Jan Cox Talk 0386 - Summary by EW & SD

0386 Jan Cox talk summary by EW and SD

08/31/1988

Summary written 01/13/2019



GETTING OFF AN ENDLESS HIGHWAY LOOP


The "Tricky-Trick" Of How Things Are Arranged:

Grasping fully that your job in THIS THING is not to correct, combat or destroy "The Old Guard" of the inner self; Rather, the needed direction lies not in the pop psychology of "Im ok you're ok," or, in the interminable belief of being flawed, but somewhere else entirely.

Picturing The Situation Within The Whole Spectrum Of The Human Life Span:

The childhood/adolescent/early-adulthood illusion, of "Going Somewhere" in Life's seeming expanse. The ideals run high. Life is fun. The grandeur of imagination runs toward seeing one's future self as highly accomplished, recognized and satisfied, regardless the role envisioned. Gradually a diminishing of the original dream state occurs, as Life's highway reveals its futilities. Lesser day-dreams come into play as we settle for the reality of what presents itself.

Picturing The Metaphor Of The Endless Highway Loop:

As humans age, it becomes apparent that Life is not "going anywhere." The situation is now felt for what it is: An endless beltway around The City of Line Level Consciousness. One begins to realize the unforeseen trap of "making a living" and "raising a family," or the "endless pressures of a chosen career track." Regardless the imagined "gains" of reputation, recognition, wealth or fame, the dissatisfaction sets in. Age brings "noises under the hood." Health concerns of "the vehicle" replace the preoccupation with earlier plans, dreams, expectations and intentions.


The Involvement Of The Self in "Necessary Irrelevance."

Over time, Life is so arranged to shift, almost seamlessly, a man's internal/external focus, from one preoccupation to the next. Caught on the periphery-highway-loop of The City consciousness, the interest goes from early stages of grandiose imaginings to a fallback interest in "maintaining the vehicle." The belief in this futile direction is seemingly hard-wired into the nervous system, and yet it is a trap for human consciousness. The belief that continues to drive the human mechanism is of a "Fix-It" type mentation.


A would-be Revolutionist must begin by recognizing the Necessity To Start in this ordinary human condition, by sensing that something is amiss, and then be able to discontinue with the highway's 3D loop. Seeing the Irrelevance of Everything, he/she must gradually grasp the ultimate Irrelevance of the Necessary trap and all that it presents. Fixing the vehicle is not the answer to life's seeming Problems, The "tricky-trick" is to Start somewhere and yet not get caught.


The Real Focus Should Be on Highway Design:

The Revolutionist must realize that his/her Work in This Thing, is not "fix-it" focus toward the vehicle, nor concern over Life's cleverly designed Highway loop trap. The sly awareness must be to discover a new piece of the highway. The correct focus must be in getting off the loop and onto the exit ramp to new wiring.

Metaphors Of The Endless Beltway Detailed:

The capacity to gradually recognize the Necessary/Irrelevance as preparation for insight into the human situation. Realizing that Jan cannot tell what Can't Be Told. A Revolutionist must internally labor to understand his individual position on the grid and its moment to moment movement. He/she must grasp that This Thing is too subtle for words. Pressing On must become the great Understanding and the deliberately-chosen (willful) Moto against our our seemingly nullified mortal situation on the 3D loop of City Consciousness.

Updated "Prescription" From Jan To The Would-Be-Revolutionist:

1) Abandon any interest in the Cause of Anything (whether inside the Self or outside)

2) Abandon any interest in the ILL of Anything ( whether inside the Self or outside)

By following this directive on the Highway of Life, by means of this "Prescription," the possibility arises of eventually discovering an area, an off-ramp, a corner of Consciousness, that Life does not allow. It is here that we see that things are not broken. No ordinary "traveler" is allowed at this juncture. Only a True Revolutionist has the propensity to find a glimpse of this "off-map" location. When it's beauty is revealed, "This Thing, "folds up" making a Mobius strip look crude,"


Willful Stalling Approach Revisited (from Talk 385:)

Grasping the purpose and perhaps prelude, of the Technique of deliberate Willful Stalling as an enhancement to The Prescription. Real Power detailed as to what it is Not. Ultimate Power in Work Direction, defined, in being able to "fuel" the vehicle (on your own) in order to "get around the corner " to an area of the wiring that you cannot now actualize, nor even yet conceive.

Final Words of Encouragement/Advisement From Jan:

"Don't forget. Take your best shot, IF, you've got a gun."







Jan Cox Talk 0385 - Summary by EW & SD

Jan Cox Talk 0385 - Summary by EW & SD
08/29/1988
Suggested Title: Episodic vs Conclusive Change

Change in The City - Apparent Frontiers

Ordinary change as "hobby" or as more seemingly "conclusive," to the city dweller.

How seemingly "conclusive" changes become meaningless to the one
on the apparent " personal frontier of change " (such as permanent weight loss).

Why semi-"conclusive" City changes end up being "no big deal" to the one who has
accomplished the change.

A non-ending inconclusive string of statements continue in the mind of the
so-called "changed one" that do not match up to the original frontier of
expectations. The "pay-off" may not be as hoped for due to the illusionary
nature of the original "frontiers" and imaginations.

The false idea that a person has of being able to change a fragmented
" piece" of themselves. ( see diagram 179A)

179A grab.jpg
 


All city change as episodic instead of Real Conclusion.

City Consciousness believes that it is somehow terribly flawed

Illustration of a movie based on a tug boat carrying explosives that ignite
when exposed to water.

The illusion that man can throw away things he/she does not like about
themselves. ( like throwing the explosives overboard)

All people are designed to feel that they are lacking "something."
This idea or feeling of "lacking" turns into a desire to fix or throw away.
But the human cannot throw away or repair themselves as if they were
an automobile.

Life, for its own purposes has misdirected Man into this idea of the human flaw,
which keeps him constantly struggling.

The Revolutionist must see through this mis-guided "detour" map, and
stay focused on the Road of Life, without worry.

"Just Press On" must become the un-uttered Moto of the Revolutionist.

The Real Matter, is not the automobile, with its limited duration or its
noises under the hood, BUT, rather, it is a matter of Going Somewhere Else,
(another Destination in ones inner direction.)

A Technique for Going "Somewhere Else."

( see diagram 179B)
Human nervous system basically wired for two simple modes:
1) action. 2) thinking about action

These modes not sufficient for Real change.

The Revolutionist must apply a 3rd, (unknown in the city) response.
A process called "Willful Stalling."
Technique of pretending that no matter what happens, you Intended it to happen.

Result of using this technique implicates Real Change in the entire nervous system of the practitioner .

The "No whining" rule of dwelling on inconclusive statements such as:
How did this happen
Why did this happen
What does it mean

Willful Stalling Further Defined

Understanding that it is not ordinary "city stalling" which is based on fear of outcome, or ordinary desire to escape a situation.

Understanding that it is not ambivalence or the inability to act.

Understanding that it is not an attempt to delay or ignore.

Grasping that it is always a deliberate, willful refrain from taking the first two modes of ordinary human reaction to act or to think of acting.

Realizing the Technique as a willful interference with the ordinary, non-ending mental flow of non-conclusive statements/ possibilities that hi-Jack the nervous state of Man.

A form of Real deliberate Conclusion in terms of authentic Change to the nervous system of the practitioner.

Insight Into The so called "World of Human Ideas" along with their "Hope for a Gratifying Or Agreeable Change In The World.

City consciousness clings to the impossibility of original ideas being Preserved in the original form.

Illustration of the spelunking expedition that alters the cave.

Transference of original Source Ideas cannot continue unaltered.

Not a problem of communication, but of the Natural Flow of the Vibrancy of Life.

Why a Revolutionist must first Learn and then furnish his/her own Ideas of authentic Growth as evidenced in True un-episodic change within his own neural capacities.

Question: What is the Yellow Circuit actually doing in Man's Life ?

A wiring that is attempting to make the chaos of Life appear rational.

All so called educational systems/ fields of expertise/ PHD's are attempting to make Sense of the chaotic/unpredictable.

Any Real Idea that goes beyond the city consciousness threshold is inflammatory and causes fear.

A True Revolutionist invites these New Ideas and must remain Calm.

Consider the purpose of all human entertainment devices.

To Ponder: the definition of a comedian as, " a dominant mugger with a grin and no gun."



0382 Summary by EW & SD

Jan Cox Talk 0382
08/22/1988
summary by EW & SD
1/1/2019

Suggested title : Whining and a whole string of “Fuck  its”
or Whining and a whole string of FuckIts

limitations of F.R.I.P.

