The video does not include the 42 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 42 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.
Audio Download= DOWNLOAD Jan Cox Talk 0254 from Cassette
AKS/News Items= Click here and then scroll vertically to see original pages.
Summary= See Below
Summary by TK
#254 * Apr 2, 1987 * - 2:00
[Reading of Kyroot to 0:42. ]
[Reading of Kyroot paper on Love to1:02.]
[Re: "Extraordinary Sight" (ES)--specifically in arena of controversy of environment vs.heredity. ES would be to see environment as the internal workings of Life's own genetics; Life's genetic makeup IS the environment. The example of the argument of a songbird being removed from a critical phase of its growth, never fully developing its proper song, proving the reality of 'environmental influence' over hereditary provides the opportunity for ES in The Few. ES reveals that there is no space, no emptiness within which to place environmental influences. In the equation of I + Not-I = Everything, the (+) must represent space, at least tacitly, where two elements can be joined together. Relation to that great 'dirty question' of Life's re: art--"but what does it mean?" coupled to the drive, the immediate activation to attempt an explanation-- but now applied closer to home, is that 'great tacit question' constantly surfacing: "what does it (your life) mean?" and generating overriding pressure to offer explanation; to explain yourself. None are exempt from this pressure in life.]
["Binaryspin" = energy tendency to depart the present state for a conclusion. Example of the water cycle from stream to ocean as seen from the stream point of view, and arriving at a satisfactory conclusion without seeing the third part of the cycle: evaporation/cloud formation and condensation into rain feeding the stream. 3-D consciousness vs. 4-D consciousness = continuing awareness of a time continuum. 4-D consciousness would be cognizant of time-flow as binocular vision is aware of an extra dimension of depth over monocular vision. Internal application: where only 2 "I-s" operate in the binary psyche, the addition of a third I makes 4-D consciousness possible.]
[Questions from out-of-town re: 'fuck health' dictum; belief/non-belief in same is irrelevant--you've either got to buy it all or stop shopping. Health is a routine hobby--rampant in the binary world--not to be indulged in by The Few.]
["If secret thoughts were known--all men would be hung"--This cannot be true about The Few. When The Few can realize that radio station WDNA is not who they are, they must become responsible for their thinking; not join with it.
GIVEN ENOUGH TIME, EVERYTHING BECOMES ITS OWN OPPOSITE
Document: 254, April 2, 1987
Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1987
I want to see if we can have a small conversation about extraordinary sight. There is a story about a certain songbird with which scientists have experimented. It's another one of these examples of people trying to play around with the question of "heredity versus environment." They found that with this particular songbird, if the chick is taken away from adult birds, it never develops its full song. That is, apparently without any doubt what I have told you is wrong and there is such a thing as environment after all. With this bird, unless it was in its natural environment to hear adult birds sing, it could not even later learn its full song. And of course scientists and psychologists have applied this to the study of human childhood development.
I bring this up to show you what apparently is an obvious example demonstrating that there is, indeed, an environment. But I have said, given the two choices of heredity versus environment, there is no environment. Here is where extraordinary sight comes in: what would seem to be the environment is actually the internal workings of Life's own genetics. Ordinary three-dimensional sight cannot see that. What seems to be the environment to 3-D consciousness is in truth the living reality of all of Life's body. In my great equation "I + Not-I = Everything," it would be the "plus." And the "plus," to ordinary consciousness, seems to be empty.
Before quantum mechanics, the "plus" was the ether. Now it's just empty. It's nonexistent. But I am here to tell you that if you could see four-dimensionally, you would see that Life's body is alive everywhere. Aside from the songbird example, I could have used the kinds of things which common sense and psychology nowadays take to be the obvious influences of one's environment. That is, the actions of other people. If you could see in one more dimension, you would see that the apparent mortal environment is simply the internal workings of Life's own body. There is no emptiness. There's no room for something to move from one person to another.
