Okay. Going to talk to you about the Auditor's Code.

And of this half-hour lecture, the first minute and thirty seconds will be devoted to the Auditor's Code and then we get to work.

Going to read to you the Auditor's Code:

1. Do not evaluate for the preclear.
2. Do not invalidate or correct the preclear's data.
3. Use the processes which improve the preclear's case.
4. Keep all appointments once made.
5. Do not process a preclear after 10:00 P.M.
6. Do not process a preclear who is improperly fed.
7. Do not permit a frequent change of auditors.
8. Do not sympathize with a preclear.
9. Never permit the preclear to end the session on his own independent decision.
10. Never walk off from a preclear during a session.
11. Never get angry with a preclear. (Also never get apathetic with one.)
12. Always reduce every communication lag encountered by continual use of the same question or process.
13. Always continue a process as long as it produces change and no longer. (Boy, that's an important one.)
14. Be willing to grant beingness to the preclear. (When your case is in that kind of shape.)
15. Never mix the processes of Scientology with those of various other practices.
16. And 16. Stay in two-way communication with your preclear.

Now, the gist of that code was developed over a period of years after carefully sorting out all of the things that drove preclears mad.

Every time we had an upset, a break, a fast spin, a broken session — preclear blows the session, so forth — one or more of those clauses had been violated. And so they are the test of great experience. And being the test of great experience they are of course not the development of LRH, but the arduous work of thousands of auditors and preclears.

Now, therefore the Auditor's Code does have a considerable usage. I'll tell you, factually, every time a preclear has more or less gone by the boards during auditing — which has happened very seldom, by the way — temporarily been upset by auditing, actually only three of these were of tremendous importance, just three of them. And that is, he was being audited improperly fed, he was being audited after 10:00 P.M. and he was not being audited with good two-way communication.

And when you realize that actual cases of people breaking down during auditing are very few — they are, actually, very few — it's become a maxim with us that bad auditing is better than no auditing. It's quite remarkable. But when a case has broken down it has been of a large order of magnitude. One really had to work in order to make it come to pass.

So we have the Auditor's Code. But let me assure you that the obedience to the Auditor's Code is simply following out good, practical experience. If you don't want to keep the Auditor's Code, be a psychiatrist.

But when we get into good, practical experience we have a roadway which was hewn with great ardure by a great many axes and it was a long time in the making. The first Auditor's Code sounded like when knighthood was in flower. But we found, as time went on, that more and more things were actually needed rather than idealism.

Well, now, this whole business about auditing a preclear underneath the Auditor's Code could completely go astray if you, as an auditor, were incapable of going through all of the motions necessary to being an auditor. And going through those motions is an understood part of the Auditor's Code. There are certain motions one goes through when he audits; there are certain things one does. And doing those things properly, underneath the guide of the Auditor's Code, are the heart and soul of good auditing.

There's hardly a single auditor alive who hasn't made terrible blunders, heinous mistakes, fabulous boo-boos with preclears. He was tired, he was restimulated and the preclear said just one thing too many and he lowered the boom on him in some fashion or another. He did something wild — he changed the process.

Preclear was right in the middle of a tremendous set of somatics and the auditor says, "I can't stand this anymore" and changed the process. And that dropped the preclear out through the bottom and then the auditor spent the next four sessions scraping him off the floor — next two sessions pleading with him to come back to be audited and the following two scraping him off the floor.

So in the final analysis it is the auditor — you know we used to say, "It's the woman who pays." No it isn't, it's the auditor who pays. I don't care what his fee is, he pays if he breaks the Auditor's Code. It's a way to do it the easy way. If you want to have a fight with the preclear, something like that, well, do it after the session but not during a session.

It's a very fantastic thing, you know, to have a fight with a preclear or get into a scramble of some sort with a preclear and then have to audit it all out. That is what is known as eating crow, and not a delectable dish at all.

I want to tell you frankly and flatly that anybody could follow that Auditor's Code, anybody. It's the easiest thing in the world to follow. You just get so you can follow it. You know it well.

