Jan Cox Talk 0400

Things Are as the Are, Close but no Cigar


Video = Pending ( Vneeded )
Audio = There are 5 minutes of Kyroots read on the Audio that do not appear in the Video.

October 3, 1988
AKS/News Item Gallery = jcap 1988-09-30 (0400)
Condensed AKS/News Items = See Below
Summary =
Diagrams = tbd
Transcript =See Below


#400 * Oct 3, 1988 * – 1:28
Notes by TK

The “secret”-according-to-Zen (as translated: that there is no secret) has some connection with Revolutionary activity in that: “things are not simply as they are; things partially are what they are”. The ordinary nervous system (after yellow circuit development) never takes things just for what they are. At best it insists either they are as they are or not. The true workable secret includes both options; this gives the breathing room, freedom from the terminally locked-in binary choice. It is at the root of every religion that the gods made the world as it is, and man must accept this. 

There are no two things that are diametrically opposed–antipodal–they are always coeval, possessing the same mother, equally born. When they seem otherwise it is a result of an imperfect time perception. Whatever doesn’t make sense to man therefore has an opposite. The “as opposed to…” option is absolutely necessary to Life’s growth thru man. ][ The Real Revolutionist is a living palindrome; his contour/relationship to Life is symmetrical (identical backwards or forwards); for every opinion he also holds its opposite. The ordinary man must be directionally asymmetrical—have opinions, be angry etc.—In order to be of use to Life. ][ Paradigm presents :47. Paul, Fran, Bob, Jon

And Kyroot Said…

In Revolutionist land, only the dead have regrets, and I do
NOT refer to those laying in the ground.


One guy notes that in the City he doesn’t see much “real,
strenuous intellectual exercise” taking place; he sez it’s more
like “low impact aerobics.”


There are two inevitables; the inevitable, and the
INEVITABLE. (And you gotta know the difference.)


Everyone should, of course, wear comfortable shoes, and
whatever ones a Real Revolutionist wears ARE comfortable. (Are
some of these becoming too obscure, if not overly obvious?)


Don’t you leave home now, and forget that really new ideas
are not new “things,” but new holes IN old things. Don’t chu
forget now, hear?


There was this City cult which, while trying to recruit a
new member, reminded him of their motto, “Be all that you can
be,” and the potential convert pondered this a moment, and said,
“Shit, I’ve already done THAT.”


The intellect in Man is a general system whereby he can
apparently make the chaos of life rational. (A thousand “Hu-zas”
to gracious Zeus for our old friend “apparently.”)


There was this other ole dude in the City who said he
thought “Strident” was the name of a real annoying chewing gum.


There seems to yet linger in the City the belief that it IS
one’s duty to suffer over, and through, the inevitable.


What could be truly “impossible” to at least attempt for the
totally brave, and the infinitely stupid? (Remember now, to tell
me if these are getting too difficult, or easy.)

If you’re going to try and be truly considerate of others,
remember that asking people “What they think” often just causes
them the temporary inconvenience of having TO think.


To, perhaps, help comfort the irreligious, and encourage
those with limited finances, let me point out that the ultimate
therapist, priest and rabbi IS death… (or Life, for a few).


A “willful” act cannot be merely a RE-action to perceived
external factors.


Being ordinary is also a pretty cheap way out.


The routine praise of humility is simply a resignation to


I heard one ole City feller refer to his eldest son as being
as “confused as a veterinarian’s front yard.”


The alleged “Committed, and irreversible” views of those
ordinarily in seats of City power can splatter and ruin your best
suit faster than a Peterbilt through a Mississippi mud puddle.


Was talking with this other feller in the City who sez he’s
not “all that concerned” over Man’s possible future unless it’s
determined that AT&T DOES have “the bomb.”


In the City, even when they INSIST they “take requests” —
don’t make any.


