, the needle goes quite still.
An auditor sometimes has to work like mad to get the needle responding.
It is VERY easy at this point to miss a withhold!
The auditor, faced with an implant in the pc he does not suspect, can see this still needle and suppose there is nothing there and write “clean needle” on the worksheet. And this is a mistake. For one thing, if you cannot get an area of track (or list) to F/N, there is something wrong. (One can, of course, have a false read or a Suppress or an Assert or out session ruds to prevent an F/N.)
This still needle will not respond. If one puts in ruds, asks for false reads, asserts, one may continue to get that same still needle.
If so, it means an implant—any one of the above listed methods.
One should work with various questions now that concern the possibility of an implant.
One could even draw up a prepared list that would cover all angles of an implant.
Confronted with a still needle that should react but doesn’t, one begins with “Is this something you are not supposed to tell?” and continues on with various approaches (“Ever see a psychiatrist or psychologist?” “Did anyone give you drugs?” “Is there something here that you yourself don’t know?” etc.). Sooner or later, as the auditor guesses and fishes his way through this, the still needle will jar loose and, slightly at first, begin to respond as he gets off the obscure trail and onto the main road of it.
The art is to GET THAT NEEDLE ACTIVE AGAIN.
It will only get active when you find out what it is that is making it so unresponsive. Something there has frozen the person’s wits and comm and he himself may know nothing of it.
Oddly enough, the person is not likely to blow up on you as he will when you are missing a withhold he knows about. He just gets more and more introverted.
The end phenomena, so far as the meter is concerned, occurs only when the needle is no longer so unresponsive. It is now reading with small falls, falls and even blowdowns and, when you have it all, F/Ns.
One must beware of mistaking out-ruds for an implant, but in no case, once you have a real still needle before you that won’t react, is it anything but one of the implants listed above.
If you understand this data I am giving you and use it cleverly, there goes the danger of missing withholds!
Pretty good, huh?
You’re welcome!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
STILL NEEDLE AND CONFESSIONALS
Ref:
HCOB 11 Apr. 82 SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS
The still needle which does not react on ordinary things it should react on is an indicator of withholds.
This is covered in the recent HCOB of 11 Apr. 82, SEC CHECKING IMPLANTS, but there is more data.
The “withhold” can be partially gotten off and one can get a strange F/N. It is strange because, while it is an F/N, it is less than normal width and has a sort of spring on each end, as though the needle was hitting a spring or cushion. It is not a nice flowing F/N. And if you look close you can see it is sort of springing back. It is not flowing clean. The F/N also tends to stop too soon, does not carry over.
It indicates the subject of the withhold or area of life is still somewhat withheld.
When you clean the withholds up all the way on the subject or area being sec checked, you get a free flowing F/N.
As it is fatal to miss a withhold, realize it is also fatal to miss part of a withhold.
Although the person is always a party to the withhold, it is not necessarily true that he or she committed the overts being withheld. It still registers as a still needle. And still behaves when partly clean with that F/N.
However, the person, in all cases so found, is either the one who committed the overts personally or was withholding for somebody else. It won’t clean up just by seeking to shift the responsibility and get off the hook. It may even go “stiller.” The isness of it is the isness of it.
This tech is new. It resulted from research I did on Sec Checks with the Mark VI E-Meter. It may or may not apply to the Mark V, but the probability is that it does. The Mark VI, however, is dead-on with this subject.
See a chronically still needle in answer to your questions? It tends to indicate a withhold. See an F/N that does not flow and springs at the end? The subject you are sec checking is not fully clean.
Nice to know, eh?
Good hunting!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 16 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
HCO
(Excerpted from an LRH despatch of 10 Aug. 73. Also note there are additional tools developed since this despatch was written for handling PTSes, e.g., Can We Ever Be Friends cassette, Suppressed Persons or PTS Rundown, etc.)
MORE ON PTS HANDLING
Refs:
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
HCOB 20 Oct. 76 PTS DATA
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
BPL 31 May 71RG PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING
Rev. 13.11.77 AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET
___________
PTS is a connection to an SP. That is true. But what may be overlooked is that persons of the middle class (which is a culture, not an income bracket, to which belong all the puritan hypocritical mores of the cop and the get-ajob-bea-moderate-plugging-success) frown very terribly on anything that the least bit tries to make a better world. The middle class wants the world of a job and order and even hypocrisy and cops because they are AFRAID. They hold their narrow views because any other views may disturb their twenty-year house mortgage, the store, the job. So when someone decides to make a better world, they look on him as a direct menace even though the dull middle-class world is a sort of slavery and suicide. It is the middle class that tries the hardest to keep the down-and-outer out and down, who go along with a cop America and hate support of anything not their class. And nearly every PTS you have will be found one way or another to be PTS to the middle class. As a group, not as individuals, the middle-class-parent world suppresses anything different. So you have PTSes.
The bulk of your PTSes may very well be PTS to a class, the middle class of which their particular SP is simply a member. Few of them realize this or even that the middle class (bourgeoisie) ARE very suppressive to anyone who tries to do something in the world besides support the system. My attitude in this is that both the capitalist and communist are alike old hat and a bore, that they’ve made a ruddy mess of things, exhausted the planet and, with their senseless wars, smashed up mankind.
I have sometimes heard that less PTSes are found than are found people with the question “Do you have problems in your environment?” reading on a meter.
[Editor’s Note: BPL 31 May 71RG, PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET, has been cancelled. It is replaced by HCO PL 23 May 89R I, PTS/SP COURSE, HOW TO CONFRONT AND SHATTER SUPPRESSION, and HCO PL 23 May 89 II, PTS/SP AUDITOR COURSE.]
I began to wonder about it. Then I heard of PTSes being simply transferred or demoted. Now listen, these people are PTS and there must be a total grasp on that tech. It IS a tech.
It is definitely out-tech to either (1) transfer someone who is PTS to another area yet still keep the person on one’s lines or (2) to put someone who is PTS on a lower post, AS A MEANS OF HANDLING, as it is not handling at all.
The person has to handle. If he does so, he will begin to get well and cease to have problems. The reasons he cannot handle are because he tries to do it in the heroic fashion that is required in a disconnect. Handling can be very, very gradient. I have seen a case where the person was simply coached to give his parents good roads and good weather and not take up any entheta and have seen the person pull right out of it and get well. It doesn’t have to be an explosive handling. It can be very gentle. All you want is the person at cause and that is attained on a gradient toward the SP.
The whole crux of PTSes is HANDLE. And the misunderstood on it is how gently one can handle.
Many of them are caught up in the mystery of why they are snarled at and have no conception of the middle class as a formidable and jealous force that goes psychotic when it feels anyone may get away from the treadmill and threaten their uneasy and doomed lives.
One tries to find what it is and then persuades them into handling. That’s the tech.
EVERY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE CAN BE STRAIGHTENED OUT. EVERY ONE OF THEM SHOULD BE.
Every one who reads on “problems in your environment” is to some degree PTS. Most of them don’t even know what the letters PTS stand for. So there is an educational step, the PTS/SP checksheet. It does not mean they have been connected to ogres. It means they are suppressed by someone or something, OFTEN FAR EXTERIOR TO THEIR PRESENT POSITION OR AREA. So there is an educational step. The tech is in HCO PLs and HCOBs. It is perhaps given more directly herein, as it applies to that exact scene.
So go to it. Really get a grip on it. And handle the hell out of them yourselves.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1982
Remimeo
THE CRIMINAL MIND AND THE PSYCHS
It has often been noted (and reported routinely in the papers) that criminals “treated” by psychologists and psychiatrists go out and commit crimes.
It could be suspected that these “practitioners” used pain-drug-hypnosis and other means (under the guise of treatment) to induce the criminal to go out and commit more crimes. And possibly they do.
But I have just made a discovery that sheds some light on this scene.
Morality and good conduct are sensible. That is the theme of The Way to Happiness. It follows (and can be proven) that immorality and bad conduct are stupid.
This bears out under further investigation. One could lay aside the ancient Greek speculations of “Good and Bad” and go on an easier and less contentious logic of “Bright and Stupid.”
Anything that a criminal seeks to obtain can be obtained without crime if one is bright enough. Criminals, as police can tell you, are usually very, very stupid. The things they do and clues they leave around are hallmarks of very low IQ. The “bright” criminal is found only in fiction. Now and then a Hitler comes along and begins a myth that the highly positioned are criminal—but Hitler (and Napoleon and all their ilk) were stupid beyond belief. Hitler destroyed himself and Germany, didn’t he? And Napoleon destroyed himself and France. So not even the highly placed criminals are bright. Had they really been bright, they could have accomplished a successful reign without crime.
The bones of old civilizations are signboards of stupidity. The jails are bursting with people so stupid they did bad things and even did those uncleverly.
So let us look at psychs again—what they call “treatment” is a suppression (by shocks, drugs, etc.) of the ability to think. They are not honest enough, these psychs, being just dramatizing psychotics themselves for the most part, to publish the fact that all their “treatments” (mayhem, really, when it is not murder) make people more stupid.
These actions of shock and crazy evaluative counseling, etc., lower IQ like an express elevator going down to the basement. They do not tell legislators this or put it in their books. This is why they say “no one can change IQ.” They are hiding the fact that they ruin it.
So the psych in prisons is engaging in an action (shocking or whatever) that makes people who are already criminal even stupider.
Although they obviously tell their victims to go out and commit more crimes (the psychoanalysts urge wives to commit adultery, for instance), they would not have to do this at all to manufacture more crime.
Thelr “treatments” make the criminals more stupid. The stupid commit more crlmes.
It is pretty simple, really, when you look at it.
Why does the state support psychiatrists and psychologists? Because the state is stupid? Or does it want more citizens robbed and killed? It’s one or the other. Take your choice.
One is bright and is moral and honest and does well or one is stupid and does badly.
The answer to crime is raising IQ. But only the Scientologist can do that.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MAY 1982
Remimeo
THE CAUSE OF CRIME
They say poverty makes crime. They say if one improved education there would be less crime. They say if one cured the lot of the underprivileged one would have solved crime.
All these “remedies” have proven blatantly false.
In very poor countries there is little crime. The “improving” education, it was tailored to “social reform,” not teaching skills. And it is a total failure. The fact that rewarding the underprivileged has simply wrecked schools and neighborhoods and cost billions is missing.
So who is “they”? The psychologist and psychiatrist, of course. These were their crackpot remedies for crime. And it’s wrecked a civilization.
So what IS the cause of crime? The treatment, of course! Electric shocks, behavior modification, abuse of the soul. These are the causes of crime. There would be no criminals at all if the psychs had not begun to oppress beings into vengeance against society.
There’s only one remedy for crime—get rid of the psychs! They are causing it!
Ah yes, it’s true on cases and cases of research on criminals. And what’s it all go back to? The psychs!
Their brutality and heartlessness is renowned.
The data is rolling in. Any more you pick up off a criminal or anyone, send it in.
On crime we have an epidemic running on this planet. The wrong causes psychs assign for crime plus their own “treatments” make them a deadly virus.
The psychs should not be let to get away with “treatment” which amounts to criminal acts, mayhem and murder. They are not above the law. In fact, there are no laws at all which protect them, for what sane society would sanction crime against its citizens even as science? They should be handled like any other criminals. They are at best dramatizing psychotics and dangerous, but more dangerous to society at large than the psychotics they keep in their offices and loony bins because they lie and are treacherous. Why the government funds them I do not know. They are the last ones that should be let loose to handle children.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MAY 1982
BPI
OT LEVELS
Psychotics deal with doing people in. Their whole mission in life is destruction.
They inveigh against lower-level gains and seek to discredit them since these run contrary to their aberrated purpose.
But when it gets to Clears and OT levels, psychos go berserk!
They are, it happens, terrified of punishment for their own crimes.
The thought of someone being sensible or powerful enough to punish them (the way they would do) is more than they can stand.
You can, with the utmost certainty, identify a criminal psychotic by the way he vilifies or degrades or seeks to stop Clears and OTs from coming into existence.
It is lost on him that immorality and crime in others stem from the very things he is doing to them.
So look well at psychs and antireligious campaigners. They are speaking from their own blackened souls and they speak from terror.
That people when they grow saner are less inclined to vengeance is an argument they cannot assimilate. They know if they had the power to torture and kill everyone they would do so.
Thus, the psychs with their rantings and electric shocks wear their own brand clearly marked on them by their own conduct in life.
Recognize them for what they are—psychotic criminals—and handle them accordingly.
Don’t let them stop man from going free.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1982
Remimeo
All Auditors
All C/Ses
QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST
Refs:
HCOB 8 Mar. 62 THE BAD “AUDITOR”
HCOB 15 Mar. 62 SUPPRESSORS
HCOB 26 Oct. 76 I AUDITING REPORTS, FALSIFYING OF
This list is for use in cleaning up pcs who have been audited by a questionable auditor. Often a questionable auditor or SP falsifies the worksheets and thus errors made in the session would not necessarily be visible in the pc’s folder.
If a pc has been found to have been audited by a questionable auditor or by an SP, that auditing should be FESed and any needed repair actions done. Additionally the C/S can order this prepared list assessed on the pc to detect hidden errors in the auditing.
This prepared list would ordinarily be done Method 5.
This assessment may be prefixed by the line “IN YOUR AUDITING WITH (name of auditor) . . .” or used without the prefix.
_________
1. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG ITEM? _________
(Repair the list with L4BRA.)
2. WERE YOU GIVEN SOMEBODY ELSE’S ITEM? _________
(Handle as in #1.)
3. WERE YOU GIVEN A WRONG INDICATION? _________
(Handle as in #1.)
4. DID YOU EVER THINK IT WAS ONE THING WHEN THE AUDITOR SAID IT WAS ANOTHER? _________
(Indicate the BPC and 2WC E/S to F/N.)
5. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER AN ARC BREAK? _________
(Fly the ARC break.)
6. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER A PRESENT TIME PROBLEM? _________
(Fly the PTP.)
7. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER A WITHHOLD? _________
(Pull the W/H.)
8. WERE YOU PERSUADED TO GET THE SAME WITHHOLD OFF MORE THAN ONCE? _________
(Usually comes from a false or protest read so find out which it was. E/S to find if pc had same thing happen before. Indicate to pc it did erase—for pcs, when this happens, think they cannot erase.)
9. DID YOU AND AUDITOR AGREE IN ANY WAY NOT TO PUT SOMETHING DOWN ON THE WORKSHEET? _________
(Get it fully and enter it on current worksheet.)
10. DID AUDITOR PUT SOMETHING ON WORKSHEET YOU DIDN’T WANT? _________
(Find out if there is any false entry on worksheet.)
11. WERE YOU THREATENED WITH BLACKMAIL? _________
(Handle.)
12. DID YOU FEEL YOU WERE RUNNING THE SESSION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
13. WAS THERE SOME KIND OF MYSTERY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
14. DID THE AUDITOR EVALUATE FOR YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
15. DID THE AUDITOR TELL YOU WHAT YOU SHOULD THINK ABOUT YOUR CASE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
16. WAS THERE ANY INVALIDATION OF YOUR CASE OR GAINS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
17. DID THE AUDITOR GIVE YOU A PROBLEM? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
18. WAS THE AUDITOR CHATTERING AT YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
19. WERE YOU DISTRACTED BY THE AUDITOR? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
20. WAS YOUR COMMUNICATION CHOPPED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
21. DID THE AUDITOR GET ANGRY AT YOU? _________
(If this happened, indicate it is illegal to do so. 2WC E/S to F/N. Clean up any ARC break.)
22. WERE ORIGINATIONS IGNORED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
23. WERE THERE AUDITOR’S CODE VIOLATIONS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
24. WERE YOU TOLD SOMETHING READ WHEN YOU DIDN’T SEE HOW IT COULD HAVE? _________
(Get what, indicate it was a false read. Itsa E/S to F/N.)
25. WERE YOU TOLD THAT SOMETHING DIDN’T READ ON THE METER WHEN YOU FELT IT SHOULD HAVE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Note for C/S.)
26. DID YOU FEEL AN F/N SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN INDICATED WHEN IT WAS? _________
(Find the point and get in Suppress on it and complete the action. Check “Are there any other F/Ns which should not have been indicated by the auditor when they were?” and handle as above. Then find and run the ARC breaks bypassed, with ARC break handling.)
27. WAS AN F/N OR RELEASE-POINT BYPASSED? _________
(Find and rehab the overrun of the release-point to F/N. Check for any other bypassed F/Ns and rehab them.)
28. WERE YOU PREVENTED FROM GETTING OFF A WITHHOLD? _________
(Indicate the BPC, then pull the W/H.)
29. WAS AN OVERT OR WITHHOLD NOT ACCEPTED? _________
(Get what, get off any protest and inval, and clean it up E/S to F/N.)
30. DID THE AUDITOR TRY TO PULL A WITHHOLD THAT YOU DIDN’T HAVE? _________
(Indicate if so. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
31. DID YOU FEEL GUILTY AFTER HAVING GOTTEN OFF A WITHHOLD? _________
(Get what. Get off any protest and inval, and clean it up E/S to F/N.)
32. WERE YOU MADE TO WITHHOLD SOMETHING? _________
(Indicate. Then clean up the W/H, E/S to F/N.)
33. WERE YOU MADE WRONG FOR SOMETHING YOU SAID? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Clean up any ARC break to F/N.)
34. DID THE AUDITOR TRY TO DOMINATE YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
35. DID YOU GO PTS TO THE AUDITOR? _________
(Indicate. 2WC to F/N.) (Note for C/S for further handling.)
36. WERE YOU RUN ON SOMETHING THAT WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE AUDITOR’S CASE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
37. DID THE AUDITOR TALK TO YOU ABOUT HIS/HER OWN CASE OR PROBLEMS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
38. DID YOU EVER HAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THINGS YOU’D SAID IN SESSION HADN’T BEEN REPORTED TO THE C/S? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
39. DID THE AUDITOR FAIL TO DO A NEEDED REPAIR? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Note for C/S.)
40. WERE YOU GIVEN UNNECESSARY REPAIRS? _________
(Indicate. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
41. WERE YOU FORCED TO RUN SOMETHING OVER PROTEST? _________
(Indicate. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
42. DID YOU EVER FEEL THAT THE AUDITOR HAD SOME OTHER MOTIVE THAN TO HELP YOU? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
43. WERE THERE FLUBBED COMMANDS OR OTHER TECH VIOLATIONS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
44. WERE YOU PREVENTED FROM EXECUTING AN AUDITING COMMAND? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.) (Note for C/S.)
45. WAS A PROCESS LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Get in Suppress on it and complete the action.)
46. DID THE AUDIIOR SYMPATHIZE WITH YOU INSTEAD OF BEING EFFECTIVE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. If an action left unflat, get in Suppress on it and complete the action.)
47. DID THE AUDITOR RABBIT? _________
(Handle as in #46.)
48. WERE YOU PERMITTED TO END PROCESSES OR SESSIONS ON YOUR OWN VOLITION? _________
(Handle as in #46.)
49. DID YOU COMMIT ANY OVERTS ON (name of auditor) or THE AUDITOR? _________
(Pull the overts.)
50. DID YOU GO INTO AGREEMENT WITH THE AUDITOR ABOUT SOMETHING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Senior C/S
Flag Land Base
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1982
Issue II
C/Ses
Auditors
QUESTIONABLE AUDITING
Every once in a while a C/S finds himself in the position where he’s had an auditor of questionable reputation on his lines, and he is now faced with the task of cleaning up pcs audited by that auditor and ensuring there are no hidden errors on pcs he has audited. HCOB 11 July 82 I, QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST, was written for this purpose, but there is an additional handling that should be done as well.
The handling is as follows:
A. Explain the Auditor’s Code (R-factor).
B. Ask the pc if any of the following were violated in any way by the auditor (or any auditor).
C. Read to the pc (on a meter) the Auditor’s Code line by line. Clear up all reads.
This will, of course, detect and clear up code breaks on pcs and get them back in the correct frame of mind about being audited.
Very few auditors, of course, get into the situation described above. And of this we can all be proud. But for those who have strayed we have these tools to remedy the matter.
I hope they are of some help to you.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Assisted by
Commodore’s Messenger
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1982
OT MAXIMS
For some time now I’ve been engaged on a path of OT research, resulting in the new OT levels and which will result in never-before-dreamed-of states of being for thetans.
These new OT levels and others to follow will advance a thetan to levels he hasn’t even imagined for eons.
And hear this! In order to help you along the road to OT, I’m going to release the following OT data that you can use to pull up your theta bootstraps and get along up the road.
These are OT maxims! Know them well!!
THE POWER (defined as light-year kilotons per microsecond) OF A THETAN IS MEASURED BY NOTHING ELSE THAN THE DISTANCE (defined as spherical spatial length) AROUND HIM IN HIS ENVIRONMENT THAT HE CAN CONTROL.
And that is the power of a thetan; the totality of it, believe it or not.
WHEN A THETAN EXERTS THIS POWER UNCLEVERLY, HE BRINGS ABOUT DESTRUCTION.
And thus you get a fascist state that destroys itself. It’s got the control but not good sense.
And so that is where good sense and judgment enter in.
WHEN GOOD SENSE AND GOOD JUDGMENT ARE NOT ADDED INTO CONTROL, CONTROL GETS A BAD NAME.
And that is where you get the idea that people shouldn’t control.
A WAY TO IMPROVE YOUR CONTROL OR ANOTHER’S IS TO DO IT ON A GRADIENT.
If a thetan is having trouble controlling things, get him to control things on a gradient and he’ll snap right out of it.
DEFINITIONS
GOOD CONTROL: Harmonious alignment.
BAD CONTROL: Disharmonious alignment.
And by the way, you have art here, too!
WAR: Bad control having to be exerted because good control wasn’t exerted. And this also defines destruction.
So there you are! Use these maxims well. Our future depends on it!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 AUGUST 1982
Remimeo
Art Series 10
THE JOY OF CREATING
Force yourself to smile and you’ll soon stop frowning.
Force yourself to laugh and you’ll soon find something to laugh about.
Wax enthusiastic and you’ll very soon feel so.
A being causes his own feelings.
The greatest joy there is in life is creating.
Splurge on it!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 AUGUST 1982
Remimeo
PAIN AND SEX
(Note: This HCOB probably won’t increase my popularity but I would
be very remiss if I did not pass on an important discovery.)
There are two items in this universe that cause more trouble than many others combined.
One is PAIN.
The other is SEX.
One should know more about these things.
They may have applications but they are used by destructive beings in great volume to cave others in.
Despite the false data of Freud, psychologists, psychiatrists and other criminals, they are not native to a being. They are only artificial wavelengths. They have exact frequencies that can be manufactured. A being or a machine can synthesize either one.
Pain becomes a lock on a being’s abhorrence for misalignment of his own electrical flows. It is a lock upon unconsciousness which shuts off knowingness.
Sex is a lock on and perversion of the “joy of creation” which involves a whole being and expands him, but by using just one wavelength, sex, this can be perverted and he contracts.
When pain enters a scene, a being withdraws, contracts and can go unconscious.
When sex enters the scene, a being fixates and loses power.
Destructive creatures who do not want people big or reaching—since they are terrified of punishment due to their crimes—invented pain and sex to shrink people and cut their alertness, knowingness, power and reach.
Thus, you see people who are “experiencing” either pain or sex introverting and not producing much.
Pain and sex were the INVENTED tools of degradation.
Believe it or not, a being can be so overwhelmed by either that he or she becomes an addict of it. Priests become flagellants and cut themselves to pieces with self-whipping.
Torturers drool over pain. Lovers are very seldom happy. People do the most irrational things when overcharged with sex, and prostitutes use it as a knowing stock-in-trade. Combined, pain and sex make up the insane Jack-the-Rippers (who killed only prostitutes) and the whole strange body of sex-murder freaks, including Hinckley, and the devotees of late-night horror movies. Under the false data of the psychs (who have been on the track a long time and are the sole cause of decline in this universe) both pain and sex are gaining ground in this society and, coupled with robbery which is a hooded companion of both, may very soon make the land a true jungle of crime.
Go into an asylum or a prison and look at the increasing institutional population and know what you are looking at. In the main, these are pain and sex addicts, decadent and degraded and no longer capable. They were sent on that route down through the ages by the psychs and here they are still in the psychs’ hands! And do they get well or go straight? Oh no. Whether in prisons or insane asylums they just get worse. And the psychs in both places rub their bloodied hands as they turn their products loose again upon the remaining population! It’s no accident. And the stocks-in-trade of psychs are PAIN and SEX. They will even tell you it’s “natural” to steal!
To compound their felony—if that is possible—they tell you it’s the body doing it. Another crashing big false datum on top of all their other lies.
These are data which emerged from recent thorough research of the whole track. This is not theory or some strange opinion. It is provable electronic fact. The waves are just synthesized.
They are the most-used tools in the campaign against beings in furthering the general goal of those creatures whose sole ambition is destruction. The universe does not happen to be either destructive or chaotic except as such obsessed creeps make it. Statements it is otherwise are just more false data from the same suspect “authorities.” It fits their purposes to make seem natural what they make artificially. The universe only seems that way to a being because such loathsome psychotics make it seem so. They destroyed every great civilization to date and are hard at work on this one. The one thing they can’t stand is the light of truth, so despite their objections, one must turn it on them. Only in its glare do their lies wither. It is the potent weapon they can’t fend off.
These facts may not be very palatable. But they could clear up some mysteries for you.
For wherever there is a mystery (and both pain and sex have been these for man) there are answers. As both pain and sex could have messed up your life, the above may be some answers you’ve been looking for.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 SEPTEMBER 1982
Remimeo
All C/Ses
All Auditors
C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
Refs:
HCOB 6 Mar. 74 INTROSPECTION RD, SECOND ADDITION
INFORMATION TO C/Ses
(Section: “Integrity”)
HCOB 9 June 71 II C/S Series 42
C/S RULES
HCOB 20 Nov. 73 II C/S Series 89
F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM
HCOB 26 May 71 C/S Series 38
TRs COURSE AND AUDITING
MIXING MAJOR ACTIONS
HCOB 20 June 71 C/S Series 47
THE SUPREME TEST OF A C/S
HCOB 4 Aug. 71R POST PURPOSE CLEARING
Rev. 26.11.74
HCOB 17 Dec. 81 POST PURPOSE CLEARING REVIVED
HCOB 20 Dec. 71 C/S Series 72
USE OF CORRECTION LISTS
HCOB 16 June 70 C/S Series 6
WHAT THE C/S IS DOING
(Section: “C/S Purpose”)
HCOB 8 Aug. 71 C/S Series 55
THE IVORY TOWER
Book: Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health
Book Three, Chapter 3, “The Auditor’s Role”
Book: Scientology 0-8, The Book of Basics
Chapter 3, “Consideration and Mechanics”
__________
WHEN C/Sing A RUNDOWN, ONE C/Ses THAT RUNDOWN, NOT A MIXTURE OF DIFFERENT RUNDOWNS. EACH RUNDOWN IS ITSELF AND NO OTHER, AND EACH RUNDOWN HAS ITS OWN REPAIR.
To do otherwise is violent and actionable out-tech.
EXAMPLES OF MIXED RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
Recently, one particular (now removed) C/S was found to have an “anything goes” pattern of C/Sing and programing cases. This C/S mixed rundowns one with another into hash and did not do the standard rundown or repair it standardly as its own rundown.
Example: A case was being run on Post Purpose Clearing and got up through the L&N step. The C/S decided something was wrong with the purpose that had been listed and ordered an Expanded Dianetics action on it. The result was an evaluated-for and caved-in pc. PPC is just PPC; it is not mixed with other rundowns.
Example: A pre-OT on the level of Solo OT III was Solo auditing as per the directions given in the OT III materials. At one point the pre-OT ran into some BPC. Instead of C/Sing for the repair list for that level, the C/S took parts of another rundown (Audited NOTs) and wrote out C/S instructions for the Solo auditor to run Solo, as part of OT III. Before this was caught by another C/S and handled, the pre-OT had done a number of attempted Solo sessions and gotten her case into quite a snarl. OT III and New OT V (Audited NOTs) are two entirely separate rundowns and must not be mishmashed together.
Example: A pre-OT was left incomplete on a NOTs Drug RD and put onto the HRD. Then, with the HRD only half done, was put onto a rundown of HC Lists “on your marriage,” and then put onto yet another action. Needless to say, the end product of these mixed rundowns was a totally and utterly messed-up case.
Example (taken from earlier C/S errors): A pc was C/Sed for Book One Dianetics, was audited halfway down a chain and was left there. Then, because he was upset, was C/Sed to be “repaired” by flying Scientology ruds instead of a Dianetics repair prepared list!
Example: A pc on Grade IV was given a wrong item, got upset, was “repaired” with an O/W session! And blew.
Example: A pc was started on NED and, with it incomplete, was begun on Scientology grades. Then, with Grade 0 incomplete, was C/Sed to begin Book One auditing and, when this bogged, was “repaired” with an L&N prepared list!
The result in all these cases was a thoroughly snarled-up case. It required expert C/Sing and auditing to handle and can cause a lot of trouble (including for the C/S found doing it).
Mixing rundowns or repairs for rundowns as in the above examples is outtech of a very serious nature and must not be done. It is the job of the C/S to make sure that it doesn’t happen and handle it when he finds others doing it.
CORRECT C/Sing
The right way to go about C/Sing is:
1. Ensure the pc is set up for rundown “X.”
2. C/S the pc standardly through rundown “X.”
3. If trouble, repair the pc using the repair action or repair list designated for rundown “X.”
4. Get rundown “X” completed to its full EP and attested.
Then you can C/S the case for rundown “Y” or rundown “Z” or whatever the next grade or level on the Grade Chart is that pc’s next step. When you find a case where “C/Sing” has not followed the proper Grade Chart or the case has been snarled up with each rundown interrupted with something else or wrong repairs used, the following is the proper procedure:
A. Go back in the folder to find where the case was doing well. (Or spot it on a meter with dating and get the data that way if folders are unavailable or suspected false.)
B. Plot out the rundowns run but incomplete.
C. Spot the wrong prepared lists that were used to “repair.”
D. Program the case to:
i. Complete each action in sequence of incompletes OR use the correct prepared list to repair it.
ii. Get the case back onto an Advance Program that follows the Grade Chart.
CRAMS, PPC AND CONFESSIONALS
It would be thought that, by this, no one could ever cram a person or do a PPC or require a Confessional.
There is a dicey point here. If a case cannot be crammed or post purpose cleared or have a current withhold pulled while he is on a rundown, then no one could be hatted or corrected or gotten back if blown.
This is why it is mandatory to get a C/S okay to cram or PPC or pull O/Ws on a pc.
The safe rules for giving a C/S okay are as follows:
RULE ONE: DO NOT do or permit a cram or PPC or Qual Why Finding on a pc who is NOT at a rest point or win on a rundown. Get the pc to a rest point or win on his current rundown before these are done.
RULE TWO: ALWAYS require ruds be flown before a cram or PPC.
RULE THREE: ALWAYS use only the repair actions or prepared lists for the rundown the pc is ON, not some other “repair” action for some other rundown or some action that is squirrel tech.
RULE FOUR: ALWAYS C/S the pc for his own gain, not for any other purpose. The purpose of auditing is to help the pc, not to remedy social or organizational ills. If this is followed, those same ills vanish. If this is not followed, the ills multiply. The purpose of auditing is to help the pc become more able as a being and has no part of discipline or “getting even.”
RULE FIVE: It is the C/S who C/Ses the case, NOT the pc or his or her spouse or the Ethics Officer or some senior.
RULE SIX: All cramming, PPCing, withhold pulling and even coffee-shop auditing must be part of the pc’s auditing folder.
RULE SEVEN: Get the pc on the Grade Chart and keep him progressing up it smoothly, repairing what he is on with what was designed and intended to repair it and not with something else.
RULE EIGHT: C/Sing and auditing are very straightforward procedures, well laid out. If no one in the near infinity of years behind us in this universe came up with a precise and doable system to unsnarl a being—and they didn’t— the auditor in the chair and the C/S are not going to find any new-and-wonderfuls off the cuff. Or any “different” cases or pcs either.
RULE NINE: C/Sing and auditing are a straight silver path to a golden future for the pc. It is there to be followed step by step with standard tech and all side trips lead only into grief and thorns.
RULE TEN: All C/Ses and auditors are trusted beings. They earn that trust by being very standard. When they depart from standard tech, when they mix up rundowns or repairs, they betray that trust, the pc and themselves and block the way to a better being and far better universe.
RULE ELEVEN: Standard, straight tech will get the pc there every time. It is only auditors and C/Ses who fail and they fail only when they don’t apply completely available, fully published standard tech. So don’t scatter around on the Grade Chart or mix rundowns or use wrong repairs, and handle the hell out of it when you find another has done it. And when you find it, report it swiftly to the Senior C/S Int and the new Inspector General Network via Flag. Standard Dianetics and Scientology tech has never been known to harm anyone. Pretending to apply it when not doing so is applying something else and falsely calling it Dianetics and Scientology. Thus, nonstandard actions become a violation, not only of trust but of trademark and copyright law and can be actionable.
RULE TWELVE: You are safe and secure doing standard tech.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Data collected by
Senior C/S International
P.S. What happened to the “C/Ses” and “auditors” who did the above examples? Don’t ask! This is a bulletin not a horror movie!
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 OCTOBER 1982
Remimeo
All C/Ses
All Auditors
Ethics Officers
C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
Refs:
HCO PL 18 June 68 ETHICS
HCO PL 17 June 65 STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES
HCO PL 1 May 65 STAFF MEMBER REPORTS
HCO PL 22 July 82 KNOWLEDGE REPORTS
HCO PL 29 Apr. 65 III ETHICS, REVIEW
HCO PL 30 July 65 PRECLEAR ROUTING TO ETHICS
HCO PL 4 July 65 PC ROUTING REVIEW CODE
HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79
PTS INTERVIEWS
HCOB 29 Mar. 70 AUDITING AND ETHICS
HCOB 25 June 70 C/S SERIES II
HCOB 28 Oct. 76 C/S Series 98
AUDITING FOLDERS, OMISSIONS IN
COMPLETENESS
HCOB 10 Nov. 87 Auditor Admin Series 20RA
MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS
HCOPL 27 Oct. 64R POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING,
Rev. 15.11.87 INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE
HCO PL 16 May 65 II INDICATORS OF ORGS
HCO PL 16 Oct. 67 AKH Series 16
SUPPRESSIVES AND THE
ADMINISTRATOR—HOW TO DETECT SPs
AS AN ADMINISTRATOR
HCO PL 23 Feb. 78R BOARD OF REVIEW
Rev. 7.5 .84
__________
It has just been brought to my attention that over the last few years a C/S had been advising staffs that C/S approval was required before somebody could be handled in Ethics!
(The real problem he was solving was that he had an out-ethics situation of his own going on and didn’t want an Ethics Officer anywhere around. He has since been removed from post.)
The above was not known at the time C/S Series 115 was written and it’s possible some people could use HCOB C/S Series 115 to inadvertently or otherwise deny needed ethics actions on a person.
Technically, it is very proper indeed to get a C/S okay before somebody meddles with a case, regardless of the circumstances. But let’s put this into a proper framework: If some pc is standing over a body with a smoking gun in his hand, it certainly does not require a C/S okay to take him to jail!
HCOB 28 Sept. 82, C/S Series 115, does not specifically state that C/S okay is required before someone can get ethics handling, but people could alter-is it and say, “See, this person has an out-ethics situation but he can’t be sent to Ethics because he is on the Grade Chart.”
HANDLING PC ETHICS
To handle pc ethics, a C/S must, first of all, have data. He must ensure that the various reports and worksheets, such as for cramming or Word Clearing or Product Debug actions, do get filed in pcs’ folders, as such reports often alert the C/S to existing ethics situations. (Refs: HCO PL 28 Oct. 76, C/S Series 98, AUDITING FOLDERS, OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS and HCOB 10 Nov. 87, Auditor Admin Series 20RA, MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS)
For example, the C/S sees a report that the pc has an unhandled PTS situation. He would have the pc routed to Ethics via Review. (Refs: HCO PL 29 Apr. 65 III, ETHICS, REVIEW and HCO PL 4 July 65, PC ROUTING REVIEW CODE)
Once the pc’s ethics handling is complete, he’s returned back to auditing lines via Review, and copies of any Ethics interview must be filed in his pc folder.
When ethics action on a pc is originated by a terminal other than the C/S (a lower condition, Court of Ethics or Comm Ev), the D of P should be advised and make note of this in the pc’s folder. The pc’s auditing is then suspended until the action is complete. (Ref: HCOB 29 Mar. 70, AUDITING AND ETHICS)
When the pc is off auditing for any of these handlings, there must be a tight liaison maintained with Ethics and/or Review (via the D of P) to ensure pcs aren’t lost off lines or kept waiting interminably for handling.
Where any auditing handling, such as a Confessional, etc., is recommended by a court or Comm Ev, C/S okay must, of course, be obtained and the C/S would oversee the action from his hat.
PC PROGRAMS AND ETHICS
There is a difference between a program—which is a general plan for the case—and the day-to-day C/Sing which, of course, is gauged to keep the program going forward.
Thus, it is often found that additional steps have to be added to a program to handle outnesses as they turn up, without violating the program itself.
Example: One pc had gotten into ethics trouble and was given a Repair Program to unsnarl him, the first step of which was to get up through the conditions which he was already on. He got hung up at Doubt, couldn’t get through it and virtually went off post. Step 1 of the program was then unbugged by pointing out that the Doubt would either be false data or PTSness. The PTS condition was then found and, by report, the pc was then able to get up through the conditions.
Thus, the program discovered an earlier tech outness: A PTS pc was being audited on grades. Because of this an additional step had to be added to the program, step 1A to get the PTSness handled. With that resolved, the remainder of the program could be continued.
That is an example of a program in action which is unsnarling the case, but it requires considerable alertness. From it it can be seen that C/Ses are necessary and valuable on an ethics line, but they must know what they’re doing.
HOW MUCH ETHICS IS CORRECT?
There is (or can appear to be) a conflict of targets between a C/S and an Ethics Officer. An Ethics Officer is trying to get in discipline and a C/S is trying to improve a case. But it is true that an out-ethics pc does not make case gain.
So one could say that one measures the amount of ethics which must go in to satisfy the viewpoint of the Ethics Officer who is charged with maintaining discipline and to still keep in Rule 4 of HCOB C/S Series 115 to C/S the pc for his own case gain.
In normal operating practice, the way I handle ethics in relationship to C/Sing is to:
1. Take the ethics actions necessary for the benefit of discipline in the group, and when this has been done,
2. Salvage the being independently of the organizational requirements.
So I would say that a C/S must not forbid ethics actions but that he follows steps 1 and 2 above, in that sequence. For it is very certain that tech won’t go in unless ethics is in.
Thus, the two viewpoints (Ethics Officer and C/S) are maintained.
HCO BOARD OF REVIEW
As the pendulum can swing too far in either direction (too much or too little ethics), there is a third port of call in this scene. That is the HCO Board of Review action.
The HCO Board of Review exists in Department 21. In an org, the board is convened by any LRH Comm or KOT who appoints a chairman and two other members.
Its function is to look into injustices or technically incorrect findings and cancel any miscarriage of justice or incorrect handlings. (Ref: HCO PL 23 Feb. 78, BOARD OF REVIEW)
A properly established HCO Board of Review is obviously necessary as a point of recourse to keep some sanity in between the ethics actions and the C/Sing.
SUMMARY
The data in this HCOB and in the references listed at the beginning should resolve any conflict between a C/S and Ethics and prevent a majority of pendulum swings from occurring.
