Advertisement
“An Overview of Scientology” banner

Scientology® pages index  |  Contact

Overview of Tech changes during 1978-82 vs A lost Bridge  or
     When the Route to Freedom was interfered with and
      turned upside down
   (formation of the ‘David Mayo Bridge’)  (3)
(NED causing Grades V-VII abandoned and creating the need for NOT's?)
(to other Scientology pages)

>> Do you want to help with preserving the original technology? <<  Consult my want list here!

Please note that words with an asterisk (*) are defined at the bottom of this page! Only first appearances are indicated.


Previous technology replaced with new technology - Tech changes 1978-82  (3)

This time span does deserve special mention as it was during this time span that the Grade Chart and various of its most vital services got turned around or simply abandoned.

Go to “Overview of Tech changes during 1978-82” index



 
Back to Main Index (2) ‘New Era Dianetics’ causing a change in the definition of Clear? or Grades V-VII turning obsolete (Sept 78)

The ‘Scientology Clear’ (Grades V-VII) abandoned  &  A note about Grades 0-IV
           - (a) The ‘Scientology Clear’ (Grades V-VII) abandoned (includes note about training)
- (b) Changing one's mind ...
- What about Grades 0-IV during Sept 78-Dec 81? - An irregularity
Clear without processing (Sept 78), the ‘Natural Clear’ (Mar 79) and feeding Clear cognitions
Final notices and the ‘Basic Basic’

 
Go back The ‘Scientology Clear’ (Grades V-VII) abandoned  &  A note about Grades 0-IV

        
“The state of Clear can be achieved on Dianetics.
        
 
I have now determined there is no such thing as Keyed-Out Clear. There is only a Dianetic Clear and he is a Clear. ...
 
 
..., he is not run on Power, R6EW or the Clearing Course ...
(from HCOB 24 Sept 78 III “Dianetic Clear”)
 

 
Go back
(a) The ‘Scientology Clear’ (Grades V-VII) abandoned (includes note about training)

The here above quoted HCOB introduced an altered definition of Clear, at the same time as it forwarded its consequences. This HCOB following its title says: “This bulletin revises the definition of ‘Dianetic Clear’, page 113, Technical Dictionary, and the definition of ‘Keyed-Out Clear’, page 221, Technical Dictionary.”. It meant that the in 1965 established definition of Clear actually got abolished. Questions to ask here are why we have such a change, and if it would be a logical development? Per 1965 it was established that the Dianetic Clear is a Release, a Keyed-Out Clear.
The pre-1978 status quo:  (source: HCOB 12 Jul 65 “States of Being Attained by Processing”)
    Dianetic Clear: “A Release then is pulled OUT of his Reactive Mind”
(Dianetics)
  Scientology Clear: “A Clear has fully erased his Reactive Mind”    LRH
(Grades 0-IV,V-VII)
In 1978 this now turned to there is “no such thing as Keyed-Out Clear. There is only a Dianetic Clear and he is a Clear.”, and thus abandoning the Scientology Clear. From this follows that it is thus claimed that the new technique New Era Dianetics (NED) accomplishes what the Scientology grades V-VA, VI and VII accomplished previously.
It thus abandoned:
    Grade V-VA = Power & Power Plus
  Grade VI = R6EW* (R6 bank, reactive mind, basic bank)
  Grade VII = Clearing Course (run out Basic Basic)
So it deemed the grades V-VII unnecessary, but as was found and established some 6 months later on, this would not applyfor all. And this in itself is already strange, as L. Ron Hubbard had made quite clear that all we have in common is the reactive mind (= the R6 bank). Nonetheless it was adjudicated that only a few needed grades V-VII to run it out.

Attention should be given here to some further significances. Per the above New Era Dianetics is claimed to be able to run out the basic bank, this is a simple consequence that we have to face. Here we have to consider the methods of approach of this New Era Dianetics. Would they be so different from the previous in use Standard Dianetics? Or are these changes implemented able to accomplish what previously Grade VI was designed for? Mind that HCOB 5 Aug 65 “Release Stages” states about the “R6 bank” that “We are awfully lucky to have the combination to the vault as it's been shut thoroughly for the trillions.” and “It took several years and thousands of hours of research auditing to just find the pattern of it.”   LRH.  The question to ask here is if it is realistic to state that New Era Dianetics would replace this just like that, considering what we know about the technique that it is using. Various of this is addressed in previous chapter.
Take note also that the R6 materials were highly confidential, whereas none of the materials of NED actually is. Finally take heed to what it says in Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lecture #72 (renumbered 1991: #435) “Dianetic Auditing and the Mind” from 28 Jul 66 in where L. Ron Hubbard is rather clear about that where it concerns the basic bank (Grade VI) that you can not “blow those things just by inspection”. He says: “confronting the basic reactive bank isn't like that. I'm not trying to scare you; I'm just trying to keep you from making mistakes.”   LRH.
A similar scenario and consequence is presented on the behalf of the Basic Basic (found in Grade VII) which is circumscribed in HCOB 23 Apr 69 “Basic Definitions” as “BASIC BASIC—This belongs in Scientology. It is wholly beyond the scope of Dianetics. It means the most basic basic of all basics and results in clearing. It is found on the Clearing Course.”   LRH.  It says rather clearly that it isn't even part of Dianetics. This too however is said to be run out or handled by New Era Dianetics. It is thus said to actually combine Dianetics en Scientology. The question is if searching for and running postulates will do the trick?
Mind also that the New Era Dianetics course required 1 month full time to do per the estimation indicated on its checksheet. Whereas the Standard Dianetics course during the late 70's estimated a 3 weeks full time. But ..., Grade VI was solo auditing, and this required you to be a Class VI Auditor yourself (would take 4-6 months full time). Indeed this brings the total on a lot more training.

Taking care of the R6 Bank:  (this is done solo and required you thus to be a Class VI Auditor yourself)
        
“But ahead of him is the BIG job. There is still a tiger. This tiger if not vanished utterly will sooner or later creep up and eat up the goodies.”          LRH
(from HCOB 5 Aug 65 “Release Stages”)
        
        
“When a being has been trained up to Class VI and has been given the materials of the basic Reactive Mind to audit out (they took years to find and are too complex to be tackled without training and the actual patterns), he can then attain the state of Clear.
        
 
The Reactive Mind is composed of significance and masses as old as the Universe itself and is the basic cause of the decline of the individual. Each person has his own basic bank but they are all exactly alike. The materials are quite useless and inhibiting.
 
 
A Clear is not under the great stress of this bank and so can be free. He uses his own basic purposes and is for the first time wholly himself. ”          LRH
(from HCOB 12 Jul 65 “States of Being attained by Processing”)
 
And all this then would be taken care of by NED alone or so is claimed. The Power Processes (Grade V-VA) actually even required a Class VII Auditor, however this was not Solo Auditing and so someone would be auditing you. The Clearing Course (Grace VII) was also done solo.
    Power & Power Plus (Grade V-VA) →  Given by Class VII Auditor
  R6EW (Grade VI) →  Solo Auditing: Class VI Auditor
  Clearing Course (Grade VII) →  Solo: Clearing Course
For additional data about this at below link:  (separate window)
    “About ‘Solo Auditing’, ‘R6 bank’ (Grade VI) and the ‘Clearing Course’ (Grade VII)”

A Scientology old-timer reminisces:
        
“After the locks come off you tackle the secondaries and engrams. Today that is handled on New Era Dianetics. In earlier years it was accomplished by Power Processing, Grades V and VA. Many people will rave endlessly about how mind blowing the Power Processes are.
        
 
After Power came Solo Auditor training and then a level that is a tremendous amount of fun, R6EW (Routine 6 End Words) where you, as a Solo Auditor, fish around and find the significances in the mind that keep the basic core of the reactive mind in restimulation. It's a way to find all the things you've been dramatizing in your life and cool them off. For me, R6EW was the most fun I ever had in auditing.
 
 
Then, finally, you come to the Clearing Course.”   Dan Koon
 

 
Go back
(b) Changing one's mind ...

