The most painful thing I ever hope to see is an auditor “letting a pc Itsa”.

Search and Discovery, done incorrectly (incorrect SP found) can make a preclear ill within a week or two after.

I have seen auditors let a pc talk and talk and talk and talk and run down and talk and run down and talk again until one wondered where if anywhere that auditor had been trained.

Assessment is a very proper skill. There is a great deal written on it and many tapes.

In the first place such an auditor could not know the meaning of the word ITSA.

The common errors of assessment (aside from the usual Gross Auditing Errors) are:

The word means “It is a........”

1. Too short a list

Now how an auditor letting a pc talk believes he is getting a pc to spot what it is is quite beyond me.

2. Too long a list

This pc has been talking all his life. He isn’t well. Analysts had people talk for five years and they seldom got well.

3. Clumsy or improper meter handling

So how is it supposed to happen today that a pc, let talk enough, will get well.

4. List getting suppressed

It won’t.

5. Item getting invalidated

The auditor does not know the very basics of auditing skills. That’s all. These are the TRs.

6. Pc being allowed too much Itsa

An auditor who can’t do his TRs can’t audit. Period.

7. Pc getting ARC Broken by under- or over-listing

Instead he says he is “letting the pc Itsa”.

8. Auditor not letting the pc have his item

If by this he means he is letting the pc drive all over the road and in both ditches, then this isn’t auditing.

9. Whole list going live because the item was by-passed earlier on the list

In auditing an auditor guides. He gives the pc something to answer. When the pc answers the pc has said “IT IS A.. “ and that’s Itsa.

10. Auditor not looking for good and bad indicators to see if he was correct in his assessment.

If the pc answers and the auditor acknowledges too soon the pc tends to go into an anxiety – he has been chopped. So he talks more than he wanted.

When the right SP is found the good indicators flood in and the pc does not cave in in 36 to 72 hours.

If the pc answers and the auditor does not acknowledge, then the pc talks on and on, hoping for an acknowledgement that doesn’t come, “runs dry”, tries again, etc.

The bug in S&D is that one can almost get the right item. An item can be found that is nearly the right one. If the nearly right one is accepted the pc will be doubtfully more cheerful and may insist this is it. The pc however is still not quite sure. Inevitably that is the sign of a nearly right item.

So premature or late-or-never acks result in the same thing – the pc running on and on and on.

The real reaction to the correct person is an "Of Course!" no doubt about it reaction.

And they call it “letting the pc Itsa”. Bah! If a pc talks too much in session he either is getting cut off too fast by the auditor or hasn’t got an auditor at all. It isn’t “Itsa”. It’s lousy TRs. (The one single exception is the pc who had years in analysis but even he begins to get better with proper TRs used on him.)

It is the action of nearly finding the right one that may make the pc ill in the next few days or a week. One has restimulated the by-passed charge of the right one without finding it.

The proper cure is to drill the auditor until the auditor realizes:

Remember that the real Suppressive Person (SP) was the one that wove a dangerous environment around the pc. To find that person is to open up the pc's present time perception or space. It's like pulling a wrapping of wool off the pc.

1. The auditor asks the questions.

The SP persuaded or caused the pc to believe the environment was dangerous and that it was always dangerous and so made the pc pull in and occupy less space and reach less.

2. The pc says what is the answer, “It’s a........”

When the SP is really located and indicated the pc feels this impulse not to reach diminish and so his space opens up.

3. The auditor acks when the pc has said it to the pc’s satisfaction and

The difference between a safe environment and a dangerous environment is only that a person is willing to reach and expand in a safe environment and reaches less and contracts in a dangerous environment.

4. The auditor acks when the pc has finished saying “It’s a.......”

An SP wants the other person to reach less. Sometimes this is done by forcing the person to reach into danger and get hurt so that the person will thereafter reach less.

And that’s Itsa.

The SP wants smaller, less powerful beings. The SP thinks that if another became powerful that one would attack the SP.

Scientology auditing is a precision skill, not a gag blop goo slup guck blah.

The SP is totally insecure and is battling constantly in covert ways to make others less powerful and less able.

