The first thing to know about C/Sing the HRD is that the Rundown runs and rolls along very lightly, smoothly and with excellent gains as a normal occurrence. Provided the auditor’s basic auditing is in and the Command Sheets are followed, the HRD is a dream to audit and C/S. Even despite minor flubs or errors, even using relatively untrained auditors, the HRD resulted in spectacular gains during the pilot. Why is this?
To start with, the booklet,”The Way to Happiness” contains a moral code based on truth — on real points of departure from optimum conduct and on a real ideal scene for existence — and it is based on the dynamic principle of existence: SURVIVE!
Each of the points covered in the booklet are universal in regard to anybody in this universe. Each person has encountered these points in one way or another. And these are a summation of the points where beings went off the rails.
In some respects these principles undercut other types of aberration as they are more basic to a being, his survival and his capacity to decide and act on his own determinism in an optimum manner. Decisions and choices are very intimate to a thetan. So is his beingness, doingness and havingness.
This is very interesting technically as we know that people are aberrated and have been aberrated for a long time. A question often raised is, How did a being get aberrated originally and why was the being susceptible to aberration? Obviously the being’s power of choice and responsibility for himself and others has to be part of the answer to that question. The HRD addresses and raises the individual’s ability to make correct choices toward optimum survival on his own determinism — not just because he’s supposed to — but because he understands why and because his ability to follow these precepts has been raised.
Demonstrable evidences of the HRD undercutting other types of aberration are: locks, secondaries and engrams blowing off, fixed ideas blowing, service facsimilies popping up and blowing, valences (with all their characteristics) coming to view and separating out, misunderstoods, false data, overts and motivators blowing, fixed behaviour patterns or dramatizations blowing, PTS conditions blowing and the pc becoming more and more himself — all occurring on many cases during the HRD and often without that specific aberration or case condition having been directly audited or run.
For example, there is no secondary or engram running on the HRD, yet it soon became very obvious from pc worksheets that not only were secondaries and engrams blowing, but sometimes whole chains would vanish. Another example is that the HRD doesn’t directly ask for or run service facsimilies, yet these similarly often popped up and blew on pc cognition. Just recently a case being audited on the HRD suddenly recovered the content of an incident of hypnosis and blew the hypnotic commands. Many pcs being audited on the HRD suddenly cognited on past PTS situations and expressed the EP that one would normally get when a pc completed one of the PTS rundowns. None of these were taken up directly during the HRD (nor should they be) yet they blew while doing the HRD steps!
The steps of the HRD take up and handle some of the factors relating to a thetan’s susceptibility to aberration. The result of this is twofold: 1) later, more complex, aberrations blow off as locks when the basic susceptibility to that aberration is handled; 2) there is a positive gain of increased immunity to that type of aberration in the person’s future.
Thus the HRD is dealing with very hot, rather basic charge. And any error in dealing with that basic charge could restimulate a large amount of later charge sitting on that basic. Hence the injunctions not to depart from the procedure of the HRD. Fortunately, the steps and command sheets of the HRD are very well planned and derived and there is little chance of error. There are also built in safeguards in the HRD steps and command sheets (such as the — 11 through — 20 questions which detect and catch any missed answers during the previous steps).
The brilliance with which the subject matter of the booklet and the original ten steps of the HRD were laid out, makes it possible to handle this very hot, rather basic charge lightly and smoothly. Often, the pc simply answers the questions and cognites, quite unaware of the depth of run of these materials. (To an informed auditor or C/S it can be quite amusing to see a session in which huge hunks of aberration were peeled off the case and blown, followed by a pc comment (and sometimes an uninformed auditor comment) to the effect that although what was covered in that session wasn’t very charged, the pc feels fantastic and that it was a very interesting session!)
The fact that the HRD does address such hot basic charge is a two-edged sword. While this makes it imperative to deliver the rundown standardly, it also makes possible some very spectacular case gains. During the pilot of the HRD auditing, even highly trained auditors and C/Ses with many years of experience, were very impressed with the depth of cognition and the magnitude of gains on all cases, including no grades pcs. As but one example of this, 50% of the pcs on the HRD got the following perception change and stated it very clearly to their auditor: the colors of objects in the environment increased and the objects in the PT environment became clearer, more solid and more real, accompanied by increased perception of depth or relative distances. (Very few of the auditors and none of the pcs concerned had any idea of the magnitude or significance of this phenomenon, though all were very pleased with it.) As it occurred on 50% of the cases and as the cases on the pilot covered the spectrum from no grades to OT VII, it is presumable that any pc who has not yet had that phenomenon, will get it during the HRD. That this gain occurred on a procedure using only TWC and Straightwire techniques is nothing short of miraculous.
THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN DEALS WITH VERY BASIC AND HOT CHARGE OF A UNIVERSAL NATURE, OFTEN UNDERCUTTING OTHER TYPES OF CHARGE, WITH HANDLINGS THAT ARE LIGHT, SMOOTH AND EASY TO RUN FOR BOTH THE AUDITOR AND THE PC.
As the precepts in the booklet are derived from the dynamic principle of existence and as each of these precepts is an application to life and livingness, the subject matter of the booklet and the rundown have high reality, high practical value and high interest to the pc. It is one thing to take up very basic matters as far as a being is concerned or matters that relate to things from long long ago, it is something else for the pc to have sufficient reality to be able to successfully run these matters.
Each of the precepts is as true and relevant to life and livingness today as it was way back when, when it was first encountered or collided with and when original mistakes were made by beings. Thus the time span of these precepts is both whole track as well as PT and future — not that the pc is required to go whole track during the HRD, nor is the pc restricted from doing so. But since these same points of departure from optimum behaviour and existence originally are also ever present in life today, there is another factor that the HRD handles: that of chronic restimulation of aberration on these precepts. This too, is quite an achievement technically.
Following from the above, it must be realized by the auditors and C/Ses that the HRD is not only an auditing rundown, it is also an educational rundown as it provides the stable data necessary to resolve the confusions about moral choices in life. There has been a tremendous vacuum of true stable data both in recent times and on the whole track. Thus the value of the stable data alone is considerable to the pc. C/Ses and auditors when encountering apparently”uncharged” or not heavily charged parts of the rundown should remember this point, lest they be tempted to quickie or omit parts of the booklet or rundown. (There is quite a difference between the injunction not to overrun a question past its F/N or not to clean cleans and deciding to omit questions, steps or whole portions of the rundown on the grounds that they are”unnecessary” or”uncharged”.)
THE HAPPINESS RUNDOWN AND THE BOOKLET,”THE WAY TO HAPPINESS” HAVE GREAT VALUE IN TERMS OF PROVIDING AND CLEARING THE STABLE DATA NECESSARY TO MAKING MORAL CHOICES IN LIFE QUITE IN ADDITION TO THE AUDITING VALUE OF THE RUNDOWN IN TERMS OF REMOVING CHARGE FROM THE CASE.
The sequence of the precepts in the booklet,”The Way to Happiness” follow a natural progression starting from the 1st Dynamic and expanding outwards. Thus the”straightforward method” is the preferred method. (Ref: HRD Series #4 — How to Audit the HRD)
The steps — the basic ten steps — of the rundown also follow a precise sequence. These steps are in the order necessary to handle the charge and accomplish the objects of the rundown. It is an exact technical sequence. For example, you are not likely to be able to find and clear false data unless the person has true data available. The person cannot comprehend true data over misunderstoods. It would be useless to ask for motivators or overts if the pc didn’t understand the subject of these questions. Often it is more effective to unburden the pc’s overts by getting off the overts of others first, then ask for the pc’s overts on that line. It could be impossible to find, let alone separate the pc out from a valence, if the overts committed while dramatizing that valence have not been gotten off. And what use would it be to ask a pc in the valence of Uncle Willie-the-thief whether he had any reservations about keeping the precept: ”Do not steal”?
A close inspection of the ten basic steps of the rundown will show that they are arranged in a precise technical sequence. There are additional questions (-11 through — 20) to catch any misses, additional answers or latent cognitions. But if the sequence of the ten basic steps was changed or if one or more of these steps was omitted, the rundown could be made to fail. (This doesn’t mean that the pc has to have something on every step, he might not have any misunderstoods on a particular precept or he might not be in the valence of an immoral person on a particular moral, as examples. This doesn’t mean the auditor shouldn’t ask the question though.)
THE PRECEPTS AND THE HANDLING STEPS ARE ARRANGED IN A PRECISE TECHNICAL SEQUENCE.
Examples of these appear in HCOB 24 Feb. 81, HRD Series #4, HOW TO AUDIT THE HRD. Note that these break down into two categories: 1) errors in basic auditing (GAEs), 2) errors in the HRD procedure.