Mind that it says rather clearly in HCOB 24 Sept 78 III “Dianetic Clear” that “There is only a Dianetic Clear and he is a Clear.”. It directs that there is no such thing as a Scientology Clear! This simply can not be interpreted in any other way. It thus meant that there was no use for the Scientology grades V-VII. And indeed they got abandoned even if they still were listed on the Grade Chart issued December 1978 (see ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1978 edition)). This however could be accounted for, as the book probably already had entered the printing line, it was released only 2 months later at Christmas 1978. A contributing factor could also have been as a consideration for those that were on these levels at the time of the announcement. It probably would have been decided to allow these persons to finish what they had started.

It appears however that some sort of situation surfaced. For which reason we see a little article in ‘Clear News 164 (AOLA edition)’, 12 Jul 79, that addresses the issue “Is the Clearing Course Discontinued?”. In where we are reassured:
        
“Of course not! But some may have thought so because of all of the Dianetic Clears that were being produced by New Era Dianetics. New Era Dianetics IS powerful and DOES produce many Dianetic Clears, but this is not a promise of New Era Dianetics.”
        
But the discovery from September 1978 was that “There is only a Dianetic Clear and he is a Clear.”. There is an obvious contradiction present here. A third paragraph in the article reads:
        
“There is still a course Supervisor supervising the course, there are still prerequisites to the course (not Dianetic Clear, Power, R6EW, and Solo), there are still checksheets for the Clearing Course, and the packs are not covered with dust and cobwebs tucked away in some corner of the room down at the bottom of the stack of packs, that ‘aren't used very much’.”
        
This is thus the claim made in the article. But it is not matched by the completions that are listed in this magazine during that time, and they get even fewer and fewer when time progresses. People report and confirm to me that it practically (if not completely) had discontinued.

Either way a new trend was set in motion that this time directed that most but not all people went Clear on Dianetics. And these needed to be taken in account. The solution for this was the creation of what became to be referred to as the Alternate Route to Clear. It was offered as an option, but if it was actually in use, that would be a different matter.

 
Go back
What about Grades 0-IV during Sept 78-Dec 81? - An irregularity

“To flatten an incident Dianetically, you only erase it. To flatten it Scientologically you run it until pc has it back again fully and is total cause over it (you run it after it has erased).”          LRH
(from HCOB 7 Apr 60 “A New Summary of Auditing”)

Now, abandoning these higher Scientology grades actually creates an additional very odd situation. As then there should not have been any particular need anymore for even doing the Scientology Grades 0-IV. After all you were a Clear! And Clear is placed above the grades. The grades were originally there to stabilize the condition of the Dianetic Clear and would turn him into a Scientology Clear. Apparently New Era Dianetics was now claimed to have taken care of that, and thus in the time period Sept 78- Nov 81 strictly taken there was nothing that urged you to do any of the Scientology Grades. The irregularity here is that it does say in HCOB 24 Sept 78 III “Dianetic Clear”: “The Dianetic Clear, on achieving this state, can be audited on Scientology Grades 0-IV.” And in HCOB 25 Jun 70RA (Revised 6 Oct 78) II “Glossary of C/S Terms”: “After Dianetic Clear, you can run Grades 0-IV.”. The question is WHY, WHY, WHY would one do that? Were you not already a Clear?
You see, it was already decided that you are not to do Scientology Grades V-VA, VI and VII), as per HCOB 24 Sept 78 III “Dianetic Clear”: “On completing Grades 0-IV, he is not run on Power (=Grade V-VA) , R6EW (=Grade VI) or the Clearing Course (=Grade VII) on a Dianetic Clear but goes onto OT I, after doing the Solo Auditor Course.”. And in HCOB 25 Jun 70RA (Revised 6 Oct 78) II “Glossary of C/S Terms”: “A Dianetic Clear is not run on Power, R6EW or the Clearing Course”. New Era Dianetics apparently had made them redundant. But it fails to explain or account for why “run Grades 0-IV” was maintained in the line up, and additionally why the sequence swap was not reflected so on the Grade Chart before long. There are evident illogics present here! The part of its presentation on the Grade Chart got ‘fixed’ a little more than 3 years later at such a time when Dianetics (called now NED) was placed to be done after the Scientology Grades in sequence this since November 1981.
Now, think this one carefully over! It was the 1978 guideline “There is only a Dianetic Clear and he is a Clear.” in combination with “The Dianetic Clear, on achieving this state, can be audited on Scientology Grades 0-IV.” that caused the November 1981 sequence change! Question is why did it take more than 3 years to have this reflected so on the Grade Chart, and until December 1981 to provide for or attempt for an explanation?
(Note: The references involved are HCO PL 12 Nov 81 “Cancellation of Class 4, NED Prereq” (first to promote a sequence change) & HCOB 12 Dec 81 “The Theory of the New Grade Chart” (first to make an attempt to some sort of explanation, although invalid). This matter is addressed in great detail in my article “Nov-Dec 1981: First grades then Dianetics” on page “‘The Bridge to a New World’ (History of the Grade Chart) - b) Detailed analysis”, or consult here, separate window)

This matter of not accounting for this for so long (more than 3 years) could be seen as an obvious technical irregularity. The question is if L. Ron Hubbard would have missed something like this? A more put upon the right track question would probably be: “Does someone don't want us to do Grade V-VA, VI and VII?”.

        
“—and there is no shortcut for VI and VII. Anybody who comes along and tells you there's any shortcut for VI and VII, he's just trying to cut your throat. Remember that. There is no shortcut.”          LRH
(from Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lecture #72, renumbered 1991: #435 “Dianetic Auditing and the Mind”, given on 28 Jul 66)
        
 
sound  Sound snippet (1:03) 
 
        
(Please note that above sound snippet is longer than the printed text that you find here above.)
        

As I tend to perceive it, if some person(s) wanted to get rid of the higher Scientology grades, it could not have been done more amateurish than it has been done. There are just far too many slips made on its path. The sort of slips that L. Ron Hubbard would not likely have made.


An oddity is as well that if you look up Clear in the ‘Dianetics and Scientology: Technical Dictionary’ (latest edition 1978, 83) you will find this adjusted definition of Clear in there, and no other. However if you look up various of these matters in the 1991 release of ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’ volumes, then you would discover that clashing definitions and descriptions are found. This too would be an irregularity. You see, you simply can not have conflicting information about this spread about in these volumes!

More about these matters:  (separate window)
    “‘Scientology Clear’ vs ‘Scientology Clear abandoned’ (1978)”

 
Go back Clear without processing (Sept 78), the ‘Natural Clear’ (Mar 79) and feeding Clear cognitions

        
“In the history of this universe there has never been a true Clear or true OT.
        
 
Every Clear ever encountered in this universe was a Keyed-out Clear—a Release. He still had all his bank, GPMs and engrams. They were simply keyed out and not influencing him.
 
 
We have known that for some time.”          LRH
(from HCOB 18 Jun 65 “Clear and OT Behaviour”)
 

It went even further as September 1978 also introduced the datum that there were persons that did not need Dianetics or hardly any processing at all for that matter. A prologue to this concept we find in the confidential HCOB 24 Sept 78 IV “The State of Clear” that relates about that this could occur on Goals Processing, or even Objective Processes.

This is further confirmed in a 1981 revision of HCOB 24 Sept 78, it is however not anymore found in the 1985 revision. What it says though remains interesting:
        
“The uniform attainment of the State of Clear through standard Dianetic and Scientology auditing procedures was miraculous and came as a result of a very long road of research, culminating in the release of the Clearing Course making it certain that everyone could reach the state. Then, with the further refinement of the technology of Dianetics which resulted in New Era Dianetics, and as a result of further tech developments, it became evident that some persons were attaining Clear at an earlier Grade Chart level.”
(from HCOB 24 Sept 78RA (Re-Revised 31 Mar 81) III “Dianetics Clear”)
        
  (Note: It appears that this reference had been subjected to major rewrites. The original version or 1978, the 1981 revision and the 1985 revision are all quite different. Was it hard to make up one's mind?)  
It says that only “some persons were attaining Clear at an earlier Grade Chart level”. Practically this actually meant that about everyone was attaining that. Doing the Clearing Course truly became a rarity. Notice should also be taken to that it says that the previous established route to travel “came as a result of a very long road of research”. So what “refinement” and “further tech developments” actually made the Clearing Course and running out the Basic Basic superfluous? What exactly replaces it! This is not actually explained. You see, if you don't run something out, it will remain being there, and continue to be a bother to you!

