Auditing engrams and GPM's is a new world to many auditors, especially to those who learned a different kind of engram handling. This doesn't invalidate yesterday's techniques. They have their place, especially in the field of healing. We can heal things, although we have neglected this area of responsibility, for which reason we are being attacked in the area. So we will collect and publish what we can do. R2-12, for instance, can have fantastic results, when done as a limited process. Just don't do more than four oppositions on one item. Get one RI do two or three oppositions and be happy with it. The PC has been beaten down by his experiences on the whole track. He thinks nothing good can happen in the universe. When one goodness occurs, it is almost too much for him to have. That is a different zone of expectancy from making clears and OT's. People wouldn't be able to conceive what you meant if you said that you were making clears and OT's, although in fact they would believe you and feel very uneasy about it. You would have restimulated bypassed charge, and they will always get cross with you.
In all auditing, don't stir up more charge than you can handle. If you apply that to any process you run or to any program you formulate, you will have happy PC's. The worse off a case is, the less you stir up. This goes directly in the teeth of the Q and A that is yesteryear's "mental sciences". The effect scale has to be observed. At low levels, the person cannot receive much of an effect, so you have to featherweight the effect to let the PC receive it. The more desperate the case, the more featherweight the cure.
The technology of the preliminary assessment step for R3R lowers the level on which it will be effective. That bypasses the ordinary defenses of the mind. So when you do such an assessment, the rule of not stirring up more charge than you can handle applies in neon lights, if you are auditing a case at Level 7, 6, or 5. [See pp. 414-415, above, for a description of these levels.] This person doesn't easily run engrams. The assessment has located the only tiny channel on the time track where the PC can confront engrams and on which you will not find dub-in. That is the basis on which the process has been developed. A case at Level 3 [See p. 414, above. This is the case with a partially visible time track. can be run on any engram you can find and won't be particularly upset or damaged by a wrong date or other error. But a case at Level 6 [Dub-in of dub-in case] has a barge canal a sixteenth of an inch wider than your barge and full of roots, old stoves, and curves. On that channel, there is no dub-in of dub-in, and with a correct assessment, the case will have perceptics. This gives you the responsibility of handling the case very carefully, by the rule of not stirring up more charge than you can handle, because at this level, there is no process that will put the case back together again if it falls apart.
The lower the case level, the fewer incidents you will find per preliminary step. The "chain" may be only one incident long. Test your level after you have run an incident. If it doesn't read and the PC has had some sort of cognition about it, don't choose this time to go backtrack. If you have an incident that the PC can run, it doesn't matter how long ago the incident was. If he gets TA on it, runs OK, and that is all there is to the incident, and if there are no problems finding the date and duration, and if there is no read on asking for an earlier incident, fine. Do another assessment. Things are more likely to run longer with an upper-level case. The clue to whether the chain is flat is TA action, not how far back basic is. To find out if you have run the TA out of the chain, be sure that the TA didn't cease because of wrong date, wrong duration, or a GPM in the incident. If none of those apply, leave it. Those are the criteria of a flattened chain.
The Helatrobus implant goes as far back as 43 trillion years ago.
The situation of having the TA cease is not the same as the situation of not having gotten any TA. The only reason that you have trouble with running a case, with no TA and ARC breaks, comes down to these factors:
1. Wrong assessment.
2. Wrong date.
3. Wrong duration.
4. A GPM in the incident that you are trying to run, that you have collided with but have not found out about, so you have been trying to scan the PC through the items of the GPM.
The worse off the case is, the weirder the assessments will look to you. The PC may run something well that is from the backtrack and still be a low-level case, so don't take the recentness of the incident as adjudicative of case level. Dating anything beyond an easily available incident becomes very difficult. You are very likely to mis-date and pass by incidents, and the PC will know it, too. GPM's are hard to date anyway, being timeless, and a PC will have trouble staying in a place on the time track. This can also happen with upper-level cases, but they can take it. A lower-level case will plow in thoroughly.
The preliminary steps, on a Level 4 [See p. 414, above. This is a dub-in case. or Level 3, lead inevitably to a GPM. It is about the fastest way to find a goal you ever heard of. If the case is running well, you can probably run the whole goals series right there. Any trouble you have with running a case all goes back to the four factors given above. Wrong assessment includes running something that has not been assessed. On a lower-level case, you can spend more time assessing than running the engrams. Test the level, after you have something flat. Don't run over the PC's head. When you have flattened the chain, leave it. The worse off the case is, the more it moves from nonsense to murder, so don't muddy the little channel you have to work in. Listen to what the PC tells you about what he wants to run, but assess, before you run it.
The way you make work for yourself as an auditor is by doing things that you shouldn't be doing. For instance, don't mix R3N and R3R. Don't switch from one to the other by mistake.
There is a point on the track where you can get back of and find the basic of all GPM's. "I've hit that point. I haven't got it so I can hold it steady.... I got there by the way by keying out.... Had an awful time, recently, working out the most vicious series of GPM's on the track. There are five pictures, but the first one is invisible. No goal with them. Just opposing items in dichotomy, four firing five times in a row for each picture. I ran into myself on the track trying to figure this out. I gave up. Took two sessions to get it unwound, and the first picture is invisible, so you'd always try to put a picture there, so basic is always missing. It makes a vacuum, and pictures pour in. That's why later GPM's accumulate pictures. You get in the habit." This is the vacuum that holds the whole bank together. When he contacted this, LRH could hear GPM's coming apart all the way down to PT. Obviously, you don't try something like this on a lower-level PC.
Desperate conditions are hard to maintain in the face of featherweight touches, but heavier measures, like bypassing too many goals in R3N, won't help the case. It is always OK to push a PC a little heavier than they can go, but the rougher the case, the less they can take. The ARC break is a good test. If the PC ARC breaks regularly, don't always blame yourself, except for overestimating the state of case and running the process too steep. There is no real excuse for running a PC poorly. But if you put the PC in an available channel, he will run like a doll buggy, if you run him right. Do a careful assessment after every flattened chain, checking carefully for wrong date or duration or a GPM in it. PC's that don't assess easily on the standard scale can be gotten to extend it. "Auditing is as easy to do as it is real to the PC."