Belief in empty space is the basis of the illusion of environment. But you are not seeing people floating around in some isolated, open-ended system. You are seeing the workings of a greater system, and in the greater system everything is alive. And although ordinary consciousness would not speak of such things as emptiness, that is what people are saying. There apparently has to be time and space between you and your mother for her to have said "you ugly little thing" or "no, I didn't get you anything for your birthday and shut up." Think of your own example -- whatever seems to be your particular trauma. Apparently another person can send a message through the empty space between you and them, and the deed is done. You have been environmentally impacted. But if you could see in another dimension, it is not a matter of isolated energy, emotion, or thought travelling from one person to another. We are simply in the middle of a living system. It's all alive. It is all active with energy and information, even the apparent emptiness.
Once you see all this, you can also see how ordinary consciousness believes -- quite properly, at that level -- that there is an environment, that people do individually affect each other. And you'd also understand why consciousness cannot go back any further than the Old Testament dictum that "the sins of the fathers become the sins of the sons." Hey, that's good enough. Of course if you tried to carry it back and ask about the sins of the grandfathers and the great-grandfathers, an ordinary person would say "Well, gotta go." The dictum has lost its meaning; it has become too complex.
If you recall, also I have pointed out fairly recently one of Life's dirty questions. That is, an artiste being asked, "What does it mean?" And then I added that a dirtier part of it, in a sense, is that the artiste is forced by Life to try and answer the question. But now let me expand it a little more and call it GTQ: the Great Tacit Question. You do not have to have any pretensions to being an artiste, because Life is demanding of each person continually an explanation of their art, that is, their life. It's looking at you and saying, "All right, but what does it mean?" And ordinary people cannot answer this. They do not know, and therefore they are energized to try and answer.
Here we come to the great world of conclusions -- the great world of attempting to explain oneself. Some thing, some apparent other person, is gazing upon your work of art (which is simply your existence in this case) and is always asking what it means. And the ordinary, not knowing what it means, are driven to attempt to answer. Why do you think people stay alive? Why do you think that the whole world, except of course you and I, does not understand that the way out is simply suicide? They cannot answer the question. Of course, if they could, nobody would have any fun. Nobody would buy underarm deodorant, and nobody would care that others didn't buy it. You can see this everywhere. Apparently at times it is coming from a specific person. At other times it is the Great Tacit Question: like a fog in your neighborhood, or an unusual high pressure system which seems to be pressing down on you. And you are attempting to answer it. But at the ordinary level no one knows or can explain their existence, I assure you. The pope, presidents, priests -- nobody can answer it.
Everyone at the ordinary level feels the pressure of this unspoken "something." People call it conscience, supernatural sensitivity, or just being alive. Part of what some of you didn't get when I first brought this up is that the artiste (that is, everyone) then tries to explain his art. Those of you who don't think there is enough humor in the world, read the interviews with artists in some of the more literary magazines. "What does your existence mean?" No one knows, but the pressure to answer energizes and keeps everything running.
We are still talking about sight. 3-D consciousness sees that everything which occurs has a binary spin to it. It is a binary spin in that everything is trying to get from one position, place, condition, or state to another. The "another" being, of course, the conclusion.
Let us imagine that rippling brooks were conscious. They would have dreams of satisfactory conclusions. They would dream of eventually reaching the sea, which they all do. That would be their conclusion -- the end of their binary spin. That would be the unrecognized basis of the topographical reality of their world. But what streams could not anticipate, with that kind of awareness, is that there is a trinary world in which they are ultimately going to be drawn up from the sea, back up into the heavens. Then to be redeposited as rain back in a what? A stream. But 3-D consciousness sees a great deal of emptiness between what appears to be alpha and omega. It cannot find a way in; it cannot find a way out. And with that awareness, the conclusion for the stream would be a form of death. But what it cannot perceive is that it will not be a conclusion, because the stream is ultimately going to be drawn into a right-angle non-expected inevitable. And it will be blown away from where it was drawn up over another right angle, back over the land. It will suddenly rain. The stream will suddenly be in the midst of the rain, it will be part of the rain, and it will be back into a stream. If you insist, we could say that it would then start all over and again dream of a satisfactory conclusion.
