It has been found that the abandonment of an unflattened engram to start another one can leave the case in an apparent jam. Starting a new engram without flattening the first one contacted may be, to the preclear, the same as a command not to confront the first engram.

Stable data: The incident entered by the auditor must be wholly flattened by Scientology commands before a second incident is approached.

The end goal of running incidents is the increasing of the ability to confront.

When incidents are started and not finished in favour of a new incident, the preclear may feel he is being forbidden to confront the first one.

An incident consists of an overt engram and a motivator engram on the same subject.

It is evidently necessary to scout the earlier auditing of any incident that was abandoned in order to get the incident run. Otherwise, a black detachment may result. The blackness and the detachment may exist in the earlier auditing of the same incident rather than in the incident.

The intention of a bad auditor is to prevent confronting. Therefore, bad auditing must be cleared away before a contacted engram can be completely entered again.

The process that most swiftly strips off bad auditing (to clean up engrams or otherwise) is:

“Recall something you have done to (auditor’s name).” “Recall something you have withheld from (auditor’s name).”

These questions are run alternately (one after the other) and are best run muzzled. (TR 0, 1, 2 and 3 only — auditor only nods when preclear originates.)

This mechanism is probably behind most black or invisible cases now extant in Scientology.