(Ref.
Due to the Technical breakthroughs of the past two years, and due to raised quality of auditing as a result of improvements in TR training and metering, processing results today are at a new high. Pcs get bigger and more frequent wins in auditing. And now the subject of how to correctly handle auditing wins has come to the fore.
Today, we are so used to pcs and pre-OTs having wins and gains in auditing as a very frequent occurrence, that it could easily be overlooked that there is an actual tech to handling them. Correct handling enhances case progress, but if one doesn’t know how to handle these correctly, it can take the edge off of results. Therefore, the correct way to handle wins and gains in auditing is well worth knowing.
The most common and frequent method of handling wins is by acknowledgement. And of course the failure to acknowledge a win or gain can hang a case up. Failure to acknowledge is a lesser version of invalidation. A suppressive will actually invalidate case gains, but someone whose TR 2 is poor could err in failing to appropriately acknowledge. It is important that pc wins are acknowledged. An acknowledgement conveys recognition that something is what it is, and makes neither more nor less of it.
There are varying degrees of wins. Some are bigger than others. A series of smaller wins, usually adds up to a larger win or even a major case change. All wins are valuable to pcs, but how valuable a particular win is varies from one pc to another.
Major case gains are the subject of declares or attestations. When a pc completes a Grade or Level through full application of the processes, he or she is sent to declare and writes a Success Story. Declares signify completion of a Grade, Level or major Rundown.
Sending a pc to „declare“ a minor win is an error as it seeks to make more out of it than there was. Failing to declare a major case change is incorrect as it makes less out of the win.
The gradient of handlings of wins in auditing from small to large is:
(a)acknowledging the win (TR 2),
(b)having the pc write the win in a Success Story,
(c)declaring the completion with an attestation and Success Story,
(d) and in the case of a Persistent F/N, letting the pc have the win and not attempting to audit over the win, for as long as the Persistent F/N lasts.
ABILITY GAIN: The pc’s recognition that pc can now do things he could not do before. (Technical Dictionary)
CASE GAIN: The improvements and resurgences a person experiences from auditing. Any case betterment according to the pc. (Technical Dictionary)
COGNITION: As-ising aberration with a realization about life. (Technical Dictionary)
WIN: A victory or success. (Dictionary)
STATE: A mode of existence, a phase or stage, condition. (Dictionary)
END PHENOMENA: Those indicators in the pc and meter which show that a chain or process is ended. It shows in Dn that basic on that chain and flow has been erased, and in Scn that the pc has been released on that process being run. (Technical Dictionary)
END PHENOMENA FOR A PROCESS: The proper End Phenomena for a process is F/N, Cognition, VGIs. Now look at that carefully. That is the proper end phenomena of a PROCESS. It is not the end phenomena of a Level or even of a Type of process. (HCOB 16 Jun 70 What The C/S Is Doing)
GRADE: A series of processes culminating in an exact ability attained, examined and attested to by the pc. (Technical Dictionary)
END RESULT FOR A GRADE (OR LEVEL): A cognition in lower Levels is not necessarily an ability regained. Thirty or forty cognitions on one lower Level might add up to (and probably would) the realization that one is free of the whole subject of the Level. It is safe to run more processes. It is unsafe to run too few. (HCOB 16 Jun 70 What The C/S Is Doing)
PERSISTENT F/N: An F/N that anything you try to clear and run will just F/N WITHOUT AFFECTING THE CASE AT ALL. If you audit past that you are wasting your time and processes. You have hit an „unkillable F/N“, properly called a Persistent F/N. It’s persistent at least for that day. (HCOB 8 Oct 70, C/S Series 20, Persistent F/N)
RELEASE REHABILITATION ERROR: The most laughable error commonly being made in Release Rehabilitation is one in which the auditor discounts the value of his own auditing, keys out a lock in a pre-Scientology period and tells the pc he was a Release sometime before he was audited. Of course if you key out a major lock you may today get a Release State. The pc today, with better understanding through auditing, can attain Release by keying out an incident which made him worse than normal. I’ve never seen a „natural floating needle“ in the absence of auditing. I never expect to. (HCOB 7 Nov 65 Release Rehabilitation Error)
There are two types of results from auditing that are declared. The first of these is the achievement of an ability. The second type is a new condition or state of being.
The achievement of an ability is the result of a Program, Rundown, Grade or Level (of the Grade Chart). These result in a new or regained ability as a being, and/or loss of an inability. The important point regarding such declares, is that the action, such as a Rundown or Grade, must be fully completed to the full ability stated for that Rundown or Grade. Whether the pc or pre-OT has completed the Grade is very easy to ascertain. If he has the full ability of the Grade or end phenomena of the Level, without any coaching or suggestion, then he may declare. But until the pc or pre-OT has achieved the full ability, one must not order, nor may one permit, any declare. Instead the pc or pre-OT must be continued in auditing until the full results and abilities are achieved.
Sometimes a pc or pre-OT achieves a new condition or state of being through auditing. An example of this is „Thetan Exterior“. The person exteriorizes from his body, and may remain that way for a short or long period of time. The state of „Thetan Exterior“ is the subject of a declare and acknowledges or validates that achievement. It may or may not be accompanied by an increase of ability, but it is accompanied by an increased awareness.
A „state of being“ is more a matter of subjective reality, rather than an ability that can be observed in action. And as a pc’s reality changes, so do his considerations about his state of being. Thus „states of being“ tend to be conditional, and change in processing for the better continuously and are not normally the subject of declares. They are also not as easily determined as abilities are. For example the ability to communicate freely can be readily observed, as it is evident in life and livingness and not just a matter of the pc’s reality.
