FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST LEVEL 0 COURSEPACK: Part 5 of 10 ******************************** I am the Tech Lion. Studying the Academy Levels gave me the ability to handle life. I would like others to have the same knowledge that I now have. Here is the Academy Level 0 Coursepack from 1988, in 10 parts. There was an earlier FZBA post of the Level 0 coursepack from 1974, but due to extensive CofS revision, little remains the same in both packs. The full table of contents is in Part 1 only. To see the proper formatting, use a fixed-pitch font such as Courier to view this file. Enjoy, -The Tech Lion ******************** 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 freezoners are "squirrels" who should be stamped out as heretics. 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 Judaism 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 ************************ PART 5 (this file) 30. HCOB 1 Oct. 1963 How to Get Tone Arm Action 31. HCOB 6 Nov. 1964 Styles of Auditing 32. HCOB 5 Apr. 1980 Q&A, the Real Definition 33. HCOB 3 Aug. 1965 Auditing Goofs, Blowdown Interruption 34. HCO PL 27 May 1965 Processing Keeping Scientology Working Series 31 ****************************************************************** 30. HCOB 1 Oct. 1963 How to Get Tone Arm Action HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 1 OCTOBER 1963 Franchise CenOCon SCIENTOLOGY ALL HOW TO GET TONE ARM ACTION The most vital necessity of auditing at any level of Scientology is to get tone arm action. Not to worry the pc about it but just to get TA action. Not to find something that will get future TA. But just to get TA NOW. Many auditors are still measuring their successes by things found or accomplished in the session. Though this is important too (mainly at Level IV), it is secondary to tone arm action. 1. Get good tone arm action. 2. Get things done in the session to increase tone arm action. -------- NEW DATA ON THE E-METER The most elementary error in trying to get tone arm action is, of course, found under the fundamentals of auditing -- reading an E- Meter. This point is so easily skipped over and seems so obvious that auditors routinely miss it. Until they understand this one point, an auditor will continue to get minimal TA and be content with 15 divisions down per session -- which in my book isn't TA but a meter stuck most of the session. There is something to know about meter reading and getting TA. Until this is known, nothing else can be known. TONE ARM ASSESSMENT The tone arm provides assessment actions. Like the needle reacts on list items, so does the tone arm react on things that will give TA. You don't usually needle assess in doing Levels I, II and III. You tone arm assess. The rule is, THAT WHICH MOVES THE TONE ARM DOWN WILL GIVE TONE ARM ACTION. Conversely, another rule: THAT WHICH MOVES ONLY THE NEEDLE SELDOM GIVES GOOD TA. So for Levels I, II and III (and not Level IV) you can actually paste a paper over the needle dial, leaving only the bottom of the needle shaft visible so the TA can be set by it and do all assessments needed with the tone arm. If the TA moves on a subject then that subject will produce TA if the pc is permitted to talk about it (itsa it). Almost all auditors, when the itsa line first came out, tried only to find FUTURE TA ACTION and never took any PRESENT TA ACTION. The result was continuous listing of problems and needle nulling in an endless search to find something that "would produce TA action." They looked frantically all around to find some subject that would produce TA action and never looked at the tone arm of their meter or tried to find what was moving it NOW. This seems almost a foolish thing to stress -- that what is producing TA will produce TA. But it is the first lesson to learn. And it takes a lot of learning. Auditors also went frantic trying to understand what an ITSA LINE was. They thought it was a comm line. Or part of the CCHs or almost anything but what it is. It is too simple. There are two things of great importance in an auditing cycle. One is the whatsit, the other is the itsa. Confuse them and you get no TA. If the auditor puts in the itsa and the preclear the whatsit, the result is no TA. The auditor puts in the whatsit and the pc the itsa, always. It is so easy to reverse the role in auditing that most auditors do it at first. The preclear is very willing to talk about his difficulties, problems and confusions. The auditor is so willing to itsa (discover) what is troubling the preclear that an auditor, green in this, will then work, work, work to try to itsa something "that will give the pc TA," that he causes the pc to "Whatsit whatsit whatsit that's wrong with me." Listing is not really good itsaing; it's whatsiting as the pc is in the mood "Is it this? Is it that?" even when "solutions" are being listed for assessment. The result is poor TA. TA comes from the pc saying, "it IS" not "Is it?" Examples of whatsit and itsa: Auditor: "What's here?" (whatsit) Pc: "An auditor, a preclear, a meter." (itsa) Itsa really isn't even a comm line. It's what travels on a comm line from the pc to the auditor, if that which travels is saying with certainty "It IS." I can sit down with a pc and meter, put in about three minutes "assessing" by tone arm action and using only RIC get 35 divisions of TA in 2 1/2hours with no more work than writing down TA reads and my auditor's report. Why? Because the pc is not being stopped from itsaing and because I don't lead the pc into whatsiting. And also because I don't think auditing is complicated. Tone arm action has to have been prevented if it didn't occur. Example: An auditor, noting a whatsit moved the TA, every time, promptly changed the whatsit to a different whatsit. Actually happened. Yet in being asked what he was doing in session said: "I ask the pc for a problem he has had and every time he comes up with one I ask for solutions to it." He didn't add that he frantically changed the whatsit each time the TA started to move. Result -- 9 divisions of TA in 2 1/2 hours, pc laden with bypassed charge. If he had only done what he said he had he would have had TA. If it didn't occur, tone arm action has to have