When Did Hubbard Actually Start Auditing People on Dianetics?

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
I know Hubbard had some prior reputation for being adept at hypnotizing people.

Excerpted from http://www.lermanet.com/cos/rondewolf.htm (my emphasis):

AFFIDAVIT OF RONALD DeWOLF a/k/a L.RON HUBBARD, JR.

I, Ronald DeWolf, formerly L. Ron Hubbard, Jr., hereby
do and state as follows under the penalties of perjury:

. . .

6) My father represented orally and in writing that his theories
relating to the "science of the mind" were based on 30 years of
case studies conducted on a scientific basis by him as a nuclear
physicist and scientist. Most people that I knew who paid money
to my father's corporation to learn about this science also relied
on the above stated representations in addition to my father's
credentials. Similarly, the above stated representations are false.​
My father wrote his books off the top of his head based on his
imagination. There were no case studies.
He is not a nuclear
physicist and flunked nearly all of his science related courses in
high school and college.
There are no famous Hubbard archives of his personal pcs' case folders, even though he was a pack rat and stored mountains of trivial documentation about himself.

DMSMH contains a lot of theory that doesn't pan out in practice, such as the famous abilities of a Clear, for example. Some of it was (and is) clearly useful as it became so popular, but it seems to me that it could well have been written without his ever actually having audited anyone in the manner he describes, as Nibs says.

I vaguely remember reading somewhere that Hubbard hadn't expected DMSMH to sell so well, and had to change plans quickly in order to cash in on his unexpected success.

From an article in LIBERTY Magazine, Summer 1952, webbed at http://www.lermanet.com/dianetics-reviews.htm:
First, I discovered, Dianetics is sweeping the country. Originally written as an article in "Astounding-Science Fiction" in May, 1950, the book, "Dianetics," was published in June, 1950. In July its author, L. Ron Hubbard, opened the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation Elizabeth, New Jersey, and immediately started training auditors, who in turn trained more auditors who set up practices both in New York and New Jersey. During the summer, the book climbed near the top of the New York Times best-seller list and by the end of the summer more than 75,000 copies had been sold. The book's publisher, Hermitage House, said, "At least 500,000 people are talking Dianetics and we predict this figure will hit the million mark in, six rnonths."
But the Wikipedia article on Hubbard conveniently says "In April 1950, Hubbard and several others established the Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation in Elizabeth, New Jersey to coordinate work related for the forthcoming publication of a book on Dianetics," giving as its source Thomas Streissguth's 1995 book, Charismatic Cult Leaders.

The CofS, that bastion of journalistic truth and integrity, at (CofS link) http://mediaresources.lronhubbard.org/chronicle/page04.htm says: "On 7 June L. Ron Hubbard delivers his first recorded lectures on Dianetics in Elizabeth, New Jersey, where the Hubbard Dianetics Research Foundation is formed."

So I think we can safely say that he didn't give any recorded Dianetics lectures before that date of 7 June 1950. But I can't tell when the Dianetics Organization was first set up, whether it was done before publication in anticipation of dealing with the huge demand for services, or hastily thrown together in response to the unexpected windfall.

Looking over the transcript of that 7 June lecture and demonstration session, it obviously isn't the first session he has ever given, assuming it is an accurate transcript. (Does the actual taped lecture exist in the field? Is it reasonable to assume this transcript is real and not a complete fabrication written 30 years later?)

The question is, when did he actually give his first Dianetics session? I don't think we can take Hubbard's documented statements as evidence of anything other than the fact that he made them. What do you guys think? Do you think he actually audited anyone before writing DMSMH? Is there any evidence of this?

Paul
 

secretiveoldfag

Silver Meritorious Patron
It doesn't answer the question but Dianetics: the Modern Science of Mental Health was in print before January 1951 when it was reviewed by I.I. Rabi in the Scientific American. Professor Rab was winner of the Nobel prize in physics in 1944, and in 1951 was professor of physics at Columbia University.

So he must have been doing something before then.

Edited again to add the review since it is full of good stuff.

