Nobody Can Make Up Anything
Video = none
AKS/News Items = none
Summary = pending
Diagrams = See Below in transcript Diagram #015
Transcript = See Below
NOBODY CAN MAKE UP ANYTHING
OR: NOBODY EVER SUFFERS FROM “IMAGINATION” WHEN YOU AGREE WITH THEM
Document: 54, January 22, 1983
Copyright(c) Jan M. Cox, 1983
I want you to Neuralize something. Everyone uses certain terms: You have used them; the whole world uses them, and everyone assumes that they know what they mean. I’ve used them talking to you and everyone assumed they understood what they meant. But what do you mean when you use the words? When you say them, or hear me say them? When you read them, or hear someone out in ordinary life use the words, what is it that you’ve always accepted that they represent? The words I am referring to are “imagination” and “reality”.
Now I constantly use these terms, and as I said you were exposed to them long before you met me. I’ve never made a footnote that I meant something particularly esoteric by them. I might have made up an example about someone having thoughts that he begins to hold onto; that he listens to the circuitry and takes the noise as being himself. Someone might claim to be the reincarnation of a great ancient religious figure, and I might say, “Alright, that is someone’s imagination as opposed to the reality of it.” And everyone would say that such an example makes sense. Everyone in the world uses these words, but I’m asking you now to Neuralize what the words might reflect.
You could stop people on the street, just reasonably educated people, and say, “Do you realize that almost everyone has some sort of strange imagination?” Quite ordinary people would say, “Yeah, you’re right.” But what do they mean? What have you always accepted that to mean? Suppose you know someone who is fairly educated and reasonably sophisticated. The president of a local bank. Every time you get together and maybe put down a few drinks, he starts ranting about how foreigners are putting fluoride in the water, how it’s all a plot to make our brains go soft so they can take over the world. If you then were speaking to someone else about the banker, you might say, “You know, in every other way he’s quite sane, but he’s got this strange imagination about fluoride in the water, and foreigners plotting to overthrow this country.” But what do you mean? And if the other person agrees, what do they mean?
And then, there is reality. Everyone speaks of reality, but this is especially pertinent for us in This Thing: People try to talk about, or read about, or discuss such things as “people’s imagination about themselves, about the world”, as opposed to the reality of things. And everyone goes “yeah” and continues to listen. “Thus far everything makes sense, I know what you mean.” Well, what does it mean?
Let me say again: This is not a pseudo-philosophical lecture and I am not simply playing with words. The circuitry is locked into words, even at its very best, right up at the highest point of the yellow, or decisive circuit. Everything that it can muster from its experience; from the food available; from the kind of experience that it has had, and the way in which it has translated it; from the kind of force-feeding that Life has given a person: for the Yellow Circuit, it all comes down to words. That which passes for the epitome of the human experience is the intellect. Everyone in the world would agree that, “It is the intellect that actually distinguishes us from the animals, from uncouth, uncivilized savages. We can discuss experience; we can discuss ideas about what may happen after we die; we can conceive of an idea of a god; we can conceive of a better tomorrow; we can talk about things that haven’t happened. But notice that you can only think that for which you have a word. You can only have apparent thoughts, beliefs, by stringing words together that make sense to you. Suppose you are talking to someone about a mutual acquaintance and you say, “Every time I see her, she talks about how people are always discussing her, behind her back, and she knows it.” You both go “Ahh”, and you agree that it’s her imagination. But what did you agree to? What did you mean?
I am pointing to something quite real, but the knowledge and understanding of it lies outside the ordinary circuitry. There is no way for a man’s circuitry to be separated from the continuing process of everything. Your feelings and thoughts about something can’t be separated from the thing itself.
So what is this concept of imagination? Line-level consciousness is locked into that which is describable in words. If you don’t have a word for it, you can’t conceive it. And, you can only think about that which Life has fed you. It’s simply not possible for the ordinary circuitry to “make up” something. A general definition for imagination would be “something unreal”, something someone believes is true when it is not true. Go back to the example of the person who thinks that the whole world is talking about her and you said it was “her imagination”: Did she simply conjure it all up? Now here’s where you have to be quick. You have to see that although people don’t talk about her as much as she says they do, she still didn’t make it up.
I’m trying to get you behind the words. What is behind the word “imagination”? Just try to let it float, right up at the Line of consciousness; try to get the words floating like an invisible Goodyear blimp up above the ordinary limits of your circuitry. What do people mean when they dismiss something as being “just his imagination”? Now here is where Neuralizing really comes in: It is not tied to anything. It’s not a matter of worrying about “Maybe there is some validity to what that woman thinks. Maybe I do gossip about her sometimes.” Neuralize what you think you mean when you use that word. And notice: you’ve never asked yourself, “What is it I think I mean?” How did this word come to be? How did humanity adopt this word? How did you adopt it?
