Type = 21 iDate=6/1/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HCO SECURITY FORM 19 LAUDATORY WITHHOLDS Know to Mystery Processing Check (A Class II Auditor's Skill)   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 6 JANUARY 1962 CenOCon Franchise HCO SECURITY FORM 19 LAUDATORY WITHHOLDS Know to Mystery Processing Check (A Class II Auditor's Skill) This is a most interesting and revelatory processing check. It may be done at any time but preferably after the last two pages of the Joburg (Form 3) and Form 6 on old Scientologists and Form HCO B 21 September 1961, Children's Sec Check, on others. During this check at once on brand-new people engages their interest and eases the way to more severe checks. This check is run as follows: Run 3 questions or 20 minutes of the check. Then run 10 minutes of the pc's havingness process. On any particularly hot trio of this check, go over the three again again and. It will be noticed that the check is divided in sections of 3 questions each for that purpose. Use the current HCO British E-Meter. Many withholds do not show on other meters even when their electrical responses are the same as the British meter. The mental responses are not the same. NEVER LEAVE A QUESTION UNFLAT ON ANY PROCESSING (SECURITY) CHECK. Nul the needle reaction before leaving any question (although an unflat question can be interrupted to run havingness). Run in Model Session 21 December 1961 or later with Rudiments IN. Short session a pc to keep them in when the pc is restive. Do a thorough job on the withhold question in the rudiments even when doing a Processing (Sec) Check. Use only instant reads. Repeat question exactly as written and see if it is nul before leaving it. 1. Have you ever withheld a vital piece of information? 2. Have you ever made anyone guilty of withholding vital information? 3. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others give vital information? 4. Have you ever withheld looking? 5. Have you ever made anyone guilty of not looking? 6. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others look? 7. Have you ever withheld emotion? 8. Have you ever made anyone guilty of being emotional? 9. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others emotional? 1 10. Have you ever withheld effort? 11. Have you ever made anyone guilty of using effort? 12. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others use effort? 13. Have you ever withheld thinking? 14. Have you ever made anyone guilty of thinking? 15. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others think? 16. Have you ever withheld symbols (words)? 17. Have you ever made anyone guilty of using symbols (words)? 18. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others use symbols (words)? 19. Have you ever withheld eating? 20. Have you ever made anyone guilty of eating? 21. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others eat? 22. Have you ever withheld sex? 23. Have you ever made anyone guilty of sex? 24. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others have sex? 25. Have you ever withheld a mystery? 26. Have you ever made anyone guilty of a mystery? 27. Have you ever prevented anyone from causing others a mystery? 28. Have you ever withheld waiting? 29. Have you ever made anyone guilty of waiting? 30. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others wait? 31. Have you ever withheld unconsciousness? 32. Have you ever made anyone guilty of unconsciousness? 33. Have you ever prevented anyone from making others unconscious? 2 34. Have you ever withheld anything? 35. Have you ever made anyone guilty of withholding? 36. Have you ever prevented anyone from telling a withhold? 37. Have you ever withheld security checking? 38. Have you ever made anyone guilty of security checking? 39. Have you ever sought to prevent another from security checking? The check may be continued using any specific knowledge, any perception, any emotion (see Tone Scale), any version of effort (force, strength), any version of thinking including doubt and suspicion, any version of symbols (including books), any version of sexual actions, any eating or consummation of anything (including money), any version of mystery including stupidity, any version of waiting, and any version of unconsciousness including sleep and chemical or physical means of producing sleep. By running the general version first and then doing a survey of any pc's announced difficulties along the Know to Mystery Scale and then by putting down these items on the appropriate places in the check, great case gains can be made. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 3  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 13 iDate=9/1/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3D CRISS CROSS   Sthil Course 3D List  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 9 JANUARY 1962 Sthil Course 3D List 3D CRISS CROSS To prevent misassessment I have been developing some new methods of obtaining a 3D package. Because goals lists get lost there is need also for ways of getting a 3D package without having the goal. One of these is to run O/W on self, list the pc's answers and then ask the pc, "Who would you treat like that?" Bleed the meter and nul and you will find an item of the 3D package you can then use, either as criss cross or to get a goal and modifier. This is very workable and useful. It is most useful in 3D Criss Cross. Further, if a pc blows clear on assessment you can do the above, find his goal and modifier and get the Goals Problem Mass keyed back in again. The GPM will always key back in by finding the modifier to a goal. Criss Cross, complete, consists of the following steps: 1. Ask the pc "What kind of person or being haven't you liked?" and make a complete list. 2. Nul the list and locate one item that remains in (or was the last in). (Make sure ruds are in in all nulling.) (There may be more than one item staying in. If so take strongest read.) 3. Ask the pc "What kind of person or being have you liked?" and make a complete list. 4. Nul the list and locate one item as in 2. The two resulting items are called TEST ITEMS. They are not necessarily 3D package items. 5. Write the item found in 2 at the top of a sheet of paper. Ask the pc "Who or what would oppose (item)?" Make a complete list. (Never suggest any item to a pc ever.) Bleed the meter for all items. 6. Nul this list down to one item (assessment by elimination as always, of course). 7. Write the item found in 4 down at the top of a sheet of paper and proceed as in 5. 8. Nul this list down to one item. 9. Write the item found in 5 at the top of a sheet and proceed as before. 10. Nul the list to one item. 11. Write the item found in 8 at the top of a sheet and proceed as before. 12. Nul down to one item as before. Continue to do lists and items as in 9, 10, 11 and 12. 4 BE VERY ACCURATE IN FINDING THE RIGHT ITEM EACH TIME. The two lists will eventually collide as a solid package. It will not be easy (or perhaps even possible) to find anything else on the case. When this condition is reached, you have 3D package items of high level, capable of being run. When doing listing and nulling, carefully note whenever an item gave the pc a painful somatic or a dizziness. It will be the painful somatic type of item that is the terminal, the dizzy or "winds of space" item that is the oppterm. 13. Select which is terminal, which is oppterm by usual tests. 14. Find the goal, oppgoal and Modifier for the package. 15. Run with 3D type commands. When this package is well discharged or blows, do another 3D Criss Cross using the items that were being run in 15 as the starting points for steps 5 on. You will be rather amazed how much this type of assessment does for the case and how low a level case it can be done upon. You're welcome. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:cwr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 5  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/1/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SECURITY CHECKING TWENTY-TEN THEORY   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JANUARY 1962 CenOCon Franchise SECURITY CHECKING TWENTY-TEN THEORY All valences are circuits are valences. Circuits key out with knowingness. This is the final definition of havingness. Havingness is the concept of being able to reach. No-havingness is the concept of not being able to reach. A withhold makes one feel he or she cannot reach. Therefore withholds are what cut havingness down and made runs on havingness attain unstable gains. In the presence of withholds havingness sags. As soon as a withhold is pulled, ability to reach is potentially restored but the pc often does not discover this. It requires that havingness be run to get the benefit of having pulled most withholds. Therefore on these principles, I have developed Twenty-Ten. Providing the following items are observed and the procedure followed exactly, Twenty-Ten will appear to work miracles rapidly. REQUISITES 1. That the auditor is Class II (or Class IIb at Saint Hill). 2. That a British HCO WW Tech Sec approved meter is employed and no other. 3. That the auditor knows how to find the pc's havingness process (36 Havingness processes). 4. That the havingness process is tested for loosening the needle at the beginning of each time used. 5. That standard HCO Policy Letter Form Sec Checks are used. The last two pages of the Joburg and Form 6 for Scientologists, the childhood check and Form 19 for newcomers, the remainder of the Joburg and other checks for all. 6. That the procedure of Twenty-Ten is exactly followed. TWENTY-TEN A Class II Auditor's Skill 1. Use Model Session HCO B of 21 December 1961 or as amended. 2. For every Twenty Minutes of Security Checking run Ten Minutes of Havingness. 6 3. If the Security question is not nul when the Twenty Minutes period is ended, say to the pc, "Although there may be withholds remaining on this question, we will now run Havingness." 4. If an unflat question is left to run havingness, return to it after Ten Minutes of havingness and complete it. 5. Run by the clock, not by the state of the question or meter on both security questions and havingness. 6. Be prepared to have to find a new havingness process any time the one being used fails to loosen needle after 8 to 10 commands. Do can squeeze test before first havingness command and after 8 to 10 questions every time havingness process is used. 7.. Do not count time employed in finding a havingness process as part of time havingness is to be run. 8. Use "Has a withhold been missed on you?" liberally throughout session. Use it heavily in end rudiments. Application to Goals Problem Mass The GPM is often curved out of shape by present life enturbulence to such an extent that only lock valences are available for assessing. This gives "scratchy needle" and also can lead to finding only lock valences. Lock valences are appended to a real GPM 3-D item. They register and even seem to stay in but are actually impossible to run as 3-D items. An item found by an auditor and then proven incorrect by a checker was usually a lock item. If this happens, even the new item found by the checker may also be a lock item. To uncover correct 3-D items it is better to run Twenty-Ten and other preparatory processes for 75 to 200 hours before attempting to get a 3-D package. If the whole GPM keys out, one need only find a goal and MODIFIER to key it in again. Preparatory time is not wasted as the same or greater amount of time is all used up anyway, at a loss to the pc, if a pc has a twisted GPM with earlier lock circuits abundantly keyed in present time. In such cases (the majority) the preparatory time would be eaten up in keeping the pc in session, let alone improper items. Twenty-Ten is urgently recommended for immediate use in all HGCs. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ph.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 7  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=17/1/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RESPONSIBILITY AGAIN   Gen Non-Remimeo Qual Hats Tech Hats Level VI Students & Above  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JANUARY 1962 Reissued on 7 June 1967 Gen Non-Remimeo Qual Hats Tech Hats Level VI Students & Above RESPONSIBILITY AGAIN The common denominator of the Goals Problem Mass is "No Responsibility". This is the end product that continues any circuit or valence. This is a deterioration of Pan Determinism over a game into "No responsibility" as follows: No previous or Current Contact -- No responsibility or liability. Pan Determinism -- Full responsibility for both sides of game. Other Determinism -- No responsibility for other side of game. Self Determinism -- Full responsibility for self, no responsibility for other side of game. Valence (Circuit) -- No responsibility for the game, for either side of the game or for a former self. The Goals Problem Mass is made up of past selves or "valences", each one grouped and more or less in a group. Therefore, the characteristic of the part (the valence) is the characteristic of the whole, the collection of valences known as the Goals Problem Mass. The way a being is hung with persistent masses is the mechanism of getting him to believe certain things are undesirable. These, he cannot then have. He can only combat or ignore them. Either way, they are not as-ised. Thus they persist. Only undesirable characteristics tend to persist. Therefore the least desirable valences or traits of valences persist. The way not to have is to ignore or combat or withdraw from. These three, ignoring or combating or withdrawing sum up to no having. They also sum up to no responsibility for such things. Thus we can define responsibility as the concept of being able to care for, to reach or to be. To be responsible for something one does not actually have to care for it, or reach it or be it. One only needs to believe or know that he has the ability to care for it, reach it or be it. "Care for it" is a broader concept than but similar to start, change or stop it. It includes guard it, help it, like it, be interested in it, etc. When one has done these things, and then had failures through overts and withholds, one cycles down through compulsive and obsessive care, reach and be and inverts to withdraw from, combat or ignore. 8 Along with ignore goes forgetting or occlusion. Thus a person has occlusion on past valences and past lives go out of sight. These return to memory only when one has regained the concept that they can be reached, or that one dares be them again or that one can care for them. Herein is the cause and remedy of whole track occlusion. There are many uses of these principles. Sec Checking gets off the overts and withholds and opens the gates. All chronic somatics and behavior patterns are contained in valences and are not traceable to the current lifetime since one can reach present life, is caring for present life and is being present life, so present life is an area of responsibility. All real difficulty stems from no responsibility. However, one can use these principles even on present life with considerable gain. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:sf.jp.cden Copyright $c 1962, 1967 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 9  L. RON HUBBARD Founder   Type = 13 iDate=22/1/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3D CRISS CROSS METHOD OF ASSESSMENT   Sthil CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 22 JANUARY 1962 Sthil CenOCon 3D CRISS CROSS METHOD OF ASSESSMENT The proper sequence of action in a 3D Criss Cross Assessment is as follows: (1) LIST LIST However the test item of a list is determined, the essence of the first step is to list a list. This can be the list to determine a test item or an opposition list. There are several LINES in 3D Criss Cross. Each line is derived from a test item and is thereafter continued by opposition items. LINES are lettered. Each line is an independent zig-zag of Opposition items. A line can begin by using any terminal established in old Routine 3, 3A or original 3D. Or it can begin by a test item derived from an arbitrary list such as Dislike, Like, Who by O/W, Dynamic Assessment, a Pre-hav level assessment on the pc and Who or what would ______________ , a list of withholds or outflows. The essence of all this is that one takes a button and pushes it to get a list. The List is always derived from the pc, without suggestion by the auditor. It is the pc's list and what happens to it is up to the pc. The auditor pushes the button and thereafter is an interested writer of a list (while keeping the pc in session). We do not care how short or how long this list is. The average list is about 25 items. If less than 12, we consider the pc is ARC broke. If more we only know that the "can't reach phenomenon" has set in. In the "can't reach phenomenon" the pc keeps listing because he "can't quite say exactly what it is". This is an actual sensation. The answer is to go on listing until the pc has expressed it to his satisfaction. The phenomenon is: the pc couldn't reach the right wording as it is too heavily charged and only by giving more and more items is the charge bled off and then the pc, able to reach it, can say it. The essence is to get a list as thorough as possible without putting the pc under a strain. Pc must remain interested. Forcing pc to list more and more and more when he's had enough wrecks the value of 3D Criss Cross. The list should be numbered, should be on legal (foolscap) in two columns. Readable. You don't recopy lists. Date the list, put the pc's name on it, and the full question the pc is being asked to get it at the top of the page. The back side of the paper can be used. Additional sheets can be used. But if so, name, date and item from which list is coming must be written at the top of second sheets. Numbering the items has little value but it may be done. Do not keep pc on meter while listing. (2) RUN HAVINGNESS You will see a pc getting dopey or drowsy while listing or nulling. It is good auditing to run the pc's havingness process each time you notice this. Nulling is 10 accurate even when the pc is anaten, but things blow much faster if havingness is run. After listing (or during listing if, as rarely happens, pc goes drowsy) run some havingness. Put pc on meter while running havingness. Test havingness process each time used. (3) DIFFERENTIATE THE LIST Assessment in 3D Criss Cross is aimed at straightening up the bank as much as obtaining items. Lists which won't nul on repetitive assessment by elimination have not been differentiated, or the ruds are out, or the list is incomplete in that the wanted item isn't on it. A 3D item is heavily charged and when mentioned discharges much of the list. The essence of this Differentiation Step is to read each item to the pc and have pc briefly explain how the item ______________ (whatever the list came from). This is done easily and in a friendly and interested fashion. It's the pc's list. The answer that must be ascertained by the auditor is whether the pc wants the item left on or taken off the list. This makes the pc look. And it blows charge rapidly. This step is done with the pc off the meter. The atmosphere is easy and pleasant. When the differentiation is in progress pc may want to add to the list. Let the pc add what he or she likes. Put whatever is added always at the bottom of the list. Pc is taken off the meter for this step. (4) NUL LIST Put the pc on the meter. Make sure there are no session invalidations or withholds (as different from life invalidations and withholds) and begin nulling out the list. This action is done in a brisk, business-like, staccato fashion. Each item on the list is said exactly three times with only enough pause to see if there is an instant read (about 1/2 second between speaking the item each time). The auditor then acknowledges and says, "It's in" or "It's out." Patter would be, "Tiger, Tiger, Tiger. Thank you. It's in." Mark. "Cat, Cat, Cat. Thank you. It's out." Mark. No interval between items read except the split second necessary to mark. Pc is expected to be silent during nulling. One does not consult the pc unless the ruds go out. One answers the pc if the pc originates but then only TR 4. One doesn't enter into discussions with the pc. If ruds go out all will go nul. If this happens, quickly pull session invalidations or withholds, and get going with nulling. If the item clearly reads in any one of the three reads leave it in. If in doubt leave it in. Nul with sensitivity at 16. If consecutive items which have heretofore been live vanish, suspect session invalidations and withholds, clear them, and pick up the earliest consecutive X where this might have happened and carry forward with nulling as before. Treat the list as a wheel. When you arrive at the bottom begin at once at the top. 11 Use a slash mark / before the item if it is in. Use a cross if the item goes out. If whole list goes bad and you have to re-nul it, use other side of item (to right of item), then use a different colored ball-point. Black for original and second nulling. Red for third nulling. Green for fourth nulling. A second nulling goes after the item. This code applies only to flubbed lists as a whole -- for instance whole list goes nul. You can be left with two items in a list derived from a test item. Use both, but only if they are clearly of opposite character, not the same thing in another form. At the end of nulling a test item list (first item of a line), you should have one or two live items. If one, put it under the line you're doing on a Line Plot. If two, put one under the line you are doing and use the other for a new line. There are rarely two left on opposition lists. (5) CHECK ITEM When the item is found, check it out. Get ruds in, run a bit of havingness. See if item is still registering. If not get the ruds in better and do so until item reads well. Now read an already nulled item on the list, then read the found item, then read a nulled item, then the found item. Do this until you are sure all items on the list except the found item are nul. If found item goes out, get the ruds in. When you have found the item and checked it out, put it under its proper Line on the Pc's Line Plot. The Line Plot is a sheet of white foolscap (legal) with three columns across the top of each side, Line A, Line B, etc, with an indication of how each line was derived (Dislike, Like, Who O/W, Dynamic Assessment, etc). Every one of these lines is itself. It does not cross over to other lines. A Line is a list of found 3D items each in opposition to the last item on that Line. The Line is a series of zig-zags, with an item at each zig and at each zag. Any pair, a zig plus a zag, could be a 3D package that would run. We want at least five lines. We want all the items we can get on one line. Inevitably, sooner or later, all lines will either coincide into a 3D package that will only derive itself when listed or the pc goes to OT by assessment. There is a basic problem between every pair of items on one line in a Line Plot. Getting the pc to describe that problem helps blow charge. When listing, differentiating or nulling, every time the pc gets a pain, write "PN" after the item. Every time an item makes a pc feel dizzy or he gets winds of space, write "SEN" after that item. When you finally come to run a package you could tell what is the pc's term (pain) and what is the pc's oppterm (sen) by studying the lists to see what type of item consistently gives the pc pain or sensation. Thus no error is made on selecting the terminal or further test needed. 12 ERRORS IN ASSESSMENT The whole action 1 to 5 above is called Assessment. The first error is poor E-Meter skill. The second error is just lousy, ARC breaky auditing. The third error is carrying a line by oppterms too deep beyond the other lines. Do lines one at a time in rotation. Don't keep oppterming a line on and on and forget the other lines. Fourth error is failing to note the ruds going out and getting off session invalidations and withholds. Fifth error is not getting a long enough list to include the 3D item you're after. You can unburden a case of hundreds of found 3D items (thousands of list items). This makes terrific case gains, item by item found. You have never seen such fast case gains as a well done 3D Criss Cross by assessment alone providing the auditing is well done and these steps are followed. Use only a Mark IV E-Meter. The others don't register well enough to detect 3D Criss Cross reads. Chanting a Modifier is not done in 3D Criss Cross. Don't let anybody not a Class II even attempt to learn 3D Criss Cross. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 13  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/1/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FLOW PROCESS (A Class I or Class IIb Skill)   Franchise Sthil  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JANUARY 1962 Franchise Sthil FLOW PROCESS (A Class I or Class IIb Skill) First mentioned at the June Congress 1952 at 1407 North Central, Phoenix, Arizona (the first Scientology Congress), compulsive outflow and obsessive withhold are alike aberrated. With the advent of Security Checking as a process (as opposed to a prevention of subversion) and the 1960 work on overt-withhold and responsibility, still continuing, means of "cracking cases" now lie open to the skilled auditor which, if expertly done, are capable of cracking the most resistant case. The main emphasis has been lately upon withholds. These, coming after the confusion of an overt, of course hang up on the track and tend to stop the pc in time. The overt is the forward motion, the withhold coming after it is the inward motion. While not ranking with the power of the O/W mechanism, there are, however, some very important flows which could be released and which, if released from the bank, could assist Security Checking. These are "laudable outflows" and some others. The most important flows can be listed as follows: 1. Outflow. 2. Restrained Outflow. 3. Inflow. 4. Restrained Inflow. All ridges and masses develop around these flows. You recognize in 1, Outflow, the overt act, as its most important item. In 2, Restrained Outflow, you recognize all withholds. In 3, Inflow, we have a less well studied flow and in 4, Restrained Inflow, we have a newcomer to Scientology. In that we have heretofore considered Inflow as Other-Determined it has not seemed aberrative on the basis that all acts that influence a thetan are done by himself. But Inflow and Restrained Inflow can be Self-Determined Actions, as well as Other-Determined and therefore merit study. Thus all four principal flows can be Self-Determined or they can be Other-Determined. Thus all four flows can be aberrative. In an effort to speed up Security Checking as class of processes, I am now studying 3. Inflow and 4. Restrained Inflow. An example of Inflow would be Eating. An example of Restrained Inflow would be Dieting. A general process which covers all four of these flows in the most general form would be: 14 FLOW PROCESS WHAT HAD TO BE OUTFLOWED? WHAT HAD TO BE WITHHELD? WHAT HAD TO BE INFLOWED? WHAT HAD TO BE HELD OFF? This process is a safe process for a Class IIb or an auditor in training to run on HGC pcs or others. It is a cyclic process and is ended with the cyclic wording in Model Session. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 15  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  FLOWS, BASIC   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 FEBRUARY 1962 Franchise FLOWS, BASIC A flow is a progress of energy between two points. The points may have masses. The points are fixed and the fixedness of the points and their opposition produce the phenomena of flows. There are two flows, when viewed from one point. (a) Outflow. (b) Inflow. These flows are modified by being accelerated and restrained. The acceleration and restraint as applied by a thetan can be classified by many attitudes. The basic attitudes are covered in the CDEI Scale -- Curiosity, Desire, En force, Inhibit. For purposes of processing these attitudes become 1. Permissible. 2. Enforced. 3. Prohibited. 4. Inhibited. This scale inverts from outflow to inflow so that you have PERMISSIBLE ENFORCED PROHIBITED INHIBITED INHIBITED PROHIBITED ENFORCED PERMISSIBLE. This gives us eight attitudes toward flows. We have two flows, Inflow and Outflow and so there are then sixteen Basic Flows that affect a case strongly. As we add brackets (another for another, self for others, etc) we get additional flows, of course. But these sixteen are basic. Since it is an inversion, expressed in the same way above and below Inhibited, we can list flows for processes, rudiments, assessments, sec checks and other purposes as eight, remembering we have an inversion that will occur in the processing, but the lower and upper harmonic covered by the same words. For all general purposes, these then are the listed flows that are actually used by the auditor in lists, commands, etc. PERMISSIBLE OUTFLOW. PERMISSIBLE INFLOW. ENFORCED OUTFLOW. ENFORCED INFLOW. PROHIBITED OUTFLOW. PROHIBITED INFLOW. INHIBITED OUTFLOW. INHIBITED INFLOW. If you wish to "see" this better, make a point on a piece of paper and draw the flows. Or audit them or get audited on them. The basic aberration is withheld flow and all of these flows in a session are aberrative only if the pc is withholding telling the auditor about the flow. LRH:jw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 16  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 13 iDate=1/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3D CRISS CROSS ASSESSMENT TIPS   All Auditors doing 3DXX  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 1 FEBRUARY 1962 All Auditors doing 3DXX 3D CRISS CROSS ASSESSMENT TIPS LISTING: To get a list to Differentiate and Nul rapidly, the list must be complete. It is assumed there will be one or more heavily charged items on a list. Unless this charge is blown, a SCRATCHY NEEDLE, DISINTEREST IN DIFFERENTIATION and HARD NULLING may result. The bulk of the list consists, not of errors, but of LOCK VALENCES. When the lock valences are off the top of the Item, the pc can state the item. There is a phenomenon here wherein the pc "can't quite say it", "can't reach it", "hasn't said it right ...... " All this adds to an actual feeling of distance from the item, or wrongness. It is a feeling. It has flows connected with it. So long as the pc has this feeling of not quite right, the list does not contain the actual item. And if it does not, then disinterest in Differentiation, hard nulling and scratchy needle may result. The answer to this phenomenon (call it Incompleteness) is to get more items listed. Do not let the pc just sit and comm lag and reject wordings. Take them all down. Every one rejected is really a lock valence, so get it down on the list. Keep the pc giving items, "trying to phrase it right". And put down whatever pc says. If pc is on meter during listing, you'll see a heavy fall when the item comes on. Don't consider a list complete until the pc can answer an unequivocal "Yes" to this question: "Are you sure that you've stated the correct item yet?" or "Are you satisfied we've got all the things that would ______________ ?" or "Have you phrased the item to your complete satisfaction?" This is the complete list. It is better to complete a list by questioning the pc about its completeness than by bleeding meter, as an unskilled auditor can get a read on ARC Break and keep asking for items each time he gets the ARC Break read caused by asking for items. A poor list can be caused by: 1. Line being started is of no possible interest to pc. (True only of the start of a line and for the question being used to get a line.) 2. A dissatisfaction on the part of the pc as to having stated the item correctly. METHODS FOR LINES The best ways to start a line in order of workability are: 1. Assessment of the 8 flows for the pc's chronic flow and use it for a line "Who, what would (flow)". This can be done over and over, getting one flow, then another, each time by assessment of remaining flows. 2. Assessment of Pre-Hav Scale on "You" for a level and getting items for that PH Level. (Aux PH Scale.) Listing "Who-what would ______________ " or appropriate wording. Then doing new PH assessment for next line. 17 3. A Problems Intensive to locate chronic problems, etc, and listing "Who-what would oppose _____________ ." 4. Dynamic Assessment. Finding Dynamic, listing "Who or what would represent (dynamic)". Finding new Dynamic when first items found. 5. The direct question, "What do you really consider is wrong with you?" or "What are you being audited to change?" (Best for new HGC pcs on their first intensive.) 6. Assessing whole Know-to-Mystery Scale for most reaction. Then "Who or what would _______________ ?" 7. Arbitrary selection, dislike, like, first dynamic o/w, etc. DIFFERENTIATION There is no pat wound-up doll question for Differentiation. The more the wound-up doll repetitive question approach is used the less good the pc gets out of Differentiation. In Differentiation of a list, we want the pc to: 1. Look. 2. Decide if item belongs or doesn't. 3. What the item named is in relation to the item the list came from. To do Differentiation, the pc must be in session. Differentiation blows the lock valences. A pc with ruds out blows nothing. Therefore, there is no substitute for ruds in and pc in session. Auditors who interpret this on their own flow patterns, think In session means different types of flow from pc. It's just "Willing and able to talk to the auditor". And "Interested in own case". An auditor who's interested in the pc is also interested in the list. Stiff, rugged, mechanical formality and Differentiation just don't go together. During Differentiation remove any item from the list that the pc says to remove, add any new item pc wants added. Don't suggest any item to pc ever or suggest the removal of an item. Nulling and Checking are covered earlier. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 18  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 13 iDate=3/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3DXX FLOWS ASSESSMENT   All Sthil Students  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 3 FEBRUARY 1962 All Sthil Students 3DXX FLOWS ASSESSMENT Assess the following by elimination (as in nulling). List "Who or what would (line found)". Complete list. (Continue listing until pc knows he's said it.) Find item by usual steps. Do whole operation twice for two items. Both go on same line. All items on a flow line are done by assessing flows not by oppterming as in other lines. You can continue to repeat the same operation for item after item: PERMISSIBLE OUTFLOW ENFORCED OUTFLOW PROHIBITED OUTFLOW INHIBITED OUTFLOW PERMISSIBLE INFLOW ENFORCED INFLOW PROHIBITED INFLOW INHIBITED INFLOW PERMISSIBLE OUTFLOW FROM SELF ENFORCED OUTFLOW FROM SELF PROHIBITED OUTFLOW FROM SELF INHIBITED OUTFLOW FROM SELF PERMISSIBLE INFLOW ON SELF ENFORCED INFLOW ON SELF PROHIBITED INFLOW ON SELF INHIBITED INFLOW ON SELF PERMISSIBLE OUTFLOW FROM ANOTHER ENFORCED OUTFLOW FROM ANOTHER PROHIBITED OUTFLOW FROM ANOTHER INHIBITED OUTFLOW FROM ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE INFLOW ON ANOTHER ENFORCED INFLOW ON ANOTHER PROHIBITED INFLOW ON ANOTHER INHIBITED INFLOW ON ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE OUTFLOW FROM OTHERS ENFORCED OUTFLOW FROM OTHERS PROHIBITED OUTFLOW FROM OTHERS INHIBITED OUTFLOW FROM OTHERS PERMISSIBLE INFLOW TO OTHERS ENFORCED INFLOW TO OTHERS PROHIBITED INFLOW TO OTHERS INHIBITED INFLOW TO OTHERS There are thirty-two flows on a flows assessment for sec checks, or 3DXX. LRH:sf.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 19  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT MISSED WITHHOLDS   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 FEBRUARY 1962 Franchise URGENT MISSED WITHHOLDS The one item Scientologists everywhere must get an even greater reality on is MISSED WITHHOLDS and the upsets they cause. EVERY upset with Central Orgs, Field Auditors, pcs, the lot, is traceable to one or more MISSED WITHHOLDS. Every ARC Breaky pc is ARC Breaky because of a Missed Withhold. Every dissatisfied pc is dissatisfied because of MISSED WITHHOLDS. We've got to get a flaming reality on this. WHAT IS A MISSED WITHHOLD? A missed withhold is not just a withhold. Please burn that into the stone walls. A Missed Withhold is a withhold that existed, could have been picked up and was MISSED. The mechanics of this are given in the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course Lecture of 1 February 1962. The fact of it is stated in the Congress Lectures of the D.C. Congress of December 30-31, Jan. 1, 1962. Since that Congress even more data has accumulated. That data is large, voluminous and overwhelming. The person with complaints has MISSED WITHHOLDS. The person with entheta has MISSED WITHHOLDS. You don't need policies and diplomacy to handle these people. Policy and diplomacy will fail. You need expert auditing skill and a British Mark IV meter and the person on the cans and that person's MISSED WITHHOLDS. A MISSED WITHHOLD is a withhold that existed, was tapped and was not pulled. Hell hath no screams like a withhold scorned. A MISSED WITHHOLD programme would not be one where an auditor pulls a pc's withholds, A MISSED WITHHOLD programme would be where the auditor searched for and found when and where withholds had been available but had been MISSED. The withhold need not have been asked for. It merely need have been available. And if it was not pulled, thereafter you have a nattery, combative, ARC Breaky or entheta inclined person. THIS is the only dangerous point in auditing. This is the only thing which makes an occasional error in the phrase, "Any auditing is better than no auditing." That line is true with one exception. If a withhold were available but was missed, thereafter you have a bashed-up case. 20 HOW TO AUDIT IT In picking up Missed Withholds you don't ask for withholds, you ask for missed withholds. Sample question: "What withhold was missed on you?" The auditor then proceeds to find out what it was and who missed it. And the Mark IV needle is cleaned of reaction at Sensitivity 16 on every such question. Gone is the excuse "She doesn't register on the meter." That's true of old meters, not the British Mark IV. And if the pc considers it no overt, and can't conceive of overts, you still have "didn't know". Example: "What didn't an auditor know in an auditing session?" SAMPLE MISSED WITHHOLD SESSION Ask pc if anyone has ever missed a withhold on him (her) in an auditing session. Clean it. Get all reactions off the needle at Sensitivity 16. Then locate first auditing session pc had. Flatten "What didn't that auditor know?" "What didn't that auditor know about you?" For good measure get the ruds in for that first session. In auditing an auditor, also do the same thing for his or her first pc. Then pick up any stuck session. Treat it exactly the same way. (If you scan the pc through all his auditing ever from the cleaned first session to present time, the pc will stick in a session somewhere. Treat that session the same as the first session. You can scan again and again, finding the stuck sessions and get the withholds off in that session and the ruds in as above.) Clean up all sessions you can find. And get what the auditor didn't know, what the auditor didn't know about the pc, and for good measure, get in the other ruds. Cleaning up an old session will suddenly give you all the latent gain in that session. It's worth having! This can be extended to "What didn't the org know about you?" for those who've had trouble with it. And it can be extended to any life area where the pc has had trouble. SUMMARY If you clean up as above withholds that have been missed on any pc or person, you will have any case flying. This then is not just emergency data for use on flubbed intensives. It is vital technology that can do wonders for cases. ON ANY CASE THAT HAS BEEN AUDITED A PART OF AN INTENSIVE, BEFORE GOING ON THE AUDITOR SHOULD SPEND SOME TIME LOCATING WITHHOLDS HE OR SHE MIGHT HAVE MISSED ON THAT PC. Any pc that is ending a week's auditing should be carefully checked over for withholds that might have been missed. 21 Any pc that is ending his or her intensives should be most carefully checked out for missed withholds. This makes sudden auditing gains. Any case not up to recognizing overts will respond to "didn't know about you" when the case doesn't respond to "withhold". Any student should be checked weekly for missed withholds. Any person who is giving an auditor, the field, the Organization, a course or Scientology any trouble should be gotten hold of and checked for missed withholds. It is provenly true on five continents that any other meter reaches only occasionally below the level of consciousness and the British Mark IV reaches deeply and well. It is dangerous to audit without a meter because then you really miss withholds. It is dangerous to audit without knowing how to really use a meter because of missing withholds. It is dangerous to audit with any other meter than a British Mark IV. It is SAFE to audit if you can run a meter and if you use a British Mark IV and if you pull all the withholds and missed withholds. EVERY blow-up you ever had with a pc was due ENTIRELY to having missed a withhold whether you were using a meter or not, whether you were asking for withholds or not. Just try it out the next time a pc gets upset and you'll see that I speak the usual sooth. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 22  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW TO CLEAR WITHHOLDS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS   Sthil CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Sthil HCO BULLETIN OF 12 FEBRUARY 1962 CenOCon HOW TO CLEAR WITHHOLDS AND MISSED WITHHOLDS I have finally reduced clearing withholds to a rote formula which contains all the basic elements necessary to obtain a high case gain without missing any withholds. These steps now become THE way to clear a withhold or missed withhold. AUDITOR OBJECTIVE The auditor's object is to get the pc to look so that the pc can tell the auditor. The auditor's objective is not to get the pc to tell the auditor. If the pc is in session the pc will talk to the auditor. If the pc is not in session, the pc won't tell the auditor a withhold. I never have any trouble getting the pc to tell me a withhold. I sometimes have trouble getting the pc to find out about a withhold so the pc can tell it to me. If the pc will not tell the auditor a withhold (and the pc knows it) the remedy is rudiments. I always assume, and correctly, that if the pc knows about it the pc will tell me. My job is to get the pc to find out so the pc has something to tell me. The chief auditor blunder in pulling withholds stems from the auditor assuming the pc already knows when the pc does not. If used exactly, this system will let the pc find out and let the pc get all the charge off of a withhold as well as tell the auditor all about it. Missing a withhold or not getting all of it is the sole source of ARC break. Get a reality on this now. All trouble you have or have ever had or will ever have with ARC breaky pcs stems only and wholly from having restimulated a withhold and yet having failed to pull it. The pc never forgives this. This system steers you around the rock of missed withholds and their bombastic consequences. WITHHOLD SYSTEM This system has five parts: 0. The Difficulty being handled. 1. What the withhold is. 2. When the withhold occurred. 3. All of the withhold. 4. Who should have known about it. Numbers (2) (3) and (4) are repeated over and over, each time testing (1) until (1) no longer reacts. (2) (3) and (4) clear (1). (1) straightens out in part (0). (0) is cleaned up by finding many (1)'s and (1) is straightened up by running (2) (3) and (4) many times. These steps are called (0) Difficulty, (1) What (2) When (3) All (4) Who. The auditor must memorize these as What, When, All and Who. The order is never varied. The questions are asked one after the other. None of them are repetitive questions. USE A MARK IV The whole operation is done on a Mark IV. Use no other meter as other meters may read right electronically without reading mental reactions well enough. Do this whole system and all questions at sensitivity 16. 23 THE QUESTIONS 0. The suitable question concerning the Difficulty the pc is having. Meter reads. 1. What. "What are you withholding about......?" (the Difficulty) (or as given in future issues). Meter reads. Pc answers with a w/h, large or small. 2. When. "When did that occur?" or "When did that happen?" or "What was the time of that?" Meter reads. Auditor can date in a generality or precisely on meter. A generality is best at first, a precise dating on the meter is used later in this sequence on the same w/h. 3. All. "Is that all of that?" Meter reads. Pc answers. 4. Who. "Who should have known about that?" or "Who didn't find out about that?" Meter reads. Pc answers. Now test (1) with the same question that got a read the first time. (The question for (1) is never varied on the same w/h.) If needle still reads ask (2) again, then (3), then (4), getting as much data as possible on each. Then test (1) again. (1) is only tested, never worked over except by using (2), (3) and (4). Continue this rotation until (1) clears on needle and thus no longer reacts on a test. Treat every withhold you find (or have found) in this fashion always. SUMMARY You are looking at a preview of PREPARATORY TO CLEARING. "Prepclearing" for short. Abandon all further reference to security checking or sec checking. The task of the auditor in Prepclearing is to prepare a pc's rudiments so that they can't go out during 3D Criss Cross. The value of Prepclearing in case gain, is greater than any previous Class I or Class II auditing. We have just risen well above Security Checking in ease of auditing and in case gains. You will shortly have the ten Prepclearing lists which give you the (0) and (1) questions. Meanwhile, treat every withhold you find in the above fashion for the sake of the preclear, for your sake as an auditor and for the sake of the good name of Scientology. (Note: To practice with this system, take a withhold a pc has given several times to you or you and other auditors. Treat the question that originally got it as (1) and clean it as above in this system. You will be amazed.) L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 24  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=13/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3D CRISS CROSS ITEMS   Sthil  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 FEBRUARY 1962 Sthil 3D CRISS CROSS ITEMS All items found by 3D Criss Cross must be checked out for consistent read by an Instructor before being placed on a pc's Line Plot. The item must be checked out by the pc's auditor first as usual before being checked out by an Instructor. An Instructor is only to see if Item reads consistently on meter and to instruct student appropriately if it does not. The Instructor is not to find the correct item but direct that it be found. Completeness of list is not to be otherwise checked or checked separately. LRH:sf.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CO-AUDIT & MISSED WITHHOLDS   CenOCon Franchise Co-audit Centers  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 FEBRUARY 1962 CenOCon Franchise Co-audit Centers CO-AUDIT & MISSED WITHHOLDS It could be that Co-Audit falls off because of missed withholds. Drop at once any general O/W on the Co-Audit or any effort to pull withholds except by an Instructor. This should improve Co-Audit attendance. Use the old Comm process or responsibility process or any other Co-Audit instead. LRH:sf.cden L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 25  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/2/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WITHHOLDS, MISSED AND PARTIAL   Franchise CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 22 FEBRUARY 1962 Franchise CenOCon WITHHOLDS, MISSED AND PARTIAL I don't know exactly how to get this across to you except to ask you to be brave, squint up your eyes and plunge. I don't appeal to reason. Only to faith at the moment. When you have a reality on this, nothing will shake it and you'll no longer fail cases or fail in life. But, at the moment, it may not seem reasonable. So just try it, do it well and day will dawn at last. What are these natterings, upsets, ARC breaks, critical tirades, lost PE members, in effective motions? They are restimulated but missed or partially missed withholds. If I could just teach you that and get you to get a good reality on that in your own auditing, your activities would become smooth beyond belief. It is true that ARC breaks, present time problems and withholds all keep a session from occurring. And we must watch them and clear them. But behind all these is another button, applicable to each, which resolves each one. And that button is the restimulated but missed or partially missed withhold. Life itself has imposed this button on us. It did not come into being with security checking. If you know about people or are supposed to know about people, then these people expect, unreasonably, that you know them through and through. Real knowledge to the average person is only this: a knowledge of his or her withholds! That, horribly enough, is the high tide of knowledge for the man in the street. If you know his withholds, if you know his crimes and acts, then you are smart. If you know his future you are moderately wise. And so we are persuaded towards mind reading and fortune telling. All wisdom has this trap for those who would be wise. Egocentric man believes all wisdom is wound up in knowing his misdemeanors. IF any wise man represents himself as wise and fails to discover what a person has done, that person goes into an antagonism or other misemotion toward the wise man. So they hang those who restimulate and yet who do not find out about their withholds. This is an incredible piece of craziness. But it is observably true. This is the WILD ANIMAL REACTION that makes Man a cousin to the beasts. 26 A good auditor can understand this. A bad one will stay afraid of it and won't use it. The end rudiment for withholds for any session should be worded, "Have I missed a withhold on you?" Any ARC broke pc should be asked, "What withhold have I missed on you?" Or, "What have I failed to find out about you?" Or, "What should I have known about you?" An auditor who sec checks but cannot read a meter is dangerous because he or she will miss withholds and the pc may become very upset. Use this as a stable datum: If the person is upset, somebody failed to find out what that person was sure they would find out. A missed withhold is a should have known. The only reason anyone has ever left Scientology is because people failed to find out about them. This is valuable data. Get a reality on it. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:sf.cden Copyright $c 1962 L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 27  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/3/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PREPCHECKING (A Class II Skill)   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 MARCH 1962 Franchise PREPCHECKING (A Class II Skill) A new way of cleaning up a case in order to run Routine 3D Criss Cross has suddenly emerged as more powerful in obtaining case gains than any previous process in Scientology. I developed Prepchecking in order to get around an auditor's difficulty in "varying the question" in pulling withholds. Auditors had a hard time doing this, hence Prepchecking. But Prepchecking became quickly more important than a "rote procedure for Sec Checking". The potentiality in really cleaning up a case's withholds is Mest Clear! If, of course, done by Prepchecking. Any goal Freud ever had is easily achieved by Prepchecking in a relatively few hours if done by a thoroughly trained Class IV auditor. Goals Freud never dreamed of rise beyond that point. In Prepchecking one uses the Withhold System, HCO Bulletin of February 12, 1962. But Prepchecking has exact targets and exact procedure. In Prepchecking one uses the rudiment questions one at a time as the body of Model Session. Havingness, however, is taken up last as a Prepcheck question. The target of a Prepcheck question is a chain of withholds. A withhold chain behaves exactly like any chain. The bottom of the chain is the basic. The withholds on the chain will stay partially alive, even when covered, until the basic (first) withhold on the chain is fully recovered. Then the entire chain goes nul. The definition of a Chain is: A series of incidents of similar nature or similar subject matter. (See Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health.) The first incident of any chain is fully or partially unknown to the person. THE MECHANICS OF PREPCHECKING One uses the whole subject to be cleared as the zero question. Sub zero questions are marked OA. Each OA has a Number One question which is taken from a withhold given on asking the OA question. The Number One question is worked with the When All Who of the Withhold question until it either disappears or obviously won't clear easily. Many withholds may be given relating to Number One. If it doesn't clear, one steers earlier by asking Number 1A, text taken from the withholds given in Number One. If 1A's What question doesn't clear on the meter after several withholds and When All Who is used liberally on each, one asks Question Number 1B. Continuing What questions are asked and worked with the Withhold System, until the earliest incident of the chain is found and cleaned up. This should clear the whole chain. 28 One then reworks all the previous What questions on the Zero A Chain and leaves Zero A when all the previous Whats are clear. One can clean some of the What questions, find a new branch and ask more What questions. ADMINISTRATION The auditor writes down only what the auditor says (the Zero and What questions) plus any cognitions of the pc he cares to write. He doesn't do a steno record of what the pc says, only the Zeros and Whats the auditor asks. THE MAGIC PHRASE The magic question is "Is there any incident like that earlier?" Or any version of it. The pc's attention tends to stick near present time. The auditor must press the pc gradually back down the Chain to basic, cleaning up what he can as he goes, realizing, if the Chain is long and hot, that it won't clean until basic is reached. The pc, on a charged chain, cannot go earlier until charge is moved off it by using the withhold system on each withhold the pc gives, (When All Who, test What. If What still charged on meter, another When All Who). Basic is sometimes wholly unknown to pc, sometimes known only as a picture. Unknown parts exist throughout the chain. Sample: 0. Are you willing to talk to me about your difficulties? 0A. Have you ever done anything to an organization? (Zero A found by Dynamic Assessment.) 1. What about being jealous of a leader? (1. Question found from a withhold given by pc in response to the Zero A being asked, "I was jealous of my lodge president." This is enlarged at once by auditor to be more genera].) Several withholds come off, all about leaders, each withhold well worked by the When All Who of the withhold system. Then the 1 is still alive but pc gives a withhold about stealing money from an organization. This is a new type of withhold, but is similar on the chain as it's still about organizations. 1A. What about stealing money from an organization? (Question 1A derived by pc's given withhold.) This 1A is worked by the Withhold System until pc gives a withhold still on organizations but having to do with wrecking a car belonging to a company. 1B. What about damaging organization property? Etc. Etc. When the first overt is found and fully revealed by the When All Who of the Withhold System (maybe 1F) then 1F will clear fully as a What question. One then reworks the 1E, 1D, 1C, 1B, 1A and one. The auditor may clean 1E, 1D and find a new 29 series on the same chain, giving him a new 1E and 1D after which all Whats including the Number One will go clean if worked a bit more. This up and down may happen more than once. This ends the chain labelled in Zero A as Organizations, providing Zero A is now nul. CONTROL PC'S ATTENTION Work only one subject at a time. Keep pc on the subject of the chain. Try not to start new chains when old Zero A's exist uncleared. Start new Zero A's only when an old Zero A is cleared fully. The pc is doing well only when you have TA action. Complete chains started always but choose those that will give TA action during Prepchecking. DON'T USE O/W Use no version of withholds to clean up rudiments for a Prepcheck session. You'll find yourself steered off yesterday's Zero A. Use only old non O/W processes to clean rudiments in a Prepcheck session. For withhold rud, add "Since last session". HOW TO DERIVE ZEROS The modern Model Session Rudiments are the Zeros in all cases. HOW TO DERIVE ZERO A's Derive Zero A's as follows: For "Are you willing, etc" do a Dynamic Assessment on pc and use its results. When this is cleared, do another Dynamic Assessment. Etc. Finally pc will talk to auditor about anything. For Withhold rudiment, use the Joburg and (on a Scientologist) Form 6A as OA questions. For Present Time Problem use the whole of the Problems Intensive HCO Bulletin of November 9, 1961. For Half Truth use "Have you ever told a half truth?" For Untruth, use "Have you ever told a lie?" For Impress Anyone use "Have you ever tried to impress anyone?" For Damage use "Have you ever damaged anyone?" For Meter, use itself. For Withholds, use "What withhold have you only partially revealed?" For Goals use "Have you ever set impossible goals for anyone?" For Gains, use "Have you ever propitiated anyone?" 30 For Orders and Commands, use "Have you ever made anyone obey?" The purpose of Prepchecking is to set up a pc's rudiments so they will stay in during further clearing of the bank. If a pc goes back track and out of this lifetime, let him or her go back track using the same system. Don't persuade pc to go back track. Asking the What question is the most skilled action of Prepcheck. The rule is as follows: The What question must ask about the part of the withhold most dangerous to the pc's survival, and must not be too broad to miss the chain or too narrow to get only that one withhold. The supposition is that the pc has done similar things; the What question must also be capable of getting these. There is only one exception to converting the pc's withhold to a What question directly. If the pc does one of four things, the auditor asks a What question directly relating to the subject mentioned by the pc. These four things are: Pc gives Somebody else's withhold, gives a MOTIVATOR, gives a CRITICISM of someone or an EXPLANATION, then Auditor gives a What question, in each case, as follows: "What have you done to (subject mentioned by pc)?" Learning to Prepcheck is like learning to ride a bicycle. All of a sudden you can ride it. Prepchecking gives high pc gains when done well, higher than any previous process. The auditor expects the pc to talk to him. The auditor does not prevent the pc from giving up withholds. Pcs, unlike in Sec Checking, talk glibly and easily while being Prepchecked. The only middle ruds you use are (frequently) "Have I missed a withhold on you?" and the half truth, etc, end rud question. Use "Have I missed a withhold on you?" in the end rudiments rather than "Are you withholding anything?" while Prepchecking. There are some tapes extant on Prepcheck Sessions I have given. Good hunting. LRH:sf.cden Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is corrected by HCO B 24 June 1962, Prepchecking, page 88.] 31  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/3/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  THE BAD "AUDITOR"   Franchise Sthil CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1962 Franchise Sthil CenOCon THE BAD "AUDITOR" It is time we spent time on improving auditing skill. We have the technology. We can make clears and OTs with it as you will find out. Our only remaining problem is getting it applied skillfully. This is why I started the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course. The extremely high calibre of auditor we are turning out is causing gasps of amazement whenever these fine graduates return into an area. We are not trying for cases at Saint Hill. I can always make clears. We are trying for skilled auditors. But we are getting there on cases, too, faster than anywhere else on the average. This training has been almost a year in progress. I have learned much about training that is of great benefit to all of us, without at the same time skimping the training of the Saint Hill student. Looking over incoming students I find we have, roughly, two general categories of auditor, with many shades of grey between: 1. The natural auditor. 2. The dangerous auditor. The natural auditor ties right into it and does a workmanlike job. He or she gets lots of bulletin and tape passes in ratio to flunks, absorbs data well and gets it into practice, does a passable job on a pc even at the start of training, and improves casewise rapidly under the skilled training and auditing at Saint Hill. This is true of the clears and releases that come on course as well as those who have had much less case gains prior to this training. These, the natural auditors, make up more than half the incoming students. The other category we will call the "dangerous auditor". The severe examples of this category make up about 20% of the incoming students and are very detectable. In shades of grey the other 30% are also, at the start, to be placed in the category of "dangerous auditor unless tightly supervised". At Saint Hill, with few exceptions, we only get the cream of auditors and so I would say that the overall percentage across the world is probably higher in the second category than at Saint Hill. Thus it would seem we must cure this matter at the Academies and cure it broadly throughout Scientology, and if we do, our dissemination, just on this effort alone, should leap several thousand percent. If all pcs audited everywhere were expertly audited, well, think of what that would do. To accomplish this we need only move the dangerous auditor out of the danger class. I have found out what makes a pc suffer a deterioration of profile (missed withholds) and have found out why a dangerous auditor is dangerous. Therefore, there are no barriers to our handling the matter as even the dangerous auditor, oddly enough, wants to be a good auditor but doesn't quite know how. Now we can fix it up. The difference between a natural auditor and a dangerous auditor is not case level as we have supposed, but a type of case. 32 The earliest observation on this came in ACCs. About 1% of the students (say two students every ACC) could be counted on to be miserable if his or her pc made gains and happy if the pc was collapsing. This was an observation. What were these students trying to do? What did they think they should accomplish in a session? They are an extreme case of "dangerous auditor". This is how to detect a "dangerous auditor" in any shade of grey: Any auditor who (a) cannot achieve results on a pc, (b) who finds items slowly or not at all, (c) who gets low marks on tape tests, (d) who has a high flunk-to-pass ratio on taking tests for classification, (e) whose own case moves slowly, (f) who does not respond well to a "think" process, (g) who chops a pc's comm, (h) who prevents a pc from executing an auditing command, (i) who obsessively changes processes before one is flat, (j) who apologizes or explains why he or she got no results session after session, (k) who tries to make pcs guilty, (l) who blames Scientology for not working, (m) whose pcs are always ARC breaking, or (n) who will no longer audit at all, is suffering not from withholds but from the reverse of the withhold flow, "Afraid to find out". The person with withholds is afraid he or she will be found out. The other type of case may have withholds but the dominant block is exactly the reverse. Instead of being afraid he or she will be found out, the opposite type of case is afraid to find out or afraid of what he or she may find out. Thus it is a type of case that makes a dangerous auditor. He or she is afraid of finding out something from the pc. Probably this case is the more usual in society, particularly those who never wish to audit. A person with withholds is afraid to be found out. Such a person has auditing difficulties as an auditor, of course, because of restraint on their own comm line. These difficulties sum up to an inability to speak during a session, going silent on the pc, failures to ask how or what the pc is doing. But this is not the dangerous auditor. The only dangerous thing an auditor can do is miss withholds and refuse to permit the pc to execute auditing commands. This alone will spin a pc. The dangerous auditor is not afraid to be found out (for who is questioning him or her while he or she is auditing?). The dangerous auditor is the auditor who is afraid to find out, afraid to be startled, afraid to discover something, afraid of what they will discover. This phobia prevents the "auditor" from flattening anything. This makes missed withholds a certainty. And only missed withholds create ARC breaks. All cases, of course, are somewhat leery of finding things out and so any old-time auditor could have his quota of ARC breaks on his or her pcs. But the dangerous auditor is neurotic on the subject and all his or her auditing is oriented around the necessity to avoid data for fear of discovering something unpleasant. As auditing is based on finding data, such an auditor retrogresses a case rather than improves it. Such an auditor's own case moves slowly also as they fear to discover something unpleasant or frightening in the bank. Today, the increased power of auditing makes this factor far more important than it ever was before. Old processes could be done with minimal gain but without harm by such an auditor. Today, the factor of fear-of- discovery in an auditor makes that auditor extremely dangerous to a pc. In Prepchecking, this becomes obvious when an auditor will not actually clean up a chain and skids over withholds, thus "completing" the case by leaving dozens of missed withholds and an accordingly miserable pc. In Routine 3D Criss Cross this becomes obvious when the auditor takes days and weeks to find an item, then finds one that won't check out. An item every three sessions of two hours each is a low average for 3D Criss Cross. An item a week is suspect. An item a month is obviously the average of an auditor who will not find out and is dangerous. The auditor who uses out-rudiments always to avoid doing 3D Criss Cross is a flagrant example of a no-discovery-please auditor. 33 In the CCHs, the dangerous auditor is narrowed down to prevention of executing the auditing command. This, indeed, is the only way an auditor can make the CCHs fail. In any of the CCHs, the commands and drills are so obvious that only the prevention of execution can accomplish not-finding-out. The dangerous auditor is never satisfied the pc has executed the command. Such an auditor can be seen to move the pc's hand on the wall after the pc has in fact touched the wall. Or the pc is made to do a motion over and over which is already well done. Or the pc is run only on processes that are flat and is halted on processes that are still changing. The pc is never permitted to reveal anything by the dangerous auditor. And so "auditing" fails. The remedies for the dangerous auditor, by class of process, are: Class I -- Repetitive Process, run in sequence REVELATION PROCESS XI What could you confront? What would you permit another to reveal? What might another confront? What might another permit you to reveal? What would you rather not confront? What would you rather not have another reveal? What might another hate to confront? What might another object to your revealing? What should be confronted? What shouldn't anyone ever have to confront? (Note: This process is subject to refinement and other processes on the same subject will be released.) Class II -- Prepchecking Zero Question Have you ever prevented another from perceiving something? (Other such Zero Questions are possible on the theme of fear-of-discovery.) CCHs should be used if tone arm action during any Prepchecking is less than 3/4 of a division shift per hour. Class III -- Routine 3D Criss Cross Find Line Items as follows: Who or What would be afraid to find out? (then get oppterm of resulting item) Who or What would prevent a discovery? (then oppterm it) Who or What would startle someone? (then oppterm it) Who or What would be unsafe for you to reveal? (then oppterm it) Who or What would be dangerous for another to reveal? (then oppterm it) Note: Well run CCHs, run according to the very earliest data on them, given again on two Saint Hill Briefing Course Tapes (R-10/6106C22SH/Spec 18, "Running CCHs" and R-12/6106C27SH/Spec 21, "CCHs -- Circuits"), benefit any case and are not relegated to the psychotic by a long ways. The CCHs do a remarkable job in making a good auditor for various reasons. The first CCH (Op Pro by Dup) was invented exclusively to make good auditors. The CCHs 1 to 4 are run each one in turn, only so long as they produce change and no longer, before going on to the next. When is a CCH flat so that one can go on to the next CCH? When three complete cycles of the CCH have a uniform comm lag it can be left. My advice in straightening out or improving any auditor is to first flatten the CCHs 1 to 4, and then flattening all in one 34 run Op Pro by Dup. This would be regardless of the length of time the auditor had been auditing in Dianetics and Scientology. Then I would do the Class II and Class III processes above, preferably doing the Class III items first, then the Class II so it could go whole track, or doing the Class II, then the Class III and then the Class II again. SUMMARY Following out any part of this programme in any organization, in the field and on any training course will vastly improve the results of auditing and enormously diminish auditing failures. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is added to by HCO B 15 March 1962, Suppressors, which is on the following page.] 35  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/3/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ADD HCO BULLETIN 8 March 1962 THE BAD "AUDITOR" SUPPRESSORS   Franchise Sthil CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 MARCH AD12 Franchise Sthil CenOCon ADD HCO BULLETIN 8 March 1962 THE BAD "AUDITOR" SUPPRESSORS The discovery of the "other side of withholds" type of case, the person who is afraid to find out, brings to view the reason behind all slow gain cases. My first release was directed at auditing because good auditing is, of course, my primary concern at the moment. But let us not overlook the importance of this latest discovery. For here is our roughest case to audit, as well as our roughest auditor. Every case has a little of "afraid to find out". So you may have taken HCO Bulletin of March 8, 1962, more personally than you should have. BUT everyone's auditing can be improved, even mine, and adding a full willingness to find out to one's other auditing qualities will certainly improve one's auditing ability. Here probably is the only real case difference I have had. My own "afraid to find out" is minimal and so I had no reality on it as a broadly held difficulty. Where I ran into it was in trying to account for differences amongst students and in auditors who sought to audit me. Some could, some couldn't. And this was odd because my ability to as-is bank is great, therefore I should be easy to audit. But some could audit me and some couldn't. Two different auditors found me reacting as two different pcs. Therefore there must have been another factor. It was my study of this and my effort to understand "bad auditing" on myself as a pc that gave us the primary lead in. I made a very careful analysis of what the auditor was doing who couldn't or wouldn't audit me, an easy pc. The answer, after many tries and much study of students, finally came down, crash, to the "afraid to find out" phenomena. Thus my first paper on this (HCO Bulletin of March 8, 1962) enters the problem as a problem of auditing skill. THE ROUGH PC The characteristic of the rough pc is not a pc's tendency to ARC Break and scream, as we have tended to believe, but something much more subtle. The first observation of this must be credited to John Sanborn, Phoenix, 1954, who remarked to me in an auditor's conference, "Well, I don't know. I don't think this pc is getting on (the one he was staff auditing). I keep waiting for him to say, 'Well, what do you know!' or 'Gosh!' or something like that and he just grinds on and on. I guess you'd call it 'No cognition' or something." John, with his slow, funny drawl, had put his finger on something hard. The pc who makes no gain is the pc who will not as-is. Who will not confront. Who can be audited forever without cogniting on anything. The fulminating or dramatizing pc may or may not be a tough pc. The animal psychologist has made this error. The agitated person is always to blame, never the quiet one. But the quiet one is quite often the much rougher case. The person whose "thought has no effect on his or her bank" has been remarked on by me for years. And now we have that person. This person is so afraid to find out that he or she will not permit anything to appear and therefore nothing will as-is, therefore, no cognition! 36 The grind case, the audit forever case, is an afraid to find out case. We need a new word. We have withholds, meaning an unwillingness to disclose past action. We should probably call the opposite of a withhold, a "suppressor". A "suppressor" would be the impulse to forbid revelation in another. This of course, being an overt, reacts on one's own case as an impulse to keep oneself from finding out anything from the bank, and of course suppresses as well the release of one's own withholds, so it is more fundamental than a withhold. A "suppressor', is often considered "social conduct" in so far as one prevents things from being revealed which might embarrass or frighten others. In all cases a suppressor leads to suppression of memory and environment. It is suppression that is mainly overcome when you run havingness on a pc. The pc is willing to let things appear in the room (or to some degree becomes less unwilling to perceive them). The one-command insanity eradicator, "Look around here and find something that is really real to you" (that sometimes made an insane person sane on one command), brought the person to discharge all danger from one item and let it reveal itself. Now, for any case, the finding of the suppressor mechanism again opens wider doors for havingness processes. "Look around here and find something you would permit to appear" would be a basic havingness process using the suppressor mechanism. Thus we have a new, broad tool, even more important in half the cases than withholds. Half the cases will run most rapidly on withholds, the other half most rapidly on suppressors. All cases will run somewhat on withholds and somewhat on suppressors, for all cases have both withholds and suppressors. Withholds have been known about since the year one, suppressors have been wholly missing as a pat mechanism. Thus we are on very new and virgin search ground. Additionally adding to the data in HCO Bulletin of March 8, 1962, another symptom of a dangerous auditor would be (o) one who Qs and As with a pc and never faces up to the basic question asked but slides off of it as the pc avoids it and also avoids it as an auditor. All dangerous Q and A is that action of the auditor which corresponds to the pc's avoidance of a hot subject or item. If the pc seeks to avoid by sliding off, the auditor, in his questions, also slides off. Also, the auditor invites the pc to avoid by asking irrelevant questions that lead the pc off a hot subject. Also add (p) who fails to direct the pc's attention. The pc wants to cut and run, the auditor lets the pc run. Also add (q) who lets the pc end processes or sessions on the pc's own volition. Also add (r) who will only run processes chosen by the pc. Also add (s) who gets no somatics during processing. Also add (t) who is a Black Five. The common denominator of the dangerous auditor is "action which will forestall the revelation of any data". Because the auditor is terrified of finding out anything, the whole concentration of the auditor is occupied with the suppression of anything a process may reveal. Some auditors suppress only one type of person or case and audit others passably. Husbands as auditors tend more to fear what their wives may reveal to them and wives as auditors tend to suppress more what their husbands may reveal to them. Thus husband-wife teams would be more unlucky than other types of auditing teams as a 37 general rule, but this is not invariable and is now curable if they exclusively run on each other only suppression type processes. Add Class I REVELATION PROCESS X2 What wouldn't you want another to present? What wouldn't another want you to present? What have you presented? What has another presented? Class II -- Added Zero Question: Have you ever suppressed anything? Class III -- Add Lines: Who or What would suppress an identity? (oppterm it) Who or What would make knowledge scarce? (oppterm it) Who or What would not want a past? (oppterm it) Who or What would be unconfrontable? (oppterm it) Who or What would prevent others (another) from winning? (oppterm it) Who or What should be disregarded when you're getting something done? (oppterm it) Who or What would make another realize he or she hadn't won? (oppterm it) (In choosing which one of the above to oppterm first, read each one of all such Class III Lines [including those of HCO Bulletin of March 8] once each to the pc watching the meter for the largest reaction. Then take that one first. Do this each time with remaining Lines. One does the same thing [an assessment of sorts] on Line Plot Items when found to discover the next one to oppterm.) L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 38  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=21/3/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PREPCHECKING DATA WHEN TO DO A WHAT   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MARCH 1962 Franchise PREPCHECKING DATA WHEN TO DO A WHAT Prepchecking can be defeated by failing to ask a What question at the proper time. If you ask the What question when a pc gives you a vague generality, you will find yourself doing a "shallow draft" Prepcheck that never gets any meat. When you obtain a generality early on after the Zero question, you make it a Zero A. You never ask a What question until you have managed to get a single specific overt. Only when the pc has been steered into stating an actual overt, do you ask the What question and write it down. And when the pc gives you a specific overt, you frame the What question so as to take in the whole possible chain of similar overts. A chain is a repetition of similar acts. Example: Wrong: Pc says, "I used to disconcert my mother." Auditor says and writes down, "What about disconcerting your mother?" as his What question. Of course the prepchecking goes lightly nowhere. Right: Pc says he used to disconcert his mother. Auditor steers pc into a specific time. Pc finally says, "I jumped out on her and startled her one time and she dropped a tray of glasses." Now the auditor has a specific overt. The chain will be startling his mother. The What question, then, which is written down and asked is, "What about startling your mother?" and the first incident the pc gave is worked over. If the needle doesn't fall when this What is asked, then the auditor asks for an earlier time he startled his mother. This What question is worked on different startlings of mother and only on startlings of mother until the needle is cleaned on that What question. Then one asks the Zero A, "Have you ever disconcerted your mother?" The needle reacts. The auditor fishes around for a specific other incident. Finally gets, "I used to lie to her." Now it would be an awful goof to give the What question on this one, as the pc has given no specific incident. But the needle reacted, so the auditor writes a Zero B, "Have you ever lied to your mother?" and then nags away at the pc until a specific time is recovered: "I told her I was going out with boys when in actuality, I dated a girl she hated." Now write the What question: "What about lying to your mother about dating girls?" and work over that one time the pc gave with the When All etc. If the needle reacts on the What question after a couple times over the When All etc, ask for an earlier time. Get another specific incident, work it over. Test the What question, work over exact withholds and find more incidents earlier until that What question is clean on the needle. Then ask the Zero B. If it's clean write nul after it. If not find a new What on that subject as above. When the Zero B is clean, ask the Zero A. If that's clean, write nul after it. If not, find a new chain. And that's the way it goes. 39 Working only generalities and never specific incidents wrecks all value of prepchecking and upsets the pc with missed withholds. If the pc does come up with a withhold not on the chain (example: while doing above What, pc says, "I also lied to my father") write notation ("Lied to father") on margin for later reference and leave it alone. Don't pursue it. Work only one chain at a time. Q and A is a serious thing in Prepchecking. Moving Tone Arm If you fail to get tone arm action while working a chain of overts on a pc (less than .25 division per 20 minutes) you are working a profitless chain. Clean it up a bit and leave it. Your Zero A is probably quite wrong. Be sure and ask, "Have I missed a withhold on you?" and clean it before so abandoning a chain. You want TA motion in Prepchecking. Find Zero and Zero A questions that do move the TA. It is a violation of the Auditor's Code to continue to audit processes that do not produce change. Or to stop processes that do produce change. This applies to chains and subjects selected for Prepchecking. Social Mores The criteria of what is a hot withhold depends utterly on the pc's idea of What Is An Overt. It does not depend on what the auditor thinks an overt is. The pc is stuck in various valences in the Goals Problems Mass. Each has its own Social Mores. They may not agree with or apply to current life morality at all. This can cause trouble in Prepchecking. Example: Pc is stuck in the valence of a Temple Priestess. Auditor is a bit fuddy on being a school principal. Auditor keeps looking for sexual misconduct with small boys. It isn't on pc's case. Result, no TA action. Finally almost by accident, knowing nothing about the pc's GPM yet, the auditor disgustedly asks, "Have you ever failed to seduce anybody?" and bang! That's a Zero A to end all Zero A's and the pc gives up "overt" after "overt", failed to seduce her husband's friend, her sister's boyfriend, her kindergarten teacher, etc, etc, etc, with two divisions of TA motion. "Have you ever tried to cure anyone?" is a fine Zero question for all killer types. Prepchecking is at its best after one knows some GPM items from doing 3D Criss Cross. What are the mores of a Temple Priestess and how has the pc violated them in this life? Prepchecking is wonderful at any time but it really soars when one knows some of the pc's terminals. This lifetime hasn't added anything to the GPM. It's just keyed it in. We live in quiet times. Don't Forget "Guilty" A fine Zero question is "making others guilty". "Have you ever tried to make anyone guilty?" Pc says Policemen, he guesses. Needle reacts. Auditor writes Zero A, "Have you ever tried to make a policeman 40 guilty?" He fishes for an actual incident, finds the pc bawled out a traffic officer, writes the What, "What about bawling out cops?" and we're away. Add Appear In the Withhold System, add "Appear, Not Appear" after All. The question sequence becomes for any one incident: When? All? Appear? Who? The next time around use "Not Appear" When? All? Not Appear? Who? The phrasing of this is, "What appeared there?" or some such wording. And "What failed to appear?" for the next round. This injects "Afraid to find out" into Prepchecking with great profit and knocks the Not-Is off the withhold. This will run a whole track incident. Whole Track If the pc goes back of this lifetime, let him or her go back. Now that Appear is part of the Withhold System, it's unlikely the pc will hang up and get stuck. But the golden rule of Prepchecking is to always work specific incidents, work them one at a time, and go to an earlier incident if an incident doesn't clear easily on the needle. Two times through When, All, Appear, Who should free locks, ten times through should clean any engram. If the chain you're working isn't moving the TA, you're up to your neck in red herrings. Clean "Have I missed a withhold on you?" and abandon it. Unknown Pins Chains There is always an unknown-to-the-pc incident or piece of incident at the bottom of every chain. Only an unknown incident can make a chain of incidents react on the needle. You will always find that a chain will be sticky until the unknown incident or piece of incident at the bottom of it is revealed. When you've got it fully revealed, the chain will go nul. The chain will not go nul until its basic is reached. It can be this lifetime or a former life. But it sure is unknown to the pc. That's "Basic on a Chain". Recurring Withholds The pc that gives the same withhold over and over to the same or different auditors, has an unknown incident underlying it. All is not revealed on that Chain. 41 Missed Withholds If you ask a pc if another auditor has missed a withhold on him or her and find one, you have a profitable chain to work in many cases. Rudiments in Prepchecking When you are running a chain and in the next session you find rudiments out and use any form of withhold question, the pc throws the session into a new chain and you will find yourself unable to get back to yesterday's session. This utterly defeats Prepchecking. Do not let it happen. In a Prepcheck session, when getting rudiments in, avoid any suggestion of withhold questions. Use only processes that avoid O/W entirely. See early Model Sessions. Example: Pc has Present Time Problem. It won't resolve with two-way comm. Don't ask for withholds about it or you'll ruin your control of what's to be Prepchecked. Use Responsibility or Unknown on the problem. For Room use Havingness. For Auditor use "Who would I have to be to audit you?" Exception: In a Prepcheck Session Ruds ask for Withholds since last session. Ask this pointedly. "Since the last session, have you done anything you are withholding from me?" If you get a needle reaction, ask the same question again, very stressed. Buy only an exact answer to that question. If you use any version of O/W in the rudiments in a Prepcheck session you open the door to a new chain and you'll spend the whole session on new chains without completing yesterday's session. This results in a scrambled case. You have lost control of the session. Prepchecking is a precious tool. This bulletin covers errors being made or material evidently needed for successful Prepchecking. I can tell you that if Prepchecking doesn't make a case fly for you, you need training on meters and auditing. This is one process that's a doll and if you can make it work you can do more for a case per session than any being in history. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:ph.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 42  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/3/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CCHs AGAIN WHEN TO USE THE CCHs   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 MARCH 1962 Franchise CCHs AGAIN WHEN TO USE THE CCHs We have today three major processes (and are about to get the bit of Class IV). These processes are: 1. The CCHs 2. Prepchecking 3. 3D Criss Cross 4. Running 3D Criss Cross Items Into this scheme of things the CCHs loom largely. They are our foremost "familiarization" processes that permit the pc to confront control and duplication. In actual fact 3D Criss Cross goes "further south" than Prepchecking. And the CCHs go, of course, much further south than 3D Criss Cross. The whole criteria is tone arm motion. If you do not get more than a quarter of a division of tone arm motion in 20 minutes of Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, the pc probably should be run on the CCHs. Here is a matter of no matter why there is no tone arm action, just put the pc on CCHs. As Mary Sue has said, this is a boon to any D of P. The D of P simply sees that the pc is getting only slight tone arm action after a session or two and then puts the pc on CCHs with no further reasoning or figure-figure on the case. It does not matter why the pc gets slight tone arm action. It could be that the auditor is running the wrong Zero questions. It could be the way the auditor or the pc is doing or not doing. Don't try extensively to figure out why no Tone Arm Action, just transfer the pc to the CCHs. For how long? Until all CCHs (1 to 4) are runnable without somatics and reasonably flat. This way you'll get more wins, better gains. Here is a typical case in point. A case was audited on Routine 3D, 3D XX, Sec Checking and Prepchecking for 260 hours. In all that time one half a tone arm division was all the change except during one series of 4 sessions when she got one tone arm division on one particular Zero question. At the end of this time the pc had made some small gains but was still incapable of recognizing her own overts. It would have been far better to have run a hundred hours of the CCHs first. On this case, and others, the only significant tone arm action was achieved by tactile havingness (touching things), which always brought the tone arm down one division. Tactile havingness, as you will see, is a CCH type of process. Thus one concludes that the CCHs (even though pcs are not metered of course while doing CCHs) produced tone arm action while the higher level processes did not. Therefore, a helpful (but not final) test. If you get no real tone arm action on Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross listing and nulling, and you do get tone arm action asking the pc to touch things (laying down and picking up the cans often to check the TA position) you have a CCH pc. But this test is not needful if you just follow the rule, "No TA action on 3D Criss Cross or Prepchecking more than a quarter of a division every 20 minutes, transfer the pc to CCHs." 43 Here is another test, which has sense but again is not vital to make. If the pc gets tone arm motion just discussing being audited, and relatively little in Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, it's time-saving to transfer the case to the CCHs. If you notice lots of TA action on Havingness and little tone arm action on Prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, you have a clear indication that CCHs will be all that will move the case. If you notice lots of TA action on trying to clear the auditor in the rudiments, it's probably best to use the CCHs. Now if only rudiments type Zero questions (beginning and end rudiments) move the TA in Prepchecking, but other things don't, it's a CCH case. If the pc, for whatever reason, doesn't get tone arm action from any verbal process, old-time, or current, don't investigate the reason. It may lie with the auditor or pc. Just change over to the CCHs. If you like, you can use a meter to handle beginning and end rudiments on a pc you're running on the CCHs. It would probably help and make things run faster. This is not mandatory, but knowing what we do about withholds, it might be safer. Remember, the CCHs must be run right. The two bulletins best covering them are: HCO Bulletin of November 2, 1961, "Training CCHs" HCO Bulletin of June 23, 1961, "Running CCHs" Even if you think you know all about the CCHs, read these two bulletins again before you attempt them. The CCHs expired in value after 1957 because the original method of running them was altered. There's only one way to run the CCHs and you have both the above bulletins to tell you how. They're the original CCHs and the original method of running them. This then is the third bulletin in this sequence. It tells you when to run the CCHs. HCO Bulletin of November 2, 1961, tells you how each one is run. HCO Bulletin of June 23, 1961, tells you how they're run as a series on a pc. And now we can state here When. A lot of stuff about CCHs being only for psychos has not helped their use. We now find that cases a long way from psycho won't move easily unless the CCHs are used first. "A lot of Tone Arm Motion" is defined as at least three-quarters of a division motion on the Tone Arm dial in any 20 minutes of auditing. "Not much Tone Arm Motion" is defined as one-quarter of a division of Tone Arm Motion in 20 minutes of auditing. Judgment must be used in this, of course. You can have a pc who usually gets good Tone Arm Motion but, for a session, gets little. That doesn't mean jump to the CCHs. If the pc is routinely subject to Not Much Tone Arm Motion, you must switch to the CCHs. Ds of P, Staff Auditors, and Field Auditors, watch the auditor's reports and look back through the pc's file. You'll find a lot of enlightenment on why the pc was "tough". No Tone Arm Motion. I hope this sorts it out for you. It has for me. LRH:ph.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [HCO B 2 Nov. 61, Training CCH's, was not by LRH and is not in these volumes. See page 310 for the revision of HCO B 2 Nov. 61.] 44  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=5/4/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CCHs AUDITING ATTITUDE   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1962 Franchise CCHs AUDITING ATTITUDE This is an important bulletin. If you understand it you will get results on hitherto unmoving cases and faster results (1 hour as effective as a former 25) with the CCHs. Here is what happened to the CCHs and which will continue to happen to them to damage their value: The CCHs in their most workable form were finalized in London by me in April 1957. That was their high tide of workability for the next five years. After that date, difficulties discovered in teaching them to auditors added extraordinary solutions to the CCHs (not by me) which cut them to about one twenty-fifth of their original auditing value. Pcs thereafter had increasing difficulty in doing them and the gain lessened. How far were the CCHs removed from original CCH auditing? Well, the other night on TV I gave a demonstration of the proper original CCHs which produce the gains on pcs. And more than twelve old-time auditors (the lowest graded ones out of 36) thought they were watching a demonstration of entirely foreign processes. Although these auditors had been "well trained" on the CCHs (but not by me) they did not see any similarity between how they did them and how they saw me do them. Two or three students and two instructors thought they were being done wrong. Even the higher ranking students were startled. They had never seen CCHs like this. Yet, the pc was very happy, came way up tone, lost a bad before-session somatic and within 48 hours had a complete change in a chronic physical problem, all in 1 1/2 hours of proper original CCHs. The students and instructors "knew they weren't watching the correct CCHs" because there was no antagonism to the pc, because the Tone 40 was not shouted, because there was no endurance marathon in progress. There was just quiet, positive auditing with the pc in good, happy 2-way communication with the auditor and the auditor letting the pc win. In the student auditing of the next two days, some shadow of the demonstration's attitude was used and the cases audited gained much faster than before. Yet at least two or three still feel that this is far too easy to be the CCHs. In five years, the CCHs, not closely supervised by me, but altered in training, had become completely unrecognizable (and almost resultless). Why? Because the CCHs were confused with Op Pro by Dup which was for auditors. Because the CCHs became an arduous ritual, not a way to audit the pc in front of you. The CCHs became a method of auditing without communicating, of running off strings of drills without being there. And the CCHs are so good that even when done wrong or even viciously they produced some slight gain. The CCHs shade from bright white to dark grey in results, never to black. Having been perverted in training to a system to make auditors audit them, they became something that had nothing to do with the pc. What these students saw demonstrated (and which upset them terribly) was this: 45 The auditor sat down, chatted a bit about the coming session with the pc, explained in general what he was about to do. The session was started. The auditor explained the CCH 1 drill in particular and then began on it. The pc had a bit of embarrassment come off. The auditor took the physical reaction as an origination by the pc and queried it. The routine CCH 1 drill went on and was shortly proved flat by three equal responses. The auditor went to CCH 2. He explained the drill and started it. This proved to be flat. The pc did the drill three times without comm change. The auditor explained and went to CCH 3. This also proved flat and after a three times test, the auditor came off it, explained CCH 4, and went to CCH 4. This proved unflat and was gradually flattened to three equally timed correct responses by the pc on a motion the pc could not at first do. About 50 minutes had elapsed so the auditor gave a ten minute break. After the break the auditor went back to CCH 1, found it flat, went to CCH 2 and found the pc jumping the command and, by putting short waits of different lengths before giving commands, knocked out the automaticity. The auditor went on to CCH 3, found it flat, and then to CCH 4 which was found unflat and was accordingly flattened. The auditor then discussed end ruds in a general way, got a summary of gains and ended the session. All commands and actions were Tone 40 (which is not "antagonism" or "challenge"). But the pc was kept in two-way comm between full cycles of the drill by the auditor. Taking up each new physical change manifested as though it were an origin by the pc and querying it and getting the pc to give the pc's reaction to it, this two-way comm was not Tone 40. Auditor and pc were serious about the drills. There was no relaxation of precision. But both auditor and pc were relaxed and happy about the whole thing. And the pc wound up walking on air. These were the CCHs properly done. With high gain results. The viewers saw no watchdog snarling, no grim, grim PURPOSE, no antagonistic suspicion, no pc going out of session, no mauling, no drill- sergeant bawling and KNEW these couldn't be the CCHs. There was good auditor- pc relationship (better than in formal sessions) and good two-way comm throughout, so the viewers KNEW these weren't proper CCHs. Well, I don't know what these gruelling blood baths are they're calling "the CCHs". I did them the way they were done in April 1957 and got April 1957 fast results. And the processes aren't even recognized! So somewhere in each year from April 1957 to April 1962 and somewhere in each place they're done, additives and injunctions and "now I'm supposed to's" have grown up around these precise but easy, pleasant processes that have created an unworkable monster that is called "the CCHs" but which definitely isn't. Not seeing the weird perversions but seeing the slow graph responses, the vast hours being burned up, I began to abandon recommending the CCHs after 1959 as too long in others' hands. I didn't realize how complicated and how grim it had all become. Well, the real CCHs done right, done the way they're described here, are a fast gain route, easy on auditor and pc, that goes all the way south. Take a reread of the June and November bulletins of last year (forget the 20 minute test, 3 times equally done are enough to see a CCH is flat) and, not forgetting your Tone 40 and precision, laying aside the grim withdrawn militant auditor attitude, try to do them as pleasantly as you find them described in the above outlined session, and be amazed at the progress the pc will make. The CCHs easy on auditor and pc? Ah, they'd observed a lot of CCHs and never any that were easy on auditor or pc. Everybody came to know it was a bullying, smashing, arduous mess, a fight in fact. The only trouble was, the gains vanished when the ARC ran out. Today, put any pc on the original CCHs done as above until they're flat, then go to 3D Criss Cross and the pc will fly. 46 Surely you don't have to look and sound so hungry, disinterested and mean when you audit the CCHs. You want to clear this pc, not make him or her into a shaking wreck. The CCHs are easily done (when they're done right). They'll get lost again, too, unless you remember they can get lost. I believe Upper Indoc should be cancelled in Academies and extra time put on just the CCHs as it is the Upper Indoc attitude carried over that makes the CCHs grim. SUMMARY The PURPOSE of the CCHs is to bring the pc through incidents and into present time. It is the reverse of "mental" auditing in that it gets the pc's attention exterior from the bank and on present time. By using Communication, Control and Havingness this is done. If you make present time a snarling hostility to the pc, he of course does not want to come into present time and it takes just that much longer to make the CCHs work. You do the CCHs with the Auditor's Code firmly in mind. Don't run a process that is not producing change. Run a process as long as it produces change. Don't go out of 2-way comm with the pc. Complete every cycle of the process. Don't interject 2-way comm into the middle of a cycle, use it only after a cycle is acknowledged and complete. Don't end a process before it is flat. Don't continue a process after it is flat. Use Tone 40 Commands. Don't confuse antagonistic screaming at the pc with Tone 40. If you have to manhandle a pc, do so, but only to help him get the process flat. If you have to manhandle the pc you've already accumulated ARC breaks and given him loses and driven him out of session. Improve the ability of a pc by gradient scale, give the pc lots of wins on CCH 3 and CCH 4 and amongst them flatten off what he hasn't been able to do. The CCH drills must be done precisely by the auditor. But the criteria is whether the pc gets gains, not whether the auditor is a perfect ritualist. Exact Ritual is something in which you should take pride. But it exists only to accomplish auditing. When it exists for itself alone, watch out. Audit the pc in front of you. Not some other pc or a generalized object. Use the CCHs to coax the pc out of the bank and into present time. Take up the pc's physical changes as though they were originations. Each time a new one occurs, take it up with 2-way comm as though the pc had spoken. If the same "origination" happens again and again only take it up again occasionally, not every time it happens. Know what's going on. Keep the pc at it. Keep the pc informed. Keep the pc winning. Keep the pc exteriorizing from the past and coming into present time. Understand the CCHs and what you're doing. If it all deteriorates to mere ritual you'll take 25 to 50 times the time necessary to produce the same result as I would. The auditing is for the pc. The CCHs are for the pc. In auditing you win in the CCHs only when the pc wins. LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 47  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/4/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DETERMINING WHAT TO RUN   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 APRIL 1962 Central Orgs Franchise DETERMINING WHAT TO RUN Here is some good news for you. Recently I completed surveys on pcs establishing the general workability of processes. From there I found there was a simple way of establishing what should be run on a given pc. The entire test is by tone arm action. The table follows: Considerable tone arm action during rudiments -- do CCHs. No tone arm action during rudiments and no decent tone arm action on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross -- do CCHs. Considerable tone arm action during havingness processes -- do CCHs. Minimal tone arm action during 3D Criss Cross -- do CCHs. Minimal tone arm action during prepchecking -- do CCHs. Good tone arm action during listing in 3D Criss Cross -- do 3D Criss Cross. Good tone arm action during prepchecking -- do prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross. There is a phenomenon known as the "Drift Down" which is not actual tone arm action. The pc starts in on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross with the tone arm high, and as listing goes on the arm gradually drifts down and lingers on and on at the lower read. This is not really tone arm action. The pc is just drifting toward the read of an item. In this the tone arm does not go up or down, back and forth. It just drifts slowly and evenly down over the first half hour period of listing and stays there. Similarly, there is the "Drift Up" of the tone arm during prepchecking or listing. The constantly rising needle gradually raises the tone arm up to a high read which finally just stays there. This "Drift Up" is not actually tone arm motion. It is just the pc's refusal to confront. By "considerable", "good" or "adequate" tone arm action, we mean about three-quarters of a division change in twenty minutes of auditing. Judgement has to be used in establishing this action, as for many minutes a tone arm may hang up even on an easy case before it begins to move again. By minimal tone arm action we mean a quarter of a division change in twenty minutes of auditing, or less. The secret is this. When the tone arm moves it is because mass is changing. When a pc is being the mass and no other mass or thing he cannot view it, as there is nothing there to view the mass but the mass. Thus we get cases that cannot as-is. These cases are just being the one valence or the mass or the somatic without being or seeing anything else. The pc can be a mass or a valence however and still view another mass or valence. 48 When the pc can do this we get reaction between two masses and therefore tone arm change. Also a pc who is being himself and is capable of viewing a mass will get tone arm change. It requires two locations to get a tone arm change -- the location of the pc and the location of the mass. If two such points of reference do not exist the pc cannot view anything outside of what he is being, and thus there is no as-isness of mass. When the pc is what the pc needs to have audited and cannot view it, then we get no as-ising and therefore no change of mass, since it is a one point situation as opposed to a two point situation. When we have a pc who is being a mass and cannot see anything or be anything but that mass, then we get no tone arm action on any subjective process. Everything we ask the pc to think we get little or no action on the tone arm because there is no shift of mass -- and there is no change of case either and won't be. But when we have this same pc looking at the auditor we do get the viewing of an outside mass and so we do get tone arm action. Hence when rudiments produce tone arm action it is obvious that the pc gets his change by viewing things in the room and the CCHs are indicated. When this same pc does not get tone arm motion on a thinkingness process, that clinches the matter for the CCHs. Also, in doing the CCHs, we have to take a somatic or a twitch or any pc reaction as an origin by the pc and call the pc's attention to it by asking him quietly about it. This makes the pc view it and when the pc does the pc gets exterior to it and so the mass changes. Thus two way comm of this type is vital to the pc's progress and lack of it multiplies the time in processing tremendously. Any Director of Processing must follow these rules in studying daily case reports. By looking over the pc's tone arm action, providing the auditor has recorded it frequently in prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross, the Director of Processing can tell at once what progress is being made. It goes further than that. You just mustn't run a pc on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross where the pc is getting minimal tone arm action session after session. Only the CCHs can be run. Do not let an auditor audit 3D Criss Cross if the auditor takes two weeks to find an item routinely. And don't let a pc be run on prepchecking or 3D Criss Cross unless good tone arm action routinely results. To do otherwise than follow these indications is to flagrantly waste auditing. The only exception to this is that every pc must be regularly checked out for missed withholds. Only if this is done will the pc stay in session or be happy about his auditing. This will greatly lessen your worries as an auditor and as one supervising other auditing. Use it. LRH:jw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 49  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/4/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CCHs PURPOSE   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 12 APRIL 1962 Franchise CCHs PURPOSE A long time ago -- in 1949 -- while doing research in Dianetics, I experienced considerable trouble in getting some pcs "up to present time". As you know, a pc can get "stuck in the past", and if you can get a pc out of his engrams and reactive mind (his perpetuated past) he becomes aware of the present. He or she is unaware of the present to the degree that shock or injury has caused an arrest in time. After running an engram, we used to tell the pc to "Come to present time" and the pc would, ordinarily, but sometimes no. By telling the pc to examine the room, the return to present time could be accomplished on many. I observed that a common denominator of all aberration was interiorization into the past and unawareness of the present time environment. Over the years, I developed what became the CCHs. Control, In-Communication-With, and Havingness of Present Time became feasible through certain drills of Control, Communication and Havingness, using the present time environment. This is the purpose Of the CCH drills -- getting the pc out of the past and into present time. Any drill which did this would be a CCH drill, even "Come Up to Present Time!" as a single command. The pc is stuck not just in engrams but in past identities. In fact the pc out of present time is being the past. The pc can be made to see he is being the past and that there is a present. Thus when the pc "has a somatic" and you ask the pc what it was, you get him or her to differentiate between self and past by looking. A being who is something, cannot observe it. A being who looks at something, ceases to be it. A pc can even be a somatic! Hence the CCHs must be run with a non-forbidding present time, with queries about somatics and changes. It's all as simple as that, basically. That's why they work -- they get the pc to Present Time. But only if they are run right. Only if they invite the pc to progress. Run wrong, the CCHs can actually drive a pc out of present time or park him or her in the session. Do you see, now? LRH:jvr.cden L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 50  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=26/4/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RECOMMENDED PROCESSES HGC   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 26 APRIL 1962 Franchise RECOMMENDED PROCESSES HGC After considerable study of various results I have come to the conclusion, which may be refined later, that the best shotgun for all cases is a combination of the CCHs, Prepchecking and 3D Criss Cross used in a certain specific and definite way with certain and specific indicators as to when and how they are employed. At this time there are no better processes than these three. Properly processed on these three there are no cases which cannot be moved. Whereas many old-time repetitive processes achieved wonderful results on this or that special case, no such process ever achieved results on all cases. Therefore it could be said that we have only this combination of processes which give us remarkable results on all cases -- the CCHs, Prepchecking and 3D Criss Cross. The only liability which these three types of processing have is that they require very well trained auditors and very precise application. But training skills are now such that certainly at Saint Hill all difficulties in teaching these processes have been overcome. Given some six months a student can be taught to use these with such skill as to cause a preclear to gape in wonder at the rapidity of his advance. The beauty of these processes is that they are susceptible to precision training and are precision actions. If a preclear has peculiar and special things wrong with him or if the preclear is very difficult these three processes properly administered will achieve success without special understanding of the case by the auditor. But make no error about the precise nature of administration. There are very few maybe's in the administration of these three processes. There are definite answers to every problem or difference in preclears that may be encountered. Therefore if we are to attain high level sweeping clearing in Scientology we cannot compromise with the level of auditor training. I do not say that all auditors need to be trained at Saint Hill, but I do say that all auditors so far arrived as students at Saint Hill were far, far below any required level of skill to make these processes broadly work. But we can and are overcoming this skill factor, not only at Saint Hill but in Central Orgs which have Saint Hill graduates in their technical divisions. The only real technical trouble I have seen lately occurred in Orgs where no graduate of Saint Hill was yet posted. METHOD OF USE The CCHs, according to my latest finding, should be used in company with Prepchecking. The CCHs use the extroversion factor of present time. Prepchecking gives us the introversion factor. The system is to prepcheck the pc to a win, in one, two or three sessions, and then CCH the pc to a win in one, two or three sessions. Use one then the other, then the first again then the second. Alternate these two skills, each time to a win. Use neither more than four sessions consecutively. Don't use them both in one two-hour session. Devote the whole of any session to either one or the other. Use a meter and rudiments only in the Prepcheck sessions. Use no meter or rudiments in the CCHs sessions. In doing Prepchecking use the precise system developed to date, but use only rudiments questions as the zero questions. The end product of Prepchecking used this way is to achieve better tone arm action and rudiments that will stay in when we come to 3D Criss Cross. 51 If the pc, while being given his preclear assessment, shows excellent tone arm action on the think type of assessment question (which is most of it), then the pc could be put directly onto 3D Criss Cross, and the CCHs and Prepchecking by-passed. But if after a while or at any time the pc's tone arm action became poor and rudiments became very hard to keep in, the pc would be returned to or started on again CCHs and Prepchecking until a session was more possible on 3D Criss Cross. If minimal tone arm action was present during the preclear assessment then the pc would be put at once on CCHs and Prepchecking as above. This is how these three activities, CCHs, Prepchecking and 3D Criss Cross, should be used. Use the CCHs against Prepchecking until rudiments go in very easily or stay in and the tone arm has excellent action. Then go into 3D Criss Cross. But if rudiments on 3D Criss Cross become consistently difficult and tone arm action drops, the auditor should return the pc to CCHs and Prepchecking until tone arm action is regained and 3D Criss Cross can be continued. Thus we see that the CCHs and Prepchecking are used to get the pc into session and keep him easily in session, and the 3D Criss Cross is used for long-range permanent case gain. One does not try for real case gain with CCHs and Prepchecking even though real gain exists in the use of these processes. One tries for real gain with 3D Criss Cross. LIMITATIONS OF USE Oddly enough it has been found that 3D Criss Cross is easier to learn than Prepchecking, and any auditor who can prepcheck can rapidly learn 3D Criss Cross. But it is also interesting that Prepchecking is necessary to know before one does 3D Criss Cross, due to meter experience and rudiments. It is easier to read a meter under Prepchecking than under 3D Criss Cross. But one has to be more skilled as an auditor in pressing home to do Prepchecking than to do 3D Criss Cross. If an auditor can do skilled Prepchecking and get results his battle with auditing is three-quarters over. The rest is very easy. A FINAL WORD There is nothing less than complete precision required of today's auditor. That precision can be learned and is being learned. It is marvellous to be audited by an Auditor who knows his Model Session and TRs, who doesn't Q and A and who just goes on and gets the job done, who stays in two-way comm with his pc during the CCHs, and who doesn't flinch at asking embarrassing questions in Prepchecking. It is NOT difficult to obtain this perfection. Its attainment guarantees the success of sessions and the future of Scientology. In an Academy teach the fundamentals of Scientology, Axioms, Codes, Scales, TRs, Meter and Model Session, etc. Teach such a student to do the CCHs, old repetitive processes such as ARC Straight Wire, and Prepchecking and let him get his results on graduation with CCHs and Prepchecking as used herein. And graduate him with those skills well learned. Then later teach him a Class II Course bringing his TRs, Model Session and Metering to perfection and teach 3D Criss Cross. Then we'll have good auditors. Don't compromise with auditing skill. And the combination of processes given herein will make every pc you audit thrilled with the results you will obtain. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 52  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 13 iDate=29/4/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3G (EXPERIMENTAL) (A preview of a Clearing Process)   All Saint Hill Graduates All Saint Hill Students General to Orgs Franchise Additional Mailing  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex All Saint Hill HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 29 APRIL 1962 Graduates All Saint Hill Students General to Orgs Franchise Additional Mailing ROUTINE 3G (EXPERIMENTAL) (A preview of a Clearing Process) We are engaged in piloting through fast clearing. Using the data and experience of 3D Criss Cross (which remains valid and all mistakes of which can be cleaned up as per this Info Letter) we should get faster results and, more important, obtain a continuing gain on the pc until the pc is clear. The best locator of the Goals Problem Mass is from goals. On any pc (whose rudiments can be kept in), even pcs being run on 3D Criss Cross, the fastest road to clear is probably as follows: ROUTINE 3G STEPS IN BRIEF 1. Do a goals assessment. 2. List and nul for an item obtained from the goal found, by complete listing. 3. Oppterm the item found by listing, nulling and finding the oppterm by complete listing. 4. Repeat 1, 2 and 3 many times. New data which makes this possible is as follows: 1. Listing is auditing. 2. Goals locate more deeply in the Goals Problem Mass than any other line. 3. Other types of line are less accurate and can give the pc more discomfort than goals items. 4. Finding a goal was blocked by out-rudiments, invalidations and missed withholds. 5. What a complete list is has been discovered and tests developed conditionally. 6. Pcs can become upset (given heavy somatics) by incomplete lines and by oppterming wrong items. In theory if an Item list is handled as a process, it must be completed. All charge probably does not bleed off a goals list and these tests do not apply to a goals list as (in goals) a pc is facing no mass, only ideas. In items he faces up to mass. Items are charged, not goals. The following conditional tests are applied to Lists of Items (not a goals list) to establish if a list is complete. (a) All tone arm action has ceased by list end, but was present and adequate at list beginning, just as in any repetitive process. 53 (b) By reading the first 12 items of the list back to the pc, as differentiation, no Tone Arm Action is produced. (Use the second 12 for next test.) (No thorough differentiation is done on the list.) (c) The first 12 items of the list produce no great needle action in nulling and all but one or two go out on reading them the first time. (Use the second 12 for next test, third 12 for third test, etc.) (d) Almost all the list vanishes on the first nulling of it. No items grind out. (e) The meter does not respond to a question: "Are there any more terminals?" Coax the pc into completing the list by these tests. Keep off ARC break reactions by asking for missed withholds and invalidations. In theory, when the terminal is attained by a goals assessment and a resulting list of items, and when the Opposing item is obtained, if both lists were complete, the two items should "blow" and the goal cease to react. This then would make repetitive auditing unnecessary. The safest action on any case that has been run on 3D Criss Cross is to take any goal ever found on the case and check it out. If it checks out, ignore the former terminal and complete the goals terminal list as per the above five tests and then oppterm it. 3D Criss Cross is a good training ground. Any new auditor on Routine 3 processes should be put on 3D Criss Cross with Pre-Hav Levels as a source and be made to complete his list, find an item and do a complete oppterm list. Incomplete listing, invalidations and out-rudiments are the main faults of Routine 3 processes. A new auditor should be cured of them before messing with a goals assessment, which is the touchiest to do and hardest on a case. Values gained in receiving or giving 3D Criss Cross are great. Values from Routine 3G are probably much greater and much more comfortable. In doing 3D Criss Cross or Routine 3G omit Differentiation as a step except to stir up the pc for more items or to test the completeness of a list. A goal is checked (whether new or old) by: 1. Nulling down to one goal. 2. Getting rudiments carefully in. 3. Taking off any invalidations (invalidations when present read the same as the goal or item while the goal or item does not read). 4. Reading the goal, then a goal that went out only after a second nulling of the list, then the goal found, then a nul goal, etc. The goal should continue to read. A goal or item reads constantly, each time it is said. It reads tick, tick, tick, always the same and every time, providing invalidations are off and rudiments are in. 54 An item is checked out the same way as a goal. No item on a complete list should have more than one or two nulling marks after it. If an auditor has to cover a list 25 times to get it nul, it's laughably incomplete. An auditing supervisor can simply look at a list's nul marks and tell if it's complete or not. Too many nul marks equals an incomplete list always. A complete list, in theory, just fades away and leaves an item. Perhaps an oppterm list will just fade out and the original item and goal will vanish. Routine 3G is an effort to exploit the assess to clear phenomena without auditing any items and to keep the pc continually gaining without slumps. Routine 3 failed only because of out-rudiments, poor meter handling, bad TRs and Model Session. It never failed because of its theory or technology. It is recommended that, when an auditor is skilled, the pc be placed on Routine 3G regardless of anything found by 3D Criss Cross. Ignore all previously found or run items. Take up only a goal found (that still checks out as above) or a new goals list. If a goals list has been lost, reconstruct it by taking invalidations off the subject of goals and having the pc list newly. Goals lists run from 100 to 1000, sometimes more. Item lists seldom run less than 300, usually more. Use the same goals list for Step 4 of Routine 3G. Add to it. Nul the whole thing again. Don't try to get all TA action and charge off a goals list. Always get all action and charge off an items list. The steps of Routine 3D Criss Cross now are: 1. Get a Pre-Hav Level by usual Pre-Hav Assessment. 2. List for the item. 3. Test for completeness with above Completeness tests. 4. Complete if not complete. 5. Nul list to one item. 6. Check out item (as above). 7. Oppterm the item at once. 8. Test oppterm list for completeness. 55 9. Nul oppterm list. 10. Check out item. Put anything found on a Line Plot. The steps of Routine 3G are: 1. Do or recover a goals list. 2. Nul the list to one goal. 3. Check out the goal. 4. List for an item from the goal. (Use the wording: "Who or what would want to [goal]?") 5. Test for completeness (as above). 6. Complete list if not complete. (Do 5 and 6 until the list is complete.) 7. Nul the list to one item. 8. Check out the item. 9. Oppterm list the item. (Use: "Who or what would oppose [item]?") 10. Test for completeness of list. 11. Complete list. (Do 10 and 11 until list is complete.) 12. Nul list. 13. Check out item. 14. Assess for a new goal as above and do each of these steps in order. Keep an accurate Line Plot record of all goals and items found. Repairing a case that has had bad or erroneous assessment or running of items on Routine 3 or 3A or 3D or 3D Criss Cross is done by the Routine 3G steps above. The errors should vanish. Note that the word "want" is used to get an item list from a goal. "Who or What would want to ........ (goal) ........ ?" (Not "Who or What would [goal]?") A pc can be coaxed into completing a list by differentiation, which consists of asking him "Would a (item) want to (goal)?" for each item he or she has listed. But only differentiate a few until pc is going again. Don't Tone 40 ack items or goals a pc gives you. It stops the pc by completing the cycle. Just murmur at him or her when you get a goal or item. Ask the question that is getting items only as a prompt when pc runs down. Not while a pc is talking goals or items. Try to get several goals or items for one question. Coax the pc. Keep the missed withholds picked up. 56 If the pc gets a "dirty needle" in listing 3D Criss Cross, an earlier item is wrong. (This is a pc "needle pattern".) A wrong item found constitutes a missed withhold. Backtrack to earlier items. A wrong goal found can cause a "dirty needle". Otherwise a "dirty needle" is caused by missed withholds. If you can't clean up a "dirty needle" with missed withhold questions, a goal or item was wrong and you had better backtrack to it at once, no matter what else you were doing. The way to do it is re-check all items on the Line Plot and correct the earliest item that won't now check out (unless it and its oppterm blew, of course). You will receive more data on Routine 3G as it is found. The Modifier is part, it seems, of the oppterm so its use is dropped. It is not found now. CAUTIONS DO NOT LET ROUTINE 3G BE RUN AS THE FIRST ROUTINE 3 PROCESS BY ANY INEXPERIENCED AUDITOR. LET AUDITORS BECOME PERFECT USING ROUTINE 3D CRISS CROSS AS CONTAINED HEREIN. A goals assessment is tougher than 3D Criss Cross and goals are more easily invalidated than items. Further Routine 3G should clear off any errors run into a case by 3D Criss Cross. Therefore don't train with the only cure. 3D Criss Cross does well with cases too! Train Auditors to do Routine 3 processes with Routine 3D Criss Cross from Pre-Hav Levels. Only when they're perfect, let them go to more advanced routines. Routine 3D Criss Cross can be run on staffs and HGC pcs with great advantage to the pc and no unremediable risk to the pc. Requisite to run Routine 3D Criss Cross is good gains with Prepchecking and the CCHs. We have developed a good process to graduate the auditor to clearing without fouling up pcs too badly in Routine 3D Criss Cross. And the pcs will win too if it is well and thoroughly done. All this should be good news to people whose goals have been found. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 57  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ARC BREAKS MISSED WITHHOLDS   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 MAY 1962 Franchise ARC BREAKS MISSED WITHHOLDS (HOW TO USE THIS BULLETIN. WHEN AN AUDITOR OR STUDENT HAS TROUBLE WITH AN "ARC BREAKY PC" OR NO GAIN, OR WHEN AN AUDITOR IS FOUND TO BE USING FREAK CONTROL METHODS OR PROCESSES TO "KEEP A PC IN SESSION", THE HCO SEC, D OF T OR D OF P SHOULD JUST HAND A COPY OF THIS BULLETIN TO THE AUDITOR AND MAKE HIM OR HER STUDY IT AND TAKE AN HCO EXAM ON IT.) After some months of careful observation and tests, I can state conclusively that: ALL ARC BREAKS STEM FROM MISSED WITHHOLDS. This is vital technology, vital to the auditor and to anyone who wants to live. Conversely: THERE ARE NO ARC BREAKS WHEN MISSED WITHHOLDS HAVE BEEN CLEANED UP. By WITHHOLD is meant AN UNDISCLOSED CONTRA-SURVIVAL ACT. By MISSED WITHHOLD is meant AN UNDISCLOSED CONTRA-SURVIVAL ACT WHICH HAS BEEN RESTIMULATED BY ANOTHER BUT NOT DISCLOSED. This is FAR more important in an auditing session than most auditors have yet realized. Even when some auditors are told about this and shown it they still seem to miss its importance and fail to use it. Instead they continue to use strange methods of controlling the pc and oddball processes on ARC Breaks. This is so bad that one auditor let a pc die rather than pick up the missed withholds! So allergy to picking up missed withholds can be so great that an auditor has been known to fail utterly rather than do so. Only constant hammering can drive this point home. When it is driven home, only then can auditing begin to happen across the world; the datum is that important. An auditing session is 50% technology and 50% application. I am responsible for the technology. The auditor is wholly responsible for the application. Only when an auditor realizes this can he or she begin to obtain uniformly marvellous results everywhere. No auditor now needs "something else", some odd mechanism to keep pcs in session. PICKING UP MISSED WITHHOLDS KEEPS PCS IN SESSION. There is no need for a rough, angry ARC Breaky session. If there is one it is not the fault of the pc. It is the fault of the auditor. The auditor has failed to pick up missed withholds. As of now it is not the pc that sets the tone of the session. It is the auditor. And the auditor who has a difficult session (providing he or she has used standard 58 technology, model session, and can run an E-Meter), has one only because he or she failed to ask for missed withholds. What is called a "dirty needle" (a pc's needle pattern) is caused by missed withholds, not withholds. Technology today is so powerful that it must be flawlessly applied. One does his CCHs in excellent 2 way comm with the pc. One has his TRs, Model Session and E-Meter operation completely perfect. And one follows exact technology. And one keeps the missed withholds picked up. There is an exact and precise auditor action and response for every auditing situation, and for every case. We are not today beset by variable approaches. The less variable the auditor's actions and responses, the greater gain in the pc. It is terribly precise. There is no room for flubs. Further, every pc action has an exact auditor response. And each of these has its own drill by which it can be learned. Auditing today is not an art, either in technology or procedure. It is an exact science. This removes Scientology from every one of the past practices of the mind. Medicine advanced only to the degree that its responses by the practitioner were standardized and the practitioner had a professional attitude toward the public. Scientology is far ahead of that today. What a joy it is to a preclear to receive a completely standard session. To receive a text book session. And what gains the pc makes! And how easy it is on the auditor! It isn't how interesting or clever the auditor is that makes the session. It's how standard the auditor is. Therein lies pc confidence. Part of that standard technology is asking for missed withholds any time the pc starts to give any trouble. This is, to a pc, a totally acceptable control factor. And it totally smooths the session. You have no need for and must not use any ARC Break process. Just ask for missed withholds. Here are some of the manifestations cured by asking for missed withholds. 1. Pc failing to make progress. 2. Pc critical of or angry at auditor. 3. Pc refusing to talk to auditor. 4. Pc attempting to leave session. 5. Pc not desirous of being audited (or anybody not desirous of being audited). 6. Pc boiling off. 7. Pc exhausted. 8. Pc feeling foggy at session end. 9. Dropped havingness. 10. Pc telling others the auditor is no good. 11. Pc demanding redress of wrongs. 12. Pc critical of organizations or people of Scientology. 13. People critical of Scientology. 14. Lack of auditing results. 15. Dissemination failures. Now I think you will agree that in the above list we have every ill we suffer from in the activities of auditing. 59 Now PLEASE believe me, I tell you there is ONE CURE for the lot and ONLY that one. There are no other cures. The cure is contained in the simple question or its variations "Have I missed a withhold on you?" THE COMMANDS In case of any of the conditions 1. to 15. above ask the pc one of the following commands and CLEAN THE NEEDLE OF ALL INSTANT READ. Ask the exact question you asked the first time as a final test. The needle must be clean of all instant reaction before you can go on to anything else. It helps the pc if each time the needle twitches, the auditor says, "That" or "There" quietly but only to help the pc see what is twitching. One doesn't interrupt the pc if he or she is already giving it. This prompting is the only use of latent reads in Scientology -- to help the pc spot what reacted in the first place. The commonest questions: "In this session, have I missed a withhold on you?" "In this session have I failed to find out something?" "In this session is there something I don't know about you?" The best beginning rudiments withhold question: "Since the last session is there something you have done that I don't know about?" Prepcheck Zero Questions follow: "Has somebody failed to find out about you who should have?" "Has anyone ever failed to find out something about you?" "Is there something I failed to find out about you?" "Have you ever successfully hidden something from an auditor?" "Have you ever done something somebody failed to discover?" "Have you ever evaded discovery in this lifetime?" "Have you ever hidden successfully?" "Has anyone ever failed to locate you?" (These Zeroes do not produce "What" questions until the auditor has located a specific overt.) When Prepchecking, when running any process but the CCHs, if any one of the auditing circumstances in 1 to 15 above occurs, ask for missed withholds. Before leaving any chain of overts in Prepchecking, or during Prepchecking, ask frequently for missed withholds, "Have I missed any withhold on you?" or as above. Do not conclude intensives on any process without cleaning up missed withholds. Asking for missed withholds does not upset the dictum of using no O/W processes in rudiments. Most missed withholds clean up at once on two way comm providing the auditor doesn't ask leading questions about what the pc is saying. Two way comm consists of asking for what the meter showed, acknowledging what the pc said and checking the meter again with the missed withhold question. If pc says, "I was mad at my wife," as an answer, just ack and check the meter with the missed withhold question. Don't say, "What was she doing?" 60 In cleaning missed withholds do not use the Prepcheck system unless you are Prepchecking. And even in Prepchecking, if the zero is not a missed withhold question and you are only checking for missed withholds amid other activities, do it simply as above, by two way comm, not by the Prepcheck system. To get auditing into a state of perfection, to get clearing general, all we have to do is: 1. Know our basics (Axioms, Scales, Codes, the fundamental theory about the thetan and the mind); 2. Know our practical (TRs, Model Session, E-Meter, CCHs, Prepchecking and clearing routines). In actual fact this is not much to ask. For the return is smooth results and a far, far better world. An HPA/HCA can learn the data in 1 above and all but clearing routines in the material in 2. An HPA/HCA should know these things to perfection. They are not hard to learn. Additives and interpretations are hard to get around. Not the actual data and performance. Knowing these things, one also needs to know that all one has to do is clean the E-Meter of missed withholds to make any pc sit up and get audited smoothly, and all is as happy as a summer dream. We are making all our own trouble. Our trouble is lack of precise application of Scientology. We fail to apply it in our lives or sessions and try something bizarre and then we fail too. And with our TRs, Model Session and meters we are most of all failing to pick up and clean up MISSED WITHHOLDS. We don't have to clean up all the withholds if we keep the Missed Withholds cleaned up. Give a new auditor the order to clean up "Missed Withholds" and he or she invariably will start asking the pc for withholds. That's a mistake. You ask the pc for Missed Withholds. Why stir up new ones to be missed when you haven't cleaned up those already missed? Instead of putting out the fire we pour on gunpowder. Why find more you can them miss when you haven't found those that have been missed. Don't be so confounded reasonable about the pc's complaints. Sure, they may all be true BUT he's complaining only because withholds have been missed. Only then does the pc complain bitterly. Whatever else you learn, learn and understand this please. Your auditing future hangs on it. The fate of Scientology hangs on it. Ask for missed withholds when sessions go wrong. Get the missed withholds when life goes wrong. Pick up the missed withholds when staffs go wrong. Only then can we win and grow. We're waiting for you to become technically perfect with TRs, Model Session and the E-Meter, to be able to do CCHs and Prepchecking and clearing techniques, and to learn to spot and pick up missed withholds. If pcs, organizations and even Scientology vanish from Man's view it will be because you did not learn and use these things. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is charged by HCO B 4 July 1962, Bulletin Changes, page 101.] 