It's the last lecture of this particular series, I thought it might be a very good thing to talk about the establishment or conduct of a practice or things one can do with Scientology.

And the first thing I would like to point out to you is that Scientology being what it is, a study of life, a how to livingness, a synthesis of life itself, which oddly enough at the moment knows a little bit more about life than life does, and so we can articulate it, you then have Scientology penetrating everything and anything it comes in contact with.

It's interesting, isn't it, that there is no profession — I don't care whether it's repairing cranes or making electronic computers or in digging ditches, almost everything you confront could have some Scientology applied to it.

Так что даже если вы просто обучаете профессионального саентолога, вы должны научить его чему-нибудь в одитинге.

Well, if this is the case — this is the case, your confusion about what you're going to do about Scientology, then, doesn't have to do with not having thought of anything to do with Scientology, your confusion has to do with not-knowing a few things that you can do with it.

Вы видите, что когда люди проходят основные курсы, их интеллект повышается. Вы обучаете их на основных курсах – их интеллект повышается. Это довольно заметно и довольно примечательно.

In other words, you have to do a respecialization. And it's so very, very easy for Scientology to reach into any field, that just contemplation of it is apt to make one a little giddy. So the best thing to do is just to say, "Well, I don't like — I just never did like manufacturing." Well, that segment of civilization is out. And we'll not-know that and we'll not-know this and we'll not-know that. And we finally get down to one or two items that are just fine as far as we're concerned, and then you should get very alert and say, "I wonder how Scientology applies to that?" And you will find then that it complements your own active interest.

Очень хорошо. Как далеко они могут продвинуться, не затрагивая одитинг? Ну, очевидно, инструкторы, которых вы поставили для обучения людей на продвинутых курсах и которые находятся далеко за пределами предварительных или базовых курсов, чувствуют, что они не могут дальше продвигаться, потому что они обычно сдаются, и начинают учить людей тому, как одитировать.

Now, this would be the broadest way one could go about establishing how to use Scientology. See, nobody could tell you how to use life, nobody could tell you how to live. One can tell you how to live better: he can process you so that you can then do what you can do better or you can find something new to do. But to tell you how to live would be a very difficult thing indeed. Similarly, to tell you how to use Scientology would again be a difficult thing. One can tell you how to use it in various pursuits. But if one were going to exhaustively cover all of the zones of interest where Scientology could be applied effectively and with tremendous force, what you'd find yourself doing was writing the entire book of life from beginning to end.

Ну, это кратчайший путь. Но если человек просто собирается применять это с академической точки зрения сейчас и в будущем, и никогда не собирается никого одитировать, что ж, я не намного оценю его способность работать с этим.

And I every once in a while get caught in that myself and I say, "Oh, I ought to write something about that," and then I sort of feel swamped. It means I would have to write about all of the subject. And it would require a lot of research into the subject and this and that and the other thing. And it would be normally the same time spent on that as — be, oh, I don't know, two to four years to master's degree; I'm expected to do it in a week. Anyhow. That's about the way I have to work.

Во-первых, один из самых легких, эффективных, самых стабильных способов работы с людьми, существующих в настоящее время, - это процедура одитинга. И если человек знает процедуру одитинга и умеет ее применять, у него, конечно, не будет много неприятностей с людьми. Он не должен воспринимать их всех как преклиров, но я уверяю вас, они все будут так себя вести.

In applying Scientology, then, your own action is your own action very, very markedly. There is a specialized sphere where Scientology merely applies as Scientology and this is the auditor. Scientology applies as Scientology. But it isn't the only sphere that it applies. Now, actually a person to know Scientology first and foremost would have to be an auditor.

Я говорю вам это в качестве совета относительно групп и людей вообще. В старых логических основаниях Дианетики есть логическое основание, имеющее отношение к шкалам постепенности. И у любого человеческого существа есть такая шкала постепенности: найдите какой-нибудь пункт, с которым, как вы знаете, он согласится. Затем найдите другой пункт, с которым он может согласиться. И через какое-то время вы действительно будете общаться с человеком – это постепенная шкала соглашений.

A professional Scientologist who merely knew how to apply it, let us say, to business or communication or something of the sort, if he had not done auditing, would never really have any command of the subject at all. His command would be so superficial that he would make continuous blunders. His subjective reality would not exist. And so even if one did train simply a professional Scientologist, he'd have to teach him something about auditing.

