Scientology pages index  |  Contact

(to other Scientology pages)

1) G e n e r a l   o v e r v i e w / i n t r o d u c t i o n :   M i s s i o n   s t a t e m e n t ,   o v e r v i e w ,   r e s e a r c h   s p e c i f i c s I n t r o d u c t i o n   t o   S c i e n t o l o g y   a n d   L R H K e e p i n g   S c i e n t o l o g y   W o r k i n g ,   f u n d a m en t al s S c i e n t o l o g y   i n   m e d i a   a nd   I n t e r n e t   ( +   f o r u m s ,   W i k i p e d i a ) S c i e n t o l o g y :   I t s   t r u e   h i s t o r y   e x p o s e d ? S c i e n t o l o g y   Q & A   ( F A Q ) E x t e r n a l   l i n k s M a t e r i a l s   w a n t   l i s t R e c o m m e n d e d   l i s t   o f   m a t e r i a l s 2) R e s p o n s e s   ( w i t h   a n n o t a t i o n s ) : A p p r e c i a t i v e   r e s p o n s e s   t o   m y   p a g e s C r i t i q u e   r e c e i v e d   ( 1 )   f r o m   c h u r c h g o i n g   S c i e n t o l o g i s t s C r i t i q u e   r e c e i v e d   ( 2 )   f r o m   o u t - o f - c h u r c h   S c i e n t o l o g i s t s C r i t i q u e   r e c e i v e d    ( 3 )   f r o m   a n t i - S c i e n t o l o g i s t s 3) T o p i c s   o f   p a r t i c u l a r   i n t e r e s t : (a): G e n e r a l   t o p i c s H o l y   S c r i p t u r e s   v s   S c i e n t o l o g y L R H   v s   D i c t i o n a r i e s L R H   v s   t h e o r y   o f   e v o l u t i o n L R H ' s   w o r k s   o f   f i c t i o n (b): O r g a n i z a t i o n a l   t o p i c s A   p r i n t i n g   h i s t o r y   o f   t h e   m a t e r i a l s   o f   S c i e n t o l o g y S c i e n t o l o g y   M e m b e r s h i p :   H A S I   v s   I A S L R H   v s   p r i c i n g   p o l i c i e s T h e   c o p y r i g h t s   i s s u e   a n d   l i c e n s i n g (c): T e c h n i c a l   t o p i c s H i s t o r y   o f   G r a d e   C h a r t :   a )   G e n e r a l H i s t o r y   o f   G r a d e   C h a r t :   b )   D e t a i l e d ‘ C l e a r ’   d e f i n e d N E D   f o r   O T s T h e   ‘ P r i m a r y   R u n d o w n ’ 4) C o n t r o v e r s i a l   t o p i c s : M i s t a k e n   i d e a s   o f   ‘ E t h i c s ’   c l a r i f i e d T h e   F a i r    G a m e   L a w P r a c t i c e   o f   D i s c o n n e c t i o n S e c u r i t y   C h e c k i n g F r e e l o a d e r s   v s   E x - s t a f f   m e m b e r s T h e   ‘ R e h a b i l i t a t i o n   P r o j e c t   F o r c e ’   ( R P F ) 5) C h a n g e s   i n   t h e   f l o w   o f   ‘ i n f o r m a t i o n ’: (a): A l t e r a t i o n s   ( L R H   o r   n o n- L R H ? ) L R H   v s   A l t e r a t i o n s N o n - L R H   t u r n s   i n t o   L R H ?   &   P r o p o s a l   t o   s o l u t i o n T h e    ‘ C r a m m i n g   S e r i e s ’   -   L R H   o r   n o t   L R H ? B a s e d   o n   L R H   p u b l i c a t i o n s (b): G e n e r a l   o v e r v i e w L R H   v s   A   N e w   O r d e r   ( i n t r o d u c t i o n ) → A d m i n i s t r a t i v e   a n d    o r g a n i z a t i o n a l   m a t t e r s S e t u p   o f   t h e   p r i n t e d   m a t e r i a l s   ( 1 9 7 3 - 8 6 ) T h e   R T R C ,   t h e   u n i t   t h a t   w r o t e   L R H   i s s u e s   ( 1 9 7 3 - 8 2 ) T h e   d a w n i n g   o f   R T C   a n d   n e w   m a n a g e m e n t   ( 1 9 8 2 - 8 3 ) → T e c h n i c a l   m a t t e r s I n t r o d u c t i o n   t o   t h e   e v e n t   o f   l o s i n g   a   B r i d g e ) A n a l y s i s   o f   H C O B   “ T e c h   C o r r e c t i o n   R o u n d - u p ” L o s t   B r i d g e :   T e c h   c h a n g e s   d u r i n g   1 9 7 8 - 8 2 T h e   h i s t o r y   o f   t h e   o r i g i n a l   O T   V I I I ‘ G o l d e n   A g e   o f   T e c h ’   ( G A T )   a n a l y s i s D r i l l i n g   i n   S c i e n t o l o g y (c): T h e   m a t t e r   o f   D a v i d   M a y o S t o r y   o f   D a v i d   M a y o ‘ S O   E D   2 3 4 4   I n t’   a n a l y s i s T r a i n i n g   d r i l l s   ( T R s ) M a y o   r e f e r e n c e   l i s t 6) C o n s p i r a c i e s   -   I n   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d ' s   f o o t s t e p s S c i e n t o l o g y   v s   a   N e w   W o r l d   O r d e r → W h e r e   i s   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d ?   ( c h r o n o l o g y   o f   S c n   h i s t o r y ) W h e r e a b o u t s   o f   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d   c h r o n o l o g y T h e   e r a   o f   a d o r a t i o n ;   P r e s e n t a t i o n   o f   L .   R o n   H u b b a r d L .   R o n   H u b b a r d   i n t o   a r t i s t r y :   M u s i c   &   F i l m → W h e r e   i s   h i s   w i f e   a n d   f a m i l y ? S t o r y   o f   M a r y   S u e   H u b b a r d T h e   l a s t   s t a n d :   T h e   G u a r d i a n   O f f i c e 7) S c i e n t o l o g y   u n d e r   a t t a c k (a): A   p r e m e d i t a t e d   s e r i e s   o f   o c c u r r e n c e s ?   ( ’ 8 0 s   c o n s p i r a c y ) I n t r o d u c t i o n   &   R o n   D e W o l f G e r r y   A r m s t r o n g   ( ‘ a f f i r m a t i o n s ’ ) R u s s e l l   M i l l e r    ( ‘ B a r e - F a c e d   M e s s i a h ’ ) A   r e l i g i o n   c r e a t e d   f o r   t h e   m o n e y ? (b): B a t t l e s   f o u g h t   a n d   t h e   i n t e r n e t   ( 2 0 1 6 -   ) L e a h   R e m i n i :   S c i e n t o l o g y   a n d   t h e   A f t e r m a t h   ( T V   s h o w )