The basic datum upon which all of these references are founded is just this: TECH WILL NOT GO IN WHEN ETHICS IS OUT.
As a note, with misuse of this datum it can also go to total ethics, no tech! In one org, many years ago, the C/Ses and auditors handily got rid of all the evidence of their out-tech and their inactivity and put themselves on a long loaf by simply sending every pc that came on the lines over to the Ethics Officer. The pcs, unhandled, then moved out of the org and no cases were finished at all.
So there can be abuses both ways in case handling and ethics. Ethics can be overused or it can be not used at all when needed. A C/S has simply got to know his stuff and steer a sane path on the subject.
It is the correct ethics and the correct tech action used in the correct amounts, that result in winning pcs.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 27 DECEMBER 1982
Remimeo
BPI
Pre-OT Solo Auditors
Solo Courses
Solo NOTs Auditing
Course
Ds of T
Registrars
C/Ses
TRAINING AND OT
On Solo levels you deserve the best auditor you can get: You.
Auditor training is highly recommended whether you plan to audit professionally or not. “Getting trained,” as a Solo auditor, does not simply mean to do the Solo courses. Training up to the level of a Class IV/NED Auditor who knows his business is the most positive assurance there is that you will make it to OT.
It’s all right for these guys in lower grades to be pcs—that’s fine. But there comes a point as you move up the Grade Chart when your lack of auditing skill starts hitting you in the teeth and you won’t make it to OT at all. You’re walking straight into the tiger’s lair on New OT VII and you’d better be good!
Recently, some Solo NOTs auditors reported that they were just giving themselves a session a week “to keep their ruds in.” What was actually occurring was that they were trying to make it to OT without being sufficiently trained, and giving as an excuse that, well, they’re just keeping their ruds in. If those Solo NOTs auditors knew what was ahead of them up the line, they sure would not be monkeying with that.
The plain truth of it is, if anybody is really going to make it to OT he has to know how to audit. That’s the long and short of it.
You wouldn’t put yourself and your case in the hands of an untrained or poorly trained auditor, would you?
You owe yourself the best auditor in the world on Solo, and that is you.
So get trained.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
1983
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1983
Remimeo
PTS/SP
Checksheets
All Staff
HCOs
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
Auditors
HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
Refs:
HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING
Rev. 10.9.83
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
The following was taken from one of my taped lectures (7511C20) and is hereby issued in HCOB form:
I coached a pc one time as to how to talk to his parents. I coached him very, very carefully. This is a sort of MAA job, not a C/S job. I made him repeat everything after me, very carefully: “And when your mother says to you so and so and so and so, what are you going to say?” It was simply good roads and good weather. l forced him, at pain of being squashed, to follow that exact patter with the parents. It was just good roads and good weather.
“Hello Mamma, how are you? How’s Papa?” you know. And she says, “Yeow, yeow, yeow, yeow, yeow and you whawha whawha.” Just say, “Well, all right, all right.” Don’t answer back and don’t engage in any argument of any kind whatsoever. Give it an ack. I said, “You’re calling them up just because you’re passing through and you were interested in how they were, and that is your whole story.” And he did, and that was the end of the whole situation. Pc came back to battery. Relationships with the parents went totally normal.
In other words, he was keeping it going—his worry, his upset, his letters, trying to answer their questions, his conversation with them. Whereas I cut it all into just a pattern of something on the order of about a tone 3.5 straight across the boards. That was the end of the PTS condition.
A PTS condition also has outside handling steps. But you as an auditor or you as a C/S are possibly limited by the fact that you don’t have an MAA, or you do not have somebody who is sufficiently skilled in order to do this job for you. And it winds up blowing everybody’s head off.
In such an instance, just get hold of the guy and coach him in exactly what he’s going to say.
“Oh, but no, she’d never listen, she won’t, she hasn’t talked to me for seven years! She won’t talk to me in any way, shape or form!”
“Well, all right, all right, all right. That’s fine, good.” You get a little bit inventive and you say, “Well, when is her birthday?” or something like that.
The pc says, “Well, as a matter of fact, it was a month or two ago.” And you say, “Well, all right, why don’t you send her a birthday card and tell her it’s a belated birthday card and that you remembered her birthday and always had kind thoughts of her?”
Now, the incoming comm may blow his head off. You just cool him off. Don’t engage in any corner of this; this is not the game you’re playing. You simply acknowledge any nice parts you can find.
“Papa went hunting and you’re a dirty dog and I’ve never seen the like of you and you’re an ungrateful brat and so on, and why don’t you be like your great-uncle Oscar who is now doing time in Sing Sing and’ll be executed next week?”
And you say, “I hope Daddy had a fine hunting trip.”
It’s the only part of it you answer. You coach him into two-way comm that is well above 2.0 on the Tone Scale, that mostly consists of acks and mild interest in what’s going on. You’ll find out these conditions will evaporate, if you can prevent the backflash from being responded to by the PTS person. In other words, there are ways to handle this in real life.
You will find a great many people who are “PTS” are antagonizing the people. They are antagonizing them beyond belief, and they’re telling them what’s wrong with them and they’re telling them this and they’re telling them that and the person eventually gets very resentful.
Well, even that can be patched up. You are not doing anything at the other end of the line. You cool off the PT scene sufficiently one way or the other so that the person can sit in the auditing chair.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 APRIL 1983
(Also issued as HCO PL 12 Apr. 83, same title)
Remimeo
All Tech
All Qual
All Students
AOs
SHs
Cl IV Orgs
Missions
LIST OF KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING SERIES
The following is the full list of the Keeping Scientology Working Series issues:
HCO PL 7 Feb. 65 KSW Series 1
Reiss. 27 . 8 . 80 KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING
HCO PL 26 May 61 KSW Series 2
Reiss. 30.8.80 QUALITY COUNTS
HCO PL 29 May 61 KSW Series 3
Reiss. 30.8.80 QUALITY AND ADMIN IN CENTRAL
ORGS
HCO PL 14 Feb. 65 KSW Series 4
Reiss. 30 . 8 . 80 SAFEGUARDING TECHNOLOGY
HCO PL 17 June 70RA KSW Series 5
Re-Rev. 27.4.81 TECHNICAL DEGRADES
HCO PL 26 Oct. 71 KSW Series 6
Reiss. 30 . 8 . 80 TECH DOWNGRADES
HCO PL 30 May 70 KSW Series 7
Reiss. 30.8.80 CUTATIVES
HCOB 19 Apr. 72 C/S Series 77
Reiss. 30.8.80 KSW Series 8
“QUICKIE” DEFINED
HCOB 25 June 70RB II C/S Series 12RB
Re-Rev. 27.9.80 KSW Series 9
GLOSSARY OF C/S TERMS
HCOB 21 June 70 C/S Series 9
Reiss. 30.8.80 KSW Series 10
SUPERFICIAL ACTIONS
HCO PL 25 Jan. 80 KSW Series 11
Reiss. 30.8.80 EXECUTIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR
TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE
HCO PL 31 July 65 KSW Series 12
Reiss. 30.8.80 PURPOSES OF THE QUALIFICATIONS
DIVISION
HCO PL 8 Mar. 66 KSW Series 13
Reiss. 30.8.80 HIGH CRIME
HCO PL 10 May 70 KSW Series 14
Reiss. 30.8.80 SINGLE DECLARE
HCOB 26 Aug. 70R C/S Series 17R
Rev. 22.9.80 KSW Series 15
INCOMPLETE CASES
HCO PL 2 Nov. 61 II KSW Series 16
Reiss. 30 . 8 . 80 TRAINING QUALITY
HCOB 15 Jan. 70 II KSW Series 17
Reiss. 30 . 8 . 80 HANDLING WITH AUDITING
HCOB 19 June 71 II C/S Series 46
Reiss. 30.8.80 KSW Series 18
DECLARES
HCOB 8 Oct. 70 C/S Series 20
Reiss. 30.8.80 KSW Series 19
PERSISTENT F/N
HCOB 16 June 70 C/S Series 6
Reiss. 30.8.80 KSW Series 20
WHAT THE C/S IS DOING
HCOB 22 Jan. 77 Cramming Series 13
Reiss. 12.4.83 KSW Series 21
IN-TECH, THE ONLY WAY TO
ACHIEVE IT
HCO PL 16 Apr. 65 KSW Series 22
Reiss. 12.4.83 THE “HIDDEN” DATA LINE
HCOB 9 Feb. 79 KSW Series 23
Reiss. 12.4.83 HOW TO DEFEAT VERBAL TECH
HCOB 15 Feb. 79 KSW Series 24
Reiss. 12.4.83 VERBAL TECH: PENALTIES
HCO PL 22 Nov. 67RA KSW Series 25
Reiss. 12.4.83 OUT-TECH
HCO PL 13 Sept. 65R KSW Series 26
Rev. 16.2.81 OUT-TECH AND HOW TO GET IT IN
HCO PL 16 Mar. 71R KSW Series 27
Reiss. 16.2.81 WHAT IS A COURSE?
HCO PL 30 Jan. 83 KSW Series 28
Reiss. 12.4.83 YOUR POST AND LIFE
HCO PL 31 May 68 KSW Series 29
Reiss. 12.4.83 SCIENTOLOGY TECHNOLOGY
HCO PL 29 Sept. 82 KSW Series 30
Reiss. 12.4.83 MISREPRESENTATION OF DIANETICS
AND SCIENTOLOGY
HCO PL 27 May 65 KSW Series 31
Reiss. 12.4.83 PROCESSING
HCOB 3 Mar. 69 KSW Series 32
Reiss. 12.4.83 COMPLETING LEVELS
HCOB 10 June 60 KSW Series 33
Reiss. 12.4.83 WHAT WE EXPECT OF A
SCIENTOLOGIST
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MAY 1983
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Snr C/S Hats
C/S Hats
Auditors
Tech Sec
Qual Sec
C/S Series 117
WHO OR WHAT IS A “C/S”?
Refs:
HCOB 21 Aug. 70 C/S Series 16
SESSION GRADING, WELL DONE,
DEFINITION OF
HCOB 10 Nov. 70 C/S Series 21
C/S RESPONSIBILITY FOR TRAINING
HCOB 5 Mar. 71 C/S Series 25
Auditor Admin Series 10
THE FANTASTIC NEW HGC LINE
HCO PL 6 Mar. 71 Org Series 24
LINE DESIGN
HCOB 9 June 71 II C/S Series 42
C/S RULES
HCOB 8 Aug. 71 C/S Series 55
THE IVORY TOWER
HCOB 25 Aug. 71 Auditor Admin Series 2
C/S Series 56
HOW TO GET RESULTS IN AN HGC
HCOB 1 Sept. 71 I C/S Series 57
A C/S AS A TRAINING OFFICER
A PROGRAM FOR FLUBLESS AUDITING
HCOB 7 Sept. 71 C/S Series 58
PROGRAMING CASES BACKWARDS
HCOB 22 Sept. 71 C/S Series 61
THE THREE GOLDEN RULES OF THE C/S
HCO PL 29 Oct. 71 II Exec Series 1
THE EXECUTIVE
HCO PL 29 Oct. 71 III Exec Series 2
LEADERSHIP
HCOB 20 Nov. 73 II C/S Series 89
F/N WHAT YOU ASK OR PROGRAM
HCOB 26 Sept. 74 HANDLING FLUBBED PCs
HCOB 28 Sept. 82 C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
HCO PL 7 Apr. 83 Exec Series 37
PR Series 48
GOODWILL
The C/S is the CASE SUPERVISOR.
He has to be (a) an accomplished and properly certified auditor and (b) a person trained additionally to supervise cases.
The C/S is the auditor’s “handler.” He tells the auditor what to do, corrects his tech, keeps the lines straight and keeps the auditor calm and willing and winning.
The C/S is the pc’s case director. His actions are done FOR THE PC.
The C/S may believe or be told that he is working for gross income or quantity as opposed to quality.
What he is actually accomplishing can be listed:
1. The C/S is keeping Scientology working in the hands of auditors for the benefit of pcs.
2. The C/S is keeping the correct sequence of programs and processes being used on the pcs.
3. The C/S is keeping the org tech flow lines straight and in proper sequence of actions.
4. The C/S has the repute of the org and Dianetics and Scientology in his area fully in his hands.
HANDLING AUDITORS
Studying the worksheets of auditors written during the session the C/S can tell whether or not they are doing the processes right, staying within the Auditor’s Code, attaining the end phenomena of the process without chop, doing what the C/S said to do and generally keeping the session flowing along with good TRs. Where he detects errors he puts the auditor right or sends the auditor to Cramming, specifying the materials to be restudied.
Where he sees that an apparent gain is noted by the auditor which does not compare with the Examiner’ s Report or sees that Dianetics or Scientology doesn’t seem to be wprking, he has the pc questioned by the Examiner as to what really happened in the session.
The C/S must earn the confidence of his auditors by knowing what he is doing and getting results via the auditors.
The skill of an auditor can be enormously improved by a good C/S. And reversely, under an incompetent C/S the skill and enthusiasm of an auditor can be badly deteriorated. A C/S who fails to see errors the auditor knows were there is soon regarded as incompetent. A C/S is in effect a tech leader. His skill, attitude and demands bring about the state of tech in the area. His attitude toward session length, the exactness required, the state of case preparation he requires, when he will let a pc go, what he demands of his auditors all add up to the general tech attitude in an org. If this is good, the org will be a good, respected org.
HANDLING THE PC
The pc (or pre-OT) is the real reason the C/S is there.
All C/Sing as to programing and what to run when is FOR THE PC. It is not for the org, actually, except as it influences the org’s repute. It is not for the auditor except as it influences the auditor’s willingness and attitude and skill.
The product the C/S is after is the pc’s (or pre-OT’s) case gain.
This is accomplished by applying the usual, by preventing errors and keeping pcs in session and winmng.
Correctly applied tech works. The C/S has to know this. Auditor worksheet false reports or an unskilled auditor or a failure to study the case are the main reasons the pc does not win.
Thus a C/S who is not policing his actions on the case and is not detecting departures from standard auditing begins to believe some cases are very tough, begins to get inventive and departs from the usual and eventually fails on cases.
As the C/S is directing the case on a via of the auditor his view of the case can be obscured. When this occurs he has an Examiner question the pc about the sessions he has received. And he can order a 2-way comm session to get the pc’s reactions.
Sometimes a pc has questions. The C/S can have the Examiner ask a pc who runs oddly what questions the pc has and thus get them answered.
It is very bad to let a flubbed session go unrepaired. Let go longer than 24 hours the C/S should not be surprised to have an occasional unrepaired pc go physically ill. Thus all repairs of goofed sessions are priority.
A C/S gets so he knows certain cases. But he errs when he gets upset or angry with a case or regards one with contempt. A pc’s repute has nothing to do with a C/S. When a C/S begins to regard a case as willful or hopeless or mean, he might commit errors. Admittedly some cases are very trying. But there is always a reason. It is up to the C/S to find it. I have never failed to find the reason some cases require more work than others.
The C/S is there to efficiently and effectively order the right action based on a survey of the case and then see that it is done.
The end product is a winning pc and an expansion of Dianetics and Scientology.
DIRECTING CORRECT PROGRAM SEQUENCE
The C/S who has mastered the small points of individual sessions must expand his view, widen it to take in the whole progress of the pc’s or pre-OT’s case from his entrance into auditing to its conclusion—a span which may include several years, due to many factors.
This SEQUENCE of programs includes the actions laid out on the Class Chart and Progress and Advance Programs. In C/Sing any one session, the C/S must fit it into the overall programed auditing. An assist cutting into an Interiorization Rundown, not finishing a GF40 Expanded before doing something else and similar errors in broad programing can upset a case as much as a bad session.
The C/S must be alert to the broad, long-term cycles of programs.
CONTROLLING FLOW LINES
Alterations in sequence is an outpoint. Omitting administrative steps is an outpoint. When the C/S fails to enforce the correct sequence of actions in the administration of the cases, the lines go psychotic.
A pc has to have a new invoice to get audited. He may have a former folder. He needs to have a C/S done. And he has to be scheduled. And, scheduled, he has to have an auditor and an auditing room. Then he gets a session. He goes to an Examiner, is put on a meter and makes a statement. The meter reads are recorded in the Exam Report, the Exam Report goes into the folder, the auditor completes his admin. The folder goes to the C/S for a new C/S.
While most of these actions belong to a Tech Services, WHEN THEY ARE NOT KEPT IN THE C/S HAS TROUBLE.
The C/S’s trouble may be only from the flustered state of a pc who doesn’t know when or where or who, or from an auditor who is overdue in his last session and is upset by the rush and upset of the pc. A lot of such factors can slow down gains.
Thus it’s the C/S who must demand that the correct sequence of events occur, that admin personnel are on their toes.
Ordinarily a C/S does a folder when he receives it. That is his job. But if he doesn’t receive it or doesn’t receive it in correct sequence and form he can’t do his job.
I have nearly always been served as a C/S by competent and dedicated tech admin personnel. I cannot imagine this would be true for all C/Ses. But when it isn’t true a C/S is obligated to make it true or it will upset his own lines and affect both his auditors and pcs.
A C/S who “short-sessions” of course increases admin line stresses. So a C/S who long-sessions will have an easier time of it generally.
Most of the trouble a C/S has on cases is permitting auditors on his lines who flub without sending them to retrain.
Thus even competent cramming, if absent, can keep a C/S’s job difficult.
Auditing is a TEAM ACTION.
By doing the usual, and seeing that it is done well, the C/S has the tech repute of his org in his hands.
The number of public pcs and pre-OTs who leave an org with F/N VGIs at the Examiner determines the repute of the org in that area.
The percent of staff members who currently have an F/N VGI Examiner’s Report as their last report determines directly the efficiency and solvency and expansion of the org. This is by actual survey.
Thus the C/S, by knowing tech, by ordering the usual and seeing that it was smoothly done, by keeping the auditors willing and supervising the flow lines in correct order is the person who regulates the future of Dianetics and Scientology.
The hat of C/S is a very honorable hat.
The org and all of us depend utterly on its being very well done.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 7 AUGUST 1983
Remimeo
Professional
TR Course
TR Supervisors
Cramming Officers
TR Students
ROBOTIC TRs
Stiff, unnatural TRs are robotic TRs. Students and auditors who haven’t mastered the TRs will handle communication robotically.
ANATOMY OF A ROBOT
It can be said of robots that:
1. They don’t know what a comm cycle is.
2. They have never really passed OT TR 0.
3. They have never really passed TR 0.
4. They have never really passed TR 0 Bullbait.
5. They don’t do TR 1 in a new unit of time each time they give it, so they all sound alike and they probably have TR 3 mixed up with TR 1, or they are stuck in an unflat 0 series (OT TR 0, TR 0, TR 0 BB).
6. They don’t realize their TRs are addressed to the person in front of them but are probably addressed to the Instructors for a pass.
And so, with a combination of the above, these students and auditors will look like robots. They would never get the product of a pc interested in his own case and willing to talk to the auditor. And it’s possible that they don’t know that that is their product.
The point is that it would be almost impossible for any student or auditor to go on looking like a robot if he actually did the TRs.
REMEDY
The remedy for robotic TRs is to put the student back onto restudy of the basics of ARC and the ARC triangle, the cycle of communication and the valuable final products of TRs. (Ref: HCOB 24 Dec. 79, TRs BASICS RESURRECTED) He then redrills the TRs from OT TR 0 ON UP, each one this time to a real pass.
The answer for any auditor who looks like a robot is to do the above steps and fully complete the Professional TR Course.
His pcs will be very glad that he did.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 AUGUST 1983
Remimeo
Course Checksheets
Professional
TR Course
TR Supervisors
CYCLING THROUGH TRs
ON A PROFESSIONAL TR COURSE
Cycling through TRs on a Professional TR Course has been given a new definition and action.
Newly defined, cycling on TRs means A STUDENT DRILLS THE TRs, EACH TO A PASS, UNTIL HE STICKS AND THEN HE IS PUT BACK ON THE LOWER TR HE DIDN’T PASS.
One reason for this is IT HAS BEEN FOUND CONCLUSIVELY THAT WHEN A STUDENT IS FLUNKING ON A LOWER TR, HE CANNOT DO AN UPPER TR.
The obvious handling, then, is to get him standardly through the lower TR and then graduate him up to the next one.
Originally, cycling through TRs meant the student went up through the TRs one by one, getting familiar with them and getting a little bit of a win on each TR before going to the next one. Then he went back to the beginning and cycled through the TRs in this fashion again and again until he achieved a full pass on all the TRs. The gradient of toughness was supposed to be increased each time through.
That system, however, opened the door to permissiveness and resulted in students taking interminable lengths of time on TR courses. Permissiveness has no place on any Professional TR Course. Nor does it require months to learn to do TRs correctly.
The time-honored way it was done even earlier when TRs were being rapidly passed was to simply get a student through each TR itself. Students do make it when hammered through each TR in turn until they get a full pass on that TR before going on to the next TR.
That is the rough, tough way it was done earlier with success and it has also proven successful more recently.
There is another vital factor upon which this hinges, however, and that is that the student MUST have an understanding of the ARC triangle and the cycle of communication and he MUST have done the full comm cycle in clay.
With those basics in and each TR then drilled and passed in turn, we get results.
Thus, we arrive at a new definition for cycling through TRs and we arrive at the following rules:
ON PROFESSIONAL TRs, DONE THE HARD WAY, STUDENTS DRILL EACH TR TO A PASS, ONE AT A TIME.
IF A STUDENT HAS TROUBLE AND HANGS UP AND CAN’T PASS AN UPPER TR, HE HASN’T MADE IT ON A LOWER TR. PUT HIM BACK ON THE LOWER TR HE DIDN’T PASS AND GET THROUGH IT TO A REAL PASS. HE THEN RE-DRILLS EACH TR FROM THAT POINT UP, EACH COMPETENTLY TO A PASS.
IF STUDENT HANGS UP ON THE LOWER TRs, PUT HIM ALL THE WAY BACK TO RESTUDY ARC AND THE CYCLE OF COMMUNICATION AS THERE IS SOMETHING THERE HE HASN’T GRASPED.
This regimen is simplicity itself. And it works. It is the way to fast, successful Professional TR Courses and auditors with natural, easy, flubless TRs.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 AUGUST 1983
BPI
AOs
FSO
Reges
Tech/Qual
Advance Courses
Supers
C/Ses
Students
OT III COURSE POSH-UP
The OT III Course, the celebrated “Wall of Fire” level, has now been updated in its checksheet and associated materials to reflect the technical advances made in recent years which are vital to all pre-OTs studying this level.
There has been NO change in the phenomenal technology of OT III, of course.
What has been done is a review and alignment of all the materials, and a full updating and recompilation of the checksheet with additional drills which even better prepare a pre-OT to Solo audit the materials of Section III OT.
The result is a fully updated and poshed-up course.
So for pre-OTs approaching OT III—a sparkling bright, fully updated course, containing some of the most astounding technology of all my research, awaits you! And it is being issued in course packs containing fresh, newly printed, crystal-clear issues of my original materials.
The “Wall of Fire” has now, again, been given the red-carpet treatment that it richly deserves!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 27 AUGUST 1983
Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Word Clearers
Cramming Officers
Course Supervisors
Estos
Word Clearing Series 69
WORDS AND ASSOCIATIONS
Ref:
HCOB 23 Mar. 78RA Word Clearing Series 59RA
Rev. 14 . 11 . 79 CLEARING WORDS
(The following material is from my research notes on study tech. It is released here for the first time to give further data on some of the fundamental theory underlying Word Clearing and study tech.)
A word may be difficult to grasp if it has unpleasant personal associations.
To define is sometimes not enough. One must also ask for examples. In giving these or demonstrating, unpleasant associations are discharged.
One might well conclude, were it not for a knowledge of even more basic causes, that general stupidity was only the sum of unpleasant associations grown too great to permit an approach to any word and thus cancelling any understanding, and that blindness and withdrawal were caused only by an accumulation of painful contacts with the objects of life.
To remedy either of these—stupidity or blindness and withdrawal—it is only necessary to coax a confrontation of the milder words or objects and thus reveal to the being that unpleasant associations were matters of past specialized significance rather than current general hostility.
Perhaps past-life forgottenness is only the dwindling spiral of retreat from unpleasant contacts, and old age itself might well be the vanishing of a life by retreating from it.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1983
Remimeo
HCOs
E/O Hats
MAA Hats
Tech/Qual
All Staff
PTS/SP Course
PTSness AND DISCONNECTION
Refs:
Tape: 6505C18 “Organization and Ethics”
Tape: 6506C08 “Handling the PTS”
HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA SUPPRESSIVE ACTS,
Rev. 10.9.83 SUPPRESSION OF
SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOI,OGISTS
Tape: 6608C02 “Suppressives and GAEs”
Tape: 6608C25 “The Antisocial Personality”
HCOB 27 Sept. 66 THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY
THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST
HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79
PTS INTERVIEWS
HCO PL 3 May 72R Exec Series 12
Rev. 18.12.77 ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
HCOB 29 Dec. 78 THE SUPPRESSED PERSON
RUNDOWN
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 III EDUCATING THE PTS
THE FIRST STEP TOWARD
HANDLING: PTS C/S-1
HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING
Rev. 10.9.83
HCOB 8 Mar. 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
THEORY
Perhaps the most fundamental right of any being is the right to communicate. Without this freedom, other rights deteriorate.
Communication, however, is a two-way flow. If one has the right to communicate, then one must also have the right to not receive communication from another. It is this latter corollary of the right to communicate that gives us our right to privacy.
These rights are so basic that governments have written them into laws— witness the American Bill of Rights.
However, groups have always regulated these rights to one degree or another. For with the freedom to communicate come certain agreements and responsibilities.
An example of this is a marriage: In a monogamous society, the agreement is that one will be married to only one person at one time. That agreement extends to having second-dynamic relations with one’s spouse and no one else. Thus, should wife Shirley establish a 2D-type of communication line with someone other than her husband Pete, it is a violation of the agreement and postulates of the marriage. Pete has the right to insist that either this communication cease or that the marriage will cease.
HANDLE OR DISCONNECT
In the HCOBs on PTS tech you’ll see the phrase “handle or disconnect.” It means simply that.
The term “handle” most commonly means, when used in relation to PTS tech, to smooth out a situation with another person by applying the tech of communication.
The term “disconnection” is defined as a self-determined decision made by an individual that he is not going to be connected to another. It is a severing of a communication line.
The basic principle of handle or disconnect exists in any group and ours is no different.
It is much like trying to deal with a criminal. If he will not handle, the society resorts to the only other solution: It “disconnects” the criminal from the society. In other words, they remove the guy from society and put him in a prison because he won’t HANDLE his problem or otherwise cease to commit criminal acts against others.
It’s the same sort of situation that husband Pete is faced with in the example mentioned above. The optimum solution is to handle the situation with wife Shirley and her violations of their group (marriage) agreements. But if Pete cannot handle the situation, he is left with no other choice but to disconnect (sever the marriage communication lines if only by separation). To do otherwise would be disastrous, for he is connected to someone antagonistic to the original agreements, postulates and responsibilities of the group (the marriage).
A Scientologist can become PTS by reason of being connected to someone that is antagonistic to Scientology or its tenets. In order to resolve the PTS condition, he either HANDLES the other person’s antagonism (as covered in the materials on PTS handling) or, as a last resort when all attempts to handle have failed, he disconnects from the person. He is simply exercising his right to communicate or not to communicate with a particular person.
With our tech of handle or disconnect, we are, in actual fact, doing nothing different than any society or group or marriage down through thousands of years.
LOST TECH
Earlier, disconnection as a condition was cancelled. It had been abused by a few individuals who’d failed to handle situations which could have been handled and who lazily or criminally disconnected, thereby creating situations even worse than the original because it was the wrong action.
Secondly, there were those who could survive only by living on our lines— they wanted to continue to be connected to Scientologists (see the HCOBs on the characteristics of an SP). Thus, they screamed to high heaven if anyone dared to apply the tech of “handle or disconnect.”
This put Scientologists at a disadvantage.
We cannot afford to deny Scientologists that basic freedom that is granted to everyone else: the right to choose whom one wishes to communicate with or not communicate with.
It’s bad enough that there are governments trying, through the use of force, to prevent people from disconnecting from them (witness those who want to leave Russia but can’t!).
The bare fact is that disconnection is a vital tool in handling PTSness and can be very effective when used correctly.
Therefore, the tech of disconnection is hereby restored to use, in the hands of those persons thoroughly and standardly trained in PTS/SP tech.
HANDLING ANTAGONISTIC SOURCES
In the great majority of cases, where a person has some family member or close associate who appears antagonistic to his getting better through Scientology, it is not really a matter of the antagonistic source wanting the PTS to not get better. It is most commonly a lack of correct information about Scientology that causes the problem or upset. In such a case, simply having the PTS disconnect would not help matters and would actually be a nonconfront of the situation. It is quite common that the PTS has a low confront on the terminal and situation. This isn’t hard to understand when one looks at these facts:
a. To be PTS in the first place, the PTS must have committed overts against the antagonistic source; and
b. When one has committed overts, his confront and responsibility drop.
When an Ethics Officer finds that a Scientologist is PTS to a family member, he does not recommend that the person disconnect from the antagonistic source. The E/O’s advice to the Scientologist is to handle.
The handling for such a situation is to educate him in the tech of PTSness and suppression, and then skillfully and firmly guide the PTS through the steps needed to restore good communication with-the antagonistic source. This eventually dissolves the situation by bringing about an understanding on the part of the antagonistic source as to what Scientology is and why the PTS person is interested and involved in it. Of course, when this is accomplished you no longer have a PTS at all—and you may very well find a new Scientologist on your hands !
The actual steps and procedure of this sort of handling are well covered in the materials listed at the beginning of this HCOB.
WHEN DISCONNECTION IS USED
An Ethics Officer can encounter a situation where someone is factually connected to a suppressive person, in present time. This is a person whose normal operating basis is one of making others smaller, less able, less powerful. He does not want anyone to get better, at all.
In truth, an SP is absolutely, completely terrified of anyone becoming more powerful.
In such an instance the PTS isn’t going to get anywhere trying to “handle” the person. The answer is to sever the connection.
HOW TO DISCONNECT
How a disconnection is done depends on the circumstances.
Example: The pc lives next door to, say, a psychiatric clinic and feels PTS due to this environment. The remedy is simple—the pc can move to another apartment in another location. He need not write any sort of “disconnection letter” to the psychiatric clinic. He simply changes his environment—which is, in effect, a disconnection from the suppressive environment.
Example: A pc is connected to a person or group that has been declared suppressive by HCO in a published ethics order. He should disconnect and, if he wants to inform the SP of the fact, he may write a letter of disconnection. Such a letter would be very straightforward. It would state the fact of the disconnection and the reason for it. It would not be misemotional or accusative, since this would only serve to stir up further antagonism. The letter would be inspected by the Ethics Officer before it was sent and copies kept for the PTS person’s own ethics file and pc folder. No attempt would be made to establish communication with the declared SP “to clear matters up” or to seek to reform the SP. The SP’s reform is strictly in the hands of HCO. The PTS simply disconnects.
Example: One discovers that an employee at his place of business is an SP—he steals money, drives away customers, wipes out other employees and will not correct no matter what you do. The handling is very simple—the PTS fires him and that’s the end of it right there!
To fail or refuse to disconnect from a suppressive person not only denies the PTS case gain, it is also supportive of the suppressive—in itself a Suppressive Act. And it must be so labeled. (Ref: HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA, SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS)
SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN
There is of course another technical way to h-andle PTSes and that is to get them through all problems they have had with the terminal involved and the PTSness will disappear (Ref: HCOB 29 Dec. 78, THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN). But it still requires that during the handling the person disconnects.
SUMMARY
The technology of disconnection is essential in the handling of PTSes. It can and has saved lives and untold trouble and upset. It must be preserved and used correctly.
Nothing in this HCOB shall ever or under any circumstances justify any violations of the laws of the land. Any such offense shall subject the offender to penalties described by law as well as to ethics and justice actions.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 OCTOBER 1983
Remimeo
All Sec Checkers
All Auditors,
Level II and
Above
Confessional
Checksheets
Tech/Qual
HCO
SEC CHECKING: NOTE
An auditor doing a Sec Check can run into a phenomenon that goes like this:
The pc says to the auditor, “I am in possession of a lot of secret data— therefore, I cannot get off my withholds.” And the auditor buys it and the case fails.
Actually, this is in large measure a lie, used to cover actual overts against the group or its VIPs.
When you look at the definition of a real overt as something contrary to the mores of a group, you realize that the withhold one is looking for is a withhold of having committed an actual overt on the group by omit or commit. At best you see that the pc excuse does not wash.
If the auditor were to ask for “overts contrary to the mores of the group and withholds of having done them or omitted actions that by omission caused harm to the group or its people,” one gets around that excuse.
The GO people and many others pull this.
The auditor technically is NOT interested in confidences or overts against a group’s enemies or withholds thereof. He is looking for overts against the group as above and the withholding of having committed them by omit or commit.
If this were made plain to Sec Checkers, the swindle could no longer be pulled by such pcs and the cases would not fail.
A failed case will continue to be one as long as he is committing overts on the thing that is supposed to help him. But, with skilled auditing, this can be handled.
I hope this helps resolve some “failed cases.”
L. RON HIJBBARD
Founder
1984
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JANUARY 1984
Issue III
Remimeo
Purif C/Ses
Purif I/Cs
Tech/Qual
Purification Rundown Series 7
RADIATION AND LIQUIDS
In Purif, findings seem to bear out that there is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest exudation of it and this is the sweating itself.
Radiation is apparently enormously water soluble as well as water movable. According to researchers, one merely has to take a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation off of it. This factor is well known to defense-trained personnel.
So where one is doing a Purif, one should be very careful to ensure that actual sweating occurs and in volume. The intake of water is therefore quite vital during a Purif.
This has a side effect, however, of washing a lot of minerals out of the system as well, possibly, as vitamins. Thus the intake of minerals and vitamins during Purif is also a necessity.
It is possible that a Purif RD is not as workable when profuse sweating does not occur, when liquid intake is not large to compensate for it and when vitamins and minerals of a water soluble nature are not carefully and adequately replaced. (The common vitamins taken on the Purif RD which are not water soluble are vitamins A, D and E.)
This gives us three important points that must be in on a Purification Rundown:
1. PROFUSE SWEATING MUST OCCUR.
2. A PERSON’S LIQUID INTAKE MUST BE SUFFICIENTLY LARGE TO COMPENSATE FOR THE LIQUID LOST THROUGH SWEATING.
3. VITAMINS AND MINERALS MUST BE TAKEN IN SUFFICIENT QUANTITIES TO REPLACE THOSE WASHED OUT OF THE SYSTEM THROUGH SWEATING.
As megavitamin dosages are also part of a Purif program, this mineral and vitamin intake is quite in addition to any other vitamin therapy ongoing at the time.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
Student Hat (Also issued as HCO PL 23 July 81R I)
Students
Supervisors
Study Series 12
THE USE OF DEMONSTRATION
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Oct. 64 THEORY CHECKOUT DATA
HCOB 11 Oct. 67 CLAY TABLE TRAINING
Demonstration comes from the Latin demonstrare, to point out, show, prove.
The Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary includes the following definition of “demonstrate”:
“to teach, expound or exhibit by practical means.”
A “demonstration” or “demo” is usually done with a “demo kit” which consists of various small objects such as corks, caps, paper clips, pen tops, rubber bands, etc. The student demonstrates an idea or principle with his hands, the paper clips on his desk, etc.
HISTORY
The original use of demonstration was during a checkout to detect glibness. The idea behind a “demo kit” was that, during a checkout by an examiner or twin, the student could be made to show that he really knows what he’s talking about. There was no demonstration that the student did for himself.
Later, the use of the demo kit became extended and altered to mean the student fiddles with the demo kit continually while studying. A PL, written by another (and long since cancelled), made the statement that “the student mocks up what he reads as he reads it with the bits and pieces of his demo kit.” This statement was not correct. I never developed this use of the demo kit.
This business of fidgeting with the demo kit has nothing to do with demonstration, as all it demonstrates is a quickie, surface understanding.
STAR-RATE CHECKOUTS
The demo kit is used during a star-rate checkout. It is the answer to glibness. You give the student a paper clip and a wooden block and a few leather or rubber bands and say, “You just show me with these things exactly how this would happen.” If the student can’t show you anything about it at all, you make him study it again until he gets the idea. He has to show you his understanding, because if he can’t put this in demo form in some fashion or another then he doesn’t understand it.
THE BASIC PURPOSE OF THE DEMO KIT IS TO DEMONSTRATE UNDERSTANDING.
DEMONSTRATION IN THEORY STUDY
If a student ran into something he couldn’t quite figure out, a demo kit would assist him to understand it. This is not demanded. It is at the discretion of the student himself.
The more usual action in such a case is actually for the student to go over to the clay table and work it out properly in clay in accordance with the clay demonstration HCOBs.
When people don’t understand the use of the clay table, they sometimes try to substitute a demo kit for it and clay table could then become limited.
The whole theory of clay demos is that they add mass.
A student needs mass in order to understand something. Given that, he can sort it out because he has mass and space and he can then envision it.
Demo kit demonstrations work on this principle too, only a clay demonstration more closely represents the thing being demonstrated and provides more mass.
DEMOS AS CHECKSHEET ITEMS
Checksheets very often require students to do demos. The student simply does the demo and looks up the misunderstood word each time he can’t demo it.
SKETCHING
Sketching is also a part of demonstration and part of working things out.
Someone sitting at his office desk trying to work something out doesn’t have any clay to hand to work it out with, but he could work it out with a little demo kit action or a paper and pencil, draw graphs of it, and so forth. That is a necessary part of getting a grip on something.
For instance I started to work out the flow line for an area that I was handling. I first tried to figure it out in my head, but there was something funny about it that I couldn’t quite put my finger on. The way I finally did manage to get it was by putting it on a little yellow card. I would have worked it out sooner, easier and earlier than I did if I had graphed it all and laid it all out in two dimensions in the first place.
There is a rule which goes IF YOU CANNOT DEMONSTRATE SOMETHING IN TWO DIMENSIONS YOU HAVE IT WRONG. It’s an arbitrary rule, but it’s very workable.
This rule is used in engineering and architecture. If it can’t be worked out simply and clearly in two dimensions, there is something wrong and it couldn’t be built.
This was the missing piece of demonstration.
I started working with this clear back in 1950 when I was taught mechanical drawing and engineering and that’s where I developed this datum.
This is a whole area of tech and applies to drawing out what is in a bulletin, or trying to draw an org plan or a flow line and so on.
It works in other ways too.
An obvious example is a navigator who, instead of trying to work it all out in his head with some foggy concept of where he is, simply graphs the sailing plan and progress on a chart.
Org boards and statistical graphs are also examples in their own way.
This is all part of demonstration and part of working something out.
SUMMARY
1. The basic use of the demo kit is during a checkout to demonstrate understanding.
2. If the student wants to work something out and see how it works, the usual action is to work it out in clay.
3. Sketching is part of demonstration and is particularly useful for the staff member at his desk or the engineer at work, etc.
4. Demos also appear on checksheets. If the student can’t demo it, he finds the misunderstood word.
That’s the simplicity of demonstration.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JANUARY 1984RA
REVISED 27 JUNE 1989
BPI
Happiness Rundown Series 1RA
THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN
This rundown is based on the booklet The Way to Happiness.
It has been successfully piloted and now is generally released to orgs and missions.
The booklet is distributed on general public lines. It is not a Church publication as it is not religious. The Church has its own creed and codes.
A minister or pastoral counselor can, however, counsel on any subject and that the Church sells a rundown based on the hooklet does not make the booklet religious.