Basic auditing errors are important and even more important on the HRD for this reason, the subject matter of the HRD puts the pc into session to a high degree of in-session-ness. Auditing errors then result in a rather shocking shift of attention. Some poorly trained auditors might find to their surprise that although they think they got away with being sloppy with regard to the basics of auditing previously, that they cannot do so on the HRD. There is never actually”no consequence” to out auditing basics. It only sometimes appears that way to those who have never gotten a pc into session. When such a person tries to audit a hot rundown that puts the pc into session, then his out basics show up as these throw the poor pc back out of session again!
So high is the pc’s interest in the HRD that the auditor has to commit GAEs to cause any trouble as the pc seems to still do well despite minor errors. This is a tribute to the HRD; it does not excuse any error, no matter how”minor.” The greater the auditor’s adherence to the basics of auditing, the greater the results will be. It is very much a part of the C/S’s duties to ensure that his HRD auditors are flubless professionals on basic auditing; TRs, metering, Auditor’s Code and ARC for the pc.
The tapes and materials on the HRD courses cover these basics and should be referred to and re-studied and crammed until the auditor is a real professional whose pcs make case gain on that auditor’s basic auditing alone. (This is an excellent example to set for other auditors in your area!) The basic auditing tapes and materials are not at all confidential and should be used to bring other non-HRD auditors in your area up to the same standards.
Never go on repairing auditing flubs on the pc only to risk having these happen again. Always correct the auditor toward being a real professional.
All of the steps and commands and handlings are laid out in detail in HCOB 16 Feb. 81, HRD Series #3, HAPPINESS RUNDOWN, COMMAND SHEETS. The reason for the detailed layout is to prevent auditors from mistakenly losing their place in the rundown, so that the auditor doesn’t have to memorize a long series of handling steps, and to make it possible for the auditor to put maximum attention on the pc in session. Provided the auditor is familiar with these command sheets and has drilled their use, there should be no flubs in procedure. During test of these command sheets in their final form there were no further procedural flubs even by inexperienced auditors. Should an auditor flub, cram and drill the auditor on the command sheets in cramming.
Willfully altering the HRD procedure through”know-best”, inventiveness or any other reason is culpable on a charge of Technical Alter-is.
It hasn’t happened yet but it is conceivable that someone could think that it might be better to L & N for the valence in step 8. All sorts of”technical” arguments could be presented. Such a person could argue for hours, pretending to quote issues he didn’t understand and so on. Or claim that a pc might get a wrong item on step 8 the way it is laid out in the command sheets. Except that the laid out procedure is the way it is done, has been proven extremely workable and on forty cases audited by auditors of varying levels of skill (including two”read it, drill it, do it” auditors), the pc has always found the valence where there was one to find and none has gotten a wrong item.
It could equally be argued that the HRD Repair List doesn’t include every conceivable error or BPC that could be brought about. It does include all the points found during the pilot and contains the essential points pertaining to the HRD. There is no intention of extending that repair list endlessly. The time would be more effectively spent in cramming, retreading or retraining those who invent new ways to err. And if you do have to handle such a person, be sure to get that person through the HRD themselves or repair and re-do the HRD on that person as part of the handling.
While there is an injunction not to depart from the HRD onto other actions, it is not forbidden to do a C/S 53 on a pc (or other appropriate correction list) if necessary. Experience on the pilot has taught that in the only instances where a C/S 53 was used, it turned out to be an incorrect action and the cases resolved on repair of the HRD itself and continuing the HRD.
Pcs have gone Exterior frequently during the HRD — sometimes spectacularly, once with exterior perception of the environment — but none of these had any subsequent trouble with INT. All were allowed to have their win and then continued on with the HRD and usually went Exterior again only to a greater degree next time, or simply became more and more Exterior. This doesn’t mean that a pc might not be encountered who during the HRD is found to need a repair of past Int Remedies or to need an Int Remedy. But it didn’t turn out that way during the pilot. (One pc who had been intending to blow prior to the HRD and did semi-blow and came back during an early session on the HRD, was thought to have Out Int and put onto an End of Endless Int RD. It didn’t resolve anything and she still wanted to blow after it, as Out Int was not the reason. She did start to change and got off a huge grief charge when continued on the HRD. The main BPC found on this case was out ruds of long duration and missed answers on the earlier steps of the rundown, necessitating putting her back to the beginning of the rundown to get off all the missed answers. (The auditor had been meter checking the HRD steps for read and omitting steps as”unreading” and”unnecessary”.)
