Jan Cox Talk 0252

Diary Without I


The video does not include the 51 minutes of reading the AKS ( and Kyroot Said…)( the audio does)

Audio= Stream the audio in two parts from the bars below. Part 1 has 51 minutes of various members of a group reading the AKS ( and Kyroot said…),  If you start the audio and then open the AKS/News in a new window in your browser – you can follow along as they read.

AKS/News Item Gallery = jcap 1982-5-15 ( 0252)
Condensed AKS/News Items = Below Summary  
Summary= See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below  (Tneed edit)


Jan Cox Talk #252 Mar 19, 1987 – 1:47
Notes by TK

[Reading of Kyroot papers to 0:50.]

More on explaining yourself. A real man can keep a diary without using the word “I”. Remember:everyone keeps a constant running internal diary. If such diary w/o ‘I’ could be kept, how could it be made logically palatable? With first attempt at presentation to another the word ‘I’ must come into use.

Conclusions. The many seek to become their conclusions. The Few seek a continuing merger of ideas without conclusions. The Few must be able to abandon the desire to become a conclusion.

Question from Group: Is it profitable to ‘fake it till you make it’ sexually? Or are you just fighting against your genetic makeup? This is nearly impossible for men but more possible for women. Could be used by an Extraordinary man for extraordinary change.

Ordinary love is a form of domination without overt violence, and therefore violence is never far from the surface since imbalance must exist.

Condensed AKS

…and Kyroot said:
Once a Man sees
he may then embrace the meaningless illusions of life with all
apparent enthusiasm and no visible harm.

5/15/82 (2)
…and Kyroot said:
Ordinary man accepts his dissatisfaction as being other than it is.
He calls it emotional and mental problems, material difficulties, etc.,
when it all arises from the ever-unfinished upper level of his
very own nervous system.

5/15/82 (3)
…and Kyroot said:
No lateral, I-level observations are profitable since they must fit into predetermined slots, and be subjectively judgemental.

5/15/82 (4)
…and Kyroot said:
All human activity is unknowingly directed toward affecting completion.

5/15/82 (5)
…and Kyroot said:
Those who can See can peer into mens’ eyes and view the emptiness and lateral captivity.

5/15/82 (6)
…and Kyroot said:
The problems of man can never be solved in that they are his ordinary consciousness.

5/15/82 (7)
…and Kyroot said:
There is faith and there is trust.
Faith is the hopeful ignorance of the ordinary and is always tied to thought – thinking about your faith,
while trust is a non-verbal assurance silently arising from the understanding of those who Know.

5/15/82 (8)
…and Kyroot said:
The secret clue to doing This is not in finding a solution,
but in discovering the problem.

5/15/82 (9)
…and Kyroot said:
There is unknown territory at both ends of the nervous system; the musky dark of the past
and the blinding uncertainty
of the future,
ordinary, civilized men fear them both.

5/15/82 (10)
…and Kyroot said:
Understanding is conditionally satisfying
while ordinary knowledge is absolutely disconcerting.

5/15/82 (11)
…and Kyroot said:
The past is properly implanted in the lower levels of the nervous
system, and ordinary games such as psychiatry will not be somehow
allowed to do that which appears to be its aim,that is,
undo a man’s past which would leave him blank.
His thorny past and desperate memories are now him, and this growth process up the spine in time is not to somehow now be undone, or the man himself would
become undone.

5/15/82 (12)
…and Kyroot said:
In the struggle to do This
anything you have already thought of is useless.

5/15/82 (13)
…and Kyroot said:
To have any real potential, a person must have had the inherent wiring potential to be everyone, that is, every mortal type of nervous system transformers.
These wiring possibilities must have been biologically and genetically conceivable, and one’s psychological environment must have been so that such unlimited potential was not destroyed.

5/15/82 (14)
…and Kyroot said:
Even among those passionately discussing their notions of this Thing
there is only a need for new, unfillable prescriptions,
and no demand at all for a final
(and you can quote me on that.)