Either way this concept was all nicely paving the way for the Natural Clear. Per HCOB 5 Mar 79R (Revised 6 Mar 79) “Dianetic Clear False Declares”: “Technically, a very few thetans have never been anything but Clear. These few didn't ‘go Clear’ on anything; they have simply always been Clear. When a natural Clear is found it should be so stated.”. It was even made punishable (underlining is mine): “failing to declare one who made it on Dianetics or the Clearing Course or who has always been Clear, are also actionable”.

With the concept of the Natural Clear we also set the door wide open for the speculation that one ‘might’ be Clear as soon as some case release occurs. Thus it introduced the concept of being able to simply originate: “I have gone Clear!”. And then we get straight into:
        
“Should a pc being audited on Dianetics originate that he has achieved Dianetic Clear, or if a Dianetic auditor thinks this has occurred with his pc, the folders must be routed to an org C/S who is Clear or above and who can adjudicate.”
(from HCOB 24 Sept 78 III “Dianetic Clear”)
        
And then we find ourselves diving in a very similar situation that occurred during 1969-70 in where one was being fed cognitions. You see, we opened the door for these concepts that we could be Clear/or become Clear without following the standard route that was established in earlier years. Now if this was counteracted back then, then why would it be agreeable in 1978? Now, are we feeding cognitions here? Details about this can be consulted in the link here below:  
    “The ‘Clear Cognition’”  (separate window)

Symptoms pointing at further uncertainty and speculation:
        
“It has been found that a pc who has gone Dianetic Clear, and who then receives a messed up D/L of the point, may become uncertain as to when he actually did achieve this state. At this point the pc may feel that he didn't go Dianetic Clear after all. He may also be a Natural Clear, in which case there would not be any point to Date/Locate.”
(from HCOB 2 May 79 I “Dianetic Clear Special Intensive”)
        
These are no indications or symptoms for a clear-cut scene! You were either Clear or you were not. And if you really were you did know about that, at least this is how it was with those people that had gone through the old route with the Scientology grades V-VII. You will know if your reactive mind is gone. These Scientology grades were in fact developed to stabilize the state of Clear. However the times they are a-changin', and we took them away (V-VII), because of it uncertainties and speculations had now entered the scene again that had not been there. Now we talk about the “pc may feel that he didn't” this or that ... . This in its turn asked for and culminated into a situation that others were to pass judgment onto you. Simply because matters now had become complicated. The Dianetic Clear Special Intensive (DSCI) had been especially developed to determine or work out these matters for you. The bottom line here is that if a Dianetic Clear would be a real fullfledged Clear (= Scientology Clear), then would he be vulnerable for these uncertainties and speculations as described in HCOB 2 May 79 I “Dianetic Clear Special Intensive”? (see earlier quotation here above)  This is obviously hitting at and indicating that a Dianetic Clear is not such a Clear and still requires to do grades V-VII, even if he got there by running NED, for reason that he appears not stable.
Either way a direct result of these newly introduced procedures was that it evolved into a scenario in where it is found agreeable that people were being told they are Clear. See article at link here below:  (separate window)
    “Then and now: Attesting to Clear”
Now, do you see how this one goes, and how it has gone awry? Just follow the symptoms.

There could be offered a supporting argument for the Natural Clear concept to surface. It is introducing the human factor, or ecce homo. The New Era Dianetics technique really had been merchandised as some sort of super tech. Therefore pressure was put on to in accordance account for those that did not respond all that enthousiastically to this new miracle technology, i.e. failures. The offered new Tech could not be wrong, this is never even considered. Often the very same goes for repeated incorrect application. The solution thus is that you could end up with telling the person: “Attest for Clear, as you must be a Natural Clear or sorts as you don't respond well on NED, your problems must therefore have their origin in the OT region.”. Is it imaginary that this could have occurred? I actually have seen similar scenario's in practice. Thus probably not so far sought at all: “But it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a group, then group efforts, one can only assume, will not add to it or successfully alter it in the future.”   LRH  (from HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”).

 
Go back Final notices and the ‘Basic Basic’

I would say that these changes/adjustments from September 1978 were not thought out so very well. I want to see a logic in all this, but simply fail to hit the spot. It appears accepted by a variety of Free Zone groups that one does handle the Basic Basic, if it is not by going the alternate route to Clear it would be on the OT levels. For this reason it is thought that different opinions about this will not make much of a difference regarding the end result. At present I am however quite skeptical about this. Mind that:
        
“A BASIC is the first incident (engram, lock, overt act) on any chain.
        
 
BASIC BASIC is the first engram on the whole Time Track.”          LRH
(from HCOB 15 May AD13 “The Time Track and Engram Running by Chains Bulletin 1”)
 
It is an engram. Engrams are stored in the Reactive Mind. A Clear though does not have a Reactive Mind. And this Basic Basic would then be handled on some OT levels? But had L .Ron Hubbard not long since directed about the “BASIC BASIC” that “It is found on the Clearing Course.”? (see HCOB 23 Apr 69 “Basic Definitions”)  Nonetheless people just continue arguing about these matters. Incidentally as a matter of coincidence the Dianetic Clear (abolishing Grade V, VA, VI & VII) made its entry at the exact same time as we got NED for OT's (NOT's).

“BASIC BASIC—This belongs in Scientology. It is wholly beyond the scope of Dianetics. It means the most basic basic of all basics and results in clearing. It is found on the Clearing Course. If contacted or run before the pc was brought up through the Scientology Grades, he wouldn't be able to handle it anyway as experience has shown. So this is part of Scientology, not Dianetics.”          LRH
(from HCOB 23 Apr 69 “Basic Definitions”)

More details about the significance of the Basic Basic and its relation to the Scientology clear can be consulted in the article at the link here below:  (separate window)
    “The Scientology Clear (running out the ‘Basic Basic’)”


A main breakdown gives us:
    1. Standard Dianetics handles engrams  (abolished since 30 Jul 78, replaced by next).
  2. New Era Dianetics handles postulates.
  3. Grade VII (Clearing Course) handles GPM's (and the Basic Basic).
But the Clearing Course also pretty much has been abolished. So no engrams cleared, and no GPM's cleared, and no Basic Basic gotten rid of. Since these changes were introduced it produced a Clear that only has addressed postulates.

 
Back to Main Index (3) ‘New Era Dianetics’ causing the need for ‘New Era Dianetics for OT's’? (Sept 78)

        
“New Era Dianetics or any Dianetics is NOT to be run on Clears or above or on Dianetic Clears. ...
        
 
Anyone who has purchased NED auditing who is Clear or above must be routed to an AO or Flag to receive the special NED Rundown for OTs.”          LRH   
(from HCOB 12 Sept 78 “Dianetics Forbidden on Clears and OTs”)
 

An obvious coincidence emerges here. As it seemed unrelated at first we see in the very same month the introduction of a new definition for Clear and a new service that is addressed as NED for OT's (usually briefly referred to as NOT's). What they amongst other have in common is that either of them limit the use of Dianetics (or NED). First released already on 15 September 1978, but nonetheless not delivered to the public till it got released at Flag on 16 December 1978.

There are a variety of inconsistencies to be found with and in relation to this NED for OT's. You may consult my study in the link here below:
    “Notes on NED for OT's and its relation to ‘Clear’”  (separate window)

In this study you will also find a note in regards to the whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard concerning NED for OT's. One could summarize this by saying that he is conspicuous by his absence. We don't hear him, and we don't see him. In that regard what has been the actual role of David Mayo in respect to NED for OT's? This is quite relevant to ask as for he released them, and what records confirm, he most likely wrote them.

Go to index

 
Final evaluations and various testimonies

Back to Main Index Various closing considerations worthy of mention

        
“The basics and fundamentals are stated early in the period of development and have not changed.
        
 
The ‘newest and latest’ is usually a recovery of basics and better statements of them.
 