So, while other remedies such as the Int Remedy might be found necessary on some cases in the future, experience during the pilot has been otherwise. (Possibly because the HRD deals with more basic charge and captures the pc’s attention more than other matters.)
The same appears to be true of departures from the HRD onto”OT Reviews”.
BEWARE OF ANY PROPOSED DEPARTURE FROM THE HRD ONTO OTHER ACTIONS, DO NOT PERMIT AUDITORS TO C/S IN THE CHAIR, AND ALWAYS SEEK TO CONTINUE AND COMPLETE (OR REPAIR, CONTINUE AND COMPLETE), THE HRD.
The most common and most explosive BPC on the HRD has been when answers have been missed. The ways that this has happened are: the auditor asked the pc the question but didn’t permit the pc to answer the question in full or to give all the answers to that question, the auditor checked the question for read and left it unasked as”unreading”, the auditor decided to omit the question, the auditor interrupted the pc and asked for an earlier similar before the pc had finished answering the first question asked, the auditor Q & A’d by questioning the pc’s answer, the auditor changed the question to something else or asked other additive questions instead of continuing to ask the auditing question being run.
Missed or bypassed answers are a special type of missed withhold. These are an inadvertent withhold that the auditor is not letting the pc get off by failing to flatten the auditing question or by interrupting the pc while the pc was answering. The by-passed charge is the untold answers. The handling is to go back over these questions, flattening them.
When the missed answer is on the step 8 (valence) question, then not only do you have a missed withhold, but it is a valence that has been restimulated and missed. As these valences are the valences of immoral or anti-social persons, a missed withhold of a missed valence can result in a mean reaction.
Finally there is the missed withhold of nothing or an auditor having cleaned cleans on the pc — either by insisting on re-clearing words or questions that have already been cleared, insisting that the pc find an answer to a question that the pc doesn’t have, or by”steering” a pc on a meter (inaccurately).
NEVER PERMIT AN AUDITOR TO MISS WITHHOLDS OR TO MISS ANSWERS ON A PC, OR TO LEAVE THEM MISSED OR UNPULLED (NOR LET THEM GO TO THE OTHER EXTREME OF CLEANING CLEANS).
(Actually it is awfully easy to see if a pc has bad indicators, out rudiments or is so distraught that he is about to blow and to handle these. It is just as easy to see when a pc is in session and not harass the pc. All you have to do is observe the indicators.)
Before giving the remedies (which follow) it should be stressed here that it is not sufficient to just remedy the pc or case. Also always correct any out basic auditing or procedural errors on the part of the auditor in cramming, retread or retrain or you will be perpetually trying to solve unusual case situations when that is not the correct target for your attention. And having corrected the case but not the auditor, you will soon have to repair the case again which is not good for the pc and is repeated work for you.
An L1C or rudiments are the usual remedy for any upset or enturbulence between sessions or to handle a rough session, due to out basic auditing.
The HRD Repair List and its handlings is the remedy for any procedural errors during the HRD. Sometimes an additional action needs to be done to fully or terminatedly handle what came up on the HRD Repair List, before continuing the Rundown. For example if someone is invalidating the pc between sessions or coffee shop auditing the pc between sessions, get the offender sent to ethics to knock it off. If it turns out that answers were missed in the Rundown, you might need to go back to where the pc was last running well and have the auditor come forward from there flattening each of the unflat questions. When you suspect that a situation exists that will need further handling before continuing the HRD, just C/S for the HRD Repair List and handle and require that the folder be then turned back in to you to C/S.
Usual PTS Type I handlings are not superseded by the HRD and are still necessary. The booklet though is itself an additional PTS Type I handling tool.
Most BPC from earlier flubbed auditing has not required much handling, if any at all, during the HRD. Several times during the pilot a pc during the HRD suddenly cognited on why he had gotten into trouble or BPC during an earlier session(s) and blew the BPC. Frequently, then, BPC from earlier rough sessions blows off as a lock during the HRD due to increased responsibility or perception on the pc’s part. One pc suddenly cognited that the reason for difficulty running an earlier process was that the pc was in somebody else’s valence during that auditing and that it was that valence that was having trouble. But if it comes up and you need to handle it, repair the earlier auditing error rapidly (but only repair, don’t get into re-running) and then resume the HRD. (If an earlier action done on the case needs to be completed, note it on the program to be completed after the HRD is done.)
