The auditor will encounter many cases which resolve very rapidly. These account for fully 50% of the people who come to him, but he will also encounter many people whose cases are resistive, and he will encounter a small handful who wouldn’t let anything happen if the auditor used a shotgun on them. These last are classified as “Circuit Cases.”
The characteristic of these cases is that they are occluded — which is to say that they are studying the significance of things, that they always think before they look, that they want to know before they go, that they are relatively motionless in space, and that they are holding motion in many ways.
The resolution of such cases as outlined in PAB No. 12 is not difficult, but there is a trick about these cases which the auditor should understand.
I would no more audit one of these people without an E-Meter than I would use psychiatry on them. For this case very often pretends to run one thing when it is running quite another, and only the response of a needle will tell the auditor whether or not the case is doing anything. The case merely might be lying there agreeing about it and thinking.
The Iroquois Indian had an illness which he called “the sickness of long thinking.” The auditor would do well to keep this illness firmly in mind when processing resistive cases. These cases are sick of thinking and they will go on thinking and go on computing until they are quite dead, for they cannot be brought to look without rather extraordinary means. Acceptance Level Processing is quite welcome to these cases. Formula H is extremely welcome to them and these, indeed, get the case up to a point where it can be run on such things as SOP 8.
The auditor knows he is looking at a circuit case when, during auditing, the case does not demonstrate a physical reaction as a result of the auditor’s processing; that is to say, the case does not move around. In old-time Dianetics the case which said it was running a prenatal and yet which had no tendency to curl up in a ball, no matter how slight, was actually thinking about running a prenatal.
I wish to state this very strongly about such cases: they are often very convincing and can be mistaken by the auditor for a wide-open case. On reviewing a number of cases in processing which have been reported to me as wide-open cases and on looking at these cases themselves, I find that the auditor was actually auditing a Resistive V, which yet had learned enough patter to go on and run things.
Some cases which actually did have sonic and visio were another type which falls into the same category. These are what we call the “wide-open case.” The wide-open case is actually a psychotic who duplicates continuously and psychotically.
Anyone has a time track and anyone duplicates. The wide-open case is thoroughly sure that it is duplicating, is actually under a compulsion to duplicate, but doesn’t duplicate. It doesn’t look at things enough to duplicate. It dubs in an entire track.
We have today very little concern with all this beyond a very important fact. The auditor is there to audit the preclear. The preclear is there to be audited. At that point where cases become difficult, this is what is happening: the auditor’s auditing the preclear, and then the preclear is auditing something else. The preclear isn’t being audited; the auditor is doing a second-hand audit of a circuit. This doesn’t get a case anywhere. The auditor in this wise is actually sitting there watching the manifestation of self-auditing.
In Six Steps for Self-Auditing we have more or less licked the problem. An individual can now with some success audit his own case. But this is still difficult on very low-toned cases, for these people will put the Six Steps for Self-Auditing to work so remotely from themselves that they will actually find the two upper corners of the room with a ridge; and, indeed, I have discovered a preclear doing this. I asked a preclear after nothing had happened for ten minutes what he really was doing and made him go into it in detail. (Any success I have in auditing is the result of communicating with the preclear, a procedure which is recommended.) The preclear finally permitted it to be beaten out of him verbally that he was taking a ridge which was across his chest and had put two corners of this ridge up to the two corners of the room and was making the ridge hold on to the two comers of the room. Astonishingly enough, this did not entirely defeat processing because this ridge consisted of overt acts and motivators and these were flowing off and the preclear was sitting there looking at them. But this was not auditing the preclear, this was auditing via the preclear a circuit in which I was not even vaguely interested. The preclear is so used to being employed by life as a servomechanism that he will very often simply relay the commands he is given to a something else; and this is the condition for which an auditor must be alert.
Back in 1947 I was using anything that worked and was employing hypnotism and psychoanalysis in addition to what I had learned about engrams and other factors in life. The psychoanalyst learned from Freud that there are some cases who simply stand back and look at themselves and who do not participate in the activities. The homosexual, according to Freud, is one of these. I do not know as to that, as the finding has not been borne out in my own work, but I do know that I had many preclears who did not actually participate in the process of being processed. I solved this in some of these cases rather drastically by misdirecting the preclear’s attention. One case I remember of a young man who never seemed to audit anything I asked him to audit and who was far too alert to his surroundings to be interested at all in remedying his attitude towards those surroundings. I put a vase of flowers on my desk and knocked them off with a crash and immediately said, “You’re perfectly safe; now let’s really run through this.” I know now that this Indian technique of getting immediate attention snaps the effort of the preclear which is being devoted to holding an engram at bay away fast enough for the engram to collapse. Good or bad, the young man got well. It is not a process I would particularly recommend. On a test case using this, about a year ago, I had a preclear have a ridge blow up with a considerable explosion which immediately thrust the preclear into apathy and it took me about three hours of heavy slogging with what I knew then to bring the preclear back up to normal. At least, however, the preclear was not in the same attitude.
If you have any reason to suspect that you are auditing somebody who is auditing somebody else, all you have to do is to get into very close contact with the preclear and guide him through very carefully the Six Steps to Better Beingness as contained in PAB No. 7. This can be varied with PAB No. 1 2’s cycles of explosions. Just be sure the preclear is actually doing what you want him to do and do it in such a way that the preclear actually gets interested in doing it and you will find the case advancing rapidly.
If the condition still continues, use Step VII of SOP 8. You will find that it is very productive and should be used on such a case for a rather long time.
THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THINKING IS TO COUNTERACT THE LOSS OF THE ABILITY TO GENERATE FORCE. ONLY IN THE ABSENCE OF FORCE IS THINKING NECESSARY.