Well, today we're going to get down to business on a very, very important subject called HAS Co-audit and if you don't learn all there is to know about an HAS Co-audit here in the next hour; you're dead. Very, very important subject.

Now, I would call to your attention that an HAS Co-audit, PE Foundation activity is conducted by most Central Organizations and that it can be observed in the flesh. And anybody wanting to conduct such an activity should observe it in the flesh.

The stress which is being placed on HAS Co-audit at this moment and which will be placed on HAS Co-audit is proportionate to the amount of result which it's getting. And that result is so fabulous that no auditor of 1950 would have believed it. In twelve hours we are picking people up above the middle line of a profile on their own muzzled auditing.

Several developments have occurred here in recent months which has made it possible to clear earth - almost just that, Bing! We're now looking at the weapon which can shift this civflization. This weapon, I am sure, is far more important than the H-bomb, the Q-bomb, the Stew-bomb and the stew-bums that are managing their political fate. I don't wish to be bitter about this, merely vicious.

All right. Let's take up the parts of HAS Co-audit. What were the developments which led to HAS Co-audit? Well, there's no sense in reaching way back into Dianetic and Scientology technological history and picking up the days when we first started doing TRs and that sort of thing. So let's just start in with the known fact of TRs and processes and all of that and look at what novel developments made this HAS Co-audit possible.

First was the idea that nobody should audit without some sort of a certificate. We have had so much difficulty with Book Auditors. A Book Auditor is perfectly all right and nobody says anything about a Book Auditor - anybody can pick up a book and start to audit and get someplace, maybe. But so many Book Auditors broke their hearts by not getting any results that we thought this was a very poor idea. So we made available a certificate called a Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist.

Now, originally the requisites for this certificate were a Comm Course and Upper Indoc Course. That's going it a little stiff. All we want is this individual to be able to sit there and make like an auditor. That's all. Get him some clue as to the fact there is an Auditor's Code. Give him some vague notion of duplication and repetition of the command. Just some form that they can go through, because in not going through this form, in reading a book and so on, what did they do? They'd give one command and skip it and give two or three more commands of something else, and then they'd fool around with something else. They didn't even know anything about acknowledgment or anything else. And they didn't get it out of books. They didn’t study that way. Their auditing was too poor. They didn't get results so they said, "Well, it didn't work," so on.

Now, some Book Auditors did make it work. But they accidentally were doing these drills which are required in an HAS Co-audit.

All right. To take an untrained auditor and let him audit at all is adventurous. It's extremely adventurous because he ARC breaks the preclear to such a degree that the preclear's advance by reason of processes is retarded by reason of ARC breaks. The only thing which will break down a profile is ARC breaks. If you have a person whose profile is riding in themiddle of the graph, the only thing, after auditing, that will make it reduce is ARC breaks. You can run bad processes on him, you can do almost anything. It doesn't do anything to the graph. But if you give them ARC breaks it reduces the profile. That's the only way you can do it.

Ah well, if ARC breaks are this important and we want somebody to get some results, then for sure we've got to give them (1) auditing form, and (2) make sure they don't ARC break the preclear.

So this HAS certificate we make very, very easy to acquire. People have got to come in and sit still and look at how it's done. And then we say, "Well, it's all right for you to audit now, on a muzzled basis." Now, that's what gives here.

Now, if you - if you don't say, "Look, you shouldn't be auditing without some sort of a certificate, at least an HAS certificate" - if you say this to people they'll say, "Well, that's sensible, I guess that's all right." And then you say, "Well, it's very easy for you to get an HAS certificate. You go down to the Central Organization and you go through a couple of weeks of evenings. That's only six evenings," you see.

Or if you yourself are running a unit, you say, “All right, before you can do any co-auditing or auditing around here at all, you have to have your HAS certificate and I'm running a little course on the side here while I'm taking care of co-audit people. And this little course on the side is six evenings of something like that. And you do TR 0, 1, 2, 3." And you show them just those TRs just the way you know.

Actually, we've even peeled some of those off a little bit. A co-audit TR is awfully simple. You get it right down to fundamentals. It's - you just get the person to get the idea that he's supposed to sit in a chair and say the auditing command and acknowledge it. Now, that's all you really want him to do. And you can teach him that in about six evenings. That's pretty easy to do.

All right. So this development of a certificate called an HAS certificate was very, very smart because it made people get gains who wouldn't have gotten gains at all. And therefore, it prohibited this idea of picking up a book, reading off a bunch of random auditing commands, something like that, to a pc now, and messing up at once two people. You see, the person who did that didn't get any result and maybe the pc got upset, so he's out of it. And the pc, certainly, having been upset, is out of it.

Now, you at least have something that you can say to people that this has happened to "But you shouldn't have done it! This is what happens! You come down to this group (your group) or you go to the Central Organization and you get an HAS certificate."

Now, everything is grooved so that an HAS certificate can be issued if the training is done. You see? That's not an arduous one to get. That's grooved up. The lines are real sleek.