THE WAY TO HAPPINESS
Factually, the world has gotten itself a lot of new violence potential without also getting a campaign for higher morality. Such an imbalance is catastrophic. The police, banks, merchants, insurance people are all in real trouble through the decline of morality.
The Kentucky school board, right now, is faced with no morals being taught in their schools. They already have a crime problem if their schools are like anyone else’s.
Materialism and mechanism (these are philosophic schools) are on a rampage. The biologists, psychs, evolutionists are pushing them to the limit. These are blown up by the simple question, “Your data may be quite correct but you have no proof that there is not something else that uses all this.” Their position is untenable philosophically. Using materialism, the psychs and biologists and so on are edging the churches out and factually are creating a dangerous social situation. At a time when man can wield unlimited force, he has no moral codes or restraints.
There factually is no moral code today. The Christian one was nice. But if you read the Ten Commandments, they are designed for people several thousand years ago.
There have not been any codes of morals based on common sense. They are handed down from heaven, even in China. The psychs use this to get an inside track. The US government—and possibly some others—cannot finance religion, per the First Amendment.
This means they cannot allow children to be taught morals, and cannot permit any power to churches. The psychs love that. They are antireligious. They teach that one succumbs to temptation, that morals are inbred by paralleling the history of the race and when a child gets old enough his inbred nerves go moral. This is pure claptrap, but that happens to be their belief: This means that crime will worsen, the psychs will ride higher and higher.
Philosophers (not religious ones) over the world in various times and places have noted these qualities of morality so don’t get the idea this is all derived from China. Confucius, for instance, was mainly interested in reforming the government, not the individual.
In all times and all places, the morals contained in this book have appeared amongst tribes and races.
What they lacked—in China, in the Near East, in Europe—was some basic principle which made the picture clear. When I isolated the common denominator, the dynamic principle of existence, I had such a factor.
I never before applied it to straightening out ideas on the subject of morality. But the precepts contained in this book are not just culled here and there and put together. I worked them out newly with due attention to what had gone on before in man’s history. His moral codes are woefully inadequate to deal with modern life. This one will.
There is another point. Nobody could ever possibly have kept any of the old moral codes. Old Mo-Tzu’s code only lasted a few hundred years until people finally decided you couldn’t keep it—too severe—and they even forgot it ever existed after about the first century B.C. and only found it again this century. There have been novels and plays about someone trying to live the life of Christ and the hero always winds up in a mess, the lesson being that His teachings couldn’t be followed.
The booklet The Way to Happiness contains a nonreligious moral code based on common sense. It may be the first such code.
THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN
Essentially, what the booklet does is give people stable data which holds off confusions. For people will be found to be quite confused on this subject.
This new moral code is different in that it can be kept. It consists of 21 major rules or precepts and about 15 subrules making a total of about 36 in all. In number 20 there are about 20 additional items. In all, the rundown, then, would be handling about 56 separate concepts on the subject of morality, plus morality itself. There are 10 basic steps for each concept: There are therefore over 500 questions or actions. This gives one some idea of the length of the rundown.
The object of the rundown is to clear up any confusions on the subject of morals, any and all transgressions against these specific morals, to slide the person out of the valence of any immoral person and obtain an EP of a realization that one really is on the Way to Happiness.
As these precepts and booklet do contain, in fact, the major principles of morality as they apply to modern life, and as it is a fact that tragedy and unhappiness occur when the points are violated, the rundown can steer the person in a direction where he is certain he can live a happier life. So the rundown has been quite successful. It is quite a tour de force, really, to assemblethe essentials into a modern moral code. And because these are somewhat universal, they will be found to have a lot of charge on them as they were the points where one went off the rails.
The rundown itself picks up specific confusions, transgressions and valence closures. It can get rid of a lot of shame, blame and regret. A person should feel pretty clean and sparky after it. The potential is there.
DELIVERY
The Happiness Rundown may be delivered in missions and orgs which have:
a. At least one Class IV Auditor who is also a graduate of the HRD Auditor Course and who has received his Qual Okay to Audit the Happiness Rundown.
b. A Class IV C/S who is a graduate of the HRD Auditor Course and who has received his Qual Okay to Audit the Happiness Rundown. Additionally, he must have passed a high-crime checkout on HCOB 21 Jan. 84RA II, HRD Series 6RA, C/Sing THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN.
Orgs which meet the above two qualifications may also deliver HRD auditor training.
Pre-OTs who wish to receive the Happiness Rundown must go to an AO or the FSO, where delivery personnel are available to service them.
People could have their grades before or after the Happiness Rundown. It has no engram running and could be run anywhere on the chart before Clear or after any completed level above OT III. The rundown should not be delivered between Dianetic Clear and OT III or between the start of New OT V and completion of New OT VIII, unless the person is stalled or moving slowly up the Bridge. In such cases the Happiness Rundown may be included as part of a program to get the person unstalled and moving again. (Ref: HCOB 27 Mar. 84, C/S Series 119, STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED)
The booklet itself is running on through the society, and feeding back pcs to the org even if the rundown is not religious. As I have said, a pastor can counsel anything.
Good luck with this RD.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 16 JANUARY 1984
Issue II
Remimeo
Qual
Cramming
Officers
C/Ses
Cramming Series 17
REPAIR OF PAST CRAMMING
Refs:
HCOB 24 Nov. 73RE C/S Series 53RL LF (Long Form)
Rev. 30.11.78 HI-LO TA ASSESSMENT C/S
HCOB 15 Oct. 73RB C/S Series 87RB
Rev. 4.12.78 NULLING AND F/Ning
PREPARED LISTS
HCOB 4 Dec. 78 HOW TO READ THROUGH AN F/N
HCOB 30 Oct. 78 C/S SERIES 53, USE OF
One can review all past cramming a person has had, to repair any bad cramming. This is done with a C/S 53 on “past cramming actions,” handling major reads by key-out (not rundowns) and reassessing to an F/Ning list.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
HRD Checksheets
HRD Auditors
HRD C/Ses
Qual
Happiness Rundown Series 2
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS
As the booklet The Way to Happiness and its precepts do contain, in fact, the major principles of morality as they apply to modern life, and as it is a fact that tragedy and unhappiness occur when the points are violated, the Happiness Rundown steers the person in a direction where he is certain he can live a happier life.
The rundown has proven quite successful. It is quite a tour de force, really, to assemble the essentials into a modern moral code. And because these are somewhat universal, they will be found to have a lot of charge on them as they were the points where one went off the rails.
AUDITING METHODS
There are two different approaches to auditing the HRD. One is by assessment of the precepts from the booklet The Way to Happiness and then taking up what is assessed. The other approach is simply to go straight forward from square one and proceed step by step through the booklet.
The straightforward method is used in the normal course of auditing a pc through the rundown. The assessment method has proven to be most useful in repair of a bugged HRD, where a charged precept or precepts need to be located for handling.
The full tech of the procedure and use of these two methods is given in HCOB 18 Jan. 84, HRD Series 3, HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD.
BASIC PROCEDURE
The basic steps of the HRD procedure follow:
A. Clean up the word “moral.” Get it defined. Get off any false data on it, if there. Two-way comm it and get it to F/N.
B. Take up each numbered section of the booklet from precept number 1 forward, in sequence, and do the following steps:
1. Read the precept (done by pc).
2. Clean up any Mis-U word in it.
3. Pc reads the section.
4. Clear up any Mis-U word in the section.
5. Look for and clear up any false data the pc may have for that precept.
6. The transgressions of others (general) against that precept. Two-way comm. Don’t make it a listing question. E/S it to F/N.
7. The transgressions of oneself against that precept. Two-way comm, earlier-similar to F/N. Don’t make it a listing question. Don’t miss any W/Hs even though this is only a cousin to O/W. E/S to F/N.
8. See if the pc spots another specific person in his or her past who really transgressed against the precept. Treat it more like Straightwire: an exact moment the person was transgressing. A light auditor can get the valence to spring apart just by doing that and without plowing the person into an engram. Alternate for this step: an overt the pc did against the person. The object of the step is to get the valence sprung out (separated from the pc).
9. Check if the person now has any reservations about keeping the precept. Handle with two-way comm (one of the above steps might have been missed if the person has reservations). Get it to F/N.
10. Check any reservations on getting someone else to keep it. If any, handle as a problem and E/S to F/N.
Precept 17-2 (Learn) starts with a very hot question, and a special handling has been readied to drain any charge off it. Be careful not to try to give somebody a full study tech rundown when doing this rundown. If it is very boggy, get it to F/Ning some way and advise Method One Word Clearing. It is a bit off the purpose and EP of the rundown but it might be run into, so there is a handling for it if it is.
Number 19 (“Try not to do things to others that you would not like them to do to you”) will get into overts. It may get into shame, blame and regret. Its EP is really to teach someone what a harmful act is, not to give them a full O/W handling. And remember one can miss W/Hs on this step particularly.
Number 20 (“Try to treat others as you would like them to treat you”) has a different handling. One simply does steps 1-4 as usual. But then one gets the person to imagine being treated in this fashion for each of the items. Then, virtue by virtue, take up treating another and others in that fashion; clean up any reservations to the pc’s satisfaction. One or more of these items may be charged either on being treated that way or treating others in that way. Just handle with two-way comm. Then re-read Precept 20 to get any reservations off. An object here is to give a reality on what good behavior is. That’s the real EP of number 20.
There is a definite possibility that one will run into spoken disagreement with the precept anywhere up to step 5 (false data handling). The false data steps might handle it. The other steps may do so. It needn’t be given any special attention as, truth told, people who do not live moral lives don’t because of material which will be uncovered in the original ten steps. A caution should be given any auditor doing this rundown that a flare-up probably means a missed withhold. If it were to block the session, one would have to pull it.
There is a final epilogue in the book. This is also taken up in the rundown.
If a roaring EP does not occur because of the rundown, then one of two things has occurred: One has overrun it (or introduced auditing faults) and smothered the EP. Or the rundown is not complete and should be started again from the top, as something has been overlooked. Thus, where the rundown does not result in an EP, one either repairs it or does it again, as directed by the C/S.
The full list of commands for the rundown is given in HCOB 19 Jan. 84, HRD Series 4, HAPPINESS RUNDOWN COMMAND SHEETS. Further data on the HRD procedure is in HCOB 18 Jan. 84, HRD Series 3, HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 18 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
HRD Checksheets
HRD Auditors
HRD C/Ses
Pc Examiners
Qual Div Personnel
Happiness Rundown Series 3
HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD
Refs:
Booklet: The Way to Happiness
HCOB 16 Jan. 84R HRD Series 1R
Rev. 20.7.88 THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN
HCOB 17 Jan. 84 HRD Series 2
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS
HCOB 23 June 80RA CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES
Rev. 25.10.83 PROCESSES
HCOB 27 May 70R UNREADING QUESTIONS AND ITEMS
Rev. 3.12.78
HCOB 8 June 61R E-METER WATCHING—ARE YOU WAITING
Rev. 22.2.79 FOR THE METER TO PLAY DIXIE?
HCOB 28 Sept.82 C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCOB 7 Aug. 79 FALSE DATA STRIPPING
HCOB 15 Jan. 84 HAPPINESS RUNDOWN ADDITIVES
HCOB 20 Jan. 84 HRD Series 4-1
HRD PRECEPTS ASSESSMENT LIST
The Happiness Rundown consists of a precise series of steps.
Provided the HRD HCOBs are well studied in theory and in practical, and provided that the HRD procedure is followed exactly by the C/S and auditor, the HRD is very easy to audit and C/S, and can result in spectacular gains for the pc.
AUDITOR QUALIFICATIONS
In order to audit the HRD one must be a Class IV Auditor, trained on the HRD Auditor’s Course. These qualifications ensure that the auditor is capable of handling the majority of situations and actions that may arise in the course of the HRD without having to call in a higher-classed auditor.
PROCEDURE
Once any needed setups are completed as programed by the C/S, the rundown is begun, starting from the top of the command sheets and carrying on through them step by step. A copy of the command sheets is kept in the pc’s folder and used in each session. The auditor notes the number of each command or step on the worksheet as he gives it, and marks it off on the command sheet when it is completed.
The pc should not be left in the middle of a precept at the end of a session. All of the steps for the precept being handled should be complete before ending off. Several precepts can be handled in one session.
Probably the first caution in applying the rundown is not to go past cognitions (and F/Ns) on a particular moral. And don’t overrun F/Ns. If you get a persistent F/N, end off the session and pick up the rundown later. If you get a roaring EP, then that’s it for the rundown.
USE OF THE METER
It has always been a basic rule in formal auditing that ONE DOES NOT RUN UNREADING AUDITING QUESTIONS OR ITEMS. This is well covered in HCOB 23 June 80RA, CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES PROCESSES, and the issues it refers to.
All of the auditing questions on the rundown are checked for a read. There are some steps which are not “auditing questions” as such, e.g., having the pc read the precept.
There are questions in the rundown which ask for false data, and these are not tested for read. I found years ago, in the original research on the tech now known as False Data Stripping, that a question designed to locate false data will not necessarily read on the meter. This is because the person believes the data to be true. (Ref: HCOB 7 Aug. 79, FALSE DATA STRIPPING)
There are a few questions in the procedure which ask for misunderstood words. These do not have to read for a pc to answer them, but any auditor should certainly be alert for an instant read on a word clearing question and would be remiss not to follow up on such a read. An instant read on a question such as “Do you have any misunderstoods on ?” means that there is something there to be cleaned up. (Ref: HCOB 22 Feb. 72RA, Word Clearing Series 32RA, WORD CLEARING METHOD 4)
VALENCE SEPARATION STEI?S
There are several points that should be noted (and well drilled) with regard to the valence handling steps of the rundown, steps 8a through 8f.
1. Once you have gotten a reading terminal to run with question 8a (“Is there any specific person in your past who really transgressed against the precept _____?”), the subsequent steps are not checked for read. You are using these steps to lightly get the pc separated out from the valence he has been in.
2. Should the pc give more than one terminal in response to the first question (8a), take down each terminal that he gives, noting reads. Handle them in order of longest read. Be alert for a pc starting to list on the question and be prepared to handle with L&N tech. This has not proven to be a frequent occurrence at all, but it should not be discounted as a possibility. (Ref: HCOB 17 Mar. 74, TWO-WAY COMM, USING WRONG QUESTIONS)
Note: If the pc should come up with the answer “me” in response to question 8a, the answer is accepted, but this item would not be run in the valence separation steps. (Ref: HCOB 19 Nov. 78, L&N LISTS—THE ITEM “ME”) If the pc has other reading answers for the question, they are handled as usual.
PRECEPT 20
Precept 20 (“Try to Treat Others as You Would Want Them to Treat You”) has a special handling. After going through the usual steps of reading and word clearing the precept, the auditor has the pc imagine being treated by others according to each virtue in turn (step 20, 5), and has him tell how he imagined it. If the pc has some charge on a virtue or virtues (either on treating others or on being treated that way), simply handle it with two-way comm. Once the pc has done each of these imagining steps, have him reread the precept and get off any reservations he may have on it with the usual steps 9 and 10 of the basic procedure (reservations the pc has about applying the precept and reservations on getting others to apply it). What you want to achieve for the pc is a reality on what good behavior is.
ASSESSMENT METHOD
As mentioned in HRD Series 2, HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS, there is a second method of auditing the HRD—by assessment of the precepts in the booklet The Way to Happiness and handling the reading precept or precepts (in order of longest read) using the basic HRD procedure.
The assessment method is used in repair of the rundown and appears in several of the handlings on the HRD Repair List. It is used to locate charged precepts so that these can be taken up and handled.
The HRD Auditor must be proficient in the use of both the straightforward method and assessment method.
The procedure for doing the assessment method follows:
1. Use the prepared assessment list of all the precepts and subprecepts, HCOB 20 Jan. 84, HRD Series 4-1, HRD PRECEPTS ASSESSMENT LIST.
2. In session, clear all the words that appear on the assessment list with the pc. (Ref: HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS)
3. Assess the list straight through to the end, noting all reads.
4. Take up the longest reading precept or subprecept and handle it using the basic 110 steps of the HRD procedure.
5. Continue to handle the reading precepts in order of length of reads until all that read are handled.
END PHENOMENA
The object of the HRD is:
1. To clear up any confusions on the subject of morals;
2. To clean up any and all transgression against the specific morals laid out in the booklet The Way to Happiness;
3. To slide the person out of the valence of any immoral person; and
4. To obtain an EP of realization/cognition that one really is on the Way to Happiness.
The rundown steers the person in a direction where he is certain he can live a happier life. Once the above is achieved—and in most cases it is quite a roaring EP—the rundown is ended off and the pc C/Sed to declare to its completion. The EP can occur before the entire booklet has been run through, but this is not common. It may require more than one run through the booklet to achieve the EP fully, the pc making gradient gains all the while. (Ref: HCOB 21 June 70, C/S Series 9, SUPERFICIAL ACTIONS)
At the Pc Examiner the pc attests to having realized that he/she really is on the Way to Happiness.
TIPS
a. Command Sheets
It was soon learned during the pilot that if all the questions and steps of the HRD were not numbered and laid out in full, it was easy for the auditor to mistakenly omit steps or lose his place on the steps or precepts. This is why the commands are printed out in full in the command sheets.
b. Metering
It is expected that auditors will apply the tech on detecting and handling false reads when handling HRD questions, and not run questions that are not validly reading. (Ref: HCOB 11 Sept. 68, FALSE READS and HCOB 6 Sept. 68, CHECKING FOR FALSE READS)
c. Valence Separation Steps
On the valence handling steps (8a through 8f) the pc may not always specifically express that he has “separated out of the valence of the person being run.” Sometimes there is simply an obvious key-out, F/N and VGIs. This point of procedure bears drilling until the auditor can easily detect an EP for these steps and knows when to end off on them. This includes making it quite clear in one’s worksheets what has occurred so that the C/S can properly follow the progress of the case and correct the auditor’s procedure where needed.
d. Drilling
In order to be able to handle the questions on this or any process or rundown that requires a read be checked for, the auditor must be well drilled and proficient in the skill of accurately determining whether a question is reading or not. (Ref: HCOB 23 June 80RA, CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES PROCESSES) If this is not done, you and the pc are liable to have a rough time of it, with missed reads, nonexistent “reads” taken up, or endless “button checking,” when you had the intention to get some auditing done!
CAUTION
Do not fall prey to someone trying to use the revisions of the procedure and EP of the HRD given in this HCOB as license to quickie the rundown. These revisions are A RESTORATION OF THE ORIGINAL BASIC STANDARD TECH OF THE RUNDOWN. Ensuring that the pc is well set up for this major action, insistence on standard auditing and C/Sing, and accurate observation and evaluation of the case and progress of the pc are essential. Only with these points in can you assure that those receiving the HRD get all the tremendous gains there to be had.
REMEDIES
The remedy for auditor errors on the HRD is to assess and handle the Happiness Rundown Repair List (HRL).
When an HRL is done and the reads handled, the HRD can be continued from where it was left off.
SUMMARY
The HRD is a very popular, highly successful rundown. Its delivery requires competent auditors and C/Ses trained in its procedures and skilled in the basics of auditing and C/Sing. There are no particular “special tricks” to it—just standard tech all the way. With these points in, the Happiness Rundown can produce MIRACLES.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
All Orgs
Missions
HRD Checksheets
HRD Auditors
HRD C/Ses
Qual Div
Personnel
Happiness Rundown Series 4
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN
COMMAND SHEETS
Refs.
HCOB 17 Jan. 84 HRD Series 2
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS
HCOB 18 Jan. 84 HRD Series 3
HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD
HCOB 23 June 80RA CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES
Rev. 25.10.83 PROCESSES
HCOB 7 Aug. 79 FALSE DATA STRIPPING
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
This issue contains the commands for use in auditing the Happiness Rundown. It is kept in the pc’s folder and followed by the auditor in session. The auditor notes the number of the command asked on the worksheet and checks it off in the command sheet when it is completed. This assists the auditor in keeping his track of what commands have been run. The C/S uses the command sheets to follow the auditor’s progress.
Each of the auditing questions is cleared the first time it appears. Once the basic commands of the procedure are cleared, they need not be cleared each time they appear with a new precept. The pc will already have cleared the precept thoroughly as part of the first steps of handling it. (Ref: HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS)
The auditor must be thoroughly familiar with the procedure of the HRD as covered in HCOB 18 Jan. 84, HRD Series 3, HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD.
Caution: Do not go past a major win on a particular moral or precept.
Caution: If you get a persistent F/N, end off the session at that point.
PC’S NAME: DATE:
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN COMMANDS
0000. Have the pc read the beginning chapter of the booklet, entitled “Happiness,” and ensure that he understands it.
000. Find out if the pc has read the booklet The Way to Happiness. If he has, ask him, “Did you have any realizations or gains from reading the booklet?” Rehab. ________
00. Using HCOB 7 Aug. 79, FALSE DATA STRIPPING, clear the concept of false data and the procedure used in False Data Stripping. Have the pc give examples, demos, etc., so that these are fully grasped. Let the pc know that part of the procedure you will be using on the rundown involves this data and technique. ________
0. Clear the words of the Happiness Rundown Repair List, using HCOB 20 July 88, HRD Series 5R-1, HAPPINESS RUNDOWN REPAIR LIST WORD LIST. ________
SECTION A: MORALITY STEPS
A-1 CLEAR THE WORDS: “MORAL” AND “MORALITY.” ________
(Use the definition given in the footnote in the booklet and a regular dictionary as needed to fully clear these words. )
A-2 IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT MORALITY WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
(Handle using full False Data Stripping procedure. Questions A-3 through A-6 may also be used to ensure that any false data on morality is fully handled, according to the tech of False Data Stripping.)
A-3 IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT MORALITY WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
A-4 IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT MORALITY WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
A-5 DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ABOUT MORALITY THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
A-6 DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO BEHAVE MORALLY? ________
A-7 TELL ME YOUR IDEAS AND CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT MORALITY. ________
(2WC to F/N)
PRECEPT 1: TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF
1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
1,3 (Omitted—there is no text here for the pc to read.)
1,4 (Omitted)
1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
(If so, ask the pc to tell you about it and handle using False Data Stripping procedure. Questions 5b through 5e may also be used to find and fully handle any false data the pc may have on this precept.)
1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
(Handle using False Data Stripping procedure.)
1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
(Handle using False Data Stripping procedure.)
1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
(Handle using False Data Stripping procedure.)
1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF”? ________
(Handle using False Data Stripping procedure.)
1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF”? ________
(2WC, E/S to F/N)
1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF”? ________
(2WC, E/S to F/N)
1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF”? ________
On reading terminal(s), run:
1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
(If so, allow pc to tell you about it.)
1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
(Handle as in 8b.)
1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF WAS A GOOD THING? ________
(Handle as in 8b.)
1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
(Handle as in 8b.)
1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
(Allow pc to tell you about these, alternately to EP.)
1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF? ________
(2WC any reservations the pc may have. If 2WC does not resolve the pc’s reservations, go over steps 1 through 8 again and pick up anything that has been missed, then return to step 9 and 2WC to F/N.)
1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO TAKE CARE OF HIMSELF OR HERSELF? ________
(Handle any reservation as a problem by asking, “How could that be a problem to you?” and taking this E/S to F/N. Then F/N the original question.)
PRECEPT 1-1: GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL
1-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
1-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
1-1,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
1-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
1-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT GETTING CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
1-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT GETTING CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
1-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT GETTING CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
1-1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR?
1-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL”? ________
1-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL”? ________
1-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL”? ________
1-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL”? ________
1-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
1-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
1-1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT GETTING CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL WAS A GOOD THING? ________
1-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
1-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
1-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL? ________
1-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO GET CARE WHEN HE OR SHE IS ILL? ________
PRECEPT 1-2: KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN
1-2,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
1-2,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
1-2,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
1-2,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
1-2,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT KEEPING YOUR BODY CLEAN WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
1-2,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT KEEPING YOUR BODY CLEAN WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
1-2,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT KEEPING YOUR BODY CLEAN WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
1-2,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
1-2,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN”? ________
1-2,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN”? ________
1-2,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN”? ________
1-2,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN”? ________
1-2,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
1-2,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
1-2,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT KEEPING YOUR BODY CLEAN WAS A GOOD THING? ________
1-2,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
1-2,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
1-2,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT KEEPING YOUR BODY CLEAN? ________
1-2,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO KEEP HIS OR HER BODY CLEAN? ________
PRECEPT 1-3: PRESERVE YOUR TEETH
1-3,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
1-3,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
1-3,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
1-3,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
1-3,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT PRESERVING YOUR TEETH WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
1-3,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT PRESERVING YOUR TEETH WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
1-3,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT PRESERVING YOUR TEETH WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
1-3,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “PRESERVE YOUR TEETH” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
1-3,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “PRESERVE YOUR TEETH”? ________
1-3,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “PRESERVE YOUR TEETH”? ________
1-3,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “PRESERVE YOUR TEETH”? ________
1-3,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “PRESERVE YOUR TEETH”? ________
1-3,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
1-3,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
1-3,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT PRESERVING YOUR TEETH WAS A GOOD THING? ________
1-3,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
1-3,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
1-3,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT PRESERVING YOUR TEETH? ________
1-3,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO PRESERVE HIS OR HER TEETH? ________
PRECEPT 1-4: EAT PROPERLY
1-4,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
1-4,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
1-4,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
1-4,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION.
1-4,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT EATING PROPERLY WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
1-4,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT EATING PROPERLY WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
1-4,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT EATING PROPERLY WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
1-4,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “EAT PROPERLY” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
1-4,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “EAT PROPERLY”? ________
1-4,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “EAT PROPERLY”? ________
1-4,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “EAT PROPERLY”? ________
1-4,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “EAT PROPERLY”? ________
1-4,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
1-4,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
1-4,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT EATING PROPERLY WAS A GOOD THING? ________
1-4,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
1-4,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
1-4,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT EATING PROPERLY? ________
1-4,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO EAT PROPERLY? ________
PRECEPT 1-5: GET REST
1-5,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
1-5,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
1-5,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
1-5,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
1-5,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT GETTING REST WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
1-5,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT GETTING REST WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
1-5,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT GETTING REST WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
1-5,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “GET REST” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
1-5,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “GET REST”? ________
1-5,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “GET REST”? ________
1-5,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “GET REST”? ________
1-5,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “GET REST”? ________
1-5,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
1-5,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
1-5,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT GETTING REST WAS A GOOD THING? ________
1-5,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
1-5,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
1-5,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING REST? ________
1-5,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO GET REST? ________
PRECEPT 2: BE TEMPERATE
2,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
2,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
2,3 (Omitted)
2,4 (Omitted)
2,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING TEMPERATE WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
2,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING TEMPERATE WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
2,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING TEMPERATE WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
2,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “BE TEMPERATE” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
2,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “BE TEMPERATE”? ________
2,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE TEMPERATE”? ________
2,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE TEMPERATE”? ________
2,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE TEMPERATE”? ________
2,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
2,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
2,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT BEING TEMPERATE WAS A GOOD THING? ________
2,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)?
2,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
2,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT BEING TEMPERATE? ________
2,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO BE TEMPERATE? ________
PRECEPT 2-1: DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS
2-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
2-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
2-1,3 HAVE THE PC RF,AD THE SECTION (aloud). ________
2-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
2-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT TAKING HARMFUL DRUGS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
2-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT TAKING HARMFUL DRUGS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
2-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT TAKING HARMFUL DRUGS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
2-1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
2-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS”? ________
2-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS”? ________
2-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS”? ________
2-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS”? ________
2-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
2-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
2-1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT TAKING HARMFUL DRUGS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
2-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
2-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
2-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT TAKING HARMFUL DRUGS? ________
2-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS? ________
PRECEPT 2-2: DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS
2-2,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
2-2,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
2-2,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
2-2,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
2-2,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT TAKING ALCOHOL TO EXCESS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
2-2,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT TAKING ALCOHOL TO EXCESS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
2-2,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT TAKING ALCOHOL TO EXCESS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
2-2,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
2-2,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS”? ________
2-2,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS”? ________
2-2,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS”? ________
2-2,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS”? ________
2-2,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
2-2,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
2-2,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT TAKING ALCOHOL TO EXCESS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
2-2,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
2-2,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
2-2,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT TAKING ALCOHOL TO EXCESS? ________
2-2,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS? ________
PRECEPT 3: DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS
3,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
3,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
3,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
3,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
3,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING PROMISCUOUS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
3,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING PROMISCUOUS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
3,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING PROMISCUOUS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
3,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
3,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS”? ________
3,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS”? ________
3,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS”? ________
3,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS”? ________
3,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
3,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
3,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT BEING PROMISCUOUS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
3,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
3,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
3,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT BEING PROMISCUOUS? ________
3,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT BE PROMISCUOUS? ________
PRECEPT 3-1: BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER
3-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
3-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
3-1,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
3-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
3-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
3-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
3-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
3-1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
3-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER”? ________
3-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER”? ________
3-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER”? ________
3-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER”? ________
3-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
3-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
3-1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT BEING FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER WAS A GOOD THING? ________
3-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
3-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
3-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT BEING FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER? ________
3-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO BE FAITHFUL TO HIS OR HER SEXUAL PARTNER? ________
PRECEPT 4: LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN
4,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
4,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
4,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
4,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
4,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT LOVING AND HELPING CHILDREN WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
4,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT LOVING AND HELPING CHILDREN WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
4,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT LOVING AND HELPING CHILDREN WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
4,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
4,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN”? ________
4,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN”? ________
4,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN”? ________
4,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN”? ________
4,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
4,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
4,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT LOVING AND HELPING CHILDREN WAS A GOOD THING? ________
4,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
4,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
4,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT LOVING AND HELPING CHILDREN? ________
4,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN? ________
PRECEPT 5: HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS
5,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
5,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
5,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
5,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
5,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT HONORING AND HELPING YOUR PARENTS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
5,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT HONORING AND HELPING YOUR PARENTS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
5,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT HONORING AND HELPING YOUR PARENTS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
5,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
5,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS”? ________
5,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS”? ________
5,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS”? ________
5,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS”? ________
5,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
5,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
5,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT HONORING AND HELPING YOUR PARENTS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
5,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
5,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
5,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT HONORING AND HELPING YOUR PARENTS? ________
5,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO HONOR AND HELP HIS OR HER PARENTS? ________
PRECEPT 6: SET A GOOD EXAMPLE
6,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
6,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
6,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
6,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
6,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE, RUN ACROSS ABOUT SETTING A GOOD EXAMPLE WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
6,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT SETTING A GOOD EXAMPLE WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
6,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT SETTING A GOOD EXAMPLE WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
6,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “SET A GOOD EXAMPLE” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
6,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “SET A GOOD EXAMPLE”? ________
6,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SET A GOOD EXAMPLE”? ________
6,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SET A GOOD EXAMPLE”? ________
6,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SET A GOOD EXAMPLE”? ________
6,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
6,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
6,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT SETTING A GOOD EXAMPLE WAS A GOOD THING? ________
6,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
6,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
6,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT SETTING A GOOD EXAMPLE? ________
6,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO SET A GOOD EXAMPLE? ________
PRECEPT 7: SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH
7,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
7,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
7,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
7,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
7,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT SEEKING TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
7,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT SEEKING TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
7,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT SEEKING TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
7,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
7,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH”? ________
7,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH”? ________
7,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH”? ________
7,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH”? ________
7,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
7,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
7,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT SEEKING TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH WAS A GOOD THING? ________
7,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
7,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
7,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT SEEKING TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH? ________
7,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH? ________
PRECEPT 7-1: DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES
7-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
7-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
7-1,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
7-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
7-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT TELLING HARMFUL LIES WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
7-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT TELLING HARMFUL, LIES WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
7-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT “TELLING HARMFUL LIES” WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
7-1 ,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
7-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES”? ________
7-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES”? ________
7-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAlNST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES”? ________
7-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES”? ________
7-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
7-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
7-1,8d IS THERE, ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT TELLING HARMFUL LIES WAS A GOOD THlNG? ________
7-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
7-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
7-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT TELLING HARMFUL LIES? ________
7-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES? ________
PRECEPT 7-2: DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS
7-2,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
7-2,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
7-2,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
7-2,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
7-2,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE REIN ACROSS ABOUT BEARING FALSE WITNESS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
7-2,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEARING FALSE WITNESS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
7-2,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEARING FALSE WITNESS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
7-2,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
7-2,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS”? ________
7-2,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS”? ________
7-2,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS”? ________
7-2,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS”? ________
7-2,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
7-2,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
7-2,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT BEARING FALSE WITNESS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
7-2,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
7-2,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
7-2,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT BEARING FALSE WITNESS? ________
7-2,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS? ________
PRECEPT 8: DO NOT MURDER
8,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
8,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
8,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
8,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
8,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT MURDER WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
8,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT MURDER WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
8,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT MURDER WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
8,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT MURDER” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
8,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT MURDER”? ________
8,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT MURDER”? ________
8,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT MURDER”? ________
8,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT MURDER”? ________
8,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
8,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
8,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT MURDER WAS A GOOD THING? ________
8,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
8,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
8,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT MURDERING? ________
8,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT MURDER? ________
PRECEPT 9: DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL
9,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
9,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
9,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
9,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
9,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT DOING ILLEGAL THINGS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
9,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT DOING ILLEGAL THINGS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
9,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT DOING ILLEGAL THINGS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
9,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
9,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL”? ________
9,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL”? ________
9,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL”? ________
9,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL”? ________
9,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
9,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
9,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT DOING ILLEGAL THINGS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
9,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
9,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
9,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT DOING ANYTHING ILLEGAL? ________
9,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL? ________
PRECEPT 10: SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE
10,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
10,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
10,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
10,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
10,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT SUPPORTING A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
10,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT SUPPORTING A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
10,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT SUPPORTING A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
10,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
10,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE”? ________
10,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE”? ________
10,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE”? ________
10,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE”? ________
10,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
10,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
10,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT SUPPORTING A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE WAS A GOOD THING? ________
10,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
10,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
10,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT SUPPORTING A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE? ________
10,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE? ________
PRECEPT 11: DO NOT HARM A PERSON OF GOOD WILL
11,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
11,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
11,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
11,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
11,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT HARMING PERSONS OF GOOD WILL WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
11,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT HARMING PERSONS OF GOOD WILL WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
11,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT HARMING PERSONS OF GOOD WILL WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
11,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT HARM A PERSON OF GOOD WILL” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
11,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT HARM PERSONS OF GOOD WILL”? ________
11,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT HARM PERSONS OF GOOD WILL”? ________
11,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT HARM PERSONS OF GOOD WILL”? ________
11,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT HARM A PERSON OF GOOD WILL”? ________
11,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
11,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
11,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT HARMING A PERSON OF GOOD WILL WAS A GOOD THING? ________
11,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
11,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
11,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT HARMING PERSONS OF GOOD WILL? ________
11,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT HARM PERSONS OF GOOD WILL? ________
PRECEPT 12: SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT
12,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
12,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
12,3 (OMITTED)
12,4 (OMITTED)
12,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING YOUR ENVIRONMENT WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
12,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING YOUR ENVIRONMENT WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
12,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING YOUR ENVIRONMENT WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
12,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
12,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT”? ________
12,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT”? ________
12,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT”? ________
12,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT”? ________
12,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
12,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
12,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING YOUR ENVIRONMENT WAS A GOOD THING? ________
12,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
12,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
12,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT SAFEGUARDING AND IMPROVING YOUR ENVIRONMENT? ________
12,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE HIS OR HER ENVIRONMENT? ________
PRECEPT 12-1: BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE
12-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
12-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
12-1,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
12-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
12-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING OF GOOD APPEARANCE WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
12-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING OF GOOD APPEARANCE WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
12-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING OF GOOD APPEARANCE WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
12-1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
12-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE”? ________
12-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE”? ________
12-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE”? ________
12-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE”? ________
12-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
12-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
12-1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT BEING OF GOOD APPEARANCE WAS A GOOD THING? ________
12-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
12-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
12-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT BEING OF GOOD APPEARANCE? ________
12-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE? ________
PRECEPT 12-2: TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA
12-2,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
12-2,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
12-2,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
12-2,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
12-2,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
12-2,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
12-2,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
12-2,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
12-2,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU To FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA”? ________
12-2,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA”? ________
12-2,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA”? ________
12-2,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA”? ________
12-2,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
12-2,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
12-2,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA WAS A GOOD THING? ________
12-2,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
12-2,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
12-2,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA? ________
12-2,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO TAKE CARE OF HIS OR HER OWN AREA? ________
PRECEPT 12-3: HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET
12-3,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
12-3,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
12-3,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
12-3,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
12-3,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT HELPING TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
12-3,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT HELPING TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
12-3,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT HELPING TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
12-3,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
12-3,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET”? ________
12-3,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET”? ________
12-3,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET”? ________
12-3,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET”? ________
12-3,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
12-3,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
12-3,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT HELPING TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET WAS A GOOD THING? ________
12-3,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
12-3,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
12-3,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT HELPING TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET? ________
12-3,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET? ________
PRECEPT 13: DO NOT STEAL
13,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
13,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
13,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
13,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
13,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT STEALING WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
13,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT STEALING WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
13,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT STEALING WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
13,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “DO NOT STEAL” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
13,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “DO NOT STEAL”? ________
13,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT STEAL”? ________
13,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT STEAL”? ________
13,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “DO NOT STEAL”? ________
13,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
13,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
13,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT STEALING WAS A GOOD THING? ________
13,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
13,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
13,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT NOT STEALING? ________
13,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT STEAL? ________
PRECEPT 14: BE WORTHY OF TRUST
14,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
14,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
14,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
14,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
14,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING WORTHY OF TRUST WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
14,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING WORTHY OF TRUST WHlCH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
14,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING WORTHY OF TRUST WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
14,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “BE WORTHY OF TRUST” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
14,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “BE WORTHY OF TRUST”? ________
14,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE WORTHY OF TRUST”? ________
14,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE WORTHY OF TRUST”? ________
14,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE WORTHY OF TRUST”? ________
14,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
14,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
14,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT BEING WORTHY OF TRUST WAS A GOOD THING? ________
14,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
14,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
14,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT BEING WORTHY OF TRUST? ________
14,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO BE WORTHY OF TRUST? ________
PRECEPT 14-1: KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN
14-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
14-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
14-1,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
14-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
14-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT KEEPING YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
14-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT KEEPING YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
14-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT KEEPING YOUR WORD WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
14-1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
14-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN”? ________
14-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN”? ________
14-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN”? ________
14-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN”? ________
14-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
14-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
14-1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT KEEPING YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN WAS A GOOD THING? ________
14-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
14-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
14-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT KEEPING YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN? ________
14-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO KEEP HIS OR HER WORD ONCE GIVEN? ________
PRECEPT 15: FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS
15, 1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
15,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
15,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
15,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
15,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT FULFILLING YOUR OBLIGATIONS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
15,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT FULFILLING YOUR OBLIGATIONS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
15,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT FULFILLING YOUR OBLIGATIONS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
15,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
15,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS”? ________
15,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS”? ________
15,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS”? ________
15,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS”? ________
15,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
15,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
15,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT FULFILLING YOUR OBLIGATIONS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
15,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
15,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
15,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT FULFILLING YOUR OBLIGATIONS? ________
15,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO FULFILL HIS OR HER OBLIGATIONS? ________
PRECEPT 16: BE INDUSTRIOUS
16,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
16,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
16,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
16,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
16,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING INDUSTRIOUS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
16,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING INDUSTRIOUS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
16,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING INDUSTRIOUS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
16,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “BE INDUSTRIOUS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
16,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “BE INDUSTRIOUS”? ________
16,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE INDUSTRIOUS”? ________
16,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE INDUSTRIOUS”? ________
16,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE INDUSTRIOUS”? ________
16,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
16,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
16,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT BEING INDUSTRIOUS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
16,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
16,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
16,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT BEING INDUSTRIOUS? ________
16,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO BE INDUSTRIOUS? ________
PRECEPT 17: BE COMPETENT
17,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
17,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
17,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
17,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
17,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT BEING COMPETENT WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
17,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT BEING COMPETENT WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
17,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT BEING COMPETENT WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
17,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “BE COMPETENT” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
17,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “BE COMPETENT”? ________
17,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE COMPETENT”? ________
17,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE COMPETENT”? ________
17,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “BE COMPETENT”? ________
17,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
17,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
17,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT BEING COMPETENT WAS A GOOD THING? ________
17,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
17,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
17,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT BEING COMPETENT? ________
17,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO BE COMPETENT? ________
PRECEPT 17-1: LOOK
17-1,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
17-1,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
17-1,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
17-1,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
17-1,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT LOOKING AND SEEING WHAT YOU SEE WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
17-1,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT LOOKING AND SEEING WHAT YOU SEE WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
17-1,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT LOOKING AND SEEING WHAT YOU SEE WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
17-1,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “LOOK” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
17-1,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “LOOK”? ________
17-1,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LOOK”? ________
17-1,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LOOK”? ________
17-1,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LOOK”? ________
17-1,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
17-1,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
17-1,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT LOOKING WAS A GOOD THING? ________
17-1,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
17-1,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
17-1,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT LOOKING? ________
17-1,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO LOOK? ________
PRECEPT 17-2: LEARN
17-2,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
17-2,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
17-2,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
17-2,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
NOTE: Commands 17-2,4a and 17-2,4b are special handling steps which are done if the pc reads on the first two sentences of precept 17-2: “Has there ever been an instance when another had some false data about you? Did it cause you trouble?” These special steps are also taken up if the pc becomes introverted or misemotional on reading these two sentences. As they are auditing questions, they are of course checked for read before running them.
