Русская версия

Site search:
ENGLISH DOCS FOR THIS DATE- Operational Bulletins Growing Up (OB-13) - OB560117
- Scientology Schools Curriculum (OB-13 Appendix 1) - OB560117

1 Brunswick House,
83 Palace Gardens Terrace, London, W. 8.
BAY 8881
17 January 1956
Distribution: Washington — Dr. W. H. Young; South Africa — Dr. M. Scholtz; Australia — Dr. John Farrell; New Zealand — Dr. Frank Turnbull; West. Australia — Dr. Stanley Richards; Connecticut — Dr. Dick Halpern; Dublin — Dr. Bernie Green; London — Dr. Jack Parkhouse.


This is the thirteenth issue of Operational Bulletins. So far we have been setting an enviable record of getting Operational Bulletins out on time. They are usually composed on Monday and are mimeographed and mailed late Tuesday afternoon. They are done on a special Gestetner machine which uses blue ink to distinguish them from other mimeographed material released for the various organizations. In every week except Christmas week, when nobody worked on Tuesday and when we were a day late, the Operational Bulletin is setting a record for coming out on time, a noteworthy and unusual circumstance in Dianetics and Scientology publications.

The purpose of Operational Bulletins is of course to furnish information of various types to Scientology organizations and personnel and to give them the jump, “the scoop”, ahead of the rumour line, individual instructions by letter to various personnel and primarily and principally to keep key staff personnel in Scientology from being embarrassed by the sudden change of direction or the solution or arising of certain incidents, so that they can act in the role of people who are “in the know”. This is quite important since we have in the past had many instances whereby things were released to one quarter of the world, were unknown in another quarter of the world and people in the field would ask staff members in some HAS what was going on and these HAS members would not know, much to their embarrassment. The Operational Bulletins give them a chance to have the straight dope and enable them to put people right concerning a great deal of material.

Further, if I started to originate individual letters to each and every key person in Scientology and give him regularly all that was going on we would have in effect merely a repeat of this Operational Bulletin; thus I am enabled to write to persons material which is directly and intimately in their department and to put all generalized information on the communication network covered by the Operational Bulletins.

Operational Bulletins are sent by airmail to every quarter of the globe and although there are not very many copies of them released, they have the effect of a very wide distribution system. However, you should keep definitely in mind the fact that the information which appears in the Operational Bulletins is not generally well known to the field. In fact practically none of this material is intended for direct consumption by auditors and Scientologists at large. It is not that they would not understand it but in these bulletins I do not spend any time being nice or pulling my punches or being artificially poised about everything and anything. From my viewpoint these Operational Bulletins give me a chance to vent what bad temper I have and to indulge what puckish sense of humour I might conceive to be ill placed in wider spheres.

Alert yourselves, however, to the fact that the material in Operational Bulletins 2 reworded where it is of questionable content to non-Scientologists, can be freely used and quoted in Certainty, Ability, Local Newsletters, in lectures such as those given live by instructors and those given to free group people, and indeed it is expected that the material in Operational Bulletins will get a wider release at the direct discretion and good sense of people in Scientology who are in charge of various publications everywhere.

You know how when I’m right there my closest friends sit around in the office or living room and we take the situation apart, well this is not that good, but the Operational Bulletins are at least something of a substitute for the much closer type of communication that we like and which is quite impossible on a wider publication basis wherein the publication might fall into any set of hands.


The other day a well known figure in British Scientology was standing in my office being asked to undertake an activity and I said to him, more to make conversation than anything else, “Of course you know that if we were to take on a long series of cases suffering from some specific chronic somatic we would at least, even if we used group processing, alleviate the majority of those cases.” And this gentleman who has been in Scientology for a very long time and has done a very great deal of auditing said to me, “Oh really? Could you do that now?”

WHERE HAS THIS GUY BEEN? Back in Wichita when Susie and I were combing the whole track trying to plow up the various incidents which eventually became What to Audit (in England, The History of Man) we took on a series of polio cases by means of newspaper advertisement. The newspaper advertisement said, “Polio sufferers. A research foundation is undertaking an investigation of polio. Any persons so inflicted who would like to participate in this investigation should phone -.” The same ad was also run for arthritics. People with arthritis and polio started to call in and we took these people on, the polio sufferers up at my house, the arthritics down at the foundation, and using the oldest known form of overt acts and motivators, and using effort processing, we alleviated the majority of the cases which presented themselves. The first case that came up immediately, by the way, enrolled in the professional course and other cases took professional auditing afterwards. Don G. Purcell cut the program off without informing us because of course the foundation was supposed to fail. This program alone would have meant the making of Dianetics in that immediate area, and as a matter of fact, is still heard from, although it was only in progress ten days (it happens to be a good gag for any auditor to work). But remember this was 1951, and right there, auditing these people no more than three hours per preclear, we made the majority of these people feel so much better about life that they could get on with it. One girl threw away her crutches immediately. Another one, an old lady, got out of her wheel chair, and what we did in that short program just auditing these few hours using nothing but overt acts, motivators in the manner of effort processing, yet it did so much more for these people than had ever been done for them medically or ever could be done for them medically, that they were astonished beyond gratitude.

