The action of "solo auditing" is not self-auditing.

Solo auditing is done in a regular session in Model Session form.

One of the few ways to get messed up in solo auditing is to not use regular session form, to not keep a regular auditors report and to coffee shop oneself.

When the session begins, run it, when it ends, end it. If after a session you find yourself maundering around and self-auditing, you just have something wrong in what you did or found in the last session.

Inabilities to continue a solo audit series of sessions stem wholly from end words getting into restimulation that dictate one way or another not going on - how hopeless or impossible it is, etc.

By-passed charge is not enough to stop a series of solo-audit sessions. Only end words can do it.

Getting ARC Broken in solo audit is not unusual. It is handled just as you would handle an ARC Broken pc - by-passed charge assessment from a list.

It is presupposed that a Scientologist engaged in Solo Audit is at leastProvisional Class Vl.

Lower levels simply can't solo audit.

What makes solo auditing possible is the fact that on processes below R6 one has communication as a necessity for auditing success. But as this necessity is part of the GPMs, when one is into R6 he or she is above this necessity. Only R6 can work without comm. Therefore Solo Auditing is exclusively an R6 activity.

One supposes the auditor solo auditing has already become:

Level 0. Willing to talk freely to people.

Level l. Able to answer an auditing question.

Level l. Able to duplicate.

level II. Free of hidden standards, overts and PTPs.

Level III. Physically competant.

Level IV. Has been clear.

If an auditor has not passed those six vital stages of a case, solo auditing, to be blunt, is quite impossible. The self discipline won't be there; the needful insight into one's own motives will be lacking. Any advanced Scientologist alwaysknows when he is dramatizing even when he is. The being that can't solo audit never believes he or she is dramatizing no matter what they are doing or saying.

Self control is a must in solo audit. The pc who still needs an auditor to progress should never be permitted to solo audit.

Any pc, to go on R6 must go up through the six stages listed above under levels. If you don't take a pc through those first, that pc will eventually fall on his or her head on R6.

This is all the more true on solo auditing.

If an auditor or pc is started on R6 prematurely there is the remedy of doing the Life and Livingness version or the L6 list. Each question is cleaned of needle reads by auditing by list. Also the pc can be run on any remedy or routine that does not assess for and use words as the key reason for recovery. This only outlawsLevel IV and processes depending on assessment by meter for a word to run. Even Service Facs can be run on an R6 "failed case" and certainly O/W can be run. Clay Table Healing is very good on such a case.

So if a Scientologist hasn't gone over the various hurdles as above listed he or she should neither solo-audit at all or be run on R6.

The basic reasons for solo auditing are:

1. No auditor can possibly run R6 successfully on another without personally experiencing the simultaneous reads and case reactions. It's all just unreal to a person who hasn't seen the needle move and felt the bank shift at the same instant. An auditor without this reality just messes up pcs. There's no qualifying or modifying that fact. It's just true. So an auditor who hasn't solo audited on R6 just can't run it well or at all on a pc. Such an auditor goofs. And a goof on R6 is horrible to a pc and has dreadful reactions.

2. Auditing a pc when one's own bank is in full cry on the very same material is not conducive to good auditing. This is overcame somewhat by using a "platen" (a card with holes in it that is put on another paper and has in it the line plot mostly written out) but not entirely. When one begins R6 he or she can be toorestimulated. All banks are the same.

The combined factor of no-reality on the bank and restimulation as an auditor combine with the third.

3. An auditor just starting to use All-Style Auditing is using a new tool and must have it perfect before he uses it. This is like not swimming until one knows how. The best place to learn all-style is in solo-audit.

