Audio = Stream from the bar below or download from the blue link.
Audio Download = DOWNLOAD Jan Cox Talk 0143 from Cassette
AKS/News Items = none
Summary = See Below
Diagrams = None
Transcript = see Below
Summary by TK
Jan Cox Talk 143, Jan 31, 1985, runtime 2:02
[The organism of humanity reacts to biochemical changes "out there" in one of 2 ways: 1. acting or 2. thinking of acting (TOA). #2 must be an alternative for an organism to be open-ended. Man is the only such creature, man has the alternative, pigs don't.]
[The world doesn't exist - only your perception of it. The so-called psychological aspect of man is only biochemical changes/rearrangements in the brain. Without these biochemical changes there would be no perception of the world. To have a continuing awareness of this is necessary. The instant and once-and-for-all enlightenment is not for The Few of This Thing. There must be an ongoing discovery.]
[Group activities for the last 3 years have been more TOA than action itself. The time has come for action. Feeling almost of impotence in face of the feeling of "something should be done!"]
[Historically, the great religions and systems of ideas/beliefs have been more of persuasion #1 and #2. E.g. Buddhism = #2 Islam = #1. However, both are of course, a combination of #1 and #2 while predominating in one or the other. Islam as a "do or die" direct action, conversion by the sword - no longer possible today, although if J. desired, it could be utilized - i.e. charge the White House - use futile, meaningless, impossible action - when the time comes to act. But this would be inefficient and foolish. Worked for Mohammed in his time and place.]
[Individual men have a predisposed biochemical structure to respond as behavior #1 or #2. Remember, talking is action. The Ten Commandments are a proscription for behavior 1 or 2.]
[The conflict of the public voice and private voice is always a conflict between #1 or #2 response. Such conflict yields: guilt, anger, frustration. Remember the old picturisation of meeting someone on the sidewalk, the confrontation of "step aside."]
[There is a time when action cannot be replaced by anything.]
[Blue Circuit as "teeny-weeny $2 stereo speaker" at the juncture point between the public and private voices: yellow and red circuits. The Red Circuit has no morality: "the fist doesn't feel bad over its action”. It is thinking about action that always contains morality/guilt.]
[TASK: does your biochemical structure predispose you to type#2 or #1 responses?]
[Neuralize: Life rewards wealth and power.
Transcript
ACTING AND THINKING ABOUT ACTING
Document: 143, January 31, 1985
Copyright (c) Jan M. Cox, 1985
The human organism reacts to the apparent outside world either by acting or by thinking about acting. These are the only two possibilities. Consciousness -- ordinary awareness of that which is taking place -- can only happen when sensory input is converted into some kind of internal biochemical activity. That which ordinary people refer to as being psychological, spiritual, or intellectual must become internal biochemical change before it exists for any particular person. (But note that ordinary consciousness is almost incapable of remembering this, let alone of thinking about it.)
Life can only grow through an "open-ended" organism (such as man) capable of alternatively acting, or thinking about action. It can not grow through an organism that is limited simply to action. A cow or dog is never confronted with a choice of either acting or thinking about acting. A cat seeks out food when he's hungry, but he never thinks about how fat he's getting and that, starting tomorrow, he's going to go on a diet. He never thinks about taking action. All conceptions, ideas and notions about the uniqueness man, including that which separates him from all other animals -- his singular spirit, his consciousness, and his individual personality -- require input via the senses resulting in a biochemical change within the individual, and this biochemical change results in either taking action or thinking about action.
A deer in the forest hears a noise; a limb cracking, the rustling of dried leaves, and he reacts to it. This sounds simple enough. The deer hears a noise and in self defense runs for safety. A lion might react by preparing for a battle. Can you see that there is no difference between the deer's flight to safety, and a man's reaction to a compliment or criticism? Regardless of what is happening in the environment, if a man is to be aware of it, a biochemical change must take place within him. Either you see it, hear it, feel it, taste it or smell it -- and it's converted into a biochemical change -- or it doesn't exist for you. An individual might smell the aroma of blueberry muffins baking; it provokes a series of so-called psychological associations, ultimately ending with memories of his mother. "Psychological" is only a description. The aroma of blueberry muffins came in through the nose and created a biochemical change in the man, triggering memories of previous biochemical changes. The memories themselves are biochemical change.
