SUPER SCIO #4A



Copyright 1996

All commercial rights are reserved to the author, who currently
wishes to remain anonymous and therefore is writing under the
pen name of "The Pilot".  Individuals may freely copy these files
on the internet for their own use and they may be made available
on any web server who does not charge for them and who does not
alter their contents.


It would take a large book to hold all the data that we now have on
the subject of auditing.  It is truly a lifetime study, and those
few who have become real professional auditors (and there are some,
both inside and outside of the Church) are to be highly commended.

Here I will take a brief stab at writing down some of the factors
that I consider to be important.  This is my own interpretation.


Part 1 (#4A): 


Part 2 (#4B): 




The existence of aberration stems from our need to create and
experience everything.  But, for a god like being, this is much
like viewing an occasional horror movie to keep the more desirable
conditions from becoming too monotonous.  There is nothing here
that requires a persistence or perpetuation of aberration.  You
should be able to shrug these things off effortlessly.

The persistence of aberration, on the other hand, is a grave
mistake and is due to a basic conflict between the wrong information
we were fed (see "jewel of knowledge" in #2 "Cosmic History"), and the 
true nature of our existence.  The factors in conflict are as follows:

At the beginning of our existence, we were mislead into believing
that thinking, perceiving, experiencing, or creating certain things
could be permanently harmful to us.  From this, we began to flinch
or withdraw from various things.  And those things were then used
(by each of us against the others) to further discourage looking,
and being, and thinking, and doing until we have all sunk into 
a morass of mental blindness and incapacity.

But, if we are indeed balancing nothingness with an infinity of creation
(as I proposed in "Cosmic History"), then we will never get rid
of anything unless we are capable of creating it again in the future,
because we would be unwilling to lose anything on a permanent basis.
This would mean that you will never uncreate anything unless you
look at it so completely that you could mock it up again.

And thus things persists because we mistakenly believe that we
should not look at them and must not create them.  On this basis,
if something can be brought fully into view, it should at least
desensitize.  And if the person can be made to mock up a perfect
duplicate, and therefore see that he is capable of recreating it at
will, then he should be able to completely vanish the object or
condition if he so chooses.

And if we further realize that the willingness to create something
is monitored by the willingness to be responsible for the existence
of the thing and the effects it creates, we see that responsibility 
is a key underlying button.  And since controlling something is
the act of being responsible for the effects that it is currently
creating, we furthermore see that control of something is a gradient
towards full responsibility.  And to control something, you certainly
need to know about it.  This gives us the Knowingness / Control /
Responsibility triangle (KRC) that is used in Scientology.

Coming at this from another angle, it should be obvious that fully
viewing something and being able to duplicate it is monitored by
one's ability to communicate with it.  And this is also monitored by 
the perception of the reality of it.  And furthermore, a complete
duplication would require the ability to, shall we say, synchronize
or move in sympathy with it, which could be described as having an
affinity or liking for it.  

This last button of needing to have affinity might be the big problem
because we have been shown that you're not supposed to like things
that are bad, and you're not supposed to like two things that are
in conflict with each other, and (most deadly), if you like something
and then change your mind, it's considered a betrayal.  To get
rid of a bad condition, you might have to (just very briefly)
choose to like it and that often comes in conflict with all three of
the above.

The factors of Affinity, Reality, and Communication are what is
known as the ARC triangle in Scientology.

And so we see that to bring about the vanishment of a condition,
we restore the ability to create that condition and we can work
towards this by gradient scales of increased looking, communicating,
knowing, controlling, taking responsibility, etc.  This is the
exact opposite of how things are handled in the society at large
where undesirable conditions are buried and suppressed and kept
out of view.  This, per my opening remarks, would ensure that we
will continue to compulsively create them out of our control. 

Those of you who are trained as auditors will see that I have
taken a different path than LRH did in specifying the theoretical
basis of auditing, but we do come to the same conclusions. 


Every intelligent researcher in the field has recognized that there
are portions of the mind that the individual is unaware of.  Even
the most meat body oriented theories have to allow for a vast
realm of unobserved activity and the statement that you are only
using 5% of your brain or mind is quite commonly accepted.

One of the early Dianetic principles was the idea that if anybody
had some inherent mental ability (such as total recall, lightning
fast computations, etc.), then the ability must be an inherent property
of each and every mind and must in most cases be buried and blocked
in this unaware section of the mind.  The brilliance of this
observation was partially tarnished by the inadequate one lifetime
view and the mistaken idea of blaming everything on recent engrams.
None the less, it expanded the concept of what must be hidden in
that unseen area below the level of consciousness.

The breakthroughs of 1952 opened up an immensely larger sphere in
which the individual should be capable of operating but where he
was even less aware and disabled.  The manifestation of any
OT ability, ever, by anyone, would on this basis indicate that
everyone is capable of these things but has them buried far out
of reach.  And these things do happen, just look at Rhine's 
research or the endless history of observed poltergeist
manifestations.  As an interesting side note, any such manifestation
also invalidates the absoluteness of physics and places it in the
position of being a special case in much the same way as modern
physics (both Einstein and quantum) placed Newtonian physics into
a limited (but exceedingly common and useful) special case.

We could label this hidden portion of the mind many ways.  We
could call it the subconscious, but that has many undesirable
connotations for our purposes here, as does the term "unconscious".  
Even the label "Reactive Mind" has many implications which might be
correct for some portions of this hidden area but which are not 
necessarily true for all of it. 

The only sweeping statement we can make with certainty is that
this portion of the mind is subaware or below the individual's
level of awareness.  Since there is no indication that the
whole thing is homogenous, we should realize that we are always
dealing with relative truth rather than absolutes.  An accurate
anatomy of, for example, engrams, only maps one portion of this
hidden area and leaves much else to be discovered.  One of Ron's
main weaknesses was his tendency to grab a single factor, whether
it was overts or implants or entities or whatever, and decide
that he finally had the solution to it all.

Our primary task in auditing is to move things from this hidden
realm into consciousness.

A useful (but not entirely accurate) analogy is to draw a box and 
place a horizontal line across the middle of it, and label the
upper section as aware and the lower section as hidden.  We might
even shade in the lower area to represent the blackness that comes
from lack of awareness.  Our job  would be to keep moving that 
line down until everything in the box was within the person's awareness.

But the boundary between the aware and hidden portions of the
individual's mind is not a simple line.  It would be best thought
of as a gray area in which he is almost aware.  This band may
be thin or thick and the wider it is, the more things he has
that are accessible to simple processing.  If the line is too
thin, there might only be a handful of things that he can
look at to raise his awareness and great skill and understanding
are required to get any kind of results in working with him.
If the gray area is exceedingly wide, almost any technique ever
dreamed up by anybody will produce positive results because there
is so much that is accessible.

As the individual moves things from this gray area into full
awareness, the gray area does not shrink, instead it moves downward
to encompass more things that were previously unreachable.
The individual has a certain tolerance for unknown, frightening,
or confusing things and he will allow more of the deeply buried
stuff come up to the surface as you clean up the things that are
currently accessible.  It makes it look like an unending job
because there's always something more, but this is a wrong view
brought about because the hidden area is orders of magnitude 
larger than the conscious area.  Never worry about how much more
he is finding because this may actually be a positive indication
that he is able to tolerate a wider gray area.  Instead, pay
attention to whether he is resolving things and becoming more
able and more aware.

The things that are in your full awareness are not the source of
your difficulties.  And the things hidden down in the mud are
just too deeply buried for you to figure them out until you have
worked deep enough to bring them up into the gray area.  Therefore,
the only things that you can make progress on are the ones in this
gray band.  Those things, shall we say, that are half obscured but
somewhat in view.  For this reason, there will be aberrations that
you're not going to get anywhere near handling.  It doesn't
matter how slight or silly something seems, the cause of it could
be ten fathoms deep.  So never get evangelistic about some
disability, it can be heartbreaking.  Instead, you always work
on what is accessible and keep going deeper.

But it is very useful to widen this gray area.  It makes
more things accessible.  It gives you more angles of approach
(and we don't know the right way to address everything).  It allows
more room for error.  And it lets you get deeper and undercut things
and therefore leads to faster progress in general.

Simple things like being well fed and rested will expand the gray
band because you are more willing to look deeper.  Things like
courage and confidence, knowledge and determination all play a
role in this.  And the more you succeed, the more you are willing
to grapple with so that eventually you're digging this thing out
with a steam shovel instead of handling tiny specs of dirt.


Let me first warn you that the CofS currently considers self-auditing 
to be dangerous.  I disagree because this is where the mind's
protection is the most effective.  However, the gray band of
accessibility can become extremely narrow so that most self-auditing
is unproductive of results.

The different types of auditing have a significant effect on how
wide the accessibility band is.  If you're being audited by a safe
and knowledgeable person, you are much more willing to dive more
deeply into the hidden portions of the mind than you would be if
you were auditing by yourself.

