deja.com
Please visit our sponsor
Explore by clicking here
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
 Home  »  People  »  Humanities
 >>  Theology 
fz bible 6/19
Explore More:

The Best of ZDNet
Delivered to you free!

Earth's Biggest Selection
Shop at Amazon.com

The Ultimate Directory
Cool stuff from InfoSpace

Classifieds
Cool stuff from InfoSpace

Price Comparison
Cool stuff from InfoSpace

5¢ long distance!
Save $$$$$.

Rate it!
Trama Estrelicia Crib
or choose another to rate
(1=worst, 5=best)
Safety
15
Ease of use
15
Comfort
15
Cost / Benefit
15

  • Compare it to others
  • User Comments
  • Shop new or used
     
  • top rated
    Baby Cribs
    1. Angel Line Classic Style
    2. Angel Line Contemporary Style
    3. Angel Line Continental Style
    4. Angel Line Heirloom Style
    5. Angel Line Jenny Lind Crib
  • See the full list...
  • Deja Forums
    Atheism
    Atheism
    Atheism
    Satirical atheism
    Atheism
     
    Deja Communities
    Genealogy Life
    genclassifieds
    Genealogy Saginaw Michigan
    The Russian Nobility
    Dada: Father Lives

    Start your own community in Theology.  

    My Deja
    Get more out of Deja: Register to easily manage your discussions and communities, and improve your searches. Plus, get email alerts about new posts in your favorite discussions with Deja Tracker!
     
      discussions     ratings     communities  
      back to search results 
    Help | Feedback
    >> Community
    Next in Search
       >> Forum: alt.religion.scientology
          >> Thread: FZ Bible 6/19 CLASS 8 TAPES
            >> Message 1 of 18
     
    Subject:FZ Bible 6/19 CLASS 8 TAPES
    Date:1999/07/03
    Author:Secret Squirrel <squirrel@echelon.alias.net>
      Posting History Post Reply

    FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST
     
    CLASS VIII TAPE TRANSCRIPTS 6/19
     
    **************************************************
     
    CLASS VIII TAPE TRANSCRIPTS - CONTENTS
     
    01  SEP 24, 1969 WELCOME TO THE CLASS VIII COURSE
    02  SEP 25, 1969 WHAT STANDARD TECH DOES
    03  SEP 26, 1969 THE LAWS OF CASE SUPERVISION
    04  SEP 27, 1969 STANDARD TECH DEFINED
    05  SEP 28, 1969 THE STANDARD GREEN FORM AND RUDIMENTS
    06  SEP 29, 1969 MECHANICS OF TECHNIQUES AND SUBJECT MATTER
    07  SEP 30, 1969 CASE SUPERVISOR DO'S AND DONT'S:
    08  OCT  1, 1969 CERTAINTY OF STANDARD TECH
    09  OCT  2, 1969 THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING
    10  OCT  3, 1969 ASSISTS
    11  OCT  7, 1969 ASSESSMENT AND LISTING BASICS
    12  OCT  8, 1969 MORE ON BASICS
    13  OCT  9, 1969 ETHICS AND CASE SUPERVISION
    14  OCT 10, 1969 AUDITOR ATTITUDE AND THE BANK
    15  OCT 11, 1969 AUDITORS ADDITIVES, LISTS AND CASE SUPERVISION
    16  OCT 12, 1969 STANDARD TECH
    17  OCT 13, 1969 THE BASICS AND SIMPLICITY OF STANDARD TECH
    18  OCT 14, 1969 THE NEW AUDITOR'S CODE
    19  OCT 15, 1969 AN EVALUATION OF EXAMINATION ANSWERS
     
     
    **************************************************
     
    STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
     
    Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
    Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.
     
    The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
    Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
    copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.
     
    They think that all freezoner's are "squirrels" who should be stamped out as heritics.  By their standards, all Christians,
    Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.
     
    The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
    of Judiasm form the Old Testament of Christianity.
     
    We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
    to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.
     
    But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
    the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
    testament regardless of any Jewish opinion. 
     
    We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
    as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
    without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.
     
    We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
    not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
    that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
    to aid us for that reason.
     
    Thank You,
     
    The FZ Bible Association
     
    **************************************************
     
    6809C29 Class VIII TAPE 6
     
     
    MECHANICS OF TECHNIQUES AND SUBJECT MATTER
     
    Thank you. And so we come to lecture number (SIX); lecture
    number six. And we still count.
     
    Very good. Twenty nine September AD 18, Class VIII Course.
     
    There are many things which I could take up tonight. The
    org students did their first auditing today. There were two
    well dones, one apparent false auditing report, and three,
    oh my god, how could you's. And amongst these, apparently
    somebody doesn't know why a list is done.
     
    A list is done to bring about a cognition on a question.
    Well let me give it an exact order.
     
    A cognition on the subject blowing to F/N, a realization of
    the question blowing to F/N, or an item blowing to F/N, or
    processed or relisted as in Remedy B. going to F/N. And
    those're the only reasons you do a list. And my god, you
    don't do a list to have a complete list, because as near as
    I can figure from this auditing report the list was being
    corrected on the basis that it was complete. I don't give a
    damn about a complete list.
     
    Now let's take how an auditing question can blow up on a
    subject. The fellow says, "We're now going to do Pr Pr 4,
    and the subject of this is source, Sources" Boombol F/N.
    "By golly I did realize, that, that, that, that's, is
    wrong. Yes, it's been wrong. I haven't really been
    recognizing that." And the auditor says, if the auditor is
    one of these ones that you drop a six pence in, or a penny
    in, or depending what country you're in, he goes on and
    says, "Uh, I haven't done my job." And the knucklehead will then try to clear the questions, try to run the session,
    and the TA will go up, up, up, up, up. There is such a case
    folder right in your case folder collection. It blew up on
    the subject of Pr Pr 4. And then the auditor tried to clear
    the commands, and tried to run it, and he ran it for an
    hour and a half, and the tone arm was going out through the
    roof, and then, by simply rehabbing the F/N it went (snap).
    Right back to the fact that the guy had cognited at the
    moment that the subject of the process was given to him.
     
    Now if that could happen on a process therefore it can
    happen on a list. But very often one doesn't announce the
    list, but the PC all of a sudden can get what the auditor
    is at. "Are you connected to a suppressive person?" or some such question is asked, and the PC says, "What a brand new
    idea." You know? Wow. And the auditor then says, "Alright. We're going to do the WSU." Well Christ, he's got an F/N
    right in front of his face. And all he's gonna get out of
    that is a rising tone arm.
     
    Now another instance, given the subject for what's going to
    go on, a little bit of an R factor, no lecture on the
    subject, but "We're gonna run so and so, and the question
    is so and so, now what do you understand with this
    question?" And at that moment something goes boom! You see? F/N.
     
    Now I have seen something that's so completely insane, so
    utterly insane, that the person actually, if he wound up in
    the hands of a psychoanalyst, I wouldn't say a word. And
    that is, he has the PC put down the cans while we look it
    up in the dictionary. Jesus Christ almighty, god! You mean
    you let a PC off the cans from the moment the session
    starts to the end of the set? Bull! Never! You say, "Well
    how's he gonna turn the pages of the dictionary?" Well what the hell's he doing turning the pages of the dictionary,
    the auditor got a broken arm? A PC isn't let off the cans
    ever during a session because an F/N can occur at any time
    in the session. And every now and then I'll see in old
    reports, "Took the PC off the cans so he could look up the
    word, and then the tone arm starts up, up, up, up, up, up,
    up, up, up. 4.25, the auditor going on, and bla bla bla,
    and bla bla bla, and the next item, or the next bla bla
    bla, and bla bla bla, and the next item or the next
    question, and the tone arm going up, 4.25, 4.5, all the way
    up, "Well where could the floating needle have been?" It was when he took the PC off the cans.
     