   In the "city " a fictitious reasonably insane man is limited by what he considers the full use of the yellow circuit. 

   There is the erroneous equating of education and intelligence . 

    Physical prowess (red circuit ) such as gymnastics , swimming etc. can be scored and graded ...as in Olympic trials ... 9.8 , 9.7 . 

    Even artistic talent ( blue circuit ) can be rated . Music , painting can be recognized as great or mediocre .

   Yellow zone activity can not be so seen . There is no such physical grade for an Einstein .

[Intentions ]

   Why do people do things they do not intend ? 

    Why do people get pregnant ? Get arrested ? Say dumb things ? 

   And why is the excuse " Well , I didn't intent to " offered as the answer ? 

[Barriers to THIS ]

   You can not be involved in the continuous use of alcohol or drugs and be in this work . 

    You can not hold beliefs in anything from UFO's to talking to the dead and remain a part of THIS. 

    You can not depend on anything you have to go out and buy . 

     Fuck It ,  Fuck it , Fuck it .

    An indicator of such a need is the whining sound made at purchase . 

    Whining is the sound of humanity . 

  Caveat : It is not that one must not like or occasionally even do these things, but one must not NEED them. 

[Thoughts about denial ]

     For what would you be willing to die ? 

     Faith , creed, nationality ? 

    Would you feel differently if you were offered the deal that you could live if you only acted like a different faith,etc. ,rather than actually becoming a different faith ? 

     Real question :  What is the difference between acting and believing ? 

[How can there be 110%]

    110% is an impossible phrase that has come into being because of the 

   whining populous that settles for insufficient effort .

    Fuck It ! 

[Celebrating failure ]

   Whining ,dependency and insufficient effort have set the bar so low that we  now celebrate failure . 

    Even in something as straight forward as a reporter being expelled from an enemy country , we reframe it and present it as the expelling country 's fear of his journalistic prowess. 

    This is a typical indicator that Life always plays its own song and that everything in Life is self serving . 

[see diagram of spinal column and line level consciousness ]

Nov 20 - fixed audio links in the curation named Reticular Formation

Hello all,

It was kindly brought to my attention that the audio links were broken in the talks 2394 to 2402, otherwise known as the curation Reticular Formation.

The only way to get to those talks is through that link.

I uploaded all those audio files to This site, so no more broken links there at least.

Still working on getting the wordpress site up.
That will take a bit longer than expected.

So enjoy these and the other thousand audio files here
and the approx 1200 videos on youtube https://www.youtube.com/user/jancoxmedia

3192 - Consciousness is not under your control

Jan Cox Audio 3192 August 27 2004

Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2018

Notes by Cfish June 2018

Suggested Title: Precious Consciousness is not under your control

Begin: All ordinary men know that the thing most precious to them (their consciousness) is not under their control. Humans know and consciousness knows that consciousness is not under their control. Ordinary people do not talk about it.

05:00 Ordinary people do have an affection for their bodies. But even the most beautiful women and the most outstanding athletes want to be able to be appreciated for their mind, their inner person, their consciousness. The reality of “precious consciousness” is in the choice:

Had you rather lose your arm or lose your consciousness? Which would be the most important? That is how precious consciousness is. Your consciousness is “you.” Men know, Consciousness knows, the thing most precious to them, the thing that seemingly is them is not under their control.

10:00 Ordinary people seldom talk about how precious their consciousness is to them. Ordinary folks who do talk about it (precious consciousness) probably think they need a psychiatrist. It is just one of the rules of ordinary consciousness. (Not to talk about consciousness)

Humans go to great effort and expense to submit themselves to outside rules. (ex. religion, politics) They are submitting to rules in an effort to improve the quality of their consciousness. They are submitting themselves to something they believe is superior to themselves.

But why did consciousness invent all that stuff? Because consciousness knows it is not under it’s own control. Do you get it? Men know their consciousness is not under their control. They then turn to mechanisms of control. (ex. religion, philosophy, political systems)

15:00 Why do people profess a belief in these systems? When beset with the many laws of society (ex. speed limits etc.) why does someone want to passionately also be a Christian, a Muslim. or seek a Guru, or hear God calling. or any of the other ordinary descriptions?

20:00 It is because consciousness is not under your control. And humans know that consciousness is not under their control. And consciousness knows that consciousness is not under its control. I remind you after saying it a dozen times, here is a FACT: No one ever says that.

Exceptions are people who probably get referred to a psychiatrist or a straight jacket. I point to the questions “What are you going to think or say next?” No one knows. Does talk arise from what you think? If you say certainly, then tell me, what you are going to say next?

25:00 That is the reason that ordinary people look outside themselves for something to control their consciousness. (ex. scripture, political belief systems etc. ) Crudely put, the thing most precious, singular, closest, and reflective, in their brain, is not under their control.

30:00 Religious, Philosophical, and Political systems give the appearance of control over consciousness. But it is a grand illusion. Can you smell the two week old tuna in that? "I am now my own man because I am a Republican!" Extreme dedication can be seen in any belief systems and it can almost frighten you that those are the people running life.

And it’s normal. Consciousness has engaged in an activity (ex. I’m a Christian, Republican, Italian etc.) that gives the impression that their consciousness is under their control. Are they throwing it away? (not actually) Compared to people like us they are.

35:00 Check for yourself. Have you ever heard a sane person say “my consciousness” is not under my control. They may compensate for it with religions, clubs, etc. They may invent rules to live by. Illusions. But only folks like us (mystics maybe, but you know what I mean) try to actually bring consciousness under control. And maybe only one in 20,000 ever catch on to what they are doing.

That is what wanting to wake up/enlightenment is. Taking the mystery out makes it more fun, because then you become a cornered rat. Instead of dreaming of studying with some Tibetan Master, you are stuck in Chamblee, Ga. You are stuck in Consciousness. Your Consciousness is the corner. Your Consciousness is the rat

And there is no way out. And there is only one thing to be done - trying to bring consciousness under control.

44:00 End.

Don't forget The Daily News !

If you are reading this, then you can see " Daily News" on the menu bar.

This might just be the longest running blog of all time,

as the daily news started in 1998, and it is posted Daily.......

With just what you need to interfere with your normal mental.

  Remember to have fun with all this.  If you are taking your life too seriously

you will miss the vantage point from which it all becomes clear, 

or at least not as obfuscated.

  And one way to do that, daily, is to check the Daily News.

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3191 by Cfish

note: Talks above 3000 or so are generally not public simply because the audio is so hard to listen to - you might can get it if you ask, but not to share openly,

Jan Cox Talk 3191     August 25, 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2018
Notes by Cfish May 2018

Suggested Title: After the Fact Awareness

Begin: Thinking back to early childhood (ex. six or seven years of age) can you get that feeling of being alive and maybe the carefree feeling of running out the door during the summer just to play?  And it’s not necessarily about the details.

The point is there was a time when you did not have the critical/fault finding voice of what is normally called a conscious conscience.  Remember one kingdom and two princes, with the first prince, authoritarian and the second prince represents this conscious conscience.
 
05: 00   Tonight something that you may find even more useful is the description that there may as well be two different consciousnesses and throughout history there has never been a plural for conscious. (ex. Consciousnesses) 

The two consciousnesses can appear at the same time. The authoritarian voice/first prince when asked by the host “can I pour you another drink?” usually prevails over the weaker and infrequent voice that may find fault with drinking too much.

10:00 Simply, if you look, the dominant/authoritarian voice is almost always without self criticism. Why did consciousness come up with the idea you have a conscience and that it’s discreet?  Why does man have a name for conscience? (ex. a mass murderer has no conscience)

Does conscience hold civilization together? The last few nights we have been looking at the perspective of the brain having two consciousnesses. A authoritarian voice that has no interest in “waking up” and a weaker voice that has the interest.  

15:00  Maybe someone noticed the infrequent/weaker voice ten thousand years ago. Ordinary people have a second prince/weaker voice that is almost entirely critical of the first prince/dominant voice. But something the second prince may be able to use is that there is something “not right” with that view.

We were once carefree and had no second voice. The ordinary may blame their parents, religion, or society for instilling guilt. It seems to fit but that is not it. It’s as though another voice started in your head and took away the carefree days. 

20:00  The weaker/infrequent voice did not screw up your outer life. It can still bitch but if you are ordinary you will still eat too much. The point: The voice mainly screws up your inner life. Mainly, people like us. The ordinary suffer over it, but not enough to do anything about it. 