And here is this British Scientologist who has been in practice for years standing there in front of my desk and asking me in a surprised tone of voice whether or not we could do anything for polio or other types of illnesses. This man is reputed to have more success with auditing than many others. But if he has not learned that we can alleviate the majority of any illness in any series (as distinct from curing all cases into a state of perfection), then what does this man think we are doing? Does he think that Scientology is a swindle. He must! Either that or he’s never applied it even vaguely to people who were ill.

This matter was a considerable shock to me, as you might well suppose, for it told me at once why the progress of Scientology in Great Britain was relatively limited. A further check into this subject with another person, a much better Scientologist, discovered to me that the British Scientologist is not aware of the wild reactions and phenomena obtained from running engrams. The preclear rolling up in a ball on the bed as he goes into a pre- natal or wriggling his whole body like a fish as he hits a sperm sequence is unknown in Great Britain. Indeed at this late date I suppose that it is more or less unknown in America since it has been two or three years since anybody ran an engram on anybody. But here again was the tremendous drama associated with auditing.

Now if we have forgotten in Great Britain, America, and if we have not established in South Africa or Australia, first that Dianetics or Scientology even in its crudest form could alleviate the majority of man’s illnesses, and that a majority of any series of cases of any specific illness would be alleviated, and if we have not established the various highly convincing phenomena obtained in running engrams, we of course are not making anywhere near the progress we should. Indeed if we have let this material lapse in America and are no longer beating the drum for it, no longer demonstrating it, we of course are going to make very slow progress. There is nothing quite as convincing as getting tipped over into a pre-natal and getting it run out. The phenomena of running birth, of operations, accidents, of the loud zip, pop that comes from electronic explosions hot enough to burn holes in the E-Meter electrodes, and particularly the fantastic efficiency of Dianetics and Scientology in alleviating a majority of illnesses, are any one of them capable of giving enough word of mouth to Dianetics and Scientology across a populace to alert the world to what we really have here. However, if we neglect these things utterly, if our auditors do not know they can happen, we are going to make very slow progress of it.

We can as of this moment process a chronic somatic. I know that some months ago and earlier than that it seemed rather fatal to us to continue to fixate the preclear’s attention on a chronic somatic. But that is not a problem with us right now. It ceased to be a problem the moment I invented an auditing command exactly as follows: “Invent a problem that (leg, arm, nose, eye, body) could be to you.” Running this command which is in itself a sort of a remedy of havingness, and repairing and remedying the havingness of the preclear as we go, we will discover that practically any and all phenomena associated with the service facsimile will come away and clear up and the limb or nose or eye will get well. This can be used as a word of warning, only on actual terminals. Never use this command, and I mean never, on actual conditions. Never ask the individual to invent problems lameness could be to him. Never ask him what problem blindness could be to him. Lameness and blindness are conditions. We want to know what problems legs or eyes can be to him, since legs and eyes are terminals. In running this command we reduce havingness too rapidly whenever we are stressing conditions. Therefore we run it only on terminals and use only terminals in running it. Handled in this way we do have the answer, as of this moment, to chronic somatics. This is really not news. We have had the answer to chronic somatics for years, and we have actually been able to alleviate the majority of chronic somatics which presented themselves to us.


The exact reason why our progress through the society was limited might lie in part in the fact that we no longer stressed the alleviation of chronic somatics, but in actuality it is far more important to us that for at least the last year auditors have been auditing in a way which I did not suspect and which does not produce an adequate result upon a preclear.

It is very startling news to me to review Scientology via its psychometric test results and discover that over a period of about four months neither Washington nor London had been getting anything like the rise in ability in its preclears that it had formerly been getting without at once discovering the answer. The answer in this particular case was elusive. If you will examine one of the last Ability’s published in Phoenix, Arizona, you will see two sets of graphs. One of them consists of twenty-five hours by staff auditors on a series of preclears and the other graph consists of five hours on a series of very tough preclears by myself; you will see that the gains of the twenty-five hour intensive and the five-hour intensive are quite similar. In fact the five-hour I was giving was a little bit bigger gain than that being gotten in twenty-five hours by the staff auditor. Now I thought it was merely a smoother presence or a better grip on existence and Dianetics and Scientology that was doing this, but this large generality as a statement of the difficulty was inadequate.

