Suppressive Person Defense League

Main navigation

You are here: Home / Archives for overts and withholds

overts and withholds

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Scientology Marriage Counseling

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 19 DECEMBER 1988
REVISED 30 JANUARY 1990

Remimeo
All Orgs and Missions
Chaplains
C/Ses
Auditors

SCIENTOLOGY MARRIAGE COUNSELING

Refs:

Tape: 5912C10 “Demonstration of New HGC Process”
HCOB 31 Dec. 59R Rev. 21.8.87 BLOW-OFFS 1
Tape: 6001C02 “Marriage” 2
HCOB 10 July 64 OVERTS-ORDER OF EFFECTIVENESS IN PROCESSING 3
HCO PL 27 May 65 PROCESSING

Scientology Marriage Counseling is a very powerful technique for restoring ARC between marital partners whose relationship has become strained or is headed for divorce.

Use of this technique is depicted in the public film The Married Couple.4

DELIVERY REQUIREMENTS

Scientology Marriage Counseling can be delivered by a certified Class II Auditor who is an ordained Scientology minister (or minister-in-training) and who has been high crime checked out and passed in Qual on Scientology Marriage Counseling procedure. (Ref: HCO PL 8 Mar. 66, KSW Series 13, HIGH CRIME)

The length of time required to complete Scientology Marriage Counseling can vary, but ordinarily it can be done in one or two intensives.

This processing must be done at an org which is qualified to deliver auditing to the partner with the highest case level. For instance, if one of the partners is OT III and the other is a Grade IV Release, the counseling may be delivered at an Advanced Org, but not in a Class IV Org or mission.

PROCEDURE

Scientology Marriage Counseling is actually classified as an assist. It is meant to alleviate difficulties a couple are experiencing in their relationship with each other by helping them to unburden their accumulated overts and withholds.

Unlike most other processes, this procedure is done with three people in the auditing room—the auditor and two preclears (the marital partners).

The procedure is as follows:

1. Set up the auditing room as per HCOB 4 Dec. 77R, CHECKLIST FOR SETTING UP SESSIONS AND AN E-METER. Be sure to provide comfortable chairs for both partners. The chair used by the partner who is not holding the cans is placed to one side of the auditing table, facing the pc’s chair and slightly behind the auditor.

2. Ensure both partners understand what will be taking place in the counseling sessions. If both partners are already trained as auditors or have had a Scientology C/S-l, these points need only be briefly reviewed to ensure both understand them. If one or both partners has never given or received metered auditing before, then each of these steps must be done in full:

a. Explain that everything said in the counseling you will be doing is held in strictest confidence, according to the traditional rules of pastor/parishioner confidentiality.

b. Describe how the counseling will be done, i.e., that you will be asking a set of questions, called a “process,” of one partner until a certain result is reached, then asking the same questions of the other partner. Ensure it is understood by both partners that when one of them is holding the cans and answering your questions, the other is to remain quiet and just listen, no matter what is said and no matter how much he or she may want to comment. When you are finished directing your questions to one partner, the other will be given his or her turn.

c. Briefly explain to both partners what the E-Meter is used for. For demonstration, do a “pinch test.” Explain to both partners that to show how the meter registers mental reactions, you will give the partner holding the cans a pinch. Do so. Then get that partner to think of the pinch (while still holding the cans), showing both partners the meter reaction. (Ref: The Book of E-Meter Drills, E-Meter Drill 5RB) Keep t his demonstration and explanation very simple. You can use the book Introducing the E-Meter to help handle any questions, but do not complicate this step unnecessarily.

d. Explain what the word “floating needle” means and that a floating needle indicates that you have reached a good point in the process. Let both partners know you will indicate a floating needle when one occurs in the counseling.

e. Explain that when you have finished a counseling session, you will take both partners to the Examiner. Explain that the Examiner will have the pc hold the E-Meter cans, that the pc may say anything he wishes, and that the Examiner will not say anything other than acknowledging and indicating a floating needle when one is present.

f. Clear the words “moral code,” “overt act” and “withhold” with both partners, using the definitions sheet attached to this HCOB.

g. Clear the commands of the process with both partners, making sure they understand very clearly what is meant by “done to” and “withheld from” in the questions. Explain that when the first question is answered, you’ll give the second question and so on, back and forth between the two questions. The questions are:

1. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO (spouse’s name)?

2. WHAT HAVE YOU WITHHELD FROM (spouse’s name)?

3. Put one of the partners on the meter, set the sensitivity for the pc, do a metabolism test and check to be sure the pc is well rested, has eaten and is not hungry.

4. Start the session by saying “THIS IS THE SESSION.” (Tone 405)

5. Run the process commands alternately (1,2,1,2,1,2, etc.) until the pc has an F/N, cog and VGIs6 Indicate the F/N and give the pc the R-factor7 that you have finished directing the questions to him/her for now.

6. Have the second partner sit in the auditing chair holding the cans while the first partner sits in the third chair, observing. Start a new worksheet for the second partner.

