Type = 120 iDate=0/4/58 Volnum=0 Issue=72 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  How We Work on the Third Dynamic    Ability Issue 72 [1958, ca. late April] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. How We Work on the Third Dynamic L. Ron Hubbard It is obvious that a barbarian society, leaving all to chance, believing in luck and irresponsibility, needs direction. If it cannot receive that direction from its elected leaders, it is soon drowned in confusion. This is particularly true of barbarian societies. By barbarian, we mean, of course, "lacking in social graces." A nation may have huge machines, projectiles of great violence and stoves that do all the cooking and yet be a complete barbarism socially. The activities of a barbarism one against another are punishment, revilement, contest for first dynamic supremacy with no thought of the rights of others. The barbarism solves political problems with brutality, crime with punishment and social ills with degradation. It is fairly obvious then that the United States of America -- and the Western world -- is a barbarism, wearing nylon shirts instead of bearskins, lip rouge rather than tattoo tabu marks, but subscribing to the Code of Hammurabi just the same. The social code used identifies the barbarism and an "eye for an eye" is little better than law for the sake of sadism, mere animalism. You can know a barbarism by its witch doctors, its concept of the other man's mind. In this society the mental witch doctor, comfortably enfranchised by the A.P.A., believes sincerely Man is an animal without soul or hope and, following Pavlov and other Russian teachings, that Man works only for reward like "any other dog." These are the brands of barbarism. Hate is deified above love, a deterrent to an action is better than a communication, the delusion is more palatable than the truth. If we place the government on our chart of human evaluation, we find a craven psychotic. What would you think of the sanity of a man who sits in his house all day every day loading guns for fear of some mythical enemy? What would you think of a person who used violence against the weak, the helpless, women and children? What would you think of someone who solved all his problems with threats of violence? You'd be right. Such a person would be insane. Just add up the characteristics of a government today, apply them as if done by an individual and make up your mind. Governments are insane. It is a big thought and one necessary to digest if you are not 251 going to go around all your life snarling impotently against "government stupidity." The insane aren't always stupid but they are certainly insane. Of course you could define government as "that body created by the aggregate irresponsibility of a people." The insane are irresponsible. That is why they are insane. If you lump all the irresponsibility in a nation into one body you would then have an insane body. Thus the government temper. Now it is a fact that help and destroy are opposite ends of the same string. When a person can no longer help he seeks to destroy. Destroy is the same as help to a psychiatrist. Total identification. But more of this elsewhere. It is enough here to demonstrate that if you try to help an insane body it responds by seeking to destroy you. This is nothing to be afraid of since the ability to direct in an insane body is very poor. Thus the blows usually go awry. One sees it in government when the police arrest and question the man who was attacked by a thug. The police forget the thug and arrest the innocent. Now all this comes about only when you have a barbarism, where the social training of each person is so poor as to amount to a collective insanity. To cure a barbarism one must make men socially grow up. And that is done with individuals. One works with individual people, not with groups. We in Scientology have done a "power of growing up," me and you both. We are strong in that we have the ability to make other people "grow up." Our target is the individual if we wish to increase the group level of responsibility. To properly hit the target each of us needs to be (1) a good example in our own case and (2) well trained and secure in our Scientology skills. All we really have to do to win is to get clear and clear others, the while keeping on with the routine demands of life. As startling as clearing is today, as impressive as it is to learn Scientology well at the Academy, yet these things can be done rather easily. Clear is now no esoteric goal. It can be reached in a few weeks of highly skilled auditing. Getting to be an excellent auditor is a must if one merely wishes to live. But one dynamic isn't enough. It takes all the dynamics to make a freedom. Therefore to be clear is not enough. To be a cleared auditor and to handle and audit people is a must if we wish to be totally free. Face it. We live in a barbarism. The shiny cars are driven by degraded men. You won't be free unless they are. It has taken me ten hard years to make clearing everyone an accomplished fact. That I could do it was not enough. That you could do it was part of the major plan. My purpose is to bring a barbarism out of the mud it thinks conceived it and to form here on Earth a civilization based on human understanding, not violence. That's a big purpose. A broad field. A star-high goal. But I think it's your purpose, too. Best, L. RON HUBBARD 252  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SIGNS OF SUCCESS   Post: HASI London Admin Board, D.C.  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MAY 1958 Post: HASI London Admin Board, D.C. SIGNS OF SUCCESS Whenever we're really winning the squirrels start to scream. You can tell if somebody is a squirrel. They howl or make trouble only when we're winning. Spectacular success can quadruple the number of complaints. Tell the complainees: "Come in, get clear." Otherwise skip it. To understand a squirrel, consider the reaction of somebody who could not run the fifth leg of help "How could another person help another person". The thought of this drives some people spinny. That's a squirrel. They can't view other people helping others without going berserk. There's nothing personal in having squirrels. Even heroes can have lice. Best, LRH LRH:bt.rd 253  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=135 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCEDURE CCH CONTINUED    P.A.B. No. 135 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 May 1958 PROCEDURE CCH CONTINUED Compiled from the Research Writings and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard CCH 5: This is Tone 40 Locational Processing, and the purpose of this process is to bring the preclear's attention under control and unfix it from the facsimiles which usually control his attention. It is also a most valuable process to run when the preclear's communication is too poor to run the present time problems with Problems of Comparable/Incomparable Magnitude. It brings the preclear from the problem in which he is interiorized into a recognition of the environment, which gives him havingness, and he can consequently unfix his attention from the problem. It brings him into present time -- the 6th dynamic -- and he can have mass again. Since this is a Tone 40 process the auditor does not acknowledge idle chatter from the preclear, but should HE say something, the process may be frozen after a few more commands have been executed and the auditor can discuss or "fish" the cognition. The auditor must point to and clearly indicate the object which he wants the preclear to see and must make sure that his "thank you" stops the preclear from getting stuck on the object at which he looks. The commands are "With that body's eyes notice that (indicated object, wall, etc.)." When the preclear has done so the auditor says "Thank you" with such intention as to stop the cycle of action completely and to start a new command in present time. If the acknowledgment really reached the preclear he will immediately look away from the object at which he was looking and look at you, smile and seem pleased. Incidentally, the auditor points to both that body and that object. While using this process in CCH 0, the handling of the present time problem, it can be used as either ordinary or Tone 40 Locational. CCH 6: To bring the preclear's attention further and fully under control of the auditor, Opening Procedure by Duplication 1957, with the following commands, is used: (Auditor takes a book and bottle, placing them some distance apart on tables so that the preclear doesn't have to bend.) "With that body's eyes look at that book." "Thank you." "Walk that body over to that book." "Thank you." (Auditor each time with the commands points to "that body" and "that book.") "With that hand pick up that book." "Thank you." "Put that book down in exactly the same place." "Thank you." 254 "Turn that body round" "Thank you" "With that body's eyes look at that bottle," etc. It is a Tone 40 process and should be run precisely, making sure that the preclear does not anticipate or distort the command. Duplication + Control = Communication is a formula which is well worth remembering during the running of all Tone 40 processes. This does not mean that if the preclear seems to be communicating, he is, for a lot of his machinery will go into restimulation during this process and one must be able to differentiate between the preclear's originations and those of his bank. This, being one of the most arduous processes in Scientology, should be run in one session until flat; otherwise the preclear will be hung up at the point where the process was ended and it will unnecessarily retard the progress which Procedure CCH brings about. These two processes, when well run, will bring the preclear's attention under the direction of the auditor. Since duplication will straighten out all the vias and twists the preclear might have in receiving the exact intention of the command which originated from the auditor, the auditor may then proceed to bring the preclear's thinkingness under his control with CCH 7: Tone 40 8-C -- "Keep it from going away," CCH 8: Tone 40 8-C -- "Hold it still," and CCH 9: Tone 40 8-C -- "Make it a little more solid," which should be run as a combo [combination of processes] one after the other until each one is flat. As with most processes, make sure that the command is cleared before embarked upon, and then after a while, if the preclear doesn't cognite or have any facsimiles, find out "how" and "what" he is doing, for there might still be a possibility that due to semantic difficulties he misunderstood the command and is really running another. "Keep it from going away" and "Hold it still," apart from the fundamental value in cognitions, are to exercise the preclear's ability to control facsimiles -- to keep them from going away and to hold them still when he later is going to run Then and Now Solids, which demands just that. Preclears who have been involved in Eastern teachings will cognite during running "Hold it still" and find out a lot about "serenity" and the eighth dynamic. All the things which the preclear has been keeping from going away will come to view. These are good exteriorizing processes. Refer to earlier PABs for further information regarding these processes. "Make it a little more solid" is the first exercise in making MEST and facsimiles a little more solid and must be done before the preclear can progress to Then and Now Solids. His abilities to keep things from going away, hold them still and make them a little more solid must be thoroughly checked and rechecked, and the auditor must be sure in his own mind that the preclear has acquired these abilities. Making things a little more solid is just what it says. The preclear does not have to make things very massive, but he should be aware of an increase in the mass, weight and density of the structure of that which he is making more solid. This process will increase his reality on the Prelogics and reverse the flow of solids. It will remedy the preclear's havingness and push him further up the Scale of Reality. The commands for the three Tone 40 8-Cs are: "With that body's eyes look at that (indicated object)." "Thank you." "Walk that body over to that (indicated object)." "With those hands touch that (indicated object)." "Thank you." "Keep it from going away." "Hold it still." "Make it a little more solid." Run each one flat individually. 255 Since these are Tone 40 processes, precision of execution of commands is closely observed by the auditor. "These processes include a control of thinkingness of the preclear and therefore should be run with a tremendous amount of auditor trust of the preclear and should not be run until the lower levels of CCH are to some degree flat, as they will give the preclear losses." -- LRH from "The Student Manual." CCH 12 and CCH 13: CCH 12 is known as "Limited Subjective Havingness." The commands for this set of processes are: "What can you mock up?" Preclear answers and the auditor says, "O.K." to the preclear's answer and then tells him: "Mock up (whatever the preclear said he could mock up)." "O.K." "Shove it into yourself." Run this flat then proceed in the same way except for then having the preclear "Let it remain where it is." When this is flat enter on the third part, which is "Throw it away." Have the preclear shove the mock-ups into "himself" and not the body. Remember it is "have" for the thetan and "can't have" for the body. It is important here to remedy the havingness of the preclear's bank before going on to Then and Now Solids. Should the preclear's field be black, then run the following process until it clears up: Remedy the field with blackness. Have him mock it up, let it remain and throw it away. This preclear is holding on to blackness since he does not have enough blackness. This is remedying the havingness with blackness of which he has a scarcity. If the preclear's field is invisibility, put glass objects of all sorts and sizes on a table next to him and one after another have him "Keep it from going away" until his field returns. As with all other processes in Scientology we are only interested in giving our preclears wins, and it is therefore necessary to see that he completes each step successfully before continuing with the next process. Should none of these processes do what is required, CCH has not been properly applied and steps 0 to 5 should be run once more and the auditor can then run Control Trio, which is being spoken about in a later PAB. CCH 13 is "Subjective Solids" and the first exercise to make things solid subjectively. The commands for this process are: "What can you mock up?" (which is asked every time one changes the type of mock-ups). "O.K." "Mock up (whatever the preclear said he could mock up)." "O.K." "Now make it a little more solid." When this is done the auditor checks with "Did you do it?" for preclears often say they have when they didn't execute the command. Start this on a gradient scale. As long as he makes only a few atoms of the mock-up a little more solid the auditor should be satisfied. The preclear here will break through Effort on the Know to Mystery Scale and as he proceeds use less and less effort until he just postulates the solidity. It is most important to ask the preclear what he is doing, how he is doing it to insure that he IS doing it properly. Smoothness of auditing is essential. One does not desire to break ARC with the preclear, but a certain amount of policing is necessary and this is a "certainty" process. It is important that the preclear find the process "real," otherwise he is not under control and will not be able to do Then and Now Solids, to which all these other processes lead. 256  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=2/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  BEINGNESS AGAIN    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 2 MAY 1958 BEINGNESS AGAIN The best solution to valences is beingness processing. Help on valences is excellent, even phenomenal and should not be ignored. Problems of Comparable Magnitude to a selected person cannot be ignored. But an understanding of valences gives us a new look at processes. In the first place a valence is a beingness. Bad, crazy or superb, a valence is still a beingness. A thetan has a basic personality. But if this is too thoroughly invalidated, a thetan assumes some invented valence. And if this is invalidated he then eventually completes the DEI Scale on Beingness. The things wrong with a thetan are the lower harmonics of the characteristics of a thetan. You could say carelessly that the only thing wrong with a person is himself. Let us say more accurately that the only thing wrong with a person is his abandonment of self and the assumption of other selves. Because there is a self, the assumption of selves is possible. We find that the APA or OCA is a picture of a self What self is another matter. All selves other than true self are less honest and ethical since the thetan has a poorer opinion of others than he does of himself in the basic state. To change an APA or OCA it is necessary to shift selves. It is fascinating that theft of objects is really an effort to steal a self. Objects represent selves to others. Thieves and what they steal cannot be understood by the logic of their material needs. They steal tokens of selves and hope to assume thereby another self. It is sometimes not amusing to me to be missing my lecture notes or a book from my shelf. This is covert theft of beingness. People sometimes get anxious to be me -- I know not why. They wind up stealing my things. The theft is irrational. The articles were not later cherished and all were put away or thrown away when the beingness did not materialize. Perhaps it is bad taste to mention this from my personal viewpoint but from where else should I look? And it has all happened to you, too. The senselessness of the items selected probably puzzled you when they were stolen. But they were identified with you. You couldn't be stolen, so you lost your wife, your husband or your little trinket, "meaningless" perhaps to anyone but you. A person has to discover he can't be you before he steals your things without credit. When he discovers he still isn't you, he damns you to all. He finally cannot be you, so he wastes you. And thus the DEI Scale of beingness is completed. One answer to this is never be a desirable you. And never get famous. A far better answer is to understand it, for by understanding alone you can prevent it. Thus, the major tears of the world are based on beingness. Insanity, heartbreak, bitter lives all stem from the same source. There is also an acceptance level of beingness, based on a viewpoint of an already alloyed beingness. Some people can only have the beingness of the criminal or the insane. Thus there is yet another door to cracking cases, another latchstring to the problem of Man. There is also the problem of acceptable beingness, probably more important than acceptance level. What Beingness is acceptable to various people in the pc's life? 257 There is also such a thing as taking on another's unwanted beingness to help him or lier. Such as taking a psychosomatic. We have had many beingness processes. Like we did at first with help, we missed a point. The preclear does not know what "help" means. And he does not know what beingness means. He is below cognition level on them. All help or beingness actions he undertakes are reactive, not analytical. To overcome this, one enters the case of the pc at the Inhibit end of the DEI Scale. He has the pc waste the item in brackets. He asks the pc to waste help, to waste the help of another, to have another waste help for himself and so on. Thus it is with beingness. Have the pc waste it. Man tears his idols apart trying to get a bit of desirable beingness. Every thetan wants to heal at sight; so they crucified Christ. And sold pieces of the cross. A pc who assumes the aches of another wishes to be that other. He is short on beingness. He accepts it obsessively. Wearing Empress Eugenie's hats is understandable. What woman wouldn't be an empress? But wearing the crooked back of the Hunchback of Noter Dame isn't quite so comprehensible -- if you don't know Scientology. One follows knowing assumptions of beingness with unknowing assumptions. The thief knows not why he steals. The bishop knows little of why he cherishes the bit of the True Cross. And none of them know, so invalidated has it become, that each has a basic beingness, complete. And that beingness is important to you. It is the best beingness there is. And it is important to me, how important can only be viewed through these eyes that see the magnitude of the job. Why should anyone steal when he can have the best there is for the asking? And why steal from me and thee for we alone in all Man's history can give him the priceless gift of himself. Just as the thief knows not why he steals, so does the archbishop fail to know why he dons a robe. To abandon life is to waste all beingness. There is the preclear who sits at succumb. Try it on a pc. You'll be surprised. This is one of the OT steps on which I am working for the 20th ACC. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd Copyright$c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [PAB 141, Beingness Again, 1 August 1958, is taken from this HCO B.] 258  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=73 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Assists in Scientology    Ability Issue 73 [1958, ca. early May] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. Assists in Scientology L. Ron Hubbard DEFINITION: AN ASSIST: An action undertaken by a minister to assist the spirit to confront physical difficulties which can then be cared for with medical methodology by a medical doctor as needful. An assist is not normally done in a formal auditing session. The way the term has been used is a very simple processing activity to relieve an immediate troublesome difficulty. An assist is much more specifically and definitely anything which is done to alleviate a present-time discomfort. It is differentiated from auditing at large by defining auditing as an activity directed toward the rehabilitation of the entire individual. The first moments of every formal session are an assist. Before you undertake further auditing you usually perform an assist. If you are a very clever auditor you do it by scouting what has happened between sessions, or if the person has a present time problem, for the handling of a present time problem in an auditing session is really not auditing because it is addressed to a surface difficulty. You handle the difficulty which is uppermost and foremost in the preclear's mind. A preclear may say, "Well, my wife and I had a fight last night. She threatened to commit suicide, and now she has a violent headache." The wrong way to look at what he is saying is to think that it is her headache that is causing the trouble in the session and that you cannot cure her headache as she isn't present. The actual trouble in the session is his concern about her headache. So you run Problems of Comparable Magnitude to relieve his mind to a point where he is quite comfortable and you can get on with the auditing. And that is actually what an assist is. Since you really do not have the preclear under good control, nor well orientated in the environment, you have to answer this technical question: When does an auditing session begin? The answer to that question is: An auditing session begins when you have a preclear, and when he knows he has an auditing environment and an auditor. There is auditing which is done on a relatively loose basis, which might be out in the street, in the kitchen, or anywhere. An assist could happen almost anywhere. But at the 259 beginning of the session, no matter how formally this session is constituted, you are running an assist. You have an auditing room. You have a preclear, and you are the auditor. You know all these things, but the preclear doesn't. As far as he is concerned, there isn't a formal session taking place. Don't call it a formal session. Call it an assist. Tell the preclear that it is an assist and that you are not intending anything very strenuous. In rendering an assist you should tell the preclear that "this is just an assist" to try and ease the pain in his hand a little, after which you are going to stop. The handling of an assist as an auditor is different than the handling of a formal session since the factor of control is notably slackened, sometimes almost completely missing. One of the factors in assists is that an assist has as a large part of its anatomy, "trying to help." Just remember that you are only trying to help and don't get your heart broken by the fact that the fellow's broken spine doesn't heal instantly. Another factor is that an assist is differentiated and defined as addressing the game someone knows he is playing. What techniques would comprise an assist? Anything that would help. And what are these? One of the easiest ones to render is Locational Processing. You tell the person, "Look at that chair. Look at that ceiling. Look at that floor. Look at that hand" (the auditor pointing to the objects), when he has an injured hand and the pain will diminish. This is a very easy assist. For example, a person has a bad shoulder. You touch his hand of the same arm and say, "Close your eyes and look at my fingers." Make sure that he keeps his eyes closed. You then touch him on the elbow and say, "Look at my fingers." Do this anywhere on his body. Just touch him and say, "Look at my fingers." This is a communication process which eases his attention over from a concentration upon the injury to something else which is quite near the injury and thus doesn't result in too much of a shock. It reduces havingness but it is positive and gets positive results. It can be done by an untrained person. You can teach this assist to anybody. You say, "If somebody has a bruise, injury, a burn, a cut, the way to handle this is to tell the person to close his eyes, and then you touch the area near and distant from the vicinity of the injured area, asking them, with their eyes closed, to look at your fingers. You contact them this way many times. They will experience sudden pains in the area, and you will discover that the 'psychic trauma' has been discharged." You will find that people do not have any upset about physical contact. Most people think that this is the thing to do. Say you wanted to render an assist on somebody who had a very indefinite difficulty. That is the hardest one to render an assist on. The person has a pain but he cannot say where. He doesn't know what has happened to him. He just feels bad. Use Locational Processing as such. You will find out that this process will work when other processes fail. An assist carries with it a certain responsibility. If you give an assist casually to somebody out in the public and do not shove a professional calling card in his pocket, you are making an error. The reason for this is that he will not know from whom and where help came. Therefore, an auditor walking around without a pack of cards is doing a foolish thing. An auditor goes through life and he casts his shadow upon many 260 people and they have really no cognizance of what has happened at all if he is rendering an assist. He says, "Do this, do that" -- maybe he wins, or maybe he loses because this is the type of session least calculated to procure orderly results. But in the main these people have been helped. They don't know really by what, except some word that the auditor kept saying. They don't even know that he is an auditor. They don't know anything about it at all. Show a person where he can obtain further assistance, and by whom the assistance was given. Be yourself. Be positive. Be professional and definite. Have a card and make sure the card is easily enough understood. Don't ask them for permission. Just do it. No reason to wander around and give them funny notions. If you are going to help some stranger out, help him out. Don't explain to him or any bystander, otherwise you are likely to stand there explaining, waiting for somebody's permission. Don't bother with that. You act as though you are the one in charge and you will be in charge. And this is part and parcel of the knowledge of how to do an assist. You have got to be the person in charge. This has to be so good, as far as you are concerned, that you overcome the informality of the session to a very marked degree. If you do it extremely well, the assist will amount to auditing. Say, for example, there is a big accident and a crowd of people are pressing around. The police are trying to push the people back. Well, push the people back and then push the policeman back. Say, "Officer, keep these people at a distance." Then you lean over the victim and snap him back to rights. If you are enough THERE, everybody else will realize that you are the ONE that is THERE. Therefore, such things as panic, worry, wonder, upset, looking dreamily into the far distance, wondering what is wrong or what should be done, are no part of your make-up if you are rendering an assist. Cool, calm and collected should be the keynote of your attitude. Realize that to take control of any given situation it is only necessary to be there more than anybody else. There is no necromancy involved. Just BE there. The others aren't. And if you are there enough, then somebody else will pull himself out of it and go on living. Understand that an auditor when rendering an assist must make up with presence what he lacks in surroundings and agreements. It all comes under the heading of willingness to be there and willingness to control people. One of the ways of convincing people of beingness and of being there is to exercise control -- positive, undeniable Tone 40 exercise of control. Start to control the situation with high enough ARC, enough presence and factuality -- there won't be anybody present that won't step back and let you control the situation. You are entitled to it in the first place because of senior "know- how." The control of body attention or thought comprises the majority of your knowledge. The majority in Scientology simply points in this direction. The observable thing is control of attention, objects and thoughts. When you have good confidence of being able to handle these, and when you positively know how to do these, then you can make sure that everybody else knows you can do this, and you make them realize this by doing it. You have all of these things available in rendering an assist. You might never think of a riot as being a situation which necessitated an assist, or an assist as applicable to a riot, but a riot is simply a psychosomatic momentary injury or traumatic condition on the third dynamic. Could you settle a riot? Well, if you can settle a riot, you can certainly settle one person who is in a riot. The antithesis of any pain, disturbance or tumult is order. The thing which controls tumult is order; and, conversely, the thing which controls order is tumult. You need only bring order into a confused situation and bring confusion into an orderly situation to control everything in the field of motion, action and objects. This is a fantastic simplicity and one which takes some grasping. Conceive as order, merely a fixed position, idea and attitude. A policeman knows what he is 261 supposed to do. Maybe he will put on a tourniquet or maybe he won't. Keep the people away and stop everything is his idea of how it should be. Now you can aid or abet the order he is creating, or cancel the order by creating a confusion which he cannot handle. Of the two, the first is the best in that situation. You aid and abet and cap the order he is creating. If you were to accuse him of having a confused accident scene, which is by now not at all confused, and ask him to straighten it out, you would channel his attention in the direction it is already gone, and so you control his attention. Remember, those people are still moving a little bit; they are still breathing. There is still a tiny bit of motion going on. If you were to ask him something on the order of "Can't we have it a little quieter and more orderly here?" he would at once perceive that there was far too much confusion and motion, and he would simply come under your direction because you have simply channeled his attention in the direction it was already going. Therefore, you have taken control. If you ever want to overset a fixed order, create a confusion. If you want to overset a confusion, create a fixed order. Pick out of the scene those beings in the scene whose attention is channeled in the direction you want attention to go, and you aid and abet that attention which already exists. Or, where you have too many fixed positions and fixed ideas to overcome, you simply take those turbulent individuals in the scene who are creating the confusion against those fixed ideas and channels and you make their confusion much more confused, at the same time yourself imposing another order in another direction. The mechanics of taking over any confused scene are simply the mechanics of trying to get a preclear to see through the morass of cross-purposes, commands, ideas and environments in which he has lived. And whether that applies to the third dynamic or otherwise, the laws are still there and it tells you then that the imposition of order on a preclear comes foremost in an assist. In an assist you always count on the fact that the thetan himself would, if he could, do the right thing. If you work on that postulate you will never be wrong. Get the idea that it is something else trying to do the wrong thing. The keynote of a thetan is order. 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. Maybe you will find somebody with a temperature of 106 degrees. It may very well be that he needs to lie down and be covered up, and though antibiotics are much overrated, he might be better off with a shot of one of these than with an assist at that time. Auditing will not shut off a pumping artery, but a tourniquet will. If you are going into the zone of accidents, you are going to be in the vicinity of a great deal of destruction and chaos, and you are very foolish not to have your Red Cross First Aid Certificate. 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. An assist is auditing on several dynamics. It is, therefore, much harder to do than auditing in a formal room as it requires presence. You must bring yourself to face the fact that you have to give enough presence and enough control to enough dynamics to bring the environment into a compliance with your postulate. If you postulate that 262 somebody is going to pick up his bed and walk, then you have to be willing to move and be capable of moving around the people who are going to watch him pick up his bed and walk. 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 and 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. She becomes introverted into the cut to the point that she wouldn't particularly notice what you were doing. But you relieve the anxiety that all her blood is pouring out; your first attention to the case is attention to the environment. Next you would make her sit down. To remove her from the scene of the accident is not as desirable as auditing her there. That is directly contrary, perhaps, to what you believe, but it is true. That is why you bring a little order into the environment. You position her and then you are ready for techniques. It is quite remarkable for you have manifested order in a much wider sphere than a cut hand in order to bring about a healing of the cut hand. If you understand that your responsibility always extends much wider than the immediate zone of commotion, you never miss. If you bring order to the wider environment you also bring it to the narrower environment. If you bring it into the narrow environment, you also bring it to the wider environment. It is a gradient scale of how much order you can bring. In processing, you have to control or direct attention, objects, person, or thoughts of the injured person. If you are really good on the subject of assists, you will direct an additional thing: his knowingness. You can control a man's knowingness rather easily, but it is hard to see it. About the first thing that you can observe about somebody is his person. You are trying to straighten it out. Don't think that, even though you have this person sitting down, you have straightened it out, because it is still messed up. But there is something that you can straighten out easily -- and that is his attention. If you could heighten his attention and his knowingness at the same time, you would really be in wonderful circumstances. You always shift and direct his attention, hence Locational Processing. If he was a Scientologist, with his case in pretty good shape, you could run Trio with considerable success by directing his attention. But you wouldn't run Trio with the command "Look around the room and find something you could have." You should say, "You look at that chair." "Now decide you can have it." That is a very low order of the Terrible Trio. You could run the injury out in this fashion: "Look at that chair." "Decide the injury cannot have it." This is directed attention, positively controlled. There is no permissiveness connected with this in any way whatsoever. Because he is injured you are not going to move his person around. You have got his attention. Don't try to shift his thoughts around at first because they are dispersed and chaotic. This leaves you his attention only. The above assist is quite satisfactory, but a later development in the line of assists which included the significance of "Keep it from going away," is much more powerful. In one case a bruise, turned utterly black, and covering this person's entire hip, passed away in 45 minutes of good auditing by "Keeping the right hip from going away," and then "Keeping the left hip from going away." If you run the right eye, you run the left eye as well. If you run one thing you run another. If you run his head, run his knees as well. The master of all these 263 is the direction of attention. "Keep it from going away" is tremendously workable. You don't run "Keep it from going away" first, because you are partially controlling his thoughts and this is not possible in the early stages of an assist. If someone is in terrible condition and he is really writhing around, and you want to render an assist, you don't wait until he stops writhing. He is liable to stop writhing dead. What you do with him is to direct his attention. You tell him, "Shut your eyes and look at my fingers." You press your fingers hard enough so that he can't help but put his attention on them. If you want it to come out with no bruise, then you would get him to a point where you can control his thoughts, which are chaotic enough. Have him "keep the left ankle from going away, the right ankle from going away," etc. If the process doesn't seem to be flattening, direct his attention somewhere else because he is not keeping it from going away. In this wise you can always have a successful assist, because assists all come under the heading of control. The beingness of the person and his presence makes the control possible. So part of control is always presence, identity, person, the one who takes charge and has things under control. When you are able to control his attention, his body and thoughts, then he will be in session and you are no longer doing an assist. Assists dominantly require that you direct the attention of the preclear and dispose his person one way or the other and eventually take over control of his thoughts on the subject. But by the time you have all these three in line, you are no longer doing an assist. So what you really do is do an assist up to the time the person can handle the incident or pain, put him in a more favorable environment and give him auditing. So the assist is what you do on the street, and auditing is what you do in the auditing room when he comes to you after your assist has been successful. 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. L. RON HUBBARD [The above was edited and issued under the same title in Ability 154, October 1963, which was further edited and issued as HCO B 21 October 1971, Volume VII, page 415.]  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=9/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WHO SHOULD TAKE WHICH CLASS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 9 MAY 1958 WHO SHOULD TAKE WHICH CLASS The Director of Training should never instruct the advanced Academy class, because of the amount of administrative work he has to do. Director of Training preferably teaches Comm Course. The Academy Senior Instructor should handle the advanced class and do no administrative work. His job is making sure the student is an auditor at course end. The Academy Administrator should be the Upper Indoc Instructor. LRH:bt.rd L. RON HUBBARD 264  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=15/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=136 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCEDURE CCH CONTINUED    P.A.B. No. 136 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 15 May 1958 PROCEDURE CCH CONTINUED Compiled from the Research Writings and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard THEN AND NOW SOLIDS: CCHs 0 to 13 are steps in exercising the preclear's ability to be able to do CCH 14 which is Then and Now Solids. They are a gradient scale of exercises to eliminate all his wrong conceptions and to clear out of the way those considerations which aberrated him into having that unknown, hidden and compulsive game of which he was at the mercy. The preclear must be in control of his body and environment. He must be able to keep things from going away (especially mock-ups and facsimiles), hold them still and, most important of all, make them a little more solid. We say "more solid" for it invalidates the present solidity of whatever the preclear mocked up or touched if we say "make it solid." The process is run in the following manner with these commands: "Get a picture -- and make it a little more solid." "Thank you." "Look at that (auditor indicates object) -- and make it a little more solid." "Thank you." "The commands are given with a tiny pause between the first and second phrase, as it will be found that the glance of the preclear at the object tends to give him the impression that he has already made it a little more solid before the auditor gives the command if this auditing command is broken into two commands." ("The Student Manual" by L. Ron Hubbard.) The command says get a "picture" and the auditor must explain to the preclear, if he doesn't already know, the difference between facsimiles, dub- ins and mock-ups. We must make sure that he gets a picture (facsimile). This process combines subjectivity and objectivity (introversion and extroversion) in the preclear's universe and the MEST universe. It handles time. He will have to go into the past in order to get the picture and then come up into the present by making a specific indicated object a little more solid. Its whole goal is to straighten out the preclear's time track, to clear up his reactive bank and disclose his Service Facsimile and Life Computation (and even whole track computations which make him act in a certain manner life after life). It will enable the preclear to handle time and get rid of all the unwanted facsimiles, for by viewing them and making these a little more solid 265 he will get the restimulative facsimiles under his control. He will then be able to handle in its totality the whole reactive mind. To impress its importance, here is a direct quotation from "The Student Manual": "HISTORY: Developed from Over and Under Solids, which was developed by L. Ron Hubbard in late 1955 and improved by him in 1956. The process more or less completes the work begun on the reactive mind in 1947. It will be noted that many earlier processes and effects are woven into Then and Now Solids." The auditor running this process must be capable of handling any emotional situation, however startling and unexpected it might be, with great smoothness and ease. Facsimiles will stand out unexpectedly; the preclear will get sudden somatics and past life enemies will be there in front of his body in metrocolor and three dimensions. He will run up and down that tone scale, dramatize anger or pain to such a degree that the auditor who has not been run on High School Indoc or Hi Hi Indoc might get the scare of his life and take off, leaving the preclear in a spin. Then and Now Solids demonstrates in its application all that is written in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health and A History of Man. It takes into account the basic theory and elements of both Scientology and Dianetics, and only the expert can handle this process well. Nowhere along the line is the auditor allowed to move from the commands of the process, since it is Tone 40. It does not mean that the auditor must not communicate with the preclear. Indeed, it is most necessary at times, but he must keep the original intention of the process in mind at all times and gently but firmly steer the preclear back on to the route he is leading. The process MUST be run EXACTLY as given. It is not advised that any book auditor or beginner use this process, for the session will most certainly go out of control if Tone 40 and the TRAININGS (see "The Student Manual")* are not clearly understood and applied. This process acts quickly if it is real to the preclear. If these facsimiles do not sometimes stand out with alarming clarity he is not running the process. It should not be run for hours and hours without a break. One can always run it to a flat point and then return to the beginning of Procedure CCH and flatten each command, which by now will take a comparatively short period. It is not necessary for the preclear to tell the auditor each time what the facsimile was that he found, but it is advisable that the auditor check now and again to see that the preclear is doing it properly. It should be run non-specifically. The auditor will notice that the preclear will go further and further into the past and then come up nearer and nearer to present time and eventually, after many of the cycles are completed, come wholly into present time. There are a few developments from Then and Now Solids which can be used on valences, for example. If the preclear has trouble with mother, have him "Get a picture of mother -- and make it a little more solid." Then have him "Notice (an indicated object or wall) -- and make it a little more solid." (It must remain THEN and NOW solids alternately throughout the whole session.) Should the auditor suspect that the preclear is stuck in a past life or has recurring facsimiles of past lives during processing, have him get the pictures, make them a little more solid and then make something in present time a little more solid. It will blow. The same procedure applies for any troubles the preclear has regarding men, women, children or other parts of the dynamics. [* See HCO B 11 June 1957, Training and CCH Processes. "The Student Manual" is unavailable.] 266 LRH told an HGC auditor to clear the valences with Then and Now Solids, then the preclear's own body, and after that to return to general non-specific Then and Now. CCH 14 is the fastest and most effective process in Scientology if the earlier steps are well accomplished, but it stirs up so much motion and emotion that the auditor better be fully trained before he attempts to run it on an innocent preclear. PROCEDURE CCH (LONG FORM) The CCH numbers in the preceding PABs and on this chart do not necessarily coincide with that of "The Student Manual" by L. Ron Hubbard, but is a procedure which LRH gave HGC staff auditors. The numbers by which they are known will be published in "The Student Manual" or may be obtained from the central organizations. CCH 0a. Rudiments. 0b. Goals. 0c. Present Time Problems. 0d. Help. CONTROL OF 1. "Give me that hand" PERSON (Body) (right, left and both hands). 1a. "Don't give me that hand" (right, left and both hands). 2. Tone 40 8-C. 3. Book Mimicry. 4. Hand Space Mimicry. CONTROL OF MIND 5. Tone 40 Locational Processing. (Attention) 6. Opening Procedure by Duplication 1957. CONTROL OF 7. Tone 40 8-C -- "Keep it from THINKINGNESS going away." 8. Tone 40 8-C -- "Hold it still." 9. Tone 40 8-C -- "Make it a little more solid." CONTROL OF 10. S-C-S on an object. (Covered PERSON in previous PABs.) 11. S-C-S on a person. (Ditto.) CONTROL OF 12. Control Trio. MIND 13. Trio. CONTROL OF 14. Limited Subjective Havingness. THINKINGNESS 15. THEN and NOW Solids. Creative Processing (as in Scientology 8-8008). Route One (as in The Creation of Human Ability). 267  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ENEMIES OF THE PC    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 22 MAY 1958 ENEMIES OF THE PC List the enemies of the pc. Then run help on them. Entrance, run things pc doesn't have to do to them. A PT Prob doesn't free on help is under-pinned by a similar earlier problem. LRH LRH:bt.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 268  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=74 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Scientology and the Reactive Mind    Ability Issue 74 [1958, ca. mid-May] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. Scientology and the Reactive Mind L. Ron Hubbard You may have wondered why we have said so little in Scientology about the reactive mind. That it hasn't been mentioned lately doesn't mean everyone changed his ideas and decided it didn't exist. In Dianetics the reactive mind was that thinkingness which went on without analytical inspection. The reactive mind was described fully and accurately in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. The whole of Freudian Analysis concerns itself with treating the reactive mind. Freud called it the Unconscious, amongst other things. The whole of German (and U.S.) psychology concerns itself with examining the reactive mind. Only Dianetics laid bare the full anatomy of the reactive mind. That anatomy is concerned with mental image pictures ordinarily unseen by the person which nevertheless dictate his illnesses and responses. The primary characteristic of the reactive mind is response to a situation without analytical inspection. People react without volition. They do strange things when confronted with stimuli. Offer a man a cup of coffee. He twitches. He doesn't know why he did. Wink at a girl and she gets an earache. She doesn't know why she did. This is the reactive mind at work. Think of going for a drive -- get tired. Decide to study -- get a stomach ache. These are reactive mind actions. And the pity of it is the man didn't know it was the cup of coffee that made him twitch. The girl didn't know it was the wink which gave her an earache. Because it is an illogical connection. But that is the stock-in-trade of the reactive mind -- everything equals everything. If you really want to know more about this strange mind you should study Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health thoroughly. It's enough here to say it still exists and still accounts for all one's "unaccountable" actions. Scientology went upstairs from Dianetics into the area of the spirit. But that didn't mean that all we knew was forgotten. Far from it. In Scientology we find the source of creation, of good, of evil. We also find the source of the reactive mind. 269 The spirit is the source of all. You are a spirit. These are the basic lessons of Scientology. These are heady lessons. They are not easily learned. Man would rather be approached slowly than leapt upon. He shudders away from truth when truth seeks to pinpoint him as the responsible party. In Scientology we have found that a person can be so far below apathy that he doesn't know what he is doing. And so he can have a reactive mind. Clearing in Dianetics consisted of getting rid of the reactive mind by erasing it and learning to handle it. That's a long task. Clearing in Scientology consists of discovering the source of the reactive mind itself and making it vanish. That's a short, fast task. The basic difference between Dianetics and Scientology is this: Dianetics attacked the reactive mind on a materialistic level. Scientology, amongst other things, attacks the reactive mind on a spiritual level. Scientology works faster, better and more stably than Dianetics ever did. In clearing, the reactive mind vanishes. That is not the primary Scientology target in clearing but it is a worthwhile one. Freud's Unconscious is conquered territory. The German psychologist's "mind" is conquered territory. Conquest comes in Clearing. And fast Clearing is done by Scientology. There are many real proofs of this. A reactive mind can be seen on a lie detector or any skin galvanometer. When it is gone, these machines do not react on the person. And there are other proofs as substantial. That Scientology has whipped the reactive mind is brand-new news. That the ills of Man can be healed only by an address to the spirit is news. That no materialistic means, no medicines, no treatments by matter permanently heal or cure anything is a demonstrable fact. In Dianetics it was a large forward step well meriting its acclaim to identify the anatomy of the Freudian subconscious. In Scientology it is a large forward step again to find that the reactive mind vanishes before the strong spirit. And it is another great step now to know that any material means or defense can come to nothing in the end: The spirit is the source of all creation. You are a spirit. L. RON HUBBARD 270  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A COMMENT ON BEINGNESS PROCESSING   All Staff Field Offices  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 (Issued at Washington) HCO BULLETIN OF 24 MAY 1958 All Staff Field Offices A COMMENT ON BEINGNESS PROCESSING I recently received the following from an HGC auditor: "Dear Ron, "I am writing to congratulate you on the development of the Beingness processes outlined in HCO Bulletin of May 2 AD 8 *** "These are wonderful processes and I thank you for them. "Not as a report, but purely as clinical data I want you to know what happened in seven and a half hours of using them. "Nine major valences came off the case, including the weak one and the strong one. All the important ones stripped off clean. Plus the fact that the service facsimile keyed out. This person is not a clear, yet, but is a brand new person." *** HCO BULLETIN OF 2 MAY 1958 Beingness Again The best solution to valences is beingness processing. Help on valences is excellent, even phenomenal and should not be ignored Problems of Comparable Magnitude to a selected person cannot be ignored. But an understanding of valences gives us a new look at processes. In the first place a valence is a beingness. Bad, crazy or superb, a valence is still a beingness. A thetan his a basic personality. But if this is too thoroughly invalidated, a thetan assumes some invented valence. And if this is invalidated he then eventually completes the DEI Scale on Beingness. The things wrong with a thetan are the lower harmonics of the characteristics of a thetan. You could say carelessly that the only thing wrong with a person is himself. Let us say more accurately that the only thing wrong with a person is his abandonment of self and the assumption of other selves. Because there is a self, the assumption of selves is possible. We find that the APA or OCA is a picture of a self What self is another matter. All selves other than true self are less honest and ethical since the thetan has a poorer opinion of others than he does of himself in the basic state. To change an APA or OCA it is necessary to shift selves. It is fascinating that theft of objects is really an effort to steal a self. Objects represent selves to others. Thieves and what they steal cannot be understood by the logic of their material needs. They steal tokens of selves and hope to assume thereby another self. It is sometimes not amusing to me to be missing my lecture notes or a book from my shelf. This is covert theft of beingness. People sometimes get anxious to be me -- I know not why. They wind up stealing my things. The theft is irrational. The articles were not later cherished and all were put away or thrown away when the beingness did not materialize. Perhaps it is bad taste to mention this from my personal viewpoint but from where else should I look? And it has all happened to you, too. The 271 senselessness of the items selected probably puzzled you when they were stolen. But they were identified with you. You couldn't be stolen, so you lost your wife, your husband or your little trinket, "meaningless" perhaps to anyone but you. A person has to discover he can't be you before he steals your things without credit. When he discovers he still isn't you, he damns you to all. He finally cannot be you, so he wastes you. And thus the DEI Scale of beingness is completed. One answer to this is never be a desirable you. And never get famous. A far better answer is to understand it, for by understanding alone you can prevent it. Thus, the major tears of the world are based on beingness. Insanity, heartbreak, bitter lives ill stem from the same source. There is also an acceptance level of beingness, based on a viewpoint of an already alloyed beingness. Some people can only have the beingness of the criminal or the insane. Thus there is yet another door to cracking cases, another latchstring to the problem of Man. There is also the problem of acceptable beingness, probably more important than acceptance level. What Beingness is acceptable to various people in the pc's life? There is also such a thing as taking on another's unwanted beingness to help him or her. Such as taking a psychosomatic. We have had many beingness processes. Like we did at first with help, we missed a point. The preclear does not know what "help" means. And he does not know what beingness means. He is below cognition level on them. All help or beingness actions he undertakes are reactive, not analytical. To overcome this, one enters the case of the pc at the Inhibit end of the DEI Scale. He has the pc waste the item in brackets. He asks the pc to waste help, to waste the help of another, to have another waste help for himself and so on. Thus it is with beingness. Have the pc waste it. Man tears his idols apart trying to get a bit of desirable beingness. Every thetan wants to heal at sight; so they crucified Christ. And sold pieces of the cross. A pc who assumes the aches of another wishes to be that other. He is short on beingness. He accepts it obsessively. Wearing Empress Eugenie's hats is understandable. What woman wouldn't be an empress? But wearing the crooked back of the Hunchback of Noter Dame isn't quite so comprehensible -- if you don't know Scientology. One follows knowing assumptions of beingness with unknowing assumptions. The thief knows not why he steals. The bishop knows little of why he cherishes the bit of the True Cross. And none of them know, so invalidated has it become, that each has a basic beingness, complete. And that beingness is important to you. It is the best beingness there is. And it is important to me, how important can only be viewed through these eyes that see the magnitude of the job. Why should anyone steal when he can have the best there is for the asking? And why steal from me and thee for we alone in all Man's history can give him the priceless gift of himself. Just as the thief knows not why he steals, so does the archbishop fail to know why he dons a robe. To abandon life is to waste all beingness. There is the preclear who sits at succumb. Try it on a pc. You'll be surprised. This is one of the OT steps on which I am working for the 20th ACC. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rs.msp.rd Copyright$c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 272  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SPECIAL BULLETIN STANDARD CLEAR PROCEDURE AND AN EXPERIMENTAL ROAD: CLEARING BY VALENCES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 29 MAY 1958 SPECIAL BULLETIN STANDARD CLEAR PROCEDURE AND AN EXPERIMENTAL ROAD: CLEARING BY VALENCES There have been many roads to clear. The first was the most simple in description but the most difficult to audit. I never succeeded in teaching it to anyone. All one did was renew the pc's confidence in being able to face sonic, visio, tactile, etc, in the bank by gradient scale and at long last he would be able to confront a bank wholly. When that happened he didn't have a reactive bank. He was clear. It required a very gentle touch. That was the way I made all the early clears in 1947 to 1949. Then I had to explain it all to the "scientists" and the fact of clear was lost in the mire of the roadway for some years. I've been accused of wanting it that way to tell the sheep from the goats. The point remains that this route was the first successful route. We did not know how much there was to a bank or its anatomy. We had to know the worst before the sun came up again. It came up in December of 1957 with my development of "help" and Step 6. Suddenly we were making clears. Making them out of both high and low profile cases, out of occluded cases and wide open cases. Clearing is now an accomplished fact for any well-trained validated auditor using a central organization E-Meter. The further in miles from the central organization the attempt to clear is tried, the more difficulty is being experienced. First the word goes out that clearing is being done, then the how-to-do-it. By the time it gets to Alaska or the Bronx or some distant place, the auditor is uncertain as to the right way and even the fact of clearing. He tries it (or thinks he does) (his version anyway) and laying an egg or two, gives up or thinks it isn't real. For such an auditor an HAA clearing course is indicated. (1) He'll learn right and (2) he'll see some clears around and begin to understand what one is. And he'll know there is at least one valid road to clear that he can take and do. Therefore we do not really need right now more roads to clear and certainly we need no roads to OT while the path to clear is still a thin blazed trail. Good Heavens, what's happened is wonderful enough -- and nobody far away has any reality on that yet. However I am still on the job looking for (1) Alternate clear roads and (2) Roads to OT. Standard Clearing Procedure, the procedure that is making clears in skilled hands, is a very set SCP indeed. It alone has made all clears to date by persons other than myself. SCP is aided here and there by other techniques used to cross a block or two faster. But all older techniques only assist the steps of SCP (and sometimes impede 273 SCP). Of course there are some people who would rather walk in the swamp alongside the causeway just built -- that's up to them. If they know there's a causeway and still walk in a swamp it's power of choice. If they haven't seen the big causeway beside them and walk in the swamp, that's stupidity. Standard Clearing Procedure works as follows: Requisite for auditor - Validated certificate. Tools: A quiet room and clearing E-Meter from D.C. or London (not some tin quivering together on the hopes of some tinker nor yet an old Model T E-Meter made in California). Publications: Clear Procedure available from the HCO. [See page 172.] First Action: Start session CCH 0. Second Action: Search out by meter a p.t. problem and run it by finding "What part of it pc can be responsible for" as a repetitive command, formal auditing. Third Action: CCH 0 b. Clear help in brackets with a meter, running meter toward a freer needle. Don't overrun a leg of the bracket and get the pc stuck or anaten. Fourth Action: Run Step 6 of the book Clear Procedure and run it flat. Fifth Action: Reclear help. Sixth Action: Step 6 until flat, flat, flat and needle free. That's SCP. It is assisted by SCS and Connectedness on some pcs. SCP is an accomplished fact only if the auditor has good training and validation. He doesn't have to be clear. But he has to be accurate. The HAA-BScn course teaches Validation and Clearing. HCA-HPA teach the basics of Scientology -- you have to know those first. Thus an experimental road to Clear is today a luxury. But you know me -- I'm always cutting corners. So here is an alternate, still in theoretical stage, which promises to be the 3rd successful road. However it requires even greater auditing skill and understanding than SCP but may be faster for lower cases. It is called "Clearing By Valences". Its theory is simple. One can assume that a thetan has all the attributes of clear in his basic personality (see Book I, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health for a discussion of Basic Personality). The action of clearing gives a person back to himself. Therefore the bulldozing of rubble from the basic personality would give us a clear. I have known for some time that an APA or OCA profile was a picture of a valence or of valences -- artificial overlays. I have also known that there is a basic personality. When you clear someone you don't get a ghost or a god -- you get a distinct personality. Men are not equal even if the highest courts in the U.S. so insist. And neither are clears. It is Commie-psychiatric thinking that each is equal to the next like grains of mush. You can generalize by saying clears are good and able. But some are gooder than others and some are distinctly differently able. So people are different. But valences (borrowed, artificial personalities) overlay the real self and weaken it. Valences are the sum of overwhelmings of the pc. Whenever he lost he got one. 274 His basic personality was invalidated so he sought new ones. These were invalidated so he sought even newer ones. Like standing between two mirrors facing each other we achieve the multiple pc. But where is the clear? We find him when we scoop away the thousands of others he is being. The first straight wire run at Elizabeth, N.J., in 1950 succeeded when it knocked off a sick valence. Well we can knock them off wholesale today - with skilled auditing. The clue is the Curiosity-Desire-Enforce-Inhibit Scale run on valences. That which the pc erases with difficulty is misowned by him. Therefore it is a valence. In the presence of valences he cannot change his mind easily when he misowns the consideration. Therefore all fixed, harmful ideas or aberrations stem from valences. The process on this would be "Tell me how you could waste a (male) (female) (other) valence." This would have to be cleared as a command thoroughly and often. That's the skill. An auditor can ask a pc about an aberration and spot a valence possibility. And then run it by waste, etc. People usually have to waste before they can have. A person who can have a valence isn't subject to it. This type of command is rounded off with "What part of that valence could you be responsible for?" The general rules of auditing must be observed. The basics of Scientology must be understood. And great skill and understanding are required of the auditor. "Tell me how you could waste father's valence" "... a fat valence" "... a defeated valence" etc. The list is enormous. Well there it is in the rough. When it's made some clears it will be an alternate probably and have a highly polished form like SCP. Right now it is used as an assist to SCP on a difficult case as per the next HCO B. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.jh Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [PAB 138, Standard Clear Procedure and An Experimental Road: Clearing by Valences, 15 June 1958, is taken from this HCO B.] 275  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SPECIAL BULLETIN No. 2 AN EXAMPLE OF CLEARING BY VALENCES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 29 MAY 1958 SPECIAL BULLETIN No. 2 AN EXAMPLE OF CLEARING BY VALENCES An Experimental Process Experimental Case C by V No. 2. Auditor: LRH Pc -- Experimental Case. Nervous, restless, heavy somatics. I started session by attempting to clear a p.t. problem. First he had to clear the command. The pc, very restless, defined a problem as "Something that can't be solved." "You can keep trying but of course you can't solve it." I tried in vain to get pc to as-is that computation. It would not change. I was faced by this: One cannot audit successfully up against a p.t. problem. If one tries to do so without clearing the problem the whole case hangs fire. Every unchanged profile or case after auditing is unchanged because the auditor left a present time problem partly or wholly unflat and in restimulation. A pc whose definition of a problem is "something that can't be solved" and who yet has a p.t. problem could not be audited successfully unless the computation altered. Trying "What is a problem?" as a repetitive question for half an hour only made the pc nervous, restless and tearful. Obviously the consideration would not change. Therefore, obviously, the consideration was mis-owned. It was a valence, another person the pc was being with complete tenacity and total error. Process abandoned. Decided to strip the valence off. A discussion of what was a valence finally bore fruit. Pc understood term as meaning a mental package of ideas and considerations really belonging to another person and unknowingly borrowed by pc. Started in to run a process to at once give greater reality on valences and to hit at the computation. If pc would fight help so hard then the valence had four considerations that were known to me. (1) It couldn't be assisted; (2) It considered a problem is "something that could not be solved"; (3) It was steeped in defeatism; and (4) The pc thought of the valence as self. Just to ease into valences I ran a process as follows "Can you get an idea of somebody that cannot be helped?" Pc could. "Describe the person." Pc did, thus getting a detached idea of a personality in the mind. "Now what would you say that person's definition of a problem would be?" The first dozen people so imagined all had definitions of problems identical with pc's own. But then there began to be a change in the definition. Possibly this process would have gotten further but pc was looking brighter and a flat place was reached and I was really trying to clear by valences. Therefore I bridged, started in on valences directly. I called the valence in which pc was stuck "that valence" (pc thought of it as self. I used the repetitive command "Tell me how you could waste that valence". Now and then I asked where it was. Pc didn't know sometimes, sometimes did. (At first it was just back of pc's eyes and was pc's thinkingness.) 276 Terrible somatics cut in after fifteen minutes, all chronic with pc. I went right on with process for some time (over one hour) when pc suddenly began to cognite on problems. The somatics had ceased entirely fifteen minutes before. As a process can be left when (a) an ability is regained, or (b) three responses are given with equal comm lag or (c) pc truly cognites in line with process, I could then leave it and bridge. I bridged over to "What part of that valence could you be responsible for?" for twelve minutes to round process off and keep pc from making "that valence" an enemy if any bit of it remained and to check out somatics. Pc felt very dazed for a moment or two (typical of a separating somatic) but came out of it very bright. Process flat. Bridged into earlier commands for a few commands each to flatten them and bridged out to begin clearing of session. Pc could not now consider any of the five initial problems listed as problems now ... they all seemed simple and routine parts of life. Ended session. Time of auditing 2 1/2 hours approximately including one short break. Goal of session was to clear up problems on the subject of problems. Goal was attained. Added bonuses -- Loss of main thinkingness circuit, loss of chronic somatic and service facsimile, increase of potential, new zest to continue on to clear. Pc heretofore desiring little auditing, hard to control in session, reactive toward help offered by others. All changed. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:bt.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [PAB 139, An Example of Clearing by Valences, 1 July 1958, is taken from this HCO B.] 277  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=137 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SOME MORE CCH PROCESSES    P.A.B. No. 137 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 June 1958 SOME MORE CCH PROCESSES Compiled from L. Ron Hubbard's Research Writings and Taped Lectures to the 18th American Advanced Clinical Course CONTROL TRIO: After one has run CCH 0 to 5 and has brought the preclear's body and attention under control, there are various ways of handling the case from there on. Here is a series of processes which undercuts Trio and is called "Control Trio." The commands for Control Trio are: 1. "Notice that (auditor indicates object) and get the idea of having it." 2. "Notice that (auditor indicates object) and get the idea of permitting it to continue. 3. "Notice that (auditor indicates object) and get the idea of making it disappear." The processes should be run in that order and each one must be run flat before the next one is attempted. It is very necessary to clear the command before embarking upon the process. Preclears simply understand that "having" means that they must possess something, carry it with them wherever they go -- without just leaving the mountain, chair or whatever it is, in its own space- time continuum. He gets it confused with ownership and so forth. In Fundamentals of Thought there is an excellent definition of havingness: "The essential definition of having is to be able to touch or permeate or to direct the disposition of". During the running of the first command the preclear will come up with cognitions regarding the necessity of having or not having things, its goodness or badness, and will in general run out his earlier training regarding this point. It will change his conceptions which earlier religions may have implanted, such as it is "bad to have," and run out the compulsions of "must, must not, got to, can't have," etc. Find out what the preclear is doing and how he is doing this, for he should get havingness from this process and his tone should rise considerably. A change should take place within a very short period, otherwise (a) his body and attention are not under control or (b) he doesn't understand the command and is running a different process than that which you intended. 278 There should be no qualifications or conditions such as "If I had the money I could buy that object and then have it," or "I don't like it and thus don't want it," or "What shall I do with it once I have got it?" It is just the ability to have without other considerations of goodness, badness, ownership or beauty going with it, and the auditor and preclear should clear such conceptions through good but non-evaluating two-way communication. The second part of this trio brings the preclear's sense of active participation of creativity and responsibility out, for he must grant that particular object sufficient life and beingness to allow it to "continue within its own space and time." Preclears come up with the considerations that they have either tried to not-is objects and/or people or "withheld" something from them or tried to push them out of their environments because they didn't like them or agree with them. This is an interesting process to put their ideas about what they should have around them back into proper perspective. They will find that there is no harm in permitting the sixth dynamic to continue in present time right where it is. The third part of the trio is the most effective and more will be said about it in a following PAB. It is a very good exteriorizing process and the preclear will come up with many cognitions on his own and the rest of the dynamics. Here the idea is just to "get the idea of making the object disappear" instead of to dispense with it or not-know or not-is it. This cycle can be run over and over again until it is flat, within a few minutes after the command has again given the preclear some gains. After this, Trio (old-time Terrible Trio) can then be run with great advantage on a case who couldn't do it before. Control Trio, which undercuts Trio, will bring out its reality level. GOALS: With every preclear it is most necessary to establish goals that are REAL for the PRECLEAR. You want him to have some goals which are HIS and not what grandma, father or schoolteacher desires for him. Preclears who have no real goals are working on other people's determinism and we have to (a) establish the certainty of a future for the preclear, and (b) get him to put things in that future that he WANTS, so that he can have a future. There is a gradient scale of processes which will establish goals which are REAL to the preclear by casual two-way communication, using the following questions: 1. "What are you absolutely sure will happen in the next two minutes?" one hour, three days, one week, three months, one year, etc. Complete certainty on each time span is necessary before the auditor continues to the next time span. This is done by two-way communication, and the auditor must all the time be sure that the preclear is certain that these things are going to happen in the next two minutes (or whatever the time span is) to ensure that the process really bites. 2. "Tell me something that you would like to do in the next two minutes," one hour, etc., is the next process that would put doingness and more time into that future. On some preclears the following questions may be realer and bite faster. This is putting the accent on have instead of do, since we work from the bottom up on the Be, Do, Have triangle. They are: 279 3. "Tell me something you are sure will be there in two minutes, etc.," and 4. "Tell me something you would like to have in two minutes, etc." The last two processes really undercut the above and are thus lower level processes and it is advisable to run them on preclears whose ability to communicate and reality level are low. Watch out for the preclear attaching all sorts of conditions to his answers. Also work towards positive goals of "things" and not conditions such as "I want to get rid of my fears and somatics." The latter type of preclear is working towards nothing rather than towards something. (A more positive goal of something would be "I want a stick of candy or a glass of water.") Check for certainty at all times, for certainty strengthens reality and the reality of a future for the preclear is most essential if auditing is to succeed all the way. LOSSES: Why doesn't a preclear exteriorize easily and stay exteriorized? And "Why does he get sick when one asks him to conceive a static?" is the accompanying question. The answer to this is "Losses." The preclear associates a static with loss, and he says, "All right, if there is nothing there I've lost it." Conceiving a static is therefore painful, and whenever he lost anything something disappeared. An individual cannot conceive a static if he associates static with a loss -- if it is painful. So we have to cure him of the painfulness of loss, consideration of, before we can exteriorize him easily. We do this by going back to automaticity. The universe has been taking things away from the preclear. It has become an automaticity known as "time." Time itself is a consecutive series of losses. So we have to cure this preclear of losses before we can get him to appreciate time, otherwise he would be so afraid of losing it that he'd park himself on the track, and this is the "stuck on the track" phenomenon. This is done with the process "Recall a moment of loss," sandwiched with havingness (Control Trio, Trio or Locational Processing). This gets the preclear to take over the automaticity of all of the losses which he has experienced unwillingly. When an individual has no visio, has never seen anything, couldn't see anything, the only thing that he is looking at is a "stuck" loss. Recall a Moment of Loss and Goals are a lower harmonic of running Then and Now Solids and are at the moment making a bid for our chief exteriorization processes. Recall a Moment of Loss should be run with two-way communication, but not too much outflow of the preclear. Communication must at all times remain two-way. Ask the preclear "when" this happened now and again, unless, of course, he told you when he recalled the loss. Control Trio, Goals and Recall a Moment of Loss are a combination of processes and should be run as a combination to secure the best gain for the preclear. 280  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 0 iDate=0/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A Scientologist is one who controls persons, environments and situations.    A Scientologist is one who controls persons, environments and situations. Scientology means knowing in the fullest sense of the word. Scientology is used on Life and its forms and products. A Scientologist operates within the boundaries of the Auditor's Code and the Code of a Scientologist. The chief uses of Scientology are in the fields of education, organization, mental disability and religion. Scientology is the first to give scientific meaning to these. A Scientologist is considered a professional if he uses Scientology in any of these fields and has been thoroughly trained in Scientology. A Scientologist is a first cousin of the Buddhist, a distant relative to the Taoist, a feudal enemy to the enslaving priest and a bitter foe of the German, Viennese and Russian defamers of Man. The religion of the Scientologist is freedom for all things spiritual on all dynamics which means adequate discipline and knowledge to keep that freedom guaranteed. We are the people who are ending the cycle of homo sapiens and starting the cycle of a good earth. There is no barrier on our path except those we make ourselves. Our ability belongs to all worlds everywhere. L. RON HUBBARD 281  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=76 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  "Offbeat" Processing    Ability Issue 76 [1958, ca. early June] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. "Offbeat" Processing L. Ron Hubbard Experimental auditing has its place. Indeed, we got where we are because of experimental processes. Every process was once experimental. BUT when you want results you had better use standard techniques and procedures. After all, I have sweated through their testing for years and we now KNOW what will ease or clear a preclear. Most clearing "failures" are caused by use of non-standard techniques and procedures. Also, such failures can be caused by ignorance. An auditor thinks he is using standard material. He isn't sufficiently trained to know. Such an auditor who has had failure, should take a leaf from New Zealand. Frank Turnbull wasn't getting the results he wanted way "down under." So he grabbed a plane and came halfway around the world for a two-day briefing. Frank was right. They weren't using techniques properly -- and their old-style E-Meters weren't even working and they didn't know it. Now if a smart, clever auditor like Turnbull can doubt his command of the subject, I am sure other auditors would experience no disgrace in following through and getting squared around. For clearing is easy if you know how. Such stories as an auditor who "clears his pcs each week" are more tragic than funny. And rather costly to luckless pcs. Some auditors don't understand "What is a Clear" and get confused with their own cases -- but that doesn't mean a Clear doesn't have a precise definition, an exact and distinct beingness -- and very worthwhile, as any clear can assure you. Perhaps the saddest case of experimental auditing to come to my attention was the case of a young man whose wife was depressed. She was making such difficulty in the family that he could not work. He had had training as an auditor but felt he could not help her. He had no money for auditing from a professional. I reviewed the case and asked him why he did not at least try to help her, and recommended he use standard auditing and procedures. This he did with adequate results and his efforts succeeded very well so that he was able to resume his work, his wife sharing his responsibilities. 282 And then it seemed to him that he might go a bit further faster. That is the usual stumbling block-anxiety to do it all at once. But preclears cannot do it all at once and the thoroughly experimental approach he used, born out of his own basic lack of reality, was not successful. He "audited" his wife downward into a condition almost as low as she had been in before, thus canceling over two-thirds of his gain. Now none denies his right to undo what he had done to help her, but his intention was to help her swiftly and spectacularly. Had he read his PABs he would have found as of three years ago a mention of his "discovery" as an unworkable approach, in defiance of the principles which make Scientology function. Once more he had to quit his job and his wife has lost confidence in his willingness to assist her. Fortunately, another auditor has now volunteered to assist -- and he will use standard, proven, tested techniques and procedures. You see, there is a thing called Scientology. It has axioms. It has principles. It has the goal of empowering a thetan to overcome his own problems. Thus standard Scientology we don't change every day. The uninformed, not knowing that a standard exists see in each new release a new subject. So they say, "Why don't I experiment on my pcs?" And they experiment with the standard background, not with a further reach of old, tried, principles. Without a guiding central organization Scientology would fall into an anarchy of opinions in a week for there are too many who can go through the motions of auditing who do not know their basics. They think a new thing, Scientology, is an experimental thing. It is not. The basics are inflexible and have been for years. We know now just exactly what clears people. And we know exactly what a clear is. And we know exactly how to train and process. These are hard won riches. Don't waste them and your time, too. This is the way out! Are some people so fond of the trap they avoid the flaming beacons which show the entrance? Or are they afraid to set Man free? L. RON HUBBARD 283  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RUNNING VALENCES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JUNE 1958 RUNNING VALENCES 1. Never leave one half flat. Stupidity is then in restimulation. 2. Always run a specific valence. 3. Past track valences are preferable to run over present life valences. 4. Thetan valences are preferable over body valences. 5. "Invent a (valence)" is a milder form, less effective but often more real to PC than "Waste a (valence)." Commands for Invented valences: "Invent a (specific valence)." "Think of a problem that valence could have." "Thank you." Commands for Wasting Valence: "Tell me (Think of a way to waste a (specific valence)." "Does that really waste it?" (occasional use) "Thank you." Types of valences that can be run: Formula -- Invent and/or Waste valences on eight dynamics from 8 to 1. Goals for Clearing by Valences: Uncover basic personality. BP is, of course capable of all attributes of clear. OT is an educated BP. Wind up all valences you have run with "What part of that could you be responsible for?" which puts him back at cause (since he elected as cause any valence you ran). Clearing by Valences is probably the 3rd step (with Help and Step 6) of Clearing. C by V doesn't neglect or supplant Help or Step 6. Always pick bad or contra-survival valences. Never run pro-survival. Differentiation is on this basic: A contra-survival valence physically injured pc. A pro-survival valence never did. Pcs pick out for their randomity stuck flows on help. E-Meters don't register well on valences. They stick and several valences mentioned will only stick more. A valence sticks. It must be freed up on meter. 8th and 7th Dynamic area of valences produce wildest results. Chief characteristic of formula 8 to 1 is to produce judgement. LRH LRH:-.cden Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 284  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STANDARDIZATION OF CLEAR PROCEDURE FOR GUIDANCE AND USE OF THE HGCs    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JUNE 1958 STANDARDIZATION OF CLEAR PROCEDURE FOR GUIDANCE AND USE OF THE HGCs (a) Stress 4 pts of error. (b) Run Help, Step VI. (c) Standardize Valences. (d) Eliminate Wasting Help. (e) 4 pts of Error 1. Profile, IQ unchanged = PT Problem left in restim, or not located at all. Cure = Understand, Locate and Flatten PT Probs. 2. Profile dropped = Auditor code break, real or imagined, unrepaired by auditor. Cure = Repair any code breaks with 2-way comm & Help. 3. Unstable Gain = Too many processes or processes not flattened. Cure = Increase confidence on auditor's part. Let him off of a total effect need. 4. Auditors unable to produce good results = Introduction of new processes which auditors then use without sufficient reality. Cure = Use only processes on which auditor personally his a reality. (b) Clear Procedure Clear Procedure consists of Help in Brackets on any terminals and Step VI. There are no other certain processes at this time. (c) Standardize Valences Valence splitting is most reliably done by running Help in Brackets on the valence. There are two valence processes now under test which seem to be better than others. They are still experimental. Experimental (a) Invent a being who could not be helped. What problem could that being have? Ack. Experimental (b) Invent an unconscious being (person). What problem could that being (person) pose? Ack. All other tested valence processes have so far failed. (d) Waste Help This process violates rule of terminals, "Run terminals, not conditions". LRH:bt.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 285  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=77 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Learning How to "Clear"    Ability Issue 77 [1958, ca. late June] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. Learning How to "Clear" L. Ron Hubbard In December of 1957 the first Clear was made by another than myself. This was the gain. This was the fruit of the years. Now we can have many clears. We can have thousands of clears. And if we can have that, we can have a civilization. So this was the bottleneck -- other auditors couldn't really clear people. And this bottleneck is splintered to diamond bits. Other people can clear others. And so we're on our way. However, it wasn't so much the technique that counted -- it was knowing how to apply it -- knowing fundamentals, knowing procedures. THERE IS A KNOW-HOW IN AUDITING TO CLEAR. It won't be picked up out of books. It won't be taught by word of mouth. It will be taught where Scientology teaching itself was evolved -- the Academy. The procedure of teaching to clear is as much part of clearing as the techniques of clearing. We must face that fact. And there's no real text on it because the text would be too long. There are very few people who know this teaching procedure. But brighter than that, there is at least one place where the combined know-how can accomplish the fact -- and that place is Washington, D.C. So now that we've got clearing and clear people, we also have a course, enrolling every Monday, that teaches clearing and only teaches clearing. That course is the Academy course leading to the grade of HUBBARD CLEARING SCIENTOLOGIST. This is the old BScn Course and replaces the grade of Hubbard Advanced Auditor, which certificate while still valid, will not be issued again at this time. The Hubbard Clearing Scientologist Course is five weeks in length. It is taught by L. Ron Hubbard, Jr. It is taught only at the Academy of Scientology. It will continue to be taught. 