By Mike Eldredge

Some time ago I was asked to write a post regarding Standard Tech, but for various reasons I never got around to it. Having now had some time to give it some thought, here it is.

“Where does standard tech begin? What is it? It is the accumulation of those exact processes which make a way between humanoid and OT.

“The exact method of organizing them, the exact method of delivering them, and the exact repair of any errors made on that route.” LRH (Class VIII Tape #2 What Standard Tech does)

Since operating in the field for the last 23 years off and on I have encountered a number of people touting themselves as trained and standard who obviously lost sight of the above or never thought it was relevant to begin with. By the same token many people I have worked with have always taken it to heart and do their best to stay on the straight and narrow, as described in these tapes and several HCOPLs and HCOBs.

Obviously there are an infinity of wrong ways to do anything . Certainty of action and results only stems from adherence to the fundamental path of the subject of Scientology Technology. In addition it takes real training and real case supervision by qualified individuals and experience as an auditor to become proficient. All of which is available to those who truly desire it. It takes discipline and persistence.

Standard Scientology was developed from hard won experience. It is not an App, there is no such thing as instant OT. The ‘organization “ calling itself “The church of Scientology” has lost sight of the above and statistically has paid the price with the loss of public respect of the subject and its organization and has deteriorated into what it is today.

Nonetheless Standard Tech is still available by individuals who were , and are currently being, properly trained and their services are still available on an international scale. These are not people who are “under the radar” they are people who openly practice Scientology at their respective training levels despite any “threat” to them from any source stating that they have no right to. They practice Scientology as it was intended, to make the able more able. They know that doing so is not about labels or status. They know that auditing if for the PC and not for someone else or to satisfy someone else’s opinion of how they think the PC should be or think or look.

Having spent 18 years studying, practicing and training others in the subject of auditing, training and supervising the subject of Scientology on an intensive basis culminating in thousands of hours of practice and experience in the subject, I offer up the following observations of why the practice has failed at various levels.

a. Organizationally what was once an expanding competent activity on a technical level it was supplanted by untrained and technically incompetent personnel interfering with training and case supervision , resulting in death in some cases and drastic invalidation of cases on an international scale.


Money, the god of the planet.

b. Blanket invalidation of trained and competent practitioners, for the same reason.

And these things were done under the guise of bringing about a “higher standard” by the same incompetent untrained greedy individuals mentioned above.

The result has only been contraction and bad public relations and an industry being made of scientology bashing only rivaled by such things as Duck Dynasty and that ilk.

To put one word to it all I would simply call it BETRAYAL.

In Standard Tech PCs are only ever handled on an individual basis and trained Auditors are only ever corrected or retrained on an individual basis. While there is a general path to be followed in both auditing and training (The Grade Chart) each individual partaking in this activity travels it at their own pace and accomplishes each level with certainty of result or ability at their own pace. The important point being that the individual has certainty of accomplishment for his or her self in fact or truth. (personal integrity).


I have encountered several bizarre practices “in the field “ that I will list here as an illustration of how far off track things can go when untrained individuals calling themselves auditors will go just to make a quick buck. Let it serve as a warning .

a. “Auditing” over the telephone or Skype.

b. Pretending to be an AO or Ls auditor because you found some information on the internet.

c. auditing a PC on Ls in the middle of another major action .

d. deciding a PC can handle OT materials and coffeeshop auditing them on OT level data.

e. promoting smoking weed while mid OT or other auditing as a sleep remedy.

f. endlessly sec checking a PC/Pre OT in the middle of a major action searching for “critical thoughts”.

g. running GPMs for fun and physical sensation.

h. Auditing Solo with no training or C/S.

i. deciding and telling a PC you don’t think they made a grade based on their wife’s opinion.

j. Telling a PC you will audit them up to and through OT III with no AO training, taking their money and then abandoning them .

All of the above I have encountered and were done by “auditors” who were GAT trained and are at large now in the field. So much for “higher standards”. C/S Series 1 covers the basics of auditor actions relative to C/Sing and is on every auditor check sheet .

Real auditors and C/Ses would never entertain any of the above.

The legacy of Scientology lies with those who actually practice Standard Tech whether in an organization or on ones own. Being a real Scientology practitioner takes real training and discipline and the ability to stand ones ground to defend it. My hat’s off to those who do.