7. Give the partner on the cans the R-factor that you’ll now be directing the same questions to him/her. Ask if he/she has any questions before you begin. Set the sensitivity, etc., as in step 3.

8. Repeat steps 5-7, each time running the process to an F/N, cog and VGIs for the partner on the meter.

9. When the minister ends a session, such as for a meal break or to end off for the day, both pcs are taken to the Examiner. When counseling is ended for the day, the minister should see that the couple is scheduled for their next counseling session.

10. Write up the counseling session using a separate Auditor’s Report Form and set of worksheets for each pc. In order to ensure that a complete record of the session exists in both pes’ folders, a photocopy of each partner’s work-sheets should be included with the original worksheets of the other when those are placed in the pc folder. (For example, the husband’s pc folder would contain the original worksheets of his sessions, plus a photocopy of the worksheets of the wife’s sessions.) Route the two folders to the C/S.

END PHENOMENA

By continuing the counseling a point should be reached where the TA has flattened out on both partners, and both are F/Ning, VGIs and in ARC with each other. That is the EP.

The aim of Scientology Marriage Counseling is to assist marital partners in restoring affinity, reality and communication with each other.

Many, many marriages at the brink of divorce have been successfully salvaged with the help of this processing. There is, however, no guarantee that a couple wishing to get a divorce will decide to remain married, and no minister or any org staff member should make any such promise or claim to anyone.

If the counseling is completed standardly, the couple will have been unburdened of the overts and withholds affecting their relationship and will be in good communication with each other and better able to make rational decisions concerning their marriage.

It may take several counseling sessions to reach the EP. A marriage that is in trouble is not something that is put together again in one night, because the number of overts and withholds usually takes a little longer to detail.

When the EP has been reached, both partners are C/Sed to declare to completion of Scientology Marriage Counseling in Qual8

TIPS

TRs
Excellent auditor TRs9 are a must in delivering Scientology Marriage Counseling. The auditor should have a flawless command of TRs 0-4 and be an expert at Upper Indoc TRs10. Considerable upset can sometimes occur in a Scientology Marriage Counseling session, and the auditor must be able to handle it and control both partners smoothly and with high ARC.

Auditor’s Code

The Auditor’s Code must be strictly observed by the minister at all times during Scientology Marriage Counseling. It is particularly important that the auditor not give any impression, by his words, tone of voice, mannerisms or by any other means, that he favors or sympathizes with one partner or the other, either in or out of session. (Ref: HCO PL 14 Oct. 68RA, THE AUDITOR’S CODE; HCOB 23 May 71 X, Basic Auditing Series 9, COMM CYCLE ADDITIVES; and HCOB 26 Apr. 71 I, TRs AND COGNITIONS)

OTs

Scientology Marriage Counseling procedure is not changed when it is being done on an OT. The procedure is the same regardless of the case level of the pc or pre-OT.
Only in doing repair of Scientology Marriage Counseling on an OT III or above is there any difference in procedure. In such a case an LCRE11 would be done following the technical rules for use of correction lists on OTs.

C/Sing

Scientology Marriage Counseling is C/Sed as one would any metered assist processing, according to the HCOBs of the C/S Series.

As the pcs may be very green, the C/S should be alert for any indicators that one or both of them do not understand what is expected and get this remedied if spotted. The C/S should also ensure that an auditor is thoroughly checked out and drilled before allowing him to do this processing. With the added randomity of two people to handle in each session and the misemotion that can sometimes come to the surface in this processing, it requires excellent auditor TRs, metering and command of the procedure.

REPAIR

Ordinarily upsets or bogs in Scientology Marriage Counseling stem from missed withholds and are handled by simply continuing the process. However, if a session is utterly bogged or if a pc is refusing to go on at all, an LCRE should be assessed and handled.

If an LCRE must be used, it should be done in a session without the pc’s spouse present; however, if overts or withholds on the spouse are gotten off in a pc’s repair session they must also be revealed by the pc to his spouse in a later session when the spouse is present. This is done by simply having the pc, in the next session, tell the spouse each of the overts or withholds that were gotten off in the repair session.

If the auditor delivering the counseling is not qualified to use the LCRE, the pc is turned over to another auditor for the repair session.

If one or both of the pes refuse to come in for a Scientology Marriage Counseling session after counseling has begun, arrangements should be made to get them in immediately for repair as above.

CAUTIONS

Simplicity

Scientology Marriage Counseling procedure is quite simple. Guard against any tendency to complicate the procedure with additional commands or steps.

One point of complexity that has been added to this action by some is in the area of setting up the pc for the action. Scientology Marriage Counseling is done as an assist for a present time difficulty. It is not a major grade or rundown requiring extensive setups before it can be done. Even rudiments are ordinarily unnecessary—if the pc is there for Scientology Marriage Counseling on his own determinism, he’ll be found to be in-session12 already; rudiments would act as a distraction in such a case and could tend to throw the pc out of session. (Ref: Tape 5911C09, “Demo of an Assist”) Unless it is known that a pc has a situation which must be handled before an assist is begun (such as a read on out-Int or out-lists) the counseling is simply begun and carried through to completion much as one would do any assist action.

