TR 0

A lecture given on 16 January 1963

Good enough, good enough. OK, this is a few words on TR0. This is the 16th of January Saint Hill Special Briefing Course.

Well let’s give all those coaches some applause huh? And let’s give those students some applause. Thank you.

I don’t know if you noticed it, but the upper unit students confront comparison with the newer student confront was quite marked wasn’t it? I thought it’d be something like that. That’s why I chose them up that way.

Now you know the rules about TV. You know if you’ve been on TV, then you’re not on TV again!

That’s normally believed. But actually that’s only if you’re canceled before the program. You probably didn’t know that part of the rule. There are a lot of rules about it. They change from week to week. You might as well get used to it, because TV- type training is going into Central Orgs and you’ll find out it’s very beneficial.

Now TR0, the original TR0, was simply to be there and be aware. That was all there was to it. In actual fact apparently people have begun to confront with that definition. See you don’t let them confront with their noses, or their big toes, or stomachs, or something like that. They always confront with that definition.

These are nevertheless - the definition is still valid, and the original TR0 is still valid, but there are some other things that have been added in on top of it.

You can make somebody confront with a professional attitude and usually you find every here and there that some student has got a real professional attitude that he is confronting with. You see, it’s a confront with - that’s the trouble with it. And an auditing attitude, and an interested attitude, and so forth.

These things are all fine, as long as they’re run out. The trick in coaching TR0 - it all depends on a good coach - is spotting something the student is doing. Getting him to be aware of it, and run it out. That’s in actual fact all there is to the system of coaching. But of course, you can give a student so many "Flunk" s, that he just caves in. So what, he can’t win anyhow and goes into apathy.

Now you can give a student so many wins that he never learns how to confront. You can do this both ways too. It takes a little wisdom in the matter. But what you’re actually trying to get him to do is to stand up to the duress of auditing.

Let’s get off of our basic definitions and let’s get into a little bit of the whys and where’s of TR0.

I’ll recall one of the Upper Indoc. TRs, that somebody was trying to teach somebody in an ACC, and it was the one that teaches 8C with violence. You remember that old one you know? And all of a sudden the student quit. The student quit and walked out and an instructor stopped the student and said: "Why - what’s the matter?", and very very grimly and primly, the student said: "PCs never act like that." The coach had actually been giving this student a bad time you know, and "Well, people just don’t act like that" A couple of years went by and this student showed up for a retread in the Academy, or something of the sort, or else for

some auditing, and came round and had an apology to make on the subject. He had audited an actual PC who had acted much worse. So PCs did act like that.

Well in actual fact, one of the things that is most disturbing to a PC, is to have an auditor whose confront is corned up in some way. It is a very unnatural confront and shatters under an upset in the session.

Well normally these upsets are assignable to TR4 and nearly everybody gives TR4 the medal for auditor upset don’t you see? The auditor Qs and As, and Qs and As. Every time you Q and A you see, you make the PC miss a withhold. One Q and A, one missed withhold, you see? So therefore an ARC- break gets worse and worse and worse when an auditor Qs and As. Very simple mechanism goes on there. Then PC says in answer to some question, or an origin: "Well, I thought a moment ago that you were nulling too fast.". The auditor says "Alright, I’ll null more slowly."

Now you see, it isn’t the actual fact that the auditor has followed the order of the PC in TR4 - that’s not what is important. What is important is that he has failed to acknowledge an answer to an origin, or an auditing command you see? He’s failed to acknowledge an answer, and with some auditors you work and work and work and work and work to stop them from Qing and Aing.

It’s so bad that the auditor says: "In this session, is there anything you have suppressed?", and the student says: "Well, I suppressed thinking that you were a bit untidy with your paper.", and the auditor says: "OK, I’ll straighten it up.". Of course that’s a missed withhold at once. Now, the PC can’t get this off because every time the PC tries to repeat his answer, the auditor starts arguing that he is perfectly willing to tidy up his papers. You get the idea?

Now let’s look at why an auditor very often - and some auditors do - take a long time to get up to a point where they never Q and A. And it isn’t in actual fact the TR4. It’s the TR0 that is shot.

This auditor can’t stand up to an auditing session with TR0 and is so, in that fashion, on a sort of an inflow or something you see? And isn’t really there and being aware. But retreats. Anytime anything looks like it’s a little bit odd in a session, the auditor retreats. And that’s the basic sin.

Well you can see these Upper Indoc drills, somebody knocks a student all over the place. The coach knocks the student around and the student has to stand up to it and retain control of the situation if he can. You know, we can see that. It’s all very visible, but those same mechanisms are present in TR0. Exactly those same mechanisms are present.