25:00  Folks like us suffer so much we try to do something about it. Ordinary people, in essence, have the same two voices and live with it. It’s like the old story about Southern Baptists, it doesn’t stop the sinning - it just stops you from enjoying it.  

30:00  After a lifetime of observation,  there is no  adequate description of Awakening/Enlightenment. We have nothing to compare the descriptions of the two states to. So you can’t say if your description or my description is adequate.

I say we have two states. One is the weak/second prince and wants to awaken and the other one/dominant whose power is irrepressible and when it wants to take over, the weaker prince, the more awake consciousness, never gets a knock on the door.

35:00  The weaker prince never gets an advance warning that the conventional/mechanical consciousness is taking over. All there is is “after the fact awareness.” When the dominant/mechanical consciousness wants to take over it never asks for permission.

And maybe in five minutes or five hours the weaker consciousness/ the younger prince in a sense, takes over the kingdom again, momentarily, after the fact. (ex. I was asleep/distracted) The second prince being asleep for the last several hours is a highly useful description. But there is something “not right” about the description. And there is no way to know how substantial the description really is.

40:00  The working model of having two consciousnesses and that there is no such word as consciousnesses - well, doesn’t that make your head tingle? And is that someone’s idea of a sick joke? Life, The Universe,(?) but the universe has no sense of humor.

I’ve spent most of my life trying to understand what it is I’ve been doing. But there is no way to know.  If the description of having two consciousnesses is useful, maybe it pushes you up a notch. Maybe thinking you’ve seen something about what’s going on in your brain.   
END 49:53

JanCox Talk 2766 - Notes by Wrench Tuttle

Tempostudy
summary in haiku JC 2766
by Wrench Tuttle

They say lost are we
Destroying nature itself
How life wants us, this

Some portion feeling
Of humanity always
Out of sync with it

Colorblind people
Cannot understand murders
Based on wrong color

Obvious it is
Natural tempo out of sync
What life wants is this

Only one creature
With no explanation kills
That should wake one up

And if you wake up
You can never understand
That people are this

At the heart of all
Metaphysical teachings
Natural tempo

The chosen few are
Those capable of seeing
The consciousness plan

Jan Cox Talk # 2765 - notes by Wrench Tuttle

2765 notes in Haiku by Wrench Tuttle

Like Fat in the Wind
summary in haiku JC 2765

Because of my weight
Because of my family
Because of my job

Because of because
Unhappily forever
Finding blame is food

Look what we have done
The past was more fulfilling
Better consciousness

People like us act
Disappointed with our state
As if mind can change

People cannot stand
To be upset, not know why
Suicide explained

Our complaint is not
With our state of consciousness
But with consciousness

Sticks in the machine
A noble and worthy goal
Fuck up consciousness

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3190 by Cfish

Jan Cox Talk 3190   -  23 August 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2018
Notes by Cfish April 2018

Suggested Title: One kingdom, Two Princes, Continued

Begin:  I thought of another way of putting, what I was talking about last time. It’s an allegory about a kingdom ruled by two princes who were born at the same time. One of the princes seems older and makes almost all the decisions. The second prince seems younger and doesn’t seem to do much.

The seemingly younger prince criticizes the seemingly older prince, who for the most part ignores the criticism. That is what I spent most of last Friday night’s talk trying to describe. This allegory, this shorter version, seems more substantial than the attempt at a straight and longer version.

For one reason, in the allegory, it is easier to highlight the juxtaposition of the two consciousnesses. Passing Interest: In one decent dictionary I have there is no plural for consciousness. And maybe that is all you need to know, “that man’s consciousness never allowed it to say consciousness in the plural.”

05:00  We have a kingdom with two princes (two consciousnesses) and although they were born at the same time, one seems older (the conventional/automatic consciousness) and seems to be the stage for ninety eight percent of your thoughts. It’s the first consciousness you remember.

And then you have the second prince/consciousness (though it clearly serves a crucial purpose) that seems younger, weaker, and shows up rarely. The first remembrance of the second prince/consciousness maybe when you hit your baby sister and felt bad/guilty.  It’s not the “bad boy” comment by parents.

10:00 Though the allegory may not seem scientific (two princes born at the exact same time) if you can get a feel for the allegory it’s a good description.  Maybe the second prince hid in a corner for the first year or two and never said a word. But in a year or two after the first prince can speak in coherent sentences, the second prince  consciousness shows up at the throne and makes a comment.

You can observe it in children. The first couple of years the older/conventional prince/consciousness has free rein. I’m not sure I can remember the first year of consciousness but I can feel what it is. Maybe a giggle, maybe life as one big adventure, stumbling, knocking stuff over, breaking stuff. 

And parents say “no, bad boy, bad girl.”  But a human child with two princes/consciousnesses, but only one of them speaking in his brain, then no amount of outside hectoring (ex. bad boy) has any effect for that year or so. Some parents worry if the child is ok. (ex. he keeps knocking stuff over)

15:00  Then one day the kid reaches for some food and stops and thats the day the child experiences what the parents call consciousness. It’s vague but I bring it up because that is the day the second prince/consciousness criticized the one normally in charge. (ex. first prince/consciousness)

It is not the end of the giggling, great adventure but it made the older/conventional/normally in charge consciousness/first prince stop for a moment. It’s never discussed. And even those who heard it and understood it, it is hard to hold. The second prince/consciousness does little more than criticize the first prince.

By the way you do not have three consciousnesses and you don’t have one consciousness. You have two. The first one is the constant talking, daydreaming, one hears in their head. It hears itself. From the ordinary view the first prince/consciousness replays scenes from the past, things that don’t ever matter.

20:00  And the first one takes up all the room available, almost all of the time.  And it tries to take up all the room available in folks like us. Under ordinary conditions, the second prince/consciousness, when it briefly takes over, it is infrequent, unless it’s frequently showing up to apologize for defending yourself for something you said.

The point being a man in apology mode is being as sincere as a man can be. In the country music sense a man in apology mode is pleading for his life. But it’s just for split seconds and then it is back to the conventional consciousness.

25:00  Having two consciousnesses is at the heart of people like us wanting to Awaken. And it is at the heart of ordinary people wanting to improve themselves. But under ordinary conditions, ordinary people don’t mind all that much if they succeed or not. Folks trying to Awaken take it seriously.

Every time you remember your aim (ex. one brain here and there are two of us) that is the second prince, the second consciousness talking and seeing the aim. First consciousness, the first prince, does not care if there are two consciousnesses and why should it? It literally runs roughshod over the second prince/consciousness. 

30:00  There are exceptions to everything in life. (ex. insanity, phobias) First consciousness/first prince is absolute. The second consciousness/prince is real and has different views. And it shows up for only moments and says its piece. But first consciousness/prince does not even bother to refute it.

That is what is known as power. Despots don’t argue. It is striking once you see and think about it this way. The second consciousness/prince almost does nothing - but offer criticism of first consciousness/first prince. And the first prince does not even respond.

35:00  That is the way consciousness operates. Maybe you are overweight and second consciousness comments  when reaching for an eclair “what about your diet?” but first consciousness does not respond. It may hesitate, like a child getting ready to stick his hand in the mashed potatoes, but it will still eat the eclair.

A better example concerns alcohol. Maybe a doctor saying you need to cut down on the drinking. The second consciousness hears it and agrees with it. But one of the reasons people drink is it will silence the voice of the second prince.

40:00 In people like us, it’s clear. Second prince/consciousness appears every time you think “I’m trying to wake up” etc. That is a distinct other consciousness. When I realized that, it meant more to me in a practical sense, up to that point, well, it is still a benchmark, that took decades, and it was useful.

If you can see the story of the two princes as being useful to you, and see that the story is about two distinct consciousnesses, and that anything to do with wanting to awaken - well that is the second prince/second consciousness. The first consciousness, the conventional consciousness, has no interest in awakening.

I looked for another word to describe the first consciousness, other than power. But I think you will know what I mean. There are two consciousnesses.  Not three, not one. One consciousness wants to awaken and the other one has almost all the authority and runs everyone’s ordinary life.

45:00  Ordinary people can’t put up with people talking about consciousness. In folks like us second consciousness is not so easily pushed around. But what if trying to “wake up” is just second consciousness’s excuse for something to do? (ex. the second prince saying, “listen, don’t just push me out of the way, I got something important to say.”)

I planned to never say that out loud.  But I have almost said it a dozen times. But second consciousness decided in private that I wouldn’t do it. Tonight I either changed my mind or I misspoke. Right?  To be continued.  