286 The prerequisites of the course are Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist and Hubbard Certified Auditor certificates. The cost is $285.00 unless taken consecutively with an HCA Course where there is a discount. The grade of Hubbard Clearing Scientologist will be the only validation stamp grade below the ACC Course. We have found that an aspiring auditor does better in school if he first has a Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist Course, preferably under a validated field auditor, of which there are many. However, this course is taught at the Academy as well. This is a two-week course at the Academy. We have found that an auditor goes nowhere if he does not know his basic Scientology and the fundamental activities and procedures of an auditor. These are taught in the Hubbard Certified Auditor Course. How to analyze problems, handle preclears, apply Scientology to life, give assists, do spiritual healing, handle the mind and a multitude of skills are all basic in this HCA Course. It is the Key Scientology course. It lasts eight weeks and contains 575 hours of personalized instruction. This is the course that really makes a Scientologist. It is a requisite to the Clearing Course. The Hubbard Certified Auditor Course is constructed as a wholly practical course, more on the order of a laboratory than a lecture series, in which every important aspect of livingness is taken up part by part and demonstrated with simplicity and clarity. Until such a thing has been done with a person, his attempt to clear others would meet with failure. But, even more importantly, successful living would be questionable without a modern HCA Course. The new Hubbard Clearing Scientologist Course follows a long tradition. Called the BScn Course and later the HAA Course, it has always taught clearing in one form or another. Earlier courses stressed exteriorization and other routes. Dr. L. Ron Hubbard, Jr. and Dr. Richard F. Steves have been the principal instructors in the past. The length and schedules have not been varied greatly from its earliest beginnings. The only things new about it are the title of the certificate and the actual, precise, welded-in-place, embedded-in-concrete stable data and procedures surrounding the new fact of clearing. People who complete this course will be able to clear people and that's all there is to it. The possibility of clearing somebody without such a course is, on the average, not very probable since clearing is a new reality. That doesn't mean people shouldn't try. A person attempting to clear will do more for a preclear than he's been able to do before, but to really reach the ultimate fact of clear with a pc would be quite a feat indeed without the auditor being specially trained. We want people who can routinely clear people -- and fast. We want no false prophets who, unable to really clear, degrade the definition or results of Clear. We want clearing auditors. We've made them in the HGC, I made them in the ACC, so we can make them in a five-week course -- if they are good HCAs already. The public will buy Clearing from an auditor. Even the dullest seem to understand what you mean when you describe "Clear." So an auditor selling clearing had better be sure he can. And we can make him sure -- not only of the fact of clear but his own ability to clear. In an Advanced Clinical Course after 1958 I am going to teach only Operating Thetan technology. The goals of an Advanced Clinical Course are to clear the 287 students who aren't and teach all the students how to audit toward Operating Thetan. Thus, as you can see, the ladder of courses we have developed have evolved into their natural places following the natural evolution of people and can stay that way. To develop this ladder we had to have technology about teaching and developed what we needed over these eight years. And we had to have the actual facts toward which to train. And so we obtain the following courses and goals, all of them logical and practical: 1. Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist. -- Two weeks of day training. Teaches people how to communicate and handle people. Field or Academy trained. 2. Hubbard Certified Auditor. -- Eight weeks of day training. Teaches people the practical parts of life and the fundamentals of handling it, as well as the procedures of auditing. Taught by Academy only. 3. Hubbard Clearing Scientologist. -- Five weeks of day training. Teaches auditors to clear people. Taught by Academy only. 4. Hubbard Graduate Scientologist. -- (Advanced Clinical Course -- ACC.) Six weeks of night and day training. Teaches auditors how to audit toward Operating Thetan. Taught by LRH only. Those are the grades which have evolved. We see no reason to change the arrangement or the certificates for the next thousand years. There will be other special courses, of course, but these are the basics. You might ask why all these certificates beginning with the word "Hubbard" -- auditors in 1950 and again in 1954 voted it that way, overthrowing my plea to take it easy, and so that's the way it is. They want it that way. Doctor of Scientology still exists, too, you know. I am very happy to make this announcement of courses. I haven't liked the changing around, either. But any Hubbard Dianetic Auditor can have a Hubbard Certified Auditor certificate just by writing in and paying the small cost of preparation and any HDA or Hubbard Advanced Auditor certificate is still valid. What a long, hard struggle it has been to stabilize the know-how and goals of training. We've done it just in time. Not too far off we'll need to hire a thousand auditors at high pay to take care of something special. So we haven't missed by much. Preference will be given, of course, to Hubbard Clearing Scientologists -- and the training, no matter how many we hire, will have to continue to be at the auditor's expense -- as is true of every staff auditor we have. We, the auditors, built all this ourselves out of our own pockets and so we own it. That won't change. A hundred thousand clears would change for the better all the civilizations of Earth. Say -- do you know we're already doing it? The Scientologist is today's Cause point in an embattled world. We'll win. L. RON HUBBARD 288  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/6/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCEDURE FOR CERTIFYING CLEARS  Type = 11 iDate=28/5/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  This Applies WORLD-WIDE All Offices and Auditors  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1958 (Revision of HCO Bulletin of 28 May 1958) PROCEDURE FOR CERTIFYING CLEARS This Applies WORLD-WIDE All Offices and Auditors Clears are tested by several departments. In only one department does all this data assemble. And only that one unit can pronounce a clear "Clear". Testing department gives test. Testing should not tell pc anything which would lead pc to think he has been passed for clear. Dir of Pr gives an E-Meter test and review of written tests but cannot finally inform pc he is clear. The most he can say is that it seems so, but final declaration of clear is reserved to the HCO Board of Review. When all papers and data are assembled at HCO Board of Review, this unit then reviews the entire picture. HCO Bd of Review can call for a retest at its own discretion after a lapse of time. HCO Bd of Review then submits all tests to LRH for a final review. Only after LRH certifies a person as "Clear" can a clear bracelet be issued. THIS APPLIES WORLD-WIDE. ALL TESTS FROM ALL OFFICIAL SCIENTOLOGY OFFICES. The issuance of the bracelet by HCO Bd of Review is the first time the recipient is informed finally that he is clear. This Bulletin is retroactive to the first person cleared by modern Scientology. LRH:rnd.rd Copyright $c 1958 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This revision changes the fifth, sixth and seventh paragraphs which in the 28 May 1958 issue read: "Only when HCO Bd of Review is completely satisfied does it then issue a clear bracelet. "The issuance of the bracelet is the first time the recipient is informed finally that he is clear. "HCO Bd of Review should refer cases about which it can't decide to LRH for personal review."] 289  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CONTENTS AND COVERAGE OF HCA/HPA COURSE   Training Activities Please Comply  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 7 JULY 1958 CONTENTS AND COVERAGE OF HCA/HPA COURSE Training Activities Please Comply Required knowledge of an auditor: Knowledge gives Results. The Auditor's Code. Code of a Scientologist The TRs The Axioms The following Scales must be well known: ARC Triangle (Emotional Scale) Know to Mystery Effect Scale Processes he must know before he runs clear processes: ARC Straight Wire Havingness Subjective Trio 8-C Thinkingness Processes Assists Running Engrams & Secondaries Handling of PT Problems Problems of Comparable Magnitude Opening Procedure by Duplication, earliest style LRH:bt.jh L. RON HUBBARD  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=9/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STAFF CLEARING    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JULY 1958 STAFF CLEARING The Director of Processing is in charge of Staff Clearing. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:bt.rd 291  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STANDARDIZATION OF CLEAR PROCESSES FOR GUIDANCE AND USE OF THE HGCs    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JULY 1958 STANDARDIZATION OF CLEAR PROCESSES FOR GUIDANCE AND USE OF THE HGCs (a) Stress 4 pts of error. (b) Run Help, Step VI. (c) Standardize Valences. (d) Eliminate Wasting Help. (a) 4 pts of Error 1. Profile, IQ unchanged = PT Problem left in restim, or not located at all. Cure = Understand, Locate and Flatten PT Probs. 2. Profile dropped = Auditor code break, real or imagined, unrepaired by auditor. Cure = Repair any code breaks with 2-way comm & Help. 3. Unstable Gain = Too many processes or processes not flattened. Cure = Increase confidence on auditor's part. Get him off of a total effect need. 4. Auditors unable to produce good results = Introduction of new processes which auditors then use without sufficient reality. Cure = Use only processes on which auditor personally has a reality. (b) Clear Procedure Clear Procedure consists of Help in Brackets on any terminals and Step VI. There are no other certain processes at this time. Supplemental Processes: CCH 0-1-2-3-4, S-C-S, Connectedness. (c) Standardize Valences Valence splitting is most reliably done by running Hello in Brackets on the valence. There are two valence processes now under test which seem to be better than others. They are still experimental. All other tested valence processes have so far failed. (d) Waste Help This process violates rule of terminals, "Run terminals, not conditions". L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 292  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  20TH ACC TRAINING PROCEDURE   Not for general use. HGC Auditors may find of interest.  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JULY 1958 Not for general use. HGC Auditors may find of interest. 20TH ACC TRAINING PROCEDURE The first day on auditing the student checks out as many other students for clear as possible with Clear Check Out Sheets and E-Meter. Text: Ability and HCO Bulletins. Purpose: To learn to check out clears. The way to learn clear check-out is to check out many non-clears. How to clear a command. Clear each word once only so that the word means something to pc. Only repeat if the pc says he doesn't understand. Never ask twice "What does Help mean to you?" Clearing a command is not a repetitive process. There is no other right way to clear a command in any case. Clear the command for all sides of a bracket before running one. All auditing and check-outs are actual. There is no student coaching except on TRs. 1. CCH 0 with emphasis on goals and PT Problem. Done thoroughly at start of every session. 2. ARC Straight Wire using following type command only -- "Recall a time when you communicated with something." Run as a complete 9 way bracket one command each side. Use communicate only. Run until needle of meter is relatively free. Pay attention to cyclic aspect of answers. Purpose: To loosen up bank and screens and to teach student use of a bracket and give him practice. This permits student to ease into a rather strict and exacting auditing activity without an instruction to him from an instructor upsetting preclear as it would if Help were being used instead. Avoid beefy processes where correction, supervision and general instruction are involved. Auditor requires no verbal answer from pc, only a head nod, but checks now and then as to when the communication being recalled took place. 3. Start-C-S oldest version. Emphasis on start and stop. Run change when the start or stop seem flat and only to unflatten them. Purpose: Smoothness of auditor control; accomplishment by pc of really controlling body. You start that body, etc is emphasized. 4. Connectedness, control version. Sole command: "You get the idea of making that (object) connect with you." No other side of bracket. Purpose: Havingness, unsticking needle, directing pc's attention. 4b. Student should scout pc's track looking for the "rock", spot it or something like it in minimal time, stick it good and free with Connectedness. Purpose: Giving student and pc confidence that some sticky business can be plowed into and gotten out of readily by use of Connectedness. 5. Help. 5 or 9 way bracket in general to groove pc in. "How could ..... help you?" On a sticky item run one side of bracket after another, never repeat any one side twice. Use whole track type commands, never localized this lifetime. 5a. Run "auditors" and "preclears" as subjects for Help. 5 way bracket. First run auditors, then pcs, then auditors, then pcs, etc. Purpose: Clean up all past auditing. 294 5b. Isolate whole track "rock" and run 5 or 9 way bracket on it. This is an adroit matter. It requires that one know the pc and audit this particular pc. It doesn't mean forcing one's own "rock" on the pc. It requires judgment and a knowledge of valences. It may be necessary to unburden the "rock" with several items before it appears. Free the needle on the "rock". Command must be phrased to include whole track version of pc's rock. Purpose: To locate largest reality of pc and to hit squarely on what he is always mocking up obsessively. 5c. Scout Help with a general bracket to see if it is freer. 6. Step 6 as in Clear Procedure. Use simple forms. Repeat 5, 5a, 5b, 5c and Step 6 alternately until clear. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:bt.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CARRYING ON    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 15 JULY AD 8 CARRYING ON Members from Australian and South African HASIs are here attending the Congress and 20th ACC. They are working hard and learning fast. In the meanwhile the Australian and SA staffs are carrying on short- handed and doing a very fine job of it. I know how hard it is to cover additional posts for two months. And I wish to thank those staffs for carrying on. Best, LRH:bt.nm Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard LRH ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 295  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  COMMAND SHEET FOR HGC CLEAR PROCEDURE   All Staff ACC Instructors and students Field Offices  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JULY 1958 All Staff ACC Instructors and students Field Offices COMMAND SHEET FOR HGC CLEAR PROCEDURE ON ALL COMMANDS: BEFORE AUDITOR GIVES THEM, HE MAKES CERTAIN HE HAS PC'S ATTENTION ON HIM AGAIN AND OFF LAST QUESTION. CCH 0 -- Starting Session.. "Is it all right with you if we begin the session now?" "The session is started." GOALS: "What goal might you have for this session?" (Be certain to end session with "Have we gained anything of your goal at the session's beginning?") PT PROBLEM: (Caution: Problem itself, not just its terminals, must exist in pt.) "Do you have anything worrying you so much that you will have a difficult time keeping your attention on auditing?" (If pc has) "Describe the problem to me." (Pc does.) "Does that problem exist in present time now?" (If pc thinks it does): "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" -- or, "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem." (Repetitive questions.) (No further descriptive name is allowed auditor in this command.) Auditor frequently asks, "Describe that problem to me now." -- "Does that problem now exist in present time?" ARC Break: "Have I done something you feel is wrong in this session?" "Describe it to me." Plenty of acknowledgement to pc, no further apology and certainly no explanation. Object is to get pc's attention on auditor in present time, not earlier in session. Goal of TR 2, of goals, PT Problem and auditing is to get pc's attention into present time, so don't stack commands on the track or park pc somewhere in session or leave him in an out-of-session problem. S-C-S: (Note: All formal auditing, except for final acknowledgement of cycle, which is Tone 40.) Commands: START: "I am going to tell you to start. And when I tell you to start, you start the body in that direction. Do you understand that?" "Good." "Start." "Did you start that body?" "Thank you." STOP: "I am going to tell you to get the body moving in that direction. Somewhere along the line I will tell you to stop. Then you stop the body. Do you understand that?" "Good." "Get the body moving." "Stop." "Did you stop the body?" "Thank you." 296 CHANGE: - "Do you see that spot?" "Good. We will call that Spot A. Now you stand here. O.K." (Auditor indicates another spot.) "Now do you see that other spot?" "Good. We'll call that Spot B. All right, now when I tell; you to change the body's position, YOU move it from Spot A to Spot B. All right?" "Good. Change the body's position." "Did you change the body's position?" "Thank you." "Do you see that spot?" "Well, we'll call that Spot C. Now when I tell you to change the body's position, YOU move the body from Spot B to Spot C. Do you understand that?" "Fine." "Change the body's position." "Did you change the body's position?" "Thank you." (NOTE: Change is run only to unflatten START and STOP, when both are flat.) CONNECTEDNESS: Use: Only to unstick pc on meter when meter can't be read well or when auditor desires to clear an object wrongly chosen as rock in order to look for another. (a) "You get the idea of making that (object) connect with you." (Auditor points.) (b) (If pc isn't looking at object with Mest body's eyes, use following:) "Look at that (object)." "You get the idea of making that object connect with you." (c) (On blind humans:) "Feel that (object)." "You get the idea of making that object connect with you." HELP: 1. SCOUTING. This is a 2-way comm activity. (a) "How do you feel about........?" Vary any object that sticks by asking about specialized form. If a specialized form frees, go back to object that stuck. Gradually sort object that consistently sticks from objects that stick by association with it only. (b) If pc reads high on the Tone Arm, gets inconsistent lie reaction, use following: "What have you had to be responsible for?" To be sure pc is reacting, turn Sensitivity knob very high. Guide him carefully around his life until he gets on a sticky point. Then sort it out, attempting to get parts of it to clear up. Do not let pc linger on matters which do not stick. Responsibility sorts the matter out. His realization (cognition) of various zones is what does him good. This is not necessarily a repetitive command. It can be varied with "What part of that (discovered area or item) have you had to be responsible for?" Large area of current lifetime can be freed up and with clues from what he has stuck on repeatedly and using what would not free, return to a standard scout as above. By using part (b) a pc can be brought down on the Tone Arm and can be made to react more normally on meter. 2. Running Help in general: USE generalized items, not specific people or objects (don't pin pc in current life). General Help bracket: 9-way: "How could you help yourself?" "How could you help me?" "How could I help you?" "How could I help myself?" "How could you help another person?" "How could I help another person?" 297 "How could another person help you?" "How could another person help me?" "How could another person help another person?" Running Help on an item: "How could you help a........?" "How could a........ help you?" "How could another person help a........?" "How could a........ help another person?', "How could a........ help itself?" "How could you help yourself?" "How could I help you?" "How could you help me?" Run in sequence as above. Do not give same command twice. CLEARING COMMANDS: Clear each word and the full phrase once each with the following: "What is the usual definition of the English (or other language) word......?" Do not ask for definitions over and over as a repetitive command. If pc's definition is poor, clear command every few commands. Clear only each different work in a bracket. Don't clear each line in a bracket. STEP SIX: Select simple non-significant objects. Run: "In front of that body you mock up a . . . and keep it from going away." "Did you?" "Thank you." Then use all directions from the body -- "Behind that body...," "To the left of that body...," "To the right of that body...," "Above that body...," "Below that body...." Run 6 objects each on six sides of the body on "Keep it from going away," then proceed to "In front of that body you mock up a...... and hold it still." Same procedure, then "In front of that body you mock up a...... and make it a little more solid." (There is no acknowledgement by auditor after pc mocks it up and keeps it from going away, etc, or the "Did you?" -- there is acknowledgement only after full command is executed. Otherwise acks will thin pc's mock-ups.) Note: The objects should be simple at first, leading on up to complexity. But at first, keep them simple and non-significant. LRH:md.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above section on Clearing Commands has been excerpted as HCO B 28 February 1959, Clearing Commands, page 430.] 298  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/7/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE ROCK   All staff Field Offices  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 29 JULY 1958 Distribution All staff Field Offices THE ROCK The Rock is a Reach-Withdraw mechanism and the phenomenon of a stuck needle is the ridge so created. The Rock is: That which a person has used to reach people or things with and is determined in value by its creativeness or destructiveness. It is simply the reach and withdraw mechanism which makes a ridge and this causes the stuck of the needle. The Rock is AN OBJECT -- it is NOT a significance. And you determine a scout by what the pc shies away from as well as what he sticks on -- and a theta bop always winds up in a stuck needle if pursued in a scout. CYCLE OF THE ROCK (object) A person (1) failed to communicate himself; (2) started using something to communicate with; (3) put the last item on automatic and it created for him; (4) it failed. The Rock itself, when first located, will be a solution to many earlier cycles as described above. And so, a Rock is peeled off cycle by cycle as above. The rule is to find the last cycle that is real enough to the pc to stick a needle and this is true of locating and running and lock of the Rock. Be careful during a scout not to choose an object which makes the needle rise slowly, as this is an addition to the Rock which is being done gratuitously by the pc. (This factor is an indicator but it must not be run.) The Rock stick does not rise-it just sticks. LRH:-.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 299  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=5/8/58 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  "What is a People Pleaser?"    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 5 AUGUST AD 8 Issue 2 Revised The basic locating question of the Rock (primary aberrative object) is: "What is a People Pleaser?" It can also be run just like this: "How could you help a People Pleaser?" as an item bracket. Do not "kid around with" or invalidate this Rock. The new item bracket is as follows. It has been designed to preserve A-R- C and to be used in this exact order one command at a time: The Rock Bracket: How could a........ help itself? How could you help a........? How could a........ help you? How could I help a........? How could a........ help me? How could another person help a........? How could a........ help another person? How could others help a........? How could a........ help others? How could you help yourself? How could I help myself? How could you help me? How could I help you? Command words but not as a whole phrase are cleared often (every three brackets) and the pc is asked for his opinion only of the word "help" and the item. His answer is not challenged. Only ARC breaks can hide Rock again after found -- clear them well. CLEAR ALSO environmental ARC breaks on the Rock between sessions. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:b.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 300  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/8/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACC AUXILIARY PROCEDURE THIS IS A ROUGH DRAFT   For Optional Use  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST AD 8 ACC AUXILIARY PROCEDURE For Optional Use THIS IS A ROUGH DRAFT 1. Start Session. 2. Clear auditor with pc -- "Who should I be to audit you?" "What is it all right for me to do?" "Look at me. Who am I?" 3. Get pc into session. Establish goals for session. "What question shouldn't I ask you?" Handle resultant answers with Straightwire as indicated. "Do you have anything worrying you so much that you will have a difficult time keeping your attention on auditing?" Handle pt problem by Responsibility or Problems of Comparable Magnitude. "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem." "Describe that problem to me." "Does that problem exist in present time now?" Run two-way bracket on Help. "How could you help me?" "How could I help you?" Flatten for the session. (Every time you audit somebody this should be touched on and flattened so that it will stay flat at least for that session. To flatten it for all time or for all sessions would be impossible.) Check for ARC breaks. If they exist, take them up two-way comm, and also re-flatten above two-way bracket on Help. WHEN AUDITOR AND PC ARE CLEARED FOR SESSION, ONLY THEN BEGIN ON CASE. THIS IS TRUE OF ALL SESSIONS AND ALL CASES. KEEP PC IN SESSION WITH ABOVE STEPS, USED WHENEVER PC WANDERS OFF IN SESSION. OF COURSE, DO NOT INTERRUPT UNFLATTENED PROCESS TOO SUDDENLY TO GET PC BACK INTO SESSION. ALWAYS USE COMM BRIDGES WHENEVER YOU CHANGE THE COURSE OF THE SESSION. CLEAR ALL COMMANDS. ASK FOR OPINION OF KEY WORDS BUT NOT IN SUCH A WAY AS TO MAKE THIS ASKING A PROCESS. THE PC'S IDEA OF WHAT THE KEY WORDS ARE IS THE PC'S IDEA, AND A REPETITIVE ASKING FOR OPINION IS NOT A PROCESS BUT AN INVALIDATION. 4. Where pc's idea of the following words is obviously impossible to make any process move, do the following on the words CHANGE, PROBLEM, HELP, CREATE, RESPONSIBILITY, PLEASED. A mis-definition on these words can keep a whole case from moving. It is not necessarily true that clearing these words clears a person. To reorient these words run the following process: "Invent a person" (and when pc has, do not acknowledge, but add:) "Tell me his idea of (key word)." This is a repetitive question. 301 5. Clear up, psychosomatics as feasible with "What sort of a (limb, organ, body) would please people?" "Tell me a person that that would please." This is actually one command with two questions which are used repetitively until psychosomatic or illness is markedly alleviated. This is done to give pc confidence in the auditor and certainty that something can happen in processing. It will only work if the first four steps are complete and in good working order. 6. Clear up desires about new or different states of mind with "What sort of a mind (personality as needful with those who cannot understand what a mind is) would please people?" "Tell me a person that that would please." This is actually one auditing command with two questions. There is no acknowledgment after the first question, only after the second. This is used repetitively. 7. Isolate basic Rock by any method. Run Rock Help bracket on it. Or, boost out with "What sort of a (Rock as found) would please people? Tell me a person that that would please." See above for running directions. 8. Run general Help and Step 6 as given, first one then the other until case is clean, taking up any of above as needful to keep auditor and pc cleared and in session. If you do these things with any case you should wind up with a clear. The length of time it takes depends upon the auditor's skill in getting the auditing done and is much less modified by "severity of case". L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 302  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=20/8/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PRESENT TIME PROBLEM -- RUNNING OF    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 20 AUGUST 1958 PRESENT TIME PROBLEM -- RUNNING OF Auditors are occasionally unsuccessful in running present time problems, life computations and service facsimiles because they themselves are not alert to the definition of a problem. A problem is two-terminaled. A single terminal cannot make a problem. The basic problem is Postulate-Counter Postulate. Therefore, when the preclear says his wife is a present time problem and the auditor runs "A problem of comparable magnitude to a wife", he is not running a problem at all. He is running a condition. For this to be a problem the wife would have to include another terminal. An auditor should make the preclear define the problem accurately as a problem, not as a condition or situation. The problem of "my wife's desire for another man" is a problem. The problem of "my husband's fooling around with machinery" is a problem. Wherever a PT problem arises it is up to the auditor to locate an actual problem and get the preclear to describe it. He then runs "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem." Thereafter frequently he says, "Describe that problem to me" and makes sure each time he does that the problem is described as a problem, not a single terminal or a condition. When running a PT problem he also asks, "Does that seem to be a problem to you now?" Failure to get the preclear to define the problem as a problem will result in a failure to relieve the PT problem and the auditor and the preclear may proceed into the session believing implicitly that they have run the PT problem when, as a matter of fact, they have not even touched it but have in actuality run the conditions of a single terminal. Probably the biggest holdup in all intensives is this fact of mis- definition of problems. And in passing it may be remarked that given Clear Procedure the biggest delay on clearing is the failure of the auditor to run PT problems and ARC breaks. It might also be said that the preclear only protests violently about ARC breaks under one of the two following conditions: (1) the auditing is actually very bad and (2) the PT problem has not been run. As a rough rule of thumb it could be said that given well-intentioned auditing, a preclear only protests about ARC breaks when a PT problem has not been isolated and run. The problems connected with "being audited', "being a preclear", "the auditor", have been rather uniformly overlooked by auditors, and cases which tend to hang up in processing are usually hung up on these. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.cden Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 303  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=20/8/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  OUT OF SESSIONNESS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 20 AUGUST 1958 OUT OF SESSIONNESS The mechanisms used by the preclear in living to keep his attention off the Rock are: to get involved with many present time problems, and ARC Breaks. We used to believe that a thetan had to have problems. This is not true. A thetan thinks he needs problems to keep his attention exteriorized from the Rock chain and when the Rock is not run out he will continue to dream up problems in present time to keep his attention enforcedly fixed elsewhere than the Rock chain. A thetan will also dream up ARC Breaks to exteriorize his attention from a present time problem. The common denominator of all locks on the Rock is ARC Breaks. Therefore, in running the Rock, expert auditing is necessary since in this case as in no other, the preclear will dream up ARC Breaks. When his attention flicks back to the Rock when he is between sessions, he will get himself involved in present time problems and ARC Breaks obsessively to keep his attention from going back on to the Rock chain. Thus, we have the answer to the fact that a session will not progress unless the present time problem is run and alleviated and we also have the answer to the ARC Break difficulties. If the preclear is unsuccessful in keeping his attention off the Rock by a present time problem, he will then dramatize the Rock chain, which is another combination of motives which explains preclear behavior. The moral of this story is to run out pt problems and to patch up all ARC Breaks or you will not find and run any Rocks. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 304  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/8/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CHANGE AUDITOR'S CODE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 28 AUGUST 1958 CHANGE AUDITOR'S CODE 6. Do not process a preclear who is improperly fed or who has not received enough rest. 16. Maintain two-way communication with the preclear. 17. Never use Scientology to obtain personal and unusual favors or unusual compliance from the preclear for the auditor's own personal profit. 18. Estimate the current case of your preclear with reality and do not process another imagined case. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:b.rd  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/9/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HCA COURSE EXAMINATION    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 3 SEPTEMBER 1958 HCA COURSE EXAMINATION The cost for an individual challenging the HCA Course Examination. is $25 for tests and interview and $15 for exam and cert. Exam alone can be given. They must: 1. Pass HCA written exam 100% given by Academy Administrator. (If this is flunked, no further exam is given. It is always flunked.) (This is an opinion.) If they passed written, then they have to: 2. Read well on IQ, APA, Tone Scale and Aptitude Tests. 3. Be passed by Comm Course Instructor on Comm Course TRs. 4. Be passed by Indoctrination Instructor on Indoc TRs. 5. Be passed by CCH Instructor on CCH Processes. 6. Be passed by Director of Training and be passed by Technical Director. LRH:b.rd L. RON HUBBARD 306  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/9/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  POST CASE ANALYSIS ROUTINE   Staff Auditor Hats  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 12 SEPTEMBER 1958 Staff Auditor Hats POST CASE ANALYSIS ROUTINE When pc has been taken to the Director of Processing or case analyst (third party enters auditing picture in any way) the auditor must then RE-ESTABLISH THE AUDITOR with 1. Two-way comm on analyst person. 2. "Who would I have to be to audit you successfully?" 3. "What am I doing?" This is to avoid pc transferring to case analyst as auditor and then not coming back to session. This is also done when pc has coffee shop auditing between sessions. LRH:b.jh LRH Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/9/58 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAVINGNESS -- NEW COMMANDS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 12 SEPTEMBER 1958 Issue II HAVINGNESS -- NEW COMMANDS The value of havingness has not diminished. However, it needed new commands. I have now developed these. They are remarkably more effective than Trio. FACTUAL HAVINGNESS "Look around here and find something you have." When this can be left -- "Look around here and find something you would continue." When this can be left -- "Look around here and find something you would permit to vanish." Then return to first again. The order may be reversed. Some cases may run 250 of the third before finding one of the first or second. LRH:b.jh LRH Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 307  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/9/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MORE ON TRAINING DRILL TWO    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 15 SEPTEMBER 1958 MORE ON TRAINING DRILL TWO Avoidance of Double Acknowledgement is vital if you ever hope to keep pc in session. Double Acknowledgement occurs when pc answers up, the auditor then acknowledges, and the pc then finishes his answer, leaving the auditor with another acknowledgement to do (and also leaving the auditor with no session). Wrong: Command: "What could you say to your father?" PC: "I could say, 'Hello'." Auditor: "FINE." PC: "... 'Father, how are you?' I could say that." Auditor: (weakly) "Good. What could you say to your father?" PC: "I could say, 'Are you feeling well?' " Auditor: (desperate by now) "GOOD!" PC: "... 'enough to go fishing?'" Auditor: "Well, okay all right. Now...." A pc is not always sure he has answered the question so he often changes his mind. If the auditor gives him Tone 40 or any ack at all in between a pc's reply the auditor is wrong. You just don't "encourage" a pc with a lot of agreement okays and yes in the midst of answers. The pc answers, the pc is sure he has answered and the auditor then acknowledges. After all, it's the pc that must be satisfied. There are many ways to mis-acknowledge a pc. But any mis-acknowledgement is only and always a failure to end the cycle of a command -- auditor asks, pc replies and knows he has answered, auditor acknowledges. Pc knows auditor has acknowledged. That is a full auditing command cycle. Don't forget it and expect a process to work, it won't. The roughest spot in most students is TR 2, not so much how to acknowledge but when. An auditor running into this with a pc should handle it this way. Auditor: "What could you say to your father?" PC: "I could say, 'Are you feeling well?'" Auditor: "Did that answer the question?" PC: "Well, no. I could say, 'Are you feeling well enough to go fishing?'" Auditor: "Did that answer the question?" PC: "Yes, I guess it did. He always liked fishing and sympathy." Auditor: (sure pc is through) "Good! What could you say to your father?" And there's the way of it. If the pc is not sure he has answered and that the auditor has accepted the answer, the pc will get no benefit from the auditing. And that's how important that is. You can always spot a bad auditor. He does two things: he talks too much to the pc and he stops the pc from properly answering. Add all the above to all training of students. LRH:md.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [PAB 145, More on Training Drill Two, 1 October 1958, is taken from this HCO B.] 308  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/9/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  VITAL TRAINING DATA    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 29 SEPTEMBER 1958 VITAL TRAINING DATA (This Bulletin Changes the Character of Training) No instructor can train a student unless he follows the Instructor's Code. This code is learned by heart by an instructor, not read. Wherever we are making poor auditors, we have confused the role of the Academy with that of the HGC. The HGC processes, the Academy trains only. Tell every student, tell every class of students, tell every instructor many times. THERE ARE ONLY AUDITORS AT THE ACADEMY. THERE ARE NO CASES. Every time you as an instructor get interested in the student's case, you make him put up his engrams for your inspection. Every time you get interested in his auditing skill only, you make him put up auditing skill for your interest. From this date: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES MAY AN ACADEMY TAKE UP THE PERSONAL OR CASE PROBLEMS OF A STUDENT. We've got 2,500,000,000 preclears. We can somehow control ourselves long enough to make a few auditors. They are made by direct, blunt instruction, the tougher the better. They are unmade by a lot of super saccharine sympathy about their poor, hopeless little cases. So let's go, training units. No more clinics where there should be schools. You'll have nothing but cases forever if you don't make some auditors! The week's intensive formerly offered with courses is turned over herewith to HGCs. No further clinics as such may be run by Academies. Auditing may occur in Academies but there may not be preclear conferences, general or private, about the students' own cases. This works a hardship on HGCs to some degree but HGCs occasionally are victimized by having to train late students who were not trained but only processed through to HCA/HPA. Thus an HGC has an interest in training quality. Herinafter all processing for keeps will be done in the HGC and all training will be done in the Academy. There is a standard toward which a student is trained. It includes two disciplines. Formal Auditing and Tone 40 Auditing. Formal is taught in Comm Course, Tone 40 in Upper Indoc. Students must know their codes and must know how to follow them -- no evaluation, no invalidation. All of Dianetics, the Anatomy branch of Scientology must be taught. The six simple types of processing are taught. The axioms are taught. Anatomy of the mind is taught, not just a lot of figure-figure theory. The student gets there by finding hc can confront in a preclear locks, secondaries, engrams, chains, time track, circuits, machinery, valences, the parts of livingness. 309 Manifestations of phenomena are taught, overt-act motivator sequences, problems, computations, cognitions, comm lags, introversion, extroversion, exteriorization, A-R-C. Scales are taught -- ARC Scale, Effect Scale. The Academies must now undertake 3 separate courses and adhere to each. If an instructor won't confront students he starts a big theory course that avoids all anatomy, takes up the personal problems of the students, excuses every failure to teach by saying it was student case. If case gets in the road send the student to the HGC to pay for auditing or not. If theory gets in the road of training auditors, teach anatomy only. Let's go on this. I am instructing all HCO Boards of Review to examine completely on the above outlined items only and to flunk hard any student who doesn't know his subject. We care little for the synopses and the paper work. We want auditors who know their business, not a lot of squirrels. A pc gets well in direct ratio to his ability-to confront the anatomy of life, the anatomy of mind and the physical universe. How do you suppose you'll ever get any auditing done if the student can't confront, via a pc yet, life, the anatomy of the mind and the physical universe. It's easier for a student to confront than a preclear to confront. I've got a big idea for training: to wit: Let's deliver the goods! L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd Copyright$c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 310  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/10/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACC CLEAR PROCEDURE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 15 OCTOBER AD 8 ACC CLEAR PROCEDURE The Goal of the Auditor: to help the preclear re-establish confidence in his ability to confront Thetans, Thought, Time, Life, Energy, Matter and Space. The theory of auditing: the preclear has lost confidence in his ability to face existence and its parts and has difficulty in participation. He is trapped in many of those things he has failed to confront or has been prevented from confronting or has prevented others from confronting or didn't exist. By gradient scales his confidence in confronting Thought, Time, Life, Energy, Matter and Space is improved. The rule is, "Find something the preclear can confront and improve that ability." This normally begins with some part of an auditor. In less able cases, it begins with a thought of the auditor's or the preclear's. Auditing is not erasure. Erasure dramatizes lost things to confront. Where an auditor can be confronted and makes corny errors, the preclear stops being able to confront -- hence the graph goes down on ARC breaks only. Therefore, the stress on smooth auditing. A present time problem makes it hard for the preclear to confront the session. Therefore the stress on handling present time problems. Auditing has as its sole liability confronting on a via -- it may look to the auditor that he is using the pc (preclear) to confront things and this can be restimulative if the auditor doesn't know what he is doing. If the auditor is actively preventing the pc from confronting anything or has as his goal never permitting the pc to confront, there's trouble to hand. ARC, in auditing, is: A = the ability to be in or at a distance from something. R = the ability to co-exist with something. C = the ability to transmit thought between two or more points. Thus we see that the minimum of two anything is needed for the conditions of ARC to occur. In actuality the thetan incurs no liability in confronting or not confronting, being in or not being in things and thus a total confronting or total non-confronting are attainable goals. The thetan believes things about confronting or necessities to confront or not to confront and so becomes aberrated (not straight-lined). To confront, knowing is necessary. Unknown confronting or not confronting, when uncovered, gives us the phenomenon of "cognition" -- and that is the definition of it. Auditing is that process which restores confidence in confronting and undoes necessity to confront Thought, Time, Life, Energy, Matter and Space. 311 Theory of Auditing It should be realized that an optimum Clear Procedure should take a preclear from the lowest possible levels up to clear. Earlier procedures (1957- 1958) did not attempt to address every case but were content to handle about 50% of the preclears. The remainder had to have special address just as cases. Therefore, auditors adopted the idea that on one hand there was Clear Procedure and on the other hand low level procedure -- they did not place one above the other in a gradient scale to clear. This particular Clear Procedure does that. In use it should be realized that different cases require different emphasis. An easy case would not demand a tedious command clearing, suspicious probing to break non-existent occlusions or emphasis on the lower steps. Indeed, these lower steps could be skipped up to CCH 0. It is all a matter of judgment, how long and hard to run which. Two errors are potential: both rest on accurate case estimation. The commonest is to overestimate the level of the case. And not uncommon, to audit a high level case with very low level processes. The answer is to audit the case one is auditing, not some other case or one's own case. Since estimation and auditor-sensitivity are subject to variety and error one cannot cleanly estimate the length of time required to clear anyone. Only approximations are possible and these are varied by possible environmental difficulties of the preclear during auditing: i.e., daily present time problems of crushing magnitude. We are not today in the area of thousands of hours, however. We are in the area of hundreds of hours in any case, sane or insane. I cite an example: a woman suffering from a post-partum psychosis was audited 600 hours on CCH 1, 2, 3, 4 before she turned sane long enough for the auditor to snap off the case the valence of her dying brother, at which moment she turned stably sane. Only then could she have been audited on less fundamental steps. However, auditors are not concerned with the insane but often address relatively unconscious people. This example is cited as the most extreme time in auditing we have on record with modern technique. I would not be surprised that, with all variables introduced, some case required 800 hours to clear. On a jigsaw puzzle test such a case would have failed to have fitted a single piece in the first 30 seconds, by our present method of estimation. There are several means of establishing an idea of length of time in processing from present state to clear. The minimum in any case would be three weeks (75 hours); the probable maximum would be 1,000 hours. Between these extremes, we have most people. The peak of the curve would probably be around 250 hours, as estimated by older clearing methods. Anxieties to attain faster push-button clearing defeat most research. These speed methods violate the reality of the preclear and too thoroughly evaluate for him. In all cases of clearing it is only the reality of the preclear which milestones the gains. That reality requires a certain speed of advance. While being audited, also, a preclear is living, and his surroundings require his attention. Man is somewhat cautious. He must adjust himself within his own ideas of security. The auditor always knows what is wrong with the preclear long before the preclear finds out. One must permit the preclear to find out! That discovery is only assisted, never blackjacked into being (see Psychiatry: The Greatest Flub of the Russian Civilization, by Tom Esterbrook). The patient is part of the therapy -- a lesson the Russ school never learned. Therefore, Clear Procedure starts where it should, CCH 1. In running the CCHs, a set procedure is followed not only with the single process but with the series. One will discover that only one of the series of CCH 1, 2, 3, 4 bites the first time through. It is useless to run very long on the ones that don't bite. Example: An auditor does CCH 1 for an hour -- no bite. He does CCH 2 for an hour or 312 so -- no bite. He does CCH 3 and it bites. He does it for a few hours and CCH 3 levels off a bit. Now he returns to CCH 1 and finds it bites. He flattens it a bit, does CCH 2 for an hour, CCH 3 for a couple of hours and when he starts CCH 4, now this one bites! He flattens it in a few hours, goes back to CCH 1, etc. The processes CCH 1, 2, 3, 4 are all of a piece. They are done in series fashion, not as individual items. CCH 1, 2, 3, 4 Number: CCH 1 Name: Give me that hand, Tone 40. Commands: "Give me that hand." Physical action of taking hand when not given and then replacing it in preclear's lap. And "Thank you," ending cycle. All Tone 40 with clear intention, one command in one unit of time, no originations of preclear acknowledged in any way verbally or physically. May be run on right hand, left hand, both hands, each one flattened in turn. Position: Auditor and preclear seated in chairs without arms, close together. Auditor's knees both to auditor's left of preclear's knees, outside of auditor's right thigh against outside of preclear's right thigh. This position reversed for left hand. In both hands preclear's knees are between auditor's knees. Purpose: To demonstrate to preclear that control of preclear's body is possible, despite revolt of circuits, and inviting preclear to directly control it. Absolute control by auditor then passes over toward absolute control of his own body by preclear. Training Stress: Never stop process until a flat place is reached. To process with good Tone 40. Auditor taught to pick up preclear's hand by wrist with auditor's thumb nearest auditor's body, to have an exact and invariable place to carry preclear's hand to before clasping, clasping hand with exactly correct pressure, replacing hand (with auditor's left hand still holding preclear's wrist) in preclear's lap. Making every command and cycle separate. Maintaining Tone 40. Stress on intention from auditor to preclear with each command. To leave an instant for preclear to do it by own will before auditor does it. Stress Tone 40 precision. To keep epicenters balanced. CCH 1(b) should also be flattened. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in the 17th ACC, Washington, D.C., 1957. Number: CCH 2 Name: Tone 40 8-C. Commands: "Look at that wall." "Thank you." "Walk over to that wall." "Thank you." "With the right hand, touch that wall." "Thank you." "Turn around." "Thank you." Run without acknowledging in any way any origination by preclear, acknowledging only preclear's execution of the command. Commands smoothly enforced physically. Tone 40, full intention. Position: Auditor and preclear ambulant, auditor in physical contact with preclear as needed. Purpose: To demonstrate to preclear that his body can be directly controlled and thus inviting him to control it. Finding present time. Havingness. Other effects not fully explained. Training Stress: Absolute auditor precision. No drops from Tone 40. No flubs. Total present time auditing. Auditor turns preclear counterclockwise, then steps always on preclear's right side. Auditor's body acts as block to forward motion when preclear turns. Auditor gives command, gives preclear a moment to obey, then enforces command with physical contact of exactly correct force to get command executed. Auditor does not check preclear from executing commands. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1957 for the 17th ACC. 313 Number:. CCH 3 Name: Hand Space Mimicry. Commands: Auditor raises two hands, palms facing preclear, and says, "Put your hands against mine, follow them and contribute to their motion." He then makes a simple motion with right hand, then left. "Did you contribute to the motion?" "Good." "Put your hands in your lap." When this is flat the auditor does this same thing with a half inch of space between his and the preclear's palms. When this is flat auditor does it with a wider space and so on until preclear is able to follow motions a yard away. Position: Auditor and preclear seated, close together facing each other, preclear's knees between auditor's. Purpose: To develop reality on the auditor, using the reality scale (solid communication line). To get preclear into communication by control + duplication. Training Stress: That auditor be gentle and accurate in his motions, giving preclear wins. To be free in two-way communication. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard, in Washington, D.C., in 1956, as a therapeutic version of Dummy Hand Mimicry. Something was needed to supplant "Look at me. Who am I?" and "Find the auditor" part of rudiments. Number: CCH 4 Name: Book Mimicry. Commands: Auditor makes a simple or complex motion with a book. Hands book to preclear. Preclear makes motion duplicating auditor's mirror-image-wise. Auditor asks preclear if he is satisfied that the preclear duplicated the motion. If preclear is and auditor is also fairly satisfied, auditor takes back the book and goes to next command. If preclear says he is and auditor is fairly sure preclear isn't, auditor takes back book and repeats command and gives book to preclear again for another try. If preclear is not sure he duplicated any command, auditor repeats it for him and gives him back the book. Tone 40 only in motions. Verbal two-way quite free. Position: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. Purpose: To bring up preclear's communication with control and duplication. (Control + duplication = communication.) Training Stress: Stress giving preclear wins. Stress auditor's necessity to duplicate his own commands. Circular motions are more complex than straight lines. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard for the 16th ACC in Washington, D.C., 1957. Based on duplication developed by LRH in London, 1952. CCH 0 (1) Start Session by saying "Start of Session". Don't discuss things and then start session and startle preclear, who thought he was in session all the time. To do this throws pc out of session. Also, you can't end a session that was never started. (2)(a) Establish Auditor. Clear auditor with pc. Discuss any successful auditing in the past, even successful doctoring. Shake pc loose from heavy ARC with past practitioners, not by running down practitioners, but getting pc to realize he has been helped. Develop this into process, "Who should I be to help you successfully?" Get it flat, then run "What am I doing?" (2)(b) Establish Preclear. Put preclear more in session with goals -- "What would you like to accomplish through Scientology?" "What would you like to accomplish in this session?" The foregoing two we care little about. We now hit this hard: "What are you willing to have happen in this session?" We get a final clear answer to this even if it takes an hour of two-way comm. Then we establish, "What are you absolutely certain will happen in (finite period of time such as ten minutes or one hour)?" (2)(c) Establish problems, if any. Run "Is there any place you would like to be more than here?" When this is threshed out, "Is there any place you should 314 be rather than here?" This may bring any present time problem to view. If it does, audit it with "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" If pc is too agitated to run this or if two-way comm cuts his havingness badly, run Factual Havingness: "Look around here and find something you have." When this can be left, "Look around here and find something that you would continue." When this can be left, "Look around here and find something you would permit to vanish." Then return to first again. (The order may be reversed. Some cases may run 250 of the third before finding one of the first or second.) Factual Havingness can resolve present time problems, which are always and only threats of loss. If preclear seems hard to audit, is in propitiation, does obsessive agreement, has hypnotic eyelid flutter, or in general seems unnatural about talking or not talking, you can put pc into session and get present time problem most rapidly by spending real time on this: "What question shouldn't I ask you?" and sort it out on a meter, with two-way comm, then ask question again, etc., until pc is really talking to the auditor. The goal of present time problems or problems is to get pc in session. The goal of this, "What question shouldn't I ask you?" is not to learn the pc's secrets but to get pc to talk freely to auditor. Accomplishing this one thing on a hitherto non- advancing pc is a great thing and will make the pc advance faster than anything else. Get the pc to talk to you honestly. Then take up present time problems directly: "Do you have a present time problem?" Preclear says he does but needle on meter doesn't move. Ask question a few more times -- "Is there anything worrying you?" you can say for variation. If needle still doesn't drop, forget it. IF NEEDLE DROPS pursue it and run only the problem that drops. Don't run problems that don't drop! Keep your eyes on the meter while handling pc with present time problems, expand what falls, not something else. Pc can't confront his problems, therefore the drop vanishes easily, comes back and drops again. This can fool an auditor badly if he doesn't watch his meter and take up to run and discuss only the drop. (Note: If the meter is "Stage Four" [idle swing, not clear but pc can't affect meter, which only swings up, sticks, falls and so forth on same pattern -- a Stage Four needle has a stick in the top of its oscillation, a clear needle doesn't] or if it is too stuck to show a fall on a problem, play safe, run Factual Havingness or Connectedness.) This exact way to run a present time problem can make a full intensive. Command (when problem located): "Describe that problem to me now." Make sure pc does. ACCEPT ANY VERSION PC GIVES YOU, BUT ONLY FOLLOW THROUGH ON A VERSION THAT DROPS ON METER. If the version drops, run the following for two or five commands, "What part of that problem could you be responsible for?" Then whether drop on meter vanishes or not, say, "Describe that problem to me now." If the described problem did not drop, buy it but don't run it, say again, "Describe that problem to me now." If you can handle this type of problem-handling, if you got pc to really talk to you, you can practically clear a case on this since it gets out of case the succumb postulates that war against betterment. This is the scale of succumb problems from the bottom up: How to go unconscious; How to feel nothing; How to go insane; How to escape; How to die; How to get shed of responsibilities so one can die; How not to care; How to endure; How to get better; How to Live; How to live better. There are inner levels. The basic problem is a "whether" (all problems are "whether" or "how"): Whether to Survive or Succumb. Decisions to do either are, if obsessive, the stable data in the center of the major confusions. When a pc is sitting there in heavy succumb postulates his goals and the auditor's goals are on opposite vectors. Therefore, preclears who don't get better aren't trying to get better no matter how much they say they are. Hence a whole case can run on this provided some havingness is also run from time to time. In brief, this is where running a present time problem well gets to. Remember, a problem is not a condition or a terminal. It is a "how" or "whether". It is a doingness, not a person. "My wife" is no answer to a present time problem question. "How to live with my wife" is a problem. "Whether or not to live 315 with my wife" is a problem. "My wife's illness" is not a problem. "How to cure my wife's illness" is a problem. Sometimes a pc will come right down on an old stable decision about the problem and say, "It isn't a problem to me now." The auditor must not buy this. He wants to know "Why?" until pc is off the old solution and can go on describing problems. How to be audited. How to stay in session. Whether the auditor has pc's interest at heart. Such present time problems are very much in order to ask about. To completely flatten any problem it is necessary to run not "responsible for" but "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem." This is run in the same way as above, but is given more commands for each version handed out by the pc. This is the problem command if you want it flat forever. Don't lose this process or command from your repertoire. (2)(d) Getting Auditor and Pc established. Take up any ARC breaks with pc or any breaks between pc and past auditors. Always clear away ARC breaks. Don't dodge them as an auditor. Explaining why the break occurred is an Auditor's Code violation -- Evaluation. Saying that the ARC break didn't occur or was the pc's fault is an Auditor's Code violation -- Invalidation. When an auditor fails to take responsibility for the ARC break he loses the responsibility of running the session -- which, of course, causes a session to cease to exist. The relative destructive value of an ARC break is greater than the failure. ALWAYS HANDLE CCH 0 in every session well except when giving not a session but an Assist only. TR 11 TR 11. ARC Straight Wire. That process best calculated to orient pc in his past is ARC Straight Wire. Commands: "Recall something that was really real to you." "Thank you." "Recall a time when you were in good communication with someone." "Thank you." "Recall a time when you really liked someone." "Thank you." The three commands are given in that order and repeated in that order consistently. Position: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other at a comfortable distance. Purpose: To give the student reality on the existence of a bank. This is audited on another student and is audited until the other student is in present time. It will be found that the process discloses the cycling action of the preclear going deeper and deeper into the past and then more and more shallowly into the past until he is recalling something again close to present time. This cyclic action should be studied and understood and the reality on the pictures the preclear gets should be thoroughly understood by the student. The fact that another has pictures should be totally real to the student under training. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in 1951 in Wichita, Kansas. This was once a very important process. It has been known to bring people from a neurotic to a sane level after only a short period of application. It has been run on a group basis with success but it should be noted that the thinkingness of the individuals in the group would have to be well under the control of the auditor in order to have this process broadly beneficial. When it was discovered that this process occasionally reduces people's havingness, the process itself was not generally run thereafter. It is still, however, an excellent process with that proviso, a reduction of havingness in some cases. 316 Many cases have achieved their first step upward with the process. It is a process which, known, gives the pc the comfortable feeling that he at least has stopped getting worse and that there is something that permits him to hold his own. In the 20th ACC Lectures I described how all entheta receives its charge from theta. ARC in the bank makes ARC breaks possible. A re-orientation of ARC can be more important than one realizes. The way to blow ARC breaks can be more ARC. Even a psychotic may rise up to merely neurotic on ARC Straight Wire. The cyclic aspect of ARC Straight Wire must receive attention. You don't want to know what when he recalls something, you want to know when. Ask, "When was that?" frequently and you will see pc slide into past and then return to present time as a regular cycle. Don't end the process while pc is still in past. Don't finish the process with a comm bridge that leaves him in the past. Just warn him that the process will soon end, and stop it when pc's recall was of a near present time thing. You get lots of past lives in view this way. Buy them. Lasting and easily obtained results were gained in 1956 by using just two processes. With the 1958 Theory of Auditing (above) it is easy to see why. These are basically confrontingness processes. They were S-C-S and Connectedness. I developed these two for use in combination for a standardization of processing for a whole firm that was having its employees processed in London in 1956. The results were so good that Mary Sue Hubbard, while Director of Processing London, used the same regimen on all preclears with uniformly astonishing results. The exact regimen used in that period was as follows: simple S-C-S on objects with pc and auditor seated at a table. Then S-C-S on the body. Then "Keep it from going away" and "Hold it still" on two small objects with pc seated, using first one object then the other and always touching them with his hands at command. Finally, subjectively, on facsimiles, "Keep it from going away," and "Hold it still." Throughout, Connectedness was used to bolster havingness as needed with the command, "You make that (indicated object) connect with you." The regimen as given here was superseded because auditors, unsupervised, tended to complicate the processes and not until a short time ago did we learn that the best answer to an auditor's desire for "more information" was a repetition of what he was told the first time. He didn't understand the original and so wanted a new one. Further, in supervised processing, there has been a frailty in that the auditor sometimes reported, "I did what you said and it didn't work." An unwary supervisor then gives him a new process to do. A wary one says in reply to the above, "What didn't work?" and usually discovers that the supervisor's directions were neither remembered nor run. This set of factors has accounted for many abandonments of SOPs (standard operating procedures) which were in actuality working like mad, only the people they were given to never used them, only said they did, and fed bad data back. It is the role of a supervisor to get the process he gave out run, not another version of it. CCH 3(c) The rationale behind S-C-S was simple: it placed the pc in the auditor's control. And it placed the pc's body under his own control. But there is more to S-C-S than this since it is also a confrontingness process. CCH 3(c) Name: S-C-S on a person. (Start, change and stop on a person.) Commands: There are three sets of commands, each one of which is run until it is relatively flat. The commands are as follows: "Now we are going to start the body. 317 When I say start, you start that body in this (indicated) direction. All right, Start." The commands for "Change" are as follows (indicating four positions on the floor one after the other): "This we are going to call Spot A. This we are going to call Spot B. This we are going to call Spot C and this we are going to call Spot D. Do you have that? All right, when I say Change, I want you to change the position of that body from A to B. All right, Change." (The same applies for the other positions.) The commands for " Stop" are as follows: "Now I want you to get that body moving in (indicated) direction, and when I say Stop, I want you to stop that body. All right, move that body. Stop." Each one of the commands is followed with the question, "Did you start that body?" "Did you change the position of that body?" "Did you stop that body?" Position: Auditor and preclear ambulant. Auditor accompanies preclear as he walks and occasionally touches him and turns him around manually as needed to assist the preclear. Purpose: To give the preclear good control of his body and to exteriorize him. Training Stress: Stress is on precision of the motion and command. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in 1955 as an exteriorization process. First discovered in 1952 was the fact that a person, which is to say a thetan, stays as close to an object as he has confidence in his controlling of it. GP-3 Connectedness. The basic form of any havingness process is Connectedness. After one flattens S-C-S, one then runs Connectedness on the preclear. Commands: (a) "You get the idea of making that (object) connect with you." (Auditor points. (b) If pc isn't looking at object with Mest body's eyes, use following: "Look at that (object)." "You get the idea of making that object connect with you." (c) On blind humans: "Feel that (object)." "You get the idea of making that object connect with you." There is a new version of havingness called Factual Havingness. It is used in conjunction with any subjective process such as those subjective processes which follow. Factual Havingness Commands: "Look around here and find something you have." "Look around here and find something that you would continue." "Look around here and find something you would permit to vanish." Confrontingness The earliest clearing process, made more workable by repetitive commands and a broad understanding achieved in the ensuing 11 years, is made part of the most modern (1958) procedure. I was clearing people in 1947 by getting them to look at locks, secondaries, engrams, circuits and the physical universe. I cleared a lot of people in about 100 hours each. All I did was renew their confidence in being able to "look at" their pictures. I turned on sonic, tactile, the works, with renewing confidence, lessening fear. Three years later, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health was written. Its processes are slanted toward teaching people to audit and are the result of people not doing and saying they did. Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health 318 processes are good. They are the best training processes re banks there are. They train an auditor better than they clear a pc. We now return to earliest clearing with what we now call Confrontingness. See "Theory of Auditing" above. In general, we persuade the pc to confront things at his own gradient scale of willingness. We find an ability to confront and we improve it. Body Confrontingness This is close to a specific for a chronic somatic. Auditor: "What part of that body can you confront?" Pc: "Elbow." Auditor: "What part of that elbow can you confront best?" Pc: "The wrist." Auditor: "Thank you." This is the whole cycle of the command. The auditor does not correct the pc when "part of" becomes some other part of the body. Subjective Confrontingness General version: "What mental view can you confront?" "What part of it can you confront best?" "Thank you." The above wording allows for dark fields and other phenomena and runs easily on an occluded case. For a person who has pictures and sensations, a more specific form using "pictures", as well as "emotions", "feelings", "sounds", "thoughts", etc., can be used. There can be and will be many versions of confrontingness given. Suffice here that the above work well and can form an entirety of clearing. They are a refinement, a simplification of the first version of clearing and should work as well today. Participation We must not overlook the factor of participation in life. Participation in session is necessary for processing to work. It is achieved by bettering the factor "Confronting". Auditing toward the goal of total non-confront is eventually to achieve total non-participation. This is highly undesirable. Destruction as an impulse has as its goal the removal of the need to confront. When one can confront he does not need to destroy. Unwillingness to confront is the source of most "have to be processed". One is asking the auditor to destroy "all these horrible things". Obsessive confronting is almost as bad. "Can't confront it so I'll prove I can by confronting it forever -- and I'll keep on creating it to prove I can confront it." The mechanics of the bank can be worked out on such a basis. Participation is only possible when one can also confront. Gradient scale of confronting can lead to participation without being overwhelmed. 319 Survival All processes since the earliest endeavors in this search have aligned on "Survive". Continuance in Factual Havingness expresses this factor. The postulate to Survive is invalidative of the fact that a thetan cannot do otherwise. The whole key to brainwashing and punishment is that they make a thetan postulate survival which is "continuous confronting". This is handled by various versions of confronting. Creating A reactive bank comes from obsessive creating. A thetan's answer to being threatened or struck is to create. His basic training is all aligned along creating something. This factor is used in various ways in processing, usually inherent in a process. Help Probably the first thing that will have to be taken up in some cases is the subject of Help. To this degree Help is part of CCH 0 in establishing an auditor-preclear relationship. People who do not volunteer to be audited at all will require help orientation as the first step. Five hours on Help with such a person, using a two-way bracket, is often well spent. But such a bracket must be exceptionally well audited, without ARC breaks, to begin an intensive or to repair ARC breaks. Aside from the above, Help is of vast importance. The first burning question, when we approach Help as a process, is, "What condition would you have to be in to get help?" This is usually the condition the pc is in. The repetitive command for this is, "Mock up (or invent) somebody in such a condition that they would receive help." HELP ON THE ROCK The "Rock" is the thing the preclear uses to reach people. It is an object far back on the track. It is confrontingness on a via. The E-Meter is used to locate a stuck object. This is a "lock on the rock". (The stuck can be freed by using Connectedness on the room, always.) Help Bracket on the Rock Use in this exact order, one command at a time: How could a ___________ help itself? How could you help a ___________? How could a ___________ help you? How could I help a ___________? How could a ___________ help me? How could another person help a ___________? How could a ___________ help another person? How could others help a ___________? How could a ___________ help others? How could you help yourself? How could I help myself? How could you help me? How could I help you? The command words, but not as a whole phrase, are cleared often (every 3 brackets) and the pc is asked for his opinion only of the word "help" and the item. His answer is not challenged. 320 General Help Bracket How could you help yourself? How could you help me? How could I help you? How could I help myself? How could you help another person? How could I help another person? How could another person help you? How could another person help me? How could another person help another person? Responsibility The basic clearing process using responsibility is, "You make a picture for which you can be wholly responsible." This, flattened, can make a clear. It uses the fact that a person is making his whole bank anyway and it persuades him to realize it. Some version of responsibility is required to end all clearing. Assignment of responsibility is at the bottom of the search for phenomena and magic to clear people. ----------------- Answers Everyone who does not change in processing is being an answer. He "has it made". Therefore, there is an opposite side to problems. That is answers. "Mock up a problem for which you are (or your condition is) the answer." Origins (Originations) The original version was: "What origin of yours has been mishandled?" "Recall a time when you were pleased with that person." A shorter version is, "What origin of yours has been handled properly?" Any creation is an origin in a communication line, for the purposes of auditing. Hence the importance of origins. THE BUTTONS There are certain buttons which depress clearing if the pc has erroneous definitions for them. These are: CHANGE, PROBLEM, HELP, PLEASED, CREATE, RESPONSIBILITY, CONFRONT. Various processes redefine them in action. This is such a process: "Invent a person who likes (the button)." 321 STEP 6 A cleared person is no longer in confusion about Help or who makes the mock-ups. "Help and Step 6" were the early 1958 clues to clear. These are still used as tests and even when their running is brief, they must be run. Caution: It is almost fatal to run Step 6 if the rock is not out. How to Run Step 6: Select simple nonsignificant objects. Run: "In front of that body you mock up a __________ and keep it from going away." "Did you?" "Thank you." Then use all directions from the body -- "Behind that body...," "To the left of that body...," "To the right of that body...," "Above that body...," "Below that body...." Run 6 objects each on 6 sides of the body on "Keep it from going away," then proceed to "In front of that body you mock up a ___________ and hold it still." Same procedure, then "In front of that body you mock up a ___________ and make it a little more solid." (There is no acknowledgment by auditor after pc mocks it up and keeps it from going away, etc., or the "Did you?" -- there is acknowledgment only after full command is executed. Otherwise acknowledgments will thin the pc's mock-ups.) Note: The objects should be simple at first, leading on up to complexity. But at first, keep them simple and nonsignificant. Read and understand Scientology 8-8008, and use an E-Meter throughout. A valuable side process here: "Decide to make a mock-up. Decide that will ruin the game. Decide not to do it." Also this one: "Decide to make a mock-up everyone can see. Decide that would ruin the game. Decide not to do it." * * * In the above there are several roads to Clear. But there are also several levels of case to be cleared. Experience tells one what to run. Auditing skill alone gets the experience across. The original 1947 processes were defeated in the hands of others by lack of auditing drills and skill. Help and Step 6 do not work on low level cases to make clears of everyone -- hence the CCHs. By doing all of the above on every case you would certainly have clears in all cases. As your experience increases you can begin to omit steps. You will finally be able to adjust the processes to the exact cases you do. Get the preclear in session, run something. You'll win. LRH:-.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright$c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above was made available as a booklet called ACC Clear Procedure and is referred to as such in various issues.] 322  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=15/10/58 Volnum=0 Issue=146 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCEDURE CCH    P.A.B. No. 146 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication In Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 15 October 1958 PROCEDURE CCH (This lecture is a final summing up of the previous CCH PABs [interrupted at PAB No. 138] and should be read after those have been digested. It was given by L. Ron Hubbard to the HGC staff auditors in Washington, D.C on 23 August 1957.) Thinkingness in general should not be suspected to be under anybody's control. It is probably more under the auditor's control than it is under the preclear's. When I say or ask "Is the preclear's thinkingness under control?" I want you to understand that it is less under the preclear's control at any time than under the auditor's. The auditor can certainly control the preclear's thinkingness better than the preclear can. But before you can do this you must first get the preclear's body and attention under control. A condition to running Trio is: Is the person and attention under your control? To assume that the power of choice is also under the preclear's control -- much less his thinkingness -- is, of course, completely wrong. This condition then moves Trio way up on the present scale of processes. In order to give the preclear some havingness after CCH 0 to 5 has been flattened, I have developed an undercut to Trio. Trio is a directive process and should be prefaced by "Get the idea of having that clock." "Get the idea of having that picture (indicated picture on the wall)," etc. That's highly directive and would keep thinkingness of a rough case under control. The second version is: "Get the idea that it is all right to permit that (indicated object) to continue." It is also just an indicating process. The third section of this trio is the clincher: "Get the idea of making that (indicated object) disappear." One runs "disappear" instead of "dispense with" or "not-know." Small objects are much easier for the preclear to make disappear than large ones. You have not told him to make it disappear but only to "get the idea of making it disappear." Preclears usually literally interpret you and try like mad to make it disappear -- and it usually does for a short time. I have solved the enigma of exteriorization. Why doesn't a preclear exteriorize easily and stay exteriorized? We ask the accompanying question: Why does a preclear get sick when one asks him to conceive a static? Obviously we would have to get 323 somebody to conceive a static before he could himself stay comfortably outside his body's head. The answer to this problem is contained in the process "Recall a moment of loss." Loss prevents the preclear from conceiving a static. He associates a static with loss. He says, "All right, if there is nothing there I've lost it," or "I've lost something there, therefore I'd better not conceive a static." Conceiving a static is therefore painful. The truth of the matter is whenever he lost anything, something disappeared. All right. The funny part of it is that he never noticed that he didn't lose totally every time. He still had other objects. He lost his tie pin, but he still has his tie. He's still got the floor, the room, this universe, space, etc., but he never realizes this in these instances and that is why we run this process "Recall a moment of loss" to accustom somebody to conceiving a static very directly on loss and to get him to exteriorize. An individual cannot conceive a static if he associates static with loss- if the loss is painful. So we have to cure him of the painfulness of loss, consideration of, before we can exteriorize him easily. We do this by going back to automaticity. The universe has been taking things away from him. It has become an automaticity, and we find that the universe has an automaticity known as time and time itself is a consecutive series of losses. So we have to cure the preclear of losses before we can get him to appreciate time, otherwise he would be so afraid of losing it that he'd stick himself on the track and we get the "stuck on the track" phenomenon. The process "Recall a moment of loss" aimed at this, but the third command of Control Trio (as this series of processes had better be called), "Get the idea of making that (indicated object) disappear," handles it very well. This gets the preclear to take over the automaticity of all of the losses which he has unwillingly experienced. The universe has been taking the things away from him, and just spotting objects and getting the idea that they are going to disappear or are disappearing takes over the automaticity of losses, and he becomes accustomed to it after a while. All of the invisible masses that preclears have around them are actually simply symptoms of mass -- loss, mass -- loss. When an individual has no visio the only thing that he is looking at is a "stuck" loss. He is looking at the nothingness of something that was there. So one takes over that automaticity with the third command of Control Trio and one therefore has a very highly directional, workable set of processes. Each part of that Trio would be run relatively flat and go on to the next part, and I would say that one would run each part certainly not a hundred commands each and the auditor should endeavor to stay in that order of magnitude and just run it round and round. Take somebody with glasses, for example. His eyesight will do more tricks in less time on this third command of Control Trio than one can imagine. Things will go black. Well, why do things go black? Blackness makes things disappear and one takes over the automaticity of blackness to make things disappear. Night grabs, the way of the universe, once in every 24 hours on earth here. This is the process we have been looking for to turn on visio. If you want to turn on sonic with this you would have to go down to a noisy part of town and just run Trio on sound, but you wouldn't dare run Control Trio on sound if the preclear did not already have it flat on objects. Visio turns on before sonic. 