Итак, вот перед вами какой-нибудь парень, который разговаривает с вами о саентологии. И он хочет знать все ее части в деталях. Он хочет знать всю технику и теорию.

Now, you see that in teaching basic groups, people's intelligence improves. You teach the basic group, their intelligence improves. This is quite marked and quite remarkable. Very well.

И вот вы сидите и даете ему целый курс по саентологии, но в таком случае вы очень, очень глупый человек. Не нужно просто сидеть и давать целый курс по саентологии – не говорите ему об этом вообще ничего.

How much further can they go without running into auditing? Well, evidently Instructors that you put on the job (in teaching an advanced course out and beyond a basic free course or group course) feel that they can't go any further because they usually break down and start teaching these people how to audit.

Скажите: «Давай я тебе покажу. Вот, встань сюда.Теперь, видишь вон ту стену? Хорошо, я хочу, чтобы ты сейчас подошел к ней, и я покажу тебе, что это такое…»

Well, it is the shortest route. But where an individual is simply going to apply it academically from here on out and is never going to process anybody at all, why, I wouldn't give much for his ability to handle it.

И он выйдет из этих домыслов и размышлений.

In the first place, one of the easiest, surest, most poised ways of handling people extant to date is in auditing procedure. And if one is cognizant of auditing procedure and very competent in handling it, he certainly is not going to have too much trouble with people. They don't have to all look like preclears to him but I assure you they all react that way.

Зачем разговаривать с грампластинкой? Вы никогда ее ничему не научите.

You can even get warlike in your handling of people with auditing. (I don't advise you to do that even vaguely.) But I remember one time — every once in a while some very, very deep fellow who runs about one molecule under the surface, you know, tries to take a crack at me one way or the other, some flippant chap, and of course they don't get very far doing this. I remember one chap that did this in particular — he was an attorney. And this fellow said, "Ha, ha, ha," you know, "ho-ho and ho-ho," and he was having a good time.

Вы когда-нибудь пробовали сесть рядом с грампластинкой и научить ее чему-нибудь? Это просто никогда не работало. Они не пройдут самого элементарного экзамена. Вы просто положите еще одну инграмму поверх существующей.

So I looked at him with — sort of with a — I hated myself afterwards. (laughter) I said, "How would you like to know a subject so well that you had a witness on a witness stand that you didn't want to testify and all you had to do was utter a certain magic set of phrases and snap your fingers and he'd curl up on him — in a ball and fall on the floor? How would you like that?"

А иметь дело с людьми очень, очень просто – с одним условием: если вы любите людей. Не навязчиво или компульсивно, а если вы просто любите людей. Если вы одитируете людей, чтобы свести с ними счеты, то вы покалечите их. Если вы одитируете людей, потому что вы терпеть не можете жить с людьми, когда они в таком состоянии… Помните, ваша собака не разговаривает – она не лает и не устраивает беспорядок, она достаточно дисциплинирована, но вы живете с ней и ее способностями. Я клянусь, что она не станет печь пироги, даже если вы пригрозите пристрелить ее! Я просто хочу, чтобы вы поняли. Я имею в виду, что способность не обязательно должна присутствовать у вашего собрата-человека.

"Oh, I guess that would be pretty useful but, ha-ha, you couldn't do that! Ha-ha-ha-ha."

Вы должны уметь просто как бы дотянуться до своего собрата-человека и просто, знаете, просто пожать ему руку. Вы должны уметь это делать. Это довольно удивительно. Я хожу по улице, навещаю кого-нибудь. И почти не бывает такого, чтобы кто-то хмурился или злился из-за того, что я случайно наступил ему на ногу или что-либо в этом роде. Они не делают этого: они улыбаются. Почему? Потому что я улыбаюсь им первым, и они воспроизводят это. Я люблю их. Они хорошие ребята. С ними легко иметь дело. Они не доставляют на самом деле неприятностей. Иногда они получают должности в жизни, эти должности разговаривают; и тогда они немного доставляют неприятностей. Но это неприятности с должностями. Вы не должны менять людей; поменяйте должности.

