From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 8 - September 1992
 
You Can Audit
By Leonard Dunn, England

One has only to look at this world and the aberrated behaviour of so 
many of its inhabitants to realise that a lot of auditors are needed 
if even the planet itself is not to be made uninhabitable. "Everyone" 
knows that auditing is very complex and needs an awful lot of 
training. Let me tell you just how I began to audit - without "any" 
training.

A friend told me about Dianetics, the Modern Science of Mental Health 
(Book One). I found a copy on the shelves of my Central Library, read 
it in three days and, on the fourth, began using it on my wife - and 
got results. I then read "Science of Survival", found it complex and 
decided that I couldn't continue without training - not available at 
that time as far as I knew. So, a warning here. Don't be put off by 
material that is beyond that which you are capable of handling at the 
moment. Do what you can and the rest will come later. I'd like to 
mention here that in the spring 1992 issue of "Free Spirit" there is 
the first of two articles on the use of Book 1 methods of auditing. 
The first is excellent and I have no doubt that the second will be 
equally good. Robert Ross knows his subject.

Next I started going to group meetings, at Holland Park Avenue in West 
London. These were conducted by George Wichelow, a very colourful 
personality who will still be remembered by old timers. He gave a talk 
followed by Group Processing. I was so impressed that I went home and 
started a group with friends and relations, having copied down the 
commands of the processing. I also noted what had been said at the 
talk and relayed this each week to my own group. (Leonard got good 
results with this early, and comparatively ill prepared work. In a 
letter he mentions: "I was dealing with ARC in the group and was 
talking about agreement strengthening one's communication. I mocked up 
a lion in the corner of the room, told them, and asked them to agree 
it was there. They all decided they could see it. With some of them 
for weeks after they could still see it and say 'Your lion's still in 
the corner, Len.'" Ed.)

A little training came later - a Saturday spend in listening to 
recorded lecture's by LRH on Group Processing. Heard the same thing on 
two further Saturdays - LRH believed in doing things three times - 
then I was given a Group Auditor's certificate.

It can be as simple as that to make a start!

The Gradient Scale

A very good way to get started is to begin with a group. If you 
haven't the old Group Auditing handbooks then "Self Analysis" will do 
quite well. For giving talks on the basics I can highly recommend 
"Scientology - more thant a Cult? Edition Scien Terra (no author given 
but copyright L.Kin).

Next I suggest that you get and study LRH - "Dianetics Today". One may 
be able to self-train but it is better to work with someone who knows 
the ropes, if possible. Dianetics is quite easy to run and I have 
found this book much easier to apply than Book 1.

Finally, get a copy of Geoffrey C Filbert's "Excalibur Revisited" I 
have written an article about these processes in "IVy" 7 (page 23) and 
to avoid unnecessary repetition, that should be read in conjunction 
with this one.

These processes can be run "by the book" until one is more experienced 
and confident of one's own abilities and then they can be run in the 
specific way needed for the individual PC. This is covered in this 
previous article.

The E-meter

I find that a meter is essential to this work once beyond Group 
Auditing so what meter should one get? The "good old work horse" as 
LRH called the Mark 5 is quite good but there are more refined meters 
available now. I use the Ability 2 meter, designed and supplied by 
Barry Penberthy of 6d Highfield road, Caterham, Surry CR3 6QX, Great 
Britain. Again there are articles on E-meters in Spring 1992 edition 
of "The Free Spirit."

What's in a name?

In the survey that accompanied a recent copy of IVy the majority of 
those who replied felt that there should be a different name for 
Independent Scientology since the latter word has such a bad 
reputation. Again it is "Scientology - more than a cult?" that is the 
best work I have read dealing with this break with the C of S.

There is also a move to get away from scientology "jargon". This I 
feel to be very desirable even in regard to the term "auditor". In 
Britain an auditor is an accountant who audits his client's books. Its 
use in regard to Scientology or any other word that is used to signify 
the variant of this, that one is using, will mean nothing to the 
general public. I am rather inclined to feel that an auditor is one 
who only follows the practices of the C of S.

For myself I use the term counsellor in preference. This may not be so 
precise but it is more readily understood by the outside world and 
this is the area that we are trying to reach. The trouble with 
"counsellor" is that it has the meaning of one who gives advice which 
we do not do. Still, it is better understood in this country than 
"auditor".