Once you begin to hold a continual awareness of this, I guarantee that you will be off-balanced for a while. You will find it astounding. But then you might also note, two days later you will have forgotten all about it. You will forget when you are again drawn back to the ordinary level. Everything is arranged for precisely that to happen. It is not that Life has singled you out in particular, allowing you to See something extraordinary, then knocked you back down.
Many people are chemically arranged to be attracted to the idea of instant enlightenment. It apparently happens out in Life, but that's the end of it for such people. Then they have no choice but to write a book about it. This Thing is not about instant enlightenment. There is a kind of foundation of understanding which must be laid in you if you are to obtain anything personal and lasting. Things are arranged in such a way that you can catch glimpses of something, beyond any of my verbal descriptions, and you can fully taste the reality of it. It is a payoff of the effort you are making, even though you cannot necessarily find a direct causal relationship to the experience. "I was not doing anything exceptional...I was changing a tire and getting rather pissed in the process, when suddenly it was as though for a moment the description of a biochemical reality became crystal clear."
The entire biochemical process has never been questioned in the way I am presenting it to you. You might hear about hunger in Africa, a home burning down, the embezzlement of public funds. Your internal voices react in a particular way, perhaps with great sympathy or with the feeling that Life is unjust. You think that surely, here is the proof that humanity is not only singular, it is singularly insane. But your reaction is not different from tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, or deer running for their lives. That which seems to be singular phenomena taking place within the world of humanity must become internal biochemical activity if it is to exist for you.
The idea that, "The world does not exist, only our perception of it exists," has been around, in mythology and among certain religious and philosophical schools, for thousands of years. There have been thousands of papers written and sermons delivered based upon that idea. Even some of the more Yellow Circuited philosophers have tried to prove that regardless of how passionately a man debates over the kind of world we live in, it does not exist until it is perceived. And many have listened to such ideas and vibrated sympathetically to this. It is the feeling, "Ah ha! This is precisely it!" Of course, five minutes later, it's time to go to work, or they discover indeed that their car has a flat tire, and the feeling of "Ah ha!" is gone.
There is a scientific basis for the kind of information Life was giving out about this even thousands of years ago, but now that kind of map is too old. There is now additional information available, and simultaneously humanity's level of consciousness is at a higher stage of development. You can believe that the world does not really exist without your perceptions of it and still have unanswered questions about the nature of justice: "The idea of perception sounds good, but in this particular instance, I see destruction and injustice at work, and other people agree with me. So if there are others who have a similar perception, then either there is injustice at work or you're saying that a large number of us are incorrect in our perception. How can so many of us be wrong?" I am talking about more than a philosophical fact. Anything that occurs outside your senses literally does not exist -- you cannot be conscious of it, you cannot react to it, you cannot think about reacting to it -- until it has turned into biochemical activity in your brain. If the neural activity taking place is not altered, regardless of what something is called, what it smells like, what it looks like, how tall it is, and whether or not you agree or disagree with it, it does not exist for you.
Periodically, whether you analyze it this way or not, you will experience in the pursuit of This a sensation of losing everyday energy. On other occasions I have given you a generalized response, referring to the ordinary energy and motivations that drive a man to paint or play guitar. I also called it dream energy. While pursuing This Thing, you might find yourself separated from those ordinary motivations and dreams. If the energy that drives you to pursue such areas is not really part of your basic biochemical structure, if it is driven more by that which seems to be your Public Voice, then you do, indeed, lose such interests. Hence, my continuing injunction to pursue any hobby that you seem to really have. It's not in conflict with This at all, be it stamp collecting, shoe repair, or penmanship. If you find something in which you have a real interest, that is, something for which you need no audience, then pursue it.