Now what we’ve seen in demonstration here is a rather smoothly polished TR0. Two people who have had quite a hit of TR0 run already, can be polished further. But there’s the additional element which isn’t on those demonstrations - is pushing buttons. And finally a person will harden into it and then lose the hardening and then find out he can do it, you know? And he’ll be able actually to sit there with an auditing presence, and have a PC blowing up without getting rattled. The PC starts to have an ARC- break, the auditor doesn’t go into an instant lost TR0 you see? TR0 doesn’t go up the spout.

Now therefore TR0 can also, after you’ve led a person forward of getting rid of all the junk - can be stepped up. It can be stepped up. You can start to rough it up, and this is particularly what I wanted to add to this - not talk more about the demonstrations - but to show you that there is an additional step you can use.

Now it requires a considerable perception on the part of the coach in order to step this up accurately, and you had one example of a step up.

Now, as I was actually stepping it up on Norman Stanley when he was a student there, he

was blowing up see, but he settled back down into it and he was OK. But in actual fact, do you see there, do you see, he was breaking his confront? Do you see that?

Now you can lead on that type of a gradient to higher and higher step- ups. You get him just fine so he can stand up to that, and then you’d uncork something else. But let’s look at something they’re doing or something that they’re incipiently doing, and start punching the button, and get the person to explain it. Explain how he’s doing it and the he starts to as- is it, don’ t you see?

He becomes aware of it. In essence, takes over the automaticity of it, and you keep leading out that way, further and further and further well ... until it’d be a matter of the coach jumping up and poking the chair you see, at the student to get him to break his confront. You see how to the degree that that could be stepped up.

I’ve noticed that in the presence of an ARC- break, Q and A becomes very very grim. This auditor never Qs and As but in the presence of an ARC- break and I’m pointing this out to you. The reason he Qs and As is not that his TR4 goes to pieces, but his TR0 goes to pieces. So therefore there is a great deal that can be said for stepping up what there is there to be confronted.

Now anybody can confront a completely motionless PC. You see? Anybody can confront a motionless PC. But how about confronting a PC in motion?

Well the first thing you think of is somebody shaking his hand in front on the students’ eyes. The coach shaking his hand in front of the students’ eyes and get the student to stop flinching. That’d be a very easy gradient on the thing you know.

But how about dodging E- meter cans? Hmm? Do you realize that in general practice, particularly due to the ARC- breaks which can sometimes come up under Routine 2- 12, that I would say if you went six months without having a PC throw the cans down - why you must be either very very lucky , or have very apathetic PCs. And I’d say once a year an auditor could certainly expect to get the cans in his chest. Now you don’t want to train an auditor to the point where he doesn’t dodge the cans. But you certainly want him trained to the point where the cans do not interrupt his command of the session. See? That his action of dodging doesn’t interrupt the command of the session.

Now this gets pretty grim after a while you see, it’s just the sky is the limit. It gets up to one of these Tom & Jerry cartoons you know. Buildings falling down, and holes going through the center of the Earth. But the thing I’m trying to put across is that your gradient is what there is there to confront. You could add more things to confront and get him to analyze what he was doing. You could actually take an old E- meter and throw it into his chest you know, and get him so he would take care of the E- meter can see, and still be able to confront the PC.

Auditors do very interesting things - not good auditors - but I’ve seen very interesting things happen in auditing sessions. I have seen a person go into total silence. This is more common than you would think.

PC all of a sudden seems to be in trouble and the auditor goes into total silence. That is about the grimmest thing that can happen to a PC. That’s no auditing with an exclamation point. It’s actually worse than Q and A. The PC had just lost his auditor - that is it. Tell now it normally happens on a freeze. In other words, the auditor freezes, becomes incapable of confronting and just goes into wood.

Now this is a much more insidious type of thing to break than action. So you wouldn’t want to specialize in coaching your TR0 in the fellow blinking, the fellow twitching, the fellow moving and so forth. Don’t specialize in that. Let’s give at least 50% of our coaching to the fellow going into wood. You see what I mean there? As you go up in upper drills, if he’s liable to clam up on a PC, you can also make him do it on TR1.

Now it’s an odd mechanism, this one of freezing - just goes into wood.

Now a good coach can recognize the fact that he hasn’t got a confronting PC, that he’s just got a solid piece of granite in front of him. Now remember, that person who thinks that confrontingness is just becoming a solid piece of granite, may someday, merely stop auditing in the auditing session and just say nothing. And that’s just about the grimmest thing that can happen.