17-2,4a DID YOU THINK OF AN INSTANCE WHEN ANOTHER HAD FALSE DATA ABOUT YOU? ________
(2WC, E/S to F/N. L1C if needed. )
17-2,4b IS THERE AN INSTANCE WHEN YOU MAY HAVE CAUSED ANOTHER TROUBLE BY GIVING FALSE DATA ABOUT HIM OR HER? ________
(2WC, E/S to F/N.)
17-2,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT LEARNING WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
17-2,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT LEARNING WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
17-2,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT LEARNING WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
17-2,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “LEARN” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
17-2,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “LEARN”? ________
17-2,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LEARN”? ________
17-2,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LEARN”? ________
17-2,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “LEARN”? ________
17-2,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
17-2,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
17-2,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT LEARNING WAS A GOOD THING? ________
17-2,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
17-2,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
17-2,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT LEARNING? ________
17-2,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO LEARN? ________
PRECEPT 17-3: PRACTICE
17-3,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
17-3,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
17-3,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
17-3,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
17-3,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT PRACTICING WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
17-3,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT PRACTICING WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
17-3,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT PRACTICING WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
17-3,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “PRACTICE” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
17-3,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “PRACTICE”? ________
17-3,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “PRACTICE”? ________
17-3,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “PRACTICE”? ________
17-3,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “PRACTICE”? ________
17-3,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
17-3,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
17-3,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT PRACTICING WAS A GOOD THING? ________
17-3,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
17-3,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
17-3,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT PRACTICING? ________
17-3,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO PRACTICE? ________
PRECEPT 18: RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS
18,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
18,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
18,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
18,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
18,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT RESPECTING THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
18,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT RESPECTING THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
18,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT RESPECTING THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
18,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
18,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS”? ________
18,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS”? ________
18,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS”? ________
18,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS”? ________
18,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
18,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
18,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT RESPECTING THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS WAS A GOOD THING? ________
18,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
18,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
18,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT RESPECTING THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS? ________
18,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS? ________
PRECEPT 19: TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU
19,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
19,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
19,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
19,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
19,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT TRYING NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
19,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT TRYING NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
19,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT TRYING NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
19,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
19,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU”? ________
19,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU”? ________
19,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU”? ________
19,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU”? ________
19,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
19,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
19,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT DOING THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU WAS A GOOD THING? ________
19,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
19,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
19,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT TRYING NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU? ________
19,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT HE WOULD NOT LIKE OTHERS TO DO TO HIM? ________
PRECEPT 20: TRY TO TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO TREAT YOU
20,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
20,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
20,3 Due to the length of the text of this precept, the Word Clearing of the text is done by having the pc read over one section or part of the text, and then checking for Mis-Us in that part. Each of the virtues is taken up and word cleared individually.
20,4 (omitted)
20,5 Get the pc to imagine being treated by others according to each virtue in turn. One simply has the pc imagine each, then tell you how he imagined it. If the pc has some charge on a virtue, handle it with 2WC. Each virtue should F/N on the pc imagining being treated that way.
“CAN YOU IMAGINE BEING TREATED________”
“TELL ME HOW YOU IMAGINED IT” (unless pc has already told you).
5a. justly? ________ 5k. with forgiveness? ________
5b. with loyalty? ________ 5l. benevolently? ________
5c. with good 5m.with belief in you? _______
sportsmanship? ________ 5n. with respect? ________
5d. fairly? ________ 5o. politely? ________
5e. honestly? ________ 5p. with dignity? ________
5f. with kindness? ________ 5q. with admiration? ________
5g. considerately? ________ 5r. with appreciation? ________
5h. with compassion? ________ 5s. with friendliness? ________
5i. with self-control? ________ 5t. with love? ________
5j. with tolerance? ________ 5u. with integrity? ________
20,6 Get the pc to imagine treating another in that fashion. (This is handled the same way as 20,5.) “CAN YOU IMAGINE TREATING ANOTHER AND OTHERS “ “TELL ME HOW YOU IMAGINED DOING IT.”
6a. justly? ________ 6k. with forgiveness? ________
6b. with loyalty? ________ 61. benevolently? ________
6c. with good ________ 6m. with belief? ________
sportsmanship? ________ 6n. with respect? ________
6d. fairly? ________ 6o. politely? ________
6e. honestly? ________ 6p. with dignity? ________
6f. with kindness? ________ 6q. with admiration? ________
6g. considerately? ________ 6r. with appreciation? ________
6h. with compassion? ________ 6s. with friendliness? ________
6i. with self-control? ________ 6t. with love? ________
6j. with tolerance? ________ 6u. with integrity? ________
20,7 HAVE THE PC REREAD THE PRECEPT (full text). ________
20,8 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT TRYING TO TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD LIKE THEM TO TREAT YOU? ________
20,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING OTHERS TO TREAT YOU THE WAY THEY WOULD WANT TO BE TREATED? ________
PRECEPT 21: FLOURISH AND PROSPER
21,1 HAVE THE PC READ THE PRECEPT (aloud). ________
21,2 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE PRECEPT. ________
21,3 HAVE THE PC READ THE SECTION (aloud). ________
21,4 CLEAR ANY MIS-U WORD IN THE SECTION. ________
21,5a IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE RUN ACROSS ABOUT FLOURISHING AND PROSPERING WHICH YOU COULDN’T THINK WITH? ________
21,5b IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE ENCOUNTERED ABOUT FLOURISHING AND PROSPERING WHICH DIDN’T SEEM TO ADD UP? ________
21,5c IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT FLOURISHING AND PROSPERING WHICH NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO YOU? ________
21,5d DID YOU COME ACROSS ANY DATA ON THE PRECEPT “FLOURISH AND PROSPER” THAT YOU HAD NO USE FOR? ________
21,5e DO YOU KNOW OF ANY DATUM THAT MAKES IT UNNECESSARY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPT “FLOURISH AND PROSPER”? ________
21,6 HOW HAVE OTHERS TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “FLOURISH AND PROSPER”? ________
21,7 HOW HAVE YOU TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “FLOURISH AND PROSPER”? ________
21,8a IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC PERSON IN YOUR PAST WHO REALLY TRANSGRESSED AGAINST THE PRECEPT “FLOURISH AND PROSPER”? ________
21,8b CAN YOU RECALL AN EXACT MOMENT WHEN YOU OBSERVED (name) DOING THAT? ________
21,8c IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU WANTED TO BE LIKE (name)? ________
21,8d IS THERE ANY TIME WHEN YOU DECIDED THAT NOT FLOURISHING AND PROSPERING WAS A GOOD THING? ________
21,8e DID YOU EVER DO ANYTHING BAD TO (name)? ________
21,8f ARE THERE ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF?
ARE THERE ANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN (name) AND YOURSELF? ________
21,9 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT FLOURISHING AND PROSPERING? ________
21,10 DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO FLOURISH AND PROSPER? ________
EPILOGUE
EP 1. HAVE THE PC READ THE EPILOGUE (aloud). ________
EP 2. CLEAR UP ANY MIS-U WORD IN IT. ________
EP 3. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE EPILOGUE THAT YOU DISAGREE WITH? ________
(Find out what it is and acknowledge it. Check for and handle any Mis-U words in the epilogue, then check for and handle any false data on it with standard False Data Stripping procedure. Once handled, have the pc read the epilogue again.)
EP 4. DO YOU ANTICIPATE ANY DIFFICULTY IN APPLYING WHAT YOU READ IN THE EPILOGUE? ________
(If so, 2WC to F/N. Flatten any incomplete precept that may come up.)
EP 5. DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT FOLLOWING THE PRECEPTS OF The Way to Happiness? ________
(If so, 2WC to F/N. If this does not fully handle, the RD is incomplete. Return the folder to the C/S who will C/S for any needed repair and completion of the RD.)
EP 6. DO YOU HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ABOUT GETTING ANOTHER OR OTHERS TO FOLLOW THE PRECEPTS OF The Way to Happiness? ________
(If so, handle as in EP 5.)
EP 7. HOW DO YOUR LIFE AND FUTURE SEEM TO YOU NOW? ________
(Allow the pc to tell you. The pc should be VVGIs and F/Ning at this point. If this is not the case, handle any obvious out-rud or do an HRL, and get the folder to the C/S.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
HRD Checksheets
HRD Auditors
HRD C/Ses
Qual Div Personnel
Happiness Rundown Series 4-1
HRD PRECEPTS ASSESSMENT LIST
Refs:
HCOB 17 Jan. 84 HRD Series 2
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS
HCOB 18 Jan. 84 HRD Series 3
HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD
HCOB 19 Jan. 84 HRD Series 4
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN COMMAND SHEETS
The following form is used when the Happiness Rundown is audited by the assessment method.
The list is assessed Method 5. The reading precepts and subprecepts are then handled in sequence, in order of the largest reading item first, then the next largest reading item, and so on.
Each reading item is handled using the basic 1-10 steps of the HRD procedure, per HCOB 17 Jan. 84, HRD Series 2, HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS.
PC NAME: DATE:______________
AUDITOR: ORG:_______________
1. TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF. _________
1-1. GET CARE WHEN YOU ARE ILL. _________
1-2. KEEP YOUR BODY CLEAN. _________
1-3. PRESERVE YOUR TEETH. _________
1-4. EAT PROPERLY. _________
1-5. GET REST. _________
2. BE TEMPERATE. _________
2-1. DO NOT TAKE HARMFUL DRUGS. _________
2-2. DO NOT TAKE ALCOHOL TO EXCESS. _________
3. DON’T BE PROMISCUOUS. _________
3-1. BE FAITHFUL TO YOUR SEXUAL PARTNER. _________
4. LOVE AND HELP CHILDREN. _________
5. HONOR AND HELP YOUR PARENTS. _________
6. SET A GOOD EXAMPLE. _________
7. SEEK TO LIVE WITH THE TRUTH. _________
7-1. DO NOT TELL HARMFUL LIES. _________
7-2. DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS. _________
8. DO NOT MURDER. _________
9. DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL. _________
10. SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT DESIGNED AND RUN FOR
ALL THE PEOPLE. _________
11. DO NOT HARM A PERSON OF GOODWILL. _________
12. SAFEGUARD AND IMPROVE YOUR ENVIRONMENT. _________
12-1. BE OF GOOD APPEARANCE. _________
12-2. TAKE CARE OF YOUR OWN AREA. _________
12-3. HELP TAKE CARE OF THE PLANET. _________
13. DO NOT STEAL. _________
14. BE WORTHY OF TRUST. _________
14-1. KEEP YOUR WORD ONCE GIVEN. _________
15. FULFILL YOUR OBLIGATIONS. _________
16. BE INDUSTRIOUS. _________
17. BE COMPETENT. _________
17-1. LOOK. _________
17-2. LEARN. _________
17-3. PRACTICE. _________
18. RESPECT THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF OTHERS. _________
19. TRY NOT TO DO THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU
WOULD NOT LIKE THEM TO DO TO YOU. _________
20. TRY TO TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD WANT
THEM TO TREAT YOU. _________
21. FLOURISH AND PROSPER. _________
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JANUARY 1984R
REVISED 20 JULY 1988
Remimeo
HRD Checksheets
HRD Auditors
HRD C/S
Qual Div Personnel
Happiness Rundown Series 5R
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN REPAIR LIST (HRL)
This correction list is used to repair auditing errors on the Happiness Rundown.
The list may be assessed Method 3 or Method 5. (Refs: HCOB 28 May 70, CORRECTION LISTS, USE OF; HCOB 20 Dec. 71, C/S Series 72, USE OF CORRECTION LISTS; HCOB 10 June 71 I, C/S Series 44R, PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS)
_________
1. DID YOU GO EXTERIOR? _________
(Indicate and handle per Int Series HCOBs, or turn the pc over to an auditor classed to do so.)
2. LIST ERROR? _________
(Find out what list, and repair it with an L4BRA.)
3. IS THERE AN ARC BREAK? _________
(Get what it is and handle with ARCU CDEINR, E/S to F/N.)
4. DID YOU GET UPSET DURING A SESSION? _________
(Get what it is and handle with ARCU CDEINR, E/S to F/N.)
5. WAS THERE AN UPSET IN LIFE BETWEEN SESSIONS? _________
(Get what it is and handle with ARCU CDEINR, E/S to F/N.)
6. IS THERE A PROBLEM? _________
(Get what it is and handle with E/S to F/N.)
7. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU’RE WORRIED ABOUT? _________
(Get what it is and handle with E/S to F/N.)
8. WAS A WITHHOLD MISSED? _________
(Pull it with standard M/W/H handling procedure, E/S to F/N.)
9. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU HAVEN’T TOLD ME? _________
(Pull it with standard M/W/H handling procedure, E/S to F/N.)
10. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT YOU DIDN’T TELL YOUR AUDITOR? _________
(Pull it with standard M/W/H handling procedure, E/S to F/N.)
11. HAS THERE BEEN SOME WORD OR COMMAND YOU HAVEN’T UNDERSTOOD? _________
(Find and clear the misunderstood words to F/N.)
12. WERE YOU PROTESTING? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
13. HAS THERE BEEN ANY EVALUATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
14. HAS THERE BEEN ANY INVALIDATION OF YOUR GAINS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
15. HAS THERE BEEN ANY INVALIDATION OF THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
16. WAS AN F/N OVERRUN? _________
(Find out which question or action was overrun past F/N and indicate. If no F/N, rehab to F/N.)
17. WAS AN F/N MISSED? _________
(Find out which question or action was overrun past F/N and indicate. If no F/N, rehab to F/N.)
18. WERE YOU RUN PAST A COGNITION ON A PRECEPT? _________
(Indicate, and rehab to F/N.)
19. WERE YOU RUN ON AN UNCHARGED QUESTION? _________
(Find out which question and indicate that the auditor missed that it didn’t read. If no F/N, take it E/S to F/N.)
20. WAS A FALSE READ TAKEN UP? _________
(Find out which question this occurred on and indicate. If no F/N, take the false read E/S to F/N.)
21. WAS A QUESTION LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Find out which question and flatten it.)
22. WAS A PERSON LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Find which person and which precept and handle using steps 8b-8f of the HRD procedure.)
23. WAS A PRECEPT LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Find out which precept and handle using HRD steps 1-10. If pc does not know which precept it is, HRD assessment method may be used.)
24. WAS SOMETHING LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Find out which question or action was left unflat and flatten it. HRD assessment method procedure may be used if meter is reading on “a precept was left unflat” but pc does not know which precept it is.)
25. WAS A READ MISSED? _________
(Find out which question or action the read was missed on and run and flatten it.)
26. WAS A CHARGED QUESTION NOT RUN? _________
(Find which question and run it.)
27. DO YOU HAVE ATTENTION ON A PRECEPT THAT HASN’T BEEN TAKEN UP YET? _________
(Get which precept or precepts and handle with HRD procedure.)
28. WAS THERE A COGNITION YOU DIDN’T MENTION? _________
(Get the pc to tell you, and acknowledge it. If no F/N, rehab it. It may have occurred in or out of session.)
29. WAS A COGNITION NOT ACCEPTED? _________
(Find what cognition, and acknowledge it. If no F/N, rehab it.)
30. DID THE AUDITOR REFUSE TO ACCEPT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING? _________
(Indicate, and handle E/S to F/N.)
31. WAS AN EARLIER AUDITING ERROR RESTIMULATED? _________
(Get what it was and handle with the appropriate correction list, or an L1C “In session . . .”)
32. HAS ANYONE ELSE BEEN AUDITING YOU DURING THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN? _________
(2WC to find out who was auditing the pc, and on what. If no F/N, handle with the appropriate correction list. Note data for the C/S.)
33. HAS ANYONE DONE SOME OTHER FORM OF CASE ACTION ON YOU DURING THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN? _________
(2WC to find out what case action has been done. If no F/N, handle with the appropriate correction list. Note data for C/S.)
34. WAS THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN INTERRUPTED? _________
(Indicate. If no F/N, take it E/S to F/N.)
35. HAVE YOU BEEN DOING ANY OTHER PRACTICE BETWEEN SESSIONS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Note for C/S.)
36. HAVE YOU TAKEN ANY DRUGS, MEDICINE OR ALCOHOL DURING THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Note what the pc took and any reads for future drug handlings.)
(Note to C/S: If the pc is ill, see that proper medical treatment is obtained and assists done as needed, then complete the HRD.)
37. DURING THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN IS THERE ANYTHING YOU HAVE DECIDED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
38. CONCERNING THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONSIDERATIONS? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
39. HAVE YOU THOUGHT OF A TRANSGRESSION YOU DON’T DARE MENTION? _________
(Pull it with standard M/W/H handling procedure, E/S to F/N.)
40. ARE YOU AFRAID YOU’LL GET IN TROUBLE IF SOMETHING IS FOUND OUT? _________
(Pull it with standard M/W/H handling procedure, E/S to F/N.)
41. HAS AN OVERT BEEN RESTIMULATED? _________
(Pull it, E/S to F/N.)
42. IS THERE SOME PRECEPT THAT YOU FEEL INCLINED TO TRANSGRESS AGAINST? _________
(Find out when he transgressed against the precept and continue with steps A-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
43. IS THERE SOME PRECEPT THAT YOU HAVE TO RESTRAIN YOURSELF FROM TRANSGRESSING AGAINST? _________
(Find out when he transgressed against the precept and continue with steps A-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
44. IS THERE SOME PRECEPT YOU DO NOT INTEND TO KEEP? _________
(Find out when he transgressed against the precept and continue with steps A-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
45. IS THERE SOME PRECEPT THAT YOU FEEL YOU WOULDN’T GET OTHERS TO KEEP? _________
(Find out what precept and when he himself transgressed against that precept, and continue with steps A-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
46. DO YOU HAVE SOME GOAL OR PURPOSE THAT CONFLICTS WITH KEEPING THE WAY TO HAPPINESS PRECEPTS? _________
(Handle the goal or purpose with steps C-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
47. DO YOU HAVE A HARMFUL INTENTION CONCERNING A WAY TO HAPPINESS PRECEPT? _________
(Handle the harmful intention with steps C-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
48. ON THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN, WAS AN EVIL PURPOSE RESTIMULATED? _________
(Handle the evil purpose with steps C-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
49. ON THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN, WAS AN INTENTION TO SUCCUMB RESTIMULATED? _________
(Handle the intention with steps C-G of False Purpose Rundown procedure. If you are not an FPRD Auditor, 2WC E/S to F/N, then end the session and turn the pc over to an FPRD Auditor to handle with FPRD procedure.)
50. WAS THERE NOTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE? _________
(Indicate, and handle E/S to F/N.)
51. IS SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? _________
(Get what and handle, or get the data to the C/S.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JANUARY 1984RA
REVISED 27 JUNE 1989
Remimeo
HRD C/Ses
HRD Auditors
Qual Div Personnel
Happiness Rundown Series 6RA
C/Sing THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB 18 Jan. 84 HRD Series 3
HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD
HCOB 17 Jan. 84 HRD Series 2
HAPPINESS RUNDOWN BASICS
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCOB 12 Nov. 81RC GRADE CHART STREAMLINED
Rev. 1.7 .85 FOR LOWER GRADES
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
HCOB 27 Mar. 84 C/S Series 119
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED
This HCOB takes up the points of technical expertise a C/S needs to successfully case supervise the Happiness Rundown.
C/S QUALIFICATIONS
In order to C/S the HRD, one must be a Class IV C/S and trained on the Happiness Rundown Auditor Course, with a Qual Okay to Audit the Happiness Rundown. Additionally, he must have passed a high-crime checkout on this issue.
PROGRAMING
The Happiness Rundown may be done before or after lower grades or before or after NED (provided that the pc does not go Clear on NED). It may also be delivered after OT III or after any completed level above OT III. The HRD should not be run on a pre-OT between Dianetic Clear and OT III, or between the start of New OT V and completion of New OT VIII, except where the pre-OT is moving slowly or is stalled; in such a case the HRD may be given as part of a program to get the person unstalled and moving up the Bridge again. (Ref: HCOB 27 Mar. 84, C/S Series 119, STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED) It is most optimumly done after Objectives and before lower grades.
In most cases, a Purification Rundown and Objectives are required before beginning the Happiness Rundown. The only cases where this would not be needed are those in case category 4 of HCOB 12 Nov. 81RC, GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES: “OCA ALL IN THE UPPER HALF OF GRAPH. NO HEAVY DRUG HISTORY.”
The HRD would not be begun on a pc in the middle of another major action or who had unhandled outnesses on his case. Such would be spotted in the folder study done by the C/S before programing a case onto this or any rundown and handled as per the C/S Series HCOBs and other basic C/S materials.
Once any needed setups are successfully completed, the rundown is simply begun, right from the top of the command sheets and carrying through the steps as laid out, one after the next. The auditing procedure is given in HCOB 18 Jan. 84, HRD Series 3, HOW TO AUDIT THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN and in the command sheets themselves.
COMPLETION OF THE RUNDOWN
The rundown is complete when the pc realizes that he really is on the way to happiness. In the process of going through the rundown, the pc should have cleared up any confusions on the subject of morals, cleaned up any and all transgressions against the morals laid out in the booklet The Way to Happiness and come out of the valence of any immoral person he may have been in. There should actually be quite a roaring EP on the rundown—it is no minor matter to get these points cleared up, as they are the points where one went off the rails.
HRD BUGS AND REMEDIES
The Happiness Rundown Repair List and its listed handlings are the primary tools used to clean up bugs that may arise with the HRD. There are additionally several handlings that an HRD C/S uses where needed:
1. Assessment Method
The assessment method of auditing the Happiness Rundown is done by doing an assessment of the precepts in the booklet The Way to Happiness and handling those that are reading using the steps of the HRD procedure. Use of the assessment method is part of the handling given for several of the questions on the Happiness Rundown Repair List. In these cases it is used to quickly locate precepts which are charged and in need of handling with the basic steps of the HRD procedure.
Another of the uses of the assessment method is given in the following section.
2. Rerunning the Rundown
If the end of the HRD command sheets has been reached without the full EP of the rundown having been achieved, an HRL should be assessed and handled to pick up any errors in the auditing. If in the course of this repair it becomes apparent that the EP of the rundown was achieved earlier, it can be rehabbed once any BPC or upset has been handled. If after the repair it is evident that the rundown is incomplete, it is simply redone using the assessment method, as something has been missed.
3. Drugs
You may encounter a pc whose drug case is heavily interfering with his ability to run on the HRD. The solution is to end off the HRD at a flat point and get the pc through whichever of the Drug Rundowns is appropriate to his case level. After the Drug Rundown, get the HRD auditing he has already had thoroughly repaired and then complete the rundown.
Such a case should not have been put onto the HRD in the first place, not being properly set up for the rundown. The unhandled drugs should have been spotted and adequately handled previously.
4. “Unreading” Prepared Lists or “Unreading” HRD Commands
If you get a report of “no reads” or get mostly false reads on an HRL (or other repair list), realize that you are looking at out-assessment TRs and/or out-metering. Also, if an auditor turns in a report showing all or many of the HRD commands to be “unreading,” realize that you are looking at a situation of out-TRs and/or out-metering.
Get that auditor cleaned up using HCOB 22 Apr. 80R, ASSESSMENT DRILLS and get the pc’s BPC properly located and handled. Don’t start puzzling or going unusual because a prepared list “doesn’t work.” (Ref: HCOB 6 Dec. 73, C/S Series 90, THE PRIMARY FAILURE)
Another indicator that an auditor’s metering is probably faulty is a pc who says that the things that have been taken up and handled in doing the rundown really don’t seem to be correct, wasn’t really interested in them, etc. The handling in such a case is again to get the auditor’s metering handled and an HRL assessed on the pc and its handlings done.
5. O/Ws or Evil Purposes
The Happiness Rundown Repair List includes questions that will detect a pc who has gotten plowed into an inability to free up on something on the HRD due to O/Ws or evil purposes. The instructions for handling these questions include use of False Purpose Rundown procedure, to be done by an FPRD Auditor.
If, after doing the HRL standardly, the pc is not then able to successfully run the HRD, he should be programed over onto False Purpose Rundown auditing and given the form or forms necessary to free him up from the restimulated O/Ws and evil purposes, and then returned to the Happiness Rundown.
MIXING RUNDOWNS
Remember that the HRD is a specific rundown, with its own procedures and repairs. It is not to be mixed with other rundowns or have repairs intended for other rundowns or types of auditing applied to it. (Ref: HCOB 28 Sept. 82, C/S Series 115, MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS)
SUMMARY
C/Sed and audited standardly, the Happiness Rundown is a powerful tool for use in creating a saner, happier environment. I count on HRD C/Ses to use this tool to the fullest.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JANUARY 1984R
REVISED 20 JULY 1988
Remimeo
HRD Auditors
HRD C/Ses
HRD Checksheets
All C/Ses in
Advanced Orgs
and Above
Qual Personnel
Happiness Rundown Series 7R
DELIVERY OF THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN
TO CLEARS AND OTs
Refs:
HCOB 28 Sept. 82 C/S Series 115
MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS
HCOB 23 July 69 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES
HCOB 15 Jan. 84 HAPPINESS RUNDOWN ADDITIVES
HCOB 4 July 79 HANDLING CORRECTION LISTS ON OTs
HCOB 27 Mar. 84 C/S Series 119
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED
Modifies:
HCOB 23 Dec. 71RA C/S Series 73RA
Rev. 1.7.85 THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
CLARIFIED AND REENFORCED
The HRD should not be delivered between Dianetic Clear and completion of OT III, nor between the start of New OT V and completion of New OT VIII, except where the pre-OT is moving slowly or stalled and not moving up the Bridge. Such pre-OTs may be given the HRD as part of a program to get them unstalled and moving again. (Ref: HCOB 27 Mar. 84, C/S Series 119, STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED)
In order to audit a Dianetic Clear or above, the auditor must be of the same case level as the pre-OT (or higher), fully qualified to audit persons of that case level, AND a trained and certified Happiness Rundown Auditor. The C/S must be fully trained and certified to C/S persons of the pre-OT’s case level and an HRD C/S.
This means that New OT 1’s and above may receive the HRD only at a Sea Org org which has the technical personnel and lines necessary to service them.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
Cl III Auditors
and Above
All C/Ses
NED Courses
New Cl VI Course
DRUG RUNDOWNS AND RADIATION
Radiation of different types (medical x-ray examinations, exposure on the job, watching TV, sunburn, etc.) is sometimes given by a pc in assessments for drugs, as something that has acted like a drug. If radiation comes up in this way and is reading, it may be preassessed or run.
The Scientology Drug Rundown and NED Drug Rundown are gauged to remove this-lifetime locks and the auditor should limit himself to this action in lower grades as there is much radiation in any pc’s background. This does not forbid finding radiation incidents in NED or anything like that, but it does mean that an auditor shouldn’t go plunging down the track just looking for radiation or he could wind up in a mess. Radiation is quite general.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JANUARY 1984
Remimeo
All Orgs
Specialist FSM
Hat Checksheet
Supervisors
SSO
PES FSM I/C
Qual Sec
FSM BREAKTHROUGH
NEW FSM TRs—CONTROLLING A CONVERSATION
Refs:
LRH ED 348 Int RON’S JOURNAL 37
HCOB 16 Aug. 71R II TRAINING DRILLS REMODERNIZED
Rev. 5.7.78
HCO PL 23 Oct. 65 DISSEMINATION DRILL
HCO PL 26 Sept. 79RA II SPECIALIST FSM HAT CHECKSHEET
Rev. 27.1.84
These TRs have been specifically devised to teach the student to CONTROL A CONVERSATION.
All one is teaching here is TOTAL CONTROL of a conversation. One can see that the target is not to fight with public or SPs, but simply to control and guide the conversation where one wants it to go.
These drills are a superior technical development that the Greeks, in their science of argumentation, would have been proud of. They are superior drills in controlling conversations, whether hostile or otherwise.
The drills may be done by any FSM or Scientologist and are the drills called for in HCO PL 26 Sept. 79RA II, SPECIALIST FSM HAT CHECKSHEET.
These FSM TRs in no way excuse a person from attending a regular TRs course and/or Success Through Communication Course and are not a substitute for regular TRs but are a special application of them. A regular TRs course is not a prerequisite to FSM TRs even though they would help enormously. Nothing in this changes any data in other HCOBs regarding TRs or substitutes for any other HCOB on TRs.
The book What Is Scientology? is used throughout the TRs.
1. OT TR 0— Done per HCOB 16 Aug. 71R II.
PURPOSE: To train the student to be there comfortably and confront another person. The idea is to get the student able to BE there comfortably, in a position three feet in front of another person, to BE there and not to do anything else but BE there.
METHOD: Student and coach sit facing each other with eyes closed. There is no conversation. This is a silent drill. There is NO twitching, moving, confronting with a body part, “system” or vias used to confront or anything else added to BE there. One will usually see redness, blackness or an area of the room when one’s eyes are closed. BE THERE COMFORTABLY AND CONFRONT.
2. FSM TR 0— CONFRONTING OR NOT CONFRONTING BY CHOICE (Ref: HCOB 16 Aug. 71R II)
A. PURPOSE: To train the student to confront another person who is manifesting various levels of the Tone Scale.
METHOD: Coach uses different Tone Scale levels physically (silently) as he sits opposite the student. The student confronts the coach’s various manifestations of the Tone Scale levels until he can do it comfortably.
B. PURPOSE: To teach the student that he has a choice of confronting or not confronting various Tone Scale levels and to train him in not confronting by choice.
METHOD: Student and coach in same position as in above TR, coach continues to show various Tone Scale manifestations. The student now nonconfronts (by choice) the coach ‘ s various manifestations. This is done until the student can do this drill comfortably. One way to nonconfront by choice is to walk away.
3. FSM TR 0 BULLBAIT— CONFRONTING OR NOT CONFRONTING BY CHOICE BULLBAITED. (Ref: HCOB 16 Aug. 71R II)
A. PURPOSE: To train the student to confront another person who is pushing his buttons. The whole idea is for the student to sit there comfortably without being thrown off, distracted or reacting in any way to what the coach says or does.
METHOD: Coach, in this drill, must push the student’s buttons and can do anything except leave his chair. The student must BE there comfortably and not be distracted.
B. PURPOSE: To teach the student that he has a choice of confronting or not confronting someone pushing his buttons and to train him in not confronting by choice.
METHOD: Coach pushes the student’ s buttons and can do anything except leave his chair. The student nonconfronts (by choice) the coach’s actions. This is done until he can successfully nonconfront the coach at his own choice.
4. FSM TR 1— DELIVERING A COMMUNICATION.
PURPOSE: To train the student to deliver a communication about Scientology to another without flinching or trying to overwhelm or using a via.
METHOD: Student uses the answers section of the book What Is Scientology? to get something across to the coach, asking a question or making a statement. Coach answers easily as per normal TR 1.
5. FSM TR 2—ANSWERING OR NOT ANSWERING QUESTIONS BY CHOICE.
A. PURPOSE: To teach the student to fully answer a question to the satisfaction of the coach.
METHOD: Student and coach must both have a copy of What Is Scientology? and must both be at the same page. Coach asks a question and the student must answer out of What Is Scientology? without flustering or being unsure. The coach flunks when he does not feel his question has been fully answered.
B. PURPOSE: To teach the student to take off the line of questioning, by choice, questions he does not want to answer.
METHOD: Coach asks a question and the student “answers” in such a way as to take it off that line of questioning and onto something else (BY CHOICE). Coach flunks when student cannot successfully steer the line of questioning.
6. FSM TR 3— GETTING THE QUESTION ANSWERED.
PURPOSE: To teach the student to get his questions answered no matter what the circumstances are.
METHOD: Student uses data from What Is Scientology? (or asks something like, “Have you read the book Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health?”). Coach refuses to answer—either by remaining silent, being antagonistic or stating, “I don’t want to talk to you.” Student must handle and get his question answered.
7. FSM TR 4— CONTROLLING CONVERSATIONS BY HANDLING ORIGINATIONS.
A. PURPOSE: To train the student to fully handle an antago or critical remark or statement and get the conversation back on the tracks.
METHOD: Student uses data from What Is Scientology? (questions and statements) and starts up a discussion. Coach goes along with it but in the middle of the discussion throws in a critical or antago comment or question. Student must handle it smoothly and get it acknowledged and get the discussion back on the tracks.
B. PURPOSE: To train the student to handle the critical or antago question or comment and then steer the conversation onto some other subject (using What Is Scientology?) of the student’s choice, as in FSM TR 2B.
METHOD: Student uses data from What Is Scientology? (questions and statements) and starts up a discussion. Coach goes along with it but in the middle of the discussion throws in a critical or antago comment or question. The student must acknowledge and handle it per TR 4 and must steer the conversation onto some other subject (using What Is Scientology?) of the student’s choice as in FSM TR 2B.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Compilation assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 1 FEBRUARY 1984
Remimeo
Art Series 11
HOW TO VIEW ART
There is a skill needed by anyone engaging in any of the fields of the arts, including writing, music, painting, editing of films, mixing—in other words, across the boards.
It is the ability or skill, native or acquired, to view any piece of work in a new unit of time each time one views it. One has to be able to sweep aside all past considerations concerning any piece of work which has been changed or is under handling and see it or hear it in a brand-new unit of time as though he had never heard of it before.
By doing this, he actually sees or hears exactly what is in front of him, not his past considerations concerning it.
The skill consists solely of being able to see or hear in a new unit of time as though one had never seen or heard the work before.
Only in this way can one actually grasp exactly what he now has before him. When he does not do this, he is viewing or hearing, in part, what he saw or heard before in memory and this gets confused with what it now is.
If one can do this, he can wind up with stellar presentations. But all too often, when he doesn’t do this, he winds up with hash.
Some painters, for instance, will redo and redo and redo a painting up to an inch thick of paint when, possibly, several of those redos were quite acceptable. But he continued to try to correct the first impressions which were no longer there. By not viewing his painting in a new unit of time as though he had never seen it before, he cannot actually get a correct impression of what is in front of him.
Some painters or illustrators have a trick by which to do this. They look at their painting via a mirror. Because it is now backwards, they can see it newly.
There is another trick of looking at a painting with a reducing glass (like looking at a view through the wrong end of a telescope) to reduce the painting to the presentation size it will eventually have, let us say, on a printed page. It is quite remarkable that this reduction actually does change the appearance of it markedly. But at the same time, a small painting, enlarged, can be absolutely startling enlarged when it did not look good at all small. But this is actually change of format, not viewing in a new instant of time. The additional skill of viewing something in a new instant of time is also vital.
When anyone engaged in any of the arts in any field has not acquired this skill, he never really knows when he has arrived at the point of completion. And he can often get a distorted opinion of a piece of work which does not any longer merit it.
AUDIENCES
There is another skill which is also acquired in the field of seeing or hearing. This is being able to assume the viewpoint of the audience for which the work is intended.
There are certain areas which pretend to teach various arts, while actually covertly trying to wreck the future of the student, which stress “self-satisfaction” as the highest possible goal of engaging in any work related to any of the arts. There is, it is true, a considerable self-satisfaction in producing a good piece of work. But to profess that one works in these fields for his own self-satisfaction is to overstress the first dynamic to such a point that the work of the artist or technician then fails miserably. It is actually pure balderdash and a sort of a weak limping apology for not being successful to say that one works for his own self-satisfaction.
This false datum can mix up many artists and technicians who would otherwise be quite successful. For it blocks out the one test which would make him successful: the audience.
It is quite vital that anyone engaged in any of these fields be able to assume the viewpoint of the eventual audience.
One has to be able to see or listen to any product he is engaged in from the audience viewpoint.
He can, of course, and has to, view it from his own viewpoint. But he has to be able to shift around and view or hear it from the audience viewpoint.
There are some tricks involved in this. One of them is to keep an ear open for “lobby comment.” After a performance or viewing of any work or cinema or recital or whatever—not necessarily one’s own—one mingles with or gets reports on those who have just experienced the presentation. This isn’t really vital to do. It is quite feasible actually simply to assume a viewpoint of an audience one has never even seen. One just does it.
A mixing engineer often puts this to a further test but this is because what he is busy mixing on his high-priced top-quality equipment is not what the audience is going to hear. So he takes a cheapo Taiwan wrist cassette-player speaker or a 3-inch radio speaker from the local junk store and he listens to the program he has just mixed through it. This tells him what the audience will actually be hearing. But this is mainly a technical matter as it is true that excellent speakers or earphones may handle easily certain distortions in a mix or performance whereas the cheapo speakers shatter on them. When they do, one adjusts the mix without spoiling it so that it will play over a cheap speaker. This is a sort of a mechanical means of assuming the viewpoint of an audience. But the necessity to do this is introduced by equipment factors.
The truth of the matter is even the mixing engineer is not mixing to remedy “faults” but is mixing for an optimum quality presentation to an audience. To know when he has it, it is necessary for him to assume the viewpoint of the audience.
In all arts it is necessary to be able to shift viewpoint to the viewpoint of the listener or the viewer other than oneself. And this extends out to audiences.
SUMMARY
What really separates the flubbers and amateurs from the professional are these two skills. One has to be able to view or hear anything he is working on at any time in a brand-new unit of time. And one has to be able to see or hear his production from the viewpoint of the eventual audience.
In other words, the really excellent professional can be fluid in time, not stuck in the past and can be facile in space location.
There is no reason why one should be stuck on the time track or fixated in just his own location in space.
Actually, just knowing that these skills can exist is often enough the key to acquiring them.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 25 FEBRUARY 1984
Remimeo
Dirs of Promo
Marketing Hats
Art Series 13
DEPTH PERSPECTIVE
The subject of depth perspective applies to filmmaking and photography as well as to art and design.