If you run a solitary race, you don’t have to check your





Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1988

Document: 400,  October 3, 1988

Everyone try your best to get real, real smart for a few minutes. Many times when I wanted to give you breathing room, I have pointed out that I’m not playing Zen revisited by saying such things as, “This is the way things are, though people don’t see it; that’s the secret: things simply are as they are.” At such times you would have been within your “City intelligent rights,” that is, your mechanical inclinations, to think all I meant was that no matter what you do, no matter what you say, no matter how much you study and dream, things are as they are and that’s the Big Secret.

I keep blaming that idea on Zen. I’ve never asked, but I assume most of you have had some exposure to the Zen writings translated in this country after World War II. In those translations the idea of enlightenment — in the Zen sense — comes across this way. Because ofttimes the so-called Zen masters seemed to say that after 30 years of sitting motionless, starving yourself, cleaning out toilets in the monastery, or having someone stand above you and drip water on your head for ten hours a day, it finally hits you that, “There’s no secret! This is it!” And there were many Americans, if not you, who read these Zen stories and thought, “Yeah, that’s it! Things just are what they are!” This has not been limited to Zen, but I’ve used that to give you a place to hang your hat.

What I’m leading up to is that most of you have been exposed to the idea that the Secret is something like, things simply are as they are. You believe that’s part of the Secret — or maybe that is the Secret, or at least prime information in the right direction. Now, try and be smart for just a few more minutes, because this idea has some nexus to Real Revolutionary activity. The nexus is:

Things are partially as they are;

things are not just as they are.

That is what nobody in the City can get their hands on. If you sat around for the rest of your life — you and l,000 monkeys with computers — typing all the works of Shakespeare and every other famous writer who ever lived, your nervous system would never, never stumble across this. Because things are not simply as they are. Things are partially as they are; and that can’t be seen.

Things are partially as they are.

If that wasn’t true there would be no such thing as This Activity. At least, This would not exist at the level where we’re operating. We would almost be back on the “watch me and do this” level, which is almost no system at all. There would be no way to contemporaneously convey This in a way suitable for Yellow Circuit activated people, were it not for the fact that things are partially as they are. But things are NOT as they are.

One of the tricks here is that even the idea that “things are as they are” is ordinarily incomprehensible. The closer you move to the center of the bell curve of human consciousness, the harder that is to perceive. Ordinary people’s inability to conceive of such an idea was part of the point of the Zen stories about monks suddenly seeing through the religious trappings and realizing some great secret. You cannot tell the majority of humanity that things are as they are. Most people would find this to be of no consequence; they couldn’t really hear the idea. And once you succeeded in engaging the part of the nervous system that talks, the most common response would be, “Yeah, as opposed to what, dumb ass?”

The nervous system doesn’t take things as being what they are. If it did, humanity would not attempt to change anything. They wouldn’t try to alter their environment or themselves. So we’re talking about a very obscure notion, one not meaningful to the majority of humanity. Yet, there have been people throughout history who had moments wherein they believed they saw a great secret which translated as something like, “Things are as they are.” What I’m telling you now is that that’s very low level enlightenment — maybe a l0 watt bulb shining in the pitch dark.

The real secret to Consider is how Life is always letting out just enough hints in the right direction. It’s always as if Life says, “Hey, right down there about three or four blocks is a most interesting street.” Life doesn’t tell you which street, or give exact directions. Life never tells you whether you should turn left or right — just that you might go down a few blocks for some other information. In this case, people are led in a certain direction; they’re led to believe the secret may simply be that things are as they are. Close, but no cigar.

The real new information is simply that things are partially as they are. Once you See that, you’ve seen something. Then you are freed — not theoretically — from the apparently inescapable dichotomy of, “Things either are as they are, or they’re not.” Of course, at the level of the ordinary intellect, that’s a necessary dichotomy. What other choice do you have? Insanity. “No, things are not as they are, but then again things are as they are, but they’re not. See?”