"This volume probably contains more promises and less evidence per page than has any publication since the invention of printing. Briefly, its thesis is that man is intrinsically good, has a perfect memory for every event of his life, and is a good deal more intelligent than he appears to be. However, something called the engram prevents these characteristics from being realized in man's behavior. During moments of unconsciousness and pain and at any time from conception onward, the "reactive mind" can still record experience, but experiences so recorded -engrams- are a major source of man's misery, his psychosomatic ills, his neuroses and psychoses, his poor memory, and his generally inefficient functioning. By a process called dianetic reverie, which resembles hypnosis and which may apparently be practiced by anyone trained in dianetics, these engrams may be recalled. Once thoroughly recalled, they are "refiled," and the patient becomes a "clear," who is not handicapped by encumbering engrams and who can thenceforth function at a level of intellect, efficiency and goodness seldom if ever realized before in the history of man. The system is presented without qualification and without evidence. It has borrowed from psychoanalysis, Pavlovian conditioning, hypnosis and folk beliefs, but, except for the last, these debts are fulsomely denied. The huge sale of the book to date is distressing evidence of the frustrated ambitions, hopes, ideals, anxieties and worries of the many persons who through it have sought succor."
 
Last edited:

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
What do you guys think? Do you think he actually audited anyone before writing DMSMH? Is there any evidence of this?

Paul

I think he actually *did* 'audit' at least a few people during the writing of DMSMH and before the first public 'lectures', but, I doubt he did so following any kind of DMSMH regulated 'Tech'. More as a transition from his earlier amateur hypnotism dabbling.

Of course, we have dozens of people who'll swear that Ron audited them *much* earlier than that (including ancient Past Lives,) but, I don't think I'm willing to accept that as 'evidence' :)

Zinj
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
I think he actually *did* 'audit' at least a few people during the writing of DMSMH and before the first public 'lectures', but, I doubt he did so following any kind of DMSMH regulated 'Tech'. More as a transition from his earlier amateur hypnotism dabbling.

One reason I ask is Hubbard's insistence on the *earliest* part of an incident as being the part to contact first. It is embedded in concrete as part of the procedure: Go to the BEGINNING of the incident, and move through it.

The mind doesn't work like that. A movie or book might, but the mind doesn't. Anyone who has written up their story here, if there was any charge to speak of associated with it, will have noticed that their attention went to a particular part first, irrespective of where it was chronologically. Someone discharging an incident or topic using Rub & Yawn will observe that some part of it comes to the fore first, and it isn't usually the earliest part. As that part first coming to mind gets relieved/discharged, another part will come to mind, maybe next in time or maybe not.

Once all the heavy stuff has been discharged, it is possible to edit the account into chronological order, but it sure as hell doesn't happen naturally like that, unless there is little or no charge associated with the topic or incident.

So how come Hubbard didn't notice this? Was it because he had never actually done any auditing and never noticed that the mind works like this? Was it that he had made a call and was now stuck with it, even though it was wrong, as to change something so basic would have shown up his lies too much? Although the Clear fiasco involving Sonja Bianca apparently never worried him too much, at least not enough to warrant editing that chapter in DMSMH.

Paul
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
I would suspect it was just his interpretation of a 'popular science' type reading of Freudian 'trauma' in psychoanalysis. Which is not much more effective or safe than Dianetics.

Of course, it was also very useful for him, since tilting at ever-earlier 'similars' would distract from having to show results for handling an actual present time problem.

Zinj
 

AnonyMike

Patron
It is embedded in concrete as part of the procedure: Go to the BEGINNING of the incident, and move through it.

The mind doesn't work like that.

Paul

You are right, on the one hand the mind is less structured than Hubbards pulp phantasy made up mind. BUT with hubbards technique you can also get results, so the right way to ask is

Why did he never notice that releasing incidents is much easier if you go round in circles from the point that sticks out the most.
 

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
I think he actually *did* 'audit' at least a few people during the writing of DMSMH and before the first public 'lectures', but, I doubt he did so following any kind of DMSMH regulated 'Tech'. More as a transition from his earlier amateur hypnotism dabbling.