But I'll tell you what isn't easy to follow — is under every stress and strain to go through all of the motions necessary to being an auditor. You have to know them so well. You have to have them so expertly at your tongue tip that no matter what happens, they happen.

Now, everybody who starts to study Scientology has to some degree, naturally, an interest in his own case. Naturally. This is his biggest stumbling block. It isn't that his case is his biggest stumbling block: he's been living with that for years. But when he starts to audit, his case is liable to get in his road.

I'll tell you a very amusing experience — took two auditor-preclear teams which had failed to achieve any marked result. Put the auditor and the preclear each on two different E-Meters and went over the lists of things the auditor had audited on the preclear — unsuccessfully, since he'd never flattened these things on the preclear. But what do you know, what do you know. Although he'd never gotten to these things, the list of things he was trying to audit out of the case banged on the auditor's meter and were completely null on the preclear's meter. You get that?

Now, a similar phenomenon — a similar phenomenon: if you simply start mocking up teeth ( just as an experimental process, you know), you just start mocking up teeth and you mock up more and more teeth, more and more teeth, more and more teeth, just tons and tons and tons and streets full and towns full of teeth, all of a sudden you get the main aberration that assaults thetans. It comes out. (You ought to do this sometime. Some preclear will tell you this and you'll be flabbergasted.) The postulate is "Whee! Let's make everybody into teeth." You got that?

An effect was produced upon the person, so the person knows that the best way to make an effect on another is to produce that same effect upon him. You got the idea? So that every psychoanalyst — back in the old days when psychotherapy still existed, the analyst was completely fixated on transferring his patient into the valence of the analyst. That is what transference is. The patient had to become an analyst. Well, that's fine if the same phenomenon didn't show up when you mock up teeth. It tells you that this is simply an obsessed phenomenon.

Now, we are studying much less a science than life. And using this word science is a sort of a sop to the public at large. We're studying living. Kahlil Gibran said in his very, very great book The Prophet that anyone to understand him had to have a shadow of that knowledge in himself first. And when you understand what I say to you, it's because you already know it. And so we have hit the peak, the uttermost top-level peak, on this "make everybody into us." There isn't anything else in people but what we're doing to them. You get that? Well, now, if you understand that fully, you'll never try to make your preclear into your aberrated case. You understand this?

Now, you think mainly of Scientology as being a body of data. Please extend — please extend that. Scientology has added something to life.

There is something more than data and understanding to Scientology and that something is simply this — a procedure of handling life, a set exact procedure for handling life. And that procedure has not changed for just ages.

Now, it's all right for you to get interested in a postulate. It's all right for you to get interested in a certain type of engram. It's all right for you to get interested in anything you want to get interested in as long as that interest does not deter you as an auditor from these procedures. Do you understand that?

The procedures are more important than the knowledge. We could actually take an auditor and set him up almost like a robot — almost — and have him go forward with a case. We could plug in a certain process and we would get some sort of a result.

Now, that's an awful commentary, isn't it? That's an awful thing to say to an auditor. But that robot would be a little bit better than the very worst auditors there are. See, he'd be a little bit better than the very worst. He would be infinitely poorer, oh, just unimaginably poorer, even though we had him all keyed up to stimulus-response mechanisms of all kinds, he'd be infinitely poorer than a good or even a mediumly good auditor. You understand that?

But as we sort all this out we find ourselves trying to grasp, trying to understand, trying to take apart and put back together again certain tenets in Scientology. For heaven's sakes, before we worry ourselves frantic with those things, let's find what is the motion called Scientology. And that's an easy one.

Now, if we take the various things that we have to learn one by one and master each one, it becomes easy then to do them all at once. It's nowhere near as difficult as playing a piano, but if we learn to do those things, each one separately so that one won't become confused, we will eventually achieve the coaction of all of them. And there aren't very many. But we have to be able to do each one independently and well.

Why? Look, you study about curiosity. You find that curiosity is a universal solvent. You can study about engrams. You can study about vacuums. You can study about all types of phenomena and reactions, all kinds of maladies that stem from aberrated conditions, stem from mental aberration. You can study all these things. And when you finally get all the way through with that study, it's a very strange thing that you won't have grasped how to handle another person.