324 There are many things one could do with this process. People who have anaesthetized areas in their body -- like they have no chest, etc. -- do weird things during this process. I wanted to tell you particularly about this particular process because it is a specific and will be found to be very useful to you. We had to find out if one version of this would run without killing a preclear and that is "Recall a moment of loss." Actually "Recall a moment of loss" should act as a havingness process because it as-ises all of the lost points on the track and it should be a havingness process all by itself; but we didn't want to be so bold as to run it with no havingness. (Until I find out differently, this Control Trio and "Recall a moment of loss" are making a bid for our chief exteriorization processes.) Now here is a process which is based on our old "Recall a secret." The version is entirely straight wire. The auditor explains to the preclear that he is not looking for hidden data to evaluate it. He is only asking the preclear to look at the data. He then makes a list of valences, paying great attention to those the preclear considers "unimportant" or is very slow to divulge. Then the auditor takes this list and runs repetitive straight wire (195l) as follows: "Think of something you might withhold from (valence)." The auditor repeats this question over and over until no communication lag is present. He never says "something else you might withhold from valence" because the auditor wants the preclear to think of some of these many times. Before selecting another valence the auditor runs a little Locational or Trio. He then takes the next valence the same way. The list is covered once and then the same list is covered again. The object is speed. Cover many people. Given time the auditor can do the same thing on all dynamics. There is a variation. Instead of a valence, body parts may be used. "Think of something you might withhold from that (body part)." Leave sexual parts or obvious psychosomatic difficulties until last. Don't begin on a withered arm, for example. It is amusing to realize that this process overlords all early psychotherapies, but they, using this effort to locate secrets, thought that divulgence and confession were the therapeutic agents. These have no bearing on workability. Further, early efforts naively thought there was one secret per case. Actually there are billions. It is easy to get into past lives on this. A basic secret is that one lived before. Whenever you run "withhold" on a valence you finish up with "can't have" on the valence and "have" for the preclear. It flattens off better that way. You will often find that it is more advantageous to run Locational Processing than Problems of Comparable or Incomparable Magnitude at times. A Problem of Comparable Magnitude is all right, but it is a thinkingness process and on a case that is having an awful lot of trouble with it, it gives them hell to run Locational Processing, but nevertheless it does run out the present time problem, which is most fascinating. Any one of the Rudiments is an excellent process. Two-Way Communication is great and does not as-is havingness. You have to keep the reality of two-way comm very high, though, and be willing to interrupt obsessive outflows and silences of the preclear. It is establishing a high level of reality. It consists of the auditor feeding experimental data to the preclear to have him look it over and decide about it one way or the other. You don't let the preclear in Two-Way Comm as-is everything he knows, thinks, or wants to do. The latest addition to the Rudiments is "Clearing the Auditor." Actually the crudest way known of clearing the auditor is "Who do I remind you of" "Tell me 325 something you like about me." The best way of clearing the auditor we know of is in Training 15, which is "Could I help you?" "How?" "Could you help me?" "How?" "Could I help anybody else?" "How?" "Could you help anybody else?" "How?" "Do other people ever help other people?" "Do women ever help women?" "Do men ever help men?" "Do men ever help women?" etc. You beat it to pieces on a big long bracket. This goes so far that it becomes a fantastic process in itself. You take father and mother valences and they are usually quite hot. You can run this on "Help." This is usually quite necessary on a case that is going to hang up because the only reason he is sitting there is to waste help. One has to understand that this case is trying to waste help, and it isn't a matter of "Find the Auditor" in the Rudiments today, but "Clear the Auditor" and the only point on which he is cleared is "Help" -- "Can I help you? Can you help me?" We use Handbook for Preclears to give the preclear some homework at the Hubbard Guidance Centers and it has been helping out just to the degree that it does some clarification on goals and gets the preclear stirred up. It simply stirs up the case so that it will run out. I was running over a phrenological questionnaire, and it said people are never permitted to do anything they want to do and this is the best goal of discipline. I got this tangled out in one way or the other. I got thinking about it from the standpoint -- this was about 20 years ago -- of "I wonder if there is anybody around that could articulate with great conciseness what he would like to do?" And I have found on all hands a failure to articulate was the main difficulty. A person had the feeling that he wanted to do something and that it would be wonderful, but it was all in a sensory capacity. If he could have been made to articulate this it would really have been something. And I experimented on it a little bit and we see that today in the Handbook for Preclears. If you can get a person to articulate in a session anything about the future you have won the subject of goals. But it must be in the alignment of this person's frame of reference. It must be aligned with his life -- not aligned with something we think he ought to live. So let's take a look at the clearance of goals. Goals would not be likely to run on a high generality. In other words, they are specific, personal and intimate. It is "What do you think? What do you want? What is aligned to your life?" Let's look at Goals as a process. One could run Goals for 25 hours with the greatest of ease. One could run the Present Time Problem for 25 hours, and we just had a report of a terrific win here on a preclear who was run on Locational for 25 hours. So it looks as though the Rudiments could be the session. We discover a preclear in the terrible condition of not wanting any auditing, not going any place and all of his goals being somebody else's goals. Two things can be done immediately: Clear the auditor and then run Goals. Goals could be run with two-way comm in this manner. You ask the preclear what he is absolutely sure would happen in the next couple of minutes, the next hour, a day from now, a week from now, one month from now and one year from now. We want something that the preclear is absolutely sure would happen. We are running right there the reverse process of atomic bombs which say "no future -- no future -- no future." That is basically what is wrong with a person. Why does he get jammed on the track? It is because of "no future." He had been denied to a point where his loss was so great that he dared not own. 326 I had a case by the way, which was one of the roughest cases I have ever run into. He put on the total appearance of being sane -- dramatized sanity -- and yet the case would make odd remarks like "I really think people are crazy." "Well, why do you think people are crazy?" I would say. "Well, because people say they can tell right from wrong and you know there's no difference." It was fascinating. He would make odd remarks like this from time to time. One day he made a remark on goals: "Well, it's really best to tell people that things cannot happen to them because otherwise they might hope they could and then they would be disappointed." This person was stark, staring mad and had no future of any kind. Five hours just this one question, "Is there anything going to happen in the remainder of this afternoon?" "Will anything happen the rest of today?" "Is there anything going to occur any place in the world the rest of today?" was run on him and his confident answer, with great certainty was, "No. No. No." Finally we broke through it and I finally got the person to admit that there was some slight possibility that there would be a room here for the rest of the day. That busted the case. It read from total no-future up. This case was an isolated one as we have had occasionally. Now and then an inspirational sort of process cracked them through. Well, now we see this process of Goals on the basis of futures and a person without futures cannot have a fancy future called a goal and all a goal is is a fancy future determined by the person. If he has no future at all determined by anybody, then he isn't going to go anywhere from that point and any goal he has is totally unreal. The best way that I know of to clear up a goal is as follows (with two-way comm): "Is there anything that is going to happen in the next couple of minutes?" We get this thrashed out until he has got some great big certainty that there will be something a couple of minutes from now. Then we gradiently move it up and we get certainties at each one of these stages and levels -- regardless of on what. The person knows there is going to be a future there. Now let's have him put something in this future he has now created. He has created a future and has certainty on it. Now let's put some desire in the future and we get a goal. "Now what would you like to have happen in the next couple of minutes?" or "What would you like to do in the next couple of minutes, tomorrow, next week, etc?" We will get weird things which have no desire in them; they will all be get-rid-of's, and if you finally plowed him down on it he would get down to the bottom of the ladder, which is "Knock this body off right now." And when he says, "I would like to get over my fear of darkness, I would like to get over feeling bad every time my mother screams at me," these aren't desires. These are run-aways, flinches. These are "Let's not confront it," "Let's get out of the universe; let's scram," and the final result is the basic postulate, "If I could just get rid of this body right this instant I would be all right." So that process doesn't even vaguely get flat unless there is a real goal like "I'd like to have a stick of candy." That is a goal, a real goal. Preclears will modify their goals in some way or another: "Of course, I can't because I have to work and I don't have any money," and "yak, yak, yak." They are modified goals, and as long as they modify them they don't have a goal because they are making a postulate and the MEST universe is kicking the postulate in on them. So we do this on a gradient scale of time so that goals become real to them. L. RON HUBBARD 327  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/10/58 Volnum=0 Issue=83 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  New HCA Course You Can Begin at Home    Ability Issue 83 [ 1958, ca. mid-October] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. New HCA Course You Can Begin at Home L. Ron Hubbard A wonderful new course has been instituted in the Academy of Scientology. It is not just a correspondence course nor really an extension course, it is a real HCA Course. In fact, it becomes the course leading to certification as Hubbard Certified Auditor. For exactly five dollars you can enroll in the Academy of Scientology of Washington, D.C., and begin your studies at once at home. In fact, from here on out all of the work you will do will be required to get your certificate anyway. Now that all the basic problems of training auditors have been resolved and now that clearing is a real fact and attainable, it becomes our problem to communicate this skill to Scientologists at large and to all those in the world who would help their fellow man. This new course is probably the biggest single undertaking of worldwide Scientology that has ever been attempted. Here is what I have found out. I have found out that a Scientologist in his training must approximate the route of the actual research and discovery. Otherwise, he is not able to clear people easily since he lacks fundamental understandings which became commonplace many years ago. There might be an easy road to clearing, and, indeed, an excellent auditor well trained can pilot that road, but there is certainly no easy road to training. After a careful survey of a very large number of students I have come to the conclusion that the only barrier to clearing everyone in the world or, probably with more reality, one's immediate associates is the quality of training received by the auditor. If an auditor understands Scientology from its earliest beginnings up to the present and if he takes modern Clear Procedure and uses it with that understanding, he has no difficulty in clearing people, no matter how "difficult the case." On the other hand, given the simplest, fastest, and easiest rendition of Clear Procedure as now used in the Hubbard Guidance Center, and yet not given thorough background in training, an auditor will be unable to clear people. How to make auditors rapidly has been our greatest problem. We cannot expect people to support themselves for years, as in college days when somebody else footed 328 the bill, in order to achieve skills which make him superior to any mental practitioner in any time and period, without investing some time and effort in the study. As far as we can determine it takes about three years to make a thoroughly excellent auditor. To expect somebody to spend three years at the Academy in person is too much. The doors would be slammed shut on all but a few and we would probably cost ourselves some of our best future auditors. On the other end of the extremes, to expect somebody to study the subject for only a few weeks and then achieve remarkable results with it is almost an impossible thing to ask. That some people have done it, that some people even have simply read a book and gone out and achieved excellent results does not mean that it is generally feasible and, indeed, it is not even desirable, since these quick studies will sooner or later run into material which, though well covered in research is not yet known to them and they go astray into phenomena and waste a year or two or six trying to wander back out of a labyrinth that was in actuality very well charted some years before. Between these two extremes there has to be a compromise. But the compromise must work and it must find a person at the end of a period of study totally competent to clear people, otherwise the study itself would have no purpose whatever. Accordingly, following the pattern of some of the greatest educational institutions, we have hit upon a combination of home study and classwork for each of the three principal grades of skill and practice. My records indicate that it takes approximately a year from the moment of enrollment in the Academy through the classwork and the homework and the book synopses and the final award of the grade of Hubbard Certified Auditor. If this is a fact in actual practice, then why do we not make it a reality? We have done so. It takes now a year to become a Hubbard Certified Auditor. No certificate may be awarded earlier than one year from the date of actual enrollment in an HCA Course, either extension or at the Academy. Further records, though less complete, demonstrate that it takes about a year from time of enrollment to complete all of the studies required for Hubbard Clearing Scientologist (the old Bachelor of Scientology Course). Therefore, no HCS certificate may be awarded any earlier than one year from the date of enrollment at the Academy. It has been demonstrated over a long period of time that it takes approximately a year for an Advanced Clinical Course student to complete his classwork, his cases and his thesis. Therefore, no certificate at the grade of Hubbard Graduate Scientologist may be issued earlier than one year from the moment of enrollment. What does this mean in general to our standards and standing? It means that any student of Scientology will have spent more actual study in the field of the spirit and human behavior than any other practitioner in the world today. Instead of carrying on with the unreality that we are the briefest trained people, we can step over to the reality that we are the most thoroughly trained people. And this is all done without expenditure of any more class time than before by the new combination Extension Course and classroom study program. It takes about a year for an auditor starting from scratch to become familiar enough with his tools to alleviate chronic somatics, to bring about some degree of 329 serenity and to handle the accidents of life in a preclear, and to handle many types of preclears. By this I mean the achievement of actual tangible results. He knows what he is doing and can approach anguish and accident with confidence. Here, though we deal in the realm of the thetan, we have more command of the anatomy of the mind than any other practitioner or priest ever had in any period of Man's history. To achieve this in a year is quite remarkable. But that it does take a year is factual. It takes a further year's study to get up to a point where one can approach a case with some confidence with the end goal of clearing that case. People who attempt this under that period of training are liable to be bitterly disappointed and this disappointment will do us more harm, as we have already found, than all of the mad-doggings of vested interest and the orthodox organizations. After all, isn't it worth two years of study to be able to do this for one's fellow man? But even an auditor who has studied for two years will find cases which balk him and he requires a finishing course to get his own case in shape and to attain the ability to confront any case and do something for it. Thus the goals of our three years of study. Now I know that America has to do everything in a minute, but, after all, if one spent 76 trillion years getting that way he can certainly spend three years getting back on the track again. The problem of finance has balked many people from taking courses but in this program it is possible to achieve the highest rank and skill as an auditor for only a few hundred dollars a year. THE PLAN The way the plan works is not complicated. Special lessons have been prepared. The applicant enrolls in the Academy at a cost of only $5.00. He pays for the few texts he will need, and, indeed, many people may already have them. He is at once sent his lessons to begin his training. By devoting only a few hours a week he can keep his lessons flowing in to the Academy where they will be studied and returned to him in order to coach his schoolings. It would assist anyone taking this Extension Course and Academy classwork to have first an HAS Course (Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist) from any local auditor qualified to give one. This certificate, HAS, is not, however, a prerequisite to the Academy Extension Course or further work, but would simply benefit the student a great deal. Or, you can come to the Academy for this course which would then be credited toward HCA as well as HAS. If his finances are too cramped to permit him his full 8 weeks of study in one year, he can do some of it in one year and some of it in the next and so stretch out his course of study to suit his pocketbook. The student pays nothing for his training beyond his $5.00 enrollment fee until he actually presents himself at an Academy for his Communication Course and his Upper Indoctrination Course. There he pays only for the classwork he receives which averages about $1.00 per hour of personal coaching. He can do this as well for the grade of Hubbard Clearing Scientologist in the following year, except that the length of time in actual classwork at the Academy would be only 5 weeks. The following year he would have only 6 weeks of actual class training and that would be received in the attendance of an ACC. 330 Further, by extending his studies over a period of time and by paying in small sums every week he could have his course paid for, so far as classwork is concerned, well in advance of actually taking it. There are many ways this study and endeavor can be brought to fruition but he should attain these positive results. At the end of his first year of combined home study of 44 weeks and his Academy class study of 8 weeks he should be able to relieve many misemotional conditions and correct the course of many anxiety- and pain-wracked lives. At the end of the second year he should be able to clear at least half of the people he attempts to audit. At the end of the third year he should be able to clear any case he meets and should himself by this time be clear. "Correspondence courses" are supposed to have various frailties. We have studied these frailties, too, and we find that companies giving correspondence courses very often, and perhaps purposely, make some lessons much more difficult than others and so stop the progress of a student by imposing a noncomprehension on the line. We have taken care of this by an evenness of study and a gradient scale of approach. "Correspondence courses" have an additional liability of not imposing classroom discipline. This we have cared for in a reply system, and if you do not get your lesson in, believe me you will hear from the Extension Course Director at the Academy. "Correspondence courses" also fail by their loneliness, and I have taken care of this by making very sure that much of the latter half of the course is devoted to getting the student into circulation and actually and actively observing humanity. So this is not a "correspondence course." It is actual study just as though you were at the Academy. There is no reason to go on being mystified about what life is all about or what Dianetics and Scientology are all about when a ready pilot is now to hand. There is no reason to sit back and worry and fret because one doesn't have the immediate cash to rush to the Academy and study the subject. Furthermore, this is an excellent way to complete work where some classroom training has already been begun in Dianetics or Scientology, and it is a very fine way to review the subject up to date and get wheeling with modern clearing. THE GOAL Without a broadly informed population who are capable of understanding motives and aberrations no sane government of Earth is possible. Without a great many clears no real effective leadership is possible for Man. The joke is on all of us, to say nothing of Man at large. The singular truth of the matter is that when he deserts this life he doesn't quit. He has to come back here again and do it all over. You might not believe this but you can learn it subjectively fast enough if you are in the hands of any good auditor. Truth will out, no matter how final everyone has pretended death might be. Death is very far from a permanent state. This is probably much easier to prove with much less strain on the brain than some of the fundamental laws of physics. If we don't do something about this now, we'll have to come back at a less optimum time without adequately organized data and organizations and somehow muck through once more. Personally I don't believe we could in the next few hundred thousand years and I believe this is a rare opportunity to break the chain and start walking upward into the sunlight. We aren't any cult that believes some outrageous nonsense about demons and devils and we aren't any get-rich-quick scheme and might even succeed better if we were. We are dedicated and sincere in getting the job done and we are the first people 331 to appear on Earth since its first solidification out of nebulous vaporings who can get the job done and who know what we are doing. The very truth that we know, its simplicity and ease of grasp, the very honesty with which we approach our task are probably the largest barriers we have to overcome. Man has been defrauded so often, persuaded so wrongly and has returned to the same old rut so inevitably and in such a defeated frame of mind that he is not able to grasp easily the firm and friendly hand which is being reached toward him. It will take more people, more auditors, better understanding on all our parts to get this task anywhere near done. The most immediate answer is the Extension Course of the Academy of Scientology. It is the answer to those who studied a little, thought there was some truth there but because of lacking skill and complete study missed it. It is a chance for those who, low on finance, yet wish to become skilled auditors. It is the chance for those who did some studying and did not do it well enough. It's a good chance, and it isn't much of a gamble. Will you ever find a better offer than this Extension Course and enrollment in the Academy of Scientology? L. RON HUBBARD 332  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/10/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ABBREVIATIONS   1 ea staff member Field Offices (info) HCO D.C.  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 25 OCTOBER 1958 1 ea staff member Field Offices (info) HCO D.C. ABBREVIATIONS Since Director of Processing and Director of Procurement have same abbreviation (D of P or Dir of Pro) use: D of P for Director of Processing and Dir of Procu for Director of Procurement. Best, LRH:rs.rd L. RON HUBBARD [some copies of the above HCO B were dated 5 October 1958.]  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/10/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO READ PROFILES ON OCA: COMPARING CURRENT WEEK PROFILE WITH WK BEFORE   1 ea. stf member Field Offices Washington  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 27 OCTOBER 1958 1 ea. stf member Field Offices Washington HOW TO READ PROFILES ON OCA: COMPARING CURRENT WEEK PROFILE WITH WK BEFORE Drop on Critical -- havingness drop. Whole line (or majority of points) drops -- ARC breaks with auditor. Line doesn't change (same as before) -- p.t. problem not touched by auditor. Rough auditing -- reduction of havingness. Drop in Responsibility from former week -- Auditor evaluation. Drop in Composed -- loss of auditor. Poor CCH 0 in Find the Auditor. Drop in Comm Level -- double acknowledgement by auditor, putting pc off before finished. Drop in Appreciative -- lowered reality level. Nervous is toughest point to raise on a graph. It is done by finding the auditor. This is a primary point to watch in low profiles. Did preclear find auditor. CCH 3 and CCH 4 are the indicated processes for these low ones. They were designed to find the auditor. LRH:rs.rd L. RON HUBBARD 334  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=147 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  COMMUNICATION COURSE    P.A.B. No. 147 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 November 1958 COMMUNICATION COURSE I want to welcome you to the Communication Course. It seems that a Communication Course is necessary as the first step to an auditor. And if an auditor doesn't successfully pass the Communication Course, then to the end of any career* he has as an auditor, there will be something wrong with his auditing. It is very odd that one of the highest levels of indoctrination, Tone 40 on an Object, is most often unsuccessfully approached by a student at the HPA or HCA level when he has flunked the one I am going to talk about right now, which is a newcomer's first look inside the Academy at communication. And that is Dear Alice, part A. It would have amused you the other day to have found a former Director of Training of an organization being sent back by the HCO Board of Review coach in his coaching to Dear Alice so that he could get good enough to pass Tone 40 on an Object. But it was absolutely necessary that this happen, because he had for some reason or another, being an old-timer and having been in it for a long time, never hit Dear Alice. It had been omitted from his training. In spite of all the auditing he had done and all the experience he had had, at the end of this time we find him sitting up in the coaching room, good as gold, perfectly comprehensible, doing Dear Alice, part A -- a man who has probably audited two or three thousand hours' worth. But everywhere he had difficulty with a preclear, that difficulty stemmed from an inability to do Dear Alice, part A, which is in effect to deliver an auditing command in a unit of time as a completed cycle of action -- he delivered an auditing command. Well now you have to get up to step 2 and even step 3 before you can call it a full cycle of action. But as far as the auditor is concerned in Dear Alice, part A, only, his job is done when he has delivered an auditing command to a preclear. He didn't deliver it over the hills and far away or to the window; he delivered it to a being and he delivered it from where he was to where the preclear was -- and it's so easy. Anyone to whom this was described briefly, insufficiently, out in the street would, flunking it at the same time, tell you, "Of course I can communicate to people! Well, yes! There's nothing to it. I'm a salesman, you know. I run the Atomic Energy Omission. I'm a big man! Of course I communicate to anyone." We look in that man's vicinity and nobody's heard anything he's said since the days of Noah's Ark. He never said it to anybody in the first place. He sort of throws things out, you know, and he just hopes they land. Well, that's what passes for communication, and it isn't by a long ways -- he throws out a statement of some sort or another and he thinks he's communicating with somebody. It's a great oddity, but I must confess to you at this moment that the third dynamic is simply an agreement. It is an agreement which people have agreed to and *Per HCO PL 22 Feb 1979 "Errata -- P.A.B. No. 147" 335 therefore it has an existence and we certainly cannot live in this world without it, but it's a violation of the communication formula. A violation of it. The only thing that you can talk to in the final analysis is a living being, and all third dynamics are composed of individual dynamics. And you can summate them and you can say this is a third dynamic, and that is the agreement on which we go, and it is quite factual and they are quite actual unless we stress them with the communication formula -- so that you don't talk to all preclears, you talk to a preclear. There was a fellow by the name of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that never talked to the nation -- he never talked to the nation -- he talked to an individual citizen. And therefore he communicated. There was another fellow who spoke the most beautiful English I have ever heard, almost incomprehensibly parsed. Perfect. Would have passed any Oxford English Professor's most critical look, and that was Herbert Hoover. And I don't think Herbert Hoover ever said hello to a dog. I don't think in his whole life he ever said anything to anybody anywhere. And when this man uttered pronunciamentos they pronounced nothing to anybody anywhere. And therefore he couldn't lead a nation out of a depression. He couldn't lead anything for an excellent reason. He had no concept in the final analysis of talking to an individual, of getting his communication to land right there. Now this is a touchy point that I open up. You say, "Well, how about you, Ron? You talk to an awful lot of people." Well, that's the whole secret of Scientology -- I don't talk to an awful lot of people -- I talk to you. I haven't any concept of a large multitude that reads my books or listens to my lectures. I can get a multiple concept of talking to a great many at the same time by talking to every one of them individually. Therefore I perhaps add a little conceit to the line, but I do communicate. Therefore someone wanting to know how to speak to a crowd would first begin with Dear Alice, part A. So it is very, very far from an unimportant step. It is not just the entrance step that you have to get through to get your Communication Course over so you can really learn something. That is not what it is. It is the first door that opens and that door opens when it opens, and it opens when you can communicate a statement from you to a person. We won't worry about a preclear, because really the person in dummy auditing who is sitting there as preclear is really a coach, you know. But you've got to get something across from you to that person. And it has to be from you to that person -- it has to be a communication. And when you can do that, well, you're all set. I once told somebody that if he had a very difficult student -- not you -- but if he had a very very difficult student, the thing to do with this difficult student would be to put him through seven weeks of dummy auditing and then teach him in the last week to remedy havingness and turn him loose with a certificate and it would be a safe investment. We would be perfectly safe in doing that. But to give him one week when he needed two or three on dummy auditing and then try to cram him full of data and hope that the processes would carry him through somehow didn't make an auditor, it made a liability -- both to himself and to preclears. So this first step is not just an easy one -- it is the toughest step you'll perform in Scientology and that's why it's right at the beginning. It's to say something to somebody with the full confidence that they will receive it. And that's quite a trick. All right. How exactly is this done? We give a person a book. The book is Alice in Wonderland. Why Alice in Wonderland? Well, that's just because it is. No further significance. We give him this book and he is supposed to find any sentence in that book that he cares to find. (These people who just want to read the book consecutively 336 to the preclear are not doing dummy auditing. They again are not in communication with the preclear.) He is supposed to find a line. Now he doesn't put "Alice said" or "The Queen said" or something like that on the line. He just puts the statement itself, you see. "Why do they run so fast?" Well the book says, " 'Why do they run so fast?' the Queen asked." Well we don't use "the Queen asked." We just say, "Why do they run so fast?" All right, he picks that up out of the book. Why out of a book? Why not out of his head? Oh, remember. Remember something -- in using the English language, you are not using your own ideas, you did not invent the words. You only helped invent the words that compose the English language. You are already using somebody else's ideas. Now there is nothing wrong with your composing these into new ideas of your own, but remember you are already using somebody else's ideas when you're speaking English. All right. Now let's get it a little bit further. We are given a set pat process. Oh I know I dreamed it up, I found it one way or the other, but an awful lot of auditors worked with this. It's had a lot of looking at, and it's become phrased in a certain way, and that certain way might very well be taken by you out of the textbook and given to the preclear, and it won't ever work if you do. "Do fishes swim?" is not a therapeutic procedure -- it's not. The repetition of it can be very good for an auditor, but it's not a therapeutic procedure. But the statement "Do fishes swim?" is not yours really, at the beginning, is it? You got it from the instructor or off of a book, and then you used it. Well when does it become yours? Well, any idea is yours that you make yours. We won't go along with dialectic materialism and say that no ideas are new, because that's not true. There can be new ideas. But if you get an idea from someone else, it is not still their idea. It's your idea. There is nothing wrong with mis-owning ideas, there's no mass in them to get you confused. You take an idea out of a book, it becomes your idea, and then as your idea you relay it to the preclear. And that is all there is to it. It is coached this way. It is not from the book to the preclear. It is from the book to the auditor, and then the auditor, making it his own idea, expresses that idea to the preclear in such a way that it arrives at the preclear. So it's from the auditor to the preclear. But we give him the book as the third via because most of the material he is going to handle in communication is from a source outside himself. You've just got to get used to the idea that there is nothing wrong with using another person's ideas. I always know what someone's state of learning is in Scientology when they speak of Scientology as "your" ideas. They say, "I've been reading your ideas." I know at once this person can't communicate. It's a great oddity. It's quite wonderful. Because they reveal at once that they cannot take this first basic step of taking an idea and then communicating it to someone else. They are standing back looking at the world in some large sense and they are not any part of it, because they can't own any of the world's ideas. If they can't own any of the world's ideas, then they won't own any of the world, because the easiest thing to own is an idea. No mass to impede it. So, we coach just exactly in this way. We want the person to find a phrase in Alice in Wonderland and then, taking that as his own idea, communicate it directly to the preclear and he can say it over and over, the same phrase if he wishes, in any way he wishes to say it, until the preclear (who is really a coach) tells him that he thinks it has arrived. Now sometimes the preclear, the first day, feels just a little bit strange about these communication lines, too, and sometimes has his entire criticism based upon the erudition, the pronunciation, the way the auditor holds his little finger while he announces the phrase -- this has nothing to do with it. It is the intention that 337 communicates, not the words. And when you have the intention to communicate to the preclear, and that intention goes across, it will arrive. If you broadcast that intention, no matter if you're saying it in Chinese, if you're a Scientologist, it will arrive. One of the steps of the much higher indoctrination level, Tone 40 8-C, consists entirely and completely of saying things in funny voice tones while one is communicating an intention -- using very odd voice tones; well, this is not part of Dear Alice. The voice tones are unimportant; pronunciation is unimportant. It's whether or not the person could take that idea out of that book, own it, and then communicate it. And the intention must communicate. And it must be communicated in one unit of time. That is to say, it isn't repeated from the last time it was repeated. It is new, fresh, communicated in present time. The fifty-fifth command of "Do fishes swim?" is the fifty-fifth, not the first repeated. So we have one unit of time, one command, and the intention. And when we have those things relayed across, then he can find another phrase and communicate that. And that is the way we do that, and I hope you find it helps communication. L. RON HUBBARD  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PERSONNEL EFFICIENCY, DUBLIN   FOR WIDE PUBLICATION  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 3 NOVEMBER 1958 FOR WIDE PUBLICATION AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PERSONNEL EFFICIENCY, DUBLIN Having paid B. Green of Dublin the final owing item in the American College of Personnel Efficiency, Dublin, this establishment and its personnel cease to be in any way connected with the Admin or info lines of HASI London, Founding Church D.C., or HCOs. This entire establishment reverts to status of field auditor. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ph.jh Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 338  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HPA COURSES FOR STAFF   1 ea stf member hat Dir Procu hat Assoc Sec hat Accounts London hat Treasurer Field Offices info Washington HCO  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON 1 ea stf member hat Dir Procu hat HCO BULLETIN OF 7 NOVEMBER 1958 Assoc Sec hat Accounts London hat Treasurer Field Offices info Washington HCO HPA COURSES FOR STAFF Any PERMANENT staff member may enroll in the week-end HPA Course on the following terms: #10 down payment. 10% deducted from salary until balance is paid. Staff member to remain with organization until amount is paid in full -- or whole remaining balance becomes due and payable at once on departure from staff. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Executive Director [The text of HCO B 27 October 1958, HPA Courses for Staff, was the same as the above, except that it did not have the word, "PERMANENT" in the first paragraph.]  L. RON HUBBARD Executive Director   Type = 11 iDate=11/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACC SCHEDULE   1 ea staff member Field Offices Washington  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 11 NOVEMBER 1958 1 ea staff member Field Offices Washington ACC SCHEDULE 21st ACC USA Course starts Monday Jan 5th, 1959 Course ends Saturday Feb 14th, 1959 6th London ACC UK Course starts Monday May 4th, 1959 Course ends Saturday June 13th, 1959 1st Melbourne ACC Australia Course starts Monday Sept 7th, 1959 Course ends Saturday Oct 17th, 1959 All above ACCs will be conducted by L. Ron Hubbard personally and instructed by Nibs Hubbard, Jan Halpern and Dick Halpern. LRH:mp L. RON HUBBARD 339  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TRAINING INSTRUCTORS, HCO SEC   1 each Staff Member Field Offices Washington  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 13 NOVEMBER 1958 1 each Staff Member Field Offices Washington TRAINING INSTRUCTORS, HCO SEC TR9 (b) and TR9 (c) HCO was asked for a TR number for "Handling ARC Breaks and Opening and Closing a Session". TR 16 is assigned to "Handling ARC Breaks". Below are TR 9 (b) and TR 9 (c) as contained in the unpublished Student Manual. Number: Training 9 (b) Name: Starting the Session Command: No formalized command except that auditor must make sure that the pc is cognizant of the fact that a session has started. Position: Auditor and pc seated a comfortable distance apart. Purpose: To make known the beginning of a session so that no mistake as to its beginning is made. To differentiate between an assist (erasing a surface difficulty) and formalized auditing. To let both auditor and pc know that a session has started. Training Stress: To bring about the purpose of this rudiment. To begin sessions, not just let them happen and when pc goes out of session to re-establish and start the session again. To demonstrate that if a pc doesn't realize that a session has started, he doesn't get audited and change consequently does not take place. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London, England, in 1955. Number: Training 9 (c) Name: Ending the Session Commands: A gradient scale of two-way communication to "End of Session" first giving the pc adequate warning that the session is going to end shortly. Position: Auditor and pc seated a comfortable distance apart. Purpose: To make known the end of a session and prevent pc from being either stuck in a session or self-auditing. To end the cycle of action of being audited. Training Stress: To teach the student the importance of ending the session, of completing the cycle of auditing to the degree that the pc is cognizant of this. To illustrate that pc will be left stuck on the time track if this isn't done or done too abruptly. To do this gradiently, warning the pc beforehand that it is going to end. To teach auditor not to end session where pc has somatic, dope-off or any restimulation brought about by use of a technique. History: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard as parts of the Rudiments of Auditing in London, England, in 1955. LRH:mp.rd L. RON HUBBARD 340  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CLEAR BRACELETS   Full Distribution  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 17 NOVEMBER 1958 Full Distribution CLEAR BRACELETS No clear bracelets will be issued until person has been tested for engrams as per E-Meter techniques of 5th London ACC which will be made available shortly. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STEP 6   Full Distribution  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 25 NOVEMBER 1958 Full Distribution STEP 6 All persons who were run on Step 6 before they had help and engrams fiat must be run in such a way as to knock out the auditing. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rt.rd 341  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACADEMY TRAINING BULLETIN TECHNIQUES TO BE USED ON HGC PRECLEARS   All Area Offices  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO TECHNICAL POLICY LETTER OF 25 NOVEMBER 1958 ACADEMY TRAINING BULLETIN All Area Offices TECHNIQUES TO BE USED ON HGC PRECLEARS Effective Dec. 1, 1958 in all Area Offices The following techniques are the only techniques to be used on HGC preclears, effective Dec. 1, and continuing. These produce clears in the hands of most auditors. Deviations by Director of Processing or staff auditors are violations of the Code of a Scientologist under No. 2 and Auditor's Code under No. 3. Where needed: CCH 1 CCH 2 CCH 3 CCH 4 On all other Pcs: 1. Rudiments (not CCH 0) Establish: Auditor, pc, room, session to start. 2. Start-Change-Stop on a person or object. 3. Factual Havingness. 4. What can you confront? (Repetitive Command) 5. You make a mock-up for which you can be wholly responsible. 6. General Help. Help on the Rock. 7. Step 6 of Clear Procedure. Exception: Only where staff auditor has been trained in an ACC given to running engrams only (1st such ACC was 5th London October-November 1958) may the staff auditor run engrams or use CCH 0. Early Dianetic auditors are not, repeat not, included in this exception. It is a matter of judgment here that in event of question about engram running the auditors not specially trained in 1958 or later to do so will make more clears by the above than by "running engrams". The running of engrams by Scientology, rather than Dianetics, is splendid and speeds clearing but only where specially trained. There is too much new data about it for assimilation short of an engram running ACC. 20th ACC graduates are not qualified to run engrams. LRH:-.rd L. RON HUBBARD 342  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 51 iDate=0/11/58 Volnum=5 Issue=22 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Violence    CERTAINTY Vol. 5, No. 22 [1958, ca. late November] The Official Publication of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY in the British Isles Violence L. Ron Hubbard Man's answer in his more barbaric stage was always VIOLENCE. If you weren't obeyed, use VIOLENCE! If you were balked, use VIOLENCE! If they wouldn't bow or scrape or wouldn't lick the boots, then VIOLENCE was the answer, fit for one and all and, in particular, YOU. But where did all this violence get Man? Where did rows of trenches men for four years filled with uncounted dead get Man? Just where the A-bomb and the H-bomb and the Z-bomb will get him. Back to barbarianism! Let's blow it all up! Let's splatter Earth and all her pleasant ways to atoms and to shreds. VIOLENCE! Ah, that's the answer, isn't it? The very thing to do to little kids. Blow them up! That stops their weeping. Kill them all. They only die but once. But do they? Do they now? What a foul trick fate waits to play upon the Men of Violence. They blow it all up. They spatter their homes and kids and fishing poles from here to Kingdom Come. They blow it all up and blow themselves out of their heads. And they aren't dead! They're still alive and only the body is dead and nothing is solved. And, oh my, isn't it messed up! No priest was there, no Gabriel with a cornet solo to play them into Pearly Gates. Not even the wasted coals of hell exist to greet them. They blasted everything in sight and the other men blew back and they all blew out of their silly heads and charred derbies and caps and homburgs and what did they see? They saw a world they'd ruined all out of political cause and glee. They saw bodies where their kids had been and bones where their hat had been and embers where their lives had been. And all nicely radioactive now. And nothing with which to rebuild the world. Nothing. No order. Just chaos. No bodies. Just fish. No grass, just radiation. A planet as bald as a burned egg. And that's their win. And they've earned the right to build it back with nothing to work with and no people to talk to and no fishing pole, no books, no blueprint. The joke's on them. They did live. They did come back. There wasn't either death or heaven and it's all to do again. Too bad the rest of us are being asked to come along too. Otherwise it would be such a good cruel joke on these MEN OF VIOLENCE. Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard. All Rights Reserved. 343  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=85 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  The Theory of Training in Scientology    Ability Issue 85 [1958, ca. late November] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. The Theory of Training in Scientology L. Ron Hubbard The third dynamic called education, when engaged upon the installation of false or imagined premises, can be quite aberrative. The only right we have to train in Scientology is that we are training people in things which they already know. The principles and axioms of Scientology are considerations which have been agreed upon and out of which stem this universe and livingness. To train a person in these trains him only to handle this universe and livingness, therefore Scientology training is non-aberrative. On the contrary, thorough training in Scientology is in itself, if a slow one, a road to Clear. The very fact that we are training people in things which they already know brings us to a liability, however. As we train we restimulate considerations already undertaken in some distant past by the student. As many of these were assumed to remedy ills and evils he imagined he had (the restimulation of earlier postulates he has made -- which are the postulates which become the axioms and other materials in Scientology), the student may experience somatics and confusions which he would not experience in ordinary scholastic pursuits. Even though this is all for the better a student sometimes conceives himself to be under duress, either in student auditing sessions or from an instructor, which is not actually present. There are three ways in which this single liability is overcome. First, we train a student thoroughly until the somatic or confusion is discharged. We do not give up training in something simply because he finds it confusing or painful. Just as in an auditing session we would continue to run the process to discharge the somatic which the same process turned on, so in training we continue to train in the area which has been restimulated. Second, we train vigorously and emphatically so that there will be no confusion in the student's mind as to the source of the training, and Third, we consider a student always as an auditor, never as a preclear. We are not at all interested in the student as a case. We are interested in the student only as a Scientologist. The moment he joins a course of training, he is considered from that moment on an auditor. When he is being audited he is, of course, for that time a preclear, but only by assignment. That he does experience case gains is entirely incidental to training. It is a maxim of Scientology instructors that if a mirror held to a 344 student's lips shows the mist of breath, the student is in shape to audit a preclear. There is no compromise with this state of mind. Only an instructor who intended actual harm to students would use sympathy for a student concerning his case. Therefore, Scientology Academies are looked upon as "tough schools." Just the fact of living through a course of training merits the designation Scientologist. The goal of training from the viewpoint of the Director of Training of the Academy is to bring the student up to a level where he could be safely entrusted with a Hubbard Guidance Center preclear. This does not mean that the student will be so entrusted, but before the Director of Training and the Examiner and the Board of Review pass the student as graduated, they have to be sure to their own complete satisfaction that they would have no qualm entrusting a difficult case to this student. This training goal insures an orientation point and standard of excellence. The instructors, the Director of Training, the Examiner and the HCO Board of Review know what I demand of a staff auditor. Thoroughness of training is achieved on a gradient scale. It might frighten a student to look across the training chart and realize what he must be able to perform, but it should not, if he realizes that he is climbing a stairway of rather easy steps. The steps are each one of them easy and their gradient has been planned and experienced carefully. Therefore, no student is ever passed to the next step of these many steps before the instructor is entirely certain that he has mastered the last step. For example, on this gradient scale a student who has thoroughly learned Dummy Auditing Step A ("Dear Alice"), will have very little trouble graduating up to the top of the step, "Tone 40 on an Object." While it would be a mistake to demand in Dummy Auditing Step A, the excellence necessary to pass "Tone 40 on an Object," it is nevertheless true that those people who had difficulty with "Tone 40 on an Object" need a review of Dummy Auditing Step A. Therefore, an instructor is always niggardly with his signature at the end of each step. To permit a student to climb too swiftly would be to condemn him to a confusion in some later area of training. Training in Scientology contains no thought for explaining to some student how Scientology fits into some other frame of reference. By straightly teaching him Scientology he will come at last to see that it does not fit into any other frame of reference but other things fit into its frame of reference. A great many things in Scientology have been said before. Indeed, everything in Scientology has been directly and actively postulated by the person being trained at some point in the past. It would be odd indeed if these points then did not echo or harmonic or crop up in other teachings elsewhere. It should be understood by the student that all things proceed from postulates and that these postulates go from simplicities to complexities. Therefore, it would be surprising if Tibetan Lamaism did not contain some of the data of Scientology. By working entirely with the data which is simplest and earliest one does the odd thing with Scientology of taking a new, freshly born science and undercutting any older philosophy. If Scientology is not found to do this in some field of human experience then it simply means we will have to do some more studying. But before we in the development of Scientology do more studying we should be very sure that we know enough Scientology to apply it to this apparently random field. Scientology contains several logics which are very important to training. These are actually the logics of education. Calling your attention to one of these, it will be seen that the evaluation of the importance of a datum is often more important than the datum itself. The datum found in Scientology may also be found in other philosophic 345 works. But hold on for a moment. Did the other philosophic work give an evaluation of the importance of the datum or did it give dozens of other data as having equal rank? This point is mentioned here because it is often overlooked by students. Scientology, for instance, has some abrupt, sharp things to say about Time. Indeed, Time could be said to be the single source of human aberration. The hunger for a number of incidents to occur simultaneously will in itself cause people to jam their time tracks. These people, of course, are not aware of the amount of incident and as a result jam many adventures into present time with a consequent disability of differentiation. Now it will be seen that in many philosophies Time is covered exhaustively. Time is given many definitions. Time is given chapters and volumes but nowhere in these chapters and volumes does the philosopher place his finger squarely upon the two or three important data which are most important about Time. He ranks these data with all of the other data and so loses them in an ocean of drops of water, all the drops looking the same as all the other drops. Thus, truth becomes submerged in an ocean of outflow. Scientology is more parsimonious. It is more incisive, it is more thoroughly evaluated. The two or three data in Scientology which concern Time are the data from which all other data about Time flow. Thus, when a student is taught a datum from Scientology, he is taught it with the understanding that it will clarify many other later and more complicated data. Thus, he is taught the simple datum thoroughly. Thus, he is taught fundamentals far more thoroughly than he believes necessary. The work in the development of Scientology has been the culling of truth from an ocean of fact and finding that the truth has a tiny group of data possessed of the overwhelming power of changing all other facts in this universe and in livingness. This is the power of Scientology: that it, by stressing single, simple truths, eliminates oceans of mere data. Thus in training we concentrate solidly and continually upon these small truths and we are impatient with excursions until we have established these fundamentals as fundamentals with our students. L. RON HUBBARD 346  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/11/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACCs   All Staff FCNY and HASI -- Calif offices HCO London  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 26 NOVEMBER 1958 All Staff FCNY and HASI -- Calif offices HCO London ACCs The first ACC after the 21st is tentatively scheduled for July 1960. JULY 1960, in Washington, D.C. We have new methods engram-running. No staff auditor will be permitted to run engrams unless he has attended the 5th London ACC or onward. All others use older, slower, clearing methods. ACCs in the year and a half will be held in England, Australia and Africa. The 21st ACC in the USA is the last chance to hear about short clearing by the new engram running for one and a half years. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd 347  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PERMITTED TO AUDIT ENGRAMS BY SCIENTOLOGY PROCESSES ARE:   FULL DISTRIBUTION  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE LONDON HCO BULLETIN OF 1 DECEMBER 1958 FULL DISTRIBUTION PERMITTED TO AUDIT ENGRAMS BY SCIENTOLOGY PROCESSES ARE: Cornelia Alford George Edwards Herbie Parkhouse Peter Davies Jessie Gray Madge Stevens Nicol Paterson Carl Jensen Marianne Christie Ray Thacker Noel West Lance Harrison Pam Kemp Viviane Madsen John Fudge Jim Paterson Jean Gill Paul Meyer Jim Pembry Charis Mostart James Dimmock Marcus Tooley Jack Campbell Sylvia Ferree Eve Harrison James Madsen Leon Bosworth Cyril Vosper Alan Burton Alix Stansfield Bill Dicks Fred Postowka Jenny Parkhouse Lensworth Small Harry Dorfman Cyril Sweetland Joe Tole Joe Cromie Quentin Kelly Barry Fairburn The remaining enrollees of the 5th London ACC are invited to use HCO Bulletin of Nov 25, 1958 (Effective Dec 1, 1958) allowable to HGC auditors until they have had further training in the running of engrams or had their own cases straightened. The processes outlined in the above mentioned bulletin are: Where needed: CCH 1, CCH 2, CCH 3, CCH 4 On all other pcs: 1. Rudiments (not CCH 0) Establish: Auditor, pc, room, session to start. 2. Start-Change-Stop on a person or object. 3. Factual Havingness. 4. What can you confront? (Repetitive Command) 5. You make a mock-up for which you can be wholly responsible. 6. General Help. Help on the Rock. 7. Step 6 of Clear Procedure. This bulletin was done by profile gains and IQ gains on pcs audited on the 5th London ACC and is an arbitrary differentiation and is not necessarily the class grades of the student. This bulletin is of interest in that it lists the first ACC graduates from any ACC who are permitted to run engrams by Scientology processes by reason of training in an ACC. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 348  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=149 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DUMMY AUDITING Step Two: Acknowledgment    P.A.B. No. 149 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 December 1958 DUMMY AUDITING Step Two: Acknowledgment Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard Dummy Auditing, Step Two, Acknowledgment, is the second part of the communication cycle. Now the actual fact is when you have gotten a thought over to a preclear it is customary to prove it. The whole stress of acknowledgment is entirely and completely upon making sure that the preclear receives the auditor's acknowledgment. That is the entire stress. Now why all this stress on acknowledgment? Well, acknowledgment is a control factor -- I'll just let you in on a secret right here at the beginning. If you acknowledge a preclear well, you will have the preclear under much better control. Now, why? The formula of control is Start, Change and Stop. And that's just it -- an acknowledgment is Stop. If you said to him "Keep going" or "Keep talking," you would not be acknowledging him. The perfect acknowledgment communicates only this: I have heard your communication. That's all there is to it -- I have heard what you said. It signalizes that the preclear's (or person's, since Scientology applies to life, not just to an auditing room) communication to you has been received. But when you use it as an auditor you use it also as a control factor. And it says this: Your communication has been received -- and that is all there is to it, and that is the end of that cycle of action, thank you. That's what it says, and you have to put that whole intention into a "Yes" or an "Okay" or anything else you use. It isn't the word, it's the intention that ends it. Your communication has been received and I have now decided to stop that cycle of communication and your communication is therefore under my control. Those things which you stop, very crudely, are things which you control. You have to be able to stop things if you control them. If you cannot control a preclear's communication line you can't control the preclear. I'll give you an example of this. Let's say we're auditing Mrs. Gotrocks, the wife of the executive manager of Flea-bite Dustpowder or something, and she is bored (the only thing wrong with her), and she's crazy (that's the only other thing wrong with her), and she never had anything to do, and she's just been lying around, and she has ailments. She comes into the auditing room and she starts to talk to you. She says, "Oh, I've been to this specialist and that specialist and it cost this much money and that much money and I've been here and I've been there and what's really wrong with me and what you really should take up is so and so rah rah rah...." It's none of your business. The longer you let such a person talk, the less havingness they have. You can watch them go straight down the ARC tone scale if you keep on letting them talk. Obsessive communication -- obsessive outflow. And the first major use that you will 349 make of this, the first time you really understand what this acknowledgment is all about, is when somebody starts this on you and starts talking, talking, talking, talking, and you want to get a session started, and you get the intention real good and you say to them, "Good." And they stop talking. Your intention was such that they knew that you had received their communication. And if you can do this very well, if you can get that acknowledgment just right and if it does exactly what it is supposed to do, very often the person will look at you fixedly and say, "You know, I don't think anybody has ever heard me before." Why is this person talking obsessively? They are trying to make up in quantity what they lack in audience. There's nobody listening to them. They are not talking to anyone. And you all of a sudden come up with an acknowledgment and say, "Hey! I heard you. I heard that. You have communicated to me, and that's it, now." And they say, "Wow. I don't think I've ever talked to anybody before." It's quite amazing. I have seen an auditor on an obsessive outflow case get down in front of the preclear, fix him with an eye, move his finger back and forth just in front of the preclear's nose and say, "Good; I heard that," and have the preclear all of a sudden say, "Ooooh. Geeeeee. You are there, aren't you!" So a good acknowledgment can actually wind up the entire goal of the process and find the auditor -- that's how important it is. Now, that is a specialized use, stopping a compulsive outflow. Its general use is putting a period to the communication cycle. It ends the moment of time in which you gave the command you learned how to give, we hope, in Dear Alice, part A. You said something, the preclear heard it, and we understood then that the preclear had heard it, and we said, "Good." Now the exact way Dear Alice, part B (which is Dummy Auditing, Step Two), is done is this. The coach -- or a person acting as a preclear -- takes Alice in Wonderland and reads random phrases out of it. And, reading the phrase in any old way, we don't care how (we're not disciplining the preclear, you know; we never do that, we merely control them within an inch of their lives), in this particular case this person says something out of Alice in Wonderland and the auditor has to say, "Good," "Fine," "Okay," "I heard that," anything -- in such a way as actually to convince the person who is sitting there acting as the preclear that he has heard it. Now there is a specific way to do this. That is to intend that the communication cycle ends at that point and to end it there. Anything that you do to make that come about is, of course, legitimate, unless it utterly destroys ARC. But it finishes a cycle of communication. So what could the auditor in this case do? You see, there sits the auditor, no book; there sits the preclear with a book; and the preclear is reading, "And the Mad Hatter dipped his watch into the teapot," and the auditor says, "Good." But that ends that, you see. Now, in view of the fact that the preclear is reading a continued story which goes on sentence after sentence after sentence, the auditor will have a tendency to treat this as "in passing," and that is not an acknowledgment. The auditor could say, "Well, read some more." That's not an acknowledgment -- it didn't stop it, did it? "Continue, go ahead" -- no, that's not an acknowledgment at all. An acknowledgment says, "Stop" -- "Whoa" - - "Air brakes" -- "Period" -- "End" -- "Heard you" -- "You've communicated" -- "That's the end of that moment of time" -- "Final cycle" -- "That's it" -- "You've had it." You get that? So the auditor has to say "Good," "Fine," "Okay," in such a way as to receive the communication in the preclear's eyes. The preclear has to know that the auditor has received the communication, and that's the only point on which they are coached -- at first. Then we could start to bear down and say, as an instructor, "Well, did you acknowledge that preclear's communication? Did you?" And the auditor says, "Well, uhh...." "Did you do a perfect acknowledgment?" "Well -- certainly." And the answer to that would be "No." The preclear is still reading, still got the book in 350 his hands, still going on with it, still sitting in the chair, and he's still not in this universe. What is this all about? What are we actually trying to do? Well, we're not trying to reach the ultimate in an acknowledgment because that would be the end of the universe. If somebody could say "Yes," "Good," or "Okay" with enough intention behind it, all communications of this universe from the moment of its beginning would then be acknowledged, totally. (Except that this would violate the communication formula because they weren't all addressed to him, although lots of people think they were.) But what does the auditor actually feel called upon to do? Well, he feels called upon to put a period to that cycle of communication. It actually started, you see, with the auditor's phrase to the preclear, then the preclear signified with some kind of wince or grunt or something that it had been heard, and then the auditor says, "Well, that's the end of that. Good..Fine. That finished that." You see? But an acknowledgment ends the cycle of the communication which you read about in Dianetics 1955, and that is the Bill-Joe cycle. "Good," says the auditor. This is fantastic. If you got good enough at this, a traffic cop would drive up and say something to you and you would acknowledge the fact that he had spoken and he would simply get back on his bike or go back to the station house and turn in his badge and retire. You see, that would be the end of that. That would be it. As a matter of fact, it actually staggers people to have an acknowledgment come to them -- it staggers them, really to get it through. People who are having a hard time, particularly. It's a good thing, and it's very therapeutic for a person to know that he has been acknowledged. I know that you will be around in the local stores, maybe stopping a pedestrian on the street and suddenly looking at him and saying, "Good" -- acknowledging him. And you will have some fantastic things occur if you do. An acknowledgment is a very, very powerful sixteen-inch gun in the communication formula; and you shouldn't use it sparingly, you should use it to end cycles of communication. I hope you learn to do that very, very well. 351  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO RUN AN ENGRAM Brief Summary for HGC Use   HGC Use  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER 1958 HOW TO RUN AN ENGRAM Brief Summary for HGC Use First -- only graduates of ACCs including the 5th London October 1958, and after are qualified to run engrams by Scientology processes. This does not include Dianetic processing of engrams which can be done by anyone but is not allowed in HGCs. Reason: Scientology processing of engrams is too strong for most untrained personnel and better results are obtained by HGC wholly repetitive processes. Stable Data: The HGC has the responsibility of using only the processes which obtain the highest results. A Director of Processing must bring about only the use of the best processes. For wholly repetitive command clearing processes, see other bulletins. Engram running with Scientology processes in unschooled hands does not bring about bettered cases by actual test. This is evidently due to the roughness of the auditing and failures to handle ARC breaks. ACC trained personnel therefore, are the only ones qualified or permitted to run engrams in an HGC. Locating the Engram Finding the engram necessary to resolve the case is done by an E-Meter and finger snaps. The E-Meter is the final check. If an E-Meter is stuck on the pc or Stage Four (rises, sticks, falls in a repetitive cycle and reacts on nothing else) CCH processes may be used or preferably, the 3 commands of Factual Havingness (8 of vanish, 2 of continue, to one of have). The experience necessary to resolve the case is the engram asked for. It is run back in time and located exactly in time. The falls of the needle are the equivalent of a "yes" answer to the auditor's question. Only the time is isolated, not the content. The time may turn out to be a span of years. The incident may be even a century in length. In a rough case some current lifetime "lock" may be the incident. In a very rough (unreality) case, the "engram" necessary to resolve the case may be the moment the pc walked into the room. In a majority of cases however the "engram necessary to resolve the case" is a past death, complete with its accompanying overt act. Its place in time is the concern of the auditor. Questions such as "Greater than five hundred years?" "Less than five hundred years?" narrow the time down precisely. Several incidents may be located in passing. Run that incident which has the steepest fall. Don't run the earliest necessarily. In case of doubt as to which of two falls most pick a later incident (closer to p.t.) as it will actually be easier for the pc to confront it. With this incident selected, don't then change it or let the pc change it. Don't start to run one incident and then change to another ever. What you pick, flatten. To change is to pretty well lose the whole case. We aren't interested here in the significance of what running it does for the case. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gn.cden Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 352  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TRAINING DRILL CHANGE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 7 DECEMBER 1958 TRAINING DRILL CHANGE TR 5N will now replace TR 5 as a Comm Course drill and will occupy the 5th day of the Comm Course. TR 5N is ARC Break handling. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gn.rd 353  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=15/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=150 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DUMMY AUDITING Step Three: Duplication    P.A.B. No. 150 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 15 December 1958 DUMMY AUDITING Step Three: Duplication Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard This interesting, interesting dummy auditing step has a villainous and vicious goal. It makes somebody duplicate. 'Way back in 1950 we found out that auditors, in order to be interesting, would vary their pattern; and every time the pattern was varied, every time the auditing command changed, the preclear received a little jolt. There was an upset because of it. A long time ago we would have considered it fairly legitimate for an auditor, using the auditing command "Do fishes swim," to say, "By the way, do finny creatures wiggle in the water?" -- and next time to say, "Say! does the finny tribe bathe?" -- and the next time to say, "What brands of fishes are there that progress from point A to point B in liquid habitats?" That possibly would have been legitimate then, but we don't do that today. We do a horrible thing. The auditor says, "Do fishes swim?" And, just to vary it, he then says, "Do fishes swim?" And, just for good wild variation, he then says, "Do fishes swim?" This is where we learn why we were so insistent on one command in one moment of time back in Dear Alice, part A, because we don't repeat the first "Do fishes swim" another thousand times. No auditing command should ever depend for any of its meaning on any other auditing command ever uttered. Each one exists, theoretically and purely, in its own moment of time and is uttered itself in present time with its own intention. Now this is quite important. Do you know that the basic auditing process of CCH does not work unless each command is in a separate unit of time? If you run it this way, "Give me your hand -- thank you; give me your hand -- thank you; give me your hand -- thank you," it's not very therapeutic and nothing happens to the preclear. Why? Well, we've got a machine which is simply repeating the first "Give me your hand" over and over again. We're not saying it -- there's no intention there. Do you know that if you told somebody to give you his hand with enough intention behind it his body would respond without any via through the thetan? The body doesn't obey the words, the body obeys the intention to extend a hand. Therefore, when you are asked to express an auditing command with the same words over and over and over, each time you must express it in present time as itself with its intention. It isn't just a long duplication of it. Just duplicating something over and over and over is sometimes so trying that people wonder how auditors ever arrive at all. Nobody could sit in a chair and say each time with a new intention, "Do fishes swim," for seventy-five hours. It's beyond human possibility, according to some people. But the trick is that if it's always uttered in present time it could be said for a thousand and seventy-five hours. It's only 354 when it's repeated -- only when the first command is repeated over and over and when no new intention arrives -- that it becomes very arduous. Only when it goes on to a machine does it become almost impossible to do. Communication is reached by control plus duplication. At first you find that to make each utterance of the command different in its own unit of time you use different voice inflections. But as you come up the line on this you find out that you actually can pattern the same tone and each time have it entirely new. It would be very, very incorrect to teach this, to have the auditor each time duplicate his own voice tones as they were the last time, because that is making an auditing command depend on the last auditing command. We couldn't care less; and, after a while, you couldn't care less, either, what voice tone you're uttering, but each intention is new and fresh. The intention is to ask and get an answer to this question, "Do fishes swim?" and, each time you utter it, it is uttered newly and in its own area of time. That's really the only stress there is. One command per unit of time. Each command separate, and each command containing the words, quite incidentally, "Do fishes swim?" Here we learn a great deal about the duplicative factors of communication. We find out that, in having to duplicate, we think we actually lose some of the communication at first. It's utterly idiotic -- how could you possibly maintain ARC and therefore, of course, interest, asking a person over and over again this silly question, "Do fishes swim?" Who could do this? Well, interest in communication has everything to do with the intention to be interesting and very little to do with text. Furthermore, it is not the auditor's job to be interesting. Being interesting is a part of the communication formula, but to an auditor the least possible part, as far as the preclear is concerned. He's not there to interest and intrigue the preclear. Right away, people think they are. Place two people in chairs facing each other and each one of these two people feels the compulsion to be interesting to the other. That's not auditing, that's being interesting, that's being social and so on. So if a person had any difficulty doing Step Three, Do Fishes Swim, the instructor would be perfectly in order if he simply told the person to sit in that chair and told some other student who wasn't doing too well, or just some other student, to sit in the other chair, and told them just to sit there and look at each other without saying a thing or being embarrassed or anything else. Interesting drill, if you think of it. We do have variation, and therefore interest, in the first and second dummy auditing steps; but now we reach this one and it is utterly devoid of interest. We're saying the same thing over and over and over and over. And if a person can't do this he probably has a compulsion to vary, to alter-is, to be interesting, and he wouldn't find it easy just to sit in a chair and face another human being and not say a word and not do a thing but just sit there and look at the other human being. And if I were coaching someone that had difficulty in repetition of steps, I would do that for an hour or two that day. All right. It is absolutely necessary that an auditor be able to duplicate. But answer me this: Is a person who is saying something in present time each time really duplicating the last moment of time? He really isn't, is he? And so this duplication that we do in Scientology means only the ability apparently to duplicate while being in present time. The greatest motto of experience and the life we have lived is this: I won't ever do that again. This is the one thing your mama wanted you to promise. If you did nothing else, if you lived a completely sinful life, why, mama still wanted you to learn by experience; which is to say that when you did something wrong, or did something, you weren't ever to do it again. She hoped perhaps you would eat enough candy to make you so sick that you wouldn't "wolf" candy again; that you would eat enough ice cream so that ice cream would make you so green that you wouldn't make a pig of yourself over ice cream again; that you would become so embarrassed and lose so many friends that you would not do that evil thing again, whatever it was you did; and thus 355 learn by experience never to do it again. And this is experience talking. One thing you must understand -- that experience teaches you -- is never to do anything the second time. This doesn't necessarily mean that all experience is painful, but people who are having a hard time tend to believe that it is; and when they begin to depend upon experience and stand by this lesson of never doing it again, they can no longer duplicate. And what do you know -- they can't communicate. Also, their bank jams. All sorts of interesting things occur. All moments become one moment. One moment becomes all moments. Identification occurs all over the place. And just the action of repeating something like "Do fishes swim?" as an auditor, with a full intention, has a tendency to unjam the time track. You should know that this is what this step is up against. It is violating all of that hard-won experience that you have accumulated in the last seventy-six trillion years -- if you believe an E-Meter, you're seventy- six trillion years old. And all that hard-won experience, all that wonderful, wonderful lot of mess that you got into, added up completely to Never do it again. And so you've been taught not to live, which is what happens when you get experience. And when you can duplicate an auditing command over and over again, you will find out that auditing does not become a painful experience. A person who can do this well, by the way, never gets restimulated. Why should he -- he's not in the moment of time in which the restimulation took place. There is a more basic step to this particular one, by the way. This is to pat the wall five times and then distinguish one of the pats from the rest. An instructor can do that on a student with some profit. Pretty soon the student can tell all five pats apart, and when the student can tell them all apart, even though they sounded all the same, he can also duplicate an auditing command in present time all the way. I've broken cases with that one. 356  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=16/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  EXTENSION COURSE CURRICULUM   D of T Acad Admin Ext Course Dir Acad Insts D of P Processing Admin HCO Bd of Review ACC Worldwide Inst HCO  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. D of T HCO BULLETIN OF 16 DECEMBER 1958 Acad Admin Ext Course Dir Acad Insts D of P Processing Admin HCO Bd of Review ACC Worldwide Inst HCO EXTENSION COURSE CURRICULUM The Extension Course for HCA/HPA is outlined as follows: Section A -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 A to 20A, eight questions each lesson. Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, entire book covered in 160 questions. Section B -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 B to 20B, eight questions each lesson. Science of Survival, entire book covered in 160 questions. Section C -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 C to 20C, eight questions each lesson. Advanced Procedure and Axioms, entire book covered in 160 questions. Section D -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 D to 20D, eight questions each lesson. Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought entire book covered in 160 questions. The Extension Course for HCS/BScn is outlined as follows: Section E -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 E to 20E, eight questions each lesson. The Hubbard Electrometer and Electropsychometric Auditing, entire subject covered in 160 questions, theory and practice. Section F -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 F to 20F, eight questions each lesson. Scientology: 8-8008, entire book covered in 160 questions. Section G -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 G to 20G, eight questions each lesson. The Creation of Human Ability, entire book covered in 160 questions. Section H -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 H to 20H, eight questions each lesson. Various Clear Procedures from various texts, entire subject covered in 160 questions. The Extension Course for DScn/HGS is outlined as follows: Section J -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 J to 20J, eight questions per lesson. All TR Drills, entire subject covered in 160 questions (text not yet published). Section K -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 K to 20K, eight questions per lesson, Track Scouting (text not yet published). Entire subject covered in 160 questions. Section L -- 1 tablet Lessons 1 L to 20L, eight questions per lesson, Scientology Organizations, entire subject covered in 160 questions. Section M -- 1 tablet Not outlined. The following activities are responsible for submitting questions to be made into printed lessons: 357 Section A -- Academy DC Section B -- Academy London Section C -- HCO Bd of Review DC Section D -- HCO Bd of Review London Section E -- HGC Washington DC Section F -- HGC London Section G -- Academy London Section H -- HCO Washington DC Section J -- ACC Worldwide Instructor Section K -- ACC Worldwide Instructor When you have completed your section, please send the questions complete to HCO for forwarding to me. This is the fastest way I know to get the Extension Course completed. I have only its format and a DMSMH outline at this moment. Would you do this for me? HOW TO WRITE AN EXTENSION COURSE SECTION An Extension Course Section consists of a textbook and a series of lessons done on a glued-top tablet, one sheet per lesson, eight questions or exercises per lesson. The questions are consecutively numbered from 1 to 160 with the identifying letter on each number. Example: Section B, third question, is 3B. The name of the textbook, but not its page numbers, is carried on every lesson page, not each question. We only want the questions for the section, not the printed complete product. The questions concern only vital definitions needed for a knowledge of the subject and examples of the use and meaning. To do a course, use the following: Make a list of all vital definitions used in the text specified on the subject. These should number around eighty so pare or expand the list until it is composed of eighty vital words or phrases or objects. Use the definition for odd numbered questions. Demand an explanation, an example, a discovery from real life, a consequence, etc, of the definition as the following even-numbered question. The Extension Course should give the taker a passing knowledge of Dianetics and Scientology terminology, phenomena and parts. This is its goal and purpose. The reasoning or examples in a text are considered secondary, for the purposes of the course, to precision definitions. The Extension Course Student should finish the course with the feeling he is dealing with a precision science, composed of identifiable parts. Example (not necessary to use): Question 5A: What is a reactive mind? Question 6A: Give something out of your own experience that would illustrate a reactive mind at work. The main tasks imposed here are (1) To summarize the important definitions and parts of Dianetics and Scientology from a text and (2) Ask interestingly for an application to life. Now you see why I want your swift help in writing it. It would take one person months. Your contribution, as assigned in this bulletin, will speed it up by months. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd Distribution: Not to be stencilled in London (their copies being sent direct from DC). Info copies going to Melbourne, SA, and all field offices, via HCOs; 3 copies -- 1 for HCO, 1 to D of T, 1 to D of P. 358  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  BASIC POSTULATE OF OVERT ACT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE   1 to each Staff Member Dollar field Offices HCO London for stencilling and dist  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 17 DECEMBER 1958 1 to each Staff Member Dollar field Offices HCO London for stencilling and dist BASIC POSTULATE OF OVERT ACT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE The inability to restrain dramatization of past experience only occurs when one has decided he can do nothing about such an experience. Thereafter he is the effect of all similar pictures. Test: Pick up a moment in the past when you decided you could do nothing about a certain thing -- then examine later experience on same subject. This is the make-break point of reactivity. This is the bridge between cause point and effect point on any given subject. "I have to do something about it -- I can do nothing about it" are the basic postulates of the overt act-motivator sequence. Straight Wire against an E-Meter on times one felt one could do nothing about it works to resolve very difficult cases. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.cden Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 359  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AUDITING ARC BREAKS ON REGISTRAR AND ASSISTANT REGISTRAR   1 to each Staff Member Dollar Field Offices HCO London for release  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 17 DECEMBER 1958 Issue II 1 to each Staff Member Dollar Field Offices HCO London for release AUDITING ARC BREAKS ON REGISTRAR AND ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I have found it desirable to run TR 5N (ARC Breaks) fully on both Registrar and Assistant Registrar in new comm line. A good auditor who can handle 2-way comm is needed. The commands are, "What has anyone done wrong to you?" and "What have you done wrong to people?", and other ARC Break questions. Getting the overts of the pc is important. It is necessary to remove, in this special case, ARC Breaks between Registrar and Assistant Registrar with -- 1. Students 2. Instructors 3. Auditors 4. Preclears 5. Field Auditors 6. The Central Org 7. Groups 8. Customers 9. Salesmen 10. LRH Get out what each of the above did to the Registrar or Assistant Registrar and what the Registrar and Assistant Registrar have done to or thought about doing to each of the above. This will make it possible for them to (1) live in their operating climate and (2) write warmer, more forward "invasion of privacy" letters. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.cden Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 360  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=20/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCESSING A NEW MOTHER   (An article for any Scientology Magazine authorized by a Central Organization)  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 20 DECEMBER 1958 (An article for any Scientology Magazine authorized by a Central Organization) PROCESSING A NEW MOTHER The handling of a woman during and after pregnancy has a specific successful drill which should be generally known. This is not an attempt to give all the known data concerning pregnancy, delivery and child care. I will someday summarize all these. At this time I wish to give you only the processes and general use. First, a woman should not be processed on engrams after the early months. Therefore a pregnant woman should be processed toward clear early and well. In other words she should be gotten into good shape soon in the pregnancy. Old Expanded Gita on babies, husbands, wives, bodies is definitely indicated. After the sixth month only havingness and general Scientology processes can be run without injuring the baby -- no engrams. Next, the delivery itself should carry as little anaesthetic as possible, be as calm and no-talk as possible and the baby should not be bathed or chilled but should be wrapped somewhat tightly in a warm blanket, very soft, and then left alone for a day or so. At once after delivery the woman should have simple havingness run -- "Look around here and find something you have" -- preferably by the husband. One hour of this at once, one more hour same day, two hours following day, all havingness and havingness only should be run. After two days run the following: "Invent something worse than -- a delivery" (flatten it), "... a baby" (flatten it), "... a doctor" (flatten it), "... a nurse" (flatten it), "... a delivery room" (flatten it), "... a mother" (flatten it), "... a husband" (flatten it), "... an abdomen" (flatten it), "... a womb" (flatten it). This should be done in next many days following the delivery. This and more factual havingness (all 3 commands) should straighten up the mother. It would be well if the six buttons and inventing were cleared away in early pregnancy so the post-pregnancy processes will run easily. She shouldn't face a new processing idea in the first few days after delivery, so if the processes are early prepared, all will be well. On the baby, perhaps the best thing is no processing for three days. Then talk to the baby, tell the newcomer he or she is welcome, then make friends. Various things can be done -- touch assist is best. Even the birth engram can be run but that's a little adventurous in a lot of cases. The most to know about the baby is not to tire him or her unduly for a week or two, feed a protein formula if mother not breast feeding. This formula is most like human milk. I picked it up in Roman days and have used it since -- 15 ounces of barley water, 10 ounces of homogenized milk, 3 ounces Karo syrup (this can be multiplied by any number according to the number of bottles desired but the ratio remains the same). Evaporated or condensed milk and heavy sugar make fat not bone. Protein is the thing that heals and makes strong growth. Modern hospital formulas and patent mixes for babies are not just bad, they are criminal. 361 Then the next important thing for a baby is to know he or she is winning. Don't expect him or her to do more than a baby can do. Grant beingness to a baby. "You make that body lie in that cradle" is wonderful on babies up to six months. Let the child see Mama and Daddy both at least once a day. Never quarrel or argue in front of a baby or child -- it destroys security. Always treat mama and baby with courtesy and respect and they'll thrive. After all, they have done something. They're keeping the human race going. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gn.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 362  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NEW HGC PROCESS A New Straight Wire   To all staff US Field Offices HCO London for comparable dist. (This can be used in any official Scientology Magazine)  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 22 DECEMBER 1958 To all staff US Field Offices HCO London for comparable dist. NEW HGC PROCESS A New Straight Wire (This can be used in any official Scientology Magazine) There is a new process allowed in HGC. It is -- ARC Break Straight Wire This process belongs after S-C-S and Factual Havingness and before What Can You Confront. ARC Break Straight Wire is a form of TR 5 ARC Break. Its processing number, however, is CCH-50. Any and all rules governing Straight Wire apply, including -- (a) The pc cycles into past and back to pt. Therefore, ask and pin point when. (b) Stop the process only with the pc near pt. Put in a bridge, therefore, without specified number of "more times". Wrong: "I am going to ask this question three more times and end the process." Right: "I am going to ask this question until your answers are close to present time and then end it if that's all right with you." Then check when on each reply, get pc into present time and say, "Are you near present time? All right, this is the end of the process." The Command to a Scientologist is, "Recall an ARC Break." This is for an unlimited type process. "Recall an ARC Break between us", or "... in an auditing session" or "... with your mother" to limit process to this life. The first form is preferred. The second form is used on a sticky valence that has been isolated. The unlimited version rapidly dives for whole track and into engrams. This is all right. But don't stop and change the process. Just continue to run "Recall an ARC Break" when the pc gets into heavy weather. Be very careful with this process to keep the Auditor's Code. Otherwise, 50% of the time is spent getting rid of ARC Breaks in the session itself -- and with this process these are heavy. (However, two auditors co-auditing who are a bit clumsy can use this process better than other processes and it and Factual Havingness should be the total activity of an auditor who is having trouble with a pc who is having trouble with ARC Breaks.) The pc, in diving for whole track, gets into and out of heavy incidents. So long as he answers the question, fine. Don't let him fail to answer every question. Reality on the whole track leaps up with this process. This is the first process that accomplishes this easily. In running it, remember that the overt act is as important as the motivator (see A History of Man, Chap. 9). The reason A gets mad at B is as often because A has done something to B as it is because B has done something to A. 363 Here is a fine, smooth process that is a one-shot Clear, and can be used by auditors not ACC-trained to run engrams. ARC Break Straight Wire is very useful in husband-wife co-auditing teams and, with Factual Havingness, is the only process that should be used in a co- auditing relationship that is already intimate to a point of easily gathering ARC Breaks. From two standpoints the process is the best we have ever had -- (a) It handles touchy pcs well, and (b) It is the first to open up whole track in general with as great a reality or greater than the R on present life. From two other viewpoints the process is vulnerable: (a) It requires strict observance of the Auditor's Code if you don't want to waste 50% to 75% of the auditing time. (b) It runs the pc into heavy incidents and the process must be continued until pc is again in pt -- making an uncertainty in session timing. However, the shortcomings are far outweighed by the value of ARC Break Straight Wire. There is one "bug" in the process. The non-Scientologist does not readily grasp the command -- and there is no substitute for a quick question. ARC Break means, "The assignment of responsibility for a sudden drop in Affinity, Reality or Communication." Thee and me have a "feel" for this. Substitute commands are many, none as good. "Recall something you have done to a person" -- "Recall something that has been done to you" is fair but misses by a mile. History: This process is, in genus, very old. I introduced its rudiments at the June 1952 first Congress in Phoenix, Arizona. ARC is even older and goes to July of 1950. The present version in a narrower form was first used by Mary Sue Hubbard in 1958. The valuable lesson this gives us is that Mary or Joe or Pete may be mad at us because Mary or Joe or Pete did something to us. We may or may not have done anything to Mary or Joe or Pete to make them mad at us. In other words, the pc who comes back into session furious with the auditor, may have committed an overt act against the auditor out of session and not prompted by an action of the auditor. The wife may be mad at the husband because of something she did to the husband. She talked about him behind his back (prompted by some old engram about husbands) and, now having committed this overt act, she becomes furious with the husband. Etc. Etc. The person mad at Scientology may only be motivated by having done something to Scientology. Etc. Etc. A whole new view of human behavior opens when you see this point. Therefore, caution the pc to "pick up his overt acts against things, too" while he's running it, if he's only getting overt acts against him. The only reason the process won't work is that the pc isn't doing it, but only pretending to, or he doesn't understand it. But all in all, we've a wonderful weapon here to straighten out a lot of lives. Use it with wild abandon and get the results in. It's good. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:md.rd Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 364  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=86 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Something Has Happened!!!    Ability Issue 86 M [1958, ca. late December] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. Something Has Happened!!! L. Ron Hubbard The single largest technical gain in eight years has just occurred. Anyone can be cleared by engram running. A new style of auditing has had to be developed to handle the explosive power of the new Scientology methods of handling Dianetic engrams. Shades of Book One! Whoever would have thought that engram running could be improved as much as it has been improved in the past three months. To make engram running possible, twelve new TRs have had to be developed. There are now three styles of auditing: Tone 40, Formal and Engram Auditing. The first two are quite adequate to clear fifty percent of cases. It takes a new approach to get enough locks off the rocks of the remaining fifty percent to get them clear too. I've been busy, busy, busy. I had the largest ACC ever held in the world during October and November. And I had the luck in research to put us on a new plateau of stable clearing. I asked the ACC Instructors, "What shall we do about America?" They were just about knocked to pieces training the British to handle the double- dynamite of modern engrams. But they said, "Somehow we've got to get in everybody we can to the January '59 ACC in Washington. We've got to get this data out." So we're doing it in a Congress on the 3rd and 4th of January in D.C., and the 21st American ACC following. Look, it's no promotion talk. It just can't be said hard enough. We've made it! We've shot through the last barrier. We've got it and a new society made. We've worked hard. We're willing to work harder. But we need help. I want to drop some coal on the fire and get the show on the road. I need people who can do this. I can show a lot of people at a Congress and can show specialists in an ACC. I need staff and I need action. ACCs are my own course. I don't care what arrangements are made to pay for it. But this one has been on wait for eight years and now it can get going. I can't give another U.S. Congress and ACC for some time. There's only the 21st American ACC. And only the Success Congress. Will I see you there? Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard. All Rights Reserved. 365  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  B.SCN/HCS COURSE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 26 DECEMBER 1958 B.SCN/HCS COURSE Any fully enfranchised area office may teach a B.Scn/HCS Course if the course is specifically allowed in writing by myself via HCO Worldwide in London. The standard B.Scn/HCS Course is in actuality the 20th ACC. It is expected that the instructor of a B.Scn/HCS Course will have taken the 18th, 19th or 20th ACC. The tapes to be used are the 20th ACC tapes. These are available from Washington. The texts are Scientology Clear Procedure Issue One and ACC Clear Procedure as published in booklet form. Extension Courses E, F, G & H are also required but may be done after regular schooling. It is preferred that Section E (the E-Meter) be done before the course. No Comm Course or Upper Indoc or TRs are given in the B.Scn/HCS Course. If these have not been had by the applicant he must take them in the regular Academy Comm Course and Upper Indoc -- these weeks to be added to the time in course. The B.Scn/HCS Course is five weeks in length. If Comm Course and Upper Indoc have not been covered by the student, the course becomes seven weeks in length. The same schedule, the same tapes as the 20th ACC are employed. However, the exact times of day may be altered to fit an area. Those areas granted the right to teach a B.Scn Course at this time are HASI London and HASI Melbourne. That area permitted to teach an HCS Course at this time is Washington, D.C. The examination for this course will be based chiefly on the ACC Clear Procedure Booklet. HCO Washington, HCO London and HCO Melbourne are the only centers now examining for B.Scn/HCS. These may be assisted by other areas. When regularized by establishment of an area HCO, Johannesburg, Auckland and Los Angeles may receive B.Scn/HCS rights to train. It is recommended the B.Scn/HCS Course start every five weeks instead of every Monday as in HCA and the schedule be pre-published for six months, and that people who have not had Comm Course and Upper Indoc be warned to start two weeks earlier in all literature. L. RON HUBBARD 366  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE FIRST FIRST DYNAMIC PROCESS   Full Distribution  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 27 DECEMBER 1958 Full Distribution THE FIRST FIRST DYNAMIC PROCESS All processing to date has been in the main third dynamic processing. For the first time I have worked out a purely first dynamic process. It is used by the Auditor on a pc with lots of attention to ARC Breaks, havingness and, of course, smooth skill. The process is "Invent something worse than you." Theoretically this is a "one shot clear" process. It directly changes the being that is making the bank -- the thetan. It does not hope for a change of the person via a change of the bank. The HGC and any validated Auditor can use this with great profit. 2 cautions: Do not permit a pc to escape "invent". Do not let him do something else (such as see how he is to find if something is "worse than"). The process does not work unless "Invent Something" is workable. Therefore, to run it, one makes sure first that the pc knows he can invent something. The process does not work if the pc also does something else. Ask the pc "What are you doing exactly" now and then and make the pc do only the process. Patch up any ARC Breaks with "What have I done wrong". And follow that with "What have you done to me" to get both motivator and overts in the session. This is a wonderful process -- simple to run and do, with good results -- if it is done right. It is easier to run than ARC Break Straight Wire. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gn.cden Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 367  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SHORT SESSIONING   To all staff General Dist. For use in any official magazine For use in any HGC  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 28 DECEMBER 1958 To all staff General Dist. For use in any official magazine For use in any HGC SHORT SESSIONING One of the simplest ways to get a case moving is a technique known as "Short Sessioning" which I developed for the 20th ACC. The 20th was the last ACC to teach clearing without engram running and as such had several lagging cases. I studied one of these carefully against the basic auditing rule, "Find something the pc can do and then improve his ability to do it." The case under study defied all known processes. It was "unreality, unreality, unreality", and "ARC Break, ARC break, ARC Break". ARC Straight Wire old style was also unreal. Imagine that! However, even when all else was lost, I still had the idea that this pc could be run on something and finally had a long blue spark -- the pc would start and end sessions. Probably this was the sole ability, Scientology-wise, of this pc. SO I made the auditor start and end ten-minute sessions. And it worked. It worked even though the auditor never really cognited on the value of it! I had to heavy-8c the auditor a bit to keep the auditor from "running something". Short sessioning was evidently not something to do. Only a process was something. Anyway, everybody won. The pc got brighter, the auditor got a win and we got a new technique. That's the way with Scientology, everybody wins -- even the people who claim I'm too enthusiastic for their point five. The exact way to do "short sessioning" is as follows. One uses old rudiments if he isn't comfortable with CCH 0. Or he uses CCH 0 as given in ACC Clear Procedure. [See page 311.] It doesn't matter much which since he is depending on starting and ending sessions rather than "running something". Therefore, the auditor should use that with which he is the most comfortable. The auditor gets the pc's agreement to start a very short session and says, "Start." Then he clears up some small thing like an ARC Break in the session or a pt problem without really getting into anything hot. (Finds auditor and pc.) The auditor then does something objective with the auditing room such as "How does this room differ from an ideal environment?" Probably by this time the ten minutes are up, so the auditor tapers it off and bridges to session end. "Is it all right with you if we end this session shortly?" "Is there anything you'd like to say before we do?" "All right. End of session." The auditor makes the pc get up and take a break for a few minutes. Then he gets the pc back and does it all over again more or less as above. 368 The idea is not to try to get benefit from a process but to get the pc less and less nervous about doing something. The pc will begin and end sessions. Anything between is pure gravy if it works but the in-between may not work at all. It does not matter. Starting and ending sessions is what is wanted for the pc. Short sessioning works for many reasons. It injects time into the picture, for one thing. It breaks up habits on the cycle of action. It gets the pc used to the auditor. You could think of many more reasons but basically whatever the reasons, it works. Try it on that case that ARC Breaks on you all the time. Try it on the pc that has it all unreal-unreal-unreal. You'll be amazed at what short sessioning, smoothly run and without crude auditor flubs, can do for almost any case, not just bad ones. Several difficult cases have improved markedly with this alone. Simple, isn't it? Well, most good things are. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mg.jh Copyright $c 1958 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=31/12/58 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACC CLEAR PROCEDURE CHANGE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 31 DECEMBER 1958 ACC CLEAR PROCEDURE CHANGE Omit "What part of that can you confront best?" from ACC Clear Procedure commands. It attracts pc's attention too deeply into engrams encountered. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gn.rd 369  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=151 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DUMMY AUDITING Step Four: Handling Originations    P.A.B. No. 151 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 35/37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 January 1959 DUMMY AUDITING Step Four: Handling Originations Compiled from the Research Material and Tape Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard The fourth thing an auditor has to do (in that order) is to handle an origin from the preclear. It is actually true that when you are handling Tone 40 processes, you do not handle the preclear's originations. But if you will look on the HCA/HPA chart you will find that these Tone 40 processes are in the minority amongst processes, and in all processes not Tone 40 a preclear's originations are handled -- remember that. Don't let anybody talk you out of it. If you are handling Tone 40, which is just pure, positive postulating, you, of course, are not worried about anybody's opinion, origin, condition, or anything else -- you simply want him to do certain things, and he finds out that his beingness can be controlled and therefore that he can control it. What do we mean by an origin of the preclear? He volunteers something all on his own; and do you know that is a very good index of case -- whether the person volunteers anything on his own? An old-time auditor used this as a case index. He said, "This fellow isn't getting any better. He hasn't offered up anything yet." You see, he didn't originate -- he didn't originate a communication. Do you know that that is the hardest thing to get an organization to do: to originate a communication? You actually could work in the direction of getting a preclear to originate a communication, in spite of the fact that you just previously were running him on Tone 40 processes. He Originated the communication that his arms and legs felt like they were just going to fall off, and you said, "Give me your hand -- thank you." Preclear says, "My head's coming off now! I know it's going to fall on the floor!" Auditor: "Give me your hand -- thank you." Good Tone 40. But on control of person, the first two processes are Tone 40, but Book Mimicry and the next process up the line from it, Hand Space Mimicry, are not Tone 40, and originations by the preclear are not only handled but encouraged. So remember that we have not lost out of the galaxy of processes the fact that the preclear is as well as he can originate a communication. That means he can stand at Cause on the communication formula. And that is a desirable point for him to reach. You see, in controlling people we are really only showing them that they can be controlled, that it is possible for their possessions to be controlled. And then they eventually decide that these are controllable and that people are controllable and that things are controllable and their bodies are controllable, and they say, "Wonderful! Look, I'll try!" And before that they didn't even try. 370 So we are controlling a person's possessions or body only until this person then himself decides to take a hand in it, too. And then he finds out that control is possible. But most people don't originate. Circuits originate, computers originate, compulsive outflows originate. And when you first start to use Tone 40 on a person you will apparently see originations -- but they are not originations, they are restimulations being dramatized. There is a big difference between a restimulation being dramatized and an origination. It's whether or not the thetan said it. Did he say it, or was it just a circuit starting up? Well, you can start up circuits and actually throw them into being and you will see that these are not originations. But when an origination appears in anything but a Tone 40 process, you handle it. And you must handle it well and conclusively. There are preclears who have had astonishing things happen to them, who have tried to communicate them to the auditor, who have failed to do so and have then sunk into apathy and just gone right on out of session because their communication origination was not handled properly by the auditor. There are instances of this, and many of them. Tone 40 processes do not particularly violate this. An understanding of what they are takes place rather rapidly with the preclear and he doesn't expect you to. But if he has graduated into being a human being and he's getting up there and he originates something and you answer it, now he's liable to say the most astonishing things to you. And if you don't handle them he's liable to drop into apathy about the whole thing. So you must handle them well because they're always unexpected. I would say that unexpectedness actually should be part of the definition of an origination, because they are quite often completely off the subject, they take you completely by surprise, they are apparently not at all what you expected him to say. The fellow says, "Huh! I'm eight feet back of my head!" Well, what do you do? In the old days, we might have gone right onto Route One, but we don't today -- we handle the origination. (By the way, this used to be an old technical phrase, "He Q-and-A'd." In other words, he did what the preclear did. Any time the preclear changed, the auditor changed. That is the deadliest crime in auditing. The preclear changes because he is being processed and the auditor changes the process. Q-and-A -- the preclear changed, the auditor changed. Well, that isn't what you do.) He says, "You know, the whole back of my head feels like it's on fire." Once upon a time we might have handled this. We might have gone right in there and said, "Oh, that's very good." We had finally gotten a somatic on this fellow and we would have handled it in some fashion or other and questioned him about it and audited it, and so on. But we found out that this stuck people on the time track. Therefore, we do not do that any more. So what do we do when he says, "The back of my head is on fire!" -- do we ignore it? Well, if we are running Tone 40 processes, we ignore it. But if we are auditing any other process, of which there are many in CCH, we handle the origin. And an auditor who has not been trained to do this will often find himself very embarrassed. But how about in the walk-away world -- the world that is ambulant and moving around and spinning quietly, or noisily, as the case may be? Do you ever have to handle an origin in it? Well, I dare say that every argument you have ever got into was because you did not handle an origin. Every time you have ever got into trouble with anybody, you can trace it back along the line you didn't handle. If a person walks in and says, "Whee! I've just passed with the highest mark in the whole school," and you say, "I'm awfully hungry, shouldn't we go out and eat?" -- you'll find yourself in a fight. He feels ignored. He originated a communication to have you prove to him that he was there and he was solid. Most little kiddies get frantic about their parents when their parents don't handle their originations properly. Handling an origination merely tells the person, "All right, I heard it, you're there." You might say it is a form of acknowledgment, but it's not; it is the communication formula in reverse. But the auditor is still in control if he handles the origin -- otherwise, the communication formula goes out of his control and he is at effect point, no longer at cause point. An auditor continues at cause point. 371 So let's look this over. The handling of an origin has a great deal of use and, until recently, it was the least pat step in Scientology. How did you handle an origin? And we finally found out. I finally had a cognition myself. I tried for a long time to communicate this to people and they still blundered on it occasionally. And I finally found out something that did seem to communicate. There are three steps in handling an origin. Here is the setup: The preclear is sitting in the chair and the auditor is sitting across from the preclear, and the auditor is saying, "Do fishes swim?" or "Do birds fly?" and the preclear says, "Yes." Here is the factor, now, entering: "Do fishes swim?" The preclear doesn't answer Do fishes swim, the preclear says, "You know -- your dress is on fire," or "I'm eight feet back of my head," or "Is it true that all cats weigh 1.8 kilograms?" You see, wog, wog -- where did this come from? Well, although it is usually circuitry or something like that at work when it's that far off beam, it is, nevertheless, an origin. How do you handle it? Well, you don't want the preclear to go out of session, and he would if you handled it wrongly, so (1) you answer it; (2) you maintain ARC (you don't spend any time at it, but you just maintain ARC); and (3) you get the preclear back on the process. One, two, three. And if you spend too much time in (2), you'll be doing wrong. What is an origin? All right, he says, "I'm eight feet back of my head." It's an origin; what are you supposed to do with it? Well, you're supposed to answer it. In this particular case, you would say to him something in the order of, "You are?" (You mean something like, "I've heard the communication -- it's made an effect on me.") Now, in maintaining ARC you can skimp that second one if you handle the third one expertly enough. The least important one is the second one, but the most deadly thing you can do is utterly to neglect the second one of maintaining ARC. That's deadly. But you can skip it if you really punch it into the third one, which is to say, get him back into session. So he says, "I'm eight feet back of my head," and you say, "YOU ARE???" (What he said really hit, you know.) He's kind of wog-wog about this -- he's not sure what this is all about. You say, "You are?" and the fellow says, "Yes." "Well!" you say. "What did I say that made that happen?" "Oh, you said 'Do birds fly,' and I thought of myself as a bird and I guess that's the way it is, but I am eight feet back of my head." "Well, that's pretty routine," you say -- reassure him, maintain the ARC. "Now, what was that auditing question?" "Oh, you asked me 'Do birds fly?'" And you say, "That's right. Do birds fly?" Back in session, you see. You can't do this: You can't put it into a can and put a label on it and say This is how you do it always, because it's always something peculiar; but you can say these three steps are followed. I will give you another example. You say, "Do birds fly?" and he says, "I have a blinding headache." "You do?" you say. "Is it bothering you (that's the ARC) too much to carry on with the session (and you've reached number three at once)?" "Oh no -- it's pretty bad though." 372 "Well, let's go on with this, shall we?" you say. "Maybe it'll do something with it (maintaining ARC)." He says, "Well, all right," and you're right back onto it again: "Do birds fly?" One of the trickiest of these is "What in my question reminded you of that?" The fellow says, "Well, so and so," and he explains it to you and you say, "Well, good. Do birds fly?" and you're right back in session again. Three parts, and -- that is the important thing -- you have to learn how to handle these things. At the same time that we are doing this, we can get much more complicated, particularly toward the end of the session, by just trying out a communication bridge. A communication bridge from "Do birds fly" to "Do fishes swim" and from "Do fishes swim" back to "Do birds fly." A communication bridge is a very easy thing. It simply closes off the process you were running, maintains ARC, and opens up the new process on which you are about to embark. If you could look at it as two V's, the points facing each other, with a line between the bottoms of the two V's, you would see that one process, which you have been running, is closed on down to nothing, easily, by gradients. You say, "How about running this just three or four more times, and then we'll quit -- okay?" We give him warning, you see, that we're closing the process off, and we do run it three or four more times. Then we say, "How are you doing?" (We never ask people, by the way, "How do you feel?" -- this as-ises havingness.) We say, "How are you doing?" and he says, "Oh, not too badly," and so on. "Well, did anything happen there while we were running 'Do fishes swim?'" And he says, "I don't know. I got a little bit of reality -- I felt like a fish for a couple of moments there." Auditor says, "How do you feel about that?" and so on. "Is it okay? Are you doing all right now?" The preclear says, "Not too badly." You say, "Well, let's go over onto 'Do birds fly?' It's an interesting process and it just goes like this -- I ask you, 'Do birds fly' and you answer me. How about running that?" and he says, "Well all right, okay." You establish agreement again and away we go. Actually, it is three contracts in a row. The first contract is: to stop the process we are running; the next contract is: we are in an auditing session, binding this as a continuing auditing session; and the third contract is simply: we have a new process we would like to run, and I want your signature on this dotted line that you will run it. That actually is a communication bridge. The reason we do this is so a preclear will not be startled by change, for if we change too rapidly in a session we stick the preclear in the session every time. We give him some warning; and that is what a communication bridge is for. The handling of origins, however, is most important. Learn how to handle origins, and you'll never be taken by surprise by a preclear. You'll be right in there pitching, and the session will keep on. I have seen an auditor sit with his mouth open for twenty or thirty seconds after some preclear said something fantastic. He just didn't know what to make of it. Well, you answer it, you maintain ARC, and you get him back in session. 374  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=87 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  What Are Clears?    Ability Issue 87 [1959, ca. early January] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. What Are Clears? L. Ron Hubbard There are three known grades of Clear. The first is the Book One Clear. This is called Mest Clear. An adequate description of this is to be found in Book One. The second is a Theta Clear. This has been known for years but has only recently been obtained through engram running as taught in the 5th London and 21st American ACCs and is done in the Processing Department of the Central Organization. The third is called OT or Operating Thetan and is a rather esoteric level, hard to reach, hard to describe in full. Any confusion about the state of clear is a confusion of these three terms: Mest Clear, Theta Clear and OT. An uninformed public thinks a Mest Clear should act like an OT with magical attributes. It is not enough that the general auditor can now approximate a Book One Clear. The public, striving for unattainable attributes, wants an OT who eats buildings. The two states if on the same scale are not the same states. A Mest Clear knows he has reached the bottom rung of the ladder on his way up. He also knows the rest of humanity uncleared is below this state but that they don't know that they are. A Mest Clear still thinks of himself more or less as a body and is more or less subject to one. All engrams are effectually keyed out without being examined. For practical purposes they are erased. He has excellent recalls. They may or may not be eidetic. Book One Clears are a bit below the Mest Clear standard of today. If the person making the picture required in eidetic recall makes the picture, he has to know first what is in it. So why make a picture. A picture is memory on a via. So the argument about eidetic recall is a rather dull one at best. It is not my purpose, thank God, to prove I was right. It is my purpose to blaze a trail into zones and heights Man has not known before. I can tell you only what is as I know it now. And I know that eidetic tests of recall do not prove a Mest Clear. Only freedom from keyed-in engrams proves a Mest Clear. 375 Theta Clear is another thing -- much higher than a Book One or Mest Clear. This is a real triumph and I'm proud of it. The fact of a real Theta Clear is only a few months old. A Theta Clear has no obsessive engrams whatever. They aren't. But he can put back at will his reactive bank or any engram in it and blow it off again at a glance. Now that is news. A Theta Clear does not have to depend on the body line for his "survival." He does not have engrams of any kind unless he creates them. He does not have to be in a head. And the state can be obtained in at least 80% of all cases in about 350 hours of auditing or more depending on the auditor's skill. Only the Processing Department of the Central Organization or the graduates of the 5th London ACC or the 21st American ACC are doing this one. Mest Clear, however, is a way station on the road to Theta Clear or OT so it doesn't much matter what auditor starts you on the way -- your HAS co- auditor, a professional HCA, an HCS or BScn or a new ACC graduate. You'll win with them all toward the same goal. Lately I even developed a co-auditing formula that reaches near Mest Clear. OT, of course, remains theoretical and is reached through lower clear states. So here we go. We built a bridge. And built it better than we hoped. It's time to start if you've been hanging back. The best way to see this elephant* is from inside! Clearing is wonderful conversational material. It is a better experience. L. RON HUBBARD The 1959 HCA Course Becomes a Clearing Course L. Ron Hubbard Three subjects, not one, have been in development in Dianetics and Scientology for these many years. First and foremost of course is Scientology itself. Second is Organizational know-how. Third is How to Train Auditors. These last two technologies did not exist in 1950, which accounts for our inability to make every gain we needed to make. Only in the past three years have we grown larger than we ever were in '50. Organizational know-how permits us to grow. Training know-how permits us to get results generally. Today the student in the new 1959 Academy can be taught at Hubbard Certified Auditor Level to Clear somebody. That is news. And with this issue we announce that the HCA Course will teach clearing to Mest Clear. With a newly grooved Communication Course, with an even stiffer Upper Indoc [* " 'Seeing the elephant' -- an old U.S. Army saying to new recruits going into action for the first time. In Scientology, we have this analogy: when the student auditor has seen the WHY of aberration, objectively and subjectively, we say 'he's seen the elephant' -- he'll never again doubt the fact of an engram or the awesome implications of what he, the auditor, is able to confront and do with a preclear. He is now, in short, operational." -- Ability 103] 376 Course and with Theory and Practice aimed only at Clearing we are giving the best we have to the first professional level of the HCA Course. As the HCA student, as well as other people, studies the Extension Course, much class time is saved for practical application of auditing. The enrolling student may arrive any Monday. He is placed at once in a Communication Course. This teaches him the basic drills of auditing. After a week he moves to the Upper Indoctrination Course which teaches the basic drills of handling people. The student is then graduated to Theory and Practice and "gets in" his first professional level auditing. At the end of eight weeks he has studied and should know how to do the basic processes of Tone 40 auditing: CCH 1, Give Me That Hand CCH 2, 8-C CCH 3, Hand Space Mimicry CCH 4, Book Mimicry He has also studied and knows how to do the basic processes of Mest Clearing by formal auditing: Rudiments of Auditing Factual Havingness What Can You Confront? Total Responsibility Help Step 6 These are the clearing processes for Mest Clear. He is also taught other skills and processes needed in general auditing. At course end he is examined for his practical ability in auditing by the HCO Board of Review in the Academy area and, due to the precision of Academy training, is generally passed. Training in engram running and other items was attempted in late 1958 but has been relegated to higher training levels. The HCA must know how to clear people now and all dross has been dropped. I reorganized the Academy in early 1959 after several tests and trials and can promise you now that the training is more skillful and precise than it has ever been. All the instructors are old-time auditors. They know their business. I taught most of them myself and can vouch for it. It's time for all those who aren't to get themselves trained and get about the business of clearing people. L. RON HUBBARD 377  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FIELD ACTIVITIES   All Scientologists  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JANUARY 1959 FIELD ACTIVITIES To: All Scientologists For Scientology to go well in any area, it is only necessary for the trained auditor in that area to follow the following steps: 1. Get good results on every pc processed individually. 2. Operate a group and do PE and Group Processing. 3. Keep the group recruited. It is not necessary that a field auditor has great sums of money to finance his activity. All successful Scientology activities have financed themselves. In extreme, an auditor with no pcs to keep him going can get a job and run a group evenings until the income of the group activity makes the job unnecessary. The keynote of handling any area is to bring order. Every time you put some order into a pc or a group, or society, a little confusion blows off. Ignore the confusion. It is transitory. Order is not. It stays. Therefore the more order (not necessarily the more activity) you put into things the more continuance you have. This is new data, extremely important and should be carefully gone over again and again and applied. It is data that brings big wins in a society, a group or a pc. Bring a little order. Get the pc to see that he can bring order into his affairs. Ask him bluntly, "What order could you bring into your life?" And his case will start resolving. The highest ability of a thetan is to Bring Order. Therefore, orderly processing brings results, disorderly processing does not. All an ARC break is is a disorder. What order, then, can a trained auditor bring into his area? Into his own life? Into his pc's? Into his group? That is the question worth answering. The confusion that flies off when the order is entered in seems so important to many auditors that they Q and A with it. They stop pursuing order and start pursuing confusion. Never change from order to disorder just because confusion blows off. Let the confusion go. If you want it all gone, just put more order into it. That's why CCH works when properly used. An auditor who just starts a group blows some disorder out of a society. The disorder flies into view. Ignore it. Just put some more well-run, exactly scheduled group there. More disorder discharges. Order put in too suddenly always discharges disorder too fast. That's an explosion. You don't want that. Leave explosions to the government (its highest level of entering order is to blow everything up). Here's a program. Get hold of all the people you have processed in the area you are in. Give them an interview. In it, ask each one, "What order are you trying to bring into your life?" "What part of your life?" Tell them that's what Scientology is trying to help them do. You'll have more pcs. Weld them into a group. Give them some group processing Tone 40. Bring order into their lives. 378 Take responsibility for every pc's whole life. Take responsibility for all the reactive banks in your area. Clear them up by bringing more order. Money cannot flow back to you on disorderly lines. AUDITOR CONFIDENCE Every field auditor has had some loses. These cut down his confidence. He should rebuild his confidence. He should rebuild his confidence as his first step. He failed where he failed to bring order into lives. Therefore, he had better now discipline himself to use one simple process and use it right and without change until he has won with it. Don't change the process because it blows off disorder. To the devil with the disorder -- put the order in regardless of how much disorder it blows off. KEY REHABILITATION PROCESS 1. Start session. 2. Find out if the pc has an auditor. 3. Find out if the pc has an auditing room. 4. Ask pc (goals), "What part of your life would you like to bring some order into?" Two-way comm on it for no more than five minutes. Get into session then. 5. For one hour at the beginning of each session every session run "Look around here and find something you have." Only that command. If pc originates, understand and acknowledge. DON'T DO ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT IT. 6. For remainder of session run "Recall something you have done." When he says he has, acknowledge only. Session after session run nothing else but this. And you'll bring order to a pc, believe me. And he'll have great case changes and he'll be moving forward toward clear. This process will give you wins unless you do something else to vary it. The only people it doesn't work well on are nearly unconscious. On these only CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4 work. If the process doesn't bite at all, use CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4. But don't worry, it will bite -- if you keep your mouth shut and don't flub. Now you want some wins. Don't talk to the pc much during a session. Use TR 4 whenever he talks. Keep him reassured, happy, comfortable and don't let him out of session until you end it. And you'll win. If you lose, it's because you got fancy or chopped the pc up. Factual Havingness will ease off p.t. problems and ARC breaks. That's why you use it for an hour always. If a process regimen comes along that's simpler or better than the above I'll let you know right away. Until then, this is the very best you can do. GROUP RECRUITING Groups fall apart on sloppy scheduling. They need one night a week at the minimum. Always the same night, same hours. That's order. Always a one hour lecture and one hour group processing Tone 40. We have new phonograph records of lectures for you. They're cheap. Buy them. 379 When you have a group processed a while get people into an HAS Course. Teach them TRs 0 to 9 and then let them co-audit on exactly the above regimen. By permitting co-auditing, the trained auditor actually gets more pcs. Charge for co-auditing consultations. Keep them at it. We're taking the lid off. The country is full of people. They should be in groups and co-auditing. In that way we'll bring enough order to the country to make even it survive. By the way, HCO Washington, D.C., will issue a Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist certificate to anybody you guarantee has passed TRs 0 to 9 without charge to you. We trust you to make sure they're good. In recruiting a group, keep explaining Scientology as something that helps people bring order into their lives. You'd be amazed how little order they believe they can inject. Call on new people. Run an ad for your group: "Tired of Being Human? ______________ Scientology Group Clears People," or "Does Life Seem Disorderly? Join the______________ Scientology Group and begin to win for a change." We need action. In an all but leaderless world, somebody has to make some people. Let's begin. LRH:-.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CHANGE OF HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 DECEMBER 1958   Full Distribution  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JANUARY 1959 Full Distribution CHANGE OF HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 DECEMBER 1958 Step 6 is deleted from HCA/HPA Curriculum and added to HCS/BScn section. No E-Meter is used or taught in HCA/HPA courses. Comm lag is taught instead. LRH:gn.jh Copyright $c 1959 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [HCO PL 15 Dec. 1958, Academy Training Curriculum & Examination, is in OEC Vol. 4, page 274.] 380  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JANUARY 1959 (Supersedes all Earlier Directives for HGC Processes) HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES The Director of Processing of an HGC is the person who indicates the processes to be used by auditors on pcs. The following plan is furnished for the information and guidance of the D of P and HGC auditors. LOW PCS All pcs who lie markedly below the center line of an APA/OCA graph should be run on CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4. Not all auditors, even when they know these, can get results with them. Therefore, use an auditor who does get results with the CCHs. MEDIUM PCS Pcs who lie on either side of the center line respond easily to Fac Havingness and benefit well from it. Fac Hav with all three commands (as per ACC Clear Procedure) should be run solely and only with good case gain. Flatten each command on such a case about an hour at a time in rotation. If no comm lag develops, run 8 vanish, 2 continue, 1 have in that order until case changes for the better. Then run an hour each on each of the three in rotation. These can also be run on "Recall something you have done". HIGH PCS Pcs who lie mostly or entirely above the center line can be run on "Recall something you have done". However, if you have auditors trained to run engrams, by all means start this pc on engrams at once and run according to 5th London or 21st American procedure. OTHER PROCESSES FOR ALL Any help process runs on almost any pc except the very low pc. Therefore, particularly to get sessions started, "help on auditor and pc" is valuable. ARC Break Straight Wire works well on medium level pcs, but only an auditor who is expert with an E-Meter and in locating in time incidents can be trusted with it. GENERAL NOTES HGC auditors have to be checked out on CCH 0 before being permitted to run it. The process is a great invitation to spend half an intensive talking. Fac Hav or TR 10 also run problems and should be used if auditor doesn't check out on CCH 0. 381 Auditors must not be permitted to use TR 13, fishing a cognition. Use TR 4 instead or the ACC TR accepting pc's answers. (TR 4 and the ACC TR are quite similar.) Use TR 5N handling ARC Breaks only when auditor is checked out on it and handles it well. The most trouble you get in an HGC is same as field. Auditors won't use TR 4. They always have to do something about what pc volunteers. After a while pc gets afraid of volunteering data and goes out of session. In general auditors talk too much. Cut it down unless auditor really knows when to talk. Auditors who are always dragging pc's attention to auditor are a liability in an HGC. On a new auditor in HGC you can ask "What process has gotten you best results?" And whatever he says, you'll win better, until he's grooved in, by letting him run it. Otherwise, give him Fac Hav and no comments to pc and you will get a fair showing. RESULT RETARDERS ARC Breaks mostly retard results. The less talk, from auditor, the less breaks. Good TR 4 avoids them. PT Problem stalls cases. Handle it with good CCH 0 as per ACC Clear Procedure, or, if auditor not checked out -- with Fac Hav, or in extreme low cases TR 10. CLEARING PROCEDURES It is fruitless to embark on straight clearing until the case is up. So, all the above applies to clearing. When case is well up, after using the above processes, use Confront and Help as per ACC Clear Procedure, or, better, run engrams. SUMMARY To get gains, use processes gauged to case, handle PT Problems and prevent ARC Breaks by checking auditor comments. To clear, run engrams and make Theta Clears where you can. If not all your auditors can run engrams, have lower cases set up by them and when in shape, pass to an engram running auditor to finish off. If you have no engram running auditor, clear by this bulletin plus ACC Clear Procedure. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [See HCO B 4 March 1959, HGC Allowed Processes, which supersedes all earlier HGC allowed processes.] 382  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  An amusingly effective process.   To all Staff HCO London  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street N.W., Washington, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JANUARY 1959 To all Staff HCO London An amusingly effective process. "Invent a problem for which (pc's worry or malady) is the answer." Examples -- bad leg, old age, wrinkles, bad heart, obsession about sex, pt illness, inability to work, etc. LRH:rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TONE OF VOICE -- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT   D of T Acad Admin Ext Course Dir Acad Insts D of P Processing Admin HCO Bd of Review ACC World Wide Inst HCO  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE D o f T WASHINGTON, D.C. Acad Admin Ext Course Dir HCO BULLETIN OF 12 JANUARY 1959 Acad Insts D of P Processing Admin HCO Bd of Review ACC World Wide Inst HCO TONE OF VOICE -- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Mood can be expressed by an acknowledgement. Evaluation can also be accomplished by acknowledgement, depending on the tone of voice with which it is uttered. There is nothing bad about expressing mood by acknowledgement, except when the acknowledgement expresses criticalness, ridicule, or humor. LRH:-.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 383  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=15/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=152 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE FIVE LEVELS OF INDOCTRINATION    P.A.B. No. 152 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 15 January 1959 THE FIVE LEVELS OF INDOCTRINATION Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard I am now going to give you the five levels of Indoctrination very rapidly. We already have the five dummy processes which form the first level -- the five dummy auditing processes. The second one up the line is 8-C -- plain 8-C. It is given without stress on control or anything of the sort. You don't touch or handle the person. It is an old process done this way. The auditing commands of 8-C in this particular instance have suffered change recently because no auditing command must depend upon any other auditing command or it won't be in present time. So each auditing command depends upon itself, and the commands of 8-C are: "Look at that wall. Thank you." "Walk over to that wall. Thank you." "With your right hand touch that wall. Thank you." "Turn around. Thank you." There is no "let go" there or other direction. If we have not directed him to do something and he does it, if the way he does something is a little different from what we expected, we really have no basis for Objection; and the training stress is only this: to get a person to walk another body than his own around the room. There is nothing to this. It is NOT High School Indoctrination. At this level he must be able to duplicate the command, and it is run to a point where a person does not make a mistake on the commands and stops feeling nervous about walking a person's body around. That is the training stress. Now we move up to the next level of Indoctrination, which might look like 8-C at the first glance, but is not. This is High School Indoctrination. The commands of High School Indoctrination are the same as those for plain 8-C, but this is entirely and completely a training process and it is only run for this reason: to keep an auditor from being stopped by a preclear by devious and diverse statements and actions. The "preclear" (we can't really call him a preclear at all, for he is actually the coach) runs on this "auditor" anything he can think of to stop him, and the auditor must at no time permit himself even to be halted or falter in any way. He must be able to continue a clear, free-flowing 8-C on this person who is getting down on the floor and barking like a dog. He mustn't be permitted to go down on the floor. You let a man get below the level of your shoulders and he is going to get down on the floor -- that's for sure. You have to catch him before that. He is going to try not to walk across the room. He is going to try and run across the room. He is going to try and do anything. You told him to walk: walking fast is allowable but running is definitely not allowable. The training stress is entirely upon getting an auditor to persevere against any trick mechanism anybody could think of or react to, or any circuitry or dramatization in 8-C. It is total 384 auditor persistence. We don't ask the auditor to do it smoothly -- we only ask him to do it constantly and consistently. That is High School Indoctrination, one of the great steps of Scientology. If we had had this a few years ago, it would have made the world of difference in several cases I can think of. A fellow would sit down in the middle of the floor and he wouldn't do anything. We depended totally on our voices, and these people weren't in communication. The coach in this case has a role to play. He is the preclear. He has two signals, one "flunk" and the other "that's it," which are effective. Anything else he says does not count. Of course, he says "Start" and they go on with it, but when the coach (who is the final judge) considers that the auditor has blundered, has been stopped, and has waited too long, then the coach says "Flunk." What happens when the coach says "Flunk"? They go back to the beginning of the nearest cycle of action of 8-C. They do not take it from where they were, but go back to the beginning. They leave that cycle incomplete. The auditor in this case is not permitted to override a flunk. When the coach says "That's it," he means "We are through. We are going to take a breather. What I say now counts." And that ends it. It doesn't begin again until the coach says "Start." This is 8-C done on a very heavy body contact: the coach being lugged around and doing anything he can think of to stop this fellow. It is interesting what will stop some auditors. If you understand your business as a coach, you will understand that it is the soft ones and the unexpected ones that count. It isn't the heavy ones, it isn't the preclear just lying down on the floor and refusing to budge and exerting every muscle and having to be dragged from there on. This is perfectly allowable, but it isn't the one that catches the auditor. It is the subtle unexpected actions that "flunk" an auditor. High School Indoctrination is a marvelous training process. Several hours should be spent on this and one shouldn't run it just with one coach but with two or three others as well, because everybody develops his own abreactive pattern. It is a wonderful opportunity to abreact your insanities. An auditor will very swiftly learn how to stop one preclear, but take two or three more, swapping teams around, and he eventually gets a smooth look at the whole thing. There isn't such a thing as being too tiny to handle too big a preclear. The next level of Indoctrination is Tone 40 on an Object. (Actually all these are groups and a number of techniques of indoctrination could be evolved from each one of these. I am simply giving you those that have to be passed.) In this Tone 40 on an Object you can have a number of commands and variations of one kind or another, but the one we use is this: You take an object -- a small doll, ashtray, Coke bottle -- and the auditor tells it to "Sit down in that chair" or "Sit on the table" and thanks it. Then he tells it to "Stand up," and thanks it. "Sit down on the chair" or "Sit on the table" -- then the auditor moves it with his own hands. He does all this while the coach is just standing there heckling him, and he has to do it so that his intention is so good that he gets perpetually surprised that the thing, the object, didn't sit down in the chair or sit on the table, or didn't stand up. The furthermost extremity of this would be that the object would do so without any further contact with the auditor than his intention. That point may be reachable -- I must tell you that. A person does this until his tone in giving the commands is Tone 40. There are many little drills that come into this. One is to make him put the intention into it and squeak and not say a word at the same time, but put the intention into it and alter his voice all over the place until he finds out that his intention doesn't have anything to do with his voice or tone. He will eventually discover what Tone 40 is. Tone 40 is a 385 positive postulate with no counter-thought -- expected, anticipated, or anything else; that is, total control. Actually, today we use the word "control" very loosely. What we really mean is "positive postulation"; what the world means by control is, if he doesn't do it, shoot him. Not Tone 40, but Tone .4 . In order to get Tone 40 on a Person going, you can continue Tone 40 on an Object; but whether this belongs to Tone 40 on a Person or belongs to the last end of Tone 40 on an Object doesn't much matter. It is not a separate level, but it is a separate command. You give the 8-C commands to an object and lug it around for a little while -- i.e., having the object move over and touch the wall, etc. -- but that is only getting the person used to these commands in that tone. That is the only reason there is for it. We don't use the 8-C commands to get his drill in because he is going to get heckled. What does the coach do on Tone 40 on an Object? At first he is really helpful and tries to get the auditor to get the intention in there until he can put the intention in without speaking. When the fellow is getting too good the coach must remember that this Tone 40 on a Person is going to be up against somebody with counter-thought, counter-effort and counter-action of one kind or another and the coach furnishes it. He doesn't do it loudly or obstreperously, but he does furnish it. "Is that Tone 40? Are you absolutely sure that was Tone 40? What do you mean by Tone 40?" etc. -- this is when the coach isn't being helpful. The coach is supposed to furnish randomity as a substitute for the randomity of the environment. The person can do this in spite of the fact that something or somebody is resisting him, heckling him and messing him up. You could go much further with this. As I say, one can go much further with each one of the five levels of Indoctrination, but I don't advise it. On Tone 40 on a Person, we do 8-C at Tone 40 and that is a total, accurate estimation of effort, with no halts or jagged motions -- that is, smooth. Your estimation of effort must be absolutely perfect; your estimation of intention must also be perfect -- which is sometimes rather hard on a coach because somebody can get so good that a coach's body starts to walk around and obey the commands rather easily and you find almost all coaches on Tone 40 on a Person are much more docile than on High School Indoc. They really want to be rougher but the technique is rather over-weighing this, is too strong. Those are the five levels of Indoctrination and they are only doing this: placing an auditor into a frame of mind and an ability where his postulates can be positive and his command is no longer diffident, where he can control and handle somebody, where he can assume the attitude that is necessary to an auditor. And a person is all through with these when the instructor is sure that the auditor in training can do this. [Continued in PAB 153, page 394] 386  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=19/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NEW HCA/HPA COURSE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1959 NEW HCA/HPA COURSE This is the new course outline and time schedule for the HCA/HPA Course. All students will be enrolled in the Extension Course. Communications Course Course Outline: MONDAY ................... TR 0 TUESDAY................... TR 1 WEDNESDAY ................ TR 2 and TR 3 THURSDAY ............... TR 4 FRIDAY ................... TR 5N SATURDAY ............... Auditing Session Time Schedule (Monday through Friday): 9:00 -- 9:30.............. Lecture by Instructor 9:30 -- 9:45.............. LRH Comm Course Tape (if available, if not, explanatory lecture on TR by Instructor) 9:45 -- 10:00............. Break 10:00 -- 1:00............. Session "A" 1:00 -- 2:00.............. Lunch 2:00 -- 5:00.............. Session "B" 5:00 -- 5:30.............. Testing and Review (optional) by Instructor Time Schedule (Saturday): 9:00 -- 12:00............. Auditing Session Upper Indoctrination Course Course Outline: MONDAY ................... TR 6 TUESDAY................... TR 7 WEDNESDAY................. TR 8 THURSDAY ................. TR 8 FRIDAY ................... TR 9 SATURDAY ................. Auditing Session Time Schedule (Monday through Friday): 9:00 -- 9:30.............. Lecture by Instructor 9:30 -- 9:45.............. Break 9:45 -- 12:00............. Session "A" 12:00 -- 1:00............. Lunch 1:00 -- 3:45.............. Session "B" 3:45 -- 4:00.............. Break 4:00 -- 5:00.............. Tape Lecture 5:00 -- 5:30.............. Q and A period Time Schedule (Saturday): 9:00 -- 12:00............. Auditing Session 387 Theory and Practice Course Course Outline: (Week "A") MONDAY ................ Tone 40 CCH 1 TUESDAY................ Tone 40 CCH 2 WEDNESDAY ............. Tone 40 CCH 3 THURSDAY .............. Tone 40 CCH 4 FRIDAY ................ Op Pro by Dup (old style) SATURDAY .............. Auditing Session Course Outline: (Week "B") MONDAY ................ Straight Wire Processes TUESDAY................ S-C-S WEDNESDAY ............. Factual Havingness THURSDAY .............. 1) "What can you confront?" 2) "Make a picture for which you can be wholly responsible. FRIDAY ................ Help (all brackets) SATURDAY .............. Auditing Session Time Schedule for both Week "A" and Week "B" (Monday through Friday): 9:00 -- 9:30.............. Lecture by Instructor 9:30 -- 9:45.............. Break 9:45 -- 12:00............. Session "A" 12:00 -- 1:00............. Lunch 1:00 -- 3:45.............. Session "B" 3:45 -- 4:00.............. Break 4:00 -- 5:00.............. Tape Lecture 5:00 -- 5:30.............. Q and A period Time Schedule for Saturday (Weeks "A" and "B"): 9:00 -- 12:00............. Auditing Session L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 388  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=20/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACC PREPARATORY PROCESS SCHEDULE FOR RUNNING ENGRAMS   RECOMMENDED FOR NEW AUDITORS IN HGCs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 20 JANUARY 1959 ACC PREPARATORY PROCESS SCHEDULE FOR RUNNING ENGRAMS RECOMMENDED FOR NEW AUDITORS IN HGCs SELECTED PERSONS OVERT ACTS The student is started in the following fashion: "Find a person you feel you have failed to help." By two-way comm, not repetitive. Several persons may be located. Select one that is real to the pc (not wholly unreal) and run the following process: "Recall something you have done to (selected person)." This is a repetitive command. The auditing is done "muzzled". The auditor is not permitted to say ANYTHING to pc except the command and to acknowledge that command's answer, once the process is started. If the pc originates the auditor is permitted to nod only. If pc seems to have lost the command, or originates, the auditor nods and says, "I'll repeat the auditing command" and does so. No discussions, or rudiments beyond START and END OF SESSION are employed. When several persons so selected in the pc's life are apparently flat, the process may be considered flat. Some reality should have been gained by both auditor and pc. OVERT ACT STRAIGHT WIRE When several selected persons pc "could not help" have been run with the above, the auditor broadens the process to the command, "Recall something you have done to somebody". This is also run "muzzled". When pc originates, the auditor does not speak, he only nods his reply. When the preclear seems to be without a command, the auditor repeats it as above. No further two-way comm is allowed. ARC BREAK STRAIGHT WIRE When the pc shows signs of being easy with the above process, the process used becomes ARC BREAK STRAIGHT WIRE run in the following fashion. For the first time, E-Meters are employed. The sole use of the E-Meter is to locate incident in time, BC-AD dates to be used only, "Is it greater than...?" "Is it less than...?" "Is it such and such a date?" A forbidden question is "How many years ago" as this is the sole criteria used in between-life implants where they say things are "Thousands of years ago...trillions of years ago...etc." The question "When?" is the only thing the auditor solves and only when needed, and he tells the pc about the drop he gets. The command is "Recall an ARC break". The pc does. The auditor says "When?" Any time statement by the pc is accepted except "I don't know". If pc says this, the auditor resolves it with the E-Meter to the best of his ability, tells the pc the date or character of drops, and then continues the process. Any other origin by pc is met with a nod only. The auditor may make no comments. This process goes very easily into whole track. If a whole track incident is located in time it de-intensifies or goes back on the track. By locating the incident in time the pc is not made to plow through an engram with this command only, which is poor stuff. Therefore, no departure is allowed from the above regimen and no two-way comm is permitted beyond locating the incident in time. The process will be found to open up a track into greater and greater reality. As ARC Break Straight Wire will give pc 3D spots on the track it can be followed by "What can you confront?" or regular engram running. LRH:-.rd L. RON HUBBARD [HCO B 18 Jan. 59, ACC Preparatory Processes for Running Engrams, is basically same as above.] 389  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NOT-IS STRAIGHT WIRE   Full distribution  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JANUARY 1959 Full distribution NOT-IS STRAIGHT WIRE Those persons on whom a process works once and those who have either dub- in or occlusion, process easily, if dramatically, on Not-Is Straight Wire. (See Axioms 11 D, 18 and 22.) Pcs divide into three general classes: 1. Those who have 3D pictures and good time sense. 2. Those who are occluded with black, colored or invisible fields and poor time sense. 3. Those who dub-in and have no time sense. The scale of deterioration of a case is as above. First there are 3D copies of the real universe, then there is the action of not-ising these pictures (while they're still there) and finally, while not-ising, substituting false pictures. This process is aimed at case types 2 and 3 above. (ARC Break Straight Wire also handles type 2 but not so well as type 3.) Types 2 and 3 press into invisibility pictures by making them "unimportant". This is the clue word to unreality, stupidity, occlusion and dub-in. (See the Logics.) The cycle which occurs is that the person gets overwhelmed with other people's declared importance. They counter by not-ising the importance of others. The reverse cycle of others reducing the pc's own importances is not run in Not-Is Straight Wire as it reduces havingness. The commands of Not-Is Straight Wire are only these and no other: "Recall a time you implied something was unimportant." Pc does. "When?" Pc says or auditor assists him by pegging it on an E-Meter. This is run for about an hour. Then a second command only is run. "Recall a time when somebody else thought something was important." Pc does. "When?" Pc says or auditor assists him by locating on E-Meter. Acknowledgement is used. TR 4 is reduced to a nod. An hour of one is followed by an hour of the other. There's dynamite in this process. It is good, clean and unlimited. But don't chicken on it and pull out and don't quit because the pc gets uncomfortable. Here may be the QED for all occlusion and dub-in cases. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gn.rd 390  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=88 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A Campaign for Ethical Auditing    Ability Issue 88 M [1959, ca. late January] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. A Campaign for Ethical Auditing L. Ron Hubbard General ethical standards in America are at their low-low ebb. When we see what the peers of "healing" do to make a dishonest dollar, when we see "mental healing" relegated to mental torture and destruction we find at the same time that the local and the national governments enforce the vicious practitioners, the antibiotic quack and the electric shock witch doctor. If Scientology is to make any progress whatever its own ethical standards must be without reproach. Why Q and A with a caved-in society? One of my "hats" is ethical standards. HCO is Hubbard Communications Office. It is the office that helps me wear my hats. Therefore one of the three principal hats of HCO is Ethical Standards, the keeping of the codes. The other two are Technology and Awards. There are many HCO offices throughout the world. But nowhere do they have the problems of magnitude in the field of ethics that they have in America. Succumbing to the general low tone of the society, there are persons about who: 1. Do not care to have the actual skill necessary to get results; 2. Do not scruple in their promises to pcs and 3. Work against the best interests of the Central Organization and other auditors. Heretofore I have been relatively unaided in this problem. I have tried many ways to solve it. All failed in America. These solutions worked elsewhere but not in America. Fortunately HCO has come of age. I am getting help. An HCO Secretary is a well-trained Scientologist. After that she is my own secretary in the area. She has a motto "Bring Order" -- the motto of HCO. HCO staff are dedicated Scientologists, the best, carefully selected. Today any unethical practitioner in Scientology is beginning to feel uneasy. And rightly. HCO (to say nothing of Central Organizations) is breathing down his neck. 391 Today ethical auditors, doing their jobs and well, are feeling easier. HCO is backing up their activity and making them secure in their gains by, for instance, keeping roving auditors out of ethical areas and the squirrels gasping their last. An ethical auditor does the following: 1. He helps the good repute of Scientology. 2. He keeps dissemination up with a healthy part of his income. 3. He gets results when he processes somebody. 4. He charges standard fees, no cut-rate. 5. He stands in well with his fellow auditors. 6. He makes no wild promises to pcs he can't back up. 7. He never tells a pc the pc is now clear. 8. He uses standard processes. 9. He keeps his own case improving toward clear on higher levels. An unethical auditor is earmarked by the following: 1. He lives on the good repute of Scientology but downgrades it. 2. He profits by the dissemination of others or the Central Organization and pockets what he should contribute as "profit." 3. He processes people without caring about results, only profit. 4. He cut-rates his processing or grossly overcharges. 5. He is despised by other auditors. 6. He makes any promise he has to to get a pc to buy processing. 7. He tells pcs they are clear no matter what they think. 8. He uses any process that happens to occur to him and avoids standard proven processes. 9. He shuns personal auditing on himself. And there you have what's holding us back. When the New Year of Year Nine came, I made a resolution. I had the administrative machinery set up, the needful comm lines. And I resolved to "Take steps to take full responsibility for field auditors in America." I don't care whether this resolution is popular or unpopular. It's got to be done. Here's how it is: I tell people about recent results and about clears. Some creep, already in bad with me, yet finds ways of "profiting" by "cashing in." Trouble is, these couldn't audit out a sore finger on a clear. What do they know about my goals or ethics. Yet they use the name and rake in cash -- and spoil areas with their stupid blundering. They fail to help cases. They are parasitic upon the dissemination done by others. They take money that should go into sound future and waste it. HCO is vitally interested in this campaign. The HCO goal is "Get the field auditor to get results in America, and get the show on the road." And HCO can spend thousands to do it. 392 Any area that is being victimized by an unethical auditor will soon feel the influence of HCO. We mean business. And America has been asking for it hard. Scientology is the greatest movement on Earth today, the only honest movement with real hope for Man's future. It must not be stalled by the prevailing low of American ethics. It is shameful that I can only guarantee Scientology results in America where HCO or myself can directly supervise the processing. This must change. A professional auditor's certificate must continue to mean honesty, results and adherence to the codes. This is no sudden campaign that will be forgotten. There are HCO offices all over the world, more than in America. I'm winning. HCO is winning. It's about time the field won too. For Scientology is winning a new life for Man the world around. L. RON HUBBARD  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/1/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Scientology Axiom 58:   Full Distr.  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JANUARY 1959 Full Distr. Scientology Axiom 58: Intelligence and judgment are measured by the ability to evaluate relative importances. Corollary: The ability to evaluate importances and unimportances is the highest faculty of logic. Corollary: Identification is a monotone assignment of importance. Corollary: Identification is the inability to evaluate differences in time, location, form, composition or importance. LRH:gn.rd L. RON HUBBARD 1/24/59 393  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 13 iDate=1/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=153 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C. C. H.    P.A.B. No. 153 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 February 1959 C. C. H. (Continued from P.A.B. No. 152 of 15 January 1959 on "The Five Levels of Indoctrination") Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard WE GO NOW INTO CCH. CCH could not even vaguely be attempted without the five levels of Indoctrination having been run. Nevertheless, early in the HPA or HCA Course you will discover that an individual hasn't yet had Tone 40, so, although CCH starts with Tone 40, the training continuity of CCH does not. Training starts with dummy auditing in the Communication Course and then goes to the second level of Indoctrination, which is simple 8-C, and they coincide at that point. The order of learning these processes is therefore different from the order in which they are given to a pc. You don't have to remember the order of learning, but you do have to remember the order of giving them to a pc. However, I am going to give them to you in the order of training. We have simple 8-C (which I have already given you) at the second level. The commands of simple 8-C are very simple and they do not depend on any other command. In simple 8-C the commands are: "Look at that wall. Thank you." "Walk over to that wall. Thank you." "With your right hand touch that wall. Thank you." "Turn around. Thank you." The second process we deal with in training is Locational Processing, and this, as you can see at once, is a command of attention process. The commands are: "Notice that __________. Thank you." This is very simple Locational Processing and, by the way, an interestingly therapeutic process. The training stress is simply this: the direction of attention must not be disturbed by other mechanisms of attention direction. The auditor must do this smoothly. We are trying to get the auditor to get the preclear's attention to go smoothly to the object indicated. What we have here is one person handling another person's attention -- this is quite unusual, and must be done very smoothly. We don't care how well the commands are getting across, beyond, of course, that they should get across as well as a person learned to get across a command in dummy auditing. The auditor picks out objects and says "Notice that _______________." He normally points, and the preclear merely turns his head. There are no cautions to be used with this except that, it the preclear gets very restimulated, flatten it. The third is called Locational, Body and Room, and here we have the first example of extroversion-introversion. The commands are: "Look at that _______ __________. Thank you. Look at your ___________ (foot, hand or knee). Thank you." There is an alternative set of commands on this: "Notice the chair. Notice your hand. Notice the 394 wall. Notice the floor." They actually have a difference. A person who is pretty dead in his head had better be told to "notice," because the strain and stress which will come on him through trying to get out of his body and "look" at his head is so great he will start pulling ridges to pieces. So, of the two, the safest is "Notice." The other will exteriorize somebody. They are two different sets of commands, two different objects. "Look at that wall, look at your hand," etc., is liable to find a person out there five feet outside his head. But if a person would not normally exteriorize by his build, bank behavior, etc., you would use "Notice." In training we use "Notice," but we must remember that the process works fabulously well with "Look." That's an extroversion-introversion process. We have the sequence of it as "Look in on yourself. Look at yourself. Look at the environment. Look at yourself. Look at the environment" -- alternating it. This is what is known as an alternate command. It is necessary to call your attention to that bit of terminology because in "Give me your hand" Tone 40, we run it on the right hand and we run it on the left hand, but it is not an alternate. We don't say, "Give me your right hand. Give me your left hand." The next one of these is Objective Show Me. Here the preclear does a little demonstrating. The reason this is put in here is because it is one of the more miraculous therapeutic processes. It is the reason why a person's bank is invisible to other people. It is the reason why people have secrets, they pull banks in on themselves, and the reason why they don't dare show it to anybody else. The commands are: "Show me that __________. Thank you." The auditor points to the object he wishes to be shown. Only when that is running fairly well will you run it on an extrovert-introvert basis, and the next series of commands on it could be "Show me that ___________. Show me your ___________." (I.e., "Show me that table. Show me your foot. Show me that ceiling. Show me your hand.") This, by the way, opens the door to mock-ups and facsimiles anybody could see. If there is some method of achieving that, this is the process to do it. A person overcomes his unwillingness to show things, and he realizes that he is not still on Arcturus and you are not the space police from Saturn. He is being made unwilling by life to show anybody anything. Actually, I would omit this process under training. I wouldn't show a person how to do this early in his training. I would let him find this one up the track somewhere. That is why I have not given it out in training earlier. But you must know that it exists because it is a very important process and has to be handled very delicately -- that is why at this level of training it isn't used. Instead, we use a mild one called Attention by Duplication 9, Number 4. This is a very old process, but we don't run it in the old manner. We place a book in one location and a bottle in another location (never more than five feet apart), and we say, "Look at that book. Walk over to that book. Pick up that book. Put the book down in exactly the same place." The same goes for the bottle. You could add a "Turn around" in there, but you have then graduated this to Tone 40 Book and Bottle. Tone 40 Book and Bottle is not Opening Procedure by Duplication. You have to be ready to assume total control of the preclear to run Tone 40 Book and Bottle. The commands are the same, except that you never acknowledge anything but the execution of the auditing commands. Then we would only have to add the command "Turn around." He is really not supposed to do anything else we have not told him to do. (In training we use Opening Procedure by Duplication and later on will have to show somebody what we mean by Tone 40 Book and Bottle.) The training stress on this is precision. The auditor must not make any mistakes or omissions on this command. It is one of the most arduous processes to run known to man. If an auditor adds into it the randomity of getting his commands mixed up, he can practically finish a preclear. It is one of the number one exteriorization processes. If Opening Procedure by Duplication 1957 will exteriorize somebody (and it will), Tone 40 Book and Bottle is likely to send 395 him on his way. You have no latitude for mistakes here. The training stress is the exact duplication of the commands. One of the cautions that must be observed in running this is that it is not left unflattened and mustn't be faltered if it begins to run. If the process is biting it must not be stopped simply because there is a class schedule involved. If you were unfortunate enough to begin Opening Procedure by Duplication 1957 at 3 p.m. and it was running on the preclear, you have no choice if it is still running at 2 a.m. in the morning -- Auditor's Code or not, you are still going to be there running it. I couldn't possibly tell you that emphatically enough. We remember this from way back when. The most fatal thing that can happen is to be interrupted during this process, which may never bite again. And if it isn't flattened, it is liable to leave somebody hung right there. It is a major auditing error to start Opening Procedure by Duplication 1957 and not flatten it. When you start that one, don't have any other dates. Most of these processes under training sooner or later will be left unflattened on somebody, but that one must never be. [Continued in PAB 154, page 400] 396  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC CURRENT PROCEDURE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 3 FEBRUARY 1959 HGC CURRENT PROCEDURE SELECTED PERSONS OVERTS STRAIGHTWIRE If you want an undercut on Selected Persons Overts Straightwire, run people close to present time and if you want to undercut it further, downscale its command to: "Think of something you have done to...." The preclear does not have to talk to run this process. He can just think of something. Additional note: ARC Break Straightwire cannot be run on a case that is motivator hungry. Overt acts must be owned up to thoroughly on the lower processes before you can get ARC Break Straightwire to run properly. Bad auditing is much easier to do with ARC Break Straightwire than the other two processes. Bad auditing is the limitation of ARC Break Straightwire. It gives the auditor much more chance to make mistakes than either Selected Persons Overts or Not-Is Straightwire. The two biggest single auditor crimes are: 1. Rough and choppy auditing. 2. Overestimating the level of case. When either of these two crimes is committed you get reduced profile readings. If a profile reduces, the answer is in either one or two above. The remedy for rough auditing is muzzled auditing. This gives the auditor wins, thus improving his judgement and gives the preclear wins. Muzzled auditing is best run on: 1. Selected Person Overts Straightwire 2. General Overts Straightwire 3. Not-Is Straightwire. ARC Break Straightwire belongs between General Overts Straightwire and Not-Is Straightwire in the scale of things, but is generally omitted because it requires smooth auditing; however, it produces the best results if case reality is up to it. GRADUAL SCALE OF PROCESSES The lowest is: 1. Selected Person Overts Straightwire: "Recall a time you did something to . . . . . " 2. General Overts Straightwire: "Recall a time you did something to somebody." 3. ARC Break Straightwire: "Recall an ARC Break." "When?" 397 4. Not-Is Straightwire: "Recall a time you implied something was unimportant" alternated with "Recall a time somebody thought something was important." 5. Factual Havingness: "Look around here and find something you would permit to vanish." "Look around here and find something you would continue." "Look around here and find something you have." The results to be achieved by the above scale compare favorably to the CCHs and are faster. When part of the profile gain lags on the OCA or APA, the person is found to have a dropped havingness, thus Factual Havingness (Third Rail -- run 8-2- 1) can be combined with the above, using the third command, VANISH, first. In any event, the fifth process in the above order is "Third Rail" (run 8-2-1) of Factual Havingness. I would like to see this run extensively by HGCs. I would like to see this gradient scale run in full after every engram is flat, and before starting a new engram. This will keep auditors from being fooled by dub-in. Dub-in can occur in a different lifetime, even when it was not present in the lifetime just run. Dub- in is a continuous characteristic of a person in a single lifetime and may not be present in the ensuing lifetime. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FLATTENING A PROCESS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 3 FEBRUARY 1959 FLATTENING A PROCESS A process is flat when: 1. There is the same lag from the moment the command is given until the time the preclear answers the command at least 3 times in a row. 2. A cognition occurs. 3. An ability is regained. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd 398  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  OP. PRO. BY DUP.    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 4 FEBRUARY 1959 Originally issued from London OP. PRO. BY DUP. Use two objects -- a book and a bottle. Have the pc look them over and handle them to his satisfaction. Then have him place them at some walking distance apart in the room, on a couple of tables or similar locations. The commands: "Look at that book." "Walk over to it." "Pick it up." "What is its color?" "What is its temperature?" "What is its weight?" "Put it down in exactly the same place." Repeat with the bottle. Do not vary the commands in any way. Use Tone 40. "Thank you" acknowledgment. The basic commands should never be departed from, and never, never trick the preclear by using the book again when you knew he was just about to start toward the bottle. The purpose of the process is duplication. Good control should be used. Accept the pc's answers whether they are logical, silly, imaginative, dull or unlawful. In starting the process you can discuss with him what you are about to do and make sure you have got the rudiments established. Run the process until the comm lags are flat. This process is an HPA/HCA requisite. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mc.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 399  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=15/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=154 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  C. C. H. (Concluded)    P.A.B. No. 154 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 15 February 1959 C. C. H. (Concluded) Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard The next process in training order is Subjective Havingness. One way to run this is to ask the preclear what he can mock up. Then have him mock up what he can, and shove it into his body. That is the most elementary way of running this. Remedy of Havingness and Havingness in general are the most therapeutic levels of processing when they work. You run CCH so the fellow can have, and here you are directly doing it. Quite important. You can always get a black case to mock things up and you can always get somebody to throw something away. This is not even a problem today. The way you crack up a black case is to have him mock up something in the blackness and push it in until the blackness cracks up. He will go anaten; but because he goes unconscious is no reason to stop auditing him. There is a way to crack up the "invisible" case, who cannot see mock-ups (they have no field and do not see anything when they close their eyes; everything is invisible, they have no facsimiles, no mock-ups). The most spectacular crack-up of an invisible case was occasioned by putting a number of glass objects on a table and, one after the other, just repetitively round and round, the preclear was asked to "Keep each one from going away"; and, when he succeeded in doing this for a few rounds, he no longer had an invisible field. That invisible field of his had been impervious to all other attacks by auditors for five years or longer. The next one is Book Mimicry, its commands being totally motion. All the processes up to this moment (we have mentioned Book and Bottle Tone 40, but it is not taught or run at this level of training) are simply communicative. We could talk to the preclear. This is also true of Book Mimicry and Hand Space Mimicry. Don't get this mixed up because your first process in CCH is Tone 40 "Give me your hand" and this is followed by Tone 40 8-C and then followed by Book Mimicry and then followed by Hand Space Mimicry; you are liable to believe that Book Mimicry and Hand Space Mimicry are Tone 40. They are not. They are just common, ordinary, run-of-the-mill routine -- be a good fellow, pick up the ARC, remember your dummy auditing sort of processes. You can talk to the preclear. It is necessary that you do so. Book Mimicry is run this way: You sit facing the preclear, rather close together, your knees a few inches from his knees. You take in your hands a book -- not another object -- and you make a motion with this book, preferably not the most complicated motion in the world and preferably not the simplest motion. And remember, you, the auditor, have to be able to remember any motion that you make with that book so that you can do it again. So it is sometimes necessary for an instructor to make somebody take the book and wave it around in certain patterns 400 and make him wave it around again before he lets him run this on anybody. Just check him out so that he can wave the book the same way twice, because, if he can't, he can't run this process. You make the motion with the book and give the book to the preclear, and he, with a mirror image, takes the book and makes as near as he can the same motion with it. If you are not satisfied with it, you take the book back and make the same motion that you made before with the book newly and in present time and give him the book once more and he makes the same motion back. You do the motion until you and he, but particularly he, are satisfied that a duplication has occurred. The auditing commands of this process aren't commands -- they are patter. There is comment. There is talk. And one of the lines that undoubtedly should be part of your patter should be, "Well, did you do it?" "Are you satisfied?" If he isn't, you do it again and ask him again. It is the preclear that has to be satisfied that a duplication took place, not the auditor. It is completely - different from dummy auditing. Remember, we are not dummy auditing now, we are auditing for keeps. You can talk all you want to, acknowledge what he says, but don't you dare let that looseness in conversation interfere with the tremendous precision of the motions of the process itself. In other words, the motions are the commands, and these must not be interfered with by the speech, but the speech can, and should, take place. Number seven is Hand Space Mimicry, and again it is the motion that is the command. The training stress on Hand Space Mimicry is to do good, useful hand space mimicry. The auditor sits in the same position as in the last process, and puts one or two palms up against the preclear's hands and he says, "I am going to make a motion with my hands and I want you to contribute to that motion"; and we make some simple little motion to which he contributes. We do this for a while until it is more or less flat or we can leave it for the moment. Then we bring the auditor's and preclear's hands half an inch apart, and we do the same thing, and we say the same thing. You may lead him out to four or five feet away by these tiny gradients, another inch at a time, without his ever becoming aware of the fact that you have left him, and he is definitely aware of his auditor. This is modern "Look at me, who am I?" It finds the auditor. The Scale of Reality is employed here, and this is why it is done. (Scale of Reality: At the bottom there is nothing; above that there is a communication line, the line becomes more solid, then above that terminals begin to materialize lightly and the line becomes less solid, then above that you have the terminals and you don't have any lines, and above that the terminals are there mostly by agreement; above that there is agreement, and above agreement there is consideration, individual consideration, and above that there is postulate. That is the Scale of Reality.) You will see this Scale of Reality take place, for what are these hands against these hands but communication lines to the preclear? So we play it in this fashion. We begin to break it down and we become less a line and more a terminal. Next one is Trio, a famous old process which is included here because it is too good to miss. The commands of Trio were originally "Look around the room and find something you could have." A very non-control sort of process, but that's the Trio. It has an opposite: "Look around the room and find something that your body cannot have." It is "have" for the preclear, "have not" for any other object, person, being, valence, or anything else than the preclear. You do numbers of things with the Trio. You have to know the Trio because it is a fast patch-up for almost any process there is except Op. Pro. by Duplication 1957. (The only thing that patches up Op. Pro. by Duplication 1957 is Op. Pro. by Duplication 1957. Tone 40 Opening Procedure by Duplication will run out Opening Procedure by Duplication 1957, and any Tone 40 process will run itself out. There is no dead-end street there.) Trio will run out almost anything in the entire bank if it is biting at all. If a person can have anything, or if he can get the idea of "something can't have," it will run anything out. It is slow and reliable, and an auditor must always have it. 401  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=16/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC PROCESSES FOR THOSE TRAINED IN ENGRAM RUNNING OR TRAINED IN THESE PROCESSES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 16 FEBRUARY 1959 HGC PROCESSES FOR THOSE TRAINED IN ENGRAM RUNNING OR TRAINED IN THESE PROCESSES STARTING A CASE: BEGIN EVERY SESSION AS FOLLOWS WITH THESE RUDIMENTS. USE RUDIMENTS. FIND THE AUDITOR, FIND THE PC, FIND THE AUDITING ROOM. ESTABLISH A GOAL FOR THE SESSION. ASK FOR PRESENT TIME PROBLEM. PRESENT TIME PROBLEM: If PTP exists then run it as follows and in no other way. Do not yak around about it. Just ask if there is one, see if one registers on the meter. On the PT PROBLEM THAT REGISTERS ON THE METER (not some other one) do the following. Ask for and write down all the persons connected with this problem. That problem includes the preclear. On each of these persons, one after the other, beginning with the one most real to the pc, run this: "Think of something you have done to (selected person)." "Think of something you have withheld from (selected person)." These commands are run one after the other until the selected person chosen is somewhat flat. (Pc begins to repeat things he has recalled before.) Do this to each person involved in the problem. PT PROBLEMS WERE CUT OUT OF HGC BECAUSE AUDITORS BURNED UP HALF AN INTENSIVE ON THEM. A PT PROBLEM NEVER REQUIRES MORE THAN A COUPLE OF HOURS TO FLATTEN. NO "WHEN" IS USED WITH PT PROBLEM BY SELECTED PERSONS. USE RUDIMENTS AND CHECK PT PROBLEM EACH SESSION AND HANDLE AS ABOVE. DYNAMIC STRAIGHT WIRE: Do a survey, one time on the pc, not every session, to discover any errors in their dynamics. This is done with an E-Meter. On pcs not familiar with Sci. terms use the following words: Self, sex, family, children, groups, mankind, the animal kingdom, birds, beasts, fish, vegetables, trees, growing things, matter, energy, space, time, spirits, souls, gods, God. Assess with this question only, "Tell me something that would represent (each of the above, one after the other)." When one changes the pattern of the needle action or when it is definitely balmy, write it down. When list is completed, take those items written down and run: "Think of something you have done to (selected terminal you wrote down)." "Think of something you have withheld from (selected terminal, same one)." Run these questions on each, one after the other, until pc seems flat. 402 IF NO DAFFY TERMINALS ARE FOUND ON SURVEY, SURVEY IT ALL AGAIN. IF NONE ARE FOUND THIS SECOND TIME, SKIP THIS PROCESS. DO THIS ONLY ONCE PER AUDITOR PER PC. PAST AND FUTURE EXPERIENCE: This process goes rapidly into engrams but can be continued even if engrams are contacted. Run these two questions one after the other, one time per each. "What part of your life would you be willing to re-experience?" "What part of the future would you be willing to experience?" KEEP AN ACCURATE RECORD OF ANY ENGRAMS CONTACTED. WHEN ENGRAMS PERSIST IN THE PC'S VIEW, CAREFULLY SPOT THEM IN TIME FOR HIM. ENGRAM RUNNING: Find the engram necessary to resolve the case. ONCE YOU HAVE CHOSEN IT AND HAVE BEGUN TO RUN IT, BE SURE YOU HAVE THE MOTIVATOR AND THE OVERT AND THEN DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT DEPART FROM THAT INCIDENT TO RUN ANOTHER THAT "DROPS BETTER" OR COMES UP. IN OTHER WORDS ONCE YOU HAVE FOUND AN INCIDENT STAY ON IT UNTIL IT IS FLAT. NOT-IS STRAIGHT WIRE: When you have flattened an engram thoroughly with all five commands gone over twice, run Not-Is Straight Wire between incidents. In other words, flatten an engram, then run Not-Is Straight Wire, get that a bit flat and locate and run the next incident. Selected Person Overt Withhold, and General Overt and Withhold can be run on a pc only if they are biting. This is also true of Not-Is Straight Wire. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Supplemented by HCO B 27 February 1959, How to Select Selected Persons, page 427, and HCO B 10 March 1959, Supplemental Data Sheet to HCO Bulletin of February 16, 1959 and Staff Auditors' Conference of February 16, 1959, page 439. This bulletin was discussed by Ron at the Staff Auditors' Conference of February 16, 1959, see the following page.] 403  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 10 iDate=16/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  STAFF AUDITORS' CONFERENCE OF FEBRUARY 16, 1959 REGARDING HCO BULLETIN OF FEBRUARY 16, 1959: HGC PROCESSES FOR THOSE TRAINED IN ENGRAM RUNNING OR TRAINED IN THESE PROCESSES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. STAFF AUDITORS' CONFERENCE OF FEBRUARY 16, 1959 REGARDING HCO BULLETIN OF FEBRUARY 16, 1959: HGC PROCESSES FOR THOSE TRAINED IN ENGRAM RUNNING OR TRAINED IN THESE PROCESSES Nearly everyone here has been trained in these exact processes and, if anyone here hasn't been trained in these processes, then everything on this Bulletin applies except Engram Running. The whole bulletin applies except Engram Running. There will be a staff Theta Clearing Course, and those auditors who are on staff who have not been trained by an ACC in Engram Running will have an opportunity to get that training; and not too many months will go by before they are up to this, too. So this will apply at that time. Maybe it will have shifted slightly by that time, but I don't think very much. Now what you are looking at here is the aggregate know-how that was gained and assembled on the 21st American ACC. UNDERCUTTING CASES: Now the undercuts of cases became a vital necessity. This whole ACC was devoted to the R factor plus Engram Running. It was discovered that the thing that keeps individuals from running engrams adequately was their R factor, and when their R factor was very poor they could not run an engram adequately. Now the funny part of it is that an engram can be contacted and run and, if done persistently and well without ARC breaks, can run the following Scale of Confront. Here is the Scale of Confront, just to refresh your minds: DUB-IN: Lowest scale. This scale could possibly invert, and down below that you might have a black dub-in. Once you had run blackness, you would find a dub-in case. But the scale we are mostly interested in, because that is the one we most commonly see, begins at the bottom with dub-in, runs up, turns BLACK. Runs through blackness, turns INVISIBLE. Runs from invisible to ELSEWHERE -- a desire to be elsewhere. The way they solve things is elsewhereness. Runs up from elsewhereness to ABILITY TO CONFRONT. Runs from confront to EXPERIENCE or PARTICIPATE. And only then are you up to BEINGNESS. Now this is the Confront Scale, and it is the scale of disintegrating Reality. It is how a person handles terminals or a situation. A person handles terminals and situations above all this by not having to participate, by not having to confront, finding no necessity to do anything about it unless he chooses so on his own determination; and if he did so, could do so with no personal liability. He could experience or not as the case may be. Now you'll find a lower harmonic on this in some philosophic level of somebody saying, "Yap, yap, well, I could, or I couldn't, and that's my choice," etc, well, he hasn't got any power of choice. He's just using this as the final escape mechanism -- a philosophic escape mechanism. If I said "bottom" -- the bottom mechanism -- it would be the one most commonly contacted. But you are apt to get a mechanism which is philosophic, which is simply a figure-figure mechanism about a situation, and the individual feels that if he could just figure it out he would be all right. In other words, this is a thought-thinkingness figure-figure, and he not-ises by figure-figure. Such a case, not-ising by figure-figure, 404 will turn into a dub-in case as soon as you start curing his figure-figure; would turn into a black case; would turn into an invisible case; would turn into a confront case; would turn into an experience case. Which is quite interesting. Now it is true that an engram could be found, started, and, if the auditor were good and held the individual right on the time period and had the time period well spotted, and had the overt and motivator, no matter how crazy they seemed or sounded, contacted, he could theoretically, just by running that engram, run a person through the totality of this Reality Scale. See? So there's another approach here. You get a guy who is figure-figure, find the engram necessary to resolve the case. First he figure-figures about it, and he'll run it, and run it just with the auditing commands -- the five auditing commands to run an engram -- he figure-figures about it, then after a while he dubs-in about it, then after a while it all goes black; and then after a while it eases into an invisibility -- it's just not there -- somatics are, and discomfort and other things are, but it's not there -- and its not-thereness suddenly turns into little flicks -- little flicks of confront. And boy, he goes elsewhere. It just starts to turn on and he gets it for the least little flick and he goes elsewhere. And then pretty soon he can confront the thing; then pretty soon he can participate -- he can run it in valence, squarely in valence, right in its moment of time, at which time it becomes pretty damn real. And then he goes to being able to put it there or not put it there, and its importance-unimportance factor flattens out so that it's neither important nor unimportant. And that engram is licked. Theoretically, this could happen. That is actually the way I run engrams. But you will find in auditing in the HGC that the public expects of you a different thing than is expected of you by students. And that's why I wanted to talk to you for a few minutes. They expect a different thing. They expect you to be interested in their case. And that is quite amusing -- because it's your job to get them interested in their case. But they want you to be interested in their case. All right, any case is interesting, so that's a pretty easy one. But you can get so interested in their case that you do a lot of talking to them and burn up an awful lot of auditing time. So there is some point where your interest becomes an indulgence, and on the happier side of that, where the pc is pleased you're interested in his case, and that's enough. Then you get him interested in his case. All right. Now, we have for a long time not used PT problems. I'll tell you why very bluntly. It was not unusual for an auditor to burn up twelve and a half hours on a PT problem. It was not unusual. He did this with two motives: one just yak, letting the pc go on and on, poor control, not controlling the pc's comm outflow, letting the pc get into non-essentials. And the other side of it: he was trying to run the whole case with the PT problem. Well, wonderful -- you can run a whole case with a PT problem -- but why? Since it's slow freight. That's a very slow way to go about it. So we take a PT problem now and handle the session in this fashion: We establish the rudiments every time we establish a session. Find the auditor, find the pc, find the auditing room, establish a goal for the session. Do that rapidly. We don't care what goal it is, so long as he has some kind of a goal. And then we ask for a PT problem. And we take an E-Meter (up to that time we didn't care whether the pc was handling the cans or not) but we take an E-Meter, and we have this PT problem appear on the E-Meter, or we don't run it. Got it? And we run the PT problem that appears on the E- Meter. So we get him to state this problem, and we don't care how he states the problem, because all we want to know is "Did it drop?" That tells you at once you won't run a PT problem on a stage-4 needle. Didn't drop -- see, that's all within the requirements -- it didn't drop, so skip it. It isn't going to be real to the pc anyhow. You'll have to do something else with this case. He's probably got thousands of problems; probably all of life is a problem. Probably every time he walks in a room he installs an engram. You know, the furniture's there -- that's an engram. Get the idea? So why worry about a problem? But if you got a PT problem that drops, you should remove yourself at that moment from all temptation. As soon as the problem drops, and as soon as he states that it is a problem to him and is worrying him in present time, you take the cans away from him and put the thing aside. Just lay the E-Meter aside. You're not interested in an E-Meter from there on. The reason why is because you'll increase the drop, you'll 405 increase more drop and more drop as you ask him about it. You're already running it. And the problem is going to change. You have seen this phenomenon. You're not interested in a problem changing. The fact of your laying aside the E-Meter will rather convince him that you have found it and that's it. And you only want to know this: the personnel associated with that problem. You don't want to know more about the problem. You just want to know the personnel associated with that problem. His wife, his mother, and his wife's boy friend, or something of that sort. And that's the personnel associated with the problem. You just check that off. Now, I'm going to ask you to take a notebook and a ball-point into the auditing room, because you've got two or three things to do here that require a list. I want you to get accustomed to establishing a list and then flattening it, not trying to run the case all over new again every time the case changes. That's one of the ways to waste time. You run one terminal, and of course the case changes, the problems change, everything changes on the case. If you re-assessed it at this time to find a new terminal, you'd for sure find new terminals. Well, the devil with it. Let's just flatten what we contact, and when we're contacting and scouting and using cans and the E- Meter, just write down what we find. Then put the E-Meter aside and run what we've found until we get rid of all of that. Now you're going to do something new -- give him back the E-Meter cans. Got the idea? Pcs don't much like to hold onto these E-Meter cans forever. Furthermore, they become restive, and they want to scratch their heads, and they want to do this, and they want to rassle around, and most pcs you get are slightly nervous in this direction. Why should you worry about it? Because the E-Meter is only going to give you a certain amount of the information that is quite valid. Now, you're going to write down the personnel connected with this PT problem. You're going to take SELECTED PERSON OVERT-WITHHOLD on each one of these people. And the commands for this are right here: "Think of something you have done to ( )," and "Think of something you have withheld from ( )." And you are going to run one of those commands and the next command, and then the next command -- first command again, then the second command, first command, second command. In that way, you'll never lay an egg on an unbalanced flow. No flow will unbalance on you. They'll always stay there more or less stable. The case won't suddenly turn black when it's not supposed to turn black, and so forth. You won't ever overrun a flow and the pc will never get upset. Now, let's look at this again. You have written down "wife", "his mother", and "his wife's boy friend". Which one do you run first? You have to ask this question to establish that terminal: "Which one of these things do you think is the most real to you?" The individual says, "Oh, Mother, of course." Who cares? That's what he says. All right, so that's the first one you take. Then you take the two remaining ones: "Which one is most real?" That's the one you knock out. That leaves you one more person. Knock that one out. Now, there is something that is not stated here. I just typed this up rapidly for you -- I didn't have a backing sheet, so there are typographicals because I couldn't even see what I was typing. This has a criterion, and it is an old criterion of all PT problems -- it is, they are PT problems. By definition, a PT problem must exist right now in the physical universe. By definition. So therefore, the personnel involved in a PT problem must exist right now in the physical universe. He will tell you halfway through the run, that "It was actually my mother who influenced me this way" -- ah skip it. That's not a PT personnel in that problem. His mother isn't really part of, let us say -- it was her mother that was part of the PT problem. In other words, the people have to be actually associated with the problem and existing at this time in this pc's life influencing that problem, for this to be a PT problem. So therefore, we don't dive in any direction to pick up any new personnel we don't care about. We get this problem flat. It is only flat if it answers this question: "Now, what do you have to do about that problem now?" And the pc says, "Nothing." It's flat. For 406 intellectual response which has nothing to do with any reality under the sun, moon or stars. Something he read in a book and a machine is rattling it off. So you do the assessment again. The second time you go through you're liable to trip him on something. Got the idea? So, if you get a perfect assessment, run it again. I actually don't care how many times you run it, but you're apt to be wasting time, because by two-way comm and definition alone you may not get anywhere with a very badly machined case. Nevertheless, a couple of times through, he should trip somewhere. Machine case generally does. The rule governing Dynamic Straight Wire is: That which doesn't fall out by two-way comm just on assessment. He says it, and then it looks funny to him, and he laughs, and he thinks this is for the birds, and he says, "Oh, no, that wouldn't be one -- actually, a substitute for a tree would be a leaf, or a small tree," or something like this. That's fine. Nothing wrong with letting him correct himself, because you are actually auditing him just by asking him the question. People, when they straighten out things in their own categories, very often recover very, very easily. All right. Let's take up this next one here. That's an easy way to run Dynamic Straight Wire, isn't it, huh? I would ask you to do this, however, in view of the fact that you are doing a professional job of auditing for the public mainly, and that is, I'd ask you to memorize that list -- rather than hold a bulletin in your hand and read it. Now, the next thing we're going to run into here is PAST AND FUTURE EXPERIENCE. This is a bid for two things: One, the lowest level case there is - - because experience, to him, is a dub-in, usually. Or it's a figure-figure, or it's something, so it compares to the Reality Scale. His definition of experience compares with the Reality Scale. His definition of experience is a direct index to the Reality Scale, by the way. What does experience mean? He'll say, "Experience -- that's very easy. To consider." There you've got your figure-figure level. "What does experience mean?" Well, "To write about it or make something out of it -- experience is that thing which you use to manufacture the future." He's dub. "Now, what is an experience?" "Well, experience is that which you try not to have." That's probably black or invisible. Or, "It's the thing you forget," would be blackness. "Experience is something you try to forget" -- invisibility level. "Experience is something you have to cope with." Obsessive confront. "Experience is -- ah -- well, experience -- that's pretty hard to define -- experience. I guess it's to go through something." You're getting a fairly sane response -- to go through something. To have an actual adventure, something of this sort. You're getting a fairly sane reaction to experience. So don't think that Past and Future Experience is pegging up at the highest level of the Reality Scale. It isn't. This process was found, in the 21st American, to be the undercut process. This was the lowest undercut process. And this is a killer, and it is very trying to an auditor. A very trying process, because it offers so many wonderful temptations. And that's what's wrong with this process. Now, you run these two questions, one after the other, with no assessment, no E-Meter, nothing. You just put the E-Meter down after you've done the Dynamic Straight Wire thing, because on Dynamic Straight Wire, when you said, "Children," the needle was going on a gradual shift over here, and a little theta bop now and then. You said, "Children," and it fell a dial, or all of a sudden started doing a big theta bop in the middle. When you got off of children, it settled down to the other pattern. That told you that you had something to be run on the subject of children. That he will also, at the same time, give you a daffy reading, he will tell you some daffy terminal to represent -- so you needed the E-Meter there. But you don't need the E-Meter on Past and Future Experience, not even vaguely. You can just put the E-Meter aside and turn it off, and just run these two commands. Just clear them with the pc very bluntly. Say, "We're going to run something about experience. Now, we're going to see how you get along with this little process, and here are the commands of it: What part of your life would you be willing to re- experience? And the other command is: What part of the future would you be willing to experience? Now, here's the first command: What part of your life would you be willing to re-experience?" 408 The answer actually called for is a time, isn't it? And this is a time process. But there are very few preclears that will find this out for a very long period. They won't give you anything but super-significances and ball-up, and the pc who is real bad off will give you a type of experience. You accept all these things. You say, "What part of your life would you be willing to re- experience?" He says, "Well, eating cake." That's an answer? That's an answer. And that's followed with this: "What part of the future would you be willing to experience?" He says, "Well, more cake." That's an answer. So you just accept any answer that he gives you on the line. It gradually will boil down to a time answer. And it will gradually go back-track. The longer you run it, the more track you're going to cover, the more future you're going to cover. And there will be periods when the individual is absolutely sure that he is totally predicting the future. He gets into implants, let us say, that tell him what the future is all about. He's stuck 8000 years ago, but he's telling you about the future. All kinds of odd phenomena show up. But engrams come up and slap you in the teeth, one right after the other. You run this for a while, and the individual says, "Oooh, well, you know I really wouldn't be willing -- well, I would be willing -- I don't know -- I would -- oohh, welll -- I really don't know -- dental operation there, I was a young boy -- I don't know if I'd like to re-experience that -- I guess I could re-experience sitting in the -- no, no, no. I could re-experience -- I could re-experience the next day after it." You say, "That's fine," and just mark it down with the ball-point: "Dental experience as a child." That one he can't confront. Now, you're never going to run it as an engram, but you're going to have some tag of it as an engram. See, it may show you something. As you go along and he runs into hot experiences, real, real hot experiences one right after the other, it is about time you put the E-Meter back in his paws. Get the idea? You don't have to start it with the E-Meter, but if he starts running into hot experiences, or if he gets into an engram and he can't seem to get out of the thing, the thing to do is not run the engram but give him an E-Meter and spot it in time for him. Get it spotted in time. If he's running into them hot and heavy, one right after the other, just leave him with the E-Meter. But if there is only one you have to spot in time, and then in a little while he doesn't seem to be running any more, take the cans away from him again and put the E-Meter aside. But if he starts running into one that obsessively sticks with him, don't let him flounder in the thing for an hour. Don't let him wallow in this one. Because he will just wallow in it, and this is no process -- this is not a good process to run an engram with. So you let him out, OK? And the way you let him out is to locate it in time with an E-Meter. And you go on running the process. Now, as I say, it offers enormous temptations to the auditor -- beautiful temptations to run the things contacted. As you sit this out, you actually are going to change the characteristic of the engram you will ultimately run on the case. But you keep listing engrams that he runs into. Keep listing engrams that he runs into, well knowing that he will favor motivators. For every one of those motivators there is an overt. Now an engram that he consistently and persistently keeps hitting and hitting and hitting, you are going to find in that engram probably the engram you will run, eventually. But not until he is in PT, out of the engram, it seems to have dropped out, and so forth, and he seems to be all smooth on this thing, are you going to reach for that one again. You are going to flatten the process and then go to the engram. Here we go. ENGRAM RUNNING. Of course, that is run all the way through with an E-Meter. Give him the cans and start out on this engram that you more or less found with Past and Future Experience. Now, this is going to undercut cases, and I don't care how long you run it. I don't care if you run it for two weeks, because this is a very productive process. But if you are going to run it over that period of time, it isn't noted here, but some THIRD RAIL had better be brought in here some place. And he'd better be shifted up finally until havingness. And you put in PAST AND FUTURE EXPERIENCE, right after that line, "COMBINE WITH THIRD RAIL IF RUN MORE THAN 8 HOURS". If you run it eight hours, this guy's havingness is going to start dropping on him, and you are going to run into difficulties. You could get into difficulties. All right. 409 ENGRAM RUNNING. Well, Engram Running, when the case has been prepared this way, becomes very simple. A case will start running like a little typewriter, if you have got this Past and Future Experience pretty flat. Once you have picked an engram, make sure you get its motivator not only its overt. If you have got an overt, get the motivator. If you have got the motivator, get the overt. And only when you have got that have you got an incident. Now, an engram that is having one side of the overt or motivator run will get sticky. You have got to find the other side, and you have got to get both of these things in date. Normally, this will start showing up on Past and Future Experience. Well, we are going to run this engram with an E-Meter, we are going to consider that we have an incident when we have got both a motivator and an overt that fit together. And if the thing is just awful sticky, and dubby, and shockingly poor, and a lot of other things, you just started running it too fast, that is all. We have got several things you can do at this state of the case, and so forth. Probably the best of them is go back to running Past and Future Experience. You didn't flatten it. Now, here is this Engram Running. If you notice here, it says you run all the commands that run an engram twice. Run them all twice. That's because "Find something unimportant in that incident" is going to stir up stuff that newly has to be confronted. Once you have chosen an engram and you have begun to run it, you have had it. That's it. That's the engram you are going to run. So it has to be chosen with considerable care. Listen to me now: If you re-assess the case after you have started an engram, you will get almost any other incident that is hot to drop more than the engram you started, because most of the charge is already dissipated. So if you keep re-assessing a case, thinking another engram would be better to run for the case, you are of course always going to find another engram. You will never find the one you started to run again dropping with as much velocity. You see? That's something you have to keep in mind. If you are going to run an engram, that's the engram you are going to run. It's got to have its overt or motivator; suppose you are running the overt side of it, you have got to have the motivator side of it. So you really haven't got an incident until you have got both of these things located. And once you have started to run that, you have had it. Because it will discharge its charge and won't register on a meter any more the way some other incident will. You can get a case just stirred all up and run all backwards and upside down, and that's the biggest mistake an auditor can make. I have given you the reason for the mistake -- because now almost anything will drop better than the one you partially flattened. If in doubt, run the engram you were running. If you are not getting rapid recovery, go back to the first engram you ran and considered flat and run it again. Sometimes, it will only take you fifteen minutes to run all five commands. You do it very fast. But very often something happened that it re- charged in some fashion. Very peculiar. If you leave about a third of an engram missing and unflat, the whole engram has a tendency to charge up again. It is kind of funny. But you have got to flatten the engram you contacted. Now the rule of the Last Largest Object is the only one I want you to pay any attention to in questioning the pc. Pc apparently is getting out of it. Change your auditing command. You are running, "What part of that incident can you confront?" He says, "Well, I don't know, it's pretty unreal to me, I don't know whether this happened or not." What was the last largest object? If he said anything that was offbeat and showed an unwillingness to run any more of the engram, you want to find out at once what was the last largest object that you contacted in there. And he says, "A house." You are going to shift your auditing command now to: "What part of that house can you confront?" And you are going to run that simply until he is back in the 410 incident, and then you are going to go off on to "What part of that incident can you confront?" Doesn't require any vast bridge. You just tell him you are going to shift. In that way, using that rule, you can actually pick up an engram where he was running as Abraham Lincoln, and in the engram he was shot in Ford's Theater -- you know -- and the date is obviously correct. Dropped and everything. And then he runs John Wilkes Booth -- no, he wasn't Lincoln, he was John Wilkes Booth. And so help me God, you may find that he was the Secret Service Agent who had a couple of drinks that night and wasn't watching. You don't care whether he runs it dub or not. Don't give up because he's running it wrong, because it'll come out right. There was a joke on us in the 21st American. We had our paws on Bowie. He was Jim Bowie. And of course everybody doubted this, because it is a famous historical figure. And they tried to do everything under the sun to shake him out of this engram, and they finally went back to running it, and it was the one that flattened out. The trouble was, he had dub on it, which made Bowie die the wrong kind of a death under wrong circumstances. But as he ran it, the more he ran it, the more he ran it, the more right the circumstances got. And it finally all came out in the wash. He did run the death of Jim Bowie. Historical figures, however, are usually the yo-yo point used. The guy went out of his own body at the death; there was some current historical figure; he said, "That is the identity necessary to resolve this incident. That identity could handle it. So I will just be Catherine the Great." And he goes and runs Catherine the Great. The only mistake is to let him escape out of the time period. Maybe he did yo-yo right into the palace, maybe he did go right through her skull. But the right engram will shake out, because the Reality Scale is run by running an engram. Theoretically, you could clear a person just by running one engram well enough. So never get off onto quantitative engrams. An engram is merely something for him to get used to confronting, and creating, and mocking up, and so forth. It's just a playing field you are using. The significance, the amount of change he gets in his life, none of these things have anything to do with it at all. It is just how well he can handle a mental image picture, and you have chosen a honey for him to handle. That is about all it amounts to. And when he finds out he can handle this thing from A to Izzard and beginning to end, and he can do it well, then the next engram to resolve the case will run quite rapidly. And you will run on down and finally run his basic, earliest shift of identity, which is the rock. And formerly he said, "There is a beautiful, clear sphere -- that's the rock. And that's all the rock." Oh, heck. When you get several engrams run and get the rock as one of the engrams, you find out this beautiful, clear sphere was something he customarily clamped around thetans as a trap, and they sometimes clamped it around him, and there were raiding Parties, and there was all kinds of personnel and there is drama and there is strain, and there is scenery and everything else. When you contacted the rock first and ran the rock first, he was insufficiently able to contact things. The date when he was mocking up this thing, he was so capable of mocking up that later on this poor, little, weak ole thetan, years and years and centuries and so forth afterwards going back to mock up this rock -- uh-uh -- it's too beefy. That's too much engram for him to confront first off. So you choose the engrams -- it doesn't much matter what you choose. You will find that every sexual incident you contact is a bounce from a death. A little rule for you. So don't let me catch anybody in the HGC running prenatals, birth, conception, because that is a bounce. Those are all tied in with the death, and the death is the engram which is necessary to resolve the case. So you keep running Past and Future Experience until you get them down to that -- OK? Leave the second dynamic incidents severely alone. Now it can be that he died, and he died is followed by a conception sequence, and he goes back to the old body to see if it is still decently buried -- you know -- and then he can't find the person that he thought he was going to be, get the next body from, and he gets all confused. And mess-ups of this character can occur. But keep him on the incident. Is this part of the text? When you finish a death and go through the exteriorization sequence, right at the end of it there is a conception or a 411 prenatal or a birth. They quite ordinarily bounce into it, and you don't want it. You want nothing to do with it. So you stop him when you have got all of the exteriorization run. There is a lot to know about engrams. You have been taught all this, but I am just showing you what you can do to win in the HGC with Engram Running. This would be a good, clean job then. Every time you run an engram, now is the time to use some Not-Is Straight Wire, with its ordinary commands which you know. They are: "Recall something that you implied was unimportant." "Recall something somebody else thought was important." Don't ever let a pc run it in reverse, because it discharges havingness in about five commands. That is real rough the other way, too. All right. Now there we have a rundown that will get engrams run, that will get ordinary, run-of-the-mill cases squared around, and that will get a lot done. But what about people who were not through the American 21st? And during that period of time up until they start in with a Theta Clearing Course, to run actual engrams on pcs, how about these people? Well, you have Selected Person Overts, with the "withhold" command added, and you will have a new bulletin out on these things, and so forth. We want that auditing to be relatively muzzled. It will win and everything will go along just dandy. But if you have got some case (and this is more for D.O.P.s than anything else) -- if you have got some case that was awfully hard to start, very low random profile, you'd better turn it over to a graduate of the 21st American. And if you have got some case that, after he ran along for a while and was getting up to a point where he'd just run engrams beautifully, and the whole track's opening up, everything is going along just dandy, and it is certain that the engram necessary to resolve the case is just waiting, give him an auditor that can run it. In other words, you can run an HGC this way: You can get some auditors that set pcs up to run engrams. You got the idea? And then you can have some auditors that run engrams. This is not any real violation of the Auditor's Code, because that will still give him the best processes and the best treatment for the pc that can be given. Now there is no reason why, particularly after a staff Theta Clearing Course, that everybody can't run a regimen of this sort. But running it in the HGC, with all the profiles being submitted to me and all the Case Analysis Reports -- the Case Analysis Reports now are more vital than profiles, because R changed on a case does not necessarily change the profile at all. You should know about that. You can change the R of the case without changing the profile. The person answered the same questions, only he answered them with Reality. This is quite remarkable. We need a brand new test. That test is in development right at this moment. It is a confront test, and that test will be coming up, but there is no reason to rush it, particularly. Let's just do it by Case Analysis. I will get out a Bulletin that will take care of auditors who were not trained to run engrams, what they will run. But you already have data and material on this, and it is just as before, what you have been running. Now, to start a case out with NOT-IS STRAIGHT WIRE is adventurous. That's an adventurous thing to do. That's a rough thing to do. We learned a great many things in the 21st American ACC. Learned a great many things, and that was one of them. Selected Persons Overt-Withhold is very, very superior in undercutting cases to Selected Persons Overts. The only main change we have got is that we run Selected Person Overt-Withhold commands, just as it is given here in PT problem. That is a wonderful thing to do with a case, as long as the terminal is real to the pc. And there is no real reason that running a Scientologist, who knows what the command is, why ARC Break Straight Wire cannot be run on a person by an auditor who has not been through an Engram Running Course. That's a beautiful process. 412 I want to tell you something else. Can I tell you something here? A lot of research was done in the 21st American ACC, and students didn't see me as much as they thought they should, I suppose, but I was around. And I never saw so many flips and changes and vagaries in my life as I saw in that particular unit. The reports which I got were very -- very helpful to me -- very, very helpful to Scientology at large. There was a great deal done in that course. I spent about three weeks of the course -- did very rapid research just in catching up with some of these undercuts. Because, let me assure you, the R factor in most of the cases you approach is so low that it poses a problem of running greater than we had ever imagined. Therefore, these are the processes that we are handing out. Now, these are a Not-Is type of process. Dynamic Straight Wire runs a straight identification, but the rest of these things are Not-Is types of processes. To cure somebody from not-ising. When a person can confront something, he no longer has to not-is it. But there was a funny command came up along the line, that I don't fully understand yet, but it takes care of a theta body. Now this is part of the research that was never given to the 21st American. And this is a peculiar darned thing. You can write it down on the back of this Bulletin, if you want to. It is: "Recall a time when you thought something bad was unimportant." And that is just about the wildest thing you ever saw. Now that runs all by itself but can be combined with: "Recall a time somebody else thought something bad was important." And you will run all the newspapers off the case. The second command there is really not essential, but you just run this first command repetitively, and if it seems to run down or something bad happens, flip over to the other command. But you will as-is a theta body. This is the doggondest thing you ever saw. It is a perfectly wild pitch. I was just adding up all possible combinations and working in all possible directions, and this one fell out of the hamper, and it doesn't integrate too well with the rest of our data. But this is the goofy one. Now, something else came up in the 21st American that I should tell you in the HGC, and that is: After nine years, we have found out WHY. We had nine years of HOW, and now in the ninth year we find out why. Why people are aberrated. Why they are sick. Why they act the way they do. Why individuation takes place. And that is all wrapped up with WITHHOLD. I had withhold earlier, but didn't shake it all out of the hamper, because I didn't have the overts to go with it. We find out that an individual gets sick by having the overt impulse to make somebody else sick and then withholds it, because it is less social to give people illnesses. So he gets them himself. This is Freudian transference, it is a whole number of things. So when you run these overts, run the withhold with it and the case will start finding out why. The theta body thing, and the masses and ridges, why, they run out when you ask a person to recall a time when he thought something bad was unimportant, or recall -- well, that is the best command -- recall a time when he thought something bad was unimportant. When you run this, you evidently run the center pin of the withhold. But you will get his tolerance. And this is the first straight ethical process, evidently, we have. It raises a person's ethics. It as-ises a theta body. It takes demon bodies and things like that off cases. I tested it two or three times here, just monkeying around with this thing, and it is one of the wilder ones. This is a wild pitch, that particular process. So you could say that when a field doesn't immediately disintegrate, when you can't get an individual easily in the engram, when the field stays persistently black or something like that, you have got another string to your bow, and I don't care if you 413 use it. But if you do use it, know this: It runs as an automaticity on such a demon case. He runs br-r-r-r-t -- the last two thousand years he has been not- ising and saying it was unimportant that something was bad. And he will start coming up with, "Well, I should do something -- no, I shouldn't do something -- well, what is this? I should do something about it. I shouldn't do something about it. I have been very neglectful, but that really isn't bad. Not really. Somebody dying from the bullet wound I gave 'em -- that really isn't bad. But - - " And he is stuck right with the consideration on all of his overts -- consequences of overts. They all must be unimportant. And it reduces his ethical level. But I have now seen two demon bodies disintegrate just with that one command -- just disintegrate -- and this is the first time we ever had something that would disintegrate the astral body. So we find out at once that the astral body was an aberration. It isn't a necessary thing to make a thetan stick in the head at all. All right. Now I wanted to give you this rundown, because today you were having a little bit of a rough rime doing a transition from student to pro auditor, and I wanted to talk to you, even though it burned up some of your valuable time and mine. And ask you to sic semper transit, huh? Now are there any questions? Yes, Jean. Q. I have two questions. In running of the engram, do you ignore what they were running in the ACC, or do you just go back and run them? My preclear has had several engrams started. A. Now, if we look over this carefully, we see in running an incident: Find the engram necessary to resolve the case. Once you have chosen it and have begun to run it, be sure you have the motivator and the overt and then do not, do not, do not, do not, depart from that incident to run another that "drops better" or comes up. Now look here. The engrams that were run on them in the course are no longer going to fall. And an engram is not going to show on an E- Meter. And if there were several engrams run on somebody in the course, and the first one wasn't flattened, then whoever audited them ought to be hit in the head with a sledge-hammer. There's only one or two cases that got by with this, that I have checked up on so far, and it is about the most serious blunder that could be made. Now, what you do in a case that's had an engram already started is get a lie reaction check -- that's all you want -- of some sort or another, concerning this particular thing. You can put him on the E- Meter and ask him if it was run, and so forth, and ask him which one was the first one run. You could possibly get an occlusion, but usually the pc will tell you. There's no particular reason to doubt the pc. Get the first one, and get that one flat, and then you have no choice but to pick up the next one and flatten that one. This applies without regard to how many auditors were on the case. This also, you will find out, will sometimes apply to somebody who had an engram audited in 1950. The only trouble with a 1950 engram is that it is probably an operation in the current lifetime, or a prenatal in the current lifetime, and it was the wrong engram necessary to resolve the case, and you won't get very far running the thing. And we have no data at this time, whether it's best to pick that one up and run it or not. But I would say for sure that an engram that should have been run to resolve the case, such as a past death, if that was ever entered in all of those years, including 1950 -- it may no longer drop on the E-Meter, because some of its charge is gone. That is the engram necessary to resolve the case. Yes, got another one? Q. Yes. The Dynamic Straight Wire -- do you keep running this until you have picked up all the daffy terminals, then go through it several times and get the daffy ones each time? A. If you get a daffy one, if you get several daffy ones, you take those you got on the first run and run them. Don't bother to go through again, because it will have straightened out. Enough will have straightened out to admit progress of the case. But if you don't get any daffy ones through once, then run it again. Any other questions? Dale. 414 Dale: I just had a comment on that. One 1950 engram, in which the auditor blew session because it was whole track, was the engram necessary to resolve the case and finally showed up. The guy had been black since 1950. A. Good. Picked it up and flattened it. Well, that's a good job. That tells you that a black case, then, doesn't necessarily require five or six weeks of preparation before you run an engram. You pick up an engram as early as you can on a case and charge through. But it doesn't get you around starting a case. You have always got to start a case or start a session. Yes? Q. On this re-experience process, do I run it until I get 3-D pictures, and track? A. Yes. Oh, 3-D pictures and back in PT. Back in PT. I'll give you an example of one of these. Here's the pc. He is sitting in a terror charge, in a total black freeze, it 1500 AD. One second later, everything went to hell. One second before, everything had gone to hell. And he's sitting in this split second, at a rest point. Got it? Well, now, what do you think happens when you start asking him about future and past, alternately? He'll move right off that rest point, won't he? So this is an explosive, doggoned process. Now, I say you run it until he gets to PT. Some time or other you might find it impossible to get him to PT on the process. You just might. But the experience that has been had with it so far is that it does eventually move him to PT. Now is the time to take him back, at the auditor's discretion, and have him run that incident in which he was stuck. By the way, "What part of PT are you willing to experience?" has on several cases exposed the engram necessary to resolve the case. It is the engram he's sitting in, and it is the one necessary to resolve the case. Yes? Q. If you leave a process very unflat one afternoon, and come back in the morning and start questioning the guy, and you pick up first of all present time problems. Now supposing that process is the basic of his present time problem of the morning. Are he and you the terminals, the preclear and auditor the two terminals? A. Yes. Q. Do you run it that way? A. Oh, well, if he got a lot of ARC breaks, it would be a good thing to run it this way. That would clean up all the ARC breaks, wouldn't it? Now I am going to give you that again on ARC breaks. This is the hottest one to run ARC breaks on. Just pick up the auditor and pick up the pc, as the two people involved in the present time problem. I am glad you brought that up, Joe. This idea of throwing him back into session after you have ended a session the day before is another point of judgment. Just how do you smoothly get him into it? Usually he has piled up something on top of the engram. There is a process here, which is not really a very good process, but which kicks them out, and it was not given in this ACC. That is Problems of Comparable Magnitude to that Engram, or that Incident. It will actually de-intensify an engram. You should have that as a little panacea. That is an interesting one to wind up an intensive on. About noon of the last day you all of a sudden realize, "Boy, this man isn't going to make it." And you could run a problem of comparable magnitude to that engram and get it keyed out. However, you are better than that, and you will have had it flat by the last day of the last intensive he has, that's for sure. Any other questions? Don? Q. Is "recall something" preferred over "recall a time"? I have heard "Recall a time you did something to somebody," and also "Recall something you did to somebody," which is slightly different. A. "Recall a time" is always a superior process, unless the individual is consistently not recalling a time, at which time he is not obeying the auditing command. So you should say, "Recall something you have done to" to somebody who can't spot something on a time track. 415 Q. What's the difference there? A. You are running really two processes with "Recall a time you did something," and you are running only one process, "Recall something you have done." Q. Can he continue to do that without recalling a time? A. Yeah. Definitely. Anything else? "Recall a time," all by itself -- you just sit down and say to a pc, "Recall a time. Thank you. Recall a time. Thank you." Some interesting things would happen to a case. Time, you see, is the single aberration. Joe? Q. In running an engram, when you are tagging the engram for the first time, is it possible to peg, say, a 20-ton motivator and a one-pound overt, and that's the incident? A. Yes. Because until they get some of the overt flat, the motivator will come off. The right one to run there, by the way, is the overt. You get that overt damn real, and all of a sudden you'll find the 20-tons have departed down to about 10-tons on the motivator. Now they'll run on comparable lines. Yes. Q. Couldn't you have, say, a 20-ton motivator, as he was saying, and twenty one-ton overts tied to the same motivator, rather than one large overt? A. You could. You could. Nevertheless, you'll find somebody getting all loused up on this, and best remedy is just to play what overt you find against what motivator you find as the incident. And just keep playing them one against the other, back and forth, back and forth, and eventually the thing will come out right. There are many remedies, and one is Selected Persons Overt-Withhold Straight Wire on the personnel of the incident. You could take any incident as a PT and run any PT process on the incident. That's a little rule. I don't advise you doing it, however, but you can do it. It's very interesting: "Find something unimportant about that executioner," is just about the same as, "Find something unimportant about this room." If you want to get a reality soaring on a pc, just run "Find something unimportant about this room." And he'll start this not-is machinery going, you know, and he'll run it out to some degree, and all of a sudden the room will brighten up. Very interesting. "Think of something you did to an executioner" would be it, rather than, "Think of something you did to that executioner." And he will come up with the overt, and he will find out he was the executioner in the same castle for about three lifetimes before he suddenly came back there and got executed. That usually is the way these things compare. Any other questions? There is a burning question that you should ask, is: "Are we supposed to run these things muzzled?" Now, let me just say this, to do this for me: Let's cut down the unnecessary yak. And if the pc seems to be ARC breaking at all, you voluntarily muzzle your auditing. You got it? Because what he's got is an engram of being talked to or being interrogated in some fashion, and everything that he doesn't consider exactly necessary to the auditing session he resents. So if you find a pc is ARC breaking, you muzzle your session. Any other questions before we break this up? Thank you very much for your time, I appreciate very much your coming in. I know you had a hard day getting on to a new routine, and you have got auxiliary duties. Several people in the HGC have been split off of administration, and there are other things going on. Latch on to 'em, get wheeling, but let's start making theta clears in this HGC and just make nothing else but theta clears. I have given you a pattern here that was thoroughly tested out in the 21st American ACC, and you can make theta clears - - there's no great difficulty to it. Thank you very much. LRH:ng.rd.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Supplemented by HCO B 10 March 1959, Supplemental Data Sheet...., page 439.] 416  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=19/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AUDITOR'S CODE #19    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 19 FEBRUARY 1959 AUDITOR'S CODE #19 Do not explain, justify or make excuses for any auditor mistakes whether real or imagined. LRH:-.rd L. RON HUBBARD [Some copies of the above HCO B were issued incorrectly dated 9 February 1959.]  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TECHNICAL BULLETIN SELECTED PERSONS OVERT WITHHOLD STRAIGHTWIRE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 24 FEBRUARY 1959 TECHNICAL BULLETIN SELECTED PERSONS OVERT WITHHOLD STRAIGHTWIRE It is not only unreasonable but impossible to run engrams or higher processes than Selected Persons Overt Withhold on people who have low reality and low responsibility. Selected Persons Overt Withhold raises both reality and responsibility and some of the cases around will only start to respond after four to five weeks of Selected Persons Overt Withhold Straightwire. But the main point is that they do -- repeat, do respond. We have got it made in Selected Persons Overt Withhold Straightwire. Let's not lose it. Selected Persons Overt Withhold Straightwire Select a person (terminal) that is real to the preclear. Run "Recall something you have done to _________" (that terminal) and "Recall something you have withheld from (that terminal)" alternately. (one question after the other) Wherever the person has a misidentification or a fixated terminal on any dynamic, that terminal should be selected out and flattened by Selected Persons Overt Withhold Straightwire. We will be rid of these unresponsible cases. Do not graduate into General Overts until Selected Person Overt Withhold Straightwire is flat. When is Selected Persons Overt Withhold Straightwire flat? It is flat when the preclear has come up tone through shame, blame, regret, and a recognition of his own failures and preferably 4.0 on the tone scale as per "Science of Survival". Minimize the two-way communication, clean up present time problems with the same process, using the terminals involved in the present time problem, and if in doubt MUZZLE the auditor. LRH:mc.msp.rd L. RON HUBBARD 417  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  IDENTIFICATION    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 26 FEBRUARY 1959 IDENTIFICATION I received the following dispatch from Jack Parkhouse, in South Africa: "On going around the Union with the Film shows so far provided a point of correlation between attendance figures and groups has been noticed which may be of interest to you. 1. Pretoria -- had biggest group in Union before establishment of HASI -- run on the 'everybody's equal basis'. Film show result: Worst attendance so far. 2. Cape Town -- second largest 'everybody's equal' group. Second worst attendance. 3. Port Elizabeth -- third largest group -- mainly run on an equality basis. Third worst attendance. 4. East London -- large group established by HASI trained auditor on CCH. Good on control -- gets people to help but definitely not on equality basis. Attendance best yet -- over #200 receipts including book sales." What price identification? Best, L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 418  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ENGRAM RUNNING ON OLD DIANETIC CASES OR RESTARTED CASES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 26 FEBRUARY 1959 ENGRAM RUNNING ON OLD DIANETIC CASES OR RESTARTED CASES It has been found that the abandonment of an unflattened engram to start another one can leave the case in an apparent jam. Starting a new engram without flattening the first one contacted may be, to the preclear, the same as a command not to confront the first engram. Stable data: The incident entered by the auditor must be wholly flattened by Scientology commands before a second incident is approached. The end goal of running incidents is the increasing of the ability to confront. When incidents are started and not finished in favor of a new incident, the preclear may feel he is being forbidden to confront the first one. An incident consists of an overt engram and a motivator engram on the same subject. It is evidently necessary to scout the earlier auditing of any incident that was abandoned in order to get the incident run. Otherwise, a black detachment may result. The blackness and the detachment may exist in the earlier auditing of the same incident rather than in the incident. The intention of a bad auditor is to prevent confronting. Therefore, bad auditing must be cleared away before a contacted engram can be completely entered again. The process that most swiftly strips off bad auditing (to clean up engrams or otherwise) is: "Recall something you have done to (auditor's name)." "Recall something you have withheld from (auditor's name)." These questions are run alternately (one after the other) and are best run muzzled. (TR 0, 1, 2 and 3 only -- auditor only nods when preclear originates.) This mechanism is probably behind most black or invisible cases now extant in Scientology. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd 419  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=90 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  How to Study Scientology    Ability Issue 90 M [1959, ca. late February] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. How to Study Scientology L. Ron Hubbard The first thing that a student has to find out for himself and then recognize, is that he is dealing with precision tools here in the courses. It isn't up to someone else to force this piece of information on him. The whole subject of Scientology as far as the student is concerned is as good or bad in direct ratio to his knowledge of it. It is up to a student to find out how precise these tools are. He should, before he starts to discuss, criticize or attempt to improve on the data presented to him, find out for himself whether or not the mechanics of Scientology are as stated, and whether or not it does what has been proposed for it. He should make up his mind about each thing that is taught in the school. The procedure, techniques, mechanics and theory. He should ask himself these questions: Does this piece of data exist? Is it true? Does it work? Will it produce the best possible results in the shortest time? There are two ways to answer these questions to his own satisfaction: Find them in a preclear or find them in himself. These are fundamentals, and every auditor should undertake to discover them himself, thus raising Scientology above an authoritarian category. It is not sufficient that an instructor stand before him and declare the existence of these. Each and every student must determine for himself whether or not the instructor's statements are true. As an example of a science in an Authoritarian Category, in the field of medicine some instructors declare that multiple sclerosis is the decay of nervous fibers, and that it is incurable, and that people who contract the "disease" die in a relatively short period of time. It must be answered in just this way on the examination paper or the student will find himself with less than a passing grade. This is not instruction -- this is obstruction. In the first place, no one in a medical school knows anything about multiple sclerosis. A good instructor would expect his students to question such a statement and to find for themselves what can be done about multiple sclerosis. There are two ways Man ordinarily accepts things, neither of them very good. One is to accept a statement because Authority says it is true and must be accepted, and the other is by preponderance of agreement amongst other people. Preponderance of agreement is all too often the general public test for sanity or insanity. Suppose someone were to walk into a crowded room and suddenly point to a ceiling saying, "Oh, look! There's a huge, twelve-foot spider on the ceiling!" Everyone 420 would look up, but no one else would see the spider. Finally someone would tell him so. "Oh, yes, there is," he would declare, and become very angry when he found that no one would agree with him. If he continued to declare his belief in the existence of the spider he would very soon find himself institutionalized. The basic definition of sanity in this somewhat nebulously learned society is whether Or not a person agrees with everyone else. It is a very sloppy manner of accepting evidence, but all too often it is the primary measuring stick. And then the Rule of Authority: "Does Dr. J. Doe agree with your proposition? No? Then, of course, it cannot be true. Dr. Doe is an eminent authority in the field." A man by the name of Galen at one time dominated the field of medicine. Another man by the name of Harvey upset Galen's cozy position with a new theory of blood circulation. Galen had been agreeing with the people of his day concerning the "tides" of the blood. They knew nothing about heart action. They accepted everything they had been taught and did little observing of their own. Harvey worked at the Royal Medical Academy, and found by animal vivisection the actual function of the heart. He had the good sense to keep his findings absolutely quiet for a while. Leonardo da Vinci had somehow discovered or postulated the same thing, but he was a "crazy artist" and no one would believe an artist. Harvey was a member of the audience of a play by Shakespeare in which the playwright made the same observation, but again the feeling that artists never contribute anything to society blocked anyone but Harvey from considering the statement as anything more than fiction. Finally, Harvey made his announcement. Immediately dead cats, rotten fruit and pieces of wine jugs were hurled in his direction. He raised quite a commotion in medical and social circles until finally, in desperation, one doctor made the historical statement that, "I would rather err with Galen than be right with Harvey!" Man would have made an advance of exactly zero if this had always been the only method of testing evidence. But every so often during Man's progress there have been rebels who were not satisfied with preponderance of opinion, and who tested a fact for themselves, observing and accepting the data of their observation, and then testing again. Possibly the first man who made a flint axe looked over a piece of flint and decided that the irregular stone could be chipped a certain way. When he found that flint would chip easily he must have rushed to his tribe and enthusiastically tried to teach his fellow tribesmen how to make axes in the shape they desired instead of spending months searching for accidental pieces of stone of just the right shape. The chances are he was stoned out of camp. Indulging in a further flight of fancy, it is not difficult to imagine that he finally managed to convince another fellow that his technique worked, and that the two of them tied down a third with a piece of vine and forced him to watch the axe from a rough stone. Finally, after convincing fifteen or twenty tribesmen by forceful demonstration, the followers of the new technique declared war on the rest of the tribe and, winning, forced the tribe to agree by decree. EVALUATION OF DATA Man has never known very much about that with which his mind is chiefly filled: Data. What is data? What is the evaluation of data? For instance, if you have been in Scientology very long the chances are that someone has glibly told you that he knew from psychoanalysis that if one could remember childhood experiences one could be 421 relieved of certain psychosomatic pains. His conclusion from this tiny scrap of information was that Scientology is not new. In 1884 when Breuer first presented this tiny fact to Freud, he was unable to convince the eminent Doctor, but he managed to convince Freud in the next ten years. Then Freud convinced his friends. Medicine then fought Freud to a standstill, but eventually psychoanalysis emerged from the imbroglio. All these years in which psychoanalysis has taught its tenets to each generation of doctors the authoritarian method was used, as can be verified by reading a few of the books on the subject. Within them is found, interminably, "Freud said...." The truly important thing is not that "Freud said" a thing, but "Is the data valuable? If it is valuable, how valuable is it?" You might say that a datum is as valuable as it has been evaluated. A datum can be proved in ratio to whether it can be evaluated by other data and its magnitude is established by how many other data it clarifies. Thus, the biggest datum possible would be one which would clarify and identify all knowledge known to Man in the material universe. Unfortunately, however, there is no such thing as a Prime Datum. There must be not one datum, but two data, since a datum is of no use unless it can be evaluated. Furthermore, there must be a datum of similar magnitude with which to evaluate any given datum. Data is your data only so long as you have evaluated it. It is your data by authority or it is your data. If it is your data by authority, somebody has forced it upon you, and at best it is little more than a light aberration. Of course, if you asked a question of a man whom you thought knew his business and he gave you his answer, that datum was not forced upon you. But if you went away from him believing from then on that such a datum existed without taking the trouble to investigate the answer for yourself -- without comparing it to the known universe -- you were falling short of completing the cycle of learning. Mechanically, the major thing wrong with the mind is, of course, the turbulence in it, but the overburden of information in this society is enforced education that the individual has never been permitted to test. Literally, when you are told not to take anyone's word as an absolute datum you are being asked to break a habit pattern forced upon you when you were a child. Your instructor in Scientology could have told you what he found to be true and invited you to test it for yourself, but unless you have tested it you very likely do not have the fundamentals of Scientology in mind well enough to be comfortable in the use of any or all of the techniques available to you. This is why theory is so heavily stressed in Scientology. The instructor can tell you what he has found to be true and what others have found to be true, but at no time should he ask you to accept it -- please allow a plea otherwise. Test it for yourself and convince yourself whether or not it exists as truth. And if you find that it does exist, you will be comfortable thereafter; otherwise, unrecognized even by yourself you are likely to find, down at the bottom of your information and education an unresolved question which will itself undermine your ability to assimilate or practice anything in the line of a technique. Your mind will not be as facile on the subject as it should be. It is not through courtesy that you are being asked to check your data -- you are being asked to become much better auditors by resolving your basic and fundamental concepts. Any quarrel you may have with theory is something that only you can resolve. Is the theory correct, or isn't it correct? Only you can answer that; it cannot be answered for you. You can be told what other auditors have achieved in the way of results, and 422 what other auditors have observed, but you cannot become truly educated until you have achieved the results for yourself. The moment a man opens his mouth and asks, "Where is validation?" you can be sure you are looking at a very stupid man. That man is saying, bluntly and abruptly, "I cannot think for myself. I have to have Authority." Where could he possibly look for validation except into the physical universe, and into his own subjective and objective reality? A LOOK AT THE SCIENCES Unfortunately, Scientology is surrounded by a world that calls itself a world of science, but it is a world that is in actuality a world of Authority. True, that which is science today is far, far in advance of the Hindu concept of the world wherein a hemisphere rested on the backs of seven elephants which stood on seven pillars, that stood on the back of a mud turtle, below which was mud into infinity. The reason engineering and physics have reached out so far in advance of other sciences is the fact that they pose problems which punish Man so violently if he doesn't look carefully into the physical universe. An engineer is faced with the problem of drilling a tunnel through a mountain for a railroad. Tracks are laid up to the mountain on either side. If he judges space wrongly the two tunnel entrances would fail to meet on the same level in the center. It would be so evident to one and all concerned that the engineer made a mistake that he takes great care not to make such a mistake. He observes the physical universe, not only to the extent that the tunnel must meet to a fraction of an inch, but to the extent that if he were to misjudge wrongly the character of the rock through which he drills, the tunnel would cave in -- an incident which would be considered a very unlucky and unfortunate occurrence to railroading. Biology comes closer to being a science than some others because, in the field of biology, if someone makes too big a mistake about a bug the immediate result can be dramatic and terrifying. Suppose a biologist is charged with the responsibility of injecting plankton into a water reservoir. Plankton are microscopic "germs" that are very useful to Man. But if through some mistake the biologist injects typhoid germs into the water supply, there would be an immediate and dramatic result. Suppose a biologist is presented with the task of producing a culture of yeast which would, when placed in white bread dough, stain the bread brown. This man is up against the necessity of creating a yeast which not only behaves as yeast but makes a dye as well. He has to deal with the practical aspect of the problem, because after he announces his success, there is the "yeast test": Is the bread edible? And the brown-bread test: Is the bread brown? Anyone could easily make the test, and everyone would know very quickly whether or not the biologist had succeeded or failed. Politics is called a science. The punishment for a mistake in the "science" of politics is so tremendous that this whole culture is on the verge of being wiped out! There are natural laws about politics. They could be worked out if someone were to actually apply a scientific basis to political research. For instance, it is a foregone conclusion that if all communications lines are cut between the United States and Russia, Russia and the United States are going to understand each other less and less. Then by demonstrating to everyone how the American way of life and the Russian way of life are different, and by demonstrating it day after day, year after year, there is no alternative but a break of affinity. By stating flatly that Russia and the United States are not in agreement on any slightest political theory or conduct of Man or nations the job is practically complete. Both nations will go into anger tone and suddenly there is war. 423 Russia is very, very low on the tone scale. She is a totalitarian slave state and about as safe to have in the family of nations as a mad dog at a cocktail party. We as a nation could be very, very clever -- we could try to put Russia back together again. We are a nation possessed of the greatest communications networks on the face of the Earth, with an undreamed of manufacturing potential. We have within our borders the best advertising men in the world. But instead of selling Europe an idea we give machine guns, planes and tanks for use in case Russia breaks out. The more threats imposed against a country in Russia's tone level, the more dangerous that country will become. When people are asked what they would do about this grave question, they shrug and say something to the effect that "the politicians know best." They hedge and rationalize by saying that after all, there is the American way of life, and it must be protected. What is the America way of life? This is a question that will stop almost any American. What is the America way of life that is different from the human way of life? We have tried to gather together economic freedom for the individual, freedom of the press, and individual freedom, and define them as a strictly American way of life -- why hasn't it been called the Human Way of Life? In the field of humanities Science has been thoroughly adrift. Unquestioned authoritarian principles have been followed. Any person who accepts knowledge without questioning it and evaluating it for himself is demonstrating himself to be in apathy toward that sphere of knowledge. It demonstrates that the people in the United States today must be in a low state of apathy with regard to politics in order to accept without question everything that happens. FUNDAMENTALS When a man tries to erect the plans of a lifetime or a profession on data which he himself has never evaluated, he cannot possibly succeed. Fundamentals are very, very important, but first of all one must learn how to think in order to be absolutely sure of a fundamental. Thinking is not particularly hard to learn. It consists merely of comparing a particular datum with the physical universe as it is known and Observed. How, for instance, would you find out for your own satisfaction that there exists such a thing as a mock-up. Find a preclear who is also interested in verifying such existence of mock-ups or have someone run you on them. Your instructor has done this a sufficient number of times, and has seen it done to Others a sufficient number of times to satisfy himself that mock- ups exist and can be run and bettered on a preclear. But just because they exist for him and he informs you of his knowledge does not mean that it exists for you. Unless you have made up your mind through comparison of the information with the known universe, you will not be able to handle mock-ups properly. When there is an authoritarian basis for your education you are not truly educated. Authoritarianism is little more than a form of hypnotism. Learning is forced under threat of some form of punishment. A student is stuffed with data which has not been individually evaluated just as a taxidermist would stuff a snake. Such a student will be well-informed and well-educated according to present-day standards, but unfortunately he will not be very successful in his chosen profession. Indecision underlies an authoritarian statement. Do not allow your Scientology education to lie on the quicksand of indecision. Unless you have looked into the matter of engrams and unless you have actually run a preclear into an engram -- the realization that (1) there is a time track, and (2) 424 that physical pain can be stored and can be recovered, and (3) that all the perceptics are registered during these moments of unconsciousness, will not be yours. Your knowledge concerning the engram depends exclusively upon what you have observed about that engram. There have been volumes of articles written about techniques of running engrams. There are many techniques in existence which run them. Make up your mind whether or not they work for you. First of all, find out to your own satisfaction whether or not there is an engram in existence. Then determine whether or not the technique in question will discover the engram for you, and whether or not the technique really runs the engram. Having made certain that there is an engram, ask yourself what kind of technique you would evolve if you decided to do something about this object, the engram. How would you go about it? Unless you have asked yourself this question and tried to come to a definite conclusion about it, you will never come into agreement on the technique of running engrams! You will be performing an authoritarian rote. You can learn how to run an engram by rote, but unless you decide from your own observation that there is an engram to be run you will be simply performing some ritual in which a mistake is very easy to make. An auditor who does not understand memory has no business attempting to improve a preclear's memory. He could hardly know what the anatomy of memory is. It cannot be done well by rote. About the worst thing that could happen to a preclear is to drop into something and then feel that the auditor is thinking, "Now, let's see -- it was page 62... or was it 63?... and the question was..." while the preclear sits there, suffering, and thinking, "Do something! Say something!" An auditor who is auditing by rote will make mistakes like that because he does not have the basic fundamentals as a part of his background of training. A truly good auditor doesn't have to think twice. He knows "instinctively" how the auditing session itself should be run. When the basic fundamentals are securely the auditor's own there is no need for him to be told what must be done. You are asked to examine the subject of Scientology on a critical basis -- a very critical basis. It is not to be examined with the attitude that when you were in school you learned that such and such was true, and since you learned that first, the first learning takes precedence. A prime example of this is the literary critic who says, after reviewing a book, that the book is not a novel because it is not a cross section of life. His professor in literature gave him a passing grade because he answered the question "correctly" on his examination paper, and therefore a book is not a novel unless it is a cross section of life. There is yet to appear a good definition for aesthetics and art, and yet they parrot a definition for a specific form of art! Do not make the mistake of criticizing something on the basis of whether or not it concurs with the opinions of someone else. The point which is pertinent is whether or not it concurs with your opinion. Does it agree with what you think? Nearly everyone has done some manner of observing of the material universe, and there is surely no one in Scientology who has not done some small amount of observation of organizms. No one has seen all there is to see about an organizm, but there is certainly no dearth of organizms available for further study. There is no valid reason for accepting the opinion of Professor Blotz of the Blitz University who said in 1933 that schizophrenics were schizophrenics, and that made them schizophrenics for all the time. 425 If you are interested in the manifestation of insanity, there is any and every form of insanity that you could hope to see in a lifetime in almost any part of the world. Study the peculiarities of the people around you and wonder what they would be like if their little peculiarities were magnified a hundredfold. You may find that by listing all the observable peculiarities you would have a complete list of all the insanities in the world. This list might well be far more accurate than that which was advanced by Kraepelin and used in the United States today. If sanity is rationality and insanity is irrationality, and you postulated how irrational people would be if certain of their obsessions were magnified a hundredfold, you might well have in your possession a far more accurate and complete list of insanities and their manifestations than is currently in existence. If you will take the time and effort, then, of making a complete examination of your subject, introspectively and by observation, you will find that you have suddenly become an excellent auditor. The hard way is to sit down and memorize a third of a million words contained in Science of Survival -- the method all too many educational systems employ in this age. So then we ask you to look at Scientology, study it, question it, and use it as we present and you will have discovered something for yourself. And in so doing you might well discover a lot more. What you will be doing in Scientology, the techniques and the theories are highly workable, but they are not highly workable just because we say so! Since Scientology is a very precise science based on proven data, axioms, and precise procedures, it must be used exactly as stated in order to gain the results which have been obtained. By using it with understanding the student can observe for himself its workability. When you have applied it as it should be, and applied as it is taught at the school, and still find it unworkable, it is your privilege to question it and, if you like, reject it. But it is a very funny thing, in the history of Scientology the only people who have shouted out against Scientology are those people who know little or nothing about it or they have been given some erroneous data about it and had used a very bad perversion of Scientology and said, "This is the way it is." So, the only advice we can give to the student is study Scientology for itself and use it exactly as stated, then form his own opinions. Study it with the purpose in mind of arriving at his own conclusions as to whether or not the tenets he has assimilated are correct and workable. Compare what you have learned with the known universe. Seek for the reasons behind a manifestation, and postulate the manner and in which direction the manifestation will likely proceed. Do not allow the Authority of any one person or school of thought to create a foregone conclusion within your sphere of knowledge. Only with these principles of education in mind can you become a truly educated individual and a good Scientologist. L. RON HUBBARD [The above article was reissued under the same title in Ability 139, ca. June 1962. Parts of the above text were originally issued as Dianetic Auditor's Bulletin, Vol. 2, No. 1, July 1951, Education and the Auditor -- see Volume I, page 124.] 426  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO SELECT SELECTED PERSONS (Supplementing HCO Bulletin of February 16, 1959)   For All Staff All U.S. Official Offices London for reissue  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 27 FEBRUARY 1959 For All Staff All U.S. Official Offices London for reissue HOW TO SELECT SELECTED PERSONS (Supplementing HCO Bulletin of February 16, 1959) In Selected Persons Overt Straightwire, there is an element of diagnosis. How does one select the "selected person"? Every time this process misses on a preclear, one of three things is at fault, either 1. Pc has pt problem 2. Dynamic Straight Wire should have been run a week or two 3. The wrong person was selected for the process. The whole thing is a matter of attention units (1950). If the preclear has his attention totally fixed on a terminal, little else is real to him. Look at one object only in a room. How real are the other objects? If a preclear's attention is all bound up in some person, how can he find reality elsewhere. Very well -- how do we find, then, the "selected person"? The most loaded two-way comm question is, "Who in your life is to blame for the condition you're in?" Others of like ilk produce the "selected person" you then run on Selected Persons Overt Straight Wire. "Who was the person who really had it in for you?" "Who do you know or did you know that you'd really hate to be?" If the pc to any of the above or all of them says, "myself", that's what you have to run. Select a new person each time pc splits off the one you're running. You'll find some amazing valence shifts. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mg.rd 427  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ANALYSIS OF CASES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1959 ANALYSIS OF CASES A primary skill required of an accomplished auditor would be analysis of a case. The basic error is overestimating the case's ability. All failures stem from a failure to undercut the reality of a case. If that reality level is reached, the case will improve. If not, the case remains stagnant. RESULTS DEFINED: Case achieves a reality on change of case, somatic, behavior or appearance, for the better. BETTER DEFINED: Negative gain. Things disappear that have been annoying or unwanted. ABILITY GAIN DEFINED: Pc's recognition that pc can now do things he could not do before. INTELLIGENCE GAIN DEFINED: Loss of restimulation of stupidity by reason of attempts to confront or experience the problems of life. (Intelligence appears when stupidity is keyed out or erased.) Intelligence is a confronting ability. FAMILIARITY: or familiarization permits intelligence to manifest. Reaching and withdrawing are more possible when stupidity is keyed out or erased. Increasing ability to reach and withdraw increases intelligence. It can be seen that when attention is fixed, the ability to reach and withdraw decreases, therefore intelligence decreases, therefore the ability to change decreases, therefore no "case gain". Unfixing attention is done in various ways. As hypnotism is done by fixing attention, a parallel observation is that a person wakes up, receives less fixed effect, when attention becomes unfixed. Unfixing attention must be done by increasing ability to reach and withdraw from the specific thing or person on which attention is fixed in the bank. The bank merely expresses a recording of past attention fixations. Shocks of various kinds can unfix attention but always lead to a decrease in ability over a period. Unfixing attention by violence throws a case downscale. As the case goes upscale the attention refixes on things violence unfixed it from. Clearing is a gradient process of finding places where attention is fixed and restoring the ability of the pc to place and remove attention under his own determinism. Case Analysis consists then of the determination of where pc's attention (at current state of case) is fixed on the track and restoring pc's determinism over those places. This is done by: 1. PT Problem running. 2. Dynamic survey and remedy of fixed points. 428 3. Selected items and persons survey and unfixing other- determined attention at those points. The auditor's skill in locating where attention is now fixed is even greater now than the auditor's ability to remedy the fixation of the pc's attention since this latter problem is fairly well in hand. There are many ways of doing a survey to determine what the pc's attention is fixed upon now. The E-Meter and interrogation of the pc are the main methods. "What has your attention been fixed on lately (or 'in this Life')?" would elicit a reply that could then be used in the questions "Recall a time when you did something to (item or person so located)." "Recall a time when you withheld something from (item or person so selected)." If you find the exact item or person on which attention is fixed, you achieve immediate case gain, which is to say reality, which is to say interest, in-sessionness, success. If any pc you are running has not manifested -- case gain, reality, interest, in-sessionness, then one of two things is true: 1. You haven't found the item or person on which pc's attention is other-determinedly fixed and haven't run it yet, or 2. Pc is gone-man-gone. I trust this may be of some small assistance in learning how to analyze a case. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 429  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TECHNICAL ARC BREAKS WITH AUDITORS   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1959 BPI TECHNICAL ARC BREAKS WITH AUDITORS When severe, ARC Breaks are repaired by running Selected Persons Overt-Withhold on the auditor as a selected person. Otherwise, TR 5N. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iwh.rd  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/2/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TECHNICAL CLEARING COMMANDS Excerpt from HCO Bulletin of July 28, 1958   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 28 FEBRUARY 1959 BPI TECHNICAL CLEARING COMMANDS Excerpt from HCO Bulletin of July 28, 1958 CLEARING COMMANDS: Clear each word with the full phrase once each with the following: "What is the usual definition of the English (or other language) word ________?" Do not ask for definitions over and over as a repetitive command. If pc's definition is poor, clear command every few commands. Clear only each different word in a bracket. Don't clear each line in a bracket. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iwh.rd 430  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MAGAZINE MATERIAL TWO RULES FOR HAPPY LIVING   MAGAZINE MATERIAL  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 1959 Issue 2 MAGAZINE MATERIAL TWO RULES FOR HAPPY LIVING 1. Be able to experience anything. 2. Cause only those things which others are able to experience easily. Man has had many golden rules. The Buddhist rule of "Do unto others as you would have these others do unto you", has been repeated often in other religions. But such golden rules, while they served to advance Man above the animal, resulted in no sure sanity, success or happiness. Such a golden rule gives only the ca point, or at best the reflexive effect point. This is a self- done-to-self thing and tends to put all on obsessive cause. It gives no thought to what one does about the things done to one by others not so indoctrinated. How does one handle the evil things done to him? It is not told in the Buddhist rule. Many random answers resulted. Amongst them are the answers of Christian Science (effects on self don't exist), the answers of early Christians (become a martyr), the answers of Christian ministers (condemn all sin). Such answers to effects created on one bring about a somewhat less than sane state of mind -- to say nothing of unhappiness. After one's house has burned down and the family cremated, it is no great consolation to (1) pretend it didn't happen, (2) liken oneself to Job or (3) condemn all arsonists. So long as one fears or suffers from the effect of violence, one will have violence against him. When one can experience exactly what is being done to one, ah magic, it does not happen! The most basic proof of this is the earlier tests with problems of comparable magnitude and later tests of "selected overts". When the problem or terminal is no longer restimulative, it ceases to have power to harm one. How to be happy in this universe is a problem few prophets or sages have dared contemplate directly. We find them "handling" the problem of happiness by assuring us that man is doomed to suffering. They seek not to tell us how to be happy but how to endure being unhappy. Such casual assumption of the impossibility of happiness has led us to ignore any real examination of ways to be happy. Thus we have floundered forward toward a negative goal -- get rid of all the unhappiness on Earth and one would have a liveable Earth. If one seeks to get rid of something continually, one admits continually he cannot confront it -- and thus everyone went down hill. Life became a dwindling spiral of more things we could not confront. And thus we went towards blindness and unhappiness. To be happy, one only must be able to confront, which is to say, experience, those things that are. Unhappiness is only this: the inability to confront that which is. Hence (1) Be able to experience anything. The effect side of life deserves great consideration. The self-caused side also deserves examination. To create only those effects which others could easily experience gives us a clean new rule of living. For if one does, then what might he do that he must withhold from others? There is no reason to withhold his own actions or regret them (same thing) if one's own actions are easily experienced by others. 