 
That things which were true early in the subjects are still true.”          LRH
(from HCOB 12 Jun 70 “Programming of Cases”)
 

 
Go back (a) Brief overview

A brief summary of consequences for changes implemented during July-September 1978 gives:
    1.  New Era Dianetics (NED) replaced Standard Dianetics (St Dn).
  2. New Era Dianetics (NED) substituted for Scientology grades V-VA, VI and VII.
  3. NED for OT's (NOT's) gives the impression to be some form of Dianetics, which it is not.
  4. The Natural Clear concept reintroduced the Clear origination and the speculation.
  5. Fear created re that it was very dangerous to run Dianetics if one was found to be Clear in some form.
  6. Thus a Release or Clear cognition could suffice to stop running Dianetics all together.
And we may end up with being a long, very long way from good ol’ Dianetics and a Scientology Clear.

Revisiting:
        
“Dianetics is Dianetics and Scientology is Scientology.
        
 
They are separate subjects. They have in common certain tools like the E-Meter, TRs and auditor presence. But there it ends.
 
 
Dianetics addresses the body. Scientology addresses the thetan.
 
 
While a thetan can produce illness, it is the body that is ill.
 
 
Thus Dianetics is used to knock out and erase illnesses, unwanted sensations, misemotion, somatics, pain, etc. Scientology and its grades are never used for such things.
 
 
Scientology is used to increase spiritual freedom, intelligence, ability, to produce immortality.
 
 
To mix the two has been a very bad error.
 
 
Dianetics came before Scientology. It disposed of body illness and the difficulties a thetan was having with his body. This was a Present Time Problem to the thetan. In the presence of a PTP no case gain results (an old discovery).
 
 
When a thetan has body discomfort or upset solved, he could then go on with what he really wanted which were the improvements to be found in Scientology.
 
 
Mixing the two practices in any way produced and will produce no real case gain. Scientology grades will only occasionally get rid of body ills and Dianetics will not achieve real spiritual freedom.
 
 
Used within their own areas they both each one separately achieves that for which it was intended. Dianetics can make a well body, Scientology can make a recovered thetan.”          LRH
(from HCOB 22 Apr 69 “Dianetics vs Scientology”)
 
Considering that Dianetics is Dianetics an that the Grades 0-VII are Scientology!

If we would compare an original Scientology Clear from the earlier days with a Dianetic Clear from today, then what will we find? May be today one is satisfied with just feeling great instead of fundamentally having changed for the better, but this is something that today's people will not know about, nor will they be able to determine this, for reason that they have nothing to compare with! As an experiment one could examine the nature of the success stories that we find in the Scientology periodical Advance dating from before the cancellation of the Scientology Clear and compare these with today's success stories. Although I will not direct you, for you as the reader have to find out for yourself and establish your own truths.
Please understand this well!! The matter is not if one has had or can have advantages from NED processing. The matter is if you have gotten the advantages that you should have gotten from this processing! For this reason one should carefully study the list of end phenomena's (see here, separate window). That someone would come to you and informs you that you are now Clear is just all too suspect. Your own evaluation/observation has to have a say in this.

 
Go back (b) Warning signs  or  How easily a workable technology can get lost

Taking it overall, then are the modifications implemented in the R3R procedure and the other minor modifications, not forgetting the additional “twelve brand new developments” that were thrown into the new approach of New Era Dianetics. Now, would all these account and make up for the losses of the original route, which in particular were the dropped Scientology Grades V-VA, VI and VII. This is one of the questions you have to ask yourself. Another is if you would agree with the modification of Step Nine of the Routine 3-R, Engram Running by Chain procedure, and in particular its direct consequence of running with minimum TA. Next is that one would have to determine if this whole matter would not have turned to be an incidence of a quickie?
        
“In the dictionary you will find ‘Quickie also quicky: something done or made in a hurry. Also: a hurriedly planned and executed program (as of studies).’ ...
        
 
Anything that does not fully satisfy all requirements is QUICKIE.
 
 
So ‘quickie’ really means ‘omitting actions for whatever reason that would satisfy all demands or requirements and doing something less than could be achieved.’
 
 
In short a quickie is not doing all the steps and actions that could be done to make a perfect whole.”          LRH
(from HCOB 19 Apr 72 “‘Quickie’ Defined”)
 
As it would be rather obvious that the consequences of the implementation of New Era Dianetics is cutting considerably in the previous/original route.

I write these lines here just to get you into the state of mind that one is not to fall for some rather excessive promotion as we saw it at the time of the release of NED, and its relay of the concept that it was so very effective as if it virtually could handle anything. This may have persuaded people to too quickly accept that it had made the higher Scientology grades (V-VA, VI and VII) redundant. Some evaluation has to be enforced onto these matters, by you. We are not to just accept, and adopt what some will say or claim. Freedom is not found this way, and this is not how the subject of Dianetics en Scientology functions. Time after time L. Ron Hubbard has forewarned that man will try to knock out or alter that which works. Man persistently will invent new solutions. This is the reactive mind speaking. This can be observed happening within the world at large, but also this has been tried within Scientology numerous times and which was then counteracted and rectified by L. Ron Hubbard. And today we have New Era Dianetics which all by itself literally knocked out a carefully laid out route that took many years and thousands of hours of research to put together, it just wiped it out. The technique of New Era Dianetics is rather simple, why was it not discovered and in use much earlier?

New Era Dianetics for OT's (NOT's) may also indicate at that NED may not be doing what it is supposed to handle, as it confirms that somatics are still a bother after having attested to Clear. First offered only as a rundown (since September 1978), and a 3½ years later (in March 1982) it suddenly turned mandatory and was rechristened as New OT V. The problem here is that we find far too many of such inconsistencies which were because of NED and its direct consequences. It is like if one has been attempting to patch up the Bridge actions and cope ever since!

The creation of the Alternate Route to Clear also appears to add upon the confusion. For if all that man has in common is the reactive mind then how would this justify an Alternate Route? All that I ask is to you to enforce plain logic, and then see where it gets you.

A rather interesting testimony about this time period (1978-80) is given by the below extract when an old-timer Scientologist reminisces:
        
“In November 1978 I was posted as a Cramming Officer in the Qual Div at WHQ, Scientology's Winter Headquarters. I fired on an Obs Mission to PAC to gather data on the effect of the Dianetic Clear announcement. I did another one about 14 months later in January 1980. The difference in  data gathered on the two missions was dramatic. From the first, most of those coming in to attest to Clear were Power Releases who had stalled on the Bridge or preclears who had had many, many, many hours of Dianetics. By 1980 the demographic had switched to public who had little Dianetics, or even much Grade Chart auditing at all. Quite a large number were asserting ‘Natural Clear’ after mention of the state by LRH, though in a recorded remark to a Tech Messenger around that time he said there were probably 4 on the entire planet. I don't think that was ever made known.
        
 
Clearly, things were a mess. C/Ses didn't know what they were doing and Snr C/S Int Office was little help in straightening out the scene. The initial handling was the DCSI, the Dianetic Clear Special Intensive. This was developed by LRH in conjunction with the then Snr C/S Int, David Mayo. The DCSI was followed years later by the Clear Certainty Rundown, which itself was revised several years later. A NOTs handling was developed for cases who had gotten onto OT levels but whose Clear status was still in doubt.”   Dan Koon
 
        
* Qual Div.  ‘Qualifications Division’.   * Obs.  ‘Observation’.   * PAC.  Pacific Area Command (base)’. The Church's national seminary headquarters located in Hollywood, Los Angeles.
        
This may actually speak for itself, although do keep in mind that New Era Dianetics (NED) made its entry in July 1978. Although it does confirm that something was not quite alright, and it gives support to my comments about that various patching up after the fact, was being done! The question is if all this patching up of this nature and at such many levels would have been called for if NED really was the miracle cure that it was claimed to be?
In addition an oddity is actually present in regards to that this Dan Koon for some reason still appears to believe that L. Ron Hubbard was doing various things, but we do not actually know that. Just a name written at the bottom of some reference at this point in time does not mean that this would be the person that actually wrote that. Various rules had also been changed with the release of HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up”.

And haven't we been warned about situations like these?
        
“The outnesses which have occurred surrounding this Chart are hard to believe. They consist of total abandonment of the Chart, degrading and losing all its lower grade processes, feeding a pc at Dianetic level data at Class VI and telling him, who has not made Dianetics yet, he is now Clear, cutting down all processes from the Chart bottom up to IV to be able to do them in 2½ minutes, neglecting all levels up to OT V and then trying to put in a few lower grades and sending on to OT VI, having the pc after one trivial session attest all abilities at once and many other errors.
        