Laterally although my own auditing on preclears was getting better and better, the staff auditing on preclears and the auditing on preclears out in the field was getting worse and worse; less and less gains were being obtained during the last few months. I have spent a very uncomfortable three months researching and looking hard at techniques in Scientology in trying to determine what was happening to preclears who were coming in for auditing and why they were not easily and smoothly progressing as they were being audited. Only at the last did I look hard at something the auditor himself was doing.

You have heard me say dozens and dozens of times I am sure, “When in doubt, remedy havingness.” Well, you ain’t doing it, and you better start right now.

I cannot entirely congratulate my only alertness in discovering this for the matter was presented to me about two weeks ago when I came out with a process known as “body motivators”. I had discovered that a body is very, very hungry for motivators of such a very low level that any and all motivator remedy had in the past escaped it. All you have to do is mock up a mock-up of any kind and have the preclear state an intention into it that it is there to kill the body and instantly it goes into the body. This hunger was so pronounced and widely spread that one auditor suggested that we invent a technique on it called “SOP SLURP”. It was not until three separate auditors asked me how you went about getting a preclear to mock up a mock-up and get it into the body that I awakened to the fact that in our HPA-HCA schools we had not adequately instructed on how to repair and remedy havingness. That was the first inkling. The next was some auditing I myself got in which no havingness was repaired or remedied and even this passed me by; and the next was just a week ago, checking a case to discover with some astonishment that each and every symptom of loss of havingness was missed by the auditor. At that time last week I gave a lecture on the subject of remedying havingness and its necessity, but at the time I gave this lecture, which is available in London and Washington, and which covers the subject fairly adequately, I was not entirely aware of the fact that auditors in general are completely ignorant of the necessity for remedy and repair of havingness.

It is then with considerable shock that I have to report that one of the basic tenets of Scientology invented here in England three years ago and in use for all those three years has been missed and is being overlooked by auditors everywhere and if they are overlooking this, then they are messing up preclears at a most delightful pace.

It may not be that every auditor is obsessed with the idea of making nothing out of preclears, but it certainly looks as if we have overlooked the repair and remedy of havingness, that we have all too many of us been trying to make nothing out of the preclear’s aberrations. the wrong way around. The way to make nothing out of those aberrations is to repair and remedy the preclear’s havingness every time it drops.

What are the symptoms of loss of havingness? Running any as-ising technique, the preclear may become anaten, or he may become slightly nervous or agitated or want a cigarette or seem to break out of the session in some fashion. In either case, he is “down in his havingness”. In other words he has burned up, used up or as-ised too much of his physical body energy in the auditing itself. In view of the fact that every subjective technique puts a sort of a hole in the middle of the electronic mass surrounding a preclear, parts of that mass then begin to cave in on the preclear. Thus running an as-ising technique on a preclear beyond the ability of the preclear to sustain the consequent loss of havingness will bring in on the preclear many new engrams which he did not before have, and a technique which as-ises energy if used without a repair or remedy of havingness will bring about a worsening of the case of the preclear.

For instance, there are several auditors I have not directly trained on staff now working in Washington. Just as this has missed me, it has evidently missed Julia and in London has missed Dr. Walker. A careful study of the Washington staff auditor reports reveals that the only advance in graph of the preclear which is significant and worthy of the name of Scientology during the last few weeks occurred when the auditor repaired and remedied havingness or was using a mock-up type of technique along with as-ising types of techniques. As an example, the preclear audited last week by Dick

Morley was run very largely on repairs and remedying of havingness. Old time staff auditor Dick Morley evidently wasn’t taking his finger off any number. He very carefully repaired and remedied havingness and reported it as such and his case did a remarkable jump.