    The PC looked it up in the dictionary and cognited. Because
    that is a point where it can go. It can go on the command,
    the clearing of the command. It can go on the first
    auditing question asked without it being answered. Or it
    can go on the first answer, second answer, and actually
    most often goes on the first answer on lists. The first
    item. And these god-awful painful lists which you see that
    go eighty nine pages, or something of this sort, are either
    listing a dead horse, or the item was the first item. So you
    don't let the PC off cans. Because those are the sequences
    of F/N I've just given you. And it happens on a list, and it
    happens on a process, and it can happen at any time. It can
    happen at any time, any time. So don't let the PC off the
    cans for any reason under the sun, moon or stars.
     
    Now I will tell you another kooky one. I'll give you
    another kooky circumstance with regard to all of this. And
    that is this. Electronics men think an E-meter works
    because hands sweat. And I haven't been around orgs to
    shoot the electronics men who say this, and as a net result
    of all of this they remain unshot, and they do talk. And in
    this great, advanced, modern society in which we live, they
    think that a galvanometer works because of hand sweat. Now
    the fellow, you can just see the fellow sweating and
    unsweating. He sweats a read, and he unsweats a read. And
    he sweats a read, and he unsweats a read. And he sweats a
    read, and he unsweats a read. And that is mirrored in the
    fact of "PC wiped his hands and tone arm rose." Now I
    imagine some low TA case figured this out, that if the PC
    wiped his hands and then you got a higher TA read, then
    immediately and directly, and instantly; it was the sweat
    which gave him the low TA read. I'll tell you what gives a
    low TA read. Three. B-thetans. That is a low TA.
     
    The whole of low TA. The whole subject of low TA is
    contained in that. "PC has attested three, tone arm 1.2." Now that is something which comes from male cows. When you
    see a TA dive, guy's got B-thetans. Now there'd be eight
    thousand, seven hundred and sixty five additional reasons
    why a person doesn't have a this, or doesn't have a that.
    And we could have an infinity of wrongnesses. There is no
    reason of my harping on certain sets of wrongnesses.
     
    I'm just showing you what goofy-nesses can come up.
     
    Now listen very carefully. When the PC puts down the cans
    and moves his hands and arms, the body density mass of the
    B-thetan beefs up. So that when he goes back on the cans
    again, the TA is reading higher. I'm afraid you cannot
    avoid these horribly, factual facts! That a PC who gets a
    low TA is an unflat three.
     
    Now we had an auditor here today very, very puzzled, very
    puzzled as to how his meter, beautifully trimmed at the
    beginning of session went out of trim during the session,
    at the end of session was found marvelously out of trim.
    And this he was being very mystified about. He doesn't know
    this fact. It takes a while for a meter and a can to warm
    up. So, the PC grabs hold of the cans, or the meter is
    turned on, and if you instantly trim it at that precise
    instant that it's turned on, you are turning on a cold
    circuit. And you're trimming a cold circuit. It takes a
    minute or two for the circuit to warm up and your trim will
    change. And this is not true of all E-meters.
     
    Some of them heat up faster than others. But it's a safe
    bet, that if you're going to do a trim check on a meter,
    you do it at the end of session, not at the beginning of
    session. And what's your meter doing so far out of trim, do
    you carry it around by the trim knob? My meters from one
    month's end to the next just stay where they're supposed to
    stay. So I don't know why other people's meters don't,
    unless they uses the trim knob to scratch their heads, or
    something.
     
    But the point I'm making here, is there are certain data.
    Now when you see people trying to avoid this data they
    have, they feel the data is discreditable to themselves, or
    somebody to whom it is discreditable is trying to argue
    them out of it. Now you can have this kind of a fire fight
    develop up the line someplace, there is no such thing as a
    service facsimile. There is no such thing as a service
    facsimile. It's very amusing, because that will be the
    guy's service facsimile.
     
    Now this is this bad. You can get somebody who is in a
    foul, foul condition in his life as far as casualties,
    accidents, that sort of thing is concerned, and he gets to
    three and he can't find any.
     
    He can't find any at all. And the idea's upsetting to him.
    Now if his grades are out and he has not come up well
    through his grades, his level of reality will not be
    adequate to embrace three, anyway. And so you have people
    going around, every now and then you will find somebody
    going around and saying, "Well, idea of body thetans, na
    na, ah ha ha ha ha ha, yeah, yeah." Not true.
     
    Now, he considers it discreditable. He himself wants to
    invalidate it for some reason or another. So he starts
    spreading it about so as to discredit the information. And
    this blocks the way for an awful lot of people. So
    therefore, you've got to have a grip on your standard data
    which is sufficient to stand up to all of this
    cockeyed-ness. This is wild stuff that comes around. Crazy,
    crazy stuff.
     
    There is one going in Los Angeles, I think it is, right
    this minute, that it won't be possible to become clear or
    OT. It's not possible to make these grades. Out of seventy
    people polled, twenty of them thought it was impossible and
    they wouldn't be able to make it, and they didn't have much
    reality on it. Who's been at work there? One of the first
    things you see is the invalidation of the state of clear.
     
    Reality is a fascinating thing. Reality is proportional to
    the amount of charge off a case. If you took Clearing
    Course materials and handed 'em over to some wog he would
    look them over and scratch his head, maybe come down with a
    cold or something. If he tried to run them, if you tried to
    run them on him, your possibility of doing so is so
    microscopically remote, and most of 'em wouldn't even upset
    him. That's how far they are from clear. Because there is
    this stable datum - the amount of charge off a case is
    proportional to the reality. Also, proportional to the
    awareness.
     
    So you have somebody walking down the street and there are
    four elephants, and these four elephants are walking down
    in squad formation, and each one of them's carrying green
    banners. And you say to this fellow, "What the hell. Four
    elephants walking down the middle of the streets" And he
    says, "What elephants?" Just that. Just, what elephants? So, it is very fascinating. People are unaware to the
    degree that they haven't got much reality anyway. Now you
    let one ofthese monkeys come along and tell you what
    reality is. Do you follow? It's one of these incredible,
    nonsense propositions.
     
    The whole subject of reality is mixed up in the subject of
    perception, the subject of recognition, the subject of
    truth. You wonder how in the name of god the people of this
    planet could be lied to. 'Cause brother, can they be lied
    to. Look at the newspapers they buy. Now if you want to
    know how much truth is in the newspapers, all you have to
    do is read the report about Scientology. Now you know
    that's for the birds. What about the story at the right and
    left of the one about Scientology? Did you ever think of
    that? They're just as lying as the one about Scientology.
    See? The newspapers at this certain level of action here at
    this particular time are not particularly kicking back at
    us. They, as a matter of fact, their last report at least,
    they were doing very well indeed. But the level of truth,
    the level of truth isn't there. And yet these are the
    people who are keeping people informed. Well, think of the
    people who are keeping them informed, and think of the
    people who are quote, "being informed", unquote. See?
    Unreality.
     
    One of your basic protests is unreality. But unreality is
    proportional to the amount of charge on the case. " these
    guys are pretty charged up, aren't they? So they're in a
    figure-figure, boggle-woggle, snuggle-luggled, hanging
    around. There's an old comic strip character, Joe
    Bliffelstick, something like that, and he always went
    around with a little rain cloud over his head, you know?
    That's the boy. That's your standard issue humanoid today.
    See? He's got too much storm going on right in his
    immediate vicinity to see very much out there.
     