been prevented! It doesn't just "not occur." In confirmation of auditors being too anxious to get in the itsa line themselves and not let the pc is the fad of using the meter as a Ouija board. The auditor asks it questions continually and never asks the pc. Up the spout go divisions of TA. "Is this item a terminal?" the auditor asks the meter. Why not ask the pc? If you ask the pc, you get an itsa, "No, I think it's an oppterm because ..." and the TA moves. -------- Now to give you some idea of how crazy simple it is to get in an itsa line on the pc, try this: Start the session and just sit back and look at the pc. Don't say anything. Just sit there looking at the pc. The pc will of course start talking. And if you just nod now and then and keep your auditor's report going unobtrusively so as not to cut the itsa, you'll have a talking pc and most of the time good TA. At the end of 2 1/2 hours, end the session. Add up the TA you've gotten and you will usually find that it was far more than in previous sessions. TA action, if absent, had to be prevented! It doesn't just fail to occur. But this is not just a stunt. It is a vital and valuable rule in getting TA. RULE: A SILENT AUDITOR INVITES ITSA. This is not all good, however. In doing R4 work or R3R or R4N the silent auditor lets the pc itsa all over the whole track and causes overrestimulation which locks up the TA. But in lower levels of auditing, inviting an itsa with silence is an ordinary action. In Scientology Levels I, II and III the auditor is usually silent much longer, proportionally, in the session, than he or she is talking -- about 100 of silence to I of talking. As soon as you get into Level IV auditing, however, on the pc's actual GPMs, the auditor has to be crisp and busy to get TA, and a silent, idle auditor can mess up the pc and get very little TA. This is all under "controlling the pc's attention." Each level of auditing controls the pc's attention a little more than the last and the leap from Level III to IV is huge. Level I hardly controls at all. The rule above about the silent auditor is employed to the full. Level II takes the pc's life-and-livingness goals (or session goals) for the pc to itsa and lets the pc roll, the auditor intruding only to keep the pc giving solutions, attempts, dones, decisions about his life and livingness or session goals rather than difficulties, problems and natter about them. Level III adds the rapid search (by TA assessment) for the service facsimile (maybe 20 minutes out of 2 1/2hours) and then guides the preclear into it with R3SC processes. The rule here is that if the thing found that moved the TA wouldn't make others wrong but would make the pc wrong, then it is an oppterm lock and one prepchecks it. (The two top RIs of the pc's PT GPM is the service facsimile. One is a terminal, the pc's, and the other is an oppterm. They each have thousands of lock RIs. Any pair of lock RIs counts as a service facsimile, giving TA.) A good slow Prepcheck but still a Prepcheck. Whether running Right-Wrong- Dominate-Survive R3SC or Prepchecking (the only 2 processes used), one lets the pc really answer before acking. One question may get 50 answers! Which is, I whatsit from the auditor gets 50 itsas from the pc. Level IV auditing finds the auditor smoothly letting the pc itsa RIs and lists but the auditor going at it like a small steam engine finding RIs, RIs, RIs, goals, RIs, RIs, RIs. For the total TA in an R4 session only is proportional to the number of RIs found without goofs, wrong goals or other errors which rob TA action. So the higher the level the more control of the pc's attention. But in the lower levels, as you go back down, the processes used require less and less control, less auditor action to get TA. The level is designed to give TA at that level of control. And if the auditor actions get busier than called for in the lower levels, the TA is cut down per session. -------- OVERRESTIMULATION As will be found in another HCO Bulletin and in the lectures of summer and autumn of 1963, the thing that seizes a TA up is overrestimulation. THE RULE IS, THE LESS ACTIVE THE TA THE MORE OVERRESTIMULATION IS PRESENT. (THOUGH RESTIMULATION CAN ALSO BE ABSENT.) Therefore, an auditor auditing a pc whose TA action is low (below 20 TA divisions down for a 2 1/2-hour session) must be careful not to overrestimulate the pc (or to gently restimulate the pc). This is true of all levels. At Level IV this becomes: don't find that next goal, bleed the GPM you're working of all possible charge. And at Level III this becomes: don't find too many new service facs before you've bled the TA out of what you already have. And at Level II this becomes: don't fool about with a new illness until the pc feels the lumbosis you started on is handled utterly. And at Level I this becomes: "Let the pc do the talking." Overrestimulation is the auditor's most serious problem. Underrestimulation is just an auditor not putting the pc's attention on anything. The sources of restimulation are: 1. Life-and-livingness environment. This is the workaday world of the pc. The auditor handles this with itsa or "Since big mid ruds" and even by regulating or changing some of the pc's life by just telling the pc to not do this or that during an intensive or even making the pc change residence for a while if that's a source. This is subdivided into past and present. 2. The session and its environment. This is handled by itsaing the subject of session environments and other ways. This is subdivided into past and present. 3. The subject matter of Scientology. This is done by assessing (by TA motion) the old Scientology List One and then itsaing or prepchecking what's found. 4. The auditor. This is handled by What would you be willing to tell me, Who would you be willing to talk to. And other such things for the pc to itsa. This is subdivided into past and present. 