Perspective means the art of conveying the impression of depth and distance; representation of scenes as they appear to the eye by means of correct drawing, shading, etc. (Funk and Wagnall’s Standard Dictionary of the English Language, International Edition)
The following are the eight types of perspective:
1. Depth by aerial perspective. Distant areas go hazy; near areas go sharp.
2. Depth by color. Warm colors appear to advance while cool hues recede from the observer. All colors appear to have their relative distances according to the background against which they appear.
Darker and lighter of the same color, even if different shades, is not a point of depth perspective.
3. Depth by linear perspective. There are two other factors which give the illusion of space. One is illumination. By making an object recede and diminish as it goes back, one gets an illusion of space depth.
The other is perspective by which parallelisms of lines are plotted to withdraw to a common point of infinity “behind” the picture. These lines are always drawn in to converge at this preselected infinity point. This point may be within or outside the frame of view but it is always “behind” the picture within it or to left, right, above or below it—but always at an infinite distance away from the viewer. Perspective can actually be plotted and drawn in with a ruler from the infinite point forward and it will give the planes, lines and lack of parallelism to rectangles, etc.
4. Depth by light.
5. Depth by light as shadow.
6. Depth by solidity. Solidity of shapes is different than shadow actions. The solidity itself is special. A thing can be drawn to be solid. Then one can add perspective. Shadows are closer to illumination.
7. Depth by focus. Things when quite near are sharp. Things that are far are a bit blurry. Sharp sun gives you sharp detail. In photography, for soft focus, put a little spiral of Vaseline in the middle of the lens.
8. Depth by lateral movement.
This is the first codification of these as distinct types of perspective.
L. Ron HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 FEBRUARY 1984
Remimeo
Art Series 14
COLOR
Color is one of the basic tools that must be well understood and used in many areas of artistic endeavor: painting, photography, set design for stage or cine, interior design and so on.
COLOR HARMONY
Color harmony is found by the use of a color wheel. Using a cine set as an example, color harmony concerns the key color in the set, which is determined by the color that one cannot change—as in an outdoor set where there may be predominantly green grass; or where the lead character must wear a specific color for his costume. It is the biggest amount of color in the scene, or what you are trying to concentrate your people’s attention on in the picture. Harmonious colors are based on the key color and this would then be the basic setting for the color wheel for sets and costumes.
The dominant colors must integrate when put together and make the scene look like it belongs together (which is the reason you use a color wheel). Color has to be used to make something look like it belongs together, not so it’s “pleasing.”
There are four types of color harmonies most usually described in texts on the subject:
1. “Direct” harmony: This is the color directly opposite the key color on the color wheel. This color is also known as the “complementary color” or “complement” to the key color. In the direct harmony one has the equal or lesser amount of color in the scene as complementary.
2. “Related colors”: The immediate adjacent areas to the key color are the “related colors.” When you go two spaces away from the key color on a color wheel, you are stretching color harmony. Some color harmony texts refer to these adjacent colors to the key color as “analogous harmonies.”
3. “Split complementary” or “Splits”: This refers to the colors immediately adjacent to the complement of the key color. When you go into splits, you actually should apply them only to lesser image sizes and even then sparingly.
4. “Triadic harmony,” “Triadics” or “Triads”: This refers to the colors two spaces to either side of the key color’s complement. When you go into triadics, you are dealing with just spots of color in a picture.
When you use triadics and splits, they have to be in small areas.
The fewer the colors in a scene, the more integrated the scene looks.
One color wheel that has been found useful is the Grumbacher Color Compass, published by M. Grumbacher, Inc., 460 West 34th Street, New York, New York 10001. It is available in many artist’s supply stores and may also be ordered directly from the publisher.
COLOR DEPTH
There is another aspect of color which must be understood, and that is “color depth.” This is the apparency of depth (relative distance from the viewer) characteristic of different colors and depending on the background against which they appear.
Against a white background, colors give the illusion of distance from the viewer in the order:
blue-green (apparently nearest the viewer)
blue
purple
red
yellow
yellow-green (apparently farthest from the viewer)
Against a black background, the apparency of distance changes:
red (nearest)
orange
yellow
green
blue-green
blue violet (farthest)
Color depth and color harmony must be used in conjunction.
As an example of the use of this tech, I was once submitted a set design for a fill which looked a bit unintegrated, as though it didn’t really belong together. The main fault was that a blackboard in this particular classroom scene looked like it was closer to the audience than the students, when it was actually farther away—thus robbing the set of depth. I tried to work with the color wheel to find some different color background for the set and discovered at that time that I couldn’t get the combination that had been proposed on a color wheel or on the depth perception chart. It turned out that the blackboard would have to be yellow to make the set come off.
As another example, a proposed set design for a Greek temple I was handed had its color depth backwards, collapsing the set and making it look small. The back walls and floors and pillars should have been Greek white marble, and a decorative frieze set in the back wall (because of the white backgrounds in this set) could only have been apple-green.
The costumes would also have to have followed color depth perception — fabrics of almost all hues were available in Greece.
Further data on color depth may be found in the book The Techniques of Lighting for Television and Motion Pictures, by Gerald Millerson, and published by Hastings House, 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016.
COLOR ASSOCIATIONS
According to marketing research, there is a whole index of emotional responses to colors. For example, blue is usually associated with knowledge or serenity; yellow is mostly associated with value and red prompts impulse buying. There have been various studies done on these associations, and it is worth the artist’s time to become familiar with the subject. The television lighting text mentioned earlier (Millerson) includes a short section on color associations.
As an example of the use of color associations, one would not use a blue, connoting serenity, as a key color for a painting meant to convey terror. The message ends up garbled.
_________
The principles of color depth, color harmony and color associations are invaluable tools for forwarding your message. Learn them well.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 26 FEBRUARY 1984
Remimeo
Art Series 15
Marketing Series 20
ART AND INTEGRATION
Art is the result of INTEGRATION of all its components. One can add that the result invites CONTRIBUTION of and from the beholder.
It isn’t very mysterious.
By components we mean all of the parts which go to make up a whole. In a picture or a painting or ad or set design, this would include such things as the actual objects to be shown, color, color harmony and color depth, depth perspective, geometric design and the use of mood lines, and calligraphy or the form of type to be used. There may be other components which would enter into it as well.
The components that go into a work of art depend upon the art form itself. In music, for example, a matter of integration is that the melody has to match the rhythm and the tonality of instrumentation has to match the mood—otherwise, you get no integration in music.
Components are chosen only because they INTEGRATE into a whole design. Only then does one have something pleasing. Otherwise, everything sticks out like sore thumbs.
Artistic designs are good when they attain a harmony of components. When components clash—except when used to counterpoint or overtly make a clash—it is because they have nothing in common. A Model-T Ford in a 1560 A.D. formal garden is a violation of integration. Because it is an outpoint. Cubes, nicely stacked and orderly, do not blend with broken glass.
Things have to be of a kind to integrate into art and the introduction of something contrary can only be used for counterpoint, perhaps to accentuate the integrity of the remainder.
MESSAGE
The purpose of art is to communicate an intended MESSAGE. Message is what you want someone to think about things. It is not a description of things. It is that which communicates a significance.
Messages can be feelings, sensations, desires, repugnance—practically anything that anybody is capable of thinking of. The idea is dominant. The technique exists to forward the idea and give it punch and power.
Thus, the selection of components that integrate is done to forward and assist the message. And with the selection and arrangement of components so that they do integrate, we are into composition.
But message comes before composition.
Composition is not a subject in itself. It is simply a portion of the harder subjects of meaning and message and emotion.
COMPOSITION
The word “composition” is misdefined in most dictionaries in that these definitions usually state it is a thing in itself. But composition cannot exist independently of a message. Therefore, I have arrived at a comprehensive definition of it which would be
COMPOSITION: ANY OR ALL OF THE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO INTEGRATE AND GIVE MEANING TO A MESSAGE.
And I have gone further in handling it than the many textbooks with their infinity of rules for composition, some of them valid, many of them false and misleading. I have the WHY that one should compose properly, and that is to make a scene or picture integrate rather than disperse. That is why one uses color harmony, geometric design, mood lines, center of interest and other such tools.
All one is trying to do is make a scene not violate itself by introducing things that don’t naturally seem to belong to it or, by introducing a positive contradiction, to cause shock or impingement.
Composition is simply locating things as they would be expected and, for impingement, locating something that would not be expected or that contradicts, and at the same time controlling direction and interest.
Composition simply consists of putting shapes together which belong together and not introducing or including something that doesn’t belong there. This applies to objects (type of), color harmony, color depth, depth perception, etc.
CENTER OF INTEREST
In any scene or design there is a center of interest and it would tie in intimately with the message. If one just doesn’t have any message, composition can go awry. The breakthrough here is that composition is inextricable from message. Without message it becomes merely trite composition. Or one can wind up conveying two messages and this is called splitting interest, which is dispersal—not integration. It isn’t that one can’t have two points of interest but, if so, one combines (or integrates) the two points of interest. If you split interest and don’t combine the two points of interest, the result is no message.
OBJECTS
Choice of objects is important to integration. The type or types of objects chosen for a scene must fit together. For example, one may be working with a nautical motif, but that would narrow down to a specific period of nautical history or experience.
The period of decor would not be mixed. If it should be the clipper ship era—1802 to 1840—one would choose objects from that period. Figureheads, for one thing, go with clipper ships—the romantic era of sail. So do captain’s chairs. Introduction of the Queen Mary, which is 1930, into the scene would be an outpoint. If it is to be INTEGRATED, it would be clipper ship, 1802 to 1840.
GEOMETRIC DESIGN
On the subject of geometric design, a design takes its geometric form from the dominant object you have to include in your scene.
Geometric design has to do with consistency. This also has to do with integration.
Things which do not have a consistent geometric design—although it can be counterpointed by other geometric design—look like they don’t belong there.
As an example of a basic design fault, one could first make the mistake of putting circles on a rectangle and then compound the error with use of rectangular lettering. Different typefaces at different levels, nonparallel, would add to the confusion. The design would lack geometric integration; it would not really integrate with its shapes. The design fault would have to do with nonparallelism of lines.
The artist may know what it is supposed to be all about, but the fact is he is trying to communicate something to an audience. When one has a nonintegrative design—a mixture of circles and spheres and triangles and rectangles and/or different typefaces at different, nonparallel levels, the geometric message is confusing. And the audience result will be confusion.
Classic design is concerned with geometric patterns relating with similar geometric patterns—circles with circles, squares with squares, etc.—which can be counterpointed with other geometric shapes. Other basic shapes are triangles, ovals, rectangles, horizontal and vertical lines. Consistency of the shape chosen, repeated in other shapes, is the basis of classic design.
The whole idea of a design is to make something look like it belongs together. That is the reason back of use of geometric designs. It isn’t that they are geometric forms. It is to attain the target of consistency and integration. That is why things look smooth and pretty or why they look jarring and ugly. They are either integrated in geometric design or they are messed up in design with mixed geometric designs.
For example, rectangular and octagonal do not go together. Octagons and triangles, however, do go together as the octagon breaks down into triangles. Rectangles, though, don’t go along with this and, in fact, don’t even counterpoint it. The essence of geometric design is consistency of geometric form.
Mood lines come into play here as a means of communicating the emotion of a scene or design. A mood line of low left to high right, for example, is optimism, and if that’s the mood the message calls for, fine. If not, one had better select and use the lines that are going to convey the desired mood. Knowing and following mood lines is important in integrating the whole of a thing.
On a set, even the people, the actors, are a part of the design and, if not designed in the same geometric plan as the set, will look as if they do not belong there.
In that your sets are triangular or multiples of triangles, then even your costumes should also be triangular or multiples of triangles.
When these are not consistent, the parts of the set and the people don’t look like they belong together and things look dispersed.
The reason you have set and costume consistency of geometric form is the same reason you have color harmony. It all has to do with integration.
COLOR
To use color effectively and as a means of integration, one must know how to use a color wheel and how to use color harmony against a color depth perception chart. The color harmony and color depth must agree.
The use of color as a means of achieving integration in a piece is covered in detail in HCOB 26 Feb. 84, Art Series 14, COLOR.
One can and should experiment with that data to gain a familiarity with the use of color and color depth. With a little experimentation, one can quickly see, for example, how one object can be moved into the distance and others pulled into the foreground using color alone.
It can be helpful when initially working out a design to do plain pencil sketches using integrated geometric forms and experimenting with different colors with these to arrive at something that integrates.
CALLIGRAPHY AND TYPE STYLES
Calligraphy or the style of type or lettering to be used enters into all of this. So, also, do type sizes and arrangements.
Disparity of type sizes used in related areas where one would expect uniformity will strike a discordant note. Print sizes varied all over the place on a page simply add confusion and a lack of integration.
And, from the viewpoint of integration, flowing color patterns or lines have no integration whatsoever with a sharp, modernistic style of typeface. The type doesn’t align with the art form, so the two don’t integrate. They don’t seem to belong together, so they don’t seem to be art.
To integrate with flowing color patterns, the calligraphy or lettering would have to fit with lines that give the impression of “in motion” or “flowing” or something similar. Different color patterns or geometric lines would require different types of calligraphy.
In other words, in an ad or other design the calligraphy or type style should align and integrate with the art form used.
And the type style itself should agree with the colors.
One should work toward an integration of geometric message, color depth, text alignment and text.
What is needed is very direct communication in all of those areas.
To arrive at a final design, one that will communicate the message, one has to know that it integrates.
One can describe a possible design but that isn’t a rough layout. It’s just an idea for a layout. What is missing is the artist and his rough sketches of full designs. Without these one can’t see if it integrates.
Finished art on random components which MIGHT become a design is not the basic step, as who knows how they’ll add up in the final product?
One first does a rough layout, or many, based on one or more ideas, and only then could one see what it’s going to do or be. Only then can one see if they will “work”—i.e., integrate.
Without this, one would be just shooting in the dark.
_________
This data is true of ALL design—ads, cine sets, great paintings, cars. And in its basics, it translates over into the fields of other art forms—music, literature, any other form of art.
The key is INTEGRATION.
Begin with a message.
Attain a harmony of components that will assist the message.
Achieve an integration of all components.
You will then have achieved a quality of communication which invites contribution from the beholder. And that is art.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1984
Remimeo
Execs
MAA/EO Hat
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
Sec Checkers
De-PTSers
PTS Packs
SSOs
Missionaires
C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
(This data is also issued as an HCO PL so that executives know what to look for when somebody that they have requested be handled in Ethics hasn’t been handled.)
Refs:
HCOB 19 June 70 II C/S Series 8
CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION
HCOB 3 May 80 PC INDICATORS
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCO PL 11 May 65 ETHICS OFFICER HAT
HCOB 9 May 77 II PSYCHOSIS, MORE ABOUT
HCOB 28 Nov. 70 C/S Series 22
PSYCHOSIS
HCO Info Letter 2 Apr. 64 TWO TYPES OF PEOPLE
HUBBARD CHART OF HUMAN EVALUATION
It is evident that asking directly for evil purposes as part of Sec Checking has been knocked out of use over the years by SPs.
It recently occurred that, in using Sec Checking to clean up several persons who had gotten into ethics trouble on their posts, a peculiar phenomenon and pattern came to light. The persons being handled had been asked for “overts” before and had “gotten them off” but would continue committing the overts. In each case they had blamed their difficulty on having been the effect of false data and black PR fed them by bad hats long since detected and removed from the area. However, these particular cases did not straighten out with de-PTSing actions.
These persons were then asked directly for evil purposes and this action finally got to the root of the matter.
APPARENT SEQUENCE
Apparently, the sequence with such persons is:
a. They “get off overts” but then continue committing them.
b. When overt products and flaps in their areas get investigated, they palm it off as having “gone effect of others’ black PR or false data.” In other words, the person appears to be PTS.
c. They manage to convince those doing the investigating that that’s the end of the investigation.
d. If something flaps, they get off some overts and start the cycle again at (a).
In other words, they were actively committing suppressive actions while pretending to be PTS. And were busy making people around them feel PTS. While apparently the effect of suppression or black PR, they were actually generating it themselves: originating black PR to cover their own overt acts.
What had been omitted in the handlings these persons had gotten previously was the full follow-through, because routine PTS tech would of course not handle someone who was on the other side of the coin—and by pursuing it all the way through, it would have exposed the pretense.
We have in the (a) through (d) sequence above, the exact mechanism by which such people skid through the lines undetected. This may explain a great deal to many executives who have ordered staff handled and then have had to conclude that the tech didn’t work because the staff wasn’t handled. What had actually occurred is that evil purposes had been omitted from Sec Checking tech with malice aforethought and that PTS checks did not include checks for evil purposes.
This sequence shows the exact “failure” to handle people in RPFs, etc.
HANDLING
In handling a PTS, the C/S must monitor the person’s progress closely. This means inspection of all interviews and session worksheets, observing the results of each PTS handling action, his change of position (or lack of) on the Chart of Human Evaluation as evident from the pc folder and so forth.
Also, it is important that the Ethics Officer advise the D of P when a staff or public person is undergoing an ethics or justice action so that this can be noted in the person’s pc folder. In this way, the C/S can also find out if the pc has landed in ethics trouble. (Ref: HCOB 13 Oct. 82, C/S Series 116, ETHICS AND THE C/S)
If the person is not making change, or repeatedly slipping into further out-ethics behavior, the C/S must recognize this. It is, possibly, the (a) to (d) sequence above in action. If the C/S suspects this to be the case, his action is to begin to handle the case with Sec Checking by a competent Sec Checker. And such Sec Checking must include questions about the person’s purposes and intentions.
Instead of only Sec Checking on, for example, “Have you committed an overt on the org?” one would also ask, “Have you had an evil purpose regarding the org?”
Handled standardly in this way, the person can be expected to experience tremendous relief and case change.
CAUTION
If a person is progressing well on a de-PTSing program (such as PTS interview, PTS RD, Suppressed Person RD), is making change, keeping his personal ethics in and moving up the Chart of Human Evaluation, then it would be a C/S error to suddenly interject a Sec Check into his program.
ETHICS
None of this sets aside standard ethics and justice procedures. Such a person as would be found with a pretended-PTS situation is quite likely already under some justice action, and in fact doesn’t deserve immediate handling other than what HCO deals out.
SUMMARY
Some executives have gotten in the frame of mind that it is a waste of time trying to handle a bad hat. It is true the bad hat probably doesn’t deserve to be handled but it is nevertheless true that we do have the tools to handle one.
We’re not out to handle the insane, but whether we like it or not we live in a pretty insane civilization. Any data which handles that or amplifies it technically or solves it is of course extremely vital.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 2 MARCH 1984R
Remimeo
All Staff
HCO
Eth Offs/MAAs
Tech/Qual
O/W WRITE-UPS
Refs:
HCOB 3 Jan. 60 A THIRD DYNAMIC FOR
SCIENTOLOGY
HCO PL 1 Nov. 70 III YOU CAN BE RIGHT
HCOB 5 Oct. 61 CLEAN HANDS MAKE A HAPPY LIFE
HCOB 21 Jan. 60 JUSTIFICATION
It has been longstanding knowledge in Scientology that in the presence of overts and withholds no gains occur.
An overt act is an act of omission or commission which does the least good for the least number of dynamics or the most harm to the greatest number of dynamics. Overts are the biggest reason a person restrains and withholds himself from action.
Man is basically good. When people commit overts and then withhold them it is because they conceive that telling them would be another overt act. By withholding overt acts, these are kept afloat in the universe and are themselves, as withholds, entirely the cause of continued evil.
A person who has overts and withholds becomes less able to influence his dynamics and falls out of communication with those people and things he has committed overts against.
Writing up one’s overts and withholds offers a road out. By confronting the truth an individual can experience relief and a return of responsibility.
BASIC THEORY
The theory behind the action of writing up one’s overts and withholds is contained in the Scientology Axioms, published in their entirety in the book Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics.
Axiom 38 is particularly applicable:
1: Stupidity is the unknownness of consideration.
2: Mechanical definition: Stupidity is the unknownness of time, place, form and event.
1: Truth is the exact consideration.
2: Truth is the exact time, place, form and event.
Thus we see that failure to discover truth brings about stupidity.
Thus we see that the discovery of truth would bring about an as-isness by actual experiment.
Thus we see that an ultimate truth would have no time, place, form or event.
Thus, then, we perceive that we can achieve a persistence only when we mask a truth.
Lying is an alteration of time, place, event or form.
Lying becomes alter-isness, becomes stupidity.
(The blackness of cases is an accumulation of the case’s own or another’s lies. )
Anything which persists must avoid as-isness.
Thus, anything, to persist, must contain a lie.
Writing up one’s overts and withholds can accomplish an as-isness and thereby relieve a person of the burden of his transgressions.
O/W WRITE-UP FORMAT
When people do O/W write-ups, abuses can occur if the specifics of the action are not known and followed.
The first step to be done before one undertakes the action of an O/W write-up is to word clear exactly how such write-ups are done.
Experience has proven that people have run into trouble on O/W write-ups when the format (including the key words and terms) was not word cleared before embarking on the action.
Format:
The format for doing an O/W write-up is as follows:
1. Write down the exact overt of commission or omission.
2. Then state explicitly the specifics regarding the action or inaction, including:
a. Time (Definition: A precise instant, second, minute, hour, day, week, month or year, determined by clock or calendar; the point at which something has happened.)
b. Place (Definition: A definite location.)
c. Form (Definition: The arrangement of things; the way in which parts of a whole are organized.)
d. Event (Definition: That which happens; result; any incident or occurrence.)
One has to get the time, place, form and event and one has to get a done or a failure in order to get as-isness.
Example:
“1. I hit a friend’s car when backing out of my parking space at work and caused about five hundred dollars worth of damage to his car.
“2. On the 30th of June 1987, when I was leaving work, I was backing out of my parking space and hit the back end of my friend Joe’s car. There was no one else around and the parking lot was almost empty. I drove away without leaving a note or telling Joe, knowing that I caused about five hundred dollars damage to his car which he had to pay for.”
or, when there is a withhold or withholds to be gotten off:
1. Write down the withhold.
2. Then state explicitly the specifics regarding the action or inaction withheld, including:
a. Time
b. Place
c. Form
d. Event
For example:
“ 1. I cheated on my wife (Sally) by seeing another woman and never told her about this.
“2. Three years ago, when I was first married to Sally, I cheated on her by seeing another woman. I have never told Sally about this. One morning (in June 1985) I had told Sally I would take her to the movies that night and on my way home from work, when I was at Jones’ Department Store, I saw an old girlfriend of mine (Barbara). I asked Barbara to go out to dinner with me that night and she accepted. (She did not know that I was married.) I told her I would pick her up at 8:00 P.M. that night. When I got home from the store I told Sally I had to go back to work to get some things done and would not be able to go to the movies with her.” “I then went out to dinner in another city with Barbara (at the ‘Country Inn’) so that I would not risk seeing any of my friends.”
ADMINISTERING O/W WRITE-UPS
The action of writing up one’s overts and withholds can be applied to anyone, and the breadth of its application is unlimited.
Examples:
A person is assigned a Danger condition and is instructed to write up his O/Ws per HCO PL 22 Mar. 85, Esto Series 51, FULL DANGER CONDITION HANDLING.
A person wants to leave a course and the Ethics Officer has him write up his O/Ws. It could be that a person is nattering or feels critical, in which case the Ethics Officer or MAA could have the person write up his O/Ws.
C/S Okay:
It is the responsibility of the person administering the O/W write-up, whether this is the Ethics Officer/MAA, an Esto, the person’s senior or a Supervisor, to get the person’s pc folder checked by a qualified C/S to ensure that they are not in the middle of a major case action such as Int repair or List repair or in the middle of an incomplete listing action, any of which would need to be completed before the pc started on an O/W write-up. (Ref: HCOB 10 June 71 I, C/S Series 44R, C/S RULES, PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS)
This is not to be construed as a rule that someone needs a C/S okay to get handled in Ethics. It simply means that the C/S and Ethics must be coordinated when handling a pc who needs to do an O/W write-up as fully covered in HCOB 13 Oct. 82, C/S Series 116, ETHICS AND THE C/S.
End Phenomena:
In doing an O/W write-up a person writes up his overts and withholds until he is satisfied that they are complete. The person will feel very good about it and experience relief. One would not engage in carrying on an O/W write-up past this point.
End Ruds Check:
When a person has completed his O/W write-up he must receive an end ruds check. This acts as an acknowledgment of the action completed. End ruds must be done by a qualified auditor (Class II or above, or a Hubbard Senior Security Checker). The original copy of the O/W write-up must go into the person’s pc folder, regardless of whether or not any copy is additionally given to the MAA or Ethics Officer. (Ref: HCOB 28 Oct. 76, C/S Series 98, Auditor Admin Series 26, AUDITING FOLDERS, OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS)
Repair:
When a person doing an O/W write-up bogs on the action at any point or gets sick or falls on his head shortly after doing an O/W write-up, he must be repaired at once by a qualified auditor using a Confessional Repair List. (Ref: HCOB 23 July 80R, CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST—LCRE)
O/W WRITE-UP PROCEDURE
The following steps are the full procedure for getting a person to do an O/W write-up:
0. The first action is for the person administering the O/W write-up to: (a) study and word clear this HCOB, (b) clear the words included in step 4 below, (c) word clear the O/W write-up format.
1. Get a qualified C/S to check the person’s pc folder to ensure that the person is not in the middle of a major case action such as Int repair or List repair or in the middle of an incomplete listing action that would be interrupted by an O/W write-up.
2. Ensure that a space is provided where a person can write up his overts and withholds undistracted.
3. Provide paper and pen.
4. Have the person clear the following words in the Tech Dictionary: overt, withhold, motivator, justification, overt-motivator sequence.
5. Have the person read this HCOB and word clear the O/W write-up format as covered above, to full understanding.
6. Have the person write up his O/Ws, exactly per the O/W write-up format above. This is done until the person is satisfied that he has written them up completely and he feels very good about it.
7. Get the person an end ruds check once the O/W write-up is complete.
8. See that the original copy of the O/W write-up is filed in the pc’s folder along with the worksheets of his end ruds check.
SUMMARY
Writing up one’s overts and withholds is a simple procedure that has unlimited application. O/W write-ups can bring about great relief and enable a person to achieve greater happiness.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1984
Remimeo
Art Checksheet
Art Series 16
MESSAGE
Successful works of art have a message.
It may be implicit or implied, emotional, conceptual or literal, inferred or stated. But a message nonetheless.
This applies to any form of art: paintings, sculpture, poetry, writing, music, architecture, photography, cine, any art form or any form that depends on art, even advertising brochures and window displays.
Art is for the receiver.
If he understands it, he likes it. If it confuses him, he may ignore or detest it.
It is not enough that the creator of the work understands it; those who receive it must.
Many elements and much expertise go into the creating of successful works of art. Dominant amongst them is message, for this integrates the whole and brings comprehension and appreciation to those for whom it is intended.
Understanding is the base of affinity, reality and communication.
A message is fundamental to understanding.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1984
Remimeo
Purif C/Ses
Purif I/Cs
Tech/Qual
Purification Rundown Series 8
OILS CAN GO RANCID
Apparently oils such as those used on the Purif go rancid after a period of time, and can also go rancid if they are improperly stored and subjected to heat.
These include “All Blend” oil (which is a combination of soy, safflower, peanut and walnut oils), vitamin A, vitamin D, vitamin E and wheat germ oir.
According to published nutritional research, rancid fats (oils) destroy important vitamins in the body and this can result in a physical condition of swollen joints or cords or muscles, known as “gout.”
WHEAT GERM OIL
An example is wheat germ oil. If you look at a bottle of vitamin E you will see that it is mainly wheat germ oil. Apparently wheat germ oil, after being pressed, will only last a week before it goes rancid. Taking this oil after it has’ gone rancid could bring about, after exercise, agonizing cramps.
This rancidness could also bring about a condition of gout. And if a person took rancid wheat germ oil while on the Purif RD he might incorrectly attribute these sore muscles to the exercise, when in actual fact it was the result of rancidness of the oil.
RANCID OILS
This data is given here for information to those supervising Purification Rundowns. But one could find oil in other places that has turned rancid—such as that contained in mayonnaise that has not been properly refrigerated.
According to Adelle Davis, noted nutritionist, some manufacturers even use rancid oils in the preparation of margarines, cooking fats and highly refined commercial vegetable oils. She recommends that one consume only pressed, unrefined oils. However these must be stored properly or they can turn rancid.
STORAGE OF OILS
Apparently the reason that these oils go rancid is exposure to the sun or radiation. One Purif I/C reported that a jar of vitamin E, left out in the sun, went rancid within a matter of days. And if a bottle of oil, or a container of oil capsules (such as vitamins A, D and E are often sold in), is stored for a long period of time instead of being used up, it could go rancid.
The best thing to do is to keep these oils in a refrigerator and test them periodically to ensure none of them have turned rancid.
HOW TO DETECT RANCID OIL
The simplest way to tell if an oil has gone rancid is to smell it. Rancid oil smells peculiar—it does not smell at all like the same oil when fresh.
With a bottle of oil such as “All Blend” oil, one just needs to open it and smell it. And with capsules of oil, such as vitamin E capsules, you can simply poke a hole in one of the capsules and smell the oil to see if it is rancid.
OTHER FORMS
Due to the fact that wheat germ oil goes rancid so quickly, it is advisable that when one is taking vitamin E as a supplement, it is taken in a dry powdered or tablet form.
Also, vitamins A and D can be obtained in tablet form and it is quite okay for persons on the Purif to take these in place of the capsules of oil. The advised dosage would not change. One does, however, need to take the “All Blend” oil in its oil form. The intake of oil is an essential part of the Purif RD, as per the basic Purif HCOBs.
On vitamins the important point is protecting them from sunlight, heat and oxygen—therefore vitamin containers should be kept closed and stored in a refrigerator. There is no reason one could not take vitamins such as A, D and E in oil capsule form as long as they are properly stored and not permitted to go rancid.
HANDLING OF GOUT
There are recommended dietary handlings for a person who has gout in the book Let’s Get Well, by Adelle Davis (published by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.). Any person who does have what appears to be a condition of gout should consult a qualified medical doctor.
SUMMARY
The Purification Rundown I/C should take adequate measures to ensure that none of the oils being taken are rancid.
This is done by:
1. Proper storage of oils, including not only bottled oils but also those contained in capsules such as vitamin E. Oils should be kept refrigerated, and not left out in the sunlight or near any heat.
2. Oils should be checked regularly to see if they have turned rancid.
3. Any oils that are rancid should be thrown out as soon as detected.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 1984
Remimeo
All Orgs
Tech/Qual
C/Ses URGENT—IMPORTANT
Auditors
Sec Checkers
Solo C/Ses
C/S Series 119
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED
(This bulletin modifies any earlier HCOBs on the subject
of what can or cannot be run on Dianetic Clears.)
Refs:
Book: Advanced Procedure and Axioms, 1951, Chapter “Postulates”
Book: Scientology 0-8, Chapter 3, “Consideration and Mechanics”
HCOB 6 Sept. 78 II SERVICE FACSIMILES AND
ROCK SLAMS
HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III ROUTINE THREE SC-A
FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE
HANDLING UPDATED WITH
NEW ERA DIANETICS
HCOB 12 Sept. 78 DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON
CLEARS AND OTs
HCOB 3 May 80 PC INDICATORS
HCOB 30 July 80 THE NATURE OF A BEING
HCOB 14 Dec. 81 THE STATE OF CLEAR
HCOB 8 Mar. 82R CONFESSIONALS AND THE
NONINTERFERENCE ZONE
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
Note: Earlier, various persons carefully obliterated the technical data given below (and the tech of Expanded Dianetics) from use, to effectively bar Dianetic Clears from going any further up the Bridge and becoming fully powerful beings.
The major steps for a Dianetic Clear moving up the Bridge are:
CCRD and the Sunshine Rundown
Solo Auditor Course Part 1
OT Preparations/Solo Setups
Solo Auditor Course Part 2
Eligibility for OT Levels Check.
There is no reason to interfere with a Dianetic Clear who is progressing on that route or who is progressing on the route between OT I and OT III and doing well. They should not be interfered with by Sec Checking or anything else, really.
But where the person in this zone is moving slowly or stalled, there is a technical factor which must be known and taken into consideration:
Dianetic Clears who do not go up the Bridge are still subject to the vagaries and pressures of life.
Therefore, to handle any of the points of possible hang up, the following are included as allowed handlings on a Dianetic Clear:
PTS handlings, but no Dianetics
Confessionals, including Sec Checking on evil purposes
The handling of postulates, considerations, attitudes, evil purposes or evil intentions
False purpose checks
O/Ws
Disagreement Checks
Black PR handling
Service fac handling (by the bracket method only, which does NOT use engram running)
Rudiments
Happiness Rundown
Scientology Drug Rundown (as it uses Recalls), only if required
Method One Word Clearing
End of Endless Int Rundown, only if required (Note: This is a major rundown, not a repair action.)
and the Flag-only rundowns of L10, L11, L12.
The following actions can also be done to assist a Dianetic Clear who is stalled or not actively moving up the Bridge:
Ethics condition formulas
Repair of Past Ethics Conditions
Conditions and Exchange by Dynamics
Actions given in the Product Debug Series HCOBs (False Data Stripping, Crashing Mis-U Word Finding, Product Debug Checklist, etc.)
Getting the 21-department org board in in one’s own life.
POSTULATES
The fact that one can sec check a Dianetic Clear and can locate purposes and nonsurvival considerations does not in the least make less of the state of’ Clear. It is simply a matter of a different case phenomena on a Clear than on a
preclear.
The definition of Clear is:
A BEING WHO NO LONGER HAS HIS OWN REACTIVE MIND.
Postulates and considerations can stand independently of mental mass. Therefore, if anybody said you couldn’t find postulates or try to spot them on Dianetic Clears then that is false data.
One can locate all the postulates one wants on a Dianetic Clear so long as he doesn’t go into running engrams. Finding postulates and considerations is a free field on a Dianetic Clear; there is no slightest prevention of it. Finding and handling evil purposes is also in the area of postulates. And a Dianetic Clear can also be black PRed and go PTS.
Because someone is Dianetic Clear is no reason he does not still have postulates in place or counter-survival considerations which, cleared up, could improve his power as a being.
You will find that people who are not burdened with overts and black PR and evil purposes ARE going on up the route to the top. What stalls the person is lack of Sec Checking and discovery of any PTSness or black PR or evil purposes and the like—all of them counter-survival.
THE TECHNICAL FACT IS THAT IF THE PERSON IS NOT GETTING ON UP THE LEVELS, IF HE IS CLEAR AND/OR IS IN THE NON-- INTERFERENCE ZONE AND IS MOVING SLOWLY OR STALLED, HE IS A CANDIDATE FOR HANDLING OF THESE FACTORS.
The handling of a Dianetic Clear on these is the same as for any preclear, with the proviso that no engram running may be attempted. One CAN handle postulates, purposes, considerations, attitudes, evil purposes or intentions and O/Ws. One can do false purpose checks, Disagreement Checks, black PR handlings, service fac handling (without running engrams) and rudiments on a Dianetic Clear, and one can also do all types of PTS handling that do not call for running engrams. And one had better get the appropriate handling done in such cases. You’ll find the person experiences huge relief from being rid of these nonsurvival factors and he can then move on up to his next level and get the gains that are there to be achieved.
SUMMARY
It is expected that responsible technical terminals will ensure the needed handling gets done where a Dianetic Clear is not progressing well.
A person at the point of Clear should take effective measures to get himself up the Bridge.
But where this is not occurring, he needs help in the form of the exact technical action that will enable him to progress.
We are in the business of making beings more able. Here we have restored to use powerful tools with which to do it.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 5 JUNE 1984R
REVISED 11 JANUARY 1990
BPI
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
False Purpose Rundown Series 1R
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
Refs:
Book: Advanced Procedure & Axioms, Chapter “Postulates”
Book: Scientology 0-8: The Book of Basics, Chapter “Consideration and
Mechanics”
HCOB 27 Mar. 84 C/S Series 119
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED
HCOB 30 July 80 THE NATURE OF A BEING
That beings are basically good and are seeking to survive are two fundamental principles of Scientology.
A being’s basic goodness can be made brightly evident or be heavily obscured, the quality of his life and survival potential can be enhanced or reduced, all through a factor fundamental to the thetan himself: PURPOSES.
Where a being has accumulated nonsurvival purposes and intentions, he will be found to be having, doing and being far below his potential. Having committed overt acts (prompted by false, nonsurvival intentions and purposes), he then restrains himself from action. Achievement, stability, certainty, respect for self, and even the thetan’s innate power can seem to deteriorate or disappear altogether.
And it can be found that many of these contrasurvival purposes have been fettering the being for a VERY long time. Recent upper-level research breakthroughs have led to the development of a new rundown designed to slash straight through to the root of such false purposes and unwanted intentions and BLOW them.
The name of this new rundown is the FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN.
RESEARCH
The tech research done was quite extensive and involves several major discoveries. But I’ll let you in on one thing: There were psychiatrists who existed way, way back on the track.
It was the aim of these psychs back on the whole track to very carefully push in people’s anchor points to prevent them from reaching. The psychs were, themselves, a bunch of terrified cowards, and the prevention of reaching was one facet of their operation. Handling overts, withholds and nonsurvival purposes with the False Purpose Rundown has proven highly effective in undoing the effects of the “work” of psychs on the whole track, and restoring the thetan’s willingness and ability to reach.
DELIVERY
The False Purpose Rundown may only be delivered by an auditor who has completed the HUBBARD FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN AUDITOR (HFPRDA) Course, where one studies the materials of the new tech breakthroughs and masters the laser-precise techniques of False Purpose Rundown auditing. The rundown may only be C/Sed by a Class V Graduate C/S (or above) who also has been thoroughly trained in the tech of the False Purpose Rundown as both an auditor AND a Case Supervisor.
The auditing is very fast and very direct.
And—hold your hat—though it is the result of research into the far reaches of the OT band, it can be delivered to persons who have just begun on their way up the Bridge! Case prerequisites for the rundown are determined by the Case Supervisor, based on the pc’s drug history and personality test results. Some pcs will need no prior case actions at all. (Ref: HCOB 12 Nov. 81RB, GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES)
RESULTS
Pcs and pre-OTs report—and folder studies confirm—a very high rate of case gain per hour of auditing on this rundown, with unwanted fixed conditions and considerations dropping away left and right.
Barriers to enjoyment of life and attainment of goals that before seemed solid and formidable can be whisked away like a puff of smoke before a fresh gust of wind. What would be left if such barriers were gone? Certainty of self and one’s basic purposes and intentions—and a revitalized reach, drive and confidence in one’s ability to achieve them, free from self-restraint.
And that spells a better game!
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
HCO
Tech/Qual
MAAs/Ethics Offs
New Class IX
(ACS) Auditors
False Purpose RD
C/S Course
ROCK SLAMS, MORE ABOUT
Refs:
HCOB 3 Sept. 78 DEFINITION OF A ROCK SLAM
HCOB 10 Aug. 76R R/Ses, WHAT THEY MEAN
Rev. 5.9.78
HCOB 1 Nov. 74RA ROCK SLAMS AND ROCK SLAMMERS
Rev. 5.9.78
It is true that an R/S indicates an underlying evil intention. And if one occurs it is vital that it be noted clearly. But an R/S is only an indicator.
R/Ses found in folders sometimes can’t be made to repeat due to additional overburden or new withholds or something of the sort. A rock slam is a definite indicator but it is not THE indicator. There are various reasons for this—the auditor might be looking somewhere else, the meter may be discharged and the R/Ses missed or, on the other hand, a bad connection in the line or the pc wearing rings can also turn on a false R/S.
