Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [1/7]
Datum: 24 Nov 1999 00:44:43 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FreeZone Bible Association Tech Post

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 1 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

 =TABLE OF CONTENTS=

PART 1 (this file)

0a. Table of Contents

0b. Academy Level 4 Checksheet

PART 2

 1. HCO PL  7 Feb. 1965      Keeping Scientology Working
                             Keeping Scientology Working Series 1

 2. HCO PL 17 June 1970RB    Technical Degrades
                             Keeping Scientology Working Series 5R

 3. HCO PL 23 Oct. 1980R II  Chart of Abilities Gained for Lower
                             Level and Expanded Lower Grades

 4. HCOB    8 June 1970      Low TA Handling

 5. HCOB    6 Nov. 1964      Styles of Auditing

PART 3

 6. HCO PL 27 Oct. 1964R     Policies on Physical Healing,
                             Insanity and Sources of Trouble

 7. HCO PL  7 Aug. 1965      Suppressive Persons,
                             Main Characteristics Of

 8. HCO PL  5 Apr. 1965      Handling the Suppressive Person,
                             The Basis of Insanity

 9. HCOB   27 Sept 1966      The Antisocial Personality,
                             the Anti-Scientologist

PART 4

10. HCOB   31 Dec. 1978R III Educating the Potential Trouble
                             Source, The First Step Toward
                             Handling: PTS C/S-1

11. HCO PL 20 Oct. 1981R     PTS Type A Handling

12. HCOB   24 Apr. 1972 I    PTS Interviews
                             C/S Series 79
                             Expanded Dianetics Series 5

13. HCOB   10 Aug. 1973      PTS Handling

14. HCOB    8 Mar. 1983      Handling PTS Situations

15. HCOB   16 Apr. 1982      More on PTS Handling

16. HCOB   10 Sept 1983      PTSness and Disconnection

PART 5

17. HCOB   24 Nov. 1965      Search and Discovery

18. HCOB   28 Jan. 1966      Search and Discovery Data, How a
                             Suppressive Becomes One

19. HCOB    5 Feb. 1966      S and D Warning

20. HCOB   10 June 1966 II   S&D -- The Missed Item

21. HCOB   19 Jan. 1968      S&Ds by Button

22. HCOB   19 Nov. 1978      L&N Lists -- the Item "Me"

23. HCO PL 20 Oct. 1976RA    PTS Data

24. HCOB   31 Dec. 1978RA II Outline of PTS Handling

25. HCOB   21 May  1985      Two Types of PTSes
                             C/S Series 121
                             FPRD Series 11

26. HCOB    7 July 1964      Justifications

27. HCOB    8 July 1964      More Justifications

PART 6

28. HCOB   22 July 1963      You Can Be Right

29. HCOB    1 Sept 1963      Routine Three SC

30. HCOB    5 Sept 1978      Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

31. HCOB    6 Sept 1978 II   Service Facsimiles and Rock Slams

32. HCOB    6 Sept 1978 III  Routine Three SC-A
                             Full Service Facsimile Handling
                             Updated with New Era Dianetics

PART 7

33. HCOB    8 Sept 1978RB    Mini List of Grade 0-IV Processes

34. HCOB   14 Nov. 1987      Expanded Grade IV Process Checklist



******************************************************************

0b. Academy Level 4 Checksheet

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

 HCO POLICY LETTER OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1978RC
                Issue V
        REVISED 21 NOVEMBER 1987

Remimeo
Scn Orgs
Academies
Level IV Students

    (Revised to update the course with
    additional LRH materials and practical
    actions. Revisions not in script.)

         SCIENTOLOGY LEVEL IV
     STANDARD ACADEMY CHECKSHEET
    HUBBARD ADVANCED AUDITOR (HAA)

"THE ACADEMY LEVELS CONTAIN SOME OF THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL
DISCOVERIES REGARDING LIFE AND THE HUMAN MIND THAT HAVE EVER BEEN
DISCOVERED IN THE HISTORY OF THIS UNIVERSE. THEY ARE A BASIC,
SWEEPING TRAINING GROUND IN HANDLING LIFE AND PEOPLE." -LRH

NAME:________________________ORG:_________________________
POST:_____________________________________________________
DATE STARTED: _______________DATE COMPLETED:______________

This checksheet contains the vital survival knowledge of
Scientology Level IV technology. It deals with the technology of
"rightness and wrongness," the fixed solution or service facsimile
and its handling.

PREREQUISITES:  1. The Student Hat
                2. A Professional TR Course
                3. Provisional Class III
                4. Method One Word Clearing

(Method One Word Clearing is a prerequisite for training at this
level, except where waived by a qualified C/S as covered in HCO PL
25 Sept. 79RB 11, Rev. 1.7.85, METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING.)

STUDY TECH: Study tech is to be applied in full throughout this
course. The materials are to be studied and drilled in sequence. By
initialing the blank after each checksheet entry, you are attesting
that you fully understand and can apply the data.  DRILLS ARE TO BE
DONE FULLY TO THEIR RESULT. If you are not a fast flow student, you
must star-rate check out on all items marked with an asterisk (*).
(Ref: HCOB 13 Aug. 72RA, FAST FLOW TRAINING) The course does not
require twinning.

BASIC TEXTS:
  Books: Handbook for Preclears
         The Book of E-Meter Drills
         Advanced Procedure and Axioms
         Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary
  Hubbard Advanced Auditor course pack
  Level IV Academy lectures

The student must have these books, course pack and lectures.

The student also must have his own E-Meter, as it will be needed
during this course to do the required drills and auditing.

You are required to maintain a standard course schedule. Study and
work during your class periods and outside of class. You have a lot
to study and get checked out on in order to complete this course.
You can't afford to waste time. You may be credited with materials
you have studied on previous checksheets.

TECHNICAL TRAINING FILMS:

"THE TECHNICAL TRAINING FILMS ARE DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY TO CLARIFY
AND GREATLY IMPROVE AND SPEED THE TRAINING OF AUDITORS." -LRH

These LRH films can help you achieve a high level of skill and
certainty as an auditor and are a vital part of Academy training.
Before you may graduate from this course, each of the films
assigned to it is viewed along with the student body in regularly
scheduled showings.

You must also have seen all films assigned to earlier courses
before completing this checksheet.

You may view each film as many times as needed to ensure you have
fully grasped the tech presented in it. Viewing these films more
than once is recommended: Number of times over the material equals
certainty and results.

After the first viewing of a single film, you must be word cleared
on that film before viewing it again or viewing the next film.

PRODUCT: A Hubbard Advanced Auditor who is able to audit others to
Grade IV Ability Release standardly.

CERTIFICATE: On completion of this checksheet you may be awarded a
provisional HUBBARD ADVANCED AUDITOR certificate. A provisional
certificate is only valid for one year unless validated by
successful completion of the Class IV Internship.

LENGTH OF COURSE: 2 weeks full time.

=================================================================
SECTION A: ORIENTATION

_____ 1. HCO PL 7 Feb. 65 - KSW Series 1 KEEPING SCIENTOLOGY
         WORKING

_____ 2. HCO PL 17 June 70RB, Re-rev. 25.10.83 - KSW Series 5R
         TECHNICAL DEGRADES

=================================================================
SECTION B: TECHNICAL TRAINING FILMS

(NOTE: The films assigned to this course and its prerequisite
courses, along with any drills called for in those films, are
listed in a directive issued to Course Administrators.)

1. (To be done before the end of this course.) View any films
assigned to courses which are prerequisites for this course that
you have not already viewed. Any drill that is specified in a
particular film is to be done after viewing that film. These films
and their drills are to be filled in by the Course Administrator.

      a. Film:____________________________________
_____ To be viewed before the end of this course.
_____ Drill:______________________________________

      b. Film:____________________________________
_____ To be viewed before the end of this course.
_____ Drill:______________________________________

      c. Film:____________________________________
_____ To be viewed before the end of this course.
_____ Drill:______________________________________

      d. Film:____________________________________
_____ To be viewed before the end of this course.
_____ Drill:______________________________________

2. The Course Administrator fills in the films assigned to this
course in the blanks provided below before you begin this
checksheet. The point on the checksheet where each film should be
viewed is also filled in, as well as any drill called for in that
film. Any drill that is specified in a particular film is to be
done after viewing that film.

If a film is not scheduled for showing when you reach the indicated
point on your checksheet, continue on with your study and see the
film at its next scheduled showing.

Once you have viewed and been word cleared on a film, put your
initials and the date in the blanks provided next to each film's
title.  When you do any drill called for in that film, put your
initials and date in the blank provided.

      a. Film:_____________________________________
_____ To be viewed while studying section _________.
_____ Drill:_______________________________________

      b. Film:_____________________________________
_____ To be viewed while studying section _________.
_____ Drill:_______________________________________

      c. Film:_____________________________________
_____ To be viewed while studying section _________.
_____ Drill:_______________________________________

      d. Film:_____________________________________
_____ To be viewed while studying section _________.
_____ Drill:_______________________________________

=================================================================
SECTION C: CLASS IV AND GRADE IV

_____*1. CLASSIFICATION, GRADATION AND AWARENESS CHART OF LEVELS
         AND CERTIFICATE - Class IV Auditor section and Grade IV
         Expanded section.

_____ 2. HCO PL 23 Oct. 80R II, Rev. 16.11.87 - CHART OF ABILITIES
         GAINED FOR LOWER LEVELS AND EXPANDED LOWER GRADES

_____ 3. DEMO: The Abilities Gained for Grade IV.

=================================================================
SECTION D: HANDBOOK FOR PRECLEARS

_____ 1. Chapter: "How to Use This Book"

_____ 2. Chapter: "On the State of Man"

_____ 3. Chapter: "An Ideal State of Being"

_____ 4. Chapter: "The Goals of Man"

_____ 5. Chapter: "The Human Mind"

_____ 6. DEMO: What a facsimile is.

_____ 7. Chapter: "The Control Center"

_____ 8. DEMO: How the control center ("I") operates in its
         environment using the body and mind.

_____ 9. Chapter: "Emotion"

_____ 10. Chapter: "Processing"

_____ 11. Chapter: "Processing Section (The First Act)"

_____ 12. CHART OF ATTITUDES (contained in the back of the book)

_____ 13. Chapter: "The Second Act"

_____ 14. Chapter: "The Third Act"

_____ 15. Chapter: "The Fourth Act"

_____ 16. DEMO: The liability of having one's attention either too
          fixed or too unfixed.

_____ 17. Chapter: "The Fifth Act"

_____ 18. DEMO: Why someone's troubles, from a physical standpoint,
          apparently stem from moments when they tried to help and
          failed.

_____ 19. Chapter: "The Sixth Act"

_____ 20. Chapter: "The Seventh Act"

_____ 21. Chapter: "The Eighth Act"

_____ 22. Chapter: "The Ninth Act"

_____ 23. DEMO: How the counter-emotion of one person can affect
          another person's facsimiles.

_____ 24. Chapter: "The Tenth Act"

_____ 25. Chapter: "The Eleventh Act"

_____ 26. Chapter: "The Twelfth Act"

_____ 27. Chapter: "The Thirteenth Act"

_____ 28. DEMO: What can happen to a person's facsimiles if he
          blames others for being cause.

_____ 29. Chapter: "The Fourteenth Act"

_____ 30. Chapter: "The Fifteenth Act"

=================================================================
SECTION E: METERING

_____*1. HCOB 8 June 70 - LOW TA HANDLING

_____ 2. DEMO: How poor TRs or rough auditing can cause a pc to
         have a low TA.

_____ 3. DRILL: Do the following E-Meter drills per The Book of
         E-Meter drills. The Course Supervisor will issue pink
         sheets for any earlier E-Meter drills observed to be out.

_____ a. E-Meter Drill 12: "Needle Actions"
_____ b. E-Meter Drill 19: "Instant Reads"
_____ c. E-Meter Drill 20: "How to Dirty and Clean a Needle"
_____ d. E-Meter Drill 24: "Assessment by Instant Read"
_____ e. E-Meter Drill 26: "Differentiation Between Sizes of Needle
         Reads"

=================================================================
SECTION F: STYLES OF AUDITING

_____*1. HCOB 6 Nov. 64 - STYLES OF AUDITING (Section headed LEVEL
         IV, DIRECT-STYLE AUDITING)

_____ 2. DEMO: What is meant by "Direct-Style Auditing"?

=================================================================
SECTION G: PTS/SP DATA

_____*1. HCO PL 27 Oct. 64R, Rev. 15.11.87 - POLICIES ON PHYSICAL
         HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE

      2. DEMO: Each of the sources of trouble (a-j).
_____ a.
_____ b.
_____ c.
_____ d.
_____ e.
_____ f.
_____ g.
_____ h.
_____ i.
_____ j.

_____ 3. HCO PL 7 Aug. 65 - SUPPRESSIVE PERSONS, MAIN
         CHARACTERISTICS OF

_____*4. HCO PL 5 Apr. 65 - HANDLING THE SUPPRESSIVE PERSON,
         THE BASIS OF INSANITY

_____ 5. CLAY DEMO: A suppressive person.

_____ 6. Tape: 6608C02 SH Spec-73 - SUPPRESSIVES AND GAEs

_____*7. HCOB 27 Sept. 66 - THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY, THE
         ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST

      8. DEMO:
      a. Each of the 12 characteristics of the antisocial
         personality.

         1_____   5_____    9_____

         2_____   6_____   10_____

         3_____   7_____   11_____

         4_____   8_____   12_____

      b. Each of the 12 characteristics of the social personality.

         1_____   5_____    9_____

         2_____   6_____   10_____

         3_____   7_____   11_____

         4_____   8_____   12_____

_____*9. HCOB 31 Dec. 78R III, Rev. 26.7.86 - EDUCATING THE
         POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD
         HANDLING: PTS C/S-1

_____ 10. DEMO: The purpose of the PTS C/S-1.

_____ 11. HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R, Rev. 10.9.83 - PTS TYPE A HANDLING

_____ 12. DEMO: Why it is important to write up a program for a
          person to handle his PTS situation and how you would
          handle the person if there was any BI on the program,
          including the program not getting done.

_____*13. HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I - C/S Series 79, Expanded Dianetics
          Series 5, PTS INTERVIEWS

_____ 14. DRILL: A PTS interview on a doll. Coach answers for the
          doll and holds the cans, squeezing them to simulate
          reads. Any flunk is handled by reference to the exact
          LRH material violated. The drill is passed when the
          student has demonstrated he can do a standard PTS
          interview.

_____*15. HCOB 10 Aug. 73 - PTS HANDLING

_____ 16. DRILL: On a doll, drill a PTS handling per HCOB 10 Aug.
          73. Coach answers for the doll and holds the cans,
          squeezing them to simulate reads. Flunks are handled by
          reference to the exact LRH material violated. The drill
          is passed when the student has demonstrated that he can
          do a standard PTS handling per HCOB 10 Aug. 73.

_____*17. HCOB 8 Mar. 83 - HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS

_____ 18. DEMO: How a PTS Type A can be coached through a handling.

_____*19. HCOB 16 Apr. 82 - MORE ON PTS HANDLING

_____ 20. DEMO: How one could become PTS to a class.

_____ 21. DRILL: PTS Type A handling on a doll. Coach makes up a
          PTS Type A situation and answers for the doll. Student
          must handle as per the issues in this checksheet
          section, including drawing up a program for handling
          the situation found and following up to ensure the
          handling is actually effectively done. Flunks are
          handled by reference to the exact LRH material violated.
          The drill is passed when the student has demonstrated he
          can do a standard PTS Type A handling.

_____*22. HCOB 10 Sept. 83 - PTSness AND DISCONNECTION

      23. DEMO:
_____ a. How to handle an antagonistic source.
_____ b. When disconnection is used.
_____ c. How to disconnect.
_____ d. The handling of a person who refuses to disconnect from
         an antagonistic source.

_____*24. HCOB 24 Nov. 65 - SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

      25. DEMO: The three types of PTS, and the handling of each.
_____ Type One
_____ Type Two
_____ Type Three

_____ 26. HCOB 28 Jan. 66 - SEARCH AND DISCOVERY DATA, HOW A
          SUPPRESSIVE BECOMES ONE

_____ 27. HCOB 5 Feb. 66 - S AND D WARNING

_____*28. HCOB 10 June 66 II - S&D-THE MISSED ITEM

_____ 29. CLAY DEMO: Illness = only PTS.

_____ 30. CLAY DEMO: What you know if a person who has had an S&D
          gets sick, and how you handle.

_____*31. HCOB 19 Jan. 68 - S&Ds BY BUTTON

_____ 32. HCOB 19 Nov. 78 - L&N LISTS-THE ITEM "ME"

      33. DRILL: Drill doing 3 S&Ds on a doll. Coach answers for
          the doll (using fruit names for items) and holds the
          cans, squeezing them to simulate reads. Any flunk is
          handled by reference to the exact LRH material violated.
          The drill is passed when the student has demonstrated
          he can do 3 S&Ds standardly, with meter and worksheets.

          Unbullbaited _____
          Bullbaited   _____

_____*34. HCO PL 20 Oct. 76RA, Rev. 25.8.87 - PTS DATA

_____ 35. DEMO: Why a full PTS handling includes having the PTS
          study the PTS/SP Checksheet.

_____ 36. HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II, Rev. 26.7.86 - OUTLINE OF PTS
          HANDLING

_____ 37. HCOB 21 May 85 - C/S Series 121, FPRD Series II,
          TWO TYPES OF PTSes

_____ 38. DEMO: The handling a C/S would program a pc for if the
          pc said he was PTS to a well-intentioned person.

=================================================================
SECTION H: JUSTIFIED O/Ws

      1. Word clear (using the Technical Dictionary) and demo the
         following:
_____ a. a DED
_____ b. a DEDEX

_____ 2. HCOB 7 July 64 - JUSTIFICATIONS

_____ 3. HCOB 8 July 64 - MORE JUSTIFICATIONS

_____ 4. DEMO: The mechanism of the justification of overts.

=================================================================
SECTION I: ADVANCED PROCEDURE AND AXIOMS

_____ 1. Introduction

_____ 2. Chapter: "Self-Determinism Processing"

_____ 3. DEMO: How an individual can become the effect of his own
         causes.

_____ 4. Chapter: "Justice"

_____ 5. Chapter: "The Role of the Auditor"

_____ 6. Chapter: "The Evolution of Man"

_____ 7. Chapter: "Advanced Procedure"

_____ 8. Chapter: "Thought"

_____ 9. Chapter: "Emotion"

_____ 10. Chapter: "Effort"

_____ 11. Chapter: "Effort Processing"

_____ 12. DEMO: How the amount of effort a pc has been overcome by
          determines his position on the tone scale.

_____ 13. Chapter: "Postulates"

_____ 14. Chapter: "Evaluation"

_____ 15. Chapter: "Types of Cases"

_____ 16. Chapter: "Computations"

_____ 17. Chapter: "Service Facsimiles"

_____ 18. DEMO: How a preclear uses a service facsimile to
          apologize for his failures.

_____ 19. DEMO: The anatomy of a service facsimile.

_____ 20. Chapter: "Past Problems"

_____ 21. Chapter: "Future Goals"

_____ 22. Chapter: "The Emotional Curve"

_____ 23. DEMO: The emotional curve.

_____ 24. Chapter: "An Analysis of Self-Determinism"

_____ 25. Chapter: "Responsibility"

_____ 26. DEMO: Full responsibility.

_____ 27. DEMO: What rationalization is.

_____ 28. Chapter: "Cause and Effect"

_____ 29. Chapter: "Definitions, Logics and Axioms"

_____ 30. Chapter: "The Logics"

_____ 31. Chapter: "Axioms"

=================================================================
SECTION J: SERVICE FACSIMILES

_____*1. HCOB 22 July 63 - YOU CAN BE RIGHT

_____ 2. Tape: 6308C27 SHSBC-299 - RIGHTNESS AND WRONGNESS

_____*3. HCOB 1 Sept. 63 - ROUTINE THREE SC

_____ 4. Tape: 6309C03 SHSBC-302A - R3SC

_____ 5. Tape: 6309C04 SHSBC-302 - HOW TO FIND A SERVICE FACSIMILE

_____ 6. CLAY DEMO: A computation.

_____ 7. CLAY DEMO: A service facsimile.

_____ 8. Tape: 6309C05 SHSBC-303 - SERVICE FACSIMILE ASSESSMENT

_____ 9. Tape: 6309CI2 SHSBC-305 - SERVICE FACSIMILES

_____ 10. DEMO: How a service facsimile is a substitute confront.

_____ 11. Tape: 6309CI8 SHSBC-308 - SAINT HILL SERVICE FACSIMILE
          HANDLING

_____*12. HCOB 5 Sept. 78 - ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FACSIMILE

_____*13. HCOB 6 Sept. 78 II - SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS

_____ 14. DEMO: The relationship between a service facsimile and
          an R/S.

_____*15. HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III - ROUTINE THREE SC-A, FULL SERVICE
          FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS

_____ 16. DEMO: The procedure for handling a service facsimile.
          Note: This is not to include the handling of service
          facsimiles by New Era Dianetics.

_____ 17. HCOB 8 Sept. 78RB, Rev. 16.11.87 - MINI LIST OF GRADE
          0-IV PROCESSES (13,14)

      18.
       a. Study the commands for #13 in HCOB 8 Sep. 78RB and drill
          it on a doll with full session setup. Coach answers for
          the doll and holds the cans, squeezing them to simulate
          reads. On any flunk, the coach shows the student the
          exact LRH reference violated. The drill is passed when
          the student can standardly run the process with the
          meter and keep session admin.

          Unbullbaited _____
          Bullbaited   _____

       b. Study the commands for #14 in HCOB 8 Sep. 78RB and drill
          it on a doll with full session setup. Coach answers for
          the doll and holds the cans, squeezing them to simulate
          reads. On any flunk, the coach shows the student the
          exact LRH reference violated. The drill is passed when
          the student can standardly run the process with the
          meter and keep session admin.

          Unbullbaited _____
          Bullbaited   _____

=================================================================
SECTION K: EXPANDED GRADE IV

_____ 1. HCOB 14 Nov. 87 VI - EXPANDED GRADE IV PROCESS CHECKLIST

=================================================================
SECTION L: STUDENT THEORY COMPLETION

1. STUDENT ATTEST:

The following attest is to be signed off, point by point, before
the student begins auditing
Grade IV processes.

If the student has any reservation or question about attesting to
any of the points below, he should retread himself in that area.

Only when the student has acquired these skills without question
will he or she achieve good results on Grade IV processes.

I attest that:

_____ a. I know and can fully apply the study tech given in the
         Student Hat.
_____ b. I have applied the study tech of the Student Hat fully
         while on this course.
_____ c. I have seen and I understand all Technical Training Films
         assigned to the Professional TR Course and Academy Levels
         0-IV.
_____ d. I understand the E-Meter and know how to use it with
         precision.
_____ e. I have acquired excellent TRs 0-9 by drilling each to its
         EP.
_____ f. I fully understand the Laws of L&N and can apply them.
_____ g. I understand the materials on PTSness and SPs and can
         apply them.
_____ h. I understand and can deliver a metered PTS interview
         standardly.
_____ i. I understand and can deliver a standard PTS C/S-1.
_____ j. I have, without question, a good grasp of the materials on
         service facsimiles and can apply them.
_____ k. I can assess for and find a service facsimile.
_____ l. I can confidently run a service facsimile in the brackets.
_____ m. I understand the theory and rules regarding checking
         questions on Grade processes and can apply them.

2. CONDITIONAL:

If the student has not completed Method One Word Clearing, an
examination is fully passed in Qual on the materials of this
checksheet.

STUDENT EXAMINER: _____________________________DATE: ____________

=================================================================
SECTION M: STUDENT AUDITING

The student now begins student auditing of Grade IV processes.  Pcs
are procured per HCO PL 8 June 70RC II, STUDENT AUDITING.

The student must not and cannot be required by anyone to audit
processes above his training level. Where upper-level processes are
necessary for a case, upper-level students should be called upon to
audit the actions.

NOTE: YOU ARE NOW QUALIFIED TO BEGIN CO-AUDITING OF EXPANDED GRADE
IV (WITH C/S OK), AND MAY DO SO IF YOU WISH. YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED
TO AUDIT THE EXPANDED GRADE IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THIS CHECKSHEET.

Ref. HCOB 8 Sept. 78RB, Rev. 16.11.87 - MINI LIST OF GRADE 0-IV
PROCESSES

_____ 1. PRACTICAL: Audit #13 per HCOB 8 Sept. 78RB on a pc to
         completely satisfactory results by exam report and C/S
         attest.

_____ 2. PRACTICAL: Audit #14 per HCOB 8 Sept. 78RB on a pc to
         completely satisfactory results by exam report and C/S
         attest.

_____ 3. CONDITIONAL: Get any errors or misunderstandings on the
         standard application of the materials of Level IV
         reviewed and corrected.

4. ATTESTATIONS:

I attest that I have successfully fulfilled the auditing
requirements for certification on Level IV, as given above.

STUDENT ATTEST: _______________________________DATE: ____________

I attest this student has successfully fulfilled the Level IV
auditing requirements for certification, as given above, and has
demonstrated his competence in auditing the style of this level.

SUPERVISOR ATTEST: ____________________________DATE: ____________

STUDENT C/S ATTEST: ___________________________DATE: ____________

=================================================================
SECTION N: STUDENT COURSE COMPLETION

1. STUDENT COMPLETION:

I have completed the requirements of this checksheet and I know and
can apply this material.

STUDENT ATTEST: _______________________________DATE: ____________

I have trained this student to the best of my ability and he has
completed the requirements of this checksheet and knows and can
apply the checksheet data.

SUPERVISOR ATTEST: ____________________________DATE: ____________

2. STUDENT ATTESTATION AT C&A:

I attest: (a) I have enrolled on the course, (b) I have paid for
the course, (c) I have studied and understand all the materials on
the checksheet, (d) I have done all the drills on this checksheet,
(e) I can produce the results required in the materials of the
course.

STUDENT ATTEST: _______________________________DATE: ____________

C&A: __________________________________________DATE: ____________

3. STUDENT INFORMED RE: CERTIFICATE VALIDATION BY C&A:

I hereby attest that I have informed the student:

a. that to make his provisional certificate permanent he will have
to be interned within one year, and

b. that the skills and techniques of delivering special rundowns,
unraveling the more difficult cases and spotting errors in auditing
are available on the Hubbard Class IV Graduate Course.

C&A: __________________________________________DATE: ____________

4. CERTS AND AWARDS:

This graduate has been issued a certificate of HUBBARD ADVANCED
AUDITOR (Provisional).

C&A: __________________________________________DATE: ____________

(Route this form to the Course Administrator for filing in the
student's folder.)


L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL
LRH:CSI: RTRC: dr.bk.fa.rw.gm

(The directions, drills and study assignments which make up this
course checksheet were written by LRH Technical Research and
Compilations staff.  The compilation of this checksheet was done
according to specific LRH advices on what materials should be on
this course, as well as LRH policies and instructions which
prescribe the standard format for course checksheets.)



Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [2/7] Repost [x2]
Datum: 26 Nov 1999 22:43:25 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 2 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 2

 1. HCO PL  7 Feb. 1965      Keeping Scientology Working
                             Keeping Scientology Working Series 1

 2. HCO PL 17 June 1970RB    Technical Degrades
                             Keeping Scientology Working Series 5R

 3. HCO PL 23 Oct. 1980R II  Chart of Abilities Gained for Lower
                             Level and Expanded Lower Grades

 4. HCOB    8 June 1970      Low TA Handling

 5. HCOB    6 Nov. 1964      Styles of Auditing

******************************************************************

1. HCO PL  7 Feb. 1965       Keeping Scientology Working
                             Keeping Scientology Working Series 1

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

  HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 FEBRUARY 1965

Remimeo
Sthil Students
Assoc/Org Sec Hat
HCO Sec Hat
Case Sup Hat
Ds of P Hat
Ds of T Hat
Staff Member Hat
Franchise

   Keeping Scientology Working Series 1

Note: Neglect of this PL 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 EXECUTIVES. 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 FUNDAMENTAL 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 Assoc 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 I 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-abnegation 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 organizations 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-
and-Aed 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 0 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 straightened 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 someday 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

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:CSI:jw.rr.nt.ka.mes.rd.bk.gm



******************************************************************

2. HCO PL 17 June 1970RB     Technical Degrades
                             Keeping Scientology Working Series 5R

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

   HCO POLICY LETTER OF 17 JUNE 1970RB
       RE-REVISED 25 OCTOBER 1983

Remimeo
Applies to all
  SHs and
  Academies
HGCs
Franchises

      Keeping Scientology Working Series 5R

             URGENT AND IMPORTANT

              TECHNICAL DEGRADES

   (This PL and HCO PL 7 Feb. 65 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 investigation 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 I Sept. 1970 any checksheet for any course not
authorized by myself or the Authority, Verification and Correction
Unit International (AVC Int).

(Hat checksheets may be authorized locally per HCO PL 30 Sept. 70,
CHECKSHEET FORMAT.)

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 considerations.

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 completions and auditing completions was mistakenly
answered by just not delivering.

The correct way to speed up a student's progress is by using two-
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

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:CSI:iw.gm



******************************************************************

3. HCO PL 23 Oct. 1980R II   Chart of Abilities Gained for Lower
                             Level and Expanded Lower Grades

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

 HCO POLICY LETTER OF 23 OCTOBER 1980R
               Issue II
       REVISED 16 NOVEMBER 1987

     (Also issued as HCO Bulletin,
        same title, same date.)

Remimeo
Tech/Qual
Execs
C/Ses
KOTs
Auditors
Reges
Examiners
Qual Secs
HCO
C & A

        CHART OF ABILITIES GAINED
        FOR LOWER LEVELS AND
        EXPANDED LOWER GRADES

   Refs:
   CLASSIFICATION, GRADATION AND AWARENESS CHART
   HCOB 11 Nov. 73    PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE
   HCOB 12 Dec. 81    THE THEORY OF THE NEW GRADE CHART
   LRH ED 107 Int     ORDERS TO DISVISIONS FOR
                      IMMEDIATE COMPLIANCE

Expanded Grades are attested to by the pc declaring the full
statement of the Ability Gained for all four flows.

The chart given below lists the Ability Gained for each of the
lower levels, the four flows of the Expanded Grades 0-IV and for
New Era Dianetics.

It is used by the Examiner when a pc is sent to "Declare?" The
Examiner has the pc read the entire statement for the Ability
Gained for that Grade (including all four flows) or level and
must accept only the pc declaring the full statement for the
Ability Gained.

Declare procedure is done exactly as stated in HCOB 11 Nov. 73,
PRECLEAR DECLARE? PROCEDURE.

LEVEL                       ABILITY GAINED

GROUP PROCESSES             Awareness that change is available.

LIFE REPAIR                 Awareness of truth and the way to
                            personal freedom.

PURIFICATION RUNDOWN        Freedom from the restimulative effects
                            of drug residuals and other toxins.

OBJECTIVES                  Oriented in the present time of the
                            physical universe.

SCIENTOLOGY DRUG RUNDOWN    Released from harmful effects of
                            drugs, medicine or alcohol.

EXPANDED ARC STRAIGHTWIRE   Knows he/she won't get worse.

EXPANDED GRADE 0
 COMMUNICATIONS RELEASE

  FLOW 1:                   Willing for others to communicate
                            to him on any subject. No longer
                            resisting communication from others on
                            unpleasant or unwanted subjects.

  FLOW 2:                   Ability to communicate freely with
                            anyone on any subject. Free from or
                            no longer bothered by communication
                            difficulties. No longer withdrawn or
                            reticent. Likes to outflow.

  FLOW 3:                   Willing for others to communicate
                            freely to others about anything.

  FLOW 0:                   Willingness to permit oneself to
                            communicate freely about anything.

EXPANDED GRADE I
 PROBLEMS RELEASE

  FLOW 1:                   No longer worried about problems others
                            have been to self. Ability to recognize
                            the source of problems and make them
                            vanish. Has no problems.

  FLOW 2:                   No longer worried about problems he has
                            been to others. Feels free about any
                            problems others may have with him and
                            can recognize source of them.

  FLOW 3:                   Free from worry about others' problems
                            with or about others, and can recognize
                            source of them.

  FLOW 0:                   Free from worry about problems with self
                            and can recognize the source of them.