Alright now, your next action on this is an actual flee by the auditor. That’s not as bad as a total clam- up, but it amounts to the same thing. You see, frankly, the more motionless or inactive a person, the worse off he is, but that doesn’t mean that the more active he is, the better off he is. You see that?

You take the psychiatrist - the psychiatrist he’s, he hasn’t got the faintest grip on this. He hasn’t a clue about this. This has totally escaped him. He’s always tried to put people into apathy so they will look all right. Now he’s totally sold on the idea of insanity is motion. Whereas a matter of fact it’s far more often no action at all. You see? It’s much harder, hear me now, it’s much harder to do something for a very apathetic case than it is for an angry one. You see? Your Tone Scale tells you that of course, and you’ve known that for a long time, but I’m pointing that out in TR0 that you can very easily, very easily slip a cogwheel here.

Now just because the guy is sitting there in a total apathy, think that he is doing TR0, and let only the very apathetic and the very granitesque student get by. You see? That’s not the case at all. So you might as well add something to it - look alive. Does he look alive? You can add that. You know - be there and be aware, but that awareness let’s color that with the definition of - let’s have him be alive too, you know? Have the blood flowing in his veins.

That’s an important thing. And actually that one little point is the one that would be host often missed by a coach. He can spot the fellow who goes: "Blrrrr.". He can spot the fellow who goes: "Huhh?", "Euhh?"," Ruhh?", you know? He can spot that dead easy, but the guy who is going - - - he didn’t spot that you see?

Well, it’s all right - he’s sitting there quietly you see? He’s made a psychiatric mistake and this is a mistake that he’s made and you gotta keep pointing that little point up when you’re training people, because it’s a natural thing apparently to think that something that is quiet is safe.

Now of course the psychiatrist is simply trying to make his patients safe. See, he’s operating totally on the 3rd Dynamic and he’s trying to protect the 3rd Dynamic you see, from the 1st. What’s bad is the 1st Dynamic see. That’s why you don’t easily understand this psychiatrist because he’s not trying to make anybody any better see? He’s trying to make the 3rd Dynamic safe. So therefore his "cures" are all cures which apparently are supposed to benefit the 3rd Dynamic. None of his "cures" are ever supposed to benefit the patient. He doesn’t even think so.

You ask him: "Have you ever cured anybody?", and he will say immediately: "Yes.", but you’ve never asked him probably, "What have you cured him of?", and if he doesn’t give you some long imaginary name that was dreamed up by Craplin over in Germany and you get him down to it, he’s cured somebody of being in motion. That’s what he’s cured somebody of. That’s all.

So this is very important to point out. This is very important to point out because you will find as you look down a whole row of people who are doing TR0 that a certain number of them have gone to granite and dropped out of the bottom and something like this. You want to know what their auditing responses are at that particular time and so forth, and of course they’re zero. They get into a session, auditing somebody, something happens - they go into

inaction. Because they’re not confronting. They can’t confront. This idea of total withdrawal you see? Watch it. You could actually put some kind of a meter on the back of the chair to find how hard the student was pressing the back of the chair, and you would get an accurate measurement of how little he was confronting. Because the more weight that goes against the back of the chair, the more he’s trying to get out of there man.

Now this’ll go into a total apathy of "can’t get away", and "can’t speak" in a situation of duress. It’ll go to a - actually that’s very low scale - upper scale is, the auditor will actually run away. Flee. Flee the session. Get out of there.

Now where good auditing shows up as different from bad auditing is in moments of duress. And somebody will get along beautifully auditing some chipper lady that isn’t causing any trouble at all, and he luckily got on the right lines and he hasn’t made any mistakes and so forth. You look at him and you say: "Well he can really audit. He’s just doing fine.", you see?

Well to really know this auditor, you have to see him in a moment of duress. What happens in that moment of duress to his TR0? What’s the first thing to go - his TR0. He’ll start making mistakes and of course that’s the one thing you mustn’t make. Whether he makes the mistake of shutting up, or simply the mistake of bungling the auditing commands, or the mistake of suddenly transferring over to a new list. You got that one?

PC ARC- broke, so must be the wrong list, so we’ll abandon it and then we wonder why day after day thereafter, the PC makes no recovery. Of course he’s ARC- broke, because the list was not finished. The list was abandoned. But he’ll make a wrong judgment no matter how well he’s taught, if his TR0 is terribly bad under duress. He’ll make a wrong judgment.

So you might say there are two or three TR0s. There’s the TR0 of the fellow doing the drill. Let’s take that one as the first one. It isn’t anything to do with auditing, isn’t anything to do with anything else - it’s something that the instructor or the coach told him to do and so he’s doing it. You got that? It’s not associated with anything.

