Scientology pages index  |  Contact

Scientology: The ‘Primary Rundown’ and Superliteracy  or      The telltale of the definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’ (2) (Scientology: Training - How to go about it  or        Tracking the history of ‘Fast Flow Training’ (1968-83))

(to other Scientology pages)

1) General overview/introduction:   Overview of the studies, synopsis & disclaimer Introduction to Scientology and LRH Scientology in media and Internet (+ forums, Wikipedia) Scientology: Its true history exposed? Scientology Q&A (FAQ) External links Materials want list Recommended list of materials   2) Responses (with annotations):   Appreciative responses to my pages Critique received (1) from churchgoing Scientologists Critique received (2) from out-of-church Scientologists Critique received (3) from anti-Scientologists   3) Topics of particular interest:   (a): Organizational and general topics A printing history of the materials of Scientology Scientology Membership: HASI vs IAS Story of Mary Sue Hubbard LRH vs pricing policies The copyrights issue and licensing Holy Scriptures vs Scientology LRH vs Dictionaries LRH vs theory of evolution LRH's works of fiction   (b): Technical topics History of Grade Chart: a) General History of Grade Chart: b) Detailed ‘Clear’ defined NED for OTs The ‘Primary Rundown’ Tracking ‘Fast Flow Training’   4) Controversial topics:   Mistaken ideas of ‘Ethics’ clarified The Fair Game Law Practice of Disconnection Security Checking Freeloaders vs Ex-staff members   5) Changes in the flow of ‘information’:   (a): Alterations (LRH or non-LRH?) LRH vs Alterations Non-LRH turns into LRH? & Proposal to solution The ‘Cramming Series’ - LRH or not LRH? Based on LRH publications  (b): General overview LRH vs A New Order (introduction) Analysis of HCOB “Tech Correction Round-up” Tech changes during 1978-82 Setup of the printed materials (1974-86) ‘Golden Age of Tech’ (GAT) analysis Drilling in Scientology (c): Involvement of David Mayo Story of David Mayo ‘SO ED 2344 Int’ analysis Training drills (TRs) Mayo reference list   6) Conspiracies - In L. Ron Hubbard's footsteps - Scientology under attack:   Scientology vs a New World Order Whereabouts of L. Ron Hubbard chronology The era of adoration; Presentation of L. Ron Hubbard ’80s conspiracy (?) (1): Intro & Ron DeWolf (2): Gerry Armstrong (‘affirmations’) (3): Russell Miller ( ‘Bare-Faced Messiah’) (4): A religion created for the money?   7) Battles fought on the Internet:   planned planned planned planned

>> 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.

	“So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING:
	ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A ‘FAST FLOW STUDENT’.”
	L. Ron Hubbard
	(from HCOB 13 Aug 72R (Corrected and Reissued 15 Aug 72) “Fast Flow Training”)

The disappearance of information (3) -
‘Primary Rundown’ and Superliteracy  (page 2)

Go to “Scientology: The ‘Primary Rundown’ and Superliteracy”  index page

‘Fast Flow Training’ - A chronological and factual overview

	(1) A chronological and factual overview of what it meant during 1968-83:
		Lecture 5 Jan 68, AO-1 “Fast Flow and Inspection Before the Fact”
		‘LRH ED 2 Int’, 20 Jan 69 “Attestation Reinstated”
		HCO PL 29 Jul 72 II “Fast Flow - Training”
		HCOB 13 Aug 72R (Corrected and Reissued 15 Aug 72) “Fast Flow Training”
		HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”
			- The matter of HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” - ‘Advance! 25’, Oct 74 “L. Ron Hubbard Reinstates Fast Flow Training on ALL AO Courses” - ‘The Auditor 105 (US Edition)’, Nov 74 “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”
		BPL 18 Oct 76 “Successful Training Lineup”
		HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup”
		HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training”
	(2) Further analysis:
		What involved the change incorporated since August 1974 in the definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’?
		What reason could there be for the introduction of this altered definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’?
		Was this change actually authorized by L. Ron Hubbard?
		Various annotations found in HCOB 21 Aug 79 “Twinning”  &  Summary

Lecture 5 Jan 68, AO-1 “Fast Flow and Inspection Before the Fact”

A Fast Flow System of Management was introduced by HCO PL 29 Mar 65 II “Administration, Flows and Expansion: The F A S T  F L O W System”.

The basic idea in regards to learning had turned: “Fast Flow is obtained by removing all unnecessary actions.”  (from HCO PL 14 Mar 68 “Policies Governing the Qualifications Division”).

“SPECIAL LECTURE ON FAST FLOW SYSTEM BY L. RON HUBBARD GOING TO ALL ORGS John McMaster, Clear 1, Class VII Honours, now on a tour of all Scientology Organizations, is bringing with him a special tape lecture by L. Ron Hubbard on the new Fast Flow System of Examination, without inspection. This recording was made at the Advanced Organization early in January, 1968, at the first Graduation Ceremony at the Advanced Organization. Ron attended the graduation and when it had finished, stepped forward and gave a fine lecture on the new Fast Flow System. FAST FLOW SYSTEM In his lecture, Ron lucidly explains how the Fast Flow System sweeps aside all barriers to swift progress by students or preclears on the    road to Total Freedom. From Class 0 to Class VII or Grade 0 to Clear and beyond, fast progress and certainty is the keynote of each step you take. The Fast Flow System was piloted at the Advanced Organization, and following its success there, Ron sent a Sea Org Officer, Fred Payer, to Saint Hill to put the Fast Flow System in at Saint Hill. Fred is currently making a world tour specifically to put in the Fast  Flow System of examination without inspection in every Scientology Organization. Ron's lecture will be played at 8 p.m. on the evening of John's first lecture at each Scientology Organization. John is giving two lectures at each Organization.”           (from ‘The Auditor 34’, [ca Apr 68])