EXPANDED GRADE II
 RELIEF RELEASE

  FLOW 1:                   Freedom from things others have done to
                            one in the past. Willing for others to
                            be cause over him.

  FLOW 2:                   Relief from the hostilities and
                            sufferings of life. Ability to be at
                            cause without fear of hurting others.

  FLOW 3:                   Willing to have others be cause over
                            others without feeling the need to
                            intervene for fear of their doing
                            harm.

  FLOW 0:                   Relief from hostilities and sufferings
                            imposed by self upon self.

EXPANDED GRADE III
 FREEDOM RELEASE

  FLOW 1:                   Freedom from upsets of the past. Ability
                            to face future. Ability to experience
                            sudden change without becoming upset.

  FLOW 2:                   Can grant others the beingness to be
                            the way they are and choose their own
                            reality. No longer feels need to
                            change people to make them more
                            acceptable to self. Able to cause
                            changes in another's life without ill
                            effects.

  FLOW 3:                   Freedom from the need to prevent or
                            become involved in the change and
                            interchange occurring amongst others.

  FLOW 0:                   Freedom from upsets of the past one
                            has imposed upon oneself and ability
                            to cause changes in one's own life
                            without ill effects.

EXPANDED GRADE IV
 ABILITY RELEASE

  FLOW 1:                   Free from and able to tolerate others'
                            fixed ideas, justifications and make-
                            guilty of self. Free of need to respond
                            in a like manner.

  FLOW 2:                   Moving out of fixed conditions into
                            ability to do new things. Ability to
                            face life without need to justify own
                            actions or defend self from others.
                            Loss of make-guilty mechanisms and
                            demand for sympathy. Can be right or
                            wrong.

  FLOW 3:                   Can tolerate fixed conditions of
                            others in regard to others. Freedom
                            from involvement in others' efforts to
                            justify, make guilty, dominate, or be
                            defensive about their actions against
                            others.

  FLOW 0:                   Ability to face life without need to
                            make self wrong. Loss of make-self-
                            guilty mechanisms and self-invalidation.

NEW ERA DIANETICS           Freedom from harmful effects of
 DRUG RUNDOWN               drugs, alcohol and medicine and free
                            from the need to take them.

NEW ERA DIANETICS           A well and happy preclear.
 CASE COMPLETION

For a person who attains    A being who no longer has his own
the State of Clear on NED   reactive mind.
and is sent to Examiner
following the Clear
Certainty RD:

L. RON HUBBARD
FOUNDER

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:CSI:TRRC:bk.ahg.gm



******************************************************************

4. HCOB    8 June 1970      Low TA Handling

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JUNE 1970

Remimeo

             LOW TA HANDLING

A person whose TA is low is in a state of overwhelm.

Poor TRs or rough auditing easily drive the TA down.

A TA can go low during a run like on engrams, and can come back
up when actual erasure occurs.

Usually a person whose TA goes below 2.0 when run on incidents
too steep for him will get low TA.

A low TA is of course any TA below 2.0.

An occasional cause of this is as simple as the meter not being
trimmed.

Sweaty hands, improper electrodes and sometimes a faulty meter
also cause a "low TA" to appear.

Heavy processes like LX 1-2-3 are sometimes an overwhelm.

An invalidative look on an Examiner's face can drive a TA down a
bit. Cold cans can send it UP high. Lack of rest or time of the
day gives some cases a low or high TA. At 2:00 A.M. TAs often are
very high, for instance.

Persons with low TAs tend to be somewhat inactive in life and
noncausative.

When audited with poor TRs or on processes too steep, some
persons' TAs go low (below 2.0).

An F/N is NEVER an F/N when above 3.0 or below 2.0.

Life repairs and auditing repairs, light processes and no-goof
auditing are the proper actions for low TA cases.

Auditors whose pcs' TAs go low should look to the flawlessness of
their auditing, the ease of their TRs and refuse any heavy
overwhelm-type C/Ses for such pcs.

Good two-way comm on troubling subjects, use of prepared lists on
life, mild close-to Objective Processes, no forcing over
protests, never running processes that don't read first, getting
the pc out of being effect and toward being cause, extroverting
the pc's attention with Objective Processes, all work well on low
TA cases.

The actual technical reason for low TAs is found in higher levels
and does not concern and would be of no use to lower-level pcs.

Take it easy. Don't goof as auditor or C/S are the keynotes of
low TA cases.

My opinion on this is that people worry too much about low TAs.

On Flag where auditing is done like silk, we haven't seen any low
TAs for ages.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:dz.rd.jh.gm



******************************************************************

5. HCOB    6 Nov. 1964       Styles of Auditing

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 6 NOVEMBER 1964

Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students

           STYLES OF AUDITING

  Note 1: Most old-time auditors, particularly Saint
  Hill graduates, have been trained at one time or
  another in these auditing styles. Here they are
  given names and assigned to levels so that they
  can be taught more easily and so that general
  auditing can be improved.

  Note 2: These have not been written before because
  I had not determined the results vital to each level.

There is a style of auditing for each class. By style is meant a
method or custom of performing actions.

A style is not really determined by the process being run so
much. A style is how the auditor addresses his task.

Different processes carry different style requirements perhaps,
but that is not the point. Clay Table Healing at Level III can be
run with Level I style and still have some gains. But an auditor
trained up to the style required at Level III would do a better
job not only of Clay Table Healing but of any repetitive process.

Style is how the auditor audits. The real expert can do them all,
but only after he can do each one. Style is a mark of class. It
is not individual. In our meaning, it is a distinct way to handle
the tools of auditing.

                LEVEL 0
             LISTEN STYLE

At Level 0 the style is listen-style auditing. Here the auditor
is expected to listen to the pc. The only skill necessary is
listening to another. As soon as it is ascertained that the
auditor is listening (not just confronting or ignoring), the
auditor can be checked out. The length of time an auditor can
listen without tension or strain showing could be a factor. What
the pc does is not a factor considered in judging this style.
Pcs, however, talk to an auditor who is really listening.

Here we have the highest point that old-time mental therapies
reached (when they did reach it), such as psychoanalysis, when
they helped anyone. Mostly they were well below this, evaluating,
invalidating, interrupting. These three things are what the
Instructor in this style should try to put across to the HAS
student.

Listen style should not be complicated by expecting more of the
auditor than just this: Listen to the pc without evaluating,
invalidating or interrupting.

Adding on higher skills like "Is the pc talking interestingly? or
even "Is the pc talking?" is no part of this style. When this
auditor gets in trouble and the pc won't talk or isn't
interested, a higher-classed auditor is called in, a new question
given by the Supervisor, etc.

It really isn't "itsa" to be very technical. Itsa is the action
of the pc saying "It's a this" or "It's a that." Getting the pc
to itsa is quite beyond listen-style auditors, where the pc
won't. It's the Supervisor or the question on the blackboard that
gets the pc to itsa.

The ability to listen, learned well, stays with the auditor up
through the grades. One doesn't cease to use it even at Level VI.
But one has to learn it somewhere and that's at Level 0. So
listen-style auditing is just listening. It thereafter adds into
the other styles.

               LEVEL I
          MUZZLED AUDITING

This could also be called rote-style auditing.

Muzzled auditing has been with us many years. It is the stark
total of TRs 0 to 4 and not anything else added.

It is called so because auditors too often added in comments, Q-
and-Aed, deviated, discussed and otherwise messed up a session.
Muzzle meant a "muzzle was put on them," figuratively speaking,
so they would only state the auditing command and ack.

Repetitive command auditing, using TRs 0 to 4, at Level I is done
completely muzzled.

This could be called muzzled repetitive auditing style but will
be called "muzzled style" for the sake of brevity.

It has been a matter of long experience that pcs who didn't make
gains with the partially trained auditor permitted to two-way
comm did make gains the instant the auditor was muzzled: to wit,
not permitted to do a thing but run the process, permitted to say
nothing but the commands and acknowledge them and handle pc
originations by simple acknowledgment without any other question
or comment.

At Level I we don't expect the auditor to do anything but state
the command (or ask the question) with no variation, acknowledge
the pc's answer and handle the pc origins by understanding and
acknowledging what the pc said.

Those processes used at Level I actually respond best to muzzled
auditing and worst to misguided efforts to "two-way comm."

Listen style combines with muzzled style easily. But watch out
that Level I sessions don't disintegrate to Level 0.

Crisp, clean repetitive commands, muzzled, given and answered
often, are the road out -- not pc wanderings.

A pc at this level is instructed in exactly what is expected of
him, exactly what the auditor will do. The pc is even put through
a few "do birds fly?" cycles until the pc gets the idea. Then the
processing works.

An auditor trying to do muzzled repetitive auditing on a pc who,
through past "therapy experience," is rambling on and on is a sad
sight. It means that control is out (or that the pc never got
above Level 0).

It's the number of commands given and answered in a unit of
auditing time that gets gains. To that add the correctly chosen
repetitive process and you have a Release in short order, using
the processes of this level.

To follow limp listen style with crisp, controlled muzzled style
may be a shock. But they are each the lowest of the two families
of auditing styles -- totally permissive and totally controlled.
And they are so different each is easy to learn with no
confusion. It's been the lack of difference amongst styles that
confuses the student into slopping about. Well, these two are
different enough -- listen style and muzzled style -- to set
anybody straight.

               LEVEL II
        GUIDING-STYLE AUDITING

An old-time auditor would have recognized this style under two
separate names: (a) two-way comm and (b) formal auditing.

We condense these two old styles under one new name: guiding-
style auditing.

One first guides the pc by "two-way comm" into some subject that
has to be handled or into revealing what should be handled and
then the auditor handles it with formal repetitive commands.

Guiding-style auditing becomes feasible only when a student can
do listen-style and muzzled-style auditing well.

Formerly, the student who couldn't confront or duplicate a
command took refuge in sloppy discussions with the pc and called
it auditing or "two-way comm."

The first thing to know about guiding style is that one lets the
pc talk and itsa without chop, but also gets the pc steered into
the proper subject and gets the job done with repetitive
commands.

We presuppose the auditor at this level has had enough case gain
to be able to occupy the viewpoint of the auditor and therefore
to be able to observe the pc. We also presuppose at this level
that the auditor, being able to occupy a viewpoint, is therefore
more self-determined, the two things being related. (One can only
be self-determined when one can observe the actual situation
before one: otherwise, a being is delusion-determined or other-
determined.)

Thus, in guiding-style auditing the auditor is there to find out
what's what from the pc and then apply the needful remedy.

Most of the processes in The Book of Case Remedies are included
in this level (II). To use those, one has to observe the pc,
discover what the pc is doing and remedy the pc's case
accordingly.

The result for the pc is a far-reaching reorientation in life.

Thus, the essentials of guiding-style auditing consist of two-way
comm that steers the pc into revealing a difficulty followed by a
repetitive process to handle what has been revealed.

One does expert TRs but one may discuss things with the pc, let
the pc talk and in general one audits the pc before one,
establishing what that pc needs and then doing it with crisp
repetitive auditing, but all the while alert to changes in the
pc.

One runs at this level against tone arm action, paying little or
no heed to the needle except as a centering device for TA
position. One even establishes what's to be done by the action of
the tone arm. (The process of storing up things to run on the pc
by seeing what fell when he was running what's being run, now
belongs at this level [II] and will be renumbered accordingly.)

At II one expects to handle a lot of chronic PTPs, overts, ARC
breaks with life (but not session ARC breaks, that being a needle
action, session ARC breaks being sorted out by a higher-classed
auditor if they occur).

To get such things done (PTPs, overts and other remedies) in the
session, the auditor must have a pc "willing to talk to the
auditor about his difficulties." That presupposes we have an
auditor at this level who can ask questions, not repetitive, that
guide the pc into talking about the difficulty that needs to be
handled.

Great command of TR 4 is the primary difference in TRs from Level
I. One understands, when one doesn't, by asking more questions,
and by really acknowledging only when one has really understood
it.

Guided comm is the clue to control at this level. One should
easily guide the pc's comm in and out and around without chopping
the pc or wasting session time. As soon as an auditor gets the
idea of finite result or, that is to say, a specific and definite
result expected, all this is easy. Pc has a PTP Example: Auditor
has to have the idea he is to locate and destimulate the PTP so
pc is not bothered about it (and isn't being driven to do
something about it) as the finite result.

The auditor at II is trained to audit the pc before him, get the
pc into comm, guide the pc toward data needful to choose a
process and then to run the process necessary to resolve that
thing found, usually by repetitive command and always by TA.

The Book of Case Remedies is the key to this level and this
auditing style.

One listens but only to what one has guided the pc into. One runs
repetitive commands with good TR 4. And one may search around for
quite a while before one is satisfied he has the answer from the
pc needful to resolve a certain aspect of the pc's case.

O/W can be run at Level I. But at Level II one may guide the pc
into divulging what the pc considers a real overt act and, having
that, then guide the pc through all the reasons it wasn't an
overt and so eventually blow it.

Half-acknowledgment is also taught at Level II -- the ways of
keeping a pc talking by giving the pc the feeling he is being
heard and yet not chopping with overdone TR 2.

Big or multiple acknowledgment is also taught to shut the pc off
when the pc is going off the subject.

              LEVEL III
       ABRIDGED-STYLE AUDITING

By abridged is meant "abbreviated," shorn of extras. Any not
actually needful auditing command is deleted.

For instance, at Level I the auditor always says, when the pc
wanders off the subject, "I will repeat the auditing command" and
does so. In abridged style the auditor omits this when it isn't
necessary and just asks the command again if the pc has forgotten
it.

In this style we have shifted from pure rote to a sensible use or
omission as needful. We still use repetitive commands expertly,
but we don't use rote that is unnecessary to the situation.

Two-way comm comes into its own at Level III. But with heavy use
of repetitive commands.

At this level we have as the primary process Clay Table Healing.
In this an auditor must make sure the commands are followed
exactly. No auditing command is ever let go of until that actual
command is answered by the pc.

But at the same time, one doesn't necessarily give every auditing
command the process has in its rundown.

In Clay Table Healing one is supposed to make sure the pc is
satisfied each time. This is done more often by observation than
command. Yet it is done.

We suppose at III that we have an auditor who is in pretty fine
shape and can observe. Thus, we see the pc is satisfied and don't
mention it. Thus, we see when the pc is not certain and so we get
something the pc is certain of in answering the question.

On the other hand, one gives all the necessary commands crisply
and definitely and gets them executed.

Prepchecking and needle usage is taught at Level III as well as
Clay Table Healing. Auditing by List is also taught. In abridged-
style auditing one may find the pc (being cleaned up on a list
question) giving half a dozen answers in a rush. One doesn't stop
the pc from doing so, one half-acknowledges and lets the pc go
on. One is in actual fact handling a bigger auditing comm cycle,
that is all. The question elicits more than one answer which is
really only one answer. And when that answer is given, it is
acknowledged.

One sees when a needle is clean without some formula set of
questions that invalidate all the pc's relief. And one sees it
isn't clean by the continued puzzle on the pc's face.

There are tricks involved here. One asks a question of the pc
with the key word in it and notes that the needle doesn't
tremble, and so concludes the question about the word is flat.
And so doesn't check it again. Example: "Has anything else been
suppressed?" One eye on pc, one on needle. Needle didn't quiver.
Pc looks noncommittal. Auditor says, "All right, on______" and
goes on to next question, eliminating a pc's possible protest
read that can be mistaken for another "suppress."

In abridged-style auditing one sticks to the essentials and drops
rote where it impedes case advance. But that doesn't mean one
wanders about. One is even more crisp and thorough with abridged-
style auditing than in rote.

One is watching what happens and doing exactly enough to achieve
the expected result.

By "abridged" is meant getting the exact job done -- the shortest
way between two points -- with no waste questions.

By now the student should know that he runs a process to achieve
an exact result and he gets the process run in a way to achieve
that result in the smallest amount of time.

The student is taught to guide rapidly, to have no time for wide
excursions. The processes at this level are all rat-a-tat-tat
processes -- Clay Table Healing, Prepchecking, Auditing by List.

Again it's the number of times the question is answered per unit
of auditing time that makes for speed of result.

               LEVEL IV
        DIRECT-STYLE AUDITING

By direct we mean straight, concentrated, intense, applied in a
direct manner.

We do not mean direct in the sense of to direct somebody or to
guide. We mean it is direct.

By direct, we don't mean frank or choppy. On the contrary, we put
the pc's attention on his bank and anything we do is calculated
only to make that attention more direct.

It could also mean that we are not auditing by vias. We are
auditing straight at the things that need to be reached to make
somebody Clear.

Other than this the auditing attitude is very easy and relaxed.

At Level IV we have Clay Table Clearing and we have assessment-
type processes.

These two types of process are both astonishingly direct. They
are aimed directly at the reactive mind. They are done in a
direct manner.

In Clay Table Clearing we have almost total work and itsa from
pcs. From one end of a session to another, we may have only a few
auditing commands. For a pc on Clay Table Clearing does almost
all the work if he is in-session at all.

Thus, we have another implication in the word "direct." The pc is
talking directly to the auditor about what he is making and why
in Clay Table Clearing. The auditor hardly ever talks at all.

In assessment the auditor is aiming directly at the pc's bank and
wants no pc in front of it thinking, speculating, maundering or
itsaing. Thus, this assessment is a very direct action.

All this requires easy, smooth, steel-hand-in-a-velvet-glove
control of the pc. It looks easy and relaxed as a style; it is
straight as a Toledo blade.

The trick is to be direct in what's wanted and not deviate. The
auditor settles what's to be done, gives the command and then the
pc may work for a long time, the auditor alert, attentive,
completely relaxed.

In assessment the auditor often pays no attention to the pc at
all, as in ARC breaks or assessing lists. Indeed, a pc at this
level is trained to be quiet during the assessment of a list.

And in Clay Table Clearing an auditor may be quiet for an hour at
a stretch.

The tests are, Can the auditor keep the pc quiet while assessing
without ARC breaking the pc? Can the auditor order the pc to do
something and then, the pc working on it, can the auditor remain
quiet and attentive for an hour, understanding everything and
interrupt alertly only when he doesn't understand and get the pc
to make it clearer to him? Again without ARC breaking the pc.

You could confuse this direct style with listen style if you
merely glanced at a session of Clay Table Clearing. But what a
difference. In listen style the pc is blundering on and on and
on. In direct style the pc wanders off the line an inch and
starts to itsa, let us say, with no clay work and after it was
obvious to the auditor that this pc had forgotten the clay, you'd
see the auditor, quick as a foil, look at the pc very
interestedly and say, "Let's see that in clay." Or the pc doesn't
really give an ability he wants to improve and you'd hear a quiet
persuasive auditor voice, "Are you quite certain you want to
improve that? Sounds like a goal to me. Just something, some
ability you know, you'd like to improve."

You could call this style one-way auditing. When the pc is given
his orders, after that it's all from the pc to the auditor, and
all involved with carrying out that auditing instruction. When
the auditor is assessing, it is all from the auditor to the pc.
Only when the assessment action hits a snag like a PTP is there
any other auditing style used.

This is a very extreme auditing style. It is straightforward --
direct.

But when needful, as in any level, the styles learned below it
are often also employed, but never in the actual actions of
getting Clay Table Clearing and assessment done.

(NOTE: Level V would be the same style as VI below.)

               LEVEL VI
               ALL STYLE

So far, we have dealt with simple actions.

Now we have an auditor handling a meter and a pc who itsa's and
cognites and gets PTPs and ARC breaks and line charges and
cognites and who finds items and lists and who must be handled,
handled, handled all the way.

As auditing TA for a 2 1/2-hour session can go to 79 or 125
divisions (compared to 10 or 15 for the lowest level), the pace
of the session is greater. It is this pace that makes perfect
ability at each lower level vital when they combine into all
style. For each is now faster.

So, we learn all style by learning each of the lower styles well,
and then observe and apply the style needed every time it is
needed, shifting styles as often as once every minute!

The best way to learn all style is to become expert at each lower
style so that one does the style correct for the situation each
time the situation requiring that style occurs.

It is less rough than it looks. But it is also very demanding.

Use the wrong style on a situation and you've had it. ARC break!
No progress!

Example: Right in the middle of an assessment the needle gets
dirty. The auditor can't continue -- or shouldn't. The auditor,
in direct style, looks up to see a puzzled frown. The auditor has
to shift to guiding style to find out what ails the pc (who
probably doesn't really know), then to listen style while the pc
cognites on a chronic PTP that just emerged and bothered the pc,
then to direct style to finish the assessment that was in
progress.

The only way an auditor can get confused by all style is by not
being good at one of the lower-level styles.

Careful inspection will show where the student using all style is
slipping. One then gets the student to review that style that was
not well learned and practice it a bit.

So all style, when poorly done, is very easy to remedy for it
will be in error on one or more of the lower-level styles. And as
all these can be independently taught, the whole can be
coordinated. All style is hard to do only when one hasn't
mastered one of the lower-level styles.

               SUMMARY

These are the important styles of auditing. There have been
others but they are only variations of those given in this HCO
Bulletin. Tone 40 style is the most notable one missing. It
remains as a practice style at Level I to teach fearless body
handling and to teach one to get his command obeyed. It is no
longer used in practice.

As it was necessary to have every result and every process for
each level to finalize styles of auditing, I left this until last
and here it is.

Please note that none of these styles violate the auditing comm
cycle or the TRs.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jw.rd.gm



Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [3/7] Repost [x2]
Datum: 26 Nov 1999 23:16:53 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 3 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 3

 6. HCO PL 27 Oct. 1964R     Policies on Physical Healing,
                             Insanity and Sources of Trouble

 7. HCO PL  7 Aug. 1965      Suppressive Persons,
                             Main Characteristics Of

 8. HCO PL  5 Apr. 1965      Handling the Suppressive Person,
                             The Basis of Insanity

 9. HCOB   27 Sept 1966      The Antisocial Personality,
                             the Anti-Scientologist

******************************************************************

6. HCO PL 27 Oct. 1964R     Policies on Physical Healing,
                            Insanity and Sources of Trouble

        HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
  Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

    HCO POLICY LETTER OF 27 OCTOBER 1964R
          REVISED 15 NOVEMBER 1987

Remimeo
All Staff
Missions
Academy Students
Field Auditors
FSMs

   POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY
          AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE

  Cancels and replaces:
  HCO PL 27 Oct. 64   POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING,
                      INSANITY AND "TROUBLESOME
                      SOURCES"
  HCO PL 27 Oct. 64   POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING,
     Reiss. 23.6.67   INSANITY AND POTENTIAL TROUBLE
                      SOURCES
  HCO PL 21 Feb. 69   CANCELLATION OF "CORRECTIONS TO
                      HCO POLICY LETTERS," POL LTR OF
                      NOVEMBER 5,1964
  HCO PL  7 May  69   POLICIES ON "SOURCES OF TROUBLE"

It has been the long-standing policy of Central Organizations to
handle physical illness and insanity in the following manner.

                 HEALING

Any process labeled "healing," old or new, refers to healing by
mental and spiritual means and should therefore be looked upon as
the relief of difficulties arising from mental and spiritual
causes.

The proper procedure in being requested to heal some complained-
of physical disability Is as follows:

1. Require a physical examination from whatever practitioners of
the physical healing arts may be competent and available;

2. Clearly establish that the disability does not stem from
immediately physical causes;

3. If the disability is pronounced to be curable within the skill
of the physical practitioner and is in actual fact a disease or
illness which surrenders to contemporary physical treatment, to
require the person to be so treated before Scientology processing
may be undertaken;

4. If, however, the physical practitioner's recommendation
includes surgery or treatment of an unproven nature or the
illness or disease cannot be accurately diagnosed as a specific
physical illness or disease with a known cure, the person may be
accepted for processing on the reasonable assumption that no
purely physical illness is proven to exist, and that it is
probably mental or spiritual in origin.

       POLICIES REGARDING THE INSANE

With insane persons or persons with a proven record of insanity,
do the following:

1. Establish to the best of your ability within reasonable
administrative limits and known tests that any HGC pc accepted
for processing does not have a history of deserved
institutionalization in an insane asylum or similar place;

2. Process only those persons who have no such history;

3. Do not recommend any other treatment by practitioners in the
field of insanity where there exists any evidence that such
practitioners injure, disable or maltreat patients by violently
reacting drugs, by painful shocks, surgery or other barbaric and
outdated means of "mental treatment";

4. If no recommendation is possible under (3) above, recommend
only rest and a change of environment, but not in a professional
capacity.

            SOURCES OF TROUBLE

Policies similar to those regarding physical illness and insanity
exist for types of persons who have caused us considerable
trouble.

These persons can be grouped under "sources of trouble." They
include:

a. Persons intimately connected with persons (such as marital or
familial ties) of known antagonism to mental or spiritual
treatment or Scientology. In practice such persons,' even when
they approach Scientology in a friendly fashion, have such
pressure continually brought to bear upon them by persons with
undue influence over them that they make very poor gains in
processing, and their interest is solely devoted to proving the
antagonistic element wrong.

They, by experience, produce a great deal of trouble in the long
run as their own condition does not improve adequately under such
stresses to effectively combat the antagonism. Their present time
problem cannot be reached as it is continuous, and so long as it
remains so, they should not be accepted for auditing by any
organization or auditor.

b. Criminals with proven criminal records often continue to
commit so many undetected harmful acts between sessions that they
do not make adequate case gains and therefore should not be
accepted for processing by organizations or auditors.

c. Persons who have ever threatened to sue or embarrass or attack
or who have publicly attacked Scientology or been a party to an
attack and all their immediate families should never be accepted
for processing by a Central Organization or an auditor. They have
a history of only serving other ends than case gain and commonly
again turn on the organization or auditor. They have already
barred themselves out by their own overts against Scientology and
are thereafter too difficult to help, since they cannot openly
accept help from those they have tried to injure.

d. Responsible-for-condition cases have been traced back to other
causes for their condition too often to be acceptable. By
responsible-for-condition cases is meant the person who insists a
book or some auditor is "wholly responsible for the terrible
condition I am in." Such cases demand unusual favors, free
auditing, tremendous effort on the part of auditors. Review of
these cases shows that they were in the same or worse condition
long before auditing, that they are using a planned campaign to
obtain auditing for nothing, that they are not as bad off as they
claim, and that their antagonism extends to anyone who seeks to
help them, even their own families. Establish the rights of the
matter and decide accordingly.

e. Persons who are not being audited on their own determinism are
a liability as they are forced into being processed by some other
person and have no personal desire to become better. Quite on the
contrary, they usually want only to prove the person who wants
them audited wrong and so do not get better. Until a personally
determined goal to be processed occurs, the person will not
benefit.

f. Persons who "want to be processed to see if Scientology works"
as their only reason for being audited have never been known to
make gains as they do not participate. News reporters fall into
this category. They should not be audited.

g. Persons who claim that "if you help such and such a case" (at
great and your expense) because somebody is rich or influential
or the neighbors would be electrified should be ignored.
Processing is designed for bettering individuals, not progressing
by stunts or giving cases undue importance. Process only at
convenience and usual arrangements. Make no extraordinary effort
at the expense of other persons who do want processing for normal
reasons. Not one of these arrangements has ever come off
successfully as it has the unworthy goal of notoriety, not
betterment.

h. Persons who "have an open mind" but no personal hopes or
desires for auditing or knowingness should be ignored, as they
really don't have an open mind at all, but a lack of ability to
decide about things and are seldom found to be very responsible
and waste anyone's efforts "to convince them."

i. Persons who do not believe anything or anyone can get better.
They have a purpose for being audited entirely contrary to the
auditor's and so, in this conflict, do not benefit. When such
persons are trained, they use their
training to degrade others. Thus, they should not be accepted for
training or auditing.

j. Persons attempting to sit in judgment on Scientology in
hearings or attempting to investigate Scientology should be given
no undue importance. One should not seek to instruct or assist
them in any way. This includes judges,
boards, newspaper reporters, magazine writers, etc. All efforts
to be helpful or instructive have done nothing beneficial, as
their first idea is a firm "I don't know" and this usually ends
with an equally firm "I don't know." If a person can't see for
himself or judge from the obvious, then he does not have
sufficient powers of observation even to sort out actual
evidence. In legal matters, only take the obvious effective steps
-- carry on no crusades in court. In the matter of reporters,
etc., it is not worthwhile to give them any time, contrary to
popular belief. They are given their story before they leave
their editorial rooms and you only strengthen what they have to
say by saying anything. They are no public communication line
that sways much. Policy is very definite. Ignore.

To summarize sources of trouble, the policy in general is to cut
communication, as the longer it is extended, the more trouble
they are. I know of no case where the types of persons listed
above were handled by auditing or instruction. I know of many
cases where they were handled by firm legal stands, by ignoring
them until they changed their minds, or just turning one's back.

In applying such a policy of cut communication, one must also use
judgment as there are exceptions in all things, and to fail to
handle a person's momentary upset in life or with us can be quite
fatal. So these policies refer to non-Scientology persons in the
main or persons who appear on the outer fringes and push toward
us. When such a person bears any of the above designations, we
and the many are better off to ignore them.

Scientology works. You don't have to prove it to everyone. People
don't deserve to have Scientology as a divine right, you know.
They have to earn it. This has been true in every philosophy that
sought to better man.

And the less enturbulence you put on your lines, the better, and
the more people you will eventually help.

           THE STRESS OF POLICY

All the above "sources of trouble" are also forbidden training,
and when a person being trained or audited is detected to belong
under the above headings (a) to (j), he or she should be advised
to terminate and accept refund which must be paid at once and the
full explanation should be given them at that time. Thus, the few
may not, in their own turmoil, impede service to and the advance
of the many.

Scientology is an applied philosophy designed and developed to
make the able more able. In this sphere it is tremendously
successful.

Efforts to involve philosophy with medical imperialism,
psychiatric sadism, the bigoted churchman, bring about a slowing
of our progress.

These people are sick spiritually because of their own continuous
harmful actions against patients and the society and are beyond
our normal means to help.

These policies will continue in existence until such time as
those interested care to invest the time and treasure necessary
to build the institutions and reeducate the professions which now
practice medical and physical mental healing, and this is
definitely not within our time, but would belong to some remote
future when more men are sane.

However, such a program would depend upon the continued existence
of the medical imperialist and the psychiatrist, and as their
more reprehensible activities are rather new and very radical,
they may be abandoned by public and government long before
Scientology could help them. This is probably the more likely
occurrence as even in Russia the communist has now forsworn all
violent treatments of the insane according to their delegates to
the London Medical Conference of this year, and Russian
practitioners look with contempt and scorn upon the Western
psychiatrist. The medical doctor of England, taken over by
socialism, has lost his ambition for medical imperialism and has
no contest with Scientology. In the United States the American
Medical Association has become locked in mortal combat with the
government and probably will be socialized entirely in a few
years due to fee abuses and lack of gains. The medical doctor
remains strong only in more backward small nations such as
Australia where world trends are late in arriving.

Even the Church in Rome is considering a surrender of principles
and amalgamation with other faiths in an effort to save a
dwindling religious membership.

Thus, there may be no medical practitioner as we know him left in
a few decades. Membership in the psychiatric profession is
declining.

In the place of these institutions, if we ever get around to
them, we may find ourselves dealing with completely different
practices in the fields of physical healing and the treatment of
the insane. All we ask of them is that they are competent in
their treatments and less greedy for monopoly than their
predecessors. And if this is so, then our policies will then
remain fully in force, but in a spirit of cooperation, not with
the desire to protect ourselves and the public from them and the
products of their bungling.

Ours are the powerful communication lines. They are powerful
because they are theta lines. Entheta (enturbulated theta)
obtains all its apparent power by being parasitic on theta lines.
Only when you add the power of our lines to the weakness of
entheta lines can they then have strength.

Example: It was the FCDC communication to its own field about
that government raid that (a) cost the most in cash and (b) did
the most damage. You can actually ignore an entheta line in
almost all cases without the faintest consequence. It only has
power when we let it have power by answering it.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:CSI:jw.cden.ms.gm



******************************************************************

7. HCO PL  7 Aug. 1965      Suppressive Persons,
                            Main Characteristics Of

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 AUGUST 1965

Remimeo
Ethics Hats
Executive Hats

           SUPPRESSIVE PERSONS,
         MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF

It is interesting in the detection of suppressive persons that
they use "policy" to prevent purpose.

In one org which went into a serious decline a suppressive person
was in a high position.

Every time org personnel returned from Saint Hill and proposed
that the org get going, they were told by this SP that their
proposals were "against policy."