This evaporation of dream energy will eventually lead you to confront the division of action and thoughts of action as it relates to This. Based upon what you may know about the spiritual heroes of humanity and their respective religions -- what was their apparent original focus, action or thinking about action? From a certain viewpoint, you can look upon religions and see one as a body of ideas primarily leading to thoughts of action, compared with another whose system of teaching primarily leads to direct action. In your pursuit of This Thing you will come upon times when it feels as though you understand more about what's going on in Life than almost anyone else, and it seems as though something should be done about it. You will feel it even though you know that no one is personally responsible for what is going on in the world. There is a reality to that feeling of near impotence: there is a point past which there is no substitute for action.
Everyone's automatic response to that which is taking place in Life is to either respond by acting, or by thinking about action. No matter how much we may love a dog, regardless of the way he responds to certain of our words, a dog can do one thing and one thing only. Action is his only possible response and that's it. Instead of a man's biochemical processes responding to that which seems to be "out there" through action, he can think about action. He can think about action without moving a muscle. He may remain motionless while simultaneously responding through a biochemical rearrangement of his molecular structure which results in thinking about action. It is not thinking about thinking, nor is it thinking about feeling. It is thinking about action. Man is the only creature on this planet with a nervous system that is biochemically structured with a choice of responses. Anything that falls singularly within the sphere of man, be it the arts, technology, sports, music, literature, or religion, exists only because men are not limited to one response. Both responses are absolutely necessary. Though this is not absolutely true, you can divide humanity into those whose primary molecular structure is arranged so as to act in response to what is going on, and those who are neurally structured to think about acting. As I said, on one level this is not true, but on an individual level you can sense the camp into which any particular man would primarily fall. The bricklayer, for example, who might blurt out anything: "Oh no, your mother's coming to visit? Not that old bat!"
On a more personal level you can find, you can simply taste, that there are certain situations and particular people to which you react in a characteristic fashion by either acting or by thinking about acting. You have certain areas within your basic molecular structure which respond in a highly predictable manner to certain kinds of biochemical activity occurring in the environment, although the internal voices rationalize and describe the behavior using psychological terminology. Under ordinary conditions, a man or woman's response to particular external biochemical activity, be it through action or thinking of action, does not change over the course of a lifetime. Given similar circumstances, there is a most decided predictability to the way a man's own biochemical structure will respond.
I direct your attention toward that which is normally referred to as mental illnesses: phobias, neuroses, and fixations. Can you See that mental illness can be analyzed in a nonlinear, non-ordinary fashion? It can, quite correctly, fit into the categories I have been talking about. More specifically, the biochemical activity that happens to be the driving force behind an individual's response can be in conflict with his other internal voices. Consider people of a particular molecular makeup with voices telling them to act in certain situations, who can't seem to take action. Instead, they think about taking action. The other possibility would be a person taking action in a way that seems habitually self-defeating while simultaneously, one of their voices is primarily structured to respond by thinking of action. If a man could ignore the voice that trembles with fear over telling a wealthy socialite the time of day and get in touch with that part of his biochemical structure shouting, "Act," and he did act, that would be the end of his phobia. If a man could follow the directive of the voice requesting thoughts of action, rather than pursuing a particular self-defeating habitual act, he would instantly and abruptly be freed from that compulsive behavior. Except for the fact that Life is not arranged for this to happen, and that it would do no good to tell this to an ordinary person (for he could not hear it) can you See that this is true?
There comes a time when you must act. I have to act, and This Thing must move into the apparent world of acting. You cannot, forever, sit here and listen to me talk. From one viewpoint, your pursuit of This has been much more than simply thinking of action or you would have wasted your time. Nonetheless, I am aware of the fact that you may at this moment feel capable of actually doing something. That even though you know that everything in Life is running in a quite mechanical fashion, that things are not going to the dogs and everything is just the way it should be, you still feel as though you could stick your finger in the machinery somewhere and have an effect. So let me present you with this...what kind of action would you take regarding This?