 
This is crazy driving. If a bus were driven along a road this way it would soon be wrecked and back where it started but in an ash heap.”          LRH
(from HCOB 12 Jun 70 “Programming Cases”)
 
Obviously causing the reissue notice of 15 Jun ’70 (issued only 3 days later) found in HCO PL 7 Feb 65 “Keeping Scientology Working”:
        
Note:  Neglect of this PL has caused great hardship on staffs, has cost countless millions and made it necessary in 1970 to engage in an all-out, international effort to restore basic Scientology over the world. Within 5 years after the issue of this PL, with me off the lines, violation had almost destroyed orgs. ‘Quickie grades’ entered in and denied gain to tens of thousands of cases.”          LRH
        
Are we looking for the wrong answers/solution? Instead of going back and reinstate, we persist with the changes and continue patching up and coping?

A technology or a precision clock gets so very easily corrupted. One just has to be aware of the warning signs.
        
“But the moment that you move even a sixteenth of a millimeter sideways off of what is generally applicable to all minds, you are again into the particularities and opinions. So therefore, if you had a broad sphere of knowledge which was true, and these were all high generalities and everybody would agree with them, frankly it'd be very easy to bankrupt and upset that whole operation by taking it, and by false relay—you see, bad instruction and bad relay of the Material and dropping out a datum here and a vital datum there and substituting something or other—you eventually could then again effect a sort of a slavery out of that information.
        
 
In other words, even if you arrive at the technology, you still have the task of safeguarding the technology because, once more, it can easily turn and become a false technology.”          LRH
(from Saint Hill Special Briefing Course lecture #308, renumbered 1991: #338 “Saint Hill Service Facsimile Handling”, given on 18 Sept 63)
 
 
sound  Sound snippet (1:28) 
 
        
(Please note that above sound snippet is longer than the printed text that you find here above.)
        

        
“The situation with regard to standard tech at this time is we have had a few mice. And I imagine down through the years there will be a few other mice. A bulletin gets altered, a tape gets pulled off the line, some vital action is shifted. Somebody comes tearing in with a brand new idea that seems to be absolutely vitally essential, and the first thing you know, why we have trouble of one kind or another. And tech fails. And it suddenly ceases to give the results which it should attain. ... These are the danger points of the past and of the future.”          LRH
(from Class VIII lecture #5 “The Standard Green Form and Rudiments”, given on 28 Sept 68)
        
 
sound  Sound snippet (1:05) 
 
        
(Please note that above sound snippet is longer than the printed text that you find here above.)
        

 
Go back (c) Déjà vu? Banished in 1970, but accepted some 10 years later. Why?

Haven't we seen these things before? Why is it so that various of the matters that L. Ron Hubbard had forewarned about and counteracted in a previous turn of the decennium, were suddenly pushed through and materialized some 10 years later during the 1978-82 time span? Probably all that it required was an enthousiastic and persuasive promotion, and last but not least references carrying an LRH signature that condoned it.
The fact however that he had dismissed various of these alterations some 10 years earlier should awaken a critical eye regarding the correctness of its authorization this day. In particular if one can point out that since 1977 references could be passed through, this with authorization, that had not been written (or were even seen) by L. Ron Hubbard, but that nonetheless still could carry his signature! In where the original writer/compiler had turned into an assistant according to guidelines found in HCOB 24 Jan 77 “Tech Correction Round-up”. More about this here, separate window.

Not to mention his withdrawal from public presentation of his person overall since 1973, but in particular his physical absence at such time that these changes in his technology got released. L. Ron Hubbard had always released such matters in person. But he really had been conspicuous by his absence for any of the technical turnaround releases from the 1978-82 time span.
What we have to look for is happenings in where some new technology was released in some official capacity, and to then determine if L. Ron Hubbard was present. For example he wasn't there at the official release of New Era Dianetics in July 1978, and he wasn't there at the official release of Audited NOT's and Solo NOT's (presently in use as New OT V and New OT VI-VII). At the release of Audited NOT's in December 1978 we instead have the then Senior C/S Int David Mayo forwarding: “Ron asked me to give you his love.” (see ‘Source 19’, Feb-Mar 79 in article “NED for OTs Released at Flag”).
It should be normal procedure that the person that developed something also would the person that makes the first presentation for public release. Interestingly in regards to is that we have it pretty much confirmed that David Mayo wrote Audited/Solo NOT's and coincidently we see then that he also made the first presentation for public release.

Most people unfortunately are rather gullible and highly uncritical and when that, which was earlier delegated to the trash bin, is introduced once again, it gets, for some reason, more than readily accepted, and finally adopted. And from that day on they will live by it. Not looking left nor right and willfully ignoring all of the symptoms of the disease that are in plain sight.

“I'll not always be here on guard. The stars twinkle in the Milky Way and the wind sighs for songs across the empty fields of a planet a Galaxy away.”          LRH
(from booklet ‘Scientology: Clear Procedure - Issue One’ (published 1957))

Therefore, find L. Ron Hubbard concerning such matters!

 
Go back (d) Dianetics placed out of reach ... and not being delivered when it should ...

        
“All you really have to do to get at least a minimum job of it is to get the materials and the students and keep them at it.
        
 
It takes a steady three or four weeks of work to make a Dianetic Auditor.”          LRH
(from HCO PL 9 Dec 71 (Revised 22 Feb 75) “What? No Auditors?”)
 

The most vital ingredient of all that is contained in the subjects of Dianetics and Scientology is in fact Dianetics. You get close to instant results and it gets the person motivated to continue and find out more what is on that route called Scientology. It was always Dianetics what got people into Scientology. The final product of Dianetics was the Dianetic Clear, and Scientology only then made its entry when it was found that this state of Clear was somehow not stable. This led to the development of the Scientology grades.

When expansion was at its highest peak it was because of Dianetics that was being pounded upon. The highest priority and a first necessity had always been to become a Dianetics Auditor as quickly as possible and as a first action. At such times people were auditing each other with Dianetics anywhere and everywhere. At the old Saint Hill at East Grinstead, England they were even filling up the toilets because of unsufficient with auditing rooms. The times however have been in for a change, and a drastic change it turned out to be. Prior to you receiving Dianetic auditing this day you are now put through to first receive or do a whole bunch of other things. Because of that many tend to loose interest prior to reaching the point of the biggest value found in the subject, which is Dianetic auditing, or you just don't come around to arrive at or get started on it. This is what we see in the present day Church of Scientology. Auditing is not so important, today we do reading courses (reading a book basically), we do Scientology courses, we do not do Dianetics. The auditing rooms today are really not that many anymore and for sure are not that occupied as they were in the hay days.
I recall that which I found to be an interesting anecdote. In 1983 I saw this Spanish girl and a Dutch guy in the auditing area at Amsterdam org, they we're co-auditing and seemed so motivated and they were progressing on their Objectives. In 1987 I saw them again in the auditing area (in a new building across the street this time as the org had changed locations), they still appeared motivated and they were auditing each other on (you may have guessed it), yes, Objectives.

This thing about placing Dianetics so far away in fact is all wrong, Didn't L. Ron hubbard say:
        
“Any Scientology failures are totally owing to the auditor not learning his Dianetics in the first place.”          LRH
(from HCOB 6 Apr 69 “Fundamental Auditing”)
        
Today you don't learn first about Dianetics. And for that matter you don't receive it first either anymore. Mind however:
        
“Dianetics is itself and has its place. When one can handle Dianetics so as to make people well and happy, one can then begin to think of and work on the higher aspects of Scientology.”         LRH
(from HCOB 6 Apr 69 “Fundamental Auditing”)
        
And these are by far not the only references that advocate first Dianetics and only then Scientology!
(Note: I list and quote quite a few of them in my Grade Chart study in chapter “Nov-Dec 1981: First grades then Dianetics”, see sections 1 & 3, separate window)

The today's situation (and has been for quite a while) is actually much worse than I describe.
        
“If a preclear or pre OT has physical difficulties, bad perception trouble, illness or physical disability HE HAS NO BUSINESS GETTING GRADES, POWER, CLEARING OR OT LEVELS. HE NEEDS DIANETICS.
        