End 49:39

 

 

2784 Notes by Wrench Tuttle

2784 Notes Haiku by Wrench Tuttle
The situation is the situation

If self you think you
Then unsuccessful study
And worlds cheapest laugh

Consciousness raising
Attempt to make it stable
Practices of all

Never ending stream
Thought and thought and thought and thought
Mind, not stable thing

Mind is not a noun
One more part of the joke, is
Trying to awake

Mind is a verb, yes
Just try and imagine that
Better word - minding

Tendency to say
I think, as if there is I
Producing the thoughts

Better not to say
We are trying to wake up
Consider - make up

A clue for you all
Try creating consciousness
Better to say that

Try to be cured, but
There is no situation
Just situation

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3189 by Cfish

Jan Cox Talk # 3189 - 20 August 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2018
Notes Cfish - March 2018

Suggested Title:  A Pleasure Based on an Annoyance

Begin:  If someone asked me about this stuff (ex. awakening, enlightenment, etc.) and after asking them what they have heard about awakening, etc., I would tell them that they did not understand what it is. And that the person who wrote about it did not understand it either.

And if they did not walk away , maybe thinking I had insulted their teacher, I would tell them the same way I keep trying to tell you guys. (Not knowing if it has meaning to you) And that is to continually try to come up with a better and better explanation to yourself of what it is you are trying to do.

And if you get on this path (ex. observing what your consciousness is up to day and night, and not just taking my words) you are not trying to answer some great metaphysical question. I’m thinking that it may have been hard for any of you to think about this without thinking about it thru my words.

That is the nature of consciousness. The first decade or more that I thought I was involved with this, I could only think about it and see it thru another man’s words. Some of you involved with this in longer terms, there are some simple ways of just looking at your consciousness, maybe driving home tonight.

05:00  And assuming you are alone, just you and your consciousness in your head, and you just look at consciousness. (You are suppose to be looking as much as you can, at least since you have known me. I still do it.)  And ask, based on what consciousness does naturally, what is it I am trying to do?

Never mind “I’m trying to wake up” though that is OK but the term “trying to wake up” does not answer the question “what is it I am trying to do?”  There are better explanations than “I am trying to wake up” and when you get there on your own, it makes the other efforts seem like kindergarten. 

The “method of methods” is finding a better description than “trying to awaken, achieve enlightenment, etc. (assuming that is the method chosen) There is a better explanation/description than the conventional “trying to wake up/achieve enlightenment.” And only “you” can find it.

10:00  The fastest way to achieve the reality of waking up/enlightenment is for “you” to find a better description. It’s not like a task. It’s a pleasure based on an annoyance. The last few weeks,  a primo description/method for the struggle to awaken is a sentence in quotation marks.

“There is one brain here and there are two of us.” You have to find your own description but that one made me run my car into a ditch. Metaphorically, because I was sitting in the garage at the time.  The sentence is a description of what we are trying to do in some way.

15:00  It could not be cruder. It’s consciousness trying to do something with consciousness. Consciousness is not trying to do anything with my muscles, my feelings, or my fears. All the thought of awakening is, is a man’s consciousness wanting to do something to and with itself.

And it’s nearly impossible, because “there is one brain and two of us.” Whatever description you have had access to, (ex Buddhism, Tantric disciplines, Awakening, etc.) and spending your entire life doing the practices and then, never getting close enough to personally understanding it. 

It’s consciousness (my consciousness) looking at the situation (I’m asleep, trying to awaken) and  the best description I have come up with, personally,  these last several weeks is “There is one brain here and two of us.” That is the situation that gave rise to a few man thinking I’m living in a dream.

20:00  It’s part of every human being. And it is what makes most humans want to improve themselves. (ex religion, psychology) You can find the situation in you and it is manifested in sane and normal people everywhere. No one is satisfied with themselves.

Waking up is becoming aware of “one brain here and there are two of us.” That’s the situation and in a few people like us, one consciousness does not like the other consciousness. Ordinary people may say stuff like “I’m working on my anger issues.” But you know that’s just bullshit.

No ordinary person, including you when you are ordinary is trying to improve themselves consciously. Ordinary people can do easy stuff like lose weight but not so much personality stuff like looking on the brighter side. Ordinary people have two consciousnesses.

One consciousness’s main job is not liking the features of the second consciousness. And it only shows up for a split second and it has no power. (ex. I am sorry I am late again. It will not happen again.) The one consciousness whose main job is not liking the features of the second is the basis of guilt.

25:00  And internally, the one consciousness that does not like the other consciousness (“One brain here, and there are two of us.”) the only time it will show up is when it has to excuse “what’s going on.” (ex. I’m sorry about my anger issues, I will get a counselor.)

Ordinarily, the one consciousness’s job of disapproving of the other consciousness internally, mentally, rarely shows up and when it does it’s only for a moment and it has no power. Because ordinary consciousness/the main consciousness comes stomping back in.

People trying to awaken have the same situation but slightly different. It’s one consciousness saying, "Ok, We got one brain here, and there are two of us.”

  If you work on it, and you see it, even if I were dead and gone - you run to the cemetery and dance on my grave, with a party hat, and confetti, and I will try to get up and join you.

END 29:14

An all caps version of the AKS/news of talk 2500

Jan typed these in all caps. If anyone knows of a Mac program that will automate the process of upper/lower case with proper capitalization -- twould be nice to learn how.

This is the format I wish to use throughout the website;
with the talk number and item number on one line as separator.
and the poetic indents as spaces. ( no formatting codes allowed )
jcap is short for Jan Cox Aphorism
Any votes for using " jcap 2500-01 " as the separator ?
   This would help people track it down if posted by itself somewhere.

jcap 2500 ALL CAPS

COPYRIGHT 2000: JAN COX    
set 2020 ( FORMERLY NEWS2020.TXT AND JCAP 2020.PDF )  ( NOT IN DAILY NEWS )

2500-01
A SPEAKER ON THE MATTER OF MENTAL ALTERATION SO SAID TO AN AUDIENCE:
"THE TRICK IS TO NEITHER REJECT THOUGHT, NOR EMBRACE IT.", AND SOMEONE ASKED:
"WHAT IS IT IN US THAT CAN EITHER REJECT OR EMBRACE THOUGHT?",
AND THE SPEAKER REPLIED: "THE SAME THING IN YOU THAT PRESENTLY ASKS ME
THE QUESTION.", AND THE MAN THEN SAID: "BUT IT IS ONLY A THOUGHT IN ME
THAT MADE MY MOUTH SPEAK THE QUESTION, SO IT IS A CIRCLE WITHOUT BEGINNING,
OR END, AND YOUR DIRECTIVE, (AS FINE AS IT MAY SOUND), IS MEANINGLESS,
IS IT NOT?!", AND THE SPEAKER REPLIED: "MOST ASSUREDLY, AND IN THAT YOU
REALIZE IT: I AM GLAD I COULD BE OF SERVICE.".

EVEN THOUGH THE EPISODE MAKES ANOTHER PRIMARY POINT
THERE IS NONETHELESS POTENTIAL USEFULNESS,(IF YOU NEED IT), IN THE IDEA OF NEITHER REJECTING NOR EMBRACING THOUGHT.

IT'S ALWAYS GOOD ADVICE TO GET OUT OF THE WAY OF A MAN EITHER:
SEEKING THE TRUTH -- OR
FLEEING FROM IT;
FOR EITHER WAY: A MAN ON A FRANTIC MERRY GO ROUND
                          CAN RUN YOU DOWN.

...I CAN'T LET US LEAVE THIS AREA WITHOUT FINALLY MENTIONING THAT LEGENDARY FIGURE WHO STOOD ATOP THE CANYON'S HIGHEST BRIDGE, TIED SECURELY TO THE ILLUSIONARY BOOMADARY-BUNGEE-CORD, WHO MIGHTILY CRIED, AS HE PREPARED TO JUMP:
"I REJECT ALL THOUGHT -- AND UNCONDITIONALLY EMBRACE MY REJECTION."

