learning by doing

For those around in the 50’s and 60’s, learning to audit was a hands-on activity. Take a book – use it to help another.  Learn a process – apply it. In the 70’s we had a large volume of Grad Vs, Class VI’s and Class VIII auditors made. In the 80’s we had Class IX’s and Class XII’s.

Unfortunately the last 20+ years has seen auditor training drop into Non-Existence. Those who were auditing have been discouraged through invalidation, cancellation of certificates or declares – and those who had the desire to become an auditor gave up after years of trying to get a TRs & Metering pass, or trying to get through extensive “Golden Age of Tech” training before they actually audit someone.

In the field there are a number of veteran auditors, but nowhere near the numbers needed to actually service those wanting service. We need more auditors trained.   But how to do this when there are few academies and so much past invalidation resulting in resentment if not apathy?

LRH details how to train an auditor:

“All right. The next thing, if you’re teaching him to audit, is not to ask him to try his skill 100 percent on a preclear the first time. Actually, he’ll be scared to death. This is something he mustn’t touch. He’s superstitious about it. He has gained the idea that the phenomena exists, You can even show him that past lives exist by the machine behavior. You can account for various things for him. But this still has not gotten across this one bridge – he hasn’t touched a preclear’s mind yet.

“Now, he expects the preclear to blow up or something strange to happen if he does something to this mind. So what you do is take a – old copy of Self Analysis or the Handbook for Preclears, even better, and you put it in his hands and you give him a preclear. And you make him read this thing to the preclear, Make him make the preclear recall these things. And give him a little indoctrination along in this line and his confidence will come up the line.

“Then have him run what you might call emotional curves on the preclear a little bit: feeling this emotion, feeling that emotion, getting it here, getting it there. He’ll find out the emotional curve exists. And then you can assign to him running a secondary.

“Now the running of the secondary, as you know, is not very complex, but many secondaries are badly shut down. You have him run a secondary: have him go from the beginning to the end, get the exact moment and all the perceptions on the preclear when the preclear received some bad news, and run those through to the end of the incident – maybe ten minutes later, maybe an hour later or a day later – and keep running that through, over and over and over and over. But remembering that if it doesn’t spill, it has overt acts before it, so have him go find the overt act again. But again, this is just emotional. Just emotion – that’s all you want out of these incidents. That is running a secondary.

“You could even permit him to run an engram and validate for himself, either in himself or on a preclear – particularly on a preclear – the fact that things are recorded during periods of  unconsciousness.

“Now, oddly enough, this is not hard to demonstrate.  …

“But his first address to the other mind, as I say, ought to be the handbook. Let him take it easy. He will get up to a point where, if he hit a terror charge, he would run it out instead of run away from it. Let him become accustomed to his tools, little by little, each time gaining reality on what he is doing.

“He has to have subjective reality, furthermore. An auditor who does not have subjective reality on this subject finds it very difficult to understand what is happening to the preclear. He can study until he is the best-read person in Scientology, and he still will not be a good auditor if he has never touched physical pain in himself, if he’s never experienced an emotion out of a facsimile. If he doesn’t have any reality on this, he is not a good auditor. And he will actually cut down the preclear. …

“All right. Now, all the training in the world is not going to overcome a lack of this subjective reality. And all the training in the world is – that’s only education, after all – is not going to make an optimum individual or a Clear.  …

“So any time you’re training auditors, you better encourage them, by this process of taking it a little bit at a time and a little bit at a time and a little bit at a time, to get their hands wet, you might say, and dirty up to the wrist in other people’s engrams. And get them to work on each other and get your advanced students to work on the earlier students up to a point – with good auditing – so that you wind up with students who are cleared.

“Now there’s – you got all the tools, there aren’t any bugs left in this. There are no bugs left in it. There’s nothing left hanging out. You’ve got the tools, you learn the tools, you apply them with good reality, with good confidence, well learned – you get Clears. All right, then you’ve really got auditors. Then you’ve really got auditors.”  LRH R&D 10 Training Auditors, from lecture 520309 TRAINING AUDITORS: THE ANATOMY OF FAC ONE

From a Milestone Two perspective we are very interested in both getting trained auditors back in the chair, and training new auditors.  We are putting together the lines to assist people in this regard, including internship lines, refreshers and more.

We take Aristotle’s advice, along with LRH’s, and believe that you learn to be an auditor by auditing. Whether it is to open your own practice, work in a local group, or work on dissemination lines, if you would like help in this regard, in any respect, drop us a line.

6 thoughts on “Aristotle is right

  1. I’m one of those people LRH is talking about here. I always wanted to be able to audit, but the opportunity never presented itself. I actually turned on quite a grief charge at one point about it. But at the same time, it scares the hell out of me. Good reference.

  2. I tried being an auditor (standard Dianetics). Did about 4 well done or very well done sessions, followed by a VVGI’s, pin to pin f/n at exam session, followed by a 10-hour session that was a flunk, followed by 2 or 3 more well dones, then I lost my pc because he joined the SO. Then I got another pc. My first & only session with him was a flunk. As far as I know, there was no auditor’s code break. However, the cramming officer/case sup (who was also my case sup as a pc) told me that the problem with my auditing was that I have bad intentions toward pc’s. I haven’t had any real desire to audit anyone since.

    When GAT came out, it seemed like a good idea to me. I thought it would make it easier for people to become auditors. I didn’t know until this past year that the stats indicate otherwise.

    My goal is to contribute somehow to the making of standard auditors. But first I have to be able to escape from the church.

    • My goodness! I hardly know what to say about this. A C/S tells you that you have bad intentions towards your PC’s? PC’s-plural?Really? I am stunned and appalled to read this.

      People who take the time, expense and suffer through the learning curve in order to audit others don’t carry around ill intentions toward their PC’s.

      LRH stated that auditors are the most valuable beings. They can take away pain, upsets, and confusions and bring peace to a mind. I am quite certain LRH would weep to hear this said about one of his auditors.

      I generally don’t turn to tears but this story almost had me there.

    • Sofia13 – I’m going to second KFrancis on the positive side. An auditor is a VERY valuable being, and a cramming officer handles VERY gently with VERY kid gloves. A mistake, is a mistake, a technical error which can be easily corrected. The state of the auditor is the cramming officer’s primary concern. It is so easy to take a loss on an error, (the feeling is that death would be better), and it is the cramming officer’s or C/S’s job to rake care of the auditor, first, then point out the technical mistake, with the reference for the mistake, and the correction, with the reference for the correction. In the example you gave, the auditor was handed an unsubstantiated generality, no mistake indicated, with no reference and no correction. That is not tech. There is of course more to this, and someone could point to the reference for the cram officer’s hat, purposes, goals, handlings, etc.. The goal is understanding, and a really good cram officer will check with his auditors periodically to see how things are going, see if they want anything, feel they could use some more of something, or have a question. Are you SURE I can’t do anything for you? There must be SOMETHING!!

What is your view?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s