There are certain states of being which are definite states. For example: „Thetan Exterior“ and „The State of Clear“. These are accurately determined states, and must be declared when and if they have been attained, (and never declared when they have not been!). These states can easily be determined as to whether they have been achieved by a qualified Case Supervisor as there are specific evidences or phenomena that accompany these states. It is not just a matter of what the pc says or thinks, they are actual real states. And these states, when achieved, are beyond anything Man has experienced. They have been sought after and struggled for for eons and are not to be wasted or treated with disrespect. The gains from Dianetic and Scientology processing are available to be achieved and enjoyed and this is what we have been doing and what we must continue to do.
Sometimes people encounter lower harmonics of these states and sometimes a preclear can run into a dramatization of a false high from an engram. Unhandled drugs and toxins in the body can go into restimulation and cause the person to experience hallucinations, including the false highs and euphoria contained in drug trips. The person will sometimes state or even assert that he or she has attained some new high and wonderful state and may even want to declare it. But the Case Supervisor must never acquiesce nor propitiate to such demands by permitting a declare. It is always obvious as to whether the pc has genuinely attained a state through auditing, or whether the pc is asserting something not attained but possibly hallucinatory, or is even just hopeful or in wishful thinking.
Worst of all, is the matter of a pc having been fed a cognition or EP and then falsely asserting he or she has attained a state for dishonest reasons. Instances of such false declares have occurred, and must be cleaned up and handled, and such cases must be continued in auditing until they have genuinely attained such states.
Then there are instances of persons who have not gone Clear at all, who have asserted that they have and that they attained the state in an earlier practice, or outside of auditing, or that they are a natural Clear. If these persons were in fact Clear the actual evidence and phenomena of the state would be present and obvious to a qualified C/S as verified in a DCSI. In many instances these declares were done simply on the person’s assertion that he was Clear, without any evidence of Clear being present, because someone „didn’t want to invalidate the person’s reality“, or felt they „had to validate“ the person. This is a mis-application of the Auditor’s Code, in that you can’t validate something that isn’t true to start with. Besides it does a great disservice to the person, both by permitting the person to think there is nothing more to achieve, and by risking exposure to upper level materials before the person is ready for them.
A common reason for such false declares is that the person, never having gone Clear, does not have the evidence or phenomena of the state of Clear, and some have mistakenly thought that this could mean that the person was a natural Clear. That isn’t so, of course, and is pretty obvious if you look at it. If he were a natural Clear, he would exhibit the phenomena of Clear. Sometimes having been unable to find the point when the person went Clear (either due to poor auditor skill, or due to there not being any such point as the person isn’t yet Clear), the auditor has then assumed that the pc might be a natural Clear. But states such as the state of Clear have very definite and precise phenomena, and if these do not exist then the person simply is not Clear. The only correct handling is to continue handling the case per the Grade Chart until he or she actually does make the state.
Similar to the above is the example of the person who sought to assert the state of „natural Superliterate“, rather than confront the study course which would have resulted in Superliteracy’. This is silly of course as the person wasn’t able to study, and by trying to blow from study by asserting „natural Superliterate“, the person was denying himself all the advantages of becoming able to study and being Superliterate! So if anyone feels that they simply „have to validate“ someone’s assertion, they should realize that by not doing so, and by insisting that the person continue and get the full gains and results available, they are doing that person a favor!
Some Technical personnel have felt that they might cause an ARC break if they didn’t go along with a false assertion by permitting a declare. Most often it doesn’t cause an ARC break at all. But even if there is a slight upset, it can easily be handled in session, and let me assure you — it would cause a far far greater ARC break to let someone falsely attest. The being always knows when he hasn’t made it, and if you make him think that you are a fraud by permitting a false declare, you could make an enemy.
It is only honest to tell a pc that there are more gains to be had from a process, Grade or Level, that it is not yet complete and so cannot be declared, and to continue the action to its full EP and result. The pc will always appreciate this in the end.
Likewise, with students, the course supervisor would never permit the student to attest complete until the student really did know and could apply the data successfully. While there may be work to do to complete the course, that supervisor’s graduates will respect him and Scientology highly.
Whenever you encounter a false assertion from a preclear that he „has made it“, you will find that the preclear is overwhelmed, is either being audited too steeply, or sometimes has not been audited at all. The false assertion is invariably an effort to solve a difficulty or difficulties the person is encountering, but doesn’t think he can confront and handle. The false assertion is a false solution, and is an effort to blow.
Similarly with students seeking to false attest, they are overwhelmed, and don’t think they can make it honestly. But with study Tech and a correct gradient they could.
The solution, in either case, is to repair the by-passed charge or errors, and then resume the auditing or study at a lower gradient that the person can do.
Never resort to false declares as a solution to HE&R and by-passed charge, even if it is being demanded.
Always handle the by-passed charge and get the case winning again an continued in processing until the full result is achieved.
If you do the above, and apply Dianetics and Scientology fully, your preclears and students will respect and appreciate you, and you will respect yourself. Ignore the dishonest who tell you that all their pcs are natural Clears, or how these processes are unnecessary, or how fast they managed to get through a process or Rundown. Follow your HCOBs and Tech materials, and work at it until you get the full end phenomena of each process, the full results and abilities of each Grade and Level.
In years and years to come you will be rewarded as you see your preclears and students winning and succeeding as they go up the Bridge.
Keep Scientology Working and everybody will win. I am counting on you to do it.