    Now the quality of the charge taken off the case is very
    important. If you take charge off on the main line of the
    grades, as they go up, why, it is basic charge which then
    blows a lot of side charge. Now if you just took charge off
    on mass, without any judgement as to whether or not it was
    main line, just take charge off, just get the E-meter to
    read. Put a person on the cans, get the E-meter to read.
    Probably at the and of fifty, sixty years of auditing,
    something like that, there'd be a great oddity would occur.
    His reality would come up to OT. Do you follow? Now what
    we've got is a way to go right through the fiddle of the
    charge line to remove those central charges which then
    discharge all the side charges. Now a PC usually feels
    better in some way or another, but an auditor who badly
    audits, that is who audits very poorly, can actually
    put as much charge on the case as he takes off. He
    can invalidate the case. The PC says "Why? You know, I feel better, I, I, didn't I have a floating needle, or
    something?" And the auditor says, "Ha ha ha ha. Case like yours, no sir!" Well you do the same thing. You say , "Who or what has unmocked you?" Or something. And, question
    didn't read. Person isn't PTS. Now you've given him the
    evaluation that he's suppressed. Because you're going to
    now list the list. So the list lists out to a dead horse,
    but the PC seems charged up.
     
    Alright, I'll give you another example of it. The list is
    charged, it does read, and you give him the wrong item.
    Alright, when you give him the wrong item, you'll hang him
    with that little pocket of charge because that isn't the
    item. So it didn't discharge the list. So you've got the
    charge of the list hung up in the fact that he's now got a
    wrong item. So that after a listing action is done, or
    after a listing action session, if the TA is high it was a
    wrong item. That's; it's very elementary. TA's high, wrong
    item.
     
    You're busy listing away, listing away madly on a case,
    getting up to your hundred and fifty fifth page, or
    something like this, and you notice the TA is starting up.
    Well you're putting charge on the case. Do you see that
    your tone arm, the tore arm, is, in actual fact, the
    measure of accumulation of charge? The needle surges are
    just gradients of the tone arm. You can get a tone arm
    actually behaving like a needle. And a tone arm over a long
    period of time, does behave like a needle. A tone arm
    measures the amount of charge-up on the case at that
    particular time. When you get into the higher OT sections
    you will find something else very peculiar happens. You can
    find that your PC will lean on something, and drive his TA
    up. And you can do your nut as a review auditor, trying to
    get this TA down on some guy who is up around six, seven,
    eight levels, and his TA is up, boy. It's up. 4.75, or
    something like that. And you suddenly sort it out and you
    find out he's leaning on something. Well at that level he
    can lean on something so much harder than anybody ever
    thought of, that, of course, you are reading the side of a
    building. Or you are reading the density of the ridge he is
    making against his body. And you can fish it around,
    actually, to find out what he is doing, and all of a
    sudden, why, he says, "Well you; what am I doing? I, well,
    pushing on the ceiling." Slllll. Down she come.
     
    Now you can actually reverse this when he is OT8. You can
    reverse this, and as far as a meter is concerned you can
    put him on the meter, have him connected with the body, and
    then have him lean on the wall. Just lean on the wall, not
    go through any energy body grips and so forth.
     
    After all, the guy isn't the body. Have him lean on the
    wall, and you'll watch your TA come right on up. Unlean off
    the wall and it goes down. In other words, at high levels
    your TA starts to behave like a needle. Which is quite,
    quite interesting. But your needle, you see, is just a sort
    of a, of a small, easily read TA. They are connected.
     
    So, you put more charge on the case. Down at a lower level
    the guy isn't leaning on anything, but the guy's got a lot
    of body thetans, or something like that, and remember that
    from three down you are auditing somebody with body
    thetans. So very peculiar things can happen. And you can
    audit him incorrectly, do an incorrect action, and have the
    TA go up. You can incorrectly list him, you can overrun
    him, and so on. You've got something leaning against
    something. Something making more mass than it did before.
    So you haven't taken charge off the case, you've put charge
    on the case.
     
    So if your TA is higher at session end than it was at the
    beginning, the case is more charged up at the end than it
    was at the beginning. Elementary.
     
    Do you follow? I mean, these, these, these, this is, this
    is very easy. This is very easy. The auditor, through
    incorrect actions put more water in the bucket than he took
    out, and of course the tone arm measuring the amount of
    water in the bucket will, of course, measure more water in
    the bucket. It's, it's, it's just that elementary. It, it's
    not a very esoteric datum.
     
    We're dealing, in actual fact, with a creature who can make
    mass, and who does make mass.
     
    And the mass which he makes below three, or actually below
    seven, the mass he makes, and so on, is normally, bank
    mass. Now, if he is given an item which isn't his item, he
    then has been given something which he then grips, and which
    stays with him. And it's a very funny phenomenon that a wrong
    item will be remembered very, very easily by the PC.
     
    Now there's a piece of rehabbing which is, at this stage of
    the game, being done wrong. I don't know why you guys keep
    asking for a service facsimile. I notice a lot of PCs can
    give you their service facsimile. What the hell's he doing
    remembering his service facsimile? Now it isn't true that
    because he can remember his service facsimile it wasn't his
    service facsimile, but you're asking a PC to do a rather
    considerable feat. You're asking him to remember something
    that has probably been erased. And instead of rehabbing it,
    you're keying it back in again. So I don't know why you
    keep asking him for the wording. I saw a folder here the
    other day, it came in from an org. and it said it wasn't
    his service facsimile because he couldn't remember it.
     
    And it's probably the one valid service facsimile that's
    passed through the lines. It's whether or not it rehabs.
    Whether or not it goes F/N. That, that's, that's the whole
    test. Does it go F/N? Alright, that's it.
     
    Now the other thing, the other thing which you must get
    very straight as far as E-meter reactions and processes and
    so on, that you must get very straight, is that where an
    item, or a process, brought about a state of release there
    is an F/N there to rehab. And if it doesn't rehab he didn't
    go release at that point.
     
    Well you say, "Well how many times can you rehab this
    things" I don't know. Infinity. So you say, "Alright, let's rehab this fellows' grades." And you could make this
    mistake as a C/S, as a case supervisor. Say, "Let's rehab
    this fellows' grades. Tell him rehab the grades.' And this
    auditor obediently tries to rehab ARC Straightwire. Tone
    arm rose, you give him hell because he rehabbed it wrong.
    Or you say it's been rehabbed too many times. I saw a
    remark in a case summary here today. There's a complete
    error. The person has been overrun on Ruds. Now a person
    couldn't be overrun on Ruds. Not possible to be overrun on
    Ruds. It is possible to overrun one particular ARC break,
    but it is not possible to overrun the whole subject of ARC
    breaks. So when you see this, you tried to rehab ARC
    Straightwire and it didn't rehab, and the tone arm went up,
    and you fish around trying to find the point of rehab, and
    it didn't exist, why naturally at that stage of the game
    you're going to get a rising tone arm. It's as easy as
    that. So what do you do about this? You say, "Well I
    couldn't possibly do this. It's obviously been overrun."
    Well you gotta make up your mind. It's either been overrun
    or not run at all.
     
    One of the ways to do this is to run it. And you say, "God, that's adventurous." Yeah it is .
     
    Yes, but what the hell's this guy doing being a, being a
    grade three without his ARC Straightwire in? See? So you
    run it. Blows down, it F/Ns. That's the first time it was
    ever run, I assure you. Supposing, as you tried to run it,
    it just really shot up. Well at that time you could
    indicate that it was overrun and try to fish around and
    find out what in the name of common sense happened to it.
     
    One of the things just would be to date the session in
    which it was supposed to have been rehabbed, supposed to
    have been run, and get the buttons in on that session.
    Because there might have been a crashing invalidation on
    the session, of something that swallowed up the F/N in some
    weird fashion. It couldn't have been an F/N which appeared
    below the invalidation. Don't get that sort of thing. There
    was an F/N but the auditor wound up on the guy and told him
    that wasn't it, that it was no good, or something, and the
    guy can't remember this session because it was sort of
    painful. Something bad happened in the session. Well you
    could, you could rehabilitate the session and get the F/N.
     
    So, obviously, obviously your right procedure would be,
    you're getting somebody, you wanna rehab ARC Straightwire.
    Well, the fellow might be protesting it being rehabbed,
    because this is the hundred and fifth time, and he's tired
    of the whole thing, so you got protest on it. Something
    like that doesn't rehab, see? It doesn't rehab. The tone
    arm starts up.
     