There's something gone awfully wrong that I don't know anything about if somebody holds up an HAS certificate in a Central Organization or an HCO office for a week. You know, you - you as a field auditor, you're under a franchise, you can train people and the certificate is then issued to the people you trained just on your say-so, you see. And if you send in a list of names and say, "These people are to be issued HAS certificates" and a week goes by and they haven't got them, boy, you let me know. You let me know. So, you see, somebody is just flubbing the dub. You know? There's a hole in the lines someplace that you could throw a couple of maharajahs through.

All right. Now, here's that first development, that is to say, the propaganda line, if you want to call it that - the public release line, that prohibits somebody from auditing unless he knows at least the auditing form. You know, just make that real good and strong, just show a terrific amount of shock. Person says, "Well, I picked up a textbook on Dianetics and I was reading my wife some of the commands...

You say, "What! Oh, no!" You know? "Oh, God . . .” Pain, agony, you know.

This person says, "What's the matter with that?"

"Well, you're supposed to come over to my group and get an H… - You're not supposed to audit anybody unless you get a basic certificate. Whuff! Whew! Boy, don't let the queen hear about this!"

All right. Now, that's - that if you want to call it such is really a technical development, because it prohibits somebody auditing carelessly and randomly and then spoiling their idea of the subject and the person they worked on's idea of the subject at first crack. We prohibit that.

All right. The next one is a technical development called muzzled auditing. That was developed, by the way, in the 5th London ACC and ran on for a very short time. We weren't geared up to handle it and we didn't put it into practice until the 21st American. But in the meantime it was pretty well developed. And a muzzled co-audit is named muzzled because if you could envision a nice dog's muzzle sitting on the auditor, you've got it made. He can only say certain things! And if he says anything else it's just a case of whap, whap, whap, whap! A fine of pounds, you know.

This is another thing. It's "Oh my God, what do you want to do, go up before the Lord Chief Justice or something? You know? Muzzled co-audit is muzzled co-audit and that is what it is and this is all you're supposed to do and we don't let you do another single blessed thing! And you mustn't at any time do anything else but this! And if you open your mouth to that pc just with one extra word, rhrrfff!" Got the idea?

A muzzled co-audit - as an Instructor handling muzzled co-audit, you can't let anything go by. If you do you get into this phenomenon of the ARC break dropping the profile. And muzzled co-audit consists simply and totally of this-TR 0, confrontingness. Well, let's not even worry about the TRs. Confronting the pc, able to sit in a chair and look at him, uttering an auditing command. See, the Instructor of a muzzled co-audit starts and stops the session

- see, he doesn't have anything to do with rudiments-uttering the auditing command and acknowledging that auditing command when answered. That's all.

Now, it doesn't include "I will repeat the auditing command" because a person who is untrained can actually do this trick. He can use "I will repeat the auditing command" to invalidate the pc. See?

Now, I'll show you how he does it. "Do fish swim?" The pc says, "Yes, I think they do."

And the auditor is dissatisfied with this. So he says, "Well, I'll repeat the auditing command. Do fish swim?"

And the pc says, "Well, I told you, I think they do."

And the auditor says, "I'll repeat the auditing command." The pc goes around the bend. See that?

Well, that's all that happens. That is all that a person is permitted to do if he's auditing muzzled - he's permitted to utter the auditing command. He is permitted to acknowledge the pc's answer. And if he runs into anything else he puts his hand not up but diagonally back of him into the aisle. If anything else happens - the pc has a cognition or some catastrophe occurs, he sends for the Instructor. Got the idea? And he puts his hand back here.

Now, people are carelessly saying - this is a little bit careless. There are evidently two grades of muzzled co-audit. There is muzzled auditing which is done by a staff auditor on pcs particularly who ARC break very easily. But listen, that staff auditor starts the session, doesn't he? He stops the session, doesn't he? He throws rudiments in there, doesn't he, and so on. That's not pure muzzled auditing. You can call it muzzled.

Now, don't get this mixed up with Tone 40. Of course, you don't acknowledge what the pc says in - as an origin in Tone 40 auditing, but that's an entirely different proposition. This is simply formal auditing graded…. graded down to just confront, utter the auditing command and acknowledge what the PC says.

Now, if the pc says - starts something else or says, "I haven't got the auditing command," the muzzled auditor puts his hand back in the aisle back of his chair and just waits.

Everything is on wait if the Instructor is busy or something like that. The Instructor just takes care of those hands as rapidly as he can.

And he comes - the Instructor comes around and he says, "What's the matter here?" And the muzzled auditor says, "Well, I – I - he hasn't got the auditing command." And so the Instructor says, “All right, repeat the auditing command to him."

And the muzzled auditor says, "Do fish swim?"

And the Instructor looks at the pc and says, "You got that now?" And the pc says, "Yeah, yeah."