Also, making mistakes Vs having successes is a major factor in 
accessibility.  Early on, when you know the least and are most
likely to goof things up, you're better off with somebody who knows
what they are doing.  On the other hand, a bad auditor who screws
things up might actually make the PC less accessible in session than
he is when he is alone, hence there has occasionally been a problem
with people self-auditing (and not doing very well at it) in between
professional sessions that should have fixing them up but instead
were making a mess of things.

Here is my list of the types of auditing, starting with the one that
gives the greatest accessibility (if done right) and working down.

A) Professional Auditing

Here, an auditor, who should be extremely skillful and
knowledgeable, audits the PC (PreClear - from habit we even call
OTs PCs).  The PC is not expected to know very much.  The PC is
also expected to pay a lot, possibly with some justification since
it is very hard to make a good auditor and the PC is doing very
little for himself.  Its the unnecessary and screwed up actions
that cause people to really scream about the prices (who in their
right mind would want to pay thousands of dollars for an unnecessary
sec check for example).  There is rarely any complaint if the
right thing is run to a good result.

I personally believe that this is a cop-out on the PCs part and a
way to offload responsibility onto the auditor.  Although this
will give the widest band of accessibility at any given moment,
it does not encourage the band to grow wider to the same degree
that learning the subject will.  Therefor I think professional
auditing is best suited to repair actions and startup actions
(to get someone moving) and should not be used as the main thrust.

Furthermore, the PC has little idea of what is going on and he can
be led into trouble by bad auditing or incorrect C/Sing (Case
Supervision, which specifies what is to be audited).  This is
the only situation (outside of using drugs etc. to force yourself
over your head) where somebody might get worse instead of better
because he is usually reaching much deeper than normal because
he expects the auditor to keep him safe.

B) Co-Auditing

Here the person studies the materials and is paired up with another
person who is doing the same.  They take turns auditing each other.

In this case, the co-auditors can get away with the sloppiest
techniques and still produce fantastic results on each other because
the person being audited is well aware of the procedures and
purposes and is taking responsibility.  The only really critical
factors are ARC and a desire to help.  The mere presence of
somebody else who is willing to listen and give assistance gives
a tremendous boost to this factor of accessibility.

I believe that this is the way to go for most people until they
reach a point where they can make good progress on solo auditing.

The ideal situation would be to have a professional auditor
available to give assistance in case of trouble.

C) Solo Auditing

Here the person goes at it by himself, but with the full formal
procedure of auditing.  He uses an E-meter and writes things
down in a professional manner.

In the CofS, solo auditing is always done with a Case Supervisor
who reads the sessions and issues instructions.  This ensures
that there is still an external communication line and that
someone else is there to provide missing knowledge or an
external point of observation.

Although the band of accessibility will be narrower than in a
co-audit, this has the big advantage that the person, as his own
auditor, has an internal communication instead of having to
relay everything in words and it also raises the person's
responsibility even further.

The same formal procedures will work without a case supervisor
if the person has enough understanding of the subject.  The
sessions should still be written down, because this helps get
everything exterior to the person.  The band of accessibility
will be found to be narrower because there is nobody else there
to bail you out if you get into trouble, but if it is already
extremely wide, because of a great deal of study and determination,
then it can still be adequate to the task.

D) Self auditing

In the final analysis, the only way out is to become a fully
self-clearing individual.  If you're floating around in a bodiless
condition without a book or an E-meter and there's no one around
who knows enough to give you a hand, you should still be capable
of taking anything apart and setting yourself free.

But you can't self audit in the absence of understanding and 
without any workable techniques.  People have been known to
just spin around endlessly just figure figuring and getting
nowhere.  If people could do this right on an instinctive basis,
we would already have gotten out of here.  The problem is that
we swallowed a whole lot of wrong data early in our existence
and it predisposes us to becoming abberated.  So the person's
instinct is often wrong and leads him into a downward spiral.

Furthermore, the band of accessibility is at its narrowest in
this case because the individual has no help.  If you are
extremely advanced and very knowledgeable, then it doesn't
matter so much because the band is incredibly wide anyway,
but if you are just beginning and know little and have little
perseverance or determination, then the band might be so 
tiny that little progress can be made.

There is also the research question of developing techniques which
are conducive to successful self auditing.  Unfortunately, the
CofS has leaned away from this.  There are some exceptions, like
the book "Self Analysis", but generally this is an untapped area.

My own experience was that I was able to successfully self audit 
the route 1 procedures in "Creation of Human Ability" based on 
reading the book shortly after I joined the subject.  Although
this didn't fully turn on real OT abilities, it was a lot of fun and
I believe that it set me up for the big OT key out that I had
the following year.

According to the Philadelphia Doctorate Course tapes, the OT drills
are self auditable if you know the materials well enough, and
they can be done immediately on a certain percentage of new 
people when they walk in the door (these were what was then 
referred to as Step 1 cases, people who could run step one without
preparation).  But this research line was pretty much abandoned.

On the other hand, the Dianetic techniques in DMSMH absolutely
cannot be self audited.  Something like Dianetic repeater technique 
is almost dangerous even in professional hands, nothing to say of
having people go try it by themselves.  But that is mostly 
because it is a poor technique on any basis.  The modern Dianetic
techniques are smoother and easier, and possibly could be self
audited by a very advance case, but such a case would probably be a
Dianetic clear already and the technique would actually be in his
way and inappropriate to use.

But there is a self auditable technique for running engrams.
It consists of alternately spotting something in the incident and
something in the room.  This can actually let you recover the
unconscious period of an operation and bring up the words being
spoken and everything.  You just need to persist with it long
enough.  We still have the problem of accessibility.  Some cases
are just not up to running engrams.  But if they are, this
trick will work almost as well as the modern Dianetic R3R 
procedure, with the difference being that it is slower but does
not require an auditor or an E-meter.

It is almost criminal not to have a technique like this and teach
it to people as soon as they are up to running engrams.  What
if the person should die?  This is one of the few ways that they 
could run out the death experience successfully.

Furthermore, this one works for Dianetic clears without the 
liabilities of running R3R (which can get the NOTS aspects of
the case all stirred up if too much of it is done after clear).

The technique would be to "Spot an incident underlying (condition)"
and then alternately spot something in the incident and something in 
the room until something happens.  Then spot another incident 
underlying ... etc. until the condition is handled.  In general, you 
should not ask for an "Earlier Similar" incident when doing this on
a clear because the "engram chain" mechanism is not fully operative
after someone goes clear.  A looser question allows for an
earlier similar to be run if one is there but doesn't force it.
This is actually more of a high powered recall process rather
than true Dianetic picture running.


3.1 ITSA

First and foremost is simply looking and seeing "What Is".  Since
this results in saying "It is a ...", we call this ITSA in
Scientology.  The opposite, which is saying "What is it?" is
referred to as WHATSIT.

By actual observation in the auditing of preclears, if the PC
continues to ITSA he will make forward progress and if he 
concentrates on WHATSIT he will jam up and grind to a halt.
This doesn't mean that you can't wonder what something is.  But
it does mean that if you concentrate your attention on all the
things you don't know, you will bog down.  The trick is that
there must always be more ITSA than WHATSIT if you wish to get

If you have something you are wondering about or trying to figure
out or if you are trying to run a processing question, then
you already have one WHATSIT there to work on.  At that point,
you're just slowing yourself down if you start thinking of what
else you don't know.  Instead, you should concentrate on things
that you can identify or see or know about.

If you don't know what time it is, and need to know, you don't
handle it by also thinking about how you don't know the date and
don't remember where you left your watch.  That's all WHATSIT 
and if you keep it up for too long, you'll just bog down and
decide that the whole matter is hopeless.    Instead, you look
around and try to spot a clock ("It is a clock and it says that
it is 5 minutes after six" - this is ITSA).  And if you can't
spot any, then you spot things that you do know about the time.
Maybe you remember that the sun was going down, etc.

Never be afraid to consider something that you don't know, but
always balance it with lots of ITSA.  That is the fastest way
to make progress.

If you're trying to figure something out, it often helps to
go over the things you do know which have a bearing on the problem.

This also tells us that you are much better off expanding outward
from areas that you do know something about rather than plunging
into completely unknown regions.


To pound in a nail, you hit it over and over again with a hammer.
Often it is hard to start and then things pick up.  You don't
try to do it all in one blow.  You also don't hit it once and
then keep the hammer on the nail and try to push real hard to
get it to sink in the rest of the way.

The biggest gain in perception is when you first look at something.
Just continuing to stare at it after that only produces a small
perception change in proportion to the amount of time spent.
If you want to see something more clearly, keep looking at it
and something else alternately, or shift around between different
spots on a large object rather than staring at it.  This will 
improve perception and can be tried easily.

You can also do this on a physical basis, actually reaching out
and touching something and then withdrawing from it and then
reaching again etc.

Among other things, we are drilling the ability to reach out with
and withdraw one's attention.  When an area is abberated, one
either gets one's attention stuck on it or one flinches from it
and can't look at all.  Either way, putting your attention onto
and off of it in a controlled manner can restore the ability to
think about and handle something.

Furthermore, drilling the precise control of your attention is
like any other exercise, it gets better with practice and you
build up muscles.

