FREEZONE BIBLE TECH POST LEVELS 0-IV CO-AUDIT COURSE: 1 of 1 ************************************************** 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 Levels 0-IV Co-audit Course checksheet from 1982. This checksheet continued to be in use by the orgs as late as 1990. They would cross out the BTBs and write in the HCOBs that replaced them. We've also included the bulletins that are listed in the checksheet. Good luck with your studies, -The Tech Lion CONTENTS: 1. HCO PL 3 Jan 82 LEVELS 0-IV PROFESSIONAL CO-AUDIT CHECKSHEET 2. HCO PL 7 Feb 65 KSW Series 1, KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING 3. HCO PL 17 Jun 70RA KSW Series 5, TECHNICAL DEGRADES 4. HCOB 28 May 80 Co-Audit Series 1, CO-AUDIT DEFINED 5. HCO PL 23 Jul 69 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES 6. HCOB 12 Nov 81RD GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES 7. HCOB 8 Sep 78RB MINI LIST OF GRADE 0-IV PROCESSES [note: the expanded grade process list for each level will be included in the Academy Levels coursepack that we'll be posting next month] ************************************************** 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 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 ************************************************** 1. HCO PL 3 Jan 82 LEVELS 0-IV PROFESSIONAL CO-AUDIT CHECKSHEET [Best viewed with a fixed-pitch font such as Courier.] HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 JANUARY 1982 Remimeo All Orgs Co-Audit Series 7 LEVELS 0-IV PROFESSIONAL CO-AUDIT CHECKSHEET NAME:___________________________ORG:____________________________ POST:___________________________ DATE STARTED:___________________DATE COMPLETED:_________________ INFORMATION: "A professional co-audit is a co-audit between auditors trained on the skills of a level who are auditing each other on that level. "Professional co-audits have long been a favored and highly successful method whereby Scientologists could move up the auditing and training sides of the Bridge. "Professional co-audits are for auditors who are doing the Professional Training Route and for auditors who have completed their training but haven't themselves moved up the Grades. Professional co-audits are offered in Department 11 (Department of Training). "Academy and Briefing Course students could and SHOULD co-audit and get themselves up the Grade Chart as they go, in pace with their training. "Professional co-auditing can be done following each auditor training course. It can also be done on special co-audits set up by orgs so that these auditors can continue to co-audit under the supervision of org tech terminals and use of org facilities." (Ref. HCOB 28 May 80 Co-Audit Series 1 CO-AUDIT DEFINED) PREREQUISITE: Level 0. NOTE: The student may start his co-audit upon completion of Level 0 and continue as he complete each subsequent Academy Level OR he may start his co-audit after he completes Levels 0 - IV. PURPOSE: The purpose of this checksheet is to get Level 0 - IV co-auditors through their Grades. STUDY TECH: This course is studied per HCO PL 25 Sep 79 I URGENT- IMPORTANT, SUCCESSFUL TRAINING LINEUP, with full use of study tech. The co-auditing part of this checksheet is conducted per HCOB 28 May 80 Co-Audit Series 1 CO-AUDIT DEFINED and HCOB 29 May 80 Co-Audit Series 2 CO-AUDITS: HOW TO RUN THEM. LENGTH OF COURSE: Theory - 2 days Co-Audit Practical - determined by amount of auditing needed. PRODUCT: Each co-audit partner successfully through his Grades. CERTIFICATE: Upon completion of this co-audit checksheet the student is awarded the certificate of: LEVELS 0-IV CO-AUDIT COURSE COMPLETION ************ SECTION 1 - KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING 1. HCO PL 7 Feb 65 KSW Series 1, KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING _______ Reiss. 27.8.80 2. HCO PL 17 Jun 70RA KSW Series 5, TECHNICAL DEGRADES ________ Re-rev. 27.4.81 3. ________ 4. ________ ************ SECTION 2 - CO-AUDITING THEORY *1. HCOB 28 May 80 Co-Audit Series 1, CO-AUDIT DEFINED ________ 2. DEMO: a. The definition of a co-audit. ________ b. The purpose of a co-audit. ________ 3. HCO PL 23 Jul AD19 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES ________ 4. DEMO: How you would pair up a co-audit team. ________ 5. ________ 6. ________ ************ SECTION 3 - CO-AUDITING PRACTICAL 1. HCOB 12 Nov 81R GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES ________ Re-rev. 18.1.82 2. HCOB 8 Sep 78R MINI LIST OF GRADE 0-IV PROCESSES ________ Rev. 6.10.81 3. BTB 15 Nov 76 I 0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES - QUADS PART A, ARC STRAIGHTWIRE ________ 4. PRACTICAL: (To be done on completion of Level 0 or Levels 0-IV.) a. Go see the Co-Audit Supervisor and get a co-audit partner assigned, if not yet done already. ________ b. Study your pc's folder(s) and propose a program to the C/S. Get the program approved. ________ c. Start co-auditing. ________ d. Audit your co-audit partner to completion on EXPANDED STRAIGHTWIRE. ________ e. Receive auditing on EXPANDED ARC STRAIGHTWIRE to completion ________ 5. BTB 15 Nov 76 II 0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES - QUADS PART B, GRADE 0 PROCESSES ________ 6. PRACTICAL: (On completion of Level 0 or Levels 0-IV.) a. Audit your co-audit partner to completion on GRADE 0 EXPANDED. ________ b. Receive auditing on GRADE 0 EXPANDED from your co-audit partner to completion. ________ 7. BTB 15 Nov 76 III 0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES - QUADS PART C, GRADE 1 PROCESSES ________ 8. PRACTICAL: (On completion of Level 1 or Levels 0-IV.) a. Audit your co-audit partner to completion on GRADE 1 EXPANDED. ________ b. Receive auditing on GRADE 1 EXPANDED from your co-audit partner to completion. ________ 9. BTB 15 Nov 76 IV 0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES - QUADS PART D, GRADE 2 PROCESSES ________ 10. PRACTICAL: (On completion of Level 2 or Levels 0-IV.) a. Audit your co-audit partner to completion on GRADE 2 EXPANDED. ________ b. Receive auditing on GRADE 2 EXPANDED from your co-audit partner to completion. ________ 11. BTB 15 Nov 76 V 0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES - QUADS PART E, GRADE 3 PROCESSES ________ 12. PRACTICAL: (On completion of Level 3 or Levels 0-IV.) a. Audit your co-audit partner to completion on GRADE 3 EXPANDED. ________ b. Receive auditing on GRADE 3 EXPANDED from your co-audit partner to completion. ________ 13. BTB 15 Nov 76 VI 0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES - QUADS PART F, GRADE 4 PROCESSES ________ 14. PRACTICAL: (On completion of Level 4 or Levels 0-IV.) a. Audit your co-audit partner to completion on GRADE 4 EXPANDED. ________ b. Receive auditing on GRADE 4 EXPANDED from your co-audit partner to completion. ________ ************ COURSE COMPLETION A. STUDENT COMPLETION: I have completed this checksheet and can and have fully applied the data. STUDENT ATTEST:_____________________________ DATE:_________________ I attest that this student has studied these materials with full study tech and has applied them to good result on this course. CO-AUDIT SUPERVISOR:________________________ DATE:_________________ I attest that this sutdent has received auditing to completion on Expanded Grades ARC SW, 0-IV. CASE SUPERVISOR:____________________________ DATE:_________________ B. STUDENT ATTEST AT C & A: I attest that I have: (a) Properly enrolled on the course, (b) Paid for the course, (c) Studied and understood all the materials of the checksheet and (d) Can produce the results required in the materials of the course. STUDENT ATTEST:_____________________________ DATE:_________________ C & A ATTEST:_______________________________ DATE:_________________ C. CERTS AND AWARDS: Certificate of LEVELS 0-IV CO-AUDIT COURSE COMPLETION issued. C & A:______________________________________ DATE:_________________ (Route this form to Course Admin for filing in student's folder.) L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER Assisted by Flag Compilations Bureau LRH:FCB:bk Copyright © 1982 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Printed in the U.S.A. Issued by BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. ======================== 2. HCO PL 7 Feb 65 KSW Series 1, KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965 REISSUED 27 AUGUST 1980 (As the first issue in the Keeping Scientology Working Series) Remimeo Sthil Students Assn/Org Sec Hat Case Sup Hat HCO Sec Hat Ds of P Hat Ds of T Hat Staff Member Hat Franchise (Issued May 1965) Keeping Scientology Working Series 1 Note: Neglect of this Pol Ltr has caused great hardship on staffs, has cost countless millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an all out international effort to restore basic Scientology over the world. Within 5 years after the issue of this PL with me off the lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. "Quickie grades" entered in and denied gain to tens of thousands of cases. Therefore actions which neglect or violate this policy letter are HIGH CRIMES resulting in Comm Evs on ADMINISTRATORS and EXECU-TIVES. It is not "entirely a tech matter" as its neglect destroys orgs and caused a 2-year slump. IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it. SPECIAL MESSAGE THE FOLLOWING POLICY LETTER MEANS WHAT IT SAYS. IT WAS TRUE IN 1965 WHEN I WROTE IT. IT WAS TRUE IN 1970 WHEN I HAD IT REISSUED. I AM REISSUING IT NOW, IN 1980, TO AVOID AGAIN SLIPPING BACK INTO A PERIOD OF OMITTED AND QUICKIED FUNDAMEN-TAL GRADE CHART ACTIONS ON CASES, THEREBY DENYING GAINS AND THREATENING THE VIABILITY OF SCIENTOLOGY AND OF ORGS. SCIENTOLOGY WILL KEEP WORKING ONLY AS LONG AS YOU DO YOUR PART TO KEEP IT WORKING BY APPLYING THIS POLICY LETTER. WHAT I SAY IN THESE PAGES HAS ALWAYS BEEN TRUE, IT HOLDS TRUE TODAY, IT WILL STILL HOLD TRUE IN THE YEAR 2000 AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO HOLD TRUE FROM THERE ON OUT. NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN SCIENTOLOGY, ON STAFF OR NOT, THIS POLICY LETTER HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH YOU. ALL LEVELS KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY WORKING HCO Sec or Communicator Hat Check on all personnel and all new personnel as taken on. We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology. The only thing now is getting the technology applied. If you can't get the technology applied, then you can't deliver what's promised. It's as simple as that. If you can get the technology applied, you can deliver what's promised. The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is "no results." Trouble spots occur only where there are "no results." Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are "no results" or "bad results." Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success is assured if the technology is applied. So it is the task of the Assn or Org Sec, the HCO Sec, the Case Supervisor, the D of P, the D of T and all staff members to get the correct technology applied. Getting the correct technology applied consists of One: Having the correct technology. Two: Knowing the technology. Three: Knowing it is correct. Four: Teaching correctly the correct technology. Five: Applying the technology. Six: Seeing that the technology is correctly applied. Seven: Hammering out of existence incorrect technology. Eight: Knocking out incorrect applications. Nine: Closing the door on any possibility of incorrect technology. Ten: Closing the door on incorrect application. One above has been done. Two has been achieved by many. Three is achieved by the individual applying the correct technology in a proper manner and observing that it works that way. Four is being done daily successfully in most parts of the world. Five is consistently accomplished daily. Six is achieved by instructors and supervisors consistently. Seven is done by a few but is a weak point. Eight is not worked on hard enough. Nine is impeded by the "reasonable" attitude of the not quite bright. Ten is seldom done with enough ferocity. Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are the only places Scientology can bog down in any area. The reasons for this are not hard to find. (a) A weak certainty that it works in Three above can lead to weakness in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. (b) Further, the not-too-bright have a bad point on the button Self-Importance. (c) The lower the IQ, the more the individual is shut off from the fruits of observation. (d) The service facs of people make them defend themselves against anything they confront good or bad and seek to make it wrong. (e) The bank seeks to knock out the good and perpetuate the bad. Thus we as Scientologists and as an organization must be very alert to Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. In all the years I have been engaged in research, I have kept my comm lines wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea. Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of suggestions (less than twenty) had long-run value and none were major or basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions and used them, we went astray and I repented and eventually had to "eat crow." On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So 1 know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in accepting unworkable "technology." By actual record the percentages are about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad technology to destroy good technology. As we could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as "unpopular," "egotistical" and "undemocratic." It very well may be. But it is also a survival point. And I don't see that popular measures, self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for Man but push him further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels, self-abnega-tion has filled the Southeast Asian jungles with stone idols and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax. Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had not supported me in many ways, I could not have discovered it either. But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future. I can only say this now that it is done. There remains, of course, group tabulation or coordination of what has been done, which will be valuable - only so long as it does not seek to alter basic principles and successful applications. The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results and of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are, appreciated. Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what we are. Discovery contribution was not however part of the broad picture. We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above the bank. We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact - the group left to its own devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild dramatizations of the bank called "new ideas" would have wiped it out. Supporting this is the fact that Man has never before evolved workable mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious technology he did evolve - psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment, whips, duress, punishment, etc., ad infinitum. So realize that we have climbed out of the mud by whatever good luck and good sense, and refuse to sink back into it again. See that Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten above are ruthlessly followed and we will never be stopped. Relax them, get reasonable about it and we will perish. So far, while keeping myself in complete communication with all suggestions, I have not failed on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten in areas I could supervise closely. But it's not good enough for just myself and a few others to work at this. Whenever this control as per Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten has been relaxed, the whole organizational area has failed. Witness Elizabeth, N.J.; Wichita; the early organi-zations and groups. They crashed only because I no longer did Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. Then, when they were all messed up, you saw the obvious "reasons" for failure. But ahead of that they ceased to deliver and that involved them in other reasons. The common denominator of a group is the reactive bank. Thetans without banks have different responses. They only have their banks in common. They agree then only on bank principles. Person to person the bank is identical. So constructive ideas are individual and seldom get broad agreement in a human group. An individual must rise above an avid craving for agreement from a humanoid group to get anything decent done. The bank-agreement has been what has made Earth a Hell - and if you were looking for Hell and found Earth, it would certainly serve. War, famine, agony and disease has been the lot of Man. Right now the great governments of Earth have developed the means of frying every man, woman and child on the planet. That is bank. That is the result of Collective Thought Agreement. The decent, pleasant things on this planet come from individual actions and ideas that have somehow gotten by the Group Idea. For that matter, look how we ourselves are attacked by "public opinion" media. Yet there is no more ethical group on this planet than ourselves. Thus each one of us can rise above the domination of the bank and then, as a group of freed beings, achieve freedom and reason. It is only the aberrated group, the mob, that is destructive. When you don't do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten actively, you are working for the bank-dominated mob. For it will surely, surely (a) introduce incorrect technology and swear by it, (b) apply technology as incorrectly as possible, (c) open the door to any destructive idea, and (d) encourage incorrect application. It's the bank that says the group is all and the individual nothing. It's the bank that says we must fail. So just don't play that game. Do Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten and you will knock out of your road all the future thorns. Here's an actual example in which a senior executive had to interfere because of a pc spin: A Case Supervisor told Instructor A to have Auditor B run Process X on Preclear C. Auditor B afterwards told Instructor A that "It didn't work." Instructor A was weak on Three above and didn't really believe in Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. So Instructor A told the Case Supervisor, "Process X didn't work on Preclear C." Now this strikes directly at each of One to Six above in Preclear C, Auditor B, Instructor A and the Case Supervisor. It opens the door to the introduction of "new technology" and to failure. What happened here? Instructor A didn't jump down Auditor B's throat, that's all that happened. This is what he should have done: Grabbed the Auditor's Report and looked it over. When a higher executive on this case did so, she found what the Case Supervisor and the rest missed: That Process