61  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PREPCHECKING AND SEC CHECKING   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MAY 1962 Franchise PREPCHECKING AND SEC CHECKING How do you use Form 3 (the Joburg), Form 6A and other forms with Prepchecking? These forms have great value in improving a case, they dig up things. They get off the overts against Scientology that hold up many a case. Now that Prepchecking is here, with all its vast ability to clean up this life, you still need these forms. For the most general auditor fault in Prepchecking is going too shallow. By using these forms this is to a large measure remedied by the use of all our Sec Check forms as released on HCO Policy Letters or even in Information Letters. An old auditor, for instance, will make much faster case progress (or even make case progress) if given the Saint Hill Special; "last 2 pages of the Joburg and a Form 6A". Prepchecking and Sec Checking come together with a simple formula: IF A SEC CHECK QUESTION DOESN'T AT ONCE CLEAR ON THE METER BY SIMPLE REVELATION, THE AUDITOR PREPCHECKS IT. The smoothest way to clean a Sec Check question is to ask the pc to consider it carefully, then clean the needle of any response to it and go on. There is no varying the question. If a question doesn't clear on one or two revelations, you then swing straight into a formal Prepcheck of the question. This specific drill, shortly to become a TR, should be precisely followed. Auditor (watching meter) (using Sec Check Form question): "Have you ever stolen anything?" (Auditor may tell pc if needle reacted and steer pc's attention.) Pc: "I stole a watch once." (Or whatever response.) Auditor: "Thank you. I will now check the question: 'Have you ever stolen anything?'" IF NEEDLE DOESN'T REACT: Auditor: "That seems clear at the moment." (Asks next Sec Check question.) IF NEEDLE STILL REACTS: Auditor: "There's still something on this." (Auditor writes down the question on his report as a Zero A question. Auditor probes for a specific single overt, finds one, forms the What question for use in a chain, writes it on his report and goes straight into routine Prepchecking. When the What question is null, the auditor returns to the same Sec Check question as above, tests it for now being clean. If not, more Prepchecking on it is indicated. If clean now he goes to next question on Form.) If the auditor knows this drill his progress down a form will be relatively rapid. The theory of this is that if a question doesn't promptly clear on the needle then it is part of a chain and must be Prepchecked to get all of it. The phrasing of the What question for Prepchecking is not the Sec Check question. The What question is derived only from the overt discovered. Any Sec Check question Prepchecked is tested before leaving it just as though it were found reacting in the first place (same drill as above). 62 USE OF RUDIMENTS IN PREPCHECKING Do not continually ask the pc, "In this session have I missed a withhold on you?" while doing any Prepchecking. In Prepchecking one asks for missed withholds only after cleaning a What question and in End Rudiments. Prepchecking sends the pc down the track. If an auditor says during Prepchecking a chain, "In this session have I missed a withhold on you?" it yanks the pc back to present time and out of whatever incident he or she is in. In doing a Routine 3 Process one asks for missed withholds often and at any time, but not in a Prepcheck session. If you do five or so Sec Check questions without a single one having to be Prepchecked, it is, however, good policy to ask for missed withholds. Ask for missed withholds in Prepchecking only after a What question is nul, but always ask and clean it then. In Routine 3 processes ask for missed withholds at any time. HELP THE PC In general, when getting rudiments in or getting off missed withholds or invalidations, help the pc by guiding his attention against the needle. This is quite simple. The auditor asks the question, the needle instantly reacts, the pc (as he or she usually does) looks puzzled if the auditor says "It reacts." The pc thinks it over. As he or she is thinking, the auditor will see the same reaction on the needle. Softly the auditor says "That" or "There" or "What's that you're looking at?" As the pc knows what he or she is looking at at that instant, the thing can be dug up. This is auditor co-operation, not triumph. Most often the pc does not know what it is that reacts as only unknowns react. Therefore an auditor's "There" when the needle twitches again, before the pc has answered, co ordinates with whatever the pc is looking at and thus it can be spotted and revealed by the pc. This is only done when the pc comm lags for a few seconds. Remember, the pc is always willing to reveal. He or she doesn't know What to reveal. Therein lies the difficulty. Pcs get driven out of session when asked to reveal something yet do not know what to reveal. By the auditor's saying "There" or "What's that?" quietly each time the needle reacts newly, the pc is led to discover what should be revealed. Auditors and pcs get into a games condition in Prepchecking and rudiments only when the auditor refuses this help to the pc. New auditors routinely believe that in Prepchecking the pc knows the answer and won't give it. This is an error. If the pc knew all the answer, it wouldn't react on the meter. Old-timers have found out that only if they steer by repeated meter reaction, giving the pc "There" or "What's that?" can the pc answer up on most rudiments questions, missed withholds and so on. This is the only use of reads other than instant reads on the E-Meter. Help the pc. He doesn't know. Otherwise the needle would never react. Even if doing a Sec Check form still call it Prepchecking when done this way. This is "Prepchecking on Forms." The Zero for the whole lot of course is "Are you withholding anything?" Thus Sec Check form questions, when they do not nul at one crack become Zero A questions, and the What formed from the overt found becomes the No. 1 question. LRH:jw.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 63  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 13 iDate=10/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3GA (EXPERIMENTAL) (A Clearing Procedure Intended to Handle the GPM Accurately without Liability)   Students, Sthil Franchise Central Orgs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Students, Sthil HCO INFORMATION LETTER OF 10 MAY 1962 Franchise Central Orgs ROUTINE 3GA (EXPERIMENTAL) (A Clearing Procedure Intended to Handle the GPM Accurately without Liability) As the commonest difficulties auditors are having and the greatest errors that can be made on a Routine 3 process are the same, I have been working to get around these and may have done so in Routine 3GA. The difficulties are: 1. Getting a pc to complete a list. 2. Getting the right item. The greatest liabilities in a Routine 3 process are: 1. Incomplete list. 2. Wrong item. As you can see (aside from getting the correct goal), the greatest dangers in the processes are unfortunately the most difficult for an auditor to do correctly by recent experience. Therefore in Routine 3GA we have the same end product as in Routine 3G (as per HCO Information Letter of 29 April 1962) but, if it works smoothly, without the liabilities. As listing can be considered processing, I have made it follow the rules of processing in Routine 3GA, to wit, plus and minus and possible stuck flows should be regarded. The principle of the four basic flows is therefore used in Routine 3GA (HCO Bulletin of 25 January 1962). ROUTINE 3GA This has four steps only: 1. Find a goal (done as in Routine 3 and Routine 3G). 2. List four lists simultaneously to no TA action on any list. 3. Nul each list once in rotation, then twice in rotation, then three times, etc, to try to locate items. 4. Find a new goal and repeat 2 and 3. STEP ONE This is the most difficult and is done exactly as in Routine 3 or 3G. The goal must check out to a constant instant tick. If the goal has an instant "Dirty needle" get the missed W/Hs off it before checking. It will probably vanish as a goal and another goal is the correct one. Goal finding is made easier by keeping the subject of listing, auditing, the session and the goal free of missed withholds, including the overt of missing withholds on others. A good, clean instant ticking, constantly reacting each time it is said goal is what we want in Step One. 64 Once it is checked out as THE GOAL we don't check it again until Step 3 is complete. STEP TWO This is the innovation. We do not oppterm an item. We oppterm the goal itself. Thus we never really have to find an item in order to oppterm. And even if we found a wrong item, it would not further upset the case. Further, we use FOUR versions of the goal fur our lists. And we do Four lists at the same time. We take items down on one list until the pc seems draggy. Then we pick up any missed withhold and go to the next list. And so on through four lists, around and around until each list shows no TA action on a few items being read to the pc. The words "Who or What would WANT...." inserted before the original goal for the first list, the words "Who or What would oppose...." for the second list. The words "Who or What would not oppose...." for the third list. And the words "Who or What would not want...." for the fourth list. Example: Goal: To Catch Catfish. List One: Who or What would want to catch catfish? (Outflow.) List Two: Who or What would oppose catching catfish? (Inflow.) List Three: Who or What would not oppose catching catfish? (Restrained Inflow.) List Four: Who or What would not want to catch catfish? (Restrained Outflow.) Use four sheets of paper or four double sheets, legal (foolscap) length, ruled or not. Put the page number and the list question, the date and pc's name at the top of the first sheet, and the page number and list question on subsequent pages. Don't tangle up on labelling and numbering as it will be a trick keeping four lists going anyway. And if you fail to label them right or list on wrong sheets, you'll confuse the session horribly. So be neat and try to shift paper quietly in the session to reduce pc's getting attention on auditor. When a sheet is full drop it on a common pile on the floor, do a new sheet for that list. Separate the floored lists afterwards. List a list as long as the pc does it easily. Whether this is 3 items or 30 On one list. Then check for missed withholds: "In this session have I missed a withhold on you?" Clean it as necessary and go on to the next list. Give the pc the list question only often enough to keep the pc going, not for every item he or she gives. Put anything on the list the pc wants on it. Don't let pc mutter and claw around for "the exact item", just keep the pc naming items. Try to keep the lists vaguely equal in length. If the "winds of space" turn on (if pc is getting his or her face pushed in) go a little stronger on Lists 1 and 3. That takes the pressure off. If pc thinks they're all complete, pull any session missed withhold, test one or two lists for TA action by reading a few items to pc, and if TA action is present or if the list question reacts (or other tests including finding if the pc still has somatics or pressures), continue listing. When lists do not produce TA action, etc, the listing can be considered complete. Do NOT test goal for complete list as a test. Lists may go to several hundred items each. 65 Learn to list rapidly. Don't upset the pc by calling for repeats of earlier items you missed. The pc probably will have forgotten them and get confused. Don't pretend you've heard an item when you haven't. Get it correct from pc. He or she will only feel more acknowledged. Pcs go groggy, lose interest and refuse to list only when session withholds are missed. Running too long on one flow, however, is conducive to withholds developing. STEP THREE Nul each list with three repeats of the item. Mark it with a slant for "In", use an X for "Out". Tell the pc it's in Or out and go on. If a list is at all live, listing is incomplete. This is not likely to happen in Routine 3GA unless the auditor has made very short Lists. Nul all lists. Try to isolate an item on each. Be fully prepared to find, with all rudiments well in, no items and to have the goal vanish. You will have made a long step toward clear if all goes out. If all doesn't go out and items and goal hang, lists are incomplete. The goal may also fail to react on only partially completed lists using Routine 3GA, so make sure the TA action is out of the lists before nulling is begun. Nul List One once down, List Two once down, List Three once down, List Four once down. Then nul List One through any items still reacting, List Two similarly, etc. It may be found on further data that nulling one page of each list at a time in sequence, List 1, 2, 3, 4, is easier on the pc than nulling a whole list. This is permissible. STEP FOUR Find a new goal as in Step One. You may have to add more goals. You may only need to get missed withholds and invalidations off goals lists and various goals to have a new one pop up. Repeat Steps 2, 3 and 4. If the pc has been run extensively on 3D Criss Cross, Routine 3GA should push off all such charge without further attention according to preliminary findings. A good auditing maxim applies hard to 3GA. When the auditor is faced with the unusual, do the usual. Use Routine 3GA in preference to any other Routine 3 activity. Lengthy as this may seem, it is far shorter than finding and auditing items on processes. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 66  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CASE REPAIR   CenOCon Franchise Sthil Students Sthil Graduates  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 14 MAY 1962 CenOCon Franchise Sthil Students Sthil Graduates CASE REPAIR We, for some time now, have been moving in spheres of higher level auditing which reached deeper into a case than old processes could repair. The definition of a master process would be one which ran out all other processes and processing. We now have such processes. As there have been several Routines run on various cases, and as there is a new way of Sec Checking called Prepchecking, it is time I issued data on case repair in case any of these routines were done wrong by auditors or left unflat. Routine 1a The best remedy for any bracket process on problems is to flatten the exact process that was run and left unflat. The auditor should explore this and get the exact version. Only the exact problems process that was left unflat will flatten that problems process. Sec Checking Unflat Sec Checking, where material was overlooked, is best remedied by a combination of CCHs and Prepchecking, using the exact Sec Check form originally left unflat and covering it completely again, but using HCO Bulletin of May 10, 1962 which combines Sec Checking and Prepchecking. This will get off all the rough edges that are left over from Sec Checking only. It is quite revealing how much auditors left untouched during the Sec Checking days. And how many missed withholds were generated. CCH Blowy Pcs Pcs who give an appearance of blowing while being run on CCHs or who are nattery to their auditors are best run on the CCHs in complete Model Session form, with full beginning and end rudiments on the meter. The body of the session is, of course, run without a meter when Model Session is used on the CCHs. Never ask the pc if you've missed a withhold on him or her with the pc off a meter. Don't ask it socially either. You can lose more friends that way! Prepchecking Repair When a pc has been getting a lot of Prepchecking from one or several auditors and the pc has begun to look withdrawn or misemotional in life, a lot of What questions have been left unflat. The best remedy, and the proper one, for this is to take all the pc's Prepcheck auditors' reports and, in session, test every What question from the earliest one ever asked for needle reaction. If a What question reacts, no matter what it was, clean it up by the routine 67 Prepchecking system until the original What question is nul, then ask for missed withholds in the session and go on to the next What question in the reports. Don't vary the What questions you find in the reports. Just work the chain until you get the chain fully blown. This cleaning up of every What question left not nul can do wonders for a pc. Some What questions will be found to be silly. Clean them up anyway. If another auditor did it, ask, after a What question is nul, "In that session, did the auditor miss a withhold on you?" and clean it off the needle. CCHs Where the CCHs have been done wrong or have been left unflat, just do more good CCHs with proper two way comm about Physical originations by the pc. The CCHs done right flatten CCHs done wrong. SCS Where SCS has been done wrong or left unflat, just do it right with two way comm about physical originations by the pc and it should come right. In one case SCS was never flattened on Start because the pc considered the body already started and thus the pc could never execute the command. The remedy was to flatten Stop much better. Op Pro by Dup Old Opening Procedure By Duplication has been left unflat on a lot of Scientologists. One way is to just flatten it. Another way is to add it to the CCHs as a fifth CCH in sequence and run it only until it ceases to produce change and then go to CCH 1. However, I think it's best just to grind it flat, as it was and is a test of endurance in duplication unlike the CCHs. Routine 2 If left unflat just ignore. There are things you can do with it such as to add want, not want, oppose, not oppose to the level and list four lines with You or Your as the terminal. Example: Original level found was "blame". Who or what would want to blame you? Who or what would oppose blaming you? Who or what would not oppose blaming you? Who or what would not want to blame you? Only if a worsening of case was directly traceable to having had a Pre- Hav level run would one recover that level and treat it as above. The listing would have to be complete on every one of the four lists and it would be done as in Routine 3GA, Information Letter of May 10, 1962. As the auditor might not have had the right level at the time, repairing Routine 2 should be done only after careful review and probably not even then. 68 Routines 3, 3A and 3D The original Routine 3 began with finding the pc's goal. This also applies to Routine 3A and 3D. All these are repaired the same way. You ignore everything but the goal. You skip the terminal or oppterm or the modifier or oppgoal. You use only the goal. Choose the First Goal Ever Found. The FIRST, FIRST, FIRST, no matter who found it or where. All invalidations, suppressions and missed W/Hs on: (a) The routines, (b) The auditor or auditors who did any assessments on the pc, (c) Scientology, (d) Listing in general (goals, items), (e) Nulling any list (including Pre-Hav Scale), (f) The goal found, are carefully picked up. The goal itself is worked over hardest. When the goal is clean, it is carefully checked against the rest of the goals list. If the goal checks out, you then use the current goals routine on it (Routine 3GA it this time of writing) and go on from there. If the goal does not check out even after the most careful cleaning up of its invalidations, suppressions or missed withholds, add to the goals list and start in to find the right goal and then use it in the current routine and continue with that routine. This repair is highly specific, is very important, and will have to be done on every person on whom a goal was ever located. THIS INCLUDES ALL CLEARS. There is no other method of salvage. If more than one goal was found, take the first and treat it as given here, then take the second goal ever found, clean it up and so forth. Routine 3D Criss Cross Because auditors had so much trouble getting lists completed, Routine 3D Criss Cross is the most important to patch up. In fact, many cases run on it will not progress on a current Goals Routine until 3D Criss Cross is cleaned up. The process was powerful and only cleans itself up. But, cleaned up, it gives fantastic case resurgences. Take all the items found and scrap them. Take a list of the lines from which the items came, written in the sequence they were used. 69 With the pc on a meter in Model Session query the pc for his or her reactions on each line at the time it was done. Take the earliest line source that was done on the pc that gave the pc sensation, pain, heat or cold. In other words, the earliest line source that produced somatics. It must be the earliest. In some cases a goal was the earliest thing from which a list was taken but the listing of a goal, if it was not productive of somatics, can be left, just as any other line source can be left alone on repair -- no somatics, neglect the line. Now comes the only tricky part. Convert the line source into four line sources by entering into its wording want, oppose, not oppose, not want, in that order. These four lines must include the original source line that was listed. Now list the three hitherto unlisted lines up until they are in even length with the original line done and then, as in Routine 3GA, keep the four abreast of each other. List all TA action out of all lines. Use 3GA tests to find this out. When no charge of any kind is left, skip the lot. No need, so far as I know at this writing, to nul them as this is just a repair job. When all lines that were formerly active (had somatics during listing) are so repaired, get on with the current Routine 3 Process. (At this writing, Routine 3GA.) The case gain you'll get on the pc from this alone will be startling -- providing the four lines you list from any single 3DXX source formerly used are now complete. Note: If pc confused as to which was it, the lines probably aren't complete. Pull missed withholds on assessments, listing, items and get pc to list further. Note: Unless you do this repair well, the case may bog when you try to get a goal. Note: In case you missed it, you throw away all items ever found before doing anything else and you oppterm no items. On Pre-Hav levels used for 3DXX see Routine 2 above. For flow lines do the expansion with want, oppose, not oppose, and not want as contained herein. General Repair Repair of earlier auditing than those processes specifically mentioned here is best done by Prepchecking combined with CCHs. The best Zero question for such repair is any one of those calculated to unearth missed withholds. A general process on missed withholds, repetitive, will be the subject of another HCO Bulletin and it is permissible to use this to repair all earlier sessions in which the above-mentioned routines were not run. In general repair you can get nice gains by Prepchecking all rudiments, beginning and end, in a general way. You will be amazed how many have been out on old pcs. I found one who had not answered even one havingness command although auditors had given the pc thousands. That's thousands of failures to answer the auditing command -- and no havingness worked on this pc until I'd discovered and remedied this. Case repair is a task for a skilled auditor. No case will repair if it continues to be audited badly. If you want to be sure you can repair cases -- and audit them -- take an Academy retread or apply for Saint Hill -- or both. LRH:jw.aap.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 70  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=21/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MISSED WITHHOLDS, ASKING ABOUT   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MAY 1962 Central Orgs Franchise MISSED WITHHOLDS, ASKING ABOUT Since a pc can give a motivator response to the question, "Have I missed a withhold on you?" and since a pc's case can be worsened by permitting the pc to get off motivators rather than overts, the following becomes a must in asking for Missed Withholds: "What have you done that I haven't found out about?" Use "done", not "missed a withhold" in all missed w/h questions. The prior confusion aspect will be found to operate also if this is followed and the missed withhold will blow. In short use done not "missed withhold" in rudiments and middle rudiments questions and stress doingness rather than withholdingness. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 71  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MODEL SESSION CHANGE   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 22 MAY 1962 Central Orgs Franchise MODEL SESSION CHANGE In Beginning Rudiments the withhold question should be worded "Since the last time I audited you have you done anything you are withholding?" This must be answered exactly as asked. It cannot be answered with a "They did to me" or your end command rud will go out. In the first session the auditor gives the pc the line is omitted. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 72  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  VERY IMPORTANT E-METER READS PREPCHECKING HOW METERS GET INVALIDATED   Central Orgs Tech Depts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 MAY 1962 Central Orgs Tech Depts VERY IMPORTANT E-METER READS PREPCHECKING HOW METERS GET INVALIDATED Due to the fantastic number of instant needle reactions missed by poorly trained auditors, it would be well to check this question out on any preclear who has been previously audited: "Has any auditor ever failed to find a meter read on you that you thought should have reacted?" Or any version thereof. "As an auditor have you ever deliberately ignored a significant meter response?" Or any version thereof. "Have you ever invalidated an E-Meter?" Or any version thereof. "As a preclear have you ever successfully persuaded an auditor the meter was wrong?" Or any version thereof. "Have you ever attempted to invalidate a meter read in order to keep something secret?" Or any version thereof. Pcs who have routinely had meter reads missed on them become so unconfident of the meter that they are perpetually ARC broke. Only ARC breaks stop a meter from reacting. Therefore this unconfidence in the meter can cancel meter reads! It is utterly fatal to pass up an instant reaction on a pc. It invalidates the meter and may cancel further reads. Meters work. They work every time. Only auditors fail by failure to use the meter reactions to guide a session. Only the auditing question or the auditor's inability to read can be wrong. Because of bad metering many pcs get the secret opinion that meters do not in fact work. This is caused by sloppy auditors who miss instant reads and fail to clean up hot questions. If the pc knows it is hot and the auditor fails to see the meter react, the pc thinks he can "beat the meter" and is thereafter harder to audit because of this specific phenomenon. This is exactly how meters get invalidated -- auditors who fail to read them and meters that aren't Mark IVs. There have been plenty of both in the past, so clean up the above question. It's all that keeps some pcs from winning. And, oh yes, don't miss meter reads! And, oh very yes, be sure you are well trained on meters! L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 73  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Q and A   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 MAY 1962 Franchise Q and A A great deal has been said about "Q and A-ing" but few auditors know exactly what it is and all auditors have done it without exception up to now. I have just completed some work that analyzes this and some drills which educate an auditor out of it. With a better understanding of it, we can eradicate it. Q and A means ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT A PC'S ANSWER. A SESSION IN WHICH THE AUDITOR Qs and As IS A SESSION FULL OF ARC BREAKS. A SESSION WITHOUT Q and A IS A SMOOTH SESSION. It is vital for all auditors to understand and use this material. The gain for the pc is reduced enormously by Q and A and clearing is not just stopped. It is prevented. The term "Q and A" means that the exact answer to a question is the question, a factual principle. However, it came to mean that the auditor did what the pc did. An auditor who is "Q and A-ing" is giving session control over to the pc. The pc does something, so the auditor also does something in agreement with the pc. The auditor following only the pc's lead is giving no auditing and the pc is left on "self audit". As nearly all auditors do this, no auditing is the rule of the day. Therefore I studied and observed and finally developed a precision analysis of it, for lack of which auditors, although they understood Q and A, nevertheless "Q'd and A'd". THE Qs AND As There are 3 Qs and As. They are: 1. Double questioning. 2. Changing because the pc changes. 3. Following the pc's instructions. The Double Question This occurs on Rudiment Type questions and is wrong. This is the chief auditor fault and must be cured. The auditor asks a question. The pc answers. The auditor asks a question about the answer. This is not just wrong. It is the primary source of ARC Breaks and out rudiments. It is quite a discovery to get this revealed so simply to an auditor as I know that if it is understood, auditors will do it right. The commonest example occurs in social concourse. We ask Joe, "How are you?" Joe says, "I've been ill." We say, "What with?" This may go in society but not in an auditing session. To follow this pattern is fatal and can wipe out all gains. Here is a wrong example: Auditor: "How are you?" PC: "Awful." Auditor: "What's wrong?" In auditing you just must never, never, never do this. All auditors have been doing it. And it's awful in its effect on the pc. Here is a right example: Auditor: "How are you?" PC: "Awful." Auditor: "Thank you." Honest, as strange as this may seem and as much of a strain on your social machinery as you'll find it, there is no other way to handle it. 74 And here is how the whole drill must go. Auditor: "Do you have a present time problem?" PC: "Yes" (or anything the pc says). Auditor: "Thank you, I will check that on the meter. (Looks at meter.) Do you have a present time problem? It's clean." or "...... It still reacts. Do you have a present time problem? That...... That." PC: "I had a fight with my wife last night." Auditor: "Thank you. I will check that on the meter. Do you have a present time problem? That's clean." The way auditors have been handling this is this way, very wrong. Auditor: "Do you have a present time problem?" PC: "I had a fight with my wife last night." Auditor: "What about?" Flunk! Flunk! Flunk! The rule is NEVER ASK A QUESTION ABOUT AN ANSWER IN CLEANING ANY RUDIMENT. If the pc gives you an answer, acknowledge it and check it on the meter. Don't ever ask a question about the answer the pc gave, no matter what the answer was. Bluntly you cannot clean rudiments easily so long as you ask a question about a pc's answer. You cannot expect the pc to feel acknowledged and therefore you invite ARC Breaks. Further, you slow a session down and can wipe out all gain. You can even make the pc worse. If you want gains in a session never Q and A on rudiments type questions or Form type sec check questions. Take what the pc said. Ack it. Check it on the meter. If clean, go on. If still reacting, ask another question of a rudiments type. Apply this rule severely. Never deviate from it. Many new TR drills are based on this. But you can do it now. Handle all beginning, middle and end rudiments exactly in this way. You'll be amazed how rapidly the pc gains if you do and how easily the rudiments go in and stay in. In Prepchecking you can get deeper into a pc's bank by using his answer to get him to amplify. But never while using a Rudiment or sec check type question. Changing because the Pc changes This is a less common auditor fault but it exists even so. Changing a process because the pc is changing is a breach of the Auditor's Code. It is a flagrant Q and A. Getting change on the pc often invites the auditor to change the process. Some auditors change the process every time the pc changes. This is very cruel. It leaves the pc hung in every process run. It is the mark of the frantic, obsessive alter-is auditor. The auditor's impatience is such that he or she cannot wait to flatten anything but must go on. The rule of auditing by the tone arm was the method of preventing this. SO LONG AS YOU HAVE TONE ARM MOTION, CONTINUE THE PROCESS. CHANGE THE PROCESS ONLY WHEN YOU HAVE RUN OUT ALL TONE ARM MOTION. Rudiments repair processes are not processes in the full sense of the word. But even here the rule applies if to a limited extent. The rule applies this far: If a pc gets too much tone arm motion in the rudiments, and especially if he or she gets little tone arm motion in the session, you must run Prepchecking on the rudiments questions and do CCHs on the pc. Ordinarily, if you run a rudiments process in getting the rudiments in, you ignore the Tone Arm Motion. Otherwise you'll never get to the body of the session and will have Q'd and A'd with the pc after all. For you will have let the pc 75 "throw" the session by having out rudiments and will have let the pc avoid the body of the session. So, ignore TA action in handling rudiments unless you are Prepchecking, using each rudiment in turn in the body of the session. When a rudiment is used as a rudiment, ignore TA action. When a rudiment is used in the session body for Prepchecking, pay some attention to TA action to be sure something is happening. Don't hang a pc up in a thousand unflat processes. Flatten a process before you change. Following the Pc's Instructions There are "auditors" who look to the pc for all their directions on how to handle their cases. As aberration is composited of unknowns this results in the pc's case never being touched. If the pc only is saying what to do, then only the known areas of the pc's case will get audited. A pc can be asked for data on what's been done by other auditors and for data in general on his reactions to processes. To this degree one uses the pc's data when it is also checked on the meter and from other sources. I myself have had it bad in this. Auditors have now and then demanded of me as a pc instructions and directions as to how to do certain steps in auditing. Of course, snapping attention to the auditor is bad enough. But asking a pc what to do, or following the pc's directions as to what to do is to discard in its entirety session control. And the pc will get worse in that session. Don't consider the pc a boob to be ignored, either. It's the pc's session. But be competent enough at your craft to know what to do. And don't hate the pc so much that you take his or her directions as to what to do next. It's fatal to any session. SUMMARY "Q and A" is slanguage. But the whole of auditing results depends upon auditing right and not "Q and A-ing". Of all the data above only the first section contains a new discovery. It is an important discovery. The other two sections are old but must be discovered sooner or later by any auditor who wants results. If you Q and A your pc will not achieve gains from auditing. If you really hate the pc, by all means Q and A, and get the full recoil of it. A session without ARC Breaks is a marvellous thing to give and to receive. Today we don't have to use ARC Break processes if we handle our rudiments well and never Q and A. LRH:jw rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 76  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  E-METER INSTANT READS   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 25 MAY 1962 Central Orgs Franchise E-METER INSTANT READS An instant read is defined as that reaction of the needle which occurs at the precise end of any major thought voiced by the auditor. The reaction of the needle may be any reaction except "nul". An instant read may be any change of characteristic providing it occurs instantly. The absence of a read at the end of the major thought shows it to be nul. All prior reads and latent reads are ignored. These are the result of minor thoughts which may or may not be restimulated by the question. Only the instant read is used by the auditor. Only the instant read is cleared on rudiments, What questions, etc. The instant read may consist of any needle reaction, rise, fall, speeded rise, speeded fall, double tick (dirty needle), theta bop or any other action so long as it occurs at the exact end of the major thought being expressed by the auditor. If no reaction occurs at exactly that place (the end of the major thought) the question is nul. By "major thought" is meant the complete thought being expressed in words by the auditor. Reads which occur prior to the completion of the major thought are "prior reads". Reads which occur later than its completion are "latent reads". By "minor thought" is meant subsidiary thoughts expressed by words within the major thought. They are caused by the reactivity of individual words within the full words. They are ignored. Example: "Have you ever injured dirty pigs?" To the pc the words "you", "injured" and "dirty" are all reactive. Therefore, the minor thoughts expressed by these words also read on the meter. The major thought here is the whole sentence. Within this thought are the minor thoughts "you", "injured" and "dirty". Therefore the E-Meter needle may respond this way: "Have you (fall) ever injured (speeded fall) dirty (fall) pigs (fall)?" Only the major thought gives the instant read and only the last fall (bold-italic type in the sentence above) indicates anything. If that last reaction was absent, the whole sentence is nul despite the prior falls. You can release the reactions (but ordinarily would not) on each of these minor thoughts. Exploring these prior reads is called "compartmenting the question". Paying attention to minor thought reads gives us laughable situations as in the case, written in 1960, of "getting P.D.H.ed by the cat". By accepting these prior reads one can prove anything. Why? Because Pain and Drug and Hypnosis are minor thoughts within the major thought: "Have you ever been P.D.H.ed by a cat?" The inexpert auditor would believe such a silly thing had happened. But notice that if each minor thought is cleaned out of the major thought it no longer reacts as a whole fact. If the person on the meter had been P.D.H.ed by a cat, then only the discovery of the origin of the whole thought would clean up the whole thought. Pcs also think about other things while being asked questions and these random personal restimulations also read before and after an instant read and are ignored. Very rarely, a pc's thinks react exactly at the end of a major thought and so confuse the issue, but this is rare. 77 We want the read that occurs instantly after the last syllable of the major thought without lag. That is the only read we regard in finding a rudiment in or out, to find if a goal reacts, etc. That is what is called an "instant read". There is a package rudiment question in the half truth, etc. We are doing four rudiments in one and therefore have four major thoughts in one sentence. This packaging is the only apparent exception but is actually no exception. It's just a fast way of doing four rudiments in one sentence. A clumsy question which puts "in this session" at the end of the major thought can serve the auditor badly. Such modifiers should come before the sentence, "In this session have you............?" You are giving the major thought directly to the reactive mind. Therefore any analytical thought will not react instantly. The reactive mind is composed of: 1. Timelessness. 2. Unknownness. 3. Survival. The meter reacts on the reactive mind, never on the analytical mind. The meter reacts instantly on any thought restimulated in the reactive mind. If the meter reacts on anything, that datum is partly or wholly unknown to the preclear. An auditor's questions restimulate the reactive mind. This reacts on the meter. Only reactive thoughts react instantly. You can "groove in" a major thought by saying it twice. On the second time (or third time if it is longer) you will see only the instant read at the exact end. If you do this the prior reads drop out leaving only the whole thought. If you go stumbling around in rudiments or goals trying to clean up the minor thoughts you will get lost. In sec checking you can uncover material by "compartmenting the question" but this is rarely done today. In rudiments, What questions, et al, you want the instant read only. It occurs exactly at the end of the whole thought. This is your whole interest in cleaning a rudiment or a What question. You ignore all prior and latent reactions of the needle. The exceptions to this rule are: 1. "Compartmenting the question", in which you use the prior reads occurring at the exact end of the minor thoughts (as above in the pigs sentence) to dig up different data not related to the whole thought. 2. "Steering the pc" is the only use of latent or random reads. You see a read the same as the instant read occurring again when you are not speaking but after you have found a whole thought reacting. You say "there" Or "that" and the pc, seeing what he or she is looking at as you say it, recovers the knowledge from the reactive bank and gives the data and the whole thought clears or has to be further worked and cleared. You can easily figure-figure yourself half to death trying to grapple with meter reads unless you get a good reality on the instant read which occurs at the end of the whole expressed thought and neglect all prior and latent reads except for steering the pc while he gropes for the answer to the question you asked. That's the whole of reading an E-Meter needle. (Two Saint Hill lectures of 24 May 1962 cover this in full.) LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [HCO B 21 July 1962, Instant Reads, adds to this HCO B.] 78  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=26/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TRAINING DRILLS MUST BE CORRECT   Franchise Central Orgs Tech Depts Post Conspicuously in Training Office and on Student Board  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 26 MAY 1962 Franchise Central Orgs Tech Depts Post Conspicuously in Training Office and on Student Board TRAINING DRILLS MUST BE CORRECT TRs which give an incorrect impression of how auditing is done may not be taught. All TRs must contain the correct data of auditing. THIS IS VITAL. There have been two broad instances where TRs gave an impetus to improper auditing which all but crippled the forward advance of Scientology. These were: Upper Indoc TRs which caused students to conceive that the CCHs were run without 2-way comm and with a militant, even vicious attitude. (See HCO Bulletins of April 5 and 12, 1962.) E-Meter Needle drills which caused the student to believe that every action of the needle was a read and prevented three-quarters of all Scientologists from ever getting rudiments in or questions cleared (see HCO Bulletin of May 25, 1962 and 2 Saint Hill Lectures of May 24, 1962). In the matter of the CCHs, we were deprived of their full use for 5 years and extended the time in processing 25 times more than should have been consumed for any result. This came from TRs 6-9 which are hereby scrapped. In the matter of the E-Meter it is probable that all auditing failures and widely extended false ideas that Scientology did not work stem from the improper conception of what action of the needle one cleaned up. This came from needle reading TRs where instructors had students calling off every activity of the needle as a read, whereas only the needle action at the exact end of the question was used by the auditor. Auditors have thought all needle actions were reads and tried to clean off all needle actions except, in some cases, the end actions. This defeated the meter completely and upset every case on which it was practiced. This accounts for all auditing failures in the past two years. CCHs must be taught exactly as they are used in session, complete with two-way comm -- and no comm system added, please. E-Meter drills must be used which stress only meaningful and significant instant reads coming at the end of the full question. Other actions of the needle may be shown to a student only if they are properly called prior and latent reads, or meaningless action. From his earliest training on meters the student must be trained to consider a read only what he would take up in session and clear or use, and must be taught that mere actions of the needle are neglected except in steering the pc, fishing or compartmenting questions. ONLY TEACH PROPER USE. ONLY USE TRS WHICH EXACTLY PARALLEL USE OF SCIENTOLOGY IN SESSION AND DO NOT GIVE AN IMPRESSION THAT SOMETHING ELSE IS USED. 79 I have seen clearly that Scientology's effectiveness could be destroyed by teaching via TRs which can be interpreted by a student as the way to audit when in fact one does not audit that way or use the data in auditing. There are many valuable TRs. There will be many more valuable TRs. But an invalid TR is one which gives a wrong impression of auditing. These must be kept out of all training. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 80  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=1/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AUDITING RUDIMENTS CHECK SHEET (This is the only Rudiments Check Sheet to be used in straightening up HGC pcs or cancelling sessions on Students.)   Sthil form All Academies All HGCs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 JUNE 1962 Sthil form All Academies All HGCs AUDITING RUDIMENTS CHECK SHEET (This is the only Rudiments Check Sheet to be used in straightening up HGC pcs or cancelling sessions on Students.) The following check sheet should be used by Ds of P, supervisors and instructors seeking to establish whether or not the HGC or student auditor got the rudiments in during a session. This check is not done in Model Session. Only the R factor is put in and "End of Check" is given at end. Only a British Mark IV Meter is used. Sensitivity is at 16 throughout check. Note: During the first two sessions of a pc by that auditor randomity can be expected and the auditor should not be rebuked, as it sometimes takes two or three sessions for the rudiments to be put in solidly for an auditor and for a pc's needle to get smooth enough to be read by a checker. Note: See HCO Bulletin of May 25, 1962 on needle reading. The checker should carefully repeat at least once any rudiment on which he or she gets a read, stressing "By the end of your last session". And at first even ask the pc when that was. As auditing continues for several sessions, if the auditor is putting rudiments in every session, the needle will smooth out and checks become highly accurate. If this does not take place, then the rudiments are not ever being put in by the auditor. RUDIMENTS CHECK (Repeat the leading line before each numbered item. Mark those that give an instant read [HCO B May 25, 1962].) By the end of your last session had your auditor failed to find and clear 1. A half truth? 2. An untruth? 3. An effort by you to impress him (her)? 4. An effort by you to influence the E-Meter? 5. Something you were withholding? 6. An unanswered question? 7. An unanswered command? 8. An unwillingness to talk to him (her)? 9. A problem? 10. An unwillingness to be audited in that room? LRH:dr.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 81  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RUDIMENTS CHECKING   Central Orgs Tech Depts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JUNE 1962 Central Orgs Tech Depts RUDIMENTS CHECKING It will be found that checking a pc's rudiments leads to occasional arguments. Rudiments checking is done after the session by another auditor, more usually a leading auditor or instructor, using HCO Policy Letter of June 1, 1962 to find if the rudiments were in during a session just past. The rudiments check, especially early in a pc's auditing when the needle is rougher, or after very poor auditing, often discloses that certain rudiments were not in during the session just past. Two protests sometimes occur when rudiments have been found to have been "out" on the session just past. The first is a possible protest from the auditor who did the auditing. The auditor sometimes claims loudly that the rudiments were in but that the checker mysteriously threw them out and that the checker is in error. The auditor has been known to get the pc back on the meter before friends and show one and all that the rudiments check was in fact nul -- and it has been nul. But this does not mean the rudiments were in fact in in the session or that the checker erred. It means only this: the auditor's TR 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 are very weak and there was no impingement on the pc by that auditor. Exception: a pc early in auditing or who has been badly audited doesn't get the rudiments check question -- cure: ask the check question again if you get a read. The second is a possible protest by the pc whose rudiments have been found out by the checker. The pc seeks to "protect" the auditor and claims the rudiments were "in" in session even if found "out" by the checker. This pc is seeking to validate the stupidity of the auditor. The pc actually has something he consciously or unconsciously wishes to hide from the auditor and so wants the auditor to find the rudiments in, regardless of all evidence. Pcs have even been known to gradually raise the fingers off one can to attempt to get a rising needle and obscure rudiments reads! A rudiments checker is more concerned with a pc's needle getting smoother early on in auditing than in rudiments check results. But after a few days of sessions on a pc a rudiments checker must believe his rudiments check, not the protests. Students who fight instructors are, anyway, in sufficiently low tone to be able to fight only their friends. As they come up they can have friends and fight an actual enemy, not us. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 82  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PREPCHECKING THE MIDDLE RUDIMENTS   Central Orgs Tech Depts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JUNE 1962 Central Orgs Tech Depts PREPCHECKING THE MIDDLE RUDIMENTS The Routine Three Auditor (not the Prepcheck Auditor), as the first action in finding a goal and before listing (or before the auditor adds to list), is to prepcheck the following Zero questions in a regular prepcheck session. Thereafter this same prepcheck is ran on the pc about every fifth R3 session. On goals have you ever suggested anything? On goals have you ever had anything suggested? On goals have you ever suppressed? On goals have you ever had anything suppressed? On goals have you ever invalidated? On goals have you ever had anything invalidated? On goals have you ever failed to reveal anything? On goals have you ever been careful of anything? On goals have you ever told any half truths? On goals have you ever told any untruths? On goals have you ever influenced a meter? On goals have you ever tried not to influence a meter? Now the same list endings with: On listing ditto above. On items ditto above. The word "goal" and the word "listing" are also cleared. The whole thing can be preceded with the whole list above after "on Auditing". This whole scheme is known as "Prepchecking the Middle Ruds". The reason for this care and the use of Middle Ruds every time you check a goal or the pc stops listing, is because a goal can stay in with a tick when only invalidated, but would go out if the invalidation is listed. A goal then will go nul if the Middle Ruds are out, or a wrong goal will get active if the Middle Ruds are out. I have seen so many bum findings on goals that I have finally worked out the above as a solution to being double sure. I have seen no valid goals where the list was less than 850 goals. I think it takes 850 goals in most cases to get goals as a subject enough discharged to reveal a right one even though it appeared in the first hundred and fifty. When a wrong goal is used for further auditing the pc gets dizzy and quite uncomfortable. When a right goal is listed it's all very easy. So you can easily tell if you are listing a wrong one. LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 83  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=14/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CHECKING NEEDLE IN RUDIMENTS CHECKS   Central Orgs Tech Depts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 14 JUNE 1962 Central Orgs Tech Depts CHECKING NEEDLE IN RUDIMENTS CHECKS The following types of needle characteristic are defined and published here as a guide to all rudiments checkers. CLEAN NEEDLE: Responsive to instant reads only. MEDIUM CLEAN: Offers many prior and latent reads, but reads instantly when a question is asked. MEDIUM DIRTY: Agitated throughout check but with periods of no agitation when a read can be obtained easily. Reacts to checker's voice. DIRTY NEEDLE: Agitated throughout check, making reading difficult. Pc's attention obviously dispersed. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 84  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  MODEL SESSION REVISED (Amplified in Sthil Lecture June 21, 1962) (Cancels all previous Model Session Scripts)   Sthil Students Franchise CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JUNE 1962 [CANCELLED -- see HCO B 4 Mar 64 Volume V -- 398] Sthil Students Franchise CenOCon MODEL SESSION REVISED (Amplified in Sthil Lecture June 21, 1962) (Cancels all previous Model Session Scripts) A new, far better Model Session has been under development for some months and now that it is stabilized it is released as the official Model Session. This version has the benefit of requiring no other Rudiments process (except in the Havingness Questions) than the question itself. There are, therefore, no additional processes except Havingness. Beware of any Q and A in using this script (HCO B May 24, 1962 [ 1 ]). Ask a question only until it is clear on the needle. Don't say it is clear when it isn't. Don't ask it again if it is clear. If you couldn't read it and don't know if it was clear or reading, say, "The read was equivocal" and say the same question again. Use HCO B May 25, 1962 in reading the needle. Don't stray off Model Session into unusual questions or processes to "get in rudiments". If you don't get an instant read, say, "That's clear" and leave it. If you do get an instant read, say, "That reads" and ask the second half of the Rudiments line. Omit the second half ("What was it?") if you don't get an instant read. Continue to ask the rudiments same question until the read is clear. Don't ask anything else. If a pc has a badly behaving needle, do a perfect Model Session on pc for 2 or 3 sessions using Havingness or, better, Prepchecking in the body of the session, and you will see the needle smooth out. Don't expect the needle to become smooth all on one question or even in one session. Just do an excellent Model Session and clean up whatever instant reads and the pc will get better and better. Be careless and unusual in cleaning ruds and the pc will feel worse. START OF SESSION "Is it all right with you if I begin this session now?" "START OF SESSION." "Has this session started for you?" (If pc says, "No", say again, "START OF SESSION. Now has this session started for you?" If pc says, "No", say, "We will cover it in the rudiments.") BEGINNING RUDIMENTS: GLL: "What goals would you like to set for this session?" "Are there any goals you would like to set for life or livingness?" Env: "Tell me if it is all right to audit in this room?" (If not, run hav.) Aud: "Are you willing to talk to me about your difficulties?" "What difficulty aren't you willing to talk to me about?" 85 W/h: "Since the last time I audited you, have you done anything you are withholding?" "What was it?" Ptp: "Do you have a present time problem?" "What is the problem?" START OF PROCESS: "Now I would like to run this process on You (name it)." "What would you say to that?" MIDDLE RUDIMENTS: "In this session is there anything you have suppressed, invalidated, failed to reveal, or been careful of?" "What was it?" END RUDIMENTS: 1/2 unT: "In this session, have you told me any half-truth, untruth, or said something only to impress me, or tried to damage anyone?" "What was it?" E-M: "In this session, have you deliberately tried to influence the E- Meter?" "How did you try to influence the E-Meter?" ? or C: "In this session, have you failed to answer any question or command?" "What question or command did you fail to answer?" Dec: "In this session, is there anything you have decided?" "What was it?" W/h: "In this session, have you thought or done anything I have failed to find out about?" "What was it?" Aud: "In this session, have you been critical of me?" "What have you done?" Env: "In this session, was the room all right?" (If question reacts or can squeeze denotes down havingness, run hav.) G/g: "Have you made any part of your goals for this session?" "Have you made any other gains in this session that you would care to mention?" END OF SESSION: "Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this session?" "Is it all right with you if I end this session now?" "Here it is. END OF SESSION. Has this session ended for you?" (If pc says, "NO", repeat, "END OF SESSION." If session still not ended, say, "You will be getting more auditing. END OF SESSION.") END OF PROCESS NON-CYCLICAL: "If it is all right with you, I will give this command two more times and then end this process." (gives command two more times) "Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process?" "End of process." 86 END OF PROCESS CYCLICAL: "Where are you now on the time track?" "If it is all right with you, I will continue this process until you are close to present time and then end this process." (After each command ask, "When?") "That was the last command. Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process?" "End of process." Most flagrant errors that can be made: 1. Not being expert on Meter. 2. Fumbling with script, not knowing Model Session. 3. Asking a question a second time when it was clear the first time. 4. Not asking the question a second time when it read on the Meter. 5. Not saying you could not tell what the read was when you couldn't. (If you couldn't you say it again.) 6. Failing to get in the R factor by telling pc what you are going to do at each new step. 7. Doing what the pc suggests. 8. Adding unusual questions or remarks or making sudden irrelevant statements. PATTER ON RUDIMENTS (Question) "That reads. What was it. There, that (steering pc by needle)." (Question) "That's clean." (Go to next question without adding "What was it?") After a question gets an instant read: Whatever pc says in answer, then say, "I'll check that on the Meter," and ask the same question again. If question is clean and then pc answers, do not check it on Meter. Just ack and go to next question. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is changed by HCO B 4 July 1962, Bulletin Changes, page 101, and is amended and cancelled by HCO B 4 March 1964, Class H Model Session, page 398.] 87  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PREPCHECKING (Correction of HCO Bulletin 1 Mar 1962 and to be included as a change in all Theory Checking of that HCO Bulletin)   Franchise Sthil  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 JUNE 1962 Franchise Sthil PREPCHECKING (Correction of HCO Bulletin 1 Mar 1962 and to be included as a change in all Theory Checking of that HCO Bulletin) The Withhold System of When, All, Appear, Who must not be applied to the overt found for the formulation of the What Question. This System is only applied to the earliest overt one can discover on the chain opened by the What Question. The exact Prepcheck procedure becomes as follows: 1. Ask the Zero Question. (See HCO Policy Letters and Information Letters for Sec Check Forms. These are "Zero Questions".) 2. If the Meter gives an Instant Read (see HCO Bulletin May 25, 1962 for Instant Read) then the auditor says, "That reads. What have you done?" 3. The pc gives the overt. (If the pc doesn't, the auditor can coax or demand until an overt is given, saying such as, "But you must have done something because the Meter reads -- What have you done?" until the pc does give the overt on the subject of the Zero Question. A pc well in session will give it. (Note: A severe ARC Break can cause a Meter to react on a Zero Question. Just ask if there's an ARC Break if you suspect it and ask the Zero again.) 4. The auditor says, "I will check that on the Meter" and reads the Zero Question again. If the Zero Question still gives an instant read the auditor says, "I will formulate a broader question." 5. The auditor forms and tests What Questions until one gives an instant read the same as the Zero Question did. 6. Addressing the pc directly, the auditor asks the What Question he has composed and verified by Meter test. 7. The pc is permitted to answer the What Question, giving as many incidents in a general way as he cares to. He is never cut off short. Let him talk as long as the pc can give overts. 8. The auditor asks if there are any earlier incidents. The auditor, without a Meter, gets the pc down the track until the pc says that's the earliest. 9. The auditor now applies the Withhold System, When, All, Appear, Who, to this earliest incident, going through When, All, Appear, Who several times. 10. The auditor now says, "I will check the What Question on the Meter," and does so, asking it and watching for a read. 11. If there is an instant read, the auditor repeats steps 8, 9 and 10 above until there is no instant read on the What Question. 12. When the What Question reads nul the auditor says, "That is clean. I will now do the Middle Rudiments." Note: Various end rudiments can be added to Middle Ruds in extreme cases of pc ARC Breaks. 88 13. The auditor checks the Middle Rudiments and gets them clean. 14. The What Question is tested again. If clean, the auditor says, "It is clean." And then reads the Zero Question. If it is clean (gives no instant read), the auditor goes on to the next Zero Question. If it is not clean the auditor repeats steps 4 onward to 14 until the Zero Question is clean, at which time he goes to the next Zero Question on the list. All What Questions are asked to expose and clean a chain of Overts. If the Zero didn't clean at once originally, there is a Chain of such overts. Therefore the What Question must be asked so that it can be answered with a number of overts if they exist. It is fatal not to permit the pc to fully answer the What Question to his complete satisfaction before shoving at him with demands for earlier material. To cut off his effort to give several incidents is to leave him with missed withholds and a probable ARC Break. Don't ask the Withhold System of When, All, Appear, Who, on any late incidents. Use this system only to blow the earliest incident the pc can easily recall. This opens up earlier track if any exists. And if none exists it blows the whole chain. The pc can experience the effect of collapsing track if the auditor applies the Withhold System, When, All, Appear, Who, to an incident late (closer to pt) on the chain. Or if the auditor won't let the pc fully answer the What Question when found. THE WHAT QUESTION The formulation of the What Question is done as follows: The pc gives an overt in response to the Zero which does not clean the needle of the Instant Read on the Zero. The auditor uses that overt to formulate his What Question. Let us say the Zero was "Have you ever stolen anything?" The pc says, "I have stolen a car." Testing the Zero on the Meter, the auditor says, "I will check that on the Meter. Have you ever stolen anything?" (He mentions nothing about cars, Heaven forbid!) If he still gets a read, the auditor says (as in 4 above), "I will formulate a broader question." And, as in 5 above, says, to the Meter, "What about stealing cars? What about stealing vehicles? What about stealing other people's property?" The auditor gets the same Zero Question read on "What about stealing other people's property?" so he writes this down on his report. All of 5 above is done with no expectancy of the pc saying a thing. The auditor does it all in a testing tone of voice with a testing attitude. Now in 6 above, as he has his question, the auditor sits up, looks at the pc and says, meaning it to be answered (but without accusation), "What about stealing other people's property?" Now, as in 7 above the pc will probably mention the car, the auditor gives a half acknowledgement (encouraging mutter), the pc then recalls an umbrella and then a dressing gown and seems to think that's it. The auditor now fully acknowledges all of these with an "All right!" or a "Thank you, that's fine." The auditor does this only when the pc appears to be sure that's it. And then the auditor goes into 8 above with, "Now are there any earlier incidents of stealing other people's property?" and 7 and 8 are played out until the pc finally says something like, "Well, I stole a mirror from a little girl who lived in our block, and that really is the first time." The auditor now does 9. The pc with track opened by the 89 When, All, Appear, Who Questions, is again asked, as in 10, "I will check that on the Meter. What about stealing other people's property? That still reads. Is there an earlier incident (as in 8)?" The pc recalls one, saying, "I almost forgot. In fact I had forgotten it. I used to steal my father's car keys when I was three!" The auditor says (as in 9), "When was that?" "Is there any more to that?" "What might have appeared there?" "Who failed to find out about it?" asking these four questions in order and getting an answer each time, asking them again and perhaps again. The auditor then says, "I will check this on the Meter (as in 10). What about stealing other people's property? That's clean." And goes on into 12. The auditor says, "I will now do the Middle Rudiments" (HCO Bulletin June 23, 1962), cleans them and again says, "I will check the What Question. What about stealing other people's property? That's clean." And immediately does the Zero Question asking, "Have you ever stolen anything? That's clean. Thank you." And then asks the next Zero Question on the list. Note: The pc can go back track as far as he likes without auditor interference. TESTING WHATS To test any auditor's auditing, and to be sure all is well with a field or HGC pc, the What Questions should be checked out on the pc by another auditor and the pc turned back to the auditor to get them flat. Don't test Zeros for flatness. Increasing responsibility will unflatten Zeros. Only What Questions become forever nul if done right. So only test What Questions for nul reads. A What Question left alive can really raise mischief, as it constitutes a series of missed withholds. So test all What Questions formulated for that pc after an intensive or close to its end to be sure. And be sure every What Question used is written legibly on the auditor's report. This improvement in Prepchecking will increase speed, save ARC Breaks and make an easier and more thorough job of it. Use this version of Prepchecking for all Theory and Practical tests and drills and on all pcs. Prepchecking still combines with the CCHs more or less session for session. Form 3 and Form 6A are the most productive Zero Question Lists. For auditors, "The last two pages of the Joburg (Form 3) and Form 6A" is a required prerequisite for higher classes. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 90  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=25/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  E-METER STANDARDS   Franchise CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 25 JUNE 1962 Franchise CenOCon E-METER STANDARDS The Mark IV E-Meter is just sensitive enough at sensitivity 16 to get a pc's rudiments in so the pc knows it and to check out a goal. No earlier British or American meter is this sensitive. The use of a meter which does not so register will not detect out rudiments and will not find a goal. A pc audited on a meter even slightly less sensitive than this will have answers to rudiments questions although the meter says they are clean. Therefore the pc is nerved up with missed withholds and you get an ARC breaky or unsatisfactory session. This is the most fruitful source of "dissatisfied" or "difficult" pcs. They are being audited with rudiments out when an insensitive meter indicates the rudiments "clean". The needle gets dirtier. It becomes hard to read the meter. And, due to lack of sensitivity alone, the meter will find no goals. And as the needle is wilder, goals are even less likely. Model Session and havingness sessions which are properly run by the auditor will result in an even, clean needle. But if the meter is bad, even when auditing is good, the needle will get wilder as the ruds are actually out even when they seem to be in. You are doing earlier auditing and Prepchecking to clean up the wildness of a needle so Routine 3GA can be run. If auditing is good and the needle is getting worse, there's something wrong with the meter or the operator's meter reading. Only the Mark IV shows if a rudiment is clean. All others ruin sessions and needles and give you ARC breaky pcs. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:8l.bh Copyright $c1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 91  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RUNDOWN ON ROUTINE 3GA   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JUNE 1962 Central Orgs Franchise RUNDOWN ON ROUTINE 3GA 3GA has cleared or is clearing everyone on whom it has been run. It's a clean sweep. These include several famous rough cases so this one is really there. Procedure is to get a goal and then make awful sure it is the goal. A goals list is at least 850 long and shows, if complete, no TA action when nulling (aside from a slight drift of the TA normal in any session). Thirty or forty goals that persisted in and didn't go out are then separately listed and done at sensitivity 16. You have to catch this point in the session. Then the goal found is checked. This is done by giving the pc a full prepcheck on the Middle Rudiments. Then the Mid Ruds are also done against the goal itself with great care. If the goal remains in solidly ticking every time except when read against a swooping needle, that's it. It's best for another auditor to do the checkout. Then the lines are phrased up as per HCO Information Letter of May 10, 1962. A negative goal can be phrased "Not want the goal quote, etc", for example, "Who or what would not want the goal quote not to be detected", "Would oppose the goal quote not to be detected", etc. Now here's an important datum. As many as twenty-five hundred items per line, or ten thousand items in all, have been listed before a needle went free on every line. This was Halpern. Others are of similar length. It won't do any good to stop short and in fact would lose everything; you have to list to free needle on the first goal found. The goal doesn't vanish utterly during listing. The tick read of it transfers off to one or another of the lines in turn. Ten thousand items means about 200 hours of auditing at the slowpoke rate of 100 items found per two hour session. So you see there's considerable listing to be done, and also it's fatal to list a bum goal. The cure for listing a bum goal is just to find the right goal and list it. Listing a bum goal results in a pc's getting sick and dizzy. The bank goes solid after a dozen hours of listing and the pc has motion sensations or the winds of space. So we really got it. What we need is accurate auditing to find the pc's goal in the first place and accurate checkout to make sure that is the goal, and then you've got easier clearing than we have ever had and you've got 100 per cent clearing. More and more pcs are getting into listing here and it's all going by the book. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 92  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  DIRTY NEEDLES How to Smooth Out Needles   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JUNE 1962 Franchise DIRTY NEEDLES How to Smooth Out Needles Quite often a pc is found whose needle is jerky, random, gives many prior and latent reads and goes into small scratchy patterns or wild, continuing rock slams. Such a needle is hard to read -- and such a pc is a long way out of session a lot of the time. An auditor, seeing such a needle, and faced with the task of reading the instant read through all these prior and latents and scratchy patterns, tends to think in terms of heroic measures. It is "obvious" that this pc has W/Hs, Missed W/Hs, overts and secrets to end all reactive banks and that the thing one ought to do is pick each one of these random needle reactions up as soon as possible. RUT when you try to do this you find the needle gets even more confused. It reads something all the time! An extreme case of a dirty, random needle is not solved by any "fish and fumble" or heroic measures. The pc's needle reacts that way because of no-confidence, which induces a sort of auto-control in session which induces a dirty needle. Ability to predict equals confidence. The thing to do is give this pc about 3 sessions of rudiments and havingness -- just Model Session severely with no Q and A or added chit-chat. The sessions should be each one about one hour long. All one does is do Model Session, getting the rudiments in carefully exactly by the textbook. Use Model Session, HCO Bulletin 23 June 1962. Use instant reads only as per HCO Bulletin 25th May 1962. And avoid any Q and A as per HCO Bulletin 24 May 1962, "Double Questioning". Use Middle Rudiments somewhere during the havingness session. By doing this perfect, predictable textbook auditing session three times on the pc, most of these prior and latent reads will drop out and the needle will look much cleaner. Why? Because the pc is off auto or in session. You can make a pc's needle get dirty and react to many odd thoughts by the pc by doing the following: 1. Try to clean off prior reads and avoid instant reads in getting ruds in (going against HCO Bulletin 25 May 1962). 2. Use a scruffy and ragged session pattern (going against HCO Bulletin 23 June 1962). 3. Double question any rudiments question (as per HCO Bulletin 24 May 1962). The pc's needle, even if very clean at the start and loose, will tighten up, develop patterns and dirt if an auditor fails to use a textbook session. This includes raw meat 93 that never heard of a textbook session. Raw meat particularly requires a severely textbook session. Don't think because they're new they won't know. And too much coffee shop type auditing can rough a needle. A pc who has become unwilling to be audited is best cured by three textbook flawless sessions of havingness as above. Don't plunge for what is wrong. Just establish a standard of excellence the pc can predict. And up will come the pc's confidence. After the three sessions you can prepcheck or fish and fumble and get things really clean. And providing you continue to use a textbook session, the pc will get better and better. If a pc still has a dirty needle with many prior reads after an auditor has audited that pc three sessions, then we can conclude that that auditor 1. Is not using HCO Bulletin 25 May 1962 in reading a meter. 2. Is not handling questions as per HCO Bulletin 24 May 1962, and 3. Is not using Model Session HCO Bulletin 23 June 1962. There are no difficult pcs now. There are only auditors who do not give textbook sessions. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 94  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ARC PROCESS   Central Orgs Tech Depts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JUNE 1962 Central Orgs Tech Depts ARC PROCESS The ARC Straight wire process now used in training is the old Recall a time......... This is hereby changed for the following reason: Students and co-audit pcs go out of session when permitted to answer only "yes" to the command, as two-way comm is deleted and the definition of "In Session,, is violated. With the advent of Repetitive Rudiments the student should be otherwise (and better) trained on a repetitive process. A second question is thereby added to the ARC process and any co-audit process that can be answered merely "yes". The new process: RECALL A COMMUNICATION. WHAT WAS IT? RECALL SOMETHING REAL. WHAT WAS IT? RECALL AN EMOTION. WHAT WAS IT? Do not use the older versions or any process that can be answered only with "yes" without adding the second question. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is corrected by 27 September 1968, Issue 11, ARC Straight Wire, Volume VI -- 261.] 95  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=2/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  REPETITIVE RUDIMENTS How to Get the Rudiments In   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 JULY 1962 Franchise REPETITIVE RUDIMENTS How to Get the Rudiments In I am in a hurry to get this bulletin to you and to get it into use for all except CCH sessions. For a long time I've been urging you to get rudiments in. For the past ten days I have been working hard to analyze and resolve why you sometimes cannot. Just as an E-Meter can go dead for the auditor in the presence of a monstrous ARC break, I have found it can go gradiently dull in the presence of out rudiments. If you fail to get one IN then the outness of the next one reads faintly. And if your TR1 is at all poor, you'll miss the rudiment's outness and there goes your session. To get over these difficulties, I have developed a Model Session that can be used, in the rudiments, as a series of repetitive processes. Then, with this, I've developed Repetitive Rudiments. The auditor at first does not consult the meter, but asks the rudiments question of the pc until the pc says there is no further answer. At this point the auditor says, "I will check that on the meter." And asks the question again. If it reads, the auditor uses the meter to steer the pc to the answer, and when the pc finds the answer, the auditor again lays the meter aside and asks the question of the pc as above until the pc has no answer. The auditor again says, "I will check that on the meter" and does so. The cycle is repeated over and over until the meter is clean of any instant read (see HCO Bulletin of May 25, 1962 for Instant Read). The cycle: 1. Run the rudiment as a repetitive process until pc has no answer. 2. Consult meter for a hidden answer. 3. If meter reads use it to steer ("that" "that" each time the meter flicks) the pc to the answer. 4. Lay aside the Meter and do 1 and 2 and 3. The process is flat when there is no instant read to the question. One does not "bridge out" or use "two more commands". When the meter test of the question gets no instant read, the auditor says, "Do you agree that that is clean?" covertly looking at the needle as he or she says "clean". If the question really isn't clean, there will be an instant read on "Do you agree the question is clean?" If there is such a read, do 1, 2 and 3 again. The trick here is the definition of "In Session". If the pc is in session the meter will read. If the pc is partially out the meter will read poorly, and the rudiment will not register and the rudiment will get missed. But with the pc in session the meter will read well for the auditor. Thus you get the pc to talk to the auditor about his own case, the definition of "in session", before consulting the meter by using the repetitive process. What a relief to the pc to have his rudiments in! And goodby ARC breaks and no auditing results! Use this system always on the beginning rudiments for every type of session. Use this system on the Middle Rudiments in a havingness and sometimes on the Prepcheck type of session. But seldom on a Routine 3 (goals) type of session. Use this system always on the End Rudiments of a havingness session. Do not use it on the End Rudiments of a Prepcheck or Routine 3 type of session unless the session has been full of screaming pc (which with this system it won't be). Havingness Type Session: Repetitive Rudiments System on Beginning, Middle and End Rudiments. 96 Prepcheck Type Session: Repetitive Rudiments on Beginning and sometimes Middle Rudiments. Ask End Rudiments against meter as in step 2 and 3 of cycle (Fast Checking, see below). Routine 3 Type Session: Use Repetitive Rudiments on Beginning Rudiments. Use 2 and 3 only (Fast Checking) for Middle and End Rudiments unless Session very rough. So that's where Repetitive auditing processes wind up. Addressed to rudiments! A tip -- you can ARC break a session by overuse of Middle Rudiments on Routine 3 processes. Never use the Middle Rudiments just because the pc is talking about his or her own case. That's the definition of In Session. Use Middle Rudiments in Routine 3 when you have not had any meter needle response on three goals read three times (not one goal read disturbed the needle). Then get your Middle Rudiments in and cover the first consecutive nul goal above (the three that gave no response). Don't use Middle Ruds just because 3 goals went nul. Only if no reading of a goal disturbed the needle for three goals in a row. Also use Middle Ruds when the pc "can't think of any more" in listing of goals or items. Don't use every time you shift lists now. Only if the pc "can't list more". In Prepchecking use Middle Ruds Repetitively after 3 Zero questions have each been nul on a list of Zeros and recheck those Zeros if Middle Ruds were out. Use Middle Ruds after each What question was nulled and check the What question again and rework it if alive. Also check the Zero questions if a What went nul. If a Zero advanced to a What, both What and Zero must be checked for nullness and found nul before leaving them. One Middle Rudiments use may suffice for both unless one was found still alive after the Middle Ruds were gotten in. Repair it and recheck if so. FAST CHECKING A Fast Check on the Rudiments consists only of steps 2 and 3 of the cycle done over and over. Watching the meter the auditor asks the question, takes up only what reads and, careful not to Q and A, clears it. One does this as many times as is necessary to get a clean needle. But one still says, "Do you agree that that is clean?" and catches up the disagreement by getting the additional answers. When both the question and the agreement are seen to be clean, the question is left. In using Fast Checking NEVER SAY, "THAT STILL READS." That's a flunk. Say, "There's another read here." You cannot easily handle a transistor type meter more sensitive than a Mark IV. The needle would be so rapid in its swings you would find it nearly impossible to keep it centered. Therefore a more sensitive meter was no answer. The TR1 of many auditors lacks any great impingement. And this is remediable only when "altitude" can also be remedied. There had to be a better answer to getting out rudiments to read better on a Meter for all auditors and all pcs. Repetitive Rudiments is the best answer to this. (Note: I am indebted to Mary Sue, when I was working on this problem, for calling my attention back to this system which I originally developed for Sec Checking and where it worked well.) L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 97  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JULY AD12 Central Orgs Franchise REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING As the Prepchecking we have been doing is a complicated skill and as recent rudiments developments open the door to simplified handling of overts, you may lay aside all versions of previous Prepchecking and Security Checking and substitute the following. This is in the interests of improvement of auditing and keeping pcs from being enturbulated by unskilled auditing. The version herein is far easier to train students into as it uses the same actions as Repetitive Rudiments. REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING We will still use the term "Prepchecking" and do all Prepchecking by repetitive command. We will refer to the older version as "Prepchecking by the Withhold System" and abandon it as of this date as too complicated and too susceptible to restimulation of pcs in semi-skilled hands. THE AUDITING PROCEDURE Wc handle any Zero question exactly as in repetitive rudiments, (HCO Bulletin of July 2, 1962). The session is started exactly as per Model Session, HCO Bulletin June 23, 1962, (or as may be amended). A Mark IV Meter is used (using earlier meters on Prepchecking can mean disaster as they miss withholds). The auditor then announces for the body of the session, that a Prepcheck will be done on such and such a subject or Form. The auditor then takes an already prepared Form (such as Form 3, 6A, Prepcheck Mid Ruds, Goals Prepcheck Form [not yet released]). STEP ONE Without now looking at the Meter, the auditor asks the Form question repetitively until the preclear says that's all, there are no more answers. STEP TWO The auditor then says, "I will check that on the meter" and does so, watching for the Instant Read (HCO Bulletin May 25, 1962). If it reads, the auditor says, "That reads. What was it?" (and steers the pc's attention by calling each identical read that then occurs). There... That... That..." until the pc spots it in his bank and gives the datum. STEP THREE The auditor then ignores the meter and repeats Step One above. Then goes to Step Two, etc. STEP FOUR When there is no read on Step Two above, the auditor says, "Do you agree that that is nul?" The auditor watches for an Instant Read on this and if there is an Instant Read on it, does Step Two above, then Step Three. This gives a double check on the flatness of a question. 98 This is all there is to Repetitive Prepchecking as a system. Anything added in the way of more auditor questions is destructive to the session. Be sure not to Q and A (HCO Bulletin of May 24, 1962). Be sure your TR4 is excellent in that you understand (really, no fake) what the pc is saying and acknowledge it (really, so the pc gets it) and return the pc to session. Nothing is quite as destructive to this type of auditing as bad TR4. THE ZERO QUESTIONS TIME LIMITER There must be a time limit on all Zero questions. Although it says, "Have you ever stolen anything?" the auditor must preface this with a TIME LIMITER such as "In this lifetime..." "In auditing..." or whatever applies. Form 3 (the Joburg) has to be prefaced with "In this lifetime..." on every question. Form 6A, as it speaks of preclears, etc, is already limited in Time. In Prepchecking the Middle Ruds, use "In auditing..." before each question or other appropriate limitations. The Zero must not swing the pc down the whole track as Middle Rudiments then become unanswerable and a fruitful source of missed withholds. MIDDLE RUDIMENTS In Repetitive Prepchecking the Middle Rudiments can be Fast Checked (HCO Bulletin of July 2, 1962), (using the package question "In this session is there anything you have suppressed, invalidated, failed to reveal or been careful of?" If one of the four reads, use it singly to clean it in the same worded question and do the remainder of the Middle Ruds singly: "In this session is there anything you have failed to reveal?"). Use the Middle Rudiments Fast Checked every time you clean a Zero Question, whether the pc had answers for it or not. PREPCHECKING THE MIDDLE RUDIMENTS To begin or end a series of sessions (such as an intensive), Prepcheck also the Middle Rudiments. In such Prepchecking the Middle Ruds, for havingness sessions, the Zeros are as follows: "Since I have been auditing you is there anything you have suppressed?" "Since I have been auditing you is there anything you have invalidated?" "Since I have been auditing you is there anything you have failed to reveal?" "Since I have been auditing you is there anything you have been careful of?" To these standards add, in the same question form, "suggested" "failed to suggest" "revealed" "told any half truths" "told any untruths" "damaged anyone" "influenced the E-Meter" "failed to answer a question" "failed to answer a command" and "Since I have been auditing you have you shifted your attention?" Flatten off with O/W as below. O/W ASSISTS As a Prepcheck by form and even beginning rudiments are not calculated to handle a pc who is very distraught before the start of session by reason of upsets in life (howling PTPs accompanied by misemotion) or who is too ill physically to settle into auditing, an earlier rudiment immediately after start of session can be used. This is general O/W (Overt-Withhold): "What have you done?" "What have you withheld?" These are run alternately. This is never run on a terminal (i.e. What have you done to George? etc). Only the general type command is now used. When the pc is much better, go into the usual rudiments. (Note: This is, by the way, the best repetitive process for an assist.) 99 This is run to a nul needle on both questions. If either gives an Instant Read, continue to run both until both are nul, much as in steps One, Two, Three and Four of Repetitive Prepchecking. When used to flatten off a Prepcheck on the Middle Rudiments, whether for Prepchecking or for goals type or ordinary Repetitive Prepchecking, the O/W command wording is as follows: "Since I have been auditing you, what have you done?" "Since I have been auditing you, what have you withheld?" Both must be nul to conclude the process. If either is found alive on the needle, run both. When used to begin a session, or when used to Prepcheck the Middle Ruds, O/W must be followed by a Fast Check of the Mid Ruds. SUMMARY This type of Prepchecking -- Repetitive Prepchecking -- is more easily done and more thorough than Prepchecking by the Withhold System and its earlier forefather Security Checking. It replaces both of these. In view of the fact that the same system is used for Repetitive Rudiments (HCO Bulletin of July 2, 1962), by learning one, the student also learns the other, thus saving a lot of time in study and training. Repetitive Prepchecking replaces former auditing requirements for Class IIa and is the Class II skill. It should be thoroughly instilled in the auditor that extra doingness by the auditor is detractive from the system and that every additive is a liability, not required in the system and liable to upset the pc. It is a must that the auditor be very capable with TR4 and that the auditor makes no attempt to shut off routine pc originations as the intensity of "In Sessionness" generated by modern Model Session used with Repetitive Rudiments and Repetitive Prepchecking is such as to make the ARC breaks quite shattering to the pc if TR4 is bad. If Repetitive Prepchecking is run right, with good metering, the only remaining source of missed withholds is the inadvertent withhold caused by bad TR4. (The pc said it but the auditor didn't understand it.) This bulletin culminates three years of exhaustive research into the formation of Model Session, Rudiments and the handling of overts, and overcoming the limitations of the auditor and student in handling sessions. This, coming with the broad success of Routine 3GA, rounds out auditing from raw meat to clear for all cases capable of speech. These techniques represent a data span of 13 years and a general research of 32 years. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is changed by HCO B 4 July 1962, Bulletin Changes, which is on the following page.] 100  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  BULLETIN CHANGES  Type = 11 iDate=23/6/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=3/5/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0 Type = 11 iDate=3/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JULY 1962 Central Orgs Franchise BULLETIN CHANGES (Changes in Model Session HCO Bulletin June 23, 1962, HCO Bulletin May 3, 1962 and HCO Bulletin July 3, 1962) (Note: Make changes on your copies of HCO Bulletin May 3, 1962, HCO Bulletin June 23, 1962 and HCO Bulletin July 3, 1962 so that students passing these bulletins do not have to give the outdated data in their Theory Examination of HCO Bulletins May 3, 1962, June 23, 1962 and July 3, 1962. This HCO Bulletin July 4, 1962 is to be passed also in Theory as it gives Why.) HAVINGNESS RUD The Room Rudiment is dropped from Model Session in the Beginning Rudiments but remains in the End Rudiments. Abolish its use in Beginning Rudiments. Retain its use in End Rudiments in all HGCs, Academies, staff auditing and the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course. The Room Rudiment spoils the evenness of Repetitive Rudiments and as often as not takes the pc's attention out of session. MISSED WITHHOLDS The question: "In this Session have you thought, said or done anything I have failed to find out?" is to be used in all Model Sessions as a Random Rudiment to be used in strict accordance with HCO Bulletin May 3, 1962, "ARC Breaks -- Missed Withholds". It remains also as part of End Rudiments. The word "about" is deleted from the end rudiment question as it is unnecessary. Change your copy of HCO Bulletin May 3, 1962 to give the above as the standard command. This is used whenever the pc starts to get tense or tries to explain urgently. Don't let the pc get into a full ARC Break. See it coming. But if pc does get into a heavy ARC Break it is of course used. It means the auditor was slow observing. Its use is always repetitive as in any other Repetitive Rudiment. The "said" is added to prevent upset from poor TR4. OVERT/WITHHOLD At the start of any session, after starting the session, General O/W may be used on any pc who is feeling ill or misemotional before session beginning by reason of heavy restimulation or acute PTPs. This is run only until the pc feels better and has cycled to present time. It is not run until both questions are nul (as given in HCO Bulletin July 3, 1962). Use the cyclic type ending on the process. 101 Follow this action by Repetitive asking of the Missed Withhold Rudiment above to prevent a missed withhold from occurring. END WORDS The E-Meter has two holes in it. It does not operate on an ARC broken pc and it can operate on the last word (thought minor) only of a question. Whereas the question (thought major) is actually nul. A pc can be checked on the END WORDS OF RUDIMENTS QUESTIONS and the charge on those single words can be made known and the question turned around to avoid the last word's charge. Example: "Are you willing to talk to me about your difficulties?" The word "difficulties", said to the pc by itself gives an Instant Read. Remedy: Test "Difficulties". If it reads as itself then change the question to: "Concerning your difficulties, are you willing to talk to me?" This will only react when the pc is unwilling to do so. Caution: This trouble of END WORDS reading by themselves occurs mainly in the presence of weak TR1 and failure to groove in the question to a "thought major". With good TR1, the END WORDS read only when the question is asked. IN PRACTICE you only investigate this when the pc insists strongly that the question is nul. Then test the end word for lone reaction and turn the question about to make it end with another end word (question not to have words changed, only shifted in order). Then groove it in and test it for Instant Read. If it still reacts as a question (thought major) then of course, it is not nul and should be answered. CLEAN Change HCO Bulletin July 3, 1962 to read: Do not pay attention to any reaction consequent to asking "Do you agree that that is clean?" Trying to handle a reaction to this second question is too involved for ordinary handling. If the main question reads nul, ignore a read on "Do you agree that is clean?" DOUBLE CLEANING "Cleaning" a rudiment that has already registered nul gives the pc a Missed Withhold of nothingness. His nothingness was not accepted. The pc has no answer. A missed no-answer then occurs. This is quite serious. Once you see a Rudiment is clean, let it go. To ask again something already nul is to leave the pc baffled -- he has a missed withhold which is a nothingness. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.aap.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 102  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  COACHLESS TRAINING USE OF A DOLL   Central Orgs Tech Depts  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 JULY 1962 Central Orgs Tech Depts COACHLESS TRAINING USE OF A DOLL As it is better in the absence of good coaches to do many drills (but not TR0, 1, 2, 3, 4) with the student solo, mocking up the session as he goes, we are using this at Saint Hill. A student, many of whom feel the emptiness of the empty chair he or she is facing, should make or buy and use a doll. The doll need not be elaborate but should be at least a foot tall, preferably two feet. The drills of spitting out rapidly Model Session Repetitive Rudiments, Fast Rudiments, Listing, Nulling, etc, are at this time being done Coachless and great progress is being made. But the empty chair "gets" some auditors. Therefore the doll. Dolls were used in training first in 1957. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 103  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=14/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT AUDITING ALLOWED   Sthil Students CenOCon All Sthil Grads  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 14 JULY 1962 Sthil Students CenOCon All Sthil Grads URGENT AUDITING ALLOWED I want every auditor auditing to be perfect on a meter. To be otherwise can be catastrophic. By perfect is meant: 1. Auditor never tries to clean a clean read; 2. Auditor never misses a read that is reacting. One mistake on M.S. or TRs may not ruin a session. One mistake on a meter read can ruin a session. That gives you the order of importance of accurate never-miss meter reading. All bad auditing results have now been traced to inaccuracy in meter reading. Other aspects of a session should be perfect. But if the session, even vaguely following a pattern session, comes to grief, IT IS ONLY METER READING ACCURACY THAT IS AT FAULT. I have carefully ferreted this fact out. There is only one constant error in sessions that produce no results or poor results; inaccurate meter reading. This is also true for student and veteran auditors alike. When an auditor starts using unusual solutions, he or she was driven to them by the usual solution not working. The usual solution always works unless the meter needle reading is inaccurate. If an auditor is using unusual solutions, then THAT AUDITOR'S METER READING IS INACCURATE. Given this, consequent ARC breaks and failures drive the auditor to unusual solutions. A D of P who has to dish out unusual solutions has auditors who are missing meter reads. Meter reading must be perfect every session. What is perfect? 1. Never try to clean a read that is already clean. 2. Never miss an instant reaction of the needle. If you try to clean a clean rudiment, the pc has the missed withhold of nothingness. The auditor won't accept the origination or reply of nothingness. This can cause a huge ARC break, worse than missing a somethingness. A nothingness is closer to a thetan than somethingness. If you miss an instant reaction you hang the pc with a missed withhold and the results can be catastrophic. If you fumble and have to ask two or three times, the read damps out, the meter can become inoperative on that pc for the session. 104 If you miss on one rudiment the next even if really hot can seem to be nul by reason of ARC break. A meter goes nul on a gradient scale of misses by the auditor. The more misses, the less the meter reads. Meter perfection means only accurate reading of the needle on instant reads. It is easily attained. An auditor should never miss on a needle reaction. To do so is the basis of all unsuccessful sessions. Whatever else was wrong with the session, it began with bad meter reading. Other auditing actions are important and must be done well. But they can all be overthrown by one mistake in metering. 1. Never clean a clean needle. 2. Never miss a read. Unless metering perfection is attained by an auditor, he or she will continue to have trouble with preclears. The source of all upset is the missed withhold. The most fruitful source of missed withholds is poor metering. The worst TR 4 is failure to see that there is nothing there or failing to find the something that is there on an E-Meter. This is important: Field Auditors, Academies and HGCs are all being deprived of the full benefit of processing results by the one read missed out of the 200 that were not missed. It is that critical! A good pro, by actual inspection, is at this moment missing about eight or nine reads per session, calling one that is clean a read and failing to note a read that read. This is the 5 to 1 ratio noted between HGC auditing and my auditing. They miss a few. I don't. If I don't miss meter reads, and don't have ARC breaky pcs, why should you? With modern session pattern and processes well learned, all you have to acquire is the ability to never miss on reading a needle. If I can do it you can. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 105  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=15/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  GOALS PREPCHECK FORM ROUTINE 3GA   Sthil Students CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 JULY 1962 Sthil Students CenOCon GOALS PREPCHECK FORM ROUTINE 3GA It is mandatory that this form be completed after a goal has been found and before any listing is begun. ALL DONE AT SENS 16 on a Mark IV Meter. __________________________________________ ___________________________________ Pc's Name Date __________________________________________ Organization _______________________________________________________________________________ GOAL FOUND A. MODEL SESSION REP. RUDS: Auditor ________________________________ W/Hs _______________________ PTP ________________________________________ B. READ goal to pc: Reacts ____________________ Reacts ___________________ Reacts ____________________ C. READ GOAL ONCE AND THEN ONE OF THE LAST 30 goals that stayed in well, back and forth, until none of the long list goals react and the goal stays in at Sensitivity 16. LIST of 30 All Nul __________________________________ READ GOAL TO PC: Reacts ___________________ Reacts _____________________ Reacts ___________________ D. Is the Instant Read exactly at the end of the last word in the goal or does it occur across the last word? If it occurs at the end of the last word consistently, neither prior nor latent, continue the check. If the read is prior or latent and not exactly at the end of the last word, even when the goal is read several times, do not go on with this check. Do not try to use the fragment to compile a new goal. Continue goals listing. PREPCHECK Use Repetitive Prepcheck System only: E. On goals is there anything: Another has suggested _______________________ You have failed to suggest ________________________ You have suggested ________________________ 106 You have suppressed ________________________ You have failed to suppress ________________________ You have protested ________________________ Another has invalidated _______________________ You have invalidated ________________________ You have failed to reveal ________________________ You have been careful of _________________________ F. On the goal _________________________________ is there anything: Another has suggested ________________________ You have failed to suggest ________________________ You have suggested ________________________ You have suppressed ________________________ You have failed to suppress ________________________ You have protested ________________________ Another has invalidated _________________________ You have invalidated _______________________ You have failed to reveal _______________________ You have been careful of _______________________ G. READ GOAL TO PC: Reacts ___________________ Reacts ____________________ Reacts ___________________ (If goal does not react when read in Section G, do Section H.) H. Do you get a reaction when you ask pc -- Has this goal been: Suppressed _______________________ Invalidated _______________________ If no reaction do I. If reaction, clean with Rep. Prepcheck. I. Read goal to pc: Reacts ___________________ Reacts ___________________ Reacts ___________________ J. If reaction is a multiple reaction and not a clean single tick (if needle reacts as a dirty needle on the Instant Read) ask Repetitive "Are you withholding the goal _________________________________ from anyone?" Clean off any read. 107 K. Read goal to pc: Reacts ___________________ Reacts ___________________ Reacts ___________________ L. Do Mid Ruds Repetitive. M. Read goal to pc: Reacts ___________________ Reacts ___________________ Reacts ___________________ (Note: Do any goal found up to this point, if it got past D above. If the goal does not give a clean single tick every time it is read except against a fast rise, abandon it. If goal reads in Section L use it for listing as it is the goal.) N. Compose list wording: (Do not change pronouns. If "Myself" or some such word invites you to do so, use the goal just as it is. If goal is negative use just as it is.) 1. Who or what would want to __________________________________________ 2. Who or what would not want to __________________________________________ 3. Who or what would oppose __________________________________________ (Change verb in goal to "ing" form.) 4. Who or what would not oppose __________________________________________ (Change verb in goal to "ing" form.) Lines formed all reacted like the goal __________________________________ If not do a repetitive check on Mid Ruds and test again. Get pc to agree to lines or find out why not. When all lines react as an instant read, it is safe to list goal. Comments: ___________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________ _________________________________________ Date Auditor L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO PL is changed by HCO PL 22 July 1962, Routine 3GA -- Listing Wording, and the order of Prepcheck buttons is amended by HCO B 30 August 1962, Order of Prepcheck Buttons.] 108  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=17/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3GA HCO WW R-3GA Form 1 LISTING PREPCHECK   CenOCon Sthil Students  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JULY AD12 CenOCon Sthil Students ROUTINE 3GA HCO WW R-3GA Form 1 LISTING PREPCHECK Before and during listing of goals, and before beginning to list items for any goal from the four lines, and during listing, the following Prepcheck must be completed as a form for the pc. It must thereafter be done every fifth session. The form must be made out for the pc and included in his or her folder. The Prepcheck is done Repetitive (HCO Bulletin of 3 July AD12) in Model Session with a Mark IV Meter. ____________________________________________ _________________________________ Pc's Name Date ____________________________________________ Location of Org Mark when clean: A: In auditing is there anything you have Suggested ___________________ Protested ___________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone ___________________ Suppressed ___________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated ___________________ Altered ___________________ Revealed ___________________ Decided ___________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed ____________________ Regretted ___________________ B: Since you have begun auditing is there anything another has failed to find out about you? ___________________ Since your arrival at (location) ____________________ is there anything you have done to another that we have failed to find out? __________ C: In this lifetime, on listing is there anything you have Suggested ___________________ Protested ___________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone ____________________ Suppressed ___________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated ___________________ Altered ____________________ Revealed ____________________ Decided ____________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed ____________________ Regretted ____________________ 109 D: Since you have started Scientology listing has anything shifted your attention? ___________________ Since you have started Scientology listing is there anything you have Suggested ___________________ Protested __________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone ___________________ Suppressed __________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated ___________________ Altered __________________ Revealed __________________ Decided __________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed __________________ Regretted __________________ E: FOR LINE LISTING AFTER GOAL HAS BEEN FOUND. 1. On the line "Who or what would want to _______________________________ ____________________________________(goal)" is there anything you have Suggested __________________ Protested ___________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone ___________________ Suppressed ___________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated __________________ Altered __________________ Revealed ___________________ Decided __________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed __________________ Regretted ___________________ 2. On the line "Who or what would not want to ___________________________ ____________________________________ (goal)" is there anything you have Suggested ___________________ Protested ___________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone ___________________ Suppressed ___________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated ___________________ Altered ___________________ Revealed ___________________ Decided ___________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed ___________________ Regretted ___________________ 3. On the line "Who or what would oppose ______________ ing _____________ ____________________________________ (goal)" is there anything you have Suggested ___________________ Protested ___________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone ___________________ Suppressed __________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated ___________________ Altered __________________ Revealed ___________________ Decided ___________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed ___________________ Regretted __________________ 110 4. On the line "Who or what would not oppose _____________ ing ________ _____________________________________________ (goal)" is there anything you have Suggested ___________________ Protested __________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone __________________ Suppressed ___________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated ___________________ Altered _____________ Revealed ___________________ Decided __________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed ___________________ Regretted __________________ F: USE ONLY AFTER GOAL HAS BEGUN TO BE LISTED: On the goal _______________________________________________ (goal) is there anything you have Suggested __________________ Protested __________________ Failed to suggest _____________ Done to anyone __________________ Suppressed __________________ Tried to make anyone guilty of __________ Invalidated __________________ Altered ___________________ Revealed ___________________ Decided __________________ Failed to reveal _______________ Blamed ___________________ Regretted ___________________ Date completed ________________ Auditor ______________________________________ L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO PL is changed by HCO PL 22 July 1962, Routine 3GA -- Listing Wording.] 111  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=19/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CLEANING -- FREE NEEDLES   Sthil Students CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 JULY 1962 Sthil Students CenOCon CLEANING -- FREE NEEDLES Any auditor running a Routine 3 process and obtaining a free needle on an E-Meter should, on the Saint Hill course, have an Instructor observe and verify that condition and in a Central Organization should have it observed by an HCO Area Secretary. Any auditor obtaining a free needle on all fines continuously (the state of a first goal clear) should, on the Saint Hill course, demonstrate that condition to an Instructor and, in a Central Organization, to an HCO Area Secretary. An Instructor or HCO Area Secretary should make a statement on the auditing report testifying to the fact and existence of the free needle. In short, there are two stages of observation -- the first free needle obtained on one line and the state of continuous free needle on all lines. No verbal statement by an auditor, not otherwise confirmed as above is to be given credence or be used to establish the condition of a case. The early observation on one line being difficult to maintain for observation is not mandatory, but if not verified as above may not be claimed. The state of a "first goal clear" is established by:. 1. A free needle on each line listed from the goal. 2. No reaction of the goal on the meter after a final prepcheck on that goal as per HCO Policy Letter 15 July 1962. 3. Tone Arm near Clear Read. A free needle is not a stage 4 needle or an inverted stage 4. It is floating and free. In Routine 3GA we have actual, lasting clearing. It is accomplished by expert and exact auditing. There is no reason to fake the condition or rumor that someone is clear when he or she is not, or to tell someone he or she is clear when they are not. We are on solid ground with technology and procedure. Let's keep it that way. The goal has been sought on Earth for 2,500 years. We have achieved 8 first goal clears on the Saint Hill course in the last two months. People, with reason, trust a clear. We have attained the state of clear in Man. We must not upset that Trust. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 112  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=21/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT INSTANT READS (Adds to HCO Bulletin of 25 May 1962)   Franchise Sthil Students  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 JULY 1962 Franchise Sthil Students URGENT INSTANT READS (Adds to HCO Bulletin of 25 May 1962) On Rudiments, repetitive or fast, the instant read can occur anywhere within the last word of the question or when the thought major has been anticipated by the preclear, and must be taken up by the auditor. This is not a prior read. Preclears poorly in session, being handled by auditors with indifferent TR One, anticipate the instant read reactively as they are under their own control. Such a read occurs into the body of the last meaningful word in the question. It never occurs latent. In other words all reads occurring when the major thought has been received by the preclear must be taken up and cleaned. This does not mean all needle reactions occurring while question is being asked must be cleaned, but it does mean that the instant read is often to be found before the last meaningful word is spoken fully, and it is catastrophic not to take it up and clean it. Goals and items are however read only when the read occurs exactly at the end of the last word. This will give you cleaner sessions and smoother needles. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.pm.rd Copyright 4c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B was cabled to the Hubbard Communications Office in Washington, D.C., who issued it on the same date as above under the title of Rudiments Repetitive or Fast.] 113  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=22/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3GA LISTING WORDING (Changes HCO Policy Letter 17 July 1962, "Listing Prepcheck" and HCO Policy Letter 15 July 1962, "Goals Prepcheck Form")   Sthil Students CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 JULY 1962 Sthil Students CenOCon ROUTINE 3GA LISTING WORDING (Changes HCO Policy Letter 17 July 1962, "Listing Prepcheck" and HCO Policy Letter 15 July 1962, "Goals Prepcheck Form") The wording of the four lines for listing out a goal should be as follows: Line One: "Who or what would want to (goal) ______________________________ ?" Line Two: "Who or what would oppose (goal -ing form) ________________________ ?" Line Three: "Who or what would pull back opposition to (goal -ing form) _______ ___________________________________ ?" Line Four: "Who or what would pull somebody or something back from (goal -ing form) _______________________________________ ?" It will be noted that lines One and Two remain the same. Also it should be noted that there is no alternate to "pull back" (restrain, retard, give different vectors). It should be noted also that the goal changes in form on three lines to the "ing" form of the verb in the goal. Example: Goal -- "to fish" changes to "fishing". These changes are for all goals. If a goal is currently being listed, change the list wording to the above. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [See HCO B 21 August 1962, 3GA -- Line Wording, page 130, which changes earlier issues on 3GA lines.] 114  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=24/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  R3GA HCO WW FORM G3 FAST GOALS CHECK   Sthil Students CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 24 JULY 1962 [CANCELLED -- See HCO PL 19 Oct 82 Volume V -- 165] Sthil Students CenOCon R3GA HCO WW FORM G3 FAST GOALS CHECK (Keep completed form in pc's folder) This is a rapid check out of a goal for use by Auditors and particularly Instructors and Auditing Supervisors. By an Auditor it is done in Model Session. By an Instructor or Supervisor it is done as a simple check out. ALWAYS COMPLETE WHOLE CHECK. _________________________________________________ ____________________________ Pc's Name Date _________________________________________________ Org Location Goal __________________________________________________________________________ A: Read goal rapidly to pc three times ____________ ____________ ____________ Note reaction and inform pc if in or out. B: Repetitive Ruds. (Early reads are acceptable as instant reads on ruds, not on goal which must be instant only.) On the goal ______________________________________________________________ has anything been Suppressed _________________________ Invalidated _________________________ Suggested __________________________ Withheld _________________________ Only when each is clean, go to next and when all clean go to C. C: Read goal rapidly to pc three times ____________ ____________ ____________ Note reaction and tell pc if in or out. D: Do fast ruds: Is there anything you have suppressed, suggested, invalidated, failed to reveal. When all nul, go to E. E: Do fast ruds plus goal with no pause between ruds and goal. On the goal ______________________________________________________________ is there anything you have suppressed, suggested, invalidated or failed to reveal. (Goal) _________________ (Goal) _________________ (Goal) _________________ If none of ruds read in this section and goal did read, providing the meter reading of the check was flawless it is the right goal. This section must be read all in one sweep to be valid, with no read on any rud and a sharp downward tick each time exactly at end on the goal read. Don't add in the goal until all four ruds items read nul in one sweep. Then read the ruds line and the goal 3 times in one breath. Goal checked out ________________ ___________________________________________ Auditor Goal didn't check out ________________ LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 115  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/7/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A SMOOTH HGC 25 HOUR INTENSIVE   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JULY 1962 Franchise A SMOOTH HGC 25 HOUR INTENSIVE Here is the pattern for a new Problems Intensive that can be given by HGC or field auditors and which will get them marvellous results on new or old pcs. This arrangement makes prepchecking come into its own, for if it is well done then the pc is fairly well set up for having his goal found. This intensive is amazingly easy to run providing that the auditor does it pretty well muzzled and does not violate repetitive prepchecking drill. Of course if the auditor's meter reading is not perfect and if the auditor is not cognizant of recent HCO Bulletins on the meter and if the auditor misses as many as two reads in a session, this whole result can wind up in a fiasco. If the pc doesn't feel better on this one then the auditor just didn't read the meter or miserably flubbed current drill. Of these two the D of P had better suspect the meter readings if anything goes wrong. The first thing to do is complete the old case assessment form. We do this in Model Session and check after each small section of it as to whether we've missed a withhold on the pc. We then assess the self-determined change list (and don't goof and put other-determined changes on the pc's change list, or we'll be assessing engrams). We find the most important, most reacting change in the pc's life by the largest read. This can also be done by elimination. We then locate the prior confusion to that change. In no case will it be earlier than two weeks from the incident. These confusions, so often missed by the auditor, take place from two weeks to five minutes before the actual decision to change. Having located the time of the prior confusion, but not done anything else about it, no lists of names or anything like that, we then go one month earlier in date. This gives us an exact date for our questions. Let us say the self- determined change was June 1, 1955. The prior confusion was May 20, 1955, and the arbitrary month earlier was April 20, 1955. We get the pc to spot this arbitrary date more or less to his own satisfaction. We now form a question as follows: "Since (date) is there anything you have .... " The endings are in this order: Suppressed, Suggested, Been careful of, Invalidated and Failed to reveal. The question with one end is completely cleaned by Repetitive Prepchecking. One asks it off the meter until the pc says there is no more. Then one checks it on the meter and steers the pc with any read, and then continues the question off the meter, etc, etc. In turn we clean each one of the buttons above. This will take many hours in most cases. It is vital not to clean anything that's clean or to miss cleaning a read that reacts. In other words, do a clean meter job of it all the way at sensitivity 16. 116 When we have in turn cleaned each of the buttons above, we do a new assessment of the change list and get us a new time just as before and handle that just as before. When the second area is clean we assess for a third. Frequently, particularly if the needle gets dirty, we ask for missed withholds. Indeed one can use all the Middle Rudiments at least once each session. With expert needle reading that intensive will give the pc more gain per hour of auditing than anything else short of Routine 3GA. I wish you lots of success with it. Remember, the more variables you introduce into such a system the less confidence the pc will have in you. Good hunting. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The order of Prepcheck buttons is amended by HCO B 30 August 1962, Order of Prepcheck Buttons, page 133.] 117  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3GA GOALS NULLING BY MID RUDS   Sthil Students CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 AUGUST AD12 Sthil Students CenOCon ROUTINE 3GA GOALS NULLING BY MID RUDS Now that 3GA has been proven time and again to make clearing a certainty for all in the hands of a good auditor who knows his meter and drills, I have been spending much time smoothing out any rough spots in finding and being certain of the pc's goal. Only a wrong goal or opposition goal can get the pc in real trouble. Therefore goals listing and nulling and testing become of great importance. THE GOAL LIST The pc is asked to do a goals list. This can occur before or after a goals Prepcheck, HCO Policy Letter of July 15, 1962. The list must be at least 850 goals long, one column per foolscap (legal size) page. (Folders of 4 pages, 1 sheet, of ruled 13 inch x 8 inch paper can be bought in most stationers.) The pc is asked to get that many (850) goals written legibly and numbered. The pc must be warned not to read the list back to himself or herself to try to find the goal, and not to attempt any nulling on self. (Pcs can become quite ill doing this foolish reading or trying to nul on self. If a method is ever developed for this, I'll release it, but no such method exists and all attempts to find it on self have ended in failure.) The auditor then does the goals Prepcheck form, HCO Policy Letter of July 15, 1962. It is understood that the pc will have received at least a Problems Intensive well done and have a fairly smooth needle. TEST FOR CHARGE The auditor tests the list now for needle charge. TA action on reading half a page of goals to pc does not mater but will probably by absent. What is important is the needle action. This must not exceed a quarter of an inch rapid fall, instant, for any goal read on test. (A sudden wild rock slam a half dial wide on a goal or two per page does not matter. It is not always seen on a pc but happens on some.) Further, at least five goals out of eight or ten have no instant read on them. In other words, the list is flat on the needle. If the list is not flat at 850 goals, then do a four line goals list, one or four goals on each list, until the original goals list does react as above. This special goals listing uses the lines as follows: 1. What goal might you have? 2. What goal would oppose your goal? 3. What goal would retard opposition to your goal? 4. What goal would pull back your goal? 118 About sixty items or so, at a guess, put down one to four in rotation, on each of these lists should discharge the goals list of superfluous needle reaction. Occasional bursts of goals on these lines will be encountered. Take them down. But try to keep the lines even in number, letting only line 1 run on over length. Carefully note any pain or sensation the pc gets on any goal on any line. (Pn or Sen written after the goal.) This will help rule out opposition goals. When the main goals list in its early part, on the test, acts as above, desist on the four lines of goal. Scrap (or at least put away) lines 2, 3 and 4. Do not use or nul them. But use line one as an added line to the pc's goals list. Now ask the pc if the list is complete in addition to the above test for needle action. Make sure pc seems happy that his goal is somewhere on the goals list. This then is a complete goals list and can be nulled. NULLING BY MID RUDS Nulling by repeater technique was the original method of nulling just as repeater technique was the earliest form of Dianetic Auditing. It has now been superseded by "Nulling by Mid Ruds". If you did the Mid Ruds on every goal on the list you would be sure to have the goal when you came across it. But this is too tedious. I have worked out a much faster method using the Mid Ruds, faster even than repeater technique. There are only a few things that can hide a goal or make one read falsely. These are: "READ" throughout means "INSTANT READ". SUPPRESSED -- Can keep a goal or an invalidation, suggestion, mistake, assertion or missed withhold on the goal from reading. INVALIDATED -- Can make a wrong goal read or can steal the read from a right goal. SUGGESTED -- This is evaluation. It can do the same as "INVALIDATED" -- make a wrong goal read or steal the read from a right goal. FAILED TO REVEAL -- This is the missed withhold on the goal. It reads as a minute rock slam and can absorb all other reads or make a wrong goal read with a minute rock slam. We call this a "dirty needle". MISTAKE BEEN MADE -- This is a combination of the auditor or the pc asserting and the other denying that it is or is not the goal. It is a conflict of positive-negative opinion and forms a ridge impossible to dispel unless the auditor asks for "MISTAKE". ASSERTED -- Another name for suggested, used mainly in check out, to be sure, and occasionally in routine nulling when pc is declaring, "It is my goal." The auditor should learn the above by rote and by sight and by experience. These are the only things that can give a wrong goal or submerge a right one. In actual use on nulling, each has a priority over the rest. Suppressed is king, Invalidated is next, Suggested is third, Failed to Reveal is fourth and Mistake been made is fifth. These are used in nulling only as needed. 119 Example: The auditor reads a goal from the list once (with good TR 1 and no flubs and pc in session). If the goal does not read, the auditor asks on the meter, "Has this goal been suppressed?" If no reaction of needle on either goal or "suppressed" the auditor says, "Thank you. That is out." And marks the goal off the list. Why? Because if it (1) was the goal it would have read. (2) If it was an invalidated goal it would have read. (3) If a failed to reveal was present it would have read a dirty needle. (4) If a mistake had been made it would have read. So that leaves only Suppressed as possible. And if Suppressed doesn't read, then that isn't the goal. But if Suppressed reacted and was cleaned, the goal would have to be read again. If the goal read (originally or after Suppressed was cleaned), then it may be not a goal read but an Invalidation, Suggestion, a Failed to reveal (if dirty) or a Mistake. So one asks for an Invalidation. If that reads, the auditor cleans it, and then asks the goal again, and if it now doesn't read, the auditor asks Suppressed and if Suppressed doesn't read, the auditor marks the goal off as "Out". However, if the goal still read, after Invalidated was cleaned, the auditor asks for Suggested. If that reads, the auditor cleans it and asks the goal again. If it does not now read, the auditor asks Suppressed and if it doesn't read, then the auditor marks the goal "Out". If the last Suppressed read and was cleaned, the auditor reads the goal again and if it reads, then the auditor asks for a Failed to reveal. If that reads, the auditor cleans it and asks the goal again and if the goal reads, the auditor asks if a Mistake has been made and if that reads the auditor cleans it and asks the goal again, and if the goal does not read the auditor asks Suppressed. If Suppressed doesn't read, the auditor marks the goal "Out". Also, this sequence applies, or any part of it. The auditor asks the goal. It reads. The auditor, after a goal reads, never asks Suppressed at once but the others. Suppressed is only asked after the goal is not reading and the goal is marked "Out" only when both goal and Suppressed are found clean one after the other without cleaning anything. After a goal reads, ask Invalidated. If that doesn't read, ask Suggested, if that doesn't read ask "Failed to reveal". If that doesn't read, ask "Mistake been made". If that doesn't read ask Suppressed again to be sure and then read the goal three times to see if it kicks after each read. If it kicks only once or twice now, ask Suppressed and the rest and try to get it to read each time as that would be the goal if it did! This is like running in a maze, with doors suddenly opening to the right and left and the auditor making a fast correct choice for the next question. The more exact is his choosing, the faster the nulling. A full bulletin of drills will be published on all this to give you the hang of it. And every goal behind you is not the goal and won't be examined again, and every goal ahead may be. Drilling with this system does marvels to pick up an auditor's speed on this nulling. A keen meter reader and a fast handling of this system can dispose of a hundred goals in a couple of hours with no further re-nulling to do. And the pc stays relaxed! No anxiety. That came from the built-up charge of invalidations, etc, and the fact that the pc had no certainty for 15 hours or more of nulling. At least the pc is now certain of the goals he or she doesn't have. And the charge is gone from them. Intricate at first glance, requiring drill; this is a very rewarding system. For you may find the pc's goal in the first 300 goals. And when you have by this system, that's it. You go no further. 120 If you find this too hard at first, just do the Mid Ruds complete on every goal until you can grasp this shortened system. It would be better than repeater nulling. If you use Mid Ruds until you learn this system (don't use repeater technique any more on lists of goals, it's too long and too inaccurate) use this form: Read the goal once. Then use this Mid Rud form, "On this goal has anything been suppressed, invalidated, suggested, withheld, or mistaken?" Watch for any fall on these words and clean it off until whole question is clear. Then read the goal 3 times to see if it reacts. And mark it in or out accordingly. If it still reads well, clean it up further. If it finally reads with a sharp 1/16th of an inch more or less fall, exactly at the end every time, it's the goal. Go no further on list. When you study this HCO Bulletin well and drill on the drills HCO Bulletin that goes with it, you will be able to make the goals fly. Good hunting. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 121  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3GA NULLING DRILLS for NULLING BY MID RUDS (Accompanies HCO Bulletin of 1 August AD12)   Sthil Students CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 AUGUST AD12 Issue II [REPLACED see HCO B 29 Nov 62 Volume V-196] Sthil Students CenOCon ROUTINE 3GA NULLING DRILLS for NULLING BY MID RUDS (Accompanies HCO Bulletin of 1 August AD12) (Note: In an actual session, in addition to Model Session script, only the words below are used. No additive words or departures are necessary except to clean up a constant dirty needle with session Mid Ruds if that misfortune occurs. And use session Mid Ruds only when you can't go on otherwise.) Drill on New Nulling Procedure for Routine 3GA Position for this drill is the usual auditor-coach position. The coach only has the drill form and follows it exactly until the student auditor has each example down perfectly. When the student auditor and the coach have these drills down exactly, then the coach can give different reads and different goals for the student auditor to work on, the only caution being that the goals selected be those which would be most unlikely on anyone's goals list. The goal used in this drill is: TO BE A TIGER. On the drills below "A" is for auditor, "C" is for coach. Student and coach use only the words in the drill except when student errs at which coach says, "Flunk!" and "Start", at which student starts at the beginning. Drill 1: A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 2: A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 3: A: To be a tiger. C: Null 122 A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 4: A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 5: A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: Thank you. To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 6: A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On the goal to be a tiger is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. 123 Drill 7: A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: On the goal to be a tiger has any mistake been made? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 5: A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: To be a tiger. C: Read (Note that this goal is now ready to be checked out.) 124 Drill 9: A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 10: A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have suppressed? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Read A: On this goal is there anything you have invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have suggested? C: Read A: What was it? Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have suggested? C: Null A: To be a tiger. C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have suppressed? C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 125  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=2/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CCH ANSWERS   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 AUGUST 1962 CenOCon CCH ANSWERS The following queries and my reply are useful in the CCHs. Ron from Ray = 1/8 = 335L Thanks for Telexes 233L2 and 334L2. That's fine. Some queries have come up about CCHs. Could we have the latest stable data on 1. When is a physical origination picked up -- after command is executed and before acknowledgement, or after acknowledgement? 2. Does one pick up by saying -- "How are you doing?" "What happened then?" or "I noticed -- so and so -- happened. What's going on?" -- or is there any other method that we don't have and which is better than any of these? Love Ray Ray from Ron = 15.30 = 2/8 = 335L2 1. When it happens. 2. Only by a two way comm query like "What's happening?" Never designate the origin. Don't make a system out of queries. Three commands nicely done is flat. Don't take spoken data from PC about somatics as a reason to keep on. Also the process that turns something on turns it off. Love Ron. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 126  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  RUNNING CCHs   Sthil Students Course Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 AUGUST 1962 Sthil Students Course Franchise RUNNING CCHs CCHs being run terribly wrong. Correct version follows: Run a CCH only so long as it produces change in the pc's general aspect. If no change in aspect for three commands, with the pc actually doing the commands, go on to next CCH. If CCH producing change do not go on but flatten that CCH. Then when for three commands executed by the pc it produces no change go on to next CCH. Run CCHs One Two Three Four, One Two Three Four, One etc. Use only right hand on One. The CCHs are run alternated with Prepchecking session by session depending upon whether or not the pc has had a win on either and whether the CCHs in the CCH Session were not left with the pc stuck in one CCH which was producing terrific change and thusly very unflat as a process. CCHs are not run in Model Session, nor run on the E-Meter, nor are goals set. The reality factor is established before the first command is given. It is code break clause thirteen to run a CCH that is producing no change or to not flatten in same or subsequent session a CCH that is producing change. Some pcs get no reaction at first on any CCH; therefore run each one as above, CCH One Two Three Four, One etc, and with Prepchecking being given in alternate sessions, or as stated above in case one of the CCHs has to be flattened off in another session on the CCHs. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 127  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  HOW IT FEELS TO GO CLEAR   Magazine Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST AD12 Magazine Franchise HOW IT FEELS TO GO CLEAR Jean Kennedy of Bulawayo, Southern Rhodesia, wrote me a note after her first goal was cleared. She had been cleared once on Routine 3 and was cleared again on the same goal at Saint Hill with Routine 3GA. Her subjective reality on these two processes is of great value to all Scientologists. These are in actual fact two notes. I give you both with her permission. She has now had her second goal found and is listing on it and will soon be the first 3GA 2nd goal clear. She graduates this week from the Saint Hill course with honors. "Dear Ron, I feel tip top at the moment, and really couldn't have asked for more out of auditing, if this was as far as one could go it would be enough. I must say there are two big basic differences in the way I feel now and the way I felt after the 3rd S.A. ACC. (1) This time I have a bigger certainty, and a very 'comfortable' feeling, and while R3 processed you up to more confidence each session, I found on R3GA (just before the lines went free), that I had never felt so stripped bare, and at one stage I didn't know who I was or where I was going until I realized that 'I' had to do things not wait for something else to do them! So all in all listing on the goal was fun, pictures and track recall were very vivid and I sailed right back to the beginning of 'body moulding', but the biggest thrill of all was the basic cognition where I thought I was going to find the answer to why I decided to be that way -- and guess what, there wasn't any reason! Jean." On receipt of the above I asked her for permission to issue and she wrote the following expansion: "This is the basic difference between R3 and R3GA. Being run on R3 had a limiting effect inasmuch as you didn't run with enough depth and could never really get at the reason why you chose to be the way you are. It processed you towards greater confidence each session and finally left you feeling tip top, mass-less but still no real answer -- and one was always a little vulnerable, if you knew the right button. Pictures and cognitions were also limited. Now, R3GA was very different and had much more punch behind it, and you could 'get' at things you would never have got at on R3. At the start of listing everything seemed innocent enough and I couldn't see any difference between the two, and suddenly the track opened up and vivid pictures and recall in detail on the track came from all directions, cognitions shot off the body in little spark forms and one could feel the masses just exploding all around, at times making the rings so hot on my hands they had to be taken off. There was a steady feeling of cycling backwards (to the start of body moulding) and one's habit patterns, fixed ideas and attitudes just went flying by. The most fascinating part was the lines transferring over and viewpoints changing totally. The worst part comes just before the end, two days before the needle went free I dug my heels in and refused to give another item -- why, because I didn't know who I was, where I was and least of all why I made that postulate. I have never felt so stripped bare of everything and suddenly realized that nothing was automatically going to swing into place and do things for me, 'I' would have to do them. My auditor gently coaxed me into more items, and then at the bottom I found the answer I have been looking for, for so long -- 'nothing' -- how foolish can a thetan be! But what a certainty. Jean Kennedy." LRH:jw.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD 128  Jean Kennedy." L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROCK SLAMS AND DIRTY NEEDLES   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 AUGUST AD12 Central Orgs Franchise ROCK SLAMS AND DIRTY NEEDLES I have been lucky enough and you have been fortunate enough to trace the source of the persistent dirty needle and also the wide rock slam. A criminal I had my hands on showed me clearly that the wide rock slam was an overt. The dirty needle is a small rock slam. And so we benefit. The reason a rock slam is a rock slam is that I found it on many pcs in an effort to locate the rock. It now turns out that it is also the sign of an overt. For instance all failed to reveals read with a small dirty needle which is in fact a smaller edition of the rock slam. If you have a wide rock slam then the goal does not exist on the list and that list may be scraped. If you find this on a pc it means either that the pc has fantastic personal overts against you or that the pc's goal is such as to be an overt against Scientology. Therefore on a pc whose needle is doing a large or a small rock slam all you have to do is ask for "What goal might you have that would be an overt against Scientology?" and you will be able to run the rock slam off by so listing, and when it is gone you will have the pc's goal on that list. In the case of a small occasional dirty needle you have missed a withhold or the goal lies under your pencil while nulling or a few goals earlier. When the dirty needle is persistent and is always recurring, the solution is to list goals with the question as stated above. The actual formula for this is as follows, for a dress parade action on raw meat. Do a Dynamic Assessment. Ask the question: "What goal might you have that would be an overt against (dynamic found)?" It turns out amongst Scientologists that the roughest case is thereby now the shortest case to do, as the goal will lie on a specific list which, when nulled by Mid Ruds (Tiger Drill), will disclose the pc's goal. These principles should be put into effect at once. LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 129  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=21/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA LINE WORDING   Sthil Students Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 21 AUGUST AD12 Sthil Students Franchise Airmail 3GA LINE WORDING (Changes all earlier Policy Letters and HCO Bulletins on Lines, 3GA) Lines must read after the goal is checked out and before listing. The optimum line wording is probably as follows: LINE ONE: WHO OR WHAT WOULD WANT ( goal ). LINE TWO: WHO OR WHAT WOULD OPPOSE ( goal ing form for verb ). LINE THREE: WHO OR WHAT WOULD OPPOSE OPPOSITION TO ( goal ing form ). LINE FOUR: WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT WANT ( goal ). The line must read on the pc, firing like the goal, each time. LISTING SESSION The goal must be made to fire at least at the beginning of every listing session. The button "Suppress" can be too heavily charged to read at first on a goal unless it is repetitively used as opposed to fast checking. All other Mid Rud buttons can be fast checked. DURING LISTING Before listing any one line, the goal should be made to fire and the line made to fire, both by the Tiger Drill (HCO Bulletin 1 August 1962). The line is then listed. This may be found more time-consuming than time-saving in listing but is a good thing to do. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 130  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=22/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT TIP   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 22 AUGUST 1962 (CANCELLED by HCO PL 25 Feb 63 (see footnote)) Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GA DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT TIP To get a complete list for a Dynamic Assessment ask for "any additional parts of the dynamics", after giving pc a broad list of them. Then ask for "anything the pc can think of that should not be a part of existence" and carefully put down everything pc says isn't or shouldn't be a part of existence. DATUM: THE ONLY REASON GOAL FINDING BY DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT FAILS IS BECAUSE THE ITEM IS NOT ON THE LIST. THIS IS TRUE OF THE LIST OF DYNAMICS AND THE LIST OF ITEMS. NO WIDE ROCK SLAM WILL DEVELOP IF THE LIST IS NOT COMPLETE. USE PC'S LIST OF DYNAMICS PLUS THINGS HE SAYS AREN'T. GET LOTS OF "DYNAMICS" FROM THE PC UNDER ANY DYNAMIC HE WANTS TO LEAVE OUT. "WHAT PARTICULARLY SHOULDN'T BE A PART OF THAT DYNAMIC?" Assess by tiny Rock Slam, or wide Rock Slam, asking some version of this thought on each Dynamic, "Consider committing overts against ______________________ (dynamic)." Read by Instant RS (dirty needle or wide slam). Assess out the Dynamic that Rock Slams most. Now list this Dynamic by asking the question, "What represents ____________________ (dynamic found) to you?" Bleed meter for any more items. If list complete meter will be quiet. During this writing of items a wide Rock Slam will turn on, diminish to a dirty needle as you list and vanish when list is complete. Carefully note on Auditor's Report if this happened as it will never happen again! Assess list with the question, "Consider committing overts against (list item being tested)." Keep in all instant Rock Slams or dirty needles. Assess down to one Item. This, like the Dynamics assessment is ordinary Assessment by Elimination. Find Item. Prepcheck Item. Be very careful to keep Suppress button clean. Ask the pc for a list of goals with the following question: "What goal might you have that would be an overt against _____________________ (Item)?" As you list you will get a wide RS dwindling as you list to a dirty needle and vanish. List this first line out to a clean needle before listing goals on any of the remaining lists. You want only a few goals on each of these lists except List One. On List One list off the Rock Slam. Note on report that this happened. 131 GOALS FORMULAE What Goal might you have -- 1. that would be an overt against (item)? (Poor) 2. that (item) would consider impossible? (Check) 3. that (item) might consider was an overt? 4. that (item) would consider undesirable (also for itself or themselves)? (Good) (Check) 5. that (item) would prevent you from doing? (Good) (Check) 6. that would be impossible to realize if you were (item or part of item). (Best) 7. that would be impossible if (item) were you? (Check) 8. that couldn't be achieved because (item) acted as a barrier? 9. that (the item) would make too difficult? 10. Just list some more goals. List all lists in order above until Rock Slam and all tendency to a dirty needle vanishes. Pc will probably know his goal. Or his goal will recur on several of the lists. Assess List Six above first, being very careful of Suppress, working it over hard. If not on List Six use List Five. If not on Five, go over List Four. If not on List Four, nul remaining list. If the pc has any dirty needle (minute Rock Slam) or lots of Fail to Reveal answers, lists above were not completed to clean needle and a bled meter. If your pc's Dynamic was on the Dynamic List, if the pc's Item was on the Item List, and if your pc's goal was put down on the above lists, and if the Dwindling Wide Rock Slam was found on Listing Items and Listing Line One above on goals, you'll have pc's goal on list for sure. If you turn on the above phenomena, write it on a report giving Dynamic and Item to HCO WW as it can never be turned on again. The goal must be checked out by a Class IV auditor before it can be listed. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B incorporates HCO B 23 August 1962, 3GA-Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam, the only text of which said to add the tenth line in the Goals Formulae above. This HCO B is added to by HCO B 31 August 1962, 3GA -- Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam, page 135, and modified by HCO B 3 September 1962, 3GA -- Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam, page 138. It is cancelled by HCO PL 25 February 1963, R2-R3-Routine 3-M-Goal Finding by Method B, which has a limited distribution so is not in these volumes.] 132  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ORDER OF PREPCHECK BUTTONS   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 AUGUST 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail ORDER OF PREPCHECK BUTTONS This is the following order of buttons for all Prepcheck forms, including those of July 15 and all Problems Intensives. All buttons must be cleaned before leaving any section even if they have to be gone over several times in sequence. The first question to be asked is "What have you been careful of?" The subsequent questions are: "What has been __________________ ?" The endings are now as follows and in the order: Agreed upon. Suppressed. Asserted. Invalidated. Suggested. Protested. Revealed. Mistaken. Withheld. Done by you. Decided. Finally: "What goals have been set?" These buttons are done over and over until nothing is made to read and the suppressed button has been worked hard every time it is covered. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 133  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=31/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA EXPANDED LINE WORDING   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 31 AUGUST 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GA EXPANDED LINE WORDING The following are expanded line wordings for listing on a found and checked goal in Routine 3GA: GOAL: "To Sneeze", which is used as an example. Line One: Who or what would want to sneeze? Line Two: Who or what would oppose sneezing? Line Three: Who or what would not oppose sneezing? Line Four: Who or what would not want to sneeze? Line Five: Who or what would sneeze? Line Six: Who or what would not sneeze? Line Seven: Who or what would oppose opposition to sneezing? Line Eight: Who or what would pull back somebody or something from sneezing? Line Nine: Who or what would want to be sneezed at? Line Ten: Who or what would oppose being sneezed at? Line Eleven: Who or what would not oppose being sneezed at? Line Twelve: Who or what would not want to be sneezed at? Line Thirteen: Who or what would be sneezed at? Line Fourteen: Who or what would not be sneezed at? Line Fifteen: Who or what would cause somebody or something to be sneezed at? Line Sixteen: Who or what would help somebody or something not to be sneezed at? Line Seventeen: Who or what would someone or something have to be in order to sneeze? Line Eighteen: Who or what would someone or something have to be in order to oppose sneezing? Line Nineteen: Who or what would someone or something have to be in order not to oppose sneezing? Line Twenty: Who or what would someone or something dare not to be in order to sneeze? Lines Seventeen through Twenty are not vital to list, and Lines Nine through Sixteen, which are the effect wording of the goal, may not be broadly workable. Lines One through Eight are vital. By listing four items at a time on the first eight lines or the first sixteen lines, the case stays balanced, the goal can be kept firing, and clearing is speeded. So use eight or sixteen lines on goal listing. As regards pain, it can occur on any line in listing. The only dangerous indication is if no pain occurs on any line, only sensation, which indicates that rudiments are out or that the goal is wrong. Pain can even occur on Lines Two and Four and sensation on Lines One and Three, and all still be okay. LRH:dr.jh L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 134  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=31/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Central Orgs HCO BULLETIN OF 31 AUGUST 1962 Franchise Airmail 3GA DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM (Second addition to HCO Bulletin of 22 August 1962, same title) If a routine Dynamic Assessment by Rock Slam fails, the preclear should be prepchecked on "On Auditing is there anything you have suppressed?" etc. Then the preclear can be listed on "What isn't a part of the Dynamics?" and "What part of life have you regretted?" Completing and assessing these lists, will give you the Dynamic. LRH:dr.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA -- DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GA -- DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM The following is a step list which modifies earlier HCO Bulletin. List persons the preclear has considered opinionated and has detested. Assess by "Consider committing overts against __________ ." List "What part of existence does (person found) represent?" Assess by "Consider committing overts against __________ ." Take Dynamic found. List "What represents (Dynamic found) to you?" (dwindling Rock Slam). Assess by "Consider committing overts against __________ ." Take item found. List "What goal have you had that would be an overt against (item found)?" (dwindling Rock Slam). Do list 6 by listing "What goal might you have that would be impossible to achieve if you were __________ or (part of __________ )?" If item not on first lists above, list all remaining lists in HCO Bulletin August 22, '62, and examine for goals in common to a majority of lists and Tiger Drill these. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rah.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 135  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=2/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACCOUNT OF CONGRESS GOAL   Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 2 SEPTEMBER AD12 Franchise ACCOUNT OF CONGRESS GOAL It was offered at the Clearing Success Congress in Washington, September 1st to 3rd, that we would find a goal on someone at the Congress whose name would be drawn at random from a basket. We drew six names from a basket, and the subsequent interview demonstrated that four of these people had rock slams on asking for a short list of people they detested. Jim Skelton did the interviewing and auditing and goal finding. Lieutenant Colonel Voight was selected as the most likely candidate. Every available moment of auditing time from the first intermission to the beginning of the third day was thereafter utilized. It was impossible to turn the rock slam back on after it had been demonstrated by the PC in the interview. Standard dynamic assessment steps were taken without avail. A dynamic (group) was equivocally located as the dynamic the PC had overts on, and the item Scientology appeared on that list. Earlier than this, I requested Jim to ask the PC what would be the consequences of our clearing him. The PC's answers indicated that he would have to change his whole life. On the strength of this, we used the following two questions to list goals. 1. "What goal might you have that would be an overt against Scientology?" 2. "If you were part of Scientology, what goal of yours would be impossible to achieve?" Jim listed some 49 goals on the first question, and then happened to be looking at the meter, and out of the clean flowing meter suddenly appeared a rocket read. He asked the PC what the PC was thinking of, and the PC said, "Immortality, and things like that," and Jim said, "What goal might be associated with this?" And the PC said, "To live." Jim wrote the goal down and Tiger Drilled it at once, ignoring the remaining goals. The goal read sporadically with ticks and one half dial drop, and seemed very alive. It was interesting that no TA action whatsoever occurred during the listing of the goals on the first question above, and that the second question was never asked. It could be speculated that the goal might have appeared on the second list, but this is of course speculation. Jim came to my room to tell me about this, and I asked him where the pain and rock slam were. Jim said there had been none, and returned to the auditing room. Much to our relief on Jim's return to the auditing room, the preclear informed him that he had an excruciating pain in his arm which had made him weep, so great was the intensity of it. Jim put him back on the meter, and once more resuming Tiger Drill a wide rock slam turned on, on the goal. In the check-out session, it was obvious to the auditor that the PC needed a great deal of prepchecking to smooth him out; when he did the end rudiments on the PC, the rock slam continued straight on through the end rudiments, or would have if the auditor had not said, "Floor, floor, floor," several times and gotten the rock slam off so that he could get the end rudiments in. 137 The PC's cognitions were extreme and numerous, and the behavior of the needle was strong and persistent, and there is no slightest doubt but what this was the PC's goal. This demonstration of dynamic assessment by rock slam and finding a PC's goal with this "slight" deadline was a very adventurous activity, and we held our breaths until it had been done. As a matter of fact, we began a second PC on the second day, in hopes of at least getting one on one of the persons offered, and on the second PC were able to get a complete dynamic list as per the standard steps. This PC, on listing on the detested persons' names, listed about a hundred and fifty items, dove straight into his bank, and had extreme manifestations of insanity, and excruciating pain. The dynamic was speculated to be the eighth, but this dynamic assessment was not complete. However, this PC's life changed remarkably just by doing the first bit of dynamic assessment. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:rah.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 SEPTEMBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GA DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT BY ROCK SLAM The following is a step which modifies the HCO Bulletin of 22 August 1962: List persons the preclear has considered opinionated and has detested. Assess by "Consider committing overts against _______________________ . List "What part of existence does (person found) represent?" Assess by "Consider committing overts against _________________________ . Take Dynamic found. List "What represents (Dynamic found) to you?" (dwindling Rock Slam). Assess by "Consider committing overts against ________________________ ." Take item found. List "What goal have you had that would be an overt against (item found)?" (dwindling Rock Slam). Do list 6 by testing "What goal might you have that would be impossible to achieve if you were _______________________ or part of _______________________ ?" L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 138  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA TO BE GOALS LINE LISTING   CenOCon Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 8 SEPTEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise Airmail 3GA TO BE GOALS LINE LISTING The following is a 24 line listing for a beingness type goal. The method of running is to place the heading on 24 consecutive legal length pages so that one exists for each line. The method of running is to clean up the goal so that it fires three times at the beginning of session and then simply list for the remainder of session, putting in Middle Rudiments only at such times as the pc has obviously gone out of session. These lines are listed exactly four items on each line in rotation. After the four items have been written a short strike mark is put under the beginning of the last item written so that the auditor can easily see when he has listed the next four. The above directions will apply to all types of lines listed, beingness, doingness and havingness goals, but different wordings have to be used for doingness and havingness goals. NOTE: These lines are not ordinarily prepchecked or made to fire before being used on a pc. Line One Who or what would want to be a catfish? Line Two Who or what would not want to be a catfish? Line Three Who or what would oppose being a catfish? Line Four Who or what would not oppose being a catfish? Line Five Who or what would be a catfish? Line Six Who or what would not be a catfish? Line Seven Who or what would oppose opposition to being a catfish? Line Eight Who or what would pull back somebody or something from being a catfish? Line Nine Who or what would want a catfish? Line Ten Who or what would not want a catfish? Line Eleven Who or what would oppose wanting a catfish? Line Twelve Who or what would not oppose wanting a catfish? Line Thirteen Who or what would make a catfish? Line Fourteen Who or what would not make a catfish? Line Fifteen Who or what would oppose making a catfish? Line Sixteen Who or what would not oppose making a catfish? Line Seventeen Who or what would have to be a catfish? Line Eighteen Who or what would not have to be a catfish? Line Nineteen Who or what would have to oppose a catfish? Line Twenty Who or what would not have to oppose a catfish? Line Twenty-One Who or what would have to have a catfish? Line Twenty-Two Who or what would not have to have a catfish? Line Twenty-Three Who or what would oppose having to have a catfish? Line Twenty-Four Who or what would not oppose having to have a catfish? LRH:jb.jh Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 139  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SECURITY CHECKS AGAIN   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. HCO BULLETIN OF 12 SEPTEMBER AD12 CenOCon SECURITY CHECKS AGAIN With the advent of Dynamic Assessment a new method of Security Checking, far better than any previous Security Checking, has emerged. Nothing in this bulletin of course detracts in any way from the value of missed withholds, pulling missed withholds or handling missed withholds on preclears or other persons in the Organization. If the following questions are asked of a person on a meter it can be at once established whether or not this person will inadvertently, covertly, or unknowingly attempt to ruin, wreck, stop and otherwise interfere with an Organization, Scientology, or an Auditor. The questions are as follows: Consider committing overts against Scientology. Consider committing overts against Ron. Consider committing overts against the Organization. Consider committing overts against me. (the auditor) It will be found that such a person has a goal which the person considers to be impossible to achieve so long as any one of the above four exist, therefore destructive actions will at all times be manifested no matter how "constructive" they appear. The Rock Slam produced must be a wide Rock Slam to be decisive. By wide Rock Slam is meant a quarter of a dial Rock Slam to a full dial Rock Slam. The action which should be taken if this condition is found to exist is to suspend the person or otherwise put the person away from communication lines until such time as the person's Dynamic, Item, and Goal are found. Sometimes it is almost enough merely to find the Item, as the foolishness of the conclusion that Scientology stands immediately and directly in their road will appear to the preclear at that time. By "A Goal which is an overt against Scientology" is meant something which the pc considers to be a goal which is an overt against. When you finally see such goals appear they will not be apparent to the auditor as overts. However, the pc so interprets them. For instance a pc may have a fixed idea against any spiritual activity, interpreting it as a harsh activity which forbids dancing, and the pc may have a goal to dance. However the person's Item lying above the goal to dance will be found to be a spiritual group and this of course would make Scientology appear to the person to be highly antipathetic to the goal to dance. I cannot too strongly urge the fact that when the above occurs no possible good will result until the Dynamic, Item, and Goal are found. Therefore this should be expedited. All care should be taken not to punish the person unduly, but to carry on because often the person is unaware of the destructiveness of his or her own actions. In a marriage, if the husband were to place the wife on an E-Meter and ask the question "Consider committing overts against me" and find a wide Rock Slam immediately results, he will be then in total possession of what has been wrong with his marriage. Similarly, a wife finding this manifestation on a husband would also be informed. 140 The remedy in such a case is not to sack somebody, to shoot somebody, to divorce somebody or take some drastic final action, because we now have all the answer we need to resolve this and it will be found that as soon as the person's goal has been found the condition of hostility will cease. The Rock Slam produced must be at sensitivity 16 on the meter. If a dirty needle occurs it is necessary to pull the person's missed withholds because these obviously exist. This should not be neglected. By Dirty Needle is meant a quarter of an inch agitation of the needle as an instant response to the asking of the above questions. This is the new security programme. Any person responsible for maintaining security in an Organization or a home should perform the above tests and take the remedial action. I cannot too strongly urge that while this is absolute, or near as it can be, and positive in its diagnosis, it is not permanent because we can now clear, and clearing consists of doing away with the dock Slam and not the offending person. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jb.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=12/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=3 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AUTHORIZED PROCESSES   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 1812 19th Street, N.W., Washington 9, D.C. HCO POLICY LETTER OF 12 SEPTEMBER AD 12 Issue III CenOCon AUTHORIZED PROCESSES Only the following processes are authorized for use on Staff Members and on HGC Preclears: Assists. Problems Intensives (Modern Version). Ordinary 3GA. 3GA by Dynamic Assessment. No other processes are to be used on Staff or HGC Preclears. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jb.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 141  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=19/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA TIPS ON DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT RULES OF THUMB   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 19 SEPTEMBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GA TIPS ON DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT RULES OF THUMB 1. If the system does not work, it is invariable that the item is not on the list. 2. If an item, dynamic, or person can be found that will RS broadly, only list "What represents" from it. Do not use another form of listing (goals being a "represents" also). 3. The pc's interest follows the RS. 4. Carefully record the presence of a RS or any dwindling of the RS on any item, dynamic or, most important, during the course of listing. 5. If the pc has no cognitions the item is not on the list. 6. The dynamic and/or item will be accompanied by heavy pain or sensation if on the list. 7. A RS is a convulsion of the mind and can reflect as a convulsion of the body. 8. A pc's needle may be dirty until the goal is on the list. 9. A goal sometimes cannot be checked out until the charge is listed off on various goals lists derived from the item. 10. The item is more valuable than the person found or dynamic found. 11. An item is proven by its overt goals list (No. 1) producing a dwindling slam. 12. The real item when listed itself on "What represents" gives no further slams on the new list. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 142  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  A 40-LINE LIST ON A DOINGNESS GOAL   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 SEPTEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail A 40-LINE LIST ON A DOINGNESS GOAL Using the create CDEI scale a system of writing lines for goals listing has been attempted. This gives us Create, Interest, Desire, Enforce and Inhibit. We have four flows for each word positive and four flows for each word at effect. The goal: To impress people. And the lines are: Who or what would create an impression on people? Who or what would not create an impression on people? Who or what would create opposition to impressing people? Who or what would not create opposition to impressing people? Who or what people would want an impression created? Who or what people would not want an impression created? Who or what people would oppose an impression being created? Who or what people would not oppose an impression being created? Who or what would be interested in impressing people? Who or what would not be interested in impressing people? Who or what would oppose interest in impressing people? Who or what would not oppose interest in impressing people? Who or what people would be interested in being impressed? Who or what people would not be interested in being impressed? Who or what people would oppose interest in being impressed? Who or what people would not oppose interest in being impressed? Who or what would want to impress people? Who or what would not want to impress people? Who or what would oppose impressing people? Who or what would not oppose impressing people? Who or what people would want to be impressed? Who or what people would not want to be impressed? Who or what people would oppose wanting to be impressed? Who or what people would not oppose wanting to be impressed? Who or what would have to impress people? Who or what would not have to impress people? Who or what would have to oppose impressing people? Who or what would not have to oppose impressing people? Who or what people would have to have an impression made on them? Who or what people would not have to have an impression made on them? Who or what people would have to oppose an impression being made on them? Who or what people would not have to oppose an impression being made on them? 143 Who or what would inhibit impressing people? Who or what would not inhibit impressing people? Who or what would inhibit opposition to impressing people? Who or what would not inhibit opposition to impressing people? Who or what people would inhibit an impression being made on them? Who or what people would not inhibit an impression being made on them? Who or what people would inhibit opposition to an impression being made on them? Who or what people would not inhibit opposition to an impression being made on them? Similar goals, all of a doingness type, can be patterned as above. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 144  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=27/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  VALID PROCESSES   Franchise CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1962 Franchise CenOCon VALID PROCESSES (Changes all earlier Issues) The following processes should be used by all Scientologists and other earlier processes should be discarded except for research. Class I: Assists. Class I: CCHs, Op Pro by Dup and SCS. Class I: ARC Straight Wire. Class II: Problems Intensives (Modern). Class ll: Prepchecking Auditing, goals, etc. Class II: Goals Listing. Class III: 3GA Ordinary. Class IV: 3GA by Dynamic Assessment. Class II: Items Listing. Classes II, III and IV: Tiger and Big Tiger Drills on goals, items, lines, single words, names, persons. All except Assists, CCHs, Op Pro by Dup and SCS are done in Model Session. If a process is not mentioned above, do not use it. NOTE: Any of the above Processes, except 3GA ordinary goals finding and 3GA Dynamic Assessment may be done in Co-audits under direct supervision of classed auditors. For the greatest gain achievable by an auditor in his class, use the above. An auditor attempting processes above his class will have failures and spoiled cases. Use of processes above Classification can result in cancellation of certificates. We can clear Earth. Why spoil cases in the process? L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 145  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/9/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROBLEMS INTENSIVE USE   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 SEPTEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise PROBLEMS INTENSIVE USE The only fully valid lower level process today that achieves enormously effective results, is the Modern Problems Intensive. It does the following: Eradicates feelings of illness Adds years to life Subtracts years from appearance Increases IQ. It is very easy to run as it can be done with errors and, so long as the Tone Arm moves, will achieve marvellous results. It is the ideal HGC process for HCA/HPA staff auditors as it gives them countless wins. It is a natural for the field auditor who knows his Model Session and the rundown. It can be combined with the CCHs or used without. Its rundown is simple. One does a Case Assessment. Assesses for the Change, predates it by a month and runs the Prepcheck Buttons on it over and over, flattening each one so far as possible. When one assessed change is run, another list of changes is made and assessed and it is all done again. It can be interrupted by an end of intensive without consequences to the pc if something was left unflat. The public may scream to get clear, but most of it could only be audited on a Problems Intensive anyway. Unlike partially completed or badly done goals assessments, there is no liability to a Problems Intensive. All the gains envisioned in Book I can be achieved with enough Problems Intensives, even a 1st Dynamic clear in many cases. So don't risk your pc's health and good will if you're not a Saint Hill graduate. Get good, solid gains with the Modern Problems Intensive. Only if you fail to find and pull his or her Missed Withholds in the course of sessions could you estrange a pc. You may have to clear the buttons for the pc who doesn't understand the words, but other than that it's all plain sailing. People are suddenly losing all manner of things they thought were illnesses and were calling arthritis and ulcers and what not. They weren't sick. They were just suppressed. Please realize what you've got here in a Modern Problems Intensive. I'll be giving you lots of data on how it's done. LRH:dr.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 146  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA LISTING BY TIGER BUTTONS 114 NEW LINES FOR LISTING (Cancels all earlier HCO Bs on Listing)   Sthil Students Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 OCTOBER AD12 Sthil Students Franchise Airmail 3GA LISTING BY TIGER BUTTONS 114 NEW LINES FOR LISTING (Cancels all earlier HCO Bs on Listing) (A student under Theory Examination is not supposed to know the lines by heart, only the directions, and how to put lines together sensibly.) This is probably excellent as the later lines are the same buttons that make goals fire. The first four lines are well tried. Remember that many have gone Clear on the 1st four with smooth auditing. The next four are also well tried. The next four are taken from the ACC that cleared 15 people. The remaining lines are the buttons that make goals fire. The first Twelve Lines can be gone through more often during the course of the next 102. (NOTE: Before doing this listing, make sure the pc knows what his goal is and Tiger Drill nul any old goal found on pc or any goal wording pc thought was his. To get pc's goal to fire at each session beginning, use "In Auditing on the goal __________ has anything been ___________ ?" Goal also should be made to fire at session end just before room rud with same drill to clear up session.) (NOTE: Any trouble with listing stems from (1) Rough Auditing, auditors challenging answers or mixing up questions, pc not in session and ruds out. (2) Wrong lines. (3) Goal not cleaned. (4) Consequences of being Clear feared by pc. (5) Wrong goal. (6) Pc protesting about Lines and Listing.) (NOTE: Signs of above are (1) TA mostly at 4.5 or 5.0 and doesn't come down. (2) Pc ARC breaky even after missed withholds clean [the items are now withheld]. (3) Pc looking bad, eyes watery. (4) No pain in session [a right goal on checkout always gives pain]. (5) All sen on listing [comes from pc suppressing or being careful of Or failing to reveal, these being the Sensation buttons, Or from wrong goal]. (6) Bank getting more solid. (7) Pc sick and nauseated. [6 and 7 only occur with a wrong goal.]) (NOTE: The Tiger Drill buttons or any button or word can itself be Tiger Drilled using the ordinary 6 buttons, all with good effect.) 1. WHO OR WHAT WOULD WANT __________ 2. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT WANT ___________ 3. WHO OR WHAT WOULD OPPOSE __________ 4. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT OPPOSE __________ 5. WHO OR WHAT WOULD (Effect wording of goal) 6. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT (Effect wording of goal) 7. WHO OR WHAT WOULD OPPOSE (Effect wording of goal) 8. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT OPPOSE (Effect wording of goal) (Effect wording can include "be the effect of") 147 9. WHO OR WHAT WOULD HELP SOMEONE OR SOMETHING (goal) 10. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT HELP SOMEONE OR SOMETHING (goal) 11. WHO OR WHAT WOULD HELP OPPOSE SOMEONE OR SOMETHING (goal) 12. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT HELP OPPOSITION TO SOMEONE OR SOMETHING (goal, ing) Now into the next blank spaces fit the following buttons, one full consecutive set of lines for each button; make the line (both goal and button) make sense if it does not: Suppress Protest about Damage Invalidate Hide from Withdraw from Be Careful of Reveal things to Create Suggest things to Make a mistake about Destroy Withhold from Assert things to Agree with Change (or alter) Ignore (Each button is used on each of the following lines consecutively through all lines before the next button is put in the lines.) WHO OR WHAT WOULD (goal, ing) _______ ? WHO OR WHAT WOULD (goal, ing) NOT _______ ? WHO OR WHAT WOULD _______ (goal, ing)? WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT _______ (goal, ing)? WHO OR WHAT WOULD (goal, ing) HELP _______ ? WHO OR WHAT WOULD HELP _______ (goal, ing)? DIRECTIONS Make the button form and the goal form into a sensible sentence in each line. Pc must be able to answer it. Don't take up the lines with the pc out of session or in session before you list. Do the lines very well before you even go near a session with your pc. Then, in actual auditing and listing the first time through, after pc has answered the last line fully to his or her satisfaction, clear the command of the next line with the pc. Don't alter its sense. Just arrange its word-form so pc can answer it. Then list it and so on. Take up the lines with the pc as you come to them in auditing and not before. Take a number of stiff cards, any standard size such as 5" x 7". Write a line across the top of each card, the long way. Number the cards in the upper right-hand corner, consecutive from the first lines above. In auditing place the card stack on the table. As each card is answered with any items pc has, tum it over, face down, on top of the last cards done so as to preserve numerical order. Take a pencil or ball-point. Make a small slant mark (/) for each item pc gives you in answer to auditing question. Take more than one item per question if given. Take items until pc begins to comm lag. Then tum card to next question and use that as before. Do not leave items unaccepted. 148 Do not write down items. Only make a small slant mark (/) for each item given. For every fifth item, cross out the preceding four. For the first run of slant (/) marks use a black pencil. For the second run when the whole card is filled with black, overstrike with a red pencil using the same system. For the third run when the card is black and red filled, start again with a green pencil. This should give around 800 items to one card, which should be enough. Cards that drop behind can then be spotted in cleaning up free needles and questioned. Only the 1st 12 cards should have parity. Pcs should buy their own cards or pay for them in student auditing. Use rubber bands to enclose cards between sessions. Mark pc's name and date on the 1st card. Don't challenge pc's answers. Take all the items pc will give you. Don't force pc to give you items. If pc objects to the wording of a line as unanswerable try to make it answerable by rewording or omit it. Mark F on card each time the line produces a Free Needle. Don't list beyond a Free Needle. Leave card in stick and test each time through. Make the goal fire well by Tiger Drill at the start of each listing session and at the end after end ruds and before room rud. Get in Mid Ruds with "Since the last time I audited you", if pc is upset or can't seem to get on with listing. If a line continues Free Needle after a question is asked, don't force pc to answer it. LRH:dr.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=2/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WHEN YOU NEED REASSURANCE  Type = 11 iDate=27/9/62 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  BPI  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 2 OCTOBER AD12 BPI WHEN YOU NEED REASSURANCE (Cancels HCO Bulletin of September 27, AD12, "Dream Come True".) When you hear people growling, when the lines are all awry, when the auditor has flubbed and the world of Scientology looks black, just remember that in the dozen years of sometimes despairing work and heart-breaking set- backs, the dream has yet come true. We have it now. We can and are clearing them all -- and you. In Scientology just remember this when all looks dark: IT WILL ALL COME OUT ALL RIGHT. LRH:jw.bh Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 149  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TIGER DRILLING   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 OCTOBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail TIGER DRILLING I recently noticed that a pc's goal at start of listing sessions was only rock slamming or ticking, and the pc's TA very high. I told the auditor to clean it up so it would read with rockets. I told her to stress failed to reveal, invalidate and careful of. Here is the auditor's note giving result. Dear Ron, Thanks for your note re Jane. The RS on her goal showed up during the 13 buttons + and -, in the body of the question, and I had seen it earlier in tiger drill on the goal, but not since. I did work those 3 buttons (f to r, careful of and inval) hard in yesterday's session; got a cleaner read on the goal, but no rocket. Today, I reworked specifically the auditing in which the goal was found, after which it read with a slow only; then the listing, and got one small rocket a trifle latent; then did instructor's check and got a small instant fall. (The auditor who found the goal RSed. Uncovered more invalidations in that bit of auditing, and got the rest of the inadvertent missed W/H from the time during listing when she thought the goal had blown.) TA came down to 2.25, and we listed about 900 goals in the remaining 1 1/4 hours with TA 2.25 - 3.25, (.5 - .65 per 20 min), needle looser and clean. Love, Donna. GOAL WORDING Here is the case of an altered goal wording which kept the pc from going clear over four months of constant auditing: Dear Ron, Further to my letter of yesterday I had a wonderful session with Esta today. The Tone Arm came down from 5 - 3 and a stuck needle went free. I was running "Since April 1962 (1 month before goal was found) on the goal 'To express myself' what has been agreed upon," and the stuck point and the missed withhold emerged and I pulled it. After the goal was found in May (by another auditor) Esta was run on 4 lines but the goal was altered from "Myself" to "Himself". Esta agreed to this but thereafter ran himself instead of herself. She cognited she had partially gone into her son's valence and had been trying all the time to clear her son and other sons. She had been sitting there wanting to get clear herself and instead was running himself. Since then she had been avoiding auditing until now, and searching for herself. The missed withhold was herself as a result of the substitution of himself. 150 This also restimulated her Rock -- for this was a Sun -- but her goal was before the Rock. There was an RS on Son/Sun. Esta cognited she had switched valences from "Myself" to "Himself". So there has been this missed W/H since last May. She had identified with Son/Sun as a first creation. Her goal is now reading well. So it proves over and over again the terrible importance of not altering goal wordings and getting the lines exactly right. It was a Session which seemed like a miracle. All my love, Ron, Anne. NEW LINE LISTING And here is what happens when a goal is right and is made to read well at session beginning and is listed as per HCO Bulletin of 1 October 1962: Dear Ron, I listed on the new lines today. It really was marvellous. I must have listed around about 1500 items and on one line I went up to 75 items before I comm-lagged. The big thing I noticed, Ron, was that I didn't have to "think" or figure-figure on what the lines were about. I just dealt the items off my bank (like you say). Once my auditor cleared the questions with me and I had the understanding of it, I was away. I knew when I had given him all the items and I just stopped. It really was very textbook. Not much 2-way comm, my auditor occasionally asking me -- "How I was doing" and me just sitting there chanting items. Marvellous -- Thanks Ron. Love, Irene. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 151  Love, Irene. L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=8/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  IMPORTANT HGC CLEARING   CenOCon Sthil Students Registrars Ds of P Saint Hill Grads HCO Secs Assn & Org Secs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 8 OCTOBER AD12 CenOCon Sthil Students Registrars Ds of P IMPORTANT Saint Hill Grads HCO Secs Assn & Org Secs HGC CLEARING The plan of HGC Clearing is simple and direct but unless it is scrupulously followed, it will cause upset and dissatisfaction. If a Central Org is not clearing the public, the public will be upset with it. This is the simple matter of the penalty of not-auditing. You can make lots of Clears on the staff or in special cases but if you do not do routine clearing in an HGC you will continue to have trouble. As only recent Saint Hill Graduates are qualified to find goals -- in actual fact, they are the only ones who safely can -- the backbone of an HGC is a Saint Hill Graduate. No Saint Hill Graduates can be D of P or D of T at this time, and may be Technical Directors or Association or Organization Secretaries only with my specific permission. This will hold true until the scarcity is solved. The primary appointment of a Saint Hill Graduate in an Organization is "Goal Finder" in the HGC. When enough exist in an Organization to fill the bare needs of the HGC, then a Saint Hill Graduate will be appointed Staff Staff Auditor as per Staff Clearing Program HCO Policy Letter of September 10, 1962. The HGC system is therefore as follows: HPA or HCA Staff Auditors do the following: 1. Handle any CCH case. 2. Give Problems Intensives. 3. Give the "In Auditing" and "On Goals" and past goals Goals Prepcheck (TV Demo tape 3 October 1962 and other lectures of the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course). This includes all old goals that were found or went out hard. 4. Do the required 850 goals list. 5. List goals to clear. At this point, unless the goal was found in 3 above (not 4 above), the HPA/HCA staff auditor turns the pc over to the Goal Finder. This can happen at any time that the Goal Finder has time available. Once the pc is turned over to the Goal Finder he or she receives no further auditing from other staff auditors, only the Goal Finder. The Goal Finder takes the new pc the moment the last pc's goal was found. There is no extra charge for the Goal Finder's Auditing and the auditing time of a Saint Hill Graduate may not be sold as such by an HGC. The Goal Finder's Units may be high. The Goal Finder may not take private pcs on his or her own. There may be no part-time HGC Goal Finders. Any Sthil Graduates willing to work part-time to help the Organization should be assigned to the Staff Training Program or the Academy to heighten the level of technology. An exception is the auditing of staff members, 152 particularly the Organization or Association Secretary. Part-time Saint Hill Graduates may not be used in the HGC. FEES A Central Organization or City Office does not sell auditing hours by the hour ever. It sells (1) Clearing (2) De-Suppression (3) Longevity. It sells these by Intensives as always. It cannot sell "Ten Hours from a Saint Hill Graduate" or charge fees "for special auditing by a Saint Hill Graduate". Goals finding by an HGC is only undertaken as a part of the clearing assembly line. One cannot come into an HGC just to have a goal found or checked and get other auditing elsewhere. The practice would be very pernicious and result in few clears and many wrecked cases. A Saint Hill Graduate's auditing time is available in the HGC only if the pc signs the Clearing Contract ("We take Full Responsibility for Clearing you"). Then the person who signed the contract is put on the assembly line for clearing. This policy is not to be varied in any way. Casual pcs coming in for intensives who do not sign the Clearing Contract must sign up for Intensives as always. All former "Estimate of number of hours" procedures are now abandoned due to effectiveness of pulling Missed W/Hs and a modern Problems Intensive. A pc signing up for health reasons is just given a routine Missed W/H check and a Problems Intensive. The same is done for Geriatric Cases (longevity of life). So a pc signs up in the HGC either for Clearing and is put on the Assembly Line, or for Intensives and is given Missed Withholds and a Problems Intensive by an HPA/HCA and is made satisfied by good technical application in either case. Single hours of auditing may not be sold by a Central Organization, City Office or District Office "to see how it goes". It's Intensives or nothing. CLEARING ASSEMBLY LINE Clearing is sold by Intensives, purchased when auditing is available. A careful log of time is kept. This is TIME IN THE HGC, not time for this or that. The pc buys one or more intensives and is handed over to the D of P. The D of P thereafter tells the pc what the pc gets and assigns the pc as necessary. The line is regulated by the number of Goal Finders and the Goal Finder time available. Care is taken not to waste the pc's time. Depending on state of case and lack of Goal Finder time available, the pc has the following, some of it or all of it, done. 1. Missed Withholds and Hav process found. 2. Problems Intensive. 3. (For a long-time pc, Dianeticist or Scientologist.) One or more Intensives cleaning up "In Auditing" and "In Self-Auditing", Prepchecks. 4. Do an 850 goals list. 5. (For pcs who have had former goals found, wrongly or otherwise.) Prepcheck on the goal or goals, each one chronologically cared for (1st one taken up first, etc). 6. (For pcs who have been listed on goals or wrong goals and not to clear.) Prepcheck on the Auditing of goals, listing, etc. 153 7. Tiger Drill on every button (on suppress has anything been suppressed, etc). 8. Straighten up pc's HGC time with a Prepcheck. All the above are HPA/HCA actions. They are not done by the Goal Finder. If they have to be done, the Goal Finder turns the pc back to HPA/HCAs. The moment a Goal Finder has completed finding and checking a goal or finding one which must wait for checking by another Goal Finder, the Goal Finder grabs another pc out of the HGC or has one called in. No Goal Finder time is wasted. This may become the source of much sweat and urgency by HGC Admin, but Goal Finder time must be salvaged by grabbing up pcs for him or her. The Goal Finder uses current methods to find the goal and check it out. The moment that action is done the pc is returned to an HPA/HCA for a Prepcheck on the goal and listing it. The Goal Finder must review the lines and personally see the goal fire before permitting it to be listed and must see the pc's folder routinely to make sure it is going well. All further Prepchecking and listing is done by HPA/HCAs. The freeness of needle is checked by the D of P. The goal is fully Tiger Drilled and Prepchecked after the needle goes free on all lines. This is the Assembly Line for Clearing. The Goal Finder is on no other line, does no other auditing. The only way the pc can be on this line is by signing a Clearing Contract. FORMS A form for each pc undergoing clearing, giving the steps, must be part of the pc's folder and kept up by the auditor. This is based on the above data. If a pc has had a recent Problems Intensive and now signs a Clearing Contract this is made part of the Clearing rundown. If done, however, by an outside auditor, the pc must be given another Problems Intensive. A Special Form showing all steps and evidence of a clear must be sent to me. The idea is to get results, to turn out clears and to keep HPA/HCAs well occupied and at a high technical level. ACCIDENTAL GOAL FINDING It will happen that in cleaning up old goals found or even by sudden disclosure, the HPA/HCA staff auditor may find a goal that fires and is the goal. If so, it is checked out by the Goal Finder and listed unless other orders are given regarding the pc (such as unburdening the goal). HPA/HCAs are not, however, to attempt to find goals at this time and it is highly illegal for an HGC to employ non-Saint Hill Graduates to find goals no matter what the public pressure. It could be very destructive to Scientology to have a lot of wrong goals about or getting listed. In due course this last injunction will be released so far as Tiger Drilling the 850 list by HPA/HCAs is concerned. But wait until technology is better. This will apply only to experienced staff auditors. 154 METERS Only the latest Mark Meters are to be used by Goal Finders. Mark IV and onwards may be used by HPA/HCAs. It would be dishonest to use less. SUMMARY HGCs must afford public Clearing of individuals. Clearing Co-Audits of the public are a special role and are to be relegated to District Offices as soon as possible. It is no part of my plans to retain them in a Central Org or City Office. Only the highest technology and most exact adherence to policy can keep us afloat at this time. These are not ordinary policies. These are survival itself for Scientology. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 155  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=13/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PROCESSES Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (Effective at once) X Processes   Sthil  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 13 OCTOBER AD 12 Sthil PROCESSES Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (Effective at once) X Processes The X Unit Processes shall consist of processes as follows: 1. Security Check by Rock Slam, with an adequate report of results in the student's folder. This is done in Model Session with Meter. 2. Model Session and Havingness Processes. All with Meter. 3. Liberal use of Random Rudiments and Middle Rudiments. All X Processes are done with full use of the E-Meter. Rudiments and results will be routinely observed and reported on by the Auditing Supervisor. Students apparently not yet capable of getting rudiments in, handling auditing cycle and making the pc feel and look better will be promptly G.A.E.ed without waiting for end of week. Rock Slammers, before being so designated, must be retested by the Auditing Supervisor. Rock Slammers may be specially designated in auditing assignment. Y Unit Processes The Y Unit carries out the following schedule only: 1. With Meter, in metered Model Session, fully clean missed withholds from the pc with any version of the following questions: "What have we failed to find out about you?" "What has an auditor failed to find out about you?" "What have I failed to find out about you?" 2. With Meter, in otherwise unmetered Model Session, list and assess by elimination the following question, "In this lifetime what change have you decided to make? When was that?" 3. Complete the Problems Intensive (Routine 2A) using the Meter only to make sure of TA action, otherwise the Model Session and running to be done without recourse to needle. The above should be less than 25 hours of auditing, 3 to 5 hours for missed w/hs and 20 to 22 for the Problems Intensive. Leaving withholds missed, a wrong assessment, failure to get TA motion, or failure to get spectacular results on the pc will G.A.E. the student to the X Unit. This Problems Intensive and the pulling of missed withholds are and will be fundamental Academy and HGC actions, so the student should become expert in them. Z Unit Processes The Z Unit is totally concerned with current rundown of Routine 3GA. If the student fails to get the Detested Person, Dynamic and Item of the pc within 30 auditing hours, the student is G.A.E.ed to the Y Unit. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.cden Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 156  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  GOAL FINDER'S MODEL SESSION   Sthil Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 OCTOBER AD12 (CANCELLED -- see HCO B 20 Feb 63 Volume V -- 243) Sthil Franchise Airmail GOAL FINDER'S MODEL SESSION Where the pc has been well Prepchecked and is well under auditor control, a Goal Finder in a 3GA session may omit rudiments in Model Session, using only goals for session, and havingness, goals and gains at end and General O/W, Mid Ruds and Random Ruds where needed in the session. This salvages about an hour's auditing time per day. Start and end of session commands are used, just no rudiments; General O/W may be found necessary on some pcs at session start in lieu of rudiments to get a cleaner needle. This does not apply to Rudiments and Havingness Sessions or Prepcheck Sessions and Problems Intensives. For a pc who is well smoothed out by staff auditors, then, and who is well under the Goal Finder's control, the following may be used, particularly with a Mark V Meter. GOAL FINDER'S MODEL SESSION Usual session start, adjust chair, squeeze cans and put in the R Factor: GOAL FINDER: "Is it all right if I start this session now?" (If so) (Tone 40) "START OF SESSION." "Has this session started for you?" (If pc says No, say again, "Start of Session. Now has this session started for you?" If pc says No, say, "We will cover it in a moment," and run General O/W after goals are set.) GOAL FINDER: "What goals would you like to set for this session?" "Are there any goals you would like to set for life or livingness?" Goal Finder inspects needle. If rough, or if session didn't start for pc: GOAL FINDER: "If it is all right with you, I am going to run a short general process." "The process is 'What have you done?' 'What have you withheld?'" (Runs it very permissively until needle looks smooth.) "If it is all right with you I will give these questions two more times and then end this process." "Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process?" (Not Tone 40.) "End of Process. We will now (whatever it is they were going to do)." Mid Ruds Use either "Since the Last Time I audited you ........" (usually the first time used in the session) or "In this session ........" for the Middle Rudiments "has anything been ........" (suppressed, invalidated, suggested) and "is there anything you have ........" (failed to reveal, been careful of). Random Rudiment: "Have I missed a withhold on you?" or "In this session have you thought, said or done anything I failed to find out?" Ending the Session The Goal Finder closes the body of the session with "Is it all right with you if we end off ........ now?" "Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I do so?" "End of ............" (Goal Finder observes pc. If pc very agitated Goal Finder does General O/W as above. If needle rough but pc not bad, Goal Finder puts in Mid Ruds with "In this session".) 157 GOAL FINDER: (Adjusting Meter) "Please squeeze the cans." (If squeeze test not all right, Goal Finder runs pc's havingness until can squeeze gives an adequate response.) GOAL FINDER: "Have you made any part of your goals for this session?" "Have you made any other gains in this session that you would care to mention?" End of Session: "Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this session?" "Is it all right with you if I end this session now?" "Here it is: (Tone 40) END OF SESSION." "Has the session ended for you?" (If not, repeat it. If session still not ended, say, "You will be getting more auditing.") "Tell me I am no longer auditing you." L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 158  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=16/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3GA LISTING   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 16 OCTOBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise ROUTINE 3GA LISTING The reason some pcs go to clear on listing and the reason some don't at once lies entirely with the auditor. The dominant rules are two: 1. Don't force the pc to list more items than he has, and 2. Don't prevent the pc from giving items. The number of ways an auditor can dream up, or overlook, to violate 1 and 2 above are countless. Example: If pc can't answer the line easily skip, omit or change it, DON'T Tiger Drill it to force an answer. LISTING IS NOT PREPCHECKING. You don't wait for the pc to say he has no more before you stop asking a line. THE AUDITOR REGULATES HIS QUESTION BY THE PC'S COMM LAG. When the pc first comm lags (without asking for a repeat of the Line wording) the auditor comes off the line. The auditor doesn't ask the line again just "to make sure" or ask the pc "do you have any more". Asking it again when the pc has comm lagged leaves, amongst other things, an unanswered auditing question. The line is asked. The pc answers until he or she comm lags. The auditor then acks and goes instantly to next line. If the pc says he has more on the old line, the auditor says "sorry" and takes them. A LINE IS RUN TO FIRST COMM LAG. How long is a comm lag? It is the pause before the strained grope. A pc's decline in answering goes as follows: 1. Bright rapid giving. 2. Comm lag while looking. 3. Groping for more. 4. Comm lag while groping. 5. Can't quite say it. 6. Starts picking up and rejecting. From 3 above onward the auditor is at fault. Right at the end of 2 the auditor acks and gives the pc the next line. The auditor takes only the bright, easily gotten flows. If the pc goes fumbling and groggy the auditor is at fault and is doing wrong. Listing is a rapid action. The way to keep it rapid is to deftly see that the pc has given all and then get out of there! 159 Auditors whose pcs dope and grope will soon have pcs that mope. The auditor avoids Q and A. The auditor never repeats an item back to the pc or asks if it fits on the line. The auditor's role is permissive with good presence. If the auditor does not understand an item he or she says so but does not include any repeat of the item in saying so. That's evaluation. Listing is slightly contrary to early auditing philosophy. Then, if the pc protested, the auditor forced the pc to answer. In listing this is never done. Then, if the pc comm lagged, the auditor flattened it. In listing one never flattens a comm lag. One shifts the moment the first comm lag appears, but without startling the pc. Listing auditing is different. The pc is always right. In listing if you trick a pc into more items and prevent the pc from giving those items he has readily to hand, the whole case may have to be patched up before it will clear. It is so easy to list right as an auditor that many will fumble all over the place before they get the knack. And almost all errors will be additive errors. Listing is the biggest barrier to clear now that we can find goals. Other listing methods may appear, but these will only alter What lines. Nothing is going to alter the above, so you better learn it. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 160  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  AUDITOR FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 17 OCTOBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise AUDITOR FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND If a pc says something and the auditor fails to understand what the pc said or meant, the correct response is: "I did not (hear you) (understand what was said) (get that last)." To do anything else is not only bad form, it can amount to a heavy ARC break. INVALIDATION To say, "You did not speak loud enough ___________ " or any other use of "you" is an invalidation. The pc is also thrown out of session by having responsibility hung on him or her. The Auditor is responsible for the session. Therefore the auditor has to assume responsibility for all comm breakdowns in it. EVALUATION Far more serious than invalidation above, is the accidental evaluation which may occur when the auditor repeats what the pc said. NEVER repeat anything a pc says after him, no matter why. Repeating not only does not show the pc you heard but makes him feel you're a circuit. The highest advance of 19th Century Psychology was a machine to drive people crazy. All it did was repeat after the person everything the person said. Children also do this to annoy. But that isn't the main reason you do not repeat what the pc said after the pc. If you say it wrong the pc is thrown into heavy protest. The pc must correct the wrongness and hangs up right there. It may take an hour to dig the pc out of it. Further, don't gesture to find out. To say, pointing, "You mean this item, then," is not only an evaluation but a nearly hypnotic command, and the pc feels he must reject very strongly. Don't tell the pc what the pc said and don't gesture to find what the pc meant. Just get the pc to say it again or get the pc to point it out again. That's the correct action. DRIVING IN ANCHOR POINTS Also, do not shove things at a pc or throw things to a pc. Don't gesture toward a pc. It drives in anchor points and makes the pc reject the auditor. ROCK SLAMMER The reason a person who Rock Slams on Scientology or auditors or the like can't audit well is that they are wary of a pc and feel they must repeat after the pc, correct the pc or gesture toward the pc. 161 But Rock Slammer or not, any new auditor may fall into these bad habits and they should be broken fast. SUMMARY A very high percentage of ARC breaks occur because of a failure to understand the pc. Don't prove you didn't with gestures or erroneous repeats. Just audit, please. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [This HCO B is reissued verbatim as HCO B 23 May 1971, Issue VI, Basic Auditing Series 6, Auditor Failure to Understand. It is also edited for use on the HQS Course as HCO B 25 October 1971, Issue III, Auditor Failure to Understand.] 