Not one of these people, hearing this, ever alerted to a glaring
fact. The SP in this case was renowned for never being able to
pass a bulletin, tape or policy letter!

So how would that person have known WHAT was against policy for
that person NEVER was known to pass a hat check!

So that person's statement that "It's against policy" was
obviously false since the person was incapable of passing hat
checks or bulletins and wouldn't ever have known what any policy
was, for or against anything.

Thus, we see one of the characteristics of an SP is

1. THE NEGATION OF POLICY WITHOUT KNOWING IT AND THE USE OF
"POLICY" TO PREVENT SUCCESS IN SCIENTOLOGY IS THE PRIMARY TOOL OF
THE SP AGAINST ORGS.

                ----------

Dissemination is a prime target of the SP.

Magazines ordinarily have half a dozen SPs on their lines. These
people write in and complain about ads. If you don't watch it,
these half dozen become "everybody" and the mag is beaten down
into not advertising.

"Soft sell" is another recommendation of the SP

And "build it quietly" and "get only decent people" are all part
of this.

When somebody is demanding less reach, that person is an SP.

Therefore, we have another characteristic:

2. SPs RECOMMEND INEFFECTIVE DISSEMINATION AND FIND FAULT WITH
ANY BEING DONE.

                ----------

A suppressive will try to sell off the property or buildings of
an org, and in one case tried to give them away when temporarily
in charge.

3. A SUPPRESSIVE WILL TRY TO GET RID OF AN ORG.

                ----------

Good staff members are a prime target for SPs. In one org where
an SP got a foothold, 60% of the staff was gotten rid of and the
org almost crashed.

They do it by making people too dissatisfied to produce and so
make it impossible for the org to earn.

4. AN SP WILL SEEK TO UPSET AND GET RID OF THE BEST STAFF
MEMBERS.

                ----------

Bad news, particularly if false, is the only comm line of the SP.

The executive who is getting bad news as a steady diet on his
lines has SPs about.

5. ENTHETA IS THE SOLE STOCK IN TRADE OF THE SP.

                ----------

The triumph an SP feels in not getting rid of things the auditor
has tried to ease is quite malevolent.

6. AN SP IS SATISFIED WITH AUDITING ONLY WHEN HE GETS WORSE.

                ----------

7. SPs are happy when their pcs get worse and sad when their pcs
get better.

                ----------

8. AN SP IN AN EXAMINER POST WILL ONLY DECLARE RELEASED THE BAD
RESULT CASES AND WILL NOT PASS ACTUAL RELEASES BUT WILL ARC BREAK
THEM.

                ----------

9. Covert invalidation is the level of an SP's social
intercourse.

                ----------

An SP can only restimulate another, he has no power of his own.

10. An SP deals only in restimulation, never easing or erasing.

                ----------

11. The persons around an SP get so restimulated they can't
detect the real SP.

                ----------

The whole rationale of the SP is built on the belief that if
anyone got better, the SP would be for it as the others could
overcome him then.

He is fighting a battle he once fought and never stopped
fighting. He is in an incident. Present time people are mistaken
by him for past, long-gone enemies.

Therefore, he never really knows what he is fighting in present
time, so just fights.

12. The SP is sure everyone is against him personally and if
others became more powerful they would dispose of him.

                ----------

The SP usually commits continuing overts. These are hidden.

I have had two or three SPs blow up and shout or snarl at me.
When I investigated, I found, in these cases, they were
committing daily crimes of some magnitude.

13. An SP commits hidden overts continuously.

                ----------

14. Back of a crime you will find SP characteristics.

                ----------

15. Because an SP uses generalities in his speech, "everybody,"
"they," etc., the SP is hard to detect.

                ----------

SPs have an experiential track that is poor. SPs know how to
needle and commit overts and hold others back.

When released, the SP has so little decent background experience
that he or she has a very hard time.

16. Releasing an SP does not make a worthwhile person. It only
makes a person who can now learn to get along in life.

"A cleared cannibal is a cleared cannibal."

                ----------

SPs don't get case gains. Sometimes they pretend them. They are
held back by their continuing overts. If we were found by them to
be decent, their past conduct would swell up and engulf them.

They are in a continual PTP of their fight with mankind. And they
follow the rule that pcs with PTPs get no case gains.

                ----------

Real SPs comprise about 2 1/2 percent of the population. By
restimulating others, they make another 17 1/2 percent into
potential trouble sources. Therefore, about 20% of the population
is Ethics type.

We must not allow this 20% to prevent the 80% from crossing the
Bridge.

We are no enemy of the SP. But he can't have friends, can he?

So we handle the SP and his PTSes and carry on with our job.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:mh.rd.gm



******************************************************************

8. HCO PL  5 Apr. 1965      Handling the Suppressive Person,
                            The Basis of Insanity

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 APRIL 1965

Gen. Non-Remimeo
HCO Sec Hat
Tech Sec Hat
D of P flat
D of T Hat

    HCO JUSTICE DATA RE ACADEMY AND HGC

      HANDLING THE SUPPRESSIVE PERSON
          THE BASIS OF INSANITY

The suppressive person (whom we've called a Merchant of Fear or
Chaos Merchant and which we can now technically call the
suppressive person) can't stand the idea of Scientology. If
people became better, the suppressive person would have lost. The
suppressive person answers this by attacking covertly or overtly
Scientology. This thing is, he thinks, his mortal enemy since it
undoes his (or her) "good work" in putting people down where they
should be.

There are three "operations" such a case seeks to engage upon
regarding Scientology: (a) to disperse it, (b) to try to crush it
and (c) to pretend it didn't exist.

Dispersal would consist of several things such as attributing its
source to others and altering its processes or structure.

If you feel a bit dispersed reading this policy letter, then
realize it is about a being whose whole "protective coloration"
is to disperse others and so remain invisible. Such people
generalize all entheta and create ARC breaks madly.

The second (b) is done by covert or overt means. Covertly, a
suppressive person leaves the org door locked, loses the E-
Meters, runs up fantastic bills, and energetically and unseen
seeks to pull out the plug and get Scientology poured down the
drain. We, poor fools, consider all this just "human error" or
"stupidity." We rarely realize that such actions, far from being
accidents, are carefully thought out. The proof that this is so
is simple. If we run down the source of these errors, we wind up
with only one or two people in the whole group. Now isn't it odd
that the majority of errors that kept the group enturbulated were
attributable to a minority of persons present? Even a very
"reasonable" person could not make anything else out of that
except that it was very odd and indicated that the minority
mentioned were interested in smashing the group and that the
behavior was not common to the whole group -- meaning it isn't
"normal" behavior.

These people aren't communists or fascists or any other ists.
They are just very sick people. They easily become parts of
suppressive groups such as communists or fascists because these
groups, like criminals, are suppressive.

The suppressive person is hard to spot because of the dispersal
factor mentioned above. One looks at them and has his attention
dispersed by their "everybody is bad."

The suppressive person who is visibly seeking to knock out people
or Scientology is easy to see. He or she is making such a fuss
about it. The attacks are quite vicious and full of lies. But
even here when the suppressive person exists on the "other side"
of a potential trouble source, visibility is not good. One sees a
case going up and down. On the other side of that case, out of
the auditor's view, is the suppressive person.

The whole trick they use is to generalize entheta. "Everybody is
bad." "The Russians are all bad." "Everybody hates you." "The
People versus John Doe" on warrants. "The masses." "The secret
police will get you."

Suppressive groups use the ARC break mechanisms of generalizing
entheta so it seems "everywhere."

The suppressive person is a specialist in making others ARC break
with generalized entheta that is mostly lies.

He or she is also a no-gain case.

So avid are such for the smashing of others by covert or overt
means that their case is bogged and won't move under routine
processing.

The technical fact is that they have a huge problem, long gone
and no longer known even to themselves, which they use hidden or
forthright vicious acts continually to "handle." They do not act
to solve the environment they are in. They are solving one
environment, yesterday's, in which they are stuck.

The only reason the insane were hard to understand is that they
are handling situations which no longer exist. The situation
probably existed at one time. They think they have to hold their
own, with overts against a nonexistent enemy to solve a
nonexistent problem.

Because their overts are continuous they have withholds.

Since such a person has withholds, he or she can't communicate
freely to as-is the block on the track that keeps them in some
yesterday. Hence, a "no-gain case."

That alone is the way to locate a suppressive person. By viewing
the case. Never judge such a person by their conduct. That is too
difficult. Judge by no case gains. Don't even use tests.

One asks these questions:

1. Will the person permit auditing at all? or

2. Does their history of routine auditing reveal any gains?

If (1) is present, one is safe to treat the person as
suppressive. It is not always correct, but it is always safe.
Some errors will be made, but it is better to make them than to
take a chance on it. When people refuse auditing, they are (a) a
potential trouble source (connected to a suppressive person); (b)
a person with a big discreditable withhold; (c) a suppressive
person or (d) have had the bad luck to be "audited" too often by
a suppressive person or (e) have been audited by an untrained
auditor or one "trained" by a suppressive person.

The last category (e) (untrained auditor) is rather slight but
(d) (audited by a suppressive person) can have been pretty
serious, resulting in continual ARC breaks during which auditing
was pressed on without regard to the ARC break.

Thus, there are several possibilities when somebody refuses
auditing. One has to sort them out in an HGC and handle the right
one. But HCO by policy simply treats the person with the same
admin policy procedure as that used on a suppressive person and
lets HGC sort it out. Get that difference -- it's "with the same
admin policy procedure as" not "the same as."

For treating a person "the same as" a suppressive person when he
or she is not only adds to the confusion. One treats a real
suppressive person pretty rough. One has to handle the bank.

As to (2) here is the real test and the only valid test: Does
their history of routine auditing reveal any gains? If the answer
is NO then there is your suppressive person, loud and very
unclear!

That is the test.

There are several ways of detecting. When fair auditors or good
ones have had to vary routine procedure or do unusual things on
this case in an effort to make it gain, when there are lots of
notes from Ds of P in the folder saying do this -- do that -- you
know that this case was trouble. This means it was one of three
things: (1) a potential trouble source, (2) a person with a big
withhold or (3) a suppressive person.

If, despite all that trouble and care the case did not gain -- or
if the case simply didn't gain despite auditing, no matter how
many years or intensives -- then you've caught your suppressive
person.

That's the boy. Or the girl.

This case performs continual calculating, covert, hostile acts
damaging to others. This case puts the enturbulence and upset
into the environment, breaks the chairs, messes up the rugs and
spoils the traffic flow with "goofs" done intentionally.

One should lock criminals out of the environment if one wants
security. But one first has to locate the criminal. Don't lock
everybody out because you can't find the criminal.

The cyclic case (gains and collapses routinely) is connected to a
suppressive person. We have policy on that.

The case that continually pleads "hold my hand, I am so ARC
broken" is just somebody with a big withhold, not an ARC break.

The suppressive person just gets no case gain on routine student
auditing.

This person is actively suppressing Scientology. If such will sit
still and pretend to be audited, the suppression is by hidden
hostile acts which include:

1. Chopping up auditors;

2. Pretending withholds which are actually criticisms;

3. Giving out "data" about their past lives and/or whole track
that really hold such subjects up to scorn and makes people who
do remember, wince;

4. Chopping up orgs;

5. Alter-ising technology to mess it up;

6. Spreading rumors about prominent persons in Scientology;

7. Attributing Scientology to other sources;

8. Criticizing auditors as a group;

9. Rolling up dev-t -- off-policy, off-origin, off-line;

10. Giving fragmentary or generalized reports about entheta that
cave people in-and isn't actual;

11. Refusing to repair ARC breaks;

12. Engaging in discreditable sexual acts (also true of potential
trouble sources);

13. Reporting a session good when the pc went bad;

14. Reporting a session bad when the pc went up in tone;

15. Snapping terminals with lecturers and executives to make
critical remarks or spread ARC break-type "news" to them;

16. Failing to relay comm or report;

17. Making an org go to pieces (note, one uses "making" not
"letting");

18. Committing small criminal acts around the org;

19. Making "mistakes" which get their seniors in trouble;

20. Refusing to abide by policy;

21. Noncompliance with instructions;

22. Alter-is of instructions or orders so that the program fouls
up;

23. Hiding data that is vital to prevent upsets;

24. Altering orders to make a senior look bad;

25. Organizing revolts or mass protest meetings;

26. Snarling about justice.

And so on. One does not use the catalog, however; one only uses
this one fact -- no case gain by routine auditing over a longish
period.

This is the fellow that makes life miserable for the rest of us.
This is the one who overworks executives. This is the auditor
killer. This is the course enturbulator or pc killer.

There's the cancer. Burn it out.

                ----------

In short, you begin to see that it's this one who is the only one
who makes harsh discipline seem necessary. The rest of the staff
suffers when one or two of these is present.

One hears a whine about "process didn't work" or sees an alter-is
of tech. Go look. You'll find it now and then leads to a
suppressive person inside or outside the org.

Now that one knows who it is, one can handle it.

But more than that, I can now crack this case!

The technology is useful on all cases, of course. But only this
cracks the "no-gain case."

The person is in a mad, howling situation of some yesteryear and
is "handling it" by committing overt acts today. I say condition
of yesteryear but the case thinks it's today.

Yes, you're right. They are nuts. The spinbins are full of either
them or their victims. There's no other real psycho in a spinbin!

What? That means we've cracked insanity itself? That's right. And
it's given us the key to the suppressive person and his or her
effect on the environment. This is the multitude of "types" of
insanity of the nineteenth-century psychiatrist. All in one.
Schizophrenia, paranoia, fancy names galore. Only one other type
exists -- the person the suppressive person got "at." This is the
"manic-depressive" a type who is up one day and down the next.
This is the potential trouble source gone mad. But these are in a
minority in the spinbin, usually put there by suppressive persons
and not crazy at all! The real mad ones are the suppressive
persons. They are the only psychos.

Oversimplification? No indeed. I can prove it! We could empty the
spinbins now. If we want to. But we have better uses for
technology than saving a lot of suppressive persons who
themselves act only to scuttle the rest of us.

You see, when they get down to no-case-gain where a routine
process won't bite, they can no longer as-is their daily life so
it all starts to stack up into a horror. They "solve" this horror
by continuous covert acts against their surroundings and
associates. After a while the covert ones don't seem to hold off
the fancied "horror" and they commit some senseless violence in
broad daylight-or collapse-and so they get identified as insane
and are lugged off to the spinbin.

Anybody can "get mad" and bust a few chairs when a suppressive
person goes too far. But there's traceable sense to it. Getting
mad doesn't make a madman. It's damaging actions that have no
sensible detectable reason that's the trait of madness. Any
thetan can get angry. Only a madman damages without reason.

All actions have their lower-scale, discreditable mockery. The
difference is, does one get over his anger? The no-case-gain of
course can't. He or she stays misemotional and adds each new
burst t o the fire. It never gets less. It grows. And a long way
from all suppressive persons are violent. They are more likely to
look resentful.

A suppressive person can get to one solid dispassionate state of
damaging things. Here is the accident prone, the home wrecker,
the group wrecker.

Now here one must realize something. The suppressive person finds
outlet for his or her unexpressed rage by carefully needling
those they are connected with into howling anger.

You see the people around them get dragged into this long-gone
incident by mistaken identity. And it is a maddening situation to
be continually misidentified, accused, worked on, double-crossed.
For one is not the being the suppressive person supposes. The
suppressive person's world is pretty hard to live around. And
even ordinarily cheerful people often blow up under the strain.

So be careful who you call the suppressive person. The person
connected with a suppressive person is liable to be the only
visible rage in sight!

You have some experience of this -- the mousey little woman, who
rarely changes expression and is so righteous, connected to
somebody who now and then goes into a frenzy.

How to tell them apart? Easy! Just ask this question-Which gets a
case gain easily?

Well, it's even simpler than that! Put the two on an E-Meter.
Don't do anything but read the dial and needle. The suppressive
one has the high, stuck TA. The other has a lower TA. Simple?

Not all suppressive persons have high TA. The TA can be anywhere,
especially very low (1.0). But the needle is weird. It is stuck
tight or it R/Ses without reason (the pc wearing no rings to
cause an R/S).

Suppressive persons also can have the "dead"-thetan Clear read!

You see people around a suppressive person Q-and-A and disperse.
They seek to "get even" with the suppressive person and often
exhibit the same symptoms temporarily.

Sometimes two suppressive persons are found together. So one
can't always say which is the suppressive person in a pair. The
usual combination is the suppressive person and the potential
trouble source.

However, you don't need to guess about it or observe their
conduct.

It's really no case gain by routine processing that is the only
valid test.

For this poor soul can no longer as-is easily. Too many overts.
Too many withholds. Stuck in an incident that they call "present
time." Handling a problem that does not exist. Supposing those
around are the personnel in their own delirium.

They look all right. They sound reasonable. They are often
clever. But they are solid poison. They can't as-is anything. Day
by day their pile grows. Day by day their new overts and withholds
pin them down tighter. They aren't here. But they sure can wreck
the place.

There is the true psycho.

And he or she is dying before your very eyes. Kind of horrible.

The resolution of the case is a clever application of Problems
Processes, never O/W. What was the condition? How did you handle
it? is the key type of process.

I don't know what the percentage of these are in a society. I
know only that they made up about ten percent of any group so far
observed. The data is obscured by the fact that they ARC break
others and make them misemotional -- thus, one of them seems to
be, by contagion, half-a-dozen such.

Therefore, simple inspection of conduct does not reveal the
suppressive person. Only a case folder puts the seal on it. No
case gain by routine processes.

However, this test too may soon become untrustworthy for now we
can crack them by a special approach. However, we will also
generally use the same approach on routine cases as it makes
cases go upward fast, and we may catch the suppressive person
accidentally and cure him or her before we are aware of it.

And that would be wonderful.

But still we'll have such on our lines in justice matters from
now on. So it's good to know all about them, how they are
identified, how to handle.

HCO must handle such cases as per the HCO Justice Codes on
suppressive acts when they blow Scientology or seek to suppress
Scientologists or orgs. One should study up on these.

The Academy should be careful of this and report them to HCO
promptly (as they would potential trouble sources or withholds
that won't be delivered). The Academy must not fool about with
suppressive persons. It's a sure way to deteriorate a course and
cave in students.

                 POLICY

When an Academy finds it has a potential trouble source, a
"withholdy case that ARC breaks easily" or a suppressive person
enrolled on a course or a blow, the Academy must call for HCO
Department of Inspections and Reports, justice section. This can
be any HCO personnel available, even the HCO Sec.

The HCO representative must wear some readily identified HCO
symbol and must take a report sheet with a carbon copy on a
clipboard.

HCO must have present other staff adequate to handle possible
physical violence.

The student, if still present, must be taken to a place where an
interview will not stop or enturbulate a class, by Tech Division
personnel. This can be any Tech Division office, empty auditing
room or empty classroom. The point is to localize the commotion
and not stir up the whole Tech Division.

If Tech Division personnel are not available, HCO can recruit
"other staff" anywhere by simply saying "HCO requires you" and
taking them into the interview place.

HCO has a report sheet for such matters, original and one copy
for justice file.

The HCO representative calls for the student's folder and looks
it over quickly for TA action. If there is none (less than 10
divisions/session), that's it. It is marked on the report sheet
"No TA action in auditing" or "Little TA." HCO is not interested
in what processes were run. Or why there is no TA. If the course
requires no meters, the folder is inspected for alter-is (which
denotes a rough pc) or no case changes.

If there are no TA notations in the folder, HCO should put the
person on a meter making sure the person is not wearing a ring.
One asks no questions, merely reads the TA position and notes the
needle and marks these in the report sheet. The tone arm will be
very high (5 or above) or very low (2 or less) or dead thetan (2
or 3), and the needle would be an occasional R / S or stuck or
sticky if the person is a suppressive person. This is noted in
the report sheet.

If the folder or the student in question says he has had no case
gain, this is again confirming of a suppressive person.

If two of these three points (folder, meter, statement) indicate
a suppressive person, HCO is looking for two possible students
when so called in-the one who caused the upset and that student's
coach or student auditor. There very likely may be a suppressive
person on the course that is not this student. Therefore, one
looks for that one too, the second one.

If a bit of questioning seems to reveal that the student's
auditor was responsible, test that student too and enter it on a
second HCO report form. And order the other one to auditing at
the student's own expense.

In short, be alert. There's been an upset. There may be other
persons about who caused it. Don't just concentrate on the
student. There is a condition on the course that causes upsets.
That is really all one knows when one walks in on it. Find out
why and what.

If the HCO tests indicate some doubt about either student being a
suppressive person, HCO asks about a possible withhold and enters
any result on the sheet and sends the student and sheet
separately to the Tech Division, Dept of Estimations. The
procedure is the same for a suppressive person but is "a
withholdy pc who ARC breaks easily" or simply "a withholdy pc" if
no ARC breaks are noted. "Auditing recommended."

But there is a third category for which HCO is very alert in this
interview. And that is the POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE. For this
person may only be audited further if he or she disconnects or
handles the suppressive person or group to which he or she is
connected and can't be sent to the HGC or back to the course
either until the status is cleared up.

If this seems the case, there is no point in continuing the
person in the Tech Division and HCO takes over fully, applying
the policy related to potential trouble sources.

This type of case will probably not be dangerous but quite
cooperative and probably dazed by having to do something about
his situation. He or she has been hammered with invalidation by a
suppressive person and may be rather wobbly, but if the justice
steps are taken exactly on policy, there should be no trouble.
HCO can take a potential trouble source (but never a suppressive
person) out of the Tech Division premises and back to HCO to
complete such briefing. Remember, it is all one to us if the
potential trouble source handles it or not. Until it's handled or
disconnected we don't want it around as it's just more trouble,
and the person will cave in if audited under those conditions
(connected to a suppressive person or group).

A suppressive person found in an Academy is ordered to HGC
processing always. And always at his or her own expense.

If the suppressive person won't buy auditing or cooperate, HCO
follows steps A to E in policy on suppressive persons in the
Justice Codes; HCO may be assisted in this by Tech personnel.

The point is, the situation must be handled fully there and then.
The student buys his auditing or gets A to E. There is no "We'll
put you on probation in the course and if..." because I've not
found it to work. Auditing or suppressive person A to E. Or both.

           THE BLOWN STUDENT

The student, however, may have blown off the premises or be gone
entirely. On a minor, momentary blow, where all it took was the
student's auditor and a few words to get the student back, the
matter is not a real blow.

But where the student leaves the premises in a blow or doesn't
turn up for class, the Tech Division must send an Instructor and
the student's auditor over to HCO Department of Inspections and
Reports. An HCO representative should go with them at once to
pick up the student.

The student is brought back with as little public commotion as
possible, and the procedure of HCO checkout, etc., is followed as
above.

           THE GONE STUDENT

Where the student can't be gotten back (or in all such cases),
the real cause may be a suppressive person in the course itself,
not the blown student or the upset student.

If the suppressive person is on the course (and is not the blown
student), HCO will want to know this. In all such cases the one
who caused the commotion may not be the culprit.

The HCO representative calls for the blown student's case folder
and looks for TA. If there is none or for some reason the student
wasn't audited or if no meters were used on that course, HCO
seeks to find out what the case's responses were to processing.

If the case seemed to change or improve yet the student is gone,
HCO looks over the blown student's ex-auditor for suppressive
characteristics such as satisfaction the pc blew, critical
statements about tech or Instructors, case rough or difficult,
lies about the circumstances, etc., and if such signs are
present, HCO orders the blown student's ex-auditor to the HGC at
the student's own expense.

If this interview with the blown student's auditor seems to
indicate a suppressive person beyond any doubt, HCO orders the
student to the HGC at the student's own expense.

The blown student's course auditor will not be found usually to
be a potential trouble source as these are seldom bad or rough
auditors, so questions about this possibility don't really apply.

But if this student (the blown student's auditor) is suppressive,
it's HGC or A to E. If the student gives on A to E, he or she may
be returned to course or sent to the HGC as HCO deems best.

                ----------

In all such cases where a suppressive person is found, watch out
for legal repercussions by having reliable witnesses present
during such negotiations or upsets and take liberal notes for
possible Comm Ev. This is why there also must be an HCO
representative handling it.

If there is no agreement to be audited and the student who is
found to be a suppressive person will not respond to A to E
(because student has blown and can't be found or because the
student flatly refuses), the student is considered terminated.

A waiver or quit claim is given or sent the student stating

Date ____________________________

Place ___________________________

I, _______________________ having refused to abide by the Codes
of (name and place of org) do hereby waive any further rights I
may have as a Scientologist, and in return for my course fee of
__________, I do hereby quit any claim I may have on (name of
org) or any Scientologist personnel or any person or group or
organization of Scientology.

Signed ________________________________________

2 Witnesses ___________________________________
            ___________________________________

Only when this is signed the student may have his course fee
returned, but no other fees as he accepted that service.

The ex-student should realize this makes him Fair Game and
outside our Justice Codes. He may not have recourse of any kind
beyond refund. And after signing can only return to Scientology
as per policy on Fair Game.

The HGC audits such a suppressive person sent to it on special
processes specially issued by HCOB for suppressive persons. It
will be found that adherence to these policies will make things
in Academies very calm.

Note: Nothing in this policy letter waives or sets aside any
policy concerning the auditing of known institutional cases in an
HGC. Persons with histories of institutionalized insanity may not
be audited in HGC.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

P.S. If you've wondered if you are a suppressive person while
reading this -- you aren't! A suppressive person never does
wonder, not for a moment! They KNOW they're sane!

LRH:wmc.cden.gm



******************************************************************

9. HCOB   27 Sept 1966      The Antisocial Personality,
                            the Anti-Scientologist

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

    HCO BULLETIN OF 27 SEPTEMBER 1966

Remimeo

       THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY
         THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST

There are certain characteristics and mental attitudes which
cause about 20% of a race to oppose violently any betterment
activity or group.

Such people are known to have antisocial tendencies.

When the legal or political structure of a country becomes such
as to favor such personalities in positions of trust, then all
the civilizing organizations of the country become suppressed and
a barbarism of criminality and economic duress ensues.

Crime and criminal acts are perpetrated by antisocial
personalities. Inmates of institutions commonly trace their state
back to contact with such personalities.

Thus, in the fields of government, police activities and mental
health, to name a few, we see that it is important to be able to
detect and isolate this personality type so as to protect society
and individuals from the destructive consequences attendant upon
letting such have free rein to injure others.

As they only comprise 20% of the population and as only 2 1/2 %
are truly dangerous, we see that with a very small amount of
effort we could considerably better the state of society.

Well-known, even stellar, examples of such a personality are, of
course, Napoleon and Hitler. Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd,
Christie and other famous criminals were well-known examples of
the antisocial personality. But with such a cast of characters in
history we neglect the less stellar examples and do not perceive
that such personalities exist in current life, very common, often
undetected.

When we trace the cause of a failing business, we will inevitably
discover somewhere in its ranks the antisocial personality hard
at work.

In families which are breaking up, we commonly find one or the
other of the persons involved to have such a personality.

Where life has become rough and is failing, a careful review of
the area by a trained observer will detect one or more such
personalities at work.

As there are 80% of us trying to get along and only 20% trying to
prevent us, our lives would be much easier to live were we well-
informed as to the exact manifestations of such a personality.
Thus, we could detect it and save ourselves much failure and
heartbreak.

It is important then to examine and list the attributes of the
antisocial personality. Influencing as it does the daily lives of
so many, it well behooves decent people to become better informed
on this subject.

                ATTRIBUTES

The antisocial personality has the following attributes:

1. He or she speaks only in very broad generalities. "They
say..." "Everybody thinks..." "Everyone knows..." and such
expressions are in continual use, particularly when imparting
rumor. When asked, "Who is everybody..." it normally turns out
to be one source and from this source the antisocial person has
manufactured what he or she pretends is the whole opinion of the
whole society.

This is natural to them since to them all society is a large
hostile generality, against the antisocial in particular.

2. Such a person deals mainly in bad news, critical or hostile
remarks, invalidation and general suppression.

"Gossip" or "harbinger of evil tidings" or "rumormonger" once
described such persons.

It is notable that there is no good news or complimentary remark
passed on by such a person.

3. The antisocial personality alters, to worsen, communication
when he or she relays a message or news. Good news is stopped and
only bad news, often embellished, is passed along.

Such a person also pretends to pass on "bad news" which is in
actual fact invented.

4. A characteristic, and one of the sad things about an
antisocial personality, is that it does not respond to treatment
or reform or psychotherapy.

5. Surrounding such a personality we find cowed or ill associates
or friends who, when not driven actually insane, are yet behaving
in a crippled manner in life, failing, not succeeding.

Such people make trouble for others.

When treated or educated, the near associate of the antisocial
personality has no stability of gain but promptly relapses or
loses his advantages of knowledge, being under the suppressive
influence of the other.

Physically treated, such associates commonly do not recover in
the expected time but worsen and have poor convalescences.

It is quite useless to treat or help or train such persons so
long as they remain under the influence of the antisocial
connection.

The largest number of insane are insane because of such
antisocial connections and do not recover easily for the same
reason.

Unjustly we seldom see the antisocial personality actually in an
institution. Only his "friends" and family are there.

6. The antisocial personality selects habitually the wrong
target.

If a tire is flat from driving over nails, he or she curses a
companion or a noncausative source of the trouble. If the radio
next door is too loud, he or she kicks the cat.

If A is the obvious cause, the antisocial personality inevitably
blames B, or C or D.

7. The antisocial cannot finish a cycle of action.

Such become surrounded with incomplete projects.

8. Many antisocial persons will freely confess to the most
alarming crimes when forced to do so, but will have no faintest
sense of responsibility for them.

Their actions have little or nothing to do with their own
volition. Things "just happened."

They have no sense of correct causation and particularly cannot
feel any sense of remorse or shame therefore.

9. The antisocial personality supports only destructive groups
and rages against and attacks any constructive or betterment
group.

10. This type of personality approves only of destructive actions
and fights against constructive or helpful actions or activities.

The artist in particular is often found as a magnet for persons
with antisocial personalities who see in his art something which
must be destroyed and covertly, "as a friend," proceed to try.

11. Helping others is an activity which drives the antisocial
personality nearly berserk. Activities, however, which destroy in
the name of help are closely supported.

12. The antisocial personality has a bad sense of property and
conceives that the idea that anyone owns anything is a pretense,
made up to fool people. Nothing is ever really owned.

             THE BASIC REASON

The basic reason the antisocial personality behaves as he or she
does lies in a hidden terror of others.

To such a person every other being is an enemy, an enemy to be
covertly or overtly destroyed.

The fixation is that survival itself depends on "keeping others
down" or "keeping people ignorant."

If anyone were to promise to make others stronger or brighter,
the antisocial personality suffers the utmost agony of personal
danger.

They reason that if they are in this much trouble with people
around them weak or stupid, they would perish should anyone
become strong or bright.

Such a person has no trust to a point of terror. This is usually
masked and unrevealed.

When such a personality goes insane, the world is full of
Martians or the FBI and each person met is really a Martian or
FBI agent.

But the bulk of such people exhibit no outward signs of insanity.
They appear quite rational. They can be very convincing.

However, the list given above consists of things which such a
personality cannot detect in himself or herself. This I s so true
that if you thought you found yourself in one of the above, you
most certainly are not antisocial. Self-criticism is a luxury the
antisocial cannot afford. They must be RIGHT because they are in
continual danger in their own estimation. If you proved one
WRONG, you might even send him or her into a severe illness.

Only the sane, well-balanced person tries to correct his conduct.

                 RELIEF

If you were to weed out of your past by proper search and
discovery those antisocial persons you have known and if you then
disconnected, you might experience great relief.

Similarly, if society were to recognize this personality type as
a sick being as they now isolate people with smallpox, both
social and economic recoveries could occur.

Things are not likely to get much better so long as 20% of the
population is permitted to dominate and injure the lives and
enterprise of the remaining 80%.

As majority rule is the political manner of the day, so should
majority sanity express itself in our daily lives without the
interference and destruction of the socially unwell.

The pity of it is, they will not permit themselves to be helped
and would not respond to treatment if help were attempted.

An understanding and ability to recognize such personalities
could bring a major change in society and our lives.

          THE SOCIAL PERSONALITY

Man in his anxieties is prone to witch hunts.

All one has to do is designate "people wearing black caps" as the
villains and one can start a slaughter of people in black caps.

This characteristic makes it very easy for the antisocial
personality to bring about a chaotic or dangerous environment.

Man is not naturally brave or calm in his human state. And he is
not necessarily villainous.