5. This lifetime. This is handled by slow assessments and lots of itsa on what's found whenever it is found to be moving the TA during slow assessment. (You don't null a list or claw through ten hours of listing and nulling to find something to itsa at Levels I to III. You see what moves the TA and bleed it of itsa right now.) 6. Pc's case. In Levels I to III this is only indirectly attacked as above. And in addition to the actions above, you can handle each one of these or what's found with a slow Prepcheck. LIST FOR ASSESSMENT Assess for TA motion the following list: The surroundings in which you live The surroundings you used to live in Our surroundings here Past surroundings for auditing or treatment Things connected with Scientology (Scientology List One) Myself as your auditor Past auditors or practitioners Your personal history in this lifetime Goals you have set for yourself Your case. -------- At Level II one gets the pc to simply set life-and-livingness goals and goals for the session, or takes up these on old report forms and gets the decisions, actions, considerations, etc., on them as the itsa, cleaning each one fairly well of TA. One usually takes the goal the pc seems most interested in (or has gone into apathy about) as it will be found to produce the most TA. Whatever you assess by tone arm, once you have it, get the TA out of it before you drop it. And don't cut the itsa. -------- MEASURE OF AUDITORS The skill of an auditor is directly measured by the amount of TA he or she can get. Pcs are not more difficult one than another. Any pc can be made to produce TA. But some auditors cut TA more than others. Also, in passing, an auditor can't falsify TA. It's written all over the pc after a session. Lots of TA = bright pc. Small TA = dull pc. And body motion doesn't count. Extreme body motion on some pcs can produce a division of TA! Some pcs try to squirm their way to Clear! A good way to cure a TA-conscious body-moving pc is to say, "I can't record TA caused while you're moving." -------- As you may suspect, the pc's case doesn't do a great deal until run on R4 processes. But destimulation of the case can produce some astonishing changes in beingness. Key-out is the principal function of Levels I to III. But charge off a case is charge off. Unless destimulated, a case can't get a rocket read or present the auditor with a valid goal. Levels I to III produce a Book One Clear. Level R4 produces an OT. But case conditioning (clearing) is necessary before R4 can be run. And an auditor who can't handle Levels I to III surely won't be able to handle the one-man band processes at Level IV. So get good on Levels I to III before you even study IV. THE FIRST THING TO LEARN By slow assessment is meant letting the pc itsa while assessing. This consists of rapid auditor action, very crisp, to get something that moves the TA and then immediate shift into letting the pc itsa during which be quiet! The slowness is overall action. It takes hours and hours to do an old preclear assessment form this way but the TA flies. The actual auditing in Level III looks like this -- auditor going like mad over a list or form with an eye cocked on the TA. The first movement of the TA (not caused by body motion) the auditor goes a tiny bit further if that and then sits back and just looks at the pc. The pc comes out of it, sees the auditor waiting and starts talking. The auditor unobtrusively records the TA, sometimes nods. TA action dies down in a couple minutes or an hour. As soon as the TA looks like it hasn't got much more action in it, the auditor sits up, lets the pc finish what he or she was saying and then gets busy busy again. But no action taken by the auditor cuts into the TA action. In Levels I to III no assessment list is continued beyond seeing a TA move until that TA motion is handled. In doing a Scientology List One assessment one goes down the list until the TA moves (not because of body motion). Then, because a TA is not very pinpointed, the auditor covers the one or two above where he first saw TA and, watching the pc for interest and the TA, circles around that area until he is sure he has what made the TA move and then bleeds that for TA by itsa or Prepcheck. Yes, you say, but doesn't the auditor do TRs on the pc? One question -- one answer ratio? NO! Let the pc finish what the pc was saying. And let the pc be satisfied the pc has said it without a lot of chatter about it. TA NOT MOVING SIGNALS AUDITOR TO ACT. TA MOVING SIGNALS AUDITOR NOT TO ACT. Only the auditor can kill the TA motion. So when the TA starts to move, stop acting and start listening. When the TA stops moving or seems about to, stop listening and start acting again. Only act when the TA is relatively motionless. And then act just enough to start it again. Now, if you can learn just this, as given here, to act when there's no TA and not act when there is TA, you can make your own start on getting good TA on your preclear. With this you buy leisure to look over what's happening. With half a hundred rules and your own confusion to worry about also, you'll never get a beginning. So, to begin to get TA on your pc, first learn the trick of silent invitation. Just start the session and sit there expectantly. You'll get some TA. When you've mastered this (and what a fight it is not to act, act, act and talk ten times as hard as the pc), then move to the next step. Cover the primary sources of overrestimulation listed above by asking for solutions to them. Learn to spot TA action when it occurs and note what the pc was saying just then. Coordinate these two facts -- pc talking about something and TA moving. That's assessment Levels I to III. Just that. You see the TA move and relate it to what the pc is saying just that moment. Now you know that if the pc talks about "Bugs" he gets TA action. Note that down on your report. BUT don't otherwise call it to pc's attention as pc is already getting TA on another subject. This pc also gets TA on bugs. Store up 5 or 10 of these odd bits, without doing anything to the pc but letting him talk about things. Now, a few sessions later, the pc will have told all concerning the prime sources of overrestimulation I hope you were covering with him or her by only getting the pc started when he or she ran down. But you will now have a list of several other things that get TA. THE HOTTEST TA PRODUCER ON THIS LIST WILL GET A PC'S GOAL AS IT IS HIS SERVICE FAC. You can now get TA on this pc at will. All you have to do is get an itsa going