“Fast Flow System in at Saint Hill  Since the introduction of the fast flow system at Saint Hill, students on the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course have never looked so confident nor moved so fast through the levels of the course. The average time spent by students on the course has been cut by half. The course, still the same matchless Saint Hill Special Briefing Course, can now be completed in only 12 weeks!    In early January 1968, the new fast flow system of examination without inspection was put into operation at Saint Hill by L. Ron Hubbard and the students immediately began achieving more, and faster, than ever before. Within ten days of the introduction of the fast flow system, the Director of Training reported a one hundred percent increase in the number of students certifying or classifying.”           (from ‘The Auditor 34’, [ca Apr 68])

	“It is sometimes easier for a pc to falsely attest than to face his own bank. To escape, he falsely attests. If ethics action for such false attestation is soft, it encourages him to falsely attest as there is no real penalty. Where ethics action is savage, it is easier for him to face his bank and so he actually makes it.
	Only about 4 or 5% will falsely attest in the face of heavy ethics. This is no reason to hold up 95 or 96 people every hundred. Savage ethics such as a Condition of Liability enforced prevents the number from getting any larger than 4 or 5%.”          LRH (from HCO PL 7 Feb 68 “Fast Flow and Ethics”)

“For persons who have been found guilty at any time of a FALSE ATTESTATION – thereafter an attestation will never be accepted by anyone. There will only be an examination.”          LRH (from HCO PL 11 Mar 68 “False Attestation”)

“The PC or student signs an attestation slip that he has completed, or can apply the data or has attained the grade. All attestations must be action attestations. Never one like ‘I've read the data and know it’. Only, ‘I can apply Q & A data to a PC, is acceptable for an attestation.” (from HCO PL 14 Mar 68 “Policies Governing the Qualifications Division”)

“CANCEL ATTESTATION ON UK AND US SHSBC AND REVERT TO EXAMINATION. LIKEWISE ON ALL ACADEMY STUDENTS IN UK. GET IN TRS AND EXACT GRADE PROCESS. RETRAIN ALL WHO FLUB OR GET ETHICS RECORDS PRIOR TO THIS DATE. YOUR PROGRAM: GET AUDITORS GET RESULTS GET UP STATS.”          LRH (from ‘LRH ED 29 WW, 16 SH, 1 EU, 1 US’, 1 Aug 68 “untitled”)

‘LRH ED 2 Int’, 20 Jan 69 “Attestation Reinstated”

	“FAST FLOW means the student attests his theory or practical class when he believes he has covered the materials and can do it. There is no examination.
	The student's own attestation is accepted and he is certified.
	If he has made a false attestation it shows up in his auditing.
	However, he will not now be ordered to retrain if he errs in his auditing. He will be fined as an Ethics matter. The fine will be proportionate to the cost of the auditing done incorrectly.”          LRH

	“I am sorry for any inconvenience or slow this temporary suspension of Fast Flow may have brought about. The first release of the new non-examination system was a test. It was withdrawn and any holes in it patched up.
	Fast Flow on training as well as auditing is now fully and permanently released. It was not suspended on grades or auditing. It is now restored to training.”          LRH

“Class VIII was a great break through in auditing. It pushed results to 100%. With Class VIIIs around the simplicity and directness of auditing is in full view and results will be higher than ever before.”          LRH (all above citations from ‘LRH ED 2 Int’, 20 Jan 69 “Attestation Reinstated”)

“... a student may work with another student to be sure he knows it. In this case, HCO Policy Letter of 26 August 1965, ‘Scientology Training-Twin Checkouts’, should be followed, except that the student still attests on his own Checksheet for each item.” (from HCO PL 8 May 69 II “Fast Flow by Attestation”)

“Although Academy and Briefing Courses are taught on a fast flow basis with no examinations, students must apply HCO P/L 26 Aug 65, ‘SCIENTOLOGY TRAINING TWIN CHECKOUTS’ on all star-rated materials of their level.” (from HCO PL 22 Jul 69 “Fast Flow Training”)

Both of the above quoted references were cancelled by HCO PL 29 Jul 72 II “Fast Flow Training” ( see next chapter).

HCO PL 29 Jul 72 II “Fast Flow - Training”

This one is still escaping me. Issued at an interesting time. It was issued 2 weeks prior to the release of the reference that firmly established the definition of Fast Flow Training (see next chapter). I have not been able to acquire a copy of this. If you may have a copy of this, then please contact me!

It does not appear to be listed in the ‘HCO Policy Letter Subject Index’ (released 1976) in the section that lists policy letters “written by the Founder or ordered by him”. It does however appear in the section that lists policy letters that were cancelled and not written by L. Ron Hubbard. I like to consult this reference just for the matter of curiosity.

		“The following BPLs and HCO PLs which cancelled issues on twinning, or cancelled or suspended twinning itself, are now CANCELLED:
	1.	HCO PL 29 Jul 72 II FAST FLOW IN TRAINING written by Training and Services Aide. Though the issues it cancelled remain cancelled, this HCO PL itself was cancelled by BPL 10 Oct 75 X CANCELLATION OF POLICY LETTERS 1972 and remains so.”