2500-02
A MAN ASKED A PURPORTED MYSTIC:
"How CAN I BE OF AN ENLIGHTENED MIND?", AND THE MYSTIC REPLIED:
"Do NOT HAVE DARK CLOUDS IN YOUR MIND.", AND THE MA REFLECTED ON THIS
REPLY FOR A BIT, THEN SAID: "THAT SOUNDS GOOD, BUT I HAVE COME TO REALIZE
THAT THE DARK CLOUDS I FIND IN MY MIND DO NOT ORIGINATE THERE -- SO:
WHERE DO THEY COME FROM AND HOW CAN I STOP THEM BEFORE THEY ENTER MY MIND?",
AND THE ALLEGED MYSTIC'S FACE FELL IN APPARENT EMBARRASSMENT, AND THE MAN SAID:
"YOU DON'T KNOW, DO YOU?", AND SHAME-FACED, THE MYSTIC NODDED THAT HE DIDN'T --
-- BUT THEN HIS FACE SUDDENLY BRIGHTENED AND HE EXCLAIMED(SOMEWHAT RHETORICALLY
"WELL, YOU COULD WATCH WHAT YOU EAT?!?"

WHEN WORKING ON THE MIND, YOU COULD BE ON THE RIGHT BATTLEFIELD, BUT BATTLIN' THE WRONG FOE.

(THOSE THUGS IN THE TRENCHES WEREN'T BORN THERE YOU KNOW.)


AND ANOTHER GUY ASKED A MAN, (WHO IT TURNS OUT PROBABLY WAS A MYSTIC): "DOES ANYONE ACTUALLY -- KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING?", AND THE GUY REPLIED: "ONLY THOSE WHO SAY THEY DO."
....THE MAN CHEWED ON THIS FOR A MOMENT, THEN SAID:
"IT'S A JOKE -- RIGHT?!"
...(YOU KNOW, THE JOKES YOU FIND OUT THERE IN THE FOXHOLES DIDN'T GET THERE ALL BY THEMSELVES.)
    

2500-03    
THERE WAS ONCE A MAN WHO BECAME TRAPPED IN A HOUSE OF VAPORS; 
THE VAPORS CAME FROM HIS OWN BREATHING.

ONCE UPON A TIME THERE WAS A MAN WHOSE SOLUTION TO BEING ASLEEP & DELUDED WAS: 
"NEITHER REJECT NOR EMBRACE YOUR BREATHING."

...(AND I WILL NOT INSULT YOU BY NOTING THAT HE MAY HAVE USED THE WORD, 
"BREATHING" AS A METAPHOR FOR SOMETHING ELSE ENTIRELY.)

2500-04
A MAN TOLD A FRIEND:
"As FAR AS SEEING WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON;
EVERYONE LOOKS EVERY WHERE EXCEPT IN THE RIGHT PLACE.", AND HIS FRIEND ASKED:
"How CAN YOU TELL THAT YOU'RE LOOKING IN THE WRONG PLACE?",
AND THE MAN SAID: "IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING --
-- IT'S THE WRONG PLACE."

THERE WAS ONCE A BIRD SPOTTER WHOSE SUPREME AIM WAS TO SEE THIS ONE EXOTIC BIRD THAT HAD ALWAYS ELUDED HIM.
IT TURNED OUT THAT IT FLEW TOO FAST TO BE SEEN BY NORMAL SIGHT,
AND IT FURTHER TURNED OUT THAT IT ONLY FLEW WHEN HE THOUGHT ABOUT IT.
...WHICH SUDDENLY REMINDS ME OF THE LEGENDARY QUESTION THAT SOME SAY WAS
THE VERY BEGINNING OF ALL ATTEMPTS TO CHANGE ONE'S STATE OF MIND, (AND IT WAS): "WHAT IS IT THAT DOESN'T EXIST UNLESS YOU THINK ABOUT IT,
AND IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE AS LONG AS IT IS IN AN ACTIVE STATE OF EXISTENCE?"
...WHICH I GUESS BRINGS US BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THIS VERBAL EPISODE THAT SAID: 
"TO SEE WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON;
EVERYONE LOOKS EVERY WHERE EXCEPT IN THE RIGHT PLACE."
....(LEAST WE CAN'T SEE WE WASN'T WARNED.)
...OH YEAH, AND THAT STORY ABOUT A GUY WHO'S INVENTED BINOCULARS THAT LOOK BACK AT YA WHEN YOU LOOK THROUGH THEM -- TURNS OUT IT WAS A HOAX.

2500-05
A SON ASKED HIS FATHER:
"ARE WE AFTER A PURE MIND, AN EMPTY MIND, OR A STILL MIND?",
AND HIS DEAR PA PA REPLIED: "HOW ABOUT A --"HARD-OF-HEARING"ONE?!"

BELOW THE CORTICAL LEVEL:' ALL IS TIMELESS,
ABOVE IT EVERYTHING IS CHIPMONKS.., ï
    ,
"SOMEBODY PICKUP' THAT PHONE!" 
"SOMEBODY PUT DOWN THAT PHONE!"
"I DIDN'T WANT THAT CALL!"
"DON'T BQTHER ME, I'M WAITING ON THAT OTHER CALL!" 
"LEAVE ME ALONE, `CAN'T YOU SEE THAT I'M - ON-THE-PHONE!"

2500-06
A MAN WHO FOR YEARS HAD STUDIED WITH AN ENLIGHTENED MASTER
ONE DAY RUSHED TO HIM, EXCLAIMING: "I'VE FINALLY GOT IT -- ALL FIGURED OUT!", 
AND THE MASTER CALMLY SAID: "NO YOU DON'T."
....THE MAN THOUGHT ABOUT THIS FOR A WHILE, THEN SOFTLY SAID "OH."

(I WILL NOT INSULT YOU BY VERBALLY NOTING THE POINT OF THIS STORY,
FOR ANYONE STILL UNABLE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO REJECT OR EMBRACE THOUGHT CAN EASILY FIGURE IT OUT FOR THEMSELF.)

2500-07
MAN TALKING ABOUT THE MATERIAL WORLD OUTSIDE OF HIM IS SCIENCE; 
MAN TALKING ABOUT HIMSELF IS MEANINGLESS SPECULATION.
You CAN MEASURE A TREE'S HEIGHT, BUT ONLY GUESS AT THE MIND'S WIDTH.

2500-08
AFTER STUDYING FOR MANY YEARS WITH A CERTAIN MYSTIC, AND ONE DAY
UPON SUDDENLY DECIDING THAT HE HAD BEEN MISLEAD ALL ALONG,
A MAN RUSHED INTO THE MYSTIC'S ROOM AND EXCLAIMED: "I AM -- OUTRAGED!!", 
TO WHICH THE MYSTIC CALMLY REPLIED:
"No YOU'RE NOT, --- YOU'RE ASLEEP,"

AFTER FINDING HIMSELF UNABLE TO SATISFACTORILY COMPLETE THE
METAPHYSICAL JOURNEY FROM PARIS TO ISTANBUL
ONE MAN HEADED OFF TOWARD NEW ZEALAND.

2500-09
BY THOUGHT,
ALL MEN ARE MENTAL GODS MADE;
FOR WITH EACH BREATH WE
CREATE,
THEN DESTROY
THE SECONDARY REALITY IN WHICH WE SO PREDOMINATELY SWIM.

AND ALL THE FISH IN THE COMMON SCHOOL SANG:
"WE EMBRACE THE WATER;
WE REJECT THE WATER.",
IT IS SO THAT THEY MUST SING
TO REMAIN A PART OF THE SCHOOL.

FOR A FEW,
FROM A PARTICULAR VIEW,
THERE IS A "SOMETHING" THAT: 
PUTS YOU AWAKE -- THEN,
  MAKES YOU ASLEEP.
  AND "THE-FISH-WHO-KNOWS" IS THE
  ONE REALIZES THE IMPOTENT FOOLISHNESS OF REJECTING OR EMBRACING
  THE WATER IN THAT IT AND HE ARE INSEPARABLE.
THE MENTAL WORLDS WE CREATE & DESTROY WITH EACH BREATH COME FROM NO WHERE, AND GO TO NO WHERE INTHAT ALL WORLDS ARE AN UNRECOGNIZED SINGULARITY.

2500-10
AFTER YEARS OF ATTEMPTING TO FOLLOW THE SCHOOL'S CENTRAL DICTUM OF:
"KNOW THEYSELF.",
ONE MONK WAS FINALLY TAKEN ASIDE BY THE HEAD MASTER AND TOLD:
"IT'S NOT ACTUALLY A MATTER OF KNOWING YOURSELF,
BUT OF KNOWING THE MECHANISM THAT "KNOWS YOURSELF"."
...AND AFTER A MOMENTARILY REFLECTION OF THIS THE NEOPHYTE THOUGHT: "NOW YOU TELL ME!", TO WHICH THE MASTER REPLIED: "YES, AND JUST AT THE RIGHT TIME, HUH?!"