X increased Preclear C's TA to 25 TA divisions for the session but that near session end Auditor B Q'd and A'd with a cognition and abandoned Process X while it still gave high TA and went off running one of Auditor B's own manufacture, which nearly spun Preclear C. Auditor B's IQ on examination turned out to be about 75. Instructor A was found to have huge ideas of how you must never invalidate anyone, even a lunatic. The Case Supervisor was found to be "too busy with admin to have any time for actual cases." All right, there's an all too typical example. The Instructor should have done Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten. This would have begun this way. Auditor B: "That process X didn't work." Instructor A: "What exactly did you do wrong?" Instant attack. "Where's your Auditor's Report for the session? Good. Look here, you were getting a lot of TA when you stopped Process X. What did you do?" Then the pc wouldn't have come close to a spin and all four of these would have retained their certainty. In a year, I had four instances in one small group where the correct process recommended was reported not to have worked. But on review found that each one had (a) increased the TA, (b) had been abandoned, and (c) had been falsely reported as unworkable. Also, despite this abuse, in each of these four cases the recommended, correct process cracked the case. Yet they were reported as not having worked! Similar examples exist in instruction and these are all the more deadly as every time instruction in correct technology is flubbed, then the resulting error, uncorrected in the auditor, is perpetuated on every pc that auditor audits thereafter. So Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten are even more important in a course than in supervision of cases. Here's an example: A rave recommendation is given a graduating student "because he gets more TA on pcs than any other student on the course!" Figures of 435 TA divisions a session are reported. "Of course his Model Session is poor but it's just a knack he has" is also included in the recommendation. A careful review is undertaken because nobody at Levels O to IV is going to get that much TA on pcs. It is found that this student was never taught to read an E-Meter TA dial! And no instructor observed his handling of a meter and it was not discovered that he "overcompensated" nervously, swinging the TA 2 or 3 divisions beyond where it needed to go to place the needle at "set." So everyone was about to throw away standard processes and Model Session because this one student "got such remarkable TA." They only read the reports and listened to the brags and never looked at this student. The pcs in actual fact were making slightly less than average gain, impeded by a rough Model Session and misworded processes. Thus, what was making the pcs win (actual Scientology) was hidden under a lot of departures and errors. I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of offbeat whole track on other students after course hours. The Academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren't quickly brought under control, and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straight-ened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. BUT no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased. Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from noncomprehension. Usually the noncomprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an offbeat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood. When people can't get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology. Under instruction in Scientology, they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions. Hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and his instructors and all Scientology instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him. With what we know now, there is no student we enroll who cannot be properly trained. As an instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeves rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He's slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don't wait until next week. By then he's got other messes stuck to him. If you can't graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, graduate them in such a state of shock they'll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they'll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing. When somebody enrolls, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe - never permit an "open-minded" approach. If they're going to quit, let them quit fast. If they enrolled, they're aboard; and if they're aboard, they're here on the same terms as the rest of us - win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough, dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It's a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive - and even they have a hard time. We'll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly, he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don't make students into good Scientologists and that lets everybody down. When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in her eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she'll win and we'll all win. Humor her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, "You're here so you're a Scientologist. Now we're going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We'd rather have you dead than incapable." Fit that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear. But we won't have to bear it forever. The bigger we get, the more economics and time we will have to do our job. And the only things which can prevent us from getting that big fast are areas in from One to Ten. Keep those in mind and we'll be able to grow. Fast. And as we grow, our shackles will be less and less. Failing to keep One to Ten will make us grow less. So the ogre which might eat us up is not the government or the High Priests. It's our possible failure to retain and practice our technology. An Instructor or Supervisor or Executive must challenge with ferocity instances of "unworkability." They must uncover what did happen, what was run and what was done or not done. If you have One and Two, you can only acquire Three for all by making sure of all the rest. We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't cute or something to do for lack of something better. The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology. This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance. Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless trillions of years of the past. Don't muff it now because it seems unpleasant or unsocial to do Seven. Eight. Nine and Ten. Do them and we'll win. L. RON HUBBARD Founder LRH:jw.rr.nt.ka.mes.rd.bk.gm Copyright © 1965, 1970, 1973, 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ======================== 3. HCO PL 17 Jun 70RA KSW Series 5, TECHNICAL DEGRADES HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1970RA REISSUED 30 AUGUST 1980 as part of KSW Series RE-REVISED 27 APRIL 1981 (Re-revised to update High Crime #3) Remimeo Applies to all SHs and Academies HGCs Franchises Keeping Scientology Working Series 5 URGENT AND IMPORTANT TECHNICAL DEGRADES (This PL and HCO PL Feb 7, 1965 must be made part of every study pack as the first items and must be listed on checksheets.) Any checksheet in use or in stock which carries on it any degrading statement must be destroyed and issued without qualifying statements. Example: Level 0 to IV Checksheets SH carry "A. Background Material - This section is included as an historical background, but has much interest and value to the student. Most of the processes are no longer used, having been replaced by more modern technology. The student is only required to read this material and ensure he leaves no misunderstood." This heading covers such vital things as TRs, Op Pro by Dup! The statement is a falsehood. These checksheets were not approved by myself, all the material of the Academy and SH courses IS in use. Such actions as this gave us "Quickie Grades," ARC Broke the field and downgraded the Academy and SH Courses. A condition of TREASON or cancellation of certificates or dismissal and a full investiga-tion of the background of any person found guilty, will be activated in the case of anyone committing the following HIGH CRIMES. 1. Abbreviating an official Course in Dianetics and Scientology so as to lose the full theory processes and effectiveness of the subjects. 2. Adding comments to checksheets or instructions labeling any material "background" or "not used now" or "old" or any similar action which will result in the student not knowing, using and applying the data in which he is being trained. 3. Employing after 1 Sept 70 any checksheet for any course not written by myself or authorized by the Authority, Verification and Correction Unit International and accepted by the Board of Directors. Checksheets for Dept 17 Courses have their own approval lines as issued in HCO PL 2 Jan 80R Rev. 31 Dec 80 DEPARTMENT 17 COURSE CHECKSHEETS APPROVAL LINE. 4. Failing to strike from any checksheet remaining in use meanwhile any such comments as "historical," "background," "not used," "old," etc. or VERBALLY STATING IT TO STUDENTS. 5. Permitting a pc to attest to more than one grade at a time on the pc's own determinism without hint or evaluation. 6. Running only one process for a lower grade between 0 to IV, where the grade EP has not been attained. 