Let me point out what should be obvious to begin with. When you say, “That’s just your imagination”: in effect you are expressing your disapproval. Now if confronted with that, the circuitry can immediately say, “No, I am simply making an objective statement, because no right-thinking, educated, sophisticated person believes that. If we took a poll right now, the vast majority of people would say, “That’s not true.” All of you should at least suspect better than that by now, because that does not matter. But the circuitry, if it is wily enough, can say, “It’s not that; what they are saying is simply not true. It’s neither right or wrong, it’s just their imagination.” But notice this: Nobody ever suffers from “imagination” when you agree with them. When you meet another right-thinking person, one who is as intelligent, compassionate, talented, broad-minded as you are, it is surprising what a dearth of imagination they have. And the circuitry can say, “Well, more proof: I only associate with people who do not suffer from some kind of perverse imagination.” Then, of course, you’ve got me there again.
I’m going to zero in a little closer to the heart of town. Can you see that you could describe all personal conflict on the basis that everyone, from another’s point of view, suffers from imagination? Consider the people you’re closely involved with: Your lover, your colleagues, your mother or father. Can you see from this temporary map, from this certain viewpoint, that if it were not for a few strange quirks of imagination, there would be no great basis for disagreement between you and them? You could be kindred spirits; you could be friends as you should be; you could be close family members, if it were not for this other person’s unbelievably insane, prejudiced, crazy areas of imagination. “If not for that, why, we could be great friends, even if you are my parents. But you’ve got these weird ideas, weird imagination about how the world is going to the dogs, and how things are going downhill, and you’re always hollering about other religions. You know, it’s your imagination. I’ve been out in the world, You’ve been living here on the farm. Life is not that provincial. You picked it up somewhere, in your generation or in some instance you can’t remember, but it’s your imagination. It’s completely out of hand, and it has distorted your perception of reality.”
I ask you again — what do you think you mean? It’s a form of disagreement, no matter what the circuitry says. You’re saying, “You’re wrong” to this other person. It just sounds nicer, it sounds more sophisticated, it sounds as if you might have had some psychological training to say, “Well, they have this very unusual imagination in one area.” And people say “Yes, I know what you mean.” What generally goes unsaid is, “I see the reality of it, and they do not.” But don’t stop there — don’t plink your period down. Because that’s not all there is to be Seen.
I’ve mentioned something previously about the number of circuits, and dimensions. I pointed out that creatures with only two circuits, such as dogs, cannot comprehend time. It is that additional human circuit that makes it possible for man to conceive of time. The upper echelons of just the mechanical workings of this mechanism — Man — can conceive of that which is almost startling. He can, theoretically, conceive of dying. He can conceive of another life; he can look through a telescope and see stars and constellations, measure the distances, factor in the speed at which light travels, and realize that what he is looking at no longer exists. What I’m pointing at is the possibility of another dimension, an unseen dimension that overlays and colors everything now visible to you.
A dog does live in time, though he can’t conceive of time. In a sense, time encompasses the dog: He’s floating in something to which he is oblivious. An earthworm — a one-circuited creature — can’t even conceive of space. He still lives in space, however. The earthworm lives in space and time and cannot conceive of time. And you, too, along with the rest of humanity, are floating in something that you cannot conceive of. The slightest glimpse of this nascent circuit, the added unseen dimension, is what produces stories of the gods, of people flying through space, of talking to great spirits. People come back from such a glimpse and all they can say is, “I don’t know what to tell you. It was like a dream; it was like a miraculous dream. It was like a journey through the universe. I looked out and saw that I don’t ever see anything. I looked at the icebox, and even though I’ve had it for twenty years, I realized that I had never seen it.” These are the people I’ve described as having had a moment’s accidental activation Above the Line.
But it’s just as true to say that they were splashed with some of the mist from that unseen dimension. But even those accidentally touched, at the moment, do not say, “I saw the icebox and it was the face of God.” It’s only after it’s over, after they return to normal, that they have to explain it in the words, the experience, the food that has already been fed into their circuitry. And so Christians come back and say they saw God, Jews come back and say they saw Jehovah, Buddhists come back and say they saw Buddha. But at the time, you will turn and you will realize, “I have never seen that icebox.” It is not that the icebox turned into a floating piece of plasma going through the veins of god, through a universe the color of avocados. It is that you simply See it. And that is a fairly innocuous example, because you will turn to Fred, or Mary, someone you live with or have known for some time, and you will realize, “I have never seen them before.” They do not turn into something weird. They don’t turn into a spider, or an angel. It is that you See them for the first time, outside of your Line level perceptive mechanism. You simply See them, and you See that you’ve never before seen them. You See that you’ve never seen them; your ordinary circuitry has seen them. And that is imagination.