2500-11
QUESTION: WHAT'S IT LIKE TO WANT TO AWAKEN DURING THE TIME THAT YOU DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT'S ABOUT?
ANSWER: IT'S LIKE A SHADOW TRYING TO SUSTAIN A DISLIKE OF ITSELF.

2500-12
ONE MAN NOTES: "THE EVER-CHANGING, DIFFERENT ELEMENTS THAT SEEM TO MAKE UP "ME"
COME AND GO AS REGULARLY AS THE MINUTES TICK AWAY.
WHERE DOES THIS "ME" COME FROM, AND WHERE DOES IT GO?! 
... No, BETTER I SHOULD ASK:
WHAT IS THE SOLE SOURCE OF THIS SENSATION-OF A "ME"?",
...AND AFTER A BRIEF REFLECTION ON HIS OWN QUESTION, HE REPEATED HIS OPENING: 
"THE EVER-CHANGING, DIFFERENT ELEMENTS THAT SEEM TO MAKE UP "ME"
COME AND GO AS REGULARLY AS THE MINUTES OF MY LIFE TICK AWAY

BELOW THE CORTICAL LEVEL OF THOUGHT; ALL IS TIMELESS; 
ABOVE IT PREVAILS THE LAW OF APPARENT CHAOS."

AND FROM HIS OVER HEAD PLANE, ONE PILOT SUGGESTED:
"FOR SMOOTH FLYING THE TRICK IS TO NEITHER REJECT NOR EMBRACE THE:
"APPARENT CHAOS"."

2500-13
RE THAT POPULAR SUBJECT: THE SO-CALLED, "ILLUSIONS OF THE WORLD": 
IT'S CERTAINLY EASY TO OVERLOOK BUT --
THE "ILLUSIONS OF THE WORLD" DO NOT EXIST
OUT IN THE WORLD, 
BUT IN YOUR MIND.

2500-14
A GUY STOOD UP AT A RECENT GATHERING AND MADE THIS,DECLARATION:
"THIS, "I'M-GONNA-WAKE-MYSELF-UP-AND-BE-ENLIGHTENED" THING THAT EVERYBODY'S TALKIN' BOUT IS TANTAMOUNT TO SAYIN', "I'M GONNA KISS MY OWN LIPS."."
 HE THEN LOOKED AROUND AS THOUGH INVITING QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE, BUT EVERYONE WAS TOO INVOLVED IN PUCKERING THEIR LIPS AND ROLLING THEIR ROLLING THEIR EYES UPWARD.
... (I DUNNO, MAYBE IT WAS A CONVENTION OF, "HOPERS & DREAMERS"?

2500-15
ONE MAN SAID:
"WHAT I LIKE ABOUT IMPENDING, UNPLEASANT EVENTS IS THAT THEY
TAKE MY MIND OFF OF ME.", AND HIS BROTHER RESPONDED:
"BUT HOW CAN THAT BE? -- YOUR MIND IS YOU?!,
THUS NO MATTER THE SUBJECT OF YOUR PRESENT THOUGHTS
YOUR MIND IS ALWAYS ---
STILL ON YOU."

2500-16
A LOOK AT THAT CERTAIN MATTER FROM A TEMPORAL VIEW. 
NEITHER REJECT NOR EMBRACE THE INSTANT MOMENT.
AND SOMEONE ASKS:
"IS THE TRICK TO BEING ENLIGHTENED
TO BE -- "INDIFFERENT"?",
AND I REPLY:
BEING INDIFFERENT IS THE SAME AS BEING ENLIGHTENED,
BUT THIS INDIFFERENCE IS NOT THE SAME AS USUALLY UNDERSTOOD;
THIS ENLIGHTENED INDIFFERENCE IS NOT OF A MENTAL NATURE, (NOT CORTICAL),
BUT IS LIKE THE TYPE NATURAL TO OUR SUB CORTICAL EXISTENCE.

IT MIGHT IN FACT BE BETTER LABELED, "IMPERSONAL"
FOR IT IS ONLY IN OUR CORTICAL REALM THAT WE TAKE LIFE "PERSONALLY",
WHILE SUB-CORTICALLY WE HAVE NOT EVEN THE MECHANISM TO TAKE LIFE PERSONALLY,

THUS A MAN WHO'S CAUGHT ON TO WHAT'S GOING ON NEITHER REJECTS NOR EMBRACES
THE LIFE THAT SEEMS TO HAPPEN TO HIM,
FOR WHATEVER IT MAY BE --
HE DOES NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY,
AND IS THUS INDIFFERENT TO COME-WHAT-MENTALLY-MAY.

2500-17
ONE MAN'S ODE TO THAT CERTAIN MATTER:
THE BEST THING ABOUT
THE VOICE IN MY HEAD
IS IT LEADS THE LIFE
I WISH THAT I LEAD.
....(0-KAY!)

2500-18
IF 'TIS TRUE,
AS OFTEN SAID,
THAT POVERTY'S REQUIRED TO AWAKEN,
THEN THE POVERTY NEEDED IS IN BEING WITHOUT EITHER
 REJECTION OR EMBRACE OF THOUGHT.
...SO THAT A MAN CAN SAY:
"I HAVE NOTHING TO GIVE,
I HAVE NOTHING TO WITHHOLD.",
AT WHICH TIME A MAN HAS -- SAID IT ALL,
   AND IS NOW
   "PROPERLY POOR."
...(AND I CAN'T RESIST MENTIONING, [FOR THE SAKE OF THOSE ALREADY IN
AN ADVANCED STAGE OF SUITABLE VERBAL/MENTAL POVERTY), THAT --
--- IN ALL OF THIS TALK ABOUT NEITHER "REJECTING, NOR EMBRACING" THIS-OR-THAT,
IT WOULD BE MORE ON HIDDEN POINT TO SAY IT AS EITHER:
"NOT REJECTING, AND NOT, 'NOT' REJECTING", OR
"NOT EMBRACING, AND NOT, 'NOT' EMBRACING."
...IS YOUR INNER SIGHT CLEANED OUT ENOUGH TO RECOGNIZE WHY THIS WOULD BE
AN IMPROVED TELLING OF THIS MATTER?)

2020-19
WHEN YOUR MIND DOES NOT KNOW THE TRUTH, LIFE OUTSIDE OF YOU IS ONE WAY;
WHEN YOUR MIND DOES KNOW THE TRUTH, LIFE OUTSIDE OF YOU IS THE SAME AS IT WAS.
WHEN IT'S DARK, IT'S DARK, AND
WHEN IT'S LIGHT, IT'S LIGHT.
...AND THAT'S ALL THERE IS TO IT ALL.
 

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3188 by cFish

Jan Cox Talk 3188 -  August 18, 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2018
Notes by cFish January 2018

Suggested Title: Waking Up The Storyteller 

Begin: Last time I presented “consciousness” as a storyteller and that when consciousness is doing something useful it is telling stories about the physical world and how the physical world could be. (ex. science and technology)

And when consciousness is not telling stories about the physical world it is telling stories about intangibles (ex. religion, art), things lumped into culture versus the natural environment. But lets be more specific. Consciousness is not so much a storyteller as it is a scene screener.

And only in people like us, in an attempt to “wake up,” does consciousness actually tell a story. The rest of the time it’s not so much storytelling but brief scene presentations, almost entirely about “you and it” (consciousness) to be precise.

Consider the ordinary view of consciousness, internally, “How many scenes does consciousness show in the theater of the brain about someone else?” It is like the old joke where the guy talks about himself the entire time on a date, and realizes it, and then asks the date, “Well, enough about me. What do you think of me?”

These brief scenes of ordinary consciousness may be replaying something from earlier in the day. (ex. an encounter with a sales clerk) But the encounter is still about you.  The basic scenes of consciousness are brief and followed by another scene.

05:00 It is just like an in house theater at a Hollywood studio.  They have what is known as screening rooms where directors and producers go in to look at the scenes for a movie they are working on. And there is a projectionist that is hired to sit in there all day, on call, for any producer and plays these small scenes that last seconds.

They are either showing material objects (car or garden) or the scenes are mostly about you. But the area that interests us is when consciousness is not dealing with the material world, but with scenes about you and it. (consciousness)

10:00  “Consciousness and you” is tricky to see. The scene could be about you and your girlfriend. But if you keep looking, the scenes about “you” are about you and consciousness. 