I said, "Well, the somatic strip will now go back to." And there he was on the floor. Now, that's a mean thing to do and that I would do such a thing is disorderly and disgraceful and undignified and I apologize for it heartily, but I didn't apologize to him. (laughter)

Но, строя частную практику, вы строите, в сущности, ни что иное как доброе отношение, и вы строите его с помощью хорошей работы. И это не очень сложно делать, и нет никакой магической формулы, с помощью которой это делается. Если вы любите людей и если вы уверены в своих результатах и не боитесь подойти, похлопать человека по плечу и сказать: «Жду тебя в 10 часов», то у вас будет практика.

That's going just a little bit far in using auditing procedure because it's actually going into actual auditing, you see, that was the only thing I did wrong. I did use the technique which most advanced his knowledge, if not his case. I saw that man the next time, my god, was he respectful! (He had an awful cold too.)

И это все.

If you know these things you become less and less worried about people trifling with you, by the way. You become quite dangerous in your human environment. There's no laws, no law whatsoever against packing a snap of the fingers in your pocket. There neither is any law against a polite communication.

Если вы соберете людей в одну группу, если вы просто будете распространять нескольким людям – знаете, неважно, насколько мала группа, - то просто начните и обучите их некоторым главным основам. И если вы будете поддерживать это на достаточно простом уровне и не будете забегать вперед, (вы не должны заваливать людей тем, что они не понимают – помните это), и будете обучать их достаточно основным основам в этой маленькой группе, то вы внезапно обнаружите, что ваша группа добивается успехов.

I don't say that you're trying to put these people under duress and handle and abuse them, but they will quite often tell you — it's a very funny thing, they tell you this anyway sometimes (see most of you are very sunny people), but they tell you something else — they say, "It's a funny thing, but after I have talked to you, I feel better." Why? Well, you just gave them two-way comm. They didn't ever talk to you, you gave them an auditing session.

В большой степени это зависит от вас. На самом деле, не от состояния вашего кейса, а от вашей способности доносить свои идеи и воспринимать другого человека.

Now, if you were going to teach a salesman to sell something and you failed to teach him about the responses on the Tone Scale, you would actually do wrong, because a person will communicate at his own tone level.

И это относительно легко делать. Это примерно как езда на велосипеде. Вы можете это делать, или вы просто не делаете этого.

No reason to go into a long example of that but it does happen. It does happen that people below 2.0 on the Tone Scale will only buy things that will break down, that won't run and that sort of thing.

И чтобы построить практику и поддерживать ее, и постоянно сохранять движение по курсу в этом отношении, для этого человеку требуется достаточное количество честности, прямоты и хороших, стабильных отношений с людьми, с которыми он разговаривает.

I did an interesting thing one day. I was in an automobile salesroom: a chap came in to buy a used car, so forth. Salesman was telling him all about these bright, shiny, new, chromium-plated, eighteen-grasshopper-power cars that he had there and so forth. And I kept looking at this fellow and although he possibly had money, he was just put together in a sort of a way that was just all broken down. And I knew he wouldn't sell anything anyway, and the guy was kind of backing out and getting more and more apathetic and I finally gave the salesman that I knew slightly a little punch to get him aside — kicked him over to the side and I said, "You know, we do have a car out there" (I wasn't even a member of the firm), "we do have a car out back that we're having a great deal of trouble with."

Для этого, однако, также требуется умение посидеть немного на одном месте – что-то, чему саентолог никак не может научиться!

And the fellow brightened up a little bit.

I said, "Nobody can get it to run. And the reason we don't sell it really, though, is its price is much too high; it isn't worth that at all."

The fellow went out back to look at it.

Salesman wouldn't believe it and never picked the sale up. He just couldn't believe that this was a sales approach. But to a man in apathy that's a sales approach.

Very many little points exist on that line. As a matter of fact you could write a whole book which had nothing to do but communicating on the tone level of the other person — how would you go about this, on what subjects and so on. And yet it's absolutely necessary that you know this.

Let's take a government — estimate a government's tone level, communicate with it on that tone level. It's pretty hard to do, but you can do it, you can do it. They'll listen too. Problems, problems, get even with them, jump on everybody — you know, that sort of an attitude. Just estimate at where you're hitting and you can get a communication through.