 
Once that is completely understood it will end any and all ‘failures’.”          LRH
(from HCOB 22 Apr 69 II “Somatics and OTs”)
 

“What has happened here is that they were using Scientology to escape an uncomfortable body that should have been straightened out by Dianetics in the first place. The ‘out grade’ is in fact Dianetics, failure to use it before going on to Scientology.”          LRH
(from HCOB 1 May 69 “Grinding Out Engrams”)

And in spite of all that it is NOT being applied for some reason. I know, as this is exactly what had happened with me. I should have received Dianetics, but was instead put on Purification Rundown, Objectives, Scientology grades, Confessional auditing, Body Assists, put on courses, and so on, but was NEVER put on Dianetics. I was told that I would receive that after completion of Scientology Grade IV.
This is rather strange though as the reality factor is: “The Scientology auditor is all too often balked by the fact that his preclear comes to him already ill. ”   LRH   (from HCOB 6 Apr 69 “Fundamental Auditing”), and thus should receive his Dianetics.

I was to find out though that I was not the only one treated this way. The only reason why I stayed on and kept my interest alive was because I had seen values within this technology. If I only had known back then what I know now.
My advice would be to insist on getting your Dianetics in spite of what anyone else may say what will put you on hold, and stop you from receiving that which you should receive.

Summarizing this it seems that we could then conclude that first the effectiveness of Dianetics itself was being interfered with (replaced with NED), secondly was put out of reach (placed after the Grades), and thirdly its use had been invalidated overall (in spite of clear references stating its significance and sheer necessity). This has been a rather interesting development. Man indeed does intend to destroy that which is good for him, and then justify it. The gullibleness of man and how amazingly easy he can be led astray however astounds me grandly.

 
Go back The ‘David Mayo Bridge’

David Mayo, Senior C/S International (1978-82)
A notice evidently has to be placed here about this, for the rather simple reason that this Bridge turnaround was pretty much established and most certainly solidified during the time frame that he was posted as the most senior technical person around (after L. Ron Hubbard). We also find documentation about his personal and direct involvement in various of these implementations. Then a short time after that all these modifications were well in place he himself was forcefully removed from his position (August 1982), and finally he got kicked out of the organization (1983). Apparently no one cared very much to look into this actual Bridge turnaround and may be restore it to what it was prior to him coming to post. All that was done was that some references were cancelled and some other were rewritten, with the obvious aim to remove any and all reference to the person David Mayo. Although we can conclude that the Bridge, or the Route to Freedom that solidified during his time of reign was kept virtually intact and just as it was, at his time of leaving. Somewhere or other this is just not very logical, in particularly not if one considers the exceedingly demoralizing picture that is given about his person by the then Church of Scientology representatives (see my separate studies elsewhere on my site about this, page “The story of David Mayo (Snr C/S Int 1978-82) - Main index & introduction”).
Consequently and interestingly enough we can easily denote the Bridge that is currently offered by the Church of Scientology as the David Mayo Bridge. This in all its simplicity would then be a statement of FACT. A very ironical situation obviously. Considering now that the various Free Zone for the most also have adopted this route (as they instead find that David Mayo was a good guy), we then find that the original LRH Bridge is not available at many places, if anywhere at all.

 
Go back Ideal scene  vs  The lost Bridge

There appear to exist people that swear by New Era Dianetics, and if it is their wish to maintain and use that. Then let them do so. However, don't let this result in that people are denied to do the original route with Standard Dianetics if it be their wish to do so! Thus far this is exactly what has happened, this route has been categorically denied! It is a reality that Standard Dianetics got kicked for no valid on-policy reason. For that reason alone it should be reinstated. This automatically also would mean that it would turn mandatory to do the Scientology grades V-VII. Then considering that the consequences of New Era Dianetics actually caused the sequence change of first Grades and then Dianetics. Then this could/should be restored on that route as well. It is simply a matter of restoring lost tech, no more, no less. Now, are these targets for implementation actually realistic to any extend? In fact, I think they are. It would likely work easier for the various Free Zone out there, but it is probably impossible where it concerns the Church of Scientology. But then again, one might get a surprise some day. For now, let's focus on to just getting Standard Dianetics actually reinstated and in use!

There remains one obstacle though, and that is that the auditing procedure Routine 3-R (R3R), Engram Running by Chain is this much different, I refer to Step Nine (see at “‘Standard Dianetics’ (1969) vs ‘New Era Dianetics’ (1978) - A comparison and study”), and that they are likely to get confused if the same person one day audits someone with the Standard Dianetics technique and another day someone else with the New Era Dianetics technique. Therefore be careful about your choice of auditor.

Go to index

 
Back to Main Index Witnesses of the time ...

Here I print observations that I have received from various witnesses of the past. Individuals that were actually there at the time that Standard Dianetics auditing routine R3R (in use since 1963) was the auditing routine that ruled, a time when no one had even heard yet of such a thing as New Era Dianetics.
I find that the pieces of information revealed here are of grand importance indeed! After all they are relayed by actual witnesses of the time!

 
Go back Patricia Krenik, original Class VI auditor  (about ‘Standard Dn. vs. NED’)

Various responses I received from Patricia Krenik, a Founding Scientologist from 1951 and an original Class VI auditor. They appear reprinted here with the permission of its authoress:

        
“Hi, Michel...I don't start people out on NED in any case, it is too steep a gradient for a new auditor to learn.  A class IV auditor yes, unless they just simply want Standard Dianetics.
        
 
I always had such good results with Standard Dianetics that I don't know why the NED was developed.  Standard Dianetics is simpler, and LRH always said when given a choice of processes, choose the simpler.
 
 
I have often wondered, knowing what I have studied about the R6 bank* how a person could go Clear on Dianetics.  MEST clear*, yes, but it seems to me most are just keying out the R-6 bank on Dianetics.
 
 
MEST clear had cleared up all the this lifetime engrams (which of course one had to go whole track to clear them).
 
 
Theta clear* was a bit higher level of clear, free of a body.  Tech dictionary can give you a better definition.
 
 
In any case, all we are doing is getting charge off of the case.”
 
 
Pat (message dated 23 Mar 2013)
 
* R6 bank. Basic reactive mind, Grade VI (=Scientology).  * * These terms are addressed and defined in article: “‘MEST Clear’ versus ‘Theta Clear’” (separate window).  

        
“Hi, Michel. I was looking over your concerns on the website re: Standard Dianetics vs. New Era Dianetics.
        
 
I really loved Standard Dianetics. It was easy to do and I had excellent results with it.
 
 
When something new is introduced it is always to handle a problem. The workability of Standard Dianetics, of course, depends on the C/Sing. To really move a pc's case one has to be able to take ‘what he is sitting in’ and handle it. If you do, you will get results always.
 
 
In general, LRH moved away from ‘diagnosing the pc in the chair’ and on to C/Sing by folder inspection. This is because too many auditors just couldn't get the right item to be addressed.
 
 
So first Standard Dianetics essentially replaced Book One* techniques. Not that we can't still do book one, it still works for most if you know what you are doing. But the drug culture moved in since DMSMH* was written, and we ran into the ‘resistive case’ and book one techniques didn't work as well.
 
 
Now to your questions: First of all, one difference is in New Era Dianetics we were allowed, when necessary, to go earlier after the first run IF THE METER WAS PACKING UP. So long as the TA was moving we would do nothing, but if after a first run through it was getting more solid then we knew that the pc doesn't benefit by continuing the action. In that case we were permitted to go earlier. In my personal auditing of Standard Dianetics I never had that happen; we always ran the incident at least twice. But technically I can understand if the incident was going more solid after the first run we need to go earlier because the charge is on the CHAIN, not just the incident.
 
 
It would be rare that you would only run one time through in New Era Dianetics. Basic, of course, is run many times through.
 
 
Now if a New Era Dianetic auditor thought he only had to run each incident one time through then he has a crashing M/U* on Dianetics. Even chains need to be unburdened.:)
 
 
New Era Dianetics has a step-by-step program so that cases don't get missed due to inadequate c/sing. When an area is addressed by assessing a subject to an f/n*ing list we get ALL the charge connected with a given subject.
 