Even the antisocial personality, in his warped way, is quite
certain that he is acting for the best and commonly sees himself
as the only good person around, doing all for the good of
everyone -- the only flaw in his reasoning being that if one
kills everyone else, none are left to be protected from the
imagined evils. His conduct in his environment and toward his
fellows is the only method of detecting either the antisocial or
the social personalities. Their motives for self are similar --
self-preservation and survival. They simply go about achieving
these in different ways.

Thus, as Man is naturally neither calm nor brave, anyone to some
degree tends to be alert to dangerous persons and, hence, witch
hunts can begin.

It is therefore even more important to identify the social
personality than the antisocial personality. One then avoids
shooting the innocent out of mere prejudice or dislike or because
of some momentary misconduct.

The social personality can be defined most easily by comparison
with his opposite, the antisocial personality.

This differentiation is easily done and no test should ever be
constructed which isolates only the antisocial. On the same test
must appear the upper as well as lower ranges of Man's actions.

A test that declares only antisocial personalities without also
being able to identify the social personality would be itself a
suppressive test. It would be like answering "Yes" or "No" to the
question "Do you still beat your wife?" Anyone who took it could
be found guilty. While this mechanism might have suited the times
of the Inquisition, it would not suit modern needs.

As the society runs, prospers and lives solely through the
efforts of social personalities, one must know them as they, not
the antisocial, are the worthwhile people. These are the people
who must have rights and freedom. Attention is given to the
antisocial solely to protect and assist the social personalities
in the society.

All majority rules, civilizing intentions and even the human race
will fail unless one can identify and thwart the antisocial
personalities and help and forward the social personalities in
the society. For the very word "society" implies social conduct
and without it there is no society at all, only a barbarism with
all men, good or bad, at risk.

The frailty of showing how the harmful people can be known is
that these then apply the characteristics to decent people to get
them hunted down and eradicated.

The swan song of every great civilization is the tune played by
arrows, axes or bullets used by the antisocial to slay the last
decent men.

Government is only dangerous when it can be employed by and for
antisocial personalities. The end result is the eradication of
all social personalities and the resultant collapse of Egypt,
Babylon, Rome, Russia or the West.

You will note in the characteristics of the antisocial
personality that intelligence is not a clue to the antisocial.
They are bright or stupid or average. Thus, those who are
extremely intelligent can rise to considerable, even head-of-
state heights.

Importance and ability or wish to rise above others are likewise
not indexes to the antisocial. When they do become important or
rise, they are, however, rather visible by the broad consequences
of their acts. But they are as likely to be unimportant people or
hold very lowly stations and wish for nothing better.

Thus, it is the twelve given characteristics alone which identify
the antisocial personality. And these same twelve reversed are
the sole criteria of the social personality if one wishes to be
truthful about them.

The identification or labeling of an antisocial personality
cannot be done honestly and accurately unless one also, in the
same examination of the person, reviews the positive side of his
life.

All persons under stress can react with momentary flashes of
antisocial conduct. This does not make them antisocial
personalities.

The true antisocial person has a majority of antisocial
characteristics.

The social personality has a majority of social characteristics.

Thus, one must examine the good with the bad before one can truly
label the antisocial or the social.

In reviewing such matters, very broad testimony and evidence are
best. One or two isolated instances determine nothing. One should
search all twelve social and all twelve antisocial
characteristics and decide on the basis of actual evidence, not
opinion.

The twelve primary characteristics of the social personality are
as follows:

1. The social personality is specific in relating circumstances.
"Joe Jones said..." "The Star Newspaper reported..." and gives
sources of data where important or possible.

He may use the generality of "they" or "people" but seldom in
connection with attributing statements or opinions of an alarming
nature.

2. The social personality is eager to relay good news and
reluctant to relay bad.

He may not even bother to pass along criticism when it doesn't
matter.

He is more interested in making another feel liked or wanted than
disliked by others and tends to err toward reassurance rather
than toward criticism.

3. A social personality passes communication without much
alteration and if deleting anything tends to delete injurious
matters.

He does not like to hurt people's feelings. He sometimes errs in
holding back bad news or orders which seem critical or harsh.

4. Treatment, reform and psychotherapy particularly of a mild
nature work very well on the social personality.

Whereas antisocial people sometimes promise to reform, they do
not. Only the social personality can change or improve easily.

It is often enough to point out unwanted conduct to a social
personality to completely alter it for the better.

Criminal codes and violent punishment are not needed to regulate
social personalities.

5. The friends and associates of a social personality tend to be
well, happy and of good morale.

A truly social personality quite often produces betterment in
health or fortune by his mere presence on the scene.

At the very least he does not reduce the existing levels of
health or morale in his associates.

When ill, the social personality heals or recovers in an expected
manner, and is found open to successful treatment.

6. The social personality tends to select correct targets for
correction.

He fixes the tire that is flat rather than attack the windscreen.

In the mechanical arts he can therefore repair things and make
them work.

7. Cycles of action begun are ordinarily completed by the social
personality, if possible.

8. The social personality is ashamed of his misdeeds and
reluctant to confess them. He takes responsibility for his
errors.

9. The social personality supports constructive groups and tends
to protest or resist destructive groups.

10. Destructive actions are protested by the social personality.
He assists constructive or helpful actions.

11. The social personality helps others and actively resists acts
which harm others.

12. Property is property of someone to the social personality and
its theft or misuse is prevented or frowned upon.

           THE BASIC MOTIVATION

The social personality naturally operates on the basis of the
greatest good.

He is not haunted by imagined enemies but he does recognize real
enemies when they exist.

The social personality wants to survive and wants others to
survive, whereas the antisocial personality really and covertly
wants others to succumb.

Basically, the social personality wants others to be happy and do
well, whereas the antisocial personality is very clever in making
others do very badly indeed.

A basic clue to the social personality is not really his
successes but his motivations. The social personality when
successful is often a target for the antisocial and by this
reason he may fail. But his intentions included others in his
success, whereas the antisocial only appreciate the doom of
others.

Unless we can detect the social personality and hold him safe
from undue restraint and detect also the antisocial and restrain
him, our society will go on suffering from insanity, criminality
and war, and Man and civilization will not endure.

Of all our technical skills, such differentiation ranks the
highest since, failing, no other skill can continue, as the base
on which it operates -- civilization -- will not be here to
continue it.

Do not smash the social personality -- and do not fail to render
powerless the antisocial in their efforts to harm the rest of us.

Just because a man rises above his fellows or takes an important
part does not make him an antisocial personality. Just because a
man can control or dominate others does not make him an
antisocial personality.

It is his motives in doing so and the consequences of his acts
which distinguish the antisocial from the social.

Unless we realize and apply the true characteristics of the two
types of personality, we will continue to live in a quandary of
who our enemies are and, in doing so, victimize our friends.

All men have committed acts of violence or omission for which
they could be censured. In all mankind there is not one single
perfect human being.

But there are those who try to do right and those who specialize
in wrong and upon these facts and characteristics you can know
them.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:lb-r.rd.jh.ahg.ja



Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [4/7] Repost [x2]
Datum: 27 Nov 1999 01:57:05 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 4 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 4

10. HCOB   31 Dec. 1978R III Educating the Potential Trouble
                             Source, The First Step Toward
                             Handling: PTS C/S-1

11. HCO PL 20 Oct. 1981R     PTS Type A Handling

12. HCOB   24 Apr. 1972 I    PTS Interviews
                             C/S Series 79
                             Expanded Dianetics Series 5

13. HCOB   10 Aug. 1973      PTS Handling

14. HCOB    8 Mar. 1983      Handling PTS Situations

15. HCOB   16 Apr. 1982      More on PTS Handling

16. HCOB   10 Sept 1983      PTSness and Disconnection

******************************************************************

10. HCOB   31 Dec. 1978R III  Educating the Potential Trouble
                              Source, The First Step Toward
                              Handling: PTS C/S-1

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 31 DECEMBER 1978R
                Issue III
           REVISED 26 JULY 1986

Remimeo
HCO
Tech/Qual
Auditors
Word Clearers
C/Ses
Ethics Officers

   EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE,
      THE FIRST STEP TOWARD HANDLING:
                PTS C/S-1

  Refs:
  HCO PL 30 Jan. 83      KSW Series 28
                         Esto Series 55
                         YOUR POST AND LIFE
  HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R     PTS TYPE A HANDLING
    Rev. 10.9.83
  HCOB    8 Mar. 83      HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
  HCOB   24 Apr. 72 I    C/S Series 79
                         Expanded Dianetics Series 5
                         PTS INTERVIEWS
  HCOB   10 Aug. 73      PTS HANDLING
  HCOB   27 Sept 66      THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY
                         THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST
  HCOB   28 Nov. 70      C/S Series 22
                         PSYCHOSIS
  HCOB   24 Nov. 65      SEARCH AND DISCOVERY
  HCOB   12 Mar. 68      MISTAKES, ANATOMY OF
  HCOB   31 Dec. 78RA II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
    Rev. 26.7.86
  HCOB   28 Feb. 84      C/S Series 118
                         PRETENDED PTS
  HCOB   21 May  85      C/S Series 121
                         False Purpose Rundown Series 11
                         TWO TYPES OF PTSes

The very first step in handling a potential trouble source is
educating him in the fundamentals of PTS/SP tech with a PTS
C/S-1.

In the absence of this education, the PTS person may not
understand what is being asked of him, may not understand his
condition, may not spot the correct SP and he may not recover.
You may get people asserting they are not PTS, who yet do not
even know what the letters "PTS" stand for.

The PTS C/S-1 is a very short action for most pcs. Its purpose is
to educate the PTS person in the basics of PTS/SP tech so that he
understands what PTSness is. Once he is educated, you can do a
PTS interview (per HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I, C/S Series 79, PTS INTERVIEWS)
or a PTS handling (per HCOB 10 Aug. 73, PTS HANDLING).

The steps of the PTS C/S-1 as given in this HCOB must be completed
on all PTS persons before any sort of PTS interview or handling or
any PTS auditing is undertaken.

              QUALIFICATIONS

Anyone delivering the PTS C/S-1 must have a Qual okay to do Word
Clearing, must have high crime checked out on this issue and must
be familiar enough with the

PTS/SP materials so that he can quickly find the source
references to answer any pc questions.

             WHERE DELIVERED

The PTS C/S-1 is normally done in session by the pc's auditor as
part of the pc's auditing intensive, or by the De-PTSer or Ethics
Officer who is working with the PTS person. In cases where the
person who needs the PTS C/S-1 is not on auditing lines and whose
De-PTSer or Ethics Officer is not yet qualified to do the Word
Clearing actions then the person should be routed by Qual I&I to
the Qual Word Clearer who can deliver the PTS C/S-1.

             FURTHER HATTING

After the person has discovered to what or to whom he is PTS, it
is necessary to educate him on any further specific actions or
handlings you will be doing with him. For example, if he were to
decide to disconnect from an actual SP in his environment, you
would have him study HCOB 10 Sept. 83, PTSness AND DISCONNECTION,
ensuring that he fully understands it (using Word Clearing as
necessary).

The full PTS/SP Course checksheet, which is studied in a course
room, must be part of the PTS person's PTS handling program. This
course is designed to give him the full mechanics of the
condition that has doubtless been playing havoc with his life.
But the PTS C/S-1 will give him sufficient data and understanding
to be able to receive a PTS interview or handling.

               MATERIALS

Have the following materials available before beginning the PTS
C/S-1:

  Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary

  Modern Management Technology Defined

  Basic Dictionary of Dianetics and Scientology

  A good English dictionary

  For a foreign-language case, a good dictionary in the pc's
  native language and a dual dictionary (English to foreign
  language and foreign language to English)

  PTS/SP Course Pack (as reference material)

  Demo kit.

           PTS C/S-1 PROCEDURE

I. Word Clearing

With the pc on the meter, word clear Method 5 each of the
following terms (Ref: HCOB 21 June 72 I, Word Clearing Series 38,
METHOD 5). Definitions for each of these words can be found in
the attachment to this HCOB.

  Hostile
  Antagonistic
  Invalidate
  Suppress
  Suppression
  Suppressive Acts
  Suppressive Persons
  Suppressive Groups
  Problem
  Roller-coaster
  Potential Trouble Source (PTS)

  1. Ask "What is the definition of ________?"

  2. Have him demo the definition to ensure he has a good
  understanding of it (not glib).

  3. Have him make up sentences using the term correctly until
     you are sure he knows it.

  4. Have him give you examples of how the term could apply in
     life.

Cover by exact definition all terms used and take each word
cleared to an F/N.

Check for any questions (or misunderstoods) as you go along and
ensure any such get handled so the pc winds up with a full
conceptual understanding of each word. (Ref: HCOB 7 Sept. 74,
Word Clearing Series 54, SUPERLITERACY AND THE CLEARED WORD)

II. Study of Basic Data on SPs and PTSness

Have the pc read each of the issues listed below. Pcs with little
or no prior training in Scientology should read The Volunteer
Minister's Handbook chapter listed in parentheses after the
issue's title.

Ensure the pc understands what he is reading. Check for any
questions or misunderstoods as you go along and ensure any such
get handled so the pc winds up with a clear understanding of the
material.

Have him demo and give examples of the main ideas of each issue
to ensure he has a thorough grasp of each, including how it
applies to life and livingness.

Consult his understanding and ensure he really has the data.

If the pc says he has studied the issue before and knows it, then
simply check him out on the issue and have him demo the main
points to ensure that he does in fact know it. If the checkout
shows that he doesn't have the data, word clear him on the issue
and check him out again until he has it.

1. HCOB 27 Sept. 66  THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY THE ANTI-
SCIENTOLOGIST

(Untrained pcs should read the chapter entitled "The Antisocial
Personality -- the Anti-Scientologist" on page 239 of The
Volunteer Minister's Handbook.)

2. HCOB 12 Mar. 68   MISTAKES, ANATOMY OF

(Untrained pcs should read the chapter entitled "Mistakes,
Anatomy of" on page 261 of The Volunteer Minister's Handbook.)

3. HCOB 10 Aug. 73   PTS HANDLING

(Untrained pcs should read the chapter "PTS Handling" on page 261
of The Volunteer Minister's Handbook.)

4. HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R  PTS TYPE A HANDLING, section entitled
"Don't Create Antagonism"

(Untrained pcs should read "Don't Create Antagonism" on page 266
of The Volunteer Minister's Handbook.)

                ----------

Educating a PTS is the first step in putting him at cause over
his PTS situation. He must then be gotten to discover to whom or
what he is PTS and then coached through the PTS handling. (Ref:
HCOB 10 Aug. 73, PTS HANDLING, and HCOB 8 Mar. 83, HANDLING PTS
SITUATIONS)

Full PTS handling includes having the person do the PTS/SP Course
in a standard Scientology course room.

If all these steps are done thoroughly, that may well be the end
of PTSness for that person. It can surely spell the end of the
situation at hand.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

LRH:RTRC:fa.ahg.ja

******************

HCOB 31.12.78R III
Rev. 26.7.86
ATTACHMENT

         PTS C/S-1 DEFINITIONS SHEET

Hostile: Unfriendly, showing dislike.

Antagonistic: Showing or feeling opposition or hostility.

Invalidate: To refute or degrade or discredit or deny something
someone else considers to be fact.

Suppress: To squash, to sit on, to make smaller, to refuse to let
reach, to make uncertain about his reaching, to render less
powerful or lessen in any way possible by any means possible, to
the harm of the individual and for the fancied protection of a
suppressive person.

Suppression: Suppression is "a harmful intention or action
against which one cannot fight back." Thus, when one can do
anything about it, it is less suppressive.

Suppressive Acts: Actions or omissions undertaken to knowingly
suppress, reduce or impede Scientology or Scientologists.

Suppressive Person (SP): A person with certain behavior
characteristics who suppresses other people in his vicinity.

Suppressive Group: A group which seeks to destroy Scientology or
which specializes in injuring or killing persons or damaging
their cases or which advocates suppression of mankind.

Problem: An intention-counter-intention that worries the person.

  Intention: wanting to do something, purpose.
  Counter: against or opposing.
  Counter-Intention: an opposing intention.
  Example: Joe wants to become a musician (intention).
  His father wants him to become a doctor (counter-intention).
  This worries Joe and it is a problem.

Roller-coaster: Gets better, gets worse, gets better, gets worse.
A person who is roller-coastering is always connected to a
suppressive person and will not get steady gain until the
suppressive is found.

Potential Trouble Source (PTS):

a. Somebody who is connected with an SP who is invalidating him,
his beingness, his processing, his life.

b. Someone connected to a person or a group opposed to
Scientology. It is a technical thing. It results in illness and
roller coaster and is the cause of illness and roller coaster.
Because the case doesn't get well, he or she is a potential
trouble source to us, to others and to himself,

c. Persons intimately connected with persons (such as marital or
familial ties) of known antagonism to mental or spiritual
treatment or Scientology. In practice such persons, even when
they approach Scientology in a friendly fashion, have such
pressure continually brought to bear upon them by persons with
undue influence over them that they make very poor gains in
processing, and their interest is solely devoted to proving the
antagonistic element wrong.

PTS Type One: A PTS condition whereby the SP on the case is right
in present time, actively suppressing the person. This type of
situation is normally handled by an Ethics Officer.

PTS Type Two: A PTS condition in which the apparent SP in present
time is only a restimulator for the actual suppressive. This type
of PTS condition is handled by an auditor, in session.

PTS Type Three: A condition whereby the Type Two PTS person's
apparent SP is spread all over the world and is often more than
all the people there are. Such a person sometimes has "ghosts" or
"demons" about him and they are just more apparent SPs, but
imaginary as beings as well. The handling for such a condition is
to provide a relatively safe environment and quiet and rest,
until such time as the person is able to effectively be audited.

            END OF ATTACHMENT


******************************************************************

11. HCO PL 20 Oct. 1981R     PTS Type A Handling

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

   HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1981R
         REVISED 10 SEPTEMBER 1983

Remimeo
HCO Area Sec Hat
Dir I&R Hat
E/O Hat
PTS/SP Checksheet
Tech/Qual

            PTS TYPE A HANDLING

  Refs:
  HCO PL  7 May  69     POLICIES ON "SOURCES OF TROUBLE"
  HCOB   10 Aug. 73     PTS HANDLING
  HCOB   24 Apr. 72 I   C/S Series 79
                        PTS INTERVIEWS
  HCOB   24 Nov. 65     SEARCH AND DISCOVERY
  The Problems of Work  Chapter 6: "Affinity, Reality and
                        Communication"
  HCOB   31 Dec. 78 II  OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING

  HCOB   31 Dec. 78 III EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE
                        SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD
                        HANDLING: PTS C/S-1
  HCOB   10 Sept 83     PTSness AND DISCONNECTION
  HCOB    8 Mar. 83     HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
  HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA   SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF
    Re-rev. 10 Sept 83  SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS

THIS HANDLING IS DONE BY THE ETHICS OFFICER OF AN ORG OR THE HAS
OR IN THEIR ABSENCE BY THE QUAL SEC.

It is actually an interview with the suspected PTS person. It is
often done on an E-Meter to assist the verification of data.

If a PTS situation actually exists, the interview must result in
a written program agreed upon by the person, with copies to the
person and to his ethics file.

As the person does the steps of the program, he reports their
accomplishment to the org officer who interviewed him.

If the person fails to do the program or the program results in
no real change in the situation, the interviewing officer must
investigate thoroughly to find out what the person is doing
instead of the program and check for any communication he may
have sent which continued the upset, and get this corrected at
once. He must also ensure the PTS A person is handling the
correct antagonistic person. (Example: PTS person Jones may have
thought the antagonism was coming from Smith, whereas Smith's
upset is being kept alive by Smith's associate, Doakes, who has
disagreements with and/or misunderstoods on Scientology.)

If the handling program is drawn up standardly and yet the person
is sour on it or "doesn't want to do the handling" or never seems
to quite get around to doing the program, then the Ethics Officer
would suspect that either

a. a wrong item had been found, which would require an L4BRA done
by an auditor in session to handle (Refs: HCOB 24 Nov. 65, SEARCH
AND DISCOVERY, and tape 6510C14, SH68, "Briefing to Review
Auditors")

b. the program had been misimplemented (the pc didn't really
understand what he was to do, was miscoached on the steps of the
handling, or he "did the handling" in such a way as to create
further antagonism rather than ease it, requiring a thorough
review of the situation and handling of whatever is found).
(Refs: HCOB 8 Mar. 83, HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS; HCOB 24 Apr. 72
I, C/S Series 79, PTS INTERVIEWS; HCOB 24 Nov. 65, SEARCH AND
DISCOVERY)

If (a) and (b) above have been thoroughly checked into by the
Ethics Officer to ensure that any nonstandard application has
been corrected and there is still no change in the situation
(i.e., the antagonism and upset continue), the PTS person would
then disconnect. And if the person does need to disconnect, the
HCOB 10 Sept. 83, PTSness AND DISCONNECTION, must be followed
exactly.

Fortunately, standard PTS Type A handling does handle the
majority of these situations. When disconnection is required,
very often that is enough to handle the PTSness.

Should the condition persist, however, then the interviewing
officer must require the person to have auditing on the subject
(a PTS Rundown given by a qualified auditor in the HGC).

If, after a PTS Rundown, the person feels fine but the persons
suppressing him are still making trouble, then the Ethics Officer
must require the person to have a SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN.

The first step of any interview must be the balance of this
policy letter, clearing up any misunderstood words or definitions
in it and making certain the person knows what "PTS" really
means.

Part of any handling may include the person being required to
take a course that is usually called "The PTS/SP Checksheet."

But in any case and in any handling, one cannot permit the person
to go on being PTS, as it can ruin his life.

               DEFINITION

Per HCO PL of 7 May 69, a PTS (meaning a potential trouble
source) Type A is a person "...intimately connected with persons
(such as marital or familial ties) of known antagonism to mental
or spiritual treatment or Scientology. In practice such persons,
even when they approach Scientology in a friendly fashion, have
such pressure continually brought to bear upon them by persons
with undue influence over them that they make very poor gains in
processing, and their interest is solely devoted to proving the
antagonistic element wrong."

           A SOURCE OF TROUBLE

Such persons with antagonistic family members are a source of
trouble to Scientology because their family members are not
inactive. In fact, from direct experience with inquiry after
inquiry into Scientology, it has been found that those who have
created the conditions which brought about the inquiry in the
first place and those who testified before same have been the
wives, husbands, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters or
grandparents of some Scientologist. Their testimony has been full
of such statements as "My son completely changed after he went
into Scientology -- he no longer was respectful to me." "My
daughter gave up a wonderful career as a hairdresser to go into
Scientology." "My sister got these funny staring eyes the way all
Scientologists have."

Their testimony was illogical and their descriptions of what
occurred were untrue, but the point of the matter is that such
persons DID cause Scientology, Scientology orgs and fellow
Scientologists a great deal of trouble and difficulty.

         DON'T CREATE ANTAGONISM

Many Scientologists in their misunderstanding and misapplication
of Scientology create the conditions that bring about the
antagonism in the first place. A few illustrations of how this is
done are as follows:

Scientologist to mother: "I now know where you are on the Tone
Scale -- 1.1. Boy, are you sneaky!" (Evaluation and invalidation)

Father to Scientologist: "Now, I don't want you to borrow the car
again without my permission. I have told you time and time..."
Scientologist to father: "OKAY! FINE! OKAY! GOOD! THANK YOU! I
GOT THAT!" (Not an acknowledgment but an effort to shut up the
father.)

Scientologist to older brother: "You murdered me in a past life,
you dirty dog!" (Evaluation and invalidation)

Mother to Scientologist: "Whatever are you doing?" Scientologist
to mother: "I'm trying to confront your dreadful bank."
(Invalidation)

There are so many ways to misuse tech and to invalidate and
evaluate for others in a destructive fashion to bring about
bypassed charge, ARC breaks and upset that they cannot all be
possibly listed. The idea is NOT to do so. Why create trouble for
yourself and for your fellow Scientologists, as nothing will have
been gained but ill-will?

                THE WHY

Per HCO PL of 7 Mar. 65R III it is a CRIME to be or become a PTS
without reporting it or taking action or to receive processing
while PTS. Further, as per HCO PL of 7 May 69, a PTS may not be
trained.

This means that a person who is PTS may not receive processing or
training while PTS and it also means that they had better do
something to handle their condition.

In the original (now reinstated) policy, the PTS individual was
required to handle or disconnect before he or she could continue
with training or processing. Many took the easy course and merely
disconnected "temporarily" for the time of their training or
processing and so they did not in actual fact handle the
condition in their lives which was upsetting them as
Scientologists. In some cases, there was a misapplication of the
tech, as their situations were totally handleable with the use of
simple Scientology basics.

Now a very workable system for handling PTS Type A situations has
been developed, as covered in this policy letter, in HCOB 10 Aug.
73, PTS HANDLING; HCOB 8 Mar. 83, HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS; and in
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING.

Following the steps given in these issues and making full use of
all bulletins and policies on the subject of PTS handling will
ensure situations get terminatedly handled.

Each PTS individual should, as one step of his handling, report
to Ethics and, with the assistance of Ethics, find a Why as to
his familial antagonism and then set about actually handling the
situation. The Why could be that his parents wanted him to be a
lawyer and so blame Scientology that he is not one, rather than
the fact that he flunked out of law school and couldn't stand the
thought of being a lawyer!

Or perhaps the Why is that the Scientologist keeps writing her
parents for money or the Why could be that the mother has just
read an entheta newspaper article.

In any case, the Why should be found and the PTS individual
should then do whatever is necessary to handle.

                HANDLING

The person who is PTS should be declared as such by Ethics and
should not receive Scientology training or processing until the
situation has been handled. (The exception to this is a full PTS
Rundown done in the HGC.)

The handling could be as simple as writing to one's father and
saying, "I do not complain that you are a janitor, please do not
complain that I am a Scientologist. The important thing is that I
am your son and that I love and respect you. I know you love me,
but please learn to respect me as an adult individual who knows
what he wants in life." Or it could be as follows: "I am writing
to you, Daddy, because Mother keeps sending me these dreadful
newspaper clippings and they are upsetting to me because I know
they are not true. You do not do this and so it is easier for me
to write to you."

Again there are as many ways of handling as there are Whys found.
Each case is individual. Remember, too, there is always the
possibility of a NO situation. And if the person thinks he's PTS
and isn't, he can get sick. Or if he insists he isn't and is, he
can also get upset. So find if there IS a situation first.

It is the purpose of Ethics to ensure that the situation is
handled.

Nothing in this policy letter shall ever or under any
circumstances justify any violations of the laws of the land or
intentional legal or moral wrongs.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:CSI:iw.gm



******************************************************************

12. HCOB   24 Apr. 1972 I    PTS Interviews
                             C/S Series 79
                             Expanded Dianetics Series 5

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 24 APRIL 1972
                 Issue I

Remimeo
D of P
Auditors
PTS Pack
Ethics Officers

              C/S Series 79
       Expanded Dianetics Series 5

              PTS INTERVIEWS

  Ref:
  HCOB 17 Apr. 72   C/S Series 76
                    C/Sing A PTS RUNDOWN

Interviews to discover a PTS condition are done on a meter with
all reads marked.

The interview asks (a) about persons who are hostile or
antagonistic to the pc, (b) about groups that are anti-
Scientology, (c) about people who have harmed the pc, (d) about
things that the pc thinks are suppressive to the pc, (e) about
locations that are suppressive to the pc and about past life
things and beings suppressive to the pc.

In doing the interview, the interviewer must realize that a sick
person is PTS. There are no sick people who are not PTS to
someone or a group or something somewhere.

A somewhat suppressive pc will find the good hats suppressive.
This does not relieve his condition. He is PTS to SP people,
groups, things or locations, no matter how SP he is.

He can have been audited by someone he knew in an earlier life
and who goofed the session. A few auditors have since been
declared. Not because they goofed but because they were SP.

However, some PTS pc will make trouble for good people because
that is what PTS means (potential trouble source). So do not buy
all the good people he is PTS to.

Further, when you do get the person or group or thing or
location, the PTS person will F/N VGI and begin to get well.

The PTS condition is actually a problem and a mystery and a
withdrawal, so it is sometimes hard to find and has to be
specially processed (3 S&Ds) to locate it.

Usually it is quite visible.

Don't have a sick, roller-coaster pc appear for interview and
then say "not PTS." It's a false report. It only means the
interviewer did not find it.

The pc sometimes begins to list in such an interview, and such an
interview where a wrong item is found has to be audited to
complete the list or find the right item. (See C/S Series 78,
HCOB 20 Apr. 72 II.)

So interview worksheets are VITAL.

The interview should end on an F/N.

The interview is followed by the ethics action of HCO PL 5 Apr.
72 or other ethics actions such as handling or disconnection and
posting as called for in policy.

An interviewer has to use good TRs and operate his meter properly
and know 2-way comm and PTS tech.

Some interviewers are extremely successful.

Such interviews and handling count as auditing hours.

When properly done, plus good auditing on the PTS RD, well people
result.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:mes.rd.gm



******************************************************************

13. HCOB   10 Aug. 1973      PTS Handling

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 10 AUGUST 1973

Remimeo
A/Guardians
HCO Secs
E/Os
MAAs
Tech Secs
Ds of P
PTS Pack

               PTS HANDLING

     (PTS = Potential Trouble Source)

There are two stable data which anyone has to have, understand
and KNOW ARE TRUE in order to obtain results in handling the
person connected to suppressives.

These data are:

1. That all illness in greater or lesser degree and all foul-ups
stem directly and only from a PTS condition.

2. That getting rid of the condition requires three basic
actions: (A) Discover; (B) Handle or disconnect.

Persons called upon to handle PTS people can do so very easily,
far more easily than they believe. Their basic stumbling block is
thinking that there are exceptions or that there is other tech or
that the two above data have modifiers or are not sweeping. The
moment a person who is trying to handle PTSes gets persuaded
there are other conditions or reasons or tech, he is at once lost
and will lose the game and not obtain results. And this is very
too bad because it is not difficult and the results are there to
be obtained.

To turn someone who may be PTS over to an auditor just to have
him mechanically audited may not be enough. In the first place
this person may not have a clue what is meant by PTS and may be
missing all manner of technical data on life and may be so
overwhelmed by a suppressive person or group that he is quite
incoherent. Thus, Just mechanically doing a process may miss the
whole show as it misses the person's understanding of why it is
being done.

A PTS person is rarely psychotic. But all psychotics are PTS if
only to themselves. A PTS person may be in a state of deficiency
or pathology which prevents a ready recovery, but at the same
time he will not fully recover unless the PTS condition is also
handled. For he became prone to deficiency or pathological
illness because he was PTS. And unless the condition is relieved,
no matter what medication or nutrition he may be given, he might
not recover and certainly will not recover permanently. This
seems to indicate that there are "other illnesses or reasons for
illness besides being PTS." To be sure there are deficiencies and
illnesses just as there are accidents and injuries. But strangely
enough, the person himself precipitates them because being PTS
predisposes him to them. In a more garbled way, the medicos and
nutritionists are always talking about "stress" causing illness.
Lacking full tech, they yet have an inkling that this is so
because they see it is somehow true. They cannot handle it. Yet
they recognize it, and they state that it is a senior situation
to various illnesses and accidents. Well, we have the tech of
this in more ways than one.

What is this thing called "stress"? It is more than the medico
defines it -- he usually says it comes from operational or
physical shock and in this he has too limited a view.

A person under stress is actually under a suppression on one or
more dynamics.

If that suppression is located and the person handles or
disconnects, the condition diminishes. If he also has all the
engrams and ARC breaks, problems, overts and withholds audited
out Triple Flow and if ALL such areas of suppression are thus
handled, the person would recover from anything caused by
"stress."

Usually, the person has insufficient understanding of life or any
dynamic to grasp his own situation. He is confused. He believes
all his illnesses are true because they occur in such heavy
books!

At some time he was predisposed to illness or accidents. When a
serious suppression then occurred, he suffered a precipitation or
occurrence of the accident or illness, and then with repeated
similar suppressions on the same chain, the illness or tendency
to accidents became prolonged or chronic.

To say then that a person is PTS to his current environment would
be very limited as a diagnosis. If he continues to do or be
something to which the suppressive person or group objected, he
may become or continue to be ill or have accidents.

Actually, the problem of PTS is not very complicated. Once you
have grasped the two data first given, the rest of it becomes
simply an analysis of how they apply to this particular person.