Of course, we have dozens of people who'll swear that Ron audited them *much* earlier than that (including ancient Past Lives,) but, I don't think I'm willing to accept that as 'evidence' :)

Zinj
I think that once he cobbled together Dianetics and saw that his unfounded and frankly crappy book (my opinion) didn't carry any weight in the scientific community he scrambled to get some sort of 'something' involved that could be construed as even remotely 'scientific' to give it all some sort of validation and keep the con running; enter Matheson and his Electrotheraputic device, a 30's version of a crude ohm-meter which is now known as the E-meter. 1950 timeline-freezone.org link
 

FoTi

Crusader
I used to have a book, which I just went looking for and can't find - I evidently chucked it a while back, ......but anyway, it was, I think, the first book that LRH wrote in the area of Dianetics and the original copyright date or original 1st publishing date on it was 1936. (I don't recall if the book had the word Dianetics in it, but the principle idea was there.) I wish I still had it, then I could give you the title. Maybe it was the Original Theseis, or something like that. If anyone has the little green covered basic books from back in the early days, you might be able to look in the front of the books and see if you can find this. It was a small, fairly thin book.

There was also a lady that came to AOLA sometime around 1990 that stayed with me while she did her CCRD. She was going slightly nuts because she kept telling them that she was audited by LRH and went Clear back in, I think she said the 30's and the people in the HGC kept telling her that it was impossible because Dianetics wasn't published until 1950. She went round and round and round with them and finally found the data, which I think was in this book, because I looked at my book and sure enough, it was copyrighted in 1936. When she showed them this info, they finally let her attest to Clear and she smoothed out and was fine after that.

I also remember speaking to a Sea Org member back around that time that told me he was on a naval ship with LRH in his past life and that LRH did audit people (he said that LRH audited him) and was a rather awesome character in the way that he would handle/help the guys on the ship when they came in to talk with him and were having trouble.
 

Terril park

Sponsor
In my 1967 edition of the original thesis, in the introduction, Hubbard says he started researching in 1932, and that the original thesis was written in jan 1948.

Too long since I read them to see if the contents compared to book 1
backs that up.
 

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
He may have said that, he said so much after all, most of which has been proven to be bs, gleaned from other sources, or fantasy. I firmly believe his deepest 'research' was done with a bottle of rum and whatever drugs were available at the time, in the early 30's he was too busy failing school to do any 'research' of any sort of value, let alone anything even remotely considered profound.>
1932

Hubbard has said that he began his preliminary investigation to determine the dynamic principle of existence in 1932. His initial premise was that "the human mind is capable of resolving the problem of the human mind". (O. Garrison, Hidden Story of Scientology, Chapter 1)

In 1932, an investigation was undertaken to determine the dynamic principle of existence in a workable form which might lead to the resolution of some of the problems of Mankind. A long research in ancient and modern philosophy culminated in 1938 in the heuristically discovered primary law. (Note: See "Excalibur")
A work was written at that time which embraced Man and his activities. In the following years, further research was undertaken in order to prove or dis-prove the Axioms so established. (Dianetics: The Original Thesis)

1932, Summer

Summer break. Hubbard organizes a trip to the Caribbean. He and friends charter the old four-masted schooner Doris Hamilton and set forth in search of adventure. Their ambitious schedule includes collecting various fauna and flora as specimens for universities. Treasure hunting is also mentioned. Things, however, go wrong; eleven of the crew defect at the first port of call, the rest grimly persevere in the face of bad weather, seasickness and short funds. None of the high-minded goals had been completed, few even started. (The Roots of Scientology)

1932, September

Hubbard returns to school only to drop out after reviewing his last semester's grades. He got an "F" in molecular and atomic physics. (The Roots of Scientology)

1933, 13 April

Hubbard marries Margaret Louise Grubb. Nicknamed "Polly" she is pregnant when they wed. Two months after they were married she suffered a spontaneous abortion thought to be caused by overexertion while swimming. (The Roots of Scientology)

1933, 18 August

A three column article in the Washington Daily News stating that L. Ron Hubbard had found gold (also platinum and iridium) on his in-laws farm in Maryland. Big plans are made to unearth the hidden wealth. Nothing comes of this, they continued living in near poverty. Hubbard's income for that year was a little less than $100.00. (The Roots of Scientology)

Just another tale from a chronic liar that people have taken as gospel, hey if its written its true, right?
:whistling:
 

Peter Soderqvist

Patron with Honors
Soderqvist1: interesting notation that Dianetics did exist already in the thirties. Jacques Schnier was one of commander “Snake Thompson’s students, he has said something similar!

