Jan Cox Talk 0167

How Can Man Be Separate From Nature?


Audio = Stream from the arrow or download from the dots.

AKS/News Items=None
Summary = See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below
Keywords = Group papers, reading


Jan Cox Talk 167, July 25, 1985, runtime 1:30
Notes by TK

The astounding simplicity of: nothing is separate. TINOT vs. “man is fouling the nest”–defiling nature. Ordinary nervous systems never ask: if man is perverted and unnatural how can he be part of nature and exclusively derived from the stuff of nature? This question is the question of higher consciousness. “Unnatural and perverse” = new version of “demons”. The call for the return to the “noble savage”, a simpler, natural existence.

LIFE’S MASTERSTROKE: the fueling of the feeling of individual freedom which supports man’s struggle against the inevitable, which supports Life’s continued growth.

The “busy work” of established institutions, a visible, tangible “proof of progress”. Neuralize your own feeling of “am I really getting anywhere with This Thing?” in this regard. The need for “busywork”–“make work” to combat this. Relates to “How else can I know I’m making progress?” Red Circuit can show physical progress (by cutting out alcohol, smoking, meat etc.) as healthier, weight loss, more strength etc.

Blue Circuit has poetry and painting and musical accomplishments to show. But Yellow Circuit progress is left to only a “solitary celebration” of progress (the domaine majure of This Thing). How can you show progress, judge progress in This Thing? If you talk about it, it’s not true. Beware such.

The use by tyrants and dictators of raising the specter of unseen enemies among the populace. Use of fear of a ubiquitous enemy, poised to strike, to overwhelm, rallies morale, solidarity, discipline and obedience to the ruling regime. Relates to “personality’s” continual discovery of impending doom, faults, threats, hostilities both within and without to maintain its power. Personality as a 25B, banana republic dictator.

The “meditative life” or hermit existence as the attempt to reduce all energy transfer to a minimum. You cannot “redirect” sex energy or any other energy from Red Circuit.]
The basic, potential benefit of all the tasks is that you correctly sense you cannot accomplish them in your ordinary condition.

1:06 Begins reading of Group papers from permanent Group file.



Document:  167,  July 25, 1985
Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1985

At the basis of This Thing is a simplicity that is bewildering in its blatancy.  As an example Life continues to point to those areas wherein it seems that man is doing something opposed to “Nature”.  Psychologists and sociologists investigate some phenomenon and cannot conclude whether it is something “natural” arising in man or whether it is some sort of perversion, and then can go nowhere else with it.  If Life were still at the level of gods and demons they would say that the perversions are coming about through the work of evil forces.  But it is built into everyone’s wiring at Line-level consciousness to feel that in some way, (for example the pollution of the environment) humanity can work in opposition to “Nature”; indeed, that humanity can be separate from what is called “Nature”.  In this variation of my old equation:  I + Not-I = Everything, Not-I = Nature.

These words which are the words of Life itself talking through man at the ordinary level, all have the ring of validity:  in some way it seems man can stand apart from capital N-Nature.  A large part of the western world’s population is no longer tied to the ideas of gods and demons, but the questions remain — why do we have problems, why is there pollution, warfare, and mass murder?  The answer seems to lie in the fact that in some way man can pervert Nature’s grand plan, a plan in which oaks do not fight pines and green fish do not ostracize red fish.  Man alone, the sociologists love to point out, kills his own kind for no reason.  This assumed perversion by man fills the gap left by the demise of the belief in demons.  But how could man be separate from Nature?  People wonder, “Are man’s prejudices and warlike urges natural or is this some kind of perversion on humanity’s part?”  This is not a real question.  Where do you suppose the perversion came from?  Outside of what we’re calling nature?  Is the perversion from some disease lingering around in cypress trees that we have not identified yet?  But that is also Nature.  Line-level consciousness cannot ask questions about the source of man’s problems.  The nervous system does not ask it, it is unable to ask it.