Processes are best done with alternating commands (this
naturally shifts your attention back and forth) or with some 
inherent change of attention (spot another object or remember
another time when ...) or with great care to end the action
precisely before doing it again.

Sometimes you can get somewhere with fixed concentration, but 
its usually the long way around, and there is a tendency to
build up a resistance when you push too long and hard against
something.  In eastern practices, they often drill by holding
their attention on a single point instead of alternating and
these drills are notorious for taking years of arduous work
before they achieve a result.  Tibetan monks have been known
to wall themselves up in caves for years to complete one of
these drills.  The speed difference is at least a hundred to
one.  Just see how long it takes you to push a nail in someday
without swinging a hammer and you'll see what I mean.

There is also the matter of narrowing one's attention down to the
point where one has a chance to push through something.  There
are things that are just too much for the PC at this stage in
his existence and you handle that by addressing one piece at
a time rather than trying to handle everything at once.  You 
can probably get him to confront losing his pen if he doesn't
at the same time think about how the boss is going to yell at
him.  And then maybe you could get his confront up on people
yelling as long as they were not his boss and then you could
get him to confront his boss as long as he wasn't yelling.
Finally you can take up the subject of his boss yelling at
him for losing the pen and succeed where otherwise you would
have failed.

The idea behind processes is generally to address a specific
thing and not get into all the other stuff that's wrong with him
at the same time.  You do one thing with the attitude that
you'll worry about the other things later.  This is where you
can fail if the PC has his attention stuck on some other horrible
thing in his life (a problem or something) because he keeps
pulling that into the middle of the process you are trying to

And so you have to watch out for things that have the PC's attention
stuck.  If it is stuck to the point where he can't put it
aside briefly to do something else, then there is nothing else
that you can run, because you are going to be running that
fixed point of attention whether you like it or not.

There are some processes, such as simply looking around the
room and spotting things that you like, which will run a point of
fixed attention without addressing it directly.  But realize
that you really are running that fixed point by having
him practice putting his attention somewhere else under his own
control.  You can also run this process in the absence of fixed
attention and it will be a nice process for improving one's
perceptions of the room.  But it runs like a different process
in that case because you are not doing the same thing with it.

And here again we have the factor of accessibility.  The process
that will really cure what his attention is stuck on might
not be in the accessible band.  And so you do a lick and a
promise and try to get his attention off of it temporarily 
and then build up his muscles by handling what is accessible
until he reaches the point where he really can go after that
thing which has him swamped.


You can exercise abilities and perceptions by drilling them.
This is a form of repetitive spotting (or repetitive doing)
that is oriented towards repeating the action.  
It is addressed towards the current environment rather 
than the past and works to increase ability directly rather 
than being concerned with why the person is not able.

At Scientology lower levels, they use drills on the physical
environment and work through the body.  For example, you might
have the person look around the room (with the body's eyes) and
spot something he likes.  You would do this repetitively until
the person brightens up.

On the upper levels, the techniques are often done outside the
body.  You could, for example, close your eyes, get the idea
that you're hovering over the city, and spot something that
you like.  

Both methods are valid and valuable.  If we forget about the
silly status button as to whether or not somebody is at a
certain case level, it becomes apparent that both methods
could apply at any level.  It is often best to do a physical
drill on the room using the body first and then go on to do
the OT version of the same drill.  The OT versions of these
things are beneficial even if the perceptions are vague and
unreal.  They get better as you advance.

Making gains by means of drills alone is unfortunately very
limited.  A certain amount can expand abilities and build up
horsepower, but then you begin to run into the various 
mental barriers that you have set up and the limits of the
physical rules that you are in compulsive agreement with.

My own idea on this would be to have a short level of drills
in between each major level that is address to auditing 
something out.  This should include some physical drills
(also called "objective" processes in Scientology) and some
OT drills.  In other words, let the person do some of these
all the way up the line rather than putting them at some
special super OT level.  And do them with the knowledge that
they will be vague and sketchy at first and will get better
as one advances.

Unless you're drilling precision, you should push the speed 
just a bit because quantity of commands done is a bit
senior to the quality with which they are done and because
a faster pace tends to raise one's tone level (see 1st ACC
lectures).  This doesn't mean that you slop around and don't
really do the command or try to get through everything in
a mad rush, it simply means that a brisk pace is preferable 
if the PC is up to it.  But precision is often worth working
on (this is the keynote of martial arts or practicing the
piano, etc.).  A good technique when you're doing drills 
solo is to do a few commands very precisely and then do a
large number quickly and then do a few more with great
attention to the quality and precision etc.


Repetitive processes generally aim at pushing through something,
deeper and deeper, until you can spot a basic answer or confront
a basic incident that causes an area to fall apart.

Of course drills can also be considered processes, but here
I'm referring to questions which get you to confront things.
As discussed under repetitive spotting, the questions are often
alternating so as to bring about a natural shifting of attention
on and off of an area because this gives you the maximum push
into looking at the area.

An example would be running "What is the Problem", "What 
communications have you left incomplete about that problem".  The
two commands are done alternately, and they get the person to
shift his attention back and forth so that he doesn't bog down
on one question or the other.  For self auditing to clean up
a specific problem, you might be best off using "Describe 
the problem" instead of "What is the problem" because this encourages
more ITSA and this process will work best on a specific problem
by alternating ITSA on the problem itself and on the incomplete
communications.  The problem will change as you continue the
process, and you may even shift to a more basic problem.


A very useful technique is to go down a prepared list of things
and see which reacts.  There are many variations of this.  It
is used, among other things, for assessing a correction list
of possible things that can go wrong to see if you can find
what is wrong.

This really should be done with an E-meter so that you can see
what reacts.  This gives you an easy way to figure out what to
take up.  Trained auditors will know how to do this.  Solo
auditors using a meter can get away with this on a very sloppy 
basis because they know what is going on with themselves.  Doing
this on someone else should only be done by highly trained 
professionals or very knowledgeable co-auditors on each other because 
it can be quite evaluative for the PC and can get him all screwed up if
the auditor jams the wrong things down the PCs throat and misses 
the right ones.

Note that because the list is generalized and the topic (such as
fixing what has gone wrong) may have more than one correct answer,
this is not generally used to find the one and only answer, but
instead is used to get areas to follow up on.  The most significant
one might not even be accessible when you begin running this so that
lesser areas have to be handled first.

On a self-audit basis, you can still check over the things on a
prepared list to see if you can spot items that seem indicated
to you.  Somebody might actually read through that list of
actual GPM goals (see the previous write-up on actual GPMs) and
just know it when they come to the right one.

You might also look down a list of possible errors (e.g. a correction
list) and spot right away what has gone wrong.

If you're not sure of finding the right one but you're still fairly
clear headed, you can try out a couple of possibilities and see if
one or more of them work.  This is possible as long as you still
have enough free attention to tolerate a few wrong answers and
a bit of WHATSIT before you get your hands on something that is

The difficulty comes up when you have really gotten yourself
bogged down and its all too foggy and confused and over-charged
and maybe you've already got a lot of things wrong so that the
answer is not obvious.  In this case, all you can do is to keep
fixing individual things that are wrong until the area cools down
and you can see clearly again and that is very hard without an
E-meter.  This is really the area where we could use a team of
crack professionals supporting co-audit clubs and self-clearing
groups etc.

There are many assessment lists in Scientology.  Modern Scientology
is especially good at putting together correction lists to use in
assessing and fixing what has gone wrong in the case of trouble.
These correction lists were developed by accumulating a great 
deal of history on things that did go wrong and how they were
fixed.  Later I will talk about a few of the more critical errors,
but this will not substitute for a thorough study of case repair.

You can also put together an assessment list if you know enough
about an area.  If, for example, you know how to fix cars, you
can make a list of things that could be wrong which you can go
over when a car comes in to be fixed.  In developing such a list,
you must be very careful to put together a general list of what
could be wrong (or whatever) without looking for the exact right
thing that is wrong.  This question, of what is wrong, does not
generally go to a single perfect answer because there are usually
many things wrong and there is often an accumulation of errors
before something actually fails.

Never confuse assessment techniques with the listing techniques
given in the next section.  Assessment lists are useful lists of
things to consider.


This is an extremely powerful but potentially dangerous technique.
I do not recommend it to beginners, but you should have some
understanding of it.

You begin with a question that goes to exactly one right answer
(which is why it doesn't work on the question "what is wrong
with me" etc.).

Then you list down answers to the question.  The action of listing
itself will improve your confront in the area and will tend
to take off charge.  If the area has too much charge on it, 
you may not spot the answer (referred to as "The Item") when
you list it, but instead you might have to list some more answers
first.  You have to spot the moment when all the charge has come
off and you're ready to spot the item.

Then you go down the list of answers nulling out the ones that
are no longer valid (this is the Nulling step) until you find
The Item which is the one and only exact answer to the question
for you at this time.

You then have to recognize that it is the answer.  In an auditing
session, the auditor will indicate that "..." is the item.  In
solo, you indicate it to yourself.