“All right, carry on.” See? And walks off. Get the idea? Does this very quietly.

But he sees a pc originating - the Instructor sees a pc originating and the muzzled auditor attempting to handle it, he reinforces the thing. The exact, proper action is for him to walk back of the chair, take his hand and put it over the auditor's mouth. That's the exact proper action.

Now, you think that people casually, out of the public will be insulted. No! You're going to describe to these people exactly what you mean to do. You're going to tell them what's going to happen here.

You're going to say, "Now look, to produce results requires professional auditors. Now, I happen to be one. Now, therefore, we can get through with this only if you do exactly what I say. And you're to sit there. . ." Now, you've had a whole HAS Course of six evenings that you've taught these people already so they're already in the groove. When you issue them their new instruction, you say, "You're going to utter the auditing command and when that is answered or the PC says something you're going to say, 'Good.' And then you're going to utter the auditing command again and when the pc answers you're going to say, 'Good'. If you run into anything else you put your hand back of your chair, down low where I can see it easily, and I will answer up."

Because these chairs, you see, are dual parked in aisles and you can handle a tremendous number of co-auditing teams in one room and should, you see. And you get them with the auditor always toward the aisle so that you can see those hands easily. "And when you do, as auditors, another single blessed thing than this, well, I'm going to come around and muzzle you personally. I'm just going to walk around behind you and put my hand over your mouth. And after that you're to follow the instructions. All right, it's all agreed upon, isn't it?"

So, you're not likely to run into any big ARC breaks between them and you. It's an agreed- upon drill. They agree to do this, they agree what the limitations are. Now, you only have trouble if you don't drive this drill home with any vigor. You start doing a sloppy 8-C on this whole unit and you're not going to get results. It takes tremendous aplomb on your part.

That's just the way it is, you see?

Now, I'll let you in on something. In instructing any class, the more positive, exact, scheduled and precise your actions are with regard to that class the better results you're going to have. Now, that's true. The Instructor's Code is the Instructor's Code. And a person handled muzzled co-audit is really not running on the Auditor's Code. He's running on the Instructor's Code. So that is something to remember. And you've got to run good 8C on thesepeople. Otherwise, they're not going to get any results.

All right. Now, here's the rest of the bric-a-brac that was developed: little thing called a process.

Definition: Operating Thetan - to be at knowing and willing cause over form, matter, energy, space, time, life, see - willing and knowing cause. Definition of Operating Thetan.

Now, the processes which run best are those processes which put the pc at cause only. Now, there's a thing called a ridge, which we'll go into later, and a ridge is a reach and withdraw mechanism. And it's liable to turn dark if you just have the pc outflowing. You can have the pc doing another action, also inflowing, but being cause of the inflow. One of the reasons Havingness works - it's taking over the automaticity of inflow.

Now, these two flow motions are handled by two directional commands. One is done to, and the other is withhold from. Now, if we put this - if we put this on a recall basis we start swamping up the whole track.

Now, this is fabulous stuff, to develop out of... by the way, the most trick process in 1950, the kind of things I had really grooved - if I could teach anybody how to do a sudden Straightwire in about ten minutes, I could make people get over psychosomatic illnesses and so forth. You just sort out who else had this, you see. And you just get the person to do an exact recall on the thing. And if you're smart enough and you ask exactly the right question, you can flip one of these things out. Not all the time, but maybe fifty percent of the time, you see? So actually this was the - this was the miracle process, if you could learn how to do it. If you could learn it. After a while, a year or so, I stopped trying to teach people to do it. It's a - it was just a bit beyond them.

They say, "But how do you know?" I realized it's a strictly crystal ball process, you know? And you have to plow into "Who had sciatica?" You had to find this out and so forth. And - but you kind of had to know and guess that it was sciatica, you see, and that somebody had had sciatica and it was a this-lifetime situation - was in recall. And knowing all this sort of thing you could ask the individual to simply recall a couple of things about it and his chronic somatic would kick out. It was just hitting the pin right exactly where you were supposed to hit the pin.

All right. So it isn't really phenomenal that this many years later we get a Straightwire process doing such fabulous things because Straightwire has always done fabulous things.

Now, to make sure that he doesn't get tongue-tied and loused up - because, for sure, he's not ever - never had any Op Pro by Dup, he'll become very nervous, very upset at the thought of repeating an auditing command over and over and over again. We take a blackboard and we put it up at the end of the room where everybody can see the things and we write on it good and big. Or we take a - take a great big white piece of paper and black letter it and we letter in these two commands at the end of the room where an auditor can kick his eyes sideways, you see, and see the auditing commands. That's a part of the bric-a- brac.

All right. How does he know what to put in the blank? Well, that's up to the Instructor. And right at the beginning when people are starting in, the Instructor has one of these happy, total, flat-out, complete spin moments. You see? He's got to assess everybody just bruuum! Because he's the only person in the place that can run an E-Meter. You see? So if he could arrange this in any way to assess everybody present before they actually started in to class and that sort of thing, he'd be in a happier frame of mind than actually starting them, getting them all in their chairs and then walking around and assessing them. But this is the way it is done at the moment - handling large crowds. And all you want is an obvious terminal.