Asking about the source of man’s so-called perversion is the point of debarkation between ordinary consciousness and where This leads — to the beginning of another circuit that is not based upon binary attributes or considerations.  Yet, you can pass this point by all the time.  The assumptions about man’s artificiality come, not just from external sources, but from the voices in you.  These voices continually make their own comments, judgements, observations, and reactions to what goes on in Life.  What you see, what you read, what you see on t.v. is always on the basis that some world leader, writer of inflammatory books or some killer somewhere should be investigated or put away; his behavior is unnatural, he has strayed from the plan of Nature.  But the questions of where does man get these perverted ideas is not a serious part of any religion anywhere.  Religions, in previous times, had to stop questioning at the point where someone asked, “If god is all powerful, all good, why did he let my niece die?”  To say such occurrences are the work of evil forces really bypasses the question, just as your voices do when they speak of man’s perversity.  Even the upper levels of mechanical Yellow Circuit consciousness in parts of Life’s body that are capable of asking the theoretical questions of how can man be out of step with Nature, cannot tolerate the question of, “Where does man get this, if not from Nature?”

These questions cannot live simultaneously in ordinary consciousness.  The questions are part of a continuing process, a triaxial dance of religion that has been shifting for a long time; the dance is, in a sense, faster now, and will appear to be shifting even faster in generations after ours.  There is the bewildering blatancy of the simplistic boundary between This and what Life is thinking at it’s mechanical best:  The very things that would appear to be extremely important questions like, “What can we do with man’s perverse behavior toward Nature”, cannot be asked along with, “Where did that behavior come from, if not from nature?”  If you need any proof of the difficulty of remembering that boundary, just look at the difficulty of even seeing it.

The transition from gods and demons into the current belief — in traumas and in humanity straying away from the natural path — seems to be a kind of moving hierarchy in time.  The belief in the “noble savage”, that life would be easier if we all lived a simple life, has always been part of humanity.  When the Greeks invented indoor plumbing, there  were those who blamed the problems of that day on this invention calling it unnatural.  The variation now is that, “Technology has gotten completely out of hand and prevents man from leading a natural life.”

I would remind you of the absolute masterstroke by Life in Man’s belief in freedom of will and individual responsibility.  (And it is not simply a matter that people are robots and it’s all hopeless.  Or else what are we doing here with This Thing?)  At Line-level consciousness the belief in free will fuels a consistent struggle against the presently inevitable.  The masterfulness of this is that by things being arranged in such a way that humanity continues this struggle, it causes the continuing expansion and growth of Life itself.  Can you see the kind of energy such a struggle produces?

I have pointed out that groups of people, particularly those involved with religion or mystical work of some nature, at the ordinary level have to be supported by busy work:  building a new church building, etc. This is not some folly on their part, as even with you people there are times when you are sure of what you’re getting and then at times you don’t know if you’re making the right effort or if you’re going anywhere.  At the ordinary level what is needed is visible, tangible proof of progress.  In the business world if profits are up production will be up; and the market will measurably expand.  In less mundane areas, someone may take a self-help course or convert to a new religion and lose weight or quit smoking.  These results are physical and something seems to have happened.  Everyone has a need to feel they are making progress.

We could talk about this from the level of the circuits involved.  There are aspects in Life right now of people attempting to do some form of great spiritual work, and it’s all, or at least primarily, devoted toward only one of the circuits.  Red Circuit people judge progress by showing off their new building, or demonstrating what good shape they are in; maybe they have quit drinking because they have learned the will of the gods.  The progress is physical, with a visible result.

If the activity were devoted more toward Blue Circuit people they would display their paintings or poetry. The feeling would be that since they had become involved with their new religion or self-help group, their paintings have improved.  There seems to be some measurable kind of progress or at least some alteration.

But the celebration of any change at the very boundaries of the Yellow Circuit is almost entirely a solitary affair.  What do you have to show?  What can you take out of your pocket?