HCOB 13 Aug 72R (Corrected and Reissued 15 Aug 72) “Fast Flow Training”

In August 1972 we have a change in what is required prior to be considered eligible for Fast Flow Training:

	“L. RON HUBBARD HAS JUST WRITTEN THIS ARTICLE AND SENT IT TO THE ‘AUDITOR’. IT IS SO IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE CREATED AN EXTRA TWO PAGES SO YOU COULD HAVE IT WITH THIS ISSUE.
		FAST FLOW
		TRAINING
		BY L. RON HUBBARD

So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING: ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A “FAST FLOW STUDENT”. ... The Fast Flow Student studies within his knowledge of study tech. He is assisted by Supervisors. Any Word Clearing action needed can be done on him. He can be sent to Qual and Crammed. He can be starrated and made to clay demo by the Supervisor. He does not however have to have a twin, he does not automatically starrate starrate items, he does not have to have an examination. The Fast Flow System makes for very rapid training. This becomes possible due to the development of the Primary Rundown and Primary Correction Rundown.    PREREQUISITES Primary Rundown or Primary Correction Rundown are required for Levels 0 to IV or above and for FEBC. They are not required for HSDC or the many other courses below these levels.  NON PRDs Those students who have not had a Primary Rundown or Primary Correction must star-rate, clay demo, twin and go through the materials as many times as required, using the entirety of the student hat. It is much faster to do the PRD or PCRD first. DESIGNATION The FAST FLOW STUDENT should be given a blue lapel award and wear it in Class. It should say FFS on it in black letters. This gives the green light to rapid and effective completion of courses for the SUPER-LITERATE. ”           (from ‘The Auditor 79 (UK Edition)’, [Aug 72])

Subsequently we see this article in The Auditor issued as HCOB 13 Aug 72R (Corrected and Reissued 15 Aug 72) “Fast Flow Training”.

	“Understand at the speed of thought!  Take The Primary Rundown
	Every human being has the potential of extraordinary rapid learning. Every individual can reach a stage where he can look at a page, absorb the essential data and – what is more important – be able to apply it in his life. ...
	You can increase your learning skills in a short, intense, six weeks course – The Primary Rundown. This course consists of spiritual counseling which clears up any misunderstoods you have on subjects you have studied in the past, and a training section with unique study methods which enable you to attain a new state of awareness – Superliteracy. Superliteracy is now a requirement for most Scientology training, but it is also a must for anyone who wants to know, to learn rapidly.          (from ‘Ability 269’, (Dec 73))

HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”

• The matter of HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”
• ‘Advance! 25’, Oct 74 “L. Ron Hubbard Reinstates Fast Flow Training on ALL AO Courses”
• ‘The Auditor 105 (US Edition)’, Nov 74 “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”

 
‘The matter of HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”

“FAST FLOW STUDENT, the fast flow student passes courses by an attestation at Certs and Awards that he (a) enrolled properly on the course, (b) has paid for the course (or signed a no-charge invoice for 2½ or 5 year contracted staff), (c) has studied and understands all the materials on the checksheet, (d) has done the drills called for by the checksheet, (e) can produce the result required in the course materials. Twin checkouts are suspended. Examinations are not required. (HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II)”

The message of this reference is quite clear. Its release notices already tell us: “(SUSPENDS any HCOB, HCO PL, BTB or BPL requiring twin training or checkouts, preventing Supervisor checkouts or requiring PRD as a prerequisite for courses.)”. See scanning here below:

	“The Student Hat is suspended as a requisite for staff courses for staff.
	The Study Tech requirements for staff are the Applied Scholastics Basic Study Manual and Method 1 with each word cleared to F/N. The Primary RD is not a prerequisite for any staff training course including the OEC*.
	Twin checkouts are suspended. The course theory materials on the checksheet are attested as studied, understood and able to apply.
	Examinations are not required.”

	“The Primary RD is suspended as a prerequisite for all Academy Courses. The only prerequisites are the Applied Scholastics Basic Study Manual, unless the student has already done a non-Superliterate Student Hat or PRD and Method 1 for Level 0-4 students with each word fully cleared to F/N.
	Requirements of twin training or checkouts are suspended. The student need not have a twin. The student signs off the items done on his checksheet attesting that he has studied them applying Study Tech, knows and understands them and can apply them.”

We actually see that it abolishes the Primary Rundown as a prerequisite for any course, Academy levels and so on. But not only that, suddenly it was also all right to actually manage without even a twin for training or checkouts. It acts directly against the approach and concepts that where quite firmly established and put there in 1972 with HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training”. Just about 2 years later its outline had already been abandoned and put aside. It appears clear enough that one reverts back to what it had said in the earlier discussed ‘LRH ED 2 Int’, 20 Jan 69 “Attestation Reinstated”. While doing that it is abolishing the in 1972 established definition and meaning of the term Fast Flow Training.

Some things are strange in regards to this HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”. We find this HCO PL listed in the ‘HCO Policy Letter Subject Index’ (released March 1976) in ‘Appendix A’ which lists all the Policy Letters that were “written by the Founder or ordered by him”. At that time (March 1976) it appears in use and was considered a valid reference as per the ‘HCO Policy Letter Subject Index’. Then in October of that year we are informed that this reference was “written for LRH and not by him”, this by the BPL that cancelled and replaced it (BPL 18 Oct 76 “Successful Training Lineup”).

