Jan Cox Talk 2631


Summary = None
Condensed News Items = See below
News Item Gallery = None
Condensed Transcript = See below
Key Words =

Condensed Transcript

Notes by CF

Tape # 2631 recorded by Jan Cox January 15, 2001

Begin: Some of my mail gives me something to mention. One of my emails mentioned that I had said that “It is all in the mind.” The emailer had said that “yeah, I got all that,” but how do you explain this. He mentioned guru so and so and how awakened he was and how he had been predicting the future for some years now. Did he understand what I meant “It’s all in the mind?” The point being he could put in all sorts of “howevers”. The other email I received had the subject “Regarding the Contradictions of the news on such and such date.” I can’t tell you what was in the email because I did not read it. I could imagine what was in it. It would have started with I have enjoyed your writings however on such and such a date I saw a contradiction between paragraph two and paragraph seven that I must point out to you. Which means I must attack you on it. Do you realize that on your own you could have almost predicted what I just described.

05:00 The subject was “regarding contradictions.” That was the whole point in contacting me. How often do you realize that the same thing seems to occur in your thoughts? I challenge you to look. The same thing occurs in that there is something wrong with our state of consciousness. Every time someone feels they have slightly awakened from a state of stupor they are chastising themselves. They are bringing up the “contradictions” in life. From one view the contradictions of life are behind the whole idea of the desire to awaken. I could also model for you (this idea to awaken) is the conscious part of the brain being envious of the instinctive self. It aspires to be like the instinctive self, which it cannot do, because it is two different operations. It is consciousness, in its so called attempt to awaken, struggling to reach a level of the nonconscious operations of the brain. I should also say the nonconscious operations of us in Toto. Thoughts in many ways are not as intelligent, certain or sure as silent instinct. Nor should instinct have thoughts. Take my classic example of “running into a door or of dropping something.” There you are having important thoughts, Zoroaster thoughts, thought about the book “How to awaken” and you run into a door. That to me is the perfect example of being asleep. It is much more sophisticated than the ordinary mystics “To be asleep is to not be able to cure world hunger.”

10:00 There you are after running into a door while thinking important thought about being awake, you are now thinking thoughts about being asleep and being distracted. Can you see it this way? It is the conscious mind comparing itself to instinct. It is very unlikely that anyone would drop anything or run into a door if were not for thoughts. How often does your dog or cat knock over anything, though I have seen it? It is not a perfect comparison. I do not believe there is a perfect comparison. I assume if you run into a door it was you being involved with thought. The thought does not matter. You reach over for a cup of coffee, which instinct can do; it is almost as though you have eyeballs in the tips of your fingers. The more likely you are staring at what goes on in you head, the more likely you are going to have a physical misstep. If you could wipe out conscious thought from a man’s head it would be a rarity that you would drop something. What actually kept you from following your hand and looking at the cup of coffee you were about to pick up? I suggest that if it were not for thought that our eyes would physically be following what you did. What else would you have your eyes do? Your senses would all be on your instinctive actions. If an animal has to maneuver around something all of its senses are on its actions. Where else would they be? The animal’s nervous system is not involved with anything other than navigating in life physically. If it were not for the ability to think almost any clumsiness in life would be a rarity. The view of the desire to awaken is the conscious operations of the brain being envious of the nonconscious operations of the body. It is aspiring to be as alert, graceful, efficient and certain as the nonconscious areas of your body.

15:00 Our instinctive organs (liver and heart etc) just operate. They are not uncertain. Uncertainty is a form of clumsiness. Unless you become sick the organs of the body operate at peak efficiency. Can you say that about thought? Don’t make me laugh. The conscious part of the brain that produces thought is wishing it was as awake (metaphorically) as the liver or the heart. It is an unfair comparison between thought and instinct. It is simply metaphorical. The whole idea that we own a different state of consciousness, call it what you will, it is consciousness being dissatisfied. Conscious thought must have something to compare itself with to be dissatisfied. People believe they are studying some system. What system? Where did the system come from? It came from someone’s mind. The guy who wrote me about my idea that “it’s all in the mind.” He said he understood “but.” If you understand it (its all in the mind) you don’t have anything to say about it. If you understand there was no system to awaken on this planet, lying under some rock, waiting for someone to discover it and that the conscious part of the brain that produces thought made it up so that it could be conscious in some other way. Here is where it gets interesting. It has to have some basis for thinking there could be something else.

20:00 If human consciousness’ that produces thought is the peak of consciousness in this universe then how do you explain that their consciousness wants to be more conscious? Conscious thought must have something by which to compare. If you want to take it physically picture yourself at the top of a pole. If you are at the top of the pole where else are you going to go? There is no higher. You would be satisfied not disturbed. Ordinary humans in their own way aspire to be more conscious. Life is driving humanity but in people like us it is specific. What is the basis for the human mind to imagine it could be more conscious? Don’t fall into the trap of comparison to Christ or Buddha consciousness. That is not proof. Anyone who believes that they can explain why is proof they are not awake. It is irrelevant what you believe in regards to what I am asking you. How did it ever cross the human mind that if you get to the top of the pole that you could or would like to go higher? There is no higher. Change the pole story to the intangible. Conscious is as conscious in everybody as it can be. Collectively it is as conscious as it can be. If it could be more it would be more.

