From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 10 - January 1993
Comments on "Scientology - A Handbook for Use"
by Antony A Phillips, Denmark
The arrival of this book is a big landmark. I regard it as important
as the production of the red tech volumes in 1976.
In 1966 I worked at Saint Hill England, and was put in charge of mimeo
(the duplicating department, responsible for duplicating HCO Bulletins
and Policy Letters, Rons most important communication out line). I
found a mess. On the Briefing Course (the only one in the world at
that time) there was a check sheet with many Bulletins on it. But
people were being passed successfully off the Briefing Course without
having read all those Bulletins. Reason: items were not available!
After I had managed to sort the 7000 odd stencils (masters to single
pages of a Bulletin or Policy letter) into date order, it was found
that -nothing- on the Briefing Course checksheet was missing. But it
was still an enourmous job to duplicate and collect all the material
into packs for the Briefing course.
Ken Delderfield, the LRH Communicator, declared a danger condition,
and personally organised this work, done often at weekends by
volunteers. Some years later, now as a Sea Org Member, Ken organised
the production of most Policy Letters and Bulletins into 12 'Bulletin
Books' (Tech volumes) and 7 Policy Volumes. All large books of about
500 large pages with ten point type.
For the first time individuals and small and large groups could easily
refer to some of the most important of Rons writings. You could, and
still can, sit quietly and comfortably at home, and look up in the big
index in volume ten, all the references to service facs, and study
them. Truly an enourmous step forward, and I hope one day we will have
a statue of Ken Delderfield somewhere, with a Red Volume in his hand.
However these volumes were entirely Ron, and what Ron had allowed to
be published under his name, and had not later cancelled. I believe a
whole lot of Life Repair data, which Otto Roos originated, was
cancelled when Otto Roos was declared, which accounts for a scarcity
of "red on white" (Bulletins) on life repair. In his series of three
volumes, two already published, L. Kin has produced an easily
available supplement to the red volumes. He has given us his 'hat
write-up' (A personal description of how a person does a certain job.)
as an auditor and a c/s, something which would not have been allowed
in the CofS. An invaluable help to the less experienced. I hope it
will only be the first of such 'hat write-ups'. It is a real landmark.
I hope we can find some sculpture who can make a truly aesthetic
figure of a man with a pseudonym.
The books are full of plus points. Crammed full. This article (from
now on) is concerned with a few things I consider outpoints, which
others without my 38 years of contact with scientology, may have
missed. In both books there is a lot of attention on Zenu, which I, as
one who has not been in close contact with Ron's Org, found rather
suprising. In my 38 years I have not had much to do with Zenu, and
have tended to regard him and his influence mostly as a figment of
Ron's paranoia, which the self styled 'Ron's Org' people have gone in
agreement with, and now, apparently, become cause over that agreement.
For which they deserve only congratulations (admittedly a bit
But down to volume two - "Scientology - A Handbook for Use".
Reading page 41 onwards caused me to raise my eyebrows a few times. I
consider the CCHs fantastic processes, but ones which can be run
badly, resulting in their getting a bad reputation. I was taught to
run CCH 1 to 4 in rotation, running each CCH only three commands
(command cycles in the case of CCH2) if it did not bite (that means:
produce change). This worked, and would be a considerable saving of
both a pcs money and an auditors time, compared to L. Kins method
(which no doubt works). His description of CCH 3 is -weird-. Looks
like a misunderstanding of the word 'contribute'. Under my training I
learned that it was possible to follow and contribute at the same time
- a big cognition for me. Perhaps the cognition needed to bring about
the third empire Todde Salén writes about.
I must try and get hold of Bill Robertsons Class VIII Notes. Sounds
Paid for auditing
On page 168, line 6, L. Kin says "They were co-audited since there was
not any paid auditing for the public yet", referring to the year 1965.
I find this sentence hard to understand. When I came into scientology
in 1954, the first action I received was audited, which I paid for
from a field auditor. A year later I started the professional auditor
course (called HPA in England, Hubbard Professional Auditor), held in
the central organisation called HASI (Hubbard Association of
Scientologists International) and here there were three staff auditors
who audited members of the public for money. A year or so later I
received a twenty five hour intensive from Ray Kemp, who was a field
auditor, and a twenty five hour intensive from an auditor in the HASI
(Hubbard Association of Scientology, pre-runner of the church), both
of which I paid for. And in 1958 I was myself for a short time HGC
(Hubbard Guidance Centre) auditor. That's to say I worked for HASI
giving auditing to members of the public who paid, and a little later
I myself audited a few people as a field auditor, and they paid.
What does L.Kin mean? It is not too important, but gives a very false
idea of the history of scientology. Possibly he means at Saint Hill,
for Saint Hill delivered only the Briefing Course, until Power
Processing started in 1965.
This is a plus point (out of the many). " ... in quite a few places
the flows are misworded ... ". Additional Data. In the Filbert's book
"Excalibur Revisited" commands for the Grades processes are given
correctly worded, and Metapsychology (which has evolved a slightly
different "gradation chart") does not set out specific commands but
gives the principles of how you word commands for the different flows.
This later, working out command wording, is (or was, I don't have
present time data) a part of upper training in the church, as a case
supervisor was expected to invent more processes if a preclear
finished the processes for a grade without getting the end phenomena
of the grade.
Grades do not lead to clear
On the bottom of page 170 the author states " ... today, the grades do
not lead up to clear any more, they are but a substitute for life
repair.". This sentence made me raise my eyebrows (raising my eyebrows
seems to be the way I react to what I think is an out point!).
Again on the top of page 171 "Try running the grades after a good life
repair was done and you'll see: yawning boredom. The same is true for
clears who did not have the grades run before: they also find them
I do not have personal experience on this, but know of two auditors
who recently have run grades on pcs not needing life repair, with the
pcs being very excited about and interested in the auditing. So I'd
suggest readers look twice before abandoning the grades. I used to
think that OTs who were having difficulties with their wife, husband,
job, or any other area of life, had not had the grades run properly.
Having read L Kin's work I find it possible that what they lacked was
a full life repair. However, I feel it almost amounts to an overt act
not to allow a pc all the cognitions on life that come from the
grades. Of course you don't run the processes that don't read, or are
boring. But there are many more.
Another point is that the pcs reality can be formed by what the
auditor and other scientologists say. If every one in the preclear's
area invalidates the grades, he will have no incentive to run them. I
well remember a case many years ago that insisted on being run on OT
processes. These did not bite (work), presumably because he resisted
running any gradient to them, and protested running grades.
Fortunately the preclear of the street does not give that problem. He
runs what you run on him, trusting you as an authority. So think twice
before you deny him the understandings to be gained from the grades.
P.179 on is a -strong- plus point ("A questionaire for the
Introductory Interview"). I can't refrain from praising it.
From Clear on Up
"These levels [OT levels] have gone flat on the 4th dynamic". This is
a very interesting theory
Well, those are the outpoints I found. Not many really. I'd be
interested to hear of more, and it is possible that a more experienced
auditor and c/s will find more. In any case this is such an important
book that it deserves attention, and reading. It is also a strong plus
point that it uses the word scientology. If we are going to develop
scientology further, it will be helpful to have all developments (and
this book definitely contains developements) grouped under one name.
Otherwise how can we easily find what suggested advances others have
made? Our subject is too much needed (in a better, faster form) by
nearly all of this planet's many hundreds (or is it more now) of
inhabitants for advances to be kept secret with a view to money
You are strongly reccomended to buy the book if you have any sort of
background as an auditor.