Many people are very surprised when governments don't answer their communication. Very few people ever write governments — they know better. A member of Parliament wrote about twelve government departments one day. He just decided that he would sit down and see what the wage civil service slave was doing to earn his pay and so he wrote and asked about a dozen departments to do this and that. I'm not going to give you the exact rundown of what he got back, but he only heard from six of them and none of them, none of them, wrote him the answer to his question.

I think he asked to find out how he got a gun permit to one particular place, and they wrote back and told him he didn't have one and said they couldn't find him on file anywhere. Just — it's just wild.

Well, why? Why is that? And that's because the tone level of the office to whom one is addressing his communication is not matched by the communication itself.If you were to write some government department that was in apathy about what it was doing — they quite often are — let us say that they had these wage disposal of the entire city and it was all broken down or something of the sort and they were in lots of trouble and everybody was kind of apathetic about it. If you wrote in and you said just this sort of thing, "Isn't it terrible what an awful hard job it is trying to keep things from getting all messed up all the time," you'd probably get an answer. Oh, get a four-, five-page answer telling you how bad it was. Yet your communication wouldn't have made sense at all, but it had an emotional tone. It said it's all impossible, it's all impossible.

This is something for you to understand in talking to people. But it is much more important to understand those particular facets in trying to build a practice.

Now, we just avoid the fact that you could apply Scientology to anything. I don't know how a firm could get along in the future without a Scientologist sitting at its personnel desk. It would be impossible, see. You could save so much money, you could handle the accident rate of the firm so well, do so many other things on the post that it would be quite foolish for them to have anyone else.

They, by the way, hire, at this moment, trained personnel men for these posts and they're trained — in what lines I've never been able to discover, since I have written for textbooks and so forth on it and I just never have received anything that I would consider necessary for a fellow to know. How to file the cards of applications and how to make them out — I guess that's about all. And how to sit at a desk endlessly is about all that could be taught.

Yet Science of Survival is actually a complete textbook on the subject of employment.

But we just come off of these highly specialized things of putting in communication systems, of putting together operations of one kind or another or selling ideas or anything like that and get right down to auditing in an auditing practice and we find out that all of these things apply to an auditing practice.

And most auditors don't too much consider the ability of the preclear to make a decision when the auditor is trying to build up an auditing practice. They go around and ask people, they say, "Wouldn't you like to have some auditing?" And they're right away running Part "c" of Opening Procedure 8-C on the preclear. This guy is not capable of answering the question. If he were capable of answering it, he'd be way upstairs in this society. See, he's just not capable of answering.

You want to tell him, "Well, now, how has your health been?" "Oh, well, that's tough. Oh, that's bad. Oh no. Gee. Good lord, not really! Well, you come over and see me tomorrow morning at ten o'clock — right over at my office. That's the only thing we can possibly do. I know you probably have to work but you can get off from work. You be there at ten o'clock. Now here's the exact address." He'll appear.

You spend a lot of time discussing fees — he's not interested in fees. It doesn't matter if he's broke. He's broke because his case isn't in good shape. No, don't worry about the fee before you worry about the case too much. An auditor loses more money this way.

The old psychoanalyst lost practically all of his patients simply by spending the first hour or so talking about how they were going to pay for the analysis and then very often would send them a bill for this conference about paying for the analysis and it just drove people away in all directions. No confidence could be had in such a degree. It's quite interesting, they just lost people all over the place.

It's very interesting that — I know I normally tell people they can't afford it. They just couldn't afford it anyway. I don't tell — don't make it easy for them. Say, "You have this auditing, you're probably going to get" — in essence — "if you have this auditing, it's probably going to generate an awful lot of problems for you, one way or the other. Your wife's going to object, your family's going to object, you're probably going to lose some time on the job because you'll have to be audited in the daytime. I won't have you working all day and then being audited all night. I won't do that. You're probably going to have an awful time paying all this off" and so forth. "Nevertheless, see me at ten o'clock tomorrow morning."

When he comes in, anything — you want to talk in this direction. But don't get him too upset. Don't ask him to make too many decisions. You'll see this time and time again as you're trying to get somebody to be audited that you have asked them to make too many decisions.

After a while as you go on, you'll get overt. Your own confidence in your ability to help them therefore justifies the ways you go about making this a fact. You realize that this is the truth.