The point is that in detecting an evil purpose one would not rely totally on whether or not an R/S did or did not turn on. It is just an indicator. It’s not proof. A person’s conduct and his actions are a proof. Thus, behavior and production records are a more reliable indicator.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
Cramming Officers
MAAs/Ethics Offs
Tech/Qual
False Purpose RD
Auditors
Class XII Auditors
Sec Checkers
“MURDER ROUTINE”
Some years ago I developed a simple technique, that has proven very useful to Sec Checkers, known as “murder routine.” This name came about when an auditor, having some difficulty with a pc insisting he’d never done anything bad in his whole life was directed to ask if the pc had murdered someone, robbed a bank, and other such exaggerated Sec Check questions. Upon being asked such questions, the overt the pc was sitting on became much more confrontable to him, by comparison, and off it came. This became known as the “murder routine.” It is also known as “magnifying the overt” or “worse than” technique.
Where you have a validly reading Confessional question, but the pc is not coming up with a specific overt for one reason or another, you can very often hit pay dirt by giving the pc some samples of noncomparable magnitude. You just give him a horrible comparison, in the face of which the actual overt looks mighty small—and off it comes.
For example, the pc is getting a fall on “overts on cats” but saying, “Well, I . . . really nothing there that I can see, and . . .” The auditor, having tried unsuccessfully to get a specific overt with good TR 4, can move right in with the “murder routine”: “Well, have you deliberately run down any cats with a car? Strangled any cats just for the fun of it? Lopped some cat’s ears off with the garden shears?” The pc says, “Oh no, nothing, nothing like that! I kicked the neighbor’s cat, that’s all . . . ,” and you’re away: “Well, thank you. Now, when was that?” and so on.
Blood running all over the place, you see, in the picture you’re painting, and the pc surrenders. It begins to look like a much more confrontable thing he’s done, by comparable magnitude.
If this tech isn’t already part of your repertoire as an auditor, drill it well and put it to good use.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
Auditor-training
Checksheets
HSSC Course
Tech/Qual
Sec Checkers
MISSED WITHHOLD HANDLING
Ref:
Tape: 6211C01 THE MISSED MISSED WITHHOLD
Modifies:
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
HCOB 11 Aug. 78 I RUDIMENTS DEFINITIONS AND
PATTER
HCOB 15 Aug. 69 FLYING RUDS
Part of the routine procedure that is expected of any auditor pulling a missed withhold, whether as a rudiment or in Sec Checking, is to get “who missed it”—the people who missed the withhold—and what each of them did to make the pc wonder whether he or she knew. Sometimes, however, the rudiment keys out and F/Ns before the auditor has gotten to the “who missed it” step of the procedure.
Such an F/N is indicated, but you must then go forward and get who missed the withhold and what that person did to “miss” the withhold on the pc.
This handling can considerably widen the F/N and blow the missed withhold but good.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JUNE 1984R
REVISED 12 JANUARY 1990
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
MAAs/Ethics Officers
Cramming Officers
HCO
Tech
Qual
HSSC Checksheet
False Purpose RD
Auditors and C/Ses
False Purpose Rundown Series 2R
THE “LOST TECH” OF HANDLING
OVERTS AND EVIL PURPOSES
Refs:
HCO PL 7 Feb. 65 KSW Series 1
KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING
HCO PL 17 June 70RB I KSW Series 5R
Rev. 25.10.83 TECHNICAL DEGRADES
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCOB 9 Feb. 79R KSW Series 23R
Rev. 23.8.84 HOW TO DEFEAT VERBAL TECH
CHECKLIST
HCOB 15 Feb. 79 KSW Series 24
VERBAL TECH: PENALTIES
HCO PL 17 Jan. 79 A NEW TYPE OF CRIME
In a recent review of several cases, I’ve unearthed some vital tech in the fields of pulling overts and handling evil purposes that had been “lost” (buried) by certain SPs who’ve long since departed. This tech has now been put fully back into use and—with the addition of totally new breakthroughs on the handling of evil purposes—is more powerful than ever.
HISTORY
In early days I developed Security Checking to a high skill, whereby the meter was used to get the exact time, place, form and event nailed down on every overt.
In later years, in rundowns such as Expanded Dianetics, Sec Checking was covertly knocked out of use through verbal tech. This got to the point where some cases, not having been unburdened of later overts and withholds with Sec Checking, were sent off down the track in search of early overts and evil purposes well beyond the confront and reality of the preclear. Attempts were sometimes made to use high-powered L&N questions on such pcs to locate evil purposes and intentions to run. Burdened with unpulled overts, the pcs had a hard time answering such questions.
A few unscrupulous persons who themselves were strenuously avoiding being sec checked put this “tech” out in issues. It of course threw a wrench into the works and was one of the main tricks they pulled in an effort to undermine the workability of Expanded Dianetics.
Sec Checking tech was, some years later, put back into use with a vengeance and many pcs got excellent gains from it. But not all of the tech was restored: The tech of handling evil purposes had been omitted!
What happened was that a “pendulum swing” effect had occurred. At one extreme, only straight pulling of overts and withholds close to present time was stressed. And at the other extreme, scant attention was paid to skilled sec checking of the pc’s current or recent withholds and, instead, auditors were guiding pcs in a search for whole track incidents and evil purposes exclusively.
SUCCESS
The fact is that any auditing aimed at handling the basic factors that can stall a case cannot succeed up to its full potential unless it includes BOTH:
A. THOROUGH, VIGOROUS PULLING OF THE PC’S OVERTS, AND
B. TRACING THE OVERT BACK TO E/S OVERTS ON THAT CHAIN AND BACK TO THE UNDERLYING EVIL PURPOSE AND CARRYING IT THROUGH TO A FULL BLOW.
I have since restored the tech of Sec Checking to full use and it is working very well in the hands of skilled auditors.
But now we have the brand-new, startlingly direct and powerful tech of the False Purpose Rundown! Based on discoveries made in upper level research this new rundown has produced spectacular results, including the undoing of psychs’ suppressive actions of long, long ago. But for an auditor to be able to use this new tech he must first be a skilled Sec Checker.
This does not mean that the technology of Sec Checking cannot be used, nor is this HCOB intended to prevent people from being sec checked as part of HCO investigatory or justice actions. Sec Checking is a vital tool in its own right.
ETHICS
If in the future any person is found to be omitting or refusing to deliver the False Purpose RD or related RDs when needed, or doing something else and calling it “False Purpose RD,” he may be called before a Committee of Evidence on a charge of:
ATTEMPTING TO UNDERMINE OR ADVISING OR ENCOURAGING OR CONDONING THE ABANDONMENT OR REDUCTION OF USE OF THE FULL TECHNOLOGY OF LOCATING AND HANDLING OVERTS, EVIL PURPOSES, DESTRUCTIVE INTENTIONS AND NONSURVIVAL CONSIDERATIONS.
This offense is classified as a high crime, and if proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a Committee of Evidence, the offender may be declared suppressive and expelled from the Church.
SUMMARY
In this technology lies the key to sanity, certainty, reach and ability. Only the truly suppressive would wish to see it neglected or abandoned.
With this tech in your good hands and well applied, their wish will fade away as they do.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 7 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
False Purpose RD
Auditors and C/Ses
Cramming Officers
False Purpose Rundown Series 3
THE PRIOR CONFUSION:
NEW TECH BREAKTHROUGH
Refs:
HCOB 2 Nov. 61 THE PRIOR CONFUSION
HCOB 9 Nov. 61 THE PROBLEMS INTENSIVE
USE OF THE PRIOR CONFUSION
HCOB 5 Apr. 71RA TRIPLE RERUNS
HCOB 26 June 78RA II NED Series 6RA
ROUTINE 3RA
ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS
(Section on Narrative R3RA)
HCOB 13 Sept. 78 R3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS
AND NARRATIVE R3RA
AN ADDITIONAL DIFFERENCE
HCOB 28 May 69 HOW NOT TO ERASE
HCOB 6 Oct. 61 TRAINING OF STAFF AUDITORS
HCOB 30 July 62 A SMOOTH HGC 25-HOUR INTENSIVE
Tape: 6110C03 “The Prior Confusion”
The highly effective tech of handling problems on a pc by finding the prior confusion to the problem and pulling O/Ws in that area has been in use since its discovery in the early 60s.
The theory of this is that any fixed idea or condition is the result of a postulate made by the thetan. Just prior to that postulate there was a confusion —an unconfrontable disturbance. The postulate is a stable datum, adopted in an attempt to solve that confusion. By getting off the pc’s O/Ws in the area of the confusion, one can key out the postulate and fixed condition.
BREAKTHROUGH
I have just made a breakthrough of magnitude on the subject of the prior confusion while engaged in whole track research. This tech has a broader application than was originally envisioned.
What has actually been spotted here is that the psychs on the whole track created a confusion originally and used the overwhelm of that as the knockout for the implant. They didn’t, at that stage of the track, have any other tools to knock beings out. So the mechanism of prior confusion is very early and very dominant.
This breakthrough on the prior confusion comes from spotting the first moment of the confusion.
This does not mean that a pc, in running back an evil purpose, is necessarily going to contact an incident containing a psychiatrist. But you as the auditor should know that that is what this tech discovery is based upon.
HANDLING EVIL PURPOSES
This has immediate application in auditing addressed to the locating and handling of a pc’s accumulated evil purposes and nonsurvival considerations.
Once such a purpose or consideration is found, one locates the confusion which occurred just before it. If there is no blow of the purpose or no visible reaction, then one gets an earlier time for the same evil purpose and an earlier confusion to that. WHEN ONE FINDS THE FIRST MOMENT OF THE FIRST CONFUSION WHICH LED TO THAT EVIL PURPOSE, ONE CAN BLOW THE WHOLE THING.
Once the FIRST MOMENT of that first confusion on that chain is found, you will normally get a blowdown of the tone arm, a cognition, VVGIs in the pc and a persistent F/N, if not a floating TA.
Getting the first moment of the confusion is crucial. This follows the fundamental auditing principle of the “earlier beginning,” as described in the basic books and in New Era Dianetics tech. By locating the earliest moment when the pc had an awareness of the confusion, it can be blown.
SOURCE
The false purpose or evil intention may have been generated by the person himself or directly implanted by another. This new application of prior confusion tech as given in the False Purpose Rundown has been shown to be highly effective regardless of the source of the purpose or intention.
ERRORS
On the False Purpose RD if one gets the prior confusion but the evil purpose doesn’t spectacularly blow, it could be due to a number of reasons. But it is primarily one of these two things:
1. The auditor failed to get the EARLIER TIME THE PC HAD THAT SAME PURPOSE and then get the prior confusion beneath it; or
2. The auditor did get the basic prior confusion on that evil purpose, but failed to get the FIRST MOMENT OF THAT CONFUSION.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
False Purpose RD
Auditors and C/Ses
Cramming Officers
All Sec Checkers
HSSC Checksheet
False Purpose RD
Checksheet
False Purpose Rundown Series 4
CLEARING JUSTIFICATIONS
(Modifies: HCOB 30 Nov. 78,
CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE)
Refs:
HCOB 21 Jan. 60 JUSTIFICATION
HCOB 7 July 64 JUSTIFICATIONS
HCOB 8 July 64 MORE JUSTIFICATIONS
Tape: 6406C09 “The Cycle of Action,
Its Interpretation on the E-Meter”
Tape: 6406C16 “Communication, Overts and
Responsibility”
One of the tools of the successful auditor is the technique of getting off the pc’s justifications when pulling overts and withholds. When this tech has fallen out of use, auditing has been less effective. Therefore, in auditing the False Purpose RD it is mandatory that on each overt pulled the pc’s justifications of that overt must be cleared.
Additionally, a step is added to Sec Checking procedure of getting the pc’s justifications off on each overt that is found.
THEORY
Where the pc is justifying, he is in a nonconfront of his own causation. By justifying he is lessening the severity of the overt, and as long as he has an overt justified, he hasn’t taken responsibility for it and it will still be charged. Thus, pulling off the pc’s justifications is invaluable in raising his cause and responsibility level.
PROCEDURE
Justifications are asked for after the time, place, form and event of the overt have been gotten and before asking for “who missed it” and E/S.
The pc’s justifications can be gotten by asking, “Have you justified that overt?” or “Why wasn’t that an overt?” getting that answered and asking for any more justifications until all are gotten. Quite often they will come off in a torrent, to the great relief of the pc.
Example: Auditor is running the Confessional question, “Have you ever stolen an apple?” After getting the pc to answer and give the what, when and so forth of the overt, the auditor asks:
Auditor: “Have you justified that overt?”
Pc: “Yes, I decided it was okay to steal the apples because I was hungry.”
Auditor: “Thank you. How else did you justify it?”
Pc: “Well, the store had so many apples in stock that I knew it wouldn’t hurt them to lose a few . . . and after all, they’ve overcharged me before, so they actually sort of owed it to me, and I always shop there so they’re still making plenty of money from me.”
Auditor: “Okay. How else did you justify it?”
Pc: “That covers it. Boy, I really had that one loaded up with reasons for its being all right!”
Auditor: “Thanks very much. Who missed it?” (Auditor continues on with the “missed” step and then, if no EP, goes E/S on the Sec Check question.)
GRADE IV
This HCOB in no way changes or replaces the “Overt-Justification” process which is run as part of Expanded Grade IV.
Ls
The L Rundowns are audited exactly per the Class X, XI and XII materials and are not added to or modified in any way by this HCOB.
________
This is quite a powerful bit of tech. Its application can make all the difference in cleaning up an overt.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1984R
REVISED 3 MAY 1985
Remimeo
False Purpose RD
Auditors
False Purpose RD
C/Ses
Cramming Officers
False Purpose Rundown Series 5R
AUDITING THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB 5 June 84R FPRD Series 1R
Rev. 11.1.90 FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
Book: Advanced Procedure and Axioms, Chapter “Postulates”
HCOB 28 Nov. 70 C/S Series 22
PSYCHOSIS
HCOB 9 May 77 II ExDn Series 29
PSYCHOSIS, MORE ABOUT
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
HCOB 27 Mar. 84 C/S Series 119
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR:
SOLVED
HCOB 7 June 84 FPRD Series 3
THE PRIOR CONFUSION:
NEW TECH BREAKTHROUGH
HCOB 8 June 84 FPRD Series 4
CLEARING JUSTIFICATIONS
HCOB 6 Nov. 64 STYLES OF AUDITING
(Level II—Guiding Style)
HCOB 21 Mar. 74 END PHENOMENA
HCOB 1 Mar. 77 II CONFESSIONAL FORMS
The False Purpose Rundown is a brand-new development in the handling of overts, withholds, evil purposes and destructive intentions. Using this new technique they are traced straight down to their origins and BLOWN.
EVIL PURPOSES
An evil purpose is a destructive purpose, intention or postulate.
I discovered in 1970 that evil purposes are the basis of insanity. A person who continuously commits harmful acts has evil purposes. He is prompted by these purposes to commit overts. (Such a person often tries to keep these overts carefully hidden while continuing to commit them.)
This does not mean that every pc who gives off an evil purpose is a raving psychotic or a John Dillinger or is bent only on destruction. It does not mean that any pc who discovers he has been dramatizing a destructive intention is an SP.
What it does mean is that this is an area that will cause (or, more likely, has already caused) a great deal of difficulty or conflict not only for the pc himself but for those around him.
POSTULATES
Evil purposes are, in effect, postulates.
Research on purposes and postulates and their role in the general aberration of a case goes back as early as 1950, and a lot of material exists on this in HCOBs and in basic Dianetics and Scientology books.
In dealing with this subject we are, in reality, dealing with a whole spectrum of what are actually postulates: considerations, intentions, purposes, service facsimiles and computations. These are all postulates.
Such false purposes, false considerations, quasi-evil purposes and the like can sit squarely in the road of attempts to hat or train or get case gain on a person.
NEW TECH BREAKTHROUGH
Underlying an overt chain you will very often find an evil purpose or destructive intention. In other words, when you start tracking down O/Ws with E/Ses keeping on a certain type of O/W, you will very likely run into an evil purpose on a case. The underlying evil purpose prompts the person to commit and continue committing harmful acts.
The breakthrough that I have made on this line is in the application of prior confusion tech to the handling of overts and evil purposes. Just as an evil purpose can be found at the bottom of a chain of overts, so can a confusion be found just prior to an evil purpose.
Once the first underlying prior confusion on that chain is located, it is only necessary to have the pc spot the FIRST MOMENT of it to cause it to blow.
AUDITOR REQUIREMENTS
A False Purpose RD Auditor must be a graduate of the new HUBBARD FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN AUDITOR COURSE and provenly competent in handling the high-precision tech of the rundown. A prerequisite to this course is the HUBBARD SENIOR SECURITY CHECKER COURSE, where one becomes a highly skilled Sec Checker. NO ONE who has not successfully completed these two courses may audit the False Purpose Rundown.
The exact requirements to deliver the False Purpose RD are:
1. Student Hat
2. Pro TR Course
3. Class IV Auditor
4. Upper Indoc TR Course (or Upper Indoc TRs previously drilled on any training course)
5. Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course
6. Hubbard False Purpose Rundown Auditor Course (Provisional until interned).
To deliver the False Purpose Rundown to an OT III or New OT IV (which would only be done in an AO or at the FSO) one must have done 1-6 above PLUS:
7. Qualified to audit OT III reviews.
To deliver the False Purpose Rundown to a NOTs pre-OT one must have done all of 1-7 above PLUS:
8. Full training as a Class IX Auditor (Hubbard Advanced Courses Specialist).
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN FORMS
The False Purpose Rundown procedure utilizes a form that consists of a series of questions related to a specific subject or area. There are different False Purpose RD forms which the C/S may include in the pc’s program. Whatever form is used, the auditor does the whole form on the pc. Every question is cleared and checked on the meter as per basic Sec Checking tech.
Some of the questions on the form ask for overts (e.g., “Have you ever stolen materials from a school?”) and other questions ask directly for evil purposes and destructive intentions (e.g., “Have you had an evil purpose towards a school teacher?”) .
Form questions which simply ask for overts are taken E/S to basic, and usually lead right to an evil purpose. (See Steps A to G below.)
On questions which directly ask for evil purposes the auditor takes up the procedure from Step C and carries through to EP.
The whole aim in doing this rundown is to locate overts and evil purposes on the case and fully blow them. These two types of Sec Check questions simply give two different approaches to one thing: getting onto the trail that leads to an evil purpose and, once found, blowing the evil purpose.
AUDITING PROCEDURE
IMPORTANT: Before the rundown is started, the pc must have a clear understanding of what is meant by an evil or destructive intention, and what a confusion and prior confusion are, as per the Technical Dictionary. The commands themselves must also be thoroughly cleared. (Ref: HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS)
STEP A: Auditor clears and asks the question from the False Purpose RD form.
Example: “Do you have an overt on cats?”
On each reading Sec Check question get the question answered fully and the overt pulled with time, place, form and event and pull any justifications of the overt as part of this. This is done with full Sec Checking tech. If no persistent F/N or spectacular release on getting off the overt, go E/S on the overt chain, with each overt question being taken to basic. Just pulling an overt might resuit in a huge release and persistent F/N which would be the EP for that chain.
You may get an F/N accompanied by a cog and VGIs while going down an overt chain. An F/N indicates a release point. What occurs in a case when you get an F/N on going down an overt chain is a key-out; by pursuing it you resume the chain and can pull it down to its underlying evil purpose.
It is very important in running down these overt chains that the auditor keeps the pc ON the same chain. Should the pc offer up some other overt or even an evil purpose disrelated to the chain being run, it is just noted in the worksheet for later reference. It would be an auditor error of magnitude to Q-and-A with such an origination and pursue it in the middle of handling the overt chain that was started with. (Ref: HCOB 21 Mar. 62, PREPCHECKING DATA, WHEN TO DO A WHAT)
Note: In running an overt chain E/S, the pc may spot the evil purpose that prompted the overts on that chain. If this occurs, i.e., the pc (without prompting) volunteers the evil purpose or intention that underlies that overt chain, and it is reading on the meter, the auditor goes straight to Step C.
STEP B: If running the overt E/S (to the point where there is apparently no earlier overt) does not result in a spectacular release and persistent F/N, the auditor asks:
“WAS THERE SOME EVIL PURPOSE OR DESTRUCTIVE INTENTION THAT PROMPTED YOU TO COMMIT THAT OVERT?”
and, if this reads, he pulls the evil purpose or destructive intention. The auditor is expected to put in “Suppress” and “Invalidate” if this question is not reading.
(AN “F/N AND VGIs” IS NOT THE EP BEING SOUGHT IN FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN PROCEDURE. THE EP IS A SPECTACULAR RELEASE ANp A PERSISTENT F/N. THE PC SHOULD F/N ON THE E/S OVERT CHAIN ITSELF AND THE F/N SHOULD BE INDICATED, BUT THE PROCEDURE IS CONTINUED UNTIL THE FULL EP IS REACHED.)
(If this question [“Was there an evil purpose . . .”] does not read, this puts one back at Step A. The original question one started with [e.g., “Do you
have an overt on cats?”] is rechecked as per standard Confessional procedure. Once that original question F/Ns on being checked, carry on with the next question listed on the False Purpose RD form.)
The purpose or intention should read when the pc gives it. If it isn’t reading, do not pursue the item with Steps C1, C2, etc.
STEP C: If there is no great relief and persistent F/N from the pc on finding the evil purpose, get the prior confusion which occurred just before that evil purpose. Then ask for and find the first moment of that prior confusion which led to that evil purpose.
This is done as follows:
C1: The auditor asks: “WAS THERE A CONFUSION THAT OCCURRED JUST BEFORE YOU HAD THE PURPOSE (the wording of the evil purpose given by the pc)?”
(Example: “Was there a confusion that occurred just before you had the purpose ‘to kill cats’?”)
and, by using the meter, the auditor finds this confusion.
C2: The auditor then asks: “WHEN WAS THE FIRST MOMENT OF THAT CONFUSION?” and gets the pc to find this.
STEP D: If there is no spectacular release and persistent F/N on finding the first moment of that prior confusion, ask the pc:
“WAS THERE AN EARLIER TIME YOU HAD THE PURPOSE (the wording of the evil purpose given by the pc)?”
(Example: “Was there an earlier time you had the purpose ‘to kill cats’?”)
and find this earlier time the pc had that purpose. What is being looked for is NOT an earlier-similar purpose, but an earlier time the pc had THAT SAME EXACT PURPOSE.
STEP E: If there is no spectacular release or persistent F/N on finding the earlier time, find the CONFUSION PRIOR TO THAT TIME as per Steps Cl and C2 above, and proceed to Step D.
STEP F: The auditor continues going earlier as per Steps D and E, until the pc has found the first moment of the first confusion which led to THAT evil purpose.
STEP G: If all Steps A through F have been done yet there is still no spectacular release and persistent F/N, assess and handle a False Purpose RD Correction List.
STYLE OF AUDITING
The style of auditing used on the False Purpose RD is Level II, Guiding Style. The auditor must be well drilled in this style of auditing to be successful with the rundown.
GOOD INTENTIONS
ONLY evil or destructive intentions are picked up and handled in this auditing. DO NOT run good intentions.
PAST TRACK
Do not limit the pc to this lifetime when going E/S on overts or when asking for an earlier time he had that evil purpose. These chains very often go whole track.
LISTING
By following the False Purpose RD procedure exactly, the auditor should be able to easily find and pull the pc’s evil purposes. The pc is not asked listing questions, nor is L&N any part of the procedure. But it is possible that a pc could start listing and the auditor must be able to recognize and handle such a situation per standard listing tech.
The auditor would handle an out-list per HCOB 11 Apr. 77, LIST ERRORS, CORRECTION OF, and HCOB 17 Mar. 74, TWO-WAY COMM, USING WRONG QUESTIONS.
ADDITIONAL NOTE ON SERVICE FACS
Upon reviewing the session worksheets, the C/S may find that a service fac was found and F/Ned, but not fully blown. In such an instance the C/S can order the service fac run in the R3SC brackets in a later session, to fully blow it. It is the auditor’s responsibility to ensure the item reads; if it isn’t reading, it is not run.
However, if one is doing a False Purpose RD Correction List and in doing so locates a reading service fac, the auditor should run it out with R3SC in that session.
REPAIR
During a chain if the auditor hits an impasse, it is expected that he would apply the appropriate Sec Checking tools right then and there to handle: Murder Routine, checking for a missed withhold, use of buttons, etc.
If there is some bog that the auditor is unable to rapidly handle using the routine Sec Check debug tools, a False Purpose Rundown Correction List should be assessed and handled.
ENDING THE SESSION
When at some point in doing these steps the pc has a spectacular release and a persistent F/N, end off the session at that point and turn the folder in to the C/S. That would be the EP for that chain and that session.
In the next session the auditor rechecks the last question run on the False Purpose RD form, and if reading, repeats Steps A to G on it. When that question no longer reads on checking, one proceeds on to the next question on the form.
SUMMARY
The importance of using this tech of purposes and considerations is immeasurable.
It can make the difference between complete failure and successful hatting; between a hell-bound existence and a pleasurable productive life.
This tech is for use. Use it well.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1984
Limited Distribution:
Remimeo
False Purpose RD
Auditors and C/Ses
Cramming Officers
False Purpose Rundown Series 6
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN COMMANDS
The following are the commands of False Purpose Rundown procedure. The full data on each of these commands and its application is contained in HCOB 9 June 84, FPRD Series 5, AUDITING THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN.
STEP A: Clear, check for read and ask the question from the False Purpose RD form being used. If it reads, get the question answered fully and the overt pulled with full time, place, form and event, also pulling the pc’s justifications. This is done with full Sec Checking tech. Take this E/S as a chain of overts, down to the basic overt on the chain.
STEP B: If no spectacular release or persistent F/N, find the underlying evil purpose, using the question:
“WAS THERE SOME EVIL PURPOSE OR DESTRUCTIVE INTENTION THAT PROMPTED YOU TO COMMIT THAT OVERT?”
STEP C: If there’s no great relief and persistent F/N from the pc spotting the evil purpose, find the confusion before it, and get the pc to spot the first moment of that prior confusion:
C1: “WAS THERE A CONFUSION THAT OCCURRED JUST BEFORE YOU HAD THE PURPOSE (the wording of the evil purpose the pc gave)?”
C2: “WHEN WAS THE FIRST MOMENT OF THAT CONFUSION?”
STEP D: If still no EP, get the earlier time he had that same exact purpose: “WAS THERE AN EARLIER TIME YOU HAD THE PURPOSE
STEP E: If no EP, find the confusion prior to that time as per Steps C1 and C2 above, then proceed to Step D.
STEP F: Continue with Steps D and E as needed to get the first moment of the first confusion which led to that evil purpose.
STEP G: A False Purpose Rundown Correction List should be assessed if full EP is not reached by this point.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
FPRD Auditors
FPRD C/Ses
Cramming Officers
False Purpose Rundown Series 7
C/Sing THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
Refs:
HCOB 5 June 84R FPRD Series 1R
Rev. 11.1.90 FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
HCOB 9 June 84R FPRD Series 5R
Rev. 3.5.85 AUDITING THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
HCOB 12 June 84 FPRD Series 8
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
AUDITOR ERRORS
HCOB 16 June 70 C/S Series 6
KSW Series 20
WHAT THE C/S IS DOING
HCOB 1 Mar. 77 II CONFESSIONAL FORMS
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
HCOB 27 Mar. 84 C/S Series 119
STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR:
SOLVED
HCOB 21 Mar. 74 END PHENOMENA
This rundown is a very powerful C/S tool for case advancement. Utilizing technical breakthroughs made in whole track research, it is unique in its direct approach to the handling of evil purposes and destructive intentions. It is actually a brand-new look at the subject: Guiding the pc down to basic on overt chains with thorough Sec Checking of each overt itself, then’ carrying through with special steps designed to blow the factors that originally prompted the overt.
C/S REQUIREMENTS
In order to C/S the False Purpose Rundown one must have successfully completed the Hubbard False Purpose Rundown Auditor Course and internship and must have graduated the Hubbard False Purpose RD C/S Course.
WHO CAN RECEIVE THE RUNDOWN
Case prerequisites for the rundown are Purification Rundown and Objectives. The only exception would be a pc who is in Case Category 4 per HCOB 12 Nov. 81RD, GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES: OCA all in the upper half of graph, no heavy drug history. Such a pc could be put straight onto the rundown provided he had been fully educated as a pc with a Scientology C/S-l. But the False Purpose RD is not an introductory-type action and would not ordinarily be programed on a “raw meat” case.
It would also be a mistake to program someone for the False Purpose RD whose track was heavily blocked off with drugs, as the pc needs to be able to go E/S. If the C/S has such a case on his hands, despite the person having completed a standard Purif and battery of Objectives, then a Drug RD must be done.
The False Purpose Rundown is primarily used to unstick a stalled case and get it moving up the Grade Chart again. It is not a grade or level in itself.
Where a Dianetic Clear or any pre-OT has stalled in his progress up the Bridge, the False Purpose Rundown can give him a tremendous boost in blasting through the barriers he is faced with and make it possible for him to make it on up the line to full OT.
As an example, a pc receiving HRD auditing might plow into an inability to free up on something, and not come around with handlings specific to the HRD. If through folder study and assessment of prepared lists the C/S discovers that the primary factor holding the pc back lies in the area of evil purposes in conflict with one or more of the precepts of The Way to Happiness, such a pc would need to be shifted over to the False Purpose RD—and completed on a specific False Purpose RD form—and then returned to the HRD and the HRD carried through to completion.
Another example would be a pc receiving PTS handling. Should it become evident that the pc is actually a pretended PTS (per HCOB 28 Feb. 84, C/S Series 118, PRETENDED PTS) he can be smoothly moved over onto the False Purpose RD.
The False Purpose RD is not a panacea to be used in place of other standard case debug and repair tools such as drug handlings or the Expanded GF 40. It is used when the C/S has determined that what is stalling a case is evil purposes. It is programed so as to locate and handle the evil purposes and false purposes and nonsurvival considerations, after which the pc is returned to and moved on up the Grade Chart. Some repair lists, such as the GF 40X, contain questions which can detect evil purposes on a case. Such questions reading would alert the C/S to the need to ensure that the False Purpose RD was included in the pc’s future programing.
PROGRAMING
Though the False Purpose Rundown reaches more deeply into the heart of a pc’s case than Sec Checking, and incorporates brand-new tech discoveries from whole track research, its C/Sing and programing follow the same basic C/Sing and programing rules applicable to Sec Checking.
One could for example have a case that is in the middle of a grade or level, not in any sort of ethics trouble, and running fine in session, who simply originates to a Reg that he would like to receive the False Purpose RD. The Reg and C/S would handle this as they would any pc request for a particular rundown, as per HCOB 12 Nov. 81RD, GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES, section “PROGRAMING.” The C/S would not interrupt the grade the pc was in the middle of and interject the False Purpose RD.
On the other hand, one could have a pc who is very evidently in need of this RD right now—not later.
In all such cases the C/S follows HCOB 28 Sept. 82, C/S Series 115, MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS, and HCOB 13 Oct. 82, C/S Series 116, ETHICS AND THE C/S, which give the rules.
SETUPS
Before a pc is begun on the False Purpose Rundown he must be properly set up, with an F/N and VGIs.
CLEARING WORDS
The preclear must have a full understanding of the words and commands of the False Purpose Rundown. The pc has to have a very clear understanding of what is an overt, a withhold, an evil purpose, a confusion and so on.
BEGINNING THE RUNDOWN
A pc or pre-OT beginning the rundown is first put onto the False Purpose Rundown Basic Form (HCOB 14 June 84, False Purpose Rundown Series 10-A).
Other forms may be used in addition to the basic form. For example, a pc might be a field auditor in for some case cleanup and tech update; he could be programed for the False Purpose Rundown using an “auditor form.” If additional forms are used, the questions are handled per the A-G steps of the False Purpose Rundown procedure. In any case, questions are not deleted from the form.
Any form may have questions added to it by the C/S that pertain to the individual person’s background and occupation(s) and current scene (Ref: HCOB 1 Mar. 77 II, CONFESSIONAL FORMS).
ETHICS
The False Purpose RD does not take the place of standard ethics. If a person is currently involved in an out-ethics situation and is thereby harming the org or those around him in some fashion, or has gross downtrending statistics as a group member, that person should be hauled into Ethics and sorted out. Such handling might even include a rapid HCO Sec Check as a means of getting to the root of some PT situation, so that ethics can be gotten in.
Example (correct): A sum of money has been reported missing from the Treasury cash box. At the same time, staff member Pete begins insisting he must leave staff for one “reason” or another. Well, here is an obvious candidate for some pointed investigatory questioning by a skilled Sec Checker. The C/S in this case needs to get a certain set of Sec Check questions answered, fast. In this illustration it would be incorrect to embark on the False Purpose RD, as the auditor would be bound by the HCOBs to take the first question all the way through the rundown steps to persistent F/N, end session, start another session later and take up question number two, and so on. It is simply a matter for a straight HCO Confessional, get the questions answered and the overts pulled, each to F/N, and that’s it.
The False Purpose Rundown is a TECH handling. Handling tech before ethics is incorrect sequence.
Once the person has been interviewed or sec checked by an MAA, (or been before a court or committee) and physical universe handlings for any PT outethics have been done, or are at least in progress with the person’s ethics going in, the False Purpose RD can be used as a tool to assist him to handle the situation terminatedly. As long as ethics has gone in on the person, one can safely start him on the False Purpose RD.
Example (incorrect): Course Supervisor Elliot is found to be crashing the Academy stats, giving out verbal tech and caving in students with invalidation. Exec asks the C/S to “please get Elliot audited on the False Purpose RD right away as we must handle his destructiveness.” The C/S goes along with this. Elliot isn’t comm-eved or put through lower ethics conditions or otherwise given any ethics handling. He gets several sessions but doesn’t make any real case change. The Academy empties out. Reason: They are trying to get tech in when he is still in the ethics band. The handling is not “double the number of sessions per day he’s getting.” That would be out-sequence.
Example (correct): Betsy damaged org property and falsified an FSM commission. Turns herself in to the Ethics Officer who has her write up her O/Ws and do ethics condition formulas starting at Confusion. She works up through the conditions to Liability and writes up overts and confronts the fact that she has been out-ethics. She is, at this point, started on the False Purpose RD. Between sessions she carries on with the rest of the condition formulas, amends work, studying an ethics course, etc. The rundown is very successful. And it was successful because the sequence applied was ethics and then tech.
EP OF A SINGLE FALSE PURPOSE RD FORM
The False Purpose Rundown, similar to Sec Checking, is an unlimited process (Ref: HCOB 2 Nov. 68R, CASE SUPERVISOR CLASS VIII, THE BASIC PROCESSES). In other words, a person could receive False Purpose RD auditing any number of times, with an EP achieved for each False Purpose RD form done.
Example: Pc has had some auditing, some grades, then is inactive for a while (“falls off the Bridge”). He is involved in out-ethics, etc. He is recovered, and given False Purpose Rundown Series 10-A, the Basic Form. On completion of his auditing on this form he is doing extremely well and is ready to continue up the Bridge. He is sent to attest to completion of “False Purpose RD Basic Form.”
Example: A pc is having trouble with her marriage. She is audited on the False Purpose RD Basic Form, attests to it, and is then run on a False Purpose RD 2D Form. On completion of the 2D Form she is doing very well and her 2D situation is fully and happily resolved. She is sent to attest to completion of “False Purpose RD, Second Dynamic Form.”
When the person being audited on the False Purpose Rundown has been successfully completed on the last question of a particular form, the following indicators should be present:
1. The tone arm action has flattened off.
2. A marked shift of viewpoint accompanied by a cognition about the subject that was being sec checked, such as now being free from having to restrain oneself from committing harmful acts, etc. This would be a very big, embracive cognition, or number of them.
With these phenomena present, the pc may be sent to declare completion of that form. If they are not present, have the auditor assess a False Purpose Rundown Correction List and handle it M3 to an F/Ning list. If the EP as above is still not present, the case needs to be FESed and, taking care to use the data obtained from the correction list assessment, programed for any needed repair and then to complete that False Purpose Rundown form.
EP OF PROGRAM
Completing a whole program is a different matter than completing one form.
A stalled Dianetic Clear might, for example, have a case program that consists of several False Purpose Rundown forms (each carried to EP), followed by False Data Stripping and then Method One Word Clearing.
The overall program would be ended, and the pc sent to declare to the program, when the end phenomena of that program had been attained. This would mean achieving the end product that program was intended to achieve, as per the C/S Series HCOBs, and would include a marked rise in the person’s OCA from the range it was in before the program was begun.
AUDITOR HANDLING
The C/S must ensure that his False Purpose Rundown auditors are well trained and interned to begin with and effectively crammed on any goofs of the procedure.
A point which must be particularly watched for is the auditor’s handling of F/Ns that occur before the full EP of a chain is reached. Some auditors, accustomed to ending off an action at the first F/N, cog, VGIs will tend to end off at an F/N rather than carrying through to the full EP (persistent F/N, cog, VVGIs, evil purpose blown).
SUMMARY
With this new rundown and its direct address to factors that underlie nonsurvival conduct, the C/S is equipped to dramatically boost a pc or pre-OT on his way up the Bridge to full restoration of his power as a being.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JUNE 1984
Limited Distribution:
Remimeo
FPRD Auditors
and C/Ses
Cramming Officers
False Purpose Rundown Series 8
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN AUDITOR ERRORS
Refs:
HCOB 9 June 84 FPRD Series 5
AUDITING THE FALSE
PURPOSE RUNDOWN
HCOB 11 June 84 FPRD Series 7
C/Sing THE FALSE
PURPOSE RUNDOWN
HCOB 8 June 84 FPRD Series 4
CLEARING JUSTIFICATIONS
HCOB 7 June 84 FPRD Series 3
THE PRIOR CONFUSION:
NEW TECH BREAKTHROUGH
HCOB 30 Nov. 78 CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE
HCOB 13 Oct. 82 C/S Series 116
ETHICS AND THE C/S
The following are common errors that were made by some of the first auditors learning to audit the False Purpose Rundown. These errors can lessen or nullify results on the rundown and must be watched for closely by the C/S and thoroughly handled if they occur—by both cramming the erring auditor and repairing the pc:
1. FAILING TO VIGOROUSLY PULL THE OVERTS GOTTEN WHILE FOLLOWING DOWN THE OVERT CHAIN. Effective, no-Q&A overt pulling which nails down the overt in its entirety is a must. Patty-cake, sweaty-palmed auditors who did not master the tech of Sec Checking will not succeed with the False Purpose Rundown.
2. NOT TAKING THE OVERT CHAIN EARLIER-SIMILAR TO EARLIER OVERTS. Quite often the E/S O/W chain will go backtrack. The evil purpose will be found to be underneath the earliest overt on that chain. This error often shows up in the auditor attempting to get off an evil purpose after having pulled only a light PT overt.
3. FAILURE TO DIRECT PROPER ETHICS HANDLING WHEN NEEDED. Ethics must be in before tech will go in. Some persons will need ethics handlings before the False Purpose RD will even begin to bite at all. Trying to “handle” someone’s PT out-ethics situation with False Purpose RD auditing alone will result in loses.
4. ATTEMPTING TO “DO THE FALSE PURPOSE RD” OVER THE TOP OF PC NATTER OR OUT-OF-SESSIONNESS OR OTHER SYMPTOMS OF MISSED WITHHOLDS. This of course comes under the heading of “auditing a pc over out ruds.”
5. QUICKYING. Example: Auditor calling a persistent F/N when there obviously is no persistent F/N present. Example: Auditor saying something was an EP which wasn’t.