Where extensive setups have erroneously been entered into, it has commonly been found that the pc’s attention is primarily on his marital situation, and that is exactly what ends up being addressed in the “setup” auditing. This can even include overts and withholds on the pc’s spouse coming to light without the benefit of the spouse being present.

If a rud needs to be flown on one or both of the partners, it should be done in session with both partners present, unless the partner needing the rud is OT III or above and the other partner is not.

Session Misemotion and Overuse of Repair

It is not uncommon for one or both of the marriage partners being counseled to show a great deal of misemotion in a Scientology Marriage Counseling session. Crying, yelling, etc., are not unusual. The auditor should not instantly think he needs to do an LCRE or other repair action when misemotion occurs. The three oldest rules in processing apply: (a) GET THE PC THROUGH IT; (b) WHAT TURNS IT ON WILL TURN IT OFF; (c) THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY THROUGH. Only when continuing with the process of “What have you done to (spouse)?” “What have you withheld from (spouse)?” has not smoothed the session out should an LCRE be resorted to. (Ref: HCO PL 27 May 65, PROCESSING)

Auditing Both PCs

Ideally, both partners should be audited in the same counseling session or on the same day. Though it may not always be possible to do this, experience has shown it is definitely preferable to audit both partners in one day rather than auditing one on one day and one the next.

If you end off a counseling session by auditing spouse A, begin the next session by auditing spouse B. Example: On Monday the husband is given an hour of processing, then the wife is given 45 minutes, then the husband is given an hour and finally the wife is given an hour and a half. Tuesday the session is begun by auditing the husband, and so on.

Participation

It is very important that both partners actually take part in Scientology Marriage Counseling on their own determinism. If one of the partners is hesitant to enter into counseling, a Chaplain or FSM can and should enlighten him or her to bring about an understanding of how the counseling could help. However, if one or both of the partners is not in agreement with doing the processing or is will succeed; in fact, Scientology Marriage Counseling may not be sold or delivered in such circumstances. A person who did not sign up for this counseling on his or her own determinism is a troublesome source per HCO PL 27 Oct. 64R, POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE,13 and is to be handled per that policy.

It may happen that partway through Scientology Marriage Counseling one or both of the partners originate that they have decided to get a divorce. Even if they seem to be satisfied with their decision, the counseling must be continued until the full EP is reached: TA flattened out on both partners, both F/Ning and VGIs and in ARC with each other.

TRAINING

When a couple has completed Scientology Marriage Counseling, they must be sold and delivered training to hat them on basic Scientology and tools they can use to build a strong and lasting relationship. The How to Improve Your Marriage Course is a Scientology Life Improvement Course designed specifically for this purpose and is part of a standard marriage handling program. Following the How to Improve Your Marriage Course, the couple should also do the Success Through Communication Course.

____

When applied standardly, Scientology Marriage Counseling is a tremendously effective tool that can be used to open the way to a happy and satisfying marriage for couples who want to repair and improve their relationship.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Compilation assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations
Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations

HCOB 19.12.88R Attachment 1

SCIENTOLOGY MARRIAGE COUNSELING
DEFINITIONS SHEET

The following definitions are for use in clearing these terms as part of Scientology Marriage Counseling.

Moral Code: An agreed-upon code of conduct. Whenever people get together and operate as groups, they make agreements on codes of conduct regarding what is right and what is wrong, what is moral and what is immoral—in other words, what will be contributive to survival and what will be destructive of survival. This is a moral code—a series of agreements to which a person has subscribed to guarantee the survival of a group. It doesn’t matter what the size of the group is—whether it is a group of two people forming a marriage or a whole nation being formed—they enter into certain agreements.

Overt Act: A harmful act or a transgression against the moral code of a group. When a person does something that is contrary to the moral code he has agreed to, or when he omits to do something that he should have done per that moral code, he has committed an overt act. An overt act violates what was agreed upon.

Withhold: An unspoken, unannounced transgression against a moral code by which a person is bound. A withhold is, then, an overt act that a person committed that he or she is not talking about. Any withhold comes after an overt act.

Hubbard, L. R. (1980, 23 July). Scientology Marriage Counseling. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. XIII, pp. 364-71). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

  1. 31 Dec. 59R Rev. 21.8.87 BLOW-OFFS ↩
  2. Tape: 6001C02 “Marriage” ↩
  3. HCOB 10 July 64 OVERTS-ORDER OF EFFECTIVENESS IN PROCESSING ↩
  4. Scientology promotes this film on their web site: http://marriageproblems.org/Scientology-film.htm ↩
  5. Definition: Tone 40. ↩
  6. F/N, cog and VGIs: Floating needle on the E-Meter, “cognition” or “new realization” and “very good indicators,” such as pc smiling. See Definition: End phenomena. ↩
  7. R-factor means “reality factor.” It is a way of saying something authoritatively about the way things are. ↩
  8. Qual: Qualifications Division in an org. ↩
  9. Definition: Training Routines. ↩
  10. Definition: Upper Indoctrination. ↩
  11. See HCOB: Confessional Repair List — LCRE. ↩
  12. Definition: In session ↩
  13. HCO PL 27 Oct. 64R, POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE ↩

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Two Types of PTSes

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 21 MAY 1985R1
Revised 23 April 2001

(Also issued as an HCO PL, same date and title)

Remimeo
C/Ses
Execs
MAAs/Ethics Officers
Tech/Qual

C/S Series 121

TWO TYPES OF PTSes

(From an LRH despatch of 21 Mar. 84.)