PAB 92 10 July 1956 A Critique of Psychoanalysis By L. Ron Hubbard
My basic, if unappreciated, education in the field of the mind came from Commander Thompson of the Medical Corps of the U.S. Very few living analysts today have as direct a connection with the subject as I do and there are few who can boast of the successes with the subject, which I can. For I have used psychoanalysis as a practitioner and have achieved some certain successes with it, were one to call a success the sporadic eradication of the severe neurosis in a known mental patient.
http://carolineletkeman.org/sp/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1542&Itemid=240

Jacques Schnier A Sculptors Odyssey Page 124 -125
Riess: How is it that Thompson was the only psychoanalyst in San Francisco in 1933?

Schnier: Remember that analysis wasn't very old. There were psychiatrists in the city I used to go to hear their lectures, and he encouraged me to learn as much as I could about others in the field. I would listen to those men and think they were good subjects for analysis themselves! They were prominent psychiatrists, some with the highest academic credentials.

Riess: As well as Jungians, what were there?

Schnier: There were proponents of other systems for self-analysis that go under different names, like Dianetics which was also popular at that time.

Riess: Was it? That early?

Schnier: Yes.

Riess: That's interesting.
http://www.archive.org/stream/sculptorodyssey00schnrich#page/124/mode/2up/search/Dianetics

Soderqvist1: is it possible that Jacques Schnier saw Hubbard there back then, active with some kind of therapy, possibly in connection with Thompson, note also that one of Hubbard’s books is named, or labeled Self-Analysis?

Commander “Snake” Thompson
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=5390
 

pineapple

Silver Meritorious Patron
The question is, when did he actually give his first Dianetics session? I don't think we can take Hubbard's documented statements as evidence of anything other than the fact that he made them. What do you guys think? Do you think he actually audited anyone before writing DMSMH? Is there any evidence of this?

Paul
J. A. Winter, M.D., in the introduction to "A Doctor's Report on Dianetics" (1951), says he first heard about Hubbard in July 1949, in a letter from John W. Campbell of Astounding Science Fiction. Winter travelled to Bay Head, New Jersey to observe Hubbard auditing, and was audited himself, in that year. He mentions returning home to Michigan before Thanksgiving of 1949.
http://www.xenu.net/archive/fifties/e510000.htm

Although Winter had parted company with LRH before the book's publication, and was skeptical about some of Hubbard's claims, including "clear," "A Doctor's Report" is still very pro-dianetics. Winter claimed to have saved a patient's life with dianetics.
 

Anonycat

Crusader
Hubbard said:

Well, the subject of auditing is first recounted in a book called The Original Thesis. And the rule has not changed between 1949 and now. The Original Thesis is prior to Dianetics the Modern Science of Mental Heath. And I was glancing through it a moment ago and the last editor of it has not punched this up into the caps it deserves.
 

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander
From the 8-8008 book, 1952:

"At the end of 80,000 hours of investigation of beingness in the MEST universe, I have concluded that those processes which make it possible for the preclear to disagree with the MEST universe also make it possible for him to handle the MEST universe . . ."

You'll have to do the math for yourself, but 80,000 hours is 22 years of 70-hour work weeks (x 52). I could never make the math work out to my satisfaction. Maybe someone else could explain it to me. Seems not possible. :confused2:

Excerpt from a handwritten LRH letter to Robert Heinlein
March 8, 1949, Savannah, Georgia:

"On this book thing. I trained up Sarah into the routine. Never had anybody around before with enough time to spare, so I had never used the work on myself -- couldn't. Care of Physician etc. So anyway, I been agonizing around losing some of the bitter years. My hip and stomach and side are well again -- which pleases me and makes a fool out of Polly."

There are so many discrepancies in the story I've never been able to resolve. And I've tried over the years. :confused2:

So be it.
 