431 This is a sweeping test (and definition) of good conduct -- to do only those things which others can experience. If you examine your track you will find you are hung up only in those actions a person did which others were not able to receive. Hence a person's track can become a hodge-podge of violence withheld which pulls in then the violence others caused. The more actions a person emanated which could not be experienced by others, the worse a person's track became. Recognizing that he was bad cause, or that there were too many bad causes already, a person ceased causing things -- an unhappy state of being. Pain, misemotion, unconsciousness, insanity all result from causing things others could not experience easily. The reach-withhold phenomena is the basis of all these things. When one sought to reach in such a way as to make it impossible for another to experience, one did not reach, then, did he? To "reach" with a gun against a person who is unwilling to be shot is not to reach the person but a protest. All bad reaches never reached. So there was no communication and the end result was a withhold by the person reaching. This reach-withhold became at last an inability to reach -- therefore low communication, low reality, low affinity. All bad acts then are those acts which cannot be easily experienced at the target end. On this definition let us review our own "bad acts" (or overts). Which ones were bad. Only those that could not be easily experienced by another were bad. Thus which of society's favorite bad acts are bad? Acts of real violence resulting in pain, unconsciousness, insanity and heavy loss could at this time be considered bad. Well what other acts of yours do you consider "bad"? The things which you have done which you could not easily yourself experience were bad. But the things which you have done which you yourself could have experienced had they been done to you were not bad. That certainly changes one's view of things! Only processing can bring a person to a point where he or she could experience anything without enduring consequence. So it is no wonder that philosophy of yesteryear was stopped on "happiness" as a subject. But all processes from the beginning of Dianetics and Scientology until now which improved the ability to confront (or experience) were gaining toward the goal. All processes that eradicated experience only were poor processes. The early drop in gains in processing (1950) came about because people dramatized an eradication of all badness. The auditors were unwilling to let the pcs experience anything, the pcs sought to get rid of things without experiencing things. There is no need to lead a violent life just to prove one can experience. The idea is not to prove one can experience but to regain the ability to experience which is only done in processing. Thus today we have two golden rules for happiness: 1. Be able to experience anything; and 2. Cause only those things which others are able to experience easily. Your reaction to these tells you how far you have yet to go in processing. And that is the first time we knew that. And if we achieve these two golden rules, we Scientologists would be the happiest and most successful people in this universe for who could rule any of us with evil? Of course these are the characteristics of gods -- But who said we were trying to make anything else? L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd 432  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=155 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC    P.A.B. No. 155 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 March 1959 PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard I want to take up here with great rapidity the processes from bottom to top that we have so far found and that have been effective, and some additional data in running them. And first is the process Dynamic Straightwire. The way to do a survey on Dynamic Straightwire is this: you ask the person to describe the dynamics from one to eight. We don't care about them being sequitur -- change them round if you wish. Now, you ask a person to describe each one of these dynamics. You are watching an E-Meter for a change in pattern. Therefore you must carefully isolate the pattern, before you can tell whether or not the pattern has changed on the E-Meter needle reading. But, more important than that, you are looking for a dynamic the preclear makes mistakes about while he is trying to describe it, a dynamic he cannot describe, or a dynamic he won't even approach and is very leery of, and his statement is confirmed by the E-Meter reading. In other words, you've got the statement of the preclear in this particular analysis being stacked up against the E-Meter reading all the way through in an analysis or diagnosis for Dynamic Straightwire. All right. We go all the way through, asking for a terminal on these dynamics and we finally get a repeat. We will ask him for terminals on these dynamics, and we will get the same dynamic to read again. Now the basic rule which sorts this out is: Any dynamic which doesn't clear by two-way comm has to be run. Simple as that. Any dynamic which doesn't clear by two-way comm has to be run. So, if you have two or three dynamics jammed up, you can hope that two of them will clear up, leaving you with the remaining dynamic. But this is not the complete criteria of what you run. There is another stable datum. Don't run a terminal that is totally unreal to the preclear. Another stable datum, which comes on top of it, is: never run a terminal that is sensible. Never. If a terminal belongs on the dynamic, you can almost say you'll get nowhere running it. So you're looking for terminals that the preclear gives you for a dynamic which don't belong on the dynamic at all. Now, if that terminal is real to the preclear, you will get a tremendous change in the case. If that terminal is totally unreal to the preclear and if it does belong on the dynamic, why, you're not going to get any change on the case, so why run it? Might as well run some other process. 433 So, we have several conditions by which the diagnosis on Dynamic Straightwire works. I've done enough of these now and run enough of them, isolated enough of them and gotten conditions of change on enough of them, to realize that every time you changed a case you had (1) a person who couldn't describe the dynamic accurately, or who made mistakes while trying to describe it, (2) a person who gave you a non sequitur or erroneous terminal for that dynamic -- the terminal was fairly real to the preclear, although it didn't belong there -- and (3) you ran that, and it opened up track like mad. What have you got here? You have a terrific identification. You are trying to undo identification that is lying right on the top. Well, this tells you, then, that it is neither a long process nor an invariable process. Given enough skill, you could undoubtedly find one of these on every case -- given enough skill. But it is limited by auditor skill. Furthermore, it gives auditors a chance to "chop up" preclears and it gives auditors a chance to write some script, so this one has liability. And auditors have been writing script like mad. We had one particular case where the preclear couldn't say any terminal on the seventh dynamic, so promptly the auditor jumps in and takes the nearest related thing to the seventh dynamic, the thetan, he could get. This was A Head, and he ran A Head, and the preclear had nothing to do with it, and they wondered why the case didn't advance. Now, you have auditors who are letting the preclear choose. In other words, there are auditors who actually believe that a preclear is permitted power of choice in an auditing session. And this is the biggest bug I have found existing at this instant on this ACC. That one's a blinker. They are probably not telling you this, that they think a preclear has power of choice. They don't know this: that it has to be nutty if you are going to run it -- if it makes sense, why run it? They are looking for a wrongness in the preclear and they believe that the preclear knows all about his own case and could straighten it out all by himself. And that the auditor is an unnecessary adjunct. Now there are several people on this ACC who believe this and this is a great compliment to their faith in human nature, but it's certainly of no value in an auditor. The preclear has no power of choice at all. The one the preclear would never choose is the one you run. An example: We had a preclear here who gave three terminals on the fifth dynamic. One of these was a mountain. So the preclear was given the power of choice as to which one to run and, of course, came up with a cat. So they sat there running cats. Well, a cat happens to be right for the fifth dynamic, so why straighten it out? The process is aimed at straightening out something. Obviously, the mountain was wrong. The preclear was totally stuck on the idea that there was a mountain in on this. We found a mountain on the eighth dynamic in another case that hasn't been running. This case had been running metal on the sixth dynamic. So what? Metal belongs on the sixth dynamic -- why run it? Get the idea? But this auditor had found a mountain on the eighth dynamic and ignored it. Of course, everybody knows God is a mountain -- that's obvious.... Now, this was the one to hit. And where you find these people out of session it is because nobody has trailed down a nutty dynamic. When they're out of session on Dynamic Straightwire, they're not interested in it at all, they are just not running an identification. They're running something reasonable, and at once the biggest liability of auditors is that they are reasonable and that they write script and write in reasonable reasons for it all. And they're trying to audit unreasonability out of people -- and these two things just don't go together at all. The next process up the line is Selected Person Overts. Select a terminal who is real to the preclear and, as you undercut the process, it comes closer and closer to 434 present time. The person chosen has to be closer and closer to present time the more you try to go downscale on the process. But the person must be real, that's a criteria in there. And the next thing about it is, you must flatten off several of these people. And the basic reason for this is to prepare an individual to own up to some responsibility for his own actions. Unless he can assume some responsibility for his own actions, he won't do anything in an auditing session, so this is the one that cures. The auditing command for Selected Person Overts is "Recall a time you did something to _________ (the selected person's name)." But that is undercut by the auditing command "Think of something you did to ________" or "Think of something you have done to ________." Now, the reason you say "Think" is because these people are very chary of owning up to anything or accepting any responsibility out in daylight in front of God and everybody, so you run "Think" and you've got a lot of people who are having a rougher time who won't own up to their own lives and who can't take responsibility for them on the third dynamic, but can take responsibility for them on the first dynamic. And this is the dynamic selection. So "Think" undercuts "Recall." The next one -- General Overts -- is much less effective when it has not already been undercut by Selected Person Overts. The individual just goes on and on with sweetness and light. The auditing command for General Overts is "Recall a time when you did something to somebody." Now there are other phrases and so forth which could be used for this sort of process, but here we are interested mainly in people. We are not very interested in MEST and the remaining four dynamics. They'd splatter all over the place. That's why it's "to somebody." If you said "something," you would get the remaining four, so there is an alternate command in here if you wanted to run the other four dynamics. You would say, "Recall a time when you did something to something." Now, the next one up the line from this is Not-Is Straightwire: "Recall a time when you implied something was unimportant." And this, we find, is best run on an alternate basis with the next auditing command, "Recall a time when somebody else thought something was important." These two commands are alternated, one after the other, and you get these cases that are in a jam. This is the direct cure of not-isness; and where you have a case that is running a bad not-is, a process can evidently be invalidated or not-ised when the individual is out of session, or overnight. This is what Not-Is Straightwire cures. These are the people on whom a process works once, and never works again. These people are not-ising so badly that they can't duplicate -- and not-is, of course, is a mechanism to prevent duplication. So you cure, not duplicate. And the cure for it is Not-Is Straightwire. [Continued in PAB 156, page 441] 435  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MARCH 1959 (CANCELLED -- see HCO B 21 May 59 Volume III-468) HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES (Also for Instruction in HPA/HCA and ACC) (Supersedes all earlier HGC allowed Processes except where these give data on the following) Processes on gradient scale from unconscious pc to theta clear. CCH 1, 2, 3,4 Rudiments (Not CCH 0) PTP by Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straight Wire Know to Mystery Straight Wire (See later bulletins) Dynamic Straight Wire ARC Straight Wire Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straight Wire General Overt-Withhold Straight Wire Factual Havingness (and Third Rail) ARC Break Straight Wire Not-Is Straight Wire Past and Future Experience What Can You Confront You make a mock-up for which you can be totally responsible Track Scout Engram Running Route One The target of these processes is theta clear as different from MEST clear. Therefore, the higher MEST clear processes, Help and Step 6, are omitted. We are not trying to make MEST clears in the HGC; therefore, Help and Step 6 are disallowed. On Old Dianetic cases or where engrams have been run by other auditors, run Selected Person Overt-Withhold on "an auditor" and "a preclear" until track is free. This is a necessary early step to get some cases moving. Engram running should not be used by those not trained in it. Muzzled auditing should be used when: 1. Pc ARC Breaks easily; and 2. Auditor shows signs of over-communication. Be prepared to run Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straight Wire for as long as 3 to 5 weeks if pc begins to have emotional changes on it. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iwh.jh 436  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TRAINING DRILLS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MARCH 1959 TRAINING DRILLS NAME: ARC Break POSITION: Student and coach sit facing each other a comfortable distance apart. COMMANDS: The coach makes up his mind there has been an actual specific ARC break. He doesn't tell the student. He then says, Start. Then the student says: "HAVE I DONE SOMETHING WRONG?" The coach answers this appropriately and the student says: "WHAT WAS IT?" The coach answers, and then the student says: "WHEN WAS IT?" The student gets it described and then says: "HOW IS IT NOW?" Then when he's got it more or less stamped out here then he takes it on the other side of the picture and says: "HAVE YOU DONE SOMETHING WRONG IN THIS SESSION?" The coach answers that appropriately and the student auditor asks: "WHAT WAS IT?" "WHEN WAS IT?" and "HOW IS IT NOW?" When all have been handled satisfactorily the coach ends that cycle of action and then starts a new one. PURPOSE: Is to train the student to handle ARC breaks in a session and to get them handled quickly and effectively on both the overt and motivator side, since there's always an overt connected with an auditing ARC break of one kind or another. TRAINING STRESS: The training stress is on the reality and actuality of ARC breaks and the necessity of handling them. It should be pointed out that on an E-Meter it is the ARC break that causes the rising needle and also it must be pointed out that in actual auditing he will be using an E-Meter since he's not running this with a meter in his hand. In real auditing he flattens it until his meter shows no change on the subject. In running this TR he is simply going to flatten it by the seat of his pants and the satisfaction of the coach. This is a 2-way comm formal auditing non-duplicative process and is only used to patch up ARC breaks when one occurs. It is not a repetitive command process which is supposed to do something terrific for the pc. It doesn't. It is just supposed to keep the session on the road and is not in itself therapeutic. The student never answers or explains to the coach about the ARC break. In other words, we must keep the Auditor's Code while running an ARC break out. Probably more strongly than we would ordinarily keep an Auditor's Code. No evaluating questions. No invalidating questions. No explanations. It should be understood that an ARC break is the only thing that will depress a profile. Nothing else will depress a profile except an ARC break. Handling ARC breaks is the only thing which keeps the profile from being depressed so this is a pretty important TR and it's really got to be smooth and free. It is the one thing that can submerge an engram or foul the session. It should be understood that in actual auditing if the pc gives the auditor the Break as soon as the auditor asks for it, the question "What is it?" is dropped. LRH:-.rd L. RON HUBBARD 437  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO DO A DIAGNOSIS ON DYNAMIC STRAIGHTWIRE   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 6 MARCH 1959 BPI HOW TO DO A DIAGNOSIS ON DYNAMIC STRAIGHTWIRE You ask the person to describe the dynamics from one to eight. We don't care about them being sequitur; any way you want to break it up, we don't care. Now you ask a person to describe each one of these dynamics. You are watching an E-Meter for a change in pattern. Therefore, you have to carefully isolate the change of pattern before you can tell whether or not the pattern's changed on the E-Meter needle reading. But more important than that, you are looking for a dynamic that he makes mistakes on while he is trying to describe it, a dynamic he cannot describe, a dynamic that he won't even approach, that he is very leery of, and his statement is confirmed by the E-Meter reading. In other words, you have got the statement of the pc in this particular analysis or diagnosis for Dynamic Straightwire. All right, then, we go all the way through asking for a terminal on these dynamics and we finally get a repeat. We will ask him for terminals on these dynamics; we'll get the same dynamic to read again. Now the basic rule which sorts this out is -- any dynamic which doesn't clear by two-way comm has to be run. Simple as that. Any dynamic which doesn't clear by two-way comm has to be run. Don't run a terminal that is totally unreal to the preclear. Another stable datum which comes on top of it is: Never run a terminal that's sensible. Never. If a terminal belongs on the dynamic you can almost say you'll get nowhere running it. So, you are looking for terminals that they give you for a dynamic which don't belong on the dynamic at all. Now, if that terminal is real to the pc you will get a tremendous change in the case. If that terminal is totally unreal to the pc and if it does belong on the dynamic, why you're not going to get any change on the case, why run it? Might as well run some other process. It is neither a long process nor an invariable process. Given enough skill you could undoubtedly find one of these on every case. Given enough skill. But it is limited by auditor skill. Furthermore, it gives auditors a chance to chop up pcs and it gives auditors a chance to write some script. You do not let the pc choose. You have auditors who actually believe that a pc is permitted power of choice in an auditing session. That one's a blinker. Where you find pcs out of session, it's because nobody has trailed down a nutty dynamic. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mg.rd 438  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SUPPLEMENTAL DATA SHEET TO HCO BULLETIN OF FEB 16, 1959 AND STAFF AUDITORS' CONFERENCE OF FEB 16, 1959   Dist: All Staff All Offices  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1959 Dist: All Staff All Offices SUPPLEMENTAL DATA SHEET TO HCO BULLETIN OF FEB 16, 1959 AND STAFF AUDITORS' CONFERENCE OF FEB 16, 1959 The Feb 16 Bulletins, done rapidly to inform staff auditors, omitted the full gradient processes. Some of the omitted (and very important) processes are Overt-Withhold Straight Wire, General Overt-Withhold Straight Wire, ARC Break Straight Wire, Third Rail, What Can You Confront and Mock Up Responsibility. The complete list in order of use on any case is: ROUTE THETA CLEAR 1. Rudiments and TR 5N 2. Present Time Problem 3. Dynamic Straight Wire 4. Overt-Withhold Straight Wire 5. General Overt-Withhold Straight Wire 6. ARC Break Straight Wire 7. Third Rail 8. What Can You Confront 9. Mock up a picture for which you could be totally responsible 10. Not-Is Straight Wire 11. Past and Future Experience 12. Engram Running 13. Route One (When theta clear is obtained) This is a complete route to theta clear on all cases so far examined and audited (which contained some real "what walls"). Steps 1 to 5 above inclusive, if flattened, constitute a RELEASE. The HAS Co-Audit Processes are: 3. Dynamic Straight Wire 4. Overt-Withhold Straight Wire 5. General Overt-Withhold Straight Wire with the Instructor starting and stopping all sessions and doing all assessments. The auditing itself is severely muzzled. HCA/HPA Professional Processes include 1 to 8 above inclusive. HCS/BScn Processes include 1 to 11 inclusive. HGS/DScn Processes include entire list. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 439  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MUZZLED AUDITING   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 13 MARCH 1959 BPI MUZZLED AUDITING Following is a despatch received from Theory and Practice Instructor, Washington, D.C. "Dear Ron, "I thought you might be interested to know that the afternoon muzzled auditing in the HCA Course is really paying off. These people have, every one of them, attained a very hot reality on their tracks, pictures and Scientology. In terms of past students the results are absolutely phenomenal. It is very good. Best, John Galusha." L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 440  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=15/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=156 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC    P.A.B. No. 156 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 15 March 1959 PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC (Continued from P.A.B. No. 155 [page 433]) Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard All of these straightwire processes run best with an E-Meter, using the question "When?" about the only reason we came off time was because auditors were using time to harass. It is not that it isn't best to run it with time -- it is best to run it with time. The muzzled fashion of running here is "Recall a time... when...." The guy says he did. "When?" All right, the next response on the preclear's part is, "I don't know." Then the auditor goes into action. Now, when you hound them and mix them up and twist them up and mess them up with time questions, all that's happening is that the auditor is dramatizing his own confusion about time, and he probably wouldn't accept the preclear's answer if it was three o'clock, September 2nd, 1959. Muzzled Auditing is very severely this: The auditor utters the auditing command, the preclear answers it, and the auditor says, "All right." The preclear originates, the auditor nods. Let's make this a very severe definition of what we call muzzled auditing. Now, when you let the auditor go a little bit and give him an E-Meter and "When?" my experience and observation here in the 21st ACC is, he just goes for broke. It's rather as if you cut two strands of a three-strand rope and he quickly busts the other strand. In other words, it's muzzled or nothing. And where you have somebody who is doing any chop-up or is stacking up ARC breaks in any way, you have as your best answer "muzzled," and muzzled is muzzled. And they can't say "When?" either, because evidently if you give them "When?" they can go for broke and they can use "When?" and the answers thereof to chop the preclear up. We did try to install a muzzled "When?" For my money, it hasn't been successful. We've had at least one of our people exceed this at once. Just letting him open his mouth starts the machine. "It's all right for you to say 'When?'" you can say to this auditor -- "It's all right for you to say 'When?'" Right away, he says, "Well, I've got to do something else." And so forth. We have even found that muzzled auditing wouldn't go on this one: "I'll repeat the auditing command." You can't even let them do that. You can't let them say this, because it has been used to invalidate the preclear. We have 441 an auditor (he's not an auditor, he's a case) who, every time the preclear answers the question, says, "I'll repeat the auditing command." The preclear tries to answer the question again, and the auditor just uses this as a non- acceptance. So this can't go as part of muzzled auditing. That so far has been my observation. This may be a very harsh look, but I feel from what I have observed that I am justified. As I have already mentioned, we've got another condition here -- reasonability. People have been writing script on the preclear's engrams to some degree. That is a great evil. And those people we have turned loose and those people who are running engrams and are saying this sort of thing are doing pretty well, and some of them are writing a bit of script. And the main thing they are not doing is picking up the overts. There are a couple of them stalled around here on overts. There is a rule about this: When they cannot easily find or run the overts, take them right straight on down to Dynamic Straightwire. These people are not owning up to their own responsibilities and that means -- perhaps because the case has changed over to an area of irresponsibility -- that you have a situation here in which the individual has dropped out responsibility factors to such a degree that he cannot be trusted. When a person won't own up to his overts, you have an irresponsibility of great magnitude. This goes hand- in-glove with failing to answer the exact auditing command, failing to execute an auditing command, and so forth. And that can happen while running engrams. [Continued in PAB 157, page 453] 442  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AN INSANITY QUESTIONNAIRE   Magazine Article  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 17 MARCH 1959 Magazine Article AN INSANITY QUESTIONNAIRE The World Health Organization has issued the following questionnaire to determine whether or not a person is insane, and infers that if one answers "yes" to any of the following, he is insane and needs help: Are you always worrying? Are you unable to concentrate because of unrecognized reasons? Are you continually unhappy without justified cause? Do you lose your temper easily and often? Are you troubled by regular insomnia? Do you have wide fluctuations in your moods, from depression to elation, back to depression, which incapacitate you? Do you continually dislike to be with people? Are you upset if the routine of your life is disturbed? Do your children consistently get on your nerves? Are you "browned off" and constantly bitter? Are you afraid without real cause? Are you always right and the other person always wrong? Do you have numerous aches and pains for which no doctor can find a physical cause? Scientology organizations as the leaders in the field of mental ability are doing the only successful work in correcting such disabilities. The first sweeping, low cost attack on mental disability is now under way in Scientology organizations with HAS Co-Auditing courses, now beginning on all continents. L. RON HUBBARD [The above HCO B was reissued from Washington, D.C., dated 23 March 1959.] 443  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DO IT YOURSELF THERAPY   BPI Magazine  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 17 MARCH 1959 Issue 2 BPI Magazine DO IT YOURSELF THERAPY At last we have a successful way for the untrained person or the financially embarrassed Scientologist to make it all the way to release and prepare himself for theta clear at low cost. Heavily supervised co-auditing at HAS level has become possible with my development of two things, 1. Processes that undercut most reality levels, and 2. Muzzled auditing. For as little as 2 gns (or $10) a week, one can have the major benefits of Scientology by giving a little and getting a lot. HAS Co-auditing courses are run by all major Central Organizations and are being started in HCO enfranchised centers. The applicant enrolls in the PE Course and receives a week of theory. He graduates to a Comm Course lasting two weeks of three nights each and costing 2 gns (or $10) per week. He receives his HAS certificate and graduates to co- auditing for three nights a week for 2 gns (or $10) per week and continues on until he reaches the state of release. This may take many months but he gains all the way in health, on his job, in his environment. The co-auditing is done "muzzled" and under the heavy supervision of a trained professional who knows how to do it. It is only successful if so done. These new processes and muzzled auditing can be the beginning of a new civilization. For, cases are cracking on these units with such frequency and speed that even old timers instructing them are getting an eager new look. A release is a person whose case "won't get any worse". He begins to gain by living rather than lose. Release is a way point toward theta clear. A good release can be theta cleared by a professional running engrams in from 50 to 125 hours. This is the new look. If you want to know more about it, write Hubbard Communications Office Worldwide in London or your nearest central organization. We can put hundreds of thousands upstairs rapidly if we follow this well- blazed trail. We are still winning. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 444  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=92 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  The Subject of Clearing    Ability Issue 92 M [1959, ca. late March] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. The Subject of Clearing L. Ron Hubbard A general summary of Clears and Clearing as of March 1, 1959 is of interest to all Dianeticists and Scientologists. I have a great deal of data now that has not been generally released and indeed was never before known here on Earth. The figures are in, the checks have been made. And here's what I have found: The first Clears I made in 1947 that were stable were in reality Theta Clears, not Mest Clears. Had I had more finance and the data I collected between 1947 and 1959 I would have known that. They were made by gradually raising their confrontingness of mental image pictures. When I found in 1950 that other auditors could not achieve this, I made it my thorough business to: 1. Study all phenomena related to clearing; 2. Study ways to train auditors to do the job and 3. Achieve the original state on a broad scale by auditors in general on all types of cases. I said we needed a better bridge. Well, we've built several. Within the last fifteen months the data and findings have avalanched. Once there was a breakthrough by other auditors using standard technology to a state of release some years ago, I knew we were winning but some didn't see it. Release is the first state one attains on the way up. It is low and crude but it is. It means that state one doesn't skid any more in. In short, release means a bettered state from which one doesn't slip. A case stops getting worse and begins to get better, no matter how slowly. Old ARC Straightwire is the original process that created a Release (see Self Analysis, last page). 445 Release as a state is, in actuality, the first thing a pc is trying for. It's a gain to find level ground so that he doesn't from there on get worse. He's stable now, he won't keep slipping, if he attains the state of release. I found the second goal a couple of years ago. I managed to develop drills and skills that would make a person able to audit. The simplest form of this now is called "muzzled auditing" and makes supervised co-auditing possible on a very wide scale, thus achieving goal three above. The first great breakthrough came in Winter of 1957-58 with Mest Clearing. Mest Clearing is shortcut clearing. By keying out engrams, one becomes free of them. This was achieved in a very large number of cases. BUT not all people could be Mest Cleared, AND the state is not always stable. What happens to a Mest Clear sometimes? What makes the state unstable? A Mest Clear, according to several reports even from those given bracelets (of which they should still be proud), starts acting like a Theta Clear and can't make it. It's a lose. He falls back. In short, a Mest Clear can postulate. And he postulates himself into trouble. He can still key in engrams. His postulates operate powerfully on his bank, evidently, and there he goes. A Mest Clear has not been through a total confrontingness. He arrived by what was a shortcut. His regained ability to postulate operates unexpectedly. He puts himself into things he hadn't confronted yet. He doesn't confront them. And there he goes. So long as he doesn't use his large power to postulate unwisely, a Mest Clear stays clear. If he does, he's no longer clear. (Bob Ross, by the way, first mentioned this to me and further reports and observations bore it out.) Very well -- there is a state called Mest Clear. It is a shortcut that is sometimes the long way around and sometimes isn't stable. However, a Mest Clear, even skidded, is better off than any Release. Because of this liability (and because of later gains I made on Theta Clearing) no HGC is now even trying for Mest Clear. It's all Theta Clearing now. And if it's all right with you we'll use the word Clear to mean hereafter a Theta Clear and if we mean Mest Clear we'll say so. The Mest Clear, then, still has a malady -- the ability to postulate his engrams into heavy play. Pursuing clearing further in 1958 I developed by early February 1959 the Confrontingness Scale of Reality. This, I find just this week, on a specific test, is also a parallel to the Responsibility Scale. 446 Roughly, the Confrontingness Scale of Reality goes this way from top to bottom: No need to Experience a Reality Willing to Experience a Reality Willing to Confront a Reality Willing to be Elsewhere from a Specific Reality Willing to Not-Is a Reality (invisible field) Willing to Screen a Reality (puts black curtain over it or self) Willing to Dub-In a Reality Willing to Figure-Figure on a Reality Willing to Figure-Figure on a Dubbed-In Reality Knowing this we see how a case behaves as we raise confrontingness on Mental Image Pictures. The person is out of valence below "Elsewhere" and not even on the right track below "Screen" (the old "Wide-Open Case"). This was a lot of data to collide with. But being aware of the phenomenon of Mest Clear and having developed repetitive command engram running for the 5th London, I had to square around for Goal Three with techniques to run low reality for the 21st American and so found the Confrontingness Reality Scale. All this made quite a difference in viewpoint. Things that were very vague in 1947 became very obvious to me. A Theta Clear, then, can be defined as a person who is at cause over his own reactive bank and can create and uncreate it at will. Less accurately he is a person who is willing to experience. Operating Thetan would be the same as always -- the individual at Cause over Matter, Energy, Space, Time, Life and Form. Theta Clear is stable. Therefore I'm not letting the HGC try for any lower state. In any event Theta Clearing is faster than Mest Clearing but not, of course, faster than Releasing. The maximum time to release a raving lunatic seems to be about 600 hours of CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4 -- work, however, that we don't do. The maximum time to release a non-insane person by CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4 is probably around 350 hours. And sometimes this route has to be taken as in a non-consent case or a child or a very low reality case or a case that can't or won't talk. (CCH 1, 2, 3 and 4 on such low cases is not always successful by reason of auditing skill differences.) The maximum time to attain a Release on a fairly low reality case is about 175 hours -- usually less, using present skills or even ARC Straightwire, Fall 1951. The maximum time to theta clear somebody from beginning to end has not been determined fully for all cases by a long ways, but early data indicates that a case with high beginning reality could make it in 75 hours of HGC auditing. As all cases addressed so far in the HGC have responded steadily (under auditing done by 21st ACC graduates) on the Reality Scale, we could assume they will all go through to Theta Clear. Some cases (one with a recent severe accident) require evidently four weeks to get up to what you and I would call responsibility and reality on these new processes -- but even then the four weeks were all win and all gain. (The auditing was done by a DScn who did not attend the 21st and was only verbally coached.) Hazarding a guess, I would say we are sooner than 500 hours on Theta Clearing from beginning to end on average cases. 447 So all goals listed above -- examining clearing, auditor training, and broad-scale co-auditing and clearing -- are a reality now, just a dozen years from my first incredulous creation of a Clear to general clearing to a stable state. Of course the first goal of examining all aspects of clearing won't be over for another twenty years but it's still been dented. And you'll soon have that pleasure too, subjective or objective, on the subject of Theta Clearing. It's a dozen years back to 1947. It's nine years back to Book One. But it's only twenty-nine years back to 1931 when I first began to work at George Washington University on the subject of the mind and life. (It's only fair to tell you that I'd already abandoned physical healing as a road in 1871 after a medical career, the only fruit of which now extant is what the medicos call Endocrinology, so that path is a little longer than we'd let On to the public.) I'm pretty excited about all this -- and comfortable. There were times when people got to jumping around so in the public prints that I figured straight jackets for reporters and Commies were more vital in our logistics than clearing. But it never entered my head to quit, not even when Time magazine divorced me from a woman I wasn't even married to. (Invented inverted 2nd Dynamics always make more news to Luce* people than a world well and free.) We can now do these things: 1. Theta clear people. 2. Train auditors to theta clear people. (It's now done at new HCA level and at HCS level at the Academies in Washington and Los Angeles.) 3. Supervise HAS co-auditing clear preparation plus home co- auditing (muzzled) to prepare for clearing plus broadly practice these processes on a wide public basis. In short, we've definitely won. And it won't be long before everybody knows it. If you knew what fifty people well released by HAS co-auditing could do for Scientology in one town, you'd know we had it made. Well, you'll know even better subjectively soon enough. And that's clearing. L. RON HUBBARD [*Henry R. Luce (1898-1967) was the co-founder, editor and publisher of Time magazine.] 448  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS CO-AUDIT   Dist: WW  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London, W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 24 MARCH 1959 Dist: WW HAS CO-AUDIT All offices should recognize that we have something new and startlingly successful in HAS Co-auditing done by and in the organization as an adjunct of the PE Foundation. The complete gen on how to do this will be released in the very near future on these lines. This bulletin is to point out its importance. It is expected that the following cities will begin in the central organization HAS Co-auditing courses immediately on receipt of the technical information: London (already in progress), Los Angeles, New York, Melbourne, Johannesburg (where the information already exists), Paris, Washington (optional), Auckland (where the information already exists), Perth. At once all names and addresses of all PE attendees should be gotten in order as mailing lists by the above organizations for their areas and they should stand by to make an immediate mailing. Persons for night work should be appointed by the above organizations as follows: PE Foundation Director PE Foundation Instructor HAS Comm Course Instructor HAS Co-audit Supervisor. The PE Foundation basic course is one week long -- 5 nights. HAS Comm Course is three nights a week, Co-audit supervised is the same three nights. In case of crowded quarters the HAS Comm Course should be on a different three nights than the HAS Co-audit, i.e. Monday, Wednesday, Friday Comm Course; Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday Co-audit. The charge to any applicant should be two or three guineas per week or $10. THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT SINGLE PROMOTION EVENT OF THIS YEAR AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH. MAGAZINE -- MAJORS AND MINORS It has been found in at least one organization that the purpose of major and minor issues of the continental magazine has not been understood. A major issue goes out once every month to the membership only; a minor issue goes out once every month to the entire mailing list, particularly book buyers. Certainty Issues Vol. 5 No. 23, Vol. 6 No. 3, Vol. 6 No. 2 are typical minor issues and with their ads adjusted and made more timely are now being sent to the entire mailing list. Neglect in sending minor issues to the entire mailing list can result in the eclipse of an operation, otherwise there is no adequate method of contacting new book buyers. Minor issues are mainly slanted at new book buyers but go to the entire list. If your mailing lists are not so arranged as to make this possible or if your address systems make it difficult you had better do something about it in a hurry as these are the most uneconomical omissions that can be made by an operation. 449 SCIENTOLOGY SERVICE ADMINISTRATOR HCO offices requiring books, tapes, bulletins and other services should request them from HCO Administrator WW, 37 Fitzroy Street, London, which post is now occupied by Roddy Stock. The function of this post is to give service to other Scientology organizations and HCO offices. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd [The above HCO B was reissued from Washington, D.C., as HCO B 8 May 1959.]  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MINIMUM STANDARDS   Applicable to London To all Staff  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London, W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 24 MARCH 1959 Applicable to London To all Staff MINIMUM STANDARDS If we get two HPA students per week and maintain 25 HAS Comm Course or Co-audit students per week and never fall below this we can amply justify the cost of No. 7 Fitzroy Street. This is what it will take. If we have any less than this we will have to give up 7 Fitzroy Street because of its high rental cost. We need an absolute minimum of ten preclears in processing every week (or twelve to adjust partial rates on some) to make a living unit. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 450  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS CO-AUDIT & COMM COURSE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London, W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 25 MARCH 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT & COMM COURSE The new HAS course starts with two weeks' comm course followed by an unlimited time on the HAS co-audit course. Almost any student can co-audit, even if he has no reality on coaching. If a student is unreal on the comm course, then put him on to the HAS co-audit -- at least he will get some processing and some gains. COMMUNICATION COURSE The comm course consists of TRs 0, 1, 2, 3. The emphasis on TR 3 is not on comm bridges so much, but on the duplicative question. Method: The coach sits opposite the student auditor with his back to the center of the room. He never flunks the student auditor. His only originations are "start", "fine" and "that's it". He may make an occasional short, complimentary remark. If the student auditor is doing something wrong, the coach puts his hand out behind him and waits for the instructor to come and handle the difficulty. The instructor never corrects the student auditor. He just gets him to carry on with the session. The idea here is: 1. To get the student auditor to do the drill and not spend all evening discussing it. 2. To prevent the coach from coaching with unreality and invalidating the student auditor. HAS CO-AUDIT COURSE 1. The students are briefed and told that if they blow session the instructor will not stop them. The course exists to help people who can help themselves. They will not be pursued. 2. The students are divided into co-auditing teams. The auditor sits with his back to the center of the room and the pc faces the room. Assignment: The instructor goes to each team, puts the pc on the E-Meter and finds a terminal for the auditor to run. He does this by asking the question, "Who would you blame for the condition you are in?" If no terminal bites, run "Himself". If this still doesn't bite, run Dynamic Straightwire. The question asked on Dynamic Straightwire is "Tell me what would represent yourself" (on Dynamic one, etc). After asking this question about each dynamic, run the following commands on the wackiest answers. Processes are Selected Persons Overt Straightwire. "Recall something you have done to (terminal)," "Recall something you have withheld from (terminal)." General Persons Overt Straightwire, "Recall something you have done to somebody" and "Recall something you have withheld from somebody." Each command in these two straightwire processes is repeated alternately. The auditor does muzzled auditing. Muzzled auditing means that the auditor says only two things. He gives the command and acknowledges the answer to that command. If the pc says anything that is not an answer to the command, the auditor nods his head and awaits an answer before giving acknowledgement. 451 If the auditor gives the wrong command or gets confused, or if the pc forgets the command, the auditor says nothing to the pc. What he does do is place his hand behind him and wait for the instructor to handle the situation. The auditor never leaves his chair to ask the instructor anything. The instructor never talks to an auditor who leaves his chair. The auditor keeps on running a terminal until the pc starts repeating answers. When he judges the process is flat he puts out his hand and the instructor comes around to check. At the end of the first session students change teams simply by moving one seat round. They keep the same auditors and preclears for as long as possible on course. Seats may be numbered to ensure consistency. At the end of the evening the auditor writes out an auditor's report. This places his attention on his pc, keeping him more in session, and has him feel responsible for doing something to help his pc. If the auditors remain strictly muzzled nothing can go wrong. It is up to the instructor to see that they remain muzzled. He is processing the pcs via the auditors, and to do this, rigid control must be maintained at all times. LRH:mp.msp.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is added to by HCO B 3 April 1959, HAS Co-Audit and Comm Course, page 456.] 452  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 31 iDate=1/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=157 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC (Concluded)    P.A.B. No. 157 PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR'S BULLETIN The Oldest Continuous Publication in Dianetics and Scientology From L. RON HUBBARD Via Hubbard Communications Office 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 1 April 1959 PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC (Concluded) (Continued from P.A.B. No. 156 [page 441]) Compiled from the Research Material and Taped Lectures of L. Ron Hubbard The engram commands we are using are as follows: "What part of that incident can you confront?", "What Part of that incident can you be responsible for?" and "What part of that incident can you confront? -- for how long?" And when we have sorted these out, we run "Find an unimportant part of that incident." By incident, we mean both the overt and the motivator. An engram is some portion of an incident containing pain, unconsciousness and exteriorization. But the whole incident would consist of the overt-motivator which belong together; therefore we may find them running thousands of years apart, but, nevertheless, bundled up and identified with great thoroughness. We are running this simply with a kind of understood acknowledgment in most cases, and we are trying not to make this a sharp Tone 40 process, because that tends to drive the pictures away. (Some people are still doing this to a slight degree. Their acknowledgments are a bit too good and tend to make the engram vanish. This is a common thing.) One thing we are faced with in this ACC is the inability of the student to accept the fact that a case changes. This must be stressed. Why are you auditing a case if you don't expect it to change? These students go on auditing somebody day after day and actually downgrade the case again by giving it the same careful treatment throughout. They are careful, as if the preclear is still crazy. They haven't noticed that the preclear is now doing pretty well. This leads to ARC breaks. One more process which I haven't mentioned so far is ARC Break Straightwire. We are not using it on the ACC, not because it isn't good, but merely because it is lengthy. Dynamic Straightwire, cleverly done, takes a case apart. It starts almost any case. Selected Person Straightwire on Overts will bring up the responsibility of a case to a point where he can be trusted to run engrams; and ARC Break Straightwire is the one which lays open the track. The Only trouble is, I have seen it run for fifty hours. It's a long process, but it is a valuable process. We have one final process here. It is a central process which processes anybody, and it is the thinking process of SCS. Now, to have the thinking process of SCS would be very valuable, because the assertion of control is your biggest point out. The reason auditors can't audit and the reason cases can't run and the reason valences happen, and so forth, has to do with handling people. Taking an old, old process here and remodeling it, we find that we have a very fast, wound-up-doll, muzzled auditing process that 453 can kick the living daylights out of a case; and we are including the process in the 21st ACC. The process is simply this: "Think of an identity you could handle. Think of an identity you couldn't handle." Or: "Think of an identity that could be handled. Think of an identity that could not be handled." This is the SCS Control process, Thinking version. It is not yet decided which of the auditing commands is the best. You can run the preclear either at cause or generally. The general process is "Think of an identity that could not be handled. Think of an identity that could be handled." Run alternately, one command after the other, it probably undercuts the other process, which is "Think of an identity you could handle. Think of an identity you couldn't handle." It sounds very bad to say "you couldn't handle" -- it is a negative process. That is why it has to be sandwiched in with a positive process. Strangely enough, it doesn't totally run on the positive process, because the preclear has a private ambition -- not to be handled. He doesn't want to be controlled in any way. So you must run the negative process in on the other side of the positive process. I can't tell you at this stage how many cases this process can be run on. But I do know that it is the anatomy of cases in group one, for all my study of them so far shows that their greatest unreality is the unreality of control. They demonstrate a hectic attitude toward the preclear because of an anxiety about controlling him, or an apathetic attitude towards the preclear because they know they can't control him. The whole subject of valences finally shook out here on the 21st ACC. I hasten to tell you about it. The preclears have been through arduous control on the whole track. Arslycus, where everybody got worked to death (produce, produce, produce, work, work, work...) -- Space Opera, where control was nothing if not deadly -- in fact, at every place on the track where everybody went haywire, they had to make a total effect on people. So the preclear who is having a bad time has as his central goal an individuality that cannot be controlled; and this is why most of these lower scale people want to be clear. They do not want to be not-controlled; they just want to be absent. This is also the reason why some people, although they say they are willing to clear people, are really unwilling to do so; because a clear is someone you cannot handle the way they think of handling people. So they become unwilling to make somebody clear, and they will chop it up somewhere along the line. So there is a reasonable reason underlying this obsessive chop- up that some students do to a preclear, and a reasonable reason behind an auditor's coming up to you with great unhappiness the moment his preclear starts to make a gain. He himself wants to be clear so that he cannot be handled, but, if he knows he can't be clear, he adopts an identity that cannot be handled. Various societies in various times have various things that cannot be handled, and they get stuck with these solutions, and it is almost a rational solution. They adopt an identity that cannot be handled -- and that is what is sitting in the preclear's chair. And sitting in the auditor's chair is somebody who knows only too well that the preclear can never be handled and so it doesn't matter what he does; or somebody who is determined to handle the preclear even if it means knocking his block off. This results in misemotional responses to handling the preclear. This is one of those horrible simplicities. We had processes long ago on identity and inventing identities and various types of identities, and we also had processes on handling people ("What could you handle? 454 What couldn't you handle?" "What could you change? What couldn't you change?" -- that sort of thing). Well, that all adds up to this process; and this process works much faster than SCS. However, we shall know more about the Thinking version of SCS later on. I just wanted to give you a summary of the techniques and processes being used in the 21st ACC, for your information. 455  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS CO-AUDIT AND COMM COURSE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 3 APRIL 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT AND COMM COURSE Further to HCO Bulletin of March 25, 1959, the cost of the HAS Co-audit and Comm Course is 2 gns per week payable to the evening reception on each Monday evening. No credit is extended for this course. The price is 2 gns per week regardless of the number of weeks spent on the course. The following is the schedule covering the HAS Comm Course and HAS Co- audit: COMM COURSE First Week Monday Wednesday Friday 7.00 -- Roll Call, Briefing 7.00 -- Roll Call, Briefing 7.00 -- Roll Call 7.15) 7.15) TR 1 7.15) -- TR 0 -- TR 3 8.25) 8.25) 8.30) 8.30) TR 2 8.30) -- TR 0 -- TR 3 9.40) 9.40) -- Change 9.05 9.40 9.45 -- End 9.45 -- End 9.45 -- End New students: 7.15 - 8.00 -- OCA test. Second Week Monday Wednesday Friday 7.00 -- Roll Call, Bfg. 7.15) TR 0 7.51) Change 7.33 7.51) TR 1 8.25) -- Change 8.04 As above As above 8.25) TR 2 9.01) -- Change 8.43 9.01) TR 3 9.37) -- Change 9.19 9.45 -- End HAS COURSE 7.00 - 7.15 -- Briefing 7.15 - 8.20 -- 1st Session NO BREAK 8.25 - 9.30 -- 2nd Session 9.30 - 9.45 -- Reports and Questions Above timetable subject to alteration depending on case assessments made. LRH:mp.rd L. RON HUBBARD 456  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  LETTER FROM AUSTRALIA   Magazine Article  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 14 APRIL 1959 Magazine Article LETTER FROM AUSTRALIA "Attached you will see a letter from Jim and Wal Wilkinson -- who are very good Scientologists operating in Adelaide, capital city of South Australia. They have just started up and already have 30-35 on their PE Courses. I have met them personally and believe me they are good sorts. Now I wrote to them on Rhona's instructions asking them to apply for an HCO Franchise to regularize their setup and told them a few things about having an HCO. "They are very keen to have an HCO and I presume that the franchise would be for the area of South Australia -- quite a large state. "I am very pleased that they are doing so well because now Scientology in Aussie is really swinging in these cities: Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne and very soon we will get Sydney and Brisbane going and LO -- WE WILL HAVE ENCIRCLED AUSTRALIA. Working it out mathematically on population basis of Aussie with 250 auditors putting 500 people thru courses or processing a year, in 2 years 5 percent of the people will have been thru the courses. Of course it is very likely we are going to have more than 250 auditors around -- so watch it kiddo Aussie will be the first all Scientology country and should produce a terrific culture -- about time too -- it hasn't really had its OWN culture. Anyway that's the mockup -- and we are already succeeding in it markedly. Talk in the coffee shops is all about Dianetics or Scientology. Our people are young and able. (Sounds like I'm really converted to Aussie, doesn't it!) Well I guess I'm beating the drum slightly. Anyway if you'll talk about this tremendous advance that's getting going in Aussie (and around the world) the more people we get to agree with it -- the more it gets solid and real. You know people are fantastically interested in Scientology really -- angry young people everywhere -- are interested. Perhaps the difference in Aussie is there is a lot of hope and many possibilities of succeeding in the game here than elsewhere -- perhaps -- and also no hidebound old culture bogging them down -- tradition etc (not pooh-pooh tradition where they are useful and go ahead) but sitting on past glories (and failures) is no good. They don't do that in Aussie. "Sounds like I'm giving a lecture -- so will close sending you a spark of enthusiasm. Best, Eliz." L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 458  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  EMOTIONAL TONE SCALE EXPANDED  Type = 11 iDate=8/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0   HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 15 APRIL 1959 EMOTIONAL TONE SCALE EXPANDED (Cancels Bull. of April 8) There are several misemotions hitherto not placed on the ARC Emotional Tone Scale. These are: 0.0 -- Failure (Death) -0.2 -- Regret (Being other bodies) -1.0 -- Blame (Punishing other bodies) -1.3 -- Shame (Responsibility as blame) In running Overt Withhold Straight Wire stubborn cases run these emotions for some weeks of auditing and go upwards more or less in that order. Only when they come to failure as an emotion do they then get into apathy. No case run on Overt Withhold Straight Wire can be said to be making progress unless misemotions turn on below 2.0. If the right button is reached by correct assessment, emotional reaction occurs in the running of that button. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rt.rd [See also HCO B 25 September 1971RA, revised 4 April 1974, Tone Scale in Full, Volume VII, page 404.] 459  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  KNOW TO MYSTERY STRAIGHT WIRE FOR EXTREME CASES  Type = 11 iDate=31/3/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0   HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 17 APRIL 1959 KNOW TO MYSTERY STRAIGHT WIRE FOR EXTREME CASES (Cancels Bull. of March 31, 1959) The Know to Mystery Scale expanded Not know Know Look Emotion Effort Think Symbols Sex Eat Mystery Wait Unconsciousness To assess a case On the lower rungs of processing, ask pc, against an E- Meter, what terminal could represent each of above, select that terminal (object or person, never a condition) which changes needle action most and run Overt-Withhold Straight Wire on it. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The cancelled Bulletin of 31 March 1959 had the same title and text as this issue, except that it did not have "Look" on the Know to Mystery Scale.] 460  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  OLD AND NEW REALITY SCALE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 22 APRIL 1959 OLD AND NEW REALITY SCALE "Old" Reality Scale "New" Reality Scale Tone 40 to 20 Postulates Pan-determined creation 20 to 4 Consideration Self-determined creation 4 to 2 Agreements Experience 1.5 Solid terminals Confront 1.1 Terminals too solid ) Elsewhereness Lines solid ) 1 to .5 No terminal ) Invisibility Solid line ) .5 to .1 No terminal ) Blackness Less solid fine ) .1 No real terminal ) No solid line ) Dub-in Substitute terminal ) .0 No terminal ) No line ) Unconsciousness L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 461  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/4/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DEFINITIONS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 23 APRIL 1959 DEFINITIONS A CONSULTANT is an instructor who is on duty sporadically or from time to time, but not routinely in any one place. AN INSTRUCTOR is one who has regular classes and who is assigned to places at specific times. A COACH is a student who is standing in the role of "pc". L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SOLUTION TO SOLUTIONS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MAY 1959 SOLUTION TO SOLUTIONS It is interesting when some old well-worn Scientology phenomena such as problems and solutions resolves. I noted in 1956 that problems tended to collapse upon one as he solved them, if you will recall. When you asked someone to invent a problem of comparable magnitude, his problem went further away in distance. When you asked someone for a solution to his problem the problem approached closer. Well, I have now found the reason for this -- the "penalty of solving". It is, I might comment, not an unimportant discovery for we all become victims of problem-collapse when we solve things. This is why people won't solve their problems, why they "have to have problems". Failure to make solutions (or postulates) stick elsewhere makes the thetan "believe" that solutions collapse problems on him. A process to demonstrate the first observation is well known -- problems of comparable magnitude -- and getting the pc to then "solve the problem" (this last of course is not "therapeutic"). A process to overcome this collapsing of problems upon one is "What solution could you make stick?" L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 462  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AN AFFINITY PROCESS    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MAY 1959 AN AFFINITY PROCESS We have a fundamental Reality process in Overt-Withhold Straight Wire and, at a higher level, "What can you confront?" Variations suggest themselves but what with Administration, Congresses, HPA Courses, ACCs and heavy promotion, I have not had time to test them. The above form, startlingly enough, does work. It apparently cracks lower cases than "What can you confront?" There is some evidence it raises havingness. A basic communication process is "Recall a time you communicated." There have been few successful Affinity processes. However, as unlikely as it first appears, the following is nearly a pure Affinity process. "What would you like to confront?" L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 463  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO WRITE A CURRICULUM    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MAY 1959 HOW TO WRITE A CURRICULUM 1. Establish personality of person present. (Create their beingness on course.) Course creates a beingness, not imparts data. 2. Demonstrate how to create this beingness. 3. Establish communication by teaching the language of the subject. 4. Exemplify the communication symbols with demonstrations of ridiculous errors. When established, teach: 1. Each word and its definition that is used in the practice. Underline strange words. 2. Diagnosis. You must recognize ("Conditions we are seeking to change"), i.e. Obnosis. 3. System of classification. 4. Means of changing each class or type of child, and maintenance of state. Subject matter: "Prevention of worsening". Practice Demonstration Doingness Note: Person who is willing to be the person who sees. Person who sees. Person who discusses. Person who can do something. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 464  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NEW PROCESS THEORY    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 7 MAY 1959 NEW PROCESS THEORY It never snows but it avalanches! Possessing now tremendous processes at lowest levels, we need a new understanding of processing and assessment. The broad tone scale is divided into three general parts. Highest is Pan-Determinism. Mid-range is Self-Determinism. Low range is Other-Determinism. The fundamental difficulty is that something has so thoroughly overwhelmed the pc that he is it. This is Other-Determinism become the person. Mild locks use this route to further overwhelm him. A person doesn't really find anything in this lifetime that would have overwhelmed him enough to aberrate him. It took great doing. Things like prenatals and operations and shocks just use the existing overwhelm channel. The picture of aberration is this. The person causes an effect, time and time again. Usually this is not aberrative. But one day he causes an unintended effect. He didn't mean to. It was wrong. This is the true overt act -- an unintended bad effect. It is not deserved by the recipient. It is a wrong, unintended, undeserved effect. The person now tends to limit his effects or withhold his effects. Having been wrong once, he now becomes cautious. Next thing he knows he has assisted himself to be overwhelmed. He now has an inflow channel over which other things, all locks, can now overwhelm him. Eventually he becomes an "other-determinism". This, of course, can get nothing done, doesn't outflow, etc., etc., which adds up to all the faults we find in an aberrated person. For example, if the pc has been overwhelmed by money, he, in money matters, is now money. If you took some money and threw it on the bed it wouldn't do a thing. It wouldn't stack itself up or add up accounts. Money doesn't do anything. Therefore, the pc, as an other- determinism, does nothing really about money -- and this we find annoying in him. It is his aberration. Clearly all one need do as an auditor is to reverse this flow and put the pc at cause over the button, money, to have the other-determinism (and the overwhelmingness) fade away. Using Problems of Comparable Magnitude or Overt- Withhold Straight Wire or simple reaching, the effect is turned to cause and the pc comes out of it. Assessment is only discovering what has overwhelmed the pc. Auditing is the reversing of other-determined flows by gradient scales, putting the pc at cause again. THE BASIC ERROR The question was asked me, and a fine question it was, "Why does a thetan make his postulate fail to stick in the first place? Why would he say, 'I can get my postulates all messed up and so cause an overt act'?" Obviously all aberration is third dynamic. The entrance into self- determinism requires that a thetan conceive the idea of other beings. Also he must then conceive that there are zones of privacy from which he must not communicate. 465 This error leads to obsessive or fixed channels on which one can be overwhelmed, since he "may not" take the position of cause on this channel. Avoidance of the places he must not communicate from leads into all manner of difficulties, since this is inhibited communication. A person, therefore, becomes as aberrated as he cannot communicate, as aberrated as he is overwhelmed by Other-Determinisms, as aberrated as he himself dare not assume cause points. A NEW PROCESS This leads to a new process, for use "in individual sessions". The final phrasing is not established at this time. "From where could you communicate?" or "Find a place from which you could communicate," or "Recall a place from which you have communicated." My first tests show this to be very strong but workable. I have not established the depth this reaches nor the complete effectiveness up scale. But it does reverse Other-Determinism heavily. (This, of course, does not supplant Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straight Wire as fundamental and is not for use in HAS Co-auditing, where Selected Persons Overt-Withhold Straight Wire is the tested allowed process.) This new process may open a faster route to theta clear, even though that route is already very fast. Note: Apparently this process, LOCATIONAL COMMUNICATION, relieves the face pressures and terror stomachs (after turning them on) which have proved reluctant. Terror stomachs we have a specific for. Face pressures, we do not have totally taped. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 466  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AN UN-DOABLE COMMAND    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MAY 1959 AN UN-DOABLE COMMAND There are a very few commands that cannot be done. One of these is "Find an unknown" (1954). I have just found another one: "Invent an other-determinism". Perhaps if it could be run, as Jan Halpern commented, it would be a one- shot clear. LRH:mp.rd L. RON HUBBARD 467  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=21/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES AND ACC PROCESSES AS OF MAY 21, 1959   Central Orgs HCO Offices  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MAY 1959 Central Orgs HCO Offices CANCELS ALL EARLIER DIRECTIVES ON HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES AND ACC PROCESSES AS OF MAY 21, 1959 The following processes are the only allowed processes for use in HGCs anywhere. THETA CLEAR SCHEDULE For use on unconscious and fixedly psychotic persons unwilling to be audited: "You make that body sit on that chair" (or "lie on that bed"), and CCH 1, 2, 3, 4. For use on persons unwilling to be audited at any time: Two way help bracket "How could you help me?" "How could I help you?" Get each question answered. Use lots of two way comm. Don't Q and A with reasons. For use on persons unwilling to be audited by reason of session errors: TR 5N, which is: "What have I done wrong?" "What have you done wrong?" with two way comm. For persons who are acutely ill: Run old TR 5 if needed. Diagnose exact button and run Overt Withhold Straight Wire or Run Factual Havingness Or do an assist. For use on persons who complain that auditing has no effect on them or who make very slow gains: Have pc put the following thought in six sides of room, going around in different order each time (example, front wall, back wall, ceiling, floor, right wall, left wall). "Put the thought into that (designated room side), 'Nothing can have any effect on (pc's name)'." There are variations of this phrasing: "Nothing must be done to (pc's name)," "Nothing can be done about (pc's name)." Depends on what makes the meter fall. This process probably requires about 15 to 25 hours to flatten. Use the same wording throughout. 468 For use on persons in general. If this has been handled in an HAS Co- audit well, don't handle it again: Overt-Withhold Straight Wire after careful assessment and used on various buttons. Dynamic Straight Wire, Know to Mystery Straight Wire, are all more or less same process but are different ways of assessment. Always run terminals, never conditions. For use on persons in general, always to some extent when they enter HGC: S-C-S. For use on auditors in for auditing. Run until fully flat: Op Pro by Dup old (original) style. For use on people going to theta clear. Use liberally and long: "Find a spot from which you could communicate." For use on people going to theta clear: Find engram necessary to resolve the case each time. Check out all terminals present in it. Make a list. Run Overt-Withhold Straight Wire on a (each terminal in incident by general name). Don't run off from incident that is being run. Pc will go up and down the track but when one terminal is flat, choose next from same incident we started with. The commands for this are "Guess at something you have done to" "Guess at something you have withheld from". For finishing off cases to level of theta clear: Run Overt-Withhold Straight Wire on minds, brains, bodies, mest. For easing off any case into comfort or completion of an intensive: "From where could you communicate?" HAS CO-AUDIT The only allowed process in HAS Co-audit is Overt-Withhold Straight Wire on present life terminals selected by instructor. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.vmm.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [See HCO B 21 July 1959, HGC Allowed Processes, page 497, which gives a revised rundown for use in all HGCs.] 469  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/5/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  "MAN WHO INVENTED SCIENTOLOGY   May be used by City Offices and Area Offices for information to papers.  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 26 MAY 1959 The following article appeared recently in the London City Press. It may be used by City Offices and Area Offices for information to papers. "MAN WHO INVENTED SCIENTOLOGY One best-seller is often the real beginning in the story of a publishing house. But to come into existence because of another publisher's best-seller is unusual. This is what happened in the case of the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International. The HASI and all its concerns is founded on the work of one man, L. Ron Hubbard, engineer, explorer, nuclear physicist and writer. Holding in his mind a knowledge of Eastern thought gained in his travels, his instruction in psychology from a medical doctor who had studied personally under Sigmund Freud, and his training in mathematics and nuclear physics, L. Ron Hubbard found himself convalescing in hospital towards the end of the second world war, after a distinguished career in the United States Navy. During the year he spent in hospital he reviewed earlier work he had done on the fundamentals of knowledge. He was also confronted with the deplorable nervous reactions of his friends who had been through the war. He concluded, after many experiments, that his ideas could help people towards greater ability and greater happiness. He coined the word Scientology, to mean the science of knowing how to know. EXPERIMENT Then followed several years of experiment, which he supported by writing fiction. His ideas, like most new things, met with complete disbelief in official quarters in spite of the fact that they had by this time been practised, proved, tested and documented. A thesis he wrote in 1948 was ignored. However, people began to hear of his work and to get hold of carbon copies of his thesis and make more copies of it and hand them to friends. Hubbard's correspondence grew to embarrassing proportions as more and more people found out that Dianetics (the branch of Scientology he wrote about at that time, the branch which deals with mental anatomy) really worked in practice. They asked him for lengthy explanations. In 1950 L. Ron Hubbard thought of writing a popular text book on Dianetics to relieve him of the task of writing dozens of long letters every day. A publisher offered to print the book, but demanded the manuscript within three weeks. The book was duly written and delivered -- 180,000 words of it -- within three weeks. This book, DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH, was expected to sell 6,000 copies and sold 100,000 almost immediately. It went to the top of the best-selling lists and stayed there during the summer of 1950. The book tells the layman how to use Dianetics. Thousands of people began to use it. Hundreds of people wrote, spoke, and ranted for and against it. Interest in Dianetics reached hysteria level in the United States and various organizations were set up, with and without L. Ron Hubbard's approval, to deal with the demand for treatment and training. 470 To combat this confusion of commercial exploitation, Hubbard went back to the broader subject of Scientology and founded the Hubbard Association of Scientologists International as the official organization which would treat people, train people and supervise research. Books and more books were demanded. Hubbard duly wrote them and the HASI duly published them under its own name or under the name of one of its offices. Since 1950, more than thirty books by L. Ron Hubbard and many other Scientologists have been published by the HASI. Perhaps the best-known titles are DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH, SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, SELF ANALYSIS IN SCIENTOLOGY, PROBLEMS OF WORK and THE CREATION OF HUMAN ABILITY. It is fitting that the main part of HASI's publishing output should be written by the man who founded it, and that all the books it publishes should be about Scientology in its various aspects, whether applied to helping the individual and training professional practitioners, or to more topical subjects such as those dealt with in ALL ABOUT RADIATION and HOW TO LIVE THOUGH AN EXECUTIVE. The 'international' at the end of the HASI's title is well earned. Few publishers have offices in, and books printed in, Washington, London, Los Angeles, Melbourne, Auckland, Johannesburg, Paris and Berlin. And this within nine years. TRANSLATIONS Scientology books have been translated into many languages and the London office (which is now the central office of the organization) receives enquiries from all parts of the world and has on its staff people from Australia, Greece, New Zealand, Mauritius, Rhodesia, South Africa, Spain and the United States. Students come from far and near, east and west, for training to become professional practitioners in Scientology or 'auditors' as they are called (an auditor: one who listens and computes). When trained, they qualify to help other people improve their lives and their abilities by doing simple mental exercises under their skilled supervision; and many of them go back to their own countries and set up offices, groups, training centers and clinics of their own. A large part of their training consists of the study of texts published by the HASI. The publication of DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH in 1950 started, not just a publishing house, but a world movement. The long-ignored work of one man now suddenly affects the lives of people from Malaya to Manchester. And the HASI becomes a very busy organization indeed. (Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard. All rights reserved)" LRH:gh.rd L. RON HUBBARD 471  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=5/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FORMULA 10    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 5 JUNE 1959 FORMULA 10 This is the first practical approach I have developed toward reaching the state of OT. Up to and including step 7 gives us a theta clear. Steps 8, 9, 10 and 11 give us the finishing touches for OT. This formula gives two states, then, depending on where it is used. The full data background of all this is given in the HPA/BScn Course tapes of Spring 1959 and the 6th London ACC tapes (which also give the way to do this very broadly). FORMULA 10 -- AN APPROACH TO OT 1. Do case assessment. Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straight Wire (this life). (Flatten) 2. "Recall (or think of) something you have been responsible for." (Flatten) 3. "Recall (or think of) something you have confronted." (Flatten) 4. "Recall (or think of) something you have been responsible for." (Flatten) 5. Do case assessment. Run "From where could you communicate to a (general terminal)". Note: Run any terminals that react. 6. "From where could you communicate to a body." 7. Locate and run engrams by "From where could you communicate to (A) (generalized form of terminal found in engram)"; run all terminals found. (B) Run until Rock incident is run (run as general terminal). 8. Reassess case for ANY terminal that has ANY reaction and run "From where could you continue to communicate to a (generalized form of terminal)". Run No. 8 until there are none that react. 9. "From where could you continue to communicate to a body." (Flatten) 10. "From where could you communicate to a mind." 11. "From where could you continue to communicate to a mind." L. RON HUBBARD NOTE: This may be used in HGCs when tapes have been studied by auditors. LRH:gh.rd 472  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0     HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 6 JUNE 1959 When cases crack well on Selected Persons Overts Withhold, run Problems of Comparable Magnitude crudely on same terminals. Then go off into ARC Break Straightwire. This is a very hot route for staff processing. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.bg.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B was excerpted from an air letter written by LRH to the Washington, D.C. Org.] 473  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=9/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NEEDED MATERIAL   CENTRAL  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JUNE 1959 CENTRAL NEEDED MATERIAL I have been extremely busy during the last three months getting together vital material in the fields of research and lecture tapes. My foremost concentration has been to back up to the limit the HAS Co- Audit programme. It has been quite a trick developing and testing all this material, putting it into lecture form, and handling some crucial phases of administration and finance as well. However I more or less seem to have made the grade, and after three months have gotten together the following: 1. The HPA/BScn Course lectures. This covers all the fundamental and currently sound and valid material in Dianetics and Scientology. These carry with them as well an additional lecture series by Jan and Dick Halpern, and some mimeograph sheets containing the actual curriculum of the course. This brings the professional course up to a level that has never before obtained, with a tremendous amount of summarized technical material and emphasis. The theory is contained in my lectures, the processes are contained in the lectures of Jan and Dick Halpern. The latter lectures are not quite complete, in that the first two or three tapes are poorly done, but then the material on them is available in bulletins. The recording of these lectures is high fidelity, consisting of Theory and Practice lectures. 2. The 6th London ACC tapes which are all on the subject of clearing. These start with how to run an HAS Co-Audit course in their first three lectures and continue on through all the way to theta clear and wind up with Formula 10, which is the first formula for operating thetan. There are some tremendous Scientology advances in this lecture series which are to be found nowhere else. The course is designed for use in its early parts to play to auditors with HCO Franchises. The last part is designed for the professional auditor who has already gone through the current HPA/BScn course. Some of the material in these lectures is extremely fundamental, for instance, there are new assists given which cure acute illnesses. Every Central Organization must have these two sets of tapes, since this is the fastest way I know of to get the material out and in use. I am very interested in getting as many theta clears as possible in other places, and very interested in producing a few operating thetans. We have really made good with this new material, and every promise ever made to the Scientology public has been so far over-reached now as to make those promises under-statements. My answer to most organizational problems is the production of material and the development of new promotional systems. I have not been paying too much attention to my despatch lines, and I hope you will forgive me, for I have considered it far more important to get out materials which, in the final essence, answer nearly all of the problems being carried in on those despatch lines. Please acquire these tapes as soon as possible. LRH:mp.rd L. RON HUBBARD 474  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CO-AUDIT FORMULA   To be used by any Co-Audit Instructor  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1959 CO-AUDIT FORMULA To be used by any Co-Audit Instructor Find what the person thinks is wrong with him. Find a terminal he believes represents it. Audit that terminal with Overt- Withhold Straight Wire. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  The dates of the Australian ACC in Melbourne are changed as follows:    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JUNE 1959 The dates of the Australian ACC in Melbourne are changed as follows: Starts: November 9, 1959 Ends: December 19, 1959 A two-day standard Congress will be held on Saturday and Sunday, November 7 and 8, 1959. L. RON HUBBARD 475  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO "SELL SCIENTOLOGY"   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JUNE 1959 BPI HOW TO "SELL SCIENTOLOGY" See "What is Scientology?" article in MA Bulletin of near date to this. Base your line of talk to strangers on the premise that the 19th Century brutalities and foolishness of psychology, psycho-analysis and psychiatry have made your listener doubtful of mental healing. Agree they are right about this. Enlarge on the faults of old 19th Century practices. Then say they are not all bad since they gave us a basis on which to start Scientology. Then show how Scientology learned that men weren't animals, learned that shock and surgery on the brain was harmful, learned that sex was only a minor basis for neurosis and insanity. All this without saying what Scientology is or describing it. Then, without really ever explaining what Scientology is, say it has hope for man in a kinder, better world and that we must outgrow our fear of mental healing and look ahead, not backward. If you get real insistent, even oddly accusative of listener, even slightly angry on this point and stress it over and over, you should have some people willing to come to a PE Course. And if you also stress this in PE Courses, in the HAS Course, in the Co-audit, you will start a new concept of thought around the world. You have started a new reason to get annoyed at people. They'll use it! L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.vmm.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CLEAR TEST    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1959 CLEAR TEST From now on Clear Tests will cost #3.0.0 L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mp.rd 476  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/6/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WHAT IS SCIENTOLOGY   MA -- BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1959 MA -- BPI WHAT IS SCIENTOLOGY Scientology is the science of human ability and intelligence. It was developed over a third of a century by Doctor Hubbard, American nuclear physicist and leading world authority on the subject of life sources and mental energies and structures. The Hubbard Association of Scientologists International assists and forwards his work and is a charitable non-profit organization with thousands of professionals who help people to help others. The HASI conducts free basic classes in Scientology and is authorized to train to higher levels for which, however, charges are made amounting to about five shillings an hour for personal coaching. Professional processing in Scientology is available from the Association and many professional Scientologists in private practice. Scientology is the only full study in the field of the mind developed in the Twentieth Century. Older Nineteenth Century studies such as psychology, developed by Wundt in 1879 in Leipzig, Germany, psycho-analysis, developed by Freud in 1894 in Vienna, Austria, and psychiatry, developed through the Nineteenth Century in Russia, did not necessarily fail, since they provided data which permitted Scientology to begin. Modern, kinder methods largely have taken the place of old brutalities such as shock, brain surgery and years of pitiless self revelation. Man no longer is thought of as a brute animal, charged with unconscious and cunning force. A brighter more modern day has shed greater understanding on the problems of the mind and the nature of life and one need no longer shun mental healing practised by modern, civilized people. Scientology, in less than a decade, has become the world's primary study of Man and the mind and has today more offices and practitioners than all other Nineteenth Century practices combined. Thus we must learn to bury the past of mental healing and look forward to our better day, the day of Scientology and new hope, the day of help without threat or harm, the day of a new and better civilization, born with the birth of a better understanding of Man. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gh.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 477  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=2/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=4 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ADD FORMULA 10   CenO  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 JULY 1959 Issue IV CenO ADD FORMULA 10 These two processes are added to Formula 10 and just after running engrams: Process S2 -- "From where could you communicate to a victim?" Process S22 -- "Think of a place from which you could communicate to a victim." Optimum use on low cases is obtained running S22 fully muzzled. (Note: This is the 1st one-shot OT process.) L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gh.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 478  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  GENERAL INFORMATION    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London, W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JULY 1959 GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSE OF THIS WORK: To modify the data and material taught and demonstrated in the HCA/HPA Theory and Practice course and to bring uniformity of stable data to students and instructors. There are six basic process types. One or more processes of each type is included in the Theory and Practice course. Listed here are the six basic types, the characteristic, purpose and stable datum of each. These are the general data for each basic type. Specific data are given with the processes themselves. TYPE 1. STARTING AND ENDING SESSIONS. Characteristic: Two-way communication. Two-way communication is how it is done. Purpose: To compose preclear into and release him from the auditing session. Stable Datum: Agreement. Each thing done in starting and ending sessions is the establishment of an agreement. TYPE 2. CONTROL PROCESSES. Characteristic: Control by action. Preclear's physical actions are controlled in order to do the processes. Purpose: To place preclear's body and actions under the auditor's control to invite control of them by the preclear. Stable Datum: Never let the preclear get out of doing what he is told. TYPE 3. DUPLICATION Characteristic: Mimicry by action. Physical actions are duplicated. Purpose: To establish communication. Stable Datum: Each command in its own unit of time separate from every other command. TYPE 4. SUBJECTIVE. Characteristic: Thinkingness. The preclear must think something to do the process. Purpose: To recover automaticities of thought and as-is unwanted thinkingness. Stable Datum: Body control comes before control of thinkingness. 