on one of these things. ANY TA is the sole target of Levels I to III. It doesn't matter a continental what generates it. Only Level IV (R4 processes) are vital on what you get TA on (for if you're not accurate you will get no TA at Level IV). From Levels I to III the pc's happiness or recovery depends only on that waving TA arm. How much does it wave? That's how much the case advances. Only at Level IV do you care what it waves on. You're as good an auditor in Levels I to III as you can get TA on the pc and that's all. And in Level IV you'll get only as much TA as you're dead on with the right goals and RIs in the right places and those you don't want lying there inert and undisturbed. Your enemy is overrestimulation of the pc. As soon as the pc goes into more charge than he or she can itsa easily, the TA slows down. And as soon as the pc drowns in the overrestimulation, the TA stops clank! Now your problem is correcting the case. And that's harder than just getting TA in the first place. -------- Yes, you say, but how do you start "getting in an itsa line?" "What is an itsa?" All right-small child comes in room. You say, "What's troubling you?" The child says, "I'm worried about Mummy and I can't get Daddy to talk to me and ..." NO TA. This child is not saying anything is it. This child is saying, "Confusion, chaos, worry." No TA. The child is speaking in oppterms. Small child comes in room. You say, "What's in this room?" Child says, "You and couch and rug ..." That's itsa. That's TA. Only in R4 where you're dead on the pc's GPMs and the pc is allowed to say it is or isn't can you get good TA action out of listing and nulling. And even then a failure to let the pc say it is it can cut the TA down enormously. Auditor says, "You've been getting TA movement whenever you mention houses. In this lifetime what solutions have you had about houses?" And there's the next two sessions all laid out with plenty of TA and nothing to do but record it and nod now and then. -------- THE THEORY OF TONE ARM ACTION TA motion is caused by the energy contained in confusions blowing off the case. The confusion is held in place by aberrated stable data. The aberrated (nonfactual) stable datum is there to hold back a confusion but in actual fact the confusion gathered there only because of an aberrated consideration or postulate in the first place. So when you get the pc to as-is these aberrated stable data, the confusion blows off and you get TA. So long as the aberrated stable datum is in place the confusion (and its energy) won't flow. Ask for confusions (worries, problems, difficulties) and you just overrestimulate the pc because his attention is on the mass of energy, not the aberrated stable datum holding it in place. Ask for the aberrated stable datum (considerations, postulates, even attempts or actions or any button) and the pc as-ises it, the confusion starts flowing off as energy (not as confusion), and you get TA. Just restimulate old confusions without touching the actual stable data holding them back and the pc gets the mass but no release of it and so no TA. The pc has to say, "It's a ________(some consideration or postulate)" to release the pent-up energy held back by it. Thus, an auditor's worst fault that prevents TA is permitting the dwelling on confusions without getting the pc to give up with certainty the considerations and postulates that hold the confusions in place. And that's "itsa." It's letting the pc say what's there that was put there to hold back a confusion or problem. -------- If the pc is unwilling to talk to the auditor, that's what to itsa -- "decisions you've made about auditors" for one example. If the pc can't seem to be audited in that environment, get old environments itsaed. If the pc has lots of PTPs at session start, get the pc's solutions to similar problems in the past. Or just prepcheck, slow, the zone of upset or interest of the pc. And you'll get TA. Lots of it. Unless you stop it. -------- There's no reason at all why a truly expert auditor can't get plenty of TA divisions down per 2 1/2-hour session running any old thing that crops up on a pc. But a truly expert auditor isn't trying to itsa the pc. He's trying to get the pc to itsa. And that's the difference. Honest, it's simpler than you think. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:gw.cden,gm _ ****************************************************************** 31. HCOB 6 Nov. 1964 Styles of Auditing HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 6 NOVEMBER 1964 Remimeo Franchise Sthil Students STYLES OF AUDITING Note 1: Most old-time auditors, particularly Saint Hill graduates, have been trained at one time or another in these auditing styles. Here they are given names and assigned to levels so that they can be taught more easily and so that general auditing can be improved. Note 2: These have not been written before because I had not determined the results vital to each level. There is a style of auditing for each class. By style is meant a method or custom of performing actions. A style is not really determined by the process being run so much. A style is how the auditor addresses his task. Different processes carry different style requirements perhaps, but that is not the point. Clay Table Healing at Level III can be run with Level I style and still have some gains. But an auditor trained up to the style required at Level III would do a better job not only of Clay Table Healing but of any repetitive process. Style is how the auditor audits. The real expert can do them all, but only after he can do each one. Style is a mark of class. It is not individual. In our meaning, it is a distinct way to handle the tools of auditing. LEVEL 0 LISTEN STYLE At Level 0 the style is listen-style auditing. Here the auditor is expected to listen to the pc. The only skill necessary is listening to another. As soon as it is ascertained that the auditor is listening (not just confronting or ignoring), the auditor can be checked out. The length of time an auditor can listen without tension or strain showing could be a factor. What the pc does is not a factor considered in judging this style. Pcs, however, talk to an auditor who is really