Refs:

HCOB 28 Feb. 84R Rev. 10.11.2000C/S Series 118 PRETENDED PTS Cover-up and Justification of Black PR and Evil Purposes

HCOB 17 June 84 C/S Series 118-1 EVIL PURPOSES AND FALSE PR

HCOB 29 Dec. 78R Rev. 20.12.83 THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN A MAGICAL NEW RUNDOWN

HCOB 9 Dec. 71RE Rev. 18.4.2001 PTS RUNDOWN, AUDITED

HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING

Modifies:

HCOB 24 Apr. 72  C/S Series 79 ExDn Series 5 PTS INTERVIEWS

HCOB 17 Apr. 72R Rev. 20.12.83 C/S Series 76 C/Sing A PTS RUNDOWN

HCOB 31 Dec. 78RB I Rev. 28.10.2000 OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING

There are two types of PTSes:

1. Pretended PTS so as to cover up black PR and evil purposes or justify them, and

2. Actual PTSness.

Although PTSness can cease simply on spotting the person accurately that one is PTS to, there are two full rundowns to handle this condition: the PTS Rundown and the Suppressed Person Rundown.

On pretended PTSness as mentioned in (1) above, your very reliable clue is that the person says he is PTS to a well-intentioned person, such as a staff member or a Scientology VIP. This is almost totally conclusive evidence that you are dealing with a person with an evil purpose. Thus he would be switched to Sec Checking geared to locating and handling evil purposes. He won’t get any relief from being found “PTS” to a well-intentioned person. From time to time one sees “PTS finding” of that nature and this probably is the first analysis given as to why and what it is all about. The person who does that has been black PRing, has O/Ws and probably under those, evil purposes.

L. Ron Hubbard
Founder

Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations

Notes

  1. Document studied on the How to Confront and Shatter Suppression PTS/SP Course. (2001 ed.) ↩

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: The Prior Confusion: New Tech Breakthrough

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 7 JUNE 19841

Remimeo
False Purpose RD
Auditors and C/Ses
Cramming Officers

False Purpose Rundown Series 3

THE PRIOR CONFUSION: NEW TECH BREAKTHROUGH

Refs:

HCOB 2 Nov. 61 THE PRIOR CONFUSION
HCOB 9 Nov. 61 THE PROBLEMS INTENSIVE USE OF THE PRIOR CONFUSION
HCOB 5 Apr. 71RA TRIPLE RERUNSHCOB 26 June 78RA II NED Series 6RA ROUTINE 3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS (Section on Narrative R3RA)
HCOB 13 Sept. 78 R3RA ENGRAM RUNNING BY CHAINS AND NARRATIVE R3RA AN ADDITIONAL DIFFERENCE
HCOB 28 May 69 HOW NOT TO ERASE
HCOB 6 Oct. 61 TRAINING OF STAFF AUDITORS
HCOB 30 July 62 A SMOOTH HGC 25-HOUR INTENSIVE
Tape: 6110C03 “The Prior Confusion”

The highly effective tech of handling problems on a pc by finding the prior confusion to the problem and pulling O/Ws in that area has been in use since its discovery in the early 60s.

The theory of this is that any fixed idea or condition is the result of a postulate made by the thetan. Just prior to that postulate there was a confusion—an unconfrontable disturbance. The postulate is a stable datum, adopted in an attempt to solve that confusion. By getting off the pc’s O/Ws in the area of the confusion, one can key out the postulate and fixed condition.

BREAKTHROUGH

I have just made a breakthrough of magnitude on the subject of the prior confusion while engaged in whole track research. This tech has a broader application than was originally envisioned.

What has actually been spotted here is that the psychs on the whole track created a confusion originally and used the overwhelm of that as the knockout for the implant. They didn’t, at that stage of the track, have any other tools to knock beings out. So the mechanism of prior confusion is very early and very dominant.

This breakthrough on the prior confusion comes from spotting the first moment of the confusion.

This does not mean that a pc, in running back an evil purpose, is necessarily going to contact an incident containing a psychiatrist. But you as the auditor should know that that is what this tech discovery is based upon.

HANDLING EVIL PURPOSES

This has immediate application in auditing addressed to the locating and handling of a pc’s accumulated evil purposes and nonsurvival considerations.

