6205C24 SHSpec-148  E-meter Data -- Instant Reads (I)

     If a PC has a stuck picture, don't try to run it.  Get the session where
it was found and get the missed withhold off that session.

     LRH has a simple plan: use the E-meter.  We had a breakdown in 1961,
where everybody was misreading meters; now it is happening again.  [See
pp.145-6 for a discussion of observing the needle.] Auditors are ignoring
reads on ruds questions and auditing over out-ruds.  They are not seeing
instant reads, for some reason.

     The Ford Foundation was founded the same day as the Hubbard Research
Foundation, and for the same purpose: to find out about life.  However, their
idea of "scientific research" is looking on a via through symbols.  In
contrast, when LRH observed the generally crummy appearance of students a few
weeks ago, he looked for the reason without presuming what he would find.
This is a good way to do research.  He found out that if ruds were out, there
would be no TA, so he had old prepchecks cleaned.  [See p. 229, above.]

     People thought the meter wasn't reacting because the auditor's TR-1 was
out.  However, that was not the reason.  Auditors just failed to see reactions
that were there.  If, with modern processes, the PC isn't looking better and
doing better, someone isn't reading the meter.  An auditor can get into not
reading the meter by invalidating the meter.  This comes about because he has
been audited by someone who missed reads on him, which caused him to lose
confidence in the meter.  He feels, "It should have read on me and it didn't
read (This is a lie and hangs up like any other lie.).  If it had read, the
auditor would have seen it, so the meter doesn't work, so I won't pay
attention to it when I'm auditing." This needn't happen a lot.  Meters get
invalidated.  The inval of the missed read gets suppressed.  It hangs up and
builds a whole chain.  You clean it up by prepchecking, "Has any auditor
failed to find a meter read on you that you thought should have reacted?" That
gets the unknowns out of it.  It has unknowns in it because it occurred in
mid-session when the PC's attention was on something else.

     The mechanism of enchantment is similar to this.  It could work something
like this: At a time when thetans could mock up their own bodies, one thetan
could put in a command phrase on another thetan in the middle of subjecting
him to a severe secondary or engram.  The command phrase could be, "You are
now a deer," and the enchantee would cease to mock up the prince, or whatever
he was mocking up and mock up a deer, and he would be an enchanted deer.

     So you lay in an inval of the meter; at a time when the PC's attention is
on his withholds or something, he gets a further withhold on top of it.
Thereafter, he distrusts meters and can't read them.  It would take more than
that motivator, however.  It would take some overt that is actually a
motivator also.

     The PC is at the auditor's mercy, being out of PT, etc.  You have to
audit in a way that doesn't impede the PC from going clear.  You avoid
restimulation of the GPM until the PC is ready to go clear and you can then
blow the GPM to bits.  Auditing roughly can create inadvertent implants.

     Incomprehensible people are people who wouldn't want your goal.  [See p.
259].  The individual's goal line is important.  Things that cross against his
goal to get clear are all auditing errors.  Smooth auditing is designed not to
bat his goal back; not to impede him.  Making him think the meter doesn't work
is very upsetting to him, even if analytically he is relieved not to have been
found out.  Of course, once the PC is utterly ARC broken, the meter doesn't
read.

     So the auditor can get to the point where he doesn't see or believe the
reads that he gets.  You can get random reads on the words in the question or
on some stray thought, but if you recheck it, it drops out or at least doesn't
appear in the same place.  An instant read is instant; it is not contained in
the body of the question.  Those are prior reads.  The lag in an instant read
is essentially nonexistent.

     The auditor is actually talking to a thought in the bank.  Auditors often
mistakenly think the PC can analytically influence the meter, but he can't.
The PC can't even influence the meter on a via, as an instant read.  He can do
it by thinking of something that he knows there is unknownness about, but in
this case, the read will be latent.  Since there is no time in the reactive
mind, only nowness, you get instant reads from the reactive mind.
Furthermore, the PC doesn't know what produced the instant read; at least he
doesn't know all about it, or it wouldn't read.  A reading item contains
unknowns.  The reactive mind is a cauldron of unknowns that always exist in
Now.  "Consistency of [needle] action is determined by consistency of unknown
and its immediacy in PT."

     So use the questions in HCOB 23May62 ["Very Important:  E-Meter Reads --
Prepchecking: How Meters Get invalidated" This contains questions about
invalidation of meter reads, both from the point of being an auditor and from
the point of view of being a PC.]   to clean up meter inval.  It is important
to get this straightened out for the sake of pcs.  If you see the PC's instant
embarrassment, it is as good as an instant meter read.  You do have to
observe, however, and it is tough to get people to to this.

     [Note: LRH first mentions Routine 3GA at the end of this tape.  Routine
3DXX is mentioned in the confidential tape: 6204C26 SHSpec-139 "Rundown on
Routine 3:  Routine 3DXX".  Routine 3G is mentioned in 6205C01 SHSpec-141
"Routine 3-G" This is Routine 3 employing goals.  It is possible that the
tape, 6206C12 SHSpec-160 "How to Do Goals Assessment", contains the basic data
about Routine 3GA and that Routine 3GA means Routine 3 Goals Assessment.
Routine 3GA is also mentioned in several other SHSBC tapes.  6206C19
SHSpec-158 "Do's and Don'ts of R3GA", and SHSpec-176, 177, 178, 180, 181, all
appear to contain basic data on Routine 3GA. See also pp. 259-262, below.
Above tapes are confidential.]