No, things are not simply as they are, but things are not NOT simply as they are. Things are PARTIALLY as they are. When you See that, you’re coming close to usable, workable, “secret” information. But at Line level, City consciousness, there is no way to make such a meaningful, useful distinction or gradation. You can’t talk to someone in the City — even yourself — that way. Because you have already covered that which is partially visible and knowable by saying, “Things are as they are.” That covered it. Or say, “Things are not simply as they are.” Either way, you’ve covered what can be seen by ordinary intelligence, at Line level. So there’s no way to make any meaningful distinction. At Line level, when you say, “Things partially are as they are,” the distinction is not even real enough to warrant any great resistance. Ordinary consciousness does not find that resistive enough to start creating an equal and opposite reaction. If anything, people just hear the idea and say, “Well, that almost makes sense. I’ll call you sometime.”

You Hear this and it almost makes sense. Hearing “things are partially as they are” is like stepping into an infinite quagmire. You just know this must mean something — it’s warm and soupy and you keep on sinking, in an upward direction. There’s nothing to think about — nothing to stand on — yet the sentence almost makes sense — almost. If I keep standing here, some of you might start accepting that it does make sense, and it doesn’t. Look within, at the ordinary level of consciousness: the sentence does not make sense. The idea is not incorrect, not irrational, not illogical. There’s just not even a word for what it is. It’s just…

Most of the time you can’t even see as far as things are as they are. Once you reach that point, change your perspective just slightly — move to slightly higher ground, look down on the City — and you will see that, yes, things are as they are, but they are partially as they are. Step back down and the perception is gone; and you sure as hell can’t tell anybody in the City about what you saw or start a club to discuss it. The perception makes no sense.

Yet, it sure would explain a lot to your own intelligence to realize there’s no more need to attempt, even theoretically, to play around with the pieces you see as being the chess game of Life — trying to move people around, or change your opinion. “Maybe I’ve misread history,” “Maybe I’ve been too hard on my mother.” Because whatever you see is not right or wrong — it’s incomplete.

Unless you have some desire to become a Zen monk, you can’t spend 30 years to realize there is no Secret. And if, after all your efforts, you realize things are as they are, don’t go out and celebrate. That’s nothing. Of course, by all reports, the monks were delighted with that — I’ve never heard about one who complained or got mad. Not just Zen, but all religions have a stage, however it’s expressed, where the followers feel, “The gods made the world this way and we shouldn’t worry about the way things are, they just are.” There’s nothing wrong with that — you could look at that as stage one — but I’m telling you to go further.

I have said that, although from a 3-D view of Life some things appear to be diametrically opposed, nothing can be truly antipodal. Ordinary intelligence thinks in terms of good and evil, heads and tails, the north and south pole, though no two things — ideas, individuals, or groups of people — are actually diametrically opposed. Nothing is in complete opposition to what appears to be its absolute opposite.

Now, if you had a more complex view, you could See that what I’ve said about opposites is not unconditional. From another view, you could see this is not unconditional if you realize that what passes as being antipodal in Life is actually coeval. The whole idea in human consciousness of things having their opposite is simply a matter of distorted time perception, because “opposites” are not in opposition — they are simultaneous. They are truly coeval.

If you’re still tied to — at best — “things are as they are,” then you’re left with things not making sense. Consider this: any time something doesn’t make sense, whatever doesn’t make sense has an opposite. There are no exceptions to that. If something doesn’t make sense, it has an opposite. (I know not many people like this approach. You might call it a back door approach, but I’d call it a “root cellar, door on the side” approach to a house that doesn’t have a basement.)

Or, look at this another way: Some of what seems to go on here strikes you as, “Oooh, ahh!” Then another part of you goes, “Oooh, ahh, what??” When you’re on the right track, what you think of doesn’t make sense — not that it’s unreasonable or irrational or impossible on any ordinary basis — it can’t be compared to anything in the same area that would make sense. Because when you’re on the right track, there is no “as opposed to.” There is no opposite.