>> 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.

(from ‘Ability 290’, [Jan 76]: “Start the New Year with training”)

 
“Attempt to Wreck Auditor Training”?

 
Index:

	Professional TRs removed as a prerequisite for Academy Levels
		- HCOB/PL 13 Sept 81 “Academy Levels Prerequisites” - History of Level 0 prerequisites:  Overview  &  Chronological summary list - The ‘Method One Word Clearing’ predicament - The ‘Class VI Auditor’ consideration  (SHSBC Graduate)
	‘Training Routines Remodernized’
		- Brief pre history to ‘Training Routines (Re)Modernized’ - HCOB 16 Aug 71RA II (Revised 4 Sept 80) “Training Drills Remodernized” (1)  TR 0-4 - HCOB 16 Aug 71RA II (Revised 4 Sept 80) “Training Drills Remodernized” (2)  Additional chapters
	Additional references on TRs
		(Analysis of HCOB/PL 23 Sept 79 “Cancellation of Destructive BTBs and BPLs on TRs”, HCOB 18 Apr 80 “TR Criticism” & HCO PL 17 Jun 81 “Hubbard Professional TRs Course Checksheet”)
	Final notes concerning the findings

Professional TRs removed as a prerequisite for Academy Levels

	HCOB/PL 13 Sept 81 “Academy Levels Prerequisites”
		- Situation and evaluation - Solution - Things may not always be what they seem at first sight (incl. History of Professional TRs Course prerequisites)
	History of Academy Level 0 prerequisites (1)  Overview
	History of Academy Level 0 prerequisites (2)  Chronological summary list
		(listing of Dianetics checksheets has been included on this summary list)
	The ‘Method One Word Clearing’ predicament
	The ‘Class VI Auditor’ consideration  (SHSBC Graduate)

 
HCOB/PL 13 Sept 81 “Academy Levels Prerequisites”

• Situation and evaluation
• Solution
• Things may not always be what they seem at first sight
         (includes: History of Professional TRs Course prerequisites)

 
Situation and evaluation

	“We have had the datum for some time that a student too long on the runway is going to lose the spark and zeal he started out with.
	A student auditor about to start his Academy Levels who first has to do a long list of prerequisites would undoubtedly lose some enthusiasm and possibly never even start.
	The runway onto Academy Level 0 currently includes a Student Hat, Purification RD, Survival RD, possibly a Drug RD and a Professional TRs Course. That's approximately 2 to 3 months full time of runway just to get on to Level 0!”

In which “The prerequisites for the Professional TRs Course are” listed as “Purification Rundown”, “Survival Rundown or full Objectives”, “A Drug Rundown (not mandatory but is done as needed as a remedy for student difficulties on course per HCOB 18 Apr 80 TR CRITICISM.)” & “Student Hat” (underlining is mine).

It can be seen that this Professional TRs Course is responsible for adding a whole variety of prerequisites.

	“Method One Word Clearing is mandatory for any Scientology Auditor and is to be done during or before the first major technical course (excluding the New Era Dianetics Course). Ref: HCO PL 25 Sep 79R II, Rev. 3 Oct 80 METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING.
	A Level 0 student would therefore have to have Method One Word Clearing before he could be certified on that Level.”

 
Solution

Now, who was responsible for this change? HCO PL 13 Sept 81 “Academy Levels Prerequisites” notes “Assisted by Snr C/S Int” and the composer/typing initials say ‘BDCSC:LRH:DM:dr’. This definitely denotes David Mayo as at least being involved.

 
Things may not always be what they seem at first sight

Now, let's dig a little deeper. As we have seen in the previous it was primarily this Professional TRs Course that was responsible for the lengthening of time prior to even starting on Level 0. HCOB/PL 13 Sept 81 “Academy Levels Prerequisites” said: “The runway onto Academy Level 0 currently includes a Student Hat, Purification RD, Survival RD, possibly a Drug RD and a Professional TRs Course. That's approximately 2 to 3 months full time of runway just to get on to Level 0!”.

Alright, this Professional TRs Course had put the Purification RD, Survival RD, and a possible Drug RD there. But this is as per the Professional TRs Course that also came about in the time of reign of David Mayo, which is HCO PL 17 Jun 81 “Hubbard Professional TRs Course Checksheet”, that was issued just 3 months prior to the release of the issue that changed these Academy Level Prerequisites (HCOB/PL 13 Sept 81). The previous checksheet in use was BPL 8 Apr 75 (Corrected per BPL 8 Apr 75-1 Addition of 22 Jun 75) “TRs and Objectives Course Checksheet” which notes no prerequisites although one may not be in the middle of any major auditor action.

So, David Mayo did put the Professional TRs Course there as a prerequisite, which was also new. This course all by itself at “Full Time” would take “10 days to 2 weeks” to complete.

Now that we know all this in my opinion it all gets a little bit more suspect.

	“We have had the datum for some time that a student too long on the runway is going to lose the spark and zeal he started out with.
	A student auditor about to start his Academy Levels who first has to do a long list of prerequisites would undoubtedly lose some enthusiasm and possibly never even start.
	The runway onto Academy Level 0 currently includes a Student Hat, Purification RD, Survival RD, possibly a Drug RD and a Professional TRs Course. That's approximately 2 to 3 months full time of runway just to get on to Level 0!” (from HCO PL 13 Sept 81 “Academy Levels Prerequisites”)

 
History of Professional TRs Course prerequisites

 
History of Academy Level 0 prerequisites (1)  Overview

This prerequisite the Professional TRs Course has been proposed as a “key point”, the “most fundamental thing in auditing” (from SO ED) and “a vital tool in the training of auditors” (from HCOB/PL 8 Aug 83 “Cancellation of Issues on TRs”). Then, we should see this reflected in the various releases such as checksheets, Grade Charts and so on.

