From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 10 - January 1993
What Happened to Terrible Trio?
By Frank Gordon, USA
(Frank is a retired Biochemist with an M.A. from Harvard, an Early HDA
(Hubbard Dianetic Auditor) from Wichita, and a Bachelor of Scientology
(BScn.) from Phoenix. One of his interests is the application of the
Scientific Method to the humanities. His address is 25-C Talmar Wood,
Orono, ME 04473 USA .)
The earliest mention of havingness as a process is in Tech Vol II,
Jan. 1954, in an article on "SOP-8C: The rehabiliation of the Human
Formula IV(b) "As the pc has rendered automatic his desires and his
ability to create and destroy, and has thus placed havingness beyond
his control, the auditor should place in the control of the pc his
automaticities of havingness and unhavingness and permit him, on his
own self-determinism, to balance his havingness.
The importance of havingness
PAB 72, Tech Vol II, p. 371 has an article on "The Importance of
Havingness" which states:
".. the only advances worthy of the name of scientology occur when the
auditor repairs or remedies havingness on the pc. Without the repair
and remedy of havingness no real gains become apparent. A preclear
will not progress when his havingness is impaired".
Up to this point, we are still dealing with subjective havingness.
Then in PAB 80, "Scientology's Most Workable Process" on p. 395. Ron
".. What is there in this .. mountain of attainment which is the
highest gain? Amongst all this gold where is the super-gold? ..
Empirically, the supergold, you have had is havingness. .. When
havingness is neglected, cases do not improve, that's all there is to
"Well, amongst all havingnesses, what is the super-gold process. There
is one. It is not very fast, it is terribly certain, it does not fail
in our experience and its gains are permanent. It is a process known
as the Terrible Trio".
The commands of this now objective havingness process are: "Look
around the room and tell me what you could have." "Look around the
room and tell me what you would let remain." "Look around the room and
tell me what you could dispense with." Ron also noted that according
to report, the Terrible Trio could be self-audited, and that periodic
use of a havingness process could aid cognitions. In "The Free Spirit"
of Jan. 86, p. 4, in his article "Which Standard Tech?" M.D.
"Terrific results were obtained in the early days. ... there were many
very powerful processes that worked beautifully that were abandoned
... whose only fault was that the PC would go on cogniting and not
have to get more auditing! Processes like Terrible Trio ..."
I've tried the terrible trio on a self-auditing basis, but could not
get it to bite. So I asked a friend to check variations on the meter,
to see if there was one that would read. He tried: have, own, reach,
handle, and control without good action. I did get a "strugglely"
frustrated feeling, though, and after some conversation, "put up with"
occurred to me as one meaning of "have".
I asked him to try this: "Look around this room and find something you
could put up with." This gave me an immediate line charge and BD. Now
I had a biting question to continue to work on solo. "Put up with"
falls under -endure- - 41 along with "survive", and "tolerate" on the
pre-have scale. I had noted an earlier irritation with "survive" as
putting up with things, perhaps that I no longer have to put up with.
It also fits the "strugglely" feeling.
I ran "Look around here and find something you could put up with",
solo, and got: "reluctant acquiescence", "grudging acceptance", "grin
and bear it", "a stuck protest" (wanted to protest but decided it
wouldn't do any good), and a neat little implant: "There isn't
anything you can do about it anyway, so you'll just have to put up
with it." This gem made me laugh and clench my fist. "Oh, yeah?".
This whole operation is a giving over of control and settling into an
acceptable level of overwhelm. How subdued and compliant can I get? I
cognited that "put up with" was the attitude of MEST; a match has to
put up with being lit, etc. The MEST around me took on a compliant but
reluctant "indentured servant" attitude. I could sense how dynamite
feels when it's called upon to explode, "Oh well, I suppose if I have
to, I have to". Line Charge, TA, and loose needle.
Exploring variations, I came up with "allow" (pre-have -agree- - 45).
I could look around and find something I could (graciously) allow.
This gave an expansive higher toned feeling than "put up with" (done
in a kingly fashion) and gave good meter action.
A more effective approach
This use of the pre-have scale, along with objective havingness as per
the terrible trio or variations, can provide a more effective approach
to havingness. Since the Terrible Trio has fallen out of favor, this
may have been one factor, i.e., that the pc was actually at a pre-have
level: in addition to those factors cited by Stansfield above.