Mike Eldredge


(Note from Admin – if you are needing a standard auditor or C/S, I highly recommend Mike. Write me on admin@milestonetwo.org and I will pass on his contact details)


22 thoughts on “Standard Tech

  1. Mike,
    Excellent write up. As a former fully trained and interned and experienced Cramming officer at ASHO FDN I would offer the following.

    From 6th ACC Lecture 56 Procedure 30: How to process a case
    2 June 1954 –
    “Your preclear is no longer free to to consider on many subjects. What subject is he no longer particularly able to consider on? Oddly, enough, it’s the list of definitions of Scientology. That’s exactly what he’s no longer free to consider on. Now, your preclear – he sits there in innocence waiting for you to unwind him somehow or another, and he hopes you won’t get his armature burned out in the process. But everywhere that you process anybody – and I can say this fairly safely, of any race of Homo sapiens – you will find that he is jammed on each and every one of the definitions of Scientology.

    You want to know this subject is a little bit difficult to instruct, why you don’t get people immediately alerting and standing up and cheering when they suddenly hear one of these things? They hear one of these things and they sit down and go, ‘Blah.’ [laughter] Well, that’s a fact they do. Why? Because you just hit dead center into a jam in their ability to consider.”

    “Why does it take so long to train an auditor? Well, you just naturally went into all the jam spots he had on his ability to consider. And you just stirred him up like mad. And that’s about the end of that. In other words it’s restimulative to listen to definitions and so forth it’s very restimulative. It’s upsetting too.”

    It’s an excellent lecture to listen to by the way. The entire thing.
    I used to see this in cramming all the time and with students, and pc’s and staff members that had trouble and went off the rails. They were adrift on basic Scientology definitions. Not complex words, the basic definitions of Scientology. They sure had trouble learning, or applying the material over the top of that. I could easily and always did get a nice FTA just by clearlng the most basic 20 or so definitions of Scientology with them. So they actually had conceptual understanding of them, usually for the first time.

    Underneath every bizarre and unworkable application in the field is very basic Scientology misunderstood definitions.

    To become a skilled auditor is hard work, and it actually requires study, and drilling and knowing the basics cold. And getting any misapplications corrected.

    But it is not easy, because studying and applying scientology is going right into the teeth of everything that is out or wrong with someone, including their actions, thoughts and applications.

    It is worth your life now and for eternity to get it cleaned up, so you do understand and can apply it, exactly and simply as it was laid it.

    Please keep at it for your sake, and the sake of everyone else.

  2. Well written, Mike. Excellent points all around, and timely to boot. To your list of weird practices in the field, add:

    Mixing NOTs auditing processes on a lower level case (non-Clear) to “help” them blow some consideration or mass. True!

    “In order to make Scientology work, it is necessary to hold a standard and this standard must be held very relentlessly. And unless all the actions and all the various techniques applied can be held to a standard of rendition, then Scientology doesn’t work; Scientology doesn’t work if it’s badly done. In other words, the disciplines of Scientology are fully as important as the thoughts or discoveries of Scientology.” LRH

    (from the tape “An Afternoon at Saint Hill”)

  3. Excellent write up!
    I have one point I slightly disagree with, Skype auditing. Having experienced personally and successfully. BUT I totally understand, underlined and all caps, the need for Standard Tech and it’s application being done in person. The lower bridge is a most beautiful thing, no comparison to any other osphy or ism out there. The space created by PC & auditor with in tech application is pure magic.
    But this post is not about the pros or cons of Skype auditing, I mainly wanted to share a cog, about the tech taking one from humanoid to OT., made me look at how the exact process, followed exactly brings about uniform results and that how other forms and applications are open to interference, which can lead to a lack if wins. That being said, LRH stated, (not exact quote) the only reason an org or person fails is for lack of results.
    Ok, long winded, thank you for reading, very happy for all you standard on tech auditors out there. MUCH ARC~

    • Moneca,
      IF “skype” auditing was 100% workable it would be part of Standard Tech.

      The means to explore it were available at Saint Hill with closed circuit TV cameras, headphones, microphones etc. Was it done to success? If it was used, did it work on all cases? Is it the standard, the DEFINITE level or degree of quality adequate and proper for the specific purpose?

      Flatly, no.