7. Failing to use all processes for a level where the EP has not been attained. 8. Boasting as to speed of delivery in a session, such as "I put in Grade Zero in 3 minutes." Etc. 9. Shortening time of application of auditing for financial or labor saving considera-tions. 10. Acting in any way calculated to lose the technology of Dianetics and Scientology to use or impede its use or shorten its materials or its application. REASON: The effort to get students through courses and get pcs processed in orgs was considered best handled by reducing materials or deleting processes from grades. The pressure exerted to speed up student completion's and auditing completion's was mistakenly answered by just not delivering. The correct way to speed up a student's progress is by using 2 way comm and applying the study materials to students. The best way to really handle pcs is to ensure they make each level fully before going on to the next and repairing them when they do not. The puzzle of the decline of the entire Scientology network in the late 60s is entirely answered by the actions taken to shorten time in study and in processing by deleting materials and actions. Reinstituting full use and delivery of Dianetics and Scientology is the answer to any recovery. The product of an org is well taught students and thoroughly audited pcs. When the product vanishes, so does the org. The orgs must survive for the sake of this planet. L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER Revised by CS-4/5 Approved by L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER Accepted by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY of CALIFORNIA BDCSC:LRH:SK:JE:nt:rd:lf:dr:bk Copyright © 1982 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ======================== 4. HCOB 28 May 80 Co-Audit Series 1, CO-AUDIT DEFINED HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 28 MAY 1980RA REVISED 20 APRIL 1990 Remimeo All Orgs All Divisions C/Ses Co-audit Supervisor's Course Co-auditors Co-audit Series 1RA CO-AUDIT DEFINED Refs: HCOB 29 May 80RA Co-audit Series 2RA CO-AUDITS: HOW TO RUN THEM Rev. 20.4.90 HCOB 30 May 80RA Co-audit Series 3RA SUPERVISING CO-AUDIT TRs Rev. 21.4.90 HCOB 31 May 80RA Co-audit Series 4RA STAFF CO-AUDITS Rev. 21.4.90 ________________ The term "co-auditing" is an abbreviation for "cooperative auditing." A CO-AUDIT IS: A TEAM OF ANY TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE HELPING EACH OTHER REACH A BETTER LIFE WITH SCIENTOLOGY OR DIANETICS PROCESSING. It is a cooperative action toward a very worthwhile goal. The co-audit is an early Scientology and Dianetics innovation. It was the bright idea used in the early days to. get auditing done in more volume and on a broader scale than would ever have been possible on a one-for-one basis at that time. It was also a means of training the many who were demanding training in this new technology, and providing them with the opportunity to get their own cases handled while at the same time giving them a subjective reality on the processes they were delivering to others. It was then and is today a very valuable tool. Co-audits are our quickest and most economical way of restoring vitality and purpose to the society, something I know all Scientologists are working with me to achieve. Co-audits can handle the many, staff and public alike, who are reaching for those auditing actions meant to bring them up through the next levels toward Clearing and who are willing to bootstrap their way up through these levels. THE PURPOSE OF A CO-AUDIT IS TO GET CO-AUDITORS UP THE GRADE CHART. Co-auditing is not a limited activity. Any pair of Scientologists who have the interest and desire to help each other up the Grade Chart can co-audit. CO-AUDITING OF SPECIFIC RUNDOWNS Rundown co-audits are especially designed co-audit packages set up to permit co-audit team members, regardless of their training or lack of it, to audit each other through the full steps of a specific rundown. Included in a rundown co-audit would be any and all study and training steps needed to prepare co-auditors to successfully audit each other to the full EP of that specific rundown. The Method One Co-audit is one example of a specific rundown co-audit. The checksheet for this co-audit (HCO PL 25 Sept. 79R III) provides the technical theory and practical steps necessary to enable two co-auditors to take each other through Method One Word Clearing to full completion and EP of the action. It is a very popular action, easy to do, and gives tremendous case wins. It does not require professional auditor or word clearer training; one can simply do the Hubbard Method One Co-audit Course Checksheet with a twin. Other co-audit packages on specific rundowns may be released from time to time. These rundown co-audit packages would be carefully planned and tailored to include the minimal but correct and necessary training gradients for delivery to public as well as staff. This does not mean that, in the absence of such a package for a specific rundown, co-auditing could not be done. Auditors trained in the skills of a level or a particular rundown could co-audit that rundown, provided they are at that level pc-wise and training-wise. The co-audit would need to be organized and be properly supervised and C/Sed throughout, but the organization could be as minimal as providing a set-up for one such co-audit team. PROFESSIONAL CO-AUDITS A professional co-audit is a co-audit between auditors trained on the skills of a level who are auditing each other on that level. (A nonprofessional co-audit is one designed for co-auditors who have not had professional auditor training.) Professional co-audits have long been a favored and highly successful method whereby Scientologists can move up the auditing and training sides of the Bridge. Professional co-audits are for auditors who are doing the Professional Training Route and for auditors who have completed their training but haven't themselves moved up the Grades. Academy and Saint Hill Special Briefing Course students could and should co-audit and get themselves up the Grade Chart as they go, in pace with their training. Professional co-auditing can be done following each auditor training course. It can also be done on special co-audits set up by orgs so that these auditors can continue to co-audit under the supervision of org tech terminals and use org facilities. Such co-audits for public students would be charged for at a nominal rate and would include C/Sing, etc. A student can get all of his Grades and New Era Dianetics auditing on these co-audits. NOTE Orgs do not have the license to offer public nonprofessional co-audits on Grade 0-IV processing or on NED (New Era Dianetics). Training courses are already very much streamlined. Any public interested in co-auditing the Grades and New Era Dianetics should be routed onto the Academy Levels and the NED Course where they can rapidly complete their study and get onto the professional co-audits. Thus an org's concentration as far as public co-audits go would be on Div 6 co-audits, any specific rundown co-audit packages and professional co-audits on the Grades and New Era Dianetics. STAFF CO-AUDITS Staff co-audits are by far the most advantageous method for an org to ensure its staff get and stay in good case shape and move on up the Bridge. A well-run staff co-audit is the answer to the problem of how an org gets all its staff audited. The staff co-audit can be arranged to be done by trained staff auditors (teamed with each other) and/or untrained staff (teamed with each other). It can include any processing from the beginning of the Grade Chart up through New Era Dianetics as well as processing on special rundowns designed for co-audit purposes. In the case of untrained staff co-auditing, this would ideally begin with the TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course. As part of the co-audit, the staff member would first be trained on TRs for co-audit level and Upper Indocs and then co-audit with his twin on a full battery of Objectives, as directed by the C/S. Following this, the untrained staff co-auditors would need to be gradiently programed and C/Sed and taken step-by-step through the next Grade Chart action on a"read-it, drill-it, do-it" basis. "Read-it, drill-it, do-it" means: 1. The co-auditors twin up and study and check each other out on the basic issues and skills for the process or Grade to be audited. 2 . They drill the actual actions involved in running the process, under tight supervision of a trained Co-audit Supervisor. 