Once such a purpose or consideration is found, one locates the confusion which occurred just before it. If there is no blow of the purpose or no visible reaction, then one gets an earlier time for the same evil purpose and an earlier confusion to that.

WHEN ONE FINDS THE FIRST MOMENT OF THE FIRST CONFUSION WHICH LED TO THAT EVIL PURPOSE, ONE CAN BLOW THE WHOLE THING.

Once the FIRST MOMENT of that first confusion on that chain is found, you will normally get a blowdown of the tone arm, a cognition, VVGIs in the pc and a persistent F/N, if not a floating TA.

Getting the first moment of the confusion is crucial. This follows the fundamental auditing principle of the “earlier beginning,” as described in the basic books and in New Era Dianetics tech. By locating the earliest moment when the pc had an awareness of the confusion, it can be blown.

SOURCE

The false purpose or evil intention may have been generated by the person himself or directly implanted by another. This new application of prior confusion tech as given in the False Purpose Rundown has been shown to be highly effective regardless of the source of the purpose or intention.

ERRORS

On the False Purpose RD if one gets the prior confusion but the evil purpose doesn’t spectacularly blow, it could be due to a number of reasons. But it is primarily one of these two things:

1. The auditor failed to get the EARLIER TIME THE PC HAD THAT SAME PURPOSE and then get the prior confusion beneath it; or

2. The auditor did get the basic prior confusion on that evil purpose, but failed to get the FIRST MOMENT OF THAT CONFUSION.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Hubbard, L. R. (1984, 7 June). The Prior Confusion: New Tech Breakthrough. The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol. XII, p. 570-1.). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Stalled Dianetic Clear: Solved

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 27 MARCH 19841

Remimeo
All Orgs
Tech/Qual
C/Ses
Auditors
Sec Checkers
Solo C/Ses


URGENT—IMPORTANT

C/S Series 119

STALLED DIANETIC CLEAR: SOLVED

(This bulletin modifies any earlier HCOBs on the subject of what can or cannot be run on Dianetic Clears.)


Refs:
Book: Advanced Procedure and Axioms, 1951, Chapter “Postulates”
Book: Scientology 0-8, Chapter 3, “Consideration and Mechanics”
HCOB 6 Sept. 78 II SERVICE FACSIMILES AND ROCK SLAMS
HCOB 6 Sept. 78 III ROUTINE THREE SC-A FULL SERVICE FACSIMILE HANDLING UPDATED WITH NEW ERA DIANETICS
HCOB 12 Sept. 78 DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTs
HCOB 3 May 80 PC INDICATORS
HCOB 30 July 80 THE NATURE OF A BEING
HCOB 14 Dec. 81 THE STATE OF CLEAR
HCOB 8 Mar. 82R CONFESSIONALS AND THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE
HCOB 28 Feb. 84 C/S Series 118 PRETENDED PTS

Note: Earlier, various persons carefully obliterated the technical data given below (and the tech of Expanded Dianetics) from use, to effectively bar Dianetic Clears from going any further up the Bridge and becoming fully powerful beings.

The major steps for a Dianetic Clear moving up the Bridge are:

CCRD and the Sunshine Rundown

Solo Auditor Course Part 1

OT Preparations/Solo Setups

Solo Auditor Course Part 2

Eligibility for OT Levels Check.

There is no reason to interfere with a Dianetic Clear who is progressing on that route or who is progressing on the route between OT I and OT III and doing well. They should not be interfered with by Sec Checking or anything else, really.

But where the person in this zone is moving slowly or stalled, there is a technical factor which must be known and taken into consideration:

Dianetic Clears who do not go up the Bridge are still subject to the vagaries and pressures of life.

Therefore, to handle any of the points of possible hang up, the following are included as allowed handlings on a Dianetic Clear:

PTS handlings, but no Dianetics

Confessionals, including Sec Checking on evil purposes

The handling of postulates, considerations, attitudes, evil purposes or evil intentions

False purpose checks

O/Ws

Disagreement Checks

Black PR handling

Service fac handling (by the bracket method only, which does NOT use engram running)

Rudiments

Happiness Rundown

Scientology Drug Rundown (as it uses Recalls), only if required

Method One Word Clearing

End of Endless Int Rundown, only if required (Note: This is a major rundown, not a repair action.)

and the Flag-only rundowns of L10, L11, L12.

The following actions can also be done to assist a Dianetic Clear who is stalled or not actively moving up the Bridge:

Ethics condition formulas

Repair of Past Ethics Conditions

Conditions and Exchange by Dynamics

Actions given in the Product Debug Series HCOBs (False Data Stripping, Crashing Mis-U Word Finding, Product Debug Checklist, etc.)

Getting the 21-department org board in in one’s own life.

POSTULATES

The fact that one can sec check a Dianetic Clear and can locate purposes and nonsurvival considerations does not in the least make less of the state of’ Clear. It is simply a matter of a different case phenomena on a Clear than on a preclear.

The definition of Clear is:

A BEING WHO NO LONGER HAS HIS OWN REACTIVE MIND.