Per the above notices it apparently was established after March 1976 (release of ‘HCO Policy Letter Subject Index’), that L. Ron Hubbard had not actually written it! Could it be so that it then may be was ordered by L. Ron Hubbard to have it written and issued? Do we actually have some way to find out if he actually knew about it having been released? The BPL cancelling it only notices that it was “written for LRH and not by him”. This can very easily mean that he did not know about it having been issued. Basically everything that he did not write himself was considered written “for LRH”, and got these notices. It did not need his authorization, it just went through a Board of Issues and got approved, printed up and distributed, and that's that. It wouldn't be the first time that a non-LRH issue got issued as if it derived from L. Ron Hubbard. We have it documented that such had happened in previous years, it was then either counteracted (not acted upon or implemented) or fairly quickly cancelled. These happenings confirm that there is no guarantee for that such could not happen once again.

(Note: I address and list various of these instances elsewhere on my Scientology pages, to consult click here (“The ‘Wrong Why’ exerted? or Inventing the wheel all over again”) and here (“First grades then Dianetics (1): A first attempt in November 1969”) (separate windows).

Below scanning unfolds to us that the release itself does not indicate anywhere that it would have been “written for LRH”. We see only the signature of L. Ron Hubbard, and the composer initials ‘LRH’ tell us that the originator would have been L. Ron Hubbard, there is no additional co-compiler indicated. The small characters denote the typist with initials ‘nt’ (this stands for Nancy Tidman).

Would it have been written “for L. Ron Hubbard” it would have looked as follows:

This time around it appears to be so that a non-LRH HCO PL was abolishing and suspending something that was set up by an LRH HCOB, which is nonetheless quite noteworthy! It turns even more noteworthy when we realize that it had not been uncovered at least as late as March 1976, evidence for this we find when we see how it is presented in the ‘HCO Policy Letter Subject Index’ (released March 1976). This is more than 1½ years after its release! Then in October 1976 it gets cancelled for given reason. See in scanning here below:

When it finally was caught that it was not written by L. Ron Hubbard (just over 2 years later), we then see that the replacing reference (BPL 18 Oct 76 “Successful Training Lineup”) continues to follow the exact same line as that which HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” had introduced. It did not, I repeat, it did not reinstate the Fast Flow Training definition as established earlier in 1972, it also did not reinstate the Primary Rundown as such. The 1974 HCO PL was not counteracted in this BPL release from 1976.

We also do see that the BPL suddenly notes in the signature area at the bottom: “As ordered & approved by L. Ron Hubbard”, a fourth and a fifth revision of this BPL also note something like this, but this is then later on once again defied by the reference that in its turn replaced the BPL revision releases, which was HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup” (see later chapter with that title for quotations).

We do see here a persistent downgrade of the findings concerning superliteracy and the importance of conceptual understanding. The abandoning of the Primary Rundown being a prerequisite for the Academy Levels (0-IV) and the Saint Hill Special Briefing Course was very well promoted in various magazines, and also referred to in various checksheets. Then these strange signature notices that first attribute personal involvement of L. Ron Hubbard, and that repeatedly later were defying that. All these are quite odd circumstances. One may start to wonder about the whereabouts of L .Ron Hubbard?

A few additional references that make notice of HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II.

HCO Admin Letter 5 Dec 74 II “Bulletin Checklist HCO PLs - Jan 74-Oct 74” notes at entry HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”: “SUSPENDS any HCOB, HCO PL, BTB or BPL requiring twin training or checkouts, preventing Supervisor checkouts or requiring PRD as a prerequisite for courses.”.

BPL 12 Apr 72RB (Revised 20 Jan 75) II “The Student Hat Checksheet for Students on the Primary Rundown” notes in “SECTION V - COACHING AND CHECKOUTS”: “NOTE:  Twin training and checkouts have been suspended as a requirement on courses, however checkouts are still in full force on internships and in cramming as per HCO PL 31 Aug 74 Fast Flow Training Reinstated. ...”.

The HCO Policy Letter Subject Index (released March 1976) on page 319 gives the notice about “HCO POLICY LETTER 21 Feb 71 Supervisor Checkouts” that “This PL is suspended per HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II Fast Flow Training Reinstated”.

HCOB 21 Aug 1979 “Twinning” notes: “The following BPLs and HCO PLs which cancelled issues on twinning, or cancelled or suspended twinning itself, are now cancelled”. It then lists as #2: “HCO PL 31 Aug 74 FAST FLOW TRAINING REINSTATED which suspended twin training or checkouts, was previously cancelled and remains so.”. Further it says: “THERE ARE NO VALID BPLs OR HCO PLs NOW EXISTING WHICH CANCEL TWINNING.”. This actually actively counteracts HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” where it concerns twins and checkouts, it does not however address the matter of the Primary Rundown.

There exists also BPL 31 Aug 74-1 “Additions to Fast Flow Training”. This is probably(?) issued on 8 August 1975 as there appears a quotation from a BPL issued on that date in ‘Ability 286’, [ca Aug 75]. Is this from BPL 31 Aug 74-1 or is there also a BPL 8 Aug 75 “(Fast Flow Training Additions)”? If anyone would have copies, please contact me!

 
‘Advance! 25’, Oct 74 “L. Ron Hubbard Reinstates Fast Flow Training on ALL AO Courses”

This and the in the following section discussed ‘The Auditor’ issue can be considered a practical application of the ideas that were forwarded by HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” as found quoted in the ‘Dianetics and Scientology: Technical Dictionary’ (see previous section). These notices also are evidence for that which HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II introduced got very well promoted and implemented.

Now does it really mean: “more thorough and smooth training for you on any present or future courses”? as you will be Fast Flowing all these courses without having done the Primary Rundown!

