Audio = Stream from the bars below in two parts. The first 11 minutes of the audio stream contains Kyroots that are not on the video.
Audio Download = DOWNLOAD Jan Cox Talk 0315 from Cassette
AKS/News Items = tbd
Summary = See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = See Below
Summary by TK
Jan Cox Talk #315 * Jan 25, 1988 * - 1:30
[Kyroot reading to :10. ]
[The dictum "The world is big enough for everything/body" is a spatial one first and foremost. It is always possible to effect the 'cure' of physical removal to conditions less upsetting. ]
[Consider the phenomenon of parallax as applied to a human's changed perception of another; when it appears that the other has changed, it is only the viewer's position that has changed. City consciousness cannot be continually aware of this fact. A willful change of parallax; willful change of internal position = This Thing. ][ The Real Revolutionist has got to realize that every parameter of environment (e.g., weather) impacts human life in general and individually, but then he must simply ignore it. Without such knowledge it can’t be ignored. To transcend even extraordinary, supernatural knowledge is always the trick: ignore it; after gained unnatural awareness the Real Revolutionist actually grows less conscious of self when he understands this. Correct knowledge = no choice. ]
[All growth is cellular, at the metabolic level --but City consciousness cannot apply this to 'psychological growth'. ]
[What if action and thinking of action = C and D? Then talk itself is E; the eternal agent between thought/plan and execution. It is the keeper of the peace in the tension between C and D. The 'stress' of the City = ambiguity; the inability to decide between plan and execution tension; talk is its resolution. The Real Revolutionist would live in E, plan in C and defend himself with controlled D. (General in D, philosopher in C, enlistees in E). What if the Revolution is merely between the partners of the Partnership? Consider the Partnership of This Thing: The City vs. This Thing (unquenchable hunger to change vs. the useless, meaningless struggle of This Thing); What a dance!! ]
["You're not really rich unless you just don’t care. Internally rich/don't care vs. the 'don't care' in the City sense of ennui/cynicism. ]
[A Code of Conduct addition: don't squat (to criticize). ]
[1:30 Epilog excursion for coffee drinkers: 3 days with no coffee, then return to previous habit; finally, 3 days without coffee again.
SO RICH YOU JUST DON'T CARE
Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1988
Document: 315, January 25, 1988
I would like to point something out in regard to the dictum I gave you, "The world is big enough for everybody." As opposed to being spiritual, that is a spatial concept. A very direct spatial concept. It is spatial on this basis: you can physically remove yourself from anybody, including those toward whom you are apparently cellularly antagonistic.
It is an absolute fact that the world is big enough for everybody. It is also an absolute fact that no one notices it. People are kept too busy criticizing each other to notice it. Of course, they keep the energy of Life flowing, but what they mean when they criticize someone is: "The world is not big enough for you. We do not have room for such shoddy workmanship or such a piss-ant attitude." The fact that the world is big enough for everybody is not some kind of spiritual tolerance toward "our lesser endowed fellow humans." It is the reality of the abundance of space here on this planet. It is for you to look and see that your cells may be in a naturally antipodal position relative to another person's cellular nature, yet the world is big enough for everybody. Once you have some continuing understanding of that, I must point out to you that it is a great relief. Not just the theory of it, or the repetition of the words. Spatially, the world is so big that if you didn't want to, you would never run into your Uncle Charlie again as long as you live if you truly wanted to avoid him.
Do note that in the city this is not looked upon as being any sort of treatment much less a cure. But it gets awfully close to a cure. Awfully close. I guess somebody in the city (since most of them are either soreheads or kin to soreheads) could say it is no absolute cure because, once they did move to Skunk's Breath, Wyoming, they'd still think about Uncle Charlie. Alright, I'll grant you two months. But if you're still thinking about Uncle Charlie and all he did to you after three months in Skunk's Breath, write me. Need I point out that I'd never hear from you because you'd forget all about it?
You can take advantage of the fact that the world is big enough for everybody. You can spatially remove yourself from those with whom you seem to be in a natural cellular condition of confrontation. There is no explanation for such confrontation, and for those who understand it (even better yet) there is no explanation needed. "I wonder why I hate that person?" Oh, I don't know, are you breathing today? "Yes." There you are. Or: "How could this other person bear me such ill will?" I'll be glad to answer this. First I have to ask one question: are they alive? "They are breathing." There's your explanation.