    Well now it could be protested. Not over-rehabbed, but
    certainly protested the rehabbing of it.
     
    It could have been that the session is too painful in which
    it was run. The later part of the session was very painful
    but the early part of the session was all right, something
    goofy like this. So one of the things would be to date the
    thing. Do just a standard dating on your meter.
     
    Date the session and get in some buttons on the session and
    see if anything happens. Then you're liable to get yourself
    an F/N.
     
    Now if that action didn't occur, this is, this is rather
    working very hard at it, see? And this is how to be very
    safe, but if that action didn't occur, it didn't ever F/N.
    It didn't ever F/N.
     
    That's it. Somebody was telling a lie.
     
    But your tone arm, the tone arm only means overrun when it
    goes up on something you are running. A high tone arm means
    a generality of overruns in life. You can have a person
    with a high tone arm, that oh boys Does he got overruns in
    life. It's quite remarkable how many overruns there can be
    in life. And one of your standard actions is to get the
    life overruns off of the case. And boy, does that cool off
    TAs. Wow!
     
    Now let me show you what kind of errors can creep in, just
    as, so you're safe guarded against your tech being shot to
    hell. Somebody says that you must only get life overruns in
    this lifetime because the PC liable to get back, and bad
    things are liable to happen, and whole track doesn't exist
    anyway. Somebody is trying to invalidate whole track, so he
    says you mustn't ever try to, try to get a hold of life
    overruns earlier than this lifetime because it's liable to
    get the PC upset.
     
    Well it's very, very interesting. There have been crude
    versions of engram running on the whole track. They
    apparently didn't have meters. Then commands, god knows
    what they were. But somebody on the whole track here and
    there has tried to run engrams. And they inevitably have
    overrun them. So you're liable to find an engram overrun of
    eighty one million years ago.
     
    This guy says; you're running this process, "What has been
    overrun?", you're running this process, and the guy says;
    what's been overrun, and it occurs to him; engrams. Good.
    And you try; now you limited by asking what session, you
    see, and pin his attention up here in PT somewhere you
    know? In what foundation? You see, you could limit your
    question so that he could never rehab it. But it's
    obviously been overrun because it reads as overrun, but you
    can't get an F/N. Well, now if you know the tools of your
    trade this won't baffle you.
     
    Do you remember what I told you about the incredible? The
    PCs data, man, is not something that you, as a case
    supervisor or an auditor have a god damned thing to do
    with. Any time auditing may be run on the, only on those
    things which conform to current opinion, any time that
    phenomenon occurs, and it's liable to occur at any time
    because the, actually the first foundation, the Dianetic
    Foundation, really blew up on just this one point. The
    Board of Directors was so upset over the commotion past
    lives would cause that they tried to pass a resolution
    saying that no more research must be done into the field of
    past lives. Well, we had a parting of the ways.
     
    Anyway, because obviously, to wrap up the subject one had
    to research what was there. Now let's get somebody
    researching under the Bide-a-wee College faculty. There's
    this guy with a high choke collar and very prim, tremendous
    number of missed withholds, second dynamic overts of
    various kinds, but a respectable citizen. And all of a
    sudden somebody says that he's going to do a little
    research in this line, or they're gonna practice this and
    that, why he permits Scientology to be run in that
    university only so long as nobody...  Just fill in the
    missing lines.
     
    See? You could fill in; "As long as nobody tries to pull
    missed withholds." See? "As long as we never go into past lives." "As long as the subject religion is not touched." "As long... " Do you get the idea? You could fill it in, see, so you get a limitation. Now that is limitation of the
    preclear's data. Auditing has nothing to do with data. It
    has to do with technique.
     
    So the PC tells you there's eighteen elephants walking on
    the ceiling, boy, it's not up to you to correct him. He can
    take a snoot full of some outrageous drug or gasoline or
    something. And it's marvelous. We have people who have gone
    wing ding on gasoline. I, well, I guess they were in the
    valence of a car. (laughter) And he's trying to run out
    this incident, see? And this incident has pink elephants
    walking upside down on the ceiling. It has black bats
    flying in and out of his ears.
     
    Now psychiatry, when they found data like that, instantly
    and at once invalidated the person.
     
    And then they might put it down in their report, but their
    idea of making the thing come out straight was telling the
    person what the truth was. Now that is a whole failed line.
    It is totally failed. It is fighting its' last ditch fight
    as I speak to you now. It's going to go over Niagara Falls
    with no barrel, boy. Because, one of the tricks it uses is
    when it interferes with somebody or implants somebody, is to
    put an incredible perception in the implant so if the person
    says anything about it, it will sound so incredible he can then
    be pronounced insane. So you haven't got anything to do
    with the PCs data. What he tells you is what he tells you.
     
    So you do a list. Now let's get what just exactly what I
    mean. We do a list. And we're doing this list and he puts
    down "Pink elephants", and "Who or what has suppressed you?", and he puts down "Pink elephants, catterwacks,
    martians, a dog biscuit , and there's this hellish fall.
     
    And he sits up and...  (laughter) And the damned thing goes
    F/N. You don't even have a chance to null the list. There
    it is. Of course you say "Dog biscuits and it reads, and
    you say "That's your item", and he says, "Yeah, that sure is." You say, "Alright. Dog biscuits. That's your item.
     
    You see, one of the things that gets wrong with the time
    track is it has incredibles on it. And therefore, an
    incredible is something that won't as-is because it's not
    credible. The item is dog biscuits, he's been suppressed
    with dog biscuits. Some times you practically do your nut
    trying to figure out how the hell did he get loused up on
    the subject of dog biscuits. But actually, if you went back
    into it, inquired deeply, which you shouldn't do, but if
    you went back in to it; sometimes the PC explains this to
    you. It all sounds logical. But you're interested in the
    mechanics of it. Just the mechanics of it. Did it blow
    down? Was it the item on the list? Your action then is to
    verify and give it to the PC as his item. Those are the
    things which you're supposed to do. Not worry about whether
    or not it's dog biscuits.
     
    Do you see? You're not interested in the, in, in, in this
    data. Do you get the, you get the different orientation on
    this thing? It has nothing to do with you. If you followed
    the exact mechanical steps necessary to resolve it, why
    there you are. You're interested in the reaction of the PC,
    not his data.
     
    The PC says, "Oh yes, boy, do I have an ARC break, boy. Are they on to me," and so on, "They're all pretty bad, you know. They've been jumping all over me with wicked people,
    wicked people," and so on. "Well, that's good." By all means try to clean up this thing as an ARC break at the
    moment, and in the process of cleaning it up say, ask him
    casually, but not evaluatively if he has a withhold. And
    that reads, and you pull it. And then you check the ARC
    break, and it all of a sudden doesn't read and the whole
    thing has cooled off. Reaction. The PC was critical, that
    means, always, invariably, missed withhold. See? It's that
    kind of thing you're interested in as an auditor. Not what
    the ARC break was about, but that he was ARC broken. Not
    what the missed withhold was about, but that he did have
    one. Do you get the differences?
     
    Now the subject of each one of the grades, which is to say
    ARC breaks, withholds, problems, you name it, but the
    subject of any grade, the subject of any grade is timeless
    and endless. It can always be run forever. But not the
    commands of the grade.
     
    Supposing we tried to run Pr Pr 1 AA every time the PC
    looked worried and had a problem.
     
    Man, we would really wrap him around a telegraph pole. He
    would become overrun on that process, right? He never
    becomes overrun on problems. You, you get the vast
    difference there? He never, he's never overrun on problems.
    He is overrun on a problems process. He can be overrun, for
    instance, on problems of comparable magnitude. Problems of
    comparable magnitude. Problems of comparable magnitude.
    Problems of comparable magnitude. And you, in trying to put
    in the Ruds, had better well, damn well not run any process
    at all. ARC break is ARCU, CDEI, which is just the trying
    to find out what the ARC break is. Itsa, or earlier itsa.
     