Postulates and considerations can stand independently of mental mass. Therefore, if anybody said you couldn’t find postulates or try to spot them on Dianetic Clears then that is false data.

One can locate all the postulates one wants on a Dianetic Clear so long as he doesn’t go into running engrams. Finding postulates and considerations is a free field on a Dianetic Clear; there is no slightest prevention of it. Finding and handling evil purposes is also in the area of postulates. And a Dianetic Clear can also be black PRed and go PTS.

Because someone is Dianetic Clear is no reason he does not still have postulates in place or counter-survival considerations which, cleared up, could improve his power as a being.

You will find that people who are not burdened with overts and black PR and evil purposes ARE going on up the route to the top. What stalls the person is lack of Sec Checking and discovery of any PTSness or black PR or evil purposes and the like—all of them counter-survival.

THE TECHNICAL FACT IS THAT IF THE PERSON IS NOT GETTING ON UP THE LEVELS, IF HE IS CLEAR AND/OR IS IN THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE AND IS MOVING SLOWLY OR STALLED, HE IS A CANDIDATE FOR HANDLING OF THESE FACTORS.

The handling of a Dianetic Clear on these is the same as for any preclear, with the proviso that no engram running may be attempted. One CAN handle postulates, purposes, considerations, attitudes, evil purposes or intentions and O/Ws. One can do false purpose checks, Disagreement Checks, black PR handlings, service fac handling (without running engrams) and rudiments on a Dianetic Clear, and one can also do all types of PTS handling that do not call for running engrams. And one had better get the appropriate handling done in such cases. You’ll find the person experiences huge relief from being rid of these nonsurvival factors and he can then move on up to his next level and get the gains that are there to be achieved.

SUMMARY

It is expected that responsible technical terminals will ensure the needed handling gets done where a Dianetic Clear is not progressing well.

A person at the point of Clear should take effective measures to get himself up the Bridge.

But where this is not occurring, he needs help in the form of the exact technical action that will enable him to progress.

We are in the business of making beings more able. Here we have restored to use powerful tools with which to do it.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Hubbard, L. R. (1984, 27 March). Stalled Dianetic Clear: Solved. The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology. (1991 ed., Vol. XII, pp. 558-61.). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

by Leave a Comment

HCOPL: O/W Write-ups

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead,  Sussex
HCO POLICY LETTER OF 2 MARCH  1984R
REVISED 24 APRIL  1990

Remimeo
All Staff
HCO
Eth Offs/MAAs
Tech/Qual

(Also  issued as an HCO Bulletin, of the  same date and title)

O/W WRITE-UPS

Refs:
HCOB 3 Jan. 60 A THIRD DYNAMIC FOR SCIENTOLOGY
HCOPL 1 Nov.   70 III YOU CAN BE RIGHT
HCOB 5 Oct. 61 CLEAN HANDS MAKE A HAPPY LIFE
HCOB 21 Jan. 60 JUSTIFICATION

It has been longstanding knowledge in Scientology that in the presence of overts and withholds no gains occur.

An overt act is an act of omission or commission which does the least good for  the  least  number  of dynamics  or  the  most  harm  to  the  greatest  number of dynamics. Overts are the biggest reason a person restrains and withholds himself from  action.

Man is basically good.  When people commit overts  and then withhold them it  is  because  they  conceive that telling them would be another overt act. By withholding overt acts, these are kept afloat in the universe and are themselves, as withholds, entirely the cause of continued evil.

A person who has  overts and withholds  becomes less able to influence his dynamics and falls out of communication with  those people  and  things he has committed overts against.

Writing up one’s overts and withholds offers a road out.  By confronting the truth an individual can experience relief and a return of responsibility.

BASIC THEORY

The  theory  behind  the  action  of  writing  up  one’s  overts  and  withholds  is contained  in  the  Scientology  Axioms,  published  in  their  entirety  in  the  book Scientology 0-8:  The  Book of Basics.

Axiom 38 is particularly applicable:

1:  Stupidity is the unknownness of consideration.

2:    Mechanical definition: Stupidity is the unknownness of time,  place, form and event.

1:     Truth  is the exact consideration.

2:     Truth is the exact time,  place, form  and event.

Thus we see that failure  to discover truth brings about stupidity.

Thus  we  see  that  the  discovery  of truth  would  bring  about  an  as-isness  by actual experiment.

Thus we see that an ultimate truth would have no time, place, form or event.

Thus,  then,  we  perceive  that  we  can  achieve  a  persistence  only  when  we mask a truth.

Lying is an alteration of time,  place, event or form.

Lying becomes alter-isness,  becomes stupidity.

(The  blackness of cases  is  an  accumulation  of the  case’s  own  or another’s lies.)

Anything which persists must avoid as-isness.

Thus,  anything,  to persist,  must contain a lie.

Writing  up  one’s  overts  and  withholds  can  accomplish  an  as-isness  and thereby relieve a person of the burden of his transgressions.