Of course, there are people attempting to enlarge, as they would call it, their own consciousness, who say, “Listen, I just had the greatest thought, let me tell you about it.”  But when it gets closer into the realm of what This Thing is, you realize you lose something to even mention any possible progress.  On the contrary, should some ordinary person say to someone actively involved with This Thing, “You know, there’s something different about you — I just can’t quite say what it is,” you would deny it.  “What?  Oh, I haven’t been feeling well.”  “No, really, .payou’re not the same as you used to be.”  You do something to distract them:  “Ah, well, have a drink.”

Those who understand the most, understand that not only are such comments meaningless, they are captious.  If all else fails, you get up and leave.  Because at the level of discussion, their comments are not true; if they could see results, they are not really results.

As far back as the history of man goes, back to when the Yellow Circuit became activated with talking and writing, governments, either one man or a government itself, have continually raised up the spectre of an enemy to solidify power.  Let’s say that somewhere there was a coup and a man has taken over and he continually threatens the people about a foreign enemy about to take over.  This goes as far back as the Romans.  Life uses such ruses at the ordinary level to promote fear — it gives a sense of solidarity with and among the people, and an apparent common cause.  Forget all political ramifications, because this has far-reaching internal application.  Political dictators use it to excite, alarm and unify the people.  It also goes on in what appears to be democratic governments:  one party says that if the leftists ever take control over the senate, the defense system will collapse or the budget will be overrun.

Can anyone See the connection between these techniques of those in apparent power and that which seems to be the voice that speaks for you?  Whatever the prevailing “I” is, he is continually discovering impending “serious threats” and “enemies”.  This is the way that people are wired up.  Can anyone See how this helps to establish and hold “I’s” position of authority and power?  Everyone on this planet is dissatisfied, no matter how much money they have or how successful they are.  There is a connection between that and some dictator who has to continually hold everybody in line.  Every time there seems to be the least possibility of an uprising, he begins to yell of communists or fascists, and that everyone must band together, and that it’s a good thing that he’s around to see it coming.  The connection is there between that and this so-called personality that you’ve always lived with.  It just goes under different terminology.  At Line level this “I” seems to create the feeling in people that, “I have been drinking too much.  I get angry too much.  I’ve got to pull myself together.  Something has got to get done.”  And some dictator only speaks five or six hours at a time, but look inside:  you have a dictator that has been talking like that for thirty or forty years, rambling on about continual threats and internal dangers.

If people are able to periodically be aware of what “I” says is their flaws, then why is everyone not perfect and satisfied by now?  The answer is this self-criticism really functions to solidify the prevailing “I”.  Such self-criticism depends on the instilled wiring belief that a person is free to do and change what he wants to.  Rather than just being a second rate critic of everyone else, a person can supposedly turn his incisive, critical faculties on himself and evaluate the dangers.  But this little internal dictator, this government, after this continual rallying cry of impending danger and fear, is followed by the feeling of “Well, starting tomorrow, now that I can see clearly one of my great follies, I’m going to pull myself together.”  Different governments come and go, but there is always a government.

It’s accepted by everyone today that the meditative life of the mystical hermit or monk is an attempt to remove one’s self from evil or non-productive influences.  But another way to see it is as an attempt to cut down transfer opportunities, the passing of heat and energy, to the absolute minimum.

Recently I was asked a question about substituting or redirecting such things as sex energy.  For instance, if a person were not able to perform the minimum amount of physical exercise daily, or if he were without a sexual partner, could that energy be redirected?  When you start dealing with the Red and Blue Circuits and in certain ways the Yellow, there is no proper way to redirect or substitute those energies. Using them to write music or literature in a sense can be tried, but there is no proper way.  When the body calls for exercise there is no substitute.  The closest thing to a trick is just a matter of the strength that comes from understanding how things are.  If you are at a point that you can’t get involved with sex, you just have to be strong enough to put up with the horniness; you’ve got to have some understanding that there is no proper substitute for certain things.

Someone also noted that the scientific journals have been concerned with fractals, which is a mathematical technique to enhance and manipulate details of a picture using the most basic images and then making the image grow in detail while keeping it under control, and asked if

[transcript ended abruptly]