Now exactly what is happening is very simple. A preclear starts to go anaten and the auditor keeps on running the process. This is to some degree my fault. The auditor has been indoctrinated into running the process regardless of what happens. He hasn’t realized that he ought to interrupt any process at any time if the preclear demonstrates a loss of havingness. Anaten is such a demonstration of loss of havingness. All right, another example: the preclear becomes agitated or upset. He reaches for a cigarette. He begins to twitch. His foot begins to wobble. He begins to talk excitedly. He begins to cough while being audited. All of these things demonstrate a loss of havingness. Even the bulk of the somatics which turn on are a demonstration of loss of havingness. These same conditions by the way can result from the preclear believing that the auditor has broken the Auditor’s Code in some fashion or has treated cavalierly or has overcome his power of choice. Both a repair and remedy of havingness are immediately indicated on the observation of anaten or agitation on the part of the preclear, and in addition to this the auditor should carefully go over the session itself to find out if anywhere the preclear believed that his power of choice was being overcome or if the Auditor’s Code was believed to have been broken by the preclear. You understand that the auditor didn’t have to overcome the preclear’s power of choice or break the Auditor’s Code in order to have the preclear believe that this had happened. However, this could be overlooked entirely if the auditor had been careful enough to repair or remedy the havingness of the preclear.

The slightest drop of alertness on the part of the preclear or the slightest agitation or somatic on the part of the preclear should immediately indicate to the auditor that havingness has dropped and must be immediately repaired or remedied. A great deal of time can be spent on the subject of repair and remedy of havingness, and it is very beneficial time spent. It is better to waste time repairing and remedying havingness than to blunder on through. Now there is another thing I have noticed with regard to this. Auditors are running these days toward cognition. Very well. If they expect the preclear to cognite they should not expect him to pull in a bank on himself. If an auditor runs a very obvious process which should bring the preclear toward cognition and if he runs it several auditing commands and then stops and repairs and remedies the preclear’s havingness and then after that asks him the same auditing question two more times, he will discover that he has blown a cognition into view. In other words, you could remedy the havingness of a preclear while his mind was on one particular subject and bring a cognition into existence.

The reason Scientology has been going slowly is in part, as covered above, the fact that we have been neglecting its efficacy in the matter of chronic somatics, but in the main because auditors have not been repairing and remedying the havingness of the preclears and have been running them downhill at a mad rate.

Now boy this is something we have got to jump on in a hurry. We’ve got to get in there and grab every auditor by the scruff of the neck and say, “Listen, do not run an as- ising command beyond the point of alertness of the preclear. The moment that the ARC of the preclear drops or the preclear becomes agitated even vaguely, you get in there and repair or remedy havingness.”

This becomes particularly important today since a few months ago I discovered that you could remedy the havingness of anybody, and I mean just that. You can remedy anybody’s havingness and you can turn on mock-ups on anybody. The fact that the preclear who has a black field or even an invisible field can be caused to mock up blacknesses or invisibilities and shove them into his body brings us into an era of being able to make anybody turn on mock-ups. Getting the preclear to postulate that the blackness is bad for the body will cause that blackness to snap into the body. Getting the preclear to postulate the invisible mass he has mocked up as bad for the body will snap it into the body. Of course after this has been done a few times the consideration of the preclear will change. Then perhaps the blackness or the invisibility will only snap in when the preclear postulates that it is good for the body. He may also have residue left. It is very important to get rid of these repair and remedy havingness residues. By various postulates such as that the residue is a threat to the body, it is good for the body, it is bad for the body, the residue too will snap in.

Let’s differentiate at once here the difference between a repair of havingness and a remedy of havingness. We used to call repair of havingness “giving him some havingness”. It needs a better technical term. Therefore let us call this repair of havingness. It means having the preclear mock up anything he can mock up and in any way it can be done to get him to shove (never pull) that mock-up into the body, and by similar means to get rid of the residue which went along with the mock-up. That is a repair of havingness. It is a one-way flow. It is an inflow. Now a remedy of havingness is getting him to mock up and shove into the body enough masses or simply mock up and copy enough masses to bring him to a point where he can eventually throw one away. In other words, repair of havingness is simply having him mock up things and have him shove them into the body, and a remedy of havingness is having him mock up and shove in and throw away the same type of mock-up. Remedy of havingness is always a superior operation to repair of havingness. Repair of havingness is a very crude stop-gap but can be used at any time. However, a preclear who is working well and on whom havingness can be remedied should at all times have his havingness remedied not repaired. In other words, any mock-up mocked up should both be shoved into the body and mocked up and shoved away, and this should be done in considerable quantity until the preclear is quite relaxed about that particular type of mock-up. One does this, remember, every time the attention of the preclear drops or becomes agitated.

There is one other little point connected with this which is quite important and that is auditors very often audit a preclear into an area of time when the preclear exteriorized. This on a preclear who does not easily exteriorize brings on a considerable grief and sadness. The way to get rid of this is of course to remedy the preclear’s havingness or only repair it and to ask the preclear to recall times when he was not exteriorized. This will bring up at once times when he did exteriorize and recalling these and using further remedy and repair of havingness will get him out of those areas on the time track where he did exteriorize and where fear of exteriorization was built up considerably.