5/15/82 (15)
…and Kyroot said:
No system, including man, can conceive of itself from its own level.
And no system can be both studied as a certain object, and a continuing process.
(And the question of, “Which shall it be?”, is not even available to those who have
to ask.)

5/15/82 (16)
…and Kyroot said:
All forms of creation require the destruction of some other form, and the so-called evils of mortal life could be viewed as an intrinsic after-effect of the original creation.
(And This Thing might be seen
as certain men’s attempt to reverse creation’s original destruction.)

5/15/82 (17)
…and Kyroot said:
The mind uses words so that expectation of alternatives are offered, while the end result is just the opposite.

5/15/82 (18)
…and Kyroot said:
All news is bad news
because it is from the past
(doesn’t that give anyone a hint.)

5/15/82 (19)
…and Kyroot said:
A hobby can never be a real hobby unless its just a hobby.

5/15/82 (20)
…and Kyroot said:
Once the tricks are exposed and the methods explained and a man begins to see,
the aim of This Thing is no longer seen as the attempt to make a quickened person from a sleeping blob,
but as an enterprise to produce an extended process from
a limited system.

5/15/82 (21)
…and Kyroot said:
Since all maps are non living sketches, the cartographer must be
available to furnish the necessary breath-of-meaning, or else
the maps become but additional markers in the graveyard of
the lost.

5/15/82 (22)
…and Kyroot said:
The quicker and more explanatory is a map, the less is its attraction. Little, fragmented, piece-meal maps, apparently pointing to particular “problem areas” are always
the most welcome.

5/15/82 (23)
…and Kyroot said:
A more alert man would not have to carry about worry beads to placate nervous movement;
he knows where a better version lies in the skull.

5/15/82 (24)
…and Kyroot said:
The ordinary mind is made to be troubled.
Stilled waters are useless seas,
and the only systems at rest are undertakers on strike.

5/15/82 (25)
…and Kyroot said:
During the past peace time of the Kingdoleum Empire there arose a certain military scholar. He carefully studied the recorded and oral histories of all the world’s great battles, their generals, and their tactics. His subsequent writings and explanations of warfare raised his fame therein to an unparalleled height, and the whole empire recognized him as its greatest military theoretician.
The day came that the Northern Mongols declared war on the Empire, and the emperor immediately placed the peoples’ defense in the hands of the military scholar. A great army was raised, and the scholar, along with all his notes and knowledge, lead the forces across the Dion Plains to confront the unruly Mongols. Once over the Plains, the scholar rode up to the crest of the first mountain in the early morning hours to await the coming onslaught. The first rays of morning light found him astride his trusty steed, his notes and battle plans in hand, looking toward the opposing ridge where over the Mongols were soon expected to charge.
Suddenly, far in the distance, a rumbling sound was heard; dust began to rise over the opposing ridge, and as the mighty Mongol hordes began to crest the ridge, the scholar’s fine reputation was forever lost as he was heard to scream,
“Ga-ad-damn, where the fuck did all those guys come from?”


252xy 3/19/87


Someone asked me a potent question, but before I read it, I

want to say a little bit about Life insisting that people explain

themselves versus my comment to you that you should take it as

your duty not to explain anything. To put it another way, a Real

Person, a person who is attempting to ignite the higher levels of

consciousness, would be a person who could keep a diary and never

use the word “I.”

Do you realize everyone is keeping a diary? What passes for

your own private thoughts and feelings, what is absolutely the

oxygen base of this combustion that is an internally running

dialogue that you take as being your own private thoughts, your

own cynical, critical comments on the nature of everyone else and

the nature of life; that is all a diary. But who could say that

they are already man or woman enough that you could continue to

note these observations and never use the word “I.”

If you could keep such a diary, not to actually write down

anything in a little blank book from a bookstore, but if you

could allow this internal running dialogue to go on while

extracting the use of the word “I”, you would have that which is

close to the impossible. If I had to use a word that is only the

merest approximation of what I am talking about, you would have

that which is “objective” or even clinical. Your diary would be

a clinical notebook of the areas in Life’s body where you have

inexplicably found yourself from moment to moment.