I'll tell you bluntly why you came into Scientology. You've had a few failures in producing an effect on people. It's true, isn't it? Well, please, please reach out and embrace the procedure, the learning how to ride a bicycle of Scientology (the procedure, not the process) as ways of handling people, the like of which people never knew about before; they just didn't.

Now, that much of Scientology is actually invented and experimented into actuality. But believe me, the production of a positive effect upon another human being, in or out of an auditing session, can always be accomplished by the use of auditing procedures.

Some fellow wrote in the other day just as though he'd discovered something new. He said, "When I get into trouble with somebody and I can't get him squared around in business, I have learned a cute trick — I become his auditor for a couple of minutes."

Well, this is very fine. I'm glad he cognited. But this is one of the things that an auditor does best.

Now, an auditor has a difficulty only when he starts to handle other auditors. Occasionally you get into a fencing match — you get two very good auditors auditing each other. Wow!

I actually — I used to have a spy system in clinical rooms, that is to say, it was a microphone. It wasn't concealed, it was right in plain sight in every auditing room in a building. And that all poured in on a selective switch system and I had a speaker there. And I could hear what was going on in all of these rooms. And every now and then somebody would forget that he had a mike there and stop doing the process and just start blowing up, you know. And he'd say, "Ron distinctly said in lecture so-and-so that so-and-so and so-and-so ..."

Now, there, of course — there, of course, you are auditing somebody who is quite well aware of your mechanisms and tools and it's something like an expert magician doing tricks for an expert magician.

But what do you know, it's still interesting. You find expert magicians are still interested in expert magicians. It's quite amazing. And so it's a different climate, it's a different auditing climate.

You'll find that these same technologies in the hands of a trained auditor used on the public, used on the cashier or the bank manager or the director or somebody — wow, wow! You can actually predict quite exactly the phenomenon you will produce in the person as you go along and as you look at auditing more widely than simply in an auditing room, the auditing procedures.

Just out of wickedness one day I made a bank manager cry. How? I just sat there because the guy kept jitter-jattering way off of the subject and he was flicker-flackering around and he wasn't even there. And he told me this same thing about four times. And I got tired of it the fourth time, so I acknowledged him. I just sat there. I didn't do a better job than anybody else would have done. I'm just a Scientologist acknowledging somebody. "I heard you. I heard what you said. You know, when you said that, I was listening? I heard you. I heard every word you said and I understood what you said. You actually have said that to me and I have heard you say that."

He sat there sort of stonied for a moment, you know? You get the idea, by the way, that people, if you use these things that crudely on them, would suppose that you were straight out of a spinbin, but I assure you the weapon transcends their ability to reason. They have no opinion when you start these things. It's the most opinionless person that you ever faced. He doesn't have any idea you're crazy. It's not aberrated conduct where he's concerned; you actually have transcended his ability to react to conduct.

Now, where you can do this to a human being at random picked out of the society — and you can, it's good for you. You ought to sometime just sit down and start stupidly, no matter how crudely, start acknowledging somebody who just ordinarily doesn't receive an acknowledgment. Whether you have to get in front of their face immediately and say, "Good" terribly loudly or what you have to do, get an acknowledgment through and you'll find that person is absolutely stonied.

He's been going around as the "only one" ever since he was a kid. And he's the only one alive in the world. And all of a sudden, he finds somebody else alive in the world. Just by what? The mechanism of acknowledgment only. So these are weapons, these are weapons of magnitude.

Now, producing an effect on another human being can be achieved by the use of the procedure alone. You learn that in indoctrination. Now add to that and compound it with a knowledge of his mind, a knowledge of exact procedures and we have auditing. Do you see that?

But the thing to learn is the procedure. And the first thing to learn about procedure is the Code. And the most important thing to learn about the Code is all of it.

You'll notice that the Code includes some very, very interesting points such as "Stay in two-way communication with the preclear." Number 16. That is terribly important.

If you cannot handle an origin on the part of the preclear you can plummet him into the depths. Zoom. You can drop him further than psychoanalysis could drop him in two years, just with that. You just didn't handle his origin. He said something, you didn't handle it.