Now, here you've got to be fast - here you've got to be fast. You hand the cans to the pc, you put him on the meter, you see a stage four needle where it just swings up and sticks and drops and swings up and it sticks and drops. Knck, you've had it, that's it, you go no further because you're not going to isolate anything on a stage four needle, see - you've had it. So what do you give this auditor? You give him this little magic word: ‘yourself’. See, on a pc that operates with a stage four needle, you give the terminal as "yourself." That's it. See, they'll get someplace with it. See, that didn't take very long then, did it? You gave him the cans, saw he had a stage four needle and you said, "Well, that's it, the terminal is 'yourself'" And they look on you as a mystery man to end all swamis. See? "How'd you know this?"

All right. Now, that's the easiest one. This formerly was the hardest one to diagnose, but we just have a blanket diagnosis for this fellow. Now, it very - it very well may be that this fellow doesn't progress tremendously well on "yourself," but it's better than any other terminal you would locate. And the funny part of it is, after he runs "yourself" for a while his needle characteristic will change and you can reassess and find some other terminal.

All right. What's the next one? The individual sitting there and it doesn't have a - he just has a kind of a normal reaction on a meter. And you say you ve got to say something now to get the needle to act. See? As his Instructor you say, "Whom" (or "Who" as the case may be, depending on the state of your English) "do you blame most - do you blame most for your difficulties in life?"

And he says, "Well, that's - that's, oh, that's my father, that's my father." And the needle also falls. This is agreement between the pc and the needle. Man, he's got a reality on Father. It's hot button. You're all set, that's it, knck.

You say, “All right," you say to this fellow. You say, "That's Father."

"Boy, how did he know that?" this - he'll say, you know. "That's Father." And you just go to the next one and hand him the cans and go through the same thing.

Not a stage four needle. All right. But he says, "Father" and Father doesn't drop. You don't get any action on the needle at all. Is - you have to say, "Is there anybody else?"

"Well, really not, really not. It was all my father's fault. And of course, there was always my uncle Oswald." And the needle falls. So you say - bang! "That's it. Uncle Oswald. And that's your terminal. Now, where you see that blank up on the wall, you just fit in Uncle Oswald. That's it. We've got it." You go to the next one, you see?

Now, this is very, very fast assessment, isn't it - terribly fast. And you would make a terrible blunder if you allowed yourself to get bogged down on a two or three minute assessment.

We call two or three minutes to assess a case - that's a bog. You're bogged. Something - something's gone wrong here. This is one of these abstruse pcs, something of the sort. So what do you do? You say, "Yourself". Simple. Not an easily read pc and it - the answer is yourself". So what you fit in that blank up there - "yourself" Simple, huh?

Now, of course, as you know, blame is not the lowest point at all, not at all. What's wrong with the pc is amnesia, not memory. And that this works at these shallow levels is right incredible. You're actually working on people that are real to him that he can remember and so forth. But you understand you're getting something the pc can do and you're improving it. Now, if the needle falls, the pc can remember something about the person. Just like you can get him to get a facsimile of an incident no matter how backtrack and at least know that much about it. He must know quite a bit if he can mock it up into a facsimile, you see. He knows that much about it, he knows a facsimile. Well, he must know the terminal is real in this lifetime. And what you're doing is getting the something the pc can do and improving his ability. So he can run recall processes on Father or Uncle Oswald or his wife or her husband or something like that. This can be run, you see, because the - it's real and the person will get wins on it.

Well, now you just go around to the whole class getting an assessment of this character, just bing, bing, bing. And as soon as you've started, why, they start, you see?

Now, you're going to find that those cases you had to pitch "yourself" out to, will require some sort of attention from you later on, which is very unobvious to the whole unit. Don't go hanging on those cases that are rough. Spend more loud, boisterous time congratulating those cases that are making a tremendous range upwards. See?

Twice that evening somebody got a tremendous cognition while he was getting his hour's auditing, you see. And when you sic’em - turn them loose for that night, you say, "Boy, that was really good there, Jones there, getting those two terrific cognitions. Boy, he's right in there pitching. He's the man that makes it." You know? You hand Jones the medals. Don't hand this clunk the medals just because he had a stage four needle. You understand?

Then you'll find - everybody finds out what gets your approval. Making gains, that's what gets your approval. And you just keep them thinking that way.

All right, now this is fundamentally very simple. People who are going to run into tremendous difficulties on this are very rare. It'd take something like an institutional case to really start fouling up in a group doing this sort of thing. The person would just have to be straight out of the spinbin. And I think we've only had one in a tremendous number of cases that really gave us any great amount of trouble. But this person is, of course, asking for a tremendous lot of attention and so forth. Funny part of it is, we could crack his case too on muzzled co- audit.

