Сообщение auditor » 25 мар 2016, 12:02

Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex


No matter how complicated or confusing the environment is getting, if you have a stable datum of exact action it can see you through.
The Prepared List provides the auditor with a stable action when a session or case is confusing and can bring things under control.
The idea of such lists and their development are original to Dianetics and Scientology. They are made possible because these subjects embrace the full extent of thought, the spirit and actual and potential aberration. Thousands of hours of research and development have gone into these lists. Thousands of case histories have been reviewed and condensed to make the lists possible. They are, in themselves, a considerable tour de force.
They have often meant the difference between a failed case and a spectacular result. Just as they are important, a knowledge of them and skill in their use is vital to auditing success.


Probably the oldest „prepared list“ is the White Form, (now called THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT SHEET – HCOB 24 Jun 78R). This provided a series of questions which would give one the background of the preclear. It dates from 1950. By it one can get the probable this life areas of the preclear’s heaviest charge.
SELF ANALYSIS was written in 1951. It contains processing lists a preclear could run on himself.
Group Auditing materials of the middle 50s contained lists of commands which were run on groups. Done on a meter, it provides a case entrance.
The „Joburg“ of 1961 is probably the next historical point. It was a list of the possible withholds a preclear might have. It was called the „Joburg“ because it was developed in Johannesburg, South Africa.
The „L1“ was probably next. The original gave a list of session rudiments which might have gone out and enabled the auditor to get the session rudiments back in. It is still in use as „L1C“ or „List One C“.
The „Green Form“ was developed in the early 60s so that Qual Review at Saint Hill would have a tool to analyze a case.
Correction lists for various auditing actions began to appear. These corrected an action in progress that had gone awry.
In 1973, the famous „C/S 53“ (meaning „Case Supervisor Series 53“) was devised and continued to be improved and reissued.
Today there are dozens of Prepared Lists. There is even a prepared list to repair repaired lists in general.


A Prepared List is an assembly of the majority of things which can be wrong in a case, an auditing action or a session.
Such lists are quite remarkable, actually. Only a thorough knowledge of aberration makes such a list possible. When you look over the extent of Prepared Lists, you will see that they contain a grasp of the subject of aberration never before available.


While an auditor is expected to have studied and mastered all this theory, it is a bit much to expect that in the confusion of a case or session gone wrong he will be able to spot instantly, without help, exactly WHAT has gone wrong. Prepared Lists, where they exist, and his E-Meter will sort this out for him. All the auditor has to have is a general insight that something is going wrong, know in general what is being handled in the case, knows what list to use and then, with good TRs and metering, do an assessment of the Prepared List. Usually the trouble will come right, since the exact point will have been located. It is sometimes enough to merely indicate the point found to discharge it somewhat. One can F/N what is found or one can go into very wide, extensive handling. The point is, the use of the Prepared List has spotted the trouble. What is demanded of the auditor or C/S is WHICH Prepared List to use, but this is determined by what has been going on.


There are four general types of Prepared Lists. These are:
A. An ANALYSIS list. This is a type of Prepared List which analyzes a case broadly or analyzes a session. The purpose of it is to find out what to address in the case in order to program it. The White Form, the Green Form and the C/S 53 can all be used for this purpose. There are other such lists and there is even a Prepared List to debug production.
B. A direct AUDITING list. Prepared Lists exist which deliver direct auditing commands or questions which, run on the Pc, produce an auditing result. The lists of SELF ANALYSIS and the various Confessional Lists form this type of Prepared List.
C. A CORRECTION list. This type of list corrects an ongoing action. Examples are the Word Clearing Correction List, the Int Rundown Correction List, the Dianetic Correction List. There is a bit of a grey area in this type of list as one can also use some of them for analysis as in the case of a Course Supervisor Correction List or a Student Correction List. The C/S 53 can also serve as a correction list. The real difference is what the list is being used for – to analyze to find out what to program or start or to correct something already in progress.
D. DRILL lists. These are used in training as dummy lists to get an auditor used to handling the meter and Prepared Lists. Such lists are contained in the Book of E-Meter Drills.


There are three methods of handling Prepared Lists, depending on the type of list.
There is simply the method of asking the questions in sequence and getting the answer from the preclear. This would apply to a White Form or to auditing Prepared Lists as in Self Analysis or in Group Auditing. Very few lists are handled in this way.
The second way is called „Method 3“ wherein the list is assessed on a meter and when a read is noted, the meter-reading question is taken up with the preclear and F/Ned. Method 3 is covered in HCOB 3 Jul 71 AUDITING BY LISTS.
The third way is called „Method 5“. This type of assessment assesses the whole Prepared List rapidly without getting the preclear to talk and the reads are then noted. The largest read or reads are then taken up and F/Ned. Method 5 is covered in HCOB 3 Jul 71 AUDITING BY LISTS.