A PTS person can be markedly helped in three ways:

a. Gaining an understanding of the tech of the condition

b. Discovering to what or to whom he is PTS

c. Handling or disconnecting.

Someone with the wish or duty to find and handle PTSes has an
additional prior step: He must know how to recognize a PTS and
how to handle them when recognized. Thus, it is rather a waste of
time to engage in this hunt unless one has been checked out on
all the material on suppressives and PTSes and grasps it without
misunderstoods. In other words, the first step of the person is
to get a grasp of the subject and its tech. This is not difficult
to do; it may be a bit more difficult to learn to run an E-Meter
and considerably more difficult to learn how to list for items,
but there again this is possible and is much easier than trying
to grope around guessing.

With this step done, a person has no real trouble recognizing PTS
people and can have success in handling them which is very
gratifying and rewarding.

Let us consider the easiest level of approach:

i. Give the person the simpler HCOBs on the subject and let him
study them so that he knows the elements like "PTS" and
"suppressive." He may just cognite right there and be much
better. It has happened.

ii. Have him discuss the illness or accident or condition,
without much prodding or probing, that he thinks now may be the
result of suppression. He will usually tell you it is right here
and now or was a short time ago and will be all set to explain it
(without any relief) as stemming from his current environment or
a recent one. If you let it go at that, he would simply be a bit
unhappy and not get well as he is discussing usually a late lock
that has a lot of earlier material below it.

iii. Ask when he recalls first having that illness or having such
accidents. He will at once begin to roll this back and realize
that it has happened before. You don't have to be auditing him as
he is all too willing to talk about this in a most informal
manner. He will get back to some early this-lifetime point
usually.

iv. Now ask him who it was. He will usually tell you promptly.
And, as you are not really auditing him and he isn't going
backtrack and you are not trying to do more than key him out, you
don't probe any further.

v. You will usually find that he has named a person to whom he is
still connected! So you ask him whether he wants to handle or
disconnect. Now, as the sparks will really fly in his life if he
dramatically disconnects and if he can't see how he can, you
persuade him to begin to handle on a gradient scale. This may
consist of imposing some slight discipline on him, such as
requiring him to actually answer his mail or write the person a
pleasant good roads, good weather note or to realistically look
at how he estranged them. In short, what is required in the
handling is a low gradient. All you are trying to do is MOVE THE
PTS PERSON FROM EFFECT OVER TO SLIGHT GENTLE CAUSE.

vi. Check with the person again, if he is handling, and coach him
along, always at a gentle good-roads-and-good-weather level and
no H E and R (Human Emotion and Reaction), if you please.

That is a simple handling. You can get complexities such as a
person being PTS to an unknown person in his immediate vicinity
that he may have to find before he can handle or disconnect. You
can find people who can't remember more than a few years back.
You can find anything you can find in a case. But simple handling
ends when it looks pretty complex. And that's when you call in
the auditor.

But this simple handling will get you quite a few stars in your
crown. You will be amazed to find that while some of them don't
instantly recover, medication, vitamins, minerals will now work
when before they wouldn't. You may also get some instant recovers
but realize that if they don't you have not failed.

The auditor can do "3 S&Ds" after this with much more effect as
he isn't working with a completely uninformed person.

"3 S&Ds" only fail because of wrong items or because the auditor
did not then put in triple rudiments on the items and then audit
them out as engrams Triple Flow.

A being is rather complex. He may have a lot of sources of
suppression. And it may take a lot of very light auditing to get
him up to where he can do work on suppressives since these were,
after all, the source of his overwhelm. And what he did to THEM
might be more important than what they did to HIM but unless you
unburden HIM he may not get around to realizing that.

You can run into a person who can only be handled by Expanded
Dianetics.

But you have made an entrance and you have stirred things up and
gotten him more aware and just that way you will find he is more
at cause.

His illness or proneness to accidents may not be slight. You may
succeed only to the point where he now has a chance, by
nutrition, vitamins, minerals, medication, treatment, and above
all, auditing, of getting well. Unless you jogged this condition,
he had no chance at all: for becoming PTS is the first thing that
happened to him on the subject of illness or accidents.

Further, if the person has had a lot of auditing and yet isn't
progressing too well, your simple handling may all of a sudden
cause him to line up his case.

So do not underestimate what you or an auditor can do for a PTS.
And don't sell PTS tech short or neglect it. And don't continue
to transfer or push off or even worse tolerate PTS conditions in
people.

You CAN do something about it.

And so can they.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nt.rd.gm



******************************************************************

14. HCOB    8 Mar. 1983      Handling PTS Situations

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1983

Remimeo
PTS/SP Checksheets
All Staff
HCOs
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
Auditors

         HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS

  Refs:
  HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R   PTS TYPE A HANDLING
    Rev. 10.9.83
  HCOB   10 Aug. 73    PTS HANDLING

The following was taken from one of my taped lectures (7511C20)
and is hereby issued in HCOB form:

I coached a pc one time as to how to talk to his parents. I
coached him very, very carefully. This is a sort of MAA job, not
a C/S job. I made him repeat everything after me, very carefully:
"And when your mother says to you so and so and so and so, what
are you going to say?" It was simply good roads and good weather.
I forced him, at pain of being squashed, to follow that exact
patter with the parents. It was just good roads and good weather.

"Hello Mamma, how are you? How's Papa?" you know. And she says,
"Yeow, yeow, yeow, yeow, yeow and you whawha whawha." Just say,
"Well, all right, all right." Don't answer back and don't engage
in any argument of any kind whatsoever, Give it an ack. I said,
"You're calling them up just because you're passing through and
you were interested in how they were, and that is your whole
story." And he did, and that was the end of the whole situation.
Pc came back to battery. Relationships with the parents went
totally normal.

In other words, he was keeping it going -- his worry, his upset,
his letters, trying to answer their questions, his conversation
with them. Whereas I cut it all into just a pattern of something
on the order of about a tone 3.5 straight across the boards. That
was the end of the PTS condition.

A PTS condition also has outside handling steps. But you as an
auditor or you as a C/S are possibly limited by the fact that you
don't have an MAA, or you do not have somebody who is
sufficiently skilled in order to do this job for you. And it
winds up blowing everybody's head off.

In such an instance, just get hold of the guy and coach him in
exactly what he's going to say.

"Oh, but no, she'd never listen, she won't, she hasn't talked to
me for seven years! She won't talk to me in any way, shape or
form!"

"Well, all right, all right, all right. That's fine, good." You
get a little bit inventive and you say, "Well, when is her
birthday?" or something like that. The pc says, "Well, as a
matter of fact, it was a month or two ago." And you say, "Well,
all right, why don't you send her a birthday card and tell her
it's a belated birthday card and that you remembered her birthday
and always had kind thoughts of her?"

Now, the incoming comm may blow his head off. You just cool him
off. Don't engage in any corner of this; this is not the game
you're playing. You simply acknowledge any nice parts you can
find.

"Papa went hunting and you're a dirty dog and I've never seen the
like of you and you're an ungrateful brat and so on, and why
don't you be like your Great-Uncle Oscar who is now doing time in
Sing Sing and'll be executed next week?"

And you say, "I hope Daddy had a fine hunting trip."

It's the only part of it you answer. You coach him into two-way
comm that is well above 2.0 on the Tone Scale, that mostly
consists of acks and mild interest in what's going on. You'll
find out these conditions will evaporate, if you can prevent the
backflash from being responded to by the PTS person. In other
words, there are ways to handle this in real life.

You will find a great many people who are "PTS" are antagonizing
the people. They are antagonizing them beyond belief, and they're
telling them what's wrong with them and they're telling them this
and they're telling them that and the person eventually gets very
resentful.

Well, even that can be patched up. You are not doing anything at
the other end of the line. You cool off the PT scene sufficiently
one way or the other so that the person can sit in the auditing
chair.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:iw.gm



******************************************************************

15. HCOB   16 Apr. 1982      More on PTS Handling

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 16 APRIL 1982

Remimeo
HCO Area Sec Hat
Dir I&R Hat
E/O Hat
MAA Hat
Tech/Qual
Ds of P
PTS Pack

  (Excerpted from an LRH dispatch of 10 Aug. 73.
  Also note there are additional tools developed
  since this dispatch was written for handling
  PTSes, e.g., Can We Ever Be Friends cassette,
  Suppressed Person Rundown, etc.)

          MORE ON PTS HANDLING

  Refs:
  HCOB 10 Aug. 73     PTS HANDLING
  HCOB 20 Oct. 76     PTS DATA
  HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II  OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
  BPL  31 May  71RG   PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING
    Re-rev. 13.11.77  AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET

PTS is a connection to an SP. That is true. But what may be
overlooked is that persons of the middle class (which is a
culture, not an income bracket, to which belong all the puritan
hypocritical mores of the cop and the get-a-job-be-a-moderate-
plugging-success) frown very terribly on anything that the least
bit tries to make a better world. The middle class wants the
world of a job and order and even hypocrisy and cops because they
are AFRAID. They hold their narrow views because any other views
may disturb their twenty-year house mortgage, the store, the job.
So when someone decides to make a better world, they look on him
as a direct menace even though the dull middle-class world is a
sort of slavery and suicide. It is the middle class that tries
the hardest to keep the down-and-outer out and down, who go along
with a cop America and hate support of anything not their class.
And nearly every PTS you have will be found one way or another to
be PTS to the middle class. As a group, not as individuals, the
middle-class-parent world suppresses anything different. So you
have PTSes.

The bulk of your PTSes may very well be PTS to a class, the
middle class of which their particular SP is simply a member. Few
of them realize this or even that the middle class (bourgeoisie)
ARE very suppressive to anyone who tries to do something in the
world besides support the system. My attitude in this is that
both the capitalist and communist are alike old hat and a bore,
that they've made a ruddy mess of things, exhausted the planet
and, with their senseless wars, smashed up mankind.

I have sometimes heard that less PTSes are found than are found
people with the question "Do you have problems in your
environment?" reading on a meter. I began to wonder about it.
Then I heard of PTSes being simply transferred or demoted. Now
listen, these people are PTS and there must be a total grasp on
that tech. It IS a tech.

It is definitely out-tech to either (1) transfer someone who is
PTS to another area yet still keep the person on one's lines or
(2) to put someone who is PTS on a lower post, AS A MEANS OF
HANDLING, as it is not handling at all.

The person has to handle. If he does so, he will begin to get
well and cease to have problems. The reasons he cannot handle are
because he tries to do it in the heroic fashion that is required
in a disconnect. Handling can be very, very gradient. I have seen
a case where the person was simply coached to give his parents
good roads and good weather and not take up any entheta and have
seen the person pull right out of it and get well. It doesn't
have to be an explosive handling. It can be very gentle. All you
want is the person at cause and that is attained on a gradient
toward the SP.

The whole crux of PTSes is HANDLE. And the misunderstood on it is
how gently one can handle.

Many of them are caught up in the mystery of why they are snarled
at and have no conception of the middle class as a formidable and
jealous force that goes psychotic when it feels anyone may get
away from the treadmill and threaten their uneasy and doomed
lives.

One tries to find what it is and then persuades them into
handling. That's the tech.

EVERY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE CAN BE STRAIGHTENED OUT. EVERY ONE OF
THEM SHOULD BE.

Every one who reads on "problems in your environment" is to some
degree PTS. Most of them don't even know what the letters PTS
stand for. So there is an educational step, the PTS/SP
Checksheet. It does not mean they have been connected to ogres.
It means they are suppressed by someone or something, OFTEN FAR
EXTERIOR TO THEIR PRESENT POSITION OR AREA. So there is an
educational step. The tech is in HCO PLs and HCOBs. It is perhaps
given more directly herein, as it applies to that exact scene.

So go to it. Really get a grip on it. And handle the hell out of
them yourselves.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Assisted by
Mission Issues Revision

LRH:bm.dr.gm



******************************************************************

16. HCOB   10 Sept 1983      PTSness and Disconnection

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1983

Remimeo
HCOs
EO Hats
MAA Hats
Tech/Qual
All Staff
PTS/SP Course

         PTSness AND DISCONNECTION

  Refs:
  Tape: 6505C18          ORGANIZATION AND ETHICS
    SH Spec 61
  Tape: 6506C08          HANDLING THE PTS
    SH Spec 63
  HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA    SUPPRESSIVE ACTS,
    Re-rev. 10.9.83      SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY
                         AND SCIENTOLOGISTS
  Tape: 6608C02          SUPPRESSIVES AND GAEs
    SH Spec 73
  Tape: 6608C25          THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY
    SH Spec 78
  HCOB   27 Sept 66      THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY
                         THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST
  HCOB   24 Apr. 72 I    C/S Series 79
                         PTS INTERVIEWS
  HCO PL  3 May 72R      Exec Series 12
    Re-rev. 18.12.77     ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES
  HCOB   10 Aug. 73      PTS HANDLING
  HCOB   29 Dec. 78      THE SUPPRESSED PERSON
                         RUNDOWN
  HCOB   31 Dec. 78 II   OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
  HCOB   31 Dec. 78 III  EDUCATING THE PTS, THE
                         FIRST STEP TOWARD HANDLING:
                         PTS C/S-1
  HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R     PTS TYPE A HANDLING
    Rev. 10.9.83
  HCOB    8 Mar. 83      HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS

                  THEORY

Perhaps the most fundamental right of any being is the right to
communicate. Without this freedom, other rights deteriorate.

Communication, however, is a two-way flow. If one has the right
to communicate, then one must also have the right to not receive
communication from another. It is this latter corollary of the
right to communicate that gives us our right to privacy.

These rights are so basic that governments have written them into
laws-witness the American Bill of Rights.

However, groups have always regulated these rights to one degree
or another. For with the freedom to communicate come certain
agreements and responsibilities.

An example of this is a marriage: In a monogamous society, the
agreement is that one will be married to only one person at one
time. That agreement extends to having second-dynamic relations
with one's spouse and no one else. Thus, should wife Shirley
establish a 2D-type of communication line with someone other than
her husband Pete, it is a violation of the agreement and
postulates of the marriage. Pete has the right to insist that
either this communication cease or that the marriage will cease.

           HANDLE OR DISCONNECT

In the HCOBs on PTS tech you'll see the phrase "handle or
disconnect." It means simply that.

The term "handle" most commonly means, when used in relation to
PTS tech, to smooth out a situation with another person by
applying the tech of communication.

The term "disconnection" is defined as a self-determined decision
made by an individual that he is not going to be connected to
another. It is a severing of a communication line.

The basic principle of handle or disconnect exists in any group
and ours is no different.

It is much like trying to deal with a criminal. If he will not
handle, the society resorts to the only other solution: It
"disconnects" the criminal from the society. In other words, they
remove the guy from society and put him in a prison because he
won't HANDLE his problem or otherwise cease to commit criminal
acts against others.

It's the same sort of situation that husband Pete is faced with
in the example mentioned above. The optimum solution is to handle
the situation with wife Shirley and her violations of their group
(marriage) agreements. But if Pete cannot handle the situation,
he is left with no other choice but to disconnect (sever the
marriage communication lines if only by separation). To do
otherwise would be disastrous, for he is connected to someone
antagonistic to the original agreements, postulates and
responsibilities of the group (the marriage).

A Scientologist can become PTS by reason of being connected to
someone that is antagonistic to Scientology or its tenets. In
order to resolve the PTS condition, he either HANDLES the other
person's antagonism (as covered in the materials on PTS handling)
or, as a last resort when all attempts to handle have failed, he
disconnects from the person. He is simply exercising his right to
communicate or not to communicate with a particular person.

With our tech of handle or disconnect, we are, in actual fact,
doing nothing different than any society or group or marriage
down through thousands of years.

                LOST TECH

Earlier, disconnection as a condition was canceled. It had been
abused by a few individuals who'd failed to handle situations
which could have been handled and who lazily or criminally
disconnected, thereby creating situations even worse than the
original because it was the wrong action.

Secondly, there were those who could survive only by living on
our lines -- they wanted to continue to be connected to
Scientologists (see the HCOBs on the characteristics of an SP).
Thus, they screamed to high heaven if anyone dared to apply the
tech of "handle or disconnect."

This put Scientologists at a disadvantage.

We cannot afford to deny Scientologists that basic freedom that
is granted to everyone else: the right to choose whom one wishes
to communicate with or not communicate with. It's bad enough that
there are governments trying, through the use of force, to
prevent people from disconnecting from them (witness those who
want to leave Russia but can't!).

The bare fact is that disconnection is a vital tool in handling
PTSness and can be very effective when used correctly.

Therefore, the tech of disconnection is hereby restored to use,
in the hands of those persons thoroughly and standardly trained
in PTS/SP tech.

        HANDLING ANTAGONISTIC SOURCES

In the great majority of cases, where a person has some family
member or close associate who appears antagonistic to his getting
better through Scientology, it is not really a matter of the
antagonistic source wanting the PTS to not get better. It is most
commonly a lack of correct information about Scientology that
causes the problem or upset. In such a case, simply having the
PTS disconnect would not help matters and would actually be a
nonconfront of the situation. It is quite common that the PTS has
a low confront on the terminal and situation. This isn't hard to
understand when one looks at these facts:

a. To be PTS in the first place, the PTS must have committed
overts against the antagonistic source; and

b. When one has committed overts, his confront and responsibility
drop.

When an Ethics Officer finds that a Scientologist is PTS to a
family member, he does not recommend that the person disconnect
from the antagonistic source. The EO's advice to the
Scientologist is to handle.

The handling for such a situation is to educate him in the tech
of PTSness and suppression, and then skillfully and firmly guide
the PTS through the steps needed to restore good communication
with the antagonistic source. This eventually dissolves the
situation by bringing about an understanding on the part of the
antagonistic source as to what Scientology is and why the PTS
person is interested and involved in it. Of course, when this is
accomplished you no longer have a PTS at all -- and you may very
well find a new Scientologist on your hands!

The actual steps and procedure of this sort of handling are well
covered in the materials listed at the beginning of this HCOB.

        WHEN DISCONNECTION IS USED

An Ethics Officer can encounter a situation where someone is
factually connected to a suppressive person, in present time.
This is a person whose normal operating basis is one of making
others smaller, less able, less powerful. He does not want anyone
to get better, at all.

In truth, an SP is absolutely, completely terrified of anyone
becoming more powerful.

In such an instance the PTS isn't going to get anywhere trying to
"handle" the person. The answer is to sever the connection.

            HOW TO DISCONNECT

How a disconnection is done depends on the circumstances.

Example: The pc lives next door to, say, a psychiatric clinic and
feels PTS due to this environment. The remedy is simple -- the pc
can move to another apartment in another location. He need not
write any sort of "disconnection letter" to the psychiatric
clinic. He simply changes his environment -- which is, in effect,
a disconnection from the suppressive environment.

Example: A pc is connected to a person or group that has been
declared suppressive by HCO in a published Ethics Order. He
should disconnect and, if he wants to inform the SP of the fact,
he may write a letter of disconnection. Such a letter would be
very straightforward. It would state the fact of the
disconnection and the reason for it. It would not be misemotional
or accusative, since this would only serve to stir up further
antagonism. The letter would be inspected by the Ethics Officer
before it was sent and copies kept for the PTS person's own
ethics file and pc folder. No attempt would be made to establish
communication with the declared SP "to clear matters up" or to
seek to reform the SP. The SP's reform is strictly in the hands
of HCO. The PTS simply disconnects.

Example: One discovers that an employee at his place of business
is an SP -- he steals money, drives away customers, wipes out
other employees and will not correct no matter what you do. The
handling is very simple -- the PTS fires him and that's the end
of it right there!

To fail or refuse to disconnect from a suppressive person not
only denies the PTS case gain, it is also supportive of the
suppressive -- in itself a Suppressive Act. And it must be so
labeled. (Ref: HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA, SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION
OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS)

         SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN

There is of course another technical way to handle PTSes and that
is to get them through all problems they have had with the
terminal involved and the PTSness will disappear (Ref: HCOB 29
Dec. 78, THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN). But it still requires
that during the handling the person disconnects.

                 SUMMARY

The technology of disconnection is essential in the handling of
PTSes. It can and has saved lives and untold trouble and upset.
It must be preserved and used correctly.

Nothing in this HCOB shall ever or under any circumstances
justify any violations of the laws of the land. Any such offense
shall subject the offender to penalties described by law as well
as to ethics and justice actions.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:iw.gm



Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [5/7] Repost [x2]
Datum: 27 Nov 1999 01:15:08 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 5 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 5

17. HCOB   24 Nov. 1965      Search and Discovery

18. HCOB   28 Jan. 1966      Search and Discovery Data, How a
                             Suppressive Becomes One

19. HCOB    5 Feb. 1966      S and D Warning

20. HCOB   10 June 1966 II   S&D -- The Missed Item

21. HCOB   19 Jan. 1968      S&Ds by Button

22. HCOB   19 Nov. 1978      L&N Lists -- the Item "Me"

23. HCO PL 20 Oct. 1976RA    PTS Data

24. HCOB   31 Dec. 1978RA II Outline of PTS Handling

25. HCOB   21 May  1985      Two Types of PTSes
                             C/S Series 121
                             FPRD Series 11

26. HCOB    7 July 1964      Justifications

27. HCOB    8 July 1964      More Justifications

******************************************************************

17. HCOB   24 Nov. 1965      Search and Discovery

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 24 NOVEMBER 1965

Remimeo
Required for
  Level IV Students
  and Review Auditors

                LEVEL IV

          SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

      Prerequisite: A knowledge of
      ethics definitions and purposes.

The process called Search and Discovery requires as well a good
knowledge of ethics.

One must know what a SUPPRESSIVE PERSON is, what a POTENTIAL
TROUBLE SOURCE is and the mechanism of how and why a case roller-
coasters and what that is. All this data exists in ethics policy
letters and should be studied well before one attempts a "Search
and Discovery" or further study of this HCOB. Ethics is not
merely a legal action -- it handles the whole phenomena of case
worsening (roller coaster) after processing, and without this
technology an auditor easily becomes baffled and tends to plunge
and squirrel. The only reason a case roller-coasters after good
standard auditing is the PTS phenomena -- a suppressive is
present.

              THREE TYPES

There are three types of PTS.

Type One is the easy one. The SP on the case is right in present
time, actively suppressing the person.

Type Two is harder for the apparent suppressive person in present
time is only a restimulator for the actual suppressive.

Type Three is beyond the facilities of orgs not equipped with
hospitals as these are entirely psychotic.

          HANDLING TYPE ONE PTS

The Type One is normally handled by an Ethics Officer in the
course of a hearing.

The person is asked if anyone is invalidating him or his gains or
Scientology and if the pc answers with a name and is then told to
handle or disconnect from that person, the good indicators come
in promptly and the person is quite satisfied. If, however, there
is no success in finding the SP on the case or if the person
starts naming org personnel or other unlikely persons as SP, the
Ethics Officer must realize that he is handling a Type Two PTS
and, because the auditing will consume time, sends the person to
Tech or Qual for a Search and Discovery.

It is easy to tell a Type One PTS from a Type Two. The Type One
brightens up at once and ceases to roller-coaster the moment the
present time SP is spotted. The pc ceases to roller-coaster. The
pc does not go back on it and begin to beg off. The pc does not
begin to worry about the consequences of disconnection. If the pc
does any of these things, then the pc is a Type Two.

It can be seen that Ethics handles the majority of PTSes in a
fast manner. There is no trouble about it. All goes smoothly.

It can also be seen that Ethics cannot afford the time to handle
a Type Two PTS and there is no reason the Type Two should not pay
well for the auditing.

Therefore, when Ethics finds its Type One approach does not work
quickly, Ethics must send the person to the proper division that
is handling Search and Discovery.

               TYPE TWO

The pc who isn't sure, won't disconnect or still roller-coasters
or who doesn't brighten up, can't name any SP at all, is a Type
Two.

Only Search and Discovery will help.

         SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

The first thing to know is that CASE WORSENING IS CAUSED ONLY BY
A PTS SITUATION.

There never will be any other reason.

As soon as you doubt this datum and think about "other causes" or
try to explain it some other way, you no longer prevent cases
from worsening and no longer rescue those who have worsened.

The second thing to know is that A SUPPRESSIVE IS ALWAYS A
PERSON, A BEING OR A GROUP OF BEINGS. A suppressive is not a
condition, a problem, a postulate. Problems and counter-
postulates come into the matter but the SP as a being or group
must always be located as a being or a group, not as merely an
idea. As the technology is close to and similar to that of a
service facsimile, a poorly trained auditor can get confused
between them and produce a condition he says is the cause.
Persons who cannot confront and who therefore see persons as
ideas not people are the ones most likely to fail in doing Search
and Discovery.

The third thing to know is that there can be an actual SP and
another person or being similar to the actual one who is only an
apparent SP.

An actual SP actually suppresses another.

An apparent SP only reminds the pc of the actual one and so is
restimulated into being a PTS.

The actual SP can be in present time (Type One PTS) or is in the
past or distant (Type Two PTS).

The Type Two always has an apparent SP who is not the SP on the
case, is confusing the two and is acting PTS only because of
restimulation, not because of suppression.

Search and Discovery as a process is done exactly by the general
rules of listing. One lists for persons or groups who are or have
suppressed the pc. The list is complete when only one item reads
on nulling and this is the item.

If the item turns out to be a group, one does a second list of
who or what would represent that group, gets the list long enough
to leave on nulling only one item reading, and that is the SP.

An incident is not a person or a group. A condition is not a
person or a group. And a group is not a person. What you want is
one being.

The E-Meter signs are unmistakable and the good indicators come
in strongly when the actual SP is found.

This is the entire action. It is liable to the various ills and
errors of writing and nulling a list, such as overlisting,
underlisting, ARC breaking the pc by bypassing the item or
getting an incomplete list. These are avoided by knowing one's
business as an auditor and being able to handle an E-Meter with
skill and confidence.

When one goofs on a Search and Discovery and finds the wrong
actual SP, the signs are the same as those where a Type Two is
handled as a Type One -- not sure, no good indicators, roller-
coasters again, etc.

The actual SP can be backtrack but it is seldom vital to go far
out of PT and usual for a this-lifetime person to turn up.

Done correctly the pc's good indicators come in at once, the pc
cognites, the meter reacts very well with blowdowns and repeated
long falls, and the pc ceases to rollercoaster.

Care should be taken not to get too enthusiastic in going far
backtrack on the pc as you run into whole-track implants, etc.,
easily handleable only at Level V. The pc can get "overwhumped"
if you go too far back and you'll wish you hadn't. This normally
happens, however, only when the pc has been ARC broken by the
auditor, when the right item has been bypassed and the list is
overlong, or when two or three items are still reading on the
list (incomplete list).

Locating a service facsimile is quite similar to Search and
Discovery but they are different processes entirely. Only the
doingness is similar. In Search and Discovery the end product is
a being. In service facsimile the end product is an item or
concept or idea. Don't get the two mixed.

           HANDLING TYPE THREE

The Type Three PTS is mostly in institutions or would be.

In this case the Type Two's apparent SP is spread all over the
world and is often more than all the people there are -- for the
person sometimes has ghosts about him or demons and they are just
more apparent SPs but imaginary as beings as well.

All institutional cases are PTSes. The whole of insanity is
wrapped up on this one fact.

The insane is not just a bad off being. The insane is a being who
has been overwhelmed by an actual SP until too many persons are
apparent SPs. This makes the person roller-coaster continually in
life. The roller coaster is even cyclic (repetitive as a cycle).

Handling an insane person as a Type Two might work but probably
not case for case. One might get enough wins on a few to make one
fail completely by so many loses on the many.

Just as you tell a Type Two to disconnect from the actual SP
(wherever found on the track), you must disconnect the person
from the environment.

Putting the person in a current institution puts him in a Bedlam.
And when also "treated," it may finish him. For he will roller-
coaster from any treatment given, until made into a Type Two and
given a Search and Discovery.

The task with a Type Three is not treatment as such. It is to
provide a relatively safe environment and quiet and rest and no
treatment of a mental nature at all. Giving him a quiet court
with a motionless object in it might do the trick if he is
permitted to sit there unmolested. Medical care of a very
unbrutal nature is necessary, as intravenous feeding and
soporifics (sleeping and quietening drugs) may be necessary. Such
persons are sometimes also physically ill from an illness with a
known medical cure.

Treatment with drugs, shock, operation, is just more suppression.
The person will not really get well, will relapse, etc.

Standard auditing on such a person is subject to the roller-
coaster phenomena. They get worse after getting better.
"Successes" are sporadic, enough to lead one on, and usually
worsen again since these people are PTS.

But removed from apparent SPs, kept in a quiet surroundings, not
pestered or threatened or put in fear, the person comes up to
Type Two and a Search and Discovery should end the matter. But
there will always be some failures as the insane sometimes
withdraw into rigid unawareness as a final defense, sometimes
can't be kept alive and sometimes are too hectic and distraught
to ever become quiet. The extremes of too quiet and never quiet
have a number of psychiatric names such as "catatonia" (withdrawn
totally) and "manic" (too hectic). Classification is interesting
but nonproductive since they are all PTS, all will roller-coaster
and none can be trained or processed with any idea of lasting
result no matter the temporary miracle.

Remove a Type Three PTS from the environment, give him or her
rest and quiet, do a Search and Discovery when rest and quiet
have made the person Type Two.

(Note: These paragraphs on the Type Three make good a promise
given in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health to
develop "Institutional Dianetics.")

The modern mental hospital with its brutality and suppressive
treatments is not the way to give a psychotic quiet and rest.
Before anything effective can be done in this field, a proper
institution would have to be provided, offering only rest, quiet
and medical assistance for intravenous feedings and sleeping
drafts where necessary but not as "treatment" and where no
treatment is attempted until the person looks recovered and only
then a Search and Discovery as above under Type Two.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:ep.cden.gm



******************************************************************

18. HCOB   28 Jan. 1966      Search and Discovery Data, How a
                             Suppressive Becomes One

        HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
  Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 28 JANUARY 1966

Remimeo
Tech Hats
Qual Hats
All Students
Level IV and above

                 LEVEL IV

         SEARCH AND DISCOVERY DATA
       HOW A SUPPRESSIVE BECOMES ONE

   (Edited from a taped conference with Saint
   Hill Tech and Qual personnel--20 Dec. 1965)

Search and Discovery is being made, and auditors are finding on
one person and another, "myself." Well, just amongst us girls, of
course, you are going to find it. One of the best reasons you are
going to find it is that it is part of the R6 bank. The other
reason you are going to find it is that after a person is totally
overwhelmed by a suppressive he assumes the valence of the
suppressive. And a person you would find that on has actually
been pretty suppressive.

What you're doing is, you are pushing S&D to a point where you
are clearing suppression. It wasn't intended to go that far.

If you were to ask the listing question, however, "Name 'myself'"
or "Give 'myself' a name," you would then get the suppressive.

But this is getting very adventurous, because it is part of the
R6 bank. It is getting very adventurous to do anything about it.
We seem to be happy about having "myself." I would just let them
go right on being happy about it. With skill you probably could
bring out the identity of this person whose valence had come over
them. It would all depend on the auditor who is doing it. If I
were doing it, I'd go ahead and break it down. But not a Class
III Auditor who is not sure what he is going up against, who is
repeating the word several times, repeating the question, trying
to check it to make sure the listing question is clean. Don't you
see, you are never going to get that listing question clean. That
I assure you. That question can't be listed out.

That is the mechanism of suppression -- overwhelming a person.
Oddly enough you will only find it on persons who are suppressive
and of course you've walked into the real mechanism of how does a
suppressive become a suppressive? He becomes a suppressive by
taking over the valence of a suppressive.

Then when you list it out, you get "myself," and this is
compounded by the fact that it's part of the R6 bank so you don't
dare do much with it, but it will let a bunch of steam off the
case.

With some very, very, very, very upstage auditing, very careful
indeed, give them the auditing question once, then say, "Go on
and answer the question" but never repeat it, never check the
thing to find out if it's a clean list-you probably would get at
least one recent SP out of that combination. How we do that at
that stage when I've not worked with it technically I would not
be able to tell you, but I just know that it would be very risky.
It makes me feel like maybe I shouldn't do anything about it at
all because it's too risky, but I can see somebody getting messed
up.

         THE MAIN TROUBLE IN S&D

Your main trouble in S&D is much worse than that -- it is simply
an inability to assess. And auditors since time immemorial have
had trouble assessing. They have two troubles in assessing. They
underlist and they overlist. It's almost an accident that an
auditor ever lists the right lists the right way. I'm not saying
that sarcastically but it has been my experience in teaching
auditors to assess that they have two faults -- they underlist
and they overlist.