    You do rudiments by itsa or earlier incident itsa on. A
    totality. And they never become overrun.
     
    But if you insisted on running a problem of comparable
    magnitude for every time you found a PC with a PTP, you
    would very soon have this one wrapped around a telegraph
    pole. So the basic stable datum that you should know is
    that a process can be overrun, but the subject of grades,
    the subject of grades can never be overrun. For instance
    you can't overrun Pr Pr you, you can't overrun Pr Pr 6 with
    regard to this. You're asking the PC how life is. Well after
    all you're asking him some version of this as condition,
    aren't you? But you start asking him about conditions, vroooom, booms Do you see? You could ask him how life is. Alright. That
    also might seem to overrun Pr Pr 4 too, or Pr Pr 5, right? This
    could, this could, all of these.
     
    So the basic background subject of it. You can ask somebody
    what engram he is stuck in. Well you're trying to get a
    revivification on Pr Pr 6 and usually do get one, even
    thought it flicks through like that. You could still find
    out what incident he's stuck in, but you don't have to run
    the process Pr Pr 6. Do you follow? So the subject of being
    stuck in incidents, inexhaustible.
     
    Every once in a while you guys are talking about a stuck
    picture. The PC had a stuck picture.
     
    So the PC had a stuck pictures It's not very interesting.
    Pets have stuck pictures. Now supposing you run Pr Pr 6
    every time the PC had a stuck picture. I don't know how
    much mass you would accumulate, but boy, you would soon
    have to move the PC with a crane and a truck.
     
    Now supposing, after he's clear, he has a stuck picture.
    And you tried to run it with Power.
     
    Well in the first place it inevitably is somebody else's
    picture and he is not sufficiently permeating now into the
    other thetans around. The only thing you can run it out of
    is a body thetan. And you prematurely beef up Pr Pr 3. And
    that's why you mustn't even rehab Power.
     
    You can't run Power after he's clear. The guy went clear
    without running Power. God almighty, never run Power! Don't
    ever rehab Power after the guy's clear. But if the guy
    isn't clear, but just on the Clearing Course and he can't
    seem to make it, and he gets no reality on it, you go back
    and find out he hasn't been run on Power, well run Power.
    Because he isn't clear.
     
    It's elementary. In actual fact there is not; it's not a
    very complicated subject, beyond this. The only Power
    that's available on a clear is that you would get out of a
    body thetan. And he is being run with his pictures
    Disowned, which wraps it all around a telegraph pole. You
    can run basic track, you can run R-6 out of body thetans
    because that's where most of them are stuck anyhow.
     
    Alright. Now what, what's this amount to? What's this
    amount to? We just take this datum as a thoroughly stable
    thing. But the subject, the subject which you have to know
    on this, see, the subject of any grade...  You can run basic
    track, you can run R-6 on a body thetan because that's
    where most of them are stuck anyhow.
     
    Alright, now what, what's this amount to? What's this
    amount to? We just take this datum as a thoroughly, as a
    thoroughly stable thing. But the subject, the subject which
    you have to know on this thing, the subject of any grade
    can be run at any time, forever. Correct.
     
    Along about OT8 you're gonna have a hell of a time trying
    to run one of them, but you couldn't any more overrun the
    guy on, than, it would neither run nor overrun. Do you see?
    But the process, the process, the technique, that process,
    can be overrun, because it is addressed to a specific point
    of contact with the mind and with life, and it snaps that,
    and if you overrun it, it puts it back again.
     
    So engrams man, engrams can be run from wog to angel.
    Secondaries can be run all over the damn track at any grade
    you ever heard of. On any grade you could run a secondary.
     
    Straightwire, but not the commands of straightwire, but the
    whole idea of straightwire. What the hell do you think
    you're doing when you put in Ruds? "Do you have an ARC
    break?", you're asking the guy to recall. Do you see? You
    ran a straightwire all the way.
     
    Communication. What are you doing in an auditing session?
    His ARC breaks are mostly involved with the fact that his
    comm is cut or something like that. Problems. Although
    you've disconnected him from the large mass of problems and
    he now doesn't have all his vast number of problems that he
    had - , and the whole subject of problems is not
    overwhelming, he can still have a problem. You get the
    idea? It goes right on up the line. And what do you know,
    you can have a guy at five, he all of a sudden has a flea
    hit him in the teeth about his. A body thetan hits him. A
    body thetan with no home.
     
    He wakes up one fine morning and finds out he has a whole
    bunch of R6 pictures. Where the hell did this come from' I
    thought I ran all that out. Yeah, he ran all that out. But
    he's not up to a point yet where he has turned off all of
    his attractiveness as a thetan. He hasn't yet found out
    that he's the one that grabs hold of body thetans. They
    really don't grab hold of him. They basically don't have
    enough reach. (laughter) But until a guy is so clear that
    you hit him on the left ear and it rings for hours; as a
    thetan, as a being, he's not got any little trick pieces of
    mass that are incredible and so he hasn't bothered to
    notice that he is mocking them up, all these little patch
    up points. "Poor old body thetan around with no home. Can't find a hospital address." Something like that. Caroms, hits the guy, and probably would leave, but finds himself stuck.
     
    So, you run, you could shoot a body thetan off, and by the
    way they react very well to negative, negative
    exteriorization commands. "Try not to be ten thousand feet
    above the city." (laughter)
     
    But the net gain of all of this is that you undoubtedly
    could not run a body thetan out of a wog.
     
    You couldn't possibly. I don't think it could be done with
    a pistol. Because you see they're him, he to them. He is
    this composite being. He is a being, but he is influencers
    by a lot of composite beings. He is not a cluster. Somebody
    has originated this thing, "I am a cluster", "you are a cluster'. No, a guy is never a cluster, brother. He is
    himself with some body thetans plastered on him. But he's
    too, not enough charge off.
     
    Now, when, if the guys get up to the Clearing Course you
    get another phenomena occurring.
     
    And it's an interesting phenomenon when you get up into
    Clearing Course. If you just let people audit the Clearing
    Course materials, a certain percentage of them will write
    in and tell you that there are these black objects, and
    they seem to be other beings, and they start flying off
    when they start auditing, and what are these things. The
    guy is already prematurely encountered 3. A certain number
    of cases will do this. Also, oddly enough, you could start
    a certain very small percentage of cases, and it's a very
    small percentage, at OT; you could start them out at Grade
    four, service facsimile. And they would go on up. But the
    percentage is too small to pay much attention to this.
     
    Now if the person arrives at OT3 and he can't perceive
    these, you must recognize that there is insufficient charge
    off his case. Now what's the, what's the solution to that?
    Well, you've taken the charge off of the main grade line
    you've, you can rehab the main grade line. Make sure that
    it is run. You'll normally find out it hasn't been, it's
    been skimped somehow or another. Or more charge has been
    put on than has taken off and then somebody turned in a
    false report, or something like this. Something weird
    happened. Or you can turn around at that stage of the game
    and run him on down through the actual reason they get all
    smashed together, which is accidents, impacts and injuries.
    Then you can start auditing him down that line and they,
    it'll loosen up, and all of a sudden it all comes straight.
     
    But what is that? That's running an engram which is way
    down in the Dianetics area. Now the process of running an
    engram is the only one I know of that does not overrun. If
    the process of running an engram is to go to the beginning,
    date the thing, go to the beginning of the incident, what
    is it's duration, go through it to the end, tell me what's
    there, that won't overrun. It's not much of a, 'cause you
    see the subject matter to which it is introduced, and so
    forth. Now you go back and try to audit the engrams which
    have already been audited, you're not going to get anyplace
    because, you see, the reason why that one works that way is
    because engrams and secondaries are erased. They're not
    released. There's a difference of definition. They aren't
    something -  the engrams, secondaries and bank masses and
    implants, and all the rest of this sort of thing - they just
    don't fly off or the guy just unpins them or ceases to mock
    them up and waits 'till tomorrow when they get keyed in and
    starts mocking them up again. See? That's a release phenomenon.
     
