|
Vineeto’s Correspondence on the Actual Freedom List Correspondent No 16
VINEETO: Hi No 16, Now we are getting into the nitty-gritty of the matter of what is spiritual and what is actual and what is the difference between the two. You wrote – I don’t know what ‘never-never land’ represents for you, but I am reminded of Peter Pan’s dreamland for children, where one is transported from the misery and dullness of the ‘real’ world into the unreal land of imagination, where one never has to become a grown-up. RESPONDENT: Never-never land was not a good description to use because you have no way of knowing exactly what I meant. It did seem like an unreal land but it is more of a void or not-knowing. Kind of a disconnected feeling which is what I meant by a feeling of abandoning humanity. VINEETO: ‘Abandoning humanity’ in Actual Freedom terms stands for gaily taking the pen-ultimate step before self-immolation. After one has removed one’s social identity of being a son or daughter, a man or woman, an American or Englishman, a seeker, a writer, a doctor, etc. and has become an utter non-identity, one is then able to investigate the collective psyche, the result of the instinctual passions that all human beings have in common. Applying attentiveness and awareness to the instinctual passions as they arise enables one to stop acting as per the instinctual software in the brain and thus one can slowly, slowly reduce the automated reactive and emotional impact that instincts have on our feelings, thoughts and behaviour. In doing so one not only becomes happy and harmless but also stops being part of the biggest fold of all, humanity itself. One is no longer a member of the species that ‘nourishes malice and sorrow in their bosom’ to quote Richard’s expression. Whereas ‘a disconnected feeling’ is clearly an affective feeling, arising out of the instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire. To have a ‘a disconnected feeling’ has nothing at all to do with ‘abandoning humanity’; it is, on the contrary, common to all human beings and arises out of the Human Condition in each of us. You see, in order to communicate about the possible advantage that Actual Freedom could have for your life, it is essential to not mix up the terms that we use with emotional or spiritual terms. For instance, ‘not-knowing’ is used by Buddhists and other Eastern religions as an expression for the highest achievable wisdom when one enters the ‘Unknowable’, synonymous for the ‘Truth’. Aspiring to or succeeding in achieving the ‘Truth’ and reaching a state of ‘not-knowing’ is well accepted in the ‘book of rules for humanity’. When achieving a state of ‘not-knowing’ one simply exchanges the illusion of the ‘self’ for the grand delusion of a higher ‘Self’. * VINEETO: In order to pursue the path to an ACTUAL freedom, as opposed to the imagined freedom of the spiritual world, it is essential to remember a Pure Consciousness Experience. Otherwise one won’t know what one is looking for and will only translate a few of the words and terms describing Actual Freedom into the spiritual belief-system that has been one’s familiar environment for many years. RESPONDENT: I don’t see my previous ‘teachings’ as a spiritual belief-system although they have been a familiar environment for many years. Actually I don’t see them as 180 degrees from Actual Freedom but helpful in my understanding of it. VINEETO: I am interested to hear what those ‘teachings’ are and in what sense they are non-spiritual i.e. actual. Could you give me examples in what way your ‘previous teachings’ are helpful in understanding Actual Freedom and how you see them in the same line as – not 180 degrees opposite to – Actual Freedom? * RESPONDENT: I’m sure they could be interpreted as spiritual but this is not my understanding of my previous teachings. VINEETO: For me, Actual Freedom is not a matter of interpretation, nor has my
previous spiritual practice been a matter of interpretation. I am not talking about semantics, but for me the single-most
life-changing insight of my life has been to experientially understand the difference between spiritual and actual. I have
described my first big PCE in Actual Freedom is not a new idea that can be interpreted and integrated into an existing thought-system, it is a practical, down-to-earth non-spiritual method to eventuate an actual, irrevocable change that leads to the extinction of ‘who you think and feel you are’. * RESPONDENT: I agree that spiritual is not the way to go. I don’t see myself as spiritual. VINEETO: How can you ‘agree that spiritual is not the way to go’? We don’t mean the same thing by the word ‘spiritual’! I am interested what the term ‘spiritual’ represents for you when you say that you don’t see your ‘previous ‘teachings’ as a spiritual belief-system’ and that you ‘don’t see [your]self as spiritual’? You stated earlier * RESPONDENT: My previous teachings to me are about the actual. For example, a key ingredient of my previous teachings is about having a direct experience of the actual which I feel is necessary to having a PCE. VINEETO: I am curious what ‘direct experience of the actual’ means for you, because all the new-age teachings of self-discovery that I know of, both spiritual and therapeutic, teach you about the experience of the ‘real me’, the ‘true self’, the ‘natural I’ and the ‘original face’. Most people don’t even make a distinction between the experience of sensual feelings like touch, temperature, hunger, sex, sleepiness on one side and affective feelings, moods, emotions and passions on the other side. Whereas the actual is – to quote the library – –– Existing in act or fact. Oxford dictionary Peter: Actual is that which is palpable, tangible, tactile, corporeal, physical and material. It is that which can be experienced by the physical senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch. That which is actual, being in action or in existence at this moment in time, is not merely passive. In comparison, that which is deemed to be real is merely the cerebral and affective interpretation of the actual and physical by the psychological and psychic (social and instinctual) entity that dwells within the human body. In comparison, spiritual Reality while feeling super-real and ‘other-worldly’ is
merely an affective, imaginary, hoped and longed for, fairy tale – a further illusion built upon the initial illusion of
reality. The myth of a spiritual Reality was created in ancient times as an escape from the very real horror, and the imagined
evil spirits, evident in everyday earthly reality. I have a hunch that you might be talking about ‘Reality’. I am looking forward to hearing from you.