You see, in solo auditing one can stop before he plows in. If one were auditing a pc, and erred, one would go on just that extra second that means disaster. From which we get:

4. In solo auditing one is not assisted by the comm cycle to go deeper than one can cope with. R6 goes straight past the usual protective mechanisms of the mind mentioned in Dianetics. Therefore when one is auditing a pc on R6 one can violate those mechanisms and get the pc in too deep. While solo-auditing one is still self-protected to a large degree. One blunders, becomes relatively incapable of going on, therefore doesn't keep plowing in. The exception is the foolish one who sees no read and goes on down several non-reading items. Suddenly down comes the roof, even so. Thus solo auditing restores the self-protective nature of themind which R6 done by an auditor on a pc could violate by going beyond where one should stop and investigate what's wrong.

Thus solo auditing is:

1. Possible only on R6.

2. Possible only when a person has come up through the levels.

3. Possible only when one is well trained.

When one tries solo on lower levels, it doesn't work for long - but we can't deny it does work somewhat even at lower levels sometimes.

When one gets onto R6 solo before coming up through the levels it's a jolly mess because one is having to do lower level auditing a lot of the time (PTPs and overts for instance) that only an auditor cauld handle on a pc.

When one isn't trained, up to R6, one can't handle it at all.

So it's a specialized activity, solo auditing, and only for the provisional Class VI.

A student, just given his provisional classification, should not be given any plots of any kind.

His or her first 20 hours of solo audit should consist only of locatingdichotomies of end words.

Dichotomy in the dictionary means "Division into two parts. " It's a word we borrowed and gave a new meaning to. And after all these years it is very apt as you will discover.

The dichotomy in Scientologese means plus and minus. A plus word and a minus word. They are of the same order of things always. A crude example would be "An Apple" and "Applelessness. " That's a pair, a dichotomy.

The alchemist was on the fringe of this with his active-passive forms and words. But he, looking for the gold of truth (only the latter ones looked for real gold, having missed too many definitions, no doubt), didn't really look for PLUS and MINUS. He looked for the active, such as Man, and the passive, such as Woman by his definitions.

We, in a scientific age, look for the two sides of a thing, taking our cue from electricity. Plus and minus interchange a current as you will find on any battery. So we don't want active-passive. We want the bold PLUS and MINUS, the Opposites.

Janus, the Roman God of gates and doors, had two faces. So does each major idea have two faces. The nature of things is a major idea. It has two faces. PLUS and a MINUS. These are opposed to each other. They interchange current. They conflict. Bad and good. Things have a nature. The nature can be bad or it can begood. Poison Ivy has a bad nature viewed from a body viewpoint. Cool water is good. Thus the nature of things has two faces, two parts.

There could be, let us say the major thought, "how one feels. " This has two parts: Elation and depression. Elation is plus, depression is minus.

What is generally agreed to bc the unwanted or the poor side is minus. What is generally conceived to be all right is plus.

In a modern society wc would have the major idea that an individual has an economic status. Wealth is the PLUS and Poverty is the MINUS.

Now you don't have to have the major thought to get its two parts to find a dichotomy. But the two parts must add up to being comparable. You don't have Tall and Small as a dichotomy. The major thought of which "tall" is a part is "height. " Therefore you would have Tall and Short as the dichotomy. Small would be half of another major idea of "size. " Therefore you would have its "other face" as Big orLarge.

You would not have Nagging and Violent as two parts. They're both on the same side - both minus. For nagging you might have praising. And for violent you might have benign.

So a dichotomy means the two parts of a major idea.

Knowing the above you must also be informed of this:

In the reactive mind the end words alternate between a plus and a minus. In the top half of the bank (reactive mind) the minus turns up and has as the next one down its plus. In the bottom half of the bank the Plus turns up and just below it is the minus.

Each is the end word of a series of GPMs. Each GPM has a line plot.

The most charge (force, strength, electric energy) you can find easily withthe least disturbance if you err is a dichotomy of end words, a pair.

They are called end words because they come on the end of each of a series of goals.

Each end word has many root words. These root words are the regard or action one is supposed to have for the end word. Grab _______would be a root. It's the verb.

Just ahead of the verb is the participle To which gives us the implied purpose.