162  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=18/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GA LISTING BY PREHAV   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 18 OCTOBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GA LISTING BY PREHAV If your pc is not doing well in listing the goal on any earlier system (particularly the 114 lines which haven't done well at all in auditors' hands) the following line system should work. Prehav levels were the original breakthrough on clearing. Take the old Auxiliary Prehav Scale. Just do an ordinary Assessment by Elimination (no reference to the goal). (It is possible some change will be made in this but it will do for now.) Fit the resulting level into the following lines. Make sure it makes sense and makes sense to the pc. Any alteration of the word must register as well as the original word found when you add (ing) or vary its participle: (System of Marking Cards same as 114 Line HCO Bulletin) (Blanks refer to Prehav Level) 1. Who or what would ______________ (goal)? 2. Who or what would not ______________ (goal)? 3. Who or what would (goal) ______________ ? 4. Who or what would (goal) not _____________ ? 5. Who or what would oppose ______________ (goal)? 6. Who or what would not oppose ______________ (goal)? 7. Who or what would ______________ opposition (goal)? 8. Who or what would not _______________ opposition (goal)? (Omit effect wording lines of goal if no effect wording exists.) 9. Who or what would _______________ (effect wording of goal)? 10. Who or what would not ______________ (effect wording of goal)? 11. Who or what would (effect wording of goal) ______________ ? 12. Who or what would (effect wording of goal) not _________ ? 13. Who or what would oppose _______________ (effect wording of goal)? 14. Who or what would not oppose _____________ (effect wording of goal)? 15. Who or what would ______________ Opposition (effect wording of goal)? 16. Who or what would not ______________ opposition (effect wording of goal)? 17. Who or what would help ______________ (goal)? 18. Who or what would not help ______________ (goal)? 19. Who or what would (goal) help _____________ ? 20. Who or what would (goal) not help ______________ ? 21. Who or what would help oppose ______________ (goal)? 22. Who or what would not help oppose ______________ (goal)? 163 23. Who or what would help ______________ opposition (goal)? 24. Who or what would not help ______________ opposition (goal)? 25. Who or what would want (goal)? 26. Who or what would not want (goal)? 27. Who or what would oppose (goal)? 28. Who or what would not oppose (goal)? (Effect wording lines may be omitted if none exist for goal.) 29. Who or what would want (effect wording of goal)? 30. Who or what would not want (effect wording of goal)? 31. Who or what would oppose (effect wording of goal)? 32. Who or what would not Oppose (effect wording of goal)? Directions Flatten every level found by going over and over lines until TA action stops. Use strike marks as in 114 Line HCO Bulletin. Four slants and a long cross. Don't use fully written down lists of things pc gives. Don't demand more than pc has. Don't prevent pc from giving what he has (such as stopping automaticities of flow). Don't Q and A. Be Permissive with Presence. Don't get the pc into Protest as Sen will turn on. Fix lines so pc can answer cleanly, without confusion. If pc is being shifted from another system of lines, give auditing on goal a rapid Prepcheck before using this system. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 164  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=19/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  R3GA HCO WW FORM G3, REVISED FAST GOALS CHECK (Keep completed form in pc's folder)   Sthil Students CenOCon Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 19 OCTOBER 1962 Sthil Students CenOCon R3GA Franchise Airmail HCO WW FORM G3, REVISED FAST GOALS CHECK (Keep completed form in pc's folder) This is a rapid checkout of a goal for use by Auditors and particularly Instructors and Auditing Supervisors. By an Auditor it is done in Model Session. By an Instructor or Supervisor it is done as a simple checkout. ALWAYS COMPLETE WHOLE CHECK. _____________________________________________________ ________________________ PC's Name Date _____________________________________________________ Org Location Goal __________________________________________________________________________ A: Read goal rapidly to pc three times ___________ ___________ ____________ Note reaction and inform pc if in or out. B: Repetitive Ruds. (Early reads are acceptable as instant reads on ruds, not on goal which must be instant only.) On the goal _____________________________________________________________ is there anything you have 1. Suppressed ___________ 4. Invalidated _____________ 2. Been careful of ___________ 5. Suggested _____________ 3. Withheld ___________ 6. Mistaken _____________ Only when each is clean, go to next and when all clean go to C. C: Read goal rapidly to pc three times ___________ ___________ ___________ Note reaction and tell pc if in or out. D: Do Fast Ruds: In this session (or checkout) is there anything you have suppressed, suggested, invalidated, failed to reveal or been careful of? When all nul, go to E. E: Section E must be read all in one sweep to be valid, with no read on any rud and a rocket read (sharp downward tick at least 1/4 of an inch) each time exactly at end of reading the goal. Don't add in the goal until all six ruds items read nul in one sweep. Then read the ruds line and the goal 3 times in one breath. On the goal ______________________________________________________________ is there anything you have suppressed, suggested, invalidated, withheld, mistaken or been careful of? (Goal) ___________________ (Goal) ____________________ (Goal) ___________________ If none of ruds in this section reads and goal did read, providing the meter reading of the check was flawless it is a listable goal. Goal Checked Out _____________________________________ Goal Didn't Check Out _________________________________ LRH:jw.rd __________________________________________ Copyright $c 1962 (Auditor, Auditing Supervisor, Instructor) by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD 165  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/10/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  PRE-CLEARING INTENSIVE (Most appropriate to Z Unit Sthil or HGCs)   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 OCTOBER 1962 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail PRE-CLEARING INTENSIVE (Most appropriate to Z Unit Sthil or HGCs) On cases that have been run on many clearing procedures or goals or types of lines or who have had frequent changes of auditors, to speed eventual clearing, the following can be done: 1. Assess the Pre-Clearing Scale (below) by elimination. 2. Choose a period one month before the first session the person ever had in Dianetics and Scientology. Use only the month and year. 3. Run the seventeen buttons by Prepcheck on the Command "Since _______________ (date) in (or on) ________________ (subject from Scale below) is there anything (or has anything been, as appropriate) _______________ (button)?" 4. Clean once through the buttons only and assess again. 5. Keep the Mid Ruds in. ASSESSMENT FOR CLEARING INTENSIVE Auditing Processing Self-Auditing Working Clearing Preclears Dissemination Auditors Practising Talking Teaching Goals Learning Hopes Living Helping Intention Finance Sessions Problems Courses Sex Training Dianetics Processes Scientology Organizations LRH:dr.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 166  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  WRONG GOALS, IMPORTANCE OF REPAIR OF   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 NOVEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise WRONG GOALS, IMPORTANCE OF REPAIR OF (Use of this HCO Bulletin. Get it hat checked on all auditors whether classed or not. If an auditor is found to have found a wrong goal, make him or her pass this HCO Bulletin again.) If a wrong goal has been found on a pc and has been "confirmed" as correct but later refuted, that goal must be Big Tiger Drilled out of existence, all pain and sensation and meter reaction off, at once. If a wrong goal has been found on a pc, checked out as correct and listed, that wrong goal must be Prepchecked out of existence, and all pain, sensation and reaction on the meter removed and immediately. These are first, primary, important and mandatory actions. They must be done at once on the discovery of the wrongness of a goal. No other action may be done until the above is done. And the above must be done right now, not "next month when we have an auditor available". And poetically it should be done by the person who "found" the goal if immediately available, and should be done in addition to that person's regular auditing. Even finding the right goal does not straighten out the "found" wrong ones. If more than one wrong goal has been found and listed or not, the wrong goals must be eradicated chronologically, the first wrong goal found is the first one to be done. The above rules apply as to whether the goal was listed or not (in other words, what is to be done with each wrong goal is governed by the first two paragraphs of this HCO Bulletin). Now these rules are not because of policy. They are technical. And the technical is extreme in its validity and so this HCO Bulletin becomes policy because it has such heavy technical validity. Finding and running wrong goals is very destructive and very dangerous to a pc's life and health. The most effective treatment a pc who has had a wrong goal found or run can have is the eradication of the goal by Big Tiger or Prepcheck. The pc will get a gain beyond mere repair. In the presence of a wrong goal found or found and run, no other processes will work. I.e., a Problems Intensive or General O/W or Missed W/Hs. The presence of a wrong goal found or found and run will develop a PTP that stops all further progress. An auditor will just make no headway on a case that has had a wrong goal found or found and run until one or the other of the first two paragraphs of this HCO Bulletin has been done properly. SYMPTOMS OF A RIGHT GOAL LISTED WRONGLY 1. TA getting High and Sticky (4.5 or 5) and nothing brings it down, or TA staying below 2 and nothing brings it up. 167 2. Pc looking bad, old, grey, weight increasing. 3. Pc acting blowy. 4. More sen than pain on pc. SYMPTOMS OF A WRONG OR IMPROPERLY CLEANED GOAL UNLISTED 1. Doesn't rocket read and no Prepcheck can make it rocket read even once out of three times. 2. Checking it gives pc sen only, and no pain during check-out. 3. Pc blowy. 4. Pc says or feels goal is overwhelming. 5. Pc can't wrap his or her wits around goal. 6. It's not something pc really wanted in this life. 7. Pc has had no pain while auditor was cleaning goal up by Prepcheck. 8. Pc tries to fit goal into life. 9. Pc has had no cognitions on goal. 10. Pc looks worse than usual. 11. Pc very upset during check-out or in total apathy. (Pc's often nervous on a right goal during check-out, but with a wrong one pc is a wreck and very ARC breaky or totally uncaring.) 12. Pc very doubtful as to whether it is or isn't the goal. 13. Pc rock slamming during check-out. 14. Pc has no reality on goal. 15. Pc has to get into a certain position or spot on the time track to make goal read. 16. Pc very worried about being checked -- a lot of anxiety. This sign also accompanies a goal which is very charged because of poor prepchecking. When it's the right goal pc is usually calm. (The above 16 are taken from HCO Tech Letter of October 22, 1962.) SYMPTOMS OF A WRONG GOAL LISTED 1. TA mostly at 4.5 or 5 (or could be below 2). 2. Pc ARC breaky. 3. Pc blowy. 4. Pc looks very bad, older, greyer, skin tone poor. 5. Pc's eyes watery. 6. Only sensation predominant on list. 7. Pc dizzy. 8. Pc nauseated, or vomiting. 9. Bank getting more solid. 10. Pc gaining weight. 168 11. Rudiments can't be kept in. 12. Missed W/Hs even when pulled, fail to get pc cheerfully into session. SYMPTOMS OF A RIGHT GOAL UNLISTED 1. Goal rocket reads 2 out of three on Instructor's check. 2. Goal rocket reads 2 out of three on check after a Prepcheck on it. 3. Goal won't go out entirely and if it does it bobs back up. 4. Pc relaxed during check-out, co-operative but not selling the goal particularly. 5. Pc gets cognitions on the goal. 6. Tiger Drilling, Prepchecking or checking gives pc pain. 7. If sen is on, a clean-up wipes it off and turns it to pain. 8. Pain never wholly vanishes. Handling goal doesn't wipe out al] its pain for very long. Pain always returns even when briefly departed. 9. Goal goes out and in, sometimes does, sometimes doesn't read. 10. Right goal reads are different. Wrong goal reads are very constant and rarely rocket after maybe once or twice when found. 11. A rocket read can always be recovered on a right goal even when it has vanished, right up to the time it vanishes and the pc goes clear. The rocket read gets shorter, gets early or late, but it doesn't vanish entirely until the goal is blown. 12. Pc looked better after goal was found. 13. Rudiments easier to keep in. 14. Pc co-operative. It is hard for an auditor to get a reality on a goal until he or she has found a goal. For experience the auditor tends to hope his or her way through and trust that "even if it doesn't read, the pc will be disappointed" or the auditor feels he or she would look bad. To our shame, auditors have faked a goal to a pc or instructor. Also, an auditor who is green tends to throw the burden on the checker and do a job that's "good enough for a check". Only the right goal, reading properly, is "good enough for a check". An auditor who finds a goal and doesn't get it to read properly before a check, or who finds a goal and doesn't get it checked by another auditor who is expert, is irresponsible. And an auditor who will not immediately sweat to clean up a wrong goal or work overtime and on his own time too to clean up a wrong goal that's been listed is just not worthy of the name. Wrong goals are dynamite. Prevent them by being properly trained and by doing a good job. With goals processing in our hands we can deliver results greater than any ever achieved before anywhere. Thus, such a powerful weapon must also be respected and used right. LRH:gl.jh Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 169  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=2 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3-21 THE TWENTY-ONE STEPS FINDING GOALS   CenOCon Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 NOVEMBER AD12 Issue II CenOCon Franchise Airmail ROUTINE 3-21 THE TWENTY-ONE STEPS FINDING GOALS I have been doing considerable research auditing and case inspection and have worked out the following method of clearing. THE TWENTY-ONE STEPS The first reliable clearing method, 3GA, is to be found, improved, in 3- 21, carrying the pc who can be handled this way, all the way to OT goal by goal. For the difficult pc it is only varied in Step 4 below, which is changed on difficult pcs to 3GA XX or variations of it. Clearing has been improved by the advent of Tiger Drilling and Goals Prepchecking and by new data on finding goals and on listing. The greatest hold-up in clearing was lack of an adequate Prehav Level finding system. I have now developed this in HCO Bulletin 7 November, Issue III. This will be of enormous help both in finding Rock Slams to find goals and running out goals when found. There is, however, no substitute for a well trained, accurate auditor out to help the pc. This is a fully understood requisite to this method. The method is briefly as follows: 1. Tiger Drill or Prepcheck out of the way any earlier found goals in accordance with HCO Bulletin 7 November AD12, Issue I. 2. Prepare the pc with a Problems Intensive, new style. 3. Have pc do a goals list 850 long. 4. Tiger Drill goals from goal 1 on forward. (Do not preselect goals to be TDd ever on any list -- just do the list.) Stop at that goal which won't go out by TD, and which can be made to Rocket Read occasionally. (Only this step (4) is changed on a tougher pc when it includes different goal finding methods.) 5. Prepcheck that goal until it Rocket Reads with consistency. 6. Take the basic four lines 1. WHO OR WHAT WOULD WANT ___________________________________________ 2. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT WANT _______________________________________ 3. WHO OR WHAT WOULD OPPOSE _____________________________________ ING 4. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT OPPOSE _________________________________ ING and list and nul each one to an Item. Do a list of around 100. 170 Do a routine assessment on each. If more than one stay in, take the one that reads best as the Item. (If the pc's early lists, on a pc whose goal has been found for some time, are missing or unavailable do this step just as above. Otherwise use old written lists as in footnote below.) 7. Repeat 6 above. 8. When pc's tone arm ceases to be active (with all rudiments in and goal firing on 6 and 7) do a Roll Your Own Prehav Assessment (see next HCO Bulletin) on the goal. 9. Use the lines 1. WHO OR WHAT WOULD (GOAL) (LEVEL)? 2. WHO OR WHAT WOULD (GOAL) NOT (LEVEL)? 3. WHO OR WHAT WOULD (LEVEL) (GOAL)? 4. WHO OR WHAT WOULD NOT (LEVEL) (GOAL)? and do a written list for each and assess as in 6 above. The lines must make sense to the auditor as well as the pc and be answerable without distorting goal. If the PH Secondary Level is changed in prefix or suffix or tense make sure it reads as well as the original. 10. When TA ceases to move on 9 do a new Roll Your Own Prehav and repeat 9. 11. Continue as in 9 and 10 until pc is having no trouble whatever in spotting and blowing items. 12. When last PH Level has taken all motion out of TA by 9, 10, and 11 is evident, get a new Roll Your Own Prehav and proceed using the lines of 9 but no longer writing down items, using the pages of composition book and four slant marks with a fifth crossing them out as a tally. 13. When neither old nor new Prehav Levels can any longer be made to react on the goal and the needle is free, Prepcheck the auditing on the goal. 14. When the auditing is clean, Prepcheck the goal. 15. Test all previous Prehav Levels for the goal and have somebody qualified inspect and attest the absence of goal read and the freeness of the needle. This is a first goal clear. 16. Repeat all above steps for the second goal. 17. Repeat steps 1 to 15 for the third goal as feasible. 18. Repeat steps 1 to 15 for the fourth goal as feasible. 19. Repeat steps 1 to 15 for the fifth goal as feasible. 20. Repeat steps 1 to 15 for the sixth goal as feasible. 21. Find consecutive goals as feasible and run them out. Tips: The cardinal rule of listing is to never demand more than the pc has and never prevent the pc from giving items he or she does have. Keep the pc in session, but don't use the Mid Ruds to punish the pc every time the pc originates. 171 If the pc gets very ARC Breaky and missed W/Hs don't cure it, then in Step 4 you have passed the pc's goal in the last page or two, so get Suppress and Protest clean and redo them. In Tiger Drilling the goal is always ahead of you, never behind you. You leave nothing behind you on the goals list. Keep a careful record of the PH Primary and Secondary Levels run or used in any way. Treat a pc's goals and Items lists like jewelry. Don't lose them. Above, we have a highly standard clearing procedure, the best of everything that has worked. Only the four lines in 6 and 9 are subject to change. On the easy case this is the best rundown for finding goals and clearing. More difficult cases are characterized by two things-(a) pc's needle is occasionally very dirty, or (b) goals go out hard on Tiger-Drilling. These are the only two guiding points which dictate a change. Even so only Step 4 above is changed (finding the goal). Even if some other method than Step 4 is used to attain the goal, the rest of the above is still followed. I surmise that on less easy pcs only the first goal will require other goal finding than Step 4 and that the above holds good for all second goals onward for all pcs. This however is only a surmise and other means than Step 4 may be needed on some second goals. Therefore, today, we have no variation from the above except in actually finding the goal. Further about 50% (at a guess) of one's pcs require no variation from the above to find or run a goal. As more data becomes available some of the above can be expected to be modified in the interests of speed and positive results. But the Twenty-One Steps are based on vast quantities of experience and data. Note: Where a pc has had his goal found some time ago and written lists exist for the first four lines, recover these lists and take them in consecutive sections of 100 and nul them by usual means to an Item. Then, again in rotation, take the next 100 and nul each to an Item. The lists however must be from the correct wording of the goal, not an earlier variation as they then would not apply. In the latter case do only the steps as above. ROCK SLAMMING ITEMS Note: Items in the Twenty-One Steps which Rock Slam when found in listing the goal may have to be opposed or otherwise handled to discharge them. (See forthcoming HCO Bulletins on 3GA XX.) L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 172  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=7/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=3 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  "ROLL YOUR OWN" PREHAV (Cancels all earlier HCO Bulletins on how to do a Prehav Assessment)   CenOCon Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 7 NOVEMBER AD12 Issue III CenOCon Franchise Airmail "ROLL YOUR OWN" PREHAV (Cancels all earlier HCO Bulletins on how to do a Prehav Assessment) Roll Your Own Prehav Assessment has been developed: (a) To avoid lengthy Prehav Assessments, (b) To get much more accurate levels for the pc for use in both finding and listing out goals, and (c) To enter the Rock Slam channel easily. The assessment is done on any available or special Prehav Scale for the purpose of the assessment. (For instance the 1 st 65 levels of the Auxiliary Prehave Scale.) The assessment follows the exact steps below: HOW TO DO ONE It is very easy to do a Prehav Assessment. It is not so easy to do a completely accurate one. When clearing is going hard, the most likely source of error is the Prehav Assessment. It is ridiculously easy for an auditor to make a bad one. The Preclear's attention hangs up on a button he tells himself isn't it and the invalidation makes it stay in and voila you have a wrong assessment. Like goals, a Prehav Assessment must be kept clean of Tiger Drill buttons. You get a wrong assessment if the pc has invalidated or protested a button. Or if he or she has suppressed the right one. Also if too many levels are staying in or too many are going out, the Mid Ruds are out. A Prehav Assessment requires careful auditing. Only experience can give an auditor the full data. TERMS Prehav Scale = Any scale giving degrees of doingness or not doingness. Level = Any doingness or not doingness on the scale. Any word in the scale itself. Assessment = Any method of discovering a level on the scale for a given pc. Read = Any reaction of the needle different from its regular action for the pc, occurring during or slightly after a level has been called. Mid Ruds = The middle rudiments of the current model session. Tiger Drill = That series of buttons which are capable of preventing a right goal or level from reading or making a wrong level read, combined in an appropriate exercise. THE MOST ACCURATE ASSESSMENT Realize that the most accurate assessment of a Prehav Scale would be by the Tiger Drilling of each level in turn. By average, on a rough pc, this would require about one minute per level. This would be three hours for a 180 level scale. Unless scales are shorter, assessment by elimination would normally be faster, if done with due care. But Tiger Drilling a scale to find a level cannot be ruled out as a means of finding the real level with superb accuracy. 173 DOING THE ASSESSMENT One puts the pc in session, gets the Mid Ruds in, takes a Prehav Scale and calls out each level once, noting its reaction on the meter. If the auditor was not sure or didn't see it, the level is called a second or a third time. If too many levels go out consecutively, there is a suppress. If too many levels are staying in, there is another Mid Rud out. One marks only those that read. Those that do not read are not marked. A pc has his own Prehav Scale mimeo copy in his folder. This is used over and over. The pc's name and date of the first assessment is written at the top of the mimeo sheet. A new symbol is used for each consecutive assessment and the level found on the mimeo sheet and that symbol is marked at the top at the end of the assessment. The list is covered once. Those that read are marked in. The Mid Ruds for the session are put in at the end of the first nulling. The list is covered again but only those that stayed in the first time are now read. If they read again they are again marked in, using the same symbol. The list is covered a third time but only those that stayed in the second time are read and marked in, using the same symbol. When the list has not more than eight (on a rough pc) and not less than three levels left in, the remaining levels are Tiger Drilled. One level will remain -- or will react better than the others. Take this as the PRIMARY LEVEL and mark it in at the top of the mimeo sheet with its symbol. ROLL YOUR OWN In times past, this Primary Level would have been enough, but using the Prehav to locate the Rock Slam Channel or to list out goals requires a SECONDARY LEVEL. To "Roll Your Own" is to get the pc to give you a secondary scale that is in its turn assessed. This is done as follows: Take the Primary Level, found as above. Put it in the sentence "If somebody were fixated on (or 'wanted to' or 'intended to' or 'wished to') ___________________ (Primary Level) what would that person do?" Or use the sentence "What would ___________________ (Primary Level) represent to you?" The sentence must cause the pc to give doingness. Otherwise it must be changed, using the Primary Level, so that the pc does give doingness. The auditor, as in any assessment, lists down the pc's answers on a 13" (foolscap or legal) sheet with the pc's name, the date and the question at the top of it. When the pc says that's all, the auditor puts in the Mid Ruds and lists the question against the meter. If the meter reads on the question, the list is incomplete and must be completed. When the question gives no read with Mid Ruds in, the list is complete. This list is now handled exactly as the original scale above. The resulting level is the pc's level and is used for finding Items in 3GA-XX or in listing out goals. The Primary Level is not otherwise used. The Secondary List is not used again. A new Primary Assessment is done for the next full operation. Only these Secondary Levels are actually used in auditing. Various Primary Prehav Scales may from time to time be developed for various purposes. LRH:gl.bh Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 174  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  SOMATICS HOW TO TELL TERMINALS AND OPPOSITION TERMINALS   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 NOVEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise SOMATICS HOW TO TELL TERMINALS AND OPPOSITION TERMINALS It is important that a clearing auditor be able to distinguish pain from sensation, terminals from opposition terminals, and to have the data at the level of instant knowledge. To understand it less is to invite serious errors in clearing. Failure to sort terminals from opposition terminals can confuse the pc or even degrade the case. All a pc's somatics, deformities and distortions proceed from terminals, opposition terminals and combination terminals. Thus they are of vast importance to the pc and the auditor. DEFINITIONS SOMATICS = This is a general word for uncomfortable physical perceptions coming from the reactive mind. Its genus is early Dianetics and it is a general, common package word, used by Scientologists to denote "pain" or "sensation" with no difference made between them. To understand the source of these feelings, one should have a knowledge of engrams, ridges and other parts of the reactive bank. To the Scientologist anything is a SOMATIC if it emanates from the various parts of the reactive mind and produces an awareness of reactivity. Symbol SOM. PAIN = PAIN is composed of heat, cold, electrical, and the combined effect of sharp hurting. If one stuck a fork in his arm, he would experience pain. When one uses PAIN in connection with clearing one means awareness of heat, cold, electrical or hurting stemming from the reactive mind. According to experiments done at Harvard, if one were to make a grid with heated tubes going vertical and chilled tubes going horizontal and were to place a small current of electricity through the lot, the device, touched to a body, would produce the feeling of PAIN. It need not be composed of anything very hot or cold or of any high voltage to produce a very intense feeling of pain. Therefore what we call PAIN is itself, heat, cold and electrical. If a pc experiences one or more of these from his reactive mind, we say he is experiencing PAIN. "Electrical" is the bridge between sensation and PAIN and is difficult to classify as either PAIN or sensation when it exists alone. Symbol PN. SENSATION = All other uncomfortable perceptions stemming from the reactive mind are called SENSATION. These are basically "pressure", "motion", "dizziness", "sexual sensation", and "emotion and misemotion". There are others, definite in themselves but definable in these five general categories. If one took the fork in the pain definition above and pressed it against the arm, that would be "pressure". "Motion" is just that, a feeling of being in motion when one is not. "Motion" includes the "winds of space", a feeling of being blown upon, especially from in front of the face. "Dizziness" is a feeling of disorientation and includes a spinniness, as well as an out-of- balance feeling. "Sexual sensation" means any feeling, pleasant or unpleasant, commonly experienced during sexual restimulation or action. "Emotion and Misemotion" include all levels of the complete tone scale except "pain"; emotion and misemotion are closely allied to "motion", being only a finer particle action. A bank solidity is a form of "pressure", and when the sensation of increasing solidity of masses in the mind occurs, we say "the bank is beefing up". All these are classified as SENSATION. Symbol SEN. TERMINAL = An Item or Identity the pc has actually been sometime in the past (or present) is called a TERMINAL. It is "the pc's own valence" at that time. In the Goals Problem Mass (the black masses of the reactive mind) those identities which, 175 when contacted, produce pain, tell us at once that they are TERMINALS. The person could feel pain only as himself (thetan plus body) and therefore identities he has been produce pain when their mental residues (black masses) are recontacted in processing. Symbol TERM. OPPOSITION TERMINAL = An Item or Identity the pc has actually opposed (fought, been an enemy of) sometime in the past (or present) is called an OPPOSITION TERMINAL. As the person identified himself as not it he could experience from it only sensation. An OPPOSITION TERMINAL, when its mental residues (black masses) are recontacted in processing, produces only sensation, never pain. Symbol OPPTERM. COMBINED TERMINAL = An Item or Identity the pc has both been and opposed produces therefore both pain and sensation when it is "late on the track", which is to say, after the fact of many Terminals and Opposition Terminals. The Combination Terminal is the closure between Terminal and Opposition Terminal lines which possesses attributes of both and the clarity of neither. It signifies a period toward the end of a game. It is found most commonly when the pc's case is only shallowly entered. They exist on all cases but are fewer than terminals and opposition terminals. Symbol COTERM. ITEM = Any terminal, opposition terminal, combination terminal, significance or idea (but not a doingness, which is called "a level") appearing on a list derived from the pc. Symbol It. RELIABLE ITEM = Any Item that Rock Slams well on being found and at session end and which was the last Item still in after assessing the list. Can be a terminal, an opposition terminal, a combination terminal or a significance, provided only that it was the Item found on a list and Rock Slammed. Symbol RI. ROCK SLAM = That needle agitation which erratically covers more than three quarters of an inch on the E-Meter dial. A Rock Slam is the response of an E-Meter to the conflict between terminals and opposition terminals. It indicates a fight, an effort to individuate, an extreme games condition which in the absence of auditing would seek unsuccessfully to separate while attacking. As the pc's attention is guided to the Items involved the games condition activates and is expressed on the meter as a ragged, frantic response. The wider the response the more recognizable (to the pc) is the reality of the games condition and the violence of the conflict. The Rock Slam Channel is that hypothetical course between a series of pairs consisting of terminals and opposition terminals. If the conflict is too great for the pc's reality no Rock Slam results. Later in 8uditing as the pc's confronting rises, Items which did not react earlier in auditing now begin to be real and so express themselves on a meter as a Rock Slam. The pc with the lowest reality level is the hardest to attain a Rock Slam on, but in contradiction a pc who has the least control over himself in certain zones of life has the largest Rock Slams. The Rock Slam vanishes under Suppression and activates on Invalidate or Withhold or on other Prehav Levels. This is the most difficult needle response to find or attain or preserve. And it is the most valuable in clearing. All Rock Slams result from a pair of Items in opposition, one of which is a terminal, the other being an opposition terminal. It can exist in present time where the pc is the terminal and what the pc is faced with is the opposition terminal. Symbol RS. INSTANT ROCK SLAM = That "Rock Slam" which begins at the end of the major thought of any Item. Symbol IRS. 176 DIRTY NEEDLE = That erratic agitation of the needle which covers less than a quarter of an inch of the E-Meter dial and tends to be persistent. Symbol DN. DIRTY READ = That more or less instant response of the needle which is agitated by a major thought; it is an instant tiny (less than a quarter of an inch) agitation of the needle and is in fact a very small cousin of a Rock Slam but is not a Rock Slam. It does not persist. Symbol DR. TESTING The method of testing for the character of an Item whether Term, Oppterm or Coterm is extremely simple. If the Item, when said to the pc in any way, turns on PAIN in the pc's body it is a TERMINAL. If the Item, when said to the pc in any way, turns on SENSATION around or in the pc's body it is an OPPOSITION TERMINAL. If the Item, when said to the pc in any way, turns on both PAIN and SENSATION in or around the pc's body it is a COMBINATION TERMINAL. WAYS OF ASKING The rule is, "Give the Terminal Cause, the Opposition Terminal Effect in any listing, wording or use." The simplest form is, of course, just chanting the Item at the pc a few times. This is not always workable. The simplest but not always workable form is: For a Terminal -- "Would a ______________ commit overts" For an Opposition Terminal -- "Consider committing overts against _____________ " Using PH Level. Instead of "Committing Overts" the Prehav Level by which the Reliable item was found is normally used: For a Terminal "Would a _______________ (Item) ______________ (PH Level)" or "Consider a ______________ (Item) ______________ ing (PH Level)" For an Opposition Terminal -- "Consider _____________ ing (PH Level) a ______________ (Item)". USING TD BUTTONS The above sentences may also be used, or their rough approximation, with a Tiger Drill or Prepcheck Button, and if a Rock Slam is present, it may develop. No matter what method is being used in saying the Item being tested to find out if it is a Terminal, Opposition Terminal or Combination Terminal, the rules of Sensation and Pain apply. Sensation means Oppterm. Pain means Terminal. It is important to know if an Item is a Term, Oppterm or Coterm, as its character as one of the three determines the listing question. The same rule for testing applies in listing. If it is a terminal, it (Prehav Levels). If it is an opposition terminal it is (Prehav Leveled). Example: For a Terminal, A Waterbuck, Prehav Level Snort. Proper Listing question: "Who or what would a waterbuck snort at?" 177 Example: For an Oppterm, A Tiger, Prehav Level Snort. "Who or what would snort at a tiger?" Of course the reverse can be listed but is rarely necessary except to get a longer list when the pc stalls. THE LINE PLOT A Line Plot must be made up for any pc for his 3GAXX or the Listing the Goal Steps of Routine 3-2l (Steps 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of 21 Steps). This consists of a heavy Blue 13" (foolscap or legal) sheet of paper, kept in the pc's folder and kept up to date every time a Reliable Item (or even last Item in) is found. On this Line Plot one column, the left-hand one, is reserved for Oppterms. The right-hand column is reserved for Terms and lines indicate whenever Terms or Oppterms are derived from each other. A Reliable Item is designated as such on this Line Plot with the symbol RI. Non-Reliable Items are not designated. The date each Line Plot Item was found is added after the Item so it can be found again in the auditor's reports without a scramble. The full behavior and character of any Item found is written into the auditor's report of that session in which it was found. The width of the Instant Rock Slam in inches, whether the slam turned on every time the Item was read, what wording turned it on, and whether it would still RS by session end are all made part of the auditor's report. About 20% or 25% of the cases that appear for clearing can have Reliable Items found on them at once by exploring the words "Scientology", "A Scientology Organization", "An Auditor", "Me (the auditor)", "Ron", or the head of the local Scientology organization by name. These are considered to be oppterms by any pc whose realization of his goal would be interfered with, he or she feels, by Scientology. It does not matter what wording (see above) turns on the RS so long as it can be consistently turned on for a bit. If it is at first only a Dirty Read, it is Tiger Drilled to try to make it Rock Slam. Only in this peculiar instance is the person called a Rock Slammer or is considered a Security Risk. Everyone alive RSs on something. In any event, if Items such as those in this paragraph turn on a Rock Slam, they are put on the Line Plot as Reliable Items and used in handling the case. The above material is in actual fact a partial anatomy of the Goals Problems Mass, its identification in auditing and the behavior of an E-Meter towards it. As it has never before been viewed by any practice, mental science or religion, it has to have special terminology. The terminology has been stably in use for quite some time in Scientology. I have made the definitions more precise in this HCO Bulletin. Anyone working in clearing should have this HCO Bulletin data at his instant call without referral to the HCO Bulletin. With very few additions, this is the track one walks in clearing and going clear. Know it. LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 178  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GAXX STRAIGHTENING UP 3GAXX CASES (This is an interim HCO Bulletin issued while the Main HCO Bulletin on Step 4 of 3-21 is in composition.)   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Central Orgs HCO BULLETIN OF 11 NOVEMBER AD12 Franchise Airmail 3GAXX STRAIGHTENING UP 3GAXX CASES (This is an interim HCO Bulletin issued while the Main HCO Bulletin on Step 4 of 3-21 is in composition.) All cases being run on Dynamic Assessment must at once begin the following actions to speed progress. This applies to cases both before and after the goal has been found. Any slowdown of a case in running stems from failure to oppterm every Reliable Item, when found. Cases develop a "phantom Rock Slam" when this is not done. Further, the pc is to a greater or lesser degree puzzled as to "what was the package". Do the following: 1. Make a complete Line Plot for your pc (HCO B 8 November AD12) and get your already found Terms and Oppterms in the right places and every Reliable Item noted with RI. 2. Oppterm every Reliable Item found to date, whether in searching for or listing out the goal. 3. Represent every RI which still has an RS after being opptermed. Your pc's Line Plot probably currently looks like this: _______________________ Detested person _______________________ Dynamic _______________________ Item -------> __________ Term | | | _____v____ Term Make it so it looks like this: _______________________ Detested -------> Find this person Term 1st _______________________ Dynamic -------> Then find this Term 2nd _______________________ Item -------> __________ Term | | | Then find this <------- _____v____ Term 3rd In short, fill in all the blanks where no oppterming was done before. See HCO Bulletin 8 November AD12 for all details of how it's done. Your pc's attention is hung up where you haven't made a pair. The GPM is full of pairs of terms and oppterms. The rule is on all future Items: Oppose every Reliable Item. Represent every one that still RSes when the oppterm or term matching it is found. LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard L. RON HUBBARD ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 179  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=12/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  3GAXX DIRTY NEEDLES AND INCOMPLETE LISTS HOW TO ASSESS   Central Orgs Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise Airmail 3GAXX DIRTY NEEDLES AND INCOMPLETE LISTS HOW TO ASSESS I have long been aware of the penalties of making Incomplete Lists for nulling. But only last week did I find the only sources of the DIRTY NEEDLE. Most auditors are sitting there beating their pcs to death with Mid Ruds every time the needle dirties up. This is a Gross Auditing Error. The auditor who neglects this manifestation of DIRTY NEEDLE is going to wind up with no Item or RS on his or her pc. With the single exception of the first entrance to a case, when cleaning a needle depends on finding an Item, or Item No. 1, all DIRTY NEEDLES STEM FROM INCOMPLETE LISTS OR MISSED ITEMS. On even rough cases, the complete listing of the first line that will produce an RS will banish chronically dirty needles. And the dirty needle won't return until the auditor fails to complete a list. The best test for a complete list is to nul the first ten items and if a dirty needle shows up at all (which is to say if the Mid Ruds go out) then the list must be added to, the Mid Ruds put in and nulling resumed. DON'T just put Mid Ruds in. You'll ruin them for the pc, get a protest going and never get anything done. If the last 6 or 8 Items suddenly collect a necessity to put in Mid Ruds before you can go on, do the same operation: add to the list, then put in the Mid Ruds. It is time-saving to complete the list. Even if it seems longer to nul a longer list, how can you do it with a Dirty Needle? And you'll come to nothing anyway. Sometimes you have to use your judgment and get the Mid Ruds in enough to coax the pc to list more. But the easy way is to list more and then get the Mid Ruds in. ASSESSMENT STEPS The basic procedure of Assessment is: (a) Determine the line to be listed (the question). (b) Clear the question as needful with the pc. (c) Ask the question often enough to keep the pc going but don't use it to stop the pc from listing, acknowledge softly if at all while writing Items or Levels. (d) When pc says no more, put in the Mid Ruds and see if the question (a) reacts on the meter. If it does and the reaction is not an ARC break, continue the listing. If an ARC break, clean it up and test again. If the question reacts, continue the listing until pc says no more, get in Mid Ruds and test question. (e) Repeat (d) if question still reacts after listing. 180 (f) Start nulling. (g) If Dirty Needle develops at any stage of nulling, add to list, get in Mid Ruds and continue nulling. (h) Nul down to 3 to 8 Items or Levels in. Tiger Drill each Item or Level in turn. If Dirty Needle develops continue listing, get in Mid Ruds, come down again to 3 to 8 Items or Levels in and start Tiger Drilling. (i) Choose the last Item in. It won't go out if all the above were done right. Don't use Mid Ruds or any part of them as a response to a pc origin. Don't punish the pc for originating or commenting. DIRTY NEEDLES mean incomplete lists. They don't mean anything else. A dirty needle can be turned on by very lousy CCHs and very lousy 3GAXX. The usual answer is a good Problems Intensive. However, one good assessment with the right question, listed to a complete list and a Reliable Item will turn off the dirtiest needle in Christendom or China either. What is a Complete List? COMPLETE LIST = Any list listed for assessment that does not produce a Dirty Needle while nulling or Tiger Drilling. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 181  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=17/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 3-21   CenOCon Franchise Airmail  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 17 NOVEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise Airmail ROUTINE 3-21 The following data and other R3-21 HCO Bulletins to follow are an expansion of Routine 3-21 HCO Bulletin of November 7, AD12, Issue II. It requires a full understanding of that Bulletin as well as HCO Bulletin November 7, AD12, HCO Bulletin November 8, AD12, HCO Bulletin November 11, AD12, and HCO Bulletin November 12, AD12. It is VITAL that pcs being cleared be run only on Routine 3-21 as many cases have "lost their goals" or become hung up on listing or have failed to go clear in a reasonable length of time. These difficulties are now overcome in Routine 3-21, providing the auditing is good. One can get the pc into difficulties that need repair or skilled re-do by failing to write down Items listed from the goal as in 1 14 lines. Routine 3-21 handles all cases and all cases must be shunted over to it in order to prevent any hang-up. DEFINITION: BY-PASSED ITEM When a list has been made, either in 3GAXX or R3-21 and includes a Reliable Item (HCO Bulletin November 8, AD12) and that Reliable Item was not used to find an item in Opposition to it, the Item which was not so found is called a BY-PASSED ITEM. See HCO Bulletin November 11, AD 12. On the picture in that bulletin the Items with balloons around them are BY-PASSED ITEMS until found. It is this Item which causes the goal to submerge when finding or listing. It is this Item (or bad auditing) which causes the TA to go up and stick. It is the BY-PASSED Item which turns on the constant sen or pain that does not relieve. The rule is: Whether in finding items before or after the goal has been found, all lists must be used to find items and all Reliable Items found must be used to find their Opposition Item. In short, always nul lists to a Reliable Item whether listing to find the goal or listing from the goal. Auditing of the GPM must result in a LINE PLOT no matter how that Line Plot is achieved. (HCO Bulletin November 8, AD12.) Whether listing Items from lines to find Rock Slams or from the goal to find them you must wind up with a written picture of the pc's GPM. This is the Line Plot. It is begun by 3GAXX in trying to find the goal. It is continued after the goal is found right down to the Rock and Opposition Rock, the two basic Items of the GPM. This also applies to goals found in some other way than 3GAXX. RELIABLE ITEMS (HCO Bulletin November 8, AD12) are ALWAYS IN PAIRS. Leave one side of these pairs unlocated and you have left the BY-PASSED ITEM raising the devil with the pc. Always oppose a reliable item whenever found and you will never leave a BY-PASSED ITEM and the case will run and clear. This applies both before and after finding the goal. The difference between the case that lists Items easily to clear and the case that doesn't is this: The case that just listed to clear without fuss was able to assemble the pairs (terms and oppterms) as it went. The case that didn't list straight to clear didn't get the pairs straight and needed help; this case had BY-PASSED ITEMS, so the Tone Arm went up and stuck and the goal, overwhelmed, ceased to fire. Using HCO Bulletin November 11, AD12 version of listing, this shouldn't happen. The pc won't by-pass one side of a pair and so won't hang up. It is understood that bad auditing or a wrong goal would also cause a mess. 182 Thus the second case above -- the case where the goal has been listed on and is hung up and won't fire -- is a case of either wrong goal or By-Passed Items. The remedy is to take the first written lists from the goal and nul sections of them. Take, for instance, the "Who or What would want the goal" list and nul down just calling each item out once, about a hundred. When you have assessed an item on this list (HCO Bulletin November 12) and have a good Reliable Item, you oppose it (HCO Bulletin November 8) and find, by making the list of items that would oppose it or it would oppose, the other part of the pair. If you don't find the pairs the pc won't go clear but will hang up on the BY-PASSED ITEM or ITEMS. The more that hang up (by-passed items) the more unclear your pc will feel. I've really been lifting the roof trying to find the reason for this hang- up and there it is. The By-Passed Item keeps cases from going clear. The exact way to do Routine 3-21 Step 6 is as follows: (a) Compose the basic four lines using the pc's goal or the goal to be proven by listing. (b) Put each line wording at the top of a sheet of paper, a separate sheet for each basic line. Put pc's name and date and page number on each sheet. (c) Take Sheet One and get Items from pc until pc runs out of Items for that line. (d) Take next sheet in rotation and list until pc runs out. Continue to do this until an RS occurs. See next step. (e) Keep pc on meter, turn sensitivity down a bit so you have no trouble keeping needle on dial but can still see an RS. (HCO Bulletin November 8 definitions page 2.) As soon as you see an RS continue with that list. (Be sure RS wasn't just a body movement.) List it down until the dwindling Rock Slam, if any, is gone. List out any Dirty Reads. In short, complete any list that RSes. Don't go on to the next list. (f) Nul the list that RSed. (Get Mid Ruds in, call off each Item once, leave in all that react on meter. Eliminate these the same way. TD the last few Items, as per HCO Bulletin November 12, AD12.) Nul to a Reliable Item. (g) Establish as per HCO Bulletin November 8 whether RI found is term or oppterm. (h) List a list in opposition to it. (If a Term, Who/What would it oppose; if an Oppterm, Who or What would oppose it.) (i) Nul list as in (f) and obtain a Reliable Item. (j) Establish with pc that these two RIs oppose each other and put on PC'S LINE PLOT. (k) Nul the remaining lists rapidly looking for an RSing Item. If one found, repeat step (f) to (g) above. (Experience will tell if this is necessary on your pc. It may be possible to abandon all lists of Items done from goal. If so just get four fresh sheets and start again, using as the first line to list the one most likely to now have a potential RS.) (l) Repeat (b) to (k) over and over. This is New Step 6 Listing. Keep your rudiments in, don't upset the pc, be sure to note, find and run out RSes. 183 URGENT On ALL pcs whose goals have been found or found and listed by any earlier procedure, relocate the earliest item lists written from the first four lines and nul these and oppose the Reliable Items found in every list. The pc will brighten up and start to make fast progress. The Goals Problem Mass becomes, in the pc's folder, the Line Plot. It is safe to do the above on any goal that consistently produces pain as well as some sen. But beware the moment it goes all sen. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 184  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=23/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT ROUTINE TWO-TWELVE OPENING PROCEDURE BY ROCK SLAM AN HPA/HCA SKILL   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 23 NOVEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise URGENT ROUTINE TWO-TWELVE OPENING PROCEDURE BY ROCK SLAM AN HPA/HCA SKILL Note: Hat Check this HCO Bulletin with a stiff examination before permitting its use. Note: This Procedure is to be done on every HGC pc, every course student of every course as a pc, as early as possible and definitely before Prepchecking or CCHs. Done correctly it will end the no-results or slow result case and guarantee faster gain to the fast case. ALL Cases must have this done at once. The slow student as well as the slow gainer is always a Rock Slammer. THE SLOW-GAIN, NO-GAIN CASES The slow or never gain case has been a target with me for twelve years. I have now made a breakthrough on this. It is, I'm afraid I have to tell you, the breakthrough. You could straighten up the head of the Medical Association with it, it's that powerful. It undercuts all the reasons why. It must be done on all students. And also every HGC pc. Unfortunately the solution is similar to a Routine 3 process, but there's nothing for it but HPAs/HCAs must learn the steps in this HCO Bulletin if we are to survive. For these skills encompass more than 50% of the cases, in some areas up to 80%. And these will clear slowly or not at all unless this first step is taken first. Even a Problems Intensive will fail on about 30% of these cases. Here are the progressive data which led to this breakthrough: DATUM 1953 -- A Problem is postulate-counter-postulate. DATUM 1954 -- Persons with heavy overts on Scientology make no case progress. No Case Gain = Suspected Person. DATUM 1955 -- A person with a present time problem will get no graph change. DATUM 1961 -- The Goals Problem Mass consists of Items (valences) in opposition to one another. Any pair of these Items, in opposition to each other, constitute a specific problem. DATUM 1961 -- A person with a hidden standard won't go clear. DATUM 1962 -- Rock Slammers. Persons who Rock Slam on Scientology or associated Items are Security Risks. DATUM Nov 1962 -- When a GPM Item Exists in Present Time It Constitutes a Present Time Problem. If one of the opponents in a Problem (Item versus Item) is part of the Goals Problem Mass, that problem will not resolve without resolving at least a portion of the GPM. DATUM Nov 1962 -- All non-gain or slow-gain cases have a GPM Item in their present time environment. The companion or opposing Item to the PTP Item is buried out of sight. CONCLUSION -- All slow-gain or non-gain preclears have to have the GPM Item that is in the present time environment located and opposed before they will make adequate gains in processing or study. Suddenly it becomes of vital technical interest whether a person is any variety of 185 Rock Slammer or not. Before, it and other security measures were only of administrative interest. Now it is a question of whether or not the case will ever improve. Thus we have to have (a) a broadened definition for a Rock Slammer, (b) an easy method of detecting one and (c) quick procedures to remedy the condition. We have all these now. DEFINITION -- A ROCK SLAMMER is a preclear who Rock Slams on a Present Time GPM Item in his or her Immediate Environment. Until this Item is located and opposed the Rock Slammer will make slow gains or no gains in clearing. The Routine 2-12 method of discharging the influence of a Rock Slamming Item is actually taken from 3GA Criss Cross (3GAXX), and is a specialized routine from Routine 3. We will, however, since it does not touch goals, designate it as Routine 2. This routine will have to be learned by all HPAs/HCAs and used by all staff Auditors. It does not include clearing. It includes only Item Assessment. By labelling it Routine 2 it comes within the reach of all trained auditors. ROUTINE TWO-TWELVE 1. Make or use a list of Scientology Items. This includes Scientology, Scientology Organizations, an Auditor, clearing, auditing, Scientologists, a session, an E-Meter, a practitioner, the auditor's name, Ron, other Scientology persons, parts of Scientology, past auditors, etc. (See HCO Bulletin November 24 and subsequent HCO Bulletins for "Scientology Lists".) The list need not be endless as it will be easy to catch a trace of the GPM if the person is a Rock Slammer. The list is composed by the auditor, not the pc. 2. Assess the list, calling each item once (or until auditor is sure of the read). Eliminate down to the last 3 or 4 items. 3. Tiger Drill the Items still in. Select the one with the biggest dirty read or the last one to go out or the one that went out hardest. No matter how faintly or sporadically the Item found now reads, if the last one in stayed in at all, use it for Step 4 below. If, however, the Item found in this step produced a good Rock Slam (Reliable Item) omit Steps 4, 5 and 6 below and do the tests in Step 7 and continue with the remaining steps. If two RIs are found in this first step, oppose each one as in Steps 7 onward. 4. Using the Item selected, list a list from the line question "Who or what does __________________ (the Item found in 3) represent to you?" (It can happen that Steps 4, 5 and 6 are unnecessary. If the Item in Step 3 consistently Rock Slammed a third of a dial to a dial wide and kept on doing it when the auditor said "Consider committing overts against __________________ (the Item found)", use it instead of doing the Step 4 List. If this Rock Slam is on and then vanishes even with "Suppress" clean, do Step 4, using the Item that so slammed but vanished. In doing listing beware of stopping listing while the needle is still dirty or stopping just because the pc says the last item was it. (The real RS Item you want usually comes after the pc says the last one he put on was IT.) (If the pc stops or refuses to go on, get in your Mid Ruds and continue to list until there is no dirty needle or RS when pc thinks of Items before saying them to the auditor.) Mark every Item that RSed or DRed on Listing. While listing keep the meter at about Sens 8 and keep an eye on it to note RSs and DRs. 5. Nul the list, saying each Item on it once (or more if the auditor didn't catch the read). Be sure the Mid Ruds are in. If a dirty needle turns on while nulling, add to the list, get the Mid Ruds in and test the question for reaction. If needle reacts to question the list is incomplete or the pc is protesting the question. Leave any Item in that reacts. Eliminate all but the last 3 or 4 Items. 6. Tiger Drill the last Items in. Select one Item with the biggest needle reaction or Rock Slam. (Two Items can appear on any list. If they both Rock Slam equally and neither goes out, you have found two Items, in which case you must do the following steps to each.) 186 7. Find out if Item turned on Pain or Sensation when being Tiger Drilled, or say it to the pc and find out. If Pain, say to pc, "Consider __________________ (Item) committing overts." If Sensation, say, "Consider committing overts against ___________________ ." This should turn on a Rock Slam if it isn't on already whenever the Item was said or Tiger Drilled. This is called a Reliable Item if it Rock Slammed. The Rock Slam is very touchy sometimes and has to be Tiger Drilled back on. If an Item slammed while being nulled it is probably it. Those that RS while being listed do not have to RS flicker at all while being nulled, and usually don't. 8. If the Reliable Item found turned on Pain, list "Who or what would __________________ (the Reliable Item) oppose?" If it turned on Sensation, list "Who or what would oppose __________________ (the Reliable Item)?" Complete the list as in any listing. Don't stop just because the pc nattered or wept. Get the Mid Ruds in and get a list which gives no dirty needle (not dirty reads, there's a difference) while nulling. In case of a Coterm, test to see if there's more Pn than Sen or Sen than Pn and classify accordingly. If you can't decide, list both as opposed and oppose and nul as one list. 9. Nul the list saying each Item once, down to 3 or 4 Items. 10. Tiger Drill the last 3 or 4 that were left in. Select the last one left in. 11. Test and turn on the Rock Slam on the last one in (as in Step 7 above). Be sure to properly determine which is Term and which is Oppterm. Get pc to examine and align the package for correctness (and any Bonus Package) and put on the pc's Line Plot. 12. Go over the list used in Step 1 to see if there are any more dirty reads or traces of reads on the Scientology List. If so, repeat the above Eleven Steps on the pc. If not, make a list for the Step 1A etc, using questions given further on in this HCO Bulletin. Note: Only the Scientology List is tested again. Other lists for Step 1 are used only once. This is the only action known in auditing which will undercut the bank of a slow moving or non-gain pc. Every such pc is a Rock Slammer. Why is this? Well, these two Items (a terminal and oppterm of the GPM) make a Present Time Problem. The pc is obsessively trying to solve this problem, not trying to get well or go clear. The pc won't come off trying to solve this sub-surface problem. He or she doesn't even "know" about it. So there's the Auditor trying to make somebody well, but the pc is trying to die "to prove Scientology doesn't work" or to get sick "to make my boss realize what he's done to me", etc, etc. It's pathetic. In the largest percentage of cases, the auditor is opening the door to the next two hundred trillion years and the pc is reactively trying to get even with grasshoppers. This disagreement between auditor and pc brings about the upsets and no gains. No other technique known will get at this key problem or problems. This technique doesn't try to diagnose the problem. Indeed the problem won't be known to the pc (or the auditor) until the action is complete. And then the auditor doesn't even have to ask for it or about it. What do you do with these two Items? Well, this will prove to be the third biggest source of falls from grace in using Routine 2-12. You don't do anything with the Items except establish which is the terminal and which is the oppterm and put them on the pc's Line Plot. The thing that could be done with them would be to get "Represent Lists" from them to find more Items. You can ask for missed W/Hs, saying, "When did __________________ (oppterm found) nearly find out about you?" But it's best to leave the RS on for a goal finder as the goal finder will want to use them in 3GAXX. (Step 4A -- Routine 3-21.) So don't spoil the RS. The pc will cognite all over the place and that's the benefit, and the pc won't be trying to chop up auditors and orgs, and should respond very well to CCHs and Prepchecking after the Two Items are found. The biggest error that will be made is trying to do R2-12 with the Rudiments out, 187 and conversely, putting the Mid Ruds in every time a pc originates (a sure way to ruin a pc). The second biggest source of error is making Incomplete Lists. These go out hard and give a dirty needle and result in no Item. The unschooled auditor will usually chicken out whenever the pc says, "That's all," or "I've just put it on the list. That last Item is IT," at which the auditor stops listing. And the Item that will Rock Slam is never put on the list and so is never found. And the auditor is left fighting a dirty needle and trying to read through it. The rule is, while nulling, if a simple question "What did you want to say?" fails to smooth out a suddenly dirty needle the list is incomplete. Complete it and then put in Mid Ruds. The average list runs 80 or more Items. (Get the precise difference between a dirty needle and a dirty read in HCO Bulletin November 8, AD 12.) QUESTIONS FOR THE SECOND PAIR If you have found a pair of Reliable Items and can't find anything now on the basic list of Step One, and you want to continue Routine 2-12, the following questions will produce lists on which Reliable Items can be found. You ask the pc the question and write down whatever he says. You never correct the pc or refuse an Item. You only use one of these questions at a time for a full coverage with all 12 Steps. LISTS List R2-12 -- 1. The Basic Scientology List as given in Step 1. It is essential not to omit it as the first action in Routine 2-12. It may be done again, and should be, after other lists are used to get Reliable Items. (After other Items have been found, List 1 may come alive again as pc's case unburdens.) List R2-12 -- 1A. Special List for pc's environment. General Question, "In present time, who or what have you been upset about?" This, whatever the question, must get things like wife, husband, marriage, job, home, myself, my case, police, this country, machines, etc, etc. It is an effort to locate PT Items that keep the GPM keyed in. Use only after List 1. Pc gives the Items for this List. List R2-12 -- 1B. General Question, "Who or what would you prefer not to associate with?" Listed from pc. This list heading was developed for pcs who won't say they have enemies. It can be used on any pc. Use only what pc lists. Be sure list is complete. List R2-12 -- 1C. General Question, "Who or what have you detested?" Use only what the pc gives. Be sure list is complete. List R2-12 -- 1D. General Question, "Who or what isn't part of existence?" Use only what pc gives. Be sure list is complete. List R2-12 -- 1E. General Question, "What Problem have you had?" Use only what pc gives. Be sure list is complete. List R2-12 -- 1F. General Question, "Who or what have you had to be careful of?" Use only what pc gives. Be sure list is complete. List R2-12 -- 1G. General Question, "Who or what have you invalidated?" Use only what pc gives. Be sure list is complete. List R2-12 -- 1H. General Question, "Who or what has nearly found out about you?" Use only what pc gives. Be very very very sure that list is complete or you'll have missed a withhold on the pc. The above lists are numbered and lettered for proper sequence in use on the preclear. In other words you could do Routine 2-12 many times (plus doing Step 1 on the Scientology List more than once) on a preclear. But always do the first step with Scientology Items as many times as you can get one of its Items to react and you'll never miss. It is this first list of Scientology Items which holds up cases, so it must be used for all 12 steps again and again. Further questions can be had from Prehav assessments. 188 The rule is: "If you get a Reliable Item always get its opposing item." Then you will never get a BY-PASSED ITEM, the thing that hangs up cases. In getting any Reliable Items and their opposition, you are of course cleaning up the GPM and therefore clearing the pc. So this is a road to clear. Items have many other uses, so never fake one and never fail to record one on the Line Plot. Occasionally you get a BONUS PACKAGE off one list. In addition to the Item you are looking for, sometimes two RSing Items will show up on the same list opposing each other and blow. They oppose each other, not what you're listing. Point this out to the pc when found and put these also on the Line Plot, marked BP (Bonus Package), one as a terminal and one as an opposition terminal. And go on and find your regular Item. Routine 2-12, coupled with Problems Intensives and CCHs, gives the HCA/HPA a full kit that can handle the worst cases, knock out the no-gain cases and can clear. So I haven't forgotten the HCA/HPA. Don't try to cover up the fact that somebody has a Rock Slam or a Dirty Read on Scientology etc. You'll have set him or her up to never have gains. SKILLS REQUIRED To accomplish a 3GAXX for Rock Slammers, an auditor needs to be drilled and thoroughly examined on the following: 1. The E-Meter and what is a Dirty Read, a Dirty Needle and a Rock Slam. Practical. 2. HCO Bulletin November 8, AD 12, "Somatics". Theory. 3. Any future HCO Bulletins on Assessment for Rock Slamming Items. Theory and Practical. 4. Tiger Drilling. Theory and Practical. 5. This bulletin. Theory and Practical. If the auditor can't do 3GAXX for Rock Slammers, it will be because he did not know or was badly examined on the five things above. There's neither difficulty nor mystery about the above 12 steps. So study up and don't miss. This, but no Routine 3 process, is declared an HPA/HCA skill. If an auditor can't do it, he'll have a slow go or a no-win on about eighty per cent of all cases. With the above, properly studied and well drilled, there will be great success on anybody who can be persuaded to begin a session. And also this must be done on every case that hasn't gone clear already even after their goal has been found. It's a certainty that such a case is by- passing at least one side of a Present Time Problem that is part of and suppressing the whole GPM. This is THE PC's BIGGEST MISSED WITHHOLD of all. Note: There are no variations on the order of steps or actions above. One doesn't sometimes do this, sometimes that. This is a very rote procedure. Note: On some very, very rough cases this system may not work fully until some regular 3GAXX is run by a Class IV auditor. In any event, a case on 3GAXX should be tested again as above after every 6 or 8 RIs are found. Note: And just to clear up any possible misunderstanding you do R2-12 on all pcs first and you never vary its steps or sequence. 