O/W WRITE-UP FORMAT

When  people  do  O/W  write-ups,  abuses  can  occur  if the  specifics  of the action are not known and followed.

The  first  step  to  be  done  before  one  undertakes  the  action  of  an  O/W write-up is to word clear exactly how such write-ups are done.

Experience has  proven that people have run  into  trouble  on O/W write-ups when the format (including the key words and terms) was not word cleared before embarking on the action.

Format:

The format for doing an O/W write-up is as follows:

1.    Write down the exact overt of commission or omission.

2.    Then  state  explicitly  the  specifics  regarding  the  action  or  inaction,  including:

a.    Time  (Definition:  A  precise  instant,   second,  minute,  hour,  day, week,  month or year,  determined by clock or calendar;  the point at which something has happened.)

b.    Place (Definition:  A definite location.)

c.    Form  (Definition:  The  arrangement  of  things;  the  way  in  which parts of a whole are organized.)

d.    Event  (Definition:  That  which  happens;  result;  any  incident  or occurrence.)

One has to get the time,  place,  form and event and one has to get a done or a failure in order to get as-isness.

Example:

“1.  I hit a friend’s  car when  backing out of my  parking space at work and caused about five  hundred dollars worth of damage to his car.

“2.  On the 30th of June  1987,  when I was  leaving work,  I was backing out of my parking space and hit the back end of my friend Joe’s car. There was  no  one else  around  and  the parking  lot was  almost empty.  I drove away  without leaving a note or telling Joe,  knowing that I caused about five hundred dollars damage to his car which he had to pay for.”

or,  when there is a withhold or withholds to be gotten off:

1.    Write down the withhold.

2.    Then state explicitly the specifics regarding the action or inaction with-
held,  including:

a.    Time

b.    Place

c.    Form

d.    Event

For example:

“1.  I cheated on my wife (Sally) by seeing another woman and never told her about this.

“2.  Three years ago,  when I was first married to Sally,  I cheated on her by seeing another woman.  I have never told Sally about this.  One morning (in June  1985) I had told Sally I would take her to the movies that night and  on  my  way  home  from  work,  when  1 was  at  Jones’  Department Store,  I saw an old girlfriend of mine  (Barbara).  1 asked Barbara to go out to  dinner  with  me  that night  and  she  accepted.  (She  did  not  know that  I  was  married.)  I  told  her  I  would  pick  her  up  at  8:00  P.M.   that night.  When 1 got home from  the store I told Sally 1 had to go back to work to get some things done and would not be able to go to the movies with her.

“I then went out to dinner in another city with Barbara (at the  ‘Country Inn’) so that I would not risk seeing any of my friends.”

ADMINISTERING O/W WRITE-UPS

The action of writing up one’s averts  and withholds can  be applied to  anyone,  and the breadth of its application is  unlimited.

Examples:

A  person  is  assigned  a  Danger condition  and  is  instructed  to  write  up  his O/Ws per HCO PL 22 Mar.  85,  Esto Series 51,  FULL DANGER CONDITION HANDLING.

A person wants to leave a course and the Ethics Officer has him write up his O/Ws.

It could  be  that  a  person  is  nattering  or  feels  critical,  in  which  case  the Ethics Officer or MAA could have the person write up his O/Ws.

C/S Okay:

It  is  the  responsibility  of  the  person  administering  the  O/W  write-up, whether this is the Ethics Officer/MAA, an Esto, the person’s senior or a Supervisor, to get the person’s pc folder checked by a qualified C/S to ensure that they are not in the middle of a major case action such as Int repair or List repair or in the middle of an incomplete listing action,  any of which would need to be completed before the pc started on an O/W write-up.  (Ref: HCOB  10 June 71  I, C/S Series 44R, CIS  RULES,  PROGRAMING FROM PREPARED LISTS)

This is not to be construed as  a rule that someone needs a C/S  okay to get handled in Ethics.  It simply  means that the CIS  and Ethics must be coordinated when handling a pc who needs to do an O/W write-up as fully covered in HCOB 13  Oct.  82, CIS Series  116, ETHICS  AND THE C/S.

End Phenomena:

In doing an O/W write-up a person writes up his overts and withholds until he is satisfied that they are complete. The person will feel very good about it and experience relief.  One  would  not  engage  in  carrying  on  an  O/W  write-up  past this point.

End Ruds Check:

When a person has completed his O/W write-up he must receive an end ruds check.  This acts as an acknowledgment of the  action completed.  End ruds  must be done by a qualified auditor (Class II or above,  or a Hubbard Senior Security Checker).  The original copy of the O/W write-up  must go into the person’s  pc folder,  regardless of whether or not any copy is additionally given to the MAA or Ethics Officer.  (Ref: HCOB 28 Oct. 76, C/S Series 98, Auditor Admin Series 26, AUDITING FOLDERS,  OMISSIONS IN COMPLETENESS)

Repair:

When a person doing  an  O/W  write-up  bogs  on  the  action  at  any  point or gets sick or falls  on his head shortly  after doing  an O/W write-up,  he  must be repaired  at once  by  a qualified  auditor  using  a  Confessional  Repair List.  (Ref: HCOB 23 July 80R, CONFESSIONAL REPAIR LIST-LCRE)

O/W WRITE-UP PROCEDURE

The following steps are the full procedure for getting a person to do an O/W write-up:

0.     The first action is for the person administering the O/W write-up to:  (a) study and word clear this HCOB,  (b) clear the  words  included in  step 4 below,  (c) word clear the O/W write-up format.