3. They then audit each other on the process to EP, under the tight guidance of a trained Co-audit Supervisor. Do you want to see an immediate upsurge in staff morale, activity level and enthusiasm? Establish a staff co-audit! GUIDING FACTOR The Grade Chart is the guiding factor in any co-audit. One doesn't audit a pc on processes or rundowns above his Grade in violation of the Grade Chart, regardless of where the auditing is done or whether it is an HGC type of action or a co-audit action. On any co-audit, the process to be run is determined by the C/S and he uses the Grade Chart as the basic pc program in each individual case. HCO PL 23 July 69, AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, and HCOB 21 Dec. 79, AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, CRAMMING ASSIGNMENT POLICIES, provide the guidelines for pairing up co-auditors of comparable case level and training level. SUMMARY Co-audits are for use. They spark immediate interest. They quickly bring people up to doingness. There is no better exchange for the auditing one gets than to deliver it to another and that in itself produces gain. They are the fastest, most satisfying method of getting lots of auditing delivered, of making lots of Releases and providing actual auditing experience. If you want to turn your org scene into one of a bustling beehive of activity, get your co-audits established and running. It is within the means of any org to do so. L. RON HUBBARD Founder Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations ======================== 5. HCO PL 23 Jul 69 AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 JULY 1969 Remimeo Dianetics Checksheet Class VIII Checksheet Case Supervisors Dir Tech Services Ds of P Ds of T AUDITOR ASSIGNMENT POLICIES One used to hear auditors complain "Scientologists are harder to audit than new pcs." We know the answer to this now. It is auditor SPEED. When an auditor complains of this, he is revealing that he is a slow auditor. Dianetics and Scientology (demonstrated by carefully controlled tests) greatly speed up reaction time. They also increase IQ rapidly and were the reason colleges came off their "IQs never change." As a person is audited he becomes quicker mentally. Also he becomes less comm-laggy. Also he is more familiar with technology and his own case and is less afraid of himself and his "bank." In assigning auditors to pcs if you do not pay attention to comparable grade levels between auditors and pcs you will have failed sessions. Therefore, it is policy not to assign an auditor whose grade and class is less than that of the pc. Further, a good auditor deserves a good auditor. To assign a new student to audit a skilled and practiced veteran auditor of excellent auditing record is suppressive. The new student or new graduate would probably be intimidated just at the thought of auditing someone who is far more expert - this would magnify his flubs and comm lags. Therefore, it is policy to assign only good, proven auditors to good auditors. It is a suppressive act to assign a new or poor auditor to an auditor who has proven he can attain uniformly good results. Slow auditors will be found successful auditing slow auditors. __________ This does not excuse not drilling slow auditors up to becoming fast, precision auditors. __________ Good auditors are valuable. They should be safeguarded, given favors and even pampered. Slow auditors should be drilled and given slow (new) pcs only until their own case gain brings them, with their drills, higher case gain and thus, higher speed. L. RON HUBBARD Founder ======================== 6. HCOB 12 Nov 81RD GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 12 NOVEMBER 1981RD REVISED 20 APRIL 1990 Remimeo All C/Ses All Auditors Tech/Qual Registrars Dissem Orgs and Missions The Auditor BPI URGENT - IMPORTANT GRADE CHART STREAMLINED FOR LOWER GRADES Refs: HCOB 12 Dec. 81 THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART HCOB 14 Dec. 81 THE STATE OF CLEAR HCOB/PL 25 Sept. 79RB Word Clearing Series 34 Rev. 1.7.85 METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING Book: The Way to Happiness Classification, Gradation and Awareness Chart I recently reworked the Grade Chart in the interest of greater gain for the pc. I forwarded the notes for issue and they were added to by others. Some of the additions were done because of an unnecessary confusion on the state of Clear: They have no bearing on this new Grade Chart and so have been deleted. TWO additional HCOBs have been written by me, HCOB 12 Dec. 81, THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART, and HCOB 14 Dec. 81, THE STATE OF CLEAR. This new Grade Chart as follows is for use at once. A full new Grade Chart will be issued later. NEW GRADE CHART 0. Introductory and Assist actions as commonly used in orgs and by auditors on new pcs. 1. PURIFICATION RD. 2. OBJECTIVES as required. 3. SCIENTOLOGY DRUG RD. (OPTIONAL, only for those who need it per the sections in this HCOB on DRDs and PROGRAMING; HCOB 31 May 77, LSD, YEARS AFTER THEY HAVE "COME OFF OF" LSD; HCOB 28 Aug. 68 II, DRUGS; and HCOB 23 Sept. 68, DRUGS AND TRIPPERS.) 4. EXPANDED ARC STRAIGHTWIRE GRADE (Quad). 5. EXPANDED GRADE 0 (Quad). 6. EXPANDED GRADE I (Quad). 7. EXPANDED GRADE II (Quad). 8. EXPANDED GRADE III (Quad). 9. EXPANDED GRADE IV (Quad). 10. NED DRUG RD. 11. NED. 12. If goes Clear on NED, CLEAR CERTAINTY RUNDOWN. 13. SUNSHINE RUNDOWN if goes Clear on NED. 13A. If not cleared on NED goes to an AO for Clearing Course. 14. SOLO AUDITOR COURSE whether Clear or not (or Class 0-IV Academy courses, prior to Solo Auditor Course). INTRODUCTORY AND ASSIST ACTIONS It is quite common for auditors and orgs to give introductory or demonstration sessions. There are several of these: They have been issued under various names including "Life Repair." They should not be excluded from the Chart. Group Processing comes under this category, despite the real gains it can give. Division 6s often have counseling services which, although they can be done at any time, should be mentioned at this level. Assists are, quite often, the first auditing a pc gets and while most assists can be done at any time (excluding R3R or NED on Clears or above) they should not be omitted. OPTIONAL OR CONDITIONAL STEPS Objectives During the period of coming off drugs, Objectives are needed. For pcs who cannot follow commands, Objectives are needed. Purification in many cases has to be accompanied with auditing on Objectives to permit withdrawal. Purification, on a heavy druggie, should be followed by Objectives. This is a matter of C/S programing. The C/S should estimate the case and use or omit Objectives as indicated on an individual programing basis. Registrars are forbidden to C/S and when the Purification is done (or when they sell it) simply state that it should be accompanied or followed by personal auditing. And Reges should sell intensives. The Reg can show the Grade Chart and say where it goes but should state- must state-that what is given is up to the C/S. A low OCA, right or left, indicates a need of Objectives. This means that C/Ses can either program the case for Objectives (optional) or straight onto Scn Drug RD (optional) or Expanded Straightwire (not optional) and lower grades (not optional) and NED DRD (not optional) and NED. The TRs and Objectives Co-audit Course serves to give the preclear a full battery of Objective Processes as well as case gain from doing TRs 0-9 and the experience and wins of auditing another. Scientology DRD or NED DRD The programing and delivery of drug rundowns is done per the section on programing included in this bulletin, and with full use of the data contained in the following key HCOBs and the issues they reference: HCOB 15 July 71RDIII C/S Series 48RE Rev. 8.4.88 NED Series 9RC DRUG HANDLING HCOB 21 Dec. 80R THE SCIENTOLOGY DRUG RUNDOWN Rev. 20.4.90 HCOB 31 May 77 LSD, YEARS AFTER THEY HAVE "COME OFF OF" LSD HCOB 28 Aug. 68 II DRUGS HCOB 23 Sept. 68 DRUGS AND TRIPPERS Green Form 40 Expanded Programing and use of the Green Form 40 Expanded as an optional or conditional step in handling cases is covered in: HCOB 8 Dec. 78R II GREEN FORM AND EXPANDED GREEN FORM 40RF, USE OF Rev. 27.6.88 Happiness RD The Happiness RD can be fitted-according to the case-before or after lower grades, before or after NED, or before or after Clear. BUT to get OPTIMUM results from it, as clearly proven by pilot, is just before lower grades and after Objectives. So that is where it really belongs on the Grade Chart and where it would be done by most of those moving up the Bridge. And people whohaven't had Purification or any needed drug handling and Objectives don't do too well on it. It should not be run, of course, in the Non-Interference Zone. It even works brilliantly on OTs! The Happiness RD is the most popular RD. But it won't run, of course, on a person who needs a Purification. And it won't run on someone who needs Objectives before he can follow auditing commands at all. A C/S has to know what any RD is supposed to do. Method One Word Clearing Method One is strongly recommended for students, auditors and anyone who wants to recover his past education and increase his ability to study. Ideally it would be done after Objectives and before the NED Drug RD or NED, although it can be done at any point on the Grade Chart and on all cases, including Clears and OTs. There is one exception to this: It is NOT delivered to those in the Non-Interference Zone (THAT ZONE BETWEEN THE START OF NEW OT I AND THE COMPLETION OF OT III, FOR THOSE WHO WENT CLEAR ON NED, OR FROM THE BEGINNING OF R6EW TO THE COMPLETION OF OT III, FOR THOSE WHO DID NOT GO CLEAR ON NED). As an HGC audited action, Method One is delivered in orgs and missions. The Method One Co-audit may be done at orgs. Method One is necessary in order to be a fast flow student, and is required before doing Academy training or OEC, per: HCOB/PL 25 Sept. 79RB Word Clearing Series 34 Rev. 1.7.85 METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING PTS RDs and PTS Handlings The data under this section heading which appeared in the earlier versions of this HCOB was written by another. It included false, misleading statements which lead to only "patch-up" (quickie) type PTS handlings or no PTS handling being done at all in some orgs and areas. Specifically, the former statement that PTS RDs and handlings are done only "to a point where the PTS condition will no longer block case progress or cause roller coaster" infers that this is the EP of all PTS RDs or handlings, which is a false datum. A second statement limited delivery of the PTS RD, which contains R3RA, to those at the level of NED on the Grade Chart. The various actions and rundowns for handling PTSness, with their EPs, are covered in the following key issues: HCOB 27 July 76 PTS RUNDOWN AND VITAL INFO RD POSITION CORRECTED HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING Rev. 26.7.86 HCOB 31 Dec. 78RAIII EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD HANDLING: PTS C/S-1 Rev. 21.3.89 HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79 PTS INTERVIEWS HCO PL 27 Oct. 64R POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE Rev. 15.11.87 HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING Rev.10.9.83 HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING HCOB 8 Mar. 