See further the article here below and for various further notes regarding ...

 
‘The Auditor 105 (US Edition)’, Nov 74 “Fast Flow Training Reinstated”

Another practical application of the ideas that were forwarded by HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” as found quoted in the ‘Dianetics and Scientology: Technical Dictionary’.

A note can be made however about “You do not need to do the Primary Rundown before getting all the benefits of training.”. This was never actually the case. This Primary Rundown was not some prerequisite prior to “getting all the benefits of training”. It was only if you were to Fast Flow that training, and this is something different! The sentence at the bottom stressed in bold also does make a similar erroneous claim: “Primary Rundown no longer prerequisite for Academy and Higher Training!”. It actually never was a prerequisite for Academy Training, but it was for Higher Training (SHSBC).

Questionable is also the first sentence: “L. Ron Hubbard has swept away any delays or arbitraries which might be slowing down your training. FAST FLOW Training means you can increase your abilities faster than ever before.”. As increasing your abilities can only be established with correct duplication of the material studied. This is what the Primary Rundown was about. Not doing this Primary Rundown, but still Fast Flowing is defying what it had said in HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training”: “So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING:  ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A ‘FAST FLOW STUDENT’.”  LRH.  Now, why, why, why is this simple fact flagrantly being ignored? It makes it all the more suspect as others are speaking for L. Ron Hubbard. He did not write those articles as found in ‘Advance!’ and ‘The Auditor’, and he did not write HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” either. The reality of it is that you instead have planted “delays or arbitraries which might be slowing down your training” as you will Fast Flow your courses without having done the Primary Rundown (which is by the way not Fast Flow as established since April 1972). HCOB 4 Apr 72 (Revised 30 May 72) “Primary Rundown (Revised)” introduced the data that “students will not prosper if their study is begun without a Primary Rundown”. It even said that “It is a high crime to omit this vital step.”   LRH. Obviously a falsity had been slipped in these articles in ‘Advance!’and ‘The Auditor’.

It actually comes down to the same thing. Is an obvious misduplication of some person the reason why Fast Flow Training as established in 1972 was abolished? Or was there some other reason? This misconception was never caught, nor corrected.

BPL 18 Oct 76 “Successful Training Lineup”

We can see here that it per this reference it would suffice to just have done the Student Hat and Method One Word Clearing prior to be considered a Fast Flow Student. Note that it had said in HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training”:
	“So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING:
	ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A ‘FAST FLOW STUDENT’.”          LRH

	“FAST FLOW DEFINED
	A student attests his theory or practical class when he has fully covered the materials and can apply them. There is no examination. (LRH ED 2 INT)          (from BPL 18 Oct 76RD (Revised 10 Sept 78) “Successful Training Lineup”)

 
HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup”

“The only prerequisite for a student, staff or public to be able to fast flow his courses is Student Hat and Method One Word Clearing. Where a student has already done the full Primary Rundown, he is also qualified to fast flow his courses.” (from HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup”)

	“BPL 18 Oct 76RD, Rev. 10.9.78 Urgent Important, Successful Training Lineup is canceled because it dropped Method One Word Clearing out of training. It sought to solve students on academy courses being held up due to incomplete Method One, by no longer requiring Method One. As a result Method One Word Clearing dropped out of use and academy students and interns are now being delayed in training because they haven't had Method One. The ‘problem’ of incomplete Method One isn't even a problem, all one would have to do is complete the Method One!
	Method One Word Clearing is now being reinstated by HCO PL 25 Sep 79 II Method One Word Clearing.
	The history of BPL 18 Oct 76 and its revisions is of interest because there have been some six people involved in writing and rewriting the various versions of this issue. Each sought to solve some real or imagined problem with training, by going unusual and altering or changing LRH policy on training. As a result, arbitraries were entered into training and LRH Tech was dropped out of use. Each time this happened, training became less effective and slower. Instead of getting back to LRH policy on training each new revision entered a new arbitrary and omitted a vital piece of LRH Tech.”

Per the above it is justified to question the actual involvement of L. Ron Hubbard regarding especially the 4th & 5th revision of the BPL (version ‘RC’ & ‘RD’). These releases themselves actually claim that L. Ron Hubbard himself had revised the ‘RC’ version, and approved the ‘RD’ version. These claims per this HCO PL then were falsities.

A few notes have to be made in regards to this HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup”.  The authorship of this HCOB has been questioned. Sure, it was signed at the bottom with ‘L. Ron Hubbard, Founder’, but we also find the following composer initials found: ‘LRH:DM:gal’. Which theoretically stands for compilers/writers L. Ron Hubbard & David Mayo (the latter was the Senior C/S International at the time), ‘gal’ are the initials of the typist. Certain issues arose in regards to David Mayo during the early ’80s and the claim has been made that David Mayo compiled various references himself and signed them with L. Ron Hubbard. Or it may have been that he changed issues without authorization of L. Ron Hubbard himself. Subsequently any of such issues had been cancelled at a later date in the present official Scientology organization.

In addition it came in vogue somewhere during 1979-80 that actual compilers/originators of issues were indicated as assistants. The issue itself then was attributed as having been written by L. Ron Hubbard, when in fact he may not even have seen it.

HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training”

	“This issue, written by another, is hereby cancelled.
	The actual, proven successful lineup for training is given in HCOB 13 Aug 72RA. Revised 30 Aug 83, FAST FLOW TRAINING.”