But surely now I’ve changed the subject. Imagination is when you think something is true and it is not. But the icebox, or Fred or Mary, are not imagination, are they?
The perception mechanism that seems to be you is nothing but imagination. That which appears to be conflict between people is imagination. The great unanswerable questions — “If there is a great god somewhere and he is good, why is there tyranny, and starvation, war?” — it is all imagination. And the great on-going battle between good and evil is imagination.
Let me point out to you what imagination is. Imagination is partial perception. It is seeing one, and at times two sides of a three-sided reality. And that’s all Line-level consciousness can see. You at Line level, can see at best only two sides, two legs of a trilateral reality. That is the basis of all conflict; that is the basis of your personal perception that someone else is suffering from a very deluded and misguided imagination.
There is no imagination down in the circuitry. There is no special room labeled “imagination”; there is no special place in any of the circuits that is labeled “pool of imagination” or “pocket of imagination”; there is no sign that says “imagination starts here”. The reality behind “that’s your imagination”, or someone telling you, “Well, that’s your imagination” — is “I”. The ordinary mechanism of perception cannot see the three sides. It’s not equipped to see three. Neuralize it right now on this basis: That which is labeled “someone’s imagination” is a partial perception of what is going on. Now let me point out — that includes everything. It is just that some things are labeled “imagination”.
Try and understand that to be able to see the general direction that I am outlining for you, it is on the basis that no one is wrong. If Mary (just to pick a generic name for this example) says, “My life is just constant torment. I don’t know what it is about me — whether I’m so talented, or good-looking, so ugly or dull — but everyone I know, family included, all they do is talk about me. Don’t people have better things to do than talk about me?” Mary is not wrong. And to say, “that’s her imagination” is your imagination. What Mary just expressed is neither true nor false. It is an expression of Mary. It’s her perception mechanism issuing a partial statement of partial reality. She did not make it up. You cannot make up anything. You cannot make up a lie. You cannot make up something that is not true.
But, that can’t be right. You can think, “All right, elephants can actually flap their ears and fly and that’s not true, so there.” Or you can say, “I can fly. I’ll go jump off a building and I can fly, and I’m not even going to test it because I know I can’t fly. So there. I can make something up; I can think something that’s not true.” But that’s not true. It’s your imagination.
Diagram # 015 illustration
The running of the circuitry creates an electrical field. Ordinary people use many descriptions of what I am talking about. For example, people speak of luck, of karma; they speak of the guy who always seems to get taken in business deals, or the woman who always ends up with men who beat her up. It seems that some people have good luck, some have bad luck. That is imagination; it is the partial perception of a reality, and the reality is each person’s electromagnetic field (and what I am now speaking of is only partial, because the reality of it is omnitaneous — that is everything going on at once in all possible directions at all possible times). I am discussing the apparent forms of it, the outlines of it. Each person’s personality is a fragmented, partial reflection of where we live. It is a partial reflection of that other unseen dimension in which we all live. The running of the circuits — what seems to be you — is as infused in your muscles as it is in the Yellow Circuit. “You” are your gestures; “you” are the way you scrunch your face — the two or three main expressions you know; the way you walk, the way you sit. The way you move around certain kinds of people under certain conditions, “you” are as visible in your muscular system as you are in your perceptive mechanism, in your personality.
The running of the circuitry sets up a magnetic field, and it is this field that produces your automatic attractions and repulsions. And once the imprint is there, once your system has been shaped and formed, it’s almost impossible to affect it. It’s all held in place magnetically. You cannot “make up your mind” that, “I’m going to stop getting involved with women who always seem to end up sleeping with my best friend; I’m going to do something about it.” This electromagnetic attraction is as deeply instilled in the muscle structure as it is in your personality. You may have radical plastic surgery, but you’ll still be you; and you’ll still be recognizable as you. Have I made it clear enough? “You” is a magnetic field, a system of attractions and repulsions, and under all ordinary conditions, it cannot be simply and directly affected. Your personal relationships have an electromagnetic basis, and hence all the conflicts in that relationship. Now there is a certain laxity, a certain degree of motion allowed by the nature of things. Remember, I have told you that without a certain degree of tolerance, a machine will not run. But you can find yourself at a party, in a certain city, at a certain job, and wonder, “How in the world did I end up here? I don’t even like these people, or this job. What am I doing here? Something’s got to change.” It is your magnetic field at work.
Neuralize what people call accidents in light of this. And Consider for yourself that there is absolutely no reason for you to be at a certain intersection when someone runs a stop sign and nearly hits you. You run off the road, and damage the fender of your car. You can certainly explain it. You can say, “It’s because some drunk came flying through here.” If you’re ever going to See this other dimension that you are swimming in, that you are surrounded by and cannot see, that is not true. It is not that it’s untrue, but there is no sequential line of “this caused that”. And that is true even with my examples. I have this gigantic trilateral structure at my disposal and I just pick out splinters and hold them up for you to see. That’s what my examples are. They may be profitable, they may be true. But remember that they’re splinters.