listening. Here we have the highest point that old-time mental therapies reached (when they did reach it), such as psychoanalysis, when they helped anyone. Mostly they were well below this, evaluating, invalidating, interrupting. These three things are what the Instructor in this style should try to put across to the HAS student. Listen style should not be complicated by expecting more of the auditor than just this: Listen to the pc without evaluating, invalidating or interrupting. Adding on higher skills like "Is the pc talking interestingly? or even "Is the pc talking?" is no part of this style. When this auditor gets in trouble and the pc won't talk or isn't interested, a higher-classed auditor is called in, a new question given by the Supervisor, etc. It really isn't "itsa" to be very technical. Itsa is the action of the pc saying "It's a this" or "It's a that." Getting the pc to itsa is quite beyond listen-style auditors, where the pc won't. It's the Supervisor or the question on the blackboard that gets the pc to itsa. The ability to listen, learned well, stays with the auditor up through the grades. One doesn't cease to use it even at Level VI. But one has to learn it somewhere and that's at Level 0. So listen-style auditing is just listening. It thereafter adds into the other styles. LEVEL I MUZZLED AUDITING This could also be called rote-style auditing. Muzzled auditing has been with us many years. It is the stark total of TRs 0 to 4 and not anything else added. It is called so because auditors too often added in comments, Q- and-Aed, deviated, discussed and otherwise messed up a session. Muzzle meant a "muzzle was put on them," figuratively speaking, so they would only state the auditing command and ack. Repetitive command auditing, using TRs 0 to 4, at Level I is done completely muzzled. This could be called muzzled repetitive auditing style but will be called "muzzled style" for the sake of brevity. It has been a matter of long experience that pcs who didn't make gains with the partially trained auditor permitted to two-way comm did make gains the instant the auditor was muzzled: to wit, not permitted to do a thing but run the process, permitted to say nothing but the commands and acknowledge them and handle pc originations by simple acknowledgment without any other question or comment. At Level I we don't expect the auditor to do anything but state the command (or ask the question) with no variation, acknowledge the pc's answer and handle the pc origins by understanding and acknowledging what the pc said. Those processes used at Level I actually respond best to muzzled auditing and worst to misguided efforts to "two-way comm." Listen style combines with muzzled style easily. But watch out that Level I sessions don't disintegrate to Level 0. Crisp, clean repetitive commands, muzzled, given and answered often, are the road out -- not pc wanderings. A pc at this level is instructed in exactly what is expected of him, exactly what the auditor will do. The pc is even put through a few "do birds fly?" cycles until the pc gets the idea. Then the processing works. An auditor trying to do muzzled repetitive auditing on a pc who, through past "therapy experience," is rambling on and on is a sad sight. It means that control is out (or that the pc never got above Level 0). It's the number of commands given and answered in a unit of auditing time that gets gains. To that add the correctly chosen repetitive process and you have a Release in short order, using the processes of this level. To follow limp listen style with crisp, controlled muzzled style may be a shock. But they are each the lowest of the two families of auditing styles -- totally permissive and totally controlled. And they are so different each is easy to learn with no confusion. It's been the lack of difference amongst styles that confuses the student into slopping about. Well, these two are different enough -- listen style and muzzled style -- to set anybody straight. LEVEL II GUIDING-STYLE AUDITING An old-time auditor would have recognized this style under two separate names: (a) two-way comm and (b) formal auditing. We condense these two old styles under one new name: guiding- style auditing. One first guides the pc by "two-way comm" into some subject that has to be handled or into revealing what should be handled and then the auditor handles it with formal repetitive commands. Guiding-style auditing becomes feasible only when a student can do listen-style and muzzled-style auditing well. Formerly, the student who couldn't confront or duplicate a command took refuge in sloppy discussions with the pc and called it auditing or "two-way comm." The first thing to know about guiding style is that one lets the pc talk and itsa without chop, but also gets the pc steered into the proper subject and gets the job done with repetitive commands. We presuppose the auditor at this level has had enough case gain to be able to occupy the viewpoint of the auditor and therefore to be able to observe the pc. We also presuppose at this level that the auditor, being able to occupy a viewpoint, is therefore more self-determined, the two things being related. (One can only be self-determined when one can observe the actual situation before one: otherwise, a being is delusion-determined or other- determined.) Thus, in guiding-style auditing the auditor is there to find out what's what from the pc and then apply the needful remedy. Most of the processes in The Book of Case Remedies are included in this level (II). To use those, one has to observe the pc, discover what the pc is doing and remedy the pc's case accordingly. The result for the pc is a far-reaching reorientation in life. Thus, the essentials of guiding-style auditing consist of two-way comm that steers the pc into revealing a difficulty followed by a repetitive process to handle what has been revealed. One does expert TRs but one may discuss things with the pc, let the pc talk and in general one audits the pc before one, establishing what that pc needs and then doing it with crisp repetitive auditing, but all the while alert to changes in the pc. One runs at this level against tone arm action, paying little or no heed