If one looks at the original definition of the word, an auditor was 
one who listens "and computes". He hears what the PC says and then 
decides what to do with the information that he has received. This is 
a big step away from the limitations placed upon its auditors by the C 
of S. It is, however, in my experience, what a counsellor should be 
doing.

The Auditor's Code

My friend Terry Scott wrote a short but excellent article on this in 
IVy 5. Items 1 & 2 - evaluation and invalidation are essential and I 
think should be practiced out of session as well as in it. Much of the 
rest is just good manners and common decency.

Item 8 - Sympathy. To sympathise with the PC is to validate his 
unwanted condition and this should neither be validated nor 
invalidated. He will work his way out of it if handled properly. It is 
a basic principle that agreement strengthens a condition. One should 
have understanding and feeling for the PC - empathy in fact - but one 
must not identify with his condition. This is most likely when one has 
been through this condition oneself.

Item 15 - Other practices. Here the key word is "mix". LRH in his 
"only way" stage, came to mean that one should never permit the PC to 
indulge in anything other that scientology. My interpretation in this 
is that anything is as good and as true as it works. If some "other 
practice" is helpful to the PC then use it, but in a distinct and 
different session, I have used spiritual healing, astrology, Tarot and 
Mah Jongg divination cards when I have found these of help to the PC.

Item 25 - Co-operate fully with the legal Church ... I promise -not- 
to!

TR's in Actual Practice

The Church has tended to over dramatise these training routines, often 
to the point where they become counter productive.

They may be needed when the PC is going through a rough patch but when 
things are running easily and smoothly there can be a relaxed 
friendliness.

TR OT 0

This I do regard as being important, not in the way defined as "just 
being there". To me it is to be aware of the PC as a thetan and not as 
"a case". There should be a constant mental flow of love and 
understanding towards the PC, most especially when the going is hard 
as it inevitably will be at times.

TR 0

Jon Atack in his book "A Piece of Blue Sky" relates that his 
experience of this was of two people staring at each other. I can well 
believe that it has degenerated into this but that is not confronting. 
The auditor does not have just to be there, he has to be fully aware 
of what is happening to the PC and to respond accordingly. Even in the 
bad patch one has to be careful. On talking about this with my Case 2 
(see previous article) she told me that if I withdrew too much she 
felt that I'd left her on her own. The auditor is someone that the PC 
relies upon to help him through the difficult times and not to let him 
feel he is no longer getting support. LRH clearly laid down that the 
PC "plus" the auditor were stronger than the bank.

Bull Baiting

When I was run on this the main aim of the coach seemed to be to make 
me laugh. Then to flunk me, of course. Incidentally, I "never" use the 
invalidating word "flunk" when training.

If the PC makes a joke and the auditor just sits there quite poker 
faced, this is quite likely to produce a lack of understanding - in 
other words, an ARC break. Laugh with the PC as this can help a case 
that is rising in tone.

I never felt any gain from running the 2 hour confront. To do this in 
session is a really great way to prevent case gain. One does not 
distract the PC from what he is doing but one doesn't have to sit like 
a stone statue for the whole session.

TR 1

This is not absolutely essential if the PC is in good shape. I recall 
a session at St. Hill when the staff had been up all night stuffing 
envelopes, with the result that when I had my session in late 
afternoon my poor auditor could barely keep awake. He gave wrong 
commands but as I knew what the command was supposed to be I carried 
on as though the command had been correct. We got through. LRH said 
that if the auditor is actually breathing he is capable of auditing. 
This seems to me to be sheer nonsense. To be really effective an 
auditor must be fully awake and aware.

It is essential to clear a command before running it as a process. My 
wife had an auditor at St. Hill who re-cleared the command before 
every repetition of it! She was quite upset by it and then was accused 
at her review of having committed overts against him!

Even an apparently simple phrase may have a "bug" in it. My wife could 
never remember the meaning of "inhibit" when running out an ARC break. 
It always had to be cleared.

TR 2

An acknowledgement is a stop. TR2 is a method of controlling the PC's 
communication. If you cannot control the preclear's communication you 
cannot control the preclear ("Technical Dictionary" Definition and 
"Dianetics Today", p. 159)

When I was at the East Grinstead AAC (Advanced Ability Centre as it 
was then called - a free scientology centre in East Grinstead, Sussex 
England) to complete my NOTS a group of us were in the waiting room 
and one was relating trouble in session with a woman auditor at St. 
Hill (East Grinstead). Eventually she demanded "Who is running this 
case?" He replied "I am - with your help". That began a change in my 
style of auditing.