I've tried to push you around corners and slip you through cracks in any number of directions to help you get a glimpse of the fact that Life does not know exactly what it is doing. I have described Life itself as being alive and conscious while having every manifestation of an individual, but on another scale. Ordinary consciousness has no choice but to assume that Life must, therefore, know exactly what it is doing. However, I am telling you again, it does not know precisely what it is doing. (You don't have to listen to me to see that. The proof is everywhere.) You might think that if Life has told me all of this, then Life should tell me exactly how to proceed with the public expansion of This Thing. This is not the way it works. Life does not talk in words, and it does not know precisely what to do. But Life knows when it is time to act. How different is this from your own experience of sometimes feeling like you could shoot into outer space, fueled by your own joy in doing This, but at other times feeling impotent and helpless, bound up by an invisible set of chains? What makes you think Life is any better off than you are?
I am going to play with history just a bit. Let me point out that some of that which has gone on in the past is no longer possible. I have made references to certain religious leaders using a "do or die" method as a means for attracting converts and followers. They would enter a village, gather all the villagers together and if encouraging sermons did not work, they would look at their watches (if they had watches) and say, "Look, we're in a hurry." Then they put a sword to everyone's throat and said: "You have two minutes to decide. Either you convert or die." Is it surprising that in a short length of time, a large number of people saw the light and were converted? (It is unimportant whether or not it happened in precisely the way I described it, because, as always, I'm using such historical events for my own devices.)
But let's say that such an historical, religious figure existed: the founder of a currently mechanical religion, a man who even said that the gods were speaking to him. A short time later, he then reveals what he has learned to a few people, saying that messengers from the gods have been talking to him. A small group of people gather together, listen to his words, and write it all down. Do you understand that the people listening to his words, to what he has learned from "speaking with the gods" were as astounded, captivated, and touched, for their time and place, as the best of you are with me? A short time later, though, our historical religious figure and his small band of followers moved on to undertake an absolutely, on several levels, impossible and meaningless task. First of all, the gods told him to go on the road and convert all nonbelievers, that is, convert the entire world. Ordinary consciousness, even then, would have told many people that although that sounds great, nothing resembling that has ever come close to occurring on this planet. Furthermore, if the man himself Understood anything, he also understood that such an astounding embodiment of spiritual enlightenment cannot be exported, so it was meaningless to force converts. He might as well have held a sword to their necks and forced them to say, "I'm Donald Duck's nephew." On that level, there is not that much difference between the two.
Nonetheless, he began gathering a band of people and it expanded. Some of those who were drawn into the fold on a mechanical level, including some who were drawn into it with a sword to their throats, without any doubt, eventually Heard something and became part of the inner crowd. Eventually they learned to See something beyond their leader's external actions. They began to think about the action, think about what their leader was apparently doing, as well as think about their own participation. They became part of the inner circle. (You should know by now that I am not giving any sort of history lesson. I am just using maps in order to have a common language between us. It does not matter whether or not any of this was true. That's irrelevant.)
This religious leader acted, and he apparently undertook an absolutely futile and meaningless crusade. This does not mean there is nothing possible to be done, that there is nothing a man or a group of people can do. However, when you move This Thing into an area that seems to be more action oriented, as opposed to oriented toward thinking about action, you are then doing something which is either meaningless or futile, from the viewpoint of the person leading the action. Those who are part of the inner circle, if they understand anything, also understand that any widespread action is ultimately meaningless and/or futile -- it is also absolutely necessary.
Part of the reason I fleshed out this scenario is to point out that the obvious way to take action is to try and put your hands on the existing social, economic, and political structure and rearrange it. Back then, it was done in the name of a god, decrying the unjust nature of things and families killing each other over the multiplicity of gods and idols. Today the action would generally be directed toward the existing political structures. We are not about to overthrow a government, not because it is morally wrong, but because it is too late for that. Life is no longer arranged for that type of action to profitably work.