If they do either one of these things, they are going to ARC
break the pc and then the list isn't going to be nullable because
the pc is not responding to the auditor's voice as well, and it
quite often was the first one on the list which is where they
never looked. More fundamental than that, is simply the problem
of reading an E-Meter. Those technical facts are in the road of
S&D.

           ASSESSING AN S&D

Actually, an auditor who can assess can pass off an S&D so fast
it would be like dealing cards done by a Monte Carlo Vingt-et-Un
player; he could just roll them off left, right and center.
There's no real trouble in it. It's a very fast action. It all
depends on how much you want to keep the pc under tension in the
action, because an assessment isn't auditing to begin with.

You would start session with "Sit down, I'm going to assess you
now. Do you have some answers to this question? Brr. Brr. Brr."
And the pc says, "I want to tell you about----" "All right, good,
I'm glad you're going to tell me about that but right now I want
some answers to this question." See? Then "brrrrr" on down and
then you'll notice your needle relax. Then you say, "All right,
now I'm going through this list." Ratatat, etc. "That's it, all
right. Thanks very much." Pc cognites ten minutes. Pc cognites
and the meter blows up and good indicators come in, and you've
done an S&D. There is nothing more complicated than that.

You've got auditors who were trying to do an S&D in a session.
You got them that are afraid the pc has already given it on the
list. You got them that haven't learned how the meter reacts when
you've got a complete list. (A meter just falls flat when you've
got a complete list. The needle goes clean.) And you've got them
that aren't sure that they've got any SP, and they just didn't
see that the meter did a surge on one of them. Then you get
somebody who has overlisted and he's just ploughed the guy in, so
he can't assess it back easily.

Then you get the fellow who had four of them fall. Certainly if
you've got four falling there's two things that can be wrong at
this point which makes it very difficult to run back. In one, you
have passed it. It's above the four which are falling. You've
missed it, and the pc is simply discharging on it. And actually
you can ask the pc which one was it and he'll say, "Well, it was
Joe, of course." That's above the four. Practically every one
after the right one will read, because it's actually blowing down
all the time. He's no longer paying any attention to the auditor.

Then the other thing is you just haven't completed the list.

You have to make an opinion as to whether or not you've
overlisted or underlisted. You can also pick up a dirty needle
and an ARC broken pc or protesty pc if you've gone by the right
one.

Here are the evils of listing, and here are the evils of
assessment showing up on S&D. They are simply auditor goofs --
it's just lack of experience on the part of the auditor and lack
of understanding of what he's supposed to be doing. But an
auditor who can really assess can knock these things off. I'd
spot what auditors can assess reliably, and I'd give them
specialized jobs of that character that require listing. This is
a very, very highly skilled action. You save a lot of time by
pulling such an auditor back into specialty.

             REVIEW ACTION

In Review you have to do it sometimes when it's been done. So you
have the additional answer of "How do you patch up an assessment
that's already been goofed?"

And "Where is the list that was lost?" You've got the problem of
the list that was completed out of session. "And I got home and
was lying in bed..." and so forth. So in Review you always assume
the pc continued the list after the session. If the pc is there
as a flat ball bearing, you just automatically assume the pc
thought of it afterwards or something. It isn't that the Tech
auditor always got it.

I'll give you a tip in Qual. If you assume automatically that
standard technology has not been applied, as your first gambit,
in anybody that you're putting back together again, you'll about
99% be right. Somehow or other it slipped by in Tech. It slipped
by. Somebody thought he did it. Somebody thought it was on the
report. And therefore it looked like it didn't work or something.
Something was there. And in all of my D of P-ing I have not found
it possible to detect all departures from tech by auditors. I've
never been able to bat 1000 on that. Naturally, it's nearly
impossible.

Technically, what you have to do doesn't mean that you have to
invent technology because there are very standard answers to all
these things.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:ml.rd.gm



******************************************************************

19. HCOB    5 Feb. 1966      S and D Warning

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 5 FEBRUARY 1966

Remimeo
Tech Div Hats
HGC Auditors
Qual Div Staff
Franchise

                Level III

             S AND D WARNING

Search and Discovery, done incorrectly (incorrect SP found), can
make a preclear ill within a week or two after.

Assessment is a very proper skill. There is a great deal written
on it and many tapes.

The common errors of assessment (aside from the usual gross
auditing errors) are

1. Too short a list

2. Too long a list

3. Clumsy or improper meter handling

4. List getting suppressed

5. Item getting invalidated

6. Pc being allowed too much itsa

7. Pc getting ARC broken by under- or overlisting

8. Auditor not letting the pc have his item

9. Whole list going live because the item was bypassed earlier on
the list

10. Auditor not looking for good and bad indicators to see if he
was correct in his assessment.

When the right SP is found, the good indicators flood in and the
pc does not cave-in in 36 to 72 hours.

The bug in S&D is that one can almost get the right item. An item
can be found that is nearly the right one. If the nearly right
one is accepted, the pc will be doubtfully more cheerful and may
insist this is it. The pc, however, is still not quite sure.
Inevitably that is the sign of a nearly right item.

The real reaction to the correct person is an "Of course!" no-
doubt-about-it reaction.

It is the action of nearly finding the right one that may make
the pc ill in the next few days or a week. One has restimulated
the bypassed charge of the right one without finding it.

Remember that the real suppressive person (SP) was the one that
wove a dangerous environment around the pc. To find that person
is to open up the pc's present time perception or space. It's
like pulling a wrapping of wool off the pc.

The SP persuaded or caused the pc to believe the environment was
dangerous and that it was always dangerous and so made the pc
pull in and occupy less space and reach less.

When the SP is really located and indicated, the pc feels this
impulse not to reach diminish and so his space opens up.

The difference between a safe environment and a dangerous
environment is only that a person is willing to reach and expand
in a safe environment and reaches less and contracts in a
dangerous environment.

An SP wants the other person to reach less. Sometimes this is
done by forcing the person to reach into danger and get hurt so
that the person will thereafter reach less.

The SP wants smaller, less powerful beings. The SP thinks that if
another became powerful that one would attack the SP

The SP is totally insecure and is battling constantly in covert
ways to make others less powerful and less able.

Scientology flies into the teeth of an SP. One will go to the
most extraordinary lengths to try to injure Scientologists or an
organization or a staff member.

But SPs existed long before Scientology and finding the basic SP
around the pc just because of Scientology or the pc is a
Scientologist is in actual fact unlikely.

Childhood is the most fertile area in which to locate the SP on
the case. A child is weak and at the mercy of adults. It is this
fact alone that gave all the cures Freud ever stumbled onto. The
analyst accidentally located an SP when his work was successful.
But then he proceeded to overrun and restimulate the patient
without erasing. In other words, he would not let the patient
have his item. An hour with a meter in the hands of an expert
auditor who can assess correctly will produce everything the
analyst or Freud ever hoped to achieve and will do it invariably
compared to the small results analysts did achieve.

But if you get one almost right, and not get the really correct
SP, then you get the same phenomena that dogged the analyst --
the pc gets better for a moment and collapses.

I am not saying you can permanently injure persons. The analyst
techniques operated far more restimulatively than our S&D. They
made the person talk about it for years!

But you can still give a pc a nasty cold if you miss on an S&D.

So don't miss.

Do it correctly.

Find the correct SP

It's all correct if you assess by the book -- complete list, not
too long or too short. Correct item on the list. Good indicators
then in. And no relapse for at least two weeks.

That's how a real S&D is done.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:ml.rd.gm



******************************************************************

20. HCOB   10 June 1966 II   S&D -- The Missed Item

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 10 JUNE 1966
                 Issue II

Remimeo
Tech Div Hats
HGC Auditors
Qual Div Staff

         S&D -- THE MISSED ITEM

There are four points I want to get across to you.

1. ILLNESS = ONLY PTS

2. ONLY PTS = ILLNESS

3. ONLY A PTS CONDITION CAN MAKE A GRADE V (or any grade) SICK

4. A BAD S&D MAKES A PERSON SICK

Get it? GOOD!!

Now, if a person who has had an S&D gets sick, what do you know?
You know that

a. They are a PTS
b. The S&D was not properly done
c. An item was missed.

NOTE: The missed item may be on a list that was made two or three
years ago.

On the HCOB 5 Feb. 66, S&D WARNING, I clearly stated that "It is
the action of nearly finding the right one that may make the pc
ill." One has restimulated the charge of the RIGHT item but has
found and okayed the WRONG item.

A bad S&D is DEADLY.

A bad S&D can cause a dangerous physical condition. A bad S&D can
land a pc in hospital (I know of two such cases where it did).

So please! PLEASE!! get this, it is so very important. Always,
repeat, ALWAYS look for the MISSED item on a priorly done list
when the pc gets sick.

Know your S&D bulletins, know your listing and nulling bulletin
-- THOROUGHLY -- and you won't go wrong.

Let's fix up roller coasters, not help keep them roller-
coastering.

IT'S VERY EASY.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:lb-r.cden.gm



******************************************************************

21. HCOB   19 Jan. 1968      S&Ds by Button

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 19 JANUARY 1968

Remimeo

                   S&Ds

              S&Ds BY BUTTON

The most certain way to handle a pc with an S&D is to assess for
the type to give first.

With the pc on the meter, say "Unmock" (or "Make nothing of")
"Stop" "Withdraw from" "Suppress" "Invalidate" (or any of the
buttons used in old Problems Intensives). Then take the one that
read largest and put it in the question "Who or what has attempted
to ______ you?" or "Who or what are you trying to ______?"

When you have listed the question and found the item and given it
to the pc, you can take the above list, with the one used
omitted, and take the largest read now on the remaining words and
put that in the question and get another item for it.

So long as you can get one of the buttons to read, you can get an
item by doing an S&D with it.

CAUTION: Do not continue to do S&Ds beyond a floating needle.

CAUTION: Do not list an S&D button if the question for the list
does not read.

        S&Ds BY ASSESSMENT FOR QUESTION

You can also do an S&D by assessing for a button to use in an S&D
question.

This is done by asking the question

  "What are they trying to do to you?"

Get the pc to list it, find the item and then use it in an S&D
question.

This works on any case but always works best on cases that
haven't responded to S&Ds previously.

Fit the resulting item in the question "Who or what is trying to
______ you?"

               PURPOSE S&Ds

A Purpose S&D by assessment for question can be done by first
listing "What are you trying to do?" or "What have you tried to
do?" You test these two questions for the largest read, then you
list the one that reads best.

When you have the item of "What are you trying to do?" or "What
have you tried to do?" you fit it into the S&D question "Who or
what have you failed to ______ (item found)?" or "Who or what
have you tried to ______?" the two questions tested for largest
read and then listed for an item.

CAUTION: The question must make sense and be answerable. Don't
change the wording of the item. Change the question into a
sensible one.

This form of S&D can give an effect question as the only possible
question.

If the item found on the first list "______ trying to do" won't
word causative, word it by effect -- "Who or what has tried to
______ you ______?"

The whole attempt of this S&D is to find the person or thing that
has blunted the purpose of the pc.

               ----------

All these S&Ds do not set aside the standard S&D Types W, S and
U. "Type U" is the basic S&D. They are for use mainly when the pc
has had a long review history, or a bad ethics history, or is
insane or suppressive. BUT using them does not evaluate the pc as
downtone. They give rather magical effects on anyone.

The Purpose S&D is from earlier research and is very magical on
artists. It has the liability of having to be done sensibly,
being a sort of goals assessment plus an S&D. Sometimes the goals
assessment ("What are you trying to do") is magical enough to
produce a floating needle. If so, don't ever go past it to the
second question that uses the goal.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jp.cden.gm



******************************************************************

22. HCOB   19 Nov. 1978      L&N Lists -- the Item "Me"

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 19 NOVEMBER 1978

Auditors, Class
  IV and above
C/Ses, Class IV
  and above

           URGENT -- IMPORTANT

        L&N LISTS -- THE ITEM "ME"

RULE: THE ITEM "ME" MUST BE ACCEPTED ON ANY S&D LIST.

RULE: THE ITEM "ME" MUST NEVER BE REPRESENTED.

The item "Me" on an L&N list must be accepted as the item, as it
is basically the only right item there could be for an identity
or valence list.

The item "Me" often appears on S&D lists or similar L&N lists
which ask for an identity or valence. If it is not accepted, or
if it is represented, it will really mess up the case. (This
includes the pronouns "myself" and "I".)

The right thing to do when the pc gives this item is to accept it
as the item for the list, and do not continue that list or take
any further action with that item.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:clb.gm



******************************************************************

23. HCO PL 20 Oct. 1976RA    PTS Data

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

   HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 OCTOBER 1976RA
          REVISED 25 AUGUST 1987

Remimeo
SSO
DPE
Ethics Officers
PTS/SP Checksheet

     (Also issued as HCOB 20 Oct. 76R,
               same title)

                PTS DATA

Based on a recent pilot, it has become quite obvious that a full
and complete PTS handling would consist of:

A. PTSness handled terminatedly by interview or auditing by a
person trained on the PTS/SP Checksheet.

B. Complete study and pass on the PTS/SP Checksheet.

The correctly located suppressive, and a correct handling of the
situation based on a thorough understanding of the mechanics of
PTS/SP phenomena form the simplicity that is PTS tech. The tech
of locating the suppressive source is also fully covered in the
PTS/SP Checksheet and is a vital prerequisite for PTS handlers.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

Adopted as official
Church policy by
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY
INTERNATIONAL

LRH:CSI:RTRC:nt.lf.gm



******************************************************************

24. HCOB   31 Dec. 1978RA II  Outline of PTS Handling

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 31 DECEMBER 1978RA
                 Issue II
         RE-REVISED 26 JULY 1986

Remimeo
HCO
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
Auditors
Ethics Officers
De-PTSers
PTS/SP Checksheet

         OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING

  Refs:
  HCOB   31 Dec. 78R III  EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL
    Rev. 26.7.86          TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST
                          STEP TOWARD HANDLING:
                          PTS C/S-1
  HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R      PTS TYPE A HANDLING
    Rev. 10.9.83
  HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I       C/S Series 79
                          Expanded Dianetics Series 5
                          PTS INTERVIEWS
  HCO PL 30 Jan. 83       YOUR POST AND LIFE
  HCOB   20 Oct. 76 II    PTS HANDLING
  HCO PL 20 Oct. 76RA     PTS DATA
    Rev. 25.8.87
  HCOB   17 Apr. 72R      C/S Series 76R
    Rev. 20.12.83         C/Sing A PTS RUNDOWN
  HCOB   23 Dec. 71RA     C/S Series 73RA
    Re-rev. 1.7.85        THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
                          CLARIFIED AND RE-ENFORCED
  HCOB   27 July 76       PTS RUNDOWN AND VITAL INFO
                          RUNDOWN POSITION CORRECTED
  Book:
  The Problems of Work    Chapter 6, "Affinity, Reality
                          and Communication"
  HCOB   10 Aug. 73       PTS HANDLING
  HCOB    8 Mar. 83       HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
  HCOB   16 Apr. 82       MORE ON PTS HANDLING
  HCOB   10 Sept.83       PTSness AND DISCONNECTION
  HCOB   24 Nov. 65       SEARCH AND DISCOVERY
  HCOB    9 Dec. 71RC     PTS RUNDOWN, AUDITED
    Rev. 8.12.78
  HCOB   20 Jan. 72R      PTS RUNDOWN ADDITION
    Rev. 8.12.78
  HCOB    3 June 72RA     PTS RUNDOWN, FINAL STEP
     Rev. 8.12.78
  HCOB   29 Dec. 78R      THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN
      Rev. 20.12.83       A MAGICAL NEW RUNDOWN
  HCOB   30 Dec. 78R      SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN
      Rev. 6.1.79         PROBLEMS PROCESSES
  HCOB   21 May  85       C/S Series 121
                          FPRD Series 11
                          TWO TYPES OF PTSes

PTS situations can arise at any time during a person's Scientology
auditing or training and must be handled speedily and well to get
the person back on his course of auditing or training. Many
preclears new to Scientology require PTS handling as one of their
first actions.

Auditing or training must not be continued over an unhandled PTS
situation, as processing or study under the duress of suppression
may not produce results.

You do not go on hoping or ignore it or call it something else or
do any other action except handle. Handling PTSness is too easy
to allow for any justification or excuse for not doing so, and
the steps given below lay out the many handlings which can be
used to bring about a full resolution of all PTSness in all pcs.

                EDUCATION

A person who is PTS is often the last person to suspect it. He
may have become temporarily or momentarily so. And he may have
become so very slightly. Or he may be very PTS and have been so
for a long time. But he is nevertheless PTS and we must educate
him on the subject.

The PTS C/S-1, given in HCOB 31 Dec. 78R III, Rev. 26.7.86,
EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD
HANDLING: PTS C/S-1, must be done before any other PTS handling
is begun.

This action sets a person up to understand his PTS sit and the
mechanics of it. A thorough PTS C/S-1 is the basis of all
successful PTS handling.

              PTS INTERVIEW

A metered PTS interview per HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I, C/S Series 79, PTS
INTERVIEWS, or a "10 August handling" per HCOB 10 Aug. 73, PTS
HANDLING, done by an auditor in session or an MAA, De-PTSer, D of
P or SSO will, in most cases, assist the person to spot the
antagonistic or SP element. Once spotted, the potential trouble
source must be assisted in working out a handling for that
terminal. (Or more rarely, the PTS may need to disconnect from
that person.)

(If any difficulty is encountered on this step or if the SP
cannot easily be found, the preclear or student is probably not
PTS Type I and should be turned over to an auditor qualified to
handle Type II PTS situations with more advanced PTS tech.)

                HANDLING

Once the antagonistic terminal has been located, a handling is
done to move the PTS person from effect to slight gentle cause
over his situation. This handling is done per a program which
will include whatever is needed to accomplish the result, and
will, of course, vary depending on the person and his
circumstances.

When the antagonistic person exists in present time, in the
physical universe (as opposed to a past-life SP item), a good-
roads, good-weather approach to the antagonistic terminal is
usually what is needed. The handling must be agreed upon by the
potential trouble source and the person assisting him and must be
tailored to put the person at cause over his particular
situation.

Handling may include coaching him along to see how he himself
actually precipitated the PTS condition in the first place by not
applying or by misapplying Scientology basics to his life and
relationship with the now antagonistic terminal.

(Additional references:

  HCOB   10 Aug. 73     PTS HANDLING
  HCOB   24 Apr. 72 I   C/S Series 79
                        PTS INTERVIEWS
  HCOB   24 Nov. 65     SEARCH AND DISCOVERY
  Book:
  The Problems of Work  Chapter 6, "Affinity,
                        Reality and Communication"
  HCOB    8 Mar. 83     HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS
  HCOB   10 Sept.83     PTSness AND DISCONNECTION
  HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R    PTS TYPE A HANDLING
    Rev. 10.9.83

           WHAT IS SCIENTOLOGY?

It quite often happens that the persons antagonistic to the
preclear have no real concept of what Scientology is. This can
also be true of a very new Scientologist who then misinforms
others.

The book What Is Scientology? is a very useful tool. The preclear
can send a copy of it to persons antagonistic to him and it will
give them hope that the person will respond better to life or if
they are antagonistic to Scientology can show them what they're
being antagonistic to.

Recommendations that the PTS person obtain and use this book (or
anyone else who wants to inform his friends or get them on the
right road, as the book was not written for the purpose of de-
PTSing people) should be made by the interviewing officer. The
book was specially priced so it would be more generally available
despite the high cost of publishing. It is a large and imposing
book and contains the true answers to all the questions people
might ask and so saves the PTS person or any other person a great
deal of explanation time.

It is quite a formidable weapon when used in that fashion besides
being a good book that Scientologists should own in its own
right.

         BOOKS, TAPES AND FILMS

Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought, and other basic books,
tapes and films (particularly the film Introduction to
Scientology) are very useful tools. The preclear can send a copy
of a book or tape to the antagonistic person. Or he can bring the
person in to the local org to listen to a tape play or see a
film.

     HOW TO HANDLE FALSE DATA AND LIES

In some cases antagonism stems from false data or outright lies
that the antagonistic person has heard or read.

The handling for this is based on the datum that truth must exist
before lies, and truth blows the lie away as it is later on the
chain.

The handling for a person who has false data on Scientology is to
fill in any vacuum of missing data with factual data about
Scientology and to prove any lies, rumors and false data
encountered to be false.

Any lies are disproven by documenting the truth. For example, if
the lie is that "Scientology is not a religion," this can be
proven to be false with court decisions or documents clearly
stating that Scientology is a religion. (The tech of handling
such is covered in HCO PL 11 May 71 III, PR Series 7, BLACK PR,
and HCO PL 21 Nov. 72 I, PR Series 18, HOW TO HANDLE BLACK
PROPAGANDA.) Packs of such current materials can be obtained
through one's local Ethics Officer or the Director of Special
Affairs in your org.

The truth blows the lie away. And the source of the lie is
rendered unbelievable and any other utterances by that source
will then be discarded.

          CAN WE EVER BE FRIENDS?

Extraordinary successes in handling PTS situations with "Can We
Ever Be Friends?" cassette and booklet occur when these are used.
Many parents, friends, relatives of Scientologists, who, due to
misunderstoods or misinformation, thought they were opposed to
Scientology and its aims have discovered, after listening to this
cassette, that they are in full agreement with it and now give
Scientology their support.

The results available with this cassette cannot be underestimated.
It can be used by itself when communication has really broken
down between the two terminals or in conjunction with other PTS
handling.

              DISCONNECTION

In the rare cases where disconnection is validly indicated in
order to handle the person's PTSness, it should be done exactly
per HCOB 10 Sept. 83, PTSness AND DISCONNECTION.

                 PROGRAM

As a result of interview and the various actions connected with
it as given above and in the referenced issues, the interviewer
must give the person a program to be done by the person. If the
person does not do the program or report his actions on it or the
program results in no real change in the situation, the
interviewing officer must require the person to have auditing on
the subject. Ruds can be flown and/or a PTS RD must be given by a
qualified auditor in the HGC.

Clears and OTs can have ruds flown and can do all the PTS RD
except engram handling.

This is usually followed by a Suppressed Person RD.

                RUDIMENTS

Flying ruds and overts triple or quad flow on the antagonistic
terminal is often done to "get ruds in" and enable the PTS Type A
person to better confront the PTS situation he is faced with.
With a better confront of the situation, he is, obviously, better
prepared to carry out the handling steps of his program
successfully. This would, of course, be done only in session by a
qualified auditor when so ordered by the Case Supervisor.

The above describes the use of rudiments in handling PTS Type A
situations. Note that in cases where a PTS Rundown is needed
rudiments alone are never used as a substitute for the full
rundown.

              PTS/SP COURSE

A full and complete PTS handling would consist of getting the
person through his PTSness and then getting him through the
PTS/SP Course. This must be included as part of the handling, as
otherwise the person will never learn the full mechanics that had
been wrecking his life.

With the knowledge of PTS/SP technical data under his belt, a
person can be at cause over suppressives and is far less likely
to become PTS to anyone in the future.

             THE PTS RUNDOWN

The PTS Rundown is done when preclears who have had standard,
successful PTS handlings roller-coaster at a later date, become
ill, slump after making gains or continue to find additional
terminals they are PTS to.

Or it is done when the person doesn't brighten up with standard
PTS A handling or when he isn't sure of the SP or can't name any
SP at all.

The exceptions are:

1. that the R3RA steps of the PTS RD would not be run on Clears
and OTs (though they may be given the remaining steps of the PTS
RD), and

2. audited actions to handle PTSness would not be done on those
in the No-Interference Area.

Note: Although the PTS RD contains R3RA steps and New Era
Dianetics has been repositioned above Grades 0-IV on the new
Grade Chart, this does NOT limit the PTS RD to those at the level
of NED in their processing. When a person has a PTS condition to
be handled, it is not a matter of whether the person is up to the
level of NED on the Grade Chart but a matter of handling the
condition terminatedly, as the person may not be otherwise
audited or trained over PTSness. This does not preclude the fact
that proper setup for the action must be done, per the four
points of breakdown of the PTS Rundown.

The PTS Rundown is run to the end phenomena of a pc who is
getting and keeping case gains and never again roller-coasters.

        SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN

If after the PTS Rundown, the person feels fine but the persons
suppressing him are still making trouble, then the PTS person
must have a Suppressed Person Rundown.

The Suppressed Person Rundown can produce the wondrous result of
changing the disposition of an antagonistic terminal at a
distance, by auditing the PTS preclear. Where this terminal was
antagonistic, invalidative, hostile or downright suppressive, he
can suddenly have a change of heart and seek to make peace with
the PTS pc.

The end phenomena of this handling is a miraculous restoration of
communication between the estranged terminals originated by the
formerly antagonistic person.

The Suppressed Person Rundown is done after a PTS C/S-1 has been
done, the antagonistic terminal has been located and handlings
have been done on that terminal, and after the PTS Rundown has
been done.

It is not done in the No-Interference Area.

Note that this rundown is for USE, even after the pc himself has
been handled as a case, as this rundown handles the other person,
the SP or antagonistic person, and the pc's relationship to him
in the real physical universe. Where the SP or antagonistic
person exists in present time, this rundown is done on a one-for-
one basis. In such cases, you use it no matter how successful the
PTS handling was.

                SUMMARY

Thus, any full and complete PTS handling consists of.

1. Education (PTS C/S-1)
2. PTS Interview (discovering to what or whom he is PTS)
3. Handling (or in rare cases disconnection, if warranted)
4. PTS/SP Course (can be started earlier)
5. PTS Rundown (if needed)
6. Suppressed Person Rundown (if needed).

These are powerful and precision tools. With them we can handle
our PTS students, preclears and staffs and get resounding one-
for-one successes.

I am counting on you to do this.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

LRH:RTRC:pm.fa.sep.ja



******************************************************************

25. HCOB   21 May  1985      Two Types of PTSes
                             C/S Series 121
                             FPRD Series 11

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

        HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MAY 1985

Remimeo
C/Ses
Execs
MAAs/EOs
Tech/Qual

        (Also issued as an HCO PL,
           same date and title)

             C/S Series 121
     False Purpose Rundown Series 11

           TWO TYPES OF PTSes

  Refs:
  HCOB 28 Feb. 84    C/S Series 118
                     PRETENDED PTS
  HCOB 17 June 84    C/S Series 118-1
                     EVIL PURPOSES AND FALSE PR
  HCOB  5 June 84    FPRD Series 1
                     FALSE PURPOSE RUNDOWN
  HCOB 29 Dec. 78R   THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN
    Rev. 20.12.83    A MAGICAL NEW RUNDOWN
  HCOB  9 Dec. 71RC  PTS RUNDOWN, AUDITED
  HCOB 10 Aug. 73    PTS HANDLING

  Modifies:
  HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I  C/S Series 79
                     PTS INTERVIEWS
  HCOB 17 Apr. 72R   C/S Series 76R
    Rev. 20.12.83    C/Sing A PTS RUNDOWN
  HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING

There are two types of PTSes:

1. Pretended PTS so as to cover up black PR and evil purposes or
justify them, and

2. Actual PTSness.

Although PTSness can cease simply on spotting the person
accurately that one is PTS to, there are two full rundowns to
handle this condition: The PTS Rundown and the Suppressed Person
Rundown.

On pretended PTSness as mentioned in (1) above, your very
reliable clue is that the person says he is PTS to a well-
intentioned person, such as a staff member or a Scientology VIP.
This is almost totally conclusive evidence that you are dealing
with a person with an evil purpose. Thus, he would be programmed
for auditing geared to locating and handling evil purposes. He
won't get any relief from being found "PTS" to a well-intentioned
person. From time to time one sees "PTS finding" of that nature
cropping up. This probably is the first analysis given as to why
and what it is all about. The person who does that has been black
PRing, has O/Ws and probably, under those, evil purposes.

The usual action, when someone is observably roller-coastering
and manifesting a PTS condition, is to interview the person and
find out who he is PTS to. (Ref: HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I, C/S Series
79, PTS INTERVIEWS) If a standard interview is done and the pc
names well-intentioned persons as the people he is PTS to, the
C/S, seeing this, would not order a PTS Rundown. The C/S would
program the case for those auditing rundowns designed to uncover
and blow O/Ws and evil purposes.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:rw.pl.gm



******************************************************************

26. HCOB    7 July 1964      Justifications

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

        HCO BULLETIN OF 7 JULY 1964

Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students

           SCIENTOLOGY III & IV

              JUSTIFICATIONS

The reasons overts are not overts to people are JUSTIFICATIONS.

If you ask a pc what overt he has committed, and then ask him why
it wasn't an overt, you will find that it wasn't an overt and
therefore didn't relieve as an answer because it was all
justified.

One of the powerful new overt processes (as given by me on recent
tapes) is:

1. In this lifetime, what overt have you committed?

2. How have you justified it?

(2) is run flat until the overt given in (1) is knocked out. Then
a new overt is found and (2) is done thoroughly and repetitively
on it.

This is not a new form of process but these are very new
commands.

Note it is not an alternate command. Note that a cycle of action
is completed with question (2) on (1) before you leave off
processing this particular overt. Only when you have all the
justifications and cognitions possible on (1) do you ask for a
new overt from the pc.

This cracks the general irresponsibility the auditor is met with
in trying to get O/W to benefit the irresponsible case.

"In this lifetime" is added because the pc who can't face his
overts not only justifies them but goes way back into his past
lives to find overts instead of getting off the simple this-
lifetime ones.

This is not the same process as plain "What have you done?" in
which any action done by the pc is accepted as the answer.

However, in simple general O/W you will find the pc is not
answering the auditing question but is answering "What have I
done that caused my trouble?" The pc is running "What action that
I have done explains what has happened to me?"

Therefore, running justifications off is a further south process
than any earlier version of O/W and is very effective in raising
the cause level of the pc.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:nb.rd.gm



******************************************************************

27. HCOB    8 July 1964      More Justifications

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

        HCO BULLETIN OF 8 JULY 1964

Remimeo
Franchise
Sthil Students

           SCIENTOLOGY III & IV

           MORE JUSTIFICATIONS

The following list of Scientology justifications was compiled by
Phyll Stevens and several other course students and is issued to
show how one can get around getting off an overt and stay sick
from it.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

        SOME FAMOUS JUSTIFICATIONS

    It wasn't really an overt because...

It wasn't me, it was just my bank.
You can't hurt a thetan.
He was asking for a motivator.
He's got overts on me.
I've got a service fac on that.
His overts are bigger than mine.
My intentions were good.
He's a victim anyway.
I had bypassed charge.
I was just being self-determined.
I've come up to being overt.
It's better than suppressing.
I'll straighten it out next lifetime.
He must have done something to deserve it.
He was dragging it in.
I was in an ARC break.
He needed a lesson.
He'll have another lifetime anyway.
It's only a consideration anyhow.
It's not against my moral code.
Codes are only considerations.
They couldn't have it.
They weren't willing to experience it.
I don't see why I have to be the only one to take responsibility.
It's about time I was overt.
They are only wogs anyhow.
They are so way out they wouldn't realize it.
He's such a victim already, one more motivator won't make any
  difference.
They just can't have 8-C.
I can't help it if he reacts.
He's too critical.
He must have missed W/Hs.
He's a no-effect case anyhow.
I'm above moral codes.
Why should I limit my causativeness just because others can't
  take it.
It was my duty to tell the truth.
You wouldn't want me to withhold.
He must have postulated it first.
He never would have cognited if I hadn't told him.
I'll run it out later.
He'll be getting more auditing.

LRH:nb.rd.gm



Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [6/7] Repost [x2]
Datum: 26 Nov 1999 23:21:04 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 6 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 6

28. HCOB   22 July 1963      You Can Be Right

29. HCOB    1 Sept 1963      Routine Three SC

30. HCOB    5 Sept 1978      Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

31. HCOB    6 Sept 1978 II   Service Facsimiles and Rock Slams

32. HCOB    6 Sept 1978 III  Routine Three SC-A
                             Full Service Facsimile Handling
                             Updated with New Era Dianetics

******************************************************************

28. HCOB   22 July 1963      You Can Be Right

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

       HCO BULLETIN OF 22 JULY 1963

MA
Franchise
BPI

            YOU CAN BE RIGHT

Rightness and wrongness form a common source of argument and
struggle.