Nobody asks, "Why am I loved by this other person? Why do certain people seem to just naturally like me?" No one asks that. Of course, in the city people believe they are only interested in mysteries. Why one is liked is no mystery. And also, why one dislikes others is no mystery. Obviously, they deserve it. But why someone else should dislike you -- there's a real mystery.
I have another one. Does everyone know about parallax? Parallax is that phenomenon wherein another object seems to have changed its position due to a change in position of the viewer. Can you see that there is, as ordinary people would call it, an unrecognized psychological parallel? An example: you have a love affair with someone; it breaks up; you change your position; and the other person no longer looks the same. Or someone you have known for years as a casual acquaintance becomes, through a turn of events, your foe. Perhaps they cheat you and you now have a grudge against them. Your viewing position has changed, but as far as you are concerned, their position has not changed. Based on the principle of parallax, if your position has changed, theirs will only appear to have changed.
Don't get choked on the obviousness of this, because there is nothing in city consciousness equipped to deal with it. I could describe it to city consciousness and it would reply, "So what's the big deal?" Well, the first big deal is that it is almost impossible to hold on to an awareness of the correctness of it. For reasons we have been over time and time and time and time again, the cellular structure of human consciousness is not arranged to take into account such relativity of perception. It is easy enough to note that someone else's position has changed: they are apparently not the same person they were before. But there is nothing in ordinary consciousness to take into account that a shift in the viewer's position could produce the phenomenon. That is the kind of thing which in the city does not fly very far. "Even if that is true, so what? Even if that is true, I don't want to think about it." Nobody said life in the city was easy.
But now let me ask you: of what possible use could you make of this willfully? How might you willfully change your viewing position? Say, toward a member of your family with whom you are in cellular conflict? Of course, city consciousness would say, "So what if I changed my viewing position? Uncle Charlie would still be the same old rat-assed bastard he is." In response to the city I can just finally say, "Give me a break. What the hell do you want?"
"Yeah, but so what if I change my position and it apparently changes Uncle Charlie's position also? We're just playing with mirrors!" I don't know what you think the city was built on. It's certainly not deep bed rock foundations of poured concrete.
A Revolutionist has got to clearly discover, and then remember, that such apparently mundane things as temperature, time of day, the seasons, diet, sun spots, barometric pressure, and humidity all affect human life. Everyday human life. The Revolutionist must discover and remember this, and then what? Ignore it. The specific, hard to see part is that you must have knowledge of it before you can ignore it. This, again, is beyond city consciousness, because there are people in the city doing just what I have described, but with no thought and no understanding. To be able to absolutely ignore something you first must have an unnatural awareness of it. You have to have a non-city grasp of it. Everything affects human life, but unless you personally know it, it's meaningless. You might as well believe in astrology. I am speaking of a personal continuing knowledge from a new place in you which can affect your behavior. You might be the only one fully cognizant of it. You are then simply aware that individual people are wired up in such a way that a temperature change of three degrees in a 30 minute period can change their behavior. You may not even know exactly that the temperature was responsible, but it is very likely. It is as good as anything else.
It is certainly not that they had a flashback to kindergarten days and had suddenly begun internally choking their mother. In other words, it has no "psychological" basis. The barometric pressure rose, dropped, or went sideways. Nobody knows except the Revolutionist, and he knows that anything can cause a change in behavior. The real place to ignore it, of course, is within you. You can be aware of the fact that you might as well be a weather map on Channel 11 TV. Weather fronts come through you and who knows why? Or your mind comes up against a brick wall if you haven't eaten in 10 hours. Or your emotional reactions shift after eating two pints of ice cream. To discover such as that about yourself and other people, and then to ignore it, is the only reason to have Revolutionary information. That is always the trick: to ignore and transcend ordinary city life. That is one of the jumping-off points. It's one of the distinguishing lines between a slight understanding or even a strong suspicion of what This is, and everything else in life.