The circumstances were correct and it worked for some of the ancient religious leaders. The basis for their action still holds true today. It is the feeling that, "I've had enough talk." Everyone, at some time, feels: "The world is driving me crazy. I turn on the television and all I see is a panel of intellectuals TALKING about world hunger. Why don't we DO something about it? I am sick to death of hearing about how the government has appointed another blue ribbon committee to investigate hunger. Let's take the $80,000 each of them are being paid and use it to feed the people." This sort of reaction is built into everyone. For descriptive purposes, I arbitrarily divided humanity into those who want to molecularly respond by acting and those who respond by thinking about action. But all of humanity has both, embedded within their circuitry, to varying degrees. (Let me remind you, that although we can talk about three separate circuits and the kinds of energy that drive each one, they are connected and are continuously exchanging information. The arrangement of the circuits is the basis for an individual's public and private voices. Remembering that the private voice is primarily driven by the lower Circuitry, while the public voice is driven primarily by the newer, higher circuitry. The voice that wants to respond by acting is tied into the voice that wants to think about acting.) Within everyone's molecular structure exists a built-in desire to respond simply by acting. "We've talked about this long enough. Let's do something."
Also, there is a part within you, and by now within everyone on this planet, that is biochemically, molecularly structured to have an alternative to action. It is part of the higher circuitry. It is relatively and literally new, and it has an alternative to acting, that is, it thinks about acting. It is the part of the structure that seems to be one's self and it says, "We know that there is hunger. We have X amount of money, in fact the government is paying me $80,000 to serve on the committee to eliminate hunger. I don't need the money and I know that no one else on the committee needs it. I could donate my $80,000. But how many people would that feed? And after the money was spent, then what? There will still be millions of hungry people in the world. So, that's not the answer. We must develop some decent plans so we can get to the root of the problem." Some of you should be able to draw a definitive profile of that which seems to be your own "I", based upon which of the two basic molecular arrangements predominates in you. In other words, is your own molecular arrangement primarily structured to act, or is it structured to think about acting? There is a way to draw a multidimensional profile that would be "you", or any other individual.
I mentioned that religions go through a period of apparently thinking about action and then apparently through a period of action. Let's take that in a slightly different direction. All religions and cultures have spiritual dictums or commandments dictating certain elemental behaviors. Have you ever noted that some of these dictums are concerned with action and some of them are concerned with thinking about action? You will find in all religions maxims forbidding theft and murder, for example. They are directives concerning action. Note also, that there are other directives concerning thoughts about action. Examples of such would include maxims that speak of "having no other gods before me" and those prohibiting greed or envy. Can you see how these directives are concerned with thinking about action? They differ from directives that speak of how the actions of people can affect others. One religious figure once pointed out that if you kill someone in your mind, it is the same as literally killing them. This cannot make any sense to Line-level consciousness. There was in that idea an awareness of the fact that there is an extant world apart from the world of action. It was an awareness of the fact that thoughts about action have an effect that is equally as potent as direct action.
The idea, for instance, that, "You will reap what you sow," has permeated every part of the world, in one form or another. Many people on this planet hear such words spoken and they vibrate sympathetically to the sound of it: "How true. How true." At a very ordinary level, can any of you remember how difficult it is to find the justice in this saying? And yet, if it be true, how do you explain the fact that you continually try to do good and bad things still happen to you? Ordinary consciousness is not able to take into account the thoughts about action. It is only able to recognize its actions. "Listen to the good I tried to do yesterday. I was on my way to work, and I was late. I stopped to help an elderly lady who was trying to change a flat tire. My hands got really dirty and I tore a hole in my new suit. Do you think she even thanked me when I left, or offered to pay for the damages to my suit? And to top it off, as I was pulling out in traffic, a truck hit me. I sowed good action and just look what I reaped!" The phrase, "You will reap what you sow," does not take into account, at the ordinary level of consciousness, the individual's thoughts about action. It does not take into account the private voice. There is a mathematical, scientific truth to "reaping what you sow" for those who are able to take both voices, both thoughts of action and action, into account. Correctly stated, "You reap whatever you sow on both levels."
The actions you sow as well as your thoughts of action must be taken into account. "You'd think the old lady would show some appreciation for what I'm doing for her. My pants are ruined, I've got greasy dirt under my fingernails, and I'm late for work. I'll bet she won't even offer to help pay for the damage to my suit. This is the last time I'm ever going to offer to change a tire. You reap what you sow? Fat chance." In a split second, that which started off as a good deed, a fine action, takes an unexpected turn, for on an ordinary level, thoughts of action are not taken into account. They never are, in the Horizontal dictums of Life.