To Grab _____ as a form would be, then, the complete "Root. " ("Root" is just our word for this To Verb _____.)

Add the End Word and you have a purpose, a goal. End words are always nouns or a condition made into a noun. Avarice might be an end word - Book or Books might be one.

Thus we have To Grab Books as a full goal. Or To Shun Avarice would be one. But Books would have a lot more roots before we had done with them. So would Avarice.

Each full goal, like To Grab Books, would have a Line Plot with items like "Grabbing Books," or just "Grabbed Books. "

Now you see then that Root words are heavily repeated. But if you try to find them you may jam up many end words, for the same roots apply to each pair of end words.

The same applies to items in the Line plot.

Therefore the one thing that can be plucked out of the reactive mind without messing things up is a pair of end words. They discharge to some degree and as they're not repeated except in their own series, they don't restimulate too much.

Obviously then, in theory, End words would be the least restimulative thing to find.

In actual practice, they indeed are. And not only that, once found they cool off one's dramatization of them quite wonderfully. It's like recalling a lost experience - just knowing it happened brings a big lift. One doesn't have to erase it all to have a lot less effect from it.

So, in actual practice, then, the finding of end words brings the most R6 early case gain.

Further, finding these pairs cool off the bank without messing it up. Badly found end words do very little to one. Running a GPM badly can be quite deadly.

Therefore in starting R6, the solo auditor, regardless of the availability or the Line Plot, Root Plot and End Word (or Series) Plot, should find his or her own pairs of end words.

This will tend to straighten out the Reactive Mind, unburden it and cool off the whole case. Same fantastic changes can result from this action, if it is done right.

When a lot of end words have been cooled off (had some charge removed just by proving them out on a meter) one is enormously more capable.

Two pairs of end words properly found is equal to about one clear in terms of case gain.

But the end words to be found must be the ones in restimulation on the particular case. Just getting a standard list of end words to read does very little except maybe upset one.

The first process of solo auditing then is named R6 EW. This of course is both a co-audit and solo audit process, not only a solo process.

This is very tricky as a process and the following rigid rules must be closely followed.

1. No Listing with paper and pencil is permitted. This means no written lists of "possible end words. " Why not? Because if you go by one in listing, it suppresses and raises the mischief. Also past auditors have loved 87 page lists. You should be able to get the right end word in about four or five words and you sure don't needto write them as a list. Write down the first idea of it only.

2. Write down every end word found and proven on a separate card with its opposite also noted. Each end word has a card with the end word at the top boldly written with all its check out data. Over on the left in small letters is written the other one. These two cards make one pair which thereby refer to each other.

3. Never go on to a new pair before finding both end words in the old pair. Don't find a plus, skip finding its minus and go on with another plus. Always find both before going on.

4. Don't try to plot them an the track or bank. Just find the pairs.

5. If anything goes wrong (meter hangs up, TA goes high, you feel bad, you dramatize, you want to cease auditing forever, etc.) realize you've got a wrong pair or a wrong mate somewhere behind you and find the right pair or the right mate (the other end word or the pair). Hence, keep your cards consecutive and in one packet, the last end word found on top and its "other word" the next one down.

6. Don't wander off onto some other action. Such as prepchecking an end word (my God!). Getting curious about its roots or some GPM "To Shun Cats. " Just keep after things like cats. Realize if you stray, you've found a wrong pair or mismatched an end word behind you. Look for it.

7. Realize that the read of the needle transfers easily to locks if you suppress or challenge an end word too hard. But, saving grace, the one that reads heavily on "suppress" or "challenge" (Have I challenged Cats?) is it. A suppress or challenge read on a particular end word serves to prove it.

8. Note all meter and TA actions on the card.

9. Don't write a list between sessions. You may jot one down if it leaps up but in the next session you must take it up at once. Jotting down fifty between sessions you haven't proved up will literally slaughter you. If you do jot down fifty, take up the first one and go down the whole list, proving out the oppositeof each you prove.