If we are to insinuate that this diary without the use of

the word “I” could be any logical significance, the first thing

you would have to say to the person you were attempting to

convince, the first thing you would have to refer to is “I.” As

soon as you are about to speak to them on the basis that there

could be some lasting value in this “I-less” diary, to be

routinely conscious and then become extraordinarily routinely

conscious, you would have to first off say to the person, “I”,

and you’re no longer clinical.

You can look at it from another direction, in terms of

conclusions. Can you see that the ordinary consciousness of each

person being a diary keeper is seeking to become their own

conclusion? The way ordinary consciousness is wired up, the

molecular arrangement of humans, especially in the higher

circuits, is to come to a conclusion. It is also so in the lower

circuits, though of no great significance, for example, what’s

the point of eating — it’s to come to a conclusion, that being

expressed as, “I’m full,” or what’s the point of lying down and

resting, except to come to the conclusion at some later time that

can be expressed as, “Well, I think I’ve rested enough.” I hope

I don’t have to give you an example of this with the higher

circuits, let it suffice to say that if you examine what is your

ordinary thought process, it is nothing more than one conclusion

after another.

So you could say, the many are seeking to become their own

conclusion, whereas those attempting to extend themselves

vertically seek to become an ongoing merger. How could you keep

a diary if you came to no conclusions or made no comment? I

don’t want to detract from the inherent beauty of this, but to

draw it out a little more, what if you’re home and you begin to

note you date with Fred or Mary earlier in the evening and you

are going to fill in the diary for that day and you make no

conclusive comment about the date, you simply write, “Dear Diary,

regarding said date…,” and the page is blank. Your diary would

say, “Come on, come on, what are you trying to do, drive me nuts?

Give me a break.” But that’s it, you would note there had been a

date with Fred or Mary, and you close the book. What you are

attempting to do with this activity is to not reach a conclusion.

Furthermore, you’re not even attempting to not not reach a

conclusion. You can see verbally it is easy to run this into a

corner, but verbally what seems to be an absolutely irrational

and unsatisfactory arrangement to ordinary consciousness is, for

the few attempting this activity, at the very least just the

opposite. You do not seek to become your own conclusion in the

diary. A conclusion would be the end of Wall Street, the ticker

tape would shut down. This Activity is an attempt at ongoing

merger, not just a simple merger, such as company B buys out

company C, period, but an ongoing merger where you’re always one

step behind. It would be an ongoing merger of that which one

believes is the diary keeper with that which one believes the

diary keeper is attempting to note, to comment upon. You keep

the two from coming to a conclusion, but of course, taking this

literally you’re getting close to an area that should be

surrounded by (I guess we need a new international symbol)

“extreme hazardous irrationale”, or perhaps, “radioactive


From a very real viewpoint all religion, all sex, all

business is an attempt at conclusion. The desire to go shopping

and acquire possessions, to have hobbies and collect stamps or

collect men, or women, or opinions, or anger; to be alive you are

conclusion driven. To want anything, a new car, relief from sore

feet, is to want to be a conclusion. In attempting to do this

Activity, what I’m attempting to do as best I can, being outside

your equation of I plus Not-I Equals Everything, is to try to

trick you, misdirect you to encourage you to See that the only

proper conclusion for the Few is to abandon the desire to be a

conclusion, to be able to escape the foregone conclusion that you

were going to become a conclusion. Anything that can even be

described as being fast enough is not fast enough, because you’re

already a conclusion saying, “Well, I’ve done the best I can.”

To keep this from sounding as though it is coming to any

conclusion, I’m going to read you parts of this extraordinary

note and question. “Given that it is not necessarily beneficial

to live alone for an extended period of time, and given that

sexual attraction does not seem easy to sustain, is it possible,”

and now they are quoting me, “to fake it till you make it in

regard to sexual attraction, or is one attempting to fight

against one’s own genetic makeup in such an area?” I will tell

you this much, a woman wrote the question, and the reason I point

that out is that there are two obvious directions to which one

should look, and in this case they are not simply C force and D

force. For once, it’s in the two areas of men and women. I have

received such questions before and this is the first time a woman

has written it. I’ve had men in this group ask me on numerous

occasions if there is no one in the group that interests them,

nobody that strikes their fancy, should they look outside the

group, and if so, is there any particular type to look for, or is

it all the same. And more questions on the basis that I have

already tried this, and it’s not satisfying anymore and aren’t I

pitiful, what balm can you offer me.

