Tone-40 Auditing Rehabilitated

Free Scientologists

Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Gross, Switzerland

FS Bulletin of 6. November 2003R

Revised 17. Oct. 2007((Revised in order to mark the quotes red and give all references. ))

A significant process has been lost in the Church: How to audit Tone-40-Processes. This happened because the tech originally developed in the 50s has been rephrased and republished over and over. Finally the main core of what Tone-40 really means as an auditing process((Besides “Tone 40 as auditing procedure” you also have to consider “Tone 40 as tone level”. A third meaning is more like slang: “with full intent/assertiveness.”)) was lost.

Definitions of Tone-40

The following quotes show that a significant part of the Tone-40 definition is that no originations are confirmed. This statement has been lost in the more recent writings of the Church (especially and including the tech-dict. definitions) and lets auditors fail in cases that are in worse conditions than others. This does not solely result from the fact that LRH had been using the term Tone-40 as a synonym for “with full intent” since the beginning of the 60s.

Nowadays you have to differentiate between the various definitions of Tone-40:

1. First of all, it is a position on the tone scale (“Cheerful serenity of the being”),

2. Secondly, it is a style of auditing, especially for the CCH 1 & 2 and, optionally, also for the other objectives and

3. as an intonation of full intent when giving certain auditing commands, e.g. the “This is the session!” or “End of session!” in the model session or in the management tech as well where orders are enforced very vigorously, i.e. with Tone-40.

The most important reference is LRH in the PAB 151 of 1. Jan. 1959 Dummy-Auditing Step Four: Handling of Originations:

„The fourth thing((In the early PAB’s, Ron handled the first to third “thing” in the communication. Later on this numbering turned into TRs 1-4. So this PAB 151 is about “the fourth thing”, today’s TR4, the handling of originations. )), an auditor has to do (in that order) is to handle an origin from the preclear. It is actually true that when you are handling Tone 40 processes, you do not handle the preclear’s originations((My emphasis.)). But if you will look on the HCA/HPA chart((see HCOB 3 MAY 1957 TRAINING — WHAT IT IS TODAY – HOW WE TELL PEOPLE ABOUT IT)) you will find that these Tone 40 processes are in the minority amongst processes, and in all processes not Tone 40 a preclear’s originations are handled((Emphasis by LRH. See old Red Vol. III, page 370.)) – remember that. Don’t let anybody talk you out of it. If you are handling Tone 40, which is just pure, positive postulating, you, of course, are not worried about anybody’s opinion, origin, condition, or anything else—you simply want him to do certain things, and he finds out that his beingness can be controlled and therefore that he can control it.

What do we mean by an origin of the preclear? He volunteers something all on his own; and do you know that is a very good index of case—whether the person volunteers anything on his own? An old-time auditor used this as a case index. He said, “This fellow isn’t getting any better. He hasn’t offered up anything yet.” You see, he didn’t originate—he didn’t originate a communication. Do you know that that is the hardest thing to get an organization to do: to originate a communication?

You actually could—work in the direction of getting a preclear to originate a communication, in spite of the fact that you just previously were running him on Tone 40 processes. He originated the communication that his arms and legs felt like they were just going to fall off, and you said, “Give me your hand—thank you.” Preclear says, “My head’s coming off now! I know it’s going to fall on the floor!” Auditor: “Give me your hand—thank you.” Good Tone 40. But on control of person, the first two processes((so CCH 1 & 2.)) are Tone 40, but Book Mimicry and the next process up the line from it, Hand Space Mimicry((so CCH 4 & 3)), are not Tone 40, and originations by the preclear are not only handled but encouraged((My emphasis. In practice this means: You ask in the completion of an action cycle: “What happened?” or the like. – This process, as added to the Tone-40 processes in later references, is only to be applied to non-Tone-40 processes, according to this PAB 151. )).