When the action oriented biochemical structures in an individual are sufficiently stimulated to produce action, concurrent thoughts about action are also at work. These thoughts of action seem to weigh the possible ramifications of the action and its potential consequences. They seem to discuss the pros and cons vis-a-vis taking action. "Based upon what I understand about this situation, I might do more harm than good if I act. At the least I might be wasting my time, but it is quite possible that the situation will become worse if I take action." Let's say that this seemed to be your public voice. It seemed to be speaking and controlling your ultimate response, in this case, by taking no action. Given the choice of only two possible biochemical responses, let's say that the voice speaking had your attention and seemed to be correct. "Any action I might take could be extremely disruptive." It's an ongoing situation. The system wants to act yet through a series of so-called logical, biochemically produced thoughts of action, it comes to the reasonable conclusion that action at this time would be inappropriate. That situation leaves people with a feeling of anger, frustration, and impotence, regardless of how inadvisable it would have been to act. The thought about action, produced by the higher end of the circuitry, pondering the kinds of action that would be possible in any given situation, are apparently in control of the primary voice. And this voice stops the action. This happens to everyone.
Regardless of which way it goes, the biochemical process of human response through action or thoughts of action is transferring necessary energy. That which ordinary people, and you at the ordinary level, think of as being the very urgent dilemmas, personal problems, psychological problems, and spiritual quandaries in which humanity is immersed, are based upon a conflict between the two types of responses. It is a necessary conflict, but its biochemical basis is unrecognized. At cruder levels, the conflict is pictured through spiritual or psychological descriptions, but it is a biochemical process. It is different ends of the nervous system, one older, relative to the evolution of the nervous system, in conflict with the one newer. And both are necessary.
All of that notwithstanding, I must tell you that someone who understands this would not necessarily "turn the other cheek." There comes a time when action is the course to take. At that point, thoughts of action are absolutely unacceptable, unsuitable, and unprofitable for those doing This Thing. There is no way in which to teach that to anyone. I can't teach that to anyone. If Life could transform itself into a three dimensional form, drop down inside itself and appear here, and you asked, "When do we act?" it could not tell you when to act. Just look around, Life itself does not know when to act. Of course it's more than a game of hit and miss or trial and error, but from certain viewpoints (and I have to magnify it in order for you to See it) it would appear that Life is running in a hit or miss fashion. A group of people seem to be overcome with feelings of humanistic compassion and a year later they are at war with their neighbors. Let's bring it closer to home. What about that ordinary, personal feeling of overwhelming disgust with the injustices in Life: the poverty, the starvation, and the violence? It seems so oppressive that, at times, you can barely get up the energy to get dressed and go to work. Yet you do, and on the way your car breaks down, and inexplicably you almost feel as though you could strangle the first person who crosses your path. It's not right or wrong. It's the way things move. It's Life in action.
I'm going to mention a bit more about the Three Circuits in relationship to that which seems to be emotions. Although for purposes of clarification I speak of them as separate, you can see from this two-dimensional drawing that the circuits are intertwined. I have pointed out that they are in constant communication with each other. Even though the circuits don't actually exist in this particular configuration, there are crossover points within the circuitry where primary transfers of information take place. It's a kind of origin point. Amidst the complex of conductors, transformers, and resistors of a stereo system, these juncture points are like the stereo speakers. The public and private voices originate at the juncture points between the Three Circuits.
The Blue Circuit is like a mid-juncture, a minuscule two cent speaker, between the two voices. It's a juncture point between the two ends of the nervous system: between the older, lower portion of this biochemical arrangement (the Red Circuit) and the newer portion, the Yellow Circuit. The Blue Circuit acts as a mid-juncture between that part of a man's molecular makeup that wants to respond to incoming biochemical stimuli through action and the part that wants to think about taking action.