That, together with the heart of this question of, “Is it

possible to fake it in regards to sexual attraction or are you

fighting against your genetic makeup?” — anytime we’re talking

about faking it until you make it, or anytime we are talking

about change, you are talking about going against your genetic

makeup. This is correct across the whole range from the kind of

person who says, “I have no real desire to change,” to those who

would make the supreme sacrifices (take journeys, dance, whirl,

drugs, etc.). It is all an attempt to go against one’s genetic


The unsaid part of this question is: is there any

significance to this? An ordinary person would discover no

significance in trying to change, but the unrecognized part is

that he can’t change, so the whole question is moot, except to

them it doesn’t appear to be moot. It cannot be proven to be of

no consequence. It’s not necessary, it’s not even proper to be

able to prove it. The ordinary mind, the Yellow Circuit, can do

nothing with the reality of not being able to change.

If I wanted to be more poetic I could say, all right,

everybody is in prison. Poor old us. Poor humanity. We’re

locked down for the night, we’re all doing at least life and a

day. The real bars of each person’s cell is the fact that they

do not know that they’re in jail. It’s invisible. It’s beyond

consciousness. Given the present makeup of man’s circuitry,

especially the higher parts of his circuitry, there is no way to

bring the higher circuitry to a conclusion that it is a captive.

It cannot reach such a conclusion, it cannot be driven or dragged

there. If we speak allegorically of a prison then it is one

where the bars are absolutely invisible. They are invisible

holographically, that is, they’re more than invisible — they’re

invisible times three.

The question as to the significance of attempting to fake a

sexual attraction — you are dealing with the invisible. You’re

dealing with that which is of no consequence to an ordinary

person. To bring it to the level of one of you in this group

asking this question brings us into the great world of men and

women. It would take and extraordinary man to willfully fake a

sexual attraction for any length of time, to fake such an

attraction to any degree towards a woman to whom he was not

sexually attracted.

There is not an exact similar situation with women. The

parameters that women are wired up to feel sexual attraction are

not the same. I even hesitate to use the same term “sexual

attraction”, it is not exactly vice versa. I’m not a woman, but

I can see and feel and understand that much of what is sexual

attraction is not vice versa. If you men indeed have been around

the block, I’ll mention this: there is every likelihood that if

you’ve been to bed with more than a handful of women, that there

have been women who have been to bed with you that under the most

routine circumstances would not have given you the day of the

month, much less the time of day. It would be similar to a woman

feeling like she had been to bed with William F. Buckley. Let me

say again that there is not an exact parallel between men’s and

women’s sexual attractions, but if you could speak to a woman and

she understood what you were asking, what you were trying to get

at, vis a vis, man’s sexual attraction, she would admit, on the

basis of whether she was actually sexually attracted to him (or

if I have to say it like the old folk, whether she “actually

loved him”) she would say, “No,” with no inference that “I

dislike him” in some way. The question would be to her, “Do you

actually love him or is there something passionate? Is that what

you are after?” But here it is, they are past the age of 25 or

30 and you might ask, “Well, is it a big deal?” And she would

respond, “No, it’s no big deal.” If women had such dreams as

kids, it would be like her saying, “Well, when I was a kid, I

always wanted a Corvette, and I ended up with a Honda. But what

the hell, it gets me back and forth to the store and to work.

I’m past the point where I have any time to fool with this

anymore; I’m just not going to worry about it.”