Now, hold your hats, because I'm going to give you now the lowest case process that can be reached by verbal auditing. This is the lowest process. This is one of these killer-killers.

There used to be quite a bit of technology around this word invent. You got people to lie and then you could get them to invent. This is your originality line. Lying is the lowest level of invention. So you have to remember that one because sometimes a case can't invent, he can only lie. But, nevertheless, the auditing command which reaches these cases is "Invent a mind that nothing could have any effect on." Now, that is the bottom. Remember your Effect Scale. And so on.

Now, you're going to get a case in there who just gets screamingly mad and upset at his pc. Somewhere along the line in muzzled co-audit you're going to have somebody who gets very chargish, who gets very violent toward his pc, who gets very poundish, you know, "Wrrff, total effect, total effect." That's all he's trying to do, see, he's getting - trying to - you know, you've got this co-audit unit and he's trying to get a total effect. How to unsettle him? Well, the next time you flip the thing, give him that command. Why? Because if he's got to have a total effect on things there can be no effect on him and you're not going to find his case advancing. Oh, yes, yes, you can always run a scale backwards and read the answer on the other side.

That's the beautiful part of scales. If you know how to use your scales you will see somebody doing something and you will know the answer to it. That's very true of the Effect Scale.

People who have to have a total effect on everybody and everything can have no effect themselves. Funny part of it is this has long since inverted and everything has an effect on a person even though he's hanging on to that postulate. And his goal is to invent a mind nothing can have any effect on. Then he brings it around to you in a co-audit unit or in your professional activities and all he's doing with this mind is testing it. He's just making sure that nothing can have any effect on it and he's heard Scientology is real good and if

Scientology can't have any effect on it, he's got it made.

That's one of the reasons why you actually, to run a successful process, don't need any - get any results on anybody. It's very funny, very funny, but individual processing to be successful financially doesn't necessarily require results. That's why you see the old-time psychoanalyst and psychiatrist and so forth, these boys made quite a bit of money. They never got any results on anybody. You see? But people could bring their minds around and find out whether or not anything could have an effect on them. And then they'd see clearly that nothing could have an effect on them, they'd pay the fellow for testing them.. You think I'm just - that's really true..

How many people will walk in to a - to an HGC and just say, "Well1 here's my mind, let's see if we can have an effect on it." You'll find that person coming back and coming back and coming back and coming back and he's getting no results at all. Well, his goal is different than any goal you ever thought of. See? You think he wants to get well. No, he doesn't want to get well, he wants to reassure himself that nothing can have any effect on him. It's very fascinating. That is the bottom rung of the ladder. That's the bottom rung of thinkingness.

This is the bottom postulate.

That process, by the way, will run with some benefit on anybody. And it'll speed up his case running But these cases that have got to have a total effect on everything and anybody, they really don't respond well on anything else. You're going to have a real long run on such a case, if at all. And why grind it on so painfully? So you use that one in HAS Co-audit. This you spot. But you don't use this one the first whiz around. You get yourself a week or so as experience with all these pcs before you start throwing them atom hombs. Got the idea?

The - most of them are going to make the grade, you see. Probably all of them will make the grade without this. In the first place they were willing to be audited and they're willing to participate or they wouldn't be there. So they're not low level cases at all. See? Just the fact they walked in the front door, even though they're tripping over their tongue and so forth, they're really not terribly low-level cases. So HAS Co-audit is quite interesting.

Now, the other cases that are very bad will turn up very late in the career of all of this clearing. They're going to hear, "Everybody has an effect from this. Everybody has an effect from this."

"Ho! I'll go down there to that group and prove that nothing has an effect." See? "I'll prove they're not that good. I'll bring in my no-effect mind here, nobody can have an effect on it and that'll prove it to everybody." Just run this process on him. Recognize that brute when you run into him. And just trot this process out in the limelight and that's what you get him run on. And the guy - this just slaughters him! He gets well in spite of himself. And all of a sudden he says, "I really don't want to be the way I am, I want to be decent." You know? And he starts coming up the line.

All right.

Now, those are the processes which are allowed in an HAS Co-audit. And there are no other processes allowed at this time. However - however, after you've run a group for a few weeks it's a good thing to chip in with some Havingness. Now, when you start getting into Third Rail watch out. Watch out. Third Rail is too tough. Third Rail is a real tough process. And if a person only stayed with you a couple of weeks on Third Rail and it wasn't flat and they were unhappy and then they went away from the unit and so forth, that person - already been thrown over, see. That's not one you want to leave unflat.

But after they've run Overt-Withhold Straightwire, selected person - which is exactly what this process is, Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straightwire - for a while, you'll find out it will relieve the monotony for them. They'll never find it monotonous, but give them a change of bank by running Havingness. And you can flip their banks around and get a new set of dramatis personae by running some Havingness. Get the idea?

