The primary error one can make in ARC Break handling is to handle the pc with ARC Break procedure when the pc really has a missed withhold.

As some auditors dislike pulling withholds (because they run into pcs who use it to carve the auditor up such as “I have a withhold that everybody thinks you are awful ______”) it is easier to confront the idea that a pc has an ARC Break than the idea that the pc has a withhold.

In case of doubt one meter checks on a withhold to see if it is non-existent (“Am I demanding a withhold you haven’t got?”). If this is the case the TA will blow down. If it isn’t the case the needle and TA remain unchanged. If the pc’s nattery or ARC Breaky condition continues despite finding by-passed charge, then of course it is obviously a withhold.

ARC Break finding does work. When the pc doesn’t change despite skillful ARC Break handling, locating and indicating, it was a withhold in the first place.

The hardest pc to handle is the missed withhold pc. They ARC Break but you can’t get the pc out of it. The answer is, the pc had a withhold all the time that is at the bottom of all these ARC Breaks.

Scientology auditing does not leave the pc in poor condition unless one goofs on ARC Breaks.

ARC Breaks occur most frequently on people with missed withholds.

Therefore if a pc can’t be patched up easily or won’t stay patched up on ARC Breaks, there must be basic withholds on the case. One then works hard on withholds with any and all the tools that we’ve got.

ARC Breaks don’t cause blows. Missed withholds do. When you won’t hear what the pc is saying, then you have made him have a withhold and it responds as a missed withhold.

In short, the bottom of ARC Breaks is a missed withhold.

But an anti-social act done and then withheld sets the pc up to become „an ARC Breaky pc“. It isn’t an accurate remark really since one has a pc with withholds who on being audited ARC Breaks easily. So the accurate statement is „the pc is a withholdy type pc that ARC Breaks a lot“. Now that type exists. And they sure have lots of subsequent ARC Breaks and are regularly being patched up.

If you have a pc, then, who seems to have a lot of ARC Breaks, the pc is a „withholdy pc“ not an „ARC Breaky pc“. Any auditor miss causes a pc blow-up. The auditor by calling this pc an „ARC Breaky pc“ is not using a description which leads to a resolution of the case as thousands of ARC Break assessments leave the case still liable to ARC Break. If you call such a case that ARC Breaks a lot a „withholdy pc that ARC Breaks a lot“ then you can solve the case. For all you have to do is work on withholds.

The actual way to handle a „withholdy pc that ARC Breaks a lot“ after you’ve cooled off the last of his many ARC Breaks is:

1. Get the pc to look at what’s going on with his sessions.

2. Get the pc in comm.

3. Get the pc to look at what’s really bugging him.

4. Get the pc’s willingness to give withholds up on a gradient.

5. Bring the pc to an understanding of what he’s doing.

6. Get the pc’s purpose in being audited in plain view to him or her.

Those are of course the names of the first six grades. However, low down, these six things are all crushed together and you could really pursue that cycle in one session just to get the pc up a bit without even touching the next grade up.

Whenever I see a sour-faced person who has been „trained“ or is being „trained“ I know one thing — there goes a pc with lots of withholds. I also know, there is a pc who ARC Breaks a lot in session. And I also know his co-auditor is weak and flabby as an auditor. And I also know his auditing supervisor doesn’t shove the student auditor into doing the process correctly.

One sour-faced student, one glance and I know all the above things, bang!

So why can’t somebody else notice it?

Auditing is a pleasure. But not when an auditor can’t tell a withhold from an ARC Break and doesn’t know that continual ARC Breaks are caused by missed withholds on the bottom of the chain.

I never miss on this. Why should you?

The only case that will really „bug you“ is the CONTINUOUS OVERT case. Here’s one that commits anti-social acts daily during auditing. He’s a nut. He’ll never get better, case always hangs up.

Unless you treat his continual overts as a solution to a PTP. And find what PTP he’s trying to solve with these crazy overt acts.

You see, we can even solve that case.

BUT, don’t go believing Scientology doesn’t work when it meets an unchanging or continually misemotional pc. Both of these people are foul balls who are loaded with withholds.

We’ve cracked them for years and years now.

But not by playing patty-cake or „slap my wrist“.

Takes an auditor, not a lady finger.

„Mister, you’ve been wasting my time for three sessions. You have withholds. Give!“ „Mister, you refuse just once more to answer my question and you’re for it. I’ve checked this meter. It’s not a withhold of nothing. You have withholds. Give!“ „Mister, that’s it. I am asking the D of P to ask the Tech Sec for a Comm Ev on you from HCO for no report. “

If skill couldn’t do it, demand may. If demand couldn’t do it, a Comm Ev sure will.

For it’s a no report!

How can you make a man well when he’s got a sewer full of slimy acts.

Show me any person who is critical of us and I’ll show you crimes and intended crimes that would stand a magistrate’s hair on end.

Why not try it? Don’t buy „I once stole a paper clip from the HASI“ as an overt or „You’re a lousy auditor“ as a withhold. Hell, man, people who tell you those things just stole your lunch or intend to empty the till.

Get clever, auditor. Thetans are basically good. Them that Scientology doesn’t change are good — but down underneath a pile of crimes you couldn’t get into a Confession Story Magazine.

Okay. Please don’t go on making this error. It grieves me.