This is a very dicey procedure if done in the presence of heavy
charge, and that should be left to professionals.

But listing on a lightly charged item is very easy.  You just
spot a couple answers and know which one it is (generally listing
on NOTS works this way because its not your charge).  Generally
you can just list to the right item without doing an item nulling

If there is heavy charge, what you can do is to take most of the 
charge off with a repetitive process first.  Often you can 
even cognite what the item is without doing any listing at all.  
In self auditing, only begin a listing technique when the answer 
is almost on the tip of your tongue.  This is slower but much safer.

Among the things that can go wrong are the list is being overlisted
(you have kept on too long and it seems to be getting heavier and
more solid) or the list is still incomplete (there is still more
charge and more answers you need to get off and it seems like there
is still more than one possible answer).  Sometimes when you go
past the correct answer on Nulling the list, it seems like every
answer is correct, so find the one that triggered that happening.
Often (but not always), it turns out to be the first one on the
list.  See the "Laws of Listing and Nulling" in the tech volumes
and don't list anything that is heavily charged until you really
know what you're doing.

The worst error is indicating the wrong item.  If it feels bad,
it is not it.  The right item always cheers you up no matter how
sick the answer might seem because finding the right answer will
start straightening things out and bring about a feeling of
relief at a minimum.  If things seem bleak or hopeless after finding
an item, it is guaranteed that it is wrong.  If this happens, 
immediately indicate to yourself that the item is wrong (that will
cool down most of the side effect of a wrong item).  A wrong
item can make you sick.  The same can happen if you have the
right item and then invalidate it.  Whichever way it is, if you
suddenly feel horrible, then reverse the indication.

Don't get too worried about wrong items or listing errors.  I have
run many thousands of lists on myself and gotten hundreds of items wrong
without any serious ill effect.  Even when the listing was done
on me by someone else, the occasional wrong item didn't usually
have much effect except that a few time I got very mad and upset.
Only twice did I ever have a really bad reaction and in both cases
it was listing done on me by another in an area that was extremely
highly charged.	 In one of the two cases I became extremely sick,
and in the other I suffered very briefly from hysterical blindness,
unable to see anything but blackness with my eyes open (but this
happened instantly and made the error obvious and my vision snapped
back on on simply reversing the indication).

As a little aside, people are always indicating wrong things to 
each other in life.  You should learn to spot these things and
reject them and you'll find that life is a lot more pleasant.
Even if something is actually right, if you're not ready to have
the item, then it wouldn't do you any good so you might as well
toss it.  If you keep evolving, you'll get back to it eventually
and generally you'll find that even the things that seemed right
logically (but didn't feel correct) were slightly off base.

Its simple and easy to spot things (such as things that are wrong
etc.) and do something about them without getting into a frantic
search for the right answer.  If you pound away at searching for
the one true answer (especially with a question that has many
valid answers), you tend to get into a continual WHATSIT that
will bog you down.

If you keep spotting truth and not worrying about the stuff that is
not yet accessible, you will have an expanding sphere of rightness
and understanding and gradually the dark areas will clear up and


An old basic idea in Scientology is that you have the PC do
consciously what he is already doing automatically.

If we are adding to the richness of creation, then he can let
himself stop doing something as soon as he has full control of
doing it consciously whenever he wants.  Then he doesn't lose it
if he stops.

But if you suppress something that's happening automatically,
he can't let go of it, so it keeps going in a hidden manner and
what you end up with is both the automaticity and its suppression
being continually mocked up.  This may result in something that
looks like nothing is happening, but its solid and very busy 
under the surface (its the no motion of forces in balance instead
of a simple absence of motion) and it chews up a lot of his
horsepower keeping these things in suspension.  

A good technique is to have the PC alternately increase and
decrease the action.  If a muscle is tense, alternately make it
tenser and looser etc.  If a person is stuttering, have him 
alternately stutter worse and better in alternate sentences.

This leads to more exotic techniques based on assumptions about
what the person is doing unconsciously.  Obviously, he's automatically
making the wall solid, so you have him make it more solid, etc.


Since the underlying basic is creating things, the ultimate
process would simply be to create things consciously and under
your own control.  If you can mock something up causatively,
then you don't have to mock it up compulsively.

This is the basic technique of the Philadelphia Doctorate Course
and Ron has said a great deal about it.

If you're worried about car crashes, then do mockups of car crashes
until the mockup is under your control.  Then you'll stop worrying
and also have enough confront on the situation that you'll have
a good chance of avoiding a crash instead of pulling one in.

You really should listen to the PDC tapes, but I'll give you 
a few key points here.  First of all, mock up many copies, not
just one.  Change their color and alter them in various ways to
get them under your control.  Move them around and locate them
in different places.  Work in all directions, not just in front
of you (there is an automatic tendency to push pictures behind
your back to keep them hidden, so working mockups behind you
is especially good).   Subsequent research by Ron in the late
1950s (16th ACC etc.) showed that you must do something with
the mockup, such as making it more solid or changing it around, 
to ensure that it is your own creation rather than just pulling 
up old pictures.

The final problem with mockup processing (see 1st Melbourne ACC)
was that it sometimes stirred up charge on Create/Destroy.  It
was abandoned for that reason despite the fact that it worked
in a large percentage of cases.  In the 1960s, it was discovered
that Create/Destroy were key implant buttons and this problem
was basically solved, but mockup processing never went back into
intensive use.

The keynote of using this technique safely is to never push the
PC into having to do it, because sometimes there is charge on
the Create button.  But use it yourself anytime you feel good
about it, because it is one of the fastest and most powerful
techniques, and even in the early days, Ron explicitly stated
that it could be self audited successfully.

If there is charge on create, you can probably blow it by spotting
the top of the first penalty universe.  The first item is
"To Create Is Native State".  Then the penalty universe shows
you how that leads to death and destruction.  You can pull
out of the whole thing by spotting being blanketed and pushed
into the penalty universe and then by spotting pushing others
into it.  The context of this is given in the "Cosmic History"
and a more detailed write-up will appear later in this series.


The most important thing in running a process is to continue to
do it until it's done.

The act of running a process will bring other things into view.
There is a strong tendency to chase after the new things discovered
instead of finishing what you're doing, and that is a mistake.
If you do find something worth following up, write it down for
later and continue what you're doing.

There is a real problem in knowing when to stop.  Always end on
a win or some sort of gain or improvement.  But don't push on
endlessly trying to force some big gain and invalidating the
actual win because it seemed too small.  The invalidation itself
interferes with further progress.  Its like teaching a little
kid something.  You have to encourage the tiniest half screwed
up forward step so that he can keep getting better.

We are generally working towards getting key-outs, which means
that you don't take apart the entirety of trillions of years
of, let us say, having a car (or spaceship or whatever) 
break down while trying to drive to work.  Instead, you
spot a few things and suddenly the accumulated weight of that
thing falls away and you feel better and have a win.  That is
the point to stop.  If you carry on, you just begin to stir up
the tons of earlier stuff connected to the area you're handling
and that stuff may be too early and too far out of current
experience to be addressed right now.  So you take the win you're
given and go on to something else.  Eventually you come back around
and an earlier and broader sphere is now accessible and you can
go to a more powerful win.  Eventually you should be able to spot
the original postulates, decisions, actions, and false data that
started you on the downward path.

A process can be underrun, meaning that it hasn't been run long
enough, or it can be overrun, meaning that it has been run too long.

Leaving a process incomplete (e.g. underrun) can sometimes leave
you feeling irritable or even hopeless because you've stirred up
something, expecting to handle it, and then abandoned it instead.
Self auditors commonly leave processes underrun, get discouraged,
and then abandon the whole mess.

Overrunning a process tends to make things more solid and often
gives you a heavy or tired feeling.  The process also gets more
difficult to run and things that were easy to confront when the
process was going well can start seeming hard to handle.  If you
begin feeling that stuff is coming back that was gone, its almost
certainly an overrun.  In my experience, overrun is the most common
mistake when people are auditing each other.  They want a single
process to do everything when the real truth is that you usually
need many processes, each producing a small forward step fairly

Even a self auditor needs to keep a record of processes run so 
that he can check back over the last few if he begins to feel
irritable or hopeless (underrun) or heavy and solid (overrun).

For underrun, you finish the incomplete process.

For overrun, you spot the moment that you went release on the
process and rehabilitate that.  You can spot the win or new
awareness that occurred.  You can spot the invalidation of continuing
and the subtle action of dragging things back in (which had been
momentarily better) that occurred when you kept on running the
process.  You can even count how many times you went release 
because a long overrun can have multiple release points.  There
are more sophisticated methods taught in professional auditor
training, but you shouldn't need these unless you're handling an
untrained and unaware PC.


If a person has an upset, problem, or a withhold that they are
worrying about, then it will not be possible to make any progress
on anything else because these things cause one's attention to
stick.  These are called the rudiments because they need to be taken
care of first before handling other things.

Trained auditors, even solo auditors, learn sophisticated techniques
to handle these using an E-meter.  I will not try to cover all of
that material here.