Now, I have gone so far as to walk out on the street, see somebody gimping along one way or the other, tap him on the shoulder, give him a card and tell him to come to the office. If I do this to about eight or nine people in a row — I can even give them some small explanation like, "We're running a research project," or something of the sort — anything. Give them cards. And "Be at the office." The next day, they'll appear. It's quite remarkable.

You use the reporting mechanism. If you tell people to report who are in bad shape, they always will. They just report. Do you know that people — do you know that people — psychiatric patients report back for electric shocks? Do you know that in old Fac One times they reported back on their own initiative to be ruined again two weeks later? You realize this?

Now, if you were doing something which didn't materially assist them, this would be quite something else, you see. But you're doing something that can help them out. They can't go wrong, they couldn't possibly go wrong in reporting. They always have before on the whole track, for the last 76 trillion years, gone wrong every time they reported to anything. But this is the first time that they report straight. And they report and they actually are given at least a little scrap of their passport out. It's an amazing thing.

Now, you, sitting with your case in only an ordinary state of dishabille, with only a few tatters, are actually at a tone level which doesn't properly estimate what you're looking at when you look at these guys walking up and down out here. This fellow who is in a terrible no-effect condition, before you become experienced in handling people like this, very often can put it over on you just left and right. You confront him as an opposite valence, and he's in a compulsive game condition of one kind or another, and he's telling you that he's got a no-effect, no-effect, no-effect; this is all he's saying.

You completely miss another point ordinarily: the man is in an hypnotic trance. That's quite usual; it's just a step below no-effect. And if he's in a very compulsive no-effect, he's in an hypnotic trance. Well, this also puts some restrictions on you. You have to watch out how you talk to these people because it just goes straight in. If you don't argue with their engrams and talk to them, they hear everything you say. And unfortunately at that level, they hear it at an hypnotic level.

It's quite amazing to see somebody who is very resistive who is — you'd think from the arguments he put up it hasn't done him any good; there's been no change, this sort of thing. He's just sitting there giving you all of this yak-yak-yak-yak-yak. It's an amazing thing that it takes a while for an auditor to get up to a point to realize that he's simply looking at a talking machine. You know, it's — somebody threw the switch and it's going round and round and round and just is playing that record, that's all.

I've gotten so with these people I can pick the needle up and put it down almost anyplace on the engram. I never talk to this thing that's going round and round and round.

I never forget one particular preclear that used to come back and jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw-jaw, "You haven't done this and you haven't do that and then — and you haven't gone and done something else" and so forth, "and you're just being so mean and of course it's just a swindle anyway and you're messing me all up," and so forth.

And I'd just say, 'Well, sit down in the chair now."

And "Yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap."

And I'd say, "Well, now, can you see that ashtray over there?"

And she'd look at the ashtray. And "Yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap-yap," and so on.

Now, you'd think offhand that this person wasn't getting any acknowledgment from me. Well, this person wasn't talking. Why should you acknowledge something that isn't talking? See, this is a fine point of judgment because sometimes they're talking, then you want to acknowledge them.

But this woman would audit for about fifteen minutes and then she would shut off and the record would turn off and she would go on with the session and end up the session in herself, and eventually became herself and had no further protest left.

Were any of these protests germane to anything that was going on? No. And that is what aberration is. It is not logically connected with anything else which is occurring. The fellow who gets a pair of oars because he is going horseback riding is an obvious aberrated case. And yet it says in his bank, "He rowed a horse." He just got it identified.

Now, he has you identified with his dentist. He has you identified with doctors, psychiatrists, practitioners on the whole track. He hasn't got you differentiated yet, he doesn't know you're a friend of his, really. It's all sort of automatic and formal. So about the first thing you have to do with such a person is establish that something different is happening — something quite different is happening.

One of the easy ways to establish this — something that won't blow him up — is 8-C. And he'll know that's silly. He'll just know that is a silly process. You just develop the trick of as-ising his comment before he makes it. Just keep blowing the engram as you talk to him. You say, "Now, this is a silly process but I want you to see how it goes." Then you've got him started. You state what he's going to think before he says it or thinks it. And of course he becomes very easy to handle.