On this exact same date we see that HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training” is revised and turns into HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training”. There is an oddity to be found here. We know now that HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup” (the issue being cancelled) confirmed the change of the prerequisites for Fast Flow Training which initially was instigated by the release of HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” (as based on an LRH ED from 1969).

	“So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING:
	ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A ‘FAST FLOW STUDENT’.”          LRH          ( from HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training”)

	“So that there is NO question about what is meant by FAST FLOW TRAINING:
	ANY STUDENT WHO HONESTLY COMPLETES THE STUDENT HAT AND METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING ORTHE PRIMARY RUNDOWN OR PRIMARY CORRECTION RUNDOWN IS THEREAFTER DESIGNATED A ‘FAST FLOW STUDENT’.”          LRH          ( from HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training”)

And ...

“It is much faster to do Method One or the PRD or PCRD first.”          LRH          ( from HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training”)

HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training” also discarded of:

	“PREREQUISITES
	Primary Rundown or Primary Correction Rundown are required for Levels 0 to IV or above and for FEBC. They are not required for HSDC or the many other courses below these levels.”          LRH          ( from HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training”)

You can make a detailed comparison of the 2 versions of this same reference in a pop-up window that I created, please click here to consult.

A closer look

Now, how is it to be explained that an issue (HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I) that is later confirmed not having been written by L. Ron Hubbard was being cancelled, but that at the exact same day (30 Aug 83) the altered prerequisites for Fast Flow which were reinforced in that now cancelled confirmed non-LRH issue are then being incorporated into another existing LRH issue (HCOB 13 Aug 72RA). The issue that actually cancelled HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I was also attributed as having been written by L. Ron Hubbard. The problem is that we seem to be lacking a direct confirmed interference from L. Ron Hubbard from the ’70s regarding this drastic change in the prerequisites of Fast Flow Training.

The obvious dilemma here is why the existence of HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training” basically was ignored all these years until 30 Aug ’83? L. Ron Hubbard has not withdrawn any of his statements about the vital importance of this Rundown or even the PRD being a prerequisite to major courses, others however did. There is simply no direct referencing from L. Ron Hubbard anywhere to be found in these ’70s that would justify the change of HCOB 13 Aug 72R “Fast Flow Training” a whole 11 years later into HCOB 13 Aug 72RA “Fast Flow Training”.

Elsewhere on my website I have provided information that various issues released or changed in these early ’80s can be questioned in regards to their authorship. One should also ask oneself if L. Ron hubbard would approve of such a technical downgrade, this after having pointed out the vital importance of this Primary Rundown in various references so very very extensively (see especially my later chapter: “The importance and the necessity of the Primary Rundown confirmed”).

Also consider that a properly done Primary Rundown would have turned you into a wordclear in regards to study technology, meaning that you would have full conceptual understanding of all the data concerning the study technology as found in the Study Tapes and the Student Hat. It is simply not logical to remove this from the prerequisites prior to be considered a Fast Flow student. Being Fast Flow is about:

“THE PRODUCT AT THIS POINT IS A STUDENT WHO KNOWS HOW TO STUDY AND WILL BE ABLE TO USE WHAT HE STUDIES.”          LRH
(from HCOB 4 Apr 72“Tech Div Primary Rundown”)

Solely doing Method One Word Clearing and a normally done Student Hat does not have this product. Think about it. The circumstances surrounding this technical change are to say the least obscure and suspicious.

“Method One Word Clearing handles study difficulties due to earlier misunderstood words in subjects studied previously. To fully handle study difficulties, the Primary Rundown should be done. A person who has done this course can read comfortably and instantly translate word data into concepts and so can study accurately and swiftly and can then do the actions. It is advised that this course be done at the student's earliest opportunity and prior to commencing on auditor training courses where possible, especially if the student has any amount of difficulty with study. Method One Word Clearing is a prerequisite to the Primary Rundown.”

What involved the change incorporated since August 1974 in the definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’?

The adjusted requirements prior to be considered a Fast Flow student to only doing a Method One Word Clearing and a normally done Student Hat could be considered a technical degrade. Method One Word Clearing was also found as a step you did on the Primary Rundown. The actual implemented change involved was that it skipped the vital steps 4 & 5.

	“4.   ... , he is now put on Study Tapes. This is NOT just listening to Study Tapes, heaven forbid. This is HCO B 21 June 72 Issue IV, Word Clearing Series 41, METHOD 8.
	This is a long and careful cycle.
	It is completed in full.
	It consists of looking up every new word on the tape in a grammar or large dictionary and then listening to the tape. ...
	5.   The Student Hat is now done Method 8.”          LRH (from HCOB 4 Apr 72 (Revised 30 May 72) “Primary Rundown (Revised)”)

Above steps 4 & 5 were replaced with a normally done Student Hat.

What reason could there be for the introduction of this altered definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’

It does effect the use of the Primary Rundown. There is a time factor involved here. It clearly says: “This is a long and careful cycle.”. Could a consideration have been made in regards to time needed for a properly done Primary Rundown? If so, then one forgets that having done the Primary Rundown would markedly have speeded up any future studies done!

Either way, we do have some indication that this may have been a motivation for changing it. HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” did figure that: “The way to speed a line is to take the arbitraries and any cross orders out of it.”. It did abolish the need for a twin, checkouts, and any necessity for doing the Primary Rundown. It addressed it as an “OPPORTUNITY”:
	“Here is your opportunity to train your staff and flood your org with Academy Students.
	Here is your chance to make lots of auditors for the org.
	Make good use of it.”