The concept of rightness reaches very high and very low on the
Tone Scale.

And the effort to be right is the last conscious striving of an
individual on the way out. I-am-right-and-they-are-wrong is the
lowest concept that can be formulated by an unaware case.

What is right and what is wrong are not necessarily definable for
everyone. These vary according to existing moral codes and
disciplines and, before Scientology, despite their use in law as
a test of "sanity," had no basis in fact but only in opinion.

In Dianetics and Scientology a more precise definition arose. And
the definition became as well the true definition of an overt
act. An overt act is not just injuring someone or something: an
overt act is an act of omission or commission which does the
least good for the least number of dynamics or the most harm to
the greatest number of dynamics. (See the eight dynamics.)

Thus, a wrong action is wrong to the degree that it harms the
greatest number of dynamics. And a right action is right to the
degree that it benefits the greatest number of dynamics.

Many people think that an action is an overt simply because it is
destructive. To them all destructive actions or omissions are
overt acts. This is not true. For an act of commission or
omission to be an overt act it must harm the greater number of
dynamics. A failure to destroy can be, therefore, an overt act.
Assistance to something that would harm a greater number of
dynamics can also be an overt act.

An overt act is something that harms broadly. A beneficial act is
something that helps broadly. It can be a beneficial act to harm
something that would be harmful to the greater number of
dynamics.

Harming everything and helping everything alike can be overt
acts. Helping certain things and harming certain things alike can
be beneficial acts.

The idea of not harming anything and helping everything are alike
rather mad. It is doubtful if you would think helping enslavers
was a beneficial action and equally doubtful if you would
consider the destruction of a disease an overt act.

In the matter of being right or being wrong, a lot of muddy
thinking can develop. There are no absolute rights or absolute
wrongs. And being right does not consist of being unwilling to
harm and being wrong does not consist only of not harming.

There is an irrationality about "being right" which not only
throws out the validity of the legal test of sanity but also
explains why some people do very wrong things and insist they are
doing right.

The answer lies in an impulse, inborn in everyone, to try to be
right. This is an insistence which rapidly becomes divorced from
right action. And it is accompanied by an effort to make others
wrong, as we see in hypercritical cases. A being who is
apparently unconscious is still being right and making others
wrong. It is the last criticism.

We have seen a "defensive person" explaining away the most
flagrant wrongnesses. This is "justification" as well. Most
explanations of conduct, no matter how far-fetched, seem
perfectly right to the person making them since he or she is only
asserting self-rightness and other-wrongness.

We have long said that that which is not admired tends to
persist. If no one admires a person for being right, then that
person's "brand of being right" will persist, no matter how mad
it sounds. Scientists who are aberrated cannot seem to get many
theories. They do not because they are more interested in
insisting on their own odd rightnesses than they are in finding
truth. Thus, we get strange "scientific truths" from men who
should know better, including the late Einstein. Truth is built
by those who have the breadth and balance to see also where
they're wrong.

You have heard some very absurd arguments out among the crowd.
Realize that the speaker was more interested in asserting his or
her own rightness than in being right.

A thetan tries to be right and fights being wrong. This is
without regard to being right about something or to do actual
right. It is an insistence which has no concern with a rightness
of conduct.

One tries to be right always, right down to the last spark.

How, then, is one ever wrong?

It is this way:

One does a wrong action, accidentally or through oversight. The
wrongness of the action or inaction is then in conflict with
one's necessity to be right. So one then may continue and repeat
the wrong action to prove it is right.

This is a fundamental of aberration. All wrong actions are the
result of an error followed by an insistence on having been
right. Instead of righting the error (which would involve being
wrong) one insists the error was a right action and so repeats
it.

As a being goes down scale, it is harder and harder to admit
having been wrong. Nay, such an admission could well be
disastrous to any remaining ability or sanity.

For rightness is the stuff of which survival is made. And as one
approaches the last ebb of survival, one can only insist on
having been right, for to believe for a moment one has been wrong
is to court oblivion.

The last defense of any being is "I was right." That applies to
anyone. When that defense crumbles, the lights go out.

So we are faced with the unlovely picture of asserted rightness
in the face of flagrant wrongness. And any success in making the
being realize their wrongness results in an immediate
degradation, unconsciousness or, at best, a loss of personality.
Pavlov, Freud, psychiatry alike never grasped the delicacy of
these facts and so evaluated and punished the criminal and insane
into further criminality and insanity.

All justice today contains in it this hidden error -- that the
last defense is a belief in personal rightness regardless of
charges and evidence alike, and that the effort to make another
wrong results only in degradation.

But all this would be a hopeless impasse leading to highly
chaotic social conditions were it not for one saving fact:

All repeated and "incurable" wrongnesses stem from the exercise
of a last defense: "trying to be right." Therefore, the
compulsive wrongness can be cured no matter how mad it may seem
or how thoroughly its rightness is insisted upon.

Getting the offender to admit his or her wrongness is to court
further degradation and even unconsciousness or the destruction
of a being. Therefore, the purpose of punishment is defeated and
punishment has minimal workability.

But by getting the offender off the compulsive repetition of the
wrongness, one then cures it.

But how?

By rehabilitating the ability to be right!

This has limitless application -- in training, in social skills,
in marriage, in law, in life.

Example: A wife is always burning dinner. Despite scolding,
threats of divorce, anything, the compulsion continues. One can
wipe this wrongness out by getting her to explain what is right
about her cooking. This may well evoke a raging tirade in some
extreme cases, but if one flattens the question, that all dies
away and she happily ceases to burn dinners. Carried to classic
proportions but not entirely necessary to end the compulsion, a
moment in the past will be recovered when she accidentally burned
a dinner and could not face up to having done a wrong action. To
be right she thereafter had to burn dinners.

Go into a prison and find one sane prisoner who says he did
wrong. You won't find one. Only the broken wrecks will say so out
of terror of being hurt. But even they don't believe they did
wrong.

A judge on a bench, sentencing criminals, would be given pause to
realize that not one malefactor sentenced really thought he had
done wrong and will never believe it in fact, though he may seek
to avert wrath by saying so.

The do-gooder crashes into this continually and is given his
loses by it.

But marriage, law and crime do not constitute all the spheres of
living where this applies. These facts embrace all of life.

The student who can't learn, the worker who can't work, the boss
who can't boss are all caught on one side of the right-wrong
question. They are being completely one-sided. They are being
"last-ditch-right." And opposing them, those who would teach
them are fixed on the other side, "admit-you-are-wrong." And out
of this we get not only no-change but actual degradation where it
"wins." But there are no wins in this imbalance, only loses for
both.

Thetans on the way down don't believe they are wrong because they
don't dare believe it. And so they do not change.

Many a preclear in processing is only trying to prove himself
right and the auditor wrong, particularly the lower case levels,
and so we sometimes get no-change sessions.

And those who won't be audited at all are totally fixed on
asserted rightness and are so close to gone that any question of
their past rightness would, they feel, destroy them.

I get my share of this when a being, close to extinction, and
holding contrary views, grasps for a moment the rightness of
Scientology and then in sudden defense asserts his own
"rightnesses," sometimes close to terror.

It would be a grave error to go on letting an abuser of
Scientology abuse. The route is to get him or her to explain how
right he or she is without explaining how wrong Scientology is,
for to do the last is to let them commit a serious overt. "What
is right about your mind" would produce more case change and win
more friends than any amount of evaluation or punishment to make
them wrong.

You can be right. How? By getting another to explain how he or
she is right -- until he or she, being less defensive now, can
take a less compulsive point of view. You don't have to agree
with what they think. You only have to acknowledge what they say.
And suddenly they can be right.

A lot of things can be done by understanding and using this
mechanism. It will take, however, some study of this article
before it can be gracefully applied -- for all of us are reactive
to some degree on this subject. And those who sought to enslave
us did not neglect to install a right-wrong pair of items on the
far backtrack. But these won't really get in your way.

As Scientologists, we are faced by a frightened society who think
they would be wrong if we were found to be right. We need a
weapon to correct this. We have one here.

And you can be right, you know. I was probably the first to
believe you were, mechanism or no mechanism. The road to
rightness is the road to survival. And every person is somewhere
on that scale.

You can make yourself right, amongst other ways, by making others
right enough to afford to change their minds. Then a lot more of
us will arrive.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

(Note: This is the first in a series of HCO Bulletins designed
for publication in continental magazines. I am developing a whole
presentation of Scientology at this level for general use in
life. Follow this HCO Bulletin with the next in magazines.)

LRH:gl.jh.cden.gm



******************************************************************

29. HCOB    1 Sept 1963      Routine Three SC

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1963

Central Orgs
Franchise

            SCIENTOLOGY THREE
      CLEARING--CLEARING--CLEARING

            ROUTINE THREE SC

There has been such a rush on in technical that it may have
looked to you that we were in a state of rapid change. This was
occasioned by a speed-up caused by various events. You are
getting about a century of research (or more) in a very few
months. So bear with me. The end is not only in sight. It's here.
My job is mainly now to refine and get the data to you.

The order brought into our work by making FIVE LEVELS OF
SCIENTOLOGY is paying off rapidly. Level One is in development.
Level Two is well away. Level Four is complete. And suddenly
Level Three leaped to a final phase.

We can CLEAR, CLEAR, CLEAR.

This has been a stepchild for months, even years now. It has been
mauled, messed up, invalidated and rehabilitated and knocked
around. But a BOOK ONE CLEAR was what most people came into
Scientology to obtain. And now I've done it. I've found out why
not and how.

And this HCO Bulletin is a hurry-skurry outline of the steps so
you can do it. There will be lots of HCO Bulletins on this. The
tapes of 27, 28 and 29 Aug. 63, give most of its theory.

CLEAR DEFINED -- Book One definition holds exactly true. A Clear
is somebody with no "held down fives" in this lifetime (see
Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science).

CLEAR TEST -- Clear sits at Clear read on the TA with a free
needle. No natter. No upsets. No whole track keyed in. No SERVICE
FACSIMILE.

CLEAR STABILITY -- We are not concerned with stability. But we
can now key out so thoroughly that we need not stress "Keyed-Out
Clear." I have found the means, I am sure, to make this state far
more stable and recreate it easily if it slips.

So forgive me for being indecisive about Clear states for these
past many months.

The breakthrough is stated as follows: IF YOU CANNOT MAKE A CLEAR
IN A 25-HOUR PREPCHECK, THE PC HAS ONE OR MORE SERVICE
FACSIMILES.

The barrier to clearing and the reason for fast relapse when
Clear was attained has been the SERVICE FACSIMILE.

SERVICE FACSIMILE defined: Advanced Procedure and Axioms
definition accurate. Added to this is THE SERVICE FACSIMILE IS
THAT COMPUTATION GENERATED BY THE PRECLEAR (NOT THE BANK) TO MAKE
SELF RIGHT AND OTHERS WRONG, TO DOMINATE OR ESCAPE DOMINATION AND
ENHANCE OWN SURVIVAL AND INJURE THAT OF OTHERS.

Note that it is generated by the pc, not the bank. Thus, the pc
restimulates the bank with the computation; the bank, unlike
going to OT, does not retard the pc in this instance.

The service facsimile is usually a this-lifetime effort only. It
might better be called a SERVICE COMPUTATION but we'll hold to
our old terms. The pc is doing it. In usual aberration the bank
is doing it (the pc's engrams, etc.). Where you can't clear the
pc by auditing just bank, you have to get out of the road what
the pc is doing to stay aberrated. If you clear only what the
bank is doing, the Clear state rapidly relapses. If you clear
what the pc is doing, the bank tends to stay more quiet and
unrestimulated. It is the pc who mostly keys his bank back in.
Therefore, the pc who won't go free-needle Clear is himself
unconsciously preventing it. And by knocking out this effort we
can then key out the bank and we have a fast Clear who pretty
well stays Clear (until sent on to OT).

The state is desirable to attain as it speeds going to OT.

All this came from studies I've been doing of the tone arm. The
tone arm must move during auditing or the pc gets worse. All
those pcs whose tone arms don't easily get into action and hang
up are SERVICE FACSIMILE pcs.

Note that the SERVICE FACSIMILE is used to:

FIRST:  Make self right
        Make others wrong

SECOND: To avoid domination
        To dominate others

THIRD:  To increase own survival
        To hinder the survival of others.

The service facsimile is all of it logical gobbledegook. It
doesn't make good sense. That's because the pc adopted it where,
in extreme cases, he or she felt endangered by something but
could not itsa it. Hence it's illogical. Because it is senseless,
really, the computation escapes casual inspection and makes for
aberrated behavior.

            TO MAKE A CLEAR

The steps, in brief, are:

1. ESTABLISH SERVICE FAC. This is done by assessment of
Scientology List One of 2-12 and using that for a starter and
then using the Preliminary Step of R3R as published (HCO Bulletin
of 1 July 63). One uses only things found by assessment, never by
wild guesses or pc's obvious disabilities. These assessments
already exist on many cases and should be used as earlier found.

2. AUDIT WITH RIGHT-WRONG. Ask pc, with itsa line carefully in,
FIRST QUESTION: "In this lifetime, how would (whatever was found)
make you right?" Adjust question until pc can answer it, if pc
can't. Don't force it off on pc. If it's correct, it will run
well. Don't keep repeating the question unless pc needs it. Just
let pc answer and answer and answer. Let pc come to a cognition
or run out of answers or try to answer the next question
prematurely and switch questions to: SECOND QUESTION: "In this
lifetime, how would (whatever was found) make others wrong?"
Treat this the same way. Let the pc come to a cog, or run out of
answers or accidentally start to answer the first question. Go
back to first question. Do the same with it. Then to second
question. Then to first question again, then to second.

If your assessment was right, pc will be getting better and
better TA action. But the TA action will eventually lessen. On
any big cognition, end the process. This may all take from 2
hours to 5, 1 don't think more. The idea is not to beat the
process to death or sink pc into bank GPMs. The pc will have
automaticities (answers coming too fast to be said easily) early
in the run. These must be gone and pc bright when you end. You
are only trying to end the compulsive character of the service
facsimile so found and get it off automatic and get pc to see it
better, not to remove all TA action from the process.

3. AUDIT SECOND PROCESS. Using the same method of auditing as in
(2) above, use the THIRD QUESTION: "In this lifetime, how would
(same one used in step 2) help you escape domination?" When this
seems cooled off, use FOURTH QUESTION: "In this lifetime, how
would (same one) help you dominate others?" Use THIRD QUESTION
and FOURTH QUESTION again and until pc has it all cooled off or a
big cognition.

4. AUDIT THIRD PROCESS. Using the same method as in (2) above,
use the FIFTH QUESTION: "In this lifetime, how would (same one)
aid your survival?" and then SIXTH QUESTION: "In this lifetime,
how would (same one) hinder the survival of others?" Use FIVE and
SIX as long as is necessary to cool it all off or to produce a
big cognition.

5. PREPCHECK WITH BIG MID RUDS, using the question, "In this
lifetime, on (same one) has anything been ______?" and get in
Suppress, Careful of, Failed to reveal, Invalidate, Suggest,
Mistake been made, Protest, Anxious about, Decided.

If the pc has a really shattering cognition, just halt Prepcheck
and end it off.

This Prepcheck is done, of course, off the meter until the pc
says no, then checking it on the meter and cleaning it off. Once
you've gone to meter on a button, stay with meter for further
queries. But don't clean cleans and don't leave slows or speeded
rises either. And don't cut pc's itsa line.

                ----------

That should be the end of a service facsimile. But a pc may have
several, so do it all again through all steps as often as is
needed.

Pcs who have had Scientology List One of R2-12 should be given
these as the first things used. Pcs who have had assessments done
for R3R chains should have these assessment results used (or as
much of them as apply) for the next runs. Even if the chain
assessment has been run on R3R still use it for R3SC.

                ----------

            COMPLETING CLEARING

To complete clearing, then, it is only necessary to give a
permissive In This Lifetime 18-button Prepcheck making the pc
look hard for answers, short of ARC breaking pc.

And you should have a beautiful free needle and TA at the Clear
read and the pc shining.

                ----------

If clearing did not occur, these following faults were present in
the auditing:

1. Pc did not agree with assessment, it read only because pc did
not understand it or protested it.

2. The assessment was wrong.

3. The atmosphere of auditing was critical of pc.

4. The itsa line was not in.

5. The auditor let the itsa line wander to early track.

6. The auditor Q-and-Aed and went off process and into engrams on
pc's "sell."

7. The process was not done.

8. The assessment was done by physical disability inspection or
by choosing pc's habits, not by actual assessment.

9. The auditing did not produce TA action (wrong assessment
and/or itsa line out would be all that could produce no TA
action).

10. Pc already sitting in a heavy ARC break by reason of whole-
track bypassed charge.

11. This process used instead of an ARC break assessment well
done, thus making this process a punishment.

12. Questions phrased wrong.

13. Questions were overrun.

14. Questions were underrun.

15. Auditor too choppy on Prepchecking.

16. ARC breaks in these sessions were not cleaned up.

17. Pc trying to plunge into early track and stay restimulated.

18. Pc trying to get early-track GPMs or engrams run to avoid
giving up service facsimile.

19. Auditor missed withholds accumulated during clearing.

20. Process end product "Clear" overestimated by auditor, pc or
Supervisors.

                ----------

The keynote of clearing a service facsimile is INTEREST. If pc
isn't interested in it, the assessment is wrong.

The keynote of auditing tone is permissive, happy, easy, not
militant. Let pc run on and on.

On phrasing question, no matter what is assessed it is always IT
MAKES PC RIGHT AND OTHERS WRONG. Pc is not trying to make it
wrong.

                ----------

An ordinary Prepcheck, done with a service facsimile present,
will turn on mass on the pc. Why? Pc is asserting service
facsimile.

                ----------

Well, that's the fast rundown on R3SC (Routine Three, Service
Facsimile Clear). And that's clearing. A lot of theory is missing
in this HCO Bulletin but not one essential step. You can do it.

If a person is cleared before going on to OT, they make it
hundreds of hours faster!

(NOTE: All OT processes will shortly be released with R4
designations but with little other change.)

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:jw.cden.gm



******************************************************************

30. HCOB    5 Sept 1978      Anatomy of a Service Facsimile

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 5 SEPTEMBER 1978

Remimeo
Level IV Checksheets
Class IV Auditors
Supervisors
C/Ses

       ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FACSIMILE

  Refs:
  HCOB 22 July 63            YOU CAN BE RIGHT
  HCOB  1 Sept 63            ROUTINE THREE SC
  HCOB 23 Aug. 66            SERVICE FACSIMILE
  HCOB 30 Nov. 66            ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE
                             FACSIMILES
  Tape: 6308C27 SH Spec 299  RIGHTNESS AND WRONGNESS
  Tape: 6309C04 SH Spec 302  HOW TO FIND A SERVICE
                             FACSIMILE
  Tape: 6309C03 SH Spec 302A R3SC
  Tape: 6309C05 SH Spec 303  SERVICE FACSIMILE ASSESSMENT
  Tape: 6309C18 SH Spec 308  ST. HILL SERVICE FAC HANDLING

FACSIMILE:A mental picture unknowingly created; a copy of the
          physical universe environment, complete with all the
          perceptions, at some time in the past.

SERVICE: A method of providing a person with the use of something;
         the action or result of giving assistance or advantage;
         work done; duty performed.

COMPUTATION: That aberrated evaluation and postulate that one must
             be in a certain state in order to succeed.

SERVICE FACSIMILE: THE SERVICE FACSIMILE IS THAT COMPUTATION
                   GENERATED BY THE PRECLEAR (NOT THE BANK) TO
                   MAKE SELF RIGHT AND OTHERS WRONG: TO DOMINATE
                   OR ESCAPE DOMINATION AND ENHANCE OWN SURVIVAL
                   AND INJURE THAT OF OTHERS.

Note that it is a computation, not a doingness, beingness or
havingness. We could call this a "service computation" but we
will maintain the term we have used to describe this phenomenon
throughout the technology: "service facsimile."

It is a computation that the pc adopted when, in an extreme
situation, he felt endangered by something but could not itsa it.

It is called a service facsimile because he uses it; it is "of
service" to him.

Aberration, anybody's aberration on any subject, has been of some
use to them at some time or other. You can trace it back. It's
been of some use, otherwise they wouldn't keep mocking it up. But
now, if you put it up against survival standards, you'd find it
very nonsurvival.

The pc adopted this because he couldn't stand the confusion in a
situation. So he adopted a safe solution. A safe solution is
always adopted as a retreat from the environmental restimulation.
He adopted a safe solution in that instance and he survived. His
safe solution became his stable datum. He has hung onto it ever
since. It is the computation, the fixed idea, he uses to handle
life, his service facsimile.

     HOW THE SERVICE FACSIMILE BECOMES FIXED

An idea is the thing most easily substituted for a thetan. An
idea doesn't have any mass connected with it basically. And it
appears to have some wisdom in it so it's very easily substituted
for a thetan. Thus, the idea, the stable datum he has adopted, is
substituted for the thetan.

How does this stable datum become so fixed? It gets fixed, and
more and more firmly as time goes on, by the confusion it is
supposed to handle but doesn't.

The stable datum was adopted in lieu of inspection. The person
ceased to inspect, he fell back from inspecting, he fell back
from living. He put the datum there to substitute for his own
observation and his own coping with life, and at that moment he
started an accumulation of confusion.

That which is not confronted and inspected tends to persist.
Thus, in the absence of his own confronting mass collects. The
stable datum forbids inspection. It's an automatic solution. It's
"safe." It solves everything. He no longer has to inspect to
solve, so he never as-ises the mass. He gets caught in the middle
of the mass. And it collects more and more confusion and his
ability to inspect becomes less and less. The more he isn't
confronting, the less he can confront. This becomes a dwindling
spiral.

So the thing he has adopted to handle his environment for him is
the thing which reduces his ability to handle his environment.

Those things which do not respond to routine auditing, that
routine auditing won't change, are rooted in this mechanism.

Therefore, it is important to find the idea on which he is so
fixed. Pull the fixed idea and you free the individual for a
broader perimeter of inspection.

In service fac handling, the reason you get tone arm action when
the fixed idea has been pulled is that the confusion which has
been amassed and dammed up for so long is now running off.

     RIGHT/WRONG, DOMINATE AND SURVIVE

Right and wrong are the tools of survival. In order to survive
you have to be right. There is a level at which true rightness is
analytical, and there is a level at which rightness and wrongness
cease to be analytical or comprehensible. When it drops below
that point, it's aberration.

The point you degenerate from survive to succumb is the point you
recognize you are wrong. That is the beginning of succumb. The
moment one becomes worried about his own survival, he enters into
the necessity to dominate in order to survive.

It goes: the insistence upon survival, followed by the necessity
to dominate, followed then by the necessity to be right. These
postulates go downhill. So you get an aberrated rightness or
wrongness. The game of domination consists of making the other
fellow wrong in order to be right.

That is the essence of the service facsimile.

The reason the service facsimile isn't rational is because you
have A=A=A's along the whole line. Coming down the line, it works
itself back and forth in an aberrated A=A=A. If the individual is
surviving, he must be right. And people will defend the most
fantastic wrongnesses on the basis they are being right.

In PT and at any point along the track, the fellow is trying to
be right, trying to be right, trying to be right. Whatever he's
doing, he's trying to be right. In order to survive you have to
be right more than you're wrong, so you get the obsession to be
right in order to survive. The lie is that he can't do anything
else except survive.

It isn't that trying to be right is wrong -- it's obsessively
being right about something that's obviously wrong. That's when
the individual is no longer able to select his own course of
behavior. When he is obsessively following courses of behavior
which are uninspected in order to be right.

There is nothing sane about a service facsimile; there is no
rationality to it. The computation does not fit the incident or
event occurring. It simply enforces, exaggerates and destroys
freedom of choice over the exercise of ability to be happy or
powerful or normal or active. It destroys power, destroys freedom
of choice.

Wherever that zone or area is, you'll see the individual
worsening. He is on a dwindling spiral. But he himself is
generating it.

The intention to be right is the strongest intention in the
universe. Above it you have the effort to dominate and above that
you have the effort to survive. These things are strong. But
we're talking here about a mental activity. A thinking activity.
An intentional activity.

Survival -- that just happens. Domination -- that just happens.
Those are not intended things. But you get down along the level
of intended and it's right or wrong. The strongest intention in
the universe.

It is always an aberrated solution. It always exists in PT and is
part of the environment of the pc. He's generating it. It's his
solution. Overwhelmed as he is by it, he is still generating it.
It's aberrated because it's an uninspected solution. And it is
something that everyone, unintentionally or otherwise, is telling
the pc is wrong and causing him to assert that it is right. The
perfect solution when he first got hold of it. But now it
monitors his life; it's living his life for him. And it doesn't
even vaguely begin to take care of his life.

That is the anatomy of the service facsimile.

You are going to find these on any pc you audit. A service
facsimile is the clue, the key to a pc's case. The route to
succumb which he blindly asserts is his route to survival. And
every pc has more than one of these.

Fortunately, we have the tech to salvage him. We are the only
ones who do.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:dr.gm



******************************************************************

31. HCOB    6 Sept 1978 II   Service Facsimiles and Rock Slams

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 6 SEPTEMBER 1978
                  Issue II

Remimeo
Level IV Checksheets
Class IV Auditors
Supervisors
C/Ses

      SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS

  Refs:
  HCOB 5 Sept. 78            ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FACSIMILE
  HCOB 1 Sept. 63            ROUTINE THREE SC
  HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III        ROUTINE THREE SC-A
                             FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE
                             HANDLING UPDATED WITH
                             NEW ERA DIANETICS
  Tape: 6308C27 SH Spec 299  RIGHTNESS AND WRONGNESS
  Tape: 6309C04 SH Spec 302  HOW TO FIND A SERVICE
                             FACSIMILE
  Tape: 6309C03 SH Spec 302A R3SC
  Tape: 6309C05 SH Spec 303  SERVICE FACSIMILE ASSESSMENT
  Tape: 6309C18 SH Spec 308  ST. HILL SERVICE FAC HANDLING
  HCOB 3 Sept. 78            DEFINITION OF A ROCK SLAM
  HCOB 10 Aug. 76R           R/Ses, WHAT THEY MEAN

                ----------

A service facsimile is a brother to R/Ses and evil intentions.

This is easily seen when one understands the anatomy of the
service fac and the right/wrong, dominate and survive
computations that enter into it, and when one understands that an
R/S always means a hidden, evil intention and that the total
reason for an R/S is to make wrong. In order to get someone to
succumb, they have to be wrong.

Way back up there, the idea preceding the service fac was right,
really right. Then it came down a bit and was a method of
survival and then it was a method of dominating and then it was a
method of being right in order to make others wrong.

And in that contest one got enough overts so that the
communication line took a switcheroo. What was right about it is
now wrong about it and what was once wrong is now right. A=A=A
enters into the situation where rightness becomes wrongness. All
of his overts get piled up on one of these fixed ideas, or what
we call a service facsimile.

It isn't actually a facsimile at all. It's the guy himself
keeping facsimiles in restimulation because he "knows" what's
best. The person himself is generating the fixed idea; it is not
the bank.

It isn't what aberration the individual is dramatizing. It's what
aberration does the individual dredge up in order to make
somebody wrong. It isn't the accidental thing you think it is.
It's intended.

The intention is to be right and make others wrong, to dominate
others and escape domination oneself, to aid own survival and
hinder the survival of others. That is the service fac -- blood
brother to the hidden, evil intention that is behind the rock
slam.

This does not mean you will necessarily see R/Ses on every
service fac you run. It does mean that WHERE A PC IS R/Sing IN AN
AREA YOU HAVE AN AREA OF A HEAVY -- A SEVERE -- SERVICE FAC.

Know when you see an R/S that the individual is in the grip of an
evil intention which he himself is generating. He intends that
area or subject on which he is R/Sing nothing but harm.
Calculatingly, covertly, he will go to great lengths to carry his
intentions out, at all times carefully concealing the fact.

The evil intention is not limited to terminals. He's not R/Sing
on a terminal; he's R/Sing on the evil intention. The evil
intention can associate with many terminals.

The R/S dominates the individual; it is the person. He has been
overwhelmed by it. In that area he has no ability to reason; he
has no freedom to choose. The evil intention is substituted for
livingness. It is his safe solution to life, his service
facsimile.

The service fac does not respond to ordinary auditing because in
the course of ordinary auditing it does not get inspected. It, by
its nature, forbids inspection. But when addressed at the
right/wrong level, the pc gives it up easily because in that area
he has no power of choice.

     MORE THAN ONE SERVICE FAC PER PC

We have had, for many years, service fac processing with which to
handle these obsessions, and thus to handle the person who R/Ses.

But it is not just finding one service facsimile. You find many
service facs which then add up to the big one. At Saint Hill in
the mid-60s this was commonly associated with R/Ses.

It was what the pc had done with the service fac to make others
wrong which was important, not just finding it. Early on, the
tech included auditing them out with Dianetics. And you found
many, many more than one on each pc. We used to get complete
character changes with this.

The full tech on this has been submerged over the past several
years. It is probably this omission of requiring several service
facs to be run and then auditing them out with Dianetics that has
resulted in so many R/Sers going on up undetected.

As of this writing the full tech has been exhumed and we have now
New Era Dianetics tech to help strip these packages down and take
them apart at their basics.

So we not only have a more thorough means of handling service
facs than ever before, we also have a more reliable route to the
handling of an R/Ser.

BUT IT'S MORE THAN ONE SERVICE FAC PER PC.

You may audit off one, two or three apparent service facsimiles
that all answer up to the complete description of a service fac.
And they will run. But all are actually leaning on the central
service fac that is in restimulation in PT. As you take these
lesser service facs off, the central one comes to view.

On the first ones you find, the most you can hope for is you
found something that blew the TA down and moved you closer to
finding the main service fac. So you take them.

If you've found a service fac, the needle will be looser and the
TA in reasonable range. And it will run on the right/wrong, etc.,
brackets and the pc will get off automaticities. When you've
finally found several and walked it all the way through to the
service fac it's as if all the other service facs you've been
peeling off are like the bands of trees and sod that lie up
against the mountain peak. So you take the service facsimiles and
run them as you find them. You unburden the cliffs before you
pull the mountain out by the roots.

As you're running out the first service facs, you're reversing
the dwindling spiral, you're restoring the individual's ability
to handle his environment because he's now seeing it, he's now
beginning to confront it.

And by the time you've pulled the main one -- the mountain -- out
by its roots, you've returned him to sanity. He is now able to
inspect; he no longer needs a "safe solution."

It is the most dangerous thing in the world to have a safe
solution, because that is the hole out of which sanity drains.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:mf.gm



******************************************************************

32. HCOB    6 Sept 1978 III  Routine Three SC-A
                             Full Service Facsimile Handling
                             Updated with New Era Dianetics

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

     HCO BULLETIN OF 6 SEPTEMBER 1978
                Issue III

Remimeo
Level IV Checksheets
Class IV Auditors
Supervisors
C/Ses

           URGENT--IMPORTANT

           ROUTINE THREE SC-A
  FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED
         WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS

  Refs:
  HCOB 22 July 63           YOU CAN BE RIGHT
  HCOB 1 Sept. 63           ROUTINE THREE SC
  HCOB 23 Aug. 66           SERVICE FACSIMILE
  HCOB 30 Nov. 66           ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE
                            FACSIMILES
  Tape: 6309C04 SH Spec 302 HOW TO FIND A SERVICE FACSIMILE
  Tape: 6309C05 SH Spec 303 SERVICE FACSIMILE ASSESSMENT
  Tape: 6308C28 SH Spec 300 THE TA AND SERVICE FAC
  Tape: 6309C12 SH Spec 305 SERVICE FACS
  HCOB 26 June 78 II        NED Series 6
                            ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY
                            CHAINS
  HCOB 18 June 78           NED Series 4
                            ASSESSMENT AND HOW TO GET THE
                            ITEM
  HCOB 5 Sept. 78           ANATOMY OF A SERVICE FACSIMILE
  HCOB 6 Sept. 78 II        SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS

               ----------

NOTE: Dianetic Clears may be run on service facs but only with
any Dianetic steps deleted, as they are not to be run on
Dianetics.

               ----------

We are into a new echelon of service facsimile running.

At Saint Hill in the mid-60s many, many service facs were found
on each pc and the earliest service fac running included the use
of Dianetics.

This was later omitted from service fac procedure and service
facs were handled solely with Scientology tech by running off the
automaticities on the computation to cognition, F/N and VGIs in
the pc.