The Expanded Lower Auditing Grades (Grades 0 through IV), aka Academy Levels 0-IV were released on 25 June 1970 (as per ‘What Is Scientology?’ (1992 edition), see page 642). The first Standard Academy Checksheets for Levels 0-IV were released 30 June-4 July 1970. The Grade Chart issued in June 1970 indicates at Level 0: “No prerequisites”. Early Academy Prerequisites we would also find in HCO PL 4 Nov 71 II “Academy Prerequisites”. I have not been able to locate a copy of this reference although we do know of some of the things that it says because of the reference that is cancelling it, which is HCOB/PL 23 Sept 79 “Cancellation of Destructive BTBs and BPLs on TRs”. It confirms that it “omitted mention of the Hard TRs Course as an Academy prerequisite”.

HCO PL 22 Sept 78RB (Revised 21 Nov 87) I “Scientology Level 0 Standard Academy Checksheet Hubbard Recognized Scientologist (HRS)” list the prerequisites as: “1. The Student Hat; 2. A Professional TR Course; 3. Method One Word Clearing”. This may already have been incorporated in the RA version (release date unknown) of above HCO PL, although I have not been able as yet to consult a copy of it. Does anyone have this, please contact me!

 
History of Academy Level 0 prerequisites (2)  Chronological summary list
(listing of Dianetics checksheets has been included on this summary list)

It can be seen in this list that both the Professional TRs Course and Method One Word Clearing were actively pushed back into use by David Mayo in September 1979. HCOB/PL 23 Sept 79 “Cancellation of Destructive BTBs and BPLs on TRs” was attributed to David Mayo by the SO ED, it also bears the typing initials ‘dm’. HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup” was written by him, bearing the composer initials ‘DM’.
 (Note: the ones marked with a ‘?’ I have been unable to consult, if you have data on these, please contact me!)

 
The ‘Method One Word Clearing’ predicament

As per the above list Method One Word Clearing is confirmed being a prerequisite at least during October 1974 to early September 1978. (but probably already since January 1972)

Then BPL 18 Oct 76RD (Revised 10 Sept 78) “Successful Training Lineup” dropped Method One Word Clearing from the training line-up.

	“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.”

	“This issue, written by another, is hereby CANCELLED. ...
	In a recent review of issues on the subject of training it came to light that this issue contained a number of ‘curves’ which had blocked the training Bridge to a large number of students.
	This PL and HCO PL 25 Sep 79 Issue II, METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING (another falsely signed issue, since cancelled and replaced) restricted Academy training to those who had completed Method One Word Clearing. For those students who were unable to obtain C/S OK to get Method One due to being in the middle of other major auditing actions (such as, for example, a Drug Rundown) this meant that they must wait for an undetermined length of time before they could do any Academy training at all! This is, of course, directly 180 degrees contrary to what I have been advising all Scientologists to do for years now — GET TRAINED!!”  (attributed to have been written by L. Ron Hubbard)

Now, how was this dealt with during 1974-78 when this Method One Word Clearing was also listed as a prerequisite? Were students in that time period then also being stalled? It may have been so that there was no particular restriction doing the Method One Word Clearing while doing some “major auditing action”, may be, I don't know. As a comparison it was true already in 1971 that the Professional TRs Course required a ‘C/S ok’ as per the checksheet, referred is then to HCOB 26 May 71 “TRs Course and Auditing, Mixing Major Actions”.

All that David Mayo theoretically can be blamed for is putting the Method One Word Clearing back in as a prerequisite after it had been dropped out since September 1978. This is all that HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup” actually did. Now, was this a bad thing to do?