So remember that we have not lost out of the galaxy of processes the fact that the preclear is as well as he can originate a communication. That means he can stand at Cause on the communication formula. And that is a desirable point for him to reach. You see, in controlling people we are really only showing them that they can be controlled, that it is possible for their possessions to be controlled. And then they eventually decide that these are controllable and that people are controllable and that things are controllable and their bodies are controllable, and they say, “Wonderful! Look, I’ll try!” And before that they didn’t even try.

So we are controlling a person’s possessions or body only until this person then himself decides to take a hand in it, too. And then he finds out that control is possible. But most people don’t originate. Circuits originate, computers originate, compulsive outflows originate. And when you first start to use Tone 40 on a person you will apparently see originations—but they are not originations, they are restimulations being dramatized. There is a big difference between a restimulation being dramatized and an origination. It’s whether or not the thetan said it. Did he say it, or was it just a circuit starting up? Well, you can start up circuits and actually throw them into being and you will see that these are not originations.((And the difference from this paragraph needs to be understood because “circuit originations” are simply skipped during Tone-40 processes. But the real origination of the being that could come would be an origination of having reached the EP of the process, which we don’t want to miss. So there is no replacement of understanding for the auditor, which LRH hereby intended. The auditor simply wants to apply the process for once with Tone-40 without being stopped by the PC’s talk. The PC’s bank would like to stop the auditor and becomes quite creative in doing so. If he is invited through the new rule that was introduced later (that “bodily originations are picked up by “What is happening?”), the PC will quickly get involved and play the game with the auditor. This should be avoided by the auditor with Tone-40 processes. ))

But when an origination appears in anything but a Tone 40 process, you handle it. And you must handle it well and conclusively. There are preclears who have had astonishing things happen to them, who have tried to communicate them to the auditor, who have failed to do so and have then sunk into apathy and just gone right on out of session because their communication origination was not handled properly by the auditor. There are instances of this, and many of them. Tone 40 processes do not particularly violate this. An understanding of what they are takes place rather rapidly with the preclear and he doesn’t expect you to. But if he has graduated into being a human being and he’s getting up there and he originates something and you answer it, now he’s liable to say the most astonishing things to you. And if you don’t handle them he’s liable to drop into apathy about the whole thing.

So you must handle them well because they’re always unexpected. I would say that unexpectedness actually should be part of the definition of an origination, because they are quite often completely off the subject, they take you completely by surprise, they are apparently not at all what you expected him to say. The fellow says, “Huh! I’m eight feet back of my head!” Well, what do you do?

In PAB 133 of 1. Apr. 58 CCH Verfahren, Ron very clearly states:

„It is Tone 40, with clear intention, one command in one unit of time, no originations of preclear acknowledged in any way, verbally or physically.“

In the HCO B 2. April 1958 ARC in Comm-Course, Ron says:

There are two types of Auditing. Both include control. They are called “Formal Auditing” and “Tone 40 Auditing”.

LRH defines three styles of auditing in the 8th presentation of the 18th ACC of 24. Juli 1957 “Auditing Styles” (btw, this tape is the reference to clarify Tone-40 as an auditing style):

1. Informal Auditing. (untrained Book Auditors),

2. Formal Auditing (trained Auditors) and

3. Tone 40.0:

Then there is Formal Auditing. And this is that type of auditing which is done by a trained auditor, which pays attention to duplication, which handles the origins of the preclear, which gives the auditing command best calculated to handle the case at this particular time in the auditor’s opinion and which carries on in such a wise as to permit two-way communication to as-is many of the preclear’s problems and difficulties as they come up. Formal Auditing has a dependency upon two-way communication for its workability: it depends upon acknowledgment in order to sweep away many of the difficulties which the preclear has and depends as well upon a very high maintenance of ARC with the preclear, that he knows is being maintained; and quite in addition to this consults the power of choice of the preclear and increases it. That’s Formal Auditing.”

“The next type is Tone 40 Auditing. And Tone 40 Auditing is of consider­able interest to us because, although it is the highest toned auditing, it is preferably addressed to the lowest toned cases. ... But its greatest effectiveness is upon these cases; and it is the only known form of auditing which reaches them and, therefore, it has its proper bracket amongst such cases.