But untrained people still need something to get through these
things.  And even a professional should have methods for self
auditing these if necessary; you can't always count on having a
meter and being able to set up a formal session (especially if you
get run over by a truck).


An upset is best described as an ARC Break (ARCX).  On a self audit
basis, you would first just look the incident over very carefully,
confronting what happened and spotting things about it.
The emphasis is on saying what is (ITSA) and not worrying about the
confused and unresolved parts of it (which will be handled next).
This is to soften the incident up a bit.  Needless to say, you do
this away from the source of the ARC break if at all possible.

If you're extremely upset, furious or hysterical or whatever, then
also do alternate spotting of the room and the incident until things
cool down a bit.

When you're ready, consider the points Affinity, Reality,
Communication, and Understanding and determine which was the most
significant in the upset.  You can do this step again if there is
more than one.  This is an assessment, as discussed earlier.
Done without a meter, you simply take your best shot and if the
following step doesn't bring some relief, you try again.

Then check if the item found above was enforced or inhibited.  If
neither one of these indicates strongly, then use a broader
assessment consisting of a) Not-Known, b) Curious, c) Desired,
d) Enforced, e) Inhibited, f) No .., g) Refused.  Note that standard
tech does not include the Not-Know button in their ARCX assessments,
but it follows from general theory and shows up more as you get 
higher on the scale.

When you spot that, lets say, an enforced reality or an inhibited
communication was the primary source of the upset, there should
be a feeling of relief.  If not, then you've got it wrong and
should redo the above.

The relief on spotting this can be partial or total.  If its
complete, then you're done.  If not, then carry on as follows:

First of all, spot the primary direction of flow.  I.E., did you
inhibit someone else's communication or did someone else inhibit
yours.  It can even be another inhibiting others communication or
someone (you or somebody else) inhibiting their own communication
(or affinity or reality or whatever the button was).

Then spot exactly what communication (for example) was inhibited
and state it clearly.

Spot what you did in the incident.

Spot what you decided in the incident.

Spot what you postulated in the incident.

Note that professionals don't use this extra set of questions
specifically, but they do get the PC to ITSA about the incident.
In self auditing, you generally need more precise questions, and
the above are aimed at getting more ITSA.

If something still seems unsolvable or hopeless about the incident,
then look for an earlier similar upset and repeat the above.

And watch out for overrun.  If it gets better and then suddenly
seems more solid, you've passed the release point and should 
rehabilitate it instead of continuing.



If you have a simple problem, its sometimes enough to simply spot 
things about it (ITSA).  Professional auditors generally use a
technique that only consists of getting ITSA and then finding an
earlier similar problem etc.  This is workable in a professional
session (where the auditor is trained to keep the PC ITSAing) but
may be inadequate for self-auditing.

For better handling, it helps to know that a problem will generally
have two sides in conflict and to know, at least theoretically, that
you're doing something to attract or encourage the opposition.  One
approach would be to try to identify the two sides in conflict and
then alternately spot something about each side.

Another technique, which is good on a self audit basis, it to run
the problems and incomplete communications process as I discussed
in section 3.4 above.  Although this is also used as a general
process when running the problems grade, it can be run on a
specific problem and used to be used that way in repair sessions
(see the old circa 1966 instructions for running the Green Form
which is a general purpose case repair action).  Although the org
stopped using it this way a long time ago, it did work and has
the advantage of being usable without much training.  Note that
using it on a specific problem usually produces a release on that 
specific problem and it later can be used again on another problem.
But if you do get a major release on the entire subject of problems,
then pat yourself on the back and put this technique aside.  When
problems eventually key in again (which they will if the release
came from a single process), then shift to another problems technique
(such as mocking up problems of comparable magnitude).


If you're really worried about getting caught for something you've
done, you probably have what Scientology calls a "Missed Withhold".

The key thing that really gets your attention stuck is that somebody
did something that made you wonder if they knew, but you're not
sure.  This uncertainty really hangs you.  The handling is to
spot who nearly found out and exactly what they did that made you
think that they might know.

Of course you shouldn't be doing bad stuff and living a life of
secrecy, but that can usually be handled on a gradual and general
basis.  People usually commit overts to solve problems or because
they are out of communication or have misunderstood something
(which is almost the same thing) or for vengeance (handle the
ARCX) and there is a whole grade full of processes to clean up
the area.

Its the missed withhold (rather than the fact of having committed
an overt or having a withhold) that gets the person so stuck 
that you don't have the opportunity of running any processes
to bring about a general improvement.

If you do have your attention stuck, full handling would be to
write down exactly what you did (including all the gruesome,
embarrassing, or shameful details), get exactly when you did it,
double check that you've gotten all of it, then spot who nearly
found out and what they did to indicate that, and spot if anyone
else missed it etc.  If you don't get full relief, then look for
an earlier similar and handle as above.

I'm not asking you to send in these pieces of paper to anyone or
even to tell anybody.  You can burn it afterwards if you want.
The idea is to get your confront up on your own actions and
raise your responsibility level.  At least don't lie to yourself.

If an overt or withhold does seem to be sticking your attention and
you really can't find anyone missing it, then its probably just
a matter of confront (you might even repetitively spot what
part of that overt you would be willing to be responsible for)
and the weight of earlier similar actions (find and handle them).


There are other rudiments, such as invalidation, that can occasionally 
get in the way.  They are nowhere near as common as the 3 given above, 
but they do happen.  Furthermore, anything that can interfere with
auditing to that degree is obviously a potential grade of release
that should be run eventually.  But more research is needed here.
It took years to collect all the underlying key points on each of
the above and a similar effort has not been made in other areas.

For now, the general technique (on something such as invalidation)
is to get as much ITSA as possible and then go earlier similar.



It is very important to know some techniques that will dig you
out if you get in trouble.  There are volumes of material on this
in Scientology.  Here I am only scratching the surface.

In general, when you use an assist to handle pain, there will be
a moment when the pain becomes very sharp just before it vanishes.
This happens because you are removing the mental barrier which you
are using to keep the pain suppressed and under control.  You need
to remove that barrier and view the pain fully to get rid of it.

If there is a physical injury (bleeding etc.) always do first aid
first.  And if its really bad, get to a hospital.  You CAN do 
fantastic things and heal at incredible rates, but mental techniques
are usually too slow for real emergencies.  But if you do this
stuff in the emergency room while the doctors are working on you,
you might get out of intensive care in hours instead of weeks and
avoid long term damage.

Also note that anything you do to suppress pain will interfere
with handling it mentally.  There are things you can do that actually
reduce pain (by killing germs or reducing swelling) and these should
be used.  But don't suppress it with things that only act as pain
killers except for emergencies, and then only use them momentarily
(like an anesthetic to get through an operation) rather than taking
something steadily which will dull your mind and block your

4.1 Contact Assist (for pain after an injury)

This is the fastest and easiest one to do if you just banged into
something.  There is already a good write-up on this by Ron, but
it is so useful that I will give you a brief summary here.

Ideally, you do this where the injury occurred using the objects
involved in the injury.  Cool off any hot surfaces and blunt or
otherwise cover any sharp ones (such as a knife you might have
cut yourself with).  Then slowly repeat the action which caused the
injury.  Do this a number of times until the pain turns on strongly
for a moment and then starts to fade.

If necessary, you can try to approximate the objects involved in
the accident.  You can even try to duplicate the circumstances in
a different location if you have to, but the original location is

4.2 Advanced Touch Assist (for pain)

This is one of the key assists used in Scientology and there is
a great deal of material on how to do it.  

The method currently used in Scientology is to have the injured 
person "feel my finger", and this is the command to use on an 
unaware and untrained person because its hard to teach someone an
advanced technique while they're in pain and distracted.

But the older more effective command was to have the person close
his eyes and "look at my finger".  The org still uses this on OTs,
but in the old days it worked on new people as long as the auditor
was good enough to gently coax them into doing it and as long as
they were not so raw that the idea was too hard for them to grasp.
This version works at least twice as fast as the other one.

As you touch the person, you alternate right and left sides and
you try to follow the nerve channels and work near and far from
the injury.  And you pay special attention to working over each
finger and toe and also the spine.  The org has plenty more on this, 
but these are the basics.

You can do this on yourself, touching alternate sides and, with
your eyes closed, looking at the spots which you touch.  If the
injury is to the hand or you're distracted by the feelings coming
from the finger you are doing the touching with or you need to
reach hard to get at areas, then you can use the back of a pen or
pencil to touch yourself with.

Now for the advanced version.  This is not currently used in
Scientology.  I developed it by taking some early research
of Ron's (see the November lectures of 1952) on the subject of
how the thetan handled the body	and combining it with the touch
assist.  What he did was to have a person move their arm or walk
across the room and try to follow the energy flow through the
nerve channels of the body as they did it.

The advanced technique is to mentally follow the nerve channel
from the brain down to the spot that your touching on your body.
Flow some energy along it if possible and push through any ridges
or standing waves.  If you're in good shape, you should also be
aware of reaching into the brain to pickup the nerve channel in
the first place.  Alternate sides and follow the usual pattern
for a touch assist.  Except, if the trouble is with the head,
stomach, or spine, then also alternate head and stomach (because
they are at opposite ends of a heavy nerve channel) as suggested
by Ron for a different process in 1957.