to the needle except as a centering device for TA position. One even establishes what's to be done by the action of the tone arm. (The process of storing up things to run on the pc by seeing what fell when he was running what's being run, now belongs at this level [II] and will be renumbered accordingly.) At II one expects to handle a lot of chronic PTPs, overts, ARC breaks with life (but not session ARC breaks, that being a needle action, session ARC breaks being sorted out by a higher-classed auditor if they occur). To get such things done (PTPs, overts and other remedies) in the session, the auditor must have a pc "willing to talk to the auditor about his difficulties." That presupposes we have an auditor at this level who can ask questions, not repetitive, that guide the pc into talking about the difficulty that needs to be handled. Great command of TR 4 is the primary difference in TRs from Level I. One understands, when one doesn't, by asking more questions, and by really acknowledging only when one has really understood it. Guided comm is the clue to control at this level. One should easily guide the pc's comm in and out and around without chopping the pc or wasting session time. As soon as an auditor gets the idea of finite result or, that is to say, a specific and definite result expected, all this is easy. Pc has a PTP Example: Auditor has to have the idea he is to locate and destimulate the PTP so pc is not bothered about it (and isn't being driven to do something about it) as the finite result. The auditor at II is trained to audit the pc before him, get the pc into comm, guide the pc toward data needful to choose a process and then to run the process necessary to resolve that thing found, usually by repetitive command and always by TA. The Book of Case Remedies is the key to this level and this auditing style. One listens but only to what one has guided the pc into. One runs repetitive commands with good TR 4. And one may search around for quite a while before one is satisfied he has the answer from the pc needful to resolve a certain aspect of the pc's case. O/W can be run at Level I. But at Level II one may guide the pc into divulging what the pc considers a real overt act and, having that, then guide the pc through all the reasons it wasn't an overt and so eventually blow it. Half-acknowledgment is also taught at Level II -- the ways of keeping a pc talking by giving the pc the feeling he is being heard and yet not chopping with overdone TR 2. Big or multiple acknowledgment is also taught to shut the pc off when the pc is going off the subject. LEVEL III ABRIDGED-STYLE AUDITING By abridged is meant "abbreviated," shorn of extras. Any not actually needful auditing command is deleted. For instance, at Level I the auditor always says, when the pc wanders off the subject, "I will repeat the auditing command" and does so. In abridged style the auditor omits this when it isn't necessary and just asks the command again if the pc has forgotten it. In this style we have shifted from pure rote to a sensible use or omission as needful. We still use repetitive commands expertly, but we don't use rote that is unnecessary to the situation. Two-way comm comes into its own at Level III. But with heavy use of repetitive commands. At this level we have as the primary process Clay Table Healing. In this an auditor must make sure the commands are followed exactly. No auditing command is ever let go of until that actual command is answered by the pc. But at the same time, one doesn't necessarily give every auditing command the process has in its rundown. In Clay Table Healing one is supposed to make sure the pc is satisfied each time. This is done more often by observation than command. Yet it is done. We suppose at III that we have an auditor who is in pretty fine shape and can observe. Thus, we see the pc is satisfied and don't mention it. Thus, we see when the pc is not certain and so we get something the pc is certain of in answering the question. On the other hand, one gives all the necessary commands crisply and definitely and gets them executed. Prepchecking and needle usage is taught at Level III as well as Clay Table Healing. Auditing by List is also taught. In abridged- style auditing one may find the pc (being cleaned up on a list question) giving half a dozen answers in a rush. One doesn't stop the pc from doing so, one half-acknowledges and lets the pc go on. One is in actual fact handling a bigger auditing comm cycle, that is all. The question elicits more than one answer which is really only one answer. And when that answer is given, it is acknowledged. One sees when a needle is clean without some formula set of questions that invalidate all the pc's relief. And one sees it isn't clean by the continued puzzle on the pc's face. There are tricks involved here. One asks a question of the pc with the key word in it and notes that the needle doesn't tremble, and so concludes the question about the word is flat. And so doesn't check it again. Example: "Has anything else been suppressed?" One eye on pc, one on needle. Needle didn't quiver. Pc looks noncommittal. Auditor says, "All right, on______" and goes on to next question, eliminating a pc's possible protest read that can be mistaken for another "suppress." In abridged-style auditing one sticks to the essentials and drops rote where it impedes case advance. But that doesn't mean one wanders about. One is even more crisp and thorough with abridged- style auditing than in rote. One is watching what happens and doing exactly enough to achieve the expected result. By "abridged" is meant getting the exact job done -- the shortest way between two points -- with no waste questions. By now the student should know that he runs a process to achieve an exact result and he gets the process run in a way to achieve that result in the smallest amount of time. The student is taught to guide rapidly, to have no time for wide excursions. The processes at this level are all rat-a-tat-tat processes -- Clay Table Healing, Prepchecking, Auditing by List. Again it's the number of times the question is answered per unit of auditing time that makes for speed of result. LEVEL IV DIRECT-STYLE