The second thing to investigate is the ordinary complaints about specific scenes. It is the hobby of ordinary people and it drives them to counseling. Speaking for you folks, people like us are not bothered by specific scenes. We are bothered by the scenes being replayed endlessly. And it is not that we want particular scenes to stop - we want them all to stop.

15:00  After years of looking at what consciousness does thru man naturally, just for myself, if nothing else, all the descriptions I have used for consciousness fit perfectly with the description of consciousness as a storyteller. Even the physical stuff works. (ex. agriculture, inventing the wheel.)

16:41 But one day a refinement hit me of the storyteller description. And this description was “being asleep” was “ordinary consciousness” never telling a complete story. “Being asleep” is fragmented consciousness. It is just flashes of seeing things in bits and pieces, never seeing the full picture.

So even though it was delightful to see consciousness as a “storyteller,” the only time “ordinary consciousness” gets close to anything resembling a real story is a moment in time (speaking crudely) “when you awaken.” The rest of the time it’s a scene screener.

20:00 When some feature about life/man is forever changed in your understanding, that is a form of awakening. That is when consciousness tells a complete story. It happens in a split second. You never again have questions about that scene anymore. Your consciousness does not play scenes about it anymore because the scenes that consciousness plays are like question marks. Like “ What the hell is this? “ 

22:00 The scenes are limited, shown over and over, and to ordinary consciousness are like question marks.  They are soundbites,  trailers, that come and go. The scenes are predominately of a disturbing nature, annoying, maybe frightening, but never a satisfying conclusion. It presents bits, pieces, soundbites, scenes, trailers, excerpts.

30:00 Consciousness is in charge of showing scenes, and without extraordinary effort, will never get beyond scene screening. In conclusion; when looking at or studying the scenes, it’s not you looking. It is you making consciousness look at and examine itself.

You did not make consciousness examine the scene. It is consciousness “by its nature” showing the scenes and asking “whats up?” Ordinary consciousness may say I shouldn’t be looking at the dark side, but with ordinary consciousness the good news scene does not last long.  It is like consciousness shoving an 85 pound weakling out of the way.

35:00 . Your consciousness, ordinary consciousness shows disturbing and frightening scenes. What gives? What can you find out by making consciousness look at itself? Insights. They are there.  Almost everyday I see something. But I’m not saying I know the difference between the worthwhile and the entertaining. I don’t really see much of a difference. That’s my “urging” for the night. 

Ends 38:04

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3187 by cfish

Jan Cox Talk 3187  16 August 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2017
Notes by cfish December 2017

Suggested Title: The Raconteur (Consciousness)
(Note: Raconteur is defined as: person who tells anecdotes in a skillful and amusing way)

Begin:  Surely, the hardest thing in the universe is consciousness trying to study itself. Consciousness, by its nature is a “raconteur.” That’s the reason it is extremely difficult for consciousness to study itself.

Consciousness is a story teller. It weaves tales about the material objects on the planet, and how and by what arrangement the material objects could be. (ex. science, technology ) 

When consciousness is not doing that, it is weaving tales about how “people” could be. (ex. religion, philosophy) When consciousness tries to study itself, it can not stay focused enough, long enough, for it to actually be a study.

When consciousness remembers its aim, remembers to study itself, when it catches itself running automatically, it looks at the last thought that was going thru it, and it begins to tell a story about the last thought.

05:00 Maybe the last thought was about Uncle Charlie, and remembering the time Uncle Charlie did something. Consciousness is a story teller.  It explains everything consciousness does. It covers science, tech and, in a sense, the rise of civilization itself. 

10:00  Consciousness imagines certain aspects of material life, the physical environment, and how they could be, and that is the origin of scientific discoveries. And what does consciousness do when it is not creating and inventing?

Not being offensive, thinking only a handful of folks invent and create. Maybe a few of you folks are programmers. But what does consciousness do when it’s not creating and inventing aspects of physical life?

When consciousness is not telling stories about the physical aspects of life (ex. the planets, the wind the rain, animals and plants) it is telling stories/weaving tales about things intangible. (ex. soul essence, spirit)

15:00  Consciousness by nature is a story teller. When not weaving tales about the physical world (ex. even rearranging the furniture) its weaving tales about the intangible worlds. (ex. psychology, religion, politics)

20:00  Maybe it is a story about the fall of ancient civilizations. (ex. Athens) It is interesting, it appears scientific or academic, and the story does no damage,  But it is just story telling. Religious or atheist, it does not matter.

You get “caught up”  and it is not a weakness on you part. It is the nature of consciousness (raconteur) and it makes no distinction between the physical world and entertainment. Gossip or TV, it does not matter, consciousness loves stories.

25:00  You folks that have been around me know I am not anti religious. I am not anti anything. The beauty of God, etc. and consciousness gets “caught up” and simply forgets its the same thing as telling kids about Hansel and Gretel.

I am encouraging you folks to continue to look. You folks have a treat, it will make you laugh out loud, but not sarcastically, when you just realize that all consciousness is, is a story teller. I did not see it this way originally. 

If consciousness is not telling stories about what physical objects could be, and which make life more survivable, it is weaving stories about religion, history, psychology, political commentary, observations regarding morality, etc.

30:00  Stories are all ordinary consciousness wants to hear. Ordinary consciousness does not want to hear “that all it is, is a story teller.”  There is nothing you need to do other than getting consciousness to study itself. And that is assuming that consciousness, in a good moment, can study itself. 

But just try telling someone else. What’s there to study? It’s the last thing I remember. I remember the aim, I go from automatic running of consciousness to remembering to study consciousness.  (study mode)

For example the last thing I was thinking, I was mad about being cut off in traffic. Then consciousness starts story telling about how it was not as bad as the guy who cut me off yesterday.

Everybody who got a good hearty laugh damn near got it. Those with the aim, those remembering the aim, those remembering to study consciousness, those remembering the study mode, its a big deal to remember to do it.

And in a sense its the main thing.  Once consciousness remembers the study mode, consciousness takes a step to get right on it, and steps right back into it. That’s how strong the nature of consciousness’s story telling is. 

End 34:17

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3172

Jan Cox Talk 3172 - July 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2017
Notes by cfish November 2017

Suggested Title: Why does Innate Wisdom have to be put into Words?)

Begin:  What I am trying to point to tonight really has no description. But knowing the human mind (because I got one) and knowing what it’s prone to latch on to, its a prime example of how consciousness works.

It’s an example of how consciousness keeps looking in certain directions, at certain tilts, and how the human mind is fooling itself. It’s not “you” fooling human consciousness, and its not consciousness fooling “you.” It is it fooling itself.

If I can get you to look around at where I am pointing, you will realize that the “consciousness fooling itself” description is totally invalid. But you can’t say why. Ordinary consciousness may say human experience is idiocy.

But I am not pointing out the idiocy. What seems to be going on is not what’s going on. Consciousness works. Consciousness is not idiocy. I am not trying to get you to smirk. There are no words to say what I am trying to get you to do.

Here is the example. Consider the phrase “words to live by.” (ex. honesty is the best policy) There is more than one book, maybe a recent book, with proverbs, wise sayings, etc. that are in the public domain. (ex. no copyright)

05:00  Maybe the editor of the book will write an introduction about the great significance of the time honored proverbs, tracking them back three thousand years, and how they are just as valid today.

But if these “words to live by” are inherent/innate knowledge, and if there are versions of these phrases (ex. honesty is the best policy) thru out all the cultures, even illiterate people know them, why does it have to be put into words?

10:00  Ordinary humanity, no matter how honest, sincerely agree with the phrase “honesty is the best policy.” It appears to be an instinctive world wide truism. People will write it down and buy it in a bookstore, and then recommend the book to friends.

15:00  “Words to live by” (ex. honesty the best policy) seem to be an instinctive truism on the surface. Instinctive truisms speak to you. But why do they have to be put into words?  Humanity’s collective consciousness’s head is full of them.

A lot of truisms are restatements but I say there are twenty five to fifty truisms you will find all over the world. But why do they have to be put into words? I want to stop there. The point of it is the question, “Why is it necessary to put into words?”

20:00  What our previous forerunner mystics called “being asleep” is right here. Ask yourself if truisms are instinctive, why do folks feel the need to share, hear, and write them down?  Those actions seem  to help validate the truism.

Trying to get you folks to turn your head, think about, human collective consciousness is filled with these truisms. Sometimes the ‘words to live by’ are attributed to a religion, sometimes to an individual.