Here is a piece of a splinter from the structure of “human relationships”. Let’s say Fred and Mary are married. Mary comments to her friend, Vera, “Fred is so possessive sometimes, he drives me crazy. I’ve told you before.” Vera says, “Yes, you have told me that before.” What Mary is describing to Vera is a part of the electromagnetic field that brought Fred and Mary together to start with. It may have been a very small part, if we could quantitatively define it, and she may never have had words for it. In a sense, it never crossed her mental circuitry that he was “too possessive.” But it was a part of the totality of the circuitry of Fred that distinguished him from all the non-Freds she knew. It did not simply arise after they got married. It was a piece of this magnetic field that created Fred, and now it’s part of the magnetic field of her-and-Fred.
Mary can describe how she was shopping, and ran into a guy she used to exercise with, and how Fred saw her and ran into the store and tried to rush her out with some story about wanting to watch a big game on T.V. “It wasn’t that,” she says, “I know what it was. He saw me talking to a guy, and got too possessive. He didn’t fool me.”
It is not that that is right or wrong. It is irrelevant. It is imagination. It is a partial perception of reality. But, it is the only perception available to a person under those circumstances. And what about Fred’s perception? He certainly has one. If you were to ask him his side of what happened, he might say, “Don’t let her give you that stuff. Every time she’s talking to man in a store, it’s always, “I used to go to school with him,” or something like that. All I know is I saw her talking to a guy I didn’t know. It wasn’t her brother, and it wasn’t our minister.” So, he had a perception. And she says, “It’s just his imagination. I’ve never even come close to going to bed with another man since I’ve been with him. And if I was going to, I’d leave him. I wouldn’t drag it out. He should know me that well.” It is not Fred’s imagination. And, it is only perceivable by Mary at certain times, under certain conditions.
Let’s give it another layer: Mary never talks about Fred as being “too possessive” with anyone except Vera. She may think about Fred being “too possessive”, but she never thinks about talking about it, except with Vera. It’s part of the magnetic field between Mary and Vera. Now try something very slippery: What if Mary’s partial perception that Fred is “too possessive” is actually not true? What if she just makes it up, because Vera needs to hear it? Remember, no one can make anything up. But what if that is part of the magnetic field between Mary and Vera? That somewhere in the dark past of their friendship, the subject came up, and Vera got very interested, and said, “Oh, really? Tell me more. Does he really act that way?” It just seems to keep the conversation going; there seems to be some kind of energy passed. What if Fred is the most non-“too possessive” person in the world, and she’d never even thought about it? Remember, that cannot be true, because she can’t make that up, right? But what if it is true? What if that is what holds their friendship together? Neuralize it friends.
I’ve told you that there is a trick, a very worthwhile trick, in not telling yourself what you are doing. For instance, if you’re going to quit drinking coffee, don’t tell anyone. Don’t tell you. You decide it. But don’t you ever say it. Keep it right above the Line of consciousness, right in that special crack. If you talk about it, you’ve let it fall back down into the ordinary circuitry. If you talk about it, you’re not doing it. Remember, the Aim is to ignite the Higher Levels of the nervous system. All the rest is just fodder. It is trickery, it is deceit. It is burning up shoe leather trying to get to city X, where I say we all have to go, even though I told you, “Once we get there, never mind.” Because we don’t have to go to city X, but we do have to go somewhere. You have to get out of town.
The attempt to not tell yourself what you’re going to do is close to Neuralizing. You make a decision that is very specific, but from the ordinary viewpoint it is totally vague and undefined. It is like a secret voice inside that goes “Uhh”, and it doesn’t say it in words. It can say, “I’m not going to drink any more coffee, except I’m not saying I’m not going to drink any more. I’m not saying that I won’t, I’m saying that I will. I’m not saying that if I do quit drinking coffee I’ll reward myself; I’m not saying anything like that. I’m saying I’m not going to drink any more coffee, but I’m not saying that.” It is a secret voice, and it does not speak ordinary words. It’s a very quick flash that only you can see.
And of course it’s disturbing, if not nonsensical, to the ordinary circuitry. It says, “What do you mean we’re not going to drink any more coffee?” And you don’t answer. “What are you talking about? No more coffee?” Silence. “Well, if we’re going to quit, we better go get all the coffee in the house and throw it out so you won’t be tempted.” You don’t respond. You flash the decision; it’s as if it is done in smoke, in a secret place and only you know it. Because it lies outside the magnetic field that is ordinarily you.
There is a little secret place up above the Line and that place is what This Thing is all about. That place is the home of your only possibility. It’s the home of Neuralizing; it’s the home of everything that is not imagination, because it encompasses all of a trilateral reality.