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS HCOB 10 Sept. 83 PTSness AND DISCONNECTION HCOB 24 Nov. 65 SEARCH AND DISCOVERY HCOB 9 Dec. 71RD PTS RUNDOWN, AUDITED Rev. 28.3.89 HCOB 17 Apr. 72R C/S Series 76R Rev. 20.12.83 C/Sing A PTS RUNDOWN HCOB 29 Dec. 78R THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN, A MAGICAL NEW RUNDOWN Rev. 20.12.83 HCOB 30 Dec. 78R SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN PROBLEMS PROCESSES Rev. 6.1.79 HCOB 24 Jan. 77 TECH CORRECTION ROUNDUP HCOB 6 Aug. 65 QUALIFICATIONS TECHNICAL ACTIONS These rundowns and handlings are not assigned to a specific point on the Grade Chart as they are used when a PTS condition is encountered. C/Ses, auditors, HCOs and Quals must be fully conversant with these and must ensure their correct use in handling PTSness terminatedly when it occurs. Int Rundowns The INTERIORIZATION RD or the END OF ENDLESS INT RD are the remedies used to stabilize a pc after exteriorization and permit him to be audited further. Programing and handling is done per the following issues: HCOB 4 Jan. 71R Int RD Series 2 Rev. 24.9.78 EXTERIORIZATION AND HIGH TA HCOB 24 Sept. 78RB I Int RD Series 4RB Rev. 4.2.89 THE END OF ENDLESS INT REPAIR RUNDOWN HCOB 17 Dec. 71RB Int RD Series 15 Rev. 24.9.78 C/S Series 23RB INTERIORIZATION SUMMARY which gives a full list of references on the subject. STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED Anyone who is Clear should be actively moving on up to the next higher levels on the Grade Chart. If this is not happening, if the Clear is moving very slowly or stopped in his progress, HCOB 27 Mar. 84, C/S Series 119, STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED, provides a full array of handlings that may be done to assist the Clear to get unstuck from any point of possible hang-up. Not the least of the actions are Sec Checking and the handling of false purposes. Any of the services provided would be C/Sed for by a Case Supervisor qualified to handle Clears, and none of the actions C/Sed would include NED or any form of Dianetics, as Dianetics is not to be run on Clears. An org with stalled Clears in its field should be making full use of this technology in order to assist the individual Clear himself and, as well, to unjam the flow in the area for which the org is responsible. PROGRAMING Cases divide up into four general groups: Case 1: ON DRUGS, will go through withdrawal-Needs Objectives and Purification at same time. Then up the Chart. Case 2: HAS BEEN ON DRUGS. OCA BELOW CENTER LINE ON RIGHT OR LEFT. Needs Purification, Objectives before can respond well to think processes or auditing commands. Then up full Chart. Happiness RD before NED. Case 3 : NO HEAVY DRUGS. OCA MIDDLE RANGE. Purification, Objectives, Expanded Straightwire, Lower Grades, Happiness RD, NED on up. Case 4: OCA ALL IN THE UPPER HALF OF GRAPH. NO HEAVY DRUG HISTORY. Purification optional, ARC Straightwire, Expanded Lower Grades, Happiness RD, NED, etc. Public in this last case group who have read The Way to Happiness can come in and go right onto the Happiness Rundown and on up the Bridge. (This is one of the major routes for public into the org.) Reges must not sell the pc a program. A Reg sells auditing. Person wants a certain rundown-Reg only has to say, "Good, you'll get it," and the C/S, informed, can put it on the program in its proper place. Refunds came from nondelivery or misprograming. As all cases are not in the same state, one cannot run them all on the same program. A raw pc can have every RD there is but not in a sequence that will not match his case. Pcs will turn up who have had a Happiness RD in a mission who need Objectives. Pcs will turn up who have had intro services or assists. One simply notes it and doesn't repeat or overrun those processes. Pcs will turn up who need repair of earlier auditing. Pcs will appear who have had Book One auditing. Each needs his own program. That is all the business of the C/S, not the Reg. The Reg can tell the pc all about this RD or that but must always say "I am here to be sure you obtain enough hours so you can receive what you want. It is up to the Technical staff to give your case individual programing. We know where you want to go, the C/S will be told and we are here to help you get there. Not all cases are the same and the Tech staff will tailor your program to fit you. The rundown you have requested will be on that program. We want you to get the maximum obtainable benefit from it and that is done by preparation. If you cooperate, we will do the best we can." __________ If you show them the routes you can stress individual programing. Every pc likes individual attention. The honest fact is that a Grade Chart can give only the big pattern one should travel. How to get the pc up it is between the C/S and the pc's individual case. There is no Royal Road that has an exact starting point for every pc. There is a series of wins that people can attain and these are in a proper sequence of case levels. A Grade Chart is the sequence for all cases but cases start at different points when they begin to ascend it. And so a C/S has to use it that way. __________ ALTERNATE CLEAR ROUTE Please note that at (12) on the above list provision begins to be made for those who do not go Clear on NED. The Clear Certainty Rundown is not given to someone who has not gone Clear on NED. (13) the Sunshine Rundown, is also not given to those who do not go Clear on NED. Instead of these two (12 and 13), the person can go on to an Advanced Org for his Clearing Course. But, please note, whether a person goes Clear on NED or not, it is planned that he can begin his Solo Auditor's Course (necessary for OT steps) in his home org. Part I of the Solo Auditor's Course can be begun right after the Sunshine Rundown or not having gone Clear; and Part II, completing it, can be done in an SH or AO. L. RON HUBBARD Founder Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations ======================== 7. HCOB 8 Sep 78R MINI LIST OF GRADE 0-IV PROCESSES HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 8 SEPTEMBER 1978RB REVISED 16 NOVEMBER 1987 Remimeo Level 0-IV Checksheets Supervisors Auditors C/Ses MINI LIST OF GRADE 0-IV PROCESSES SPECIAL NOTE: The list below is by no means a complete list of Grade 0-IV Processes. Many, many processes exist on the Grades 0-IV on which a preclear should be audited to achieve the full end phenomena (ability gained) for each of the Expanded Grades. The following is a MINI LIST of Grade 0-IV Processes. On each of the Academy Levels, toward the end of each checksheet, the student auditor studies the HCOBs listed for each process and thoroughly drills the process before auditing it. He audits each process on this list for the level he is on. Each major Grade Process is followed by a Havingness Process. Each Grade Process that is run on a meter must be checked for a read before it is run and, if not reading, it is not run at that time. (Ref: HCOB 23 June 80RA, Rev. 25.10.83, CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES PROCESSES) This HCOB can also serve as a checklist of processes run on a pc. The auditor places a copy of this HCOB in the pc's folder, and as each process or flow is run to EP it is clearly marked off with the date. 1. ARC STRAIGHTWIRE PROCESS (Ref. HCOB 27 Sept. 68 II, ARC STRAIGHTWIRE) SW F1 1. RECALL A TIME THAT WAS REALLY REAL TO YOU. WHAT WAS IT? 2. RECALL A TIME YOU WERE IN GOOD COMMUNICATION WITH SOMEONE. WHAT WAS IT? 3. RECALL A TIME YOU REALLY FELT AFFINITY FOR SOMEONE. WHAT WAS IT? 4. RECALL A TIME YOU KNEW YOU UNDERSTOOD SOMEONE. WHAT WAS IT? (Run consecutively, i.e., 1,2,3,4,1,2, etc., to EP) SW F2 1. RECALL A TIME THAT WAS REALLY REAL TO ANOTHER. WHAT WAS IT? 2. RECALL A TIME SOMEONE WAS IN GOOD COMMUNICATION WITH YOU. WHAT WAS IT? 3. RECALL A TIME SOMEONE REALLY FELT AFFINITY FOR YOU. WHAT WAS IT? 4. RECALL A TIME ANOTHER KNEW HE/SHE UNDERSTOOD YOU. WHAT WAS IT? (Run consecutively, i.e., 1,2,3,4,1,2, etc., to EP.) SW F3 1. RECALL A TIME THAT WAS REALLY REAL FOR OTHERS. WHAT WAS IT? 2. RECALL A TIME OTHERS WERE IN GOOD COMMUNICATION WITH OTHERS. WHAT WAS IT? 3. RECALL A TIME OTHERS REALLY FELT AFFINITY FOR OTHERS. WHAT WAS IT? 4. RECALL A TIME OTHERS KNEW THEY UNDERSTOOD OTHERS. WHAT WAS IT? (Run consecutively, i.e., 1,2,3,4,1,2, etc., to ER) SW F0 1. RECALL A TIME THAT YOU MADE SOMETHING REALLY REAL TO YOURSELF. WHAT WAS IT? 2. RECALL A TIME YOU WERE IN GOOD COMMUNICATION WITH YOURSELF. WHAT WAS IT? 3. RECALL A TIME YOU REALLY FELT AFFINITY FOR YOURSELF. WHAT WAS IT? 4. RECALL A TIME YOU KNEW YOU UNDERSTOOD YOURSELF. WHAT WAS IT? (Run consecutively, i.e., 1,2,3,4,1,2, etc., to EP.) 2. ARC STRAIGHTWIRE HAVINGNESS SWH F1 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING THAT IS REALLY REAL TO YOU. (Run repetitively to EP.) SWH F2 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD REALLY BE REAL TO ANOTHER. (Run repetitively to EP.) SWH F3 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE REALLY REAL TO OTHERS. (Run repetitively to EP.) SWH F0 FIND SOMETHING IN OR ON YOURSELF THAT WOULD BE REALLY REAL TO YOU. (Run repetitively to EP.) 3. GRADE 0 PROCESSES (Ref. HCOB I I Dec. 64, SCIENTOLOGY 0 PROCESSES HCOB 26 Dec. 64, ROUTINE 0A [EXPANDED]) A. ROUTINE 0-0 00 F1 1. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING FOR ME TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT? 2. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO TELL YOU ABOUT THAT? (Run alternately to EP.) 00 F2 1. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO TALK TO ME ABOUT? 2. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL ME ABOUT THAT? (Run alternately to EP.) 00 F3 1. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING FOR ME TO TALK TO OTHERS ABOUT? 2. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO TELL THEM ABOUT THAT? (Run alternately to EP.) 00 F0 1. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO TALK TO YOURSELF ABOUT BECAUSE OF ME? 2. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ABOUT THAT? (Run alternately to EP.) B. ROUTINE 0A The auditor makes a list of things people generally can't talk to easily. That includes parents, policemen, governments and God. But it's a far longer list. The auditor must compile this list himself or herself out of session. It may be added to by the auditor from time to time. It must never be published as a "canned list." Scientology Instructors and Scientology personnel should not be listed on it as it leads to upset in sessions. The list is assessed on the pc and the longest reading item is used in all four flows of 0A as given below. Then the remaining items are taken up and run in the same way, in order of largest read, until all reading items have been run. Each reading item is run on all four flows before the next reading item is run in the process. On any items that are not reading, put in the Suppress and Invalidate buttons. 0A F1 1. IF (chosen subject) COULD TALK TO YOU, WHAT WOULD HE/SHE TALK ABOUT? (Pc answers one or more things at greater or shorter length. When the pc seems satisfied the question has been answered, the auditor then says:) 2. ALL RIGHT, IF (chosen subject WERE TALKING TO YOU ABOUT THAT, WHAT WOULD HE/SHE SAY, EXACTLY? (The pc is expected to give what would be said as though he were the subject in 1, talking.) (Run 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP) 0A F2 1. IF YOU COULD TALK TO (chosen subject), WHAT WOULD YOU TALK ABOUT? (Pc answers one or more things at greater or shorter length. When the pc seems satisfied the question has been answered, the auditor then says:) 2. ALL RIGHT, IF YOU WERE TALKING TO (chosen subject) ABOUT THAT, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY, EXACTLY? (The pc is expected to speak as though talking to the subject chosen in 1.) (Run 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP) 0A F3 1. IF OTHERS COULD TALK TO (chosen subject) WHAT WOULD THEY TALK ABOUT? (Pc answers one or more things at greater or shorter length. When the pc seems satisfied the question has been answered, the auditor then says:) 2. ALL RIGHT, IF OTHERS WERE TALKING TO (chosen subject) ABOUT THAT WHAT WOULD THEY SAY, EXACTLY? (The pc is expected to speak as though he were the the others talking to the chosen subject.) (Run 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP) 0A F0 1. IF YOU COULD TALK TO YOURSELF ABOUT (chosen subject) WHAT WOULD YOU TALK ABOUT? (Pc answers one or more things at greater or shorter length. When the pc seems satisfied the question has been answered, the auditor then says:) 2. ALL RIGHT, IF YOU WERE TALKING TO YOURSELF ABOUT (chosen subject) WHAT WOULD YOU SAY, EXACTLY? (The pc is expected to speak as though talking to himself about the subject chonsen in 1.) (Run 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP) C. ROUTINE 0B The auditor makes a list (not from the pc but himself) of everything he can think of that is banned for any reason from conversation or is not generally considered acceptable for social communication. This includes nonsocial subjects like sexual experiences, water closet details, embarrassing experiences, thefts one has done, etc. Things nobody would calmly discuss in mixed company. The list is assessed on the pc and the largest reading subject is run in all four flows of 0B. Then the next largest reading subject is run in all four flows, followed by the rest of the reading subjects in order of largest read. On any subjects that are not reading, put in the Suppress and Invalidate buttons. 0B F1 1. WHAT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO HAVE SOMEONE ELSE TELL YOU ABOUT ____? (When the pc has "run down" [as in clocks] ask:) 2. WHO ELSE COULD HE OR SHE SAY THOSE THINGS TO? (Continue running 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP.) 0B F2 1. WHAT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TELL ME ABOUT ____? (When the pc has "run down" [as in clocks] ask:) 2. WHO ELSE COULD YOU SAY THOSE THINGS TO? (Continue running 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP.) 0B F3 1. WHAT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO HAVE OTHERS TELL OTHERS ABOUT ____? (When the pc has "run down" [as in clocks] ask:) 2. WHO ELSE COULD THEY SAY THOSE THINGS TO? (Continue running 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP.) 0B F0 1. WHAT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TELL YOURSELF ABOUT ____? (When the pc has "run down" [as in clocks] ask:) 2. WHO ELSE COULD YOU SAY THOSE THINGS TO? (Continue running 1 and 2 per above instructions, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP.) 4. GRADE 0 HAVINGNESS 0H F1 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING YOU COULD TOUCH. (Run repetitively to EP.) 0H F2 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING ANOTHER COULD TOUCH. (Run repetitively to EP.) 0H F3 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING OTHERS COULD TOUCH. (Run repetitively to EP.) 0H F0 FIND SOMETHING IN OR ON YOURSELF YOU COULD TOUCH. (Run repetitively to EP.) 5. GRADE I PROCESSES CCHs 1-4 (Ref. HCOB 5 Apr. 62, CCHs, AUDITING ATTITUDE HCOB 12 Apr. 62, CCHs, PURPOSE HCOB 2 Aug. 62, CCH ANSWERS HCOB 7 Aug. 62, RUNNING CCHs HCOB 1 Dec. 65, CCHs) NOTE: CCHs 1-4 are run per the instructions in HCOB I Dec. 65 as follows: CCH I to a flat point, then CCH 2 to a flat point, then CCH 3 to a flat point, then CCH 4 to a flat point, then CCH I to a flat point, etc. CCH 1 (GIVE ME THAT HAND. Tone 40.) Auditor and pc are seated in chairs without arms. Auditor's knees are on outside of both pc's knees. Auditor runs the following command: GIVE ME THAT HAND. (Run to a flat point.) CCH 2 (TONE 40 8C.) Auditor and pc ambulant, auditor in physical contact with pc as needed. Auditor runs the following commands: 1. YOU LOOK AT THAT WALL. THANK YOU. 2. YOU WALK OVER TO THAT WALL. THANK YOU. 3. YOU TOUCH THAT WALL. THANK YOU. 4. TURN AROUND. THANK YOU. (Run l,2,3,4,I,2,3,4,l,2, etc., to a flat point.) CCH 3 (HAND SPACE MIMICRY.) Auditor and pc seated, close together facing each other, pc's knees between auditor's knees. Auditor raises two hands, palms facing pc's, about an equal distance between the auditor and pc and says: 1. PUT YOUR HANDS AGAINST MINE, FOLLOW THEM AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION. He then makes a simple motion with right hand then left. Auditor asks pc: 2. DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION? Auditor acknowledges answer. (Run 1,2,1,2,1,2, etc., to a flat point.) On succeeding runs through CCHs 1-4, the auditor does this same thing with a half inch of space between his and the pc's palms. The command is: 1. PUT YOUR HANDS FACING MINE ABOUT 1/2 INCH AWAY, FOLLOW THEM AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION. He then makes a simple motion with right hand then left. Auditor asks pc: 2. DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR MOTION? Auditor acknowledges answer. When this is flat, auditor does it with a wider space on each succeeding run through CCHs 1-4 until pc is able to follow motions a yard away. CCH 4 (BOOK MIMICRY.) There are no set verbal commands to CCH 4. Auditor and pc are seated facing each other, a comfortable distance apart. Auditor makes simple motions with a book. Hands book to pc. Pc makes motion, duplicating auditor's motion mirror- imagewise. Auditor asks pc if he is satisfied that the pc duplicated the motion. If pc is and auditor is also fully satisfied, auditor takes back the book and goes to next command. If pc is not sure that he duplicated any command, auditor repeats it for him and gives him back the book. (Run to a flat point.) (Once CCH 4 has been run to a flat point, auditor starts back again with CCH 1. CCHs 1-4 are then run as follows: CCH 1 to a flat point, then CCH 2 to a flat point, then CCH 3 to a flat point, then CCH 4 to a flat point, then CCH 1 to a flat point, etc., to EP.) 6. GRADE I PROBLEMS PROCESS (Ref. HCOB 19 Nov. 65, PROBLEMS PROCESS) 1 F1 1. WHAT PROBLEM HAVE YOU HAD WITH SOMEONE? 