6. FAILING TO PULL OFF THE PC ‘ S JUSTIFICATIONS FOR EACH OVERT AS THE CHAIN IS FOLLOWED DOWN. Includes asking for justifications just once (brush off), when the pc may need to be asked the question several times before all the justifications are gotten.
7. NOT GETTING ALL OF THE OVERT FIRST BEFORE ASKING FOR THE PC’S JUSTIFICATIONS OF THAT OVERT.
8. Q&A OFF THE O/W CHAIN, ONTO SOME OTHER O/W CHAIN OR ONTO SOMETHING ELSE.
9. BASIC OVERT PULLING ERRORS SUCH AS MISSING READS, NOT RAISING THE SENSITIVITY ON QUESTIONS, Q&A, NOT VARYING THE QUESTION OR PULLING STRINGS WHEN NEEDED, ETC.
10. NOT USING “LEFT-HAND BUTTONS” (e.g., “SUPPRESS” AND “INVALIDATE”) WHEN A FALSE PURPOSE RD FORM QUESTION DOESN’T READ, OR WHEN THE STEP B QUESTION OF THE FALSE PURPOSE RD PROCEDURE DOES NOT READ.
11. FAILURE TO RECOGNIZE WHEN BASIC ON THE OVERT CHAIN HAS BEEN REACHED AND THE CHAIN FLATTENED.
12. OVERRUNNING A SESSION OR CHAIN BY TRYING TO CARRY ON PAST A SPECTACULAR RELEASE OR PERSISTENT F/N.
13. AUDITOR NOT KNOWING WHAT AN EVIL PURPOSE OR DESTRUCTIVE INTENTION IS AND TAKING UP GOOD INTENTIONS, RANDOM STATEMENTS, COMPUTATIONS, ETC., AS “EVIL PURPOSES.” Includes failing to clear these terms thoroughly with the pc before beginning him on the rundown.
14. NOT TAKING THE EVIL PURPOSE EARLIER (to the earlier time the pc had that same evil purpose), when needed as per Step D of False Purpose RD procedure.
15. COMMANDS NOT FULLY CLEARED, AND/OR PC NOT GROOVED IN TO THE PROCEDURE SO THAT HE UNDERSTANDS WHAT IS TO BE DONE AND WHAT IS EXPECTED OF HIM.
16. PICKING UP AND ATTEMPTING TO RUN RANDOM EVIL PURPOSES THAT THE PC ORIGINATES WHILE BEING RUN DOWN A SPECIFIC CHAIN.
17. TURNING STEP B OF THE FALSE PURPOSE RD PROCEDURE (PULLING THE EVIL PURPOSE) INTO AN L&N ACTION.
18. NOT USING THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST WHEN NEEDED ON A CASE.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 13 JUNE 1984R
REVISED 1 AUGUST 1990
Remimeo
False Purpose RD
Auditors
and C/S’s
Cramming Officers
False Purpose Rundown Series 9R
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST
This list is used in repairing flubs or case upsets on persons receiving the False Purpose RD.
If after a session on the False Purpose Rundown the person red tags at the Examiner or if he gets sick or upset or falls on his head shortly after the auditing, this list should be assessed and handled to straighten the matter out. The repair action would be a 24-hour repair priority per policy.
If there is a bog during a False Purpose Rundown session, the auditor uses this list to sort the matter out and get the pc rolling again.
This list would normally be done Method 3, as the questions are written in a precise sequence: The initial questions cover those items which would have to be handled first, and the rest of the questions are laid out generally in the order of likelihood of what would be found to have caused the difficulty.
The list should be used with a prefix which acts as a time limiter, such as “In this session, _____?” or “On the False Purpose Rundown,_____?”
The majority of the questions on this list are handled by fully clearing a withhold or withholds that were left unhandled in a session. Once such a question is handled, it is rechecked—as per Sec Checking procedure—to ensure that there is no more to be gotten on that question.
1. YOU WENT EXTERIOR? _________
(Indicate it. If pc has never had an Int RD, give him a standard Int RD per Int RD Series 2. On a Clear or OT, do not run any Dianetics; do an End of Endless Int RD. If you are not a Class V Graduate Auditor, end off for a Class V Grad or above to handle.)
2. LIST ERROR? _________
(Indicate. If Class III or above, find out what list, and repair with L4BRB. If not Class III, end off for handling by a Class III or above.)
3. WRONG ITEM? _________
(Handle as in #2.)
4. DID YOU HAVE AN ARC BREAK? _________
(ARCU, CDEINR, E/S to F/N.)
5. WERE YOU AUDITED OVER A PROBLEM? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
6. WAS A WITHHOLD MISSED? _________
(Pull it fully, and handle as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
7. DID YOU TELL PART OF A WITHHOLD BUT NOT THE REST? _________
(Get all of the withhold, and handle as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
8. DID YOU MISDIRECT THE AUDITOR? _________
(Treat as a M/W/H. Find out what the overt was that the pc misdirected the auditor away from, and handle the overt as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
9. WITHHELD SAYING SOMETHING FOR FEAR OF GETTING INTO ETHICS TROUBLE? _________
(Pull it fully, as per Sec Checking procedure, to find out what exactly the pc withheld. After getting the what, when, etc., also ask: I. “What appeared there?” II. “What didn’t appear there?” and then carry on with the False Purpose RD procedure steps—A, B and so on.)
10. DID YOU WITHHOLD SOMETHING BECAUSE OF WHAT OTHERS MIGHT THINK? _________
(Handle as in question #9.)
11. DID YOU AVOID TELLING ONE OVERT BY GIVING A DIFFERENT ONE? _________
(Treat as a M/W/H. Find out what the overt was that the pc avoided telling the auditor, and handle the overt as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
12. DID THE AUDITOR FAIL TO FIND OUT SOMETHING ABOUT YOU? _________
(Pull it fully and complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
13. WAS THERE AN EARLIER OVERT UNDISCLOSED? _________
(Pull it, and complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
14. WAS A CHAIN OF OVERTS NOT TAKEN BACK TO BASIC? _________
(Flatten the overt chain and complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
15. OVERT TOO LATE ON THE CHAIN? _________
(Get the earlier overt and complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
16. WAS AN EARLIER WHOLE TRACK OVERT ON THE CHAIN MISSED? _________
(Get the earlier overt and complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
17. HAS AN OVERT BEEN JUSTIFIED? _________
(Pull the justifications off the overt, then complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
18. WAS THERE SOME OTHER WAY YOU JUSTIFIED THE OVERT? _________
(Pull the justifications off the overt, then complete its handling as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
19. HAVE YOU TRIED TO LESSEN AN OVERT? _________
(Find out how he tried to lessen the overt. Then get all of the overt, pull all justifications and complete its handling with steps A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
20. A CHAIN OR INCIDENT THAT WAS TOO INCREDIBLE TO BE BELIEVED? _________
(Get what the chain or incident was. Put in the buttons: Suppressed, Invalidated, Protested, Anxious About, Rejected. It will probably blow and F/N. If it doesn’t, handle per the appropriate step of the False Purpose RD procedure, depending on whether the incident was an overt or evil purpose or whatever.)
21. WERE YOU WORRIED ABOUT REPUTATION? _________
(Clean it up 2WC E/S to F/N. Then check for an overt or overts before pc became worried about reputation, and handle with False Purpose RD procedure.)
22. JUMPED TO A DIFFERENT OVERT CHAIN? _________
(Find out what overt was being pulled just before the pc jumped to some other overt chain, and complete that original overt chain as per A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure. Then take up the overt chain that the pc had jumped to, and handle that one similarly.)
23. WENT PAST BASIC ON AN OVERT CHAIN? _________
(Indicate it. Spot the flat point and indicate the overrun. Rehab if needed, to F/N. Continue with False Purpose RD procedure, step B.)
24. WAS THERE AN EVIL PURPOSE THAT DID NOT FULLY BLOW? _________
(Find the prior confusion and handle as per step C of False Purpose RD procedure. If still not blown, continue assessing this repair list.)
25. ON AN EVIL PURPOSE, WAS THE PRIOR CONFUSION NOT FOUND? _________
(Find the prior confusion and handle as per step C of False Purpose RD procedure.)
26. ON AN EVIL PURPOSE, WAS THE WRONG PRIOR CONFUSION FOUND? _________
(Find the correct prior confusion and handle as per the False Purpose RD procedure, from step C onwards.)
27. ON AN EVIL PURPOSE, FAILED TO GET THE EXACT PRIOR CONFUSION? _________
(Find the exact prior confusion and handle as per the False Purpose RD procedure, from step C onwards.)
28. WAS THERE AN EARLIER TIME WHEN YOU HAD THAT SAME EVIL PURPOSE? _________
(Find the earlier time the pc had that same evil purpose, as per step D of False Purpose RD procedure, and if no spectacular release or persistent F/N, carry on with steps E, etc.)
29. ON AN EVIL PURPOSE, DID NOT GET THE FIRST MOMENT OF THE FIRST PRIOR CONFUSION? _________
(Reorient to the earliest prior confusion found and get the first moment of that confusion. If no EP, continue as per step D of False Purpose RD procedure.)
30. HAS A SERVICE FAC BEEN MISSED? _________
(2WC to F/N. If no spectacular blow on just getting off the service fac, and if you are a Class IV Auditor or above, run it out fully with the R3SC brackets. If you are not Class IV, end off for handling by a Class IV.)
(Note: R3SC is a major action and must not be run over out-ruds; the pc must be F/N and VGIs before embarking on the R3SC brackets. If in doubt, end off for a new C/S.)
31. IS THERE SOME COMPUTATION THAT YOU USE TO MAKE OTHERS WRONG? _________
(2WC to F/N. If no spectacular blow on just getting off the service fac, and if you are a Class IV Auditor or above, run it out fully with the R3SC brackets. If you are not Class IV, end off for handling by a Class IV.)
(Note: R3SC is a major action and must not be run over out-ruds; the pc must be F/N and VGIs before embarking on the R3SC brackets. If in doubt, end off for a new C/S.)
32. PRIOR TO HAVING THE EVIL PURPOSE WAS THERE A MISUNDERSTOOD WORD? _________
(Get what the word was and clear it up to F/N. This may be what was holding the confusion in place and, on finding this, may result in a spectacular release and persistent F/N. If not, continue as per step D of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
33. NO PRIOR CONFUSION? _________
(2WC to F/N. Depending on what comes up in reply to this question, the auditor would continue with the evil purpose chain being addressed or, in the case of a spectacular release and persistent F/N, would end off for that session.)
34. UNDISCLOSED OUT-ETHICS SITUATION? _________
(Pull it as an overt and carry on from there as per the False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B and so on.)
35. HAS A CRIME BEEN COVERED UP? _________
(Pull the crime and carry on from there as per the False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B and so on.)
36. DID YOU WITHHOLD TELLING THE AUDITOR WHAT THE EVIL PURPOSE WAS? _________
(Get what the evil purpose is, and continue on as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
37. HAVE YOU BEEN GIVING FALSE REPORTS OR PR TO COVER UP A CRIME? _________
(Get what the false reports or PR were, then get the crime that was being covered up. Treat the crime as per the False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B, etc.)
38. DID THE AUDITOR TRY TO RUN OUT A GOOD INTENTION? _________
(Indicate the BPC and that this was incorrect and should not have been done. If no relief, 2WC E/S “times when an auditor tried to run out a good intention” to F/N.)
39. NOT YOUR EVIL PURPOSE? _________
(If so, indicate to the pc this was not his item. Don’t try to find whose it was.)
40. WAS THERE SOME EVIL PURPOSE YOU DIDN’T DARE MENTION? _________
(Get what the evil purpose is, and continue on as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
41. HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN A BLACK PR CAMPAIGN? _________
(Pull as a withhold, finding out the specific black PR he has spread, about whom and to whom, and handle this as an overt as per the False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B, etc. Then, get the prior overt the pc committed and handle with steps A to G. Then check for and handle any other such overt. When these have been handled, recheck the original question, #41.)
(Note for C/S to program the case for additional FPRD actions as needed.)
42. WAS A POSTULATE MISSED? _________
(Get what the postulate was. It may be a false purpose or evil purpose, in which case carry on as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure. Do not try to run out a good [prosurvival] intention or postulate.)
43. HAD THE EVIL PURPOSE ALREADY BLOWN? _________
(Rehab.)
44. WAS IT NOT AN EVIL PURPOSE BUT SOME OTHER SORT OF NON-SURVIVAL CONSIDERATION? _________
(Get what it is. Then do steps C to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
45. WAS THERE A CRASHING MISUNDERSTOOD WORD? _________
(Find and handle the Mis-U word as per HCOB 17 June 79, CRASHING MIS-Us: THE KEY TO COMPLETED CYCLES OF ACTION AND PRODUCTS.)
46. WAS AN F/N OVERRUN? _________
(Rehab.)
47. WAS AN F/N MISSED? _________
(Find out on what and rehab.)
48. WAS AN IMPLANT RESTIMULATED? _________
(Indicate. The pc may BD and F/N with relief and VGIs. If not get the pc to recall moments before the implant, until it blows. If still no blow, date/locate it.)
49. DID YOU FAIL TO ANSWER A CONFESSIONAL QUESTION? _________
(Find out which question and handle with the False Purpose RD procedure, starting with step A.)
50. IS THERE MORE THAT SHOULD BE KNOWN ABOUT SOME OVERT? _________
(Get all of it, using Sec Checking tech, and then carry on with the False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B, etc.)
51. WAS THERE A QUESTION THAT THE AUDITOR SAID DIDN’T READ THAT SHOULD HAVE? _________
(Find out what question and get in Suppress and Inval on it. Then handle it fully with the False Purpose RD procedure.)
52. WAS A QUESTION OR ITEM TAKEN UP THAT WASN’T CHARGED? _________
(Get what, indicate it was a false read. Itsa E/S to F/N.)
53. WAS A HOT QUESTION NOT TAKEN UP? _________
(Find out what question and get in Suppress and Inval on it. Then handle it fully with the False Purpose RD procedure.)
54. DID YOU TELL A LIE? _________
(Pull this as per Sec Checking tech, including getting what overt he was covering up with the lie—with all specifics—and handle it using the False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B, etc.)
55. WAS A QUESTION LEFT UNFLAT? _________
(Find out which one and flatten it with the appropriate step of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
56. HAD YOU TOLD ALL? _________
(Indicate it if so. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
57. HAS AN OVERT BEEN PROTESTED? _________
(Get what it was and get in the Protest button on it. Then handle it fully with False Purpose RD procedure.)
58. WERE THERE OVERTS OR WITHHOLDS THAT WEREN’T ACCEPTED? _________
(Get what. Get who wouldn’t accept it. Get off any Protest and Inval, and clean it up E/S to F/N.)
59. DID THE AUDITOR NOT HEAR OR ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT YOU SAID? _________
(Indicate the BPC. Get what the auditor missed and clean it up E/S to F/N.)
60. HAS SOMETHING BEEN MISUNDERSTOOD? _________
(Clean it up, clearing any Mis-U words, each to F/N.)
61. WAS ANYTHING PROTESTED? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
62. MISSED WITHHOLD OF NOTHING? _________
(Indicate it, and 2WC E/S to F/N.)
63. WRONG DATE? _________
(Correct the date to a blow, as per the HCOBs on Dating/ Locating. )
64. WRONG LOCATION? _________
(Correct the location to a blow, as per the HCOBs on Dating/ Locating. )
65. EARLIER INCIDENT MISSED? _________
(Get the earlier incident and complete handling from the appropriate step of False Purpose RD procedure.)
66. ARE THERE OPINIONS YOU DON’T DARE SAY? _________
(Get what. 2WC E/S to F/N. Then check for an overt or overts before the pc felt he couldn’t state his opinions. Handle with False Purpose RD procedure.)
67. WERE YOU WAITING FOR A DIFFERENTLY WORDED OVERT OR WITHHOLD QUESTION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Then pull any overt chain that was missed and handle with False Purpose RD procedure, steps A, B, etc.)
68. ARE YOU WITHHOLDING ANYTHING? _________
(Get what it is and handle with False Purpose RD procedure.)
69. DID YOU TELL ANY HALF-TRUTHS? _________
(Get all of the withhold and handle with False Purpose RD procedure.)
70. WAS THERE SOMETHING THE AUDITOR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT YOU THAT HE DIDN’T? _________
(Pull it and handle with False Purpose RD procedure.)
71. PRIOR TO COMMITTING THE OVERT WAS THERE AN EVIL PURPOSE OR DESTRUCTIVE INTENTION? _________
(Get what the evil purpose is, and continue on as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
72. DO YOU HAVE A HARMFUL INTENTION TOWARD OTHERS? _________
(Pull the harmful intention and continue on as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
73. IS THERE SOME PURPOSE OR CONSIDERATION YOU HAVE THAT CONFLICTS WITH SCIENTOLOGY? _________
(Get what the evil purpose is, and continue on as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
74. WAS SOME HIDDEN IMPULSE NOT REVEALED? _________
(Get what it is and continue its handling as per step C of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
75. DID YOU PR AN ETHICS OFFICER INIo BELIEVING A SITUATION WAS HANDLED WHEN IT WASN’T? _________
(Handle as a withhold and continue with step A of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
76. DO YOU INTEND TO GO ON COMMITTING OVERTS SIMILAR TO THOSE YOU’VE GOTTEN OFF? _________
(Handle as a withhold and continue with step A of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
77. WERE YOU PRETENDING TO BE PTS TO AVOID TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOME OVERT OR INTENTION? _________
(Handle as a withhold and continue handling the overt or intention with the False Purpose RD procedure.)
78. DID THE AUDITOR CALL AN F/N WHEN YOU DIDN’T FEEL YOU WERE F/Ning? _________
(Indicate it if so. 2WC E/S to F/N. Find out what question was being run and complete its handling to F/N. If this turns out to be an unflat overt chain, flatten it fully with the False Purpose RD procedure.)
79. DID YOU HAVE TO GET THE SAME W/Hs OFF MORE THAN ONCE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
80. SOMEONE DEMANDED A W/H YOU DIDN’T HAVE? _________
(Indicate if so. 2WC E/S to F/N.)
81. WAS THERE A WITHHOLD THAT KEPT COMING UP? _________
(Get what it was and then clean up anything that wasn’t gotten off about the withhold, any unhandled misses of that withhold, and if not then fully handled, take it E/S and find and handle the underlying, unhandled incident as per False Purpose RD. [Ref: HCOB 21 Mar. 62, PREPCHECKING DATA, WHEN TO DO A WHAT; Tape: 6201C11, THE MISSED MISSED WITHHOLD])
82. WERE THERE AUDITOR’S CODE BREAKS? _________
(Get what. Indicate it was illegal and 2WC E/S to F/N. C/S to program for a QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST, HCOB 11 July 82 I. )
83. HAVE YOU WANTED THIS RUNDOWN TO FAIL? _________
(Handle as a W/H. Pull all of the W/H, and then take the O/W E/S to a full handling as per steps A to G of the False Purpose RD.)
84. WERE YOU AFRAID OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
85. WAS THERE AN INJUSTICE? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Then check for any similar overt of the pc’s own and handle any found with False Purpose RD procedure.)
86. WAS THERE A BETRAYAL? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Then check for any similar overt of the pc’s own and handle any found with False Purpose RD procedure.)
87. DID THE AUDITOR GET ANGRY AT YOU? _________
(If this happened, indicate it is illegal to do so. 2WC E/S to F/N. Clean up any ARC break to F/N.) (C/S to program for a QUESTIONABLE AUDITING REPAIR LIST, HCOB 11 July 82 I.)
88. WAS ANYTHING SUPPRESSED? _________
(Clean it up E/S to F/N.)
89. WAS ANYTHING INVALIDATED? _________
(Clean it up E/S to F/N.)
90. HAVE YOU NEVER REALLY DONE ANYTHING BAD? _________
(Handle with “murder routine,” getting an overt or overts and handling with steps A to G of the False Purpose RD procedure.)
91. WAS ANYTHING FALSIFIED? _________
(Clean it up as a W/H and complete its handling with False Purpose RD procedure.)
92. WAS THERE ANY EVALUATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
93. WERE YOU TIRED OR HUNGRY? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
94. HAD YOU RECENTLY TAKEN DRUGS? MEDICINE? ALCOHOL? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Note for C/S.)
95. WAS THERE A FALSE READ? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N. Indicate the false read if so. Can also clean it up with Suppress, Inval, Protest, if needed.)
96. WAS THERE A FALSE ACCUSATION? _________
(2WC E/S to F/N.)
97. WAS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE METER OR CANS? _________
(False TA handling.)
98. BYPASSED CHARGE FROM SOME OTHER AUDITING ERROR? _________
(Find out what auditing action and handle with the appropriate repair list.)
99. DRUG INCIDENT RESTIMULATED? _________
(Handle with L3RH. On a Clear or above, only indicate the reads.)
(Note for C/S.)
100. WAS THERE AN OVERT ON SOME OTHER DYNAMIC? _________
(Pull the overt and handle as per steps A, B, C, etc., of False Purpose RD procedure.)
(Note for C/S to program the case for any additional Sec Check forms needed, to be done after the current form has been completed.)
101. WAS THERE AN OVERT ON SOME OTHER SUBJECT OR AREA OF LIFE? _________
(Pull the overt and handle as per steps A, B, C, etc., of False Purpose RD procedure.)
(Note for C/S to program the case for any additional Sec Check forms needed, to be done after the current form has been completed.)
102. IN THIS LIFETIME, HAVE YOU BEEN IMPLANTED BY A PSYCHIATRIST OR PRIEST? _________
(Applying the tools of Sec Checking tech, find out all of the data of the incident, including: name of implanter; the time, place, form and event of the incident; any commands that were given to pc and to what degree the pc has carried out or executed these commands and suggestions.)
(Note for C/S for further PDH follow-up actions.)
103. IN THIS LIFETIME, HAVE YOU EVER BEEN A VICTIM OF PAIN-DRUG-HYPNOSIS? _________
(Applying the tools of Sec Checking tech, find out all of the data of the incident, including: name of implanter; the time, place, form and event of the incident; any commands that were given to pc and to what degree the pc has carried out or executed these commands and suggestions.)
(Note for C/S for further PDH follow-up actions to be programed.)
104. IN THIS LIFETIME, HAVE YOU EVER BEEN DRUGGED AND THEN ELECTRIC SHOCKED WITHOUT KNOWING IT? _________
(Handle as in question #103.)
105. IN THIS LIFETIME, HAVE YOU EVER HAD A STRANGE, DESTRUCTIVE IMPULSE YOU COULDN’T ACCOUNT FOR? _________
(Handle as in question #103.)
106. IN THIS LIFETIME, WAS THERE A TIME WHEN YOU SAW A PSYCHIATRIST BUT AFTERWARD COULD NOT REMEMBER EVERYTHING THAT HAD TAKEN PLACE? _________
(Handle as in question #103.)
107. WHEN ASKED FOR AN OVERT OR EARLIER-SIMILAR OVERT, COULD YOU ONLY SEE BLACKNESS? _________
(Have the pc close his eyes and then do the following:
I. Date/Locate the overt—whatever the pc can see of it—as exactly as you can. This may blow it and result in a persistent F/N. Or it may just change the view slightly.
II. If no persistent F/N, run this command repetitive to EP: “What part of that scene you’re looking at could you be responsible for?” continuing to repeat the question no matter how many times the pc repeats the same answer and even if the pc gives you the most strained or vague answers. Run the process to F/N, cognition, VGIs.
III. If no spectacular release and persistent F/N, Sec Check the overt as per step A of the rundown and continue with steps B, C, etc.)
108. WAS THERE SOMETHING ELSE WRONG? _________
(If so and it doesn’t clean up on 2WC, GF M5 and handle.)
109. HAS THE UPSET BEEN HANDLED? _________
(2WC. If so, indicate it to F/N.)
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
C/Ses
FPRD Auditors
and C/Ses
Tech/Qual
MAA/Ethics Offs
False Purpose Rundown Series 10-A
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN BASIC FORM
Refs:
HCOB 5 June 84R FPRD Series 1R
Rev. 11.1.90 FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
HCOB 9 June 84R FPRD Series SR
Rev. 3.5.85 AUDITING THE FALSE
PURPOSE RUNDOWN
HCOB 1 Mar. 77 III FORMULATING CONFESSIONAL
QUESTIONS
HCOB 1 Mar. 77 II CONFESSIONAL FORMS
Here is the basic form employed on the False Purpose Rundown. It is written for use on any pc or pre-OT beginning the rundown.
This list may have questions added to it by the C/S, but questions are not deleted from it in any case. Other False Purpose RD forms may also be used in the course of the rundown, but this list is given as the basic list to be used for any pc beginning the rundown.
AUDITOR INSTRUCTIONS
The auditor does the whole form on the pc, starting with the Section I questions and proceeding on through to the end of the Section II questions. Every question is cleared and checked on the meter per standard Sec Checking tech.
Reading questions on this list are handled with False Purpose Rundown procedure. The form itself is composed of two sections of questions.
Questions in Section I of this form ask for overts, which are handled with Steps A through G of the False Purpose Rundown procedure.
Questions in Section II ask directly for evil purposes and destructive intentions, and are handled using Steps C through G of False Purpose Rundown procedure.
SECTION I QUESTIONS:
1. DO YOU HAVE A BACK-OFF IN HANDLING SOME AREA OF YOUR LIFE? _________
(Find which area he has a back-off on handling, get when it started and then pull the prior overt. Handle that overt per Steps A to G of False Purpose RD procedure. Then recheck the original question, 1.)
2. IS THERE SOME OVERT ACT YOU’VE HAD TO RESTRAIN YOURSELF FROM COMMITTING? _________
3. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU HAVE DONE YOU HAVE SUCCESSFULLY WITHHELD IN AUDITING OR SEC CHECKING? _________
4. DO YOU HAVE A SECRET OVERT? _________
5. DO YOU HAVE A BACK-OFF ON HANDLING SOME PERSON? _________
(Find out which person he has a back-off on handling, get when it started and then pull the prior overt. Handle that overt per Steps A to G of False Purpose RD procedure. Then recheck the original question, 5.)
6. HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD GET INTO SERIOUS TROUBLE FOR? _________
7. HAVE YOU BEEN REASONABLE WITH PERSONS YOU SHOULD HAVE HANDLED? _________
(Find out what person[s] he has been reasonable with in handling, get when it started and then pull the prior overt. Handle that overt per Steps A to G of False Purpose RD procedure. Then recheck the original question, 7.)
8. DO YOU HAVE SOME WITHHOLD YOU HAVEN’T WANTED TO DISCUSS? _________
9. HAVE YOU EVER BETRAYED A FRIEND? _________
10. HAVE YOU COMMITTED AN OVERT AGAINST YOURSELF? _________
11. HAVE YOU DONE ANYTHING THAT WAS HARMFUL TO YOUR OWN BODY? _________
12. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU REGRET HAVING DONE TO SOMEONE? _________
13. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SEXUALLY UNFAITHFUL? _________
14. HAVE YOU EVER DELIBERATELY HURT SOMEONE YOU LOVED? _________
15. HAVE YOU EVER COMPROMISED YOUR INTEGRITY? _________
16. HAVE YOU EVER USED DRUGS OR ALCOHOL TO TRAP SOMEONE? _________
17. HAVE YOU EVER ILL-TREATED CHILDREN? _________
18. HAVE YOU COMMITTED ANY OVERTS AGAINST YOUR FAMILY? _________
19. HAVE YOU EVER DONE SOMETHING HARMFUL TO ANOTHER’S MIND? _________
20. HAVE YOU DELIBERATELY QUICKIED ANY PRODUCT OR IMPORTANT CYCLE ON YOUR JOB? _________
21. HAVE YOU DONE A BRUSH-OFF JOB OF SOMETHING? _________
22. HAVE YOU KNOWINGLY GONE BY MIS-Us ON YOUR JOB? _________
23. IS THERE SOMETHING YOU HAVE DONE YOU THINK MIGHT GET YOU REMOVED FROM YOUR JOB OR GROUP, IF IT WERE KNOWN? _________
24. HAVE YOU EVER CONSISTENTLY MADE A PRACTICE OF SEXUAL PERVERSION? _________
25. HAVE YOU CHEATED SOMEONE WHO TRUSTED YOU? _________
26. HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING TO MAKE YOUR GROUP OR ORGANIZATION LOSE? _________
27. HAVE YOU EVER CAVED SOMEONE IN? _________
28. HAVE YOU MISREPRESENTED YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL? _________
29. HAVE YOU EVER PARTICIPATED IN ELECTRIC SHOCKING OR IMPLANTING SOMEONE? _________
30. HAVE YOU EVER DELIBERATELY INJURED SOMEONE? _________
31. HAVE YOU EVER INJURED DIANETICS OR SCIENTOLOGY? _________
32. HAVE YOU COMMITTED AN OVERT ON A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION? _________
33. IS THERE AN OVERT THAT YOU HAVE COVERED UP WITH FALSE PR? _________
(The act of false PRing should be gotten off, but then pull the actual OVERT that was being covered up, E/S to F/N.
34. HAVE YOU ALTERED LRH TECH? _________
35. IS THERE SOME OTHER OVERT YOU HAVE COMMITTED THAT WOULD BE AWFUL TO HAVE TO GET OFF? _________
36. HAVE YOU EVER CAVED YOURSELF IN? _________
SECTION II QUESTIONS
37. DO YOU HAVE A SECRET DESIRE TO SEE SOMEONE FAIL? _________
38. HAVE YOU EVER HAD AN IMPULSE TO COMMIT SUICIDE? _________
39. HAVE YOU HAD SOME PURPOSE WHICH IS IN OPPOSITION TO THE PURPOSE OF SCIENIOLOGY? _________
40. DO YOU HAVE SOME SECRET PURPOSE? _________
41. DO YOU INTEND TO HARM SCIENTOLOGY DISSEMINATION? _________
42. HAVE YOU HAD A HIDDEN EVIL PURPOSE ON SOME OTHER DYNAMIC? _________
43. HAVE YOU HAD A FEELING OF WANTING TO GET EVEN FOR SOMETHING? _________
44. HAVE YOU EVER HAD A VICIOUS, CRUEL INTENTION TOWARDS SOMEONE? _________
45. IS THERE SOME OUT-ETHICS IMPULSE THAT YOU HAVE FAILED TO RESTRAIN? _________
(Pull the overt.)
END RUDS
(Session withholds are handled with usual withhold rudiment procedure. Undisclosed overts missed in doing the questions on the list are handled with Steps A to G of False Purpose RD procedure.)
1. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD A HALFTRUTH? _________
2. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TOLD AN UNTRUTH? _________
3. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU SAID SOMETHING ONLY TO IMPRESS ME? _________
4. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU TRIED TO DAMAGE SOMEONE? _________
5. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU DELIBERATELY TRIED TO INFLUENCE THE E-METER?
6. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU SUCCESSFULLY WITHHELD SOMETHING? _________
7. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAVE YOU COVERED UP FOR SOMEONE ELSE? _________
8. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS ANYONE SAID YOU HAD A WITHHOLD WHEN YOU DIDN’T HAVE ONE? _________
9. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS ANYTHING BEEN ASSERTED? _________
10. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS ANYTHING BEEN SUPPRESSED? _________
11. IN THIS CONFESSIONAL, HAS ANYTHING BEEN INVALIDATED? _________
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
All Class IV Orgs
All Missions
Tech/Qual
False Purpose RD
Auditors, C/Ses
and Supervisors
Cramming Officers
D of T
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
INFO FOR ORGS AND MISSIONS
The distribution of False Purpose Rundown Series 10-B, FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN, ELIGIBILITY FOR OT LEVELS FORM (HCOB 15 June 84 I) is limited to Saint Hills, Advanced Orgs and the Flag Service Org.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JUNE 1984
Remimeo
Auditors
C/Ses
HCO Tech/Qual
MAAs/Ethics Offs
C/S Series 118-1
EVIL PURPOSES AND FALSE PR
Refs:
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118
PRETENDED PTS
HCO PL 2 Apr. 65 FALSE REPORTS
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72 Esto Series 14
ETHICS
An additional point in the behavior of people with evil purposes has been found: They often coveI their evil purposes up and usually with PR statements. These are actually false reports of one kind or another. The dominating behavior action is false reports and neglect of the real situation. Under all of that can generally be found an evil purpose.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
PURIFICATION: AN ILLUSTRATED
ANSWER TO DRUGS
and
THE PURIFICATION RUNDOWN
DELIVERY MANUAL
by L. Ron Hubbard
Published September 1984
In another major step in handling the growing threat of drugs and other toxic substances, Ron released two new books.
Purification: An Illustrated Answer to Drugs presents the Purification Rundown with striking and easily grasped illustrations. Showing first the far reaching effects of drugs and toxic substances on the lives of everyone in today’s society, the book goes on to offer the only effective solution, the Purification Rundown.
The Purification Rundown Delivery Manual is the tool to be used by those receiving and those delivering the rundown to ensure 100% standard tech is applied from start to finish. Ron developed this manual to route a person onto and through the rundown, with daily report forms, forms for handling any slows or difficulties that might be encountered and pages for writing up the many wins and successes that come from standardly following the Purification Rundown’s precise steps.
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 NOVEMBER 1984R
REVISED 18 JUNE 1989
Remimeo
All Sec Checkers
Auditors
C/Ses
MAAs/Ethics Offs
Academy Supers
Intern Supers
HSSC Course
Academy Level II
Tech/Qual
HCO
SECURITY CHECKER BEINGNESS
Refs:
HCOB 10 Apr. 80 AUDITOR BEINGNESS
HCOB 4 Apr. 65 ARC BREAKS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS
HCOB 26 May 60 SECURITY CHECKS
HCOB 24 Aug. 64 SESSION MUST-NOTS
HCOB 26 Apr. 71 I TRs AND COGNITIONS
HCOB 10 May 62 PREPCHECKING AND SEC CHECKING
HCOB 12 Feb. 62 HOW TO CLEAR WITHHOLDS AND MISSED
WITHHOLDS
HCOB 28 Nov. 78 AUDITORS WHO MISS WITHHOLDS,
PENALTY
Tape: 6201C16 “Nature of Withholds”
Tape: 6202C14 “Directing Attention”
Book: E-Meter Essentials, Chapter H, “Confessionals”
Just as a professional auditor must fully assume the BEINGNESS of a professional auditor in order to be a success, so must a Security Checker understand and fully assume the BEINGNESS of a Sec Checker. There is such a beingness, and it is distinctly itself.
A Sec Check session can be technically correct but for one key ingredient: the Sec Checker’s beingness. In other words, the correct questions were asked, the metering was faultless, the Auditor’s Code was observed to the letter and the pc was in-session. Yet the Sec Checker missed. He was being an auditor or an observer, when he should have been a SECURITY CHECKER.
BEINGNESS
A Sec Checker is a detective. He is there to FIND OUT.
Any theetie-weetie attitude or a coy “You don’t have any withholds do you?” approach are straight routes to failure as a Sec Checker.
The good Sec Checker is marked by his thoroughness, his willingness to pry, his swinish suspicion. He’s a believer in the meter and little else when he is on the trail of a pc’s withhold.
This does not, however, mean that a Sec Checker should be misemotional or accusative. It means that he sees what he sees. He knows that when his meter tells him something is there, something is there—and he knows when he’s gotten it all.
He knows well what sort of misdirection a preclear can volunteer in an effort to hang on to a withhold. He understands what is going on and smoothly and unconcernedly goes right ahead and gets the job done with ARC. And so his pcs win. Remember that a Sec Check, even when being done for justice or investigatory purposes, is for the pc.
The beingness of a Sec Checker is that of a detective.
ATTITUDE
Live communication with the pc (that is to say, flawless TRs) is essential. A wrong or challenging auditor attitude can throw the scene off as there is a destroyed comm cycle. Instead of bringing up the pc’s confront and willingness to dig and get off his transgressions, an accusative attitude on the part of the Sec Checker backs the pc into the reactive bank. The law from Dianetics: The Original Thesis applies: Auditor plus pc is greater than the bank.
Sometimes the pc needs an R-factor, such as a helpful “I am trying to complete this Sec Check so you can get on with your next level, so let’s buckle down and get it all cleaned up.”
SEQUENCE
One should first be well trained in the technical skills of Sec Checking. His TRs must be faultless; he has to be a metering ace and have his admin and procedure down cold. He must have certainty of his tools and his ability to use them. Just as it is a waste of time for an auditor to attempt a full sort-out of his auditor beingness before he has mastered TRs and the other technical basics of auditing, it is fruitless for a Sec Checker to attempt this step before he knows his Sec Checking tech inside and out.
Having duplicated and gained an understanding of Sec Checking basics and mastered its mechanics, the Sec Checker can then fully assume the proper beingness. The evidence of his having done so will appear in the Sec Checks he does: They will roll along successfully, with the pc well controlled and rapidly shedding the burden of his transgressions.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 22 NOVEMBER 1984
Remimeo
C/Ses
FPRD Auditors
Tech/Qual
False Purpose Rundown Series 9-1
FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
CORRECTION LIST
WORD LIST
Refs:
HCO PL 4 Apr. 72R III ETHICS AND STUDY TECH
Rev. 21.6.75
HCOB 8 July 74R I Word Clearing Series 53R
Rev. 24.7.74 CLEAR TO F/N
HCOB 21 June 72 I Word Clearing Series 38
METHOD 5
HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II CLEARING COMMANDS
HCOB 17 July 79RA I Word Clearing Series 64RA
Rev. 30.7.83 THE MISUNDERSTOOD WORD DEFINED
These are the words from HCOB 13 June 84, FPRD Series 9, FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN CORRECTION LIST.
These words should be cleared on the pc before the False Purpose Rundown Correction List is actually assessed, per HCOB 9 Aug. 78 II, CLEARING COMMANDS.
The auditor or student must have received high-crime checkouts from Qual on the above references before clearing these words on a pc. The auditor or student uses Method 5 Word Clearing when clearing these words on the pc.
This word list need only be cleared once in the pc’s auditing if it was correctly cleared the first time. Words previously cleared are not recleared.
WORDS FROM THE FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
CORRECTION LIST
A, about, accepted, account, accurately, accusation, acknowledge, afraid, afterward, alcohol, all, already, an, angry, answer, any, anything, ARC break, are, area, asked, at, audited, auditing, auditor, Auditor’s Code, avoid.
Back, bad, basic, be, because, been, believed, believing, betrayal, blackness, black PR, blow, blown, breaks, but, by, bypassed, bypassed charge.
Call, campaign, cans, chain, charge, charged, coming up, committing, computation, Confessional, conflicts, confusion, consideration, could, couldn’t, covered up, cover up, Crashing Misunderstood Word, crime.
Dare, date, demanded, destructive, did, didn’t, different, differently, do, done, don’t, drug, drugged, drugs, dynamic.
Earlier, electric, else, error, ethics, Ethics Officer, evaluation, ever, everything, evil, exact, exterior.
Fail, failed, false, falsified, fear, feel, find out, first, F/N, F/Ning, for, found, from, fully.
Get, getting, giving, good, go on, gotten, gotten off.
Had, half-truths, handled, happen, harmful, has, have, have to, having, he, hear, hidden, hot, hungry.
Implant, implanted, impulse, in, incident, incredible, injustice, intend, intention, into, invalidated, involved, is, it, item.
Jumped, justified.
Kept, knowing, known.
Late, left, lessen, lie, life, lifetime, list, location.
Make, medicine, mention, meter, might, misdirect, missed, missed withhold, misunderstood, moment, more.
Never, no, nonsurvival, not, nothing.
Of, off, officer, on, once, one, only, opinions, or, other, others, out, out-ethics, over, overrun, overt, overts.