When an unnatural knowledge becomes complete in any area, you can then ignore it. One down, and god knows how many more to go. But you don't "decide" to forget it. If you decide to forget it, you can't. It is simply that the ordinary operations are no longer an acceptable justification for behavior. And the more you get down to the bone of This, less and less explanation is required. There is less and less you are conscious of, in the ordinary sense, about yourself. The more unnatural knowledge you have about the internal fist fights and shouting matches between your Red, Blue, and Yellow departments, the more you can then ignore it. But there is the trick: you have to have a knowledge not natural to anybody.
When you have such an unnatural knowledge of something, and then ignore that "something," that is really doing it. Anything less is just some marginal degree of doing it. The real "doing it" is like one swift cut with a surgical scalpel instead of a rusty pocket knife. Whatever you've got to do, you do it and that's the end of it. Your planning stage would be a nanosecond, and once the deed is done, your passing notice of it is another nanosecond. In the city this all sounds like some form of disinterest or detachment from the "mundane run of human emotions" and all that stuff. But in the city, even if you see someone who apparently can run roughshod over people, with no planning and no care for consequences, they are not ignoring anything. They have no understanding of the situation -- how can they ignore it? They follow the call of their ancestral cellular voices just like you do. Just like everybody does. The only way you can cease to squat when the cellular voices say "squat" is to first have an understanding of what those voices are. Then and only then can you ignore them.
And if you feel like there is some choice in whether to ignore or not to ignore, you don't have the correct knowledge of the situation. It is not to afford you alternatives to your behavior patterns. If you thought there was a choice, you'd still be listening to your cellular phone. You'd still be listening to the partnership. To ignore the voices, you have got no choice. That is the trick. That is doing it. Otherwise you might as well be Jiminy Cricket whistling in the dark: "It doesn't bother me, it doesn't bother me; I won't think about it; I won't let that bother me anymore, will I? Nope, she and I have been apart for seven years now, and I don't even think about it as much as I used to..." You don't understand it, and therefore cannot ignore it.
Here's another. I have mentioned that all growth in the human organism (that is, the metabolism of energy) is cellular. Your cells are taking in energies, foods, and waters, and metabolizing them. No one can find complaint with that, except for this: city consciousness does not see how it is related to psychological affairs. (Or, as your fathers referred to it, spiritual affairs.) But how does the apparent "psychological" escape the laws of conservation and expansion of energy? How does psychological growth escape from the cellular? In the city they cannot give a solid reason for it. There is just a feeling that in some way psychological affairs transcend physiological cellular growth. But if you have indeed grown spiritually/psychologically, how is it exempt? What energy have you taken in? What has grown in you? Where is your psychological or your spiritual? How is it taking in energy?
If you took in the words of a guru or a psychologist, the energy had to be burned in some way. It had to be digested. You sit there and listen to me say all this, but what does your own dear little brain seem to be able to do with it? When it is getting good you can see no flaw in what you've just heard from me; it just seems to be smashingly correct. And yet it can't be true. There is no place for it in the city. You can't show it to anybody; there is nothing to support it. You can't take any of this new, fresh data back to city consciousness. It won't fit. And yet, if you get out of the city and run back to the bushes right quick, you can look at all I've just said about psychological growth and it's, "Yeah!" But then you're stuck back at city level and it's, "What, what?"
I have a few to put to you as questions. What if action and thinking-of-action were C and D respectively? Could you then see talk as being E? For all you people who have so shamelessly kicked talk around all these years, could you see talk as being a kind of keeper of the peace in the eternal tension between human planning and execution? Humans can either act or think about acting, and it is the latter which makes them, in some cases (at least taking into account the parallax phenomenon)...uh, superior to water coolers. And cheap luggage. If there were no tension between the two, there would be no separation. What if talk is E in that triad? What if it keeps the peace between them?
What would they say in the city is the reason for stress? If I prodded them a bit, would they not probably agree it is the inability to make a decision? It appears that decisions are made, because triads continue to change, and people take credit or blame for having taken some action. But from another viewpoint, it is simply that one triad turns into another. The world operates in such a way that people do not have to believe that they made any decisions. What goes on at the ordinary cellular level is, in fact, a form of grandiose self-delusion to claim that a decision has been made based upon a great deal of thought and weighing of pros and cons.
Oh, I know. There may have been one instance in your life when that seemed to have happened. And like everybody else in the city, you never got over it. No reason you should; it is such an astounding event. Apparently you planned what to do and apparently the son of a bitch actually happened. Nobody can get over that.