“HCO PL 25 Sep 79, Issue II, METHOD ONE WORD CLEARING has been replaced by HCO PL 25 Sep 79R, Issue II (same title). This new PL stresses the vital importance of Method One for any student, but does provide, for those who cannot obtain a C/S OK for Method One, to do their training starrated and take exams to graduate.” (from HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I (Cancelled 30 Aug 83) “Successful Training Lineup Cancelled”)

The above may indicate that it was incorrect to blame David Mayo as the culprit in where some “must wait for an undetermined length of time before they could do any Academy training at all!”. If anyone has information or referencing that may indicate that I am in error about this, then please guide me to it!

Then this cancelling HCO PL had claimed that “this issue contained a number of ‘curves’ which had blocked the training Bridge to a large number of students.”. If one would denote this as being a ‘curve’, then what are the other “‘curves’” (as in plural) in this particular reference all about? The cancelling HCO PL does not tell.

 
The ‘Class VI Auditor’ consideration  (SHSBC Graduate)

In where a Class V Auditor (Academy Level 5) “reviews all the classes (0 to IV) and retrains where necessary and awards permanent classification for all the lower certificates as well as Class V.”  (from ‘Dianetics and Scientology, Technical Dictionary’).

A consideration has to be made here also regarding that prior to becoming a full-fledged auditor it requires you to have done the Class VI Auditor Course (Academy Level 6), which means a graduate of the SHSBC (Saint Hill Special Briefing Course). Basically the Academy Levels 0 to 4 are bits and pieces taken from this SHSBC. This SHSBC though takes quite some time to complete. It was in vogue that if you were a Clear you had the choice to skip these Levels 0 to 4 and start on the SHSBC right away, although it will then require you to have done this Professional TR Course prior to commencing on it. Would you have first done these Levels 0 to 4, then the SHSBC will be a retread of these materials either way. The Levels 0 to 4 in a sense could be looked upon as quicky levels and they also match/address the Grades 0 to 4 (as achieved by the receiver of auditing), which has the advantage that one easily can twin up with some person and audit one another on the Grades as one completes these auditor Levels. One could also look upon them as a gradient prior to commencing on the SHSBC. Briefly then the Grades 0 to 4 were created to basically enabling you to get quickly going and right on target.

Mr. Ray Mithoff follows up on these lines with “Nevertheless it was untangled, ...” after which it continues explaining what actions had been taken to correct all this. One of which was: “And the correct placement of the Pro TRs Course has been restored with the issuance of HCO PL 23 Jan 83, URGENT - IMPORTANT, AUDITOR TRAINING PREREQUISITE.”. Which reference did put “THE PROFESSIONAL TR COURSE” as “A PREREQUISITE FOR ALL PROFESSIONAL AUDITOR TRAINING COURSES BEGINNING WITH LEVEL 0 AND INCLUDING NED AUDITOR TRAINING AND ANY OR ALL AUDITOR TRAINING COURSES ABOVE THESE LEVELS.”. Following this it stated “This now becomes firm, irrevocable policy, borne out of the hard, cold truth recognized many years back that YOU CANNOT TRAIN AN AUDITOR WHO HAS NOT DONE A TRs COURSE.”, as if it had not been policy already prior to this at this point in time.

The 1978 Grade Chart did not note any TR Course for any Auditor Class as a prerequisite. The 1980 Grade Chart notes the Professional TRs Course only for a Class 0 Auditor/Academy Level 0 (of course prior to going on to Level 1 one needs to have done Level 0, there is no need to list this prerequisite for all Auditor Classes). The 1982 chart lists any TR Course for Level 0 and the Professional TRs Course is listed for a Class IV Graduate Auditor. Then the 1983 chart lists the Professional TRs Course as a prerequisite for each and every Auditor Class (Class 0 to Class XII).