    No, you erase it. There is a hole in the bank where that
    was, and it is not likely to key in again.
     
    So of course there isn't anything to overrun. You get the
    difference? So the one unlimited process there is, is
    engram running or secondary running. Totally unlimited.
    With this proviso.
     
    Don't try to run an incident which has already been erased.
    Because now you're going back and trying to put the
    incident there when it's not there, and the person is trying
    to put the incident there, and you can get, and it reacts to,
    the question "overrun". It will react to it. The engram has been overrun. You can get a read on this, 'cause it
    interprets that way to his head.
     
    The truth of the matter is, is "you are making me put it
    back there again" would be the right, the actual action
    which is occurring on an overrun. So one chain, or one
    incident; the chain blew, see? Now you, "Care to run this
    chain?" He can't run the chain you're asking him something.
     
    He's got to put the chain there in order to run it again.
    That's overrun. That's the overrun. It isn't the command
    overrun. It's the fact that it's gone. And it really has
    gone. It hasn't released. He's, he's now got to put one
    there in order to have one. He hasn't got the skill to do
    it, and he becomes very upset and very baffled. His
    knowingness about what he's doing is not adequate to
    knowing that he is trying to put one there. Don't you see?
    But he really doesn't know how to put one there yet. And he
    can get all flabblebabbled up.
     
    Every once in a while you'll, you will get a read on 3,
    overrun. Wise up, auditor. Wise up.
     
    That is one body thetan who is run one too many times
    through incident one. All you just do is indicate it to
    him, he's been run through it after it was gone, and so
    forth, and he blows. And then on it suddenly he finds out
    that there's a lot more body thetans. 3 wasn't overrun. But
    the PC will read on 3 being overrun. One body thetan has
    been overrun on one engram, is what 3 overrun reads on your
    meter. "Has 3 been overrun?" (woosh) "Very good. Which body thetan was run too often through the incident?" Pull
    that one. (woosh) "That's good. Alright." Indicate that it has been over; he has been overrun on incident one, or
    incident two, as the case may be. Very good.
     
    We had a case here the other day practically fall apart.
    Apparently the auditor/PC, in doing 3, did nothing but
    overrun everybody that he had. He's one of these thorough
    cases. (laughter) And the review auditor running overruns,
    just the subject of overruns, in trying to rehab overruns,
    of course got up to a prep check on 3, and was busy
    rehabbing this and that. And my god, the case just fell to
    pieces. It went off in all directions. The guy simply
    plastered himself with overrun body thetans. By the same
    mechanism, he was asking them to go through the one, the
    two, three more times. But there wasn't anything there for
    the guy to go through. And then probably running them
    verbally. Verbalization. "Go to the beginning", or
    something like this, some generality that could stick kick
    every body thetan down the track. The guys are still trying
    to go to the beginning, there is nothing there, there now
    is no beginning, then they get very confused.
     
    Guys that run OT3 verbalized anyhow are rather bonkers. You
    get the funny picture of the guy pulling an empty chair up
    across from his auditing desk and saying to the empty
    chair, "Do you have an incident one? That didn't read.
    Good. I'll go attest 3." It's actually run telepathically.
     
    And you don't have lots of commands, and so forth. If you
    get up to that point without being able to think a guy back
    to the where, the beginning of the incident and thinking
    him through the thing you ought to quit anyway.
     
    So this is the way the; no, you, you shouldn't quit. You
    ought to get to work and finish your 3. Anyway. I'll make
    it very tactful.
     
    Now do you differentiate between the idea of the subject
    and the process? These are two different things. So as the
    case supervisor, don't make the mistake of believing that
    the person has been on the subject. "Well this person has
    just had too many ARC breaks run." See, "Just don't run any more ARC breaks on this PC." That'd be the end of him, boy. You could say, "Don't again run list four, the main change
    in your life, and waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle,
    waffle, waffle. See? So that's...  So how would you overrun
    an ARC break then? Well you would overrun, you don't
    overrun ARC breaks, but you could overrun an ARC break.
     
    And you do it this way. "Do you have an ARC break? Good.
    That reads. What was it?" "So and so and so and so." "Alright. When was that?" "So and so and so and so." "Good. C, D, E, I, pardon me, A, R, C, U, C, D, E, I. Good."
    Indicate it to the PC. "Good. Do you have an ARC break?" "No, no." "Well, I have a read here." "No." "Well, do you have an ARC break? Yep, it read. What is the ARC break?"
    "Oh, I don't know." You're asking him to run the ARC break which he's just run, which then invalidates his ability to
    as-is. And you hang it up, and the TA will go up.
     
    Alright, that's one way to do it. Another way to do it is,
    "Do you have an ARC break?" "Yes.
     
    My husband so on and so on. Yesterday, and itsa...  "Well,
    A, R. C, U. Alright. I'd like to indicate to you that it
    was understanding. It was break in under... " Floating
    needle. See? OK? And the auditor doesn't indicate that. And
    the PC said, "Yeah. That's... " Perfectly allowable for the PC to say "Yeah, that's a break in understanding. He's
    not - he didn't understand what the hell I was talking
    about." "Alright. Good." Floating needle. See? C, D, E, I. C reads. Also D. "You're curious about and desired understanding? Was that; that was the by-passed charge. Good." - "Uh, yes." "Good. Now how do you feel about that ARC break now?"
    "Well, let's see." Now he has to put it there, don't you see, in order to answer this question.
     
    And he gets a bonkers mess that would occur. See? It's
    gone, and now you're telling him it's still there, and is
    in essence, an auditor evaluation. So he, being an obedient
    PC, tries; you can handle his bank better than he. He just
    assumes that it must still be there, so he tries to put
    something there, but he can't find anything to put there,
    so the TA goes up and you leave him in a mystery. You play
    the same gag on him as, "Look at the elephant", only there isn't any elephant. You see? So he looks around, and then
    you, from altitude say, "Well you damn fool, can't you see
    this elephant? Can't you see this elephant anyplace,
    anyplace? Can't you see this elephant?" And the guy says,
    "I can't see any elephant." "Oh, well." (drums fingers on table) "Guess we'll have to send you to the psychiatrist."
     
    Well a guy in a protest like this will sort of, try to
    satisfy, "Oh, yeah, yeah. I, I, I can get the dim outline
    of an elephant. Yeah." That's why the auditors' code is the auditors code. You say it read when it didn't read, you say
    it didn't read when it read. We just had a PC wrapped
    around a telegraph pole, he let himself go all the way
    through the session with a missed withhold. Well it didn't
    read when it went by, so I didn't say anything about it.
    And the auditor sat there and watched him get kind of gray
    faced, and so on as the session went on, and didn't say
    anything about it either. Yes he didn't get a read, but the
    PC had missed withhold reactions, and he didn't get in
    suppress on it.
     
    Now you could be a damned fool, and every clean read that
    you see get in suppress on it. Do you see where, where rote
    auditing becomes impossible? You could, you could wind a
    session up to a whole bunch of inspections before the fact,
    and so on. So, you make up for this by being yourself
    acquainted totally, fully and utterly with the standard
    data you are handling. You don't have to stop and think
    that a critical PC has a missed withhold. You don't have to
    stop and think when you see somebody coming into session
    very sad and hang-dog, that he has an ARC break of long
    duration. You see these you'd know. You're not all
    fumblebumbling around, "I wonder how Scientology compares
    to Freudian god." Or, "Is Freud god? Was Freud a religion, yes. Freud was god. Yes. Wonder how it compares to that...
    I wonder how this has to do with my case... " And you
    haven't got any time to do that. No time at all, boy.
     