479 TYPE 5. OBJECTIVE Characteristic: Spotting and finding. Preclear must spot or find something exterior to himself to carry out the auditing command. Purpose: To orient preclear in present time, drop out past and improve havingness. Stable Datum: Attention of preclear must be under auditor's control. TYPE 6. STRAIGHT WIRE. Characteristic: Remembering and forgetting. Preclear must do these things to carry out auditing command or question. Purpose: To re-control remembering and forgetting and relate past to present. Stable Datum: Specific things, not generalities. DEFINITIONS OF THETAN, MIND AND BODY - the three parts of Man THETAN: The awareness of awareness unit which has all potentialities but no mass, no wavelength and no location. MIND: The accumulation of recorded knowns and unknowns and their interaction. BODY: An identifying form or non-identifiable form to facilitate the control of, the communication of and with and the havingness for the thetan in his existence in the MEST universe. A thetan himself without the body is capable of performing all the functions he assigns to the body. *** THE CCH PROCESSES -- TONE 40 AUDITING Definition of Tone 40 auditing: Positive, knowing, predictable control toward the preclear's willingness to be at cause concerning his body and his attention. CCH 1 -- A TYPE 2 -- CONTROL PROCESS NAME: Give me that hand, Tone 40. COMMANDS: "Give me that hand." Physical action of taking hand when not given and then replacing it in preclear's lap. And "Thank you" ending cycle. All Tone 40 with clear intention, one command in one unit of time, no originations of preclear acknowledged in any way verbally or physically. May be run on right hand, left hand, both hands ("Give me those hands") or "Don't give me that hand", each one flattened in turn, never switching to a different hand or command before flattening the one already started. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated in chairs without arms, close together. Outside of auditor's right thigh against outside of preclear's right thigh. This position reversed for left hand. In both hands preclear's knees are between auditor's knees. PURPOSE: To demonstrate to preclear that control of preclear's body is possible, despite revolt of circuits, and inviting preclear to directly 480 control it. Absolute control by auditor then passes over toward absolute control of his own body by preclear. TRAINING Never stop process until a flat place is reached. To process STRESS: with good Tone 40. Auditor taught to pick up preclear's hand by wrist with auditor's thumb nearest auditor's body, to have an exact and invariable place to carry preclear's hand to before clasping, clasping hand with exactly correct pressure (enough to be real to preclear, not enough to bruise his hand over a long run), replacing hand (with auditor's left hand still holding preclear's wrist) in preclear's lap. Making every command and cycle separate. Maintaining Tone 40. Stress on intention from auditor to preclear with each command. To leave an instant for preclear to do it by his own will before auditor does it. Stress Tone 40 precision -- this process puts order into preclear's case, thus precision must be stressed. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in the 17th ACC, Washington, D.C., 1957. CCH 2 -- A TYPE 2 -- CONTROL PROCESS NAME: Tone 40 8-C. COMMANDS: "With that body's eyes look at that wall." "Thank you." "Walk that body over to that wall." "Thank you." "With that right hand touch that wall." "Thank you." "Turn that body around." "Thank you." Run without acknowledging in any way any origin by preclear, acknowledging only preclear's execution of the command. Commands smoothly enforced physically. Tone 40, full intention. POSITION: Auditor and preclear ambulant, auditor in physical contact with preclear as needed. PURPOSE: To demonstrate to preclear that his body can be directly controlled and thus inviting him to control it. Finding present time. Havingness. Other effects not fully explained. TRAINING Absolute auditor precision. No drops from Tone 40. No flubs. STRESS: Total present time auditing. Auditor turns preclear counter- clockwise then steps always on preclear's right side. Auditor's body acts as block to forward motion when preclear turns. Auditor gives command, gives preclear a moment to obey, then enforces command with physical contact of exactly correct force to get command executed. Auditor does not check preclear from executing commands. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., 1957, for the 17th ACC. CCH 3 -- A TYPE 3 -- DUPLICATION PROCESS NAME: Hand Space Mimicry. COMMANDS: Auditor raises two hands, palms facing preclear and says, "Put your hands against mine, follow them and contribute to the motion." He then makes a simple motion with right hand, then left. "Did you contribute to the motion?" "Thank you." "Put your hands in your lap." When this is flat the auditor does this same thing with a half inch of space between his and preclear's palms. "Put your hands facing mine, about a half inch away, follow them and contribute to the motion." "Did you contribute to the motion?" "Thank you." "Put your hands in your lap." When this is flat auditor does it with a wider space and so on until preclear is able to follow motions a yard away. 481 POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated, close together facing each other, preclear's knees between auditor's knees. PURPOSE: To develop reality on the auditor using the reality scale (solid comm line). To get preclear into communication by control + duplication. TRAINING That auditor be gentle and accurate in his motions, giving STRESS: preclear wins. To be free in two-way comm. That the essential part of the auditing command is the motion, not the verbal patter. When it is necessary to physically assist preclear to do commands, use one-hand commands, putting preclear's hand through the command with auditor's free hand holding preclear's hand by the wrist. Accept preclear's answer to the question, "Did you contribute to the motion?" -- his answers are accepted, whatever they may be. Auditor always places his hands up before telling preclear to do so. Auditor tells preclear to put his hands in his lap and keeps his own up until preclear does so, allowing preclear to break the solid comm line. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, 1956, as a therapeutic version of Dummy Hand Mimicry. Something was needed to supplant "Look at me. Who am I?" and "Find the Auditor" part of Rudiments. CCH 4 -- A TYPE 3 -- DUPLICATION PROCESS NAME: Book Mimicry. COMMANDS: Auditor makes a simple or complex motion with a book. Hands book to preclear. Preclear makes motion, duplicating auditor's mirror-image-wise. Auditor asks preclear, "Are you satisfied that you duplicated my motion?" If preclear is and auditor is also fairly satisfied, auditor takes book back, acknowledges, "Thank you", and goes to next command. If preclear says he is and auditor fairly sure he isn't, auditor takes book back and repeats command and gives book to preclear again for another try. If preclear is not sure he duplicated any command, auditor repeats it for him and gives him back the book. Tone 40 only in motions. Verbal two-way comm quite free. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. PURPOSE: To bring up preclear's communication with control and duplication. (Control + duplication = communication.) TRAINING Stress giving preclear wins. Stress auditor's necessity to STRESS: duplicate his own motions. Circular motions are more complex than straight lines. The basic rule on complexity in duplication processes is: Make the motions as complex as is necessary to get the preclear's interest and attention and no more. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard for the 16th ACC in Washington, D.C., 1957. Based on duplication developed by LRH in London, 1952. METHOD OF RUNNING CCH 1, 2, 3, 4. CCH 1 is run first and run to a flat spot. Then CCH 2 is run. If CCH 2 produces change, it is flattened and followed by CCH 1. Then CCH 2 and if it again produces change it is followed by CCH 1. This rule is followed throughout -- when 482 either CCH 2, CCH 3, CCH 4 produces change the process is flattened and followed by CCH 1. This series of four processes is left when they can be run, one after the other (1, 2, 3, 4) in the same session without producing change. The four CCH processes are to be run on the following cases: INSANE: That is, a person who is extremely and obsessively unwilling to control his body, his attention and his thoughts. UNCONSCIOUS: Any person who is unaware, to a great degree. HOSTILE: Person who has appeared for processing but who demonstrates a complete unwillingness to accept order and to carry out an auditing command. CCH 1 "DON'T GIVE ME THAT HAND" version, is a specific process for a case who is dramatizing a heavy compulsive withhold condition. *** ARC STRAIGHT WIRE -- A TYPE 6 -- STRAIGHT WIRE PROCESS COMMANDS: "Recall something that was really real to you." "Thank you." "Recall a time when you were in good communication with someone." "Thank you." "Recall a time when you really liked someone." "Thank you." The three commands are given in that order and repeated in that order consistently. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other at a comfortable distance. PURPOSE: To give the student reality on the existence of a bank. (When used as a training drill.) This is audited on another and is audited until the preclear is in present time. It will be found that the process discloses the cycling action of the preclear going deeper and deeper into the past and then more and more shallowly into the past until he is recalling something again close to present time. This cyclic action should be studied and understood and the reality on the pictures the preclear gets should be thoroughly understood by the student. The fact that another has pictures should be totally real to the student under training. NOTE: It should be thoroughly understood that this is a valuable process and an excellent step in preparation for running the heavier recall processes. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in 1951 in Wichita, Kansas. This was Once a very important process. It has been known to bring people from a neurotic to a sane level after only a short period of application. It has been run on a group basis with success but it should be noted that the thinkingness of the individuals in the group would have to be well under the control of the auditor in order to have this process broadly beneficial. When it was discovered that this process occasionally reduces people's havingness, the process itself was not generally run thereafter. It is still, however, an excellent process with that proviso, a reduction of havingness in some cases. If this process is "policed" the auditor asks the preclear "when" before giving the acknowledgement, as often as is necessary to maintain control of the preclear -- or as often as is necessary for the auditor to maintain his own confidence that the preclear is under control and doing the process. This process can be run "muzzled" and should be, where muzzling is indicated. 483 ASSESSMENT An inventory and evaluation of a preclear, his body and his DEFINITION: case to establish processing level and procedure. 1. Determine processing level. 2. Determine process to be used. 3. Always undercut reality level of the case when assessing processing level. 4. Establish reality level of case by two-way communication using understanding and affinity as guides. Understanding: What can the preclear say and talk about that is easily understandable to the auditor? What can the auditor say and talk about that is easily understandable by the preclear? Affinity: What does the preclear like or dislike? What does he detest or ignore? What is he anxious or otherwise mis-emotional about? 5. Never overlook an obvious physical defect or communication difficulty when making an assessment of any kind. 6. Be alert to preclear's comm lags and what produces them. 7. Observe the preclear's response to control. 8. Find out what the preclear assigns cause to -- what he blames -- what he feels he can do nothing about. TERMINAL ASSESSMENT -- for OVERT-WITHHOLD PROCESS In the HCA/HPA course this is done by two-way communication. The student should learn it by observance of the instructor. Terminal Assessment is made to locate the terminals in the case which, when run, will produce an increase in the responsibility and reality level of the preclear. A VERY BRIEF COVERAGE OF DYNAMIC AND KNOW TO MYSTERY SCOUTING 1. Discover the terminals the preclear states to represent each part of the expanded Know to Mystery Scale. Any terminal which is obviously aberrated and won't clear by two-way comm should be run. 2. Discover what terminals the preclear has identified with the wrong Dynamic. Any terminal wrongly placed that won't blow by two-way comm should be run. NOTE: Two-way comm here does not mean invalidative or evaluative questions or comments by auditor. SELECTED PERSONS SCOUT This is the assessment most used. It is applied to the persons in the preclear's present life. There are several loaded questions which can be used and there are several observations to be made by the auditor. QUESTIONS: "Who is to blame for the condition you are in?" "Who do you know or have known that you'd really hate to be?" "Who really had it in for you?" "Who do you know or have known that you dislike thinking about?" To be observed by auditor: Comm lag: Willingness or unwillingness to communicate about a specific person. Physical and emotional effect produced by discussion of specific person: agitation, voice change, blushing, dopiness, etc. NOTE: Auditor must realize that preclear has no power of choice in the selection of terminals. The terminal is chosen by the auditor. 484 In a case where the preclear does not answer up to questions or shows no useful (to the assessment) effects from questions, simply select the person who is realest to the preclear and proceed with the process. Continue running the persons in preclear's present life on basis of who is realest until preclear is able to answer up to assessment questions. Realest person at start may tum out to be the auditor. If so, run it. OVERT-WITHHOLD SELECTED PERSONS STRAIGHT WIRE -- A TYPE 6 -- STRAIGHT WIRE PROCESS COMMANDS: "Think of something you have done to _____________." "Thank you." "Think of something you have withheld from ______________." "Thank you." Or "Recall something you have done to ______________." "Thank you." "Recall something you have withheld from ______________." "Thank you." The use of the "think of" command rather than the "recall" allows the preclear to plow through where his track is jammed and incidents are not easily separated, to the point where he can recall. In either case commands are run alternately, one for one. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other at a comfortable distance. PURPOSE: To put the preclear at knowing cause toward the people in his current life so that those people can no longer restimulate the preclear in livingness. TRAINING Any terminal run with this process is flat when that terminal STRESS: can no longer restimulate the preclear's reactive bank. When the preclear can find no new incidents to recall and must repeat old incidents to continue process, a given terminal can be considered flat. Make sure he is repeating incidents and not recalling similar incidents before ending the run on that terminal. Also, the first few repeats may be just the preclear's way of filling in a comm lag. Student should observe and understand phenomena occurring with this process. Where assessment has been properly made, the preclear will manifest various mis-emotions ranging from below 0.0 on the tone scale up to 2.0 and emotions up to 4.0. The NOT-ISNESS on the case will show up as attempts to not-is the auditor, process or anything preclear's attention touches. The preclear, at first, will not correctly assign the reasons for his mis-emotions and discomforts and will blame them on the auditor, etc. This is an example of COROLLARY No. 3 of AXIOM 58 in action. This process is run "muzzled" by the student in training. Muzzled auditing is done as follows: At the beginning of session, instructor makes an assessment of the preclear's case and chooses the terminal to be run. He gets the preclear's agreement to run the process and does a very brief clearing of the command with the preclear. Then, the student auditor says, "Start of session," and gives the first command. When preclear has answered the auditor acknowledges and goes on to the next command. If the preclear originates anything, either as a statement, comment or question the auditor nods his head as an acknowledgement. If the preclear asks to have the command repeated, the auditor nods his head and repeats it. This is continued until end of session or until process is flat on that terminal. If student has any question or thinks terminal is flat, he puts his hand behind his chair and wig-wags to get instructor's attention. He does not leave his chair. Near end of session instructor gives the team notice that the session will end in two minutes. At the end of that time, when preclear has answered the last command and has been acknowledged, the student auditor 485 says, "End of session." This is all there is to muzzled auditing done by students. The student auditor uses only TR 0, TR 2, TR 3 (duplicative command) and handles originations with a nod of his head, only. No rudiments or two-way comm beyond "Start of session" and "End of session". Student should understand that when he runs this process (and some others) on preclears in the field, he should use muzzled auditing whenever he finds himself with any tendency to over- communicate or with any preclear who ARC breaks easily. Student should also understand that Overt-Withhold Selected Persons, Third Rail, ARC Break Straight Wire and Not-is Straight Wire can all restimulate so much automatic NOT-ISNESS that the preclear will at times apparently lose his bank, his memory, and even the auditing command and its meaning. The only action indicated when this occurs is to persist with the process. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in the 21st ACC, in Washington, D.C., in 1959, as a means of ensuring wider and more predictable case gains by more auditors, even unskilled ones. FACTUAL HAVINGNESS -- A TYPE 5 -- OBJECTIVE PROCESS COMMANDS: "Look around here and find something you have." "Thank you." "Look around here and find something you would continue." "Thank you." "Look around here and find something you would permit to vanish." "Thank you." Commands are each flattened in turn before going on to next command. Process can be begun on any of the three commands, but the above order should be followed. If process is begun on "vanish" the next command to be run is "have". POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other at a comfortable distance and with preclear facing majority of auditing room. PURPOSE: To remedy havingness objectively. To bring about the preclear's ability to have, or not have, his present time environment and to permit him to alter his considerations of what he has, what he would continue and what he would permit to vanish. TRAINING To be run smoothly without invalidative questions. One of the STRESS: most effective processes known when thinkingness can be controlled somewhat. The student should thoroughly understand that when a preclear is set on wasting, the vanish command will at first occupy the majority of auditing time spent on this process. Student should understand that the three commands can be each flattened in order any number of times and that running one of the commands is quite apt to unflatten the other two. Process should be continued until this no longer occurs. THIRD RAIL is a special form of FACTUAL HAVINGNESS COMMANDS are the same as in Factual Havingness. However the commands are & POSITION: run in a special ratio of: 8 commands of "vanish" 2 commands of "continue" and 1 command of "have". PURPOSE: To remedy extreme conditions of NOT-ISNESS. To remedy obsessive waste. To permit use of the process without bogging preclear in any one of the commands. TRAINING Student should realize that there is very seldom any reason for STRESS: altering this ratio and should never Q and A with the preclear's 486 complaints about doing the "continue" or "vanish" commands. Student should understand that Third Rail should be run where auditor is uncertain where to begin with Factual Havingness. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1958, as the best form of objective havingness. Originally developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London in 1955 as "Terrible Trio". Third Rail developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London for the 5th London ACC. RUDIMENTS -- A TYPE 1 PROCESS -- OPENING AND CLOSING SESSIONS COMMANDS: None as such. Rudiments is the establishment of the agreements basic to an auditing session, and the termination of them, at end of session. Students must understand what the rudiments are and be able to use them with any preclear who is capable of agreeing to them, by two-way communication. They are: 1. Auditor 2. Preclear 3. Auditing room 4. Start of session 5. Preclear's goal for session. Auditor, by two-way comm, gets preclear's agreement to each of these, allowing preclear to state his own goals. The above order is not necessarily the order in which they are established. There should be enough two-way comm to get the preclear's agreement and no more. The auditor should determine for himself, but not tell the preclear, what he (the auditor) intends to do with the session. At the end of session auditor makes sure the preclear is released from agreements. Auditor does not argue with the preclear about the preclear's goals. NOTE: If a preclear cannot communicate about the rudiments or be brought to agree with them fairly easily, CCH 1, 2, 3, 4 should be run with only "Start of session" spoken by the auditor as total rudiments. Rudiments are not used otherwise with any preclear who needs to be run on CCH 1, 2, 3, 4. Alternatively, for more accessible cases, do "muzzled" auditing as described above. MOCK UP A PICTURE FOR WHICH YOU CAN BE TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE -- A TYPE 4 -- SUBJECTIVE PROCESS COMMAND: "Mock up a picture for which you can be totally responsible." "Thank you." POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. PURPOSE: To put preclear at cause with regard to mental image pictures to the degree that engrams are under his control. TRAINING That preclear not be run on this process before he is willing STRESS: to carry out a subjective process command exactly as given. Earlier processes should be well flattened before this is attempted. Otherwise the preclear will be given loses. The command means exactly what it says and the preclear's thinkingness must be well enough under control for him to view the command that way. This process should not be run for ever without an occasional flattening of NOT-IS Straight Wire. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1958. 487 RE-EXPERIENCE AND EXPERIENCE PROCESS -- A TYPE 4 -- SUBJECTIVE PROCESS COMMANDS: "What part of your life would you be willing to re-experience?" "Thank you." "What part of the future would you be willing to experience?" "Thank you." Commands run alternately, one for one. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. PURPOSE: To bring about the preclear's ability to re-experience his past without enduring consequence and to confront the future without restimulation. TRAINING That student understand that the process is run until flat and STRESS: that student be aware of what "flat" is. When the preclear can easily get out of any incident he gets into and when he can re- experience those things without enduring consequence. Where engrams are encountered with the process the auditor should attempt to find out the year of its occurrence by two-way comm and flash answers and should record the dates found. The auditor must not go into general two-way comm with the preclear about the incidents preclear contacts. Never end the process while preclear is sticking in an incident. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1959. PRESENT TIME PROBLEMS -- PART OF RUDIMENTS -- TYPE 1 PROCESSES COMMANDS: Auditor, by two-way comm, discovers the preclear's present time problem and discusses it with him. If it blows on this basis, fine. If not, we move out of Type 1 Processes. To handle the present time problem other than by two-way comm, discuss it with the preclear and get the names of the terminals involved. Ask the preclear which of these is realest. Run the one he names with Selected Persons Overt-Withhold Straight Wire. Discuss the problem. Find which of the remaining terminals is most real to the preclear. Run it with S.P.O.W.S.W. Discuss the problem and so on until the problem is run out, which is when the preclear does not need to do anything about it. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. PURPOSE: To remove the surface difficulty that is the present time problem so that the auditing session can progress. TRAINING Student should know definition of a problem and should know STRESS: very well what happens to auditing sessions where present time problem is unflat. A problem is "The conflict arising from two opposing intentions". A present time problem is one that exists in present time, in a real universe. It is any set of circumstances that so engages the attention of the preclear that he feels he should be doing something about it instead of being audited. Auditor uses questions based on definition of present time problem to find present time problems. Never leave a present time problem half run. Preclears with whom the rudiments cannot be readily established should not be run on present time problems but should be run on CCH 1, 2, 3, 4. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in London in 1952. 488 ARC BREAK STRAIGHT WIRE -- A TYPE 6 PROCESS COMMAND: "Recall an ARC break." "When?" "Thank you." POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. PURPOSE: To as-is ARC breaks. To bring about the preclear's ability to confront and as-is ARC breaks. To straighten out the preclear's time track which has become collapsed by ARC breaks in restimulation. To key out and take out of restimulation the "Rock" chain. TRAINING To not acknowledge the preclear's execution of the command STRESS: until the time of the ARC break has been established and to acknowledge with good TR 2 when the time is established. To accept preclear's reality as to "when". If he says, "It occurred the year I graduated from high school," accept it and go on to next command. Assist him with two-way comm when he has difficulty locating time. Flash answers may also be used for this. Do not leave process until preclear can easily get out of incidents he gets into on the process. Process is flat when recalling ARC breaks no longer produces undue amounts of mis-emotion. Student should understand that the process has the limitation of being somewhat hard to clear command with person unfamiliar with the term "ARC". HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1958. NOTE: In handling ARC breaks with the auditor, the auditor should use Selected Persons Overt-Withhold with the auditor as the terminal when the break is severe. Otherwise, use TR 5N. NOT-IS STRAIGHT WIRE -- A TYPE 6 -- STRAIGHT WIRE PROCESS COMMANDS: "Recall a time you implied something was unimportant." "Thank you." "Recall a time somebody else thought something was important." "Thank you." Commands run alternately, one for one. POSITION: Auditor and preclear seated facing each other a comfortable distance apart. PURPOSE: To bring NOT-ISNESS (Axiom 11) under preclear's knowing control and to reduce the NOT-ISNESS in the preclear's bank. To improve recall and increase reality. To generally increase preclear's willingness to confront his past. To as-is the times when preclear not-ised others. To bring about the ability to evaluate importances. TRAINING To be certain preclear can recall overt acts to some fair STRESS: degree before attempting this process. To make certain the preclear is not running the process on the effect side (i.e. recalling times he thought things were important and times others implied things were unimportant). To persist when preclear's restimulated NOT-ISNESS threatens to destroy the session. To run the process to a flat spot where the preclear easily gets out of the incidents he gets into and can recall incidents without immediately restimulating NOT-ISNESS, which is manifested by a sudden worsening of his recalls. HISTORY: Developed by L. Ron Hubbard in Washington, D.C., in 1959. SCALE OF PROCESSES TAUGHT IN HCA/HPA This is a scale of processes as they fit with the CONFRONTINGNESS SCALE, from the bottom up. 489 1. CCH 1, 2, 3,4. 2. Rudiments. 3. PT Problems by Overt-Withhold Straight Wire. 4. ARC Straight Wire. 5. Selected Persons Overt-Withhold Straight Wire. 6. Factual Havingness ) These two processes can be interchanged. 7. Third Rail ) 8. ARC Break Straight Wire. 9. NOT-IS Straight Wire. 10. Past and Future Experience. 11. Mock up a picture for which you can be totally responsible. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.jh.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 490  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=9/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Definition of Scientology -- Written by LRH for Legal when setting up HASI Ltd   BPI Magazine Article Written by LRH for Legal when setting up HASI Ltd  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 9 JULY 1959 BPI Magazine Article Definition of Scientology -- Written by LRH for Legal when setting up HASI Ltd "Scientology is an organized body of Scientific research knowledge concerning life, life sources and the mind and includes practices that improve the intelligence, state and conduct of persons." L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ps.rd Copyright$c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 491  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SPECIAL INFORMATION FOR FRANCHISE HOLDERS   FRANCHISE HOLDERS  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE East Grinstead, Sussex, U.K. HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JULY 1959 SPECIAL INFORMATION FOR FRANCHISE HOLDERS It has been many a year since I sat down and banged out a stencil, but here I am doing it and Susie is waiting in the other room to run it off on a Gestetner. So if you have any trouble making it out, it was done on a German typewriter and an English mimeo machine run by a cosmopolouse and a Texan respectively. Actually I have been trying for several weeks to convince people that a line should be gotten through to the US Franchise Holder but they didn't believe it and so here I am doing it. We have just moved a small staff of HCO WW down to Saint Hill and this is the place from which your bulletins will be coming and out of which we will be operating. So here and now mark down with fire or lipstick or anything that is handy all the proper addresses to which you should address all communications relating to all franchises, all payments, SOSs or anything headed "RON!" POSTAL ADDRESS: HCO SAINT HILL, East Grinstead, Sussex, England. Telephone, East Grinstead 4786 (but use cables, not phone) CABLE ADDRESS: SIENTOLOGY, EAST GRINSTEAD TELEX TELETYPEWRITER ADDRESS: HCO STHIL EGSTD TELEX 8876 Here is what happened some months ago: I ordered the HCO SEC US to issue INTERIM Franchises to able auditors in the US. Anyone qualifying under that heading could have an HCO Franchise. These people would get technical and organizational bulletins relating to HAS Co-audit from me and would get a 40% discount on books and help in other ways. In return these people would send me 10% of their gross income from Dianetics and Scientology every week to help pay for the administration of the line, postage, etc. Very big things are in the wind as I told people at the Congress but I did not tell them this subtle fact: The INTERIM HCO Franchise is a testing area. Those people who get active, do a good job and remit their ten percent regularly will receive a PERMANENT HCO Franchise -- and that means a great deal more than it looks on the surface. If after a trial period which may run up to one year, the Franchise Holder makes good on all fronts, he will be given the right to train to the level of HCA (HPA in Sterling area). Training in Central Organizations is being upgraded to HCS/BScn and DScn. There is even more to an Interim Franchise than this. HCO WW has been fortunate enough to secure the administrative services and for Interim Franchise Holders the advices of Dr. Nile Adams. He can be contacted through HCO Washington, 1812 19th St., N.W., Wash., D.C. Nile and I have worked out advertising, financing and general organization for PROJECT CLEAR U.S. Thus an Interim HCO Franchise looks to be more than first glance indicates. I determined -- and said very loudly -- in 1950 that Scientology would go as far as it worked and that I was not going to open up the ball until we had all the music written. Well, I've written the music. You don't know all about that, yet, but you will. 492 I am very aware of the fact that this has worked, in one way, a hardship on all Dianeticists and Scientologists. But not even threats of storm, flood and bankruptcy have made me swerve from that resolution. Research came first. When research had wrapped up the human mind and dissemination I was willing to fire with all guns -- but not one minute before. So I've up and done it and we're getting set on the firing line. We have many riches. We have a hard corps of trained Scientologists. We already know who our friends are. We've drawn the teeth of old-time psycho- therapy and we've lived down our sins. But more important we can and mean to clear the US. The finance for this project has been worked out very thoroughly. The job will only cost a few hundred million and, hold your hat, you're going to make it. Excitement is in the wind. The future is no calm vista. And we are right now taking this vital forward step. My first action is to clear all comm lines and ready up HCO staffs and facilities. We are putting in teletypewriters on every continent as fast as we can get them installed and we have other comm circuits planned. We are, in short, getting ready for traffic. These first stages on which we are now engaged are full of tests and reaches which are being hardened, as they prove successful, into a true pattern of advance. About the only real sorting out is the personnel. Central org staffs right now are running on each other about as rough a process as you could want, Process S 2. It's named after an English brand weed-killer. What you want to know is, exactly what do you do now? The answer is you carry on and build about as big an HAS Coaudit as you can and do individual auditing and coaching. You receive from here a lot of data you need and you remit directly to here 10% of your gross income made from Dianetics and Scientology every week. You send this to HCO St Hill by postal order, your own check or any handy means. You will receive info from US HCO offices eventually when I am sure all lines are in place. Your local area HCO office will be put back on the lines shortly. But you continue to remit to Saint Hill until we have a clear picture of both your credit responsibility and your activity. Very soon, we'll send people in to help you set yourself up on a proper financial level with proper quarters. Meanwhile, pitch like mad. Communicate to the public. Every bit of promotion counts. Meanwhile, don't shame-blame-regret and lose motion. I learned a lot watching this first struggle and enturbulence and we'll make it all pay off, every bit of it and one of these fine days we'll have a sane world. And wouldn't THAT be nice. All the best, L. RON HUBBARD HCO SAINT HILL PS: If you're getting any co-auditing yourself, be sure to run flat-flat- flat, Process S2. It's muzzled. And its command is, "From where could you communicate to a victim." And what is flat on that?? Why, to regain the ability to communicate without reservation, of course. It's a one shot OT. LRH [Another issue of the same date and title made the distribution "U.S. Franchise Holders". It also deleted the third to the last paragraph on the previous page and replaced it with, "An HCO WW Committee has just been formed which will be directly concerned with HCO WW Franchise matters, and will be acting on the instructions of HCO WW. The Committee has started with evidence of great enthusiasm and sincere desire to promote Franchise Centers throughout the States."] 493  L. RON HUBBARD HCO SAINT HILL   Type = 11 iDate=17/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AFRICA OVER THE TOP   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 17 JULY 1959 CenOCon AFRICA OVER THE TOP A cable from Jack Parkhouse tells us that HASI South Africa has topped one thousand pounds for one week's income without special events for the first time. HCO Franchises are also doing very well. As South Africa has a white population of only 2.8 million or thereabouts, you can see that every other central organization in the world has been out-created. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=18/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TECHNICALLY SPEAKING   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 JULY 1959 BPI TECHNICALLY SPEAKING We have a whole world full of "victims". That's enough. We don't have to be victims ourselves. It's a scarcity we don't have to remedy. New Definition: A Scientologist -- one who is not a victim. We can make victims into people without Q and Aing. Historical note: The whole Christian movement is based on the victim. Compulsion of the overt act-motivator sequence. They won by appealing to victims. We can win by converting victims. Christianity succeeded by making people into victims. We can succeed by making victims into people. It's time the inversion turned anyway. LRH:brb rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright$c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 494  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=18/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  INCOME TAX REFORM   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 JULY 1959 BPI INCOME TAX REFORM Please write the enclosed letter to (1) your leading local paper, and (2) your representatives in Congress. America needs your help to survive and we need your help to spread and effect a postulate as a mass-postulate test. This test is to determine the amount of mest communication necessary to change the "mind" of a governing agency. In this last respect it is purely research. But it is also a good idea. Let's do it. Your ability to postulate is workable too. Please tell us if you have done it. Dear There comes a time in the history of any country when tax collection activities become a disease that its economy cannot bear. Such a disease is ordinarily healed by revolt, inflation, or financial collapse. The primary source of disintegration in all governments, whether ancient Egypt or modern America, is tax voracity or abuses. While fighting a cold front with Communism the US is violently co- operating with Communist aims by destroying her individual confidence and initiative with a Marxist tax reform. The basic principles of US income tax were taken from "Das Kapital" and are aimed at destroying capitalism. Unless the US ceases to co-operate with this Red push, Communism could win in America. The reform of all income tax laws is needed for other reasons. (1) To increase government revenues in order to support defense. (2) To prevent spiraling inflation and another stock market collapse and (3) to return the US to the basic principles of democracy as opposed to economic tyranny. The following program should accomplish all desirable ends. The only "losers" are the people now gaining tax bonuses and the Kremlin. If America cannot act rationally on this matter of tax abuse, she is condemned to a crash, another depression and Communist dominance in the world. Income Tax Reforms that would stabilize US Economy and could win an election: Charge as tax 5% of all gross income and forbid taxes on net incomes. Abolish criminal penalties for tax failures; substitute higher percentiles of gross failures to pay. Forbid use of employers' or tax payers' time to actually collect taxes from others; (no second party tax duties). Forbid payments of bonuses or awards to tax personnel or informants for tax collections. Make tax personnel personally liable for all public actions if illegal or damaging. Forbid the payment of tax on tax monies paid; sums paid to internal revenue; tax payments to be an expense, all retroactive. 495 Delete the political aspect from income tax; make it a financial transaction, not an advance of the principles of Karl Marx aimed to penalize leadership or initiative. Delete all criminal aspects from income tax law, not using penalties about taxation to arrest men whose other crimes are suspected but cannot be proven by other law agencies; the payment of tax, if it is to be effected, must not be associated in the public mind with the actions of gangsters. Use the income tax amendment to collect taxes, not fight capitalism or the inequalities of ability amongst a people. Forbid the invasion of privacy of personal transactions and activities in order to collect tax beyond the examination of a corporation's books by a qualified accountant. Cease to penalize corporation executives exclusively because their accounts departments fail them -- penalize only the accountants who refuse to work or who make the errors, since management today is becoming difficult where the person actually making the errors and omissions cannot be touched. Forbid complex forms for taxation purposes. Allow only forms which list income and calculate its gross percentage. If the ills of income tax practice are not cured by swift law, they will be cured by (a) Economic collapse, (b) Russian victory, (c) A revolt of the people, or (d) The abandonment of democracy in favor of a fascist state. America can no longer afford the deadly disease of economic punishment in the name of income tax. This, more surely than H-bombs is destroying her future. The aim of the Kremlin is to destroy the US economic system. In 1911, the US altered her constitution to admit a Marxist tax principle. This was the first germ of the present economic disease. It can be handled in such a way as to save civilization or it can be ignored with the consequence of total destruction. A way has been hoped for that would give the government her revenues for defense without wrecking the economy. This is such a way since political popularity can be bought by it without sacrificing government revenues. L. RON HUBBARD 496  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=21/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JULY 1959 CenOCon HGC ALLOWED PROCESSES The following rundown is to be used in all HGCs. For use on unconscious and fixedly psychotic persons unwilling to be audited: "You make that body sit on that chair (or lie on that bed)", and CCH 1, 2, For use on persons unwilling to be audited at any time: Two way help bracket "How could you help me?" "How could I help you?" Get each question answered. Use lots of two way comm. Don't Q and A with reasons. For use on persons unwilling to be audited by reason of session errors: TR 5N, which is: "What have I done wrong?" "What have you done wrong?" with two way comm. For persons who are acutely ill: Ask them what part of their body they think is ill. Use that as the terminal. Run: "From where could you communicate to a.......?" (body part named). For use on persons who complain that auditing has no effect on them or who make very slow gains, or who are going for OT. Run: Process S2: "From where could you communicate to a victim?" This is flat when pc can confront calmly a victim. For use on persons in general. If this has been handled in an HAS Co- audit well, don't handle it again: Overt-Withhold Straight Wire after careful assessment and used on various buttons, Dynamic Straight Wire, Know to Mystery Straight Wire, are all more or less same processes but are different ways of assessment. Always run terminals, never conditions. For use on persons who have a p.t. problem. Get them to name the terminals associated with the problem. Run: "From where could you communicate to a........?" (general form of terminal). 497 For use on persons in general, always to some extent when they enter HGC: S-C-S. For use on auditors in for auditing. Run until fully flat: Process S 2: "From where could you communicate to a victim?' For use on people going to theta clear. Use liberally and long: Assess case with E-Meter. Spot terminals needing clearing. Use: "From where could you communicate to a........?" on each terminal. For use on people going to theta clear: Find engram necessary to resolve the case each time. Check out all terminals present in it. Make a list. Run: "From where could you communicate to a ........?" (each terminal in incident by general name). Don't run off from incident that is being run. Pc will go up and down the track but when one terminal is flat, choose the next from the same incident we started with. Remember to resurvey incident for new terminals when several are flat. For finishing off cases to level of theta clear: "From where could you communicate to a........?" (male, female bodies, bodies, mest). For easing off any case into comfort or completion of an intensive: Get person to say what is wrong. Get them to name the terminal they think is the trouble, run: "From where could you communicate to a........?" (terminal name). HAS CO-AUDIT Comm processes may be used in HAS Co-audit. Assess by asking person: "Are you sick or well?" If he says "ill", ask, "What part of your body do you think is ill?" Run: "From where could you communicate to a........?" (body part person said). If person says "well", then say, "What person or thing have you been most sorry for?" (meaning pity). Whatever person says, run it as a terminal, "From where could you communicate to a........?" (generalized form of whatever he or she said). This gets people up to talking and you get the "word of mouth advertising" you should have, plus a lot of better people. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is superseded by HCO B 25 January 1960, OT-3 Procedure -- HGC Allowed Processes, Volume IV -- 16.] 498  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACTUAL WORKING DEFINITION OF PSYCHOLOGY   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JULY 1959 BPI ACTUAL WORKING DEFINITION OF PSYCHOLOGY That body of practice devoted to the creation of any effect on living forms. This is the totality of study. The ethics of the effect do not enter in this subject. It is not a science since it is not an organized body of knowledge. In actual use it is a dramatization of Axiom 10, wholly reactive. In this wise the word can be used by Scientologists, and this definition can be used legally to prove Scientology isn't Psychology. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 499  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/7/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  OUR GOALS   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JULY AD 9 BPI OUR GOALS Well, we're easing right into the starting line for Clear Earth. Factually, we are getting lined up for the big push. Clearing a large population of Earth in our lifetimes is not even improbable now the way it's going. By establishing responsible centers all over Earth, running HAS Co-Audits and having them train and process, by having HASI and the FC give upper level training, by holding a tight rein on off-beat activities, we'll make it rather easily. The exact plan of a center is this: 1. Sign an HCO Interim Franchise. 2. Run an HAS Co-Audit and individually process people. 3. Keep a good level of activity for several months, paying regularly and correctly and thus establish "good credit" with HCO. 4. Obtain from HCO a permanent franchise. 5. Train to level of HCA/HPA in the center. 6. Progress forward toward clearing area on this pattern. Obtaining a permanent franchise is a big step. It doesn't just involve signing a piece of paper. It means an incorporation along exact lines of an exact activity in the center's area. It means an exact financial transaction wherein the center can obtain enough capital to fix up or build its own quarters, to hire people, to advertise broadly. Obtaining a permanent franchise is a big step. It means finance, promotion, success. The exact pattern of how this is done now exists and will be put out when centers are ready for it. Special people will come and do the basic work. The advertisement copy, texts, incorporation papers, everything is being made ready right now. We're moving from small time to Big Time. The HASIs and their Central Organisations will upgrade to universities. (They'll do the certificate examination and preparation for HCO so be good to them.) In centers we'll make the specialists. In Central Organisations we'll make the super specialists. Now, some questions come up. What about people who never asked for a franchise but went ahead and without helping the general push tried for a quick buck? We take them straight out of the line-up. Auditors in the future are either part of this 500 forward thrust or we forget them unpleasantly. We will close all centers operating without legal title to operate. There's too much at stake. We can't go by halves. We're Clearing Earth. Therefore people fall into two groups for us, those who are with us and those who aren't. Those who aren't will be handled by processing and where necessary, by law. So we're lining up now. This is a real tough planet. It will take a really serious shove to clear it. So here's where we start. And we start with no half-hearted measures. We have a new motto in HCO WW. If somebody drops a ball, we drop a person. First example was the solicitor for HASI Ltd. He dropped a ball, we dropped him. And we found a really good solicitor. It's a tough planet. We'd better face it and measure up to it. But your first step is to say "I'm going to clear _______" (the continent) and start telling people, naming your continent, "We're here to clear Africa." And moves that don't aim that way are dispersals. The easy part is getting people on our side. You've heard it said "Everybody is a Scientologist. Some just haven't cognited yet." The tough part is to keep everybody pointed toward the goal. So a Scientologist should say first to himself: "I'm going to clear _________" his continent. And then tell others, "We're here to clear _______" his continent. And then work along an agreed upon program. Sign or assist an interim franchise, be active, be OK with HCO WW, organize for and sign or assist a permanent center or help the HASI or HCO to get rolling. Look how far we've come in nine years! All right, I wasn't going nowhere. Were you? So let's stop fooling around and get serious. Clear Earth! Best, L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is modified by HCO PL 20 April 1968, Franchise, in OEC Volume 6, page 278.] 501  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=5/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HGC PROCESSES   D of P, London Info HCO Secretary HCO Washington, D.C.  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W.1 HCO BULLETIN OF 5 AUGUST 1959 HGC PROCESSES The lack of results in HGC is probably due to the restimulative nature of Communication Processes, a phenomenon we have noted on ACCs. Therefore, I am giving you this regimen which I want you to very thoroughly enforce so that we can regain the results and therefore income and dissemination on the HGC. These processes were first evolved by me in 1956 to process the personnel of a large London company so that they would get uniform results and would not be telling one another different processes during work. It is therefore amongst the first packages to be "used on anybody". You have all the data on this, I am sure. It is in the paperback on Control. Switch all pcs to this and we'll have a happier set of auditors and better results. Run Psychos on CCH 1, 2, 3, 4. Switch all other cases except the acutely ill (on which you should run Communication Process to the ill body part) to S-C-S and Connectedness. When these are flat run the pc for a while on the following Comm Process: "From where could you communicate to a person with difficulties?" When pc seems to be flattish on this, return to S-C-S and Connectedness. Let's increase those results. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:mc.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B was converted from a telex sent by L. Ron Hubbard on 27 July 1959 to the D of P, London, info HCO Secretary. HCO Washington, D.C., converted the telex also, and issued it under the title, HGC Regimen, on 26 July 1959.] 502  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE HANDLING OF COMMUNICATION PROCESSES SOME RAPID DATA   All HCO Franchise Holders All Staffs Central Orgs All HCOs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 AUGUST 1959 All HCO Franchise Holders All Staffs Central Orgs All HCOs THE HANDLING OF COMMUNICATION PROCESSES SOME RAPID DATA The most important research development of recent times is the "Communication Process". It has gradually been evolved for nine years, beginning in July of 1950 when I isolated Communication as one of the three important pivots on which all mental association turned, the other two being Affinity and Reality. Much could be said about this evolution and the search, but the important gain remains, that today, I have evolved finally a single command type process that answers all requirements of all levels of clearing and violates no rules of auditing. An auditor today could audit with just three packages: 1. The CCHs 2. S-C-S and Connectedness, and 3. The Communication Processes. Using these he would certainly achieve releases and clears on all cases he could keep on the auditing roster. I must call your attention to the facts of this: we have achieved our finite goals in auditing and clearing can be done easily and broadly without kick-backs. Therefore all programs should be geared with these steps: 1. Make a clear or two. 2. Use Communication Processes, in Co-audit toward clearing. 3. Groove in administratively to clear your area. I will shortly write a small book on Communication Processes which will give all. Meantime, the essentials of use are as follows: 1. By Communication Process is meant any process which places the preclear at Cause and uses communication as the principal command phrase. A typical wording now standardized is, "From where could you communicate to a..........?" 2. The terminals to which Communication Processes are addressed must be real terminals never significances only. Right "From etc, to a 'husband'" Wrong "From etc, to a 'thought'" Right "From etc, to a 'dog'" Wrong "From etc, to a 'mistake'" 3. All terminals employed in the command should be generalized. Don't peg pc to one lifetime with a proper name. Always use a generalized name since Communication Processes span lives too fast to be limited too much. Right "From etc, to a 'husband'" Wrong "From etc, to 'Bill'" Wrong "From etc, to 'your husband'" If you isolate Bill as the terminal that needs running, find out what Bill is to the pc. Use what the pc describes Bill to be or what rises on the meter. Bill will turn out to be 'a husband' or 'a friend' or 'a mechanic' or some generalized terminal. He is never run as 'Bill', as that pegs pc to one life and rarely clears Bill whereas the generalized terminal does clear Bill. 503 4. Run a Communication Process more or less muzzled. The smoother, the more confident, the more experienced the auditor, the less muzzle is needed. The process wins totally muzzled so err in the direction of more muzzle, not less. 5. A Communication Process is flat when none of that class of terminal produces change or a comm lag or a cyclic aspect on the time track. If the pc no longer goes into past on a continuous long run, the process is flat. 6. Use a meter. This alone tells you when a terminal is really flat. This alone diagnoses a terminal properly. A good electrometer can save you three hours in every five. Lack of meters means lack of clears. Only a meter keeps the auditor from clearing the auditor's buttons out of the preclear. Only a meter keeps processes from being left unflat. Only a meter can show when a terminal is clear or a preclear is clear. Use a meter if you want to clear people. Insist on your auditor using a meter if you want to get clear. 7. Know meter behavior. There's a lot of data on this. But I've recently found a new one. A terminal needs to be run if it drops and then when ignored any further questioning causes a needle to rise only. The right terminal found again sticks the needle and stops the rise. If a terminal is left unflat (if it is run and then dropped before it is flat), the needle in future sessions will only rise. A steadily rising needle is by definition then the symptom of an abandoned terminal. That terminal must be found again. If found it will stop the r1se of the needle. It must then be run and flattened. This is why some cases bog down and this is how it is remedied. A further discovery is that a terminal clears on the meter just like a pc clears on a meter. Example -- an unclear person doesn't read steadily at Male or Female Clear reading, but goes above or below that reading and the reading changes. Similarly, a terminal found on a pc reads above or below Male or Female Clear reading. If the terminal is run by a communication process it makes the tone arm read higher or lower than Male or Female Clear. The running of the terminal changes the tone arm position, making it rise and fall, rise and fall. The rises of the tone arm get easier, the falls more rapid until at last the tone arm does not rise or fall but sits on Male or Female Clear, depending on the sex of the pc (not the terminal). The more flexible the tone arm, the looser the needle. If that's Greek to you, better grab plane or train to a Central Org and study the E-Meter because you won't make any clears until you do. 8. A preclear is mest clear when no terminal selected is, when run by a Communication Process, productive of variation of the tone arm from Male or Female Clear reading. A preclear is theta clear when he can handle engrams without producing a change from clear reading. 9. Cases do not improve if they are in a victim valence as they self invalidate between sessions. Communication Process S2 or S22 must be run to remedy this. 10. If an assist is done by a Communication Process, the terminal chosen (usually a body part) must be flattened fully (see 7 above) before the case can be expected to move again on a new terminal. 11. When an auditor finds a steadily climbing needle on a pc new to him but not auditing, he must suspect that a terminal has been run but isn't flat. He should query past auditing or living until he finds a terminal which stops the rise. He then runs this flat before he goes on. 12. Old pcs benefit from a Communication Process using "an auditor" as a 504 terminal to clear off the case. This is done when the auditor fails with 11 above. 13. Old auditors can be smoothed out as cases by running a Communication Process on "an auditor" and "a preclear". Run each flat. 14. In general run any terminal selected back down until the tone arm reads Male or Female Clear stably for many commands and pc is no longer cycling on track with that terminal. 15. Process illnesses with Communication Processes if the illness is in the way of the session. Assess by finding out what part of body pc considers ill. Run what he says. Run it in one or several sessions until that part reads Clear on the tone arm. These are some of the rules above of Communication Processes. A few cautions however should be emphasised. Don't Self Audit with a Communication Process. Use a touch assist on body or room instead. Don't clip a terminal into action on a case and leave it unflat. Flatten it in one or many sessions instead or make sure you tell the next auditor that it is unflat. Communication Processes are so simple. They are apparently innocent and charming. They are in actuality strong enough to move a whole bank. So they should be handled with accuracy and the same respect you'd give 90% dynamite. Note to HCO Secs, D of Ps and Assoc Secs and heads of Organizations: It would be well worth your while to study this bulletin thoroughly, then have your people study it and take an examination on it. Those who can't pass it eventually shouldn't be handling paying preclears until well audited and retrained for we have no passing fancy here in Communication Processes and we use in them the cream of everything in techniques and procedure we have learned in nine years. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 505  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A SECOND TYPE OF FRANCHISE   HCO Franchise Holders HCO Offices Central Orgs MA  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 12 AUGUST 1959 HCO Franchise Holders HCO Offices Central Orgs MA A SECOND TYPE OF FRANCHISE A second and different type of HCO Franchise is now available in addition to the HCO HAS Co-Audit Franchise. The new type is the HCO Processing Franchise. It permits an individual auditor in practice to receive immediate bulletins, discounts, and tests, and requires that he remit 10% of his income from Dianetics and Scientology to HCO WW. This permits the individual to run an individual practice or a guidance center without running an HAS Co-Audit. THIS DOES NOT MEAN WE ARE ABANDONING HAS CO-AUDITS. These are the backbone. One auditor or several may have such an HCO Processing Franchise but if more than one are considered under such a Franchise, the processing earnings of the group are considered collectively. This makes two types of Franchise. The first is the HCO HAS Co-Audit Franchise which permits group processing, the running of an HAS Co-Audit, the processing of individuals, and, eventually, training to professional level. The second is the HCO Processing Franchise where individual processing only would be done. In the case of the HCO HAS Co-Audit Franchise HCO is going to do all it can to help set the Franchise holder up on a permanent basis when he is proved out, helping to establish proper finance, quarters, publications and organizational assistance. In the case of an HCO Franchise like the first type, we will issue now only an interim Franchise. When it is made permanent after due test of the holder by his use of it, HCO will assist the holder to Obtain proper finance, processing quarters and organizational assistance for the activity of individual processing in a guidance center. There will be a third type some day but it is not available now. This will be an HCO Organizational Franchise where the individual works "outside" Scientology organizations to bring order into larger non-Scientology activities in which he will be helped by HCO as a special activity. Persons now holding HCO HAS Co-Audit Franchises who wish to exchange their Franchise for an individual processing Franchise may do so. Where the person is not running an HAS Co-Audit and sees no immediate chance of starting one, he is liable to cancellation of Franchise. This offers such a person the right to remain a Franchise holder even though he is only processing individually. Out of these enfranchised guidance centers we hope will grow clinics, hospitals and sanitariums to cover that hole in the society now apparent. The very unable will need such assistance and we are here providing for it in the distant future. An HAS Co-Audit activity is basically more important and more immediately needed, but there are those in the society who are not up to co-auditing and we must also remember them. 506 If you transfer now you do however abandon your right to start an HAS Co-Audit and get HAS Certificates for your group. And with either Franchise you owe HCO 10% of all you make from Dianetics and Scientology. The main advantage of transfer is apparent only in the fact that you won't lose your Franchise rights if you are not now running an HAS Co-Audit and don't intend to. For all inactive Franchises will be cancelled within the next 30 days. NEWS BULLETINS HCO WW took over in the U.S. because of a previous randomness in getting Franchise holders started and serviced. Some of the randomness is still about. Some bulletins, unseen by HCO WW before issue, have been sent out from several points in the U.S. which are not factual. The following information is correct: All 10%s from Franchise holders should be sent to HCO WW only, made out to HCO WW and airmailed to HCO WW Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex, U.K. HCO 10%s from Central Organizations in the U.S. are sent to "L. Ron Hubbard, Founder", which is a special division of HCO. Contributions for research are sent to HCO WW made payable to the Scientology Research and Investigation Fund. These items cancel "HCO Policy Letter of July 22nd" mailed from Washington. Other bulletins mailed inside the U.S. to U.S. Franchise holders requesting 10%s to be sent to L.A. should be disregarded as unauthorized. Stable Datum: If it's postmarked HCO WW in the U.K. it's authentic, otherwise, ignore it. We will bring order yet. You can assist us by not being dismayed at disorder. When you start to introduce order into anything disorder shows up as the second postulate and blows off. Therefore our efforts to bring order in the society or any part of it will be productive of disorder for a short while every time. The trick is to keep on bringing order and soon the disorder is gone and you have orderly activity remaining. But if you hate disorder, and fight disorder only don't ever try to bring any order to anything for the resulting disorder will drive you half mad. Only if you can ignore disorder and can understand this principle, can you have a working world -- or a working operation, for that matter. ADAMS QUITS The problems of HAS Co-Audit Franchises have evidently gotten to Nile Adams. A few days ago, when I refused to permit him to overtax Franchise holders, he quit in Washington. His protest was against my refusal to let Franchise holders be made to pay 25% of their gross income for the privilege of being financed. The absolute maximum gross that a Scientology organization can lose to other activities and still live is 18%. A high but workable top is 15% of gross. But 25% gross is unthinkable. If you become big enough to require as a Franchise holder an HCO office of your own for liaison it will probably cost another 5% of your gross, but you will get all its services and save it on other payroll. But you will never be required to pay extravagant gross percentages while I can still stamp on toes and zap skulls. Nile has been ordered to 500 hours of processing at his own expense for breaking 507 the Code of a Scientologist flagrantly in public for he really got mad. That he did probably shows he was already under strain. So don't be too mad at him. He's a good promoter and when he's seen the elephant he'll be back in our ranks again. All he has to learn is to work for us also and he'll learn that. Don G. Purcell, by the way, the millionnaire who tried to seize Dianetics in 1951, died last month after a long illness, at the Mayo (MD type) Clinic. As in the case of the late Dr. Joseph Winter, author of much critical literature against Dianetics, Auditors refused to audit Purcell according to my reports. CABLE, DON'T PHONE We are so few at HCO WW and covering so many fronts that we cannot accept the phone calls that keep coming in. In the first place a trans- atlantic call takes usually an hour or two of waiting by one of us before it is fully connected. Such calls have taken 12 hrs to complete. And we have missed completion so often after such wasted time and have had such bad inaudible connections even with domestic calls in England, that it's no phone. Use telegrams and cables instead, they're faster. They have a memory. We can handle them without missing data not put down after a phone call. In the Manor staff office we have a Telex. That's a teletype like in the telegraph office. About five minutes after you file your telegram or cable it comes complete and accurate out of our Telex, typed with copies. These don't get lost. They get instant attention from the Communication guard. When a small group such as ours at HCO WW are handling indirectly several hundred thousand people, and are handling directly, at any given time, a few thousand and intimately a few hundred scattered all over Earth, we have to have a Communication discipline to get anything done. You're part of that Comm system, so if you want something done, be brief, to the point, and use: Airmail -- Airletters -- Cables -- Telegrams. And you'll be heard fast. Be pointless, use phones, come in person, and you won't be heard. You are much closer to HCO WW at your letter box or the telegraph office than you would be standing at the Manor's front door. We're proud of our Comm system. Use it! RESEARCH NOTE We are making fine progress with clearing. And we have three buttons we want flat on everybody in Scientology. The first is VICTIM. The second is MONEY. And the third -- well -- we'll let you know when the first two are flat on you. The auditing command is "From where could you communicate to a Victim?" and it's flat when the E-Meter tone arm reads clear for your sex and stays at that reading on the command. The second is "From where could you communicate to money?", and when the tone arm reads clear for your sex and stays there, you'll not only be well along, you'll be able to have the stuff. And now if no past emergencies spring up, I can get on with some other writing. And any day now, I may get some sleep. LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 Best, by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED RON 508  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SUGGESTED HCA COURSE SCHEDULE   CenO Info D of Ts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 AUGUST 1959 CenO Info D of Ts SUGGESTED HCA COURSE SCHEDULE The following schedule for the HCA Course is being used in the Academy at Washington, DC. This is a good schedule. It is sent out as data only and has no command value. HUBBARD PROFESSIONAL/CERTIFIED AUDITOR COURSE Purpose: To train an auditor able to Theta Clear. Design: The length is 8 weeks. Data and practical information are emphasized. The Hubbard Electrometer is used and is taught to the student well. There is one week of Comm Course, one week of Upper Indoc, six weeks of Theory and Practice. Repeats on Comm Course/Upper Indoc are reserved for slow students. Comm Course and Upper Indoc are the same as in SED 165. Theory and Practice are as follows: Week A ARC Tone Scale Mon. Lecture: Definition of Theta Clear. Process: ARC Straight Wire. Tue. Lecture: The Hubbard Electrometer and how to set it up to read the PC. Theta Clear, Release, Mest Clear. Process: None. Wed. Lecture: Assessments, with and without E-Meter. Process: Selected Persons 0-W Straight Wire. Thur. Lecture: Assessments with E-Meter. Recapitulation of various readings. Obnosis of case. Process: Sel. P. O-W SW. Fri. Lecture: Assessments with E-Meter. Willingness to read what is there to be read. Process: Op. Proc. By Dup. All auditing muzzled. All assessments done by instructor(s). Run only current life terminals on Sel. Pers. 0-W SW. Week B Mon. Lecture: CCH 1: use of CCHs in psychotic and Stage 4 cases. Process: same. Tue. Lecture: Present rime problems: definition and processes usable. Using E-Meter to locate. Process: CCH 2. Wed. Lecture: CCH 3: Reality Scale. Process: same. Thur. Lecture: CCH 4: Expanded Know-Mystery Scale. Process: same. Fri. Lecture: CCH 1-4: use of this procedure to bring low-level cases up to being auditable on E-Metered processes. Repeat definition of Clear. Repeat E-Meter readings. Process: same. All auditing muzzled. All assessments done by instructors. Students check assessments 509 at beginning of session, advise instructor if terminal needs changing, also if terminal runs flat during session. Turn PCs loose into prior life terminals as rapidly as current life terminals flattened, and all students must be running at least one whole track terminal by Thursday, regardless of whether current life terminals all flat or not. Week C Mon. Lecture: Factual Havingness: Effect Scale. Process: Fac. Hav. Tue. Lecture: 3rd Rail: ARC Tone Scale (repeat). Process: same. Wed. Lecture: Present time problems: 8 dynamics. Process: On PTPs. Thur. Lecture: Effect Scale (repeat): Psycho, Neurotic, "Normal", Release, Mest Clear, Theta Clear, OT (case levels). Process: none. Fri. Lecture: Scale of Confront: Types of Auditing. Process: none. All auditing muzzled. Assessments done by students and checked by instructor(s). Week D Mon. Lecture: Facsimiles. Process: Mock up a picture for which you... responsible. Tue. Lecture: Facsimiles -- types of. Process: Experience-reexperience process. Wed. Lecture: Flows-ridges-dispersals. Process: ARC Break SW. Thur. Lecture: Be-do-have. Process: Not-is SW. Fri. Lecture: Scales in relation to ARC tone scale: Universes/Valences. Process: Track-scouting. No muzzled auditing. All formal. Track-scouting, pinning dates. No repetitive process. Week E Mon. Lecture: The engram: Overt-Motivator Sequence: Deds and Dedexes. What is an "incident". Process: Formula 10. Tue. Lecture: Locks, Secondaries: Gradient Scales. Process: Formula 10. Wed. Lecture: The creation of a Theta Clear: OT as a speculative goal for a Theta Clear. Process: Formula 10. Thur. Lecture: Redefinition of Theta Clear: why comparison with other states not really possible except as a subjective exp. Process: Formula 10. Fri. Lecture: Type of auditors required for creation of different states of beingness: why creation of Theta Clear and OT require courage and stamina. The "Monster". All formal auditing on Formula 10. All assessments done by students. Supervised by instructor(s) only, intervention by instructor only where absolutely necessary. Week F Mon. Lecture: Basic-basic: The Rock. Gradient scale of incidents to Rock. Process: Formula 10. Tue. Lecture: Gradient scale of creation of Theta Clear. 510 Week F, contd Process: Formula 10. Wed Lecture: Stabilizing and "educating" the Theta Clear -- more on "The Monster". Process: Formula 10. Thur. Lecture: Processes usable after Theta Clear achieved: OT as a goal: def. of OT. Process: Formula 10. Fri. Lecture: Auditing programs, from PE course to individual Theta Clearing and OT. Process: Formula 10. All formal auditing on Formula 10, making sure every student gets most of the week on the "one-shot OT' process (at least three days). Strict attention to good discipline and control of session. ARC and "in-sessionness" to be superlative. WRITTEN DATA A student package should be issued to each student. This should contain: Student rules and regs. Instructor's Code. A sheet of definitions. A list of scales. "Ability" 80 (or equivalent in country). A copy of the E-Meter handbook (when available). Student hat (when issued). Mimeo sheet of end-of-course examination and other requirements. Ministerial requirements. PAB 114. Copy of HCO B on PE/HAS Co-Audit by PE (HCO) Dir WW. A blank HCO Franchise Form. TIME SCHEDULE 9:00 -- 10:00 Lecture and process of the day 10:00 -- 10:15 Break 10:15 -- 12:30 Session A 12:30 -- 1:30 Lunch 1:30 -- 3:45 Session B 3:45 -- 4:00 Break 4:00 -- 5:00 LRH Tape 5:00 -- 5:30 Question and answer period. STUDENTS ENTERING FROM UPPER INDOC The Director of Training must so arrange matters that students as closely follow the gradient scale of training here described as possible. Students may enter Weeks A-C anywhere. Weeks D-F are a specific gradient scale and may only be entered into from an earlier Theory & Practice week. If two weeks of Th. & Practice must be run concurrently, adjust schedule accordingly and keep students separated. FOOTNOTE The datum about cases not being worried about still applies, but if the course is run well, there should be plenty of Releases and some Theta Clears graduating. John Fudge LRH:ph.brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 (D of T, Washington, D.C) by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD 511  John Fudge (D of T, Washington, D.C) L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FRANCHISE HOLDERS   UK Franchise Holders  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 AUGUST 1959 UK Franchise Holders FRANCHISE HOLDERS Recent HCO Franchise Holder Bulletins sent out by HCO WW have been intended in the main for the United States. They have been sent by courtesy to Franchise Holders in the UK. The data applies equally. We have not so far attempted very much for the UK Franchise Holder and there is a great deal of ground work to be done. The US went through all this many months ago and have just now completed their first instruction courses in Washington where most Franchise Holders were carefully trained to improve their already climbing successes. US Franchise income is not yet high, amounting to an overall several thousand dollars a week only. But they have not yet had six months to get into the swing of it. When the class attendees return home from Washington where they have been since July 1, a steady acceleration can be expected. 1. The UK Franchise Holder has a lot of groundwork to do. First in the UK we have to learn to work better as a team. 2. UK Franchise Holders will have to get started on programs of co- auditing to clear up the key buttons of VICTIM, MONEY and a third one to be named later. HASI London staff is of course well along on this route. HCO WW is trying to bring the British Scientologist stability and security and this will be hard to do until his or her barriers on the subject are cleared up. We have no doubt of being able to bring security and stability to the British Scientologist and our first job is to get him or her to stand long enough to receive it. Hence the co-auditing program. If we want a better world we'll have to make it better -- nobody else seems to be trying to do anything but hold the status quo of misery. And if a better world is to be built, it will be built because we could pay our way. HAS Co-Audit is in its infancy in the UK. Even in South Africa and Australia the program is far more advanced. But this is because these areas have had great co-operation from HCO. In the very near future HCO WW will begin to work with the problems of the UK Franchise Holder. Meanwhile, it would be a good idea to get one-up personally by getting Process S 2 flattened and then you will be ready for a further step. We appreciate your patience. It will be suitably rewarded. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 512  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=19/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS CO-AUDIT -- FINDING TERMINALS   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 19 AUGUST 1959 BPI HAS CO-AUDIT -- FINDING TERMINALS If the instructor switches around terminals endlessly on a HAS Co-audit course, then you have nothing but rising needles left on these cases. It is necessary to get the very first terminal that dropped on the pc and convert it to a general form and run that terminal with a Communication Process until the terminal is again reading on the tone arm at male or female-clear (depending on the sex of the pc, not the terminal) and stays there. This is why you don't fill up the Co-audit. Regimen on this is find the first thing that dropped on the pc then state it in a general term -- make sure it drops. Example: pc's first assessment was on his wife. Find it again and see if it stops the needle rising; if it does, run: "From where could you communicate to a wife?" Note that it is a wife, not his wife. If the needle dropped the first time he was ever assessed on Bill, we have to find out what Bill is and run it. On new enrollees in the Co-audit, take a body part only. A body part is then run on the Communication Process, "From where could you communicate to a (name of body part)". This is only considered flat when no matter what or how many questions are asked about that body part, it registers on the tone arm of the meter at male or female clear, whichever the pc is. Only then can you go on to a new process. Communication Processes look so simple. They are in reality terribly tricky and terribly effective. Pick the right body part on the pc and he'll stay in the Co-audit until he's clear on that part, that's for sure. When you see a pc getting fouled up by lousy co-audit handling you are losing a student and, I am willing to confirm, gaining a victim computation. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 513  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=19/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TO A ROMAN CATHOLIC   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 19 AUGUST 1959 BPI TO A ROMAN CATHOLIC In Ireland, where we had an office for some years, the problem of processing persons of the Catholic faith was thoroughly worked out and the Church did not consider itself interested in the matter of auditing Roman Catholics and did not restrain any from being audited when Roman Catholics asked permission to be. Indeed Scientology is closer to the "Faculty Psychology" of the Church in the sixteenth century than modern psychology is. Modern psychology is not accepted by the Church because it considers man to be an animal with no soul. Scientology not only accepts but can prove than man does have a soul. Saint Thomas Aquinas is an early forerunner of Scientology. Scientology is not an heretic religion and demands no belief or faith and thus is not in conflict with faith. Several monsignors of the Church have been interested in Scientology and have approved of our activities. The late Pope Pius was an enemy of psychoanalysis but was heard to express a neutral attitude toward Scientology. He once assisted us in handling a government matter in the United States. All that processing requires is that you obtain a better reality on your environment and all its drills are aimed at this. Thus it has no conflict. Just as your religion would not forbid you to obtain a better command over a typewriter, so it could not be expected to forbid you to obtain a better command over your office, staff, or home. There is no conflict here. It is interesting that in nearly ten years of public presence, the materialistic sciences have often rapped at Scientology (Communism is a violent foe of ours) but never once in any country including Ireland has the Roman Catholic Church raised its voice against us. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 514  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/8/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  GROWTH WITH COMPETENCE   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 AUGUST 1959 BPI GROWTH WITH COMPETENCE There is a great deal of history to the development and dissemination of Dianetics and Scientology. And it has not been without its severe lessons. One of the first vows I made, in L.A. in the fall of 1950, was based on the assumption that "it will go as far as it works", and I vowed to make it work not just for the few but for the many and not just in expert hands but for the tyro as well. Well, that vow has been achieved. The HAS Co-Audit course taught in Washington, D.C., by Nibs, Dick, Jan and Nina West has made Mest Clears using only muzzled co-auditing. So it is working for the many in the hands of the relatively unskilled group co-auditor. But there were other things learned in this history. And amongst them was the lesson that a Central Org can succeed as far as it can service. When a Central Org can no longer service it cannot succeed. And that goes for any individual or group in the whole of Dianetics and Scientology, and on these the sun never sets. Our problem then, now, is to be able to service as far as we go. We are in the possession of powerful tools. We have relatively good literature and will soon have better. We can promise a great deal and point proudly to records of things we have done. We can say with truth that we have done more than fifty thousand years of thinking man could do in understanding and assisting the human being. We can command a very wide sphere of credit for first discoveries. We can promise a great many things on the basis of having delivered them. BUT CAN WE SERVICE THIS WELL AS A GROUP? I get some very fine reports from HAS Co-Audits throughout the world. But amongst these reports there are a few failures, a few resistive cases. I could audit them, a great many Scientologists could audit them and push them through. BUT the fact remains that there are auditors here and there who cannot. "Why?" I asked the HCO Area Secretary London the other night on telex -- "Low ARC," she replied. And this apparently explained two case failures by field auditors. And not very long ago when we had a bad code break with a pc in the field, the Ethics Committee suspended the auditor for a few days and then told him he could be reinstated but would have to sign a paper pledging to obey the Auditor's Code and HE REFUSED TO SIGN IT. Why? Because he had "gotten results with invalidating pcs too often", but the truth is he hadn't gotten good results and the tests showed it so he was wrong. But why wouldn't he sign the Auditor's Code? These of course are isolated things BUT AT THIS PRESENT INSTANT THEY EXIST. Low ARC, the HCO Area Sec London said. Well, what's this low ARC doing at this stage of the game? How come this late in the business does an auditor get discovered who doesn't believe in the Auditor's Code? Why do individuals and groups still flub on occasion? I know that all these people basically mean well. I would stake my life on their humanity and decency. And have. But we're in something that's got to go all the way 515 and the basic lessons contain this one, an Organisation will succeed as far as it can service. And if groups are still flubbing service let alone Administration, then they aren't going to go very far. Now does this mean there must be more training? NO. There will always have to be training but this won't entirely solve this one. "Low ARC," the HCO Area Secretary London said. What did she mean by that? She meant basically that these auditors somehow or Other weren't going to make a pc well. They didn't care enough about that pc to do the job. The button which causes such things is VICTIM. This is the central button of the Overt Act-Motivator Sequence. Some auditor, perhaps one that is ordinarily quite good, gets a restim. He keys in something not from what the pc said for this couldn't aberrate anyone. He gets a restim between sessions On the Overt Act-Motivator Sequence, and he comes back into session with the VICTIM button in full flare. And what does he do? Almost beyond his control he flubs. He makes a victim out of his pc. Why? Because that's the exact action which occurs when an Overt Act-Motivator Sequence is triggered. Low ARC. The whole answer to it is contained in VICTIM. The auditor feels that the pc deserves what he gets for a moment. He rationalizes it all out -- but he treated the pc as a victim. A dropped ashtray, a stupid auditor remark, an invalidation of a cognition... however the auditor flubs, he is treating the pc as a victim, and the pc victimized responds with bared engrams. Well, true enough a lot of pcs ARC break easily because they are really being fully fledged victims, and all the auditor has to do is slightly hint toward victimizing in the pc's estimation and bang, out goes the session. But an auditor who ISN'T really treating the pc as his victim can pull the pc through. The auditor who is keyed in by this victim thing drops all the cans in the rack and flubs but grandly. All this has been a big mystery previously. It's understood now and thoroughly. And further, we've the processes that can do something about it. The right way to audit this victim item out from scratch is with a Comm Process. Handling the whole case it is necessary in most instances to find a specific dropping terminal on the pc, perhaps even more than one, convert it into a generalized form and flatten it until it reads as a button right at the clear reading of the pc's sex. When this has been worked over and done, it is usually safe to do a plunge into this victim thing. Given the pc in session -- given the pc really answering the auditing question, then we can handle the Overt Act-Motivator Sequence with the Comm Process, "From where could you communicate to a victim?" The process is actually a one-shot OT Process. Don't make the mistake of running a pc who figure-figures his answers or gives philosophic type answers on a Comm Process without actually making him do it, do it, do it. There are cases around that have been "audited" for years who have never really done a process. This can be whipped by a Comm Process done with paper and pencil. You locate the terminal with an E-Meter and then you lay the instrument aside, give the pc a sheaf of paper and a pencil, and every time he answers your auditing question, you have him or her draw the answer on the paper. As the Comm Process exceeds language, it can be easily checked. Even if the pc seems to be having Some Success but could succeed faster you can boost it along with the "paper trick" as this is called. So even the people who couldn't be trusted with a thinkingness process can be run on a Comm Process using the paper trick. 516 All right. That's what makes an auditor not flub, and it keeps him from being a burden to himself and others as a person too. It's a cyclone of a process as the experienced person can tell you. And it prevents the flubbing of service in an Organisation. Scientologists who can't stand the sight of money or who can't seem to get pcs are just having a fine old time being in some way or another, a victim. So let's face this reality and understand clearly that we can guarantee our successes as individuals and Organisations by getting bell clear on victim. Then we can give service. And then an Organisation can give service. Then it's safe to make promises. And we don't get Administration chopped up. And it's safe and successful to have an Organisation set up and financed and running on the mission of clearing Earth. Of course we have to go right on with our jobs whether victim is flat or leaping about like a Texas thermometer. Of course we have to go right on organizing and planning and making the future real. We can't just quit and say well, when we all get to be clear then we'll go-man-go. We can't afford that. But this time be warned. We know that with our Organisations and Comm lines and plans we're going to go Successfully or not straight up the line. Let's See this one coming though and not fly into the thunderhead blind. Let's understand that staffs and individual Scientologists are going to goof just as long as the victim button is not flat and that it's going to take quite a while to get it all flat. People are always preparing for rainy days and failures. Well, let's prepare for success. If we get much bigger nobody will be able to handle anything unless we get smooth operation, smooth procurement, efficient good looking HAS Co-Audit units, successful case handling everywhere. We won't be able to live in a climate of 75% success and 25% failure. We won't be able to administer with people here and there on our lines who are bound and determined to be victims and to appoint us their executioners. We're moving right up to the Big Win and we should be able to handle it without going half round the bend patching up the flubs made by the victim impulse that comes on when we're restimmed or exhausted. Let's win all the way this time and keep it won.. You see, you can't ever get a victim valence to win. It's a plain lesson to him, and he believes it, fallacious though it is, that when somebody wins there is always a loser and that winning "is always an overt act to somebody". To prevent losers, our victim doesn't win. He quits instead. Thus there can be no constant and safe win until we have amongst us whipped our first big hurdle. No amount of planning, writing and care, no amount of education can overcome this impulse. We already know it can only be done by auditing. So let's clear up this thing, let's get the auditing, let's make sure that when we set up something to go none of us will say, "Oh-oh, that's a win! Mustn't! Mustn't!" and start tearing the whole thing down. Before we get too far along this road let's make sure we stay winners after we've won by making sure that none among us will go victim on us and cut our throats with the best intentions in the world. Let's define Scientologists as "People who aren't Victims", and really get the show on the road. LRH:brb.