AUDITING By direct we mean straight, concentrated, intense, applied in a direct manner. We do not mean direct in the sense of to direct somebody or to guide. We mean it is direct. By direct, we don't mean frank or choppy. On the contrary, we put the pc's attention on his bank and anything we do is calculated only to make that attention more direct. It could also mean that we are not auditing by vias. We are auditing straight at the things that need to be reached to make somebody Clear. Other than this the auditing attitude is very easy and relaxed. At Level IV we have Clay Table Clearing and we have assessment- type processes. These two types of process are both astonishingly direct. They are aimed directly at the reactive mind. They are done in a direct manner. In Clay Table Clearing we have almost total work and itsa from pcs. From one end of a session to another, we may have only a few auditing commands. For a pc on Clay Table Clearing does almost all the work if he is in-session at all. Thus, we have another implication in the word "direct." The pc is talking directly to the auditor about what he is making and why in Clay Table Clearing. The auditor hardly ever talks at all. In assessment the auditor is aiming directly at the pc's bank and wants no pc in front of it thinking, speculating, maundering or itsaing. Thus, this assessment is a very direct action. All this requires easy, smooth, steel-hand-in-a-velvet-glove control of the pc. It looks easy and relaxed as a style; it is straight as a Toledo blade. The trick is to be direct in what's wanted and not deviate. The auditor settles what's to be done, gives the command and then the pc may work for a long time, the auditor alert, attentive, completely relaxed. In assessment the auditor often pays no attention to the pc at all, as in ARC breaks or assessing lists. Indeed, a pc at this level is trained to be quiet during the assessment of a list. And in Clay Table Clearing an auditor may be quiet for an hour at a stretch. The tests are, Can the auditor keep the pc quiet while assessing without ARC breaking the pc? Can the auditor order the pc to do something and then, the pc working on it, can the auditor remain quiet and attentive for an hour, understanding everything and interrupt alertly only when he doesn't understand and get the pc to make it clearer to him? Again without ARC breaking the pc. You could confuse this direct style with listen style if you merely glanced at a session of Clay Table Clearing. But what a difference. In listen style the pc is blundering on and on and on. In direct style the pc wanders off the line an inch and starts to itsa, let us say, with no clay work and after it was obvious to the auditor that this pc had forgotten the clay, you'd see the auditor, quick as a foil, look at the pc very interestedly and say, "Let's see that in clay." Or the pc doesn't really give an ability he wants to improve and you'd hear a quiet persuasive auditor voice, "Are you quite certain you want to improve that? Sounds like a goal to me. Just something, some ability you know, you'd like to improve." You could call this style one-way auditing. When the pc is given his orders, after that it's all from the pc to the auditor, and all involved with carrying out that auditing instruction. When the auditor is assessing, it is all from the auditor to the pc. Only when the assessment action hits a snag like a PTP is there any other auditing style used. This is a very extreme auditing style. It is straightforward -- direct. But when needful, as in any level, the styles learned below it are often also employed, but never in the actual actions of getting Clay Table Clearing and assessment done. (NOTE: Level V would be the same style as VI below.) LEVEL VI ALL STYLE So far, we have dealt with simple actions. Now we have an auditor handling a meter and a pc who itsa's and cognites and gets PTPs and ARC breaks and line charges and cognites and who finds items and lists and who must be handled, handled, handled all the way. As auditing TA for a 2 1/2-hour session can go to 79 or 125 divisions (compared to 10 or 15 for the lowest level), the pace of the session is greater. It is this pace that makes perfect ability at each lower level vital when they combine into all style. For each is now faster. So, we learn all style by learning each of the lower styles well, and then observe and apply the style needed every time it is needed, shifting styles as often as once every minute! The best way to learn all style is to become expert at each lower style so that one does the style correct for the situation each time the situation requiring that style occurs. It is less rough than it looks. But it is also very demanding. Use the wrong style on a situation and you've had it. ARC break! No progress! Example: Right in the middle of an assessment the needle gets dirty. The auditor can't continue -- or shouldn't. The auditor, in direct style, looks up to see a puzzled frown. The auditor has to shift to guiding style to find out what ails the pc (who probably doesn't really know), then to listen style while the pc cognites on a chronic PTP that just emerged and bothered the pc, then to direct style to finish the assessment that was in progress. The only way an auditor can get confused by all style is by not being good at one of the lower-level styles. Careful inspection will show where the student using all style is slipping. One then gets the student to review that style that was not well learned and practice it a bit. So all style, when poorly done, is very easy to remedy for it will be in error on one or more of the lower-level styles. And as all these can be independently taught, the whole can be coordinated. All style is hard to do only when one hasn't mastered one of the lower-level styles. SUMMARY These are the important styles of auditing. There have been others but they are only variations of those given in this HCO Bulletin. Tone 40 style is the most notable one missing. It remains as a practice style at Level I to teach fearless body handling and to teach one to get his command obeyed. It is no longer used in practice. As it was necessary to have every result and every process for each level to finalize styles of auditing, I left this until last and here it is. Please note that none of these styles violate the auditing comm cycle or the TRs. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jw.rd.gm _ ****************************************************************** 32. HCOB 5 Apr. 1980 Q&A, the Real Definition HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 APRIL 1980 TRs Courses Q&A, THE REAL DEFINITION There are several definitions for the term "Q&A." In Scientologese it is often used to mean "undecisive; not making up one's mind." Q stands for "Question." A stands for "Answer." In "perfect duplication" the answer to a question would be the question. The real definition as it applies to TRs is "The Question proceeding from the last Answer." Example: Question: How are you? Answer: I'm fine. Question: How fine? Answer: My stomach hurts. Question: When did your stomach begin hurting? Answer: About four. Question: Where were you at four? etc., etc. The above example is a grievous auditing fault. As each question is based on the last answer, it is called "Q and A." It could also be called "Q based on last A." It never completes any cycle. It tangles pcs up. It violates TR 3. Don't do it. I trust the above handles any confusion on this subject. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:dr.nf.gm _ ******************************************************************* 33. HCOB 3 Aug. 1965 Auditing Goofs, Blowdown Interruption HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 3 AUGUST 1965 Remimeo All Students All Staff AUDITING GOOFS BLOWDOWN INTERRUPTION It is a serious goof for the auditor to speak or move during a blowdown of the tone arm. When a tone arm has to be moved rapidly down, the needle appears to float to some but it is just falling. To see if a needle is floating, the TA must have stopped moving down. A blowdown is a period of relief and cognition to a pc while it is occurring and for a moment after it stops. Therefore, it is a serious goof for an auditor to speak or move during the blowdown or for a moment afterwards. This was noted years ago and is given in early materials on goals. AN AUDITOR MUST NOT SPEAK OR MOVE DURING A BLOWDOWN. When the auditor has to move the TA from right to left to keep the needle on the dial and the movement is .1 divisions or more then a blowdown is occurring. The needle, of course, is falling to the right. That is a period of charge blowing off the bank. It is accompanied by realizations for the pc. Sometimes the pc does not voice them aloud. They nevertheless happen. If the auditor speaks or moves beyond adjusting the TA quietly with his thumb, the pc may suppress the cognitions and stop the blowdown. To see if a needle floats, the TA must be halted for the moment between 2 and 3 on a calibrated meter. A floating needle cannot be observed during a blowdown. For an auditor to sit up suddenly and look surprised or pleased, or for an auditor to say the next command or "That's it" during a blowdown, can jolly well wreck a pc's case. So it's a real goof to do so. To get auditing results, one must audit with a good comm cycle, accept the pc's answers, handle the pc's originations, be unobtrusive with his auditing actions, not hold the pc up while he writes, not develop tricks like waiting for the pc to look at him before giving the next command, not prematurely ack and so start compulsive itsa, and be very quiet during and just after a blowdown. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:ml.cden.gm _ ****************************************************************** 34. HCO PL 27 May 1965 Processing Keeping Scientology Working Series 31 HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 MAY 1965 Remimeo Sthil Class VII Course Students Sthil Staff Ethics Hats Star-rated Check Qual & Tech Divs All Hats HCO Div All Hats Keeping Scientology Working Series 31 PROCESSING Since 1950 we have had an ironbound rule that we didn't leave pcs in trouble just to end a session. For fifteen years we have always continued a session that found the pc in trouble, and I myself have audited a pc for nine additional hours, all night long in fact, just to get the pc through. Newer auditors, not trained in the stern school of running engrams, must learn this all over again. It doesn't matter whether the auditor has had a policy on this or not -- one would think that common decency would be enough, as to leave a pc in the middle of a secondary or an engram and just coolly end the session is pretty cruel. Some do it because they are startled or afraid and "rabbit" (run away by ending the session). Auditors who end a process or change it when it has turned on a heavy somatic are likewise ignorant. WHAT TURNS IT ON WILL TURN IT OFF. This is the oldest rule in auditing. Of course people get into secondaries and engrams, go through misemotion and heavy somatics. This happens because things are running out. To end off a process or a session because of the clock is to ignore the real purpose of auditing. The oldest rules we have are: a. GET THE PC THROUGH IT. b. WHAT TURNS IT ON WILL TURN IT OFF. C. THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY THROUGH. These now are expressed as POLICY. A falsified auditor's report is also subject to a Court of Ethics. Any auditor violating this policy letter is liable to an immediate Court of Ethics convened within 24 hours of the offense or as soon as is urgently possible. Auditing at all levels works well when it is done by the book. The purpose of ethics is to open the way for and get in tech. Then we can do our job. THERE IS NO MODERN PROCESS THAT WILL NOT WORK WHEN EXACTLY APPLIED. Therefore, in the eyes of Ethics all auditing failures are ethics failures -- PTS, suppressive persons as pcs or noncompliance with tech for auditors. And the first offense an auditor can commit is ceasing to audit when he is most needed by his pc. Hence, it is the first, most important consideration of Ethics to prevent such occurrences. Then we'll make happy pcs, Releases and Clears. L. RON HUBBARD Founder Adopted as official Church policy by CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL LRH:wmc.pm.cden.iw.gm