This can work as much as ten times faster than the standard touch
assist and often works on those occasional somatics (the Scientology
word for pain, which derives from psychosomatic) which don't run
very well on the ordinary version.

Note that even an extreme physical injury (such as an exposed nerve
in a decaying tooth) is far less painful than it seems because
90 percent or more of what you are feeling is the mental accumulation
of past pains rather than the actual moment to moment hurt.  You
will find that there is a faint physical component which does not
blow without actual healing (you wouldn't want to be numb after all),
but it is a shadow of the agony that we usually experience.


The OT handling for any pain, sensation, emotion, or even drug
effects is to drill placing the feeling or whatever into the walls,
floor, ceiling, or large nearby objects.  You can also vary this a
bit by occasionally putting the feeling in clouds over distant cities

A shallow version of this is still used occasionally in Scientology.  A 
more comprehensive version was used in 1953 (see the 1st ACC tapes etc.).
But even that falls short of what can be done with this technique.

You have machinery and split off pieces of yourself stashed away in
various hidden areas, mostly outside of or sideways (in a fourth
dimensional direction) of the physical universe.  This will be
discussed further in another write-up, but the basic idea is that 
you can only feel what you yourself mockup.

Much of your machinery is intimately connected to the body, and
when you stub your toe, the physical action is detected by the
machinery which then mocks up the pain for you to experience.

You can also get mentally restimulated and trigger this machinery
and experience pain or whatever without any physical impact or
damage.  This is "psychosomatic", but it is the same pain and the
same mechanism which is creating the sensation.  The only difference
is the trigger.  Note that psychosomatic is quite different from
hypochondria where the person is worrying about something that 
isn't there.

This assist can work on both psychosomatic pains and on actual 
pains coming from a physical source because it addresses the
mechanism by which you create the pains so that you can feel them.

If you have a pain, and drill intensively on putting that pain into
the walls and feeling it in that location, you will find that you
will gradually start feeling it over there instead of in the body
and you will dislodge the machinery and redirect it into the locations
that you are designating.  This restores your control over the
machinery.  It also gives you the ability to create the pain at
will, and if you can create it causatively, then you can also
dispense with it if you are not in the mood to feel it right now.
Note that this does not leave you numb.  It leaves you aware and
in control and restores choice about what you're feeling.

If, on the other hand, you try to suppress the pain, especially with
drugs, you are reducing your own ability to create and feel it, and
therefore, you keep it there more solidly.  This may seem surprising
and hard to believe because right now you probably don't want the
sensation, but deep down in your subconscious (so to speak) you know
better and you wouldn't let yourself loose any sensation no matter
how terrible unless you know you can get it back at will.

Unfortunately, this drill is not easy, but it can be done.  When
you first try it, you might only be able to get a vague imagined
idea that maybe there could be a faint bit of the pain in the wall,
but the ability grows as you practice it.

Don't grind too hard at a particular spot on the wall.  Move from
spot to spot fairly briskly, alternating or simply working around
the room.  Its best to work this in all six directions around you
rather than just using the wall in front of you.  So use the
floor and ceiling and the wall behind your back etc.  And then
pick some large objects for variety.

If necessary, after this is going well (you're getting a significant
amount but not all of the pain or whatever into the walls), you
can work near and far from the body, coming closer and then pulling
away and then finally putting the pain in the body, but not in
the place where the actual pain is.  Then you can alternate putting
the pain in the body and in the wall.  Finally, you can put the pain
where its supposed to be and where it isn't supposed to be
alternately and have the total sensation move back and forth and this 
should give you full control over it.

You can do the same thing with emotions such as anger.  This gives
you control over the emotions.

The same goes for sensations such as sexual sensations.  This
leads to being able to mockup sensations without needing a body.

This is also the missing step which is needed to really free somebody
from drugs.  Any mental or physical handling, such as the various
drug rundowns or the purif that are currently used in Scientology to
help someone get off drugs are only aimed at handling the reasons
and the effects.  They do not restore the persons ability to create
whatever kinky sensation it was that kept them addicted.  You handle
this by having the person mock up that sensation in the walls and
eventually in the body until they can do it at will without taking
the drug.  Then they will never need the drug again (assuming of
course that you also have handled the reasons why they started taking
the drug etc.).

Note that all drug effects come from the person's own machinery.
Putting chemicals into the body can get his machinery to do all sorts
of strange things, but it is still him who is doing it to himself.

The biggest limitation is that this assist (and also the contact and
touch assists) are purely objective techniques, and they do not
address the subjective reasons, decisions, etc. which are also 
present when somebody gets in trouble.  A momentary pain can
generally be handled this way, but a chronic one will require 
alternating these assists with more subjective techniques such as
running incidents, finding overts, etc.  See the assist book which
includes many subjective techniques.


This is a more difficult technique, but it is capable of addressing
the actual physical structure and is especially good for promoting
healing.  It is not really an assist for pain because it will turn
on buried pains while it is running them out and only brings relief
at the end.

This has its origins in the 3rd ACC, and was the key assist used
in that course, but I have expanded and improved it considerably.

In running this, the somatics come off in layers.  You will blow
one somatic only to find another in its place.  You must validate
yourself for blowing the somatic and then handle the next one in
line which is actually an earlier somatic.  If, for example,
you run this on a decayed tooth, you will find yourself handling
each different pain that you got in the area and they will come
up in reverse order until you get the first pain you had in that
spot in your current body.  When that one goes, you will feel
better and the body will be much more capable of healing itself.
You should take a break at this point, and be careful not to run
another command.  You can drop it at this point, or check it over
later when you're ready to dive in again.  If you do push on,
you will find yourself running through an earlier series of somatics
that you had in that area on an earlier body.

If you do this on an injured area, or area that has been injured,
you will turn on any suppressed pain and need to run through the
series of somatics to turn it off again.

The process is done as follows:

Begin by mocking up a copy of the somatic and also the injured area
slightly to one side of the area.  Mock up another one on the 
opposite side.  Then push the two copies into the injured area
simultaneously (like squeezing an accordion).

As you make copies, you need to alter them slightly to exert your
control over them and to ensure that you don't just put the mockups
on automatic (which wouldn't do you much good).  So, each time you
make copies, you do something to them.  The best things to do are
a) make it more solid, b) make it uglier and more decrepit (and
maybe alternate with making it nicer), c) change its color.  This
is not very formal and you don't have to follow a rote procedure
on altering the copies, but be sure to do something.

As you make each set of copies, vary the axis on which you're doing
it.  At a minimum, you can alternate right/left, above/below, and
in front/back.  If you can get to it, you can even run 4th 
dimensional directions.

When you first start, just make one pair of copies and push them
in.  Then start increasing the number of copies you're mocking up.
You stretch them out in a series, one after the other.  Try to get
it up to at least 5 copies fairly quickly.  In other words, you
get 5 copies of it on the right side and another 5 on the left
side and then push them all into the area somewhat like squeezing
an accordion.  If you're up to it, get more than 5.  The process
goes fairly fast if you can run copies straight out to infinity.
Always push copies in from both sides simultaneously.

The somatic should change fairly quickly.  Generally there will
be a microsecond where its gone.  Realize that it has blown and
you've got an earlier somatic.  At this moment, shift to the
opposite side of the body.  If there is a somatic in the
corresponding spot, then copy that, otherwise, just mockup copies 
of the area.  If you feel good on that side after a few commands, 
then go back to the other side and copy what is there,
if however a somatic appears (where there was none), then change
the copies to duplicate it and run it out.

In other words, you keep changing sides and copying what is now
there.  You will find a continually progressing change in the 
somatic.  Try to copy the physical structure as well.  You will
find that at first you get very oversimplified mockups which will
gradually become more complex as you begin duplicating the real
structure in the area.   This drill will raise your perception
of the area fairly quickly.

Sometimes you will find a vacuum in the area.  Try copying this
just like anything else, but if it seems to be hanging without
change, then get into the center of it and outflow copies.  If
you do that, the vacuum will usually change into a sharp pain
which you can then run with normal copies (in this case don't
shift sides but handle it immediately).

Sometimes you will find black masses or energy fields in the area.
Copy these just like anything else.

I know this is difficult and complex and it can turn up all sorts
of pains you didn't think you had.  But at a minimum, it gets
the body working to heal itself, and at maximum, you might
regain the ability to mockup (and unmock) bodies at will.


At this time we do not have very many techniques for handling loss.
This is a grave deficiency and more research is needed.

Loss goes back much earlier in our existence than did pains and

One thing you can do is to run out the incident of loss (by 
alternately spotting something in the incident and then something
in the room or by any other incident running technique) with
special attention to the moment when you first discovered the loss.

You can look for earlier similar losses and run those, but this
is not as useful as it is with handling engrams.  With engrams,
the actual pain of early incidents is long gone, so the earlier
ones are easier to look at.  But with loss, the item lost long
ago is still gone.  