 
Of course when you run the Standard NED Program you wouldn't run something twice, or run a drug rundown on someone who didn't need it. That is all in the understanding of C/Sing a case.
 
 
As to the positioning of where to run NED, it isn't locked in glue. If a pc has physical problems he needs Dianetics. The question is, does he have enough free attention to run Dianetics vs. the chain or engram he is sitting in. Per Science of Survival you need to be 3.0 on the tone scale to run Dianetics. People with lots of body problems are usually low on the tone scale. So what to do?
 
 
Putting New Era Dianetics above Grade IV prevents a pc from being thrown in over his head.
 
 
However, that doesn't mean NO Dianetics can be run. Look at the resistive case list, the GF 40*. It has lots of Dianetics, but targets the case resistance.
 
 
Most charts still have secondary and engrams releases at the bottom of the chart. That is so one can still run them as necessary, even though it isn't required. This is c/s choice. If a person has recently injured himself, there are several steps one can take --contact assist, for example, ruds on the injured body part and so on, then running the incident Dianeticly. You can see c/ses in Vol VIII (I think it is) in the original tech vols and Vol 9 in the newer issues.
 
 
The use of Standard Dianetics has dropped out because it is no longer on the grade chart. That doesn't mean it isn't valid tech. New Era Dianetics changed the handling of running NARRATIVE incidents by chains, by asking for earlier beginning after each run through the incident. This doesn't apply to the incidents that come up on a ‘pain in the elbow’ (somatic chains) They are run asking erasing or going more solid after every couple of runs through an incident (except, of course, if it is obvious it is going more solid)
 
 
There may be more than one way to wash dishes and get them clean. Some people just don't know how to get them clean, so they need a rote procedure that will work. Eventually someone makes a better dishwasher and the rules change.:)
 
 
Love, Pat” (message dated 1 Nov 2013)
 
* Book One, DMSMH. The book ‘Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health’.  * M/U. Misunderstood.  
* f/n. floating needle.  * GF 40. Green Form 40 Expanded. A particular prepared list used in auditing detecting and handling a possible resistance to processing.

 
Go back Michelle Matlock, original Class VIII auditor  (about Dianetics A.D. 1963)

It was at the dinner table in a restaurant that she taled about this buttermilk incident and commented that NED would not likely have picked it up. I asked her to write the tale down for publication here.
It be noted here that the auditing Routine 3-R (R3R) ‘Engram Running by Chain’ that identifies the Standard Dianetics basic routine was developed and in use at least as early as June 1963.

        
“I received metered Dianetic auditing in November of 1963. I was a student at the University of Texas and fellow students (John and Gareth McCoy) had spent the preceding summer in Washington, DC. They went there to take auditor training directly from L Ron Hubbard.
        
 
Gareth asked to audit me on a 25 hour intensive, as I was a good friend of hers. She had received a newly released bulletin called R-2C* SLOW ASSESSMENT BY DYNAMICS. The way she ran it was to ask the questions, note anything that read, and ask for earlier incidents involving what read. I was a very happy newlywed 19 year old who had had a happy childhood. She was not finding any significant reads.
 
 
One day we came back into session and she started with the current rudiment “Has anything happened since the last time I audited you?”
 
          
“What was THAT?”
          
   
“Oh, Tommy loves buttermilk pancakes so I fixed some for him this morning.”
   
   
“What about buttermilk?”
   
   
“Oh, I hate it.”
   
   
“Is there an earlier incident with buttermilk?”
   
   
“My grandmother had some in the refrigerator and I smelled it to try to make friends with it.”
   
 
The second those words left my mouth, I thought “WHY would I want to make friends with buttermilk?”
 
 
Gareth asked if there was an earlier incident with buttermilk. At that exact second, a picture came ZOOMING in. I was back in a scene where I was on a big bed. My mother was at the foot of the bed as she looked in her 20s. There was a nurse on either side of the bed. There was a doctor beside one of the nurses. They were trying to get me to drink buttermilk and I refused. The nurse on my left said “Get a sheet.” They wrapped me up in the sheet and force fed me buttermilk.
 
 
After session, I made a long distance call to my mother in Iowa. I asked her if I was ever force fed buttermilk. She said “Oh, Shelley, how did you ever remember that? You were 2 years old and had contracted amoebic dysentery. So many babies on the east coast had died from it. The only thing they could do for it was to give you buttermilk and you refused to drink it. After that incident, all they had to do was say the word ‘Sheet’ and you would drink your buttermilk.”
 
 
That experience gave me absolute faith in the efficiency of the ‘file clerk.’ NED would have required a preassessment for pains, sensations, attitudes, etc. Buttermilk would be considered a narrative in NED and would not readily by run as a chain. NED procedures may well have handled the incident, but would have interjected needless rigmarole - in my opinion.”
 
  (message received 7 Nov 2013)  
* R-2C. Routine 2C.

 

Vocabulary:

     ..R, ..RA, ..RB (etc) or #R, #RA (etc):
For example: ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70R’ & ‘HCO PL 24 Sept 70RA, etc. The given date denotes the first time it has been published in issue-form. The R, RA indication may also follow after an issue-number. The R stands for ‘Revision’ and would refer to that it has been revised since it was first published. If it is revised a 2nd time it is indicated as RA, a 3rd time RB, then RC, and so on. 
     AD..:
After Dianetics ..’. The main book ‘Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health’ was first published in 1950. Therefore for example AD8, AD12, and AD29 would respectively give the years 1958, 1962 and 1979.
     Advanced Org(anization) (AO):
The denominates a Scientology organization which delivers higher level auditing and training. The first Advanced Organization was located in Saint Hill, England. The initials AO will appear somewhere in the name for the various AO's. For example: AOLA, ASHO, AOSH EU, etc.. This may also be referred to as a Saint-Hill organization.
     AO:
Short for ‘Advanced Organization’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     audit, auditing, auditor:
The application of Scientology processes and procedures to someone by a trained auditor (listener). The goal of the auditor is to make the receiver of the auditing look at incidents and reduce the mental charge which may lay upon them. The auditor may not evaluate and has to adhere to the Auditor's code.
     bank:
The mental image picture collection collection of a person. It comes from computer technology where all data is in a “bank”. (HCOB 30 Apr 69)  See also at ‘reactive mind’ in vocabulary.
     C/S:
Case/Supervisor’.  1. That person in a Scientology Church who gives instructions regarding, and supervises the auditing of preclears. The abbreviation C/S can refer to the Case Supervisor or to the written instructions of a case supervisor depending on context. (BTB 12 Apr 72R)  2. The C/S is the case supervisor. He has to be an accomplished and properly certified auditor and a person trained additionally to supervise cases. The C/S is the auditor's “handler.” He tells the auditor what to do, corrects his tech, keeps the lines straight and keeps the auditor calm and willing and winning. The C/S is the pc's case director. His actions are done for the pc. (Dianetics Today, Bk. 3, p. 545)
     checksheet:
A list of materials, often divided into sections, that give the theory and practical steps which, when completed, give one a study completion. The items are selected to add up to the required knowledge of the subject. They are arranged in the sequence necessary to a gradient of increasing knowledge on the subject. After each item there is a place for the initial of the student or the person checking the student out.
     Clear:
1. What we mean by Clear is an erasure of the mental mass which inhibits their thinking, postulating, and so on. (SH Spec 75, 6608C16)  2. An unaberrated person. He is rational in that he forms the best possible solutions he can on the data he has and from his viewpoint. He obtains the maximum pleasure for the organism, present and future, as well as for the subjects along the other dynamics. The Clear has no engrams which can be restimulated to throw out the correctness of computation by entering hidden and false data in it. (Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, p. 111)
     Date/Locate (D/L):
1. A process to date and locate a flat point in a process that appears overrun. (HCOB 24 Sept 71)  2. The essence of the drill is to bring a pc to PT (present time) by erasing the date by spotting and the location by spotting, as the pc is out of PT fixed by both date and location. (HCOB 24 Sept 74R)
     engram:
1. Simply moments of physical pain strong enough to throw part or all the analytical machinery out of circuit; they are antagonism to the survival of the organism or pretended sympathy to the organism's survival. That is the entire definition. Great or little unconsciousness, physical pain, perceptic content, and contra-survival or pro-survival data. (Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, p. 68)  2. A moment when the analytical mind is shut down by physical pain, drugs or other means, and the reactive bank is open to the receipt of a recording. (Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, p. 153)  3. The word engram is an old one borrowed from biology. It means simply, “a lasting memory trace on a cell.” It may be engraved on more than the cell, but up against Dianetic processing, it is not very lasting. (Science of Survival, p. 10)  4. A recording which has the sole purpose of steering the individual through supposed but usually nonexistent dangers. (Science of Survival, p. 10)  5. A mental image picture which is a recording of a time of physical pain and unconsciousness. It must by definition have impact or injury as part of its content. (HCOB 23 Apr 69)  6. A complete recording, down to the last accurate detail, of every perception present in a moment of partial or full unconsciousness. (Scientology 0-8, p. 11)  
     entheta:
Means enturbulated theta (thought or life); especially refers to communications, which, based on lies and confusions, are slanderous, choppy or destructive in an attempt to overwhelm or suppress a person or group. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary)
     Free Zone:
Free Zone generally is regarded being those groups (as in plural) that practice Scientology outside of the control of the official Church of Scientology. Various of these groups may have their personal approach about how to use the Scientology technology. See also my note here (separate window). 
     GPM:
Goals Problem Mass’. 1. A GPM is composed of mental masses and significances which have an exact pattern, unvarying from person to person, whose significances dictate a certain type of behaviour and whose masses, when pulled in on the individual, cause psychosomatic effects, such as illnesses, pains or feelings of heaviness and tiredness. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary).  2. The problem created by two or more opposing ideas which being opposed, balanced, and unresolved, make a mass. It's a mental energy mass. (SH Spec 83, 6612C06).  3. The basis of the reactive mind is the actual Goals Problem Masses (GPMs). (HCOB 17 Oct 64 III)
     HCOB:
Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin’. Color flash–red ink on white paper. Written by LRH only , but only so starting from January 1974. These are the technical issue line. All data for auditing and courses is contained in HCOBs. For more information go here (separate window).
    HCO PL:
Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on white paper. Written by LRH only, but only so starting from January 1974. These are the organizational and administrative issue line. For more information go here (separate window).
     lock:
1. An analytical moment in which the perceptics of the engram are approximated, thus restimulating the engram or bringing it into action, the present time perceptics being erroneously interpreted by the reactive mind to mean that the same condition which produced physical pain once before is now again at hand. Locks contain mainly perceptics; no physical pain and very little misemotion. (Science of Survival, p. 112)  2. A situation of mental anguish. It depends for its force on the engram to which it is appended. The lock is more or less known to the analyzer. It's a moment of severe restimulation of an engram. (Dianetics: Evolution of a Science, p. 84).
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     NED:
New Era Dianetics’. Offcially released to the public on 30 July 1978 (ref.: ‘The Auditor 151 (US edition)’, Sept 78). It replaced and abolished the previous in use Standard Dianetics (St Dn).
     Objectives:
Refers to a package of processes which are part of a step found somewhere at the bottom of the Grade Chart or Bridge (Classification Gradation and Awareness Chart of Levels and Certificates). Generally this consists of the CCH processes I-IV (see HCOB 1 Dec 65 “CCHs”).
(CCH: Control, Communication & Havingness. Several associated processes which bring a person into better control of his body and surroundings, put him into better communication with his surroundings and other people, and increase his ability to have things for himself. They bring him into the present, away from his past problems.)
     Operating Thetan (OT):
1. Willing and knowing cause over life, thought, matter, energy, space and time. And that would of course be mind and that would of course be universe. (SH Spec 80, 6609C08)  2. An individual who could operate totally independently of his body whether he had one or didn't have one. He's now himself, he's not dependent on the universe around him. (SH Spec 66, 6509C09)  3. A being at cause over matter, energy, space, time, form and life. Operating comes from “able to operate without dependency on things” and thetan is the Greek letter theta (θ), which the Greeks used to represent “thought” or perhaps “spirit” to which an “n” is added to make a new noun in the modern style used to create words in engineering. (Book of Case Remedies, p. 10)
     org(s):
Short for ‘organization(s)’.
     OT:
Short for ‘Operating Thetan’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     overt, overt act:
A harmful act or a transgression against the moral code of a group. When a person does something that is contrary to the moral code he has agreed to, or when he omits to do something that he should have done per that moral code, he has committed an overt. An overt violates what was agreed upon. An overt can be intentional or unintentional.
     pc(s):
Short for ‘preclear(s)’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
    P/L or PL:
‘HCO PL’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     preclear (pc):
1. A person who, through Scientology processing, is finding out more about himself and life. (The Phoenix Lectures, p. 20)  2. A spiritual being who is now on the road to becoming Clear, hence preclear. (HCOB 5 Apr 69)  3. One who is discovering things about himself and who is becoming clearer. (HCO PL 21 Aug 62)
     R6:
Routine 6’. It means the exact processes and aspects of case handled at Level VI of Scientology (BTB 12 Apr 72R)
     R6EW:
Routine 6 End Words’. When the pc has taken the locks off the reactive mind itself, using R6EW, he attains Fourth Stage Release. (HCOB 30 Aug 65) [Grade VI Release].
     reactive mind:
1. That portion of a person's mind which works on a stimulus-response basis (given a certain stimulus, it gives a certain response) which is not under his volitional control and which exerts force and the power of command over his awareness, purposes, thoughts, body and actions. It consists of GPMs, Engrams, Secondaries and Locks. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary)  2. Stored in the reactive mind are engrams, and here we find the single source of aberrations and psychosomatic ills. (Scientology 0-8, p. 11)  3. ‘bank’: a colloquial name for the reactive mind. This is what the procedures of Scientology are devoted to disposing of, for it is only a burden to an individual and he is much better off without it. (Scientology Abridged Dictionary)  4. The reactive mind acts below the level of consciousness. It is the literal stimulus-response mind. Given a certain stimulus it gives a certain response. (The Fundamentals of Thought, p. 58)
     Rundown:
A series of steps which are auditing actions and processes designed to handle a specific aspect of a case and which have a known end phenomena. Example: Introspection Rundown. (LRH Def. Notes)  As a rule this mostly works as a corrective action and not as a mandatory part of the Bridge.
     Saint Hill Special Briefing Course (SHSBC):
This was a course delivered by L. Ron Hubbard at Saint Hill, England during 1961-66 and comprises of 447 lectures. Its result is a very adept auditor and thorough know-how of Scientology itself. The materials are studied in chronological sequence so as to fully understand the development of the technology. This will make you a Class VI Auditor.
     St Dn:
Standard Dianetics’. Reissue of 1950-Tech, as such established and released in April 1969 (ref.: HCOB 24 Apr 69 “Dianetic Use”). It was finalized in December of that year. Abolished and replaced by New Era Dianetics (NED) since 30 July 1978.
     TA:
tone arm (action)’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’:
This is a series of books that contain the HCOB's, and any references that are primarily dealing with technical matters. The HCOB's are printed in red ink on white paper, and the volumes themselves come in red bindings. The references are arranged in chronological release order (per issue date). These books may also be referred to as the ‘red volumes’. The ‘old red volumes’ then would refer to the 1976-80 release, the ‘new red volumes’ instead to the 1991 release. See a listing of published volumes here (pop-up window).
     thetan:
1. The living unit we call, in Scientology, a thetan, that being taken from the Greek letter theta, the mathematic symbol used in Scientology to indicate the source of life and life itself. (Ability Magazine 1)  2. The person himself—not his body or his name, the physical universe, his mind, or anything else; that which is aware of being aware; the identity which is the individual. The thetan is most familiar to one and all as you. (Auditor 25 UK)
     tone arm (TA):
1. Tone arm refers to the tone arm or its motion. (HCOB 13 Apr 64)  2. Tone arm action. A technical term for a quantitative measure of case gain in the Scientology processing of a preclear for a given unit of time. (Introduction to Scientology Ethics, p. 38)  3. The measure of accumulation of charge. (Class VIII No. 6)  4. A measure of the amount of encysted force which is leaving the case. (SH Spec 291, 6308C06)


Go to top of this page


Advertisement