‘Training Routines Remodernized’

• Brief pre history to ‘Training Routines (Re)Modernized’ 
• HCOB 16 Aug 71RA II (Revised 4 Sept 80) “Training Drills Remodernized” (1)  TR 0-4)
• HCOB 16 Aug 71RA II (Revised 4 Sept 80) “Training Drills Remodernized” (2)  Additional chapters
          (“TRs Definition”,  “The A-R-C Triangle”  & “The Full Cycle of Communication”,  “Drilling TRs on a Professional TRs Course”,  “Robotic TRs (Anatomy of a Robot)”  &  “Valuable Final Product and End Phenomena of TRs on a Professional TRs Course”)

 
Brief pre history ‘Training Routines (Re)Modernized’ 

This development of these so-called Training Routines (TRs) started in 1956 (TR 1-4), 1957 added TR 0. In 1961 they were ‘modernized’ with the release HCOB 17 Apr 61 “Training Drills Modernized”. It was revised reissued 5 Jan ’71 after which it was again revised issued as HCOB 21 Jun 71 III “same title”. A detailed overview of this is found here (separate window).

 
HCOB 16 Aug 71RA II (Revised 4 Sept 80) “Training Drills Remodernized” (1)  TR 0-4)

The revision referred to in the SO ED was released in 1980 as HCOB 16 Aug 71RA (Re-Revised 4 Sept 80) II “same title”. The revision notes tell: “(This Bulletin has been revised to fully define TRs and to include data on the cycle of communication upon which the TRs are based.) (Revisions not in Script)”. And indeed the additions are quite extensive, although all these revisions/additions in my opinion could have easily been printed in script.

The changes incorporated in each of these Training Routines themselves are summarized as follows in this HCOB itself as can be seen in the below table:  (this text is found added in the “HISTORY” section of each Training Routine)

	“‘In a case of this character, you would expect to find sneakers of one sort or another, little curves that would turn up later to wreck things.’ ...
	‘... he involved basic policy with simply tactical considerations and altered basic policy and then tangled up the rest of it as well. It is typical of criminals that they can make a championship mess that is difficult to untangle.’   (LRH)”

A brief overview of these mentioned changes here below.

Not mentioned in the revision notes as found in HCOB 16 Aug 71R II (Reissued 6 Aug 83) “Training Drills Remodernized” we find that a “THEORY” section has been added to each Training Routine. Previously there were none. We also find text additions in various of the “TRAINING STRESS” sections of each Training Routine, and in various other places within the Training Routines. All appear to aim at ensuring that no misduplication can take place or applications can be missed while doing these drills. Possible alternate and faulty interpretations (or misduplications) are eliminated. It may be a matter of opinion that possibly too much text and data is found added in this revision, although a correct understanding (concept) is vital in relation to these Training Routines as they can make or break the effectiveness of an auditor. I do not attempt to make a final conclusion or assertion about this, however I personally have not found any changes in this 1980 revision that effects the essence nor the effectiveness of these Training Routines. If anyone would be of the opinion that they do, then please do the right thing and be so kind to contact me and point these out to me, and with appropriate and exact referencing!

 
HCOB 16 Aug 71RA II (Revised 4 Sept 80) “Training Drills Remodernized” (2)  Additional chapters

We find that various additional chapters had been added in this 1980 revision that were not in direct relation to the application of these Training Routines although they do touch the subject itself. As is explained these new sections were aiming to achieve a correct understanding of the Training Routines material given in a proper context. Various of this information may also be found in Source material elsewhere, to which at times is also referred, although various key information is found in these new chapters in this HCOB. These chapters (6 in total) had captions like: ‘TRs Definition’, ‘The A-R-C Triangle’, ‘The Full Cycle of Communication’, ‘Drilling TRs on a Professional TRs Course’, ‘Robotic TRs’  & ‘Valuable Final Product and End Phenomenon of TRs on a Professional TRs Course’. Various information found in these chapters may already have been touched upon or discussed in more detail in HCOB 24 Dec 79 “TRs Basics Resurrected”.

A more close examination of these actual chapters here below. I attempted to give some brief synopsis of what they say, and make some comments. Appropriate quotations are also provided for. In addition I have consulted the judgment of a contact of mine (Class IV C/S since many years) concerning these additives and his comments are also found in the below.