Pain-drug-hypnosis, part, past, postulate, PR, pretending, priest, prior, problem, protested, psychiatrist, PTS, purpose.
Question.
Read, really, recently, remember, reports, reputation, responsibility, rest, restimulated, revealed, run, rundown, run out.
Said, same, saw, say, saying, Scientology, Sec Check, see, service fac, shocked, should, similar, situation, some, someone, something, sort, strange, subject, suppressed.
Taken, taken place, taken up, taking, tell, teiling, than, that, the, then, there, think, this, those, time, tired, to, told, too, toward, tried, trouble, try.
Undisclosed, unflat, upset, use.
Victim.
Waiting, wanted, was, wasn’t, way, went, were, weren’t, what, when, whole track, with, withheld, withhold, withholding, withholds, without, word, worded, worrled, wrong.
You, your, you’ve.
L. RON HUBBARD
Founder
Compilation assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations
SUBJECT INDEX
Subject Index
A auditor(s), (cont.)
confront of evil and, 25
abilities gained, chart, 156 C/S is auditor’s “handler,” 436
alcohol, not mind-altering but a biochemical altering goal of, 21
drug, 282 if your TRs were good enough you would be known as
alcoholic, defn., someone who can’t have just a great auditor without doing a single thing, 23
one drink, 282 must be technician on meter interpretation, 24
amino acids, defn., basic organic compounds which are skill of, can be enormously improved by a
essential to the body’s breakdown and absorption good C/S, 436
of foods, 9 Solo, on Solo levels you deserve best auditor you
analysis list, defn., a type of prepared list which analyzes can get, 427
a case broadly or analyzes a session, 38 trusted beings, 422
ARC break needle, F/N accompanied by bad indicators use of C/S 53, 40
201; see also floating needle (F/N); read(s) whether or not a prepared list reads depends upon the
Aristotle, 116 whose pcs are red-tagging, must be given a
art, see also composition; integration; message Confessional. 388
center of interest, 543 Auditor’s Code,
creating art that talks, four steps, S pledge of practitioners of pastoral counseling, 101
for the receiver, 555 required to be signed by the holders of or before the
integration and, 542, 546 issuance of certificates for the certificates to be
purpose of, 542 valid, 101
artificial deficiency, 15 Axiom 38, applicable in writing up one’s overts and
artist, see also art withholds 550
ability to assume viewpoint of audience, 535
must be able to view any piece of work in a new unit
of time, 534 B
assessment, see also assessment drills
Method 3, 39 bank, can be triggered by an out-ethics situation, 117
Method 5, 39 being,
voice pitches and, 29 basically good, 562
assessment drills, 29 human being “in the flesh” is not a simple being, 131
purpose, 36 nature of, 131
three levels of usage, 29 when you are handling a human being, you are
assist, handling a composite, 132
checklist, beingness,
how to use, 315 defn., the result of having assumed an identity, 20
injuries and illnesses handling, 315 certainty directly influences, 21
list of symptoms for injuries and illnesses, 315 confront of evil and, 25
must be suited to that pc’s case and current biochemical substances, in the body, can prevent or
condition, 316 inhibit case gain, 17; see also drugs; Purification
associative restimulator, something in the environment of Rundown
an individual that he has confused with an actual blindness, accumulation of painful contacts with the
restimulator, 290 objects of life, remedy, 445
atomic war, Purification Rundown and, 3 body,
attitude, defn., the opinion one holds or the behavior one properly feeding and caring for, importance of, 16
expresses toward some person, place, thing or quite complicated, 132
symbol as a result of the concept he has of it, 20 breast-feeding, Purification Rundown and, 14
auditing, see also auditor(s); process(es)
appointments, 101
coffee-shop auditing, must be part of pc’s C
auditing folder, 422
purpose of, 421 Cal-Mag, Purification Rundown and, 8; see also
Q-and-A, grievous fault, 19 Purification Rundown
questionable, 413 case(s), see also preclear(s)
team action, 438 failed, required to receive a Confessional, 388
Tone 40 auditing, definition, 360 four general groups, 356
very straightforward procedure, well laid out, 422 tone arm registers relative mass of, 201
auditor(s), see also auditing; minister(s) why C/S begins to believe some cases are very
beingness, 20; see also beingness tough, 437
nothing worse than an interesting auditor, 25 case action, done before Purification Rundown may be
something you yourself must decide upon, 26 needed once Purification Rundown is complete, 17
SUBJECT INDEX
case gain(s), co-audit(ing), see also auditing
basic thing that monitors it is: pc interested in own case auditors are not to leave their pcs, 88
and willing to talk to the auditor, 21 beginning muster, 84
deposits of drugs and biochemical substances in the complement, 81
body can prevent or inhibit, 17 course room vs. co-auditing room, 83
do not occur in the presence of overts and course, the most frequently observed manifestation on
withholds, 550 the drills section will very likely be the skipped
no case gain in auditing or in training is due to gradient, 89
continuous overts and withholds, 388 defined, 77
case supervision, C/S, gives a subjective reality on the processes one is
always C/S the pc for his own gain, not for any other delivering to others, 77
purpose, 421 Grade Chart is the guiding factor in any co-audit, 80
Confessional tech, 388 handling TRs and Objectives students, 85
False Purpose Rundown, 583 how it is set up, 83
okay, safe rules for giving, 421 how to run, 81, 84
procedure for programming a case where C/Sing new students, 84
has not followed Grade Chart or case has been purpose, 77
snarled up, 421 read-it, drill-it, do-it, what it means, 79
right way to go about, 420 red tag sessions, 90
very straightforward procedure, well laid out, 422 requirements, 81
when C/Sing a rundown, one C/Ses that rundown, not rules for handling session difficulties, 87
a mixture of different rundowns, 419 Saint Hill Special Briefing Course students, 78
Case Supervisor(s), see also case supervision secret of a successful one is administration, 81
auditor’s “handler,” 436 session admin, 88
Confessional List, 191 staff, see staff co-audit
Correction List, 171 stats, 91
definition of, 435-436 students,
ethics and, 423 blowy, 89
handling auditors, 436 gotten to where they can handle a session as a
handling pc ethics, 424 co-auditor, 93
honorable hat, 439 mutual out-ruds, 89
measures the amount of ethics which must go in on pc nonmusical chairs, 83
from viewpoint of Ethics Officer while still C/Sing twinned according to comparable case and
pc for his own case gain, 425 training level, 83
must steer a sane path on the subject of ethics, 426 twin responsible for recovering course partner, 89
pc’s case director; his actions are done supervising, 92
for the pc, 436 Supervisor,
product he is after is the pc’s (or pre-) interrupting sessions, 87
case gain, 437 is there to help co-auditors who get into something
requirements in C/Sing the False Purpose they can’t handle, 86
Rundown, 583 may handle reads that the co-auditor is not trained to
tech leader, 436 handle, 87
trusted beings, 422 must guard against verbal tech and case
what he is actually accomplishing, 436 evaluation, 87
certainty, directly influences beingness, 21 should be given back-up he can rely on, 98
Chaplain, interview, 287 tight scheduling must be maintained, 84
chart, abilities gained, 156 TRs, 92
checkout(s), twinning and course attitude, 82
practical, 85 WHAT IS A COURSE? and, 84
star-rate, demonstrations and, 454 coffee-shop auditing, must be part of pc’s auditing
chemical release, drugs can give sensation of releasing folder, 422
from the bank, 216; see also Scientology Drug color, 539; see also art; integration
Rundown associations, 541
clay demo, see demonstration depth, 540
Clear(s) harmony, 539
defn., a being who no longer has his own reactive four types of, 539
mind, 372 integration and, 545
allowed handlings on a Dianetic Clear, 559 wheel, 540
Book One definition is valid, 372 Commanding Officer, see Executive Director
definition of, 560 communication,
Dianetic, drugs and, 49
major steps for Dianetic Clear moving up the most fundamental right of any being, 446
Bridge, 558 reach and withdraw and, 289
stalled Dianetic Clear solved, 356, 558 two-way flow, 446
who do not go up the Bridge are still subject to the composition, see also art; integration; message
vagaries and pressures of life, 559 defn., any or all of the actions necessary to integrate
purposes and nonsurvival considerations can be and give meaning to a message, 543
located on, 560 integration and, 543
who is not getting on up the levels, handling, 560 Confessional(s), see also Security Checking
who is progressing on route to OT should not be causes for failure to report on offenses of another, 391
interfered with, 558 ethics reports required, 391
SUBJECT INDEX
Confessional(s), (cont.) C/S 53, (cont.)
Non-Interference Zone and, 389 priority of handling outnesses, 40
pc getting off other people’s withholds, 391 two forms—Short Form and Long Form, 39-40
penalties for discouraging or forbidding them, 387 use of in repairing past cramming actions, 460
penalties for refusing one, 388
penances for knowingly withholding, 388
tech, D
case supervision and, 388
Ethics Officers and, 387 dating, rehab and, 206
executives and, 387 demo kit, basic purpose of, 455
ministers and, 387 demonstration, see also study
policies, 387 basic purpose of the demo kit, 455
when you give one, 388 checksheets and, 455
writing reports to Ethics on matters relating to others clay demo, theory of, 455
offenses revealed during a Confessional, 391 definition, 454
Confessional List(s), see also Security Checking history, 454
Case Supervisor, 191 sketching, 455
Flag Representative, 244 star-rate checkouts and, 454
general staff, 146 theory study and, 455
LRH Communicator, 237 use of, 454
PRD (Primary Rundown), 160 depth perspective, eight types, 537; see also art
Registrars and sales personnel, 180 derivation, defn., is a statement of the origin of
Tours, returning personnel, 165 a word, 276
Confessional Repair List, design, see also art; integration
prefix used with, 119 calligraphy, 545
uses of, 119 center of interest, 543
consideration, Clears, mental mass and, 560 geometric design, 544
contribution, art invites contribution of and from the type styles, 545
beholder, 542; see also art Dianetic Clear, see Clear(s)
anatomy of, 51 dictionary(ies), 273; see also study
bad, defn., disharmonious alignment 414 false and omitted definitions and, 276
good defn. harmonious alignment 414 person’s own language and, 275
correction list, defn., a prepared list which corrects an recommended dictionaries 273
ongoing action, 38, see also prepared list(s) diet, 15
cramming, artificial deficiency, 15
always require ruds be flown before, 421 deficiencies and drugs, 16
done before Purification Rundown may be needed once dinky dictionary, 275
Purification Rundown is complete, 17 direct auditing list, defn., a prepared list which delivers
do not do or permit on a pc who is not at a rest point direct auditing commands or questions which, run
or win on a rundown, 421 on the pc, produce an auditing result, 38
must be part of pc’s auditing folder, 422 Director of Processing,
use of C/S 53 in repairing past cramming actions, 460 interview 285
why it is mandatory to get C/S okay to cram a pc, 421 use of C/S 53 40
creating, greatest joy there is in life, 416 disconnection, see also PTS(ness)
crime, see also criminal; criminal mind basic principle, 447
answer to, 406 definition, 447
cause of, 407 how it’s done, 449
criminal, see also criminal mind when it’s used, 448
defn., one who is motivated by evil intentions and who D of P, see Director of Processing
has committed so many harmful overt acts that he dope-off, using dope-off as only detection of
considers such activities ordinary, 337 misunderstoods is operating at below F/N level 344
does not benefit from giving off current withholds 339 drill lists, defn, prepared lists used in training as dummy
gradient scale and, 339 lists to get an auditor used to handling the meter
psychiatrists and psychologists and, 128 and prepared lists, 39; see also prepared list(s)
seeking to destroy himself, 340 Drug Rundown, radiation and, 529; see also Scientology
sees others as he himself is, 339 Drug Rundown
criminal mind, see also criminal drugs, see also Purification Rundown
individuals with criminal mind tend to band backtrack and, 48
together, 338 can prevent or inhibit case gain, 17, 280
motivated by evil intentions, 339 dietary deficiencies and, 16
psychs and, 405 heavy, defn., LSD, angel dust and other heavy street or
relentlessly seeks to destroy anyone it imagines might medical drugs, 280
expose it, 338 heavy drug history,
critic, anyone can always be criticized for something—it defn., having taken drugs in sufficient volume to
all depends on what standards the critic uses, 395 have brought about a biochemical situation
C/S 53, see also prepared list(s) physically, 281
always done Method 5, 40 history of having taken heavy drugs, or the person’s
champion list of all time, 39 drug history is heavy, 280
SUBJECT INDEX
drugs, (cont.) executive(s),
mental actions and even biophysical actions do not Correction List, 225
work in the presence of drugs, 280 penalizing auditors, C/Ses, Tech/Qual or Ethics
Objective Processes and, 48; see also Objective Officers due to his own withholds, penalty
Process(es) for, 387
running engrams and, 48 two necessary ideas he must have, 377
speed up the burning of reserves of vitamins, 49 what reveals their real intentions, 377
three classes based on volume of consumption: Executive Correction List, locates the individual reasons
stimulant, depressant and poison, 282 an executive has for not applying standard
Executive Director, interview, 287
E
E-Meter, see also read(s) F
each grade process run on a meter must be checked for
read before it is run, and if not reading, it is not false definitions, dictionaries and, 276
run at that time, 107 False Purpose Rundown,
life has ability to register an impingement and to retain auditing procedure of, 576
it or reduplicate it, 23 auditor qualifications to deliver to OT III
needle reaction in the presence of an implant, 400 or New OT IV, 576
pinch test, 23 Basic Form 603
when the meter reads it is reading on something, 24 brand new tech of 568
End of Endless Drug Rundowns Repair List, 223 common auditor errors, 588
end ruds check, after O/W write-up, 553 correction list, 591
entity, follow all the rules and laws and phenomena of C/Sing of, 583 , 583
single beings, 132 does not take the place of standard ethics, 585
erasure, defn., when you erase the mass and leave the ending the session, 579
thetan there, 203 end phenomena,
ethics, see also Ethics Officer; justice; technology program, 587
bank can be triggered by an out-ethics situation, 117 single form, 586
breakthrough in Scientology is that we do have the forms that can be used, 585
basic technology of ethics, 118 how to handle if auditor hits an impasse during
consists simply of the actions an individual takes on a chain, 579
himself, 116 in the next session rechecking the last
C/S and, 423 question run, 580
C/S measures the amount of ethics which must go in pc must be properly set up first, 585
on pc from viewpoint of Ethics Officer while still primary use of, 584
C/Sing pc for his own case gain, 425 procedure, 582
Ethics Officer must advise D of P when staff or public programming, 584
person is undergoing ethics or justice action, 548 use in unstalling Dianetic Clears or pre-OTs on their
native to the individual, 116 progress up the Bridge, 584
overuse of, 426 who can receive it, 583
pc programming and, 424 who may deliver it, 563
personal thing, 116 false report, people cover their evil purposes with, 609
philosophy and, 116 familiarity, keynote is communication, 289
reports and worksheets must be filed in pc folders, 424 FES see Folder Error Summary
tech will not go in when ethics is out, 426 Flag Representative, Confessional List 244
ethics investigation, offenses against Scientology or its floating needle (F/N), see also reads
codes by another person than the pc must be number of public pcs and pre-OTs who leave an org
reported to Ethics for investigation with F/N VGIs at the Examiner determines the
Ethics Officer, repute of the org in that area, 439
assessment drills and, 30 percent of staff members who currently have an F/N
Confessional tech and, 387 VGI Examiner’s Report as their last report
interview, 286 determines directly the efficiency and solvency
ethics reports, Confessionals and, 391 and expansion of the org, 439
evil purpose, sick person and, 316
asking for as part of Sec Checking, 547 tone arm position and, 200
false PR and, 609 when accompanied by bad indicators equals ARC
finding and handling, is in the area of postulates, 560 break needle, 201
Examiner, flow line, when they are not kept in the C/S
actions, 27 has trouble 438
assessment drills and, 30 F/N, see floating needle (F/N)
C/S using Examiner to get data from pc or answer pc’s F/Ning student, definition, 344
questions, 437 Folder Error Summary,
log must be kept for each exam, 28 checklist for starting or continuing,
must never invalidate or evaluate for the pc by word, Expanded Grades, 264
attitude or expression, 28 False Purpose Rundown, 267
whole duty is to note the TA and needle behavior L10, L11 or L12, 268
of the pc, 27 New Era Dianetics, 265
exams, non-F/N exams, handling of, 28 FES checklists and summary, 251
SUBJECT INDEX
FPRD, see False Purpose Rundown heavy drugs, defn., LSD, angel dust and other heavy
freedom of speech, 384 street or medical drugs, 280; see also drugs
FSM TRs, 530 HGC Pc Technical Estimate, interview, 283
who may use them, 530 High School Indoctrination, 381; see also TRs
Host, interview, 288
G HRL, see Happiness Rundown Repair List, 519
geometric design, 544; see also design; integration
good roads fair weather, see also PTS(ness) I
coaching someone on, 431
example of, 431 illegal pc, Purification Rundown and, 7
gout, handling of, impingement, life has ability to register an impingement
grade(s), and to retain it or reduplicate it 23
defn., a series of processes culminating in an exact implant, see also Security Checking; still needle(s)
ability attained, examined and attested by pc, 206 mistaking out-ruds for an implant, 401
attesting to Expanded Grades, 156 needle reaction in the presence of, 400
chart of abilities gained, 156 types,
each grade process run on a meter must be checked for brainwashing, 400
read before it is run, and if not reading, it is not drugs, 399
run at that time, 107 drugs and shock, 400
nearly all grade processes and flows will read on pcs electric shock, 399
in that Grade Chart area unless pc has persistent hypnotism, 399
F/N or auditor’s TRs are so poor that pc is not in imposed silence, 399
session, 107 nonexistent implants, 400
Grade Chart, 352 pain-drug-hypnosis, 400
get pc on, 422 what it is 399
main change in, 371 indicator(s),
“grinding” phenomenon, defn. an effect similar to defn., condition or circumstance arising in a session (or
running an engram late on the chain over and over before or after it) which indicates whether the
without going earlier and the person getting session (or case) is running well or badly, 42
irritated and frustrated with the rundown and bad
feeling he is not making the progress he could be list of 43
making, 68 means correction must be done, 43
good,
H list of, 45
means keep it going, 43
Happiness Rundown, 457 used to program the case, 43
auditor assignment policy for Dianetic clear, 528 insanity, see also suppressive person
auditor qualifications to deliver, 464 consists of urges to harm others, 128
command sheets, 469 is physical disease, basic tenet of psychiatry, 128
end phenomena, 466 in-session, defn,., for a pc, interested in own case and
list used when HRD is audited by the assessment willing to talk to the auditor, 21; see also auditor(s)
method, 516 integration, see also art; composition
methods of auditing, 461 art is the result of integration of all its
point on the Grade Chart it can be delivered, 459 components, 542
points on the Bridge where it shouldn’t be composition and, 543
delivered, 528 consists of uniting the similar, 6
precepts assessment list, 516 interview(s),
procedure, 461, 464 Chaplain, 287
repair list 51° Director of Processing, 285
tips in delivering 467 Ethics Officer/MAA, 286
valence separation steps, 465 HGC Pc Technical Estimate, 283
where it may be delivered, 459 Host, 288
Happiness Rundown Repair List, 519 Qual Consultant, 286
hatting, done before Purification Rundown may be Registrar, 283
needed once Purification RD is complete, 17 students, 283
havingness, Objective Processes and, 48 Solo Consultant at an AO, 286
HCO Board of Review, function of, 425
hear, skill of being able to see or hear in a new unit
of time, 534 J
heatstroke, first sign of, 63
heavy drug history, see also drugs joy, greatest joy there is in life is creating, 416
defn., having taken drugs in sufficient volume to have justice, see also ethics
brought about a biochemical situation physically, action taken on the individual by the group when he
281 fails to take these actions himself, 116
history of having taken heavy drugs, or that the Ethics Officer must advise D of P when staff or public
person’s drug history is heavy, 280 person is undergoing ethics or justice action, 548
SUBJECT INDEX
justice, (cont.) murder routine, 565; see also Confessional(s); Security
group action against individual when he fails to put in Checking
his own ethics, 117 muzzled,
man cannot be trusted with, 117 auditing, keynote for beginning co-auditor, 98
philosophy and, 116 Examiner duties are done muzzled, 27
K N
key-in, see also key-out New Era Dianetics, abilities gained, 159
defn., part of the reactive mind moving in on niacin, see also Purification Rundown
a person, 205 discoveries relating to this vitamin and its apparent
when it occurs, 205 effect on radiation exposure, 3-4
key-out, defn., reactive mind or some portion of it don’t take extra dosages when on Purification
dropping out of restimulation, 206, see also key-in Rundown, 69
Purification Rundown and, 8
L niacinamide, what it does, 9; see also niacin
no case gain, see case gain(s)
language, dictionaries and a person’s own language, 275 nonstandard actions, violation not only of trust but of
LCRE, see Confessional Repair List trademark and copyright law, and can be
life, actionable, 422
barriers to enjoyment of life handled through
FPRD, 563 O
greatest joy there is in life is creating, 416
has ability to register an impingement and to retain it Objective Process(es), Objectives, see also auditing;
or reduplicate it 23 drugs; process(es)
lobby comment, 535 . bring a person to present time, 48
long-sessioning, C/S who long-sessions will have easier bypass misunderstood words and significances, 50
time of it, 438 calling an EP when in fact process is over the pc’s
LRH Communicator, Confessional List, 237 head, 396
drugs and, 48
establish direct communication with the auditor, 48
M interaction between the individual and the existing
physical universe, 48
MAA, see Ethics Officer locate the person in his environment, 48
man, three parts of: thetan, mind, body, 360 not biting, 396
mass, remedy havingness, 48
clay demos and, 455 results of running the pc too high, 397
tone arm registers relative mass of case, 201 that produces a communication lag will produce
maxims, OT, 414 a cognition; a process that does not develop
message, see also art; composition a communication lag will not produce a
composition and, 543 two reasons why the preclear will not produce any
definition. 5, 542, 555 change, 396
successful works of art have, 555 when to undercut. 397
metering, pc confidence and, 21; see also E-Meter obnosis defn., observing the obvious, 43
middle-class PTSness, 403; see also PTS(ness) Oil,
mineral(s), see also diet; vitamin(s) can go rancid, 556
approximate mineral amounts at various stages of Purification Rundown and, 556
vitamin increase in the Purification Rundown, 11 rancid, how to detect, 557
artificial deficiency, 15 rancid, symptoms of having taken, 556
multi-mineral tablet, 9 reason it can go rancid 556
Purification Rundown and, 8 simplest way to detect if it’s rancid, 557
trace minerals, 13 storage of, 556
minister(s), see also auditing; auditor(s) Operating Thetan,
action on discovery that a pc has knowledge of overt or Confessionals and, 389
crime against Scientology or the codes of the letting an OT get onto an OT section over overts
Church, 392 and withholds, 389
Confessional tech and, 387 what one needs to know if he is going to make
missing withholds on parishioner, 388 it to OT, 427
whose pcs are red-tagging. must be given a organization(s),
Confessional, 388 no org can prosper when its staff have overts, 393
missed withhold, study, basic missed withhold, 398 number of public pcs and pre-OTs who leave an org
misunderstood(s), see also dictionary(ies); study with F/N VGIs at the Examiner determines the
dope-off as detection of, operating at below repute of the org in that area, 439
F/N level, 344 percent of staff members who currently have an F/N
when to look for one, 344 VGI Examiner’s Report as their last report
mood lines, means of communicating the emotion of a determines directly the efficiency and solvency
scene or design, 545; see also design and expansion of the org, 439
moral code, in society today, 457; see also ethics; Original Assessment Sheet, Scientology Drug Rundown
Way to Happiness and, 218
motivator, “handling” for out-ethics situation, 117; see OT, see Operating Thetan
also ethics; overts and withholds OT Drug Rundown, 224
SUBJECT INDEX
OT maxims, 414 preclear(s), (cont.)
OT III Course, posh-up, 444 C/S is pc’s case director; his actions are done FOR
out-list, handling during FPRD, 579 THE PC, 436
out-ruds, mistaking out-ruds for an implant, 401 failed case, required to receive a Confessional, 388
out-tech see technology refusing to receive Confessional, 388
overrun, see also rehab sick, F/N and, 316
handled with the tech of rehabbing, 204 who runs oddly, C/S can have Examiner ask what
in auditing, means the preclear came out of the bank questions pc has and get them answered 437
and then went back into it again, 203 pregnancy,
occurs when the thetan considers that something has auditing on Power and up on the Grade Chart, 313
gone on too long or happened too often, 203 Purification Rundown and, 14
preclear gained an ability and the auditor continued the prejudice, 385
process or grade past the point where the ability prenatal drug cases, children of mothers who were drug
had been regained, 204 addicts while pregnant, 282; see also drugs
overts and withholds, see also ethics; justice; missed prepared list(s)
withhold; O/W write-ups; withholds defn., assembly of the majority of things which
below every outness m an org or down stat there lay can be wrong in a case, an auditing action or
heavy withholds and overts, 393 a session 38
cause a person to become less able to influence his C/S 53 champion list of all time 39
confront and responsibility drop after committing, 448 history of 37
no gains occur in presence of, 550 make or break point of an auditor is his ability to get
perhaps why people commit, 386 reads on, 29
person who ,gets off overts” but then continues stable action when a session or case is confusing, 37
committing them, 547 three methods of handling, 39
success in vigorously pulling, 568 TRs and metering and 39
theory behind the action of writing them up, 550 use of, 38
why it is mandatory to get C/S okay to pull O/Ws Word Clearing and 40
on a pc, 421 present time,
write-ups, see O/W write-ups important factor in mental and spiritual sanity and
writing up offers one a road out, 550 ability, 49
O/,W write-ups, 550- see also overts and withholds Objective Processes and, 48; see also Objective
administration of, 552 Process(es)
Axiom 38 and, 550 pretended PTS, 547; see also evil purpose; False Confessional Repair List and, 119 Purpose Rundown; PTS(ness)
end phenomena, 553 Primary Rundown, Confessional List, 160
end ruds after, 553 prior confusion, 570; see also False Purpose Rundown
problems, everyone who reads on “problems in your
p environment” is to some degree PTS, 404; see also
PTS(ness)
pain, sex and, 417 process(es), see also auditing; grade(s)
pc folder, all cramming, PPCing, withhold pulling and checking for read, 108
even coffee-shop auditing must be part of pc’s doesn’t read,” stems from one of three sources, 107
auditing folder, 422 each grade process run on a meter must be checked for
person, human being “in the flesh” is not a simple read before it is run, and if not reading, it is not
being 131 run at that time, 107
personnel enhancement, co-audit is the answer nearly all grade processes and flows will read on pcs
to getting staff audited, 94 F/N or auditor’s TRs are so poor that pc is not in
pinch test, 23 session, 107
Plato, 116 objective, see Objective Process(es)
Post Purpose Clearing, recall, see recall processing
additional step for staff who hold two or three subjective, see subjective processes
posts, 376 professional,
additional steps, 375 assuming the full beingness of a professional in one’s
always require ruds be flown before, 421 field, 20
do not do or permit on a pc who is not at a rest point can be fluid in time, not stuck in the past and can be
or win on a rundown, 421 facile in space location, 536
management teams and executives, 377 programming,
must be part of pc’s auditing folder, 422 adding steps to program to handle ethics outnesses,
why it is mandatory to get C/S okay to do PPC without violating the program itself, 424
on a pc, 421 cases, four general groups, 356
postulate, Clears, mental mass and 560 correct program sequence, 437
potential trouble source, see PTS(ness) for False Purpose Rundown, 584
poverty, crime and, 407 psychiatry,
Power, pregnant women being audited on, 313 basic tenet of, 128
preclear(s), see also case(s) criminal mind and 405
always C/S the pc for his own gain, not for any other psychology, basic tenet of, 128
purpose, 421 psychotics, 408
SUBJECT INDEX
PTS(ness), see also disconnection; good roads fair Qual Consultant, interview, 286
weather Qual Why Finding, do not do or permit on a pc who is
common that a PTS has a low confront on the not at a rest point or win on a rundown, 421
antagonistic source and situation, 448 questionable auditing, handling. 413
everyone who reads on “problems in your Questionable Auditing Repair List, 409
environment” is to some degree PTS, 404
“handle or disconnect,” what it means, 447 R
handling, 403
C/S must monitor closely, 548 radiation, see also Purification Rundown
middle-class, the bulk of your PTSes may very well be cumulative effect and earlier-similars back to a basic
PTS to a class, the middle class of which their engram 3
particular SP is simply a member. 403 Drug Rundown and 529
must have committed overts against the antagonistic liquids and 453
source to be PTS in the first place, 448 water solubility of 453
action is to handle the case with Sec Checking rancid oil, see oil
including questions about person’s purposes and reach, defn., touching or taking hold of, 289; see also
intentions, 548 Reach and Withdraw
pretended, see pretended PTS Reach and Withdraw,
Scientologist can become PTS by reason commands, 292
of being connected to someone antagonistic end phenomena, 293
to Scientology, 447 examination after, 292
Purification Rundown, see also drugs; radiation grogginess and anaten may turn on, 294
atomic war and, 3 method of getting a person familiarized and in
case data, 57 communication with things, 289
completing the rundown to full end phenomena before procedure, 292
reaching 5000 mg of niacin, 69 uses,
daily schedule, 58-61 after Crashing Mis-U has been found, 291
deficiencies on, 72 in auditing to bring about an increase of sanity, 291
determining and handling what was wrong, 66 in session, as in assists, etc., 290
effects of overrun, 72 on post to get a person into good communication
end phenomena, 69, 74 with his work environment, 291
gradient in increasing niacin, 68 on students in course room, 291
“grinding,” causes of, 68 who can run it, 290
illegal pcs and, 7 who it can be used on, 290
limited gain per hour, causes of, 61 read(s), see also E-Meter
megavitamin doses and, 453 checking process for, 108
niacin, in powder or tablet form, 67 each grade process run on a meter must be checked for
nutrition while on rundown, 64 read or not run at that time, 107
oil, nearly all grade processes and flows will read on pcs
how to take It, 67 in that Grade Chart area unless pc has persistent
use of All Blend, 556 F/N or auditor’s TRs are so poor that pc not in
overheating and salt depletion, 63 session, 107
perspiration ceases while in the sauna is first sign of needle reaction in the presence of an implant, 400
heatstroke, handling for, 63 process that “doesn’t read,” stems from one of three
pregnancy and breast-feeding and, 14 sources 107
proportionate vitamin/mineral increases at various read-it, drill-it, do-it, staff co-audits, 97
stages of, 10 recall processing,
sauna ventilation, 63 method of processing in Dianetics and Scientology, 216
schedule irregularities, 65 Scientology Drug Rundown and, 216
sleep and, 62 Registrar,
sort-out on previous actions done may be needed once Confessional List for Registrars and sales
Purification Rundown is complete, 17 personnel, 180
vegetables and, 72 interview, 283
vitamin and mineral dosages, 8 regression, defn,., return to earlier or more infantile
when it can be considered flat, 71 behavior patterns, 48
when niacin is increased, 69
why it is undertaken 57 rehab, see also overrun; rehabilitate; Release
why sweating is vital during, 453 defn, restore to a former capacity or condition; short
“wind-down,” 71 for “rehabilitate,” 202
by counting, done when a process appears overrun in
session, when one is rehabbing “releases” such as
Q on drugs on the Scientology Drug Rundown, or at
any time something is likely to have a number of
Q and A, releases connected with it, 205
defn., the real definition as it applies to TRs is “The Date/Locate, used to directly spot the exact time and
Question proceeding from the last Answer,” 19 location of a specific incident and thus blow the
grievous auditing fault, 19 mass connected with it, 205
often used in Scientologese to mean “indecisive; not former releases, 211-212
making up one’s mind,” 19 grades, 207, 209
SUBJECT INDEX
rehab, (cont.) self-satisfaction,
meter dating and, 206 doing things for self-satisfaction is for professors who
of chemical releases, first step of the Scientology Drug can’t, 5
Rundown, 216 in producing a good piece of work, 535
rehabilitate, restoring a state of Release previously working only for self-satisfaction is to overstress the
attained by the pc, 202; see also rehab first dynamic to such a point that the work of the
Release artist or technician then fails, 535
defn, what occurs when a person separates service facsimile, how to handle if one is located on an
from his reactive mind or some part of it or FPRD Correction List, 579
some mass, 202 sex, pain and, 417
defn. when you take a thetan out of a mass, 202 short-sessioning, liability of, 438
repair, mixing rundowns or repairs for rundowns is sketching, 455; see also demonstration
out-tech of a very serious nature, 420 society, going downhill, 370
repute, Socrates, 116
C/S has tech repute of his org in his hands, 439 Solo Consultant, interview, 286
number of public pcs and pre-OTs who leave an org Solo levels,
with F/N VGIs at the Examiner determines the auditor training is recommended 427
repute of the org in that area, 439 you deserve the best auditor you can get, 427
revivification, Scientology Drug Rundown and 222 staff co-audit,
robot, better the case shape of each individual staff member
anatomy of, 44Q the more viable the org, 94
handling for an auditor who looks like one, 441 for everyone—the trained and the untrained, 95
remedy for, 440 has to be arranged so as not to disrupt regular
rock slam, production, 95
Post Purpose Clearing and, 376 how it is run, 98
what it indicates, 564 most advantageous method to ensure staff get and stay
rundown, mixing rundowns or repairs for rundowns is in good case shape and move on up the Bridge, 79
out-tech of a very serious nature, 420 muzzled auditing, 98
planning and execution, 96
prerequisites, 97
S Qual’s responsibility, 95
read-it, drill-it, do-it, 97
sales personnel, Confessional List for Registrars and, 180 responsibility of staff co-auditors, 98
sauna, ventilation of, 63 Supervisor, holds it all together and keeps the co
Scientology, auditors auditing, 99
breakthrough, basic technology of ethics, 118 untrained co-auditors, 97
who it can help, 393 what is run on it, 96
Scientology Drug Rundown, see also drugs staff member(s)
ability gained and EP, 221 Confessional List for General Staff 146
Dianetic Clear who has had a drug rundown but still percent of staff members who currently have an F/N
has unhandled charge in connection with drugs VGI Examiner,s Report as their last report
handling, 222 , determines directly the efficiency and solvency
pc who has gone Clear in the middle of the NED Drug and expansion of the org, 439
Rundown handling, 222 standards, 395
preclear prerequisites, 217 standard tech, you are safe and secure doing 422
procedure, 217 star-rate, see checkout(s)
repair with End of Endless Drug Rundown Start-Change-Stop,
Repair List 224 anatomy of control, 51
Scientology auditing techniques to handle drugs on brings about a greater self-determinism, 51
Dianetic Clears, 215 on a Body, commands and procedure, 53-56
SCS, see Start-Change-Stop on an Object, commands and procedure, 51-53
Security Checking, see also Confessional(s); overts and only way to err is in bad ARC, 56
withholds still needle(s),
chronically still needle in answer to questions indicates art is to get needle active again, 401
a withhold, 402 which does not react on ordinary things should react on
fatal to miss a withhold; also fatal to miss part of a an indicator of withholds, 402
withhold, 402 Stop Supreme, fourth stage of SCS on a Body, 53
F/N that does not flow and springs at the end, subject student(s)
being sec checked is not fully clean, 402 failed, required to receive a Confessional, 388
Implants, 399 responsibility to keep himself F/Ning as a, 344
Sec Checker beingness is that of a detective, 61 1 trouble if not resolving, situation not resolving, the
what to do If pc says he has secret data and therefore thing student is apparently having trouble with is
can’t get off his withholds, 450 not the thing student is having trouble with, 345
when you clean the withholds up all the way on the study, see also demonstration; dictionary(ies);
subject or area being sec checked, you get a free misunderstood(s)
flowing F/N, 402 basic missed withhold, 398
see, skill of being able to see or hear in a new unit of demonstration and, 455
time, 534 traumatic to person, remedy, 296
self-determinism, Start-Change-Stop brings about, 51 when to look for misunderstood, 344
SUBJECT INDEX
Study Green Form, 296 V
stupidity, unpleasant associations with words grown too
great to permit an approach to any word, 445 valence
subjective processes, interact between the individual and Happiness Rundown and valence separation, 465
his past or himself, 48; see also process(es) person can be under belief that he is another person or
Sunshine Rundown, defn., bright new rundown which thing entirely, 131
adds extra shine to the state of Clear, 362 verbal tech, definition for technical training films, 341
Supervisor, viewpoint, ability to assume viewpoint of audience 535
Confessional List, 151 vitamin(s), see also diet; mineral(s);
responsibility to keep students F/Ning, 344 Purification Rundown
Suppressed Person Rundown, 449 B complex, 9
suppressive person, terrified of anyone becoming more drugs and, 49
powerful, 448; see also insanity E, forms of, 557
Surveyor, assessment drills and, 30 megavitamin doses, Purification Rundown and, 453
Purification Rundown and, 8
T
W, X, Y, Z
Tapes,
course(s), Way to Happiness, theme, 405
English where the materials have been weight, problem of, resolved by counting daily calories of
translated and recorded on tape, 368 consumption of the diet as a whole, 15
how to study, 369 What is Scientology? used throughout FSM TRs, 530
headphones must be high-quality, high-fidelity, 364 wheat germ, oil, 556; see also oil
reel-to-reel, setting up and using, 364 withdraw, defn, move back from, let go, 289; see also
vast majority of technology of Dianetics and Reach and Withdraw
Scientology is recorded on tape, 369 withdrawal, accumulation of painful contacts with the
Technical Training Films, verbal tech and, 341 objects of life; remedy, 445
technology, see also ethics withholds, see also missed withhold; overts and
out, mixing rundowns or repairs for rundowns is withholds; Security Checking
out-tech of a very serious nature, 420 chronically still needle in answer to your questions
will not go in when ethics is out, 426 indicates a withhold, 402
Tone 40, F/N that does not flow and springs at the end,
defn., an execution of an intention, 359 the subject you are sec checking is not fully
positive postulate, 359 clean, 402
Tone 40 auditing, definition, 360 Word Clearing,
tone arm (TA), good Word Clearing is a system of backtracking, 345
floating needle and TA position, 200 Method 1,
registers relative mass of case, 201 position on the Grade Chart, 354
Tours, Confessional List for returning Method 2,
Tours personnel, 165 common errors and handlings, 350
training drills or routines, see TRs comprehension and, 350
trouble, if it is not resolving, the thing student is only done on individual who has received Method 1
apparently having trouble with is not the thing - to completion, 347
student is having trouble with, 345 procedure, 347
TRs, see also auditor(s) handling bogged or non-F/Ning student, 349
auditor’s beingness and attitude toward pc are the large bodies of data, 349
things his TRs measure, 20 tapes, 348
confront of evil and, 25 written materials, 347
cycling through, definition of, 442 requirements for Word Clearer, 347
FSM TRs, see FSM TRs used as routine method in Qual or courseroom, 347
if your TRs were good enough you would be known as used on a large body of data, 347
a great auditor without doing a single thing, 23 Method 3,
in-sessionness of pc and, 21 description, 344
professional. how they are drilled. 443 procedure, 344
TRs the Hard Way, how they are drilled, 443 use of 344
prepared lists and, 40
U unpleasant personal associations with words and, 445
zeroing in on the word, 345
understanding, art and, 555; see also art words, unpleasant associations and, 445
Volume XVI 1980-1984 Technical Bulletins
Volume XVI 1980-1984 Technical Bulletins
Professional auditing in any place on the planet http://timecops.net/english.html http://0-48.ru https://www.facebook.com/Galactic_Patro ... 206965424/ Auditor class X, skype: timecops
