The C/S Series 53 Short Form is the basic prepared list used by auditors to get a TA up or down into normal range or to correct case outnesses. It contains every element that could be wrong with the mind. It is written the way it is because we just want to know if a subject reads in the pc’s mind, and if so you handle it to F/N.

The C/S Series 53 Long Form is exactly the same as the short form except that it puts the items into full questions so that a less educated pc can understand what is being asked. The questions actually limit its use a bit, but are needed with uneducated pcs. The limit comes about through making the questions a bit too specific whereas the general questions of the short form don’t say to what they apply so are less limited.

Both the short form and the long form are assessed Method 5. (This means going down the list, calling off the items or questions to the pc, watching the meter and marking any tick, small fall, fall, long fall, long fall blowdown (to what TA). Do not take up instant F/Ns. You can program instant F/Ns, but not off a C/S 53.

The order the reads must be taken up is built into the list itself. You can’t audit a case on anything if Int is out. Auditing must be very limited if a list is out. If you audit over an ARC break very long the pc will go into a sad effect. If you audit over a problem the pc won’t make case gain. If you audit over a withhold the pc will get mad at you. If you look at this and compare it to the C/S 53 you will see that the list itself is built on a declining order of urgency. It is true of the remaining items on the list.

There are two ways of using a C/S 53. The first is to simply assess it and indicate the largest read. This is a sort of brushoff but is very useful in handling blown students or pcs, will get off charge and get them back into the org or more comfortable. The other way is its proper use in session. You simply start at the first read and handle it. Go to the next read and handle it, etc. Note that this is at variance with the general handling of prepared lists where you simply take the largest read and next largest read and so forth.

(References:

That an item reads, with the exception of Int, does not mean you have to do a full rundown at that point. You just have to F/N it. If further actions are needed to take an item to full handling, get it onto the pc’s Advance Program. (This includes drug handling, etc. but not, as I’ve said, Int. If Int reads, you handle it fully because no auditing can take place over out-Int. If he has already had a full Int RD you would run the End of Endless Int Repair Rundown. If he or she is already Clear or OT and has not had an Int RD you would run the End of Endless Int Repair Rundown as the primary action.)

• HCO PL 7 Feb 65 Keeping Scientology Working – Reiss. 15.6. 70 Reiss. 28.1. 73

The object of the C/S 53 is to key out things that are bothering the pc and get anything you found on the list to an F/N. That something read (except Int) does not mean the auditor doing the C/S 53 must at once run up 110 hours of auditing before he can finish the C/S 53 to an F/Ning list. Auditors who don’t realize this can get stuck in on a C/S 53 mostly because they misconceive a C/S 53 to be wholly a case analysis list. Its primary purpose is to get the case rolling so you can do something else that is scheduled on the pc’s program. Because it can be made to serve as a case analysis and is sometimes called for by a C/S to help him do a repair or advance program or to confirm it, sometimes misleads the auditor into believing he is not supposed to F/N the list.

I have even used a C/S 53 in a D of P interview when the pc wasn’t speaking up. Then by getting the reads I could program the pc and unless it was Int reading I would conclude the interview simply by indicating the largest read which would get me my F/N and let the pc go away happy while we really got to work on him in the C/S department.

So the C/S 53 is a child of many uses as it does after all, contain all the elements known to us that bring about case foul-ups.

Sections D and E of the C/S 53 can be assessed on Clears and OTs and Dianetic Clears. However do NOT engage in any activity that brings about further engram running. The correct way to handle Clears and OTs if you get a read in Section D is indicate and let him tell you about it if he wishes, to get an F/N. On Section E you can do an L3RF but you must not do more than indicate the item. You must NOT engage in engram running. (Ref: HCOB 12 Sep 78, DIANETICS FORBIDDEN ON CLEARS AND OTs)

You realize of course that LSD and some other drugs can apparently stay in the physiological body and release themselves now and then. If a Clear, OT or Dianetic Clear got a read on Section D (drugs, etc.) and it didn’t clear up easily you would program the person for a Sweat Program and even Objectives. You would not however, do any engram running on the drugs. Even Recalls might be a bit dicey. The Sweat Program and Objectives would however handle, if you got into the goofy situation of heavy or persistent Section D reads on a Clear, OT or Dianetic Clear. It would not be very usual but you better know about it.

On Section E (engrams and masses, etc.) if you got reads on a Clear, OT or Dianetic Clear you could indicate them and if they didn’t clear to F/N you could do an L3RF, remembering that the instructions on the L3RF handlings do not apply. Your actions as an auditor would simply be to indicate the read and you would probably get your F/N, providing of course your read wasn’t false. The way to program a persistent read on this would be to get the person up to OT I, II and III fast. And then program NED for OTs. But whatever you do don’t try to run these reads out with Dianetics.

An in-ethics course means that HCOBs are applied, verbal data doesn’t exist whatsoever, schedules are strictly adhered to, musters are held, the Supervisor applies all the study tech, etc.