You see, you're living in a very rarefied air. You're living with auditing procedures in an atmosphere of TNT. It is strictly atomic. It is not a common, let's talk together on the street corner climate. And therefore you reach so deep into the preclear that when you do something wrong, it produces a tremendously strong effect.

Now, I always say that an auditor isn't any good at all unless he's been audited by somebody who read half a book. And then that auditor knows — he knows how bad it can get. Does him a world of good.

He says, "You know," he said, "I — I just just had an idea about my case and — and the ..."

His auditor says, "Well, now, let's go on with the process."

He goes over the incident again in some fashion or recounts what's happening and finds himself stuck in the end of the incident and he feels he's way out of present time and way on down the track. And he looks frantically to the auditor to say something such as, "Go over it again. Come up to present time. Let's invent another opponent. Let's invent another reason to have that incident. Let's invent some method of staying in the incident." He looks in vain for something to happen, and the auditor simply sits there — "auditor" (quote, unquote) just sits there, says nothing.

Fellow is way back down the track, full somatics, fully interiorized into an incident and the auditor says not one word. Not only says not one word for five minutes but says not one word for one half an hour, all the while the preclear pleading, "Do something." Preclear finally scrambles himself up and gets himself out of it one way or the other. He goes, you might say, out of session.

Now, that's how bad it can get. But do you know that a preclear running through the incidents of the tension which we run today, with the velocity and ardures and pressures of these incidents, a preclear can be plunged straight into apathy by just your supposing that you might change the auditing wording.

You put in a communication bridge; you did everything you were supposed to do. You were following two-way communication; you put in the bridge but you just assumed that he wasn't getting along fast enough and he's in the depth of apathy. And you start to put in the bridge so that you can slightly alter the process and you just drop the preclear right out the bottom; he just goes straight into apathy. Crash.

In other words, his grip on existence and present time is so slight that he cannot tolerate that. You make a mistake, which we don't expect you to make, but every auditor makes them sometime or another. He accidently misstates the auditing command. He gives it a twist. He uses a different word, the auditing command means the same thing. Do you know that that is enough for a preclear who is having a rough time of it to plunge again into apathy and be dredged out at lord knows what labor. Just one flip on one word is enough.

You're running an alternate process: "Look at the wall. Look at the floor. Look at the wall. Look at the floor." And you're doing that very nicely and you accidently say, "Look at the wall" twice. See, you don't say, "Look at the wall. Look at the floor." You say, "Look at the wall. Look at the wall. Look at the floor." Preclear goes right out through the bottom.

You see, you're handling incidents today which have such violent content that it is only your excellent auditing which permits the preclear to get near them in the first place. You understand that?

It was just because you were there and who you were and doing what you were doing that permitted this proximity to the incident. And then you change something. You forget part of a communication bridge. You don't have a contract with him on the subject of the wording of it. You don't discuss what process we're going to run. You don't bridge between two commands. You skip in some fashion or you drop the ashtray. Of course, flagrantly — you fail to acknowledge an origin or you fail to acknowledge or you'll fail to give him the command promptly. And any one of these things can throw him temporarily into a feeling that he's just gone mad or he's gone into a deeper apathy than he can ever possibly plow out of.

Your procedures are the first and foremost important thing in auditing. And where you have failures today, they are failures of procedure.

When your preclear seems to be unwilling or seems to be sliding out of session, when you know everything is going along all right, you should ask him, "What have I done wrong?" And he will tell you some imagined blunder that you never pulled.

Don't argue with him at that time and tell him you didn't pull it. Just fish it up, because he'll get right back into session again. Preclears very often imagine you said things you didn't say. Accept that as part of the liabilities of being an auditor. Never try to justify yourself or what you did. You are cause in the auditing session. And with today's procedures and today's processes, it would be awfully difficult for you to be anything else but cause. That's all you're trying to be. You're producing an effect on your preclear that's quite marked. You don't have to make the effect any different than the effect that you can produce, because that effect is quite satisfactory. And it is best achieved by following all clauses of the Auditor's Code with very good attention to tremendous precision in the use of the procedures of Scientology.

Thank you.