	“A condition of TREASON or cancellation of certificates or dismissal and a full investigation of the background of any person found guilty, will be activated in the case of anyone committing the following HIGH CRIMES.
	1. Abbreviating an official Course in Dianetics and Scientology so as to lose the full theory processes and effectiveness of the subjects.   ...
	10. Acting in any way calculated to lose the technology of Dianetics and Scientology to use or impede its use or shorten its materials or its application.
	REASON: The effort to get students through courses and get pcs processed in orgs was considered best handled by reducing materials or deleting processes from grades. The pressure exerted to speed up student completions and auditing completions was mistakenly answered by just not delivering. ...
	The puzzle of the decline of the entire Scientology network in the late 60s is entirely answered by the actions taken to shorten time in study and in processing by deleting materials and actions.
	Reinstituting full use and delivery of Dianetics and Scientology is the answer to any recovery.”          LRH (from HCO PL 17 Jun 70 “Technical Degrades”)

Was this change actually authorized by L. Ron Hubbard?

	“Auditors and Scientologists for 27 years have tended to be suspicious of HCOBs and Policy Letters not written by myself.
	Until a few months ago my opinion was that this, while flattering, was not entirely justified.
	However, these last few months have sharply changed my belief into total agreement with all those who have expressed some fear of reinterpretations of bulletins by others.
	I have been engaged for some months now in a round-up of out tech issues.
	And I have found, I am sorry to say, that mice have been gnawing at the pillars of the Bridge, putting up traffic barriers and false detour signs.”          LRH

	“I have been finding serious out tech issues and correcting them.
	Whether because of misunderstood words (the commonest cause of out tech alterations) or other reasons, there have been a staggering number of tech sectors that have been corrupted by issues by others that alter-ised.
	The corrections I have been doing have been, are being or will be issued shortly. However, not all auditors and Scientologists keep pace with current issues and so I am here giving you a rapid summary of the gross departures from standard tech which have occurred in the past 3 or 4 years and their corrections.”          LRH

	“A very few people (3 or 4) have wittingly or unwittingly brought about outnesses which could easily make the difference between successful case handling and failed cases.
	Action has been taken to handle them and there are a great many good people at work now in compiling and reissuing the workable tech which I developed in the first place.”          LRH

In 1979 we see the release of HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup” that reiterates the altered definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’. The problem here is that it noted the involvement of David Mayo. It was cancelled by HCOB 13 Aug 72RA (Revised 30 Aug 83) “Fast Flow Training” that noted that it was not written by L. Ron Hubbard. Nonetheless also this issue actually reiterates that altered definition of ‘Fast Flow Training’ (this is all discussed earlier in detail in previous chapter “‘Fast Flow Training’ (1) etc.”).

The bottom line is actually that we have no direct confirmation from L. Ron Hubbard about the change in the prerequisites of Fast Flow Training. The references and sources that forwarded the change had not been personally written by him.

This whole development of things is rather odd to say the least. I don't know really what to think of it, you will have to make up your own mind about it.

	“What makes tech correct? When it doesn't get results it is incorrect. When it gets the expected result it is correct.
	My own writings and researches are based wholly upon things that got and get results.”          LRH

Various annotations found in HCOB 21 Aug 79 “Twinning”  &  Summary

Quotations from this HCOB:

		“The following BPLs and HCO PLs which cancelled issues on twinning, or cancelled or suspended twinning itself, are now CANCELLED:
	1.	HCO PL 29 Jul 72 II FAST FLOW IN TRAINING written by Training and Services Aide. Though the issues it cancelled remain cancelled, this HCO PL itself was cancelled by BPL 10 Oct 75 X CANCELLATION OF POLICY LETTERS 1972 and remains so.”
	2.	HCO PL 31 Aug 74 FAST FLOW TRAINING REINSTATED which suspended twin training or checkouts, was previously cancelled and remains so.
	3.	BPL 18 Oct 76RD, Rev. 10.9.78 URGENT, IMPORTANT, SUCCESSFUL TRAINING LINEUP, which cancelled requirements of twin training or checkouts for Academy, has been cancelled and replaced by HCO PL 25 Sep 79 I URGENT, IMPORTANT, SUCCESSFUL TRAINING LINEUP.
		THERE ARE NO VALID BPLs OR HCO PLs NOW EXISTING WHICH CANCEL TWINNING.
		————
		‘Twinning’ is the pairing up of two students training on the same subject to work together on their materials.
		It is a Scientology innovation in training. For years it was used highly successfully when done correctly and as a standard action on Scientology courses.
		Recently I discovered a big WHY behind course failures. That is that twinning as a subject and practice has become confused and fallen into misuse or fallen out completely and one of the reasons behind that is that a number of HCOBs on twinning were cancelled and no one issue exists that covers the subject in its entirety.
		THIS HCOB REINSTATES TWINNING FIRMLY AND WITH EMPHASIS.
		It is NOT subject to cancellation.”          LRH

It does give us two interesting revelations: “For years it was used highly successfully when done correctly and as a standard action on Scientology courses.” & “Recently I discovered a big WHY behind course failures.”. Both these are relating about the subject of this twinning.

Now, if “for years it was used highly successfully”, then why was it abandoned throughout the mid-’70s? In particular HCO PL 31 Aug 74 II “Fast Flow Training Reinstated” had caused this. Its outlines were very well promoted indeed. Then we have BPL 18 Oct 76 “Successful Training Lineup” that was claimed to be ‘As ordered & approved by L. RON HUBBARD, FOUNDER’, at least two of its revisions reiterated his involvement. And then we find that HCOB 21 Aug 79 “Twinning” is stating: “Recently I discovered a big WHY behind course failures.”. Let's repeat that: “Recently I discovered”?