Now let's really take a wild ride before I conclude. Although this will perhaps make as much sense as is possible with words, it is not going to be as sensible as you think it might be. First off, a person with one eye has almost no depth perception. You can see two-dimensionally: up and down, and horizontally. But you've got no depth perception. You get two eyes, and what have you got? Three-dimensional depth perception. Now you do realize that everyone has two eyes. You have two eyes and internally you have two I's. That is, the partnership.
Whatever I might mean by extraordinary sight would be beyond the realm of three-dimensional sight. So we would obviously be talking about four-dimensional sight at the bare minimum. But now, sticking still to ordinary words and terminology, you all know that we are considered to be inhabitants of a four-dimensional world: "the continuum of time and space" as it is popularly expressed.
Here is how I can take the ordinary descriptions and show you what is extraordinary. A four-dimensional consciousness would be a continual awareness of time, but not of "time and/or space." You would have the continuing awareness of regular 3-D reality as it is, but with the simultaneous continuing awareness of time in this respect: all things, given enough time, have been their own opposites and will do so again. All objects, predicates, nouns, verbs, and tenses are then seen as being part of a continuum in which they all, given enough time (and all it takes is your lifetime) will become their own opposites, and have been so before. That is the difference between being a one-eyed person and then suddenly acquiring depth perception.
Everything which your consciousness has ever perceived to be proper has at one time been improper. To use my passing description and enumeration of forces, everything which once seemed to be a channel for C will become apparently a conduit for D before your life is out. Maybe before you can blink. But in the same way that a one-eyed person has no depth perception, a two-eyed person working on the basis of the internal partnership has no four-dimensional field of depth to see all of this. They cannot remember that what seems to be reality out there continually changes; Man is not wired up naturally to have this continuing awareness.
With such an awareness you would not be looking upon people as being things. You would not be making demands. You would not have expectations of consistency. People haven't lied to you -- times change. What a person said at one time is now no longer valid. You would see that things are not falling apart. Of course you would see that things are going downhill, but the things going downhill are the things that were going uphill. Those things falling apart are those which have already come together and blossomed.
You would also see that there is no emptiness: everything is full up. There are understudies waiting in the wings everywhere. All possibilities will be realized; all understudies will finally have their day on the boards. "God's wife" (as the joke goes) will finally get to sing. But to see it you have to have three eyes. There's no way out. You have to have three internal eyes to see the depth of it.
As long as you are dealing with three-dimensional consciousness, everything gets chopped up. You then have to stop. You cannot deal with what seems to be physical reality and time simultaneously. That's the only way ordinary consciousness will work. If it could work the way I'm talking about, people wouldn't be people. You couldn't be mad at anybody. Because everyone you've ever been mad at, you've been non-mad at. Everything you say you disapprove of, at one time you approved of. And vice-versa. Of course the real kicker to all of this is that it seems to be self-directed, which psychologists say is the basis of the problem. And if you're going to live in a 3-D world, why not? They're right. At least that view offers some hope for a conclusion.
Several people have written questions which I need to respond to. I have summed up a certain area of concern with the phrase, "Fuck Health." (As you might imagine, people with only a limited exposure to This, hearing that motto for the first time, could take it to mean that I don't believe in health. They say, "Do you believe in health?" Think about it. It's ridiculous to answer, "No, I don't." But it's also ridiculous to answer, "Yes, I believe in health." It's ridiculous to answer it.)
You should first realize that "health" is one of Life's more enduring useless hobbies. And to do This you cannot let yourself get involved with routine hobbies. Any talk show, morning news program, or periodical today devotes a good deal of time to the illness of the week, or the malady of the month. People listen. It has a following. They check their heart and their blood pressure. They look for warning signs You've got to see that it is a useless hobby. In a sense we're all unhealthy; in a sense we're all headed for the sea. (We're going to die.) But between here and there, if you can hear me, you've either got to buy it all or quit shopping.