1. The auditor wants to know........

Scientology flies into the teeth of an SP. One will go to the most extraordinary lengths to try to injure Scientologists or an organization or a staff member.

2. The pc says it is........

But SPs existed long before Scientology and finding the basic SP around the pc just because of Scientology or the pc is a Scientologist is in actual fact unlikely.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. etc.

Childhood is the most fertile area in which to locate the SP on the case. A child is weak and at the mercy of adults. It is this fact alone that gave all the cures Freud ever stumbled onto. The analyst accidentally located an SP when his work was successful. But then he proceeded to overrun and restimulate the patient without erasing. In other words he would not let the patient have his item. An hour with a meter in the hands of an expert auditor who can assess correctly will produce everything the analyst or Freud ever hoped to achieve and will do it invariably compared to the small results analysts did achieve.

But if you get one almost right, and not get the really correct SP, then you get the same phenomena that dogged the analyst – the pc gets better for a moment and collapses.

Now an auditor who doesn’t know his technology about the mind and his processes of course never knows what to ask. So he or she simply sits like a lump of sacking hoping the pc will say something that makes the pc feel better.

I am not saying you can permanently injure persons. The analyst techniques operated far more restimulatively than our S&D. They made the person talk about it for years!

A sure sign that an auditor doesn’t know an engram from a cow about processes is seeing a pc “Itsa” on and on and on.

But you can still give a pc a nasty cold if you miss on an S&D.

In Scientology we do know what the mind is, what a being is, what goes wrong in the mind and how to correct it.

So don't miss.

We aren’t psychoanalysts or psychiatrists or Harley Street witch doctors. We do know.

Do it correctly.

The data about beings and life is there in Scientology to be learned.

Find the correct SP.

It isn’t “our idea” of how things are, or “our opinion of”....

It's all correct if you assess by the book – complete list, not too long or too short. Correct item on the list. Good indicators then in. And no relapse for at least 2 weeks.

Scientology is a precision subject. It has axioms. Like geometry. Two equilateral triangles aren’t similar because Euclid said so. They’re similar because they are. If you don’t believe it, look at them.

That's how a real S&D is done.

There isn’t a single datum in Scientology that can’t be proven as precisely as teacups are teacups and not saucepans.

Now if we get a person fresh out of the study of “the mystical metaphysics of Cuffbah” he’s going to have trouble. His pcs are going to “Itsa” their heads off and never get well or better or anything. Because that person doesn’t know Scientology but thinks it’s all imprecise opinion.

The news about Scientology is that it put the study of the mind into the precise exact sciences. If one doesn’t know that, one’s pcs “Itsa” by the hour for one doesn’t know what he is handling that he is calling “a pc”.

By my definition, an auditor is a real auditor when his or her pcs don’t overtalk or undertalk but answer the auditing question and happily now and then originate.

So how to tell an auditor, how to determine if you have trained one at last, is do his pcs answer up or do they talk on and on.

If I had an auditor in an HGC whose pcs yapped and yapped and ran dry and yapped while the auditor just sat there like a Chinese pilot frozen on the controls, I would do the following to that “auditor”:

1. Remedy A, Book of Case Remedies.

2. Remedy B, Book of Case Remedies.

3. Disagreements with Scientology, technology and orgs and Scientology personalities all found and traced to basic and blown.

4. A grind study assignment of the Scientology Axioms until the “auditor” could do them in clay.

5. A memorization of the Logics, Qs (Prelogics) and Axioms of Dianetics and Scientology.

6. TRs 0 to 4 until they ran out of his or her ears.

7. TRs 5 to 9.

8. Op Pro by Dup until flat.

9. A hard long study of the Meter.

10. The ARC triangle and other scales.

11. The Processes of Level 0.

12. Some wins.

And I’d have an auditor. I’d have one that could make a Grade Zero Release every time.

And it’s lack of the above that causes an “auditor” to say “I let the pc Itsa” with the pc talking on and on and on.

Scientology is the breakthrough that made the indefinite subject of Philosophy into a precision tool.

And pcs get well and go Release when it is applied.

[The original issue said “Level 0” above the title.]