189 Note: No preclear will achieve a lasting case gain with overts on Scientology and allied Items. No free needle will stay free in the presence of these overts. Routine 2-12 removes the unwanted valences that commit such overts rather than endlessly sec checking the pc. The most insidious By-Passed Items are those that remain in present time prompting the pc to commit senseless overts to the dismay of his good sense and the peril of his case condition. He will make no fast gain until the Scientology List is worked over and over for any reaction. FAST STEP RESUME 1. USE OR COMPILE A LIST 1, 1A, 1B, etc. 2. ASSESS LIST. 3. TIGER DRILL THE LAST 3 OR 4 ITEMS LEFT IN. TAKE THE ONE WITH LARGEST OR ANY REMAINING ACTION. IF ITEM FOUND IS AN RI OMIT STEPS 4 AND 5. 4. USING ITEM IN 3, LIST "WHO OR WHAT DOES ____________ REPRESENT TO YOU?" 5. NUL LIST. 6. TIGER DRILL LAST 3 OR 4 ITEMS LEFT IN, SELECT ONE. 7. DETERMINE IF ITEM FOUND IS A TERMINAL OR OPPOSITION TERMINAL. 8. LIST FROM ITEM USING PROPER WORDING FOR A TERMINAL OR OPPOSITION TERMINAL AS ESTABLISHED IN 7. TERM = PAIN = W/W WOULD _____________ OPPOSE? OPPTERM = SEN = W/W WOULD OPPOSE _____________ ? 9. NUL LIST. 10. TIGER DRILL LAST 3 OR 4. SELECT LAST ONE LEFT IN. 11. TEST PACKAGE (AND ANY BONUS PACKAGE) WITH PC, MAKE SURE WHICH IS TERM AND OPPTERM AND IF THEY OPPOSE EACH OTHER AND PUT ON LINE PLOT. 12. DO ALL ABOVE STEPS AGAIN ON SCIENTOLOGY LIST UNTIL IT HAS NO GHOST OF A REACTION. THEN DO 1A, 1B, ETC, EACH ON ALL STEPS. Note: This is a primary training skill. Do not give students more than instruction on the check sheet of Class IIb before turning them loose on Routine IIb as a heavy time auditing activity. They will learn little or nothing before being clean on R2-12. Put Comm Course and other instruction after R2-12 and the student will have a chance to learn it. Give the student further heavy instruction on R2-12 toward course end. Classify only on the end of course repass of the IIb check sheet. The point is don't waste instruction on basic Scientology until the student is cleaned up on Routine 2-12, particularly the Scientology List. I don't care how this is accomplished in the Academy or in the HGC. Just get it done. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 190  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=24/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE -- ISSUE ONE THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 24 NOVEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE -- ISSUE ONE THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST This is the List One of Routine 2-12. You can lengthen but do not shorten this list for Step 1 of R2-12. This list is used over and over on all 12 Steps until no reaction of any kind can be gotten off of it. If an Item on it reads sporadically, even, use it on the 12 Steps. The Scientology List is called LIST ONE. Others, 1A, 1B, are called by their designations. All lists, including the Scientology List, are referred to in general as "A first list", or "The first list". _____________________________________ _____________________________________ PC NAME DATE _____________________________________ _____________________________________ AUDITOR LOCATION (CITY) SCIENTOLOGY A DIANETIC ORGANIZATION SCIENTOLOGISTS ORG SURVIVAL AN AUDITOR A CENTRE AUDITORS FIELD AUDITORS STUDENTS HCA'S AN E-METER D. SCN'S METERS HGC PCS A SESSION ACC's CLEARING MENTAL SCIENCE A CLEAR A SCIENCE OF MIND A RELEASE MENTAL DOCTORS A PRECLEAR SAINT HILL A PATIENT COURSES INSANITY STATEMENTS THE MIND UNITS MINDS SCIENTOLOGY PAY MENTAL HEALTH WORLD CLEARING DIANETICS RON BOOK ONE L. RON HUBBARD DIANETIC BOOKS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SCIENTOLOGY BOOKS THE GOVERNING DIRECTOR A SCIENTOLOGY MAGAZINE THE FOUNDER RON'S ARTICLES MARY SUE A SCIENTOLOGY CONGRESS MARY SUE HUBBARD A BULLETIN THE ASSOCIATION SECRETARY A POLICY LETTER THE ORGANIZATION SECRETARY A HAT THE HCO SECRETARY HATS SECURITY A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION WITHHOLDS FROM SCIENTOLOGY STAFF MEMBERS OVERTS AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY A REGISTRAR YOUR CASE SCIENTOLOGY LETTERS PEOPLE'S CASES INSTRUCTORS TECHNIQUES STAFF AUDITORS PROCEDURES THE D OF P A SQUIRREL THE D OF T PSYCHOLOGISTS HCO PSYCHIATRISTS HASI HUMAN RIGHTS THE CHURCH ENTHETA THE FOUNDATION RUMOURS THE CENTRAL ORG BAD AUDITORS THE ACADEMY BAD AUDITING THE HGC SECURITY RISKS HDRF ROCK SLAMMERS THE CO-AUDIT NO RESULTS CO-AUDITING 191 _____________________________________ _____________________________________ A bad Person in Scientology The worst Auditor pc had _____________________________________ _____________________________________ A bad Person in Scientology A Scientology Exec _____________________________________ _____________________________________ A bad Person in Scientology A Scientology Exec _____________________________________ _____________________________________ Auditor's formal name A Prominent Scientologist _____________________________________ _____________________________________ Auditor's informal name Something in Scientology worrying pc _____________________________________ _____________________________________ An Auditor pc had Something in Scientology worrying pc _____________________________________ _____________________________________ The first Auditor pc had Something in Scientology worrying pc _____________________________________ The best Auditor pc had Note: Fill in all blanks with pc's help. Note: The above when found can be Terms or Oppterms. It doesn't matter which. All that matters is meter reaction unless an RI is found on this list. If so Identify for Term or Oppterm as in Step 7 and continue R2-12. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 192  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=28/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  R2-12 PRACTICAL DRILLS   Central Orgs Academies  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 28 NOVEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Academies R2-12 PRACTICAL DRILLS The following drills were prepared by Brian Pope, Practical Supervisor Saint Hill Special Briefing Course. These drills may be used in any Academy or Course. R2-12 TRAINING DRILL To teach a student to audit with 2-12 he must have certain basic auditing skills. These are: G.F. Model Session. Getting in Mid Ruds. Anti Q & A & TR4. Missed Withholds detection and cleaning. Completing a list. Tiger Drill. Nulling a list. Meter reading. When an auditor has these skills he is capable of running 2-12 and can produce results without exception. The Coach has the student use the 12 steps of 2-12 in Model Session. His purpose is to give the student a reality on the mechanics of what he is doing and coach him to be able to stick to the rote procedure without variation. The coach uses the HCO Bulletin November 23 step by step giving the student on a gradient scale anything he is likely to have to handle during R2-12. Student uses a dummy meter and coach uses a pen as a needle during listing and nulling Items. Drills 1. The coach has student assess List 1 calling off each Item one at a time and makes sure that the student can null this list using a standard marking system and marking in any meter or pc phenomena which may be of value to him, i.e., Rock Slams, Pn or Sen, Dirty Reads, etc. 2. Coach has student drilled in Tiger Drilling the last 3-4 Items in as per "Tiger" (HCO Bulletin August 1, 1962). 3. Coach shows student various things that could happen on a List One assessment. E.g. 2 Rock Slamming Items stay in, 1 RS Item stays in, Sporadic Item stays in, nothing stays in, and teaches student what to do with the Item he is left with (Step 3 of 2-12). 4. Coach shows student how to get a represent list from a reading Item (Step 4, 2-12) coaching him on marking his list with any useful data that shows up during listing or nulling. Coach gives student reality on dirty needles and incomplete lists by "turning on" dirty needles during nulling, also gives student reality on out 193 rudiments during nulling causing Items to stay in -- 3 Items in a row stay in shows a Mid Rud out somewhere -- coach has student have a complete list before nulling. 5. Coach has student null the list by saying each Item once until only 3 or 4 react. 6. Coach has student TD last few Items as in Step 2 to a Reliable -- or 2 Reliable Items. 7. Coach has student do Step 7 of 2-12 practising all he has learned regarding needle behavior and coaches student to recognize a term or an oppterm (HCO Bulletin November 8, 1962). 8. Coach has student complete the Steps 8-12 of R2-12 having him handle anything which may come up during a session and find a package or recognize a blown Item. Instructor passes student when he can run the whole 2-12 steps and find a "package" on Instructor without any variation from procedure. Coach uses HCO Bulletin on 2-12 throughout as his reference for coaching. COACHING NOTES Coach should look for: 1. Poor marking system in nulling. 2. Incomplete lists. 3. Too many Mid Ruds. 4. Failure to get in Mid Ruds. 5. Failure to add Items to list. 6. Poor Tiger Drilling (Tiger Drill is a dust-off not a full-scale cleaning up job like a prepcheck). 7. Student failure to note RS Items during listing or nulling also failure to note any Pn or Sen pc originates. 8. Poor R factor -- not keeping pc informed. 9. Failure to recognize a blown Item or package. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 194  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE -- ISSUE TWO THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Central Orgs HCO BULLETIN OF 29 NOVEMBER AD12 Franchise ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE -- ISSUE TWO THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST This is List One Issue Two. Do not add to it or change it. This list is used over and over on all 12 Steps until no reaction of any kind can be gotten off of it. If an Item on it reads sporadically, even, use it on the 12 Steps. ________________________________ _________________________________ __________ PC'S NAME AUDITOR'S NAME DATE SCIENTOLOGY THE DYNAMICS SCIENTOLOGISTS THE REACTIVE MIND AN AUDITOR PAST LIVES AUDITORS A CENTRE AUDITING FIELD AUDITORS STUDENTS CERTIFICATES AN E-METER HCAs METERS HPAs A SESSION DSCNs CLEARING HGC PCs A CLEAR ACCs A RELEASE MENTAL SCIENCE A PRECLEAR A SCIENCE OF MIND A PATIENT MENTAL DOCTORS INSANITY SAINT HILL THE MIND COURSES MINDS STATEMENTS MENTAL HEALTH UNITS DIANETICS SCIENTOLOGY PAY BOOK ONE WORLD CLEARING DIANETIC BOOKS RON SCIENTOLOGY BOOKS L. RON HUBBARD A SCIENTOLOGY MAGAZINE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RON'S ARTICLES THE GOVERNING DIRECTOR A SCIENTOLOGY CONGRESS THE FOUNDER A BULLETIN MARY SUE A POLICY LETTER MARY SUE HUBBARD A HAT THE ASSOCIATION SECRETARY HATS THE ORGANIZATION SECRETARY A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION THE HCO SECRETARY STAFF MEMBERS SECURITY A REGISTRAR YOUR CASE SCIENTOLOGY LETTERS PEOPLE'S CASES INSTRUCTORS TECHNIQUES STAFF AUDITORS PROCEDURES THE D OF P A SQUIRREL THE D OF T PSYCHOLOGISTS HCO PSYCHIATRISTS HASI AUDITORS THE CHURCH AUDITING THE FOUNDATION ROCK SLAMMERS THE CENTRAL ORG THETANS THE ACADEMY THE HGC HDRF THE CO-AUDIT CO-AUDITING A DIANETIC ORGANIZATION Auditor's Name _____________________ LRH:jw.bh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED L. RON HUBBARD 195  Auditor's Name _____________________ L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=29/11/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINES 2-12, 3-21 and 3GAXX TIGER DRILL for NULLING BY MID RUDS  Type = 11 iDate=1/8/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  Sthil Students CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 29 NOVEMBER AD12 Reissued to Franchise 12 February 1963 Sthil Students CenOCon Franchise ROUTINES 2-12, 3-21 and 3GAXX TIGER DRILL for NULLING BY MID RUDS (Replaces HCO Bulletin 1 August AD12) (Note: In an actual session, in addition to Model Session script, only the words below are used. No additive words or departures are necessary except to clean up a constant dirty needle with session Mid Ruds if that misfortune occurs. And use session Mid Ruds only when you can't go on otherwise.) DRILL ON NEW NULLING PROCEDURES Position for this drill is the usual auditor-coach position. The coach only has the drill form and follows it exactly until the student auditor has each example down perfectly. When the student auditor and the coach have these drills down exactly, then the coach can give different reads and different goals for the student auditor to work on, the only caution being that the goals selected be those which would be most unlikely on anyone's goals list. The goal used in this drill is: TO BE A TIGER. On the drills below "A" is for auditor; "C" is for coach. Student and coach use only the words in the drill except when student errs at which coach says, "Flunk!" and "Start," at which student starts at the beginning. Use of Tiger Drill: This drill is used in Routine 2-12 to sort out the last 3 or 4 Items left in on each nulling. It is used in Routine 3-21 to null the Goals list and on the last 3 or 4 Items left in. In 3GAXX it is used on the last 3 or 4 Items left in and on any Goals list. This is the Small Tiger Drill. It is however simply called the Tiger Drill. Big Tiger is always called Big Tiger. Buttons used: Only the following buttons are used in Small Tiger: Suppressed, Invalidated, Suggested, Failed to reveal and Mistake. Big Tiger is the same drill except that it additionally uses Nearly found out, Protest, Anxious about and Careful of. One shifts to Big Tiger when making sure of the last Item in on the list or a goal that fires strongly. Tiger and Big Tiger compare in buttons used to Mid Ruds and Big Mid Ruds. Drill 1: A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 2: A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? 196 C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 3: A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 4: A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 5: A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null 197 A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 6: A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On the goal to be a tiger is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 7: A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: On the goal to be a tiger has any mistake been made? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null 198 A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 8: A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: On this goal has any mistake been made? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: To be a tiger C: Read A: To be a tiger C: Read. (Note that this goal is now ready to be checked out.) Drill 9: A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? 199 C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal is there anything you have failed to reveal? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Drill 10: A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Read A: On this goal has anything been invalidated? C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Read A: That reads: What was it? Thank you. On this goal has anything been suggested? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: On this goal has anything been suppressed? C: Null A: To be a tiger C: Null A: Thank you. That is out. Acks -- These are used to complete and end a whole Drill Cycle. They can be used during the Drill if pc needs them, but only if pc needs them. It's better to use the Drill as is. Suppress -- Suppress is not used repetitively in Tiger Drilling, only in Mid Ruds and Prepchecking. "Do you agree that that is clean" -- This is not used. "I will check that on the meter" -- This is not used. After doing Suppress always check the Goal. If the pc has a tendency to lose sight of the goal on a long run you can always change, for a command, the wording to "On the goal To be a tiger has anything been _________ ?" LRH:jw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962, 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 200  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=1/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  GOALS & PREPCHECKING   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 DECEMBER 1962 CenOCon GOALS & PREPCHECKING In Prepchecking pcs through Problems Intensives, it commonly occurs that the pc presents his or her goal to the Auditor. When this occurs the goal should not be given vast importance or suppressed, either way. The pc should be taken to a Class IV Auditor and checked out. The Prepcheck may then be shifted to the goal itself. The usual actions of Routine 3-21 are then followed, of which the goals prepcheck is a part, so long as the auditing is done under the supervision of a Class IV Auditor. It is a very bad action to just take the pc's goal and run it without its being thoroughly checked out. The health and even the life of the pc can be put at risk if it is not the pc's goal. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd.jh Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 201  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE -- ISSUE THREE THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex Central Orgs HCO BULLETIN OF 4 DECEMBER AD12 Franchise ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE -- ISSUE THREE THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST Do not add to list or you will get incomplete list phenomena. _______________________________ _____________________________ _______________ PC'S NAME AUDITOR'S NAME DATE SCIENTOLOGY SOMATICS SCIENTOLOGISTS PAIN AN AUDITOR ENGRAMS AUDITORS CIRCUITS AUDITING VALENCES STUDENTS THE DYNAMICS AN E-METER PAST LIVES METERS A CENTRE A SESSION FIELD AUDITORS CLEARING CERTIFICATES A CLEAR HCAs A RELEASE HPAs A PRECLEAR D.SCNs A PATIENT MINISTERS INSANE PEOPLE HGC PCs THE MIND ACCs MINDS MENTAL SCIENCE MENTAL HEALTH A SCIENCE OF MIND DIANETICS MENTAL DOCTORS BOOK ONE SAINT HILL DIANETIC BOOKS COURSES SCIENTOLOGY BOOKS STATEMENTS A SCIENTOLOGY MAGAZINE UNITS RON'S ARTICLES SCIENTOLOGY PAY A SCIENTOLOGY CONGRESS WORLD CLEARING A BULLETIN RON A POLICY LETTER L. RON HUBBARD A HAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HATS THE GOVERNING DIRECTOR A SCIENTOLOGY ORGANIZATION THE FOUNDER STAFF MEMBERS MARY SUE A REGISTRAR MARY SUE HUBBARD SCIENTOLOGY LETTERS THE ASSOCIATION SECRETARY INSTRUCTORS THE ORGANIZATION SECRETARY STAFF AUDITORS THE HCO SECRETARY THE D of P SECURITY THE D of T YOUR CASE HCO PEOPLE'S CASES HASI TECHNIQUES THE CHURCH PROCEDURES THE FOUNDATION ROUTINE 2.12 THE CENTRAL ORG A SQUIRREL THE ACADEMY PSYCHOLOGISTS THE HGC PSYCHIATRISTS THE PE ROCK SLAMMERS HDRF THETANS THE CO-AUDIT TESTS CO-AUDITING EXAMINERS A DIANETIC ORGANIZATION GOALS THE DYNAMICS TAPES THE REACTIVE MIND LECTURES ABERRATION ________________________________ Auditor's Name LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [Added to by HCO B 9 December 1962.] 202  ________________________________ Auditor's Name L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=5/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  2-12, 3GAXX, 3-21 AND ROUTINE 2-10 MODERN ASSESSMENT   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 DECEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise 2-12, 3GAXX, 3-21 AND ROUTINE 2-10 MODERN ASSESSMENT The only actual test of a list is "Is it nullable?" Can it be nulled? Or will a dirty needle take over? Assessment is prevented by the following: (1) List taken from erroneous source. (most corny) (2) List is incomplete. (most common) (3) Missed missed withholds. (least common) (4) List Mid Ruds out. (most overworked) (5) Session Mid Ruds out. (most neglected) DEFINITIONS ASSESSMENT -- The whole action of obtaining a significant Item from a pc. LISTING -- The auditor's action in writing down Items said by the pc in response to a question by the auditor. NULLING -- The auditor's action in saying Items from a List to a pc and noting the reaction of the pc by use of an E-Meter. ROCKSLAMMER -- One who produces a Rockslam during the nulling of the Scientology List on that list. Persons who produce Rockslam reactions on other lists are not Rockslammers. This is designated because a certain behavior pattern can be expected of a Rockslammer and because this person, having a PTP from the GPM on Scientology or allied Items, especially will make no gain in other auditing or studying of any kind until that Item is properly opposed by R2-10 or R2-12 and the case further cleaned on 2-10 or 2-12. 3GAXX and R3-21 are no help to this case. Without 2-12 this case is condemned to the next two hundred trillion years in misery. So never miss in spotting a Rockslammer. NULLABLE -- The condition a list must be in in order to have an Item found on it. A DEAD HORSE -- A list which even with good auditing, failed for any other reason to produce a Reliable Item. SKUNKED -- A list with RSs on it in listing that failed to produce a Reliable Item. 203 WRITING THE LIST The list is written on 8" x 13" or 8 1/2" x 13 1/2" paper, on two sides of the paper, in one or two columns, depending on size of the writing. A fold of four pages is sometimes used, 8" x 13". The pc's name in brief, the date and page number of the list and the question being asked are put on every sheet on the first side of that sheet or on the first page of a set of four pages unseparated. The question is repeated only as often as actually needed by the pc. Items are softly acknowledged now and then, not each Item. All Items are written down that the pc gives. The list is done with pc on the meter at sensitivity 8. The auditor keeps an eye on the meter. As the pc first thinks of an Item, the Item RSs or gives a DR. The auditor marks "RS" or "DR" after each such Item. The auditor must be alert for a pc saying, "That's the Item. Now the list is complete." Invariably the RSing Items lie just after such a statement. Such a statement is acknowledged well and the auditor says, "We'll have to continue just to be sure I have a clean needle." The list is complete when the needle is clean and flowing (but this won't happen with the Session Mid Ruds out). An auditor never repeats Items to the pc after the pc says them. If the auditor doesn't understand he asks pc to spell it or if it is singular or plural. Don't fake an understanding. The list must be accurate or it will foul up the needle on nulling. The danger sign of overlisting (there are three but this is the only one used in 2-12 and 3GAXX) is the pc invalidating or questioning Items as he or she says them. When this happens near the beginning of a list, it indicates a wrong source for the list. After a hundred Items or more it means that the list is as complete as it will ever be and the auditor should stop and try to null it. If a first step 2-12 list produces no RSs one completes it anyway and uses it. In short, first step lists don't have to RS. However, a first step list that does RS is far more likely to produce results. If a step 4 2-12 list produces no RS after being stretched on and on it is definitely a dead horse and should be abandoned. An RS usually occurs before 50 Items on a live list but this is a guess and some RSs have not turned on before 100 Items or more were listed. In short, Represent and Opposition lists must produce an RS somewhere or they will not give a Reliable Item. These should be abandoned without nulling. If an Item is an RSing Item it should only be opposed, represented (in 3GAXX) only after being opposed. Representing an RSing Item rather than opposing it will fail, as in representing an RSing Item the Reliable Item for the list is, of course, the Item the auditor already has. The commonest flub is to fail to get in the Session Mid Ruds before writing or nulling a list and thereby getting a clean needle. Auditors who fail are auditors who won't clean up a dirty needle before nulling. A needle can be dirty before and during the writing of a list without harming anything. But the needle must be clean or cleaned up when the completion test (d) below is given. The commonest source of a dirty needle is out list Mid Ruds, but a new case with no Items found may have a dirty needle until a good live list is listed out to complete. Then magically the DN vanishes. 204 Various shifts, all common to auditing, may have to be employed to clean up a needle for the first assessment. But if it is too hard, just do a Zero One 2-12 List and use it before the Scientology List and the needle will usually clean, especially when the first Reliable Item is found. Don't try to bat a perfect score of one list = an RI. An auditor often has dead horses. But when the average rises above 50% dead horse there is something wrong with the auditing. Excellent auditing gives less than 20% dead horses. Because an Item RSs when given in writing the list is no reason it will RS when nulling even with the Mid Ruds in. One RSing Item on a list will impart its RS to a dozen Items during the listing step. Don't harass the pc about a dirty needle. It's the auditor who dirtied it up with wrong sources for lists or incomplete lists or cleaning clean reads. If when getting the Rudiments in, an RS is noted, take no different action. RSs seen in the Ruds merely mean the pc is hot on a PTP that goes hard into the GPM and nothing but 2-12 will relieve it permanently. Other measures such as O/W turn it off for the moment but never permanently; only 2-12 can do that. Don't run 3-21 on a pc who RSs in the Ruds. Only 2-12 or 2-10. Never say "Floor. Floor. Floor," to turn off an RS or DN or DR. You don't care if things RS and a DN is cured only with Session and/or List Mid Ruds. It is fatal to fail to oppose an RSing Item found on List One or a first list of 2-12. If a Rockslammer test disclosed an RS on the Scientology List on Tuesday and another auditor on Wednesday just does a new List One Assessment and ignores the RS test result and doesn't oppose the List One RI, the ease may breed dead horses thereafter. Use RSing Items when known or when found for opposition lists. How wide is an RS? This is a silly question as an RS is a repetitive slashing of the needle of any width. A DR is a different looking read, tiny in its strokes. One or two slashes make an RS. There isn't such a thing as an incipient RS. If it slashed up or down once call it an RS. A Rocket Read looks entirely different in velocity and decay. A common source of trouble in finding a Reliable Item is missing an in Item that is marked in and not re-nulling it. The auditor misses the slant/. Each page of a list is examined carefully fur all Items X before being abandoned. It is then marked with a big X in the upper left corner, meaning "all nulled". This saves an inspection of it again in going over the list. 205 NULLING When a list is said to be complete by the preclear (does not apply to Scientology List) the auditor (a) Gets in Session Big Mid Ruds. (b) Gets in the List Big Mid Ruds. (c) MAKES SURE THE NEEDLE IS CLEAN BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE THAN (a) and (b). (d) Says the question of the list and sees if it reacts on the meter or upsets needle flow. (e) If meter reacts auditor completes list and does test of question as in (d) again until either the needle is smooth (c) or dirty. If dirty and won't clean by listing, does Session Mid Ruds (a) and List Mid Ruds (b) and checks needle (c). (Until the (a) to (e) steps have been gone through carefully the auditor hasn't a prayer of nulling a list properly.) (A pc can become harassed by an auditor trying to smooth a smooth needle with unnecessary Mid Ruds.) The auditor now starts to null the list by the following steps: (f) Calls each Item on the list one time (or more times if read was missed by auditor the first time). (No committing Overts against, etc, is now used. Only the Item itself.) (g) Marks each Item that goes out with an X . (h) Marks each Item that stays in with a/. (i) If three or four Items stay in in a row, the auditor concludes that an Item earlier on the list has been invalidated and politely turns the list so the pc can see it and, indicating the already passed over Items, says, "Which one of these might you have had thoughts on?" The pc looks at list and answers. The auditor simply acknowledges politely and goes on nulling. He does not re-state the "falsely in" (/) Items. (j) Every ten or so Items that go out consecutively (X) the auditor asks for a possible suppress, "On this list has anything been suppressed?" If it reacts on meter it is cleaned up and the auditor draws a line down the side of the (X) Items from moment of the suppress to where he now is as a group to null them again next time. The auditor does not re-null them until the next time around. (k) At the end of the first time through the auditor gets in the List Mid Ruds until the needle is clean and flowing. It may sometimes be necessary to get the Session Mid Ruds in to accomplish a fully clean needle. (l) The auditor starts down the list again, calling off each Item left in (/) one time (or until he sees the reaction or lack of it). (m) Items now out are marked X and Items that are still in are marked / . Don't forget the X groups that were marked suppressed. (n) When the auditor has gone through the list a second time the List Big Mid Ruds are put in swiftly. (o) Do steps (l), (m) and (n) until the list is down to 3 or 4 Items. 206 (p) Briefly Tiger Drill the remaining Items. Take the one that RSs as an RI. (q) If no Item now RSs and none can now be made to RS get in the Session Big Mid Ruds and do (p) again. (r) If no RS results, take the Items still reacting and ask the pc's opinion (packaging step of 2-12). Don't oppose an Item that did not RS when found. Don't endlessly Tiger Drill an Item until it dies. Don't fail to oppose an Item that RSs. LIST APPEARANCES A nulled list does not look like this (this is the result of Incomplete Lists or out ruds or improper source): Tiger///////////X Waterbuck//X Wind//////////////X Willow wand/////////////////// Catfish/////X///X/////X Game Warden///////////X A nulled list also does not look like this: Tiger Waterbuck Wind/ Willow wand// Catfish Game Warden This is how a rightly nulled list should look: Tiger DRX Waterbuck X Wind RSX Willow wand RSpn/ RS/RS/ RS Catfish X Game Warden sen/X If a pc's List Mid Ruds (On this list has anything ________ ) go out and if pc Inspection Step (i) above is not done, this is what happens: Tiger X <----- (Pc Invalidates this Item after pc hears it.) Waterbuck/ ) ) Wind / ) ) <--------- Invalidation is dragged Willow wand/ ) <--------- over and makes these ) <--------- look like they're in. Catfish/ ) ) Game Warden/ ) 207 If a pc suppresses an Item or something else this is what happens: Tiger pnX Waterbuck X <----- (Pc Suppresses) Wind X ) ) <--------- These also look Willow wand X ) <--------- like they are ) <--------- out. Catfish X ) Game Warden X This is the way the list just above is marked when the suppress factor is found on check as in Step (j) above: Tiger X Waterbuck X ) ) Wind X ) ) Willow wand X ) Sup. ) Catfish X ) ) Game Warden X ) Horns X <------------ Auditor discovered pc suppressing Claws/X Waterbuck here. Creek X ASSESSMENTS Assessment by greatest Reaction is the earliest method of Assessment. It still works but is used now only to decide on last two or three Items that were Tiger Drilled. It is not terribly inaccurate but is no tool for a really skilled auditor as RSs transfer about on some lists. Assessment by Elimination depends wholly on the right Item being charged enough to peer through the out rudiments. One just goes over and over the list marking things in or out as above until one stays in. This is crude but it works. It is no tool for a trained auditor. ROUTINE 2-10 (R2-12 Short Form for Beginners) The Short Form of R2-12 can be used by untrained auditors with some effect until they are trained in Mid Ruds and other niceties. Do not use Model Session or Goal Finder's Model Session. Just use "Start of Session" and "End of Session". No Ruds, havingness or other actions. Step One: Assess first lists by Elimination above, taking whatever survives and reads. If an RS is found oppose it at once. Except for Scientology List, list a standard first list question to get this first list. Label paper as in Step Six below. Be sure to list until needle looks smooth or pc has really run out. Step Two: Using the Item found in Step One above, list a "Who or What does ______________ (Item found) represent to you?" list, marking "RS" all Items that RSed before being said by pc or when said by pc. List until needle looks very smooth. Step Three: Null list by RS. Neglect everything that didn't RS when said to pc. Go over Items that RSed again until only one does. 208 Read all Items to pc. Don't mark Items that don't RS with an X as the list actually hasn't been nulled. Step Four: Circle Item or Items that still RSed on Nulling on the list. (Get it checked out by the Instructor if one is present.) Choose whatever continues to RS now and then when said. Step Five: Establish if Item made pc sick or dizzy (sen) or hurt or hot or cold (pn). Step Six: If Item in Five above was sen, list question is "Who or What would oppose ______________ (Item found)?" If Item was pn, list question becomes "Who or What would a ______________ (Item found) oppose?" Write proper question and pc's name, date and page number at the top of each sheet. Step Seven: List the question in Six until needle looks clean and isn't Ticking or kicking as pc thinks of Items. Get the list complete. Be sure that every Item that RSed when pc thought of it or said it was marked "RS" after it. Step Eight: Read list Items once each to pc and note any Item that RSs when said to the pc. Go over RSing Items again. Step Nine: Circle the Item or Items that still RS. (Get it checked out by Instructor if one is present.) Step Ten: Find out with pc's help which opposes which in the Items found, or if anything opposed anything, and mark them on pc's Line Plot. Repeat all steps using same first list until it is clean on Step One and then obtain a new first list from another question. The above Routine is far less reliable than 2-12 but if a student or auditor does not know Model Session, Mid Ruds or Tiger Drilling, it will be less upsetting to the pc and get more done. Of course RSing Items will get lost by suppression but probably can be refound if the student just keeps working at it. A rather difficult ("never" RSing case) will get minimal gain on R2-10. There really are no "never" RSing cases except for a horribly inept auditor. The percentage of dead horses with 2-10 will be found much greater than with R2-12. But 2-10 does work somewhat. R2-10 can be used by new students, old auditors who are not recently trained and in Clearing Co-audits under Instructors, but should not be used by trained auditors. These should use R2-12. Others should use 2-10 only until they can be trained in 2-12. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.jh.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [The above HCO B incorporates HCO B 8 December 1962, Corrections -- HCO Bulletin of December 5, AD12, and HCO B 17 December 1962, Correction to HCO Bulletin of December 5, 1962, which simply corrected errors in the writing, typing and proofreading of the original mimeo issue.] 209  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=6/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  R2-10, R2-12, 3GAXX DATA, THE ZERO A STEPS AND PURPOSE OF PROCESSES   CenOCon Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 DECEMBER AD12 CenOCon Franchise R2-10, R2-12, 3GAXX DATA, THE ZERO A STEPS AND PURPOSE OF PROCESSES RULE: WHEN AN RSING ITEM IS FOUND ON LIST ONE THE SCIENTOLOGY LIST IT MUST BE OPPOSED. COROLLARY: WHEN AN RSING ITEM IS FOUND ON LIST ONE AND IS NOT OPPOSED THE CASE WILL TEND THEREAFTER TO PRODUCE NO ROCKSLAMMING LISTS. The Rule and Corollary are so much fact that if the auditor fails to oppose an RSing Item on List One and only represents it, the case will produce dead horses thereafter. This is true mainly for The Scientology List. As Scientology is what is helping the pc, having a GPM type present time problem about it will prevent any further case gain. On four cases now, where no RS was found on List One, The Scientology List, although DR Items were found and represented, no RSes occurred on the lists. Thereafter the history of these cases was gone into, older auditor reports were examined and it was found that in each of these cases during a Security Check that an Item like "Scientology" or "Auditor" or "LRH" had RSed. The case then fully suppressed it and it did not come up on a new assessment of The Scientology List. As soon as these Items were opposed RSes turned back on on the Lists and all went well thereafter. Further, the nattery nature of the pc was extreme until this was done. So it can be concluded that a BIG 2-10 or 2-12 goof is to fail to oppose Items that RS on List One, The Scientology List. It is an INDICATOR that if a pc is very nattery or upset on 2-10 or 2-12, it is probable that somebody overlooked and didn't oppose something that RSed on List One. It is an Indicator that if a pc is producing Dead Horses on listing, somebody overlooked and failed to oppose an RSing Item on List One or that the pc should be run on List Zero-One or List Zero-Two. A common form of missing an RSing Item on a represent and being unable to make a list nullable, is that the Item from which the represent list was taken, being unburdened by the listing, now begins to RS and becomes the Reliable Item. Rule: When having difficulty getting a clean needle on a represent list at the end of listing, and before nulling, always Tiger Drill briefly the Item the list is coming from to see if that Item is now RSing. If it is, don't bother to null the represent list just made. Do an oppose list on the original Item. 210 Example: List One Item found -- The Church. Gives a DR. A represent list is written 200 or more Items. Meter still rough. Check The Church. It will occasionally be found to be RSing and is therefore taken as the RI and now should be opposed. The represent list made is abandoned. In trying to run R2-12 on a first goal clear, use R2-10 instead and use any tick an Item gives instead of an RS in order to oppose that Item. A persistent tick or reaction = RS on a 1st goal clear. ZERO LIST QUESTIONS OR R2-12 Where a pc is producing Dead Horses on List One, there are Zero Lists that can be used. The procedure is this: R2 -- Step 02 -- Check up on the pc's record to see if an RS was ever observed on Scientology, the orgs, auditor, LRH and if so oppose that Item at once. R2 -- Step 01 -- Lists 0A If a Dead Horse is produced by (1) above, then assess the following for largest read on the meter: List 0A0 Keep Hidden List 0A1 Be Reasonable About List 0A2 Rather not think about List 0A3 Rather not know about List 0A4 Ignore List 0A5 Avoid List 0A6 Stay away from List 0A7 Not Communicate with List 0A8 Hold off List 0A9 Rather not have appear List 0A10 Have to help List 0A11 Fail to help List 0A12 Dislike List 0A13 Fight List 0A14 Advise others to Attack List 0A15 Attack List 0A16 Do away with Then use the result (largest read or RS) in the blank of the following question: "In present time who or what would you ____________________________ " Step 1-0A: Make your first List by asking the pc the question formed in (02). Proceed then with the usual remaining steps of R2-12 (or R2-10). Note: These steps do not replace the 1-A series in the original issue. The Zero A series as given above are all prior to List One, The Scientology List, which must be done after the Zero A series. 211 The Zero A series can be assessed several times for new lists. But remember, the pc who has a hot List One (The Scientology List) will make minimal progress on Routine 2-12. On a pc newly on R2-12 or 2-10, if an RS was missed on List One, and nobody can discover if this pc ever RSed on it, and List One gives two Dead Horses in a row, fall back on the Zero A List. Then after two or three packages are found from it, re-assess List One. The List One RS will have been caught by the Zero A Lists or will be there on List One again. "NEVER RSing" PCs If a pc cannot be made to RS on Represent Lists taken from List One, then List One was already RSing or the Zero A List must be resorted to. There are no never RSing pcs. All pcs RS. Those that are mediumly bad off RS very easily. Those that are way down RS less easily. Those that are in fair shape RS well but the RS is rather moderate (less wide) and their RS turns on every time an RSing Item is said to them. The bad off pc's RS suppresses very easily. The mediumly bad off pc has a wide, wild frantic RS that sometimes RSes within the RS as it slashes. The progress of a pc can be marked by this cycle: Horrible shape = Hard to find RS. Mediumly bad off = Frantic wide, sporadic RSs easily suppressed. Not too bad = Easy to find RS turns on easily on auditor's statement of Item. Mediumly wide. Fair shape = Easy to find, easy to turn on, doesn't suppress, fairly narrow and regular. Good shape = Very easy to find, very easy to turn on by command, blows on cognition. A pc in horrible shape goes through all these phases. Any other case on the scale moves up. The GPM RS is the pathway through the GPM. Any Item that RSes was part of the GPM and has another Item in opposition to it. Thus, you could, in theory, clear a pc by just finding Items on and on. However, the goal sooner or later presents itself, usually in the form of a Rocket Reading Terminal. By listing what goal that terminal may have one gets a goals list that can be assessed. (The RR Item still must also be opposed.) But wrong goals are so deadly and R2-12 Items are so beneficial when found that a Class II Auditor takes his pc's health and life in his hands to fool about with goals. Leave that to Class IVs and go on finding Items. ROCKET READS vs RSes The Rocket Read is superior in value to an RS. The RS is superior in value to a DR. A DR is superior in value to a fall. A beginning RS is sometimes mistaken for a Rocket Read. But it won't repeat itself. And a Rocket Read always goes to the right with a fast spurt which rapidly decays. The slash of an RS is all of the same velocity and doesn't decay, it just ceases. 212 The Rocket Read is the Read of the goal or the Rock itself. The RS is the read of the Rock vs the Opposition Rock and every pair above them on the cycle of the GPM. It marks the path to the Rock. Just below the Rock lies the pc's goal. The ROCK SLAM CHANNEL is the pathway through the pairs of Items that compose a cycle of the GPM and lead to the Rock and goal. The Rock Slam marks the path of Interest of the pc. RS = Interest = Cognitions. No RS = No Cognitions. Below the 1st Goal is a whole new undisclosed GPM. The 1st goal clears off a cycle of the GPM. The second goal a 2nd cycle, earlier and stronger. And so on. This is therefore the road to Theta Clear and Operating Thetan. But the first goal is too heavily overburdened to be found easily or run on the vast majority of cases. Therefore R2-12 is needed and 3GAXX. PURPOSE OF PROCESSES The target of R2-10 is fast result in the pc and greater reality for the auditor. The target of R2-12 is the packages in Present Time which bend the GPM out of shape and give the pc PTPs and Hidden Standards. The target of 3GAXX is Items on which goals lists can be compiled and unburdening. The target of Routine 3-21 is Clear, Theta Clear and Operating Thetan. Second goals are easily found by R3-21 alone without Step 4A (3GAXX). This then is the whole road from Homo Sapiens to Homo Novis to Operating Thetan. It requires only precision and the auditing skill now taught on the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 213  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  TRAINING X UNIT   Sthil Students Academies  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 DECEMBER AD12 Sthil Students Academies TRAINING X UNIT The biggest hole in student auditing is the inability to clean up a needle. Students who try to do assessments fail to get results when they attempt to null with a needle that is already filthy. It is rather easy to clean a needle and the results on the pc are highly beneficial. The basis of an inability to read a meter is state of case. This is remedied by R2-12's List One cleaning. When List One is burnished bright, the student will be able to read a meter. In V unit the auditing is heavily supervised and the student's reality is raised by accurate R2-12 or R2-10. In X unit therefore, the first indicated step is to teach the student to use the Mid Ruds. This is done by Havingness by Mid Ruds. The pattern of the session is Goal Finder's Model Session. The Purpose of the X unit Sessions is to clean a needle and to demonstrate that a needle can be cleaned. The Auditor notes the pc's can squeeze before session start. The session is started with the usual Goal Finder's pattern. The Rudiments are put in by Big Mid Ruds, "Since the last time I audited you ............ " (or "Since the last time you were audited ............ " if this is the auditor's first session, or "Since you decided to be audited ............ " for raw meat). The general missed W/Hs of the pc are pulled in the body of the early sessions. When this has been done, remaining sessions are devoted to havingness. The pc's havingness process is tested for and found, or is run. The body of the session is closed. The Big Ruds for the session are then put in. The pc is then asked with meter at Sens 16 "In this session was the room all right?" and this is cleaned. The can squeeze test is then made with Sens 1. Goals and gains are taken up and the session is ended. By end of session the needle should be without pattern and the pc should be cheerful. LRH:jw.cden L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 214  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=9/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE ADD TO LIST ONE ISSUE THREE (HCO Bulletin December 4, AD12)   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 9 DECEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise ROUTINE 2-12 LIST ONE ADD TO LIST ONE ISSUE THREE (HCO Bulletin December 4, AD12) Correction: Auditor's name at end of second column is part of second column and is used in assessment. DIRECTIONS: If anything has ever Rockslammed on List One itself it must be opposed even if it doesn't Rockslam now. The data of all observations and security checks is used to find if anything Rockslammed. The case will give dead horses if a Rockslamming Item is by-passed. Cases that give dead horses on R2-12 had a Rockslamming Item on L1st One that was never opposed. On cases that have been giving lists on which no RSs occur, Tiger Drill List One until you get an RS on any button or pain or sensation on any Item and just oppose it. After a List One Item has been represented always check it again to see if it now is Rockslamming. If so, do an opposition list to it in accordance to whether it gave pn or sen. Add these additional Items to List One Issue 3: FRANCHISE FAMILY 10%s HOME SCIENTOLOGY GROUPS LOVE GROUP AUDITING PARENTS MEMBERSHIPS FATHER REPORTS MOTHER DISSEMINATION A GROUP INFRACTIONS GROUPS PABs GOVERNMENT ASSESSMENTS ORGANIZATIONS MID RUDS COMPANY CHECK OUTS MANAGEMENT EXAMINERS LABOUR GLASSES A CLUB HEALTH PEOPLE MEDICINE MANKIND MEDICAL DOCTORS SPECIES HEALING SYSTEMS LIVING THINGS PROCESSING MATTER TESTS MASSES I.Q. ENERGY TRAINING SPACE YOURSELF TIME YOU FORM ME (meaning pc) FORMS ME (meaning auditor) AUDITING ROOMS SEX THETANS SEXUAL PRACTICES SPIRITS A MAN GHOSTS MEN KNOWLEDGE A WOMAN THOUGHT WOMEN RELIGION A CHILD GODS CHILDREN GOD MARRIAGE SUPREME BEING LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 215  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT R2-12 THE FATAL ERROR   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 DECEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise URGENT R2-12 THE FATAL ERROR The surest way to retard and upset a case with Routine 2-12 is to find a Rock Slam on List One, Tiger Drill it down to a dirty needle and then represent it. That case will then hang up, 2-12 can be pronounced as unworkable and the whole thing can be skipped. Yes, the represent list so taken will RS. Yes, the List One Item tested again will probably now RS. Yes, the auditor has followed the rules of R2-12. All except one, and that rule is: IF AN ITEM ROCKSLAMS WHEN CALLED ON LIST ONE OR AT ANY TIME DURING TIGER DRILLING, NO MATTER HOW BRIEFLY, THAT ITEM MUST BE GIVEN AN OPPOSITION LIST. And another rule: IF YOU AREN'T SURE IF A LIST ONE ITEM GAVE PAIN OR SENSATION, THE OPPOSITION LIST MUST BE MADE BOTH WAYS, "WHO OR WHAT WOULD IT OPPOSE" AND " WHO OR WHAT WOULD OPPOSE IT". If more than one Item RSed on List One you take what RSed longest or was closest to the session. List One Items do not have to continue to Rockslam forever in order to do opposition lists to them. Most pcs who know the rules lie about pain or sensation in order to pretend List One Items are terminals. Do the opposition lists both ways as above and nul all. Routine 2-12 has only this frailty: Rockslammers will not find rock slams on List One. And Tiger Drilling can be counted on, in inexpert hands, to suppress the RS. A case BOGS when you represent an RS-ing Item. NEVER represent an RS-ing Item. Always oppose it. Hear me, now. Almost 100% of R2-12 cases will fail if no attention is paid to the above. If you get a case that gets only dead horses, don't go to the Zero A List. Just write an opposition list to Scientology. You'll be right ninety percent of the time. The other ten percent RS on Scientology Orgs and Auditors. Opposition Lists only on RS-ing Items. Hear me now. If a case EVER ROCKSLAMMED ON A LIST ONE ITEM, whether on an old Security Check, a Joburg, a Rock Slam Sec Check, and you now do only represent lists from List One, that case will hang, or make small gain on R2-12 until somebody is smart enough to look at the record and oppose that RS-ing Item. Honest, the case is finished right now, kaput, wrecked, smashed, ended, snarled, messed up, ruined, stopped and skewered until a List One Item that RSed ever so briefly is opposed. Represent Lists will get it nowhere until this is done. Hear me, please. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.vmm.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 216  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=30/12/62 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT IMPORTANT ROUTINES 2-12 & 2-10 CASE ERRORS POINTS OF GREATEST IMPORTANCE   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 30 DECEMBER AD12 Central Orgs Franchise URGENT IMPORTANT ROUTINES 2-12 & 2-10 CASE ERRORS POINTS OF GREATEST IMPORTANCE The errors in doing Routine 2-10 and Routine 2-12 are divided into two broad divisions: (a) Those of auditing itself; (b) Those deriving from errors in doing the exact skills of Routines 2-10 and 2-12. AUDITING ERRORS This bulletin touches only briefly on the errors of (a) Auditing Errors. These consist of sloppy form, bad TRs, inability to read a meter, Auditor Code breaks, Q and A-ing, missing missed W/Hs, doing bad Mid Ruds or Tiger Drilling and using Auditing form to hold up results. One remedies bad auditing (as different from bad 2-10 or 2-12) by following this prescription: The poorer the auditor, the more a supervisor or instructor takes away from him the tools of auditing. In short, if an auditor makes bad auditing errors, one simplifies the auditing to prevent the errors. Don't let him or her do 2-12. Make such an auditor use only 2-10. Then, as the auditor's skill in basic auditing improves, the more he or she can be trusted with 2-12. Do NOT let an auditor who can't do any kind of a job of basic auditing do 2-12. Let such an auditor do only 2-10. And then as that auditor's case improves on 2-10 or 2-12, and as training drills are passed, let the auditor graduate up to 2-12. Remember this: 2-12 works all by itself with no auditing niceties. And it can be prevented from working (but only to some degree) by bad auditing form or intention. Strip off Model Session, Mid Ruds, Tiger Drilling, and two-way comm, demand it be run muzzled, muzzled, muzzled, use the meter only to find Rockslams, and modern Routine 2 works like a dream, a dream, a dream even for an auditor whose auditing skill is terrible. Let a Q and A artist clean cleans on a meter, muck up the Mid Ruds, yap at the pc, and Routine 2 won't work because it never gets done. So the training stress and the use stress of Routine 2 is first on Routine 2, its rules and how it's done, and when the auditor has case gains and wins, auditing form is then entered upon. The backwards way is to insist on a good hard study of form before training on Routine 2. Always hammer Routine 2 home first and get it done, not fooled with by the Mixed-up Kid from Mid Rud Gulch. 217 Your main trouble will come from not teaching Routine 2 hard just as itself before entering upon the niceties of auditing. You have to show the wild man it's a house before you teach him to serve French Pastry a la Partie. Of course nothing in this HCO Bulletin should be used to degrade the value of good auditing form. Good metering, a smooth command of the TRs, a grip on the basics and a fine knowledge of fundamentals are vital in an auditor. You can't get all there is to get out of Routine 2-12 with rough auditing. Auditing skill is not just something to acquire. It's the only thing that gets real auditing done. And good auditors are scarce and I appreciate them. I've had my share of rough auditing and I know the diamonds and gold of a smooth, flawless auditor. But Routine 2, at the time of this writing, and for always in some area of the world as we expand, will be handled with rough auditor skill. Therefore, for the purposes of this HCO Bulletin, we will consider the auditing skill to be rough and show what Routines 2-10 and 2-12 can do in unpolished hands. And never fear, when their cases are better and the training can be stepped up, they'll become polished, never fear. And appreciate being so. It's my brag I can get a pc out of anything with just auditing skill. That makes me pretty brave as an auditor. But this "Bring on your lions" attitude is born out of auditing skills, taught, not "native". I use the same pattern and patter as you do if you audit text book. But I don't clean cleans often or miss reads ever and I don't Q and A. You can audit just as well as I can with practice and study. Why do I know this? Well, auditing is not my main forte, not even close to my appointments and goals. We're probably all Rockslammers somewhere on List One and this is Man pulling himself out of the mud indeed. So don't run down pure auditing skill. It's more precious than anything in this universe. But you can acquire it as you do Routine 2 and after. Meanwhile don't overrate the power of Routine 2 to work with rough auditing, so long as the Routine 2 is done right. THE ERRORS OF ROUTINE TWO Routine Two (by which is meant 2-10 & 2-12) has its own rules and these must be learned first and learned well. Routine 2 today is a powerful process. And if it can straighten up a pc so fast, it can also cave him in fast. However such cave-ins, while dramatic, are very easy to remedy even though they must be remedied with accuracy. (The remedies are all contained in this HCO Bulletin.) Remember, in doing Routine 2, the primary pc upset is from badly done Routine 2, not badly done auditing. To repair a car don't look for paint scratches when somebody has removed the engine. Auditing form is paint scratches. The removed engine is flubbed Routine 2. Routine 2 must be taught hard, not just as a version of auditing but as itself. It is its own technical package and it doesn't even infringe on the basics of auditing. 218 AUDITOR RESPONSIBILITY Routine 2 has several hills to climb. One of them is Auditor responsibility. This process has the peculiarity of handing all responsibility for case gain or worsening to the auditor. You will hear people who haven't a clue on Routine 2 crying about bad pcs, bad D of P-ing, bad Ron and blaming everyone but themselves. Investigate and you'll find only an auditor flub on Routine 2. All Routine 2 auditor flubs consist of: (a) Not knowing Routine 2. (b) Not doing Routine 2. There are no other Routine 2 auditor flubs. In Routine 2 all gain or lack of gain is assignable directly and only to the auditor. Frightening isn't it? But encouraging too. For it puts the auditor at cause, wholly and completely, over the pc's case. You might have known that would happen with the first all case fast gain process. DURATION OF PROCESS Routine 2 is here to stay. You've been used to the changing face of processing. That discouraged learning any process very well and setting up to get it done by one and all. Well, Routine 2 is here to stay. It isn't going to change. You can invest a great amount of time and effort on learning it. It's here to stay because where it doesn't get results, the auditor didn't know it or didn't do it, and we can always remedy that. It only produces mediocre or worsening results when it either isn't known or isn't done. Further, it is quite easy to do. And it produces fast, stable results, very startling to even raw meat. There is more miracle in 50 hours of well done Routine 2 than in the entire history of the church. Further it has to be done on every case before a goal can easily or reliably be found, or even if found, before it can be run. So there it is. Learn it. NO AUDITING The first and greatest error of Routine 2 is No-Auditing. Yes, the auditor may be sitting there like a one-man band, busy as free beer at the boiler works and yet not be auditing Routine 2. Example: Eat up two-thirds of every session with needless beginning, middle and end rudiments. Example: Spend two hours Prepchecking the Mid Ruds and then find the reason the needle is dirty is an incomplete list. Example: Spend three sessions full of general O/W trying to calm an ARC breaky pc when in actual fact the auditor has been opposing an Item off an incomplete list. 219 It's not just Audit the pc in front of you. That's vital enough. But Audit the pc in front of you with correct Routine 2. Auditors have been known to spend hours, days, running old processes to get the pc "up to running 2-12" when five minutes of 2-12 would have had the pc sailing. NO AUDITING means "While seeming to deliver auditing, actually get nothing done." It's the greatest crime in Routine 2 or Routine 3. NO AUDITING can be reduced to the finest art. Doing a wrong list, re-doing a dead horse, these aren't no-auditing. Auditing may have been wasted or may be slow, but it's still auditing. No, NO AUDITING means going through endless, useless motions, perhaps in top form, perhaps perfectly, none of which are calculated to advance the pc's case one inch. Doing havingness every half page, endlessly Tiger Drilling, doing Mid Ruds just because it's "good form", all these and a thousand more add up to NO AUDITING. Absolute essentials, bare bone, and bounteous correct 2-12 are AUDITING. Mid Ruds, Tiger Drilling are necessary to good auditing but using them an inch beyond necessity is NO AUDITING. FAILURE TO SAVE RECORDS Almost the only way to completely bar the door on the pc is to lose his case folder or fail to put all lists and reports in it. Every sheet of every list must have on it the pc's name, date of the list and the question from which the list comes. This is the biggest MUST in Routine 2: Preserve the records and make them identifiable and usable. FAILING TO FIND RSs ON LIST ONE Failing to find and utilize an RS on List One is the most common (but not the most destructive to the pc's health) error in Routine 2. Example: Auditor has three dead horses. Abandons case. Another auditor assesses List One, Tiger Drills the RSs out, represents a tick. Gets another dead horse. Abandons case. Pc now known as a "tough pc". A third auditor gets cunning, looks over the original assessment, sees "Auditor" RSed once long ago. It doesn't now, having been Tiger Drilled to death. Opposes it. Gets a beautiful RSing List. Case starts to fly. This error has been done over, and over and over and is the source of all dead horses. Rule: Oppose Every RS found on List One or 1A or a "PT consists of" list. Oppose them even when they only RSed on Tiger Drill buttons. Take the RSing Item most intimate to the actual session as the first one to use. If in further doubt take the RSing Item closest to the session the pc is interested in. List One, 1A or "PT consists of" lists do not have to be RIs to be opposed. They are locks on RIs. They only need to briefly RS, or to have been seen to RS at some time, to be opposed. If they RSed at any time they must be opposed according to whether they are terms or oppterms. I have seen a case fail to give more than dead horses until somebody recalled that on a Sec Check test a year before the case had RSed on "Scientology Orgs" (now not even a tick). When that was opposed, a dial-wide RS turned on for 55 consecutive pages of Items, a high record. One remedy is to Tiger Drill "On List One _____________________ ", but it isn't infallible. 220 REPRESENTING AN RSing ITEM One of the three most destructive actions to the pc is Representing an RSing Item. (The other two are opposing the wrong way and opposing an RSing Item taken from an incomplete list, both included below.) Representing an RSing Item puts a terrible strain on the pc's attention. The list may even RS, probably will. But the opposing Item, now hidden, wreaks havoc on the pc all the time its companion is being listed on a represent list. A real calm pc can turn into a screamer if an RSing Item is listed with a represent list, whether it has been opposed or not. (Note: This is contrary to a 3GAXX action which could be done only because a detested person wasn't a vital oppterm. It should not be done even in 3GAXX.) Rule: Only do opposition lists on RSing Items. Never represent them. OPPOSE RIs Always oppose an RI and continue to oppose RIs until you get a satisfactory package. Never leave a BY-PASSED Item. To do so is destructive to the preclear. This is not the greatest source of destructiveness and not every RI by-passed will ruin the preclear. But once out of three times the pc will be upset. Example: "Scientology" RSes. A Reliable Item "A slavemaster" is found on the opposition list. It is not then itself opposed. Pc is upset by presence of a hidden Item that opposes "A slavemaster". Pc stays upset until "A slavemaster" is opposed and its RI companion Item "A freedom Fighter" is found. "Slavery" shows up on the "Opp Scientology" List as the thing that actually fronted up to "Scientology" when the whole thing was packaged. Rule: When a First List RSing Item is opposed and an RI is found, then Routine 2 steps are incomplete until the found RI is itself opposed. It goes Represent -- oppose -- oppose or Oppose, Oppose. It will be seen that First List RSing Items are usually locks into PT on actual RIs. It will also be seen that the Rockslams on the First List, the first opposing RI and the RI that opposes that all match. They have the same width and speed and pattern. They seldom all RS at the same time but in sequence of when first found. Rule: All Items found must be completely packaged. Rule: All RSs in a package must match in character and vanish when fully packaged. Leaving a by-passed Item is also possible because of incomplete lists. (See below.) INCOMPLETE LISTS If, after nulling, you have several Rockslamming Items remaining, your list is always incomplete. Bonus packages vanish as soon as spotted. They occur once in a while. They can be ignored in this rule: Rule: If you find more than one RS in nulling a list that list is incomplete and must be completed. 221 Example: "Preclear (pn)" once RSed so it is opposed. The "Who or what would a preclear oppose" list is listed and a dozen RSs were seen on listing (OK so far). The list tested without reaction on the question. The auditor starts to null the list. Some of the items that RSed while being listed, RS now on nulling. List is nulled down to 3 (!) RSing Items. Auditor chooses one. It RSes nicely. This is "A control device (sen)". Auditor now lists "Who or what would oppose a control device?" List RSes well. However, masses tend to close in on pc. Havingness drops. Pc possibly ARC breaky. Auditor continues on listing. And on. And on. Finally gets to nulling. Very hard job. Pc cutting up. Auditor tries to pull missed withholds. After much blood auditor finds four RSing Items left on list, chooses "A wild man" and tries to package. Pc glum. Very little cognition. TWO Items have been By-passed. How? Auditing supervisor sees that several Items on the "Who or what would a pc oppose" list RSed on nulling. Assumes rightly list was incomplete. Directs it to be completed. Pc smiles brightly and with a suddenly clean needle lists 80 more Items (several of which RS on listing). Masses fall away from pc again. No ARC breaks. This time only one Item RSed on nulling. "A controller (sen)." (Only new list is nulled of course. You never re-null in 2-12.) RS has mysteriously (and correctly) vanished off every other RSing Item on that list. The list Who or what would oppose a control device? is wholly scrubbed, being wrong. The auditor now lists "Who or what would oppose a controller?" The pc happily lists 200 Items (many RSing). The needle goes clean. The auditor starts nulling. Finds he has two Items on the first three pages that RS. Has learned his lesson and, leaving off nulling for the moment, gets pc to add 50 Items. Auditor goes on nulling. Nulls down to one RSing Item, "An Insane Idiot". The RS on "A Preclear", "A Controller" and "An Insane Idiot" all matched when seen each in turn (but "a preclear" doesn't RS any more). Pc cogniting like mad. Very happy. Masses all moved off and havingness up. Rule: If in nulling more than one RS is seen on list, that list is incomplete and must be completed. There are no exceptions to this rule. Bonus packages blow off on a completed list. Also, to clarify, keep in mind this rule: Rule: If a list does not RS now and then or at least once when being listed, it will become a dead horse. That some list Items RSed when the pc said them during listing is natural. If, with Suppress clean, more than one of them RSes during nulling, that list is incomplete. Also, in passing, don't finish nulling a list before adding to it as a general practice. Add to it when the pc's needle is dirty or when you see more than one RS on it during nulling. The pc ARC breaks if you keep completing the nulling of the existing list and then adding. WRONG WAY OPPOSE Pcs are not always right when telling you it's a terminal (pn) or oppterm (sen). They even sometimes lie to try to save their face (to keep from looking bad in an auditor's eyes or the world, or to seem even more villainous than they are). The only real test of a right way oppose is whether or not the list lists easily with IMPROVED SKIN TONE in the pc and improved cheerfulness, and if it produces one RSing Item that packages later. If you just can't tell which way to oppose, oppose both ways and then decide on pc's appearance which way was right and continue it. Wrong way opposition is not usual. Usually the pc tells the truth and all is well. But when a list is listed wrong way to on opposition it's long, horrible and deadly. 222 The pc goes faintly grey, green yellow or blackish looks worse, and the list gets endless. A wrong way list will RS. So it's only pc appearance that tells the story. Routine 2 is beneficial. Pcs that are listed with right way opposition look brighter, younger, with a more translucent skin tone. You won't make a mistake if you can tell the difference between a young boy and an old man, it's that distinct. (Remember, a pc will also look worse as above if you took an Item from an Incomplete list or committed any of the other R2 errors in this HCO Bulletin.) LISTS THAT WON'T COMPLETE The only reasons a list will not complete are: (a) Wrong Source (b) Wrong Way To Oppose. In either case there is something wrong with the source of the list. That a list in listing RSes is no guarantee of rightness of source. A wrong way to list will RS. Some lists taken from a wrong source cycle RS, DR, Clean needle, RS, DR, Clean needle. Wrong sources are: 1. A First List Item is opposed that didn't ever RS, 2. An "RI" grabbed off an incomplete list that must be completed, 3. An Item that was a terminal being opposed as though it were an oppterm and vice versa, 4. On a represent list, the Item being represented actually was an RSing Item, 5. On a represent list the Item being represented was badly chosen and of no interest to the pc. There are no other wrong sources and thus no other R2 way to get a list that won't complete. But when you do get a list that won't complete, be very careful to look over the above 5 reasons and pick out the right one. You may have to complete an earlier list first and scrub the one you're on. Incompleting lists are usually abandoned without further patch-up. How long is an Incomplete List? How long is a piece of string? LONG LONG LISTS Don't ever be afraid to have a long list, only be afraid of short ones. But when a list is running up toward thousands, something is wrong. Endless Lists stem basically from wrong source as above or from the auditor's failure to understand what indicates a complete list. If, on close study of the case folder and pc, Routine 2 errors seem to be absent -- the source is right and not something taken from another list itself incomplete, if the oppose is right way to, then look for the following: (a) Pc is not answering auditing question or (b) Pc has decided something was his Item and is representing it or is otherwise operating on a decision. The remedies are to get Decide in well and to make sure, without upsetting him, that the pc is answering the auditing question. 