For those involved in This, health is just kind of irrelevant. As I said, out in life it is not irrelevant, it is big biz. It is part of the discomfort. It is part of the pressure of "What does your life mean?" Part of your life means "I am sick. If I'm not sick now, I will be tomorrow." And of course the tacit sickness that nobody wants to talk about is...uh, eventually joining the oceans.
I don't mean that you necessarily qualify as being a clinically diagnosed hypocontracter. (That's what they call hypochondriacs in certain parts of Alabama. It's people who build up imaginary illnesses.) You have to see that everybody naturally has a piece of this -- everybody wants to whine and complain about their health. But it is a routine hobby, and you can't do it. I'm sure that some of you will find this almost as disturbing as "fuck health" -- but for those who know how to do it, it is almost as good to quit thinking about quitting smoking as it is to quit. You'd be in almost the same position. With any hobby or habit you are trying to change, it's the same. You've got to do one or the other. Either you stop, or you stop thinking about stopping. It looks like a binary choice; it looks like two different things. You apparently have to be in favor of health, or else not believe in health. Which is it? It's the same thing.
You've got to see it and then realize what I mean by "fuck it." Those properly attracted to This, if you'll notice, discover that health is just kind of a nebulous thing. If you are hurt and there is a bone sticking out, get someone to fix it. But do not sit around and check your blood pressure. Do not wait for the doctor to show up on the evening news and talk about the latest breakthroughs in medicine. You'd be better off, believe it or not, keeping up with basketball statistics.
There is a quotation, which seems to be quite ancient. At least, I've been reading it all my life and that's ancient enough. The quotation is: "If their secret thoughts were known, all men would deserve to hang." And that seems true enough, does it not? Except that it cannot any longer be true for you people. It can no longer be even an acceptably correct statement of your condition. The noise that goes on in your own partnership is as hateful, prejudicial, jaundiced, unthinking, and uncaring as anybody's. Including Moses and Buddha and Mohammed and Jesus. Once you realize you are not part of the many, you understand that your secret thoughts are not your secret thoughts. They are not yours to begin with. Nor are they secret. They are shared by everyone at one time or another. You didn't invent or acquire them. Once you realize that, only then do you become responsible: you cannot then let this tiger out of its cage. You cannot listen to and merge with radio station WDNA when some voice in you comments on a person's race, sex, religion, or economic status.
Of course, the basis for such a quotation exists out in life. That is, all men have cursed their neighbor, and they know it. But ordinary people look for a conclusion. The first conclusion is, "It ain't my fault. I grew up in a tightknit, bigoted community." Whatever the explanation is, you are looking for a conclusion. That is ordinary consciousness. It believes a conclusion would be satisfactory. It will even pay people to help it come to this conclusion. They are known as priests. They are known nowadays as psychiatrists. They are known as family. It is part of the use of human talk -- to adjust and prepare oneself for the continuing inevitability of it all.
But the few people can separate themselves from the full time radio station enough to know it is possible. Once that happens, you become responsible. Once you have produced almost another you inside of you, that you are responsible for. And if you let that "you" merge with the noise, you do deserve to hang.
The noise which your own DNA makes, it makes in everyone. I don't care if you are Buddha's granddaughter, genes make noise. And if you have a Yellow Circuit, the noise has a voice. It is what passes, in the ordinary currency, for consciousness. Once you understand that you personally are more than that, you also understand that you and me may be the only two in the world. (The rest of these people here -- maybe. But the only ones you are sure about is me and you.) Then we don't have to do all this talking and prodding.
It's just noise. But you've got to know that you don't have to be it. Once you know that, you can quit collecting it. You can quit shopping. Adios, pardners.