The ideas of This Thing cannot be commonly used currency in the City. At that level, this type of thinking would spell the end of some energy line. If too many people looked around and even realized, “Hey, why am I busting my buns? Regardless of what anybody says or does, things just are as they are!” everyone might take a 20 year nap. Life could not abide even that, the way things are in the City. And Life surely could not abide you looking at something and that thing not having an opposite, an “as opposed to.” Because if things were lacking that, you would have some (I hate to say this) real understanding of the things you perceived. You’d understand what you saw, and that would be that. Life can’t allow too many instances of that being that, or there would finally be one big one and that WOULD be that.

Consider whether, in some way, a Real Revolutionist might be a living palindrome. (The dictionary definition of “palindrome” is a sentence that reads the same forwards as backwards.) Could This Activity be that you become a kind of living, moving, functioning palindrome?

If there is somewhere you can go with this (and we’ll assume there is or I wouldn’t have brought it up) — if in some way doing This would lead to you being palindromic, would you actually be a palindrome, or would you just appear that way because of the unnatural contours of your relationship to Life? At the ordinary level, you see everybody’s contours. Describing them is one of the reasons for language, and for institutions. Normally, you see the apparent person as opposed to what is not the person. You draw out the contour, and the person is described as a “white, male, northern, republican…” There is his contour; from that, you can see where he’s going. He’s certainly not symmetrical — no one is — that would be unnatural. Nobody is symmetrical; let’s don’t go into whether anybody is well balanced.

If a person were symmetrical, they’d be close to being palindromic. They’d be the same coming and going. If this were possible, then the question is: Would you actually be symmetrical, or would you just be perceived by everybody else as almost symmetrical? Would your contours — the line between you and not-you; the place where you seem to interface with Life — be or appear to be symmetrical?

Could a person become a living palindrome? Kyroot once pointed out that a Real Revolutionist shouldn’t ever hold any opinion unless he’s going to hold its opposite, because fair is fair. That’s one way to put it. But could somebody somewhere almost become a functioning palindrome? Could they seem to be the same, coming and going, and not be locked into opinions and contours?

No sentence with any meaning reads the same forwards and backwards to ordinary people. “Madam I’m Adam” doesn’t mean a whole lot. In the City, a sentence such as, “People of various nationalities have no business feeling any animus toward other nationalities,” cannot be true both forward and backward. So people and nations end up killing each other over “doing good.” The outcome appears to be just the opposite of the apparent purpose of the initial endeavor.

That may seem ironic, but if you had a kind of palindromic view, you’d see there is no irony in Life. I’ve already told you that no system, institution or enterprise in the City accomplishes what it is purported to accomplish. If the purpose was accomplished, the institution would disappear. So nothing does what it’s supposed to do. If there were palindromic ideas, you couldn’t see them. Perhaps worse yet, if there were people who were palindromes, you might not be able to see them. Or, if you saw them, they might be, to ordinary consciousness, the living epitome of boredom. What could be more boring than a person with no contours, no opinions, no personal angers?

There is something behind me asking you the musical, rhetorical question: Could a Real Revolutionist in fact be simply a living palindrome? Beyond that, Consider TWE: If a Real Revolutionist were simply a living palindrome, To What End? And also: If you met someone who seemed to be a palindrome, would that actually be true — no matter what you thought you saw — or would they just appear as a palindrome to you because of the unnatural, unexpected, heretofore unseen contours between the person and everything else?

Now forget worrying about somebody else “out there.” How about dear little ole’ you — the unsinkable Fred or Mary — inside you? Is there any way you could look upon “you” as being symmetrical, a palindrome? There is nothing palindromic native to the nervous system; that’s not the basis of consciousness’ operation. There are no natural palindromes in Life. Although they don’t teach this in electronics class, there is a difference between grabbing an AC line going in one direction or going in the opposite direction; there is a difference seeing even a 2-dimensional painting or photograph from different perspectives. If you take a negative of a photograph and turn it over, you don’t have the same thing.

In Life there are no natural palindromes. Still…