Alright, your next one is the person who clams up and actively can’t act. And your next grade up the line is somebody who goes into an obsessive motion as a sort of a Q and A. Take that as three grades of things which you have to cure when you’re coaching TR0, and if you’re going to do a thorough job - cure all of them. Just take them in sections.

Now the first one that we’re doing which is just sitting there and confronting, when you add to that confronting in certain ways, you’re clearing up the first one. But actually we have no drills that go into the - well, you’re curing up the second one too when you’re doing that. But very few drills go into a cure up of this dispersal of action. But those drills are very easy for a coach to figure out.

One of the things is you know that there are some auditors around who’ll obsessively laugh. Something goes off the rails, or something like that, they will actually laugh. They’ll laugh in the wrong places in the session too. I guarantee you. They’ve got an incipient laugh and you can break them up! Well, you just go ahead breaking him up until they don’t have to.

It’s all a system of taking over the automaticity, and you might practice someday just throwing E- meter cans at their chests see? And see if they can’t keep on confronting while ducking. I don’t care how you do this. I’m just giving you an action level you see?

Now, one of the ways of doing this is talking confront. You’ve never heard of this before, because it’s normally TR1 and 2, but TR1 and 2 are in actual fact simply actions which get a command across to the PC see? And acknowledge what the PC said. Those are the purposes of those two.

So you can have a counting confront. Can the fellow go on counting while you’re throwing E- meter cans at his chest? Or does he lose track of his numbers? You got the - you see how

you could do it? You could actually have a talking confront. He isn’t trying to reach anybody with this. You’re just using this as an index.

Now there are various things then that you could do, but I’ve given you the three zones which you actually have to cure, if you’re really going to cure up an auditor of doing something weird because the session goes awry. Now today, it’d be to our great interest to beef up this one point, to make it stronger, to strengthen it up and hit it harder.

Treat ‘em on all three grades, see where they break up and keep cracking the buttons until they are all of a sudden able to pull through it. It’s a sort of an Upper Indoc TR0.

I don’t care what you do with the PC as long as you give him enough wins, I mean a student. As long as you give him enough wins to keep him going. That’s how many wins you give one. You don’t ever give them as many as they earn. That would be too reasonable. Just give them enough to keep them going and don’t give them so many that they think they can do it, because the actual fact is, they have to come to the independent opinion that they can do it.

How much and how long should you run TR0? Well, actually until the person, while doing all other actions in TRs, can keep his TR0, and where he can keep it under things going wrong and duress.

He can keep up his TR0 with Kiplings "If.." you know. If you can keep your head when all PCs about you are losing theirs, and blaming it on you ... So we actually are moving up into a higher grade requirement and I think it would be greatly to our interests in all courses that you teach. To the interest of PCs and protection of things to give a higher level of expectancy.

Now we know what 2- 12 is liable to uncork in our faces - well alright, let’s beef up the training drills to match it. We’ll lose less PCs that way. They won’t be going out dropping off the Bridge before somebody hears about it you know. Funny part of it is the PC usually doesn’t fall of the Bridge.

We had an interesting - he usually comes back for more auditing, even when he’s so ARC- broken. But the funny part of it is... I had a PC today, I had a PC today who was in an ARC break that was just doing a total suppress. Now, was just doing a big suppress and was in violent argument with a wrong item and so forth.

Now little Diana, she’s 10 and very amusing, Susie brought her down to get the item checked. Mainly so I could see that a PC at 10 would ARC- break just as hard on a wrong item as a PC of 50. I tried to get her to treat it as an Op. Term. Tried to get the rock- slam to turn on and that sort of thing. For her, she had some pretty nasty sort of things to say about the item and the whole thing. She didn’t want that item. It was a wrong item on the list. Rock- slamming item. It is very interesting to watch this, and also to watch the complete brighten up that occurred the moment I said: "Well alright - that’s not your item." Brightened right up and was very pleased and went right back upstairs and went on listing and so forth. That was it. It was interesting that you get the same pattern response. The list was not quite long enough to have a right item on it.

Well now, if this is going to happen invariably and inevitably, all you’ve got to do is flub a little bit, or be auditing a PC who already has problems from some other quarter, or is under a little stress or duress - make an accidental Q and A right at the exact moment and they blow their skulls all over the ceiling.

It’s very interesting then. TR0 ought to be pretty good, because bad TR0 will lead to immediate Q and A. It leads to a lack of comprehension of what is going on. Main thing it leads to. And it leads to a PC who is getting no auditing, and it might even lead to an auditor flying down the hall.