      That you got a win, that the person using this method got a win on you, doesn’t mean that this is going to work in all cases. That’s the difference and the achievement of Standard Tech. There are uncountable this and thats that came and went in the study and accomplishment of getting THE route. None of them were retained if they didn’t produce the consistent results that lead out.

      Numerous times in the study of Scientology Ron found auditors who got a “win” on some process or other that thereafter cursed them as they tried it on every other person.

      Skype auditing didn’t and doesn’t make the cut. Maybe you got away with it, once. Maybe again, but if you want the actual, full, real gains of Scientology then I’d recommend the real stuff. That is the tried, tested, workable road to truth, the full, nothing but and actual, truth.


      • Vertsurblanc (Green on white!?),

        Considering the eponym:

        “Man is caught in a huge and complex labyrinth. To get out of it requires that he follow the closely-taped path of Scientology.
        Scientology will take him out of the labyrinth. But only if he follows the exact markings in the tunnels.

        “It has taken me a third of a century in this lifetime to tape this route out.

        “It has been proven that efforts by man to find different routes came to nothing.

        “It is also a clear fact that the route called Scientology does lead out of the labyrinth. Therefore it is a workable system, a route that can be traveled.

        “What would you think of a guide who, because his party said it was dark and the road rough and who said another tunnel looked better, abandoned the route he knew would lead out and led his party to a lost nowhere in the dark. You’dthink he was a pretty wishy-washy guide.” Green on White, PL, 14 Feb 1965, Safeguarding Technology.

  4. Mike: This subject is the make-break on the very survival of Scn on this planet. Well said, well written and a very needed reminder at this time in Scn history. Thanks.


  5. Curious if for the safety of others whether you can post those whom you know to be off source or not standard? Might help some of us newbies know who to avoid.

    • PID,
      Rather than some sort of list of names, the “some of us” that you are speaking for would be better off with a rule of thumb: if it isn’t written or spoken by LRH, it isn’t the taped route. There is no hidden data. What you need to know is written or recorded and it is available to you. Get trained.

      That covers it.

      • That’s nice in theory Jim,

        But how will you know if it is off policy when you are mid session? Per a few examples things are mixed and the untrained PC (like most are when new) won’t know. Thus I think a list would be helpful.

        If you want to email me or anyone a list of said people privately that would help.

        • PID,
          It’s HCOBs not PLs per se, that you are looking at in this situation. Mid-session or not, if you are trained you are in the position to know whether what you are doing is Scientology tech or something else.

          If you have questions about people’s quality of delivery, specific people, then by all means send a mail to me care of the admin of this blog and I can help you determine what’s what.

          But, it isn’t “theory” this idea of getting yourself up on the materials, mate. It’s YOUR Bridge.


  6. PID: You question is a valid one. A PC should be able to know, expect, demand Standard Tech if she/he is trained as a auditor on that level or not. One may not be “trained” on L11, but be damned, he/she had better make sure they are getting the real goods.

    The first vital point is your postulate, what you want, demand and will only settle for. Then it’s your personal powers of observation combined with communications and you making an honest assesment of the person you choose to go into ANY session with.

    Real, honest, on source auditors have an unmistakable certainty and beingness about them. They are also tend to be respected by oher Tech terminals and their good works tend to be known as a matter of fact, not sales driven hype.

    Just look, listen and observe and the good ones jump out at you.

    Take the likes of Mike Elderidge, who wrote the article above, guys like Chris Black, Jim Logan and the like. These terminals stand out like lighthouses on a foggy night.

    Get trained -sure, always best. But trained or not you deserve the best of the best and that’s always the auditor who is 100% on the button with only LRH.

    Demand it, accpt no substitute, settle for nothing less EVER and you might be surprised. The real good ones will fall right into your lap.


  7. I’ll take one very tiny minor exception with the original post:


    Money, the god of the planet.”

    I wondered about this for years. Then I finally came to the conclusion that those evil folks do it for the same reason that the uptone folks do what they do– Survive! To them, survival is power and money, and the enemy against which they fight is from Mars or wherever. As far down the Tone Scale as those bad people are, survival is inverted. It is a sort of survival which achieves only destruction. Yes, money is definitely involved, but it is only part of a larger type of destructive, inverted “survival” pursued by psychotics and SPs. Money is valuable to them to the extent that it buys the power to enslave others and wantonly destroy what others have built.


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