So somewhere along the line you can run an HAS Co-audit on some Havingness. Havingness is hardly a process. It's a drill, it does a tremendous amount for people. But it's just something that's been with us for so long and it's just an old friend and you kind of say, for granted, "Well, you could always run this."

Not Third Rail, not on HAS Co-audit. You get too many effects on the preclear in the first place, he starts flipping around and so forth - anymore than you would run engrams in an HAS Co-audit. You couldn't run an engram in an HAS Co-audit. That would not be possible. Really takes some doing, it'd take too much supervision, it'd take too much this and too much that.

Now, the way you want to get the engrams run is the rest of this thing. You make sure that somebody, a few of your people, get HPA training, HCA training and that will teach them how to run engrams. They - it requires too much professional presence to run an engram. It's completely aside from whether or not they could - they could make with an auditing presence, you see. That's a lot for an auditor to confront. You don't think so, but it is!

It's a lot for one of these muzzled auditors to confront. They get real worried! They see somebody sliding around in the chair and writhing and, oh well, see one of the milder twitch cases in an ACC. A fellow starts to get audited on engrams and just starts to twitch. This would scare the muzzled auditor half to death. "Hey, what's he doing? What am I doing to this fellow? I'm making him - I'm making his head go this way," you know, or too much turns on.

The next thing you know you're liable to find yourself teaching an HPA Course. And that you don't want to do. You're not interested in that. Let them read books, let them do anything they want to do, but hold them on muzzled co-audit and don't soften up. There is no compromise between an HAS type audit and an HCA/HPA type audit. See, you - these don't combine. We have for years tried to, you know, make a gradient scale and say, "Well, we'd let them get away with it." Well, they've just never gotten away with it, that's all. It just takes professional training, that's it! And there's no arguing with it.

So your HAS Co-audit is limited, perforce, to Selected Person Overt-Withhold Straightwire. Now, you get onto general - now, it's requiring too much observation of the pc to take care of in a wide group, General Overt-Withhold Straightwire. You start to get onto engram type things and next thing you know you've got them all over the track and you have problems that you could take care of easily enough, but, boy, you'll have - you'll just be jumping around taking care of everything. That'll - that's all you'd be doing. You - the whole course would tend to pull to a stop.

Now listen, you've just got tons of people that can be run on Overt-Withhold Straightwire in anybody's bank and they can just go on running it. Because, essentially, they are trying - they are actually getting used to being cause and their causation drill effect on the case, is greater than simply stripping the case down, you see. You've just got tons of people you can run on a case.

Now, some night after you've had a – somebody - you say, Anybody that's been here for four weeks should come in tomorrow with a list of every person he has ever known." See? Take those people in the - in the co-audit unit who have been there for four weeks. You'll have new ones by this time so you'd have to differentiate. Been here for four weeks - "Make a list of all the people you've ever known."

Now, take those people, one right after the other, and take their list, take them aside privately as they come in that evening, "You were supposed to bring your list in. All right, where's your list? Come over here to the corner. Who did you leave off? Come on, come on, who'd you leave off? Who's left off of here?"

"Well," they say, "that dirty skunk that stole my wagon.,” Say, "Good. That's it. All right." And in such a wise you can trick them out of new terminals that are - so on. These are just - this, you might say, is mass assessment.

Now, you could go on to a basis of a type of test. You issue this test to everybody and they make certain errors on the test. Well, give them that type of terminal to run. See how you can broaden this thing? There can be other things to have happen here. But the basic thing that you want to have happen is simply real terminals right at the beginning, wham, Overt- Withhold Straightwire, zing-zang, get the show on the road, and that's what's important. And getting that done will get more done on the case than anything else because the pc is running straight at cause.

And at first, people - "I've never done anything to my father, I've just never done anything. I was sweet and kind and good to him and so forth." You know, rruurr, you know? And this rapidly changes from, "Boy, I bashed him a good one," you know?

Six foot rearview mirrors are terribly interesting. Looking at what one used to do and what was true and all of that. But I've seen cases crack on this Overt-Withhold type Straightwire when it wasn't being run. Just in ransacking the case you know, just trying to find out about the case, have the person suddenly own up to and admit having done something, you know?

Well, Freud called this a guilt complex and some of your people are going to explain this to you in various ways which will be fascinating to you, I'm sure. But it isn't a guilt complex, guilt has nothing to do with it at all. It's bad cause. Now, the funny part of it is that bad cause operates whether they have a guilt about it or not. They never, never felt guilty about it. They just never felt a passing fancy about it. They simply were bad cause and this wrecked the dynamics for them and from there on, why, they - they had trouble in that dynamic area. They didn't even know it. There was no guilt complex. You're talking about very, very high echelon thinkingness.