    PC comes into session, and he looks; his eyes are pretty
    heavy. And the auditor doesn't know his auditors' code
    right down through the middle, does not say "You get any
    sleep?" No, he's so busy trying to find out which is the
    trim button and which is the plug in, that he can't notice
    anything about the PC. PC looks sort of gaunt, the PC
    doesn't look well at the beginning of the session, looks
    sort of gaunt. The auditor doesn't in a conversational tone
    of voice ask him if he's had enough sleep, if he's had
    anything to eat. Are you physically ill? Doesn't ask
    himself anything like that. No he waits 'till he's gone an
    hour and a half deep in the session, the PCs fallen on his
    head, if he doesn't know his auditors code.
     
    The auditors' code is the auditors' code. It isn't
    something that is put there for no reason. For instance,
    eat and sleep are the only two things PCs have ever spun
    on. Back in the bad old days of the Dianetics Foundations
    we used to get every loony PC that could walk down the line.
     
    They weren't even PCs. They'd just let them out of
    institutions, and they'd walk in and they'd get audited.
    And a common denominator of those who were spinny in
    session, or who spun and then had to be rescued in some
    way, and heroic actions; I, we made a common denominator.
    What was in common to every one of these PCs? They hadn't
    eaten and they hadn't slept. And you, as an auditor, go and
    let somebody who has had insufficient sleep, which you
    don't know too much about as a case, are sooner or later
    going to wrap somebody around a telegraph pole. And he's
    going to spin for three or four days in a screaming state,
    man. Sooner or later this horrible experience will occur.
    That's why the auditors' code is the auditors' code. It has
    data like this in it.
     
    So when a guy goes into session, he sits down, "Oh, oh," yawns. "Good to sit down." "Have you had any sleep?" "Well, come to think about it, no, I haven't slept for a couple of
    days." "Very good. Thank you very much. You go get some sleep and then we will have a session when you are
    sufficiently rested. And I'm very sorry that this has
    prevented you from finishing the cycle of action of a
    session at this time." Indicating the by-passed charge at
    the same time.
     
    So you don't have to take it up in the next session.
     
    You say you know your data so well that you know the guy is
    going to have by-passed charge by not being able to
    complete the cycle of action. So you take care of that
    then. In other words, you know your business. It's right on
    your finger tips all the time. You don't have to think,
    "What if you were riding a bicycle, thinking every thought
    necessary to balance the bicycle and steer it at the same
    time." You'll go into a ditch, man. Well, you go into a
    ditch with auditing, just like that, if you don't know
    these things, pang, pang, pang, pang. These are the things
    you watch.
     
    Now, you, all of you know, you know, you know this data,
    you know it colds You know your auditors code, banger. See?
    You don't have to think. "Let me see, what did it say in
    the auditors' code when the ..." To hell with that. You
    shouldn't even be wandering around, "I wonder what Ron
    meant when he wrote that part of the auditors' code, it had
    something to do with it. Now let's see. There's something
    in the bit of it had something to do with that." No
    kidding. I've heard things like this. The veda. Oh, come
    now. Look at India. That's known as invidious comparison.
    The word invidious means disgraceful or bad. Anyway,
    standard tech is just main line tech. These are the
    subjects, you take them up. These are the only subjects you
    handle in standard tech. They are the subjects of the
    grades. There aren't fifty processes and actions in the
    entirety of Scientology. Now that isn't asking anybody very
    much to know, and know them so cold that he says, "Well,
    gonna do a rehab. Brrrrrrr", bow wow bub zee zee, barb barb ding ding. Pow, pow, pow. And the PC says, "So and so,
    exactly therefore, bow, bang." Floating needle. "Thank you very much."
     
    What's he rehabbing? He's rehabbing something completely
    catastrophic. You look over the list and horrors that this
    case is such an irreparable, resistive case, and so on. Do
    you get the relationship, now, do you get the relationship?
    Do you get what data you have to have? What data you have
    to have. What understanding you have to have. The grip you
    have to have on it.
     
    Nobody's asking you to know very much. But boy, what you do
    know, maaaaaanl You sure had better have a grip that is
    like steel bands!
     
    PC sits down in the session, and right that moment, just
    with one casual glance, you've got it sorted out. He isn't
    even talking yet. You know, you're going to get in the Ruds
    and fly the needle, and so forth. You ought to just know
    where it probably is. It's just as easy as that. And you
    say, "There he is. That's what's wrong with him." There's nothing mystic about it. The guy will have an ARC break, or
    a PTP, or a missed withhold, or an overt, motivator. Now
    you're starting to get faint. See? It's getting less and
    less likely. And then you've got a whole bunch of things
    that, if it didn't go; if it didn't fly on that, if it
    didn't fly on that, then you go through a green form 'till
    it flies. 'Cause the person's hung up on something. He's
    PTS, he's doing something. And you normally will find out
    on your green form line.
     
    Now you know the guy's been audited. He's been audited
    badly. And so on. Well, it's a lead pipe cinch. You do the
    same thing that you would do in any other way. Fly the
    needle, and take the general assessment form or an L4A,
    something like this. Whatever it was that you picked up the
    tool. You pick up the tool, you know the tool would be
    there.
     
    But, you're far better off if all of your auditing
    is against case supervision. You were either the case
    supervisor or you were the auditor. When the auditor is
    both the case supervisor and the auditor, he's sticking his
    neck out four hundred and eighty five miles 'cause he's
    violating it. He knows both the auditor and the PC. And if
    he knows the auditor and the PC, variables can enter into
    the problem. Do you follow? He knows the auditor, he knows
    the PC. Hah! He's violated two basic principles of case
    supervision. You never talk to the auditor about the case,
    you never talk to the PC about his case. As close as you
    come to talking to the auditor is the auditing report. As
    close as you come to talking to the PC is the examiners'
    report. And I can tell you now that you're a fool not
    to have both before you. When you case supervise you should
    have before you the auditing report in its' entirety, and
    you should have before you as well, the examiners' report
    on the PC. You say, "Well how you going to get that?" Well the PC always goes through the examiner, of course. Well
    how could you set this up if you were in private practice,
    if you'd be asked this question. Well, I don't know, I
    guess you'd have to appoint the next door neighbor or your
    wife or something as the examiner, and you'd have to train
    up somebody else to audit if you're going to be the case
    supervisor. 'Cause I can guarantee that if you're also
    doing the case supervision as well as the auditing you will
    wrap it around a telegraph pole sooner or later.
     
    Sounds weird, doesn't it? But the auditor and the PC always
    influence the case supervisor whenever they're vis-a-vis
    with him, and personal chatter on the subject of the PCs
    case, and personal chatter with regard to the auditor with
    regard to the PC case, are the only two points I have ever
    found that wrapped my case supervision around a telegraph pole.
     
    Now there's another way my case supervision can be
    misrouted and upset, and so on, is by the PC not going
    through the examiner. The PC leaves the auditing session
    and leaves review through the examiner. Now this has the
    liability that the examiner is liable to be a sourpuss, and
    the PC says, "Oh, greats Boy, just made it! Wows" You know? And the examiner says, "Hm. Take hold of the cans." "Boy, that's the greatest session I ever had in my life. "Yeah, that's what they always say. Yeah, good." And that would actually be after the fact of the examination, wouldn't it? So you could mysteriously have the PC cave in by a down curve from the examiner. But
    that'd be the only point left.
     
    The main liability of the case supervisor, the main liability of a case supervisor is a false auditing report. And he should protect himself every way he possibly can from a false auditing report. But he shouldn't go around talking to the PC. He shouldn't go
    find the PC, and look the PC up, and all this sort of
    thing. 'Cause his opinion on the thing is the case
    supervisors' point of view. And you can figure all you want
    to about why it is. It's an empirical datum. One that has
    been derived from experience. I have already cast up the
    number of cases on which case supervision errors have been
    made. They have been made by a case supervisor having seen
    the PC, and talked to the PC about the session. The error
    of errors are talking to the auditor about the session. And
    in, when those two points have occurred in case
    supervision, case supervision has erred. They color it.
    Perhaps it's a cold blooded proposition. But, the case
    supervisor can be given a false report.
     