The rest of the C/S 53 (except D and E as above) is quite valid on Clears, OTs and Dianetic Clears as it is mostly concerned with think, environment and practices.

An out-ethics course would be anything less and sometimes becomes so obviously out-ethics that you see students goofing around on course, late arrivals for roll call, students taking cigarette breaks whenever they feel like it, verbal data running rampant, and a Course Supervisor that does nothing but stand around.

There’s such a thing as group agreement and if a new student walks into an out-ethics course room, he will tend to go into agreement with it and join in.

Unless you run into the necessity to do an Int handling or you goof or get false reads you can F/N a whole C/S 53 rather rapidly.

There’s no in-between point. A course (or any activity for that matter) cannot be run semi-standardly or with “pretty much in-ethics.” It must be run with totally standard tech and in-ethics. If this is not the case you’ll get a gradually lowered ethics level, admin will go out and standard tech slips down to “some of the tech being applied when we can.”

When a student or Supervisor goes into a course room and sees things that are out-ethics or nonstandard or “not the way Ron says they should be” and doesn’t do something effective to handle the scene then he himself will become part of it; he goes into agreement with it and will actually contribute to the out-ethics.

Getting a C/S 53 to an F/Ning list is done by Method 5-ing it, handling any Int RD necessary and handling the rest of the items, each to F/N.

This situation is a widespread thing in our society today. It’s not limited to our course rooms. You see it in marriages. It has become an acceptable thing to get divorced, create broken homes, cheat on your spouse. In the world of big business you’re told to swindle Mr. X before he swindles you. This is group agreement. It is agreed upon out-ethics.

You then Method 5 the whole C/S 53 again. You may pick up an additional read or two. You F/N these. Hopefully, if Int is now handled properly, if it did read in the first place, it won’t read again. But if it does, you have the End of Endless Int Repair RD which if done already may not have been carried to EP so you simply get it carried to EP, which is an F/Ning Int button list.

Now, if a course room is run like this you’ll get auditors who won’t keep auditing appointments, misapply tech, fail to handle their pcs’ ethics, give and accept verbal data, have nonstandard admin, etc. etc. You will also train executives who will operate out-ethics, off-policy orgs. Either way, you’re setting yourself up for losses.

You then Method 5 the C/S 53 again. You will probably get an F/Ning assessment throughout. If you don’t you simply Method 5 it again.

Therefore, it is now a Comm Ev offense for a Course Supervisor or MAA (Ethics Officer) to allow the following out-ethics activities in their course rooms, with the result of declare of being a suppressive person:

The eventual EP of getting a prepared list to F/N will occur unless the meter, the auditor’s metering or TRs, or use of the list are badly out. The thing to do in that event is to get another auditor or get liberally crammed or retreaded, as frankly, F/Ning a C/S 53 is a piece of cake.

1. Does not muster his students in the morning, after lunch, and after dinner, precisely on time, note absences and take action.

F/Ning a C/S 53 to F/Ning list is relatively easy to do and can produce a remarkable resurgence of case. It’s an easy and simple way to do a set-up for a major rundown.

2. Permit students to talk to each other or wander around or take unscheduled breaks or goof off during course hours.

3. Permit students to eat or smoke in the course room.

Some pcs, particularly those who have a false TA have gotten so bugged by C/S 53s being done on them that when they see an auditor reach for one, they react adversely.

4. Permitting persons to come into the course room and bother students for any reason.

The way to handle this is 2WC the C/S 53 itself, E/S, taking the F/Ns and ignoring the TA position and then do a full false TA handling on the pc per HCOB 21 Jan 77RA, FALSE TA CHECKLIST.

5. Supervisor standing around or sitting at his desk not actively handling students who need help.

In essence what you have discovered is the biggest reading item of all without even looking at your meter.

6. Not getting students through their course and graduated.

No further repair is needed than the above as a C/S 53 will now work like a clock and can be done smoothly and correctly. It will even pick up the latent charge of “Endless C/S 53s” if you do the above.

It goes without saying that all elements of HCO PL 16 March 71R What Is A Course? should be in on a course. A Supervisor who does not run a course per checksheet, lets students study without dictionaries and demo kits, does not make all materials available and does not fully apply study tech and use Word Clearing is of course suppressive and should be declared, as he is actively blocking Scientologists from having and benefiting from Scientology.

Flag and FOLO observers and missions should always have a target to see that this policy letter is fully in.

The C/S 53 Series is a wonderful tool and like any tool can be well handled or mishandled.

You see, our success in clearing this planet depends upon the success of our courses as this is where we train our auditors, C/Ses, Supervisors and administrators and that is the whole team!

Part of its proper use is understanding exactly what it is and handling it with a good meter, good metering, and good TRs.

There is no other document in history that has rounded up so completely the factors which can be wrong with the mind. And also put it, in its short form, on one sheet of paper.