Bookmark and Share

Two Processes Types We Should Not Forget.

Seeing recently the HBO documentary on the book Going Clear, and seeing the comment (by Dave LeCroix that criticism of Scientology covered only 1% of Scientology (and my self making the comment that that 1% was Scientology's Achilles heel) I came to think of two valuable processes, overshadowed by the fuss about OT levels and The L's (said in a loud voice with triumphant trumpets blowing in the background).

The two valuable process types are Short Sessioning and CCHs.

Short sessioning.

Ron says of this in c/s series 27 (6 March 1971: "Short sessioning has its uses - small children, sick people, psychos." The principle is very simple for you just go through what ever ritual you use for opening a session, then go through the ritual you use for ending a session, and after a short relaxing pause (suggestions, cup of tea, walk into the garden and back) go through the procedure again a few times.

The procedure is described in HCO Bulletin of 28 December 1958 *

The CCHs

I happened to be around (in Dublin) when the CCHs came out and was there in London when they were implemented (it was in the time frame just after the first glimpse of Communication Training Routines came out in December 1956). As auditor I got rather a startling gain then (about 1958) when I ran them (standard HGC 25 hour intensive) on a man who could not look me or anyone in the eye. Half way through the intensive (on the process Hand Space Mimicry) he looked at me, discovered me, and seemed so fascinated by the sight of me, that I, reckoning this was a major gain and I went on to the next process but he could not do it, as he was totally enveloped in looking at me. At the time Hubbard was making a lot of fuss about "how far south we could reach" (meaning how bad a case could Scientology handle) that the CCHs have got a reputation in some places for being "only for bad off cases" to such a degree that some regarded it as an invalidation, and an affront at the mere suggestion of having the CCHs run on them. In my opinion they reach all cases and I would not mind a good auditor running them on me now (umpteen years later).

However I did have an opportunity of trying them out on a "deep down case" years later. "Frequently men's heads would turn into lion's heads for her, and this was accompanied by deep terror." see

In this little essay I will not attempt to teach all basic theory and practice of the CCHs (a very interesting and rewarding job – Hubbard was a genius at the time he developed them). I would be willing to talk to any curious person with a little Scn background and some curiosity on the subject. One of the things I was "taught" (in the 50's) was that when you were doing what was called Tone 40 auditing you ignored what was called "bank originations", and when I ran CCHs I handled any intelligible thing that came out of the preclears bodies mouth.

Written 2015 6thApril


*Short Sessioning

One of the simplest ways to get a case moving is a technique known as "Short Sessioning" which I developed for the 20th ACC.

The 20th was the last ACC to teach clearing without engram running and as such had several lagging cases. I studied one of these carefully against the basic auditing rule, "Find something the pc can do and then improve his ability to do it."

The case under study defied all known processes. It was "unreality, unreality, unreality", and "ARC Break, ARC Break, ARC Break".

ARC Straight Wire old style was also unreal. Imagine that!

However, even when all else was lost, I still had the idea that this pc could be run on something and finally had a long blue spark - the pc would start and end sessions.

Probably this was the sole ability, Scientology-wise, of this pc. So I made the auditor start and end ten-minute sessions. And it worked. It worked even though the auditor never really cognited on the value of it! I had to heavy-8c the auditor a bit to keep the auditor from "running something". Short sessioning was evidently not something to do. Only a process was something.

Anyway, everybody won. The pc got brighter, the auditor got a win and we got a new technique. That's the way with Scientology, everybody wins-even the people who claim I'm too enthusiastic for their point five.

The exact way to do "short sessioning" is as follows.

One uses old rudiments if he isn't comfortable with CCH 0.Or he uses CCH 0 as given in ACC Clear Procedure. It doesn't matter much which since he is depending on starting and ending sessions rather than "running something". Therefore, the auditor should use that with which he is the most comfortable.

The auditor gets the pc's agreement to start a very short session and says, "Start."

Then he clears up some small thing like an ARC Break in the session or a pt problem without really getting into anything hot. (Finds auditor and pc.)

The auditor then does something objective with the auditing room such as "How does this room differ from an ideal environment?"

Probably by this time the ten minutes are up, so the auditor tapers it off and bridges to session end. "Is it all right with you if we end this session shortly?" "Is there anything you'd like to say before we do?" "All right. End of session."

The auditor makes the pc get up and take a break for a few minutes. Then he gets

the pc back and does it all over again more or less as above.

The idea is not to try to get benefit from a process but to get the pc less and less nervous about doing something. The pc will begin and end sessions. Anything between is pure gravy if it works but the in-between may not work at all. It does not matter. Starting and ending sessions is what is wanted for the pc.

Short sessioning works for many reasons. It injects time into the picture, for one thing. It breaks up habits on the cycle of action. It gets the pc used to the auditor. You could think of many more reasons but basically whatever the reasons, it works.

Try it on that case that ARC Breaks on you all the time. Try it on the pc that has it all unreal-unreal-unreal. You'll be amazed at what short sessioning, smoothly run and without crude auditor flubs, can do for almost any case, not just bad ones.

Several difficult cases have improved markedly with this alone. Simple, isn't it? Well, most good things are.




  1. HCO Bulletin of 28 December 1958