1.    Get  a qualified C/S  to  check  the  person’s  pc  folder  to  ensure that  the person is  not in  the middle of a major case action  such  as lnt repair or List repair or in the middle of an incomplete listing action that would be interrupted by an O/W write-up.

2.    Ensure  that a space  is  provided where  a person can write  up  his overts and withholds  undistracted.

3.    Provide paper and pen.

4.    Have the person clear the following words in the Tech Dictionary: overt, withhold,  motivator, justification, overt-motivator sequence.

5.    Have  the  person  read  this  HCO  PL  and  word  clear  the  O/W  write-up format  as covered above,  to full understanding.

6.    Have the person  write  up  his O/Ws,  exactly  per the O/W write-up  format above.  This is done until  the person  is  satisfied that he has  written them up completely and he feels very good about it.

7.    Get the  person  an end ruds  check once  the  O/W write-up  is  complete.

8.    See that the original copy of the O/W write-up is filed in the pc’s folder along with the worksheets of his end ruds check.

SUMMARY

Writing up one’s overts and withholds is  a simple procedure that has unlimited application.  O/W write-ups can bring about great relief and enable a person to achieve greater happiness.
L.  RON HUBBARD
Founder

Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations

Hubbard, L. R. (1984, 2 March). O/W Writeups. The organization executive course. (1991 ed., Vol. 0, pp. 535-39). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications. 1

Notes

  1. Lisa McPherson wrote several O/W writeups in the weeks and months before her untimely death in 1995. See http://www.lisafiles.com/scn/ethics/ow/index.html ↩

by Leave a Comment

HCOB: Confessionals And The Non-Intererence Zone

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
HCO BULLETIN OF 8 MARCH 1982R1
REVISED 24 APRIL 1983

FSO and AOs:
Case Supervisors
Auditors
Tech/Qual
MAAs

CONFESSIONALS AND THE NON-INTERFERENCE ZONE

Refs:
HCOB 23    Dec. 71    Solo C/S Series 10 C/S Series 73 THE NO-INTERFERENCE AREA
HCOB 7 Sept. 64 II PTPs, OVERTS AND ARC BREAKS
HCOB 13 Sept. 65R OUT-TECH AND HOW TO GET IT IN
HCOB 29    Sept. 65 II THE CONTINUING OVERT ACT
HCOB 3 May 62R ARC BREAKS, MISSED WITHHOLDS
HCO PL 23 Feb. 70 QUALITY OF SERVICE
HCOB 13    Oct. 82    C/S Series 116 ETHICS AND THE C/S
HCOB 28    Sept. 82 C/S Series 115 MIXING RUNDOWNS AND REPAIRS

It has long been known that people do not make gains when audited over undisclosed overts and withholds and that a withhold missed in auditing can cause quite an adverse reaction.

Because it has not previously been specified whether Confessionals could be done during the Non-interference Zone, it tended to leave the matter open to interpretation, and a common interpretation has been that one must not do any kind of Confessional or O/W pulling during the Non-interference Zone.

But what about a case who is out-ethics and not making progress due to continuous overts and withholds or, even worse, undisclosed overts or crimes against Scientology? Such a case won’t make any progress until these are gotten off.

A person who is NCG, nattery, critical or otherwise exhibiting O/Ws or out- ethics must be handled so that he can make case gains. And must not be continued in auditing until this is done.

This applies to pre-OTs as well as pes and specifically also applies to pre-OTs on OT III; on New OT IV, OT Drug RD; on New OT V, Audited NOTs; on New OT VII, Solo NOTs—the same as it applies to any other grade or OT section.

It is a CRIME to let a pre-OT get onto an OT section in that condition in the first place. And it is also a CRIME to continue the error and not remedy the matter right away.

One would not embark on a series of Confessionals during another grade or OT section, but it is imperative that pre-OTs on these sections who have missed withholds get them off and a specific Confessional can and should be done to accomplish this.

CAUTION

A pre-OT who is running well and making case gain should not be interrupted.

And, where a person in the Non-interference Zone does need O/Ws pulled, the auditor must first obtain a C/S okay.

SUMMARY

By following these lines, you will save some pre-OTs who otherwise would not make it at all!

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder

Hubbard, L. R. (1982, 8 March). Confessionals And The Non-Intererence Zone. Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology (1991 ed., Vol. XII p. 389-90). Los Angeles: Bridge Publications, Inc.

Notes

  1. Document studied on the Hubbard Senior Security Checker Course. ↩