For loss, the incidents are easier to confront in the future.  
One technique would be to spot how far in the future the 
loss would have to be for you to find it acceptable.  In 
other words, it might be horrible to have your wife die 
now, but you could tolerate it if she were to die in a hundred 
or a thousand years.  So you find when it would be tolerable
and make up an incident of the loss occurring then and how it might
happen etc. and get your confront up on that.  Then you should be
able to confront it happening a little closer to present time,
so you repeat the step, gradually bringing the loss in closer
until you can confront the real loss which did occur.

In handling a heavy loss, you want the tears to flow rather than
suppressing them under a heavy barrier, so don't make people stop
crying and consider it a good indicator if they begin to cry after
holding it all bottled up.

Realize that if someone starts crying heavily about something that
seems insignificant, they are usually crying about something else
(or you have really mis-evaluated the importance).  In that case,
you might like to find what the real underlying loss is, but it
might not be accessible.  So learn to tolerate what might seem
to be foolish causes for upset and handle them with care because
there might be some earth shattering thing hidden just out of 
sight.  Kids cry easily at trivial things and its usually because
they just died and have lost everything and everyone they cared
about in their last lifetime and have even lost their memories
and awareness of what happened.

The ultimate mastery of loss consists of being able to recreate
anything at will (so that there is no loss of things) and to
recontact anybody no matter where they now are (e.g. total
communication so that there is no loss of beings such as friends 
and loved ones) and mastery of time (which is the same as the ability 
to recreate universes at different times in their existence) so that 
you can replay anything and have it come out differently (so that
there is no loss of doing).

Note that many of our aberrations are the fixed solutions that we
are holding in place to handle loss.  A powerful process I came
up with one day was "In this lifetime, what do you use to keep 
others from leaving".  My answer was that I get sick.  Other things
we do as solutions to loss are forgetting and becoming ARC broken.

On the subject of assists for loss, one (from the first ACC) is to
simply mockup the lost person (or whatever) and mentally reach and
withdraw from the mockup.

Another thing you can do is to do mockups of destroying the person
(or thing) various different ways at greater and then lesser
distances.  I.E. blowing them up, tossing them in the sun, etc.
until you can confront what actually happened to them.

You can also run the PROTECT button because usually you will feel
that you failed to protect the person (or whatever).  For this
you generalize the relationship (use "a wife" or "a lover" rather than 
the specific girl who left or died, etc.) and then run "How could
you protect ____" alternating with "How could a ____ protect
you".  Note that we run the positive aspect rather than the
recent failure.

There are other kinds of loss.  One can lose a group or a country
or even one's faith or hopes and dreams.  For a Scientologist, 
becoming disillusioned can be a terrible loss even if one hangs on
and remains in the organization.  The same will be found in other
religions if somebody loses faith after orienting their life around
it.  This needs to be handled as an incident of loss and misemotion
just as if one's house had burned down or a friend had died.


In Scientology, we use the term "implant" to refer to heavy 
incidents where various commands etc. were implanted into the
person to control them.  This is heavy brainwashing and conditioning
especially as it was used in more advanced civilizations.

In recent universes, this has usually been done by force (such as the
electronics used by space traveling civilizations), but as we
go earlier (when the person was above being hurt physically), we
find it done by means of aesthetics, emotional waves, symbols, etc.
and (earliest) simply by means of trickery and false information.

The implants usually have commands stated as thought intentions
(not really English words) but sometimes simply consist of pictures
which show you things.  Usually there is some sort of pattern,
such as opposing items or a declining scale.

Because the implants often used repeating patterns within patterns
(maybe a series of items that were repeated on each of a series
of goals), some of Ron's early research used sheets of paper
containing an item pattern with holes cut in it so that it could
be laid over pages that only had the goals typed on them to
make it easy to compose complex patterns with a small number of
pages.  Since these sheets with holes can be called platens
(a metal plate with holes cut into it, used, for example, on old
typewriters to hold the roller in place while giving the typehead
access to the paper), any written out implant pattern eventually 
came to be called a platen even though the holes were dispensed 
with long ago.

If you have the platen for an implant, you would run it out using
an emeter by repetitively spotting an item as long as it continued
to react on the meter and then going on to the next item and
doing the same.  It is rarely good enough simply to read the
platen.  For self auditing without a meter, you need to shift
your attention on and off the item (not just glare at it) because
you don't have the natural shift that comes about when you have
to keep looking back and forth between the item and the emeter.
One technique might be to alternate back and forth between 
opposing pairs of items.  You have to keep repeating one item
or pair until it discharges or otherwise releases before going
on to the next.

These platens are not so hot or dangerous as the CofS believes.
Nonetheless, you might occasionally get yourself restimulated
or upset or even sick while slopping around carelessly with 
implant platens.  If worse comes to worse, the restimulation 
will fade out after awhile (hopefully in a few days).  But its
good to have some tricks for cooling these things down immediately.

One trick that often works if you get in trouble in the middle of
running any incident or implant is to spot the beginning.  On an
implant, this means spotting the first item again, or spotting
events leading up to the first item.

The general way to cool down an implant in restimulation is to
spot something earlier which undercuts the implant and which
does not itself have a lot of kick to it.  This will generally
pull you right out of the implant and get you feeling better.
Usually you only have to spot the thing a few times, so it
works very quickly.

Ron himself came up with the idea of spotting what he called
incident 1 to cool down and undercut incident 2 on OTIII.
Incident 1 is at the "beginning of time" just before you come
into this universe (which means its actually very late in your
existence) and it has a charioteer and cherub etc. and should
be fairly easy to spot in a vague sort of way.  That is good
enough to cool down any of the implants used in this universe.
He didn't even have the real anatomy and details of the incident
(see my write-up on actual GPMs) but just about any piece of the
incident is enough to snap you out of any later implants.

But if you start trying to research the magic universe which
existed before this one, Incident 1 will not serve because it
is later.  There is a similar (but different) incident at the
start of the magic universe which can be used instead.  I don't
have the details, but it seems to include a sort of Arabian
ship floating in the water and various terminals, including
a sorcerer (or wizard) holding a glowing crystal ball, which come
floating over the water towards you from the ship.  If you can
find that image of the sorcerer, just spotting it will pull you
out of implants done subsequently.

When you get way back on the track, you need to spot the top
of the penalty universes, which is the item "To create is
native state" (see my write-up on the penalty universes of
the home universe era).

Going even earlier, there is being part of a crowd rushing
into agreement, going through the inverted golden pyramid,
and getting the item "To agree is native state" at the beginning
of the agreements universe.

Or, (earliest), spot entering the jewel of knowledge.  But
that one's hard because there were so many false jewels which
are later on the track (including a mockup of the jewel that 
is used in the penalty universes after the native state item).

For a beginner, the more recent ones are probably easier to
spot.  Use whatever works.

Note that spotting these things does not run out the later 
implants.  They simply are powerful enough to snap your attention
out of a later implant, and can do it at a deep enough level (e.g.
not just the surface but way down into the "subconscious") to
push the implant out of restimulation.  

The problem with implant items is that they tend to be a bit 
"sticky" and encourage you to compulsively create them if they
get into restimulation.  And they often have enough somatics
(pains and sensations) associated with them that they can make
you feel unpleasant.  But the things described above are actually
stickier and will push the implant item out of the way.  And
since these are entry point (beginning of universe) experiences,
they don't have a lot of somatics or misery sitting there.  They
do tend to make you create this universe compulsively, but you're
doing that anyway, so its just increasing your awareness of what
you're already doing.  Eventually, as you get control over one
of these and cease to be compulsive about the creation, you can
shift to an earlier one and begin working with that.

I don't think you can do the whole route by simply running 
entry points (like the above) alone, but it sure makes it easy
to fool around with implants etc.


If an entity of some sort gets stirred up or shows up or grabs
your attention in some way, the first thing to realize is that
they generally have very little ability to affect you.  It is
you, not them, who mocks up your bank, your somatics, your
emotions, and your existence.  All they can generally do is
stir things up and remind you of things that are disturbing.

First and foremost, hold your position in space and face up to
these guys.

The most useful techniques are:

a) Point to the being you divided from (discussed at greater
length in the write-up on "Divide and Conquer").

b) Have them spot the various entry points discussed in section
4.5 above.

c) Nots techniques.  Especially, simply asking "Who Are You"
and coaxing them into answering "Me".

In the rare case that a full being (rather than a fragment) who
is between lives shows up, technique b is usually best and they may
require a bit more information.  If necessary, you can teach
them how to use one of these techniques themselves, having them
blow off one of their BTs or teaching them how to run out incidents
by alternate spotting etc.  This is especially useful if you run
into somebody who is being some sort of angel or demon and working
on some kind of mission, because it helps them out and gets them
on your side and they may start helping others with this stuff.
Remember that even the ones who are being demons are only doing
so because the game has gone rather badly in this universe.  If
you show them a real way out, they are often more willing than 
others to begin helping people because they have no mistaken 
illusions about how the current oppressive mess is really good for

Only once did I run into a demon who was so bound and determined
to bother me that he wouldn't get into communication or run a
command.  So I mocked myself up as real big and dangerous and
scared the hell out of him.  He left immediately, and a palpable
feeling of terror which had been washing over me snapped off as if
I had turned a light switch.  They work so hard at scaring people
that they themselves can be scared very easily.  They can dish
it out but they can't take it.