If you get no reads on the HRD Repair List or on an L1C (or any other prepared list for that matter) or if the auditor mainly gets false reads or a few reads but the matter does not fully resolve, realize that you are running into out metering. Either get the auditor through HCOB 22 Apr 80, ASSESSMENT DRILLS or get the pc reassigned to an auditor who can assess and get accurate reads, and, get the original auditor through the ASSESSMENT DRILLS as soon as possible. Do not start puzzling or going unusual because a prepared list”doesn’t work”, realize it’s out TRs and out metering.
Use the”assessment method” of doing the HRD only when necessary and unless it is being done on someone close to completing the Rundown or on a re-do of the Rundown, get back onto the”straightforward method” as early as possible.
If when you get to the end of the HRD, the pc is not VVGIs with all parts of the EP of HRD having been obtained, repair any auditing errors with an L1C and any procedural errors with the HRD Repair List (have an HRD Repair List assessed and handled whether procedural errors are visible or not). If it is obvious that the EP occurred earlier, after any BPC or upset has been repaired, rehab the EP.
Otherwise, you must get the HRD re-done. It is unflat/incomplete either due to missed/unflat or omitted questions or steps, or possibly the pc’s case having to be unburdened by a first pass through the Rundown, before the Rundown can be fully flattened. (Some cases may need a second pass through the Rundown.)
A re-do of the Rundown can be done most rapidly by the”assessment method” if the pc is close to the EP. Otherwise it may be just as fast to start over from the beginning using the”straightforward method”.
(Note: On an overcharged case it may be obvious during the first run through of the HRD that the case isn’t likely to get the full EP and that a second run through will be required. If so, don’t be concerned about it and don’t try to overwork any of the steps or sections of the Rundown on the first run. Just keep the pc winning no matter how lightly or shallowly the case runs. As long as the basic auditing is smooth and the pc is getting wins it will all come out in the end.)
On one of the pilot cases a special type of”valence” came up which is an identity of the pc’s own. Rather than having known and gone into the valence of someone else, the pc came up with his own identity. (Of course there is no way of telling whether this identity of the pc’s wasn’t some earlier person’s valence that the pc had gone into and then assumed it was his own identity. It isn’t even important as the handling is the same either way.)
The handling is as follows:
1. Fly a Rud if no F/N.
2. R Factor pc on what you will be doing.
3a.”Can you recall a time when you observed someone else being (identity)?” ”Tell me about it.”
3b.”Can you recall a time when you wanted to be (identity)?” ”Tell me about it.”
3c.”Can you recall a time when you decided that the (position of) (post of) (beingness of) (identity) was a good thing?” ”Tell me about it.”
3d.”As (identity) did you do something bad?” ”Tell me about it.”
(Repeat steps 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, over and over until pc has a major Cog, comes fully into PT (out of the past identity) or expresses in some way that he’s now separate from that identity or can be it or not at will.)
(Note: A suitable R Factor could be something to the effect that you are going to run a process to raise the pc’s cause level over being the identity or not, or raise his power of choice over it, or to raise his ability to be that identity again-or stop being it — whatever is appropriate.)
The session on the C/S above took 1 hr 10 mins, made a major change in the pc’s case, resulted in a persistent F/N, W GIs, a rave Exam report and a 2 page originated Success Story.
You won’t have to use this often, but if you do run into an”own identity” the handling above will work.
The Happiness Rundown is a very powerful but lightly run action. It invariably results in very pleased and happy pcs — and auditors and associates of the pcs!!
If you aren’t getting lots of wins on pcs on this Rundown then there are GAEs or procedural errors. The HRD requires no inventiveness on the part of the auditor or C/S. It is a very simple easy to audit rundown and is possibly one of the most rewarding rundowns to audit or C/S in terms of pc wins and being able to help make the world a much better, happier place.
Based on the continuing stream of Success stories from pcs, auditors and friends of the pcs during the pilot, one could easily get the idea that one should drop everything else and concentrate on the Happiness Rundown alone. It does not, however, handle”everything” on a pc’s case, nor does it supplant other grades and levels. It will however enable preclears, Clears and OTs to run remaining Grade Chart actions with greater success than would have been possible before.
Keep your pcs and your auditors winning! They are counting on you.