Now, the diagnostic thing - "Whom do you blame for your difficulties?" - of course, you recognize as a high-level question. Now, if you - you could also say "shame" or "Who did you fail on?" or "What do you regret?" or "What person do you regret most?" or something like this, and you'd also get terminals, you see, because they're all in the same area. Doesn't much matter what you say as long as you get a terminal. And operate there on that very low, low end of the emotional scale. And the individual will come up with terminals that are quite beneficial for him to run - shame, blame, regret, fail, particularly. Of course, it's very high scale to ask somebody, "Is there someone about whom you're apathetic?" That's a very, very high remark. That's too high-toned. You don't want the terminal. You want lower-level terminals.

All right. Now, this is really the total technology involved in an HAS Co-audit. I've given you the total technology involved. There isn't any other technology that you need to know. But there is this thing called familiarity. There is this thing called experience.

The best way to run one is run one. If you want to slide in on a gradient scale, why, run a small one and run a big one. But you'd get along better if you associated yourself with an existing PE Foundation, HAS Co-audit for a short time, saw how it went, saw it in the flesh in the raw. You'd feel better about it. And then you, running a good one, have somebody who left it to go over to someplace and start one up over in another section of the city, something like that. He'd have to start one up via a professional course. He couldn't be trusted with that many people running on that much stuff without a professional attitude or viewpoint. He just could not be trusted.

So he'd go through a professional unit and then have him study your course or how you're doing it before he starts cutting loose on another one. Then we'll keep getting results on these things. The simplicity of them, the precise running of them, and so forth, is what gives us the results. The results aren't there just because of the process or just because of something else. You see, it's the whole package, it's the precision running of the thing and so on that counts.

All right. We've said a lot about the technology. Now, how about the administration? Many a

Scientologist loves to dive sideways off of administration, then wonders why he has no time and why everything is so hectic and running so backwards and so on. There's nothing like a tour of action in a Central Organization to finally get to a point where you can confront administration. There is no substitute for it. Don't go to Gestetner Limited or General Motors or something like that and expect to find administration - that isn't. They get things done, Lord knows how. But the very few people working in Central Organizations get a tremendous amount done and get it done in a rather orderly fashion simply because of administrative experience. But it's Scientology administrative experience.

You know, you hear the public once in a while crying around one way or the other about the Central Organizations and so on, they're talking through their hats. People in Central Organizations are pretty good, pretty darned good people. And they do a splendid job. And if you saw what they had to cope with all the time you wouldn't wonder that somewhere or another balls got dropped.

A Central Organization is essentially a government not a business and it's trying to govern a tremendous sphere of interest. It's trying to keep peace in the family and so forth, and trying to reach with its materials and get a tremendous number of things done. Its functions are so complex that an ordinary hospital director would just faint if you just gave him the list of things which a Central Organization has to do to live and exist in this society. It's big.

Now, I wouldn't blame you if you flubbed for a few weeks on your administration. But I'd blame you if you didn't recognize that administration - administration, the handling of bits and pieces of paper, the routing of comm particles, in other words. Getting a body in the front door and moving it here and then getting it there and then eventually bringing it to sit down in a chair.

After a few weeks if you still had a dog's breakfast in administration I would say, "Boy, it's pretty poor - it's pretty poor." It can be excused at first, you see, until you get used to it and get it set up and you - Oh, you can't get an invoice booklet or something and-you know. And your supplies are lacking and things - lines are sort of tumbling one way or the other. But after a while if that sort of a thing goes on, you're just never going to get anyplace, that's all, mostly because you haven't brought enough order into your environment in terms of comm particles and records and so forth to survive. A confusion does not survive. It is order alone that survives.

Now, what about this administrative picture? Actually, there were some old PABs, some of the material is old hat in them, but most of the material is still valid in them, that described how you ran a PE Foundation. Now, a PE Foundation was actually a discovery of its own, way back on the track. And the HAS Co-audit is simp]y what a PE Foundation graduates into.

And if you were running a very fine HAS Co-audit, it would run this way. There'd be a PE Foundation - Personal Efficiency. And you would tell everybody about personal efficiency, And you'd put some ads out, little classified ads in the papers or something like that. And you get some people to come in and for five consecutive nights of the week, or something of that order, you would talk to these people on the subject of Scientology, theory of.

Or you would get them to run definition by agreement. You got them to agree - you take a number of Scientology terms and just keep talking with each and every one in the particular unit, getting them to define it and getting the other people to decide whether that's right or wrong. And you just keep on with definition by agreement until a lot of them have cognitions. In other words, you give them a whole week of exposure to theory and the fact that it might be possible for somebody to understand something about the mind. That's all you teach them in that whole week. It might be possible for somebody to understand something about the mind. That's the whole goal of the PE Foundation.

Now, getting them in is difficult if you're not producing results, but people will come in rather routinely even in the absence of advertising. You make your PE Foundation free. It's the most important conducted unit. Your best Instructor or lecturer is on the PE Foundation, right at the gate, you see. The best person is at the gate. The next best person is on the - on the co-audit. If there's a question of medium grades and so forth, he's on the HAS Comm Course because that's the easiest to teach.