I have noticed another special condition regarding this exteriorization phenomena which is quite important. A preclear will occasionally repair and remedy havingness up to a point where the body disappears. He doesn’t quite know where to put the mass which he has mocked up since he cannot find the body. This is particularly true of preclears who have a very low threshold on havingness. An auditor would be stupid indeed to simply plow along beyond that point where the preclear has already said that he couldn’t find any body to push any havingness into. The moment the preclear does that the auditor should suspect that the preclear has gotten into an exteriorization type incident. It is not, however, necessary that he immediately flounder around and try to find this incident as recommended in the paragraphs just above; he can also repair and remedy havingness in this fashion, and it is very important to know this. Although it is disastrous for a preclear to be asked, “What could your body have?” since he will simply strip the bank of various old facsimiles, it is a very, very good repair of havingness to ask a preclear, “What is there around this room (area) which your body could have?” and then have him pick out specific objects in the environment which he says the body could have. If he does this he will come up the gradient scale of havingness, and his havingness will be repaired or remedied immediately or directly on the Sixth Dynamic. A preclear who cannot get mock-ups and wherein the auditor has either been too clumsy to get the mock-ups turned on or it really was impossible, more or less, the preclear’s havingness can be repaired simply by having him do this process, so this is a very, very important process and one that ought to go down in red letters.

This whole subject of repair and remedy of havingness and its effect upon auditing and the fact that it has not been stressed at all in training, being up there at Level Six in the old Basic Processes, brings us to SLP Issue 8. The entirety of Level One in SLP will be devoted to remedy and repair of havingness.

In SLP Issue 7 we have a great many phenomena associated with the remedy of the body’s havingness. The reason for their position is to bring about an adjustment of the condition of the body before one goes on to other and more complicated ways of processing. Now in Issue 8, all of these various things will be retained but they will be paralleled with a complete remedy of havingness as that particular level of SLP will be gone over. In actual experience it is better to remedy the havingness of a preclear no matter where he is on the tone scale and no matter by what process than to run any significant process. Further, if a preclear cannot at least repair his havingness, to run Waterloo Station on him is to invite disaster, because in this particular process of Level Two he is liable to get himself into a down havingness situation and of course will not be able to not-know anything. He may be chewing up too much energy while trying to not- know. Thus we would have the failures which have occasionally occurred in Waterloo Station. They were simply havingness failures, not a failure of Waterloo Station. Furthermore, there has been a new command suggested for Waterloo Station, “What would you be willing to not-know about that person?” This seems to be a better command at least for the British Isles.

You may believe I am being rather militant and accusing everybody of having pulled an overt act against me by doing this, but the truth of the matter is that no time in my auditing have I ever permitted a preclear to drop in his havingness and I have therefore gone through a considerable period of surprise when I find that this particular thing is being neglected elsewhere. This tells at once what has been happening to our psychometric graphs has been happening to our preclears where they didn’t advance in a hurry and has been definitely interrupting our goals. Any and all field auditors are undoubtedly sinning like mad in this particular direction. We’ve got to make a practice to tap these fellows on the shoulder and say, “Here, you’ve got to repair and remedy havingness, no matter what else you’re running on the preclear, every time he goes anaten or gets agitated in any way.” We’ve got to conduct an educational program in an awful hurry throughout the field. Naturally we should start closest to home and we should take our staff auditors and we should be very, very insistent that they repair and remedy havingness on preclears, and we should hold this up as more important in the early parts of a case than any change of mind or significance. The change of mind occurs after repair and remedy of havingness has been accomplished. If our auditors continue to as-is everything in sight in the preclear, the preclear’s case is going to hang and that is all there is to it.

I have not yet run the sequence I wish to on cognition. I believe that I will be able to run a few commands of a specific as-ising type command and then repair and remedy the preclear’s havingness and finally ask the same as-ising command a couple more times and get an immediate cognition on the part of the preclear. In other words, I believe that you can use repair of havingness or remedy of havingness to get an immediate cognition on almost anything with the preclear.

We also take care of vacuums and separatenesses and everything else with repair or remedy of havingness and running in with it certain other things such as problems, etc. When we discover by two-way communication a weak universe, we could then ask the individual preclear, “Invent a problem that person (weak universe) could be to you,” and then watching him very carefully and repairing his havingness on the subject of that person’s possessions get a very rapid separation of universes. I have noticed that the weak universe phenomena begins when the person elected by the preclear to be a weak universe first began to put MEST anchor points around the preclear. In other words, valuable presents.

Now although I sound very militant about this you should translate that