Русская версия

Search document title:
Fulltext search:
РУССКИЕ ДОКИ ЗА ЭТУ ДАТУ- Пересмотр Средства А, Средства Б и ПиО - Б671109 | Сравнить
Cохранить документ себе Скачать
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
Remimeo Review Auditors
Book of Case Remedies


(Note: To be reprinted for insertion in everycopy of The Book of Case Remedies. )
This bulletin is to be inserted in and changes The Book of Case Remedies Procedures for Remedy A, Remedy B and S and Ds (Search for and Discovery of Suppressives).

Recent analyses made of Qualifications Divisions Departments of Review and of the flow of students and pcs through the Saint Hill org show:

1. The Key processes so far as orgs are concerned are Remedy A, Remedy B and S&Ds.

2. Auditors need direct mechanical technology to do these three processes effectively.


Remedy A locates the misunderstoods a person has in Scientology. Originally it read "Misunderstood words". Words of course will emerge in the general run of misunderstoods.

Remedy A is done only by Listing. It must not be done verbally alone. It is a Level III process.

The listing question is "In the subjects of Dianetics or Scientology who or what has been misunderstood?"

The item is found on the list and given to the student. That is all. There is no other step.

The rules of listing all apply.

If the student won't have the item it is not correct and the list must be straightened up with the general auditing rules that govern listing.


The form of this process is changed. It is done by three lists. These three may only be done by formal LISTING and the general tech of listing as governed by Level III tech.

The lists make the form of an I

PT Subject List

Into Past List

Misunderstood List


This is done to locate what in the Scientology PT is giving trouble. It is done as a list and the item is found.

The listing question is

"In your studies of Dianetics and Scientology who or what are you having trouble with?"

The item is found and given to the student.

This step is governed by all the tech of listing.


The item found on List 1B is now listed in order to find the past track subject similar to what is giving trouble in present time.

The listing question is

"In your past, who or what was similar to … (item found in List 1B)?"

It is highly illegal to limit the question to this lifetime.

All the rules of listing apply.

The item is found and given to the student.


The third list of the process is now done.

The listing question is

"Who or what was misunderstood in … (the item found on list 2B)?"

The listing is covered by the general tech of listing as found in Level III.

The item is found and given to the student.


This completes the Remedy B.

If a floating needle occurs any time during the process with good indicators thoroughly visible in the student the process is concluded at that point.

The process is used on anyone having trouble studying Dianetics or Scientology. The trouble, as it doesn't clear up with Remedy A, is coming from some prior subject.

More than one of these can be done if all steps are done for each one.


Search and Discovery of Suppression is called an "S and D". It locates the suppressives on the case.

I have several times undercut (gotten processes that reach deeper) on S&Ds.

The earliest process asked merely who might have been suppressive to the pc. This is still valid but I have found 2 flaws in it.

1. The auditor does not do a listing type S&D at all but just chattily brushes it off.

2. The list from this question contains an actual suppressive that is passed right over.

Therefore I undercut the question and obtained much better results because the new question reached deeper.

The new question was "Who or what might have suppressed you?"

Then I recalled an even deeper question. This was "What purpose has been suppressed?" This was given to Qual Div SH some time ago. It would have 2 lists. The first is for the purpose as above and the second would be "Who or what suppressed … (purpose found)?"

For some reason, probably because no one did 2 lists, this undercut was neglected.

Therefore I researched further and developed what we will now use as an S&D.

It is one of these killer processes. It is very strong. So it isn't to be carelessly done.

If you get a wrong item on an S&D you can make the pc ill. So one has to do an S&D right and follow all the rules of listing as given in Level III tech.

Also I find now that when a list item found is a generality (multiple subject, not specific such as "dogs" or "the public") the list is simply not complete. One does not have to settle for a generality and then list the generality. He will find that the pc will eventually list the specific non-general item anyway. Of course one can also do a represent list of a general item found if that seems best.

The real question for an S&D was established only when I found a purpose all Suppressives have in common and is a very fundamental effort in suppressives. This effort by suppressives, when found, then permitted me to form the question.

The key S&D question is:

"Who or what has attempted to unmock you?"

Unmocking (an effort to reduce or make disappear) is the primary effort of suppressives.

Therefore the listing question on test delivers up items totally overlooked by the earlier types of S&D.

The question needs to be cleared carefully for non-Scientology. If it has to be rephrased, watch out as the meaning may vanish. "Tried to make nothing of you" might substitute but at this writing only unmock has been tested and a question for others than educated Scientologists will be developed and issued and made part of the enclosure for the book.

This S&D question must be done by Listing only and with great care to follow Level III Listing tech as it, being powerful, will backfire on the pc if done carelessly and a wrong item is found.

The item is found by listing and given to the pc, which is the end of the process. If a generality results it may be represented. But listing continued will give the same result of a single item. A general item must not be given to the pc as the final result.

This process will now be standard review S&D.

LRH:jp.cden [This HCO B is modified by HCO B 28 November 1967, The Key S&D Question, page 210.]