25:00 What was the cause of anybody thinking I would like to have more mind? It had to have a comparison. I am saying one of the more valid ways to consider this idea of waking up is it is the conscious part of the brain that produces thought comparing itself unwittingly, to the talents, abilities, and the rest of the operations of the human physique. I want to repeat because I think it is significant that this is not a valid comparison. Human thought is not in anyway comparable to the human heartbeat. Human thought is connected to the human body and the human body produces thought. The operation of thought in itself is not comparable to the heartbeat. The comparison is not valid but understandable. I recommend you consider the kind of comparisons thought may have come up with unwittingly. People look around and there is not another creature on this earth producing thought more efficiently.

30:00 It is clear if you can see it. You would be more conscious if the consciousness of the brain worked as efficiently as the kidneys Of course conscious thought is not suppose to operate in that manner but for people like us can you get a glimpse of it?. Is it a good example of being eternally mindful? Most times you are not aware of the silent operations of the body. Does the bladder ever talk about what happened to it when it was a little bladder growing up?

35:00 In the areas that operate outside conscious thought there are no such things as contradictions. The lungs do not contradict themselves discounting illness. It is amazing when you think about but it is amazing when you don’t think about it. It is amazing to look at a hippo and he’s awake and doesn’t know it. The greatest insult to those men who have been writing philosophies and mythology is to accuse them of being contradictory in their thinking. Outside the thinking part of consciousness there are no contradictions. Thought, unwittingly, would be envious that there are no contradictions outside its own operations. The other areas of the brain and the body do not contradict themselves. They do what they do with no revisions or missteps.

40:00 You cannot advise the silent operations of instinct. I assume the kidneys are doing something. I picture it has one eye cracked open, always prepared and alert.

I submit to you that people like us could learn a lot from this metaphor. How do you apply it? What is the connection? How did consciousness’ get the idea it could do better? But, if you listen to me I would say that this whole thing is in your mind anyway.


Jan’s Posted Daily Fresh Real News

January 15, 2001.

It is as though there are two people in each person;
one who knows what is going on,
and one who is forever struggling to find out.

The one who knows does not talk;
the one who does not, never stops.

The one who knows has satisfiable appetites;
the one who struggles is never placated.

The one who knows is self centered,
and a potential adversary to others, while the one who does not know can seemingly be one to himself.

The one who knows — physically maintains;
and one who does not — mentally scrambles;
the one who knows — does,
the one who does not — plots.

Within the non routine scaffolding around the inner lives of a few people,
the above offers a workable schematic,
and useable explanation of what it is that
uniquely drives the human species,
and specifically titillates those select individuals.

The majority of homo sapiens silently feel
their primary sense-of-self to reside in
the one in them who knows;
for beyond any doubt or debate it knows those things essential to be known, such as:
how to find food & eat; stay warm & dry;
lick its wounds, and perpetuate the race,
while with most people the other self in them
that does not know what is going on
is little more than a voice in their head that gives a running criticism of the manifestations of
other peoples, don’t-know self.
Unaware, via this situation, do all people contribute to mans collective struggle to –find-out-what-is-going-on.

No matter the extent of your education or factual knowledge, from one view, the one in you
who does not know what is going on
is a giddy idiot-child.

The endless, and apparently go-nowhere debates over
all manner of non-physical matters
in which men forever engage
can easily be sarcastically dismissed — or
seen for what they really are;
man’s collective and glacial efforts toward a —
— knowing-what-is-going-on
by the totality of each individual:
a continuing collective discussion of
all that they do not know
so as to finally arrive at a knowing.

Whether this day ever comes or not
is irrelevant to a few people
who want it this day.

Practical tips on how an anxious person could attack this can be gleaned from my opening observations regarding the several distinctions between the one in you who knows what is going on, and the one in you who does not —
— but hungers to.

Consider the three arbitrary,
top-of-my head differences I provided regarding:
speech vs. silence;
satisfiable appetites vs. implacable wants,
and selfishness vs. self-encumbrance:

since the silent one in you knows what is going on,
have the speaking one listen to it;

since the one in you who knows what is going on
has appetites that are constantly being satisfied,
have the one in you who is never satisfied, and eternally,
scrambling-to-know — learn from it,

and since the one in you who knows what is going on
is naturally self centered and always looking after your own best physical interests,
have the one in you who is still searching for “something”
compare what it says it is searching for
to what the one in you who knows
has already found and finds satisfying.

This is not to say that what will ultimately satisfy the one in you who does not know is the same as the things that satisfy the one in you who does know,
for no quantity, nor quality of food, drink, drugs, sex,
type of shelter, or anything else material will do the job,
but of profit is a clear-headed, cold-eyed consideration of the fact that the one of them whose natural appetites are readily satisfied,
and who has no doubts, and no questions as to what —
— being alive is about —
has nothing at all to say on the subject, and indeed —
never even thinks about it.

How can another person teach you this;
who outside your own skin can
know the situation for you,
and what force other than the conscious combining of the two parts of your own total self
can ever make you see it for yourself?!
— they cant; no one, and — there is no other force.

A person who does not want to see, will not see,
and a person addicted-to, or simply satisfied-with
the natural agitation of the
one in them who does not know — will never know.

For those whose inherent hunger goes incomparably beyond the normal, mortal standard of:
I do not know — but I want to know, sort of,
it is up to you;
if you truly want to know what is going on — throughout your entire being —
— then you can know,
but it will not come from any other person,
not from any book, nor ideas outside yourself;
but from the realization of what —
— wanting-to-know is.