When you walk him through 8-C for a few times that's — you see that he isn't going to blow up. You have got him moving in this direction, it was easy for him to walk over and touch the wall, you're not going to be too pedantic here, you're just going to move him straight off into SCS — wham.

He will stop worrying about whether it's simple or not about the fifteenth time he's stopped the body or something like that and feels half of his head blow off. He's not going to say, "This is silly" anymore. On the contrary he will have forgotten it entirely. He won't even remind you that you said it was silly. This is easing people into it.

Now, I give you this as a definite tip with regard to groups, with regard to people in general — that there is a logic that has to do with gradient scales in the old Dianetic Logics, and a gradient scale in any human being is to find some point with which you know they will agree. And then find another point you know they will agree with. And after a while, you're really in communication with the person. Gradient scale of agreements.

So here is some chap who is talking to you about Scientology and he wants to know all of the peculiar ramifications. He wants to know all the technique and theory. You sit there and you give him a course on Scientology, you're being a very, very foolish person. Don't sit there and give him a course on Scientology, don't tell him what it's all about at all. Say, "I will show you. Now you stand up here, and you see that wall over there? Now, I want you to walk over to the wall. Now, I'll show you what this is." He'll come right off the figure-figure-figure-figure.

Why talk to a phonograph record? You'll never educate one. Did you ever try to sit down and educate a phonograph record? It just never worked. They don't pass the examination worth a nickel. You just put in another engram on top of the existing one.

Now, handling people becomes very, very simple, with one proviso: if you like people, not obsessively or compulsively, but if you just like people. If you're auditing people to get even with them, you'll butcher them. If you're auditing people because you can't stand to live with people if they're in this condition, remember your dog doesn't talk, he doesn't bark or raise the devil, he's fairly orderly, but you live with him and his capabilities. I swear he couldn't make pancakes if you threatened to shoot him! I just call that to your attention. I mean, ability is not necessarily an absolute necessity in your fellow man.

You should be able to sort of reach out to your fellow human being and just sort of, you know, shake him by the hand. You should be able to do this.

It's quite amazing. I walk down the street, I see somebody, it is almost a no-occurrence to have somebody frown or to have somebody get upset because I stepped on their toes or pushed them sideways, something like that. They don't. They smile.

Why? It's because I smiled at them first and they did a duplication. I like them. They're fine. They're very easy to handle. They're no real trouble. Sometimes they get into positions in life and the positions talk, and then they're just a little bit of trouble. But that's trouble with a position. You don't have to change the people, change the positions.

But in building a practice, you build, in essence, nothing but goodwill and you build it by good works. And it's not very difficult to do and there isn't any magical formula of how you go about doing it. If you like people and you have confidence in your own results and you're not afraid to walk up and tap people on the shoulder and say, "Report at ten o'clock," you'll have a practice; that's all there is to it.

If you collect people in on a group, if you just reach out with a few people you know, and you just — it doesn't matter how small the group is — go ahead and train them in some basic fundamentals. And if you keep those fundamentals basic enough and don't overreach — you know, you don't ever overwhelm people with what they don't understand. You only overwhelm people with what they understand, remember that. So if you teach them sufficiently fundamental fundamentals in this little group, you'll all of a sudden find your group going along.

To a large degree, it depends on you. Actually, not your state of case — not really your state of case, but your ability to reach out and embrace the other guy. And it is something that is relatively easy to do. Something like riding a bicycle: you can do it or you don't do it.

And to build a practice and to have the practice hold together and to stay steady on course with regard to these things does require from the individual a considerable amount of honesty, straightforwardness and good, solid relationships with the people he's talking to.

You'll find that people will argue with you about money and they'll crab about this and that and they'll bark and growl. But you know how to handle people. Don't let this worry you.

You treat these people in a direction they always get for their money what they paid for or something like it — and in modern times preclears have always gotten more than they expected — and you keep them in a good, straightforward state of mind. You don't try to cut some other auditor's throat. You don't — you hear that some other auditor is cutting your throat, you should realize that preclears always come and tell you this anyway. Laugh at them. That's just — it's silly. It's nonsense.

Don't be impressed with all the entheta and pick up all the good there is lying around and you'll have a good practice. And these practices stay and they last.

It depends on you sitting down for a little while, though, in one place — something that Scientologists never learn.

Thank you very much.