Now actually, it’s a big win for an auditor sometimes when they confront an ARC- break and a lot of insults from the PC and all that sort of thing, to find out they have gotten through it. Even though the tears were coming out of their own eyes and they were terribly upset. They were mis- emotional about the whole thing, but they somehow or other brought it off. They do one or two of those and they get lots of confidence on it. Well, why should they have to gain all that confidence in the session?

Now it actually takes a certain amount of time to get R2- 12 down. It actually takes a certain amount of time.

The experience of delivery of Routine 2- 12 is considerably desirable. You get so that you know more and more about it and feel more and more confident of what you’re doing, and so forth, but it takes a while.

Now, if a person while learning 2- 12 is also learning his TRs, you are liable to have quite a mess on your hands.

Now you can have somebody under guidance, auditing 2- 10 in a co- audit unit, something like that, but they’re under such stringent guidance that somebody is there to pick them up if they drop the ball. They’re actually auditing with very little responsibility, and frankly they learn only that the technique works or is violent. But before they can independently run 2- 12 and so forth, why, they ought to have their TRs. And those TRs ought to be matched up to running such a process, and that means that what is expected of TR0 has to be upgraded.

Now I suppose that part of the training is you get a tape recorder. We’re talking about TR1 now you see. And you go down to the zoo and throw rocks at the lion until he gets a bit mad or something like that. Go down on Sunday when he’s just seen too many people, and get a darn good recording of all of this, don’t you see, and then play it on a high volume hi- fi system, have the student stand there, putting intention into the middle of the speakers. You see? You get so that you could insert the auditing command into the PCs skull, and get him to comply with it regardless of the volume of sound you are being greeted with, you see?

That’s another barrier that you find necessary. But if you don’t handle 2- 12, if you don’t handle the ARC- break, if you don’t keep on doing the right action, if you don’t carry on with it - boy you’ve got a somebody who is splattered all over the room and it just isn’t necessary for a PC to get that splattered. Actually, the splattering is in direct proportion to the confront of the auditor.

It wouldn’t be a very bad ARC- break if it hadn’t been accompanied by a no- confront of the situation. A Q and A don’t you see? A drop the ball all over the place.

Well each one of these auditor flubs throws an actual auditing reason for an ARC break in on top of the basic reason for the ARC- break, and they don’t just wrap it around the telephone pole once you see? They practically put it in around the telephone pole braided!

There it goes and the degree then of the ARC- break the PC will have on Routine 2- 12, is directly proportional to the TRs of the auditor. You see that? It’s a - you’ll see it borne out if you haven’t noticed it up to this time. Why you’ll probably see it around. You’ll certainly see it around training somebody in an Academy with this, or something like that. You’ll notice that somebody’s are very bad, and they have much worse ARC- breaks. Their PC ARC- breaks worse.

Any PC’ll ARC- break on wrong items and that sort of thing. Of course, the swiftness with which the cause of the ARC- break is being handled is only part of it. In actual fact, to Q and A on top of the bad Routine 2 flub - blurraghh - you see? And then a mistake on top of that, you see? And - blurraghh - and then a decision on the part of the auditor to go back and re- list "Where do cats come from?", which was 8 years that it was run, you see? Argghh.! All it is, is an incomplete list and it needed another page, or something like this don’t you see? Easily

remediable, but the auditor is liable to run all the way down to the earliest beginnings of the case you see, rather than simply complete the list that is right in front of him.

His judgment goes. So the judgment of the auditor must be good in this particular spot, and if his TRs are bad, his judgments going to be bad. Do you see what you’re dealing with there? I’ve often noticed that a perfect auditor as long as everything was all right. Somebody is a perfect auditor as long as everything was all right, but the moment the least little thing went wrong - that auditor suddenly became one of the worlds worst auditors to a point of just sitting there - "Uh" - fighting the PC you know - shake him, you know? Tell him he needs a session.

Well now, those are the modern purposes of TR0 and I think that all of your training in this direction couldn’t be better than matched up against the necessities of Routine 2 at this particular time. Because it’ll make Routine 2 that much easier on one and all, including the auditor. If his TRs are almost perfect you know he’ll never have to use them.

It’s something like the fellow who walks out every night. He’s got a gun and he never runs into any trouble, and one night he doesn’t have a gun and everybody jumps him. You see? This kind of an action.

If his TRs are weak, he’ll get very severe ARC- breaks, and you can trace back the PC the severely ARC- breaking PC, to the non- confront and the Q and A and the out- TRs in general of the auditor. The worse these TRs are - the harder the PC will ARC- break and the first that goes out is TR0. OK?

Thank you very much. Good night.