All right. The people come in. They enroll Monday night. They go through to Friday, and when they get some whiff of what's going on and what you're doing... Variations are done on this. The variations are never as successful as the original pattern though. Give a free PE every three months and then use those people and put them through a course - that doesn't work, if the word of mouth is not served, if you don't have a place people can come at once and listen to something that's free. All right. They go through a week's PE Foundation. Then they go through two weeks of three nights a week, HAS Comm Course. And all you teach them is just drills - TRs. That's all. You teach them the first four TRs. Then they pass on to co-audit. These are three different units.

Now, if one person instructs the HAS and the co-audit, you run into this: You will have to put your HAS Course something on the order of Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday nights and your co-audit on Monday, Wednesday, Friday. That uses the same space for the same two courses and by staggering days you can do this.

Now, if you've got to - if your quarters difficulty is the greatest difficulty you have, perhaps something like this could happen. There are various combinations here, you see. You'd run a PE Foundation for about three nights. You'd run an HAS Course for the other three nights and you'd run your co-audit the whole weekend, making up the same number of hours, you see - Saturday and Sunday. That uses the quarters all the time, if your quarters are terribly limited. In this wise you can jockey these three units around in such a way as to come out with the proper answer.

You can juggle the number of Instructors around. You - it's a nice little - nice little problem in time and space and people and Instructors and what's available. But a person with one big living room can do this and teach all three all by himself if he juggles it out well enough. It'd take a lot of doing and I wouldn't like to do it. The least I would have would be somebody giving me a hand on Reception if I was trying to do that. That would be almost insane, you see, doing it all by yourself. You’d get so exhausted and spinny you wouldn't know which end you were going on. You need somebody to talk to afterwards and say, "My God, that Mrs Jones, wow!" You know? At least you need that, you know.

So, the best administrative drill on this is to use some type of minor, inexpensive advertising and don't try to go into the intellectual louses all the time - the people who are only intellectuals and so on and circulate only amongst intellectuals and all that, never get into any doingness. You want to make sure that you cover the various stratas of society. You don't want people just to talk about this, you want them to do something. And you don't care what strata of society you are reaching. We are not being selective here at all.

You never saw anything like the first PE Foundation in the way longshoremen answered up in the thing. Boy, they thought this thing was the most! They gave it a tremendous impetus too. These guys were really wild. They could hardly talk English and they were all brawn and sweat, you know. And man, when they got into the intellectual high flights of the theory of Scientology and so on they really started going, changed their whole beingness all around.

But they would get out and just order another gang to come into the next PE Foundation course, you see. It was really fabulous working with them.

Now, it doesn't require tremendous splashes because the main impetus – it’s like cases - it's always hardest to start a case because the case is always started at its hardest point.

Similarly, with a PE Foundation HAS Co-audit, it's - the hardest point of the course is just starting it, because you don't have any advertising. You haven't too much finance to go in for big placards and that sort of thing, but you get it noised around, get it known as well as you can, any scheme by which this can be done.

And you move your people in through this free evening course and then you move them into the HAS Course. And then you move them into the Co-audit Course. And you do this with a system of invoices and labels. You know, you can put pocket badges on these people, white pocket badges or something of this sort that shows what class they're supposed to be in.

They don't get in the door and get into that classroom and so forth unless they've got their badge or they've got their identifier, you know, of some sort.

And you charge for your HAS Course, and you charge for your co-audit. And you charge well for these. But - two guineas a week or ten dollars, something like that, twelve and a half dollars a week, something like that, maybe you'd pay - get them to pay in New York, would be the minimum that you'd charge. Don't start getting goofy on this and decide that you can't have money because the next thing you know you're not going to have money for advertising. And the next thing you know you aren't going to be able to pay rent. And the next thing you know you're not going to be able to pay your receptionist and the whole thing'll cave in just because you didn't ask anybody for some money. You see?

And take in enough money to run the particular unit. And you'll find out that by the time you've got forty, fifty people storming the doors on this sort of thing, why, you're running into enough money that you can afford some better quarters and you can afford some better administration and you can afford some more personnel and you can afford some more advertising. And then you get about three or four hundred people in, you can afford some niore quarters and some better administration and some more people. And you get five, six, eight hundred people coming in, you'd better afford some more quarters and afford some more advertising. And by that time, by golly, if some of your original unit haven't been trained as HPAs, you're sunk already because you just haven't got enough people. See?

You've got to keep your whole program abreast.

Done well and done right, this can clear earth. And I'm not talking through my skull. In fact, I'm not even in it. Anyhow...

The whole forward impulse - the whole forward impulse depends on the amount of service and the amount of result which you can get. Now, if you can get service and if you can get result and if you can pound this thing home and you can square it around, why, you've just got it made, that's all. I mean, we've got a new culture and that's it. And the more I have to do with this old one, the more secondhand it appears.

So do well with your HAS Co-audit. Thank you.

Thank you.