223 And if that is all OK, then it's just a long list, so complete it. Rule: A list is complete when it can be nulled and when it produces just one RI that RSes on Tiger Drilling and stays in. A list can be nulled only when a needle is clean (except in 2-10). The definition of a CLEAN NEEDLE is one which flows, producing no pattern or erratic motions of the smallest kind with the auditor sitting looking at it and doing nothing. A CLEAN NEEDLE is not just something that doesn't react to a particular question. It's a lovely slow flow, usually a rise, most beautifully expressed on a Mark V at 64 sensitivity. A list has to be listed until this needle flow is observed (with no Mid Ruds put in). But ruds or no ruds, a CLEAN NEEDLE always appears when a list is complete. A DIRTY NEEDLE is one that jerks, tips, dances, halts, is stuck or has any random action on it with the auditor sitting looking at it doing nothing. There are the Auditing methods of converting a dirty needle to a clean needle, both as defined above. These are all the skills of auditing used with Big Mid Rud buttons. Now entirely and distinctly separate from Auditing skills for cleaning a needle, there are the Routine 2 methods for converting a dirty needle to a clean needle. Usually both Auditing and Routine 2 methods are used to clean a needle so that one can nul, the former briefly, the latter abundantly. However, do not overlook the demonstrable fact that Routine 2 methods for cleaning a needle are very beneficial and lasting in results, whereas purely auditing methods (like Mid Ruds) have value only for the moment and, even though auditing methods are desirable in this operation, when the Routine 2 is in error, the clean needle is really impossible to achieve longer than seconds with auditing methods. The obvious solution to cleaning a needle is to first have Routine 2 as perfect as possible (the errors outlined in this HCO Bulletin uncommitted or being rapidly corrected) and then use auditing methods. Try it in reverse (auditing methods first and then using corrections of Routine 2) and you will not only fail to get a needle clean longer than seconds, you may also waste the better part of an intensive trying to do it. So spend hours straightening up Routine 2 errors and doing it right and brief minutes with auditing methods when necessary. And don't revile a pc for having a dirty needle. It's the auditor who dirties it up with incorrect or inaccurate Routine 2, not the pc. Now a clean needle is vital in order to nul a list. Don't ever try to nul a list with the needle dirty. If the Routine 2 is right, the needle will clean up with two minutes' work of Big Mid Ruds. If Routine 2 errors (wrong list source, list incomplete, wrong way oppose, etc, as per this HCO Bulletin) exist and Routine 2 is being done wrong, then two hours' worth of Big Mid Ruds will not clean a dirty needle. Any of the Routine 2 errors taken up in this HCO Bulletin will create a dirty needle and keep it dirty and leave the auditor sweating over Mid Ruds and the pc going mad trying to answer the questions. Yes, the Mid Ruds are out. But why? Because one or more serious Routine 2 errors as described in this HCO Bulletin are present. So see the light. If you sweat on Mid Ruds as an auditor, curse them as a pc or see a co-auditor dripping exasperation over Mid Ruds and the needle won't stay clean, look 224 at the Routine 2, not the difficulty with Mid Ruds. Look for the errors here described. Check them off on the case, one by one, and don't even be satisfied that it's only "No-Auditing". Check all the errors off, section by section. You'll be startled. So in general, difficult Mid Ruds and dirty needle indicate wrong Routine 2, not bad auditing. Somebody has flubbed the Routine 2 before the auditing was flubbed. Once the Routine 2 is in error, auditing becomes impossible. This gives no excuse for bad metering, cleaning cleans, trying to look like an auditor but ignoring results. Auditing errors do exist. And can be serious, but a pc running on right Routine 2 would forgive the Pope for having a forked tail. You almost can't muddy up a pc running on right Routine 2. Here's a trick. Don't try to nul a list until you've seen a clean flowing needle for a lot of Items, maybe 50. Then get in fast Mid Ruds on the list and do it without cleaning any cleans. Then start nulling. If the needle dirties up after 30-40 Items, skip Mid Ruds, just show the pc the page and have him spot any big thoughts he had on it. Then immediately get back to nulling. If the needle is dirty still, resume listing until it's clean. Just do those actions and (given error free Routine 2 as per this HCO Bulletin) you'll have a smooth, smooth happy time of it in nulling. Do anything you don't have to do in auditing Routine 2 and you're in trouble in the auditing department. Bang out almost total Routine 2 and you're in clover. Give 1/10th of the session over to goals, Mid Ruds and other auditing actions and 9/10ths of the session to pure Routine 2 Actions and you'll really win. And that 1/10th includes any Mid Ruds on the list as well. Give half the session to auditing and half to Routine 2 and you'll be in continuous trouble. The righter the Routine 2, the less auditing you'll have to do. So how long is a list? Can you nul it with a needle that requires only a pc inspection of a page to keep it clean? Are all but one of the RSs that happened in auditing dead when you nulled? Are your pages long streams of X's? Did you have to use suppress only once per page (fast check) to keep it clean? Well, that's a complete list. If it gave you an RI. Just one. So how long is a list? But if all the above is true and a pc's lists are still very long, another thing can be wrong. That wrongness usually is the pc's confronting ability being driven down by auditor unconfrontability. (But also can be caused by a wrong RI or other errors gone before it as covered in this HCO Bulletin.) The auditor Qs and As, yap, yaps, nags the pc, blames, gets in endless Mid Ruds, cleans cleans, misses reads or does something else. The length of an auditor's pc's lists is to some degree proportional to the Rough auditing or no-auditing done by the auditor. (And also by a failure to use Mid Ruds and TD in the right places when necessary.) We have known since '55 that rough auditing reduces havingness. Here's why: Rough auditing lowers the pc's ability to confront in the session. The pc's havingness is proportional to his ability to confront in the session. If a pc's havingness by can squeeze test is lower at session end than at beginning on Routine 2, then there's something wrong with the auditing or with the way Routine 2 is being applied (one of the above Routine 2 errors is being made). The remedy for the bad auditing is to make the auditor only acknowledge anything and everything the pc says or put it on the list. Tear out all Rudiments, Tiger 225 Drills, two-way comm, and forbid any chance to comment or act on an Origin by the pc, and get only Routine 2 done. The remedy for Routine 2 errors (and the errors themselves) are given above in this HCO Bulletin. CONCLUSION Routine 2 does not have an endless parade of DO-NOTS. They are basically just those above. Simple, really. And I've not seen one session on Routine 2 that was going really wrong, go wrong on auditing errors alone. Routine 2 sessions go wrong on bad Routine 2. The auditing form and meter errors start to pile up after Routine 2 has been balled up. One or more of the above Routine 2 errors has been done and overlooked. The reason why Routine 2 errors are more deadly than purely auditing errors is that Routine 2 is handling the pc by batches of lifetimes. All the stress and gore and agony of generations exist on the lists of any one package. An auditing error can be gross and get by unless it is sitting on a Routine 2 error. Then the tiniest auditing flub can produce a reaction like an earthquake. The charge is all coming from Routine 2 mishandling and is evident on the surface only by the auditing error. CASE REMEDY Routine 2 case patch-up is elementary, done with a knowledge of the above errors. Just find out which one of the above sections is being violated. And get it done. The error will only be one of the above to cause case non- progress or worsening. The sections are given in order of importance. I will shortly work up a series of actual case history case repairs. So save the records and you save all. SUMMARY Routine 2-10 and 2-12 are their own technology and must be learned as such. Routine 2 errors are more shaking to a case than errors in form and meter (except where the auditor can't even see a Rock Slam!) and where a case is not winning on Routine 2 auditing it is the Routine 2 that must be reviewed -- and fast. The elements to be reviewed are all listed above by sections in order of importance. Of course many other smaller fantastic errors can be done and will be invented but they will be junior in value to those listed above and will be reported when found. Routine 2 will be with us a long, long time and it is worth learning well. It takes the toughest case apart and is the only process that can start the actual clearing of 80% or more of all cases. I have done or reviewed thousands of hours of auditing in forming and organizing and testing Routine 2. It is the most gratifying (and sometimes hair-raising) auditing I have ever done or viewed. You can't oversell Routine 2. You just can't. For it is the first gateway to light, life and liberty for all Mankind at last. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 226  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=1/1/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ACADEMY CURRICULUM HOW TO TEACH AUDITING AND ROUTINE 2   Central Orgs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 JANUARY AD13 Central Orgs ACADEMY CURRICULUM HOW TO TEACH AUDITING AND ROUTINE 2 INTRODUCTION With the placing of a clearing technology into HCA/HPA hands, we must revise our concept of training. Routine 2-12 is complicated and exact. But as it is the only thing known which cracks all cases, we have no choice in the matter. We can and must learn it well. It must not be indifferently learned. But as it is not going to change as is well proven, time and effort can be spent upon it and must be. We must rise to the occasion. We must use all we know to learn and teach all we have to teach to get Routine 2 done. CHECK SHEETS There are two distinctly different series of check sheets for doing Routine 2 processes and auditing. These are: (a) Those that apply to Routine 2, the GPM and data listing, nulling and case errors and repair; (b) Those that apply to auditing, its basics, skills, the meter. Although these associate and interlock, they are two separate subjects of study. For years we have faced the arbitrary that those whose cases got in the road of their auditing yet had to assimilate auditing theory and practice. Routine 2 well done removes with some rapidity these case barriers to auditing. Therefore there are several phases desirable in studying auditing and Routine 2. V UNIT CLASS 0 FIRST PHASE For a new student, doing Routine 2-10 precedes study of auditing and Routine 2. This is done under close supervision on a co-audit basis with the Co-audit Supervisor taking a hand on cases, checking out Items, correcting cases, etc. This is done until the student has found in another and has had found in himself 2 or 3 packages. Accuracy is the essence of this first step, otherwise the wasted time and wrong Items will give the whole action the tone of despair. Only good results are stressed, not the form of how they are achieved. In this first phase we want the student to see that Routine 2 produces changes for the better in himself and the pc and is worth learning. This is what we're trying to show. We remove, if the Routine 2 is good, the barriers to learning auditing and Scientology. All we want then from the first phase is: (a) Reality on the benefits of the process and auditing; and (b) Removal of the barriers to being a good auditor. W UNIT CLASS Ia SECOND PHASE This phase actually starts the training of a Scientologist. He or she, however, should have started its check sheets in the V unit. We teach the basics of Scientology, its history, the Auditor's Code, Axioms, the ARC triangle and Tone Scale out of the old Notes on Lectures booklet. In practical and auditing we teach and do objective processes, Op Pro by Dup and the CCHs. 227 We wish to accomplish this in this phase: (a) A Reality that Scientology is a real subject and very precise, not a mixture of Indian philosophy and cute tricks, and give the student solid grounding on pure Scientology basics, disrelated from auditing; and (b) Get the student capable of repetition of commands and unafraid in actual physical handling of other bodies. X UNIT CLASS Ib THIRD PHASE We now enter the student upon a phase of formal auditing consisting of theory and practical, using all the basics of auditing, the TRs, the meter, fine points. This phase should specialize in basic auditing skills, very precisely applicable to handling an auditing session, a meter, meter drills, anti Q and A, TRs 0-4, Model Session, Mid Ruds, Missed Withholds, etc. And we get the student to run formal processes on the Meter until he or she understands a meter. These processes consist only of ARC Straight Wire, comm processes, nothing that will disturb 2-12 or run out Rockslams. The idea of this auditing is to get the student used to handling a session with competence. From this phase we expect: (a) The basics of auditing in theory and practical; and (b) Confidence in confronting a bank and handling a pc on a meter with good form. Y UNIT CLASS IIa FOURTH PHASE In the fourth phase our interest is in Prepchecking as an action and a prelude to lists in the form of a Problems Intensive. In theory and practical we teach how to do a Problems Intensive, advanced metering, how to detect case changes, better sessioning, more TRs 0-4, more basics of Scientology such as Axioms and Logics. In auditing, the student does a Problems Intensive and receives one. The stress is on good sessioning and RESULTS. From this phase we expect: (a) A good command of a Problems Intensive theory and practical, how to detect case changes; and (b) The ability to actually audit to a good result and keep Mid Ruds in and CLEAN A NEEDLE. Z UNIT CLASS IIb FIFTH PHASE This is a theory and practical phase for Routine 2-12. The student also audits Routine 2-12 under supervision. The whole check sheet for Routine 2-12 is thrown at the student. The long HCO Bulletins are segmented into a page or two and thereby made into several passes (the student studies and is examined on them in segments). In auditing, the student is permitted to do full 2-12 and the stress is on RESULTS with accurate Routine 2-12. PG UNIT -- CLASS II SIXTH PHASE This is a post-graduate phase on Routine 2-12. It was formerly known as "Interne". The theory and practical are all on the stress of CASE REPAIR and how to supervise Routine 2. The student is used to help supervise V unit students as his auditing activity with stress on case errors. 228 The remainder of the student's time is taken up with preparation for examination for his HCA/HPA. The student may be used for charity cases and what was formerly Interne work. SUMMARY This is about a three months' course if steamed through. If it takes longer, then the V unit was flubbed. If a student hangs up longer than a reasonable time in any upper phase, he is returned to the V unit and is required to do and receive Routine 2 while continuing to try to pass upper level check sheets so as not to hold him up. Students are, of course, expected to study evenings and week-ends. The three section course plan is adhered to of Theory, Practical and Auditing. Auditing in the Auditing Section is done for RESULTS, not to teach auditing. Practical is where they practice. Students are progressively assigned to their units and are re-classed as they pass out of a unit. The Model of this Course is Saint Hill but it may not be so advertised. The chief difference of course is the necessary re-introduction of a student body tape programme such as in the old days. The last hour of the day is used for this. A sequence of about 75 tapes, mainly of general historical or auditing interest, are played to the whole student body, assembled in the main assembly hall, one tape each day, regardless of the students' classification. They are given quizzes on these tapes, very brief. No other tape use is made in an Academy. There are no headphone recorders. If tape play speakers are not good the students won't learn anything from the tapes. When tapes are omitted as a whole class activity, the whole direction, meaning and ethic of Scientology goes sour in an area and the students haven't a clue what Scientology is for and you find them idling about driving off pcs with nutty chatter. This Academy Curriculum requires a D of T and two instructors. To this can be added a Training Admin who is also Extension Course. The D of T becomes Auditing Supervisor, the other two instructors are the Theory Supervisor and Practical Supervisor. The Classes are awarded on the Completion of the phase and designate the check sheets. Students get cancelled out of units but not off check sheets. The only things that can keep students from passing through this course rapidly are (a) failure to schedule precisely, (b) failure to demand and obtain auditing results in all units, (c) local non-comprehension of R2-12, (d) capricious and unreal theory and practical examinations and (e) failure to enforce the course regulations. A full Academy will attend to all these things. An empty one will have ignored them. It is no real sin to do a lousy job of auditing. It is a terrible crime to do a bad job of training and dissemination because then there's nothing left to pick the cases up in this life or the next. Every bad auditor we turn out costs us a hundred preclears. Every good one puts us closer to our objectives. An Academy Class II should be good enough to go to work at once as an HGC auditor without causing the HGC a moment's worry. It can be done because it must be. LRH:jw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1962 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 229  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=3/1/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 2 IMPORTANT OPPOSITION LISTS RIGHT AND WRONG OPPOSE   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JANUARY AD13 Central Orgs Franchise ROUTINE 2 IMPORTANT OPPOSITION LISTS RIGHT AND WRONG OPPOSE Most PT terminals and oppterms look more like Coterms than clean Terminals or Opposition Terminals when first contacted. They become more definite Terms or Oppterms after they have been listed a page. While you should be able to make the right choice in most cases by the usual test given in the 2-12 steps you can err. Your lists will become endless and unnullable and your pc will go downhill if you oppose an RI wrong way to. Therefore, while listing, carefully observe the needle and the pc. The TA is meaningless in this test. The Indications for testing "Right Way Oppose" and "Wrong Way Oppose" are the subject of this bulletin. In opposing a Reliable Item you can consider it a Terminal (because pc said it gave pain) and list "Who or What would a Catfish oppose?" Whereas in actual fact it was an Oppterm and should have been listed "Who or What would oppose a Catfish?" Or Vice Versa. Sad consequences follow a wrong choice. POTENTIAL MISCALLING AN RI Even the best auditor can make a mistake in calling an RI he's gotten a Terminal or an Oppterm. The pc is foggy as to what's pain or sensation. The RI may have both. Sometimes Terminals are so covered with Sen there is no pain at first. Sometimes the hidden Terminal is so hard down on the Oppterm RI it seems like a Terminal. Further, you can be doing an Opposition to an RI list, expecting a Terminal to come up and get, in fact, another Oppterm. This is fine. Accept it if the list only RSed once on nulling. But the opposing Terminal is still hidden and must be gotten. Pcs, you see, often put Terms and Oppterms on the same list. STABLE DATUM: Always regard the identity of an RI as a Term or Oppterm as potentially wrong until listed and tested as per this HCO Bulletin. Do the best you can with usual tests to tell what it is before you start listing and choose your oppose question accordingly. But be ready to find that what was a Terminal is really an Oppterm or vice versa and should have been opposed "the other way around". You have only two list questions to use in opposing a Reliable Item. These are "Who or What would oppose a ______________ ?" and "Who or What would a ______________ oppose?" For every Reliable Item there is only one of the above that is right. The other is wrong. There are no true Coterms -- they only seem to be both a Terminal (pain) and an Oppterm (sensation). When it comes to listing you will benefit the pc only by listing the right way. The other oppose question then is the wrong way. 230 If you list the "wrong way" (using the wrong question), you'll get an ENDLESS LIST that never completes and won't nul. You therefore have a choice of two questions and one of them is right and the other wrong, always. If you choose the right one and list it, the pc benefits. If you choose the wrong one and list it the pc will get worse rapidly, right in the session before your eyes. It often happens that you start listing the wrong way. This is because you failed to find out correctly if the RI you were about to list an opposition list to was a Terminal (pain) or an Opposition Terminal (sensation). The pc said he had "sen" but actually felt "pain". Or the pc did have "sen" and the pain appeared afterward. In short, because PT Terminals look like Coterms very often, neither the pc nor the auditor can tell on some RIs. This happens to some RIs on every case. The solution to the dilemma is to test by listing a page or two. There are certain definite signs of wrong way opposition. They can be seen with half an eye. There is no need to go on until your pc is caved in and you have 99 pages of Items to find out you can't nul and should have opposed the other way around. A list right way to or wrong way to will Rockslam, so that's no test in itself. The tests, five in number, are a little more delicate: Aside from original tests for Term or Oppterm, how to tell if an oppose list is right way to: RIGHT WAY INDICATIONS 1. In Listing needle is loose and gets looser; 2. Pc's skin tone gets progressively better as he or she lists; 3. Masses move out off pc; 4. Pc gives Items easily; 5. List completes easily. WRONG WAY OPPOSE INDICATIONS If List is wrong way oppose (which is to say the wording is reversed, such as "Who or What would oppose a Catfish?" as different from "Who or What would a Catfish oppose?") these things will always happen: 1. In listing, the needle gets tighter, stiff and tends to jerk. It goes in cycles, DR, RS, DR, clean, DR, RS, DR, clean, etc; 2. The pc's skin tone gets progressively worse, darker and off color and the pc looks older; 3. Masses move into the pc and make him feel more or less squashed; 4. Pc gives Items with some small difficulty and tends to invalidate them and RI being listed from; 5. List doesn't ever complete. You may be able to nul a while but the needle will dirty up and no amount of Mid Ruds will clean it. Whether your list is right way oppose or wrong way oppose the pc may get pain and sensation, even nausea. Indeed, be worried only if the pc doesn't. These don't 231 count. Pain and Sensation are used for the first test you make in selection. But aren't used beyond that test given in the Steps of 2-12. It's the darkening color of the pc and his or her apparent age that count. Your tests above are visual not getting data from the pc. Pcs will list wrong way to and plow themselves right on in with no complaint. If you start listing wrong way to, and then turn it around, the pc will have trouble giving right way to Items for a bit, and then they come at a rapid easy flow and you get all the above 5 things for the right way list. Unless you change around to the right way and continue to list the wrong way you will continue to get the 5 indications given for wrong lists. Sometimes an RI is so fouled up you have to test by listing one way, then the other and then back to the first way again. A little experience is solid gold, for you begin to see the 5 indications for right lists and the 5 indications for wrong lists and recognize them more quickly. When you have opposed wrongly and then, in opposing right way to you get a complete list, you never bother to nul the wrong way list. You just abandon it. The RI won't be on it. You only nul the right way oppose list. Rule: Never nul lists taken from wrong sources. Just abandon. No list ever went to 50 pages that was right way to. Right Way Oppose Lists that can be completed are probably all below 500 Items, the usual being around 250 Items. Wrong Way Oppose is the chief source of difficulty for any opposition list, rivalled only by Incomplete Lists as a trouble maker in Routine 2. A wrong way oppose list is of course "Wrong Source" as one is using "Catfish" as a Terminal instead of "Catfish" as an Oppterm or vice versa. Endless lists also come from just continuing to list on and on and on, the pc's needle being dirty by "Protest". This is just silly. Some supervisor may develop as a stable datum, "If the needle is dirty, just continue listing." And this is wrong. A needle does get clean when a right way oppose list is completed. But wrong way oppose or Mid Ruds Out can also make a needle dirty. On an oppose list, if a needle is dirty three main things can be wrong: 1. List is right way oppose but incomplete. Remedy: Complete it to one RS only seen on nulling. 2. List is wrong way oppose. Remedy: Oppose it the other way and watch the signs (above) until you're sure. Then go on and complete. 3. Mid Ruds are out -- pc protesting the session or overlisting. Wrong Source (opposing a wrong item) can mess up a pc also. But why'd you take an Item from an incomplete or wrong way list in the first place and then oppose it? The remedy of this one lies before the fact of wrong way oppose, so is not the subject of this HCO Bulletin. LRH:dr.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 232  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=27/1/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT ROUTINE 2 -- SIMPLIFIED   CenOCon Franchise Students (Communicator: Mimeo AT ONCE and RUSH TO ALL TECH DIVISIONS)  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 27 JANUARY 1963 CenOCon Franchise URGENT Students ROUTINE 2 -- SIMPLIFIED (Communicator: Mimeo AT ONCE and RUSH TO ALL TECH DIVISIONS) I will shortly release Routine 2-12A which will incorporate Routine 2-10 and 2-12 with enormous simplification. While the basic processes and purposes remain the same, I have worked out a number of simplifications that are greatly needed. Having seen some of the trouble with R2-10 and 12, I have been furiously working to improve Indicators. I've now proved out some invariable indicators that will completely wipe out flubs if followed exactly as given in this HCO Bulletin. If they don't work for you, the R2 being done is from wrong source. These indicators are not wrong. I have also succeeded in developing a system in 2-12A that eliminates nulling, thus saving half the auditing time, and eliminates Tiger Drilling -- a weak spot for HPAs. As the sessions can be run with almost no Mid Ruds or ruds, this leaves auditors with only an RS to see on the meter and cuts out almost all other meter reading. R2 then comes much more easily into the realm of Co-Audit. If you don't get results from R2 it's being done wrong. I've got the variables pretty well licked. Until the full release of R2-12A, incorporate these changes which belong to 2-12A into any R2 you are doing or supervising. Change over at once. Abandon the old way where it conflicts as these data below will keep you out of trouble and stop some of the glaring errors being done. Apply these below to any 2-10 or 2-12 currently being done. TONE ARM The Tone Arm is used in R2-12A. On any list done on a preclear, whether source, represent or oppose, RUN ALL THE TONE ARM ACTION OUT OF THE LISTING. LIST AT LEAST 50 ITEMS BEYOND THE POINT THE TONE ARM BECAME MOTIONLESS. Keep the tone arm readings in the left margin of the list column. Note TA action about every 5 Items or at every change. In a wrong-way-to oppose list, the TA tends to be more stationary. If you don't run the TA action out and at least 50 Items beyond, plus 50 Items beyond the last RS seen on listing, the list will be incomplete. Sometimes several pages have to be listed with a motionless TA before the final RS comes on the list but ordinarily the final RS comes within 50 Items after the TA has been motionless for 50 Items. LIST BEYOND LAST RS List at least 50 Items beyond the last RS on the list. Do not stop listing with the last RSing Item. If you do you can be fooled. If you get a new RS in the 50, list 50 more beyond that and so on. TEST LIST BOTH WAYS List a few Items on each way oppose as a conclusive test to find right way oppose. The needle gets stiffer on the wrong way oppose. THE NEEDLE LOOKS LOOSER ON RIGHT WAY OPPOSE. If you still can't decide, again test either way until you are sure. Use all normal tests but list a little each way to be sure. 233 WRONG WAY LIST A list is wrong way to if 1. The list doesn't RS. 2. The RSes on the list increase in incidence -- more RSes per Item on later pages. (The number is quite marked.) 3. The pc looks darker and mass is pulling in on the pc. 4. The list is inordinately long -- 40-50 pages. 5. The needle gets tighter and stiffer as you list (the most noticeable test). (A needle also gets tighter on an added to list if you didn't read the right Item to the pc.) VANISHED RS If a case has RSed and suddenly can't be made to no matter what you do, the RS is swallowed into some earlier incomplete or fumbled action. Go back and handle the earlier action correctly. Sometimes an Item grabbed off an incomplete source list (but never use one that was found by representing an RSing Item) has to be handled fully to get the RS back. Example: Incomplete Parts of Existence List. "God" RSed heavily on it. Some auditor grabbed it and opposed it. List abandoned when directions came to use Items only from complete source lists. Eight Reliable Items later, RSes on the case vanish or get tiny. Pc's PTPs heavy and not being resolved by R2. Solution: Go back and get the "God" package complete. The big RS will come back on. (Make sure it's opposed right way to this time.) FOUR ITEM PKGs The biggest change from 2-12 to 2-12A is the four Item Package. Always get four Items in a row. Complete any existing 2 or 3 Item packages on a case to 4 Items whether the last Reliable Item found still RSes or not. The four are: (1) Reliable Item taken from a completed source list. (2) Reliable Item taken by opposing (1). (3) Reliable Item taken by opposing (2). (4) Reliable Item taken by opposing (3). It will be found that (4) is in opposition also to (1) if all was done correctly. All lists (1) to (4) must be complete, to no TA action and beyond, right- way-to opposition in each case. Where a represent enters in (which is seldom), there are five lists for four Items. These are: (1) Source list (complete to no TA for 50 Items but no RS). (2) Represent list from last Item in on source list. This is RSing Item. This is the first RI. List must be complete. (3) Oppose list on RI found in (2) just above. This gives second RI. (4) Oppose list on RI found in (3). This gives third RI. (5) Oppose list or RI found in (4). This gives fourth RI. Whether you get your first RI from an oppose or represent list, you always wind up with 4 RIs. PACKAGING A package always consists of Two RIs that are terminals and Two RIs that are oppterms. 234 The terminals oppose either oppterm, one better than the other. This is two packages 2-12 style, one pkg 2-12A style. The Term-Oppterm of each pair must be of same order of magnitude. The auditor has no business with the significances of Items. He never suggests an Item or goal. He never rejects one because of significance. Here is an actual package. 1st RI found, Oppterm RELIGION; 2nd RI found, Terminal A CONQUEROR; 3rd RI found, Oppterm PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS; 4th RI found, Terminal A DISEMBODIED SPIRIT. PACKAGE Term Oppterm A Disembodied Spirit Religion A Conqueror Public Communications In a 2-12A package you have to have 2 terminals and two oppterms, opposing and cross opposing as above. Otherwise you've goofed and will the pc hedge and ARC break! Oh, my! The sequence may be (1) Oppterm RI, (2) Term RI, (3) Oppterm RI, (4) Term RI, or it may be (1) Represent Item, (2) Oppterm RI, (3) Term RI, (4) Oppterm RI, (5) Term RI. Or it may be (1) Term RI, (2) Oppterm RI, (3) Term RI, (4) Oppterm RI, or (1) Represent Item, (2) Term RI, (3) Oppterm RI, (4) Term RI, (5) Oppterm RI. Always 4 RIs, always 2 Terms, always 2 Oppterms. If they don't come out that way then one of the lists was wrong way to or incomplete or both. NULLING R2-12A doesn't nul a full RSing list. Only a non-RS list to be represented gets nulled. And these are infrequently needed. One completes the list to no TA action plus 50 or more Items and then 50 Items beyond the last RS seen on listing. The 50-50 rule is minimum, not maximum. It sometimes must be more. One tells the pc that one is going to read him the next to last RS and does so. If it RSes, one adds to the list until a new RSing Item is seen and 50 Items beyond it. Then one reads the now next to last RSing Item again. (No Tiger Drill.) Auditor tells pc: "This is the next to the last RSing Item, not THE Item." When the next to last RSing Item does not RS on reading it to the pc (no TD), one then tells the pc that his or her Item will now be read and reads the LAST RSing Item to the pc. It should RS without TD. If the next to the last Item did RS, one does not read the last RSing Item to the pc but just returns to listing. If the RS is off the last Item seen to RS read the non-RSing Items just before and just after it, always to be sure. The RS could have been noted for the wrong Item. When one has read it to the pc and seen it RS, the auditor says, "That Rook Slams" and watches the pc. The auditor does no other action for a while, says nothing else. To speak or engage in new actions will rip the pc's attention to shreds. This is a critical moment. One watches the pc's face to see if it darkens or lightens. Darkens = wrong Item. Lightens = right Item. (Watch the area below the pc's eyes, the eye pouches.) Pc doesn't know if it's his Item or not = wrong Item. Pc knows it's his Item == Right Item. Pc ARC breaks shortly or gets critical of auditor = wrong Item. Pc happier = right Item. Pc doesn't cognite = wrong Item. Pc cognites = right Item. While pc is cogniting auditor will see the Item continue to RS on the meter. The RS may fade out or narrow as pc cognites. This does not mean wrong Item necessarily. Even if the RS vanishes after a good bit (5 minutes?) (no TD) it is still opposed. (3) is more likely to fade than (1) and (2) RIs. (2) is more likely to fade than (1) RI. (4) fades almost at once. The Item must always be the last RS on the list and must always RS the first few times read without Tiger Drill (providing session rudiments are even vaguely in). 235 If you aren't sure of the RSes while listing, nul for RS only from the one above the next to last Item to the end of list. Don't nul whole list ever. If an added portion has an RS on it there is no need to nul earlier than it either as no earlier RS will exist. However always test next to last RS. If two RSes appear before a list is added to (next to last and last) or if any two Items on a list RS before a list is added to, that list is incomplete and does not have the Item on it. WRONG ITEM SIGNS A wrong Item given to the pc as his Item does the following: 1. Darkens pc's eye shadows and face; 2. Pc immediately has more mass than before pc was told Item; 3. TA tends to stay up and stuck; 4. Pc slightly or greatly ARC breaks; 5. Pc doesn't cognite at all or cognites briefly and stops (and ARC breaks); 6. Pc can't really understand how it is his Item, but sometimes is propitiatively agreeable with no cognitions; 7. Pc can't really see how it fits in package but may say so diffidently. RIGHT ITEM SIGNS A right Item given to the pc as his Item does the following: 1. Lightens pc's eye shadows and face; 2. Pc has no more mass about him than before Item was read to him; 3. TA usually blows down; 4. Pc feels more cheerful; 5. Pc cognites, usually at length; 6. Pc sees just how it is his Item; 7. Pc sees how it fits against other Items in any package. The auditor must check up on all 7 points above as well as the RS, making 8 points in all. If the wrong indicators aren't present and neither are the right ones, list on further. Don't be a niggardly lister. Another hour's listing can save 50 hours case repair. DIRTY NEEDLE Lists that never go clean needle are wrong way to. You never end up a list with a Dirty needle if you run all the TA action out on a right way oppose list. You don't have to have a clean needle anyway on this type of nulling. RS MATCHING The RS you see on the first RI of any package exactly repeats itself in width and speed on each one of the other 3 RIs in a 4 RI package. It is the same RS when listed and when called, also. A package has a characteristic RS. If one of the Items doesn't match the RS, it's wrong. If none of the 4 RSes seen are similar, run don't walk to the nearest Academy and as soon as the pc gets out of the hospital send him to an HGC. The RSes in one package all match exactly when first seen and first called to pc. Of course after a few cognitions RI (3) and RI (4) of the package may lose their RSes, but not for a while and usually only after being listed. An RS is gone when it's listed against. 236 You only have one RS of a package of 4 RIs RSing at any one time. RI (1) RSes until listed. Then RI (2) RSes until listed, etc. RSes that grind out on packaging were wrong Items. You never audit an RI in any way but listing for another RI. Your memory and a note of width are your only tools in matching RSes on a package. USING ARC BREAKS Use any ARC Break to determine that the R2 is wrong. There is no other reason for an ARC break, no matter what the pc says. The R2 is wrong. That's the reason for the ARC break. You use ARC breaks to verify the R2. The pc will not ARC break on right R2 no matter what provocation exists in the auditing. ARC Break always equals Wrong Routine 2. Wrong Item, Item wrong way to in oppose. List Incomplete. These are what cause ARC breaks, not the auditing. Never forget that. Never try to cure an R2 ARC break with Mid Ruds or missed W/Hs. Go back to work on the R2 line-up. Example: "Your Item is 'A Cat'." Pc says ok, soon begins to chop auditor. Correct action, "Your Item is not 'A Cat'. I will examine this." That's the end of the ARC break just like that. Pc doesn't realize the wrong Item is it. He thought it was the auditor. The auditor now looks over his list to see if it's wrong source or wrong way to or incomplete and proceeds accordingly. The Rule is ALWAYS GO BACK FROM AN ARC BREAK. NEVER UNDERTAKE A BRAND NEW ACTION such as changing the universe. New lists do not cure ARC breaks. Only doing the old list right or finding the right Item cures them. This is also the dominant rule in case repair: Find the earliest ARC break and remedy what was being done just before it. Use ARC breaks to guide your R2. Don't ever Q and A with them or try to handle with auditing. Never stop the auditing on one. Just correct the R2 fast. CASE REPAIR In repairing cases all you do is look over earlier reports until you find the session where the goals went sour and correct what was done in that or the immediate earlier session. Very simple. You'll also find the RS if it has vanished off the case. Never start new actions on a case that needs repair. Only repair old ones. It's a screaming auditing goof, a major error to start a new action on such a case. DOPE OFF All dope off and boil off while listing or nulling comes from ordinary garden variety missed withholds. Pull them rapidly and go on. In R2 you only pull missed W/Hs when you can't get pc into session at all or when the pc dopes off. You don't pull missed W/Hs in case on an ARC break -- you correct the R2. Pc going into apathy is also an ARC break you know. Also propitiation. NEVER REP AN RS ITEM Never represent an RSing Item. But NEVER. Don't handle or use "RIs" that came from representing an RSing Item. Some were gotten this way in 3GAXX. They're wrong. Abandon them fast. Always test a source you are going to use for a represent list for an RS. If it RSes don't represent it. Don't oppose it either as it's off some incomplete list. Find a non-RSing thing to represent instead. 237 There's another version of this also. A pc asked to extend a list (or seeing the auditor's paper as the auditor lists) will use Items that RS to try to get the RSing Item on the list. This is fatal and will increase the number of RSes on the list and make the pc ill, give him the wrong item and so on. When you see a pc doing this tell him or her, "Just answer the auditing question. Please just answer it. The Item we're looking for probably isn't even related to any RS gotten so far." Make the pc answer the auditing question only. A pc may also seek to package when listing Items, not answer the auditing question. An educated pc knows that RI (4) must match RI (1). Get the pc off it. "Just answer the auditing question." And you'll be out of trouble. Some pcs have listed 40 pages without once answering the auditing question. SELF LISTING Getting the pc to list out of session as in goals is a poor idea in R2. Give the pc an Item wrong way to and he'll wrap himself around a telephone pole out of session. List R2 processes in session only. You would have to nul the whole list if it's listed out of session. Where's the time saved? NEVER STEER ITEMS Some eager beavers have started steering the pc to Items while listing, using the needle flicks. Never do it. You get Items that don't belong and all sorts of things. Just be simple, huh? Routine 2 is as good as you simply audit simply. So relax and start clearing. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.rd Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 238  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=11/2/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  CURRENT AUDITING   Franchise CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 11 FEBRUARY 1963 Franchise CenOCon CURRENT AUDITING Current Auditing has been unsettled due to the sudden breakthrough on R3-MX. What I was looking for was 1. A process that invariably cleared pcs easily; 2. That had very precise and invariable rules; 3. That could be taught by rote; and 4. Would not be subject to change. This process turned out to be R3-MX. The X at this writing is dropped as the process has proven itself and it becomes Routine 3-M. The designation of "M" is simply its consecutive letter in the development series, but it could stand for "Mary Sue" as she did the actual auditing under my direction that proved its rules. The rules of 3-MX were worked out in Routine 2-12 and 2-12A and then by examining Rocket Reading Item behavior in 3-MX. The first thing you should know about 3-M is that it is more precise in application than any process you have handled. When it says "List the Tone Arm Action out and then 25 Items more" it means exactly that. (Surges of the needle don't count in TA action as you couldn't follow them with the TA and back that fast.) When R3-M says "List 25 Items Beyond the last RR or RS on a list" it means 25, not 24. In 3-M it says Rocket Reading Item and that's what it means. And a Rocket Read is a Rocket Read not a fall. R3-M is therefore a masterpiece of precision. Do it wrong -- not exactly by the rules -- and it becomes a real nightmare. So know it before you do it, and do what it says only. In both R2-12A and R3-M an Item can appear anywhere on a source list so long as 2 Items do not RS or RR. One Item RSing and one RRing also means list is incomplete. On the w/w wd goal opp list (the 3-M Source List) you have to make sure list is complete to 50 Items beyond last RSing or RRing Item and 50 beyond no TA action point (where TA stops moving). This is true for both 3-M and 2-12A. You read every RRing Item back to pc from the 3-M Source List (goal opp) and every RSing Item on the 2-12A source list. A source list is of course the primary list from the goal from which you get the first RRing RI. In 2-12A the source list is what you choose to get your first list from or List One. All other lists in 3-M are extended 25 Items beyond the last RR or RS and the Item is always the last RR on the list -- if not you've goofed, didn't get the TA action out of this or the just prior list. In 2-12A you go 50 Items beyond the last RS and 50 beyond the 1st still TA. 239 The 8 tests for mass increase, etc, must be done on every Item found in 3- M and 2-12A. The best coverages of R-3M are the HCO Bulletin of Feb 1, 1963, "Routine 3", and the two hours of lecture of Feb 7, 1963, where it is covered. HCO Bulletins and other lectures will be forthcoming. R2-12A If R3-M emerges so suddenly, then what of Routine 2-10, 2-12 and 2-12A? With the single caution that you must not try to package a small RS and only use a wide RS (1/3 of a dial or more) as your source list's RI, 2-12A is very successful just as laid down. It will continue to be taught, and used. In it you have some very precise Rules. A list is continued 50 Items beyond the last RS. Never represent an RSing Item. Always carry a wide RSing RI around to a package of 4. It is not important how you get your first RI so long as it didn't come from representing an RSing Item. The last RS on the list opposing an RI is the Right Item always unless you've goofed. There must not be 2 RSing Items On a list (except List One where you choose the biggest RS as your first RI). If two appear, your list is incomplete or you let the pc (as you must never do) Represent an RR or RS he's heard or seen on the list. You don't nul in 2-12A (or 3-M), you just read the next to last, then the last RS or RR Item. Tough cases, the RS grabbed off List One Issue 3, will change with 2-12A. Rockslammers sit back and get relaxed. The process is valuable. Therefore it must be taught and used. But as R3-M is even easier than 2-12A, it also must be taught in Academies and used in HGCs. Valid Processes, then, are 1. The CCHs. 5. Prepchecking. 2. Assists. 6. Problems Intensives. 3. Ruds and Havingness. 7. R2-12A. 4. Pulling Missed W/Hs. 8. R3-M. Know these and you can crack or handle any case and clear. So know them. I'll do my best to make all the data available. LRH:jw.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED [R3M and R3N as developments are not included in these volumes. They will be found on courses to which they apply.] 240  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=15/2/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  R2 -- R3 LISTING RULES   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 15 FEBRUARY 1963 Central Orgs Franchise R2 -- R3 LISTING RULES An idiocy of long long lists can creep into Routine 2 and Routine 3. This is not as harmful as under-listing but it can make pcs pretty green or black and certainly holds up auditing. You must realize that "listing to a still Tone Arm" takes several things for granted: 1. That the auditor has his sensitivity at about 4 (Mark IV about 6) during listing. 2. That the auditor does not adjust the TA for surges (cognitions, etc). 3. That the TA is adjusted only when it has to be to get the needle into a readable position. 4. That the pc is answering the auditing question and not varying it or running havingness on himself. 5. That the rudiments are reasonably in, particularly SUPPRESS, INVALIDATE, PROTEST and DECIDE. 6. That the pc is capable of being in session. 7. That the pc isn't fiddling with the cans, yawning, stretching, etc. In other words, if an auditor has his pc under calm control the TA rule applies. As the control of the pc diminishes the TA rule grows less workable. But even so all is not lost. TA shifts because of body motion, yawning, asking questions, and particularly because of PROTESTS! do not count in reading TA position. The TA position that must be steady is for the list. So if you read it "TA position for the list must be motionless" you have it absolutely correct. The TA will also read for other attention positions such as on the auditor, on the room, on the body. The pc shifts his attention from the list and you get TA motion. The thing we want to know is: did the TA go right back to List Position when the pc put his attention back on the List. Or, with the pc's attention on the list, did the TA now move. If so, that's TA motion for the list and the list is incomplete. It's really very easy even if the pc is out of session, to find a motionless TA on the list. Understand this and you'll stop endless listing. "TA action out" is, however, not the first rule of a complete list. The rules of a complete list for R2 or R3 are: 1. TWO ITEMS (RR and RS) ARE NOT FIRING WHEN THE LIST RR AND RS ITEMS ARE READ BACK TO THE PC. 2. ONLY ONE ITEM RSes or RRs ON THE LIST WHEN RRs AND RSs NOTED DURING LISTING ARE READ BACK TO THE PC. THE OTHERS DO NOT READ. 241 3. THE LIST HAS THE RELIABLE ITEM ON IT. In Routine 2 these Rules apply: 4. ON A COMPLETED R2 SOURCE LIST, ONE RSing ITEM ONLY WILL RS WHEN READ BACK TO THE PC. 5. ON A COMPLETED R2 LIST TAKEN BY OPPOSING (EITHER WAY) A ROCKSLAMMING ITEM, THE RELIABLE ITEM WILL BE THE LAST ROCKSLAMMING ITEM ON THE LIST. IF IT IS NOT, THE ITEM BEING OPPOSED IS WRONG OR THE OPPOSITION WORDING IS WRONG WAY TO OR THE LIST IS INCOMPLETE. In Routine 3 these Rules apply: 7. ON A COMPLETED R3 SOURCE LIST, ONE ROCKET READING ITEM ONLY WILL RR WHEN READ BACK TO THE PC. NO RS OR OTHER RR ON THE LIST SHOULD NOW READ. 8. ON A COMPLETED R3 LIST TAKEN BY OPPOSING (EITHER WAY) A ROCKSLAMMING ITEM, THE RELIABLE ITEM WILL BE THE LAST ROCKET READING ITEM ON THE LIST. IF IT IS NOT, THE ITEM BEING OPPOSED IS WRONG OR THE OPPOSITION WORDING IS WRONG WAY TO OR THE LIST IS INCOMPLETE. 9. AN ITEM OR GOAL WHICH WAS SEEN TO ROCKET READ WHEN BEING WRITTEN DOWN BUT WHICH RSes WHEN READ BACK TO THE PC WILL ROCKET READ AGAIN IF GIVEN A BRIEF BIG MID RUDS PREPCHECK. The above are the rules which must apply. As some variability can result in various auditors' interpretation of a "still TA" and in how good a session the auditor can run, the TA rule is secondary. It still applies, it is still valid. But a pc on PROTEST! varies his TA all over the place and an auditor that can't handle a pc with a few deft mid ruds or get his question answered will get TA action when the list is flat. When you get the hang of it you will see that listing to a motionless TA is valid, but that of course is in an auditing session. On one of these overlong lists, you can tell if it's overlong by seeing if you have gone 50 Items (25 Items opposing RR RIs) past the last RS or RR, making sure that you don't get two Items on the list that fire, and thus find your Reliable Item. It's finding RIs that counts, not how long can we list. Also, avoid buying a pc's "hard sell" on an Item or condition. If it follows the above rules buy it. If not, just ack and go on. Auditors with low sales resistance need not apply. Often the pc says "It's a terminal" when it's an Oppterm. Apply the tests and do a decent test list before you make up your mind. Pcs don't really know -- RIs have an aberrative value you know -- so why buy a dramatized sales talk. The auditor is necessary because an auditor isn't in the RI and can think. So an auditor who buys a sales talk isn't an auditor. Get it? Audit R2 and R3 by the rules. If the rules don't seem to apply, take a walk and think over why. Don't just keep on in haggard hope. LRH:gl.rd L. RON HUBBARD Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 242  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=20/2/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  ROUTINE 2 & 3 MODEL SESSION   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 20 FEBRUARY AD13 (CANCELLED -- see HCO B 21 May 63 Volume V -- 278) Central Orgs Franchise ROUTINE 2 & 3 MODEL SESSION Here is a needed revision of Goal Finder's Model Session which is cancelled herewith. The changes are: 1. Omitting Life or Livingness Goals completely. 2. Running general O/W until PC comes back up to PRESENT TIME and not just until needle is smooth. 3. Added -- Run "Since the last time I audited you" Mid Ruds if TA is in a higher position from the last session pc had. 4. Put Havingness after goals or gains for the session. 5. Added a note that suppress is always done repetitively, as is the Random Rud. SESSION PRELIMINARIES All auditing sessions have the following preliminaries done in this order. 1. Seat the pc and adjust his or her chair. 2. Clear the Auditing room with "Is it all right to audit in this room?" (not metered) 3. Can squeeze "Squeeze the cans, please." And note that pc registers, by the squeeze on the meter, and note the level of the pc's havingness. (Don't run hav here.) 4. Go into the session start. ROUTINE 2 & 3 MODEL SESSION Where the pc has been well Prepchecked and is well under auditor control, 8n Auditor in a Routine 2 or Routine 3 session may omit rudiments in Model Session, using only goals for session, and havingness, goals and gains at end and general O/W, Mid Ruds and Random Ruds where needed in the session. This salvages about an hour's auditing time per day. Start and end of session commands are used, just no rudiments; general O/W may be found necessary on some pcs at session start in lieu of rudiments to get a cleaner needle. This does not apply to Rudiments and Havingness Sessions or Prepcheck Sessions and Problems Intensives. For a pc who is well smoothed out by staff auditors, then, and who is well under the goal finder's control, the following may be used, particularly with a Mark V Meter. START OF SESSION: Is it all right with you if I begin this session now? 243 START OF SESSION. (Tone 40) Has this session started for you? If pc says, "No," say again, "START OF SESSION. Now has this session started for you?" If pc says, "No," say, "We will cover it in a moment." RUDIMENTS: What goals would you like to set for this session? Please note that Life or Livingness goals have been omitted, as they tend to remind the pc of present time difficulties and tend to take his attention out of the session. At this point in the session there are two actions which could be undertaken: the running of General O/W or the running of Mid Rudiments using "Since the last time I audited you". One would run General O/W if the pc was emotionally upset at the beginning of the session or if the session did not start for the pc, the latter being simply another indication of the pc's being upset or ARC broken, but those symptoms must be present, as sometimes the session hasn't started merely because of poor Tone 40 or because the pc had something he wanted to say before the auditor started the session. RUNNING O/W: If it is alright with you, I am going to run a short, general process. The process is: "What have you done?" "What have you withheld?" (The process is run very permissively until the needle looks smooth and the pc is no longer emotionally disturbed.) Where are you now on the time track? If it is alright with you, I will continue this process until you are close to present time and then end this process. (After each command, ask, "When?") That was the last command. Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this process? End of process. RUNNING THE MID RUDIMENTS: One would use the Middle Rudiments with, "Since the last time I audited you", if the needle was rough and if the Tone Arm was in a higher position than it was at the end of the last session. Since the last time I audited you has anything been suppressed? (This is always done by the repetitive system.) Since the last time I audited you, has anything been invalidated? Since the last time I audited you, has anything been suggested? Since the last time I audited you, is there anything you failed to reveal? Since the last rime I audited you, is there anything you have been careful of? (These latter four rudiments are done by fast check.) The "In this session" Mid Ruds can be used to straighten up a session that has completely gone out of the Auditor's control, after he has gotten in the Random Rudiment. "On this list" Mid Ruds, particularly with suppressed or invalidated can be used to get a pc to continue listing. RUNNING THE RANDOM RUDIMENT: In this session have I missed a withhold on you? In this session is there anything I failed to find out about you? 244 In this session have you thought, said, or done anything I failed to find out? In this session have I nearly found out something about you? Any of the above versions may be used. The Random Rudiment is always run repetitively. END OF SESSION: Is it alright with you if we end off .......... now? Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I do so? End of .......... If the pc from the Auditor's observation is very agitated or upset, the Auditor would run General O/W as given above. If the session has been an extremely difficult session with the pc having been ARC broken badly and frequently, one would get in the "In this session" Mid Ruds in order to clean up the auditing, even though the pc may now be alright. Have you made any part of your goals for this session? Have you made any other gains in this session that you would care to mention? (After adjusting the meter) Please squeeze the cans. (If the squeeze test was not alright, the Auditor would run the pc's Havingness process until the can squeeze gives an adequate response.) Is there anything you would care to ask or say before I end this session? Is it alright with you if I end this session now? Here it is: END OF SESSION (Tone 40). Has this session ended for you? (If the pc says, "No," repeat, "END OF SESSION." If the session still has not ended, say, "You will be getting more auditing. END OF SESSION.") "Tell me I am no longer auditing you." Please note that Havingness is run after Goals and Gains as this tends to bring the pc more into present time and to take his attention to a degree out of the session. (Bulletin done by Mary Sue Hubbard after we worked it out) L. RON HUBBARD LRH:dr.bh Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 245  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 21 iDate=21/2/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT GOALS CHECK   CenOCon  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 FEBRUARY AD13 CenOCon URGENT GOALS CHECK Issue as Secretarial Executive Director: All Goals and Reliable Items found on students, staff or HGC pcs must be checked out and seen to rocket read by a qualified executive or staff Class IV before being run. Only Routine 3M is permitted as a clearing procedure and exactly as given in bulletins and tapes. All Clears must be checked out by a qualified executive before being pronounced Clear by the Organization or reported to me as such. No auditor may be permitted to audit staff members or HGC pcs or students who is not a regular staff member. No auditor may use Routine Three unless qualified by the Staff Training Officer or the Academy. No auditors not staff members may frequent the premises of the Organization for the purposes of obtaining private preclears. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:jw.rd Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 246  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=4/3/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT ROUTINE 2-10, 2-12, 2-12A   Central Orgs  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 4 MARCH 1963 Central Orgs URGENT ROUTINE 2-10, 2-12, 2-12A Cease to use Routine 2-10, 2-12 and 2-12A in the HGC and Academy and on staff clearing except as follows: Cases that RS on List One and whose goal cannot be found. Cases that need R2-10, 2-12 or 2-12A completed or repaired. Why? 3M suddenly emerged and is simpler than R2-10, 2-12 or 2-12A. An auditor can turn off somebody's RS and RR by using Routine 2-10, 2-12 and 2-12A wrongly, thus making it harder to find the goal and do 3M. Routine 2-10, 2-12 and 2-12A can help find a goal. It can also submerge a goal when packages are not completed. R2-10, 2-12, 2-12A Case Repair consists of completing any obvious package from Existing RIs. 3M, I repeat, emerged after Routine 2 and is easier to teach and use. Do not leave a Routine 2 package of 4 from already found RIs incomplete because of this HCO Bulletin. Complete it. Avoid Long, Protested Listing as only this can mess up a pc's RR or RS. Routine 2-12 may be taught in an Academy but not used on students' cases. I am working on easily done Routine 2-GX which is a Goal Finding Routine consisting of the nearly exact pattern of a Problems Intensive but asking a different question, which adds up to listing times in the pc's life when his purpose was balked and assessing and running as in a Problems Intensive. More goals are being delivered by ordinary Problems Intensives than by Routine 2-12. R2-12 is a highly successful process but fails in some hands. L. RON HUBBARD LRH:gl.bh Copyright $c 1963 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 247  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=8/3/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  USE OF THE BIG MIDDLE RUDIMENTS   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH AD13 Central Orgs Franchise USE OF THE BIG MIDDLE RUDIMENTS The Big Mid Ruds can be used in the following places: At the start of any session. Examples: "Since the last time I audited you ___________________________ " "Since the last time you were audited ____________________________ " "Since you decided to be audited ___________________________ " In or at the end of any session. Example: "In this session __________________________ " On a list. Examples: "On this list ___________________________ " "On (say list question) ___________________________ " On a goal or item. Example: "On (say goal or item) ___________________________ " Never say "On the goal to catch catfish __________________________ " or "On the item, a catfish ___________________________ " Say simply the goal itself or the item itself. ORDER OF BUTTONS Here is the correct wording and order of use for the Big Mid Ruds. " ______________________ has anything been suppressed?" " ______________________ is there anything you have been careful of?" " ______________________ is there anything you have failed to reveal?" " ______________________ has anything been invalidated?" " ______________________ has anything been suggested?" " ______________________ has any mistake been made?" " ______________________ is there anything you have been anxious about?" " ______________________ has anything been protested?" " ______________________ has anything been decided?" In using the first three buttons (Suppressed, Careful of and Failed to Reveal), the rudiment question should be asked directly of the pc off the meter (repetitive). When the pc has no more answers, check the question on the meter. If the question reads, stick with it on the meter like in Fast Rud checking until it is clean. The last six buttons are cleaned directly on the meter as in Fast Ruds. LRH:dr.bh Copyright $c 1963 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 248  L. RON HUBBARD   Type = 11 iDate=10/3/63 Volnum=0 Issue=0 Rev=0 rDate=0/0/0 Addition=0 aDate=0/0/0 aRev=0 arDate=0/0/0  URGENT ROUTINE 2-10 2-12 2-12A (Also applies to Routine 3-M) VANISHED RS OR RR   Central Orgs Franchise  HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 10 MARCH 1963 Central Orgs Franchise URGENT ROUTINE 2-10 2-12 2-12A (Also applies to Routine 3-M) VANISHED RS OR RR A preclear whose Items while listing or whose Items when found Rockslam, can be said to be "capable of Rocket Reading or Rockslamming". IF no RRs or RSes are seen on a preclear's list or any list while listing and also if no Items RS when called back, the preclear can be said to be "incapable of Rocket Reading or Rockslamming". Some preclears are incapable of producing an RS or RR except on the first GPM goal when found. No matter how much Item listing is done, no matter from what source, no RR or RS is seen while listing and none is found when the list is complete. No technique to turn on a pc's RS or RR will ever be found except one: Find the pc's goal for the 1st GPM. WHAT MAKES RRs & RSes VANISH The thing which turns off a pc's RR or RS is TOO MANY RELIABLE ITEMS FOUND WITHOUT FINDING THE PC'S GOAL. This can be done by life or by Auditing. As it can be done by life, some raw meat pcs will not RR or RS. It can be surmised that they have been set about in life by too many Reliable Items in full view. For instance a pc has an RI, FATHER, an RI, POLITICIAN, an RI, CITY. His father is politician who insists on living in a city. These and others in his bank, although undisclosed, are yet restimulated, and this pc will not be seen to RS or RR on listing, and no RS or RR is likely to be seen even if an actual RI is found. There is no use here for a more forceful way to get RIs. The rules are very plain, unvaried and uncompromising: RULE: WHEN A PC'S RS OR RR IS OFF, STOP TRYING TO FIND MORE RIs. No matter if you could find them, the RR or RS would just go more thoroughly off if you did. RULE: FINDING MORE RIs WILL NOT TURN AN RR OR RS BACK ON. There is a danger signal in this. The pc's RR or RS starts getting smaller, Item by Item, RI by RI; get off fast. Let the last RI be the last one looked for. If just one more is found, bang, no RR or RS on this pc no matter what is "found" in the way of RIs. RULE: COMPLETING R2 OR R3 PACKAGE WILL NOT TURN ON THE RR OR RS. However don't let the pc ARC Break on an incomplete list by starting one. It may be possible to find one more RI that gives a feeble slam, but then you've had it. However the picture is not all black. Pcs who were "incapable of RR or RS" have been subjected to 26 lists after with no RR or RS seen and still have recovered. RESTORING THE RR & RS The Rockslam and Rocket Read are brothers. A pc will Rockslam and yet not Rocket Read because the Rocket Read is the frailer brother. A pc going down hill toward no RR or RS first loses his RR. It now shows only as an RS. Then the RS vanishes too. You can't Prepcheck an RS into an RR on some pcs if the pc is on the way down toward no RR or RS. Ordinarily, however, a lot of RSes can be Prepchecked into RRing if there is an RR there to fire. An RR as it expires may become an RS. 249 The ability to RR, then, goes out first. There is only one thing that restores the pc's ability to RR or RS. RULE: THE ONLY THING THAT WILL RESTORE THE ABILITY OF A PC TO RR OR RS IS TO FIND THE PC'S FIRST (or next) GPM GOAL. Naturally it is far easier to find a Rocket Read on a goal before the pc loses his ability to Rocket Read. It is far from impossible however to find a goal on a pc that is "incapable of RRing or RSing" and far from impossible to get it to RR by Prepcheck as the pc will always RR again on the right goal. Just listing goals eases the condition of "no RR or RS". And once an RR or RS that has been shut off is found again on the goal, the pc's RR or RS is "on again" on everything. On some pcs, the goal is so charged that you will find an immediate Rocket Firing Blow Down of the TA. You get long Rocket Reads one after another as the pc realizes it is the goal. This is particularly true on some pcs who have had a lot of RIs found. In such a case you no more find the goal and Prepcheck it than you have to find another for the next GPM. ALL ITEMS COUNT ANY ITEM found by 3DXX, 3GA, 3GAXX, or even earlier "for running processes on" are ALL part of the GPM and must be put on the pc's Line Plot. It doesn't matter how they were found or by whom, or if they were checked out or not. They belong on the Line Plot and can be used to find goals. RULE: PUT ANY ITEM EVER FOUND ON THE PC BY ANY PROCESS ON THE LINE PLOT. EVERY ONE WILL ADD UP TO A GOAL. Therefore even "bad Items", Items that were found from representing RSing Items, backwards oppose Items, all belong on the Line Plot. It is understood here that there was some kind of an assessment. Whatever was found by any kind of an assessment since 1954 belongs on the Line Plot and can be used to help find goals. FOUR RIs In R2-10, 2-12 and 2-12A you are allowed only four RIs before the pc's goal must be found. If the RS or RR is seen to get smaller from one Item to the next, abandon 2-12 and begin 3-M goal finding at once. When you find the pc's goal, and when you are adding up and Prepchecking the first GPM, you will discover that everything found on the pc for the last nine years was part of his first or another GPM. So, old auditing paid off! In view of this, on old pcs, it's safest to go for the goal as your first auditing action. You can use any Item ever found to help get that goal. On raw meat pcs get a couple RIs if you can by R2-12 and use that to help find the goal. With luck one will even RR. But find the goal before opposing it. SUMMARY This discovery of what monitors the RS and RR of a pc is a very important one. I've worked ceaselessly on this since the first of the year and finally isolated it. Even a 3rd goal clear isn't immune to losing his RS and RR if you keep finding scores of Items with no goal or a wrong goal. So treat the RS and RR with respect when found, and find the pc's goal when he won't RS or RR and you've got it made. You don't need a better meter. Only the pc's goal. This rules out unlimited R2-10, 2-12 and 2-12A on a pc. But these give you the two or four RIs necessary for easy goal finding so R2 is of value after all! And I've a Prepcheck coming up that helps loosen up the pc's goal, so we're still all right. LRH:dr.bh Copyright $c 1963 L. RON HUBBARD by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 250  L. RON HUBBARD