VINEETO: [Respondent]:
It took some time until the penny dropped but I have finally understood that ‘actual change’ and ‘radically new’ are obviously not on your menu. Out of this misunderstanding I have cluttered you with heaps of irrelevant information, but never mind. In order to ensure no change you are exactly on the right track. You might remember Peter’s equation that he introduced when reviewing Paul Lowe’s spiritual book: ‘Denial plus Transcendence Equals No Change’ (D + A = nc) With the brilliant example of denial and applying the teachings of transcendence that you have given above you will have no trouble avoiding the dreaded actual change. I have always found it fascinating to discover in the course of my correspondence, meeting people and reading New Age publications, that the new fashion in spiritual circles is now introducing words like ‘non-spiritual’, ‘actual’ and even ‘apperception’ into their current vocabulary, because it sounds good and ‘feels right’. The New Age search that started in the ‘sixties now needs a new polishing, as it has become a bit of a well-worn path that hasn’t delivered the desired results for millions of seekers. This re-vamping process can be compared to taking one’s rotten old Ford car, giving it a new paintjob and a flashy bumper-bar and re-naming it ‘Lamborghini’. Now one can show it again, all the while it remains rotten to the core. A face-lift, à la Hollywood, is accomplished by creating a few new terms and labels – and the spiritual search can continue on for another fifty years without being considered out of date. Actualism writings are an excellent source for such face-lift words, particularly when applied in creative combinations. The post-modern Non-Spirituality that is evolving from the New Age Spirituality now reads like this (and most examples are not even invented by me) – Flesh-and-blood body mindfulness, apperceptive presence, non-spiritual reality, direct actual experience of truth, factuality of one’s ordinary self, a feeling of pure consciousness approaching, direct divine experience of the physical universe, non-spiritual self, spiritual ... oops, non-spiritual intimacy, thoughtless perfection, emotional facts, virtual commitment, physical Being, ever improving perfection, extremely free, exploring beyond appearance into ‘actual reality’, the all-consuming universe experiencing the moment, personal sensate-only experience, such sensuous no-mind image, natural non-spiritual living, factual emotional remembrance, timeless sense of actuality, watching without being a watcher, unfragmented observed actuality, virtual facts, greater actuality, beyond the realm of the apperceptive mind-entity. I am sure there are plenty more examples to describe the verbal assimilation that will
take place in the transformation from Eastern Religion to New Age Spirituality to Post-modern Non-Spirituality. A hilarious and
highly entertaining example of such effort can be found in Richard’s correspondence, Richard sums up his experience of years of talking to people like this:
RESPONDENT: My previous teachings to me are about the actual. For example, a key ingredient of my previous teachings is about having a direct experience of the actual which I feel is necessary to having a PCE. VINEETO: I am stunned that you can call Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti’s teaching being ‘about the actual’. If you had followed a bit of Richard’s extensive correspondence with many, many people on this very same teacher’s mailing list, you would at least have noted that Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti’s concern is the transcendental and nothing but the transcendental. Vis:
In order to be able to say that Mr. Krishnamurti’s teachings to you are ‘about the actual’ you have to either ignore 90% of Krishnamurti’s teachings or twist the meaning of the word ‘actual’ into meaning spiritual and transcendental. ‘The key ingredient of [your] previous teachings is about having a direct experience’ of the divine, not the actual. Vis:
I have no problem with whatever name you might give to your goal and your experiences but denial and transcendence are sure methods of avoiding a Pure Consciousness Experience. For comparison I copied a description of a direct experiencing of the actual.
And just a little bit further in the correspondence files I found a perfect example to demonstrate actuality:
RESPONDENT: My previous teachings to me are about the actual. For example, a key ingredient of my previous teachings is about having a direct experience of the actual which I feel is necessary to having a PCE. VINEETO: If Krishnamurti’s method and other methods of ‘self-discovery’ or ‘self-knowledge’ were able to produce a PCE, it would have happened by now, don’t you think? I acknowledge that to grasp even a glimpse of the actual world is very difficult because normal reality is all we know and spiritual reality is all we imagine. For that very reason it is so vital to remember or to experience a pure consciousness experience. However, changing a few words, applying your previous spiritual methods and denying even being spiritual at all is a sure recipe of cutting yourself off from ever experiencing anything outside of the Human Condition. RESPONDENT: Direct experience of the actual would be being with this monitor without having other thoughts about the past, etc. I’m not into any new age teachings. I clearly see the difference between sensual feelings and affective feelings. VINEETO: As you might have gleaned from Richard’s description, your ‘direct experience of the actual’ and Richard’s direct experience of the actual are two different pairs of shoes. The choice is always yours.
VINEETO: In order to be able to say that Mr. Krishnamurti’s teachings to you are ‘about the actual’ you have to either ignore 