10. Find only pairs. If you prove out a PLUS then find its Minus. If you prove out a MINUS find its Plus.

Those are the rules of R6 EW. They are far more important than how you do the process.

This is a game like charades. (Charades: a party game of guessing a word or phrase from someone acting out its parts.) Only it's played with this question:

"What am I dramatizing?" (Or "What word might you be dramatizing?" for a pc.)

That's the question.

Not, as in charades, what is he or she trying to get across? But what noun is being dramatized? Not what goal (Janus forbid!) but what single, nounal word. Not what pair; that would really chew one up. Just, what noun?

You write down this first idea rather lengthily on your auditor's report. Then you use that to find a single noun, singular or plural, that sums it up. You work with that written sentence until you've got it. Then you find its opposite.

Remember, there's a lot of "ities" and "ice" like "Servilities" and "Avarice" whereby what we consider as adjectives usually get made into nouns. But also nouns as nouns.

Not automobiles, of course. Thetans at the start of the universe didn't have them. But Machinery might do. Not clowns. Too specific. But "Assininities" might work.

The whole question is just "What did I, a thetan, early track cook up that I am now getting my head kicked in with?" "Tallness," "Stealth," "Hugeness," "Vastnesses," that sort of thing.

One checks out the correct word to express it with usual patter. "Is this an end word?" "Does it have GPMs?" "Is it a lock?" "is it an implant?" "Is it an actual end word?" "Is it a phrase out of an engram?" "Is it a lock on a root?" "Is it an Item?" There's no staccato patter that fits except "Is it an end word?"which is asked every time along with other questions.

You worry at it until you know by needle action and TA blowdown it is an end word or you know it isn't. When it definitely isn't it's very wise to find the right wording that is the end word. Don't just give up the notion.

When you've got a real end word and hauled it in and written it down and why you know it is by meter behaviour, you then must find its mate.

Snakes travel in pairs. So do end words. Both sides of the same sort of thing. If you just found "Rotten" you must now find "Fresh" or "Preserved" and prove that out on its card.

Here's an example: You ask "What am I dramatizing?" You think, then "Eating. " Ok, what is its reaction? Well ing isn't any end word so maybe its "Food. " That doesn't read. Maybe it's "Inflow. '' And so on and suddenly bang, full dial, thereIt is, gills flippers and all, the right one that expresses that idea you had.

Good. Now let's get the opposite. "Hunger," "Deprivation," etc., etc. And bang, you have its partner, the second fish.

And so you go.

Pretty soon they start popping up. Check them out, get the pair, pair after pair. When it all slows down again, once more "What am I dramatizing7" And you're on your way once more.

It's quite a process.

Be thorough, be accurate, and you'll make some long, long strides toward O.T.

And in solo audit, learn how to handle All Style to the degree of checking out. And learn bank reactions subjectively and as an auditor.

Only when you've a nice big pile of cards should you be thinking of running GPMs Item by Item off a Line Plot.

Remember, even if you had the full end word plot, you'd make faster personal gains at first and faster gains as an auditor using R6 EW.

It is my convinced opinion that if an auditor can't solo audit with high gain what is now called R6 EW he or she should not be let near running GPMs, much less audit another preclear.

R6 EW has been actually a research tool. When I found how to convert it to a process it already had its rules laid out and proven in research.

It has not been used at this writing for case gain only by others. I can,therefore, predict several HCO Bulletins giving must-nots and all that.

However, the facts remain:

1. It takes an ability to detect one's own actions before one can detect those of others;

2. It takes unburdening to make a case run smoothly;

3. The least dangerous early approach to O. T. with the greatest case gains lies in the discovery of pairs of end words that are in restimulation on one's own case;

4. The best way to start a new pc (who must have been through the six phases listed above before R6 plus pc training) is to use R6 EW on him. Not run GPMs.

The question, "What am I dramatizing?" may be unflattering and you may prefer "What noun has been in restimulation. " If so, fine. All the same.