25:00  But if no ordinary person disagrees with a truism, why do you want to write it down and tell someone else?  How come consciousness doesn’t say “Huh, I thought dishonesty was the best policy”?

Anytime when considering something that seems ironic (synonymous with moronic) maybe a smirk, it will at the very least blind you, literally. I have spent some effort here trying to knock the legs out from under that smirk.  It is not profitable to laugh at it. Without words, what would consciousness have been?

In a sense for consciousness, to be operational, requires input, a form of learning. (ex. learning language from a teacher) Yet it seems consciousness instinctively recognizes a truism. ( ex. honesty best policy)

Something in everyone’s consciousness, its not the body saying it, says don’t jump off a hundred foot cliff. But if consciousness recognizes something as soon as it hears it (ex. honesty best policy) why does it have to be put into words? If we already know it in consciousness, why don’t we just live accordingly?

That is the condition under which consciousness operates. Without words there is no active consciousness.  And that is what produces in people like us a state we find annoying, a state we call being distracted, being asleep.  

ends abruptly 32:48

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3171 by Cfish

Jan Cox Talk 3171 = July 9, 2004
Copyright Jan Cox, Jan’s Legacy 2017
Notes by Fish October 2017

Suggested Title:   Unscripted Music (Ordinary Consciousness is not Aware of Consciousness)

Begin:  The origins of improvisational music and the desire to awaken have a common source. It is when a player dropped his music, kept on playing and discovered it made no difference. 

For a while I thought it was just funny to be alive (I never said it out loud, because I thought there was something not right with that sentence) but it’s not just funny to be alive, it’s funny to be “conscious” that you are alive.

And the funny thing to me about all of this, and being alive, and being conscious that you’re alive, is that as long as “you” are “in place,” in the spot, where the unscripted music is being played, and listening, you can’t be aware of it.

Consciousness is not a physical place, it is an internal place. And in this internal place,  where the unscripted music is being played, and thinking it’s “you” playing the unscripted music, you can never be aware of it. You are asleep.

05:00  “You” did not compose the music. It’s just there. An ordinary person may say, “but I interpret the music.” (ex. from  education, reading Buddha, etc.) But “you” are playing from no music.  Ordinary commentary is not original.  

10:00  An ordinary person may say otherwise. But it’s like last time, “people do not really listen to themselves.” Check with your own “ordinary running of consciousness.” Ordinary consciousness thinks this is “me” talking. 

And if consciousness is in the midst of itself, of it’s unscripted playing, it’s not possible to realize “what’s going on.” Is there anything else in life equal to this? Can you be in the midst of physically dancing or running and not be aware of it?

Can you be in the midst of emotions (ex. sadness, anger) and not be aware of it? Is there any experience outside of the ordinary state of consciousness you can participate in and not be aware of it?

15:00  Ordinary Consciousness is the epitome of what it is to be human. It is singular to humanity. It operates without any attention. You can interfere with ordinary consciousness,  and become aware it’s operating without attention.

20:00  Life produces in man this second party, “you” and it protects ordinary consciousness from having to see what is going on. So that ordinary consciousness could talk about “you” not paying attention.

But your consciousness has got to know when it is stopped and that ordinary consciousness is not aware of consciousness. Ordinary thought thinks it is responsible for the automatic running of consciousness, and that is the one thing that consciousness can know for certain - that ordinary thought is not responsible for anything.

25:00 Asking ordinary consciousness “what are you going to say next,” stops consciousness. Just remembering “I’m where the music is playing”  for all practical purposes, stops the mind.

And then you realize consciousness is totally out of your control. But how can you forget all that? How can men not realize that? All you have to do is be where the music is playing and it is not possible to be aware of “what’s going on.” 

30:00  And when the mind stops, it’s no longer where the music is playing. Life furnishes the unscripted music and thoughts “you” hear. The unscripted music and thoughts are just there, like walking into a night club.

And as long as you “believe” “you” are playing/writing the unscripted music/thoughts, you can’t be aware it’s not “you” playing/writing the music. Consciousness did not compose the music. Life provides the music.

35:00  I assume I speak for all of you, when you first heard the idea that “man’s asleep, living in a dream” though he thinks he is conscious, and that with certain efforts, (ex. self remember, still the mind) he can awaken, that it’s not easy.

But I say after forty or fifty years, that it is even more unbelievable, that I can fall back into ordinary consciousness and take ordinary consciousness/unscripted music seriously for a couple of minutes. (not inferring we don’t fall back into it)

You have got to trust me. You may fully agree with all this, but you may not have fully experienced it. Maybe you get identified, seriously birddogging something,  but  when you see ordinary mind birddogging, it  has the tendency to snap you out of it.

And whatever it was is no longer of any significance. Not even worth looking at. All you have got to know, all consciousness has to realize is:
 “it was back in the midst of ordinary consciousness;
the nightclub;
listening.  

End  - 36:45

Notes on Jan Cox Talk 3177 by Cfish - The Three positions ( Sort of )

Jan Cox Talk 3177 - July 27, 2004
Copyright Jan Cox. Jan’s Legacy 2017
Notes by Cfish October 2017

Suggested Title: The Three Positions of Consciousness  (Sort Of) 

Begin:  Last time I was talking about the two positions of consciousness. (automatic mode/sleeping mode and the other mode/the awake mode) I was getting to the description of a sort of third mode or position.

But before I go there, there is another idea connected to it.  The idea is that you cannot get gradually better at this. (waking up/the other position) And like any good statement, about any immaterial object, the opposite could be said.

So I could also say that waking up/enlightenment is a gradual process. But tonight, preferring to be truthful, you don’t gradually get better at this. You folks know you feel better after a few years of effort. (ex. self remembering)

And you feel like you are getting somewhere.  But if you can look in a certain way,  consciousness either naturally runs in automatic mode or it’s remembering to investigate consciousness running in  automatic mode. 

05:00  And by remembering to investigate the automatic running of consciousness, it immediately takes you out of the automatic mode into the other mode/empty box mode. So you are either in automatic mode or not.

Thinking that most/maybe all of you have yet to see it completely. Reads: “That everything that goes on in your consciousness under all ordinary conditions is totally automatic.” And it has nothing to do with you individually.

The automatic running of consciousness  is just there. And with automatic consciousness, the unquestioned sensation is “this is me”, doing all this thinking, and the feelings that go along with the thinking.

10:00   Another way to look at the ordinary running of consciousness, is to look back at the memories of your internal life, (ex. intangible hatreds, prejudices, political beliefs,) and that it really hasn’t changed to any noticeable degree.

15:00  It’s shocking and discouraging, if you have the determination to keep looking, that your PHD educated, worldly and sophisticated mind is the same automatic running consciousness you had when you were a know nothing fifteen year old.

20:00  What goes on internally, who you are internally, (physically and hormonally you have changed) those beliefs and prejudices are still there. Seeing and realizing this is liberating and it spurs you on.

So you don’t gradually get better at this other mode/waking up. You feel like you do and I would not tell anyone after years of effort, they were not making progress. What happens is you develop three positions of consciousness:

The automatic/asleep mode, the other mode/awake mode,  and then yet another mode/the third position. Not so much a third position, but a gradual shift in the relationship between the automatic/asleep mode and the other/awake mode. 

25:00  It is not that you are partially in automatic mode or partially in the other mode, but something does happen and it gets harder to stay in automatic mode. Maybe its the idea that being a conservative is important in life. It becomes a ‘et tu Brutus’ moment. Enough of you chuckled at that that it makes me want to believe I made it clear. Automatic consciousness is just running as is proper for you genetically.

But it’s not personal. Over the years when you initially discovered the ideas of man is asleep and can awaken and the methods (ex. self observation, self remembering, counting breaths, etc.) all of these indirectly take you out of the automatic/asleep mode.

30:00  And put you into the other mode/awake mode. And it seems to be a running battle. You may even forget the other mode for days, weeks, or even months. But with the third position, its harder to go for even a day and not remember the goal. 

35:00 The third position operates so that you go into automatic mode only briefly. The things your consciousness thinks about in automatic mode (ex. pontificating bullshit) are the very things that jolt you out of automatic mode.

Falling back into automatic is no longer the big deal it use to be because within a few seconds something in ordinary consciousness, something preachy, something judgmental, something dogmatic, jolts you out of it.

40:00  But not only does this sort of third position make “being asleep/automatic consciousness less annoying, it makes it more annoying. But it’s only worse for a split second. If you keep on with this, you don’t worry about being permanently awake. And I am not sure I would want that.  

End 44:25