    He can be given an evaluative report of one kind or
    another. "Oh, the PC was in marvelous conditions" Pc's barely able to crawl out of the auditing room. That's why
    you want the examiners.
     
    Now what you want from the examiners, simply, is the tone
    arm, the state of the needle, and what the PC says. Not in
    response to some examiners' question. Some examiner's going
    to say to you, "Now what do you ask the PC?" And your
    answer to that is, "Shut up. Don't ask him nothing."
    There's a sign on the desk, and it says "Examiner". The mere fact that he's given the PC the cans and checking the
    meter, he's got the PCs folder there, you see. That's enough.
     
    The pc'll say something. And the examiner writes it down,
    and then the examiner must always say, "Thank you very
    much." And that is the limit of his communication, because
    if you let them talk they'll start auditing the PC. So you
    cut that talk to a minimum. You're liable to see little
    forms being made up someplace, "What gains have you had in
    this session?" "Well I got a floating needle on this, and I had a cognition on that, now I...  And there's a little
    thing that I thought was a little bit point there, and I
    wasn't quite sure what happened there, and so on. But I did
    get a floating needle on this thing. But I wasn't quite
    sure about the thing," and so on. And here the floating
    needle is busy packing up. And the examiner is a sure
    invitation to overrun, if the examiner is liable, is
    allowed to talk. The examiner's liable to talk. So the
    examiner can't talk. A little tiny bit. I can just see it
    now. There will be a form there, an examiners' form. And it
    has questions on it. Like, "Was your auditor nice to you in the session? Did he invalidate your gains? Did you really
    make your grade?" And that can kill, because it's too fast, too fast after the session. Somebody who is still part of
    the organization and part of, apparently, part of the line
    up, and a blood brother to the auditor sort of. And the
    orgs line is actually challenging him. He isn't challenging
    him. So, just the sign there, and it says "Examiner", and folder, meter, give him the cans. He comes out, he can say
    "hello", give him the cans when he comes out. "OK, ta ta. Thank you. Thank you very much." And he can point which
    direction he's supposed to go. That's the end.
     
    Now, the case supervisor has an independent tone arm,
    needle state, PC statement. And he can add these things up.
    The auditor says at the end of the session, that the pc's
    TA was at 2.75, and the examiner report, right on top of it
    says 3.75. There was no F/N at the end of session. It is a
    false report. Saves you an awful lot of trouble. You simply
    make out your next one, and say "Correct so and so, and do
    not send them to... ", whatever the auditors' name was. Some other auditor. "Correct session so and so. Something went
    wrong" And then you get better.
     
    Because a false report has a tendency to be followed by a
    false report.
     
    So we're getting down to something now that's very
    interesting, is that really only an organization can
    process. Successfully, and over continued long period of
    time, only an organization can process. And the individual
    practitioner may make a lot of bucks. Here and there you
    have a phenomenon of a guy who is tremendously successful
    as in individual auditor. He seems to be doing just great
    as an individual auditor. You follow their curves, they
    fall on their heads in a couple of years. It's an
    organization action. It takes the organization backup.
    Franchises fall on their heads by not having enough staff
    to perform all the actions of the organization. And they
    actually are totally dependent on organizations to perform
    a great many services. I couldn't even begin to list how
    many services an organization has to perform.
     
    Therefore, apparently, apparently the individual auditor
    makes a great deal of money, and so forth. But it's usually
    for a limited time. Got to be backed up. A franchise got to
    be backed up by an organization. And the franchise is
    seldom sufficiently organized to stand by itself if it
    weren't for an organization someplace.
     
    So this is, this is the thing. Now I want to call to your
    attention that the era of medicine was long and hard won,
    and so on. That the era of psychiatry is brief. But these
    practitioners, organizing themselves on a union basis,
    doing this, doing that, but practicing individually, they
    really don't do well. And they're not going to do well
    professionally over a long period of time. Because, outfits
    like us can suddenly move in sideways.
     
    Right now they, they're worried about us, frantic, because
    we're getting all the business.
     
    There's a lot of cream stuff coming out of that field. They
    don't get that anymore. They're worried. They're worried
    about their appropriations. So it's an organizational action.
     
    Now let's look at this as an organization, function. You've
    got a case supervisor. There's an auditor. There's an
    examiner. There's somebody that schedules sessions, even
    though that is also the review chief. See? You're already
    dealing with a minimum number. Now you can run one
    god-awful number of sessions through this line up. But if
    the auditor has to do all of his admin, the auditor has to
    do all of his opinionation, the auditor has to do this, and
    do that, he won't hit a hundred. He won't hit a hundred,
    because one day he's tired, or one day he's this, or he
    slips, and he doesn't catch his slips. And he gets
    optimistic about it. And he gets opinions, and side data
    starts hitting him. He wobbles, because he's talking to a
    PC all the way down the line, you see? A case supervisor's
    always got to have another auditor to send the PC to. When
    he gets a false report in, what the hell else he gonna do?
    So you see the minimum size and shape and design of such an
    activity.
     
    Now, the auditor's business is simply handling the PC. It
    shouldn't be on anything else. And his business in handling
    the PC is just running very standard actions on the PC, and
    nothing adventurous. Running the PC rapidly to the highest
    possible gain level that he possibly can.
     
    Shooting him through the line. It's really a very simple
    action. But it's one of these simplicities that you have to
    be very, very brilliant to grasp. I say brilliant to the
    degree that you have to be brilliant enough not to be
    complicated. It's actually a very simple activity. But it
    is just about as complex as the lines that a certain number
    of functions and actions which have to be taken handling
    the PC, there's Just a certain number of functions and
    actions. You start leaving some of these organizational
    setups out in the handling of a PC and something'll go
    astray. Similarly in the tech itself, something goes astray
    if you start leaving thing out, like "We never run present
    time problems anymore. No, the PC was released on problems,
    so he can't possibly have a problem. We don't know why the
    case is not changing at OT2." Anyway, the false report is
    about the only enemy that a case supervisor has, just
    getting back to that subject.
     
    Because it makes him think that standard tech isn't
    working, and is a wide open invitation to do something
    else. The thing that isn't working is the auditors' report.
     
    Normally you would have started out in your career, and
    continued to do nothing but the very standard actions, if
    you had not also seen false reports, standard reports, have
    PCs evaluating for you as to what you ought to be doing for
    their case, trying to please people, trying to do this,
    trying to do that, having case supervision work given to
    you with which you did not agree. All these other thing
    come along and they finally wind you up in a ball so you
    don't know what the hell you're doing. Now what you're
    doing here is I'm straightening you all out straight and as
    narrow, and I hope you stay that way. Thank you very much.
     
    **************************************************
     
     
    
     

    Track this thread for me

    Subscribe to alt.religion.scientology
    Mail this message to a friend
    View original Usenet format
    Post Reply

    << Previous in search   ·   Next in search >>

    Search Discussions
      For a more detailed search go to Power Search
    Search only in: People >> Humanities >> Theology
    All Deja.com
    Search for:
    Search  messages

     Arts & Entertainment   Automotive   Computing & Tech   Health   Money 
     News   People   Recreation   Sports   Travel 
    SHOPPING - Yellow Pages - Long Distance Deals - Free Stuff - Trade with Datek - Go to Gigabuys! - GET IT NOW @ NECX - FREE downloads! - Get FREE Health Info@drkoop.com - Apartments.com - eBay Auctions

    Copyright © 1999 Deja.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Trademarks · Terms & Conditions of Use · Site Privacy Statement.

    Advertise with Us!  |  About Deja.com