Just as an E-Meter can go dead for the auditor in the presence of a monstrous ARC break, I have found it can go gradiently dull in the presence of out rudiments. If you fail to get one IN then the outness of the next one reads faintly. And if your TR1 is at all poor, you’ll miss the rudiment’s outness and there goes your session.

To get over these difficulties, I’ve developed Repetitive Rudiments.

The auditor at first does not consult the meter, but asks the rudiments question of the pc until the pc says there is no further answer. At this point the auditor says, “I will check that on the meter.” And asks the question again. If it reads, the auditor uses the meter to steer the pc to the answer, and when the pc finds the answer, the auditor again says, “I will check that on the meter” and does so.

The cycle is repeated over and over until the meter is clean of any instant read (see HCO Bulletin of May 25, 1962, for Instant Read).

The cycle:

1. Run the rudiment as a repetitive process until pc has no answer.

2. Consult meter for a hidden answer.

3. If meter reads use it to steer (“that” “that” each time the meter flicks) the pc to the answer.

4. Stay with the Meter and do (2) and (3).

The process is flat when there is no instant read to the question.

One does not “bridge out” or use “two more commands”. When the meter test of the question gets no instant read, the auditor says, “The meter is clean”.

The trick here is the definition of “With Session”. If the pc is with Session the meter will read. If the pc is partially against session the meter will read poorly, and the rudiment will not register and the rudiment will get missed. But with the pc with session the meter will read well for the auditor.

A Fast Check on the Rudiments consists only of Steps (2) and (3) of the cycle done over and over.

Watching the meter the auditor asks the question, takes up only what reads and, careful not to Q and A, clears it. One does this as many times as is necessary to get a clean needle. But one still says “The meter is clean” and catches up the disagreement by getting the additional answers.

When the question is seen to be clean, the question is left.

In using Fast Checking never say, “that still reads.” That’s a flunk. Say, “There’s another read here. “

We will still use the term “Prepchecking” and do all Prepchecking by repetitive command.

Without now looking at the Meter, the auditor asks the question repetitively until the preclear says that’s all, there are no more answers.

The auditor then says, “I will check that on the meter” and does so, watching for the Instant Read (HCO Bulletin May 25,1962).

If it reads, the auditor says, “That reads. What was it?” (and steers the pc’s attention by calling each identical read that then occurs). “There… That… That…” until the pc spots it in his bank and gives the datum.

The auditor then ignores the meter and repeats Step One above. Then goes to Step Two, etc.

When there is no read on Step Two above, the auditor says, “The meter is clean.”

This is all there is to Repetitive Prepchecking as a system. Anything added in the way of more auditor questions is destructive to the session. Be sure not to Q and A (HCO Bulletin of May 24, 1962).

Be sure your TR4 is excellent in that you understand (really, no fake) what the pc is saying and acknowledge it (really, so the pc gets it) and return the pc to session. Nothing is quite as destructive to this type of auditing as bad TR4.

The E-Meter has two holes in it. It does not operate on an ARC broken pc and it can operate on the last word (thought minor) only of a question. Whereas the question (thought major) is actually null.

A pc can be checked on the End Words of rudiments questions and the charge on those single words can be made known and the question turned around to avoid the last word’s charge.

Example: “Are you willing to talk to me about your difficulties?”

The word “difficulties”, said to the pc by itself gives an Instant Read. Remedy: Test “Difficulties”. If it reads as itself then change the question to: “Concerning your difficulties, are you willing to talk to me?” This will only react when the pc is unwilling to do so.

Caution: This trouble of End Words reading by themselves occurs mainly in the presence of weak TR1 and failure to groove in the question to a “thought major”. With good TR1 the End Words read only when the question is asked.

In practice you only investigate this when the pc insists strongly that the question is nul. Then test the end word for lone reaction and turn the question about to make it end with another end word (question not to have words changed, only shifted in order). Then groove it in and test it for Instant Read. If it still reacts as a question (thought major) then, of course, it is not nul and should be answered.

“Cleaning” a rudiment that has already registered nul gives the pc a Missed Withhold of nothingness. His nothingness was not accepted. The pc has no answer. A missed no-answer then occurs. This is quite serious. Once you see a Rudiment is clean, let it go. To ask again something already nul is to leave the pc baffled — he has a missed withhold which is a nothingness.