Don’t let this sound in the least bit mystical to you , we

are still talking about genes, about molecular makeup, and you

can’t change it. I suggest to you that this is part of the world

wide popularity of drugs and alcohol, especially with men (women

do not get together and have a few drinks and then run up to the

bar to see what’s available to them). It is very common for men

throughout the world to have a couple of drinks before they go

out to meeting places, whether it be around a campfire or an

oasis, a church social or in a little village or township

somewhere, or whether it’s a singles bar nowadays. You make a

mistake if you look at this and assume it was simply as ordinary

psychology would have it — it’s a matter of you being shy, or

being psychologically dwarfed from some childhood drama that you

got ta have a few drinks to steel your nerve, that’s a childish

explanation. It is that alcohol affects very quickly, directly,

and substantially how one reacts to all stimuli, to all sensual

information, and it can apparently make you molecularly react

differently. Put more simply, it is, “Boy, I get drunk and I can

go to bed with a cow!”, (and you have!). Women do not operate on

this basis, they don’t seem to need it, it has not been arranged

in Life’s body for that to be needed by women on that basis, but

to look at alcohol as the work of the devil or something evil is

to miss the point. Life has really used it.

But I will tell you this, a man can learn a real secret from

the experience of trying to deal with a woman with whom he has no

immediate mechanical attraction, because for one thing, if you

know how to do it you can verbally get them to tell you things

that you would ordinarily never hear. Put crudely, you can get

them to tell you the truth — to tell you things about yourself

that they don’t believe that any man wants to hear. Put crudely

as an example, after a few hours of you holding control of the

kind of relationship we are talking about here, you could ask a

woman such things as, “What do you like about me?” Clinically

she’ll say, “Nothing.” Or you ask, “Now that I’ve explained

myself to you for the last couple hours, showed you my condo, my

car, telling you where I went to school and all I’ve done, what

do you think of me?” And clinically she says, “You’re an idiot,”

or, “You’re just crazy, crazy as all get out.”

Speaking of attraction and love, what is referred to as

love, from one very real view, could be seen as a form of

domination without overt violence. This is not social

commentary. The role that humanity is playing in the Life of

Life, the transfer of energy/heat/information is constantly in an

unbalanced state. If two people know the same thing, they can’t

convey any information. There has to be an imbalance, always, in

any situation involving men and women. A great entertainer

cannot go out and impress an audience full of equally great

entertainers! Once you begin to see the inexplicable, but

always present, edge of possible violence that exists in the

ordinary love affairs of men and women, you can view the

imbalance as a case of domination without overt violence. A

large percentage of all homicides take place among the family.

Poets, lovers, and philosophers throughout history have mused,

pondered, and attempted to explain why hostility and even

homicide seems to go hand in hand with love. Love, in the

horizontal world, is a form of dominance, but initially it may

show no signs of violence. Contraire — they’re rushing into

each others arms with sweet little words and remembrances, but

even this is a form of dominance. As an example, one of them

says, “Boy, I love you,” and the other through word or deed says,

“All right, I’m available to be loved.” There is an imbalance

that can be seen in different ways as a transfer of heat, of

energy, of attention, of information, or as a transfer of blood,

not your blood, but Life’s blood. And in all cases where an

imbalance attempts to balance itself, the so called struggle is a

violent one, and it is as clinical as cold air trying to find the

correct balance with hot air in a room. All the air in the room

will eventually be the same temperature, and the process,

clinically, is a violent one. This energy transfer, the seeking

to redress an imbalance, is the unrecognized drive for everything

to come to a conclusion; the proper conclusion to ordinary

consciousness is, “I’ve got to reach a balance, I’ve got to be a

good person, an enlightened person (and I’m not yet), but the

proper conclusion to my life would be a balance, a redress of

that which I want to be and that which I am.”

I sometimes wonder…if I have attempted to extract the

apparent mystery from this to a sufficient degree (some of you

within you own partnership will think I have already gone too

far), but there is still a great mystery to This. To those of

you that ever hearken back to your original dreams of this

Activity, the real mystery should be — how in the heck do I know

all of this? Second level mystery would be, why can’t I hear

more of it? Laterally removed to a third step is how is it that

you can hear some of it so clearly and then forget that same