Back to where I was. The apparent inability to make a decision is the tension. There is the separation. From the Revolutionary view, it's of no consequence. There is nothing which will eradicate the tension between planning and execution in the city, because it is necessary to city life. After all of that, I ask again: could you see human speech as being E in the acting and thinking-of-acting triad? As the keeper of the peace?
Well, let me ask you another question since you like that one so much. Could you see that a Revolutionist would live in E, plan in C, and defend himself through controlled D? How about that?
Or let me stretch it a bit further. What if a Revolutionist had a little secret bushy city with reflections of all the human institutions contained in it. How about this: he would have his generals living in D, his philosophers living in C, and all the enlistees and everyone else living in E. What about that?
Well, have any of you had this cross your mind on a bad night after eating two pizzas: what if the Revolution is actually going on simply between the partners? I'm not saying; I'm asking. Could it be? But if we're going to say "the partnership," let's switch the partnership around right quick. Instead of it being just you and the other partner in there, what if we look at the partnership as being some other things not quite so personal. (Which could be just a misdirection wherein I change the words around a little, but forget about that, okay? Sure, I knew you would.)
What if the partnership were the city, and This? Or, the two partners could be the unfulfillable hunger to change, and the meaningless struggle of This. Or (I guess we can stand one more) how about the partners being "flaws" for one, and "cellular voices" for the other?
Let's go back to the second one. Would that be a dance or not? The unattainable hunger to change, dancing with the useless struggle of This. Try and picture, down at the atomic level in the nuclei of atoms: the great whirling dance. The spinning: faster than the eye can see, and operating in ways which the human mind cannot conceive. Things being in two places at once...
Just another flight of fancy on my part. (I do that because I get bonus travel points. A few more and I get to go to the secret club room at the airport where, I understand, the real payoff comes: a reasonable person tries to talk you out of flying.) I think we'd better leave it. If I stay on it too long, one or two of you might go, "Oh!"
I think I'll finish with this one: you're not really rich until you just don't care. As always, we could look at that in the external world. That is a fact, in case you never thought about it. You could win ten million dollars in a jackpot, but you'd never actually be rich. Because for one thing, you'd spend the rest of your life worrying about it. You're not really rich until you don't care. Now, that's rich. You know I didn't bring this up to talk about money. How rich are you with new info? How rich are you with fresh experience?
Sometimes I become aware after the fact that I left some of you still wondering what the premise was. There are only a few people on this planet who are so rich that they just don't care. Don't ask me, "Care about what?" The answer is, "Care about anything." If you are that rich, you don't care about what car you drive, how you look, or what people think. That is being rich. I just want you to understand that the premise is solid. It is based upon solid statistical and sociological information to which only I am privy, since I made it up. Now, back to the important stuff. Can you see that you're not really rich with .pa"out of the city body" experience until you are to the point that you just don't care?
Now remember, this is dangerous. Because the city already seems to have a fair number of people who just don't care. Jails are full of them. Those who are not in jail seem to become automobile mechanics and attorneys. See, we're talking about someone who earns the ability. Whether you get the info from me or from your own observations, when you've got enough of it you just don't care. And coevally you must have enough experience based on, surrounded by, and connected with the information.
The "just don't care" is something else beyond just those words. It's not limited to the 3-D dynamics of it. But it is that you would then have your own new molecular structures in the old system. It would be that you could then look at all you had apparently undergone -- the shocks, the jolts, the actual changes in your molecular structure -- and you don't actually care that it happened. Or you could look at other people and see that they haven't changed and cannot change, and you just don't care. I tell you again, this is no smart aleck sarcasm, because a person who understood it would never say it. It's only me who drags this kind of stuff down here to make little mud balls with it.
If I'm not mistaken, there is another definition of "rich," as in: "Oh, that's rich!" Would that be rich or what? To have so much Revolutionary info and experience that you wouldn't even care that you might easily have never run across This at all? Boy, that's rich. In whatever connotation you want to take it. To be rich you have got to reach the level where anything additional is meaningless.
One final thing. If there was actually a Code of Revolutionary Conduct (which there is not) to your personal one you should add this: Don't squat. Don't bend, stoop, or squat to criticize, no matter how urgent the matter is.