But when you have no case but only circuits confronting you, you have no choice at all—you have to run Tone 40 Auditing. Tone 40 Auditing is why we can say we have gone all the way south((“all way south“ is used by Ron for “all the way to the bottom“, i.e. “very bad cases“, just like psychotics and even institutionalized cases. )).” …

Use the lower CCH processes with Tone 40 Auditing. Preclear says some­thing, it has only one end in view: to give you something else you can’t handle. That’s the only goal, something else you can’t handle. You got that? Something else. And you kind of handle that a little bit, scares them to death, and they come up with something else you can’t handle. And they’ll finally get frantic in the number of “can’t handles” that they hand you one right after the other. You’re validating circuits and we’ve known for years that you mustn’t do that. Well, Tone 40 doesn’t do that. It just takes it for granted that anything the preclear says is a circuit and skips it: says, “Well, here I am processing the preclear and I’m just going to process the preclear. ….

We might even spring a cognition, we might do anything in it... We put his hand back in his lap and repeat the command and go on with the Tone 40. And the preclear says, “Well, I feel a little bit tired now,” and we go on with the process. And the preclear says, “I have a pain back of my left ear that’s killing me.” And we go on with the process. You understand that?

Because we more or less determined that he would advance these things anyway to protect himself. He’s just doing a protection mechanism where these things are walking forward on an automaticity of protection. …

Now, what if the preclear says, “I’m terribly tired now,” and so on? Well, naturally, under Formal Auditing, we’d just knock off, wouldn’t we? Because we’re not enforcing auditing commands, are we? We’d continue. But, he’d never find out that it was over his dead body! Do you understand?

He said, “I’m awfully tired now.”

And you say, “Well, we have been sitting here for quite a while.” It’s a fact. “We have been sitting here for quite a while and we’ve got quite a little while to go.” And he’d say, “Well, I guess we have.”

And you say, “Well, let’s get on with it.” It wouldn’t [be] the way you’d handle it in Tone 40.

He’d say, “Well, I’m a little tired now.”

And you’d say, “Extend the body’s hands into my hot paw.” (Whatever auditing command you’re using.)

Now, here’s a vast difference. Here’s a vast difference. It’s a difference of understanding of people. And unless you understand that people lie below self-determinism and rise up into it, you would not understand that these two auditing styles are addressed to, really, two different states of case.“

Similar in this HCOB:

“There are two types of Auditing. Both include control. They are called “Formal Auditing” and “Tone 40 Auditing”.

The first is control by ARC. The second is control by direct Tone 40 command.

The first, Control by ARC, is taught in Comm Course. The second, Control by Tone 40, is taught in Upper Indoc.

The two are never mixed in teaching. Tone 40 is never taught in a Comm Course and is not even permitted. ARC is not taught in Upper Indoc.

The most widespread weakness in auditors prior to this date is an inability to use step one of Clear Procedure (Participation by the pc). This is only good ARC in the Training Drills of Comm Course. Auditors are now too prone to let CCH Ob Help do the work. Auditors fail to make the pc feel they are interested in the pc when they handle him with poor ARC.

We care nothing about ARC in Upper Indoc. We want command, we want Tone 40. We do not even handle pc origins in Upper Indoc.

Students must understand that there are two types of auditing. They should realize that Tone 40 is for the unconscious, the psycho, the non-communicative, the electric shock case pc. The student should realize that ARC formal auditing is not chatty or yap-yap,but it is itself. It has warmth, humanity, understanding and interest in it.

