An auditor’s tendency is to look for wrongnesses. He is always trying to find something wrong with the pc. That’s the nature of Scientology; we assume that there is something wrong with somebody otherwise he wouldn’t be here and be dead in his head, and he would be capable of doing a great deal more than he is doing at the particular moment.

An individual is basically and routinely good, capable of many actions and considerable power.

In the state of a Free Thetan or Native State he is a far more powerful individual than when he’s been complicated up.

The ease with which you can handle a communication cycle depends on your ability to observe what the pc is doing.

It’s the idea of the additive data to the Thetan. Try to give somebody something he doesn’t want and you are going to overthrow his power of choice. His power of choice is the only thing that he had to begin with, which gave him power, capability and anything else and that power of choice has been consistently and continuously overthrown by giving him things he didn’t want and taking away from him things he didn’t want to get rid of back and forth. You get the individual pretty overwhelmed and he goes down in power.

We have to add to the simplicity of the communication cycle obnosis (observation of the obvious).

What happened to him actually is he solved something that didn’t need solving. There was something he couldn’t confront so he solved it and he fixed the solution.

Your inspection of what you are doing should have ended with your training. Thereafter it should be taken up exclusively with the observation of what the pc is doing or is not doing.

Anytime you fix these solutions, for ever and ever you put the individual down grade. An individual becomes aberrated by additives. His experiences in this universe are usually calculated to degrade and depower him. Now all you have to do is pick up all of these criss-crosses and you return him to power.

Your handling of a communication cycle ought to be so instinctive and so good that you're never worried about what you do now.

Man is an added-to being and everything that has been added to him has decreased his ability to cope. When you add something to the Being he gets worse.

The time for you to get all this fixed up is in training. If you know your communication cycle is good you haven't any longer got to be upset about whether you're doing it right or not. You know yours is good, so you don't worry about it any more.

We are in the business of deleting wrongnesses from the individual.

In actual auditing, the communication cycle that you watch is the pc's. Your business is the communication cycle and responses of the pc.

Even the Freudian Analyst realized that some additive had been added that should be de­leted. So the idea of deleting something to bring about a recovery is not new with us.

This is what makes the auditor who can crack any case and when absent you have an auditor who couldn't crack an egg if he stepped on it.

Because we are in the business of deleting wrongnesses from the individual we seldom look at rightnesses and that’s what’s wrong with most auditors. They are so anxious to find the wrongness – and quite properly – and they never really look at the rightness. If they don’t look at the rightnesses that are present, then they aren’t appreciating the degrees of truth that are present that can be promoted into more truth.

This is the difference, it's whether or not this auditor can observe the communication cycle of the pc and repair its various lapses.

In other words they are starting at a level of no truth present all the time so of course they never make any forward progress.

It's so simple.

You must realize that there must be truth present and that this truth must be recognized and that this is hand-in-glove a part of auditing – the recognition of the fact that truth is present.

It simply consists of asking a question that the pc can answer, and then observing that the pc answers it, and when the pc has answered it, observing that the pc has completed the answer to it and is through answering it. Then give him the acknowledgement. Then give him something else to do. You can ask the same question or you can ask another question.

If you only look for wrongnesses and only recognize wrongnesses then you will never be able to pull anything up a gradient because you won’t think you have any rightnesses to work with. It just all looks wrong to you.

Asking the pc a question he can answer involves clearing the auditing command. You also ask it of the pc so that the pc can hear it and knows what he's being asked.

You have to be able to look at the wrongnesses in order to right them but we also have to be able to look at the rightnesses in order to increase them.

When the pc answers the question be bright enough to know that the pc is answering that question and not some other question.

We are only trying to find wrongnesses in order to increase rightnesses, and that’s very important. If you have no rightnesses present in a session you will never be able to make any progress of any kind. Progress is built on a gradient scale of rightnesses by which you delete wrongnesses and they drop and fall away.

You have to develop a sensitivity – when did the pc finish answering what you've asked. You can tell when the pc has finished. It's a piece of knowingness. He looks like he's finished and he feels like he's finished. It's part sense; it's part his vocal intonation; but it's an instinct that you develop. You know he's finished.

Therefore, Processing is an action by which wrongnesses can be deleted from the case to the degree that rightnesses are present in the session. You cannot take a case that doesn’t have any rightness present and delete a wrongness. So you have to realize that there are right­nesses present and then you increase those rightnesses That makes it possible for you to pick up the wrongnesses and that’s what auditing consists of.

Then knowing he's finished answering you tell him he's finished with an acknowledgement, OK, Good, etc. It's like pointing out the by-passed charge to the pc. Like – "You have now found and located the by-passed charge in answer to the question and you have said it. " That's the magic of acknowledgement.

Auditing is a contest of maintaining rightnesses so that we can delete wrongnesses. If you keep on deleting wrongnesses, all the while maintaining and increasing the rightnesses you even­tually wind up with a very right being. You are trying to get a right being, therefore if you don’t continually encourage right beingness you never wind up with a right being.

If you don't have that sensitivity for when the pc is finished answering – he answers, gets nothing from you, you sit there and look at him, his social machinery goes into action, he gets onto self auditing and you get no TA action.

You must learn to observe an auditing session. You want your pc to wind up in a right state – in a more native, more capable, less overwhelmed, higher power of choice sort of state. You want him to wind up with more rightnesses.

The degree of stop you put on your acknowledgement is also your good sense because you can acknowledge a pc so hard that you finish the session right there.

Therefore, if you audit so that you do not encourage and increase rightnesses then you won’t wind up with a right pc.

It's all very well to do this sort of thing in training and it's forgivable, but not in an auditing session.

The degree of rightness you have present must exceed the wrongness you are going to pick up. It’s a proportional action. If you’ve got as much wrongness in a session as you’ve got right­ness you’re not riding on any cushion. It makes a very difficult job of auditing. If you want to pick up this little wrongness, you have to have rightnesses present which are big enough to engulf it. That makes easy auditing.

Get your own communication cycle sufficiently well repaired that you don't have to worry about it after training.

If the rightnesses in the session are very minor and the problem is a tiny one, there isn’t enough rightness in the session to handle the problem and the pc cannot erase it.

The pc’s ability to as-is or erase in a session is directly propor­tional to the number of good indicators present in the session.

And his inability to cope in a session rises proportionally to the number of bad indicators present in a session.

Any process has its own series of bad indicators. And the bad indicator moves in when the good indicator moves out So you have to have a primary knowledge of good indicators.

Don’t look for bad indicators on and on and on; you’ll drive the pc around the bend and suppress the good indicators What you want to do is know your good indicators for the level you are running so well that when one of them disappears out of the session, your ears go up and you instantly look for the bad indicator. Don’t look for the bad indicator until you see the vanishment of the good indicator. Otherwise you’re continually prowling around looking for wrongnesses in a session and you keep a pc very upset and you get no auditing done of any kind whatsoever.

Remember this next time you see a pc start to bog and drag and flounder one way or the other. You’ve got to get the pc’s good indicators back in before you can get the pc to handle what you want him to handle.

What influences the attitude of the pc is an ARC Break (that of course is influenced earlier by the auditor’s behavior), or the pc has an overt on the auditor or the pc has a missed withhold.

An auditor who never gets in and finds out what is wrong in the session – the reasonable auditor – messes up pcs like mad.

If all the good indicators are present the auditor knows he is doing a good job of auditing.