It does seem as though people have feelings. But see if you can find any exceptions to this: are these emotional feelings derived from the action, or are they derived from the thoughts of action? Which one is it, for it must be one of the two? Does a wolf attack an animal in the forest, and as soon as it's over, feel good or bad about what he did? Let's assume a fellow, trying to be a seriously spiritual person, is waiting on a street corner for a friend and someone running down the street bumps into him. The biochemical juices begin to flow; the atmosphere instantaneously becomes hostile, the whole milieu is vibrating with hostility, and he hits the guy who bumped into him. Using ordinary terminology, he would say something like this: "I don't know why I hit him. I almost can't believe I did it. There was something about that guy, but I don't know what it was, and as soon as I hit him, I felt terrible about it." Did he experience these apparent feelings because of the action, or due to his thoughts about the action?
A man cannot feel guilt ridden or negative without thinking about it. "I can't believe I hit that guy. It was an act of hostility and I totally disapprove of all forms of violence. It goes against everything I believe in. I can't understand it, but I hit him before I knew what I was doing and as soon as I did it, I felt awful about it." When the organism, meaning you and everyone else on this planet, acts in response to the lower voice's call for action, it is not the act that makes you feel bad. It is never the action that makes you feel awful. Even if you are the world's most famous pacifist, the biochemical circuitry responsible for the act of violence cannot feel bad. The Yellow Circuit is always the last to receive information traveling up through the nervous system, it is always the last to know. Or at least, and I can guarantee this, it receives its information later than one's fists. The fist acts and it has no apology. The molecular structure of the lower circuits spoke and the organism responded by hitting the other person. The fists do not feel bad about their action; yet, "As soon as it happened, I felt just awful about it."
Let's add a bit of precision to the man's description: "As soon as I was aware of the fact that I had hit him, my thoughts about what I had done made me feel terrible." That is a fair retelling of the way things are. There is no question of morality within the biochemistry of the lower, older circuits. Its biochemistry does not produce thoughts of action. It acts, and that's it. Of course, it all becomes intertwined to some degree because none of the Circuits operate in isolation. Any action, if it is of sufficient strength, will generate cross-talk between the circuits, ultimately producing some thoughts about action. There is an unnoticed reflection of this when people say, "I can drive a car and not think about it, but if the conditions are bad enough, or there's a lot of traffic, all I can think about is driving carefully and getting home safely."
As long as the biochemical processes of the Yellow Circuit are in operation, the organism will continue to think about action, even while asleep. It is always thinking about action, but it is always after the fact. Regardless of what your smart-aleck voices may say, it also cannot think about future actions. The Yellow Circuit can think about future actions only in terms of experiences with prior actions.
You might feel as though the ways in which you used to act in Life have been altered or thwarted slightly by being involved with This. It's as though there is more control exerted over the lower circuitry by the higher end of this biochemical process. You may have the feeling that through increased understanding of hostility, you now have less of an inclination to hit people, but the part of your biochemical structure that responded through action still has just as much energy as it ever had. It perhaps does not now get the opportunity to exercise itself, but it will always have its built-in desire to respond as it did in the past.
There does come a time when nothing but absolute action will suffice. These words are beyond comprehension on an ordinary level, because from that perspective it is already occurring. Those whose primary molecular structure is driven to act, act. Those primarily driven otherwise, think about action. For you there must be some Understanding of this process; you must be able to unnaturally think about the act -- and this means traveling faster than the speed of light. You must have an understanding about the ramifications of the act before it ever occurs. "After the fact" awareness is part of the ordinary sequence of events and it won't do in This. Further, you must understand that when nothing but absolute action will suffice, it may be futile or meaningless, yet still unutterably proper and necessary.
Ordinary consciousness will say it truthfully feels bad or good about its actions, but I am telling you it does not feel good or bad. The biochemical process that is capable of thinking about its actions gets its information after the act is completed. Let me remind you one more time. I am suggesting that you look at the mid-voice of the Blue Circuit, where it makes contact with the Red and Yellow Circuits, as a physical locale and the origination point of the public and private voices.