In view of this, is controlling the preclears communication necessary 
or even desirable? See the following TR3 for just one example of 
allowing the PC to run his own case in his own way. I could quote many 
more examples.

TR 3

This, if followed, seems yet another way to induce an ARC break, If 
the PC departs from a direct answer to the question then there is a 
reason for it. In other words, this is really a PC origination (TR4) 
and I handle it exactly the same way. I had a PC who instead of 
answering the question made reference to a shell on my bookcase. If 
I'd handled as directed in TR3 I would have left undiscovered an 
important factor in her case. The shell was a symbol. The diversion 
may be as LRH maintained, a response from the bank, but I regard it as 
something to be handled like any other charge.

TR'S 6 - 9

I was never trained on these and have had no reason to believe that I 
missed out on anything by not doing them.

Auditing Room and the New Pc

The only thing that matters here is that the PC shall feel 
comfortable. The room temperature should be suitable to the PC's 
needs. An unexpected rise in Tone Arm may come from the PC being too 
hot or too chilly. A bare auditing room such as one gets in the usual 
Org can be hard on a PC being run on "Spot something in this room...".

I do not follow the idea of having a barrier between the PC and myself 
but I do familiarise the PC with the essential basics before starting 
auditing. This includes the basic functions of the meter so "that 
reads", "there's charge on that", "your needle is floating", etc can 
be understood. Instead of keeping the PC in mystery as to what is 
going on I let him know exactly what is happening as far as this is 
advisable.

I do not agree that this takes his attention off his case, as LRH 
maintained. On the contrary, I have found that this works better.

I also explain the reason for admin, since the PC can readily think 
that this is "being taken down and may be used in evidence...", as the 
Police say. I found this especially necessary with one PC in the early 
days since he was very wary of everything. Needless to say, this is 
not the case now.

Confidentiality

This is extremely important. If writing up a case history for any sort 
of publication make sure that the identity of the PC remains unknown, 
or get the PC's permission. In my Case 2 she actually wrote up what 
had happened to her in a very unusual incident in order to pass the 
information on to another auditor who is very interested in the case.

The Auditor's Own Case

Generally speaking it is not advisable for an auditor to run a level 
on another unless he has had it run upon himself. Once one is Clear or 
higher then any "low level" process can be run without difficulty.

Remembering how you have been run is usually helpful in regard to 
running another. In the early days LRH said that a PC should take 
responsibility for his own case. The C of S does not like this idea, 
they prefer to take the cash. This I found out when the incident 
occured that caused me to leave the Church.

Fees

If you need to make some charge in order to earn a living then there 
is no reason why you shouldn't. On the other hand avoid the trap the C 
of S has fallen into - "greed". Be reasonable in your demands. You can 
work out how much a week you need for a comfortable living and then 
base your charge on the number of auditing hours that you can 
comfortably run in that time.

There is, however, another point that must be considered. There are 
people who do not value anything if it is free of charge or offered at 
too low a fee. Look out for this at your initial interview before 
starting actual auditing and charge accordingly. Such are going to 
need a large number of hours in all probability.

If not charging at all, as in my case, the PC is likely to want to do 
something in return to express appreciation, I don't expect it but I 
don't reject it and if one makes me a cake, I enjoy it - even if it 
isn't too good for my figure.

Positive Thinking

All right, I know that I wrote about that in the last article and in a 
number of others but this concerns you as an auditor.

Set your goal, have full confidence of your attaining it and you will. 
It is so easy to say "I can't see how ..". As I told one would-be 
auditor, "You don't have to see, just accept that it will happen at 
the right time". I've been through this stage myself.

In 1954 I wanted to take the HPA course. I had no money as we were 
buying our house and I was doing all I could to repay a loan from my 
mother-in-law. The course was three evenings a week and I had only two 
of the evenings off in my job as a Branch Librarian. I couldn't see 
how ..., but I was determined to get there. Without going into 
details, some most unexpected changes took place and all the 
conditions were satisfied and I got there. The seemingly impossible 
had happened. It really does if you expect it to.

Finally, if there is any help that I can give you to get you started 
on the so-rewarding course of being an auditor then don't hesitate to 
write to me c/o the Editor at ant@jacome.ping.dk I am only too willing 
to do what I can to assist.