2. WHAT SOLUTIONS HAVE YOU HAD FOR THAT PROBLEM? (Get the pc to give the problem, then run TA off solutions. Then a new statement of the problem and more questions about solutions. Run it 1,2,2,2,2, 1,2,2,2, etc., to EP.) 1 F2 1. WHAT PROBLEM HAS ANOTHER HAD WITH YOU? 2. WHAT SOLUTIONS HAS ANOTHER HAD FOR THAT PROBLEM? (Run as above in F1, to EP.) 1 F3 1. WHAT PROBLEM HAVE OTHERS HAD WITH OTHERS? 2. WHAT SOLUTIONS HAVE THEY HAD FOR THAT PROBLEM? (Run as above in F1, to EP.) 1 F0 1. WHAT PROBLEM HAVE YOU HAD WITH YOURSELF? 2. WHAT SOLUTIONS HAVE YOU HAD FOR THAT PROBLEM? (Run as above in F1, to EP.) 7. GRADE I HAVINGNESS 1H F1 1. THINK OF A SPACE. 2. NOTE TWO OBJECTS. (Run alternately to EP.) 1H F2 1. THINK OF ANOTHER'S SPACE. 2. NOTE TWO OBJECTS. (Run alternately to EP.) 1H F3 1. THINK OF THE SPACE OF OTHERS. 2. NOTE TWO OBJECTS. (Run alternately to EP.) 1H F0 1. THINK OF YOUR OWN SPACE. 2. NOTE TWO OBJECTS. (Run alternately to EP.) 8. GRADE II CONFESSIONAL PROCESSING Using the technology covered in HCOB 30 Nov. 78R, CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE, and other references on his course checksheet, the student delivers Confessional processing to a preclear, as programed by the C/S. 9. GRADE II O/W PROCESS (Ref. HCOB 4 Feb. 60, THEORY OF RESPONSIBILITY PROCESSING) 2 F1 1. WHAT HAS ANOTHER DONE TO YOU? 2. WHAT HAS ANOTHER WITHHELD FROM YOU? (Run alternately to EP.) 2 F2 1. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO ANOTHER? 2. WHAT HAVE YOU WITHHELD FROM ANOTHER? (Run alternately to EP.) 2 F3 1. WHAT HAVE OTHERS DONE TO OTHERS? 2. WHAT HAVE OTHERS WITHHELD FROM OTHERS? (Run alternately to EP.) 2 F0 1. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO YOURSELF? 2. WHAT HAVE YOU WITHHELD FROM YOURSELF? (Run alternately to EP.) 10. GRADE II HAVINGNESS 2H F1 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING YOU'RE NOT WITHHOLDING. (Run repetitively to EP.) 2H F2 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING ANOTHER IS NOT WITHHOLDING. (Run repetitively to EP.) 2H F3 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING OTHERS ARE NOT WITHHOLDING. (Run repetitively to EP.) 2H F0 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING YOU'RE NOT WITHHOLDING FROM YOURSELF. (Run repetitively to EP.) 11. GRADE III PROCESS - R3H (Ref, HCOB 6 Aug. 68, R3H HCOB 1 Aug. 68, THE LAWS OF LISTING AND NULLING) 3 F1 1. Locate a change in life by listing to an F/N item or BD F/N item: WHAT CHANGE HAS ANOTHER CAUSED IN YOUR LIFE? 2. Get it dated. 3. Get some of the data of it (don't run as an engram) so you know what the change was. 4. Find out by assessment if this was a break in: Affinity ____ Reality ____ Communication or ____ Understanding ____ Get the best reading item and check it with the pc, asking if it was a break in (affinity, reality, communication or understanding). If he says no, rehandle. If yes, let him tell you about it if he wishes. Then indicate it to him. 5. Taking the one found in (4) find out by assessment if it was: Curious about ____ Desired ____ Enforced ____ Inhibited ____ No ____ Refused ____ As in (4) above, get the item and check it with the pc. If pc says that isn't right, rehandle. If yes, let him tell you about it if he wishes. Then indicate it to him. (Run as above.) 3 F2 List to an F/N item or BD F/N item: WHAT CHANGE HAVE YOU CAUSED IN ANOTHER'S LIFE? (Handle with steps 1-5 as above.) 3 F3 List to an F/N item or BD F/N item: WHAT CHANGE HAVE OTHERS CAUSED IN OTHERS' LIVES? (Handle with steps 1-5 as above.) 3 F0 List to an F/N item or BD F/N item: WHAT CHANGE HAVE YOU CAUSED IN YOUR OWN LIFE? (Handle with steps 1-5 as above.) 12. GRADE III HAVINGNESS 3H F1 WHAT IS STILL? (Run repetitively to EP.) 3H F2 WHAT WOULD ANOTHER THINK IS STILL? (Run repetitively to EP.) 3H F3 WHAT WOULD OTHERS THINK IS STILL? (Run repetitively to EP.) 3H F0 WHAT IS STILL IN OR ON YOURSELF? (Run repetitively to EP.) 13. GRADE IV PROCESS - R3SC (Ref. HCOB 6 Sept. 78 111, ROUTINE THREE SC-A, FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS HCOB I Sept. 63, ROUTINE THREE SC HCOB 6 Sept. 78 11, SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS) NOTE: The questions listed below are not a full list of all possible listing and nulling questions which can be run on a preclear to find and handle service facsimiles. Others may be found in HCOB 14 Nov. 87 VI, EXPANDED GRADE IV PROCESS CHECKLIST. For certification on Level IV, all that is required is that the student show success on auditing someone on the process as given below. I. Fully clear the terms "computation" and "service facsimile." Make sure the pc understands that a service facsimile is a computation to make self right and others wrong, to dominate or escape domination and enhance own survival and injure that of others. The pc must grasp that what is being asked for in this process is a computation, not a beingness, doingness or havingness. II. Clear and list (listing and nulling) the following listing question to an F/N item or BD F/N item: a. IN THIS LIFETIME, WHAT DO YOU USE TO MAKE OTHERS WRONG? III. Run the service facsimile found on the brackets exactly per HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III, ROUTINE THREE SC-A, FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS: 1. IN THIS LIFETIME, HOW WOULD ____ MAKE YOU RIGHT? 2. IN THIS LIFETIME, HOW WOULD ____ MAKE OTHERS WRONG? (Run to EP as described below.) 3. IN THIS LIFETIME, HOW WOULD ____ HELP YOU ESCAPE DOMINATION? 4. IN THIS LIFETIME, HOW WOULD ____ HELP YOU TO DOMINATE OTHERS? (Run to EP as described below.) 5. IN THIS LIFETIME, HOW WOULD ____ AID YOUR SURVIVAL? 6. IN THIS LIFETIME, HOW WOULD ____ HINDER THE SURVIVAL OF OTHERS? (Run to EP as described below.) These are run as follows: Give the pc the first question, "In this lifetime, how would (service fac) make you right?" and let him run with it. He will have a rush of answers, answers coming too fast to be said easily, at this stage. Don't repeat the question unless the pc needs it. Just let him answer (he may give you as many as 50 answers) until he comes to a cognition or runs out of answers or inadvertently answers question 2. Then switch to question 2: "In this lifetime, how would (service fac) make others wrong?" Treat this the same way, i.e., let him answer 2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2 until he cognites or runs out of answers or starts to answer question 1. Then switch back to question 1, same handling, back to question 2, same handling, as long as pc has answers coming easily. Upon cognition and F/N, acknowledge, indicate the F/N and end off on I and 2. Now give him question 3: "In this lifetime, how would (service fac) help you escape domination?" and let it run by the same method as above. When this seems cooled off, use question 4: "In this lifetime, how would (service fac) help you to dominate others?" Use questions 3 and 4 as above, as long as pc has answers coming easily. Upon cognition and F/N, acknowledge, indicate the F/N and go on to the next bracket. Using the same method as above, give him question 5: "In this lifetime, how would (service fac) aid your survival?" When he's run out on 5-5-5-5-5-5, switch to question 6: "In this lifetime, how would (service fac) hinder the survival of others?" Use questions 5 and 6 as above as long as pc has answers coming easily. Let him get off all the autornaticities and come to a cognition and F/N. Acknowledge and indicate the F/N. NOTE: If the item found on the service facsimile list did not run on any of the brackets, you must prepcheck it to EP (F/N, cognition, VGIs, release) using HCOB 7 Sept. 78R, MODERN REPETITIVE PREPCHECKING. IV. Repeat steps II and III, using the following listing questions one at a time in step 11: b. IN THIS LIFETIME, WHAT DO YOU USE TO DOMINATE OTHERS? (Run the item per step III, to EP.) C. IN THIS LIFETIME, WHAT DO YOU USE TO AID YOUR OWN SURVIVAL? (Run the item per step III, to EP.) d. IN THIS LIFETIME, WHAT DO YOU USE TO MAKE YOURSELF RIGHT? (Run the item per step III, to EP.) e. IN THIS LIFETIME, WHAT DO YOU USE TO ESCAPE DOMINATION? (Run the item per step III, to EP.) f. IN THIS LIFETIME, WHAT DO YOU USE TO HINDER THE SURVIVAL OF OTHERS? (Run the item per step III, to EP.) 14. GRADE IV HAVINGNESS 4H F1 WHAT COULD ANOTHER MAKE CONNECT WITH YOU? (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F2 WHAT COULD YOU MAKE CONNECT WITH ANOTHER? (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F3 WHAT COULD OTHERS MAKE CONNECT WITH OTHERS? (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F4 WHAT COULD YOU MAKE CONNECT WITH YOU? (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F5 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY SURE WILL BE HERE FOR ____ (auditor extends time bit by bit). (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F6 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING ANOTHER WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN WOULD BE HERE FOR ____ (auditor extends time). (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F7 LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING OTHERS WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN WOULD BE HERE FOR ____ (auditor extends time). (Run repetitively to EP.) 4H F8 FIND SOMETHING IN OR ON YOURSELF YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN WILL BE HERE FOR ____ (auditor extends time). (Run repetitively to EP.) __________ An auditor must not and cannot be required by anyone to audit processes above his class. L. RON HUBBARD Founder Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations LRH:RTRC:ldv.bk.dk.gm