Phenomenal gains and case changes were made on pcs with that tech
alone -- all of them valid. That tech has been retained as a
vital action to service fac handling.

Now, with the advent of New Era Dianetics, service fac handling
has been restored to its full technology.

New Era Dianetics has opened the door to a more complete and
finite handling of a service fac, with precision and exactness,
than we have had heretofore. We no longer just find a service
fac, audit off the automaticities, key it out and forget it. We
audit it out fully and terminatedly, using New Era Dianetics to
take it down to its basics and erase those.

This in no way contradicts the fact that there were many pcs who,
with a service fac found and the automaticities taken off, were
able to actually then blow the service fac computation upon
inspection.

What it does make possible is the actual erasure of a service fac
and its residuals on every pc, one for one. And not just one
service facsimile per pc, but many.

An auditor who has been trained on service fac running prior to
this bulletin will need the tech he already has plus an excellent
command of New Era Dianetics tech. If he has not done the New Era
Dianetics Course, it will be required before attempting to run
Routine 3SC-A. A Class IV Auditor who has already done the New
Era Dianetics Course need only review it in order to be able to
handle all the steps of the new, full service fac procedure.

    SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING REVISED BY STEPS

Before you can run flows on a service facsimile, you must first
find it. You want the pc's service facsimile. You don't find a
service facsimile by listing for it on flows. You find the pc's
service facsimile and run it on the flows.

The sequence is you list for the pc's service fac, find it, run
the automaticities off it; then you run the service fac itself on
R3RA, engram running by chains. It is run to basic and full
Dianetic end phenomena.

You don't leave a service fac until you have taken it apart and
blown it at its very roots.

Then you list for another service fac, using a different listing
question, and handle it fully. And another, and another. A pc can
have many, many service facsimiles. You peel them off until you
find the main service fac at the core of the case. And you handle
that one fully, as you do the others, per the steps above.

Needless to say, you are going to see some remarkable results.

      FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE PROCEDURE

PRELIMINARY STEPS:

0a. Put in the R (reality) factor with the pc, telling him
briefly what is going to be done in the session.

0b. Clear "computation" very thoroughly with the pc. Use the Tech
Dictionary, HCOB 23 Aug. 66, SERVICE FACSIMILE, and any other
reference you feel the pc may need. Have him demo it until you
are certain he fully understands it.

0c. Clear the bracket commands (right/wrong, dominate, survival)
first, using "Birds fly" as a sample service facsimile. Clearing
the bracket commands is done at this point so you will be able to
use these questions immediately when the service fac is found
without putting stops on the pc's first rush of automaticities
coming off.

0d. Then, clear the listing question.

STEPS OF THE PROCEDURE:

A. List and null for the pc's service fac, using the question:

   "In this lifetime, what do you use to make others wrong?"

You want a BD F/N item that is a computation (not a doingness,
beingness or havingness).

When you get it, indicate the item. Then indicate the F/N. Then,
despite the BD F/N, go on to the next step of the handling.

B. Run the service fac found in (A) on the brackets:

   1. In this lifetime, how would (service fac) make you right?

   2. In this lifetime, how would (service fac) make others wrong?

   3. In this lifetime, how would (service fac) help you escape
      domination?

   4. In this lifetime, how would (service fac) help you to
      dominate others?

   5. In this lifetime, how would (service fac) aid your survival?

   6. In this lifetime, how would (service fac) hinder the
      survival of others?

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 1-1-1-1-1-1 (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 (1) 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 automaticities and come to a
cognition and F/N. Acknowledge and indicate the F/N.

At this point it is safe to end off on running the brackets. The
idea is not to beat the process to death. The pc will have
automaticities coming off thick and fast early in the run. These
must be gone and the pc bright, F/Ning and VGIs when you end off.
You are only trying to end the compulsive character of the
service facsimile found and get it off automatic and get the pc
to see it better at this stage, not to bleed the process of every
bit of TA action.

Running the service fac in the brackets will result in a major
cognition, which could occur at any point during this running.
When it does occur, it is the EP of this step of the service fac
handling. End off and go onto the R3RA step.

NOTE: In running a Dianetic Clear on service facs, you would end
off running this service fac at this point, when the pc had
reached a good cognition, F/N and VGIs. Do NOT run the Dianetic
actions of service fac handling on a Dianetic Clear, as these pcs
are not to be run on Dianetics. When you have completed one
service fac on steps A and B, you can then list for another
service fac and repeat the procedure.

NOTE:   If the service fac found on any pc did not run on the
brackets, it would need to be prepchecked. See sections "When
Running Off The Automaticity" and "When To Prepcheck" below.

C. Run the service fac R3RA Quad, each flow to EP. It is not run
narrative and it is not preassessed; otherwise full New Era
Dianetics tech is used, per HCOB 26 June 78R II, NED Series 6,
ROUTINE 3RA, ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS.

The service fac phrase itself is used as the running item.

The commands for running a service fac on R3RA Quad Flows are

   FLOW 1: "Locate a time when you used (service fac)."

   (Example: "Locate a time when you used all horses sleep in
   beds.")

   FLOW 2: "Locate an incident of your causing another to use
           (service fac)."

   FLOW 3: "Locate an incident of others causing others to use
           (service fac)."

   FLOW 0: "Locate an incident of you causing yourself to use
           (service fac)."

Take each flow down its chain of incidents to the basic and full
Dianetic EP: F/N, postulate (postulate off = erasure) and VGIs.

That will be the end of all vestiges of that service fac.

D. List for another service fac on the pc, using the listing
question:

   "In this lifetime, what do you use to dominate others?"

When you have the service fac, repeat steps B and C above.

E. Find another service fac on the pc with the listing question:

   "In this lifetime, what do you use to aid your own survival?"

Handle the service fac per steps B and C above.

F. Continue to find and handle service facs on the pc, using, in
order, the following listing questions:

   1. "In this lifetime, what do you use to make yourself right?"

   2. "In this lifetime, what do you use to escape domination?"

   3. "In this lifetime, what do you use to hinder the survival
      of others?"

Further listing questions which can be used are given on HCOB 30
Nov. 66, ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE FACSIMILES.

You will need to find and handle several service facsimiles on
the pc which will then add up to the big one.

      WHEN LISTING FOR THE SERVICE FACSIMILE

You are listing for a BD F/N item. Write down each computation
the pc gives you exactly as he states it, VERBATIM, with its
read, no matter how improbable, non sequitur or inane it may
sound.

The service fac operates like a magnet as you're listing. You've
given the pc the question and as the question is in the vicinity
of the service fac you've already ticked it. It draws the pc's
attention to it. He's listing along and suddenly he'll put a non
sequitur item on the list. It doesn't make sense. It doesn't even
answer the question, but there it is. Because his attention is
being pulled to this inevitably. You're asking him for answers
and he gives you the rightest answer he knows -- "People always
jump off the Empire State Building." That's the solution. That
solves everything. It blows the TA down. That's the service fac.

Indicate the item to the pc; then indicate the F/N.

You're now ready to run it in the brackets.

      WHEN RUNNING OFF THE AUTOMATICITY

If you've found a service fac, the pc won't be able to stay out
of it, I guarantee you.

The first question is always how would it make him right. (Never
how would it make him wrong. Never, never, never.) The
automaticities should start with the first question. If not, ask
him how it would make others wrong. You almost always enter it at
the level of right/wrong. But don't make the blunder of thinking
it can't be a service fac if it doesn't enter at that level. Try
it on the other levels. It can enter at the level of dominate; it
might enter at the level of survival.

But if -- on one of those -- the pc doesn't immediately jump in
and swim into the whirlpool, it's not it. If he tells you, "Well,
let's see... make me right, no, hmmmm..." or "...escape
domination... no, doesn't make sense," that's not it.

If he says that isn't it, then that isn't it. Don't hang him with
a wrong service fac because it's too easy to find a right one.
They abound.

If he hasn't jumped in and swum madly to the center of the
whirlpool and gotten embroiled in this thing, it's not it.
Because that's the first thing they want to do with a service fac
-- drown.

When you have the right one, you'll get the automaticities coming
off thick and fast. Don't stop the avalanche with
acknowledgments. Don't stop it with a new question. Let it run
out.

It's not one auditing question for one answer. It's one auditing
question for one waterfall.

            WHEN TO PREPCHECK

When the item found as a service fac won't run on any of the
brackets, you prepcheck it to EP (F/N Cog VGIs). Ref: HCOB 14
Mar. 71R, F/N EVERYTHING.

A rightness/wrongness computation doesn't surrender to normal
auditing because it is a service fac. The pc has a vested
interest in holding onto it. He won't be able to itsa it on a
Prepcheck. Thus, a service fac, if present, will turn on mass on
a Prepcheck.

The Prepcheck is a series of types of decisions thetans make
about things. So if it doesn't prepcheck, the Prepcheck must be
in conflict with the rightness and wrongness.

Reversely, if it's not a service fac, it will prepcheck, and you
polish it off by that method to EP.

Then go back to the list and find a service fac that will run.

     COMPLETING SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING WITH R3RA

Even when the pc has gotten off the automaticities, has cognited
and is comparatively free of the compulsive character of the
service facsimile, there is more to be handled.

Running the service fac using R3RA enables him to run out what he
has done with it to make others wrong, etc. These will be the
actual most-charged incidents in which he's used it, which will
have accumulated in his wake as he went along substituting the
service fac for himself and never inspecting the consequences. He
will now be free to inspect those parts of the track as himself,
and to inspect as well the effects of the service fac on the
other flows.

Finally, the use of R3RA, engram running by chains, enables him
to fully erase the somatics and engram chains which have their
roots in the service fac, or vice versa-as well as the postulates
underlying them.

        ENDING SERVICE FAC RUNNING

Service fac running can be ended off when you have fully run many
service facs (which will lead to the main service fac). When the
main service fac has been run to full EP, service fac handling is
complete.

NOTE: It might happen (rarely) that you get the main service fac
on the pc on your first listing and nulling. It will be rare
because the main one does not usually come to view until the
others have been taken off. You run it, of course. Any service
fac, run, produces change, but on this one you will see the pc
changing character before your eyes. The results are quite
astounding.

But realize that he does have other, lesser service facs which do
not simply dissolve because the main core service fac is now
gone, even though they have been leaning upon it. You will need
to L&N for these and completely clean the pc of service facs.

The main core service facsimile will be the one the pc has used
as a solution to all of life. When found and run, it will be
unmistakable to both the pc and the auditor. When this one has
been completed on all the steps above, as well as the lesser
service facs surrounding it, you will have attained the EP on
service fac running.

You will have brought about a complete character change in the
individual, returned his freedom of choice and his freedom to
inspect and enabled him to be truly right.

And that is the stuff of which sanity is made.

This level is actually the sanity level.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

LRH:dr.gm



Betreff: FZ Bible - Level 4 Coursepack [7/7] Repost [x2]
Datum: 27 Nov 1999 00:40:21 -0000
Von: squirrel@echelon.alias.net (The Tech Lion)
Firma: FreeZone Bible Association
Foren: alt.religion.scientology,alt.clearing.technology

FREEZONE BIBLE ASSOCIATION TECH POST

Academy Level IV Coursepack: Part 7 of 7

***************************************

Thanksgiving time is here.

We at FZ Bible Association would like to give thanks to Ron for
leaving us a bounty of Tech.

And celebrate by disseminating it freely to all.

In that spirit we bring you the Level 4 coursepack, from the
late 80's.

Happy Turkey Day,

-Tech Lion

********************

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Our purpose is to promote religious freedom and the Scientology
Religion by spreading the Scientology Tech across the internet.

The Cof$ abusively suppresses the practice and use of
Scientology Tech by FreeZone Scientologists.  It misuses the
copyright laws as part of its suppression of religious freedom.

They think that all freezoners are "squirrels" who should be
stamped out as heretics.  By their standards, all Christians,
Moslems, Mormons, and even non-Hassidic Jews would be considered
to be squirrels of the Jewish Religion.

The writings of LRH form our Old Testament just as the writings
of Judaism form the Old Testament of Christianity.

We might not be good and obedient Scientologists according
to the definitions of the Cof$ whom we are in protest against.

But even though the Christians are not good and obedient Jews,
the rules of religious freedom allow them to have their old
testament regardless of any Jewish opinion.

We ask for the same rights, namely to practice our religion
as we see fit and to have access to our holy scriptures
without fear of the Cof$ copyright terrorists.

We ask for others to help in our fight.  Even if you do
not believe in Scientology or the Scientology Tech, we hope
that you do believe in religious freedom and will choose
to aid us for that reason.

Thank You,

The FZ Bible Association

************************

PART 7

33. HCOB    8 Sept 1978RB    Mini List of Grade 0-IV Processes

34. HCOB   14 Nov. 1987      Expanded Grade IV Process Checklist

******************************************************************

33. HCOB    8 Sept 1978RB     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 EP)  ________

   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 11 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,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,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 alternately to EP.)                        ________

   2H  F2  LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING ANOTHER
           IS NOT WITHHOLDING.

           (Run alternately to EP.)                        ________

   2H  F3  LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING OTHERS
           ARE NOT WITHHOLDING.

           (Run alternately to EP.)                        ________

   2H  F0  LOOK AROUND HERE AND FIND SOMETHING YOU'RE
           NOT WITHHOLDING FROM YOURSELF.

           (Run alternately 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 III, ROUTINE THREE SC-A, FULL SERVICE
             FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS
          HCOB 1 Sept. 63, ROUTINE THREE SC
          HCOB 6 Sept. 78 II, 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 1 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 II:

       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



******************************************************************

34. HCOB   14 Nov. 1987      Expanded Grade IV Process Checklist

       HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
 Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

      HCO BULLETIN OF 14 NOVEMBER 1987
                  Issue VI

Remimeo
Class IV Auditors
  and above
C/Ses

  (This HCOB gives the full list of processes
  for Expanded Grade IV, assembled per HCOB 24
  Jan. 77, TECH CORRECTION ROUNDUP. It is to
  be run on all cases programmed for Expanded
  Grade IV, effective immediately.)

             EXPANDED GRADE IV
             PROCESS CHECKLIST

  Refs:
  CLASSIFICATION, GRADATION AND AWARENESS CHART
    OF LEVELS & CERTIFICATES
  Tape: 6607C26 SH Spec 71  CLASSIFICATION CHART AND
                            AUDITING

  Cancels:
  BTB 15 Nov. 76 VI  0-IV EXPANDED GRADE PROCESSES--
                     QUADS PART F, GRADE 4 PROCESSES

PC _______________________________________ DATE _______________

AUDITOR _______________________________________________________

CASE SUPERVISOR _______________________________________________

NOTE: This HCOB is to be used ONE FOR EACH PC as a checklist for
that pc and belongs in his/her folder. IT IS DONE DURING session,
not filled in after.

Each process is run to F/N, cognition, VGIs and release per HCOB
20 Feb. 70, FLOATING NEEDLES AND END PHENOMENA. As each process
or flow is run to EP (or found not to be reading, per HCOB 23 June
80RA, CHECKING QUESTIONS ON GRADES PROCESSES) it is clearly marked
off with the date.

On any of these processes, if the pc answers only "yes" to the
command, find out what it was by asking "What was it?" (Ref: HCOB
30 June 62, ARC PROCESS)

Some of the processes on the checklist require that the auditor
find terminals to use in the process commands. The following are
references for use in finding terminals: HCOB 28 Sept. 71, C/S
Series 62, KNOW BEFORE YOU GO; HCOB 30 June 67, EVIDENCES OF AN
ABERRATED AREA; HCOB 27 May 70R, UNREADING QUESTIONS AND ITEMS;
HCOB 19 Aug. 59, HAS CO-AUDIT -- FINDING TERMINALS; and HCOB 10
Nov. 60, FORMULA 13.

All the reading processes and flows on this checklist are run on
the pc, with the Quad Grade Process and its Havingness Process
run last.

1. R2-59: SURVIVAL
   (Ref: Book: Creation of Human Ability, Section on
   Route 2, R2-59 Tape: 541 1C03, SHAME, BLAME AND REGRET)

   Part One:

   This part is run walking around the environment.

   These questions are not run alternately; have the pc
   point out things which are surviving far more often
   than you have him point out things that are not
   surviving.

   1. POINT OUT SOME THINGS IN YOUR SURROUNDINGS
      WHICH AREN'T SURVIVING.

   2. POINT OUT SOME THINGS WHICH ARE SURVIVING.

      (Run, as per instructions, to EP)                    ________

   Part Two:

   This part is run walking around the environment.

      POINT OUT SOME UNKNOWN METHODS OF SURVIVING.

      (Run repetitively to EP)                             ________

   Part Three:

   First clear the term "ally" in the Dianetics and
   Scientology Technical Dictionary.

   Then ask the pc, "Tell me any persons who have been
   allies of yours." (This is not listing and nulling.)
   Write down the terminals, noting any reads.

   The wording of the terminals can be in either specific
   (e.g., "Linda") or general (e.g., "a mother") form. On
   any terminals that are not reading, put in the Suppress
   and Invalidate buttons.

   Take the largest reading ally and use it in the blank
   in the following process.

   The commands of the process are to be run outside of the
   auditing room, without a meter, in a place where there
   is a crowd of people.

   Run any other reading allies from the list as above, in
   order of largest read.

   A. 1. WHAT COULD THAT PERSON (auditor indicating
         one) HAVE THAT WOULD BE UNINTERESTING?

      2. WHAT COULD THAT PERSON HAVE THAT WOULD BE
         UNINTERESTING TO ______?

         (Run alternately, auditor pointing out a new
         person each time the first command is given,
         to EP)                                            ________

   B. 1. WHAT COULD THAT PERSON (auditor indicating
         one) DO THAT WOULD BE UNINTERESTING?

      2. WHAT COULD THAT PERSON DO THAT WOULD BE
         UNINTERESTING TO ______?

         (Run alternately, auditor pointing out a new
         person each time the first command is given,
         to EP)                                            ________

   C. 1. WHAT COULD THAT PERSON (auditor indicating
         one) BE THAT WOULD BE UNINTERESTING?

      2. WHAT COULD THAT PERSON BE THAT WOULD BE
         UNINTERESTING TO ______?

         (Run alternately, auditor pointing out a new
         person each time the first command is given,
         to EP)                                            ________

   Part Four:

   NOTE: Clear the commands for F1 of this process with
   both "dreams" and "goals" and run whichever reads
   best. Then use the same version (either "dreams" or
   "goals") in clearing and running the remaining flows.

   F1 WHAT DREAMS (GOALS) WOULD YOU FIND
      UNINTERESTING?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F2 WHAT DREAMS (GOALS) WOULD ANOTHER FIND
      UNINTERESTING?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F3 WHAT DREAMS (GOALS) WOULD OTHERS FIND
      UNINTERESTING?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F0 WHAT DREAMS (GOALS) ABOUT YOURSELF WOULD YOU
      FIND UNINTERESTING?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   Part Five:

   Reassess the list of allies used in Part Three. Take
   the largest reading terminal and use it in the blank
   in this process.

   The commands of this process are to be run outside
   of the auditing room, without a meter, in a place
   where there is a crowd of people.

   After the largest reading terminal has been run in
   the process to EP, run any other reading terminals
   from the list as above, in order of largest read.

   1. WHAT DREAM COULD THAT PERSON HAVE THAT WOULD NOT
      INTEREST YOU?

   2. WHAT DREAM COULD THAT PERSON HAVE THAT WOULD NOT
      INTEREST ______?

      (Run alternately, auditor pointing out a new
      person each time the first command is given,
      to EP.)                                              ________

   Part Six:

   Ask the pc, "Tell me all of the people you have
   known since birth." (This is not listing and nulling.)
   Write them down, noting any reads.

   The wording of the terminals can be in either specific
   (e.g., "Bill") or general (e.g., "a father") form.
   On any terminals that are not reading, put in the
   Suppress and Invalidate buttons.

   Run each reading terminal in the following process,
   in order of largest read.

      WHAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO ______?
      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   Part Seven:

      WHAT DYNAMIC COULD YOU ABANDON?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   Part Eight:

   1. WHAT WOULDN'T A CELL SURVIVE?

   2. WHAT ELSE WOULDN'T A CELL SURVIVE?

      (Ask the first question, then run the second
      question repetitively, i.e., 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,
      etc., to EP.)                                        ________

   Part Nine:

   Make up a list of body parts, body organs and types
   of bodies. Assess the list on the meter and note
   all reads. On any items that are not reading, put
   in the Suppress and Invalidate buttons.

   Run each reading item in the following process, in
   order of largest read.

   1. WHAT WOULDN'T A ______ SURVIVE?

   2. WHAT ELSE WOULDN'T A ______ SURVIVE?

      (Ask the first question, then run the second
      question repetitively, i.e., 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,
      etc., to EP.)                                        ________

2. R2-44: MUST AND MUST NOT HAPPEN
   (Ref: Book: Creation of Human Ability, Section on
   Route 2, R2-44)

   F1 1. TELL ME SOME THINGS YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO
         HAVE HAPPEN AGAIN.

      2. TELL ME SOME THINGS YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE
         HAPPEN AGAIN.

         (Run alternately to EP.)                          ________

   F2 1. TELL ME SOME THINGS ANOTHER WOULDN'T WANT
         TO HAVE HAPPEN AGAIN.

      2. TELL ME SOME THINGS ANOTHER WOULD LIKE TO
         HAVE HAPPEN AGAIN.

         (Run alternately to EP.)                          ________

   F3 1. TELL ME SOME THINGS OTHERS WOULDN'T WANT TO
         HAVE HAPPEN AGAIN.

      2. TELL ME SOME THINGS OTHERS WOULD LIKE TO
         HAVE HAPPEN AGAIN.

         (Run alternately to EP.)                          ________

   F0 1. TELL ME SOME THINGS YOU WOULDN'T WANT
           TO HAVE HAPPEN TO YOURSELF AGAIN.

      2. TELL ME SOME THINGS YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE
         HAPPEN TO YOURSELF AGAIN.

         (Run alternately to EP.)                          ________

3. OVERT JUSTIFICATION PROCESS
   (Ref: HCOB 7 July 64, JUSTIFICATIONS)

   Command 2 is run flat until the overt given in 1
   is knocked out. Then a new overt is found and 2
   is done thoroughly and repetitively on it.

   Note it is not an alternate command. Note that a
   cycle of action is completed with question 2 on 1
   before you leave off processing this particular
   overt. Only when you have all the justifications
   and cognitions possible on I do you ask for a new
   overt from the pc.

   F1 1. IN THIS LIFETIME WHAT OVERT HAS ANOTHER
         COMMITTED ON YOU?

      2. HOW HAS HE/SHE JUSTIFIED IT?

         (Run per above instructions, to EP.)              ________

   F2 1. IN THIS LIFETIME WHAT OVERT HAVE YOU
         COMMITTED ON ANOTHER?

      2. HOW HAVE YOU JUSTIFIED IT?

         (Run per above instructions, to EP.)              ________

   F3 1. IN THIS LIFETIME WHAT OVERT HAVE OTHERS
         COMMITTED ON OTHERS?

      2. HOW HAVE THEY JUSTIFIED IT?

         (Run per above instructions, to EP.)              ________

   F0 1. IN THIS LIFETIME WHAT OVERT HAVE YOU
         COMMITTED ON YOURSELF?

      2. HOW HAVE YOU JUSTIFIED IT?

         (Run per above instructions, to EP.)              ________

4. CONFRONTING VICTIMS
   (Ref: Tape: 591 IC26 1-MACC-27, THE CONSTANCY OF
   FUNDAMENTALS OF DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY)

   Part One:

   1. WHAT PART OF A VICTIM COULD YOU CONFRONT?

   2. WHAT PART OF A VICTIM WOULD YOU RATHER NOT
      CONFRONT?

      (Run alternately to EP.)                             ________

   Part Two:

   1. WHAT VICTIM COULD YOU CONFRONT?

   2. WHAT VICTIM WOULD YOU RATHER NOT CONFRONT?

      (Run alternately to EP.)                             ________

5. RESPONSIBILITY FOR A VICTIM
   (Ref: HCOB 25 Jan. 60, OT-3 PROCEDURE, HGC ALLOWED
   PROCESSES)

    WHAT ABOUT A VICTIM COULD YOU BE RESPONSIBLE FOR?

    (Run repetitively to EP.)                              ________

6. R2-66: ELECTING CAUSE
   (Ref: Book: Creation of Human Ability, Section on
   Route 2, R2-66)

   1. POINT OUT SOME THINGS WHICH ARE CAUSING THINGS.

   2. POINT OUT SOME MORE THINGS WHICH ARE CAUSING
      THINGS.

    (Give the first command, then run second command
    repetitively, i.e., 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2, etc., to EP.)     ________

7. R2-27: RESOLVE DANGEROUSNESS OF ENVIRONMENT
   (Ref: Book: Creation of Human Ability, Section on
   Route 2, R2-27)

   F1 1. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO CAUSE?

      2. WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO BE THE EFFECT OF?

     (Run the first question to a flattened comm lag,
     then run the second question to a flattened comm
     lag, then return to the first question. Continue
     in this way to EP.)                                   ________

   F2 1. WHAT IS ANOTHER WILLING TO CAUSE?

      2. WHAT IS ANOTHER WILLING TO BE THE EFFECT OF?

     (Run the first question to a flattened comm lag,
     then run the second question to a flattened comm
     lag, then return to the first question. Continue
     in this way to EP.)                                   ________

   F3 1. WHAT ARE OTHERS WILLING TO CAUSE?

      2. WHAT ARE OTHERS WILLING TO BE THE EFFECT OF?

     (Run the first question to a flattened comm lag,
     then run the second question to a flattened comm
     lag, then return to the first question. Continue
     in this way to EP.)                                   ________

   F0 1. WHAT ABOUT YOURSELF ARE YOU WILLING TO CAUSE?

      2. WHAT ABOUT YOURSELF ARE YOU WILLING TO BE THE
         EFFECT OF?

     (Run the first question to a flattened comm lag,
     then run the second question to a flattened comm
     lag, then return to the first question. Continue
     in this way to EP.)                                   ________

8. GAMES
   (Ref: Tape: 5412C20, GAMES [FIGHTING])

   Part One: Repair

   F1 WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO REPAIR?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F2 WHAT IS ANOTHER WILLING TO REPAIR?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F3 WHAT ARE OTHERS WILLING TO REPAIR?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F0 WHAT ABOUT YOURSELF ARE YOU WILLING TO
      REPAIR?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   Part Two: Mustn't Happen Again

   1. WHAT MUSTN'T HAPPEN AGAIN?

   2. WHAT MUST HAPPEN AGAIN?

      (Run alternately, 1,2,1,2,1,2, 1, etc., to EP.)      ________

   Part Three: Fighting

   F1 WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO FIGHT?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F2 WHAT IS ANOTHER WILLING TO FIGHT?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F3 WHAT ARE OTHERS WILLING TO FIGHT?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F0 WHAT ABOUT YOURSELF ARE YOU WILLING TO FIGHT?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   Part Four: Control

   F1 WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO CONTROL?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F2 WHAT IS ANOTHER WILLING TO CONTROL?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F3 WHAT ARE OTHERS WILLING TO CONTROL?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   F0 WHAT ABOUT YOURSELF ARE YOU WILLING TO CONTROL?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

9. R2-56: GAMES PROCESSING
   (Ref: Book: Creation of Human Ability, Section on
   Route 2, R2-56)

   Part One:

   1. GIVE ME SOME GAMES WHICH ARE NO FUN.

   2. GIVE ME SOME MORE GAMES WHICH ARE NO FUN.

     (Give the first command, then run second command
     repetitively, i.e., 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2, etc., to EP.)    ________

   Part Two:

      WHAT SORT OF OPPONENTS COULD YOU HAVE?

      (Run repetitively to EP.)                            ________

   Part Three:

   1. NAME SOME UNROMANTIC ROLES.

   2. NAME SOME MORE UNROMANTIC ROLES.

   3. NAME SOME ROMANTIC ROLES.

   4. NAME SOME MORE ROMANTIC ROLES.

      (Run consecutively, i.e., 1,2,3,4,1,2,3, etc.,
      to EP.)                                              ________

   Part Four:

   1. WHAT KIND OF A GAME COULD YOU HAVE?

   2. GIVE ME SOME MORE GAMES YOU COULD HAVE.

      (Give the first command, then run second command
      repetitively, i.e., 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2, etc., to EP.)   ________

   Part Five:

   1. WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE TO BE TO HAVE A GAME?

   2. TELL ME SOME MORE THINGS YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE TO
      HAVE A GAME.

      (Give the first command, then run second command
      repetitively, i.e., 1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2, etc., to EP.)   ________

   Part Six:

   In asking this question the auditor points out some
   object in the immediate environment and the pc is
   made to describe what kind of a game he could have
   with that object.

      WHAT KIND OF GAME COULD YOU HAVE INVOLVING ______?

      (Run repetitively, pointing out a different object
      each time the command is given, to EP)               ________

10. SCS CONTROL PROCESS, THINKING VERSION
   (Ref: PAB 157, PROCESSES USED IN 21ST ACC [CONCLUDED])

   1. THINK OF AN IDENTITY THAT COULD BE HANDLED.

   2. THINK OF AN IDENTITY THAT COULD NOT BE HANDLED.

   (Run alternately, i.e., 1,2,1,2,1,2,1, etc., to EP.)    ________

11. CONTROL
    (Ref: HCO Training Bulletin 30 Nov. 56, SLP 8)

    F1 LOOK AROUND AND FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD
       ASSIST ANOTHER IN CONTROLLING YOU.

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

    F2 LOOK AROUND AND FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD
       ASSIST YOU IN CONTROLLING ANOTHER.

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

    F3 LOOK AROUND AND FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD
       ASSIST OTHERS IN CONTROLLING OTHERS.

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

    F0 LOOK AROUND AND FIND SOMETHING THAT WOULD
       ASSIST YOU IN CONTROLLING YOURSELF.

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

12. PROCESS S2
    (Ref: HCOB 3 Sept. 59, WHY "VICTIM" WORKS AS A
    PROCESS)

    F1 FROM WHERE COULD A VICTIM COMMUNICATE TO YOU?

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

    F2 FROM WHERE COULD YOU COMMUNICATE TO A VICTIM?

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

    F3 FROM WHERE COULD A VICTIM COMMUNICATE TO OTHERS?

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

    F0 FROM WHERE COULD YOU COMMUNICATE TO YOURSELF
       BECAUSE OF A VICTIM?

       (Run repetitively to EP.)                           ________

13. GRADE IV QUAD--R3SC
    (Ref: HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III ROUTINE THREE SC-A, FULL
                              SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING
                              UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS
          HCOB 1 Sept. 63     ROUTINE THREE SC
          HCOB 6 Sept. 78 II  SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS)

    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
       1-1-1-1-1-1-1 (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 1 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 automaticities 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 II:

       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.)              ________

       g. WHAT WOULD BE A SAFE METHOD OF HANDLING YOUR
          PROBLEMS HERE AND NOW IN LIFE?
          (Ref: Tape: 6309C12 SHSBC 305, SERVICE FACS)

          (Run the item per step III, to EP.)              ________

       h. WHAT IS A SAFE ASSUMPTION ABOUT YOUR
          ENVIRONMENT?
          (Ref: Tape: 6309C12 SHSBC 305, SERVICE FACS)

          (Run the item per step III, to EP.)              ________

       i. WHAT BEINGNESS WOULD BE A GOOD SOLUTION FOR
          A TOUGH ENVIRONMENT?
          (Ref: Tape: 6108C17 SHSBC 41, RUDIMENTS -
                                        VALENCES)

          (Run the item per step III, to EP.)              ________

    V. The pc's folder is to be culled for service facsimiles
       and each that reads on the meter can be run per step
       III above. (Ref: Tape: 6309C05 SHSBC 303, SERVICE FAC
       ASSESSMENT) Any such item that does not run on any of
       the brackets must be prepchecked to EP.

       End phenomena of R3SC process:

       Service fac running can be ended off when you have
       fully run many service facs (which will lead to the
       main service fac). When the main service fac has been
       run to full EP, service fac handling is complete.
       (Ref: HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III, ROUTINE THREE SC-A, FULL
       SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA
       DIANETICS)

       (Complete R3SC per above instructions, 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.)                        ________

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Compilation assisted by
LRH Technical Research
and Compilations

LRH:RTRC:dk.gm



[End of Level IV Coursepack]