My question then is: “Where was L. Ron Hubbard during all these years since 1974?”.

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.
     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.
     BPL:
‘Board Policy Letter’. Color flash–green ink on cream paper. These are the issues of the Boards of Directors of the Churches of Scientology and are separate and distinct from HCO Policy Letters written by LRH. Only LRH issues may be printed green on white for policy and only LRH issues may have the prefix HCO. These Board issues are valid as Policy. (BPL 14 Jan 74R I, New Issues).
  This issue-type was established in January 1974. In October 1975 a project was started to cancel HCO PLs not written by L. Ron Hubbard and if still found being of value having them reissued as BPLs. By 1980 all BPLs had been revoked.
     checkout:
The action of verifying a student's knowledge of something. This includes understanding of the words in a text, and being able to apply and demonstrate it.
     cramming:
A section in the Qualifications Division where a student is given high pressure instruction at his own cost after being found slow in study or when failing his exams. The cramming section teaches students what they have missed. This includes trained auditors who wish to be brought up-to-date on current technical developments.
     floating needle (F/N):
The idle uninfluenced movement of the needle on the dial (of an E-meter) without any patterns or reactions in it. It can be as small as one inch or as large as dial wide. It does not fall or drop to the right of the dial. It moves to the left at the same speed as it moves to the right. It is observed on a Mark V E-meter calibrated with the TA (Tone Arm) between 2.0 and 3.0 with GIs (Good Indicators) in on the pc. It can occur after a cognition, blowdown of the TA (Tone Arm) or just moves into floating. The pc may or may not voice the cognition. (HCOB 7 May 69 V)
     FEBC:  
‘Flag Executive Briefing Course’. Consists of high level administration technology.
     F/N:
‘floating needle’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     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).
     HSDC:
Short for ‘Hubbard Standard Dianetics Course’.
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     LRH ED:
‘L. Ron Hubbard Executive Directive’. Earlier called SEC EDs (Secretarial EDs). These are issued by LRH to various areas. They are not valid longer than one year if fully complied with when they are automatically retired. They otherwise remain valid until fully complied with or until amended or cancelled by another LRH ED. They carry current line, projects, programs, immediate orders and directions. They are numbered for area and sequence for the area and are sent to staffs or specific posts in orgs. They are blue ink on white paper with a special heading. (HCO PL 24 Sept 70R)
     Method One Word Clearing:
1. by meter in session. A full assessment of many, many subjects is done. The auditor then takes each reading subject and clears the chain back to earlier words and or words in earlier subjects until he gets an F/N*. 2. assess, take the reading items from the best read on down and with E/S (earlier similar) pull each one to F/N. Get each word you find to F/N. There can be many F/Ns per subject. End off with a win on the subject. 3. the action taken to clean up all misunderstoods in every subject one has studied. It is done by a word clearing auditor. The result of a properly done Method One word clearing is the recovery of one's education. Abbr. M1.
     Method 4 Word Clearing:
1. Method 4 fishes for the misunderstood word, finds it, clears it to F/N, looks for another in the area until there are no more with an F/N VGIs (Very Good Indicators). Then moves to another area, handles that, eventually all misunderstoods that resulted in the cramming order or non-F/N student are handled. 2. a method of word clearing in which a meter is used to rapidly locate any misunderstoods in a subject or section of materials. It is used in the classroom by the course supervisor. Abbr. M4.
     Method 8 Word Clearing:
An action used in the Primary Rundown where one is studying study tech or where one is seeking a full grasp of a subject. Its end product is superliteracy. Usually an alphabetical list of every word or term in the text of a paper, a chapter or a recorded tape is available or provided. The person looks up each word on the alphabetical list and uses each in sentences until he has the meaning conceptually. Abbr. M8.
     OEC:
‘Organization Executive Course’. Refers to ‘The Organization Executive Course’ volumes. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     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.
     ‘The Organization Executive Course’:
Subtitled in the 1970-74 release: ‘An Encyclopedia of Scientology Policy’. This is a series of books that contain the HCO PLs, and any references that are primarily dealing with administrative matters. They are divided up division wise. The HCO PLs are printed in green ink on white paper, and the volumes themselves come in green bindings. These books may also be referred to as the ‘green volumes’ or even ‘OEC volumes’. The ‘old green volumes’ then would refer to the 1970-74 release, the ‘new green volumes’ instead to the 1991 release. See a listing of published volumes here (pop-up window).
     org(s):
Short for ‘organization(s)’.
    P/L or PL:
‘HCO PL’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     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.
     SHSBC:
‘Saint Hill Special Briefing Course’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     Snr C/S Int:
‘Senior Case/Supervisor International’. The highest ranking technical (relating to auditing) person within the Church of Scientology after L. Ron hubbard.
     Tone Arm (TA):  (Primary Rundown)
The Tone Arm (meter control lever) of an E-meter could be judged as an indication of a certain accumulation of charge in the student. In regards to the Primary Rundown if the average of this charge is between position 2 and 3 on this meter it is considered ideal.
     twin checkouts:
In Scientology training we use a system called twin checkouts. Each student is assigned a “twin” to work with. The student studies his assigned material and is sometimes coached over the rough spots by his twin. When the student knows the material, he is then given a checkout by his twin. If he flunks, he returns to study and when ready gets a new checkout. When he passes, the twin signs the assignment sheet certifying that he has grasped it.
     Word Clearing Method ...:
See Method ... Word Clearing.