Although an assist can help with the pain and upset of a chronic
condition, don't expect them to cure one.  You're using a tea
spoon when you really need a steam shovel.  You can (and probably
should) run a full battery of assists on the condition, but
these processes don't pay enough attention to the underlying whys.

Your best shot on a chronic condition is to handle the pains,
sensations, emotions, and attitudes connected with it.  Early on
you would use Dianetics for this.  On a more advanced case, you
can simply run each one using the following commands (alternately):

a) Recall being made to feel ____
b) Recall making another feel ____

For good results on this, the person should be up to spotting
whole track incidents on recall processes (but each process
doesn't have to go whole track, he just has to be able to reach
whole track whenever it is needed).

On a person who is in bad shape, you take the first mild win 
on each process and then go on to another one (taking breaks
as needed between processes).

You may need to run dozens or hundreds of faint variations of
the somatics in a particular area.  On chronic headaches for
example, you might take a "pain in the head" the first time,
but you will need to carry on with more and more specific pains
in precise spots in the head with specific pains (sharp, dull,
etc.) as well as other sensations in the area (don't forget
feelings of energy etc.).  You begin with what the PC puts
on the list, but after those are handled you get him to add
more to the list, and you can ask him for precise spots or
specific feelings or energies etc. if it seems needed.  You may
have to run a very great deal on a chronic condition.  If the
area is numb, the run is even longer because you will have to
take off layers of not-isness before he can even find the somatics.

You also should do assists.  They raise his confront and build
horsepower in the area.  One way would be to start each session
with an assist for pain (if needed), run some recalls (or engrams),
and end off with one of the more OT assists.

This will do more for someone on the upper OT levels than a
Nots handling would, but you may also need to do some Nots handling
in the area occasionally.  If the PC is up to it, you could also
do some handling of split pieces of himself ("point to") that
are connected with the condition or mocking it up.  But simple
recall is the most beneficial because you are going after the
reasons why he is mocking it up (there may be many).

The body's ability to heal is amazing when the mind is aiding
it instead of inhibiting it.  But meat bodies do not generally
grow back missing arms or major organs (although there are
rare cases of people growing back things like teeth or girl's
regrowing their virginity etc.).  If you're up against a major
physical disability, then your target is the relief of pain
and suffering rather than a full cure.

Sometimes you can work a miracle.  The thetan is capable of
mocking up an entire body out of thin air.  So never make the
postulate that something can't be handled, you'll only be
limiting your own abilities.  But don't stake your reputation
on it or lead some poor guy on with false promises.  Miracles
are very rare.

Psychosomatic and mentally perpetuated conditions, on the other
hand, should be approached with confidence.  And you have at
least a chance against degenerative conditions because they
are usually degenerating because the mind has withdrawn from
the area and the situation can be reversed if the mind gets
back in control.

But any chronic condition is asking for a long run, and you
can fail if the person isn't running deeply enough.  If the
condition can be ignored (the PC has learned to live with
it), you will be much better off running grades and OT levels
and raising horsepower rather than concentrating on the body.



There are numerous assists given in the 1950s material.  Many
of them are just general ideas or ways of approaching something
without formal procedures.  Some of them have been formalized
in the assist book.  Others are still a matter of judgment
based on having a good understanding of the mechanics of the
mind.  In that case you are pretty much shooting from the hip
based on knowingness and understanding.

Two useful processes that I came up with are as follows:

A) Give Me Some Reasons For Wishing This On Someone Else

This is a subtle way to reach overts and overt intentions that
are not quite in view or easily recalled.  It has the added
benefit of pulling off justifiers and postulates.

B) Run mockups of pushing the pain or condition into crowds of
people to force them out of their bodies.

This might or might not run and if it does run it might not be
basic.  But it is one of the early reasons and can potentially
open up early track and undercut a lot of things.  If you have
an advanced case who has an unshakable somatic or condition,
he may very likely be doing this to himself from a hidden
remote viewpoint to force himself to get out of the body and
out of the human condition.

On the early track, the being's solution to sinking downscale is
to make postulates and set up mechanisms which will force him
back upscale even if they are unpleasant.  This is generally more
basic than the over/motivator sequence.

You could also ask him "what might you be trying to teach 
yourself with this pain or condition?".



- Jun 96

This is my list of assist processes that I like to use.

These are not in any particular order but they have been grouped into
objective, subjective, and advanced categories.  This is not a 
complete list.  These are all by Ron except as discussed above.
Many but not all of these are in the assist book (and it has others
as well).  Some can only be found in the old tapes.  


1.1 touch assist
1.2 contact assist
1.3 show me on my body
1.4 keep it from going away / hold it still 
    (alternate left/right or head/stomach) (16th & 17th ACC)
1.5 throw actual kicks and/or punches at the injured area on an
    imaginary opponent (2nd ACC) (also see fight the wall in PAB 106)
1.6 duplicative body parts: feel my , feel your 
1.7 clay table healing: do the area & condition in clay carefully
    labeling everything with lots of detail & itsa
1.8 locational & objective havingness processes (look at that, 
    find something you like, connectedness, etc.)
1.9 look around here & tell me something your  could
    have (PAB 88)
1.10 find something you can have/condition can't have
1.11 outdoors around people - condition in other people (route 2)


2.1 Dating (R3T in SHSBC tapes) or date/locate
2.2 Hello & OK
2.3 Alternately spot location of incident & where you are now
2.4 What part of  could you be responsible for
2.5 What part of that condition could you admit causing (SMC etc.)
2.6 Who had  (R&D 2 etc.)
2.7 what problem would that condition be a solution to
2.8 give me another purpose for 
2.9 recall a time when you saw that in somebody else (ability maj 4)
    (use together with 2.10 below)
2.10 recall a time when you decided this was a good thing
2.11 can you recall a time when somebody else had that condition
2.12 can you recall a time when you decided to have that condition
2.13 from where could you communicate to a  (1st MACC)
2.14 failed help: how could you fail to help a ..., how could a
     ... fail to help you
2.15 positive help: how could you help a ..., how could a ... help
2.16 invent a problem your  could be to you (PAB 69)
2.17 invent a problem of comparable magnitude to 
2.18 tell me a lie about your 
2.19 overts
2.20 mockup a way to waste pain
2.21 be the (area) / be yourself
2.22 spot something that could be a lie about (condition)
2.23 incident running (recalls or Dianetics or alternate spotting)
2.24 spot the efforts at the time of the incident.
2.25 give me some reasons for wishing this on someone else


3.1 Admiration Processing (1 ACC)
3.2 adjust anchor points (8th & 9th ACC, CofHA)
3.3 Handle flows, ridges, tractor beams etc. in the area & also
    at the time of the incident (T88 etc.)
3.4 handle hollow spots in the area (suppressed explosions - have
    pc get in the center & outflow) (HCL)
3.5 spot efforts at the time of the incident (R&D 8, 9, HCL, etc.)
3.6 mockup copies of the area & throw them away or push into body
    (PDC, LPC, etc.)
3.7 Rem of Hav style mockups - make more & more discreditable
    versions of area until it snaps into body, then improve it on
    a gradient (9th ACC ?, etc.)
3.8 double terminaling
3.9 turn black masses in the are white (T88 & PDC)
3.10 mockup horrible things being done to the area (1st ACC -
     handling motivator hungry condition)
3.11 mockups of beams hitting/pushing/pulling the area
3.12 mockups of putting the condition into crowds of people
3.13 perimeter processing (1ACC) (mockup explosions, vacuums, & 
     nothing hitting a protective shell - a few minutes on each
3.14 exterior version of hold it still/keep from going away (1ACC)
3.15 blow up mockups of the injured area & of the body (gradiently)
3.16 alternately put pain & waves of relief into the walls
3.17 ownership processing: get the idea that ... are/is mocking up
     that condition.  Run alternately with YOU and a general terminal
     for each of the 8 dynamics (your body, another, others, groups,
     society, lifeforms, Mest universe, spirits/entities, God) and
     also with any appropriate terminal such as doctors or even auditors.
3.18 push copies of the somatic into the area
3.19 reach and withdraw from mockups of the area
3.20 mockups of putting the condition into crowds of people to
     force them out of their bodies


4.1 2 way Help on (terminal lost)
4.2 2 way Protect (run like help) on (terminal lost)
4.3 reach & withdraw from mockups of the terminal
4.4 blow up mockups of the terminal
4.5 O/W on the terminal
4.6 put grief etc. into walls
4.7 incident running (by recalls or Dianetics or alternate spotting)
4.8 mocked up incidents of the loss happening far enough into the
    future for it to be tolerable.


besides the usual drug rundown handlings

5.1 put mockups of the sensations coming from the drug into the walls
    & (gradiently) into the body working near then far.