Last edited:

pineapple

Silver Meritorious Patron
<snip> ...
Excerpt from a handwritten LRH letter to Robert Heinlein
March 8, 1949, Savannah, Georgia:

"On this book thing. I trained up Sarah into the routine. Never had anybody around before with enough time to spare, so I had never used the work on myself -- couldn't. Care of Physician etc. So anyway, I been agonizing around losing some of the bitter years. My hip and stomach and side are well again -- which pleases me and makes a fool out of Polly."

There are so many discrepancies in the story I've never been able to resolve. And I've tried over the years. :confused2:

So be it.
Interesting. What's the source for the letter to Heinlein?
 

Danger Mouse

Patron with Honors
My personal theory about the significance of the year 1932. It's the year that the great Youngest Eagle Scout totally failed in everything he tried. I wonder whether he spent the rest of his life justifying 1932's failures:

1) Flunked out of college? No, I'm Dr. Hubbard, a Ph. D. now, a nuclear physicist in fact.

2) College sea adventure a fiasco? No, my expedition is a legend at the Explorer's Club. I have my own navy now, three ships, in fact I'm the Commodore of my own fleet.

3) Dad says I'm crazy to drop out of school in the middle of a Depression to become a writer, that I'm bound to fail, that I can't possibly write enough to support myself? No, I'm such a fast writer they had to invent a new typewriter with a spiral roll paper feed just to keep up with me. In fact, I've published a zillion words translated into a thousand languages, in fact, each one of books is a #1 best seller.

Of course, the year he was removed from command of his sub chaser in the Navy (1943? 1944?) was a bad year for him as well, and that probably pointed him in the direction that led to Dianetics and Scientology.

4) Navy says I'm crazy? No, I was at Oak Knoll to cure the (other) patients, in fact, I invented a new cure for mental illness, an invention equal to fire, the arch and the wheel.

This was someone who got a little taste of the spotlight as a kid and just couldn't stand the thought of being an ordinary human being who could fail at something. His whole life was an attempt to deny the simple truth that 1932 should have taught him: you are not that special. And how pathetic we were to buy into it, because we wanted to be special, too.
 

Gib

Crusader
From the 8-8008 book, 1952:

"At the end of 80,000 hours of investigation of beingness in the MEST universe, I have concluded that those processes which make it possible for the preclear to disagree with the MEST universe also make it possible for him to handle the MEST universe . . ."

You'll have to do the math for yourself, but 80,000 hours is 22 years of 70-hour work weeks (x 52). I could never make the math work out to my satisfaction. Maybe someone else could explain it to me. Seems not possible. :confused2:

Excerpt from a handwritten LRH letter to Robert Heinlein
March 8, 1949, Savannah, Georgia:

"On this book thing. I trained up Sarah into the routine. Never had anybody around before with enough time to spare, so I had never used the work on myself -- couldn't. Care of Physician etc. So anyway, I been agonizing around losing some of the bitter years. My hip and stomach and side are well again -- which pleases me and makes a fool out of Polly."

There are so many discrepancies in the story I've never been able to resolve. And I've tried over the years. :confused2:

So be it.

That's because Hubbard was a PR Artist. Since he stole everything from everybody else, he concluded the hours as his own, or made it so to as to get us to think he did it. He was a writer. He says "I have concluded", that doesn't mean he did it but implies it. Just like the whole of dianetics, it's all implied.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
From the 8-8008 book, 1952:

"At the end of 80,000 hours of investigation of beingness in the MEST universe, I have concluded that those processes which make it possible for the preclear to disagree with the MEST universe also make it possible for him to handle the MEST universe . . ."

I suspect that he was making a gross estimate of ALL auditing hours by anyone in SCN up to that time.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
emphasis mine:
So how come Hubbard didn't notice this? Was it because he had never actually done any auditing and never noticed that the mind works like this? Was it that he had made a call and was now stuck with it, even though it was wrong, as to change something so basic would have shown up his lies too much? Although the Clear fiasco involving Sonja Bianca apparently never worried him too much, at least not enough to warrant editing that chapter in DMSMH.

Paul

Perhaps he knew there was no money in actually handling someone's problems and then having them go on and lead a truly happy life. This was also echoed by Mike Goldstein about using John Galusha's stuff...IDENICS...that handling someone's problems - there's no money it.. they just go off and live... (this is paraphrased but what Mike relayed during a phone call years ago)
 
Top