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 517  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WHY "VICTIM" WORKS AS A PROCESS   All U.S. Franchise Holders from St Hill All other Franchise Holders via Central Orgs All Central Orgs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 SEPTEMBER AD 9 All U.S. Franchise Holders from St Hill All other Franchise Holders via Central Orgs All Central Orgs WHY "VICTIM" WORKS AS A PROCESS We all should have heard of the Overt Act-Motivator Sequence. If we have not we should review "The History of Man". The highest level of third dynamic activity and the earliest instant of it is and was communication. Before communication (in one form or another) there was only native state. Obviously you are not going to run out native state -- leave that to the Psychiatrists and Politicians. Therefore the earliest button susceptible of aberration was apparently communication. However, communication itself is not aberrative. Only the misuse and withhold of communication is aberrative. One received his first communication foul-up when he postulated "somebody can mess up my postulates", when he granted that, right, then he or she had it thereafter. The idea that communication could be harmful apparently came in about this point. And the obvious conclusion that one could injure with communication must have followed shortly after. That one could be injured and that one could injure was established by "example". Here began the game of "victim". Death is just one of the varied forms of the game of victim. That one could be killed by the communication words or missiles of another is just an extreme form of the game. That this was a game and that it was played out by Thetan "B" pretending that he had been injured so Thetan "A" would further withhold his postulates, has all been lost in the depths of the Reactive Mind. Death isn't a game anymore. Not even injury is a game. We know how seriously these things are now regarded and how utterly caved-in and lost Thetans have been for a very, very long time. Only with Scientology have we come back to the straight of it. And the straight of it is that one cannot be injured until he has postulated that Thetans can be injured and, by example of Thetans pretending to be injured, has come to the point of himself not only consenting to be injured but actually getting torn to shreds. The basic postulate of injury or death (or harmful communication) is best summed up by "victim". To restrain others one sets an example as a victim. It might be said that this is a last ditch way of being cause. On that thin idea rests all the disease and death, all the agony and travail of man. It is almost the bottom point of the Reactive Mind. In any Overt Act-Motivator Sequence there is a villain and a victim. If the auditor were to choose and run the "Villain" then he would be violating the basic definition of operating thetan which is "To be willing and knowing cause over life, matter, energy, space and time", and would be processing the pc at effect point. The basic definition of victim must then be, as our HCO Staff Auditor pointed out, unwilling and unknowing effect of life, matter, energy, space and time. Therefore, to keep the pc at cause we have no choice but to process him in such a way as to face him up to "victim". 518 Naturally this process is not going to run on the following cases until they are up to it: 1. A person who cannot conceive of ever having done anything bad to anybody or anything ("old sweetness and light"). 2. A person who has a heavy present time problem (PTP). 3. A person who has had a bad ARC break with the auditor (who conceives the auditor has made him into a victim of bad processing or code breaks). 4. A person who needs to have several buttons cleared away which are pressing and making his present time very bad; and 5. A person who simply fogs out hour after hour on general comm processes and needs to have lighter buttons run until he can handle comm processes. With these above five things cared for, then a pc should be able to run easily if lengthily on "From where could you communicate to a victim?" During the run on the process all manner of chains come into view. Monitoring the type of chain or chasing down some sideline should be avoided thoroughly especially while running "victim". The pc is all too willing to duck and dodge and an auditor who Qs and As (changes the process just because the pc changed or wandered) had better go back to the Academy for a spell or get his own case gone over at the HGC. Pcs have gone into convulsions, screaming fits and many other manifestations while running "victim". Of course they would, since they are dramatizing what they have done to others and are wearing the engram in full. But it is easier to run victim on the pc than to fun engrams on him as such for he can pull out of "victim" engrams easily with a comm process. A large percentage of pcs will not recover and stay recovered until "victim" has been run and flattened. This is due to their using auditing to be "victims" of. This is the heart of the old "service facsimile". This is why they have service facsimiles. So they can be victims The pc, while running victim, goes rapidly back and forth from one valence to another. He goes through all the various phenomena of engrams, locks and secondaries and in spite of the violence of the process, very often would rather run victim than anything else. But, as above, beware of trying to run this on somebody who will not ever admit having done something or anything to anybody. This is the figure-figure case. The difficulty here is that the person cannot face any terminal subjectively for fear of having ruined it or for fear of ruining it. Therefore -- and watch this carefully -- he does not do the comm process. Such a person needs a comm process run on very particularized terminals done in a general form: "From where could you communicate to a dog" or anything else that drops. But if this is very necessary then run the person on the paper trick even with the lighter terminals. Make him draw each answer. Cases that have never, never moved before in hundreds of hours of auditing, get shot down in flames with the paper trick. While running victim, the auditor should not use "how could you communicate" as an interjected command. It's a different process. If the auditor is having trouble he should have run a lighter terminal. One of the most effective light terminals and one of the best comm processes particularly for the HAS Co-Audit is a body part. One asks the pc if he has ever had trouble with any part of his or her body and when the answer is given, run body part named in a generalized form such as "From where could you communicate to a leg?" From all the results I've been looking over lately, it would seem that the most 519 broadly workable form of the comm process is a body part as above or "a body". After all, the pc IS in a body. Doing the comm process on mest before a body part and the body are run, seems to be a little rough on the pc (this is part of a system called universe processes), as the pc himself as a Thetan is generally mest shy. Auditing body parts, however, has its lighter moments. At the last congress I gave, the body part given by the pc as a part of the body with which he had had trouble, when run, didn't do a thing for the pc. Surprised auditors and instructors were not long in finding out why -- the pc's body part had been run and flattened years ago by older processes and didn't have a twitch left in it. This stuff's been working for a long time you know. Well, that's the way it is. A person doesn't get sick or injured unless he's cast himself in the role of victim by reason of the game and his Overt Acts. And if you want somebody to cease to be a disease prone (new term there) and get up and do things and be bright and not flub and to win win win, get him up to a point where he can run victim with a comm process and from there on flatten the living daylights out of it. When is victim flat? When the tone arm of the Hubbard Electrometer reads consistently at the clear reading for the pc no matter how many more auditing questions are asked about victims. Every terminal you run should be run until the tone arm reads male clear (12,500 ohms) for a man, and female clear (5,000 ohms) for a woman. And this is particularly true of a victim. Don't start this going in an HAS Co-Audit until the pc being audited has had flattened on him easier terminals. And these may take an awful lot of hours to flatten. Victim itself is a very long run. The run is shortened by preparing the case well first so preparation time is never lost time on this process. There is another button, in fact there are many more special buttons. It goes on up toward OT. And it isn't run at first on a comm process, but that's another and later story. I'll still be around when you get ready for it. Meanwhile, de-victimize and win! L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 520  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=9/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A SHORT STORY BY CABLE   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 9 SEPTEMBER 1959 CenOCon A SHORT STORY BY CABLE On August 31 a cable was received from Lance Harrison in Perth, Australia, at HCO Saint Hill: Charged by BMA under Medical Act with having held myself out as willing to perform service usually performed by medical practitioner. I have not done this. Engaged lawyer to defend. Please advise of assistance from Organization and suggestions for further action. HCO Saint Hill answered: LT -- Sientology Melbourne -- 108SH Eliz Harrison Perth arrested BMA pour out money and time to beat this deal stop you handle dispatch follows -- Best -- Ron -- HCO Perth -- 107SH Harrison defense important phone Melbourne Best -- Ron LT -- Sientology East Grinstead Re BMA Lance Harrison. Lance not enfranchised unco-operative refuses have lawyer contacted have engaged lawyer watch your interests -- Erica HCO Perth LT -- HCO Perth If Harrison refuses further cancel certificates auditors code number fifteen inform press Best -- RON LT -- Sientology East Grinstead -- Taking action Harrison case Lance co-operating -- HCO Perth Erica LT -- Sientology East Grinstead -- 79ME Ron Harrison Perth not arrested will ignore. Best -- Eliz Ron says: Fast dispatch lines handle awkward situations. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iet.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 521  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NEWS BULLETIN   MA  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 14 SEPTEMBER 1959 MA NEWS BULLETIN Well, here we are again back in evidence after the printing strike which brought you only mimeoed issues. For these we don't apologize. Instead we say we'd better get busy making a world where people don't have to scream and walk out just to get enough to live on. Hubbard Communications Office Worldwide is now safely and securely established at Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex. Here, on half a hundred acres of lovely grounds in a mansion where we have not yet found all the bedrooms, we are handling the problems of administration and service for the world of Scientology. We are not very many here and as the sun never sets on Scientology we are very busy thetans. By means of airmail, cables, telegrams, and in particular a teletypewriter connected to London and many other points, we are able to get our work done between morning and midnight -- most days -- and by working weekends. Saint Hill is badly understaffed, there being only nineteen persons in the whole place. Yet, in addition to administration lines twenty-five thousand miles long, we have ten vital projects running. The first and foremost of these is research and investigation. We are gathering all the files of Scientology research the world around and bringing it to Saint Hill to compile it. As Ron was never able to afford compiling all his works and results before, this project is of rather vast magnitude. Included in the project list is the application of Scientology to the fifth dynamic. Ron has already created overbearing tomato plants and sweet corn plants sufficiently impressive to startle British Newspapers into front page stories about this new wizardry. The goal of the project is to reform the world food supply. But the project has already paid off to the extent of furnishing an entirely new theory of illness and a brand-new prevention of illness in human beings. Ron, helped by a full-time gardener, is doing this one in his spare time. As HCO Saint Hill personnel each wears several hats -- which is to say does many jobs -- they are drafted on occasion into the arduous work of recording growth and electrical experimental data. Another project is the assembly of book stocks on Scientology throughout the world and making available to Scientologists and the public volumes that have never before been in plenty. Saint Hill needs all manner of assistance whether culinary, electrical wiring, helping in the kitchen or the house, running mimeo machines, typing, almost anything. There will probably come a time when we have to build more buildings at Saint Hill -- next year, most likely -- but right now we've space for a lot of people. The whole staff has to vote to accept any new person and it's a pretty good group. But standing out on a lawn near a 250 year old towering cedar tree or walking through a pleasure garden, you'd never believe that all this activity could be going on. The apparency is that it's so calm you could pack boxes of serenity out of it -- but in actuality these are the most high voltage lines in the whole world of Scientology. Right now at this moment of writing, the HCO Sec World is wrestling with rush despatches about a dying child in San Francisco, the HCO Communicator World is 522 trying to set up a new HCO Office in Australia. The treasurer is handling some financial problems in Washington and Ron has been busy reviewing some research cases and is about to inspect an experimental installation -- and it is 10:40 p.m. of a Saturday night. Saint Hill is an exciting place, its Offices filled with the chatter of communication equipment, its terraces banked with flowers, its days crammed with new things. But a stranger could be guided through most of the lakes, grounds, courts and halls and never suspect that within a short distance of him some of the most dedicated people on earth were getting the show on the road. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.jh Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 523  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS CO-AUDIT    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 25 SEPTEMBER 1959 HAS CO-AUDIT Here are some hints on how to run Comm Processes on assessment: The instructor asks the preclear if he is sick or well. If the pc says he is ill then the instructor says, "What part of the body would you say is ill?" Whatever the pc answers, this is then run on "From where could you communicate to a .... (generalized terminal) body part." If the pc answers that he is well, the instructor says, "Have you ever been ill?" The pc will in general say yes. The instructor then says, "What part of your body was ill?" and runs the Comm Process on whatever the pc says. Giving you advance scoop on a new research win it seems that the most effective and rapid clearing could take place with what we will call Universal Processes. This means running a Comm Process on Universe as follows: "From where could you communicate to the physical Universe." "From where could you communicate to a body." "From where could you communicate to a mind." "From where could you communicate to a Thetan." This is all experimental at this stage but it would be a separation process from all universes the thetan is anxious about and should be quite successful in general use. However I give you this not to use but to show you that we would probably win further and better if we began to steam people up on the subject of being clear and then slammed right in on whatever universe they could handle on Co- audit. I would then run Co-audit as follows: Do the actions described above on body part and when the pc has come through that go at once on to the physical universe and then graduate him on to any body part that bangs on the meter and finally when various parts are flat get him into running the body as a general terminal. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iet.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 524  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DATA ON CLEARING A STAFF MEMBER AFTER SPECIFIC TERMINALS ARE FLAT WITH OVERT-WITHHOLD STRAIGHT WIRE    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 26 SEPTEMBER 1959 DATA ON CLEARING A STAFF MEMBER AFTER SPECIFIC TERMINALS ARE FLAT WITH OVERT-WITHHOLD STRAIGHT WIRE "What would you like to confront?" until nominally flat. Then: "You make a mock-up for which you could be totally responsible," run until Mest Clear. Then: "From where could you communicate to a body?" until Theta Clear. Scout out and run Present Time Problems as they come up with: "Invent a problem of comparable magnitude to that problem," E-Meter check for these each session and then don't spend the whole of every session on it. Just run it until she/he doesn't have to do anything about it right now. On ARC breaks run TR 5N: "What have you done to me?" "What have I done to you?" then "What have you done to me?" Run this regimen and no other and send special weekly reports labeled "THACKER CLEAR PROJECT". This will get them clearer faster than any other project I know just now. Best, Converted from Telex Comm in Los Angeles Ron LRH:rsh.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 525  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TECHNICAL NOTES ON CHILD PROCESSING   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 28 SEPTEMBER 1959 BPI TECHNICAL NOTES ON CHILD PROCESSING The best process in Self Analysis, for a child if he can do it, is ARC Straight Wire, in the back of the book. The best process for children in general is some version of TR 10 (Notice that ............ [Room Object]). The variation which is best is "Feel my arm," "Feel your arm," "Feel my face," "Feel your face," etc, all done with the hand. Another version for very young children is "Where is the table?" "Where is the floor?" etc on room objects. Injured children respond best to touch assists and to locational "Where did you fall?" "Where are you now?" etc repetitive until child is well. For an unwilling child use short sessions (as short as two minutes) but always begin and end the session complete with goals and PT Problem query. For a bad-off child use CCH 1 and 2; these are heroic but effective. They require a very skilled auditor and no interference. Give the child the dignity of real sessions. And when a child flips to trying to audit you as a turnabout, let him. Remember that if you spoil Scientology for a child with bad auditing you may close the door on the only way out he'll have in this life. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iet.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 526  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE ORGANIZATION OF A PE FOUNDATION   HCO Franchise Holders Association Secretaries HCO Secretaries  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 SEPTEMBER 1959 HCO Franchise Holders Association Secretaries HCO Secretaries THE ORGANIZATION OF A PE FOUNDATION Even though we haven't the time, personnel or mest to do in many places a full dress PE Foundation, I think it would help if I described a minimum full dress PE. A PE Foundation is itself but it is also, in a Central Org, one of the six departments. In either case, whether done as an HAS Co-audit Franchise or as a Central Org Department, it has the same staff and routine, handles the same factors and confronts the same problems. A PE Foundation is a programmed drill calculated to introduce people to Scientology and to bring their cases up to a high level of reality both on Scientology and on life. This is best accomplished not by giving them samples and bits and trying to lead them into auditing but by giving them gen and serious results as heavily and rapidly as possible. A PE Foundation in its attitude goes for broke on the newcomers, builds up their interest with lectures and knocks their cases apart with Comm Course and Upper Indoc. There are basically three divisions to a PE Foundation; the first of these is the free course; it is the purpose of this course to: Inform and interest by showing the people that this applies to them and is a duplicate of their own actions and thinkingness. Only then does Scientology communicate. Don't overwhelm -- penetrate. Show them that this is how they think, not how we think they think. Be factually explicit about it, talk with certainty and not with apologies. A PE Course curriculum should now consist of a mixture of drills and lectures. The first evening lecture should talk about definitions in life as found in Scientology. The dynamic principle of existence, the eight dynamics, a preview of the next evening's lecture should be given, and this lecture should consist of a very rapid survey of Comm Course TRs Zero and One and should sail in the second hour into the ARC triangle, and all data for the rest of the week used in lectures should consist of ARC triangle data taking up the whole subject and one corner at a time. The remainder of the week previews TRs Two and Three, and says how the TRs are used in life and how people can't do them. The last lecture's last part sells the HAS Comm Course. The second week and the third are spent in Comm Course with basic TRs, encouraging not criticizing. The coach says fine when he thinks it's fine and otherwise keeps his mouth shut. This is muzzled coaching. The student does not get out of the Comm Course until he can be trusted to show up well in a muzzled Co-audit. This takes at least two weeks. He pays off the course by the week for his Comm Course as well as his later Co-audit. The Co-audit Course runs similar to the Comm Course in hours. The only process now permitted on an HAS Co-audit is "From where could you communicate to a body part", the body part being selected by the instructor with an E- Meter (in a pinch the instructor selects by observation and the answer to the question, "Ever have anything wrong with your body?" and uses whatever the pc says). When a key body part is flat, "From where could you communicate to a body" can be run but only this type of process is allowed. If you go and bring in a lot more processes you've had it. Only this 527 process can be counted on to bring reality and results to people on a broad scale. When a person can't gain on it because of case then get him into private auditing. NEVER let anyone simply walk out. Convince him he's loony if he doesn't gain on it because that's the truth. Very well, these are the sections of the PE Foundation. A student now has to complete at least five weeks of co-audit before we give him an HAS certificate. It's not a valuable certificate evidently unless we do it that way. Now for personnel. Nearly every PE Foundation everywhere is understaffed. Many have to be. But one should at least know the correct amount of staff. The minimum full scale PE staff should consist of five people, four of them part time, one of them full time. These people are as follows: The PE Director. Takes no classes, makes no lectures, works from two to ten p.m., supervises and interviews and keeps the course and other instructors going. Lack of a PE Director without a class leaves the place unsupervised and in a confusion. Receptionist. Routes, handles and invoices people with the help of other PE staff in the first rush, and then makes announcements and sells books in the breaks. PE Lecturer. The best and most convincing lecturer, evenings only. Comm Course Instructor. Part-time. Anybody but the Academy Comm Course instructor that knows his business. The Academy man will be too tough and heartless for the public stomachs at this stage. Co-audit Instructor. Part-time. Choose the person people tell their troubles to. Choose a person who doesn't mind people screaming in the unit and in fact rather likes it. This person takes responsibility for all cases. The PE Director, as does the HGC Director of Processing, gets in trouble really if he takes a course or a class, as he leaves all other activities unguided. He can drop in, he can start a class. He can give an address of welcome, but he should not have a class. If he has one the whole place falls apart for lack of a guiding hand and somebody competent to pick up and sort out the emergencies and interview people. Now roughly speaking, that's the staff curriculum and courses of a PE Foundation. If yours is running a long way from this one, that is the reason you're having a rough time and losing people and that's the shape you ought to be shooting for. I know we can't all have this but when things start to boom you'd better be able to have it or you'll go boom too. The thing to do is to sneak up to this as a minimum size with which you can work. If there's no Central Org you'll need daytime secretarial and files by and by or the PE Director will get swamped with papers. The whole dream of a PE Foundation is to get the people in fast, get them invoiced in a congress type assembly line, no waiting, give them hot, excited, positive service and boot them on through to their HAS and THEN worry about doing something else with them. And never let a student leave or quit -- introvert him like a bullet and get him to get audited. If he gets no reality don't let him wander out. If he walks in that door for a free PE, that's it. He doesn't get out except into an individual auditor's hands in the real tough cases, until he's an HAS. So that's the size and shape of it. Luck to you. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:brb.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 528  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/9/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  UNIVERSE PROCESSES    HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 SEPTEMBER 1959 UNIVERSE PROCESSES I have just been checking out a process series we will call Universe O/W. It is a killer in sheep's clothing. Assessment is done. with an E-Meter to discover which of four things has the greatest difference of needle pattern. One does not look for a drop, he looks for the one of the four that is different than the others. The four are: Thetan or spirit Mind or brain Body or male body or female body Physical Universe or earth or continent or town or house or dwelling. One uses different ways of putting these things if he doesn't get instant difference on calling off Spirit, Mind, Body, Physical Universe. If he does get a different pattern from the rest he proceeds to audit that discovered thing as follows: "Think of something you might have done to a ______________." (The "______________" being the terminal you discovered.) Alternated with: "Think of something you might have withheld from a _______________" (same terminal). Because these dive backtrack so fast the question may not be a direct "Recall what you have done to" since that implies certainty. This problem could be a specific for illnesses of chronic type. This is an allowable process in HGCs. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:iet.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B was reissued from Washington, D.C., dated 5 October 1959.] 529  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=5/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  UNIVERSE PROCESSES   Franchise Holders BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 OCTOBER 1959 Franchise Holders BPI UNIVERSE PROCESSES Now that HCO WW at Saint Hill Manor is settling down for the long run, thanks to the co-operation of all Central Organizations and Franchise Holders with very few exceptions, I have been able to do some co-ordination work on processes I have been developing and would like to give you a rapid rundown on some of this work. The first modern development of any importance since Comm Processes is called "Universe Processes". This is based on some work which started with the 1959 HPA/BScn Course. The most gross breakdown of parts of life is: 1. The Thetan 2. The Mind 3. The Body and 4. The Physical Universe. This division is a sort of shorthand of the eight dynamics and gives us the stuck points of the majority. As this division is refined it becomes the eight dynamics as used in the old Dynamic Straight Wire. Almost anything which applied to or was used in Dynamic Straight Wire can also be used in Universe Processes. The most elementary form of Universe Processes is called "Universe O/W". This consists of doing an E-Meter assessment of the person on the four points above, taking the most different needle reaction from the rest (Thetan, Mind, Body and Physical Universe) and running what was found with Overt-Withhold Straight Wire. Example: Let us say that we found Physical Universe to be the thing which fell the hardest or looked the most different on the E-Meter. One would then run as an alternate question: "Recall something you have done to the Physical Universe" alternated with "Recall something you have withheld from the Physical Universe". When the E-Meter was reading Clear on the tone arm for the sex of the pc, one would then reassess and use the one of the three remaining terminals (Thetan, Mind or Body) which now fell differently or more than the other two. Thus all four would eventually be run. Universe O/W is based upon the observable fact that a thetan is trapped in a thetan, a mind, a body and the physical universe. If he weren't, he or she wouldn't be sitting in a chair. Thus we process the extremely obvious, scouting out with an E-Meter only what obviousness is more troublesome to the pc than the other obviousnesses. Of course it seems strange that a thetan could think of himself being trapped in another thetan but you see this all the time in valences. Ghosts become ghosts by being overwhelmed by thetans they think are ghosts and so on. That a thetan is trapped in a mind and that it is not his own mind that he is trapped in is also obvious. If it were his own mind he would soon as-is it and you see what a hard time he has trying to erase it: that hard time comes about because he is misowning the mind in which he is trapped. And this is true of all traps. A thetan is usually quite sure that there is something wrong with the ownership of his own body and sure enough there is. And of course he's in the universe without much understanding of it. It is far more obscure that a thetan gets trapped in the remaining dynamics even though this is equally true. He isn't really trapped in an animal if he is sitting there in a human body and so forth. So Universe O/W processes the obvious that is the most obvious. All four of these terminals are run. 530 Now there is another way of attacking this problem and it is very successful. This is the "Universe Comm Process". One assesses the pc in exactly the same way but runs the terminal on "From where could you communicate to a... (one of the four universes as above)". It is very notable that Comm Processes work best on obvious and visible terminals and work much less well on things that are not present and worst on things that are merely ideas or significances. You can make great headway with a pc with "From where could you communicate to a body" when with the same pc you might get very, very slow results with "From where could you communicate to a brother". Therefore the easiest to run and make progress with a Comm Process is using an obvious terminal and this of course would be one of the four universes, thetan, mind, body and physical universe. However, when one runs a very obvious terminal with a Comm Process, one must carefully avoid pinning the process in present time. One cannot successfully run a Comm Process with "From where could you communicate to this room". This is too specific. The pc is balked by the fact that the Comm Process strongly calls up every room like "this room" and if he answers anything about these other rooms he is not doing the exact auditing command and so goes rapidly out of session. Specific terminals that permit no large breadth of time span won't run on a Comm Process because the process escapes the time limit imposed all too easily. One would have to run "From where could you communicate to a room" in order to wipe out the bad effects of "this room" on the case. Universe Comm Processes are evidently the best version of all Comm Processes. The assessment of the proper terminal can be a little tricky. The semantics of the terminal get in an auditor's way. And yet the auditor may be led astray into using a version of the terminal that is not really an obvious terminal. Example: The pc does not understand what a thetan is and the meter does react to it so the auditor sorts out "soul" and "spirit", etc, but gets a large drop on "astral body" and decides to run it only to discover that he is running an engram of recent origin in which the words appear. "Spirit" dropped less but would have run because it was more general. You are probably wondering how we can get away with running "conceive a static", forbidden in the book The Creation of Human Ability. We can just barely get away with it because of the nature and power of the Comm Process. By damping out excessive individuation the Comm Process increases havingness. A total individual can't have much of anything -- you can't even have a car really unless you can be, besides self, a "car driver" or a "car passenger". A totally individuated person cannot be anybody but himself, cares for nobody but himself and can share in no activity of any other person. Hence as we flatten out this obsessive individuation we gain in the pc usually enough havingness to run a massless identity such as a thetan. However this terminal usually runs less well than the other three employed in Universe Processes. There are other developments which will be discussed in later bulletins, such as "Think of a creation you could make unknown" but these in general are not as important to us as the above. If you are having trouble keeping your people on a Co-audit it's because the things you are running on them are not real to them. I think you will find that by using a Universe Assessment on a Co-audit as above, you will have much more constant attendance. Try it anyway. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ph.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 531  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A USEFUL PROCESS   HCO Secs D of Ps  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 OCTOBER AD9 HCO Secs D of Ps A USEFUL PROCESS On your HGC process you have many who cannot seem to plumb an overt/motivator sequence. On any such and many more, you will find the following process works admirably: "Recall being critical." "Recall withholding criticism." If the pc tends to become ill push on through. This is the lowest level of force and influences body form. Try it and tell me how it goes. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 532  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  D.E.I. EXPANDED SCALE (With a Note on Salesmen)   Franchise Holders  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 OCTOBER 1959 Franchise Holders D.E.I. EXPANDED SCALE (With a Note on Salesmen) The original scale 4.0 Desire 1.5 Enforce .5 Inhibit was expanded in 1952 to Curiosity Desire Enforce Inhibit. In 1959 I have found another vital point on this scale which gives us a new case entrance point. Curiosity Desire Enforce Inhibit Unknown I suspect also that "Wait" fits between Unknown and Inhibit. To make these agree in intention, they would become Interest Desire Enforce Inhibit Unknow. This scale also inverts, I find, similar to the Dynamics and below sanity on any subject. Unknow Inhibit Enforce Desire Interest These points, particularly on the inverted scale, going down, are lowered by failure. Each lower step is an explanation to justify having failed with the upper level. One seeks to not know something and fails. One then seeks to inhibit it and fails. Therefore one seeks to enforce it and fails. Thus one explains by desiring it and fails. And not really being able to have it, shows thereafter an obsessive interest in it. The above inversion is of course all reactive. Reactive selling (of interest to us in a salesman campaign) would be accomplished thusly (and this is the basic scale of selling): The salesman refuses to let the customer forget the product; The salesman then inhibits all efforts by the customer to refuse the product; 533 The salesman enforces the product on the customer; The salesman now finds the customer desires the product; And the customer will remain interested. There is an interplay here whereby the salesman reverses the scale: Source of Sales Failure Salesman Customer Interest Unknow Desire Inhibit Enforce Enforce Inhibit Desire Unknow Interest Salesmen, bringing about an inverted scale, can go downscale themselves as they do it. They seek to interest and meet forgetfulness. They want to sell and meet opposition. They high pressure the customer and get pressured back. And about the time the customer wants the product the salesman is reactively inhibiting the sale. And as the customer's interest is at its highest the salesman forgets all about him. SALESMAN SUCCESS All a salesman has to do is continue to try to interest the customer and the reactive inversion will take place. It is interesting that this scale, more importantly, gives us new case entrances. A series of Comm Processes on any terminal, say "bodies", could be run. From where could you communicate to an unknown body " " " " " " an unwanted body " " " " " " a necessary body " " " " " " a desirable body " " " " " " an interesting body This would pick the case off the bottom and run it to the top on any terminal that has gone totally reactive. By the way, don't take my remarks on salesmen as being "all for the best". The basic overt act is making people want useless objects and spaces, and unfortunately for him that's often part of the business of the salesman. He, unlike us, sometimes isn't fishing people out of the mud. He's often more likely pushing them in. Therefore he needs our help to get square with the world. As his income depends on making people want things and buy things (even though sometimes they need them), we haven't much choice but to show him the mechanics of selling, to the end of getting him to help pull others out of the mud. Making somebody want something they really need is no crime, but the salesman is on very shaky ground. What do people really need? We had best not try to get involved in the ethics of all this, or to persuade them to sell only needed items. The whole economic structure needs the salesman; he is the key of the whole structure. But we can leaven the flow of even useless goods by letting an invitation to freedom trickle in the same channel. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dd.rd.jh Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 534  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  LONDON UP   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 14 OCTOBER 1959 BPI LONDON UP Good old HASI London is finally stepping high again under Assoc Sec Herbie Parkhouse and HCO Area Sec Valerie Obin. HASI topped a thousand plus fifty pounds for the week. This hasn't happened regularly since the days of Jack Parkhouse. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dd.rh Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MY WHEREABOUTS IN NOVEMBER   HCO Secs Assoc Secs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 OCTOBER 1959 HCO Secs Assoc Secs MY WHEREABOUTS IN NOVEMBER I am about to do a Magellan by jet in somewhat less than 80 days, so I too can yawn and say: "It's a small world." The following dates exist according to Cook's: Leave Saint Hill 31st October, 1959 Depart London 31st October Arrive Calcutta 1st November Arrive Singapore 4th November Arrive Melbourne 5th November Arrive Fiji Islands 21st November (International Date Line) Arrive Honolulu 21st November Arrive Los Angeles 24th November Arrive Washington 26th November Arrive London 30th November Arrive Saint Hill 30th November Around the World in 30 Days. Best, LRH:dd.nm Copyright $c 1959 RON by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 535  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=20/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AN EXPERIMENTAL PROCESS   HCO Secs Franchise Holders D of P Central Orgs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 OCTOBER AD9 HCO Secs Franchise Holders D of P Central Orgs AN EXPERIMENTAL PROCESS Recall Processes have always worked well. But it has been hard to get the most fundamental processes that would reach the lowest cases. Here are some Recall Processes that work way down South of the Auks: COMM RECALL PROCESS: "Recall a Communication" KNOW MYSTERY RECALL PROCESSES: "Recall an Unconsciousness" "Recall Waiting" "Recall a Mystery" "Recall Sex" "Recall Eating" (or a variation "Recall Food") "Recall a Symbol" "Recall Thinking" "Recall an Effort" "Recall an Emotion' "Recall Looking" "Recall Knowing" "Recall Not-Knowing" These are very good, especially on bad off cases. They all work. When the lowest seems flat one can go to one above. Probably there is an E-Meter tellingness that denotes flatness. I'm working on this and will have the gen soon. The earliest experiments of this were on "Recall a Mystery" as a method of raising IQ and the pc was spouting poetry he'd "forgotten". There are many possible versions of these simplicities as one can run them on terminals and significances. Also, remember that these things (Recall Processes) take the pc out of PT and put him back in. You stop one with the PC back in PT. The Comm bridge to be used on this process is: "When you next get an answer close to present time we will end this process if it is all right with you." Then don't go on for an hour or two, catch it with 8 or 10 commands by seeing the pc is doing a short cycle at the time and has started back up. "Recall Exhaustion" is a simple, very effective version of a work process. "Recall Creating" is a good way, apparently, to mop up Step 6 flubs. Therefore you can use these processes in the HGC or you can, when 't is okayed, use them in training. These are individual processes and not co-audit. As a note on co-audit, the process, the only basic affinity process, "What would you like to confront," could cut your co-audit attendance losses. It is now allowed, having been carefully tested. Man, do they get interested in cases and hence into session. This is a fine individual process for pcs that "have no reality on pictures". L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 536  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PSYCHOANALYSIS GOES CAPITALISTIC   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 25 OCTOBER 1959 BPI PSYCHOANALYSIS GOES CAPITALISTIC The following despatch is interesting since by comparing what we know about the mind now and what the Russians are here criticising in psychoanalysis, I can estimate where Russian mental research is. And it's right there thousands of miles behind us. Russia is so consumed with her "equalism" that all her mental research is negative and no gain. Socialism, Communism and such are basically designed by people who cannot work to award people who will not work and amongst other things they defy all forms of creation, production and creativeness -- as I can soon demonstrate to you. This is not a matter now of my ideas. It's a scientific fact. So here's Ivan, spokesmanning as usual for the Great Idle Classes on the subject of psychoanalysis, which turns out to be capitalistic and the cause of all war. Ha! NEW YORK HERALD TRIBUNE, Paris, of Friday, October 23, 1959. By United Press International. "Russia Raps Psychoanalysis as Justifying War to West. LONDON, OCTOBER 22. A Soviet science correspondent said last night that the Soviet medical profession considers that psychoanalysis 'indirectly justifies war' and helps shore up the Western powers. The attack on psychoanalysis was made in an English-language broadcast to the United Kingdom. It was a broadcast by the Moscow radio's science correspondent, who was not named. 'The essence of psychoanalysis,' said the broadcast, 'seems to be that it erroneously ascribes to the instincts, or more correctly to the sexual urge, a mystic, supernatural power, which causes and determines everything in human life.' 'With a Grin' The Soviet medical profession, the Moscow radio went on, 'treats all this with a grin.' It added: 'It considers these absurd views to be widespread not just because some of the idle rich like to delve into their own sexual emotions, pathologically hypertrophied by a life of idleness and luxury. 'No, the favorite ground for psychoanalysis is also at times a result of the fact the views advocated by the following of this doctrine are to the advantage of the powers that be. By asserting the supremacy of the instincts, psychoanalysis justifies war. 'When they maintain that the main motive force in man's behavior is urges and instincts, the psychoanalysts are also indirectly vindicating such things as unemployment, poverty, widespread industrial accidents and so on.'" L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.nm Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 537  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TO RETAIN CO-AUDIT PC'S INTEREST IN CASE   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 OCTOBER 1959 BPI TO RETAIN CO-AUDIT PC'S INTEREST IN CASE All auditors should remember the definition of a preclear in session and that is: that he is interested in and talking to the auditor about his case. On a terminal contacted with the E-Meter in an assessment, if needle action slows down, with little change in its action, run the terminal to a comm lag flat point, then do another assessment, and run the terminal found. Remember all terminals run and check them out on an E-Meter later. It may be that after getting one terminal handled you will have to go back to a terminal flattened on a comm lag basis and re-run it. Eventually the tone arm will come to clear reading for the pc's sex but only if many terminals are run and come back to and run again. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 538  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=31/10/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CREATE PROCESSES -- DANGERS & ADVANTAGES   HCO Secs ) Tech Execs) ONLY  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex SPECIAL HCO BULLETIN OF 31 OCTOBER 1959 HCO Secs ) Tech Execs) ONLY CREATE PROCESSES -- DANGERS & ADVANTAGES Just before I leave on extended trips I always take the safety measure of writing down the newest and latest and exactly where we are in proven research. The newest and best as now authorized only for staff member use on Staff Theta Clearing and the Co-audit, and processing of staff members only, and not at this time for use in the HGC or on the general public, is the Create series of processes. These are the first effective OT processes and as such, when used on persons not yet Theta Clear, they have certain dangers. Additionally, they are the most valuable series of processes which we have. They can be used in one form or another on any level of case and will reach pretty much all the way to the top. As to dangers, I refer you to our experiences with Step 6 processes. Here was a series with great promise which in many cases became rather deadly. The datum here is that when you improve the ability of a pc to make and see a picture you also inadvertently improve every picture in the bank including engrams, and anybody who has seen a totally solid motivator engram will agree that it is not pleasant. Create processes stem from a new study I have made of the Cycle of Action as given in FUNDAMENTALS OF THOUGHT. Axiom 10 becomes confused by the Thetan with the Cycle of Action. Draw the two and look at them as each other and you will see what I mean -- identifying them is chaos. We get a "slip" automaticity which, whenever a person starts to create, forces him over into destruction. There is enough philosophy in this demonstrable fact to make it the subject of my next large book. Cancelling any bad effect from this slip automaticity from Create to Destroy has been solved by using the middle point of the Cycle of Action -- Survive. In Scientology the dynamic principle of existence is "Create" as in Dianetics it was "Survive" (see FUNDAMENTALS OF THOUGHT). A case run toward Create is best run on this and the inverted ARC triangle -- "What Would You Like To Create". This becomes the key process of OT from any level. However, obsessive creation is in effect the whole engram bank and the reactive mind and a lot of other things. Therefore it is best to beware of beefing up the engrams for too long a period of time. The most tested way of easing a case off from the deadly Step 6 phenomena is to change from "What Would You Like To Create" back to "What Would You Like To Confront" at routine intervals. "What Would You Like To Confront" cancels out Step 6 phenomena by easing down the Survive part of the Cycle of Action. Confront and Survive are of the same order of thing. Survival could be represented best by "continuous confronting" at a process level. Too much "What Would You Like To Create" gets us into too persistent and solid a bank on occasion. The bank is surviving. Therefore the pc is made very uncomfortable and should then be run a bit on "What Would You Like To Confront". "What Would You Like To Confront" should be interspersed with "What Would You Like To Create" at a ratio perhaps of a session of each or, in a severe case, an hour of one then an hour of the other. "What Would You Like To Destroy" is under test and apparently should run. This would be a psycho curer for sure. But "What Would You Like To Confront" would 539 have to be interspersed with "What Would You Like To Destroy" in order to keep the bank from overwhelming the pc. Here then we have three processes: "What Would You Like To Confront?" "What Would You Like To Create?" "What Would You Like To Destroy?" These are on the Cycle of Action as Create Survive Destroy. They are given above in the order of best tested. We know "What Would You Like To Confront" will make pcs feel wonderful and will straighten out Step 6's habit of making the bank more formidable. It is a good, sound, well tested process. "What Would You-Like To Create" is the key to all cases, but to run it you will have to salt it down with periods of running "What Would You Like To Confront". "What Would You Like To Destroy", though not much tested at this writing, might also have to be interspersed with "What Would You Like To Confront". We will probably discover that all three of these have to be run and that the last one will be the best case entrance at my guess. A new child process, very successful, has already emerged from this rationale. This is: "You Do Something You Think I'll Like". Various simplifications of the Confront and Destroy commands would be something like: "What Would You Like To Look At" and "What Would You Like To Tear Up". The last one is not tested. A sure kill on a pc would be to run "What Would You Like To Confront" until it has eased off and then to run "What Would You Like To Create" until it gets grim, and then "What Would You Like To Confront" again, and back and forth. This is somewhat tested as a combo at this writing and it works well. Under test right now is the way of running all three parts of the Cycle of Action to obtain the smoothest possible recovery by the pc. Right now this data is only for staffs of Central Orgs as it is very dynamitey and very experimental, but it also gives the best and clearest promise of rapid case gains and we want Central Org staffs up before we release this stuff more widely. This is about as revolutionary in rapid effect as engram running was in its time and place. We're really into something here with a high rapid gain which when it is all smoothed out and sweeping the field will take us right over the top unless we find stops on the part of auditors that we can't easily overcome. And I think we can whip all the bugs and get it wheeling. I came down to Sthil last Spring to find the route to OT that almost anybody could follow. Well, I'm betting even at this early look that we've got our teeth into it with Create series. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dd.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 540  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/11/59 Volnum=0 Issue=107 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  On Bringing Order    Ability Issue 107 [1959, ca. early November] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. On Bringing Order We will bring order yet. You can assist us by not being dismayed at disorder. When you start to introduce order into anything disorder shows up as the second postulate and blows off. Therefore, our efforts to bring order in the society or any part of it will be productive of disorder for a while every time. The trick is to keep on bringing order and soon the disorder is gone and you have orderly activity remaining. But if you hate disorder and fight disorder only, don't ever try to bring order to anything for the resulting disorder will drive you half mad. Only if you can ignore disorder and can understand this principle, can you have a working world -- or a working operation, for that matter. L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard. All Rights Reserved. 541  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/11/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IN AUDITING   Fran Hldrs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER 1959 Fran Hldrs ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IN AUDITING Avoidance of Double Acknowledgement is vital if you ever hope to keep the preclear in session. Double Acknowledgement occurs when the pc answers up, the auditor then acknowledges, and the pc then finishes his answer, leaving the auditor with another acknowledgement to do (and also leaving the auditor with no session). Wrong: Command: "What could you say to your father?" Pc: "I could say, 'Hello'." Auditor: "Fine." Pc: "'... Father, how are you?' I could say that." Auditor: (weakly) "Good. What could you say to your father?" Pc: "I could say, 'Are you feeling well?'" Auditor: (desperate by now) "Good!" Pc: "'... enough to go fishing?'" Auditor: "Well okay all right. Now...." A pc is not always sure he has answered the question so he often changes his mind. If the auditor gives him Tone 40 or any acknowledgement at all in between a pc's reply the auditor is wrong. You just don't "encourage" a pc with a lot of agreement OK's and Yes's in the middle of answers. The pc answers, the pc is sure he has answered and the auditor then acknowledges. After all, it is the pc that must be satisfied. There are many ways to mis-acknowledge a pc. But any mis-acknowledgement is only and always a failure to end the cycle of a command -- auditor asks, pc replies and knows he has answered, auditor acknowledges. Pc knows auditor has acknowledged. That is a full auditing command cycle. Don't forget it and expect a process to work, it won't. The roughest spot in most auditors is TR 2, not so much how to acknowledge but when. An auditor running into this with a pc should handle it this way. Auditor: "What could you say to your father?" Pc: "I could say, 'Are you feeling well?'" Auditor: "Did that answer the question?" Pc: "Well, no. I could say, 'Are you feeling well enough to go fishing?'" Auditor: "Did that answer the question?" Pc: "Yes, I guess it did. He always liked fishing and sympathy." Auditor: (sure pc is through) "Good! What could you say to your father?" And there's the way of it. If the pc is not sure he has answered and that the auditor has accepted the answer, the pc will get no benefit from the auditing. And that's how important that is. Mood can be expressed by an acknowledgement. Evaluation can also be accomplished by acknowledgement, depending on the tone of voice with which it is uttered. 543 There is nothing bad about expressing mood by acknowledgement, except when the acknowledgement expresses criticalness, ridicule, or humor. You can always spot a bad auditor. He does two things: he talks too much to the pc and he stops the pc from properly answering. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B is a combination of HCO B 15 September 1958, More on Training Drill Two, and HCO B 12 January 1959, Tone of Voice -- Acknowledgement.] 544  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=18/11/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  1ST MELBOURNE ACC MATERIAL   Assn Secs ) HCO Secs ) only Ds of P  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 NOVEMBER 1959 Assn Secs ) HCO Secs ) only Ds of P ) 1ST MELBOURNE ACC MATERIAL The following Technology is being taught on the 1st Melbourne ACC which began November 9, 1959, at HASI Melbourne: Bring tone arm of meter to clear reading for sex of pc at the beginning of session by getting withholds off the case, use two-way comm and "What question shouldn't I ask you?" and overts in PT restim on various dynamics. Auditing of processes on average pc not to begin until tone arm so registers. On lower than clear reading arms if all else fails to run S-C-S. In extremely difficult cases to do an assessment by dynamics for current overts to get pc's tone arm to read clear before session. Then, seeing needle changes on any one dynamic, to ferret out the overt. 75 hours spent getting pc in session not too long. Tone Arm trick to be done each session. Create series of processes "What would you like to confront?" and "What would you like to create?" "What part of a........ (assessed terminal) would you be willing to create?" alternated with "What part of a (same terminal) would you be willing to confront?" Cases in 1st Melbourne were started on clearing tone arm then running "Think of entering a mind." "Think of not entering a mind." Alternated. Goal of course is to get whizzing up toward OT. Some of the scheduled processes to be run include: "What force would it be all right to use?" "What force would it be all right not to use?" The same pattern of process to be applied to postulates, spaces, masses, forms on various dynamics. Experimental version: "What........ (as in this paragraph) would it be all right to make?" "What........ would it be all right not to make?" The main valence splitter is given above in entering minds. But another easier valence splitter (similar in action to Overt Withhold Straight Wire) is "Tell me a difference between (any specific or general terminal) and yourself." "Tell me a similarity between (same terminal) and yourself." The extreme version is "Tell me of a difference between yourself and a body." "Tell me a similarity between yourself and a body." Not necessarily recommended as not tested. This last is called Valence Differentiation. My goal at Saint Hill, in which all Orgs are assisting, is to consolidate research and produce rapid OTs. The above processes are some of the fruits already garnered. The 1st Melbourne Congress and ACC tapes are available from Melbourne or from HCO WW, same prices. Not too high. The full rationale of these processes and others are on these lectures and demonstration tapes of the 1st Melbourne. LRH:js.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 545  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=18/11/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Congratulations HASI -- South Africa! To celebrate its second birthday   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 NOVEMBER 1959 BPI Congratulations HASI -- South Africa! To celebrate its second birthday Johannesburg made two #1,000 weeks in a row. L. RON HUBBARD 546  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/11/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ALLOWED PROCESSES 1ST MELBOURNE ACC   ACC Instructors ACC Students Assoc Secs HCO Secs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 157 Spring Street, Melbourne, Australia HCO BULLETIN OF 30 NOVEMBER 1959 ACC Instructors ACC Students Assoc Secs HCO Secs ALLOWED PROCESSES 1ST MELBOURNE ACC The following processes are to be run in the last three weeks of the ACC at the option and discretion of the Instructors in consultation with individual auditors: Melbourne 1. Arduous Case Assessment by dynamics and other means: Overt-Withhold Straight Wire only on terminals having mass and no terminals of significance only. General terminals preferred. Melbourne 2. Preclear put in two-way comm with auditor by "Think of something you are willing to let me know." "Think of something you could withhold." And by other means if indicated by Instructor. Occasionally auditor asks, "How are you going?" "Is there anything you would like to tell me?" This is followed by "What would you like to confront?" alternated with "What would you rather not confront?" Two-way comm is re-established frequently by above method where pc is in or near PT on process. Melbourne 3. Establish two-way comm with the pc and get tone arm down by getting off all overts and withholds on any dynamic. Run dynamic assessment. Run small amounts of alternate create with large amounts of alternate confront on the same terminal create was run on. Commands of Alternate Create: "What part of a....... would you be willing to create?" "What part of a....... would you rather not create?" Commands of Alternate Confront: "What part of a (same terminal as used for create) could you confront?" "What part of a ....... would you rather not con front?" Alternate means two questions run one after the other consecutively, one command positive followed by one negative. Melbourne 4. Two-way comm established and continued by auditor with pc during session. Get the stories, establish the overts, pinpoint incidents in time helpfully for pc. Melbourne 5. Assists on body to be run by Communication Processes. "From where could you communicate to a....... (body part)?" Assists for PT location to be run with "To what could you communicate from this room?" Any other ways of cracking cases now known will be run only by Instructors. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B was reissued from Saint Hill as HCO B 4 December 1959, same title.] 547  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  NEW HORIZONS IN SCIENTOLOGY   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 DECEMBER 1959 BPI NEW HORIZONS IN SCIENTOLOGY With the First Melbourne ACC we begin a new era in Scientology, greater, broader and more successful than anything we have experienced before. A complete new technical front has moved solidly forward, based not so much on new materials but on a wider understanding of older data, and it is sufficiently startling in its approach and effectiveness to give new confidence to every Scientologist, his case and his dissemination problems. I myself have never before felt so confident and have never before had such spectacular auditing successes in such short periods of time. Various problems we have faced are now explained and our various vulnerabilities have been turned into new skills. We have been losing too many people from PE Courses, particularly Co-audits. We have lost too many Scientologists and even though they are replaced in even greater numbers by new ones the point has been one without previous solution. Too many Scientology marriages have gotten into difficulties. Auditors and Central Orgs have been hampered by too low incomes. We have lost too many executives and principals in Scientology and have failed to make newer people into adequate better people. All these problems were, in their combined effect upon us, slowing us down. Please understand that we were slowed down only to the extent of doubling our numbers every year. But understand also that I have not been unaware of the things that had to be solved before we could skyrocket off the launching pad and take our position in civilization's van. All these problems have now been solved by this new technology. We know why people leave PE and Co-audits and we can remedy it. We know why we have lost Scientologists and can get them back and completely prevent new losses. We can salvage almost any marriage with entirely new approaches to this problem. We can rehabilitate our own executives and push newer ones into higher responsibility zones more rapidly and effectively. We have it MADE. Now, understanding that in our earliest days we had to carry on with enthusiasm in lieu at times of know-how and that we bore up silently under many difficulties, we should not again make the mistake that we are merely entering into a new exhilaration which will itself become spent and have to be replaced by a newer forward motion. Of course there will be new forward motions but as soon as you grasp what has happened here you will see clearly that it is within our power to accomplish the following: 1. Retain all our people with better and better states of being. 2. Knit ourselves into a tight and mutually supportive third dynamic which can resist all encroachment and which can expand to encompass a much wider range of activities. 3. Assist our incomes to a point where we can command the facilities necessary to our responsibilities. These briefly are the goals we have been achieving; now we can achieve them without setbacks and losses here and there. 548 As soon as you look over this technology I am sure you will agree that it is a forward step of great magnitude and that it is based upon principles already known, but which are applied to the problems in a new way. The thirty-four hours of recorded lectures in Melbourne and the forthcoming lectures of the US Congress in early January, followed by an HCS course based on this material, plus the ACC in South Africa will put anyone who can reach only a little in possession of this information. The data itself is too lengthy for swift coverage in bulletins. It is based on new data on the cycle of action and even more importantly upon new handling of overts and withholds in clearing cases. In successive weeks I will try to give you in our bulletins some of this data. It is too much to write all at once. Central Orgs are at this moment being supplied with the tapes on all this as a background of HCS and BScn Courses and every possible way will be utilized to put all of this into your hands. You will, however, have to reach a little. If you do you will be greatly rewarded. It has taken nearly ten years for me to build a better bridge. Well, I have no qualms about this one. It will stand any loads and stresses. We know the basic buttons of aberration full and finally. And all too truly you will never be the same again. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.nm Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 549  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HAS CO-AUDIT   BPI Franchise Hldrs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER 1959 BPI Franchise Hldrs HAS CO-AUDIT It has been found that the Overt-Withhold Straight-Wire Process runs better on HAS CC-Audit than the Communication Process, as the Communication Process does not get off overts, it causes people to "blow" the course. To revert to previous instructions, then, run the following Process on HAS Co-Audits: "Recall something you have done to....." (terminal) "Recall something you have withheld from......" (terminal) (one question after the other) The Co-Audit Instructor should select a terminal by communicating freely with the pc, asking questions relating to pc's present life terminals and the eight dynamics. Pc will be fixated on any terminals against which he has committed overt acts -- even though these overts may have been not-ised. The terminal chosen by the Instructor must be real to the pc and must show charge on the E-Meter. Keep up the Co-Audit pc's interest in Case. This is a most important factor if large groups are to be maintained. If there is little change in needle reaction and no obvious signs of mis-emotion on terminal, then run terminal to a comm lag flat point and then locate another terminal. After this terminal has been handled it may be preferable to return to previous terminal, but this is a matter for the Instructor's discretion. If pc runs out of answers (for Co-Audit only) abandon terminal and find another. "What have you done?" "What have you withheld?" is the general form of this process and may be used. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [See also HCO B 15 December AD 9, Urgent Change in All Co-audit Courses, on the following page, which was issued later than the above HCO B.] 550  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Secs URGENT CHANGE IN ALL CO-AUDIT COURSES   Franchised Auditors Assn Secs HCO All PE Fnds and Personnel  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE WORLDWIDE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex, U.K. HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER AD9 Franchised Auditors Assn Secs HCO Secs All PE Fnds and Personnel URGENT CHANGE IN ALL CO-AUDIT COURSES Here we go. I told you in the last Franchise Bulletin that we had hit a jackpot. Of course, you to some degree put this down to the usual Hubbard enthusiasm. But my enthusiasm and encouragement was what kept us at it until we knew what we had to know to go for broke on OT and quite incidentally on all lower level cases. And this isn't even related to enthusiasm. No more cold- blooded statement was ever made than my telling you that the situation was definitely corralled. It is. I am sorry that the gen is sort of complicated and requires know-how, and would much rather have arranged it so all we had to do was push the button and we got a clear, but as soon as you see and experience this data I think you will be very happy with it. It all begins back in Wichita when I wrote that extremely unpopular article which is still appearing in Advanced Procedure and Axioms -- FULL RESPONSIBILITY. It turns out that this is the hottest thought the old man ever thought but it didn't come into view in its full importance for more than eight years. The one thing the public doesn't want to have anything to do with is FULL RESPONSIBILITY. They shudder and they run whenever they think of it. So thee and me will have to shoulder the load and shove them at the sausage machine and all that. For the whole story develops around this center pin of responsibility. There was so much to the story and so may possible variations of the tale that getting it all in line and trailmarking a way through the darkly woods has been a very painful job -- both to you and to me. But we did it. And we've got it. And if we can just hold still long enough we'll have the full benefit of it. Overt acts and withholds are important technology. If you can get somebody to take the overts out of any incident the incident will tend to vanish. And it would vanish completely except for one thing. Telling another person about one's overts is not enough. It is also necessary to take full responsibility for them. Thus the old wheeze about confession as advocated by one of the pagan churches (pagan to Scientology), that all one had to do was whisper one's misdeeds and they would go away, turns out to be so halfhearted that it becomes a very vicious operation. I've just been all over this ground and can tell you as a technical fact that the simple imparting of one's sins, or, more comprehensibly, one's overts and withholds, is as inadequate as using paste to build a skyscraper -- and about as dangerous. If the Church or somebody then pretended to take responsibility for the confided overts, then we've spun our fellow in just like that and we've degraded the person and the society. The person who confides must then take responsibility for the action he considered a sin by means of honest processing or it's just no-go, no-show, spin-down-spin-in. And there went the co-audits running overt-withhold. And there went up the tone arms when the pc told us his crimes. The rule is a thorough, harsh, unavoidable rule: When we get a person to confide a crime, we must then run on that crime what part of it he could be responsible for until it goes. ALERT YE HGCs. If you don't do just that you'll have some very unhappy people on your hands. THEREFORE: BE IT RESOLVED THAT -- whenever a person has discovered to the auditor a sin, crime or discreditable act or discreditable creation, that auditor is honor bound on all dynamics to run at once a process that will bring about the person's taking responsibility for his action. If the auditor does not he will have a spinning pc. 551 THIS GIVES US THE ONLY PROCESS WE COULD GET AWAY WITH IN A PE CO-AUDIT: That would be a process which recovered responsibility. The currently indicated process, done without assessment, would be "WHAT PART OF YOUR LIFE (PAST) COULD YOU BE RESPONSIBLE FOR?" DO NOT RUN ANYTHING ELSE IN CO-AUDIT! Of course doing an overt or a withhold is a refusal to take responsibility in some sphere, but overts and withholds are the offshoot of responsibility or lack of it not vice versa. Now go back and read this again and start clearing some people. More gen later. Best, L. RON HUBBARD Writ by me for thee URGENT EXPRESS. LRH:-.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=16/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITY FOR O/Ws   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 DECEMBER 1959 BPI IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITY FOR O/Ws To the degree that a pc does not take responsibility for his Overts and Withholds his bank becomes solid. On all cases on which Overt-Withhold is being run it is absolutely necessary that they be levelled off with responsibility on the incident, or the session involved, or both. A tone arm brought down by reducing the Overts and Withholds can be made high again because Overt-Withhold has a Step 6 reaction of toughening up the bank and making masses and facsimiles solid, unless the terminal and the session is handled with: "What part of a......... could you be responsible for?" LRH:js.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 552  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 120 iDate=0/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=110 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Techniques of Child Processing    Ability Issue 110 [1959, ca. late December] The Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY from Washington, D.C. Techniques of Child Processing L. Ron Hubbard Tomorrow's cases are child cases today. Whole civilizations have changed because somebody changed the children. In the past, the children were usually changed for the worse. Today let's be different and change them for the better. But whatever the benefits and reasons of child processing, however much it may do to smooth out a home and improve the future, the fact remains that it is a highly technical subject. The processing of children requires more technically perfect auditing and more properly applied sessions and processes than the average adult. To achieve the greatest benefit for children, one should first achieve the greatest possible command of auditing skill and Scientology theory and practice. Because a child is helplessly unable to express his ARC breaks violently enough to be listened to is no reason he should be given them. Child processing demands more perfect auditing than adult processing and therefore requires a better trained auditor than the average. If you would process children, be a Professional auditor first even if the children are your own. You will find that it will pay. With that reservation in mind, here are a few very modern developments in the processing of children. These are the best processes I know and the only processes that have worked out over a long period of time on a great many children. TYPE OF SESSION A child must be given a very formal session. A child's case will go downhill generally if the child is processed hit or miss, any old time, with careless sessioning. A child's session must be given the full dignity of an adult session. It must be opened and closed. All the formalities of a session must be observed -- and of course the auditing must be done in a place where the session cannot be broken in upon by outside persons or influences. The old technique of "short sessioning" works very well with a child. All one does is formally open and close a session and run within it only a minute or two of some simple process as below. The attention span of a child is short and if the child is even faintly unwilling to be audited, you can coax the child into short sessions and then, as time goes on, lengthen them gradually. 553 ASSISTS ON CHILDREN Of course one does not open and close a session with any formality while doing an assist. The preclear is always too tied up with the emergency and the agony to do anything but the process. The best assist for a child is "Where did it happen?" and, after asking this, "Where are you now?" getting the child to point each time he answers the questions. "Look at my fingers" while touching around the injured area lightly, is also a good assist for an injured child. ROUTINE CHILD PROCESSES Probably the most worthwhile child process which works as early as first speech is: "Where is the __________?" using "table," "chair" and other room objects, but avoiding bodies. The child takes this at first as a language examination and is very proud of it. It occasionally blows grief charges on losses. Very effective on a child that is normal or has a physical defect is an alternate touching of the child's arm, the auditor's arm, and using various duplicative body parts first on the auditor then on the child, accomplishing in effect: "From where could you communicate to a body?" with the actual command: "Feel my arm," "Thank you," "Feel your arm," "Thank you," and so on, using common body parts. But a warning with this -- if it turns on a somatic, do the same process session after session until the child is very bright and alert all the time. This is a very fine child psychosomatic process. CHILDREN WITH ROUGH CASES Very young children and children who are older but have rough cases, respond well to CCH 1 and CCH 2 -- but if you have to look those up to find out what they are, or if you are not a Professional, don't try them. A version of TR 5 "You make that body sit in that chair" can be run even on babies by substituting bed for chair. INSTILLING CONFIDENCE The worst crime most Scientology parents commit is demanding the child be far better and brighter than he or she can manage at once. This has the effect of making the child feel that he can't really do anything to please his parents and that he is thus failing them. The right thing to do is to acknowledge what the CHILD thinks he can do or is all right. Otherwise you are evaluating for the preclear and that's a Code break. A child seeking the approval of his parents is always inventing new tricks to attract attention. This means the child is already feeling neglected without reason, but is not in itself any bad sign. Acknowledge the tricks and spend more time with the child. RECALL PROCESSES Self Analysis Recall Processes contained on the next but last page of the book Self Analysis can be run on a child with some success. For the very young children, these require rewording. The aforementioned may seem brief to you, but it is a complete catalogue of workable and invariably helpful processes for children. If they can run any more than this, they're adults. L. RON HUBBARD 554  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RESPONSIBILITY   BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 DECEMBER AD9 BPI RESPONSIBILITY If the definition of operating thetan is knowing and willing cause over all dynamics then we can see at once that responsibility must go hand in hand with making an operating thetan. One cannot as-is acts for which one is taking no responsibility, but for which one is really responsible. The reason one gets amnesia on his past lives or even denies their existence lies with responsibility. He or she is unwilling to take responsibility for having been this or that other identity. This keys in in present time and closes one down every time one stops taking responsibility for one's fellows. Fighting 'other identities' in present time one ceases to be responsible for other identities. Therefore those he has had in the past become 'other people' and one dramatizes his own past identities because he cannot take responsibility for them. When one falls away from responsibility on the various dynamics he can then become less and less able to influence those dynamics and therefore becomes a victim of them. One must have done to other dynamics those things which other dynamics now seem to have the power to do to him. Therefore one can be injured. One can lose control. One can become in fact a zero of influence and a vacuum for trouble. The way one becomes separate from others is by his own overt acts against them. These overt acts become withholds and the person then individuates very strongly. You have seen this happening in auditing. The more overt acts the Auditor pulls on the pc the less willing the Auditor is to audit that pc. Further, the more overt acts the pc pulls on the Auditor the less willing he is to stay in session. It only looks as though cause and effect is at work. Actually all life consists of opposed causes where it is aberrated. The way a person blows out of session or blows out of an organization or blows out of Scientology is a simple one. He withholds information and hides his overts. After a while he blows himself off. Show me a pc blowing session and I will show you a pc who has not levelled with his Auditor and who is guilty of undeclared overts against the dynamics and the Auditor. Show me a staff member who is blowing the Organization and I will show you a staff member who is guilty of undeclared overts against the Organization. It is fatal to audit anyone unless full two-way comm is established between the Auditor and the pc. A person who goes on being audited without asserting his responsibility for what he has done is a person who will make no auditing gains or whose auditing gains will slump. As most of the human race has undeclared overts this fact alone assumes gigantic proportions in forwarding Scientology and for that reason alone we will have to give it a lion's share of attention from here on out. Of course you will see that many people at first will not come near us for fear of what we will find out. But as this is better understood you will find that the people who come to us will come with a willingness to bare their guilt to us and get it sorted out. As this is so much the case we must then therefore have amongst us none with 555 undeclared overts against the dynamics which would prevent their getting gains in processing or who would render a person's confidences liable to use for less pure purposes. Along with this technical discovery then goes the administrative must that our noses must be clean and our hearts cleared. Our strength will be the strength of a billion if we have nothing to hide. This may or may not be popular. I don't care about that. It is effective. I do care about that. And remember that whenever a person discloses to view discreditable overts and withholds we must run what part of that act or incident could you be responsible for. You're going to see more case gains than you've ever seen before -- providing you have the stamina to get over this first hump. So here we change from irresponsible to responsible, from guilt to strength and all in the twinkling of an eye. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.rd Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 556  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=31/12/59 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  BLOW-OFFS   Fran Hldrs HCO Secs Assn Secs HASI Dept Heads  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 31 DECEMBER AD 9 Fran Hldrs HCO Secs Assn Secs HASI Dept Heads BLOW-OFFS Scientology Technology recently has been extended to include the factual explanation of departures, sudden and relatively unexplained, from sessions, posts, jobs, locations and areas. This is one of the things man thought he knew all about and therefore never bothered to investigate, yet, this amongst all other things gave him the most trouble. Man had it all explained to his own satisfaction and yet his explanation did not cut down the amount of trouble which came from the feeling of "having to leave". For instance man has been frantic about the high divorce rate, about the high job turnover in plants, about labor unrest and many other items all stemming from the same source -- sudden departures or gradual departures. We have the view of a person who has a good job, who probably won't get a better one, suddenly deciding to leave and going. We have the view of a wife with a perfectly good husband and family up and leaving it all. We see a husband with a pretty and attractive wife breaking up the affinity and departing. In Scientology we have the phenomenon of preclears in session or students on courses deciding to leave and never coming back. And that gives us more trouble than most other things all combined. Man explained this to himself by saying that things were done to him which he would not tolerate and therefore he had to leave. But if this were the explanation all man would have to do would be to make working conditions, marital relationships, jobs, courses and sessions all very excellent and the problem would be solved. But on the contrary, a close examination of working conditions and marital relationships demonstrates that improvement of conditions often worsens the amount of blow-off, as one could call this phenomenon. Probably the finest working conditions in the world were achieved by Mr. Hershey of Chocolate Bar fame for his plant workers. Yet they revolted and even shot at him. This in its turn led to an industrial philosophy that the worse workers were treated the more willing they were to stay which in itself is as untrue as the better they are treated the faster they blow off. One can treat people so well that they grow ashamed of themselves, knowing they don't deserve it, that a blow-off is precipitated, and certainly one can treat people so badly that they have no choice but to leave, but these are extreme conditions and in between these we have the majority of departures: the auditor is doing his best for the preclear and yet the preclear gets meaner and meaner and blows the session. The wife is doing her best to make a marriage and the husband wanders off on the trail of a tart. The manager is trying to keep things going and the worker leaves. These, the unexplained, disrupt organizations and lives and it's time we understood them. People leave because of their own overts and withholds. That is the factual fact and the hardbound rule. A man with a clean heart can't be hurt. The man or woman who must must must become a victim and depart is departing because of his or her own overts and withholds. It doesn't matter whether the person is departing from a town or a job or a session. The cause is the same. Almost anyone, no matter his position, can remedy a situation no matter what's 557 wrong if he or she really wants to. When the person no longer wants to remedy it his own overt acts and withholds against the others involved in the situation have lowered his own ability to be responsible for it. Therefore he or she does not remedy the situation. Departure is the only answer. To justify the departure the person blowing off dreams up things done to him, in an effort to minimize the overt by degrading those it was done to. The mechanics involved are quite simple. It is amazing what trivial overts will cause a person to blow. I caught a staff member one time just before he blew and traced down the original overt act against the Organization to his failure to defend the Organization when a criminal was speaking viciously about it. This failure to defend accumulated to itself more and more overts and withholds such as failing to relay messages, failure to complete an assignment, until it finally utterly degraded the person into stealing something of no value. This theft caused the person to believe he had better leave. It is a rather noble commentary on man that when a person finds himself, as he believes, incapable of restraining himself from injuring a benefactor he will defend the benefactor by leaving. This is the real source of the blow- off. If we were to better a person's working conditions in this light we would see that we have simply magnified his overt acts and made it a certain fact that he would leave. If we punish we can bring the value of the benefactor down a bit and thus lessen the value of the overt. But improvement and punishment are neither one answers. The answer lies in Scientology and processing the person up to a high enough responsibility to take a job or a position and carry it out without all this weird hocus-pocus of "I've got to say you are doing things to me so I can leave and protect you from all the bad things I am doing to you." That's the way it is and it doesn't make sense not to do something about it now that we know. A recent Secretarial Executive Director to all Central Organizations states that before a person may draw his last pay cheque from an Organization he is leaving of his own volition he must write down all his overts and withholds against the Organization and its related personnel and have these checked out by the HCO Secretary on an E-Meter. To do less than this is cruelty itself. The person is blowing himself off with his own overts and withholds. If these are not removed then anything the Organization or its people does to him goes in like a javelin and leaves him with a dark area in his life and a rotten taste in his mouth. Further he goes around spouting lies about the Organization and its related personnel and every lie he utters makes him just that much sicker. By permitting a blow-off without clearing it we are degrading people, for I assure you, and with some sorrow, people have not often recovered from overts against Scientology, its Organizations and related persons. They don't recover because they know in their hearts even while they lie that they are wronging people who have done and are doing enormous amounts of good in the world and who definitely do not deserve libel and slander. Literally, it kills them and if you don't believe it I can show you the long death list. The only evil thing we are doing is to be good, if that makes sense to you. For by being good, things done to us out of carelessness or viciousness are all out of proportion to the evil done to others. This often applies to people who are not Scientologists. Just this year I had an electrician who robbed HCO of money with false bills and bad workmanship. One day he woke up to the fact that the Organization he was robbing was helping people everywhere far beyond his ability to ever help anyone. Within a few weeks he contracted TB and is now dying in a London hospital. Nobody took off the overts and withholds when he left. And it's actually killing him -- a fact which is no fancy on my part. There is something a little terrifying in this sometimes. I once told a bill collector what and who we were and that he had wronged a good person and a half hour later he threw a hundred grains of Veronal down his throat and was lugged off to hospital, a suicide. This campaign is aimed straightly at cases and getting people cleared. It is aimed at preserving staffs and the lives of persons who believe they have failed us. 558 Uneasy lies the head that has a bad conscience. Clean it up and run responsibility on it and you have another better person, and if anybody feels like leaving just examine the record and sit down and list everything done to and withheld from me and the Organization and send it along. We'll save a lot of people that way. And on our parts we'll go along being as good a manager, as good an Organization and as good a field as we can be and we'll get rid of all our overts and withholds too. Think it will make an interesting new view? Well, Scientology specializes in those. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:js.cden Copyright $c 1959 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 559  L. RON HUBBARD