Academy Dir of Tr, Comm Course and Upper Indoc Instructors should keep this in their hats as needful technical data, since we must turn out auditors capable of handling pcs with ARC.” [HCO B 2 APRIL 1958 ARC IN COMM COURSE]

Later on three:

“There are now three styles of auditing: Tone 40, Formal and Engram Auditing.” [Ability 86M, 1958, ca. late December]

With TR 4 it was clarified that there is no TR 4 with Tone-40:

The fourth thing an auditor has to do (in that order) is to handle an origin from the preclear. It is actually true that when you are handling Tone 40 processes, you do not handle the preclear’s originations. But if you will look on the HCA/HPA chart you will find that these Tone 40 processes are in the minority amongst processes, and in all processes not Tone 40 a preclear’s originations are handled—remember that. Don’t let anybody talk you out of it. If you are handling Tone 40, which is just pure, positive postulating, you, of course, are not worried about anybody’s opinion, origin, condition, or anything else—you simply want him to do certain things, and he finds out that his beingness can be controlled and therefore that he can control it.

What do we mean by an origin of the preclear? He volunteers something all on his own; and do you know that is a very good index of case—whether the person volunteers anything on his own? An old-time auditor used this as a case index. He said, “This fellow isn’t getting any better. He hasn’t offered up anything yet.” You see, he didn’t originate—he didn’t originate a communication. Do you know that that is the hardest thing to get an organization to do: to originate a communication?

You actually could- work in the direction of getting a preclear to originate a communication, in spite of the fact that you just previously were running him on Tone 40 processes. He originated the communication that his arms and legs felt like they were just going to fall off, and you said, “Give me your hand—thank you.” Preclear says, “My head’s coming off now! I know it’s going to fall on the floor!” Auditor: “Give me your hand—thank you.” Good Tone 40. But on control of person, the first two processes are Tone 40, but Book Mimicry and the next process up the line from it, Hand Space Mimicry, are not Tone 40, and originations by the preclear are not only handled but encouraged. …

So what do we do when he says, “The back of my head is on fire!”—do we ignore it? Well, if we are running Tone 40 processes, we ignore it. But if we are auditing any other process, of which there are many in CCH, we handle the origin. And an auditor who has not been trained to do this will often find himself very embarrassed. [PAB 151 of 1. Jan. ’59 Dummy-Auditing Step Four: Handling of Originations]

“Tone 40.0 8c on a person. Upper Hi School Indoc (Hi Hi Indoc). Co-Auditor basis. If auditor mentions or acknowledges anything but commands he’s dead!” [HCO B 10 APRIL 1957 HPA/HCA COURSE CURRICULUM]

“It is not a Tone 40 process, which means that you acknowledge the originations of the preclear.” [HCO TRAINING BULLETIN OF 20 MAY 1957 INTERIM PROCESS]

“No originations of PC acknowledged in any way, verbally or physically”. [PAB 133 1. Apr. 58 CCH Procedure]

“Not Tone 40. (Preclear is acknowledged when he originates, ..)” [HCOB 11.6.57 Training and CCH Processes (excerpt: CCHs 5-10) paragraph on TR 6]

“TRAINING STRESS: The exact amount of physical effort must be used by student plus a compelling unspoken intention. No jerky struggles are allowed since each jerk is a stop. Student must learn to smoothly increase effort quickly to amount needed to make coach execute. Stress is on exact intention, exact strength needed, exact force necessary, exact Tone 40. Even a slight smile by student can be a flunk. Too much force can be a flunk. Too little definitely is a flunk. Anything not Tone 40 is a flunk.” [HCOB 11.6.57 Training and CCH Processes (excerpt: CCHs 5-10) paragraph on TR 9]

“All Tone 40 with clear intention, one command in one unit of time, no originations of preclear acknowledged in any way verbally or physically.” [ HCOB 11.6.57 Training and CCH Processes (excerpt: CCHs 5-10) paragraph on CCH 1]

“Tone 40 has been defined as “Giving a command and just knowing that it will be executed despite any contrary appearances. “ (This is not the 18th ACC definition.) In other words, Tone 40 is positive postulating. – “The Student Manual” has the following to say about the procedure and the running of this unique process: “Physical action of taking hand when not given and then replacing it in the preclear’s lap and ‘Thank you’ ending the cycle. It is Tone 40, with clear intention, one command in one unit of time, no originations of preclear acknowledged in any way, verbally or physically.” However, one can freeze the process after a cycle of action has been completed if one is sure that something is occurring which needs further “fishing” for a cognition.” [PAB 133 1. Apr. 58 CCH procedure]:

If you have a very figure-figure case you better run it formal. It will run more easily for you. [PAB 131 l. March 58 THE SCALE OF WITHHOLD pg. 4]

“Tone 40 Style is the most notable one missing. It remains as a practice style at Level One to teach fearless body handling and to teach one to get his command obeyed. It is no longer used in practice.” [HCO B 6. Nov. 1964 STYLES OF AUDITING, last page]

” Since this is a Tone 40 process the auditor does not acknowledge idle chatter from the preclear, but should HE say something, the process may be frozen after a few more commands have been executed and the auditor can discuss or “fish” the cognition.” [PAB 135 CCH Procedure CCH Continued on CCH 5]

“It is a Tone 40 process and should be run precisely, making sure that the preclear does not anticipate or distort the command. Duplication + Control = Communication is a formula which is well worth remembering during the running of all Tone 40 processes. This does not mean that if the preclear seems to be communicating, he is, for a lot of his machinery will go into restimulation during this process and one must be able to differentiate between the preclear’s originations and those of his bank.” [ PAB 135 CCH Procedure CCH Continued on CCH 6]

In 1962 Ron noticed that the CCHs had been completely modified within 5 years and were not recognizable anymore. Auditors yelled at the PCs and it was more like a war rather than auditing((We are still familiar with this today because of Sea Org members: They “confuse” Tone-40 with a military-like order sound which is “accentuated” with yelling if necessary. Another case of redefinition. )). In the HCOB 5 APRIL 1962 “CCHs – AUDITING ATTITUDE”, in which Ron publishes this, he describes his correct demo session that he held thereupon:

“The auditor sat down, chatted a bit about the coming session with the pc, explainedin general what he was about to do. The session was started. The auditor explained the CCH 1 drill in particular and then began on it. The pc had a bit of embarrassment come off. The auditor took the physical reaction as an origination by the pc and queried it. The routine CCH 1 drill went on and was shortly proved flat by three equal responses. The auditor went to CCH 2. He explained the drill and started it. This proved to be flat. The pc did the drill three times without comm change. The auditor explained and went to CCH 3.

This also proved flat and after a three times test, the auditor came off it, explained CCH 4, and went to CCH 4. This proved unflat and was gradually flattened to three equally timed correct responses by the pc on a motion the pc could not at first do. About 50 minutes had elapsed so the auditor gave a ten minute break. After the break the auditor went back to CCH 1, found it flat, went to CCH 2 and found the pc jumping the command and, by putting short waits of different lengths before giving commands, knocked out the automaticity. The auditor went on to CCH 3, found it flat, and then to CCH 4 which was found unflat and was accordingly flattened. The auditor then discussed end ruds in a general way, got a summary of gains and ended the session.

All commands and actions were Tone 40 (which is not “antagonism” or “challenge”). But the pc was kept in two-way comm between full cycles of the drill by the auditor. Taking up each new physical change manifested as though it were an origin by the pc and querying it and getting the pc to give the pc’s reaction to it, this two-way comm was not Tone 40. Auditor and pc were serious about the drills. There was no relaxation of precision. But both auditor and pc were relaxed and happy about the whole thing. And the pc wound up walking on air.”

Since Ron did not explicitly mention herein that Tone-40 will remain, it was basically removed when the new CCHs were published:

All Tone 40 with clear intention, one command in one unit of time. Take up each new physical change manifested as though it were an origin by the Coach, when it happens, and querying it by asking “What’s happening?” This two-way comm is not Tone 40. Run only on the right hand. [HCO B 5 JULY 1963 CCHs REWRITTEN paragraph on CCH 1]

Only the physical originations are picked up according to this, however, since these “when it happens” are supposed to be picked up, it allows the PC to withdraw from the processing and do Q&A. This, in particular, was supposed to be prevented by Tone-40.

Have fun

Andreas Gross

for the

Independent Scientologists

Copyright © 2014 by

Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Gross

All Rights reserved