	“TRS DEFINITION”

Comments of a Class IV C/S: “The Definition Section is fine and good it is the 1st section as the word TRs is spoken so much people can dub in they know it and not look it up. I had a MU for 15 years on NASCAR Just watched the DVD where it was defined as ‘National Association of Stock Car Auto Racing’. I listed NASCAR to give an example of a common word (acronym) I heard all my life - yet didn't have clue what it really stood for until I rented the DVD from the library for personal enjoyment pleasure.)

Here is one that Billions of people don't know. Windows XP - What's the XP stand for? - Yes the XP in big colorful letters that shows up when the computer is booting up. (XP stands for ‘Experience’)

Just some more data on why the intro definition section is important to really define TRs.”

	“A more gradient approach to TRs is taught on specially packaged co-audits for those with no prior technical training, where the same degree of flawlessness and skill demanded of a professional auditor is not demanded of the untrained co-auditor.
	And there is still another gradient of TRs found on courses for new public in Division 6, where the person is getting his first experience in handling communication in his life and livingness.
	But on a Professional TRs Course for auditors absolutely no standards are lowered.”

Comments of a Class IV C/S: “The section on gradient TRs and Div 6 students is OK as it aligns with HCOB 8 August 1983 Cycling Through TRs on a Professional TR Course and the now released HCOB 5 July 1989 Coaching TRs 0-4 as if I were on the Comm Course I would run out of the place if I had to do hours of closed eyes and then confront etc.”  (Note: Both these references quoted are examined and addressed in my next chapter entitled “Additional TR references”.)

	“THE A-R-C TRIANGLE”  &  “THE FULL CYCLE OF COMMUNICATION (Communication Defined & The Parts Of The Full Communication Cycle)”

	“DRILLING TRS ON A PROFESSIONAL TRS COURSE”

A line can be drawn here with HCOB 8 Aug 83 “Cycling Through TRs on a Professional TR Course” that reads: “Cycling through TRs on a Professional TR Course has been given a new definition and action. Newly defined, cycling on TRs means:  A STUDENT DRILLS THE TRS, EACH TO A PASS, UNTILL HE STICKS AND THEN HE IS PUT BACK ON THE LOWER TR HE DIDN'T PASS.”. Although this new definition and action may not be that new as is claimed, or at least not entirely.

	“ROBOTIC TRS (Anatomy Of A Robot)”

	“VALUABLE FINAL PRODUCT AND END PHENOMENON OF TRS ON A PROFESSIONAL TRS COURSE”

Nonetheless we find that for example the whole section entitled “ROBOTIC TRS” in its entirety and identically is reissued as HCOB 7 Aug 83 “Robotic TRs”, it is in use to this very day and it is now attributed to L. Ron Hubbard. Then, if it is claimed that David Mayo was responsible for these additives and changes, and additionally if these revision notes in above paragraph state in the ‘I’ person (= L. Ron Hubbard) that they were not written by him, then what is actually the deal here? Any person with a sense of logic would agree with me that we are facing here indeed very odd and contradictory information!

Additional references on TRs 

(Analysis of HCOB/PL 23 Sept 79 “Cancellation of Destructive BTBs and BPLs on TRs”, HCOB 18 Apr 80 “TR Criticism” & HCO PL 17 Jun 81 “Hubbard Professional TRs Course Checksheet”)

	“HCOB/PL 23 September 1979, CANCELLATION OF DESTRUCTIVE BTBs AND BPLs ON TRs”

	“HCOB 18 April 1980, TR CRITICISM”

	“HCO PL 17 June 1981, HUBBARD PROFESSIONAL TRS COURSE CHECKSHEET”

Final notes concerning the findings

“‘The main discovery was that Mayo had very carefully eradicated TRs. Thinking it over, I would say that Mayo is a covert NCG*, for if he were ever audited by somebody whose TRs were out, not even his suppressive curves would permit him to make such a horror of a scene.’”

* NCG, means no-case-gain despite good and sufficient auditing. (HCO PL 16 May 69).

Training Routines

Academy Level 0 prerequisites

It has been confirmed that at least at one time period both the Professional TRs Course and Method One Word Clearing were actively pushed into use by David Mayo and well in September 1979. Method One Word Clearing had reportedly dropped out of use since September 1978 and David Mayo put it back into use by issuing HCO PL 25 Sept 79 I “Successful Training Lineup”. He also issued HCO PL 25 Sept 79 II “Method One Word Clearing” & HCO PL 25 Sept 79 III “The Method One Co-Audit Checksheet”, both of which are although revised since still in use today.