Whether or not a Prepared List reads depends upon the auditor’s TRs and Metering. At one time or another Case Supervisors have had a great deal of trouble with this. Accuracy as to what really read was greatly in question. This came to view on Flag in the early 70s when Prepared Lists that had been assessed by Class IV trainees were then reassessed, same list, sane pc shortly after the first list assessment, by Class XIIs. Totally different results were found – lists on which few or no reads were obtained by the Class IV trainees were found to be very live by the Class XIIs. The difference of quality of TRs and metering were what made the difference with the prepared list response. HCOB 22 April 1980 contains the drills which remedy this. It is the TRs and metering of the auditor that makes a prepared list reliable, not the list itself.
The champion list of all time is the C/S 53. On one page, any general thing that can be aberrated in a thetan has been assembled. There are two forms of it – Short Form for preclears who know the terms and Long Form for preclears who are unindoctrinated (they are the same lists but the Short Form is in single word and the Long Form is a full question).
A Director of Processing giving a D of P Interview can use one of these and obtain enough material to enormously help a Case Supervisor. It is not the only D of P Interview action but it is very helpful when used.
An auditor can debug a program or a session with it.
It can analyze a case for programming and it can also be used to correct a program or to correct a session.
Originally it was developed to handle high and low Tone Arm cases and although it still says this, it also says it can „correct case outnesses“. And today, this is its greatest use.
PRIORITY of handling outnesses is a vital part of C/S 53. The first three groups of items – (Interiorization outnesses), B (List errors) and C (rudiments) – give the necessary order of handling. If Int is reading, nothing else can be handled until it is. List errors take the next priority. Then rudiments. If one were to try to repair a case out of sequence, a mess could occur. So this Prepared List also gives the sequence in which outnesses must be handled.
The main fault in using a C/S 53 is overuse – an auditor reaching for it when he gets in trouble instead of improving the auditor’s own TRs, metering or knowledge of programming in the first place.
But the C/S 53 is one of the most valuable tools an Auditor or a Case Supervisor has.


The Prepared Lists of all types place in the hands of the Case Supervisor and the auditor a procedure by which a case can be analyzed and programmed.
Some auditing can be done direct from Prepared Lists.


It can happen that a Prepared List gets stalled on misunderstood words.
For many Prepared Lists there are also full word clearing lists which can be done on the pc.
At one time it was thought that before one did a list one should ALWAYS word clear it. However, this has the liability that a pc who is in one kind of trouble can’t sit still until a full word clearing action is done.
The amount of trouble which came from Prepared Lists came more from assessing and metering errors than it did from misunderstood words.
When one is using a prepared list on a pc who has never had it word cleared, it is usually enough to check that the read isn’t coming from a Mis U.
Early in a pc’s auditing, about the time he gets a CS-1, the more critical prepared lists should be word cleared and the fact noted in his folder. But when one is doing this word clearing, tone arm action or significant reads should also be noted. One is liable to think he is word clearing whereas he is actually assessing.
True, there are a lot of tech words on a prepared list that the pc isn’t likely to know. Unfortunately, the discoveries of Scientology exceed common language and require terms of their own. But a pc catches on to this quite rapidly. They are new ideas to him (even though he was been living with them all the eons of his existence). When the word is cleared, the idea is also thrown into action. So it is important to note meter reads and tone arm actions when clearing the words of prepared lists.
No hard and fast rules can be drawn on this point of word clearing Prepared Lists. If you have already word cleared the key words of a key Prepared List before you need it, thank your stars. Otherwise, carry on and hope.


A Case Supervisor and an auditor owe it to themselves to have a good command of this subject of Prepared Lists. There are many issues on the subject. There are dozens of Prepared Lists.
Knowing what Prepared Lists exist is a vital step for a Case Supervisor and auditor. Knowing what each is used for is equally important. Knowing which lists have word clearing lists already prepared is of assistance.
One has to know enough general tech in order to select what Prepared List to use.
The ability to assess, as it applies to TRs and metering is extremely important in using Prepared Lists.
When it comes to analyzing, auditing and correcting cases and actions, the Prepared Lists are a jewel box that glitters with potential success.

Professional auditing in any place on the planet Auditor class X, skype: timecops
Сообщений: 698
Зарегистрирован: 28 дек 2015, 12:01

Вернуться в L Ron Hubbard original LECTIONS, TAPES

Кто сейчас на форуме

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 2