The Professional TRs Course or even any kind of TR Course wasn't a prerequisite till very late, and wasn't a prerequisite prior to David Mayo coming to post as Senior C/S International. In fact it is confirmed that David Mayo was involved in putting this prerequisite there in the first place which is witnessed by him issuing HCOB/PL 23 Sept 79 “Cancellation of Destructive BTBs and BPLs on TRs” that was commenting on HCO PL 4 Nov 71 II “Academy Prerequisites” that “omitted mention of the Hard TRs Course as an Academy prerequisite” for which reason this issue was cancelled.

Either way these observations make the claims that are made in the SO ED in regards to this look rather silly. This includes the words attributed to L. Ron Hubbard as found in the SO ED that say: “‘In other words, this Pro TRs Course was a key point which was carefully and cleverly removed.’”, which as the facts show wasn't a “key point” to start with prior to David Mayo coming to post as the Senior C/S International. Then it says: “‘Mayo could not have done a more vicious thing than that.’ (LRH)”. Now, how “vicious” could this then have been? I personally do not think that L. Ron Hubbard would have made such a slip by making utterances like this based on such very shaky grounds concerning. In fact it would indicate that he was not very well informed, for which reason I do not think that L. Ron Hubbard actually wrote these lines as attributed to and quoted in the SO ED. Then, if we can question these lines, then what about the remainder of these quotations attributed to L. Ron Hubbard found in the SO ED.

Some will not like that I express myself like this. Well, those I would then urge to propose an alternate plausible conclusion in regards to my findings!

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.
     ARC:
‘Affinity, Reality, Communication’. A word from the initial letters of Affinity, Reality, Communication which together equate to Understanding. It is pronounced by stating its letters, A-R-C. To Scientologists it has come to mean good feeling, love or friendliness, such as “He was in ARC with his friend.” (LRH Def. Notes)
     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.
     BTB:
‘Board Technical Bulletin’. Color flash–red 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 Bulletins written by LRH. Only LRH issues may be printed green on white for Technical Bulletins and only LRH issues may have the prefix HCO. These Board issues are valid as tech. (BPL 14 Jan 74R I, New Issues).
  This issue-type was established in January 1974. In December 1974 a project was started to cancel HCOBs not written by L. Ron Hubbard and if still found being of value having them reissued as BTBs. By 1980 all BTBs had been revoked.
     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)
     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)
     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).
     LRH:
An usual abbreviation for ‘L. Ron Hubbard’.
     M1 or M1WC:
‘Method One Word Clearing’. See at ‘Method One Word Clearing’ in vocabulary.
     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.
     misunderstood(s) - Mis-U(s) - MU(s):
Refers to a word or words that have not been properly understood, and therefore one is unable to duplicate, understand or apply.
     MU(s), Mis-U(s):
‘Miss Understood(s)’. See at that entry in vocabulary.
     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.)
     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)
     PRD:
‘Primary Rundown’. The Primary Rundown consists of word clearing and study technology. Consists of Method 1 word clearing and Method 8 on on study tapes and the Student Hat course materials.
(Method 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; Method 8: 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.)
     original mimeo print-off:
Individually printed issues and distributed from the Mimeo Section of the Scientology organization as opposed to those collected in volumes. These are the issues that you may regard as the real first prints. As a rule these are typed out, mimeographed and distributed as soon as possible after having been compiled or written. They are always legal-sized, 8½ by 14 inches (approx. 21,6 x 35,6 cm). If the issue had 3 or more sides, the pages were collated and stapled together in the upper left corner. More detailed information about this is found here (separate window).
     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.
     squirrel:
Going off into weird practices or altering Scientology. (HCO PL 7 Feb 65, Keeping Scientology Working)
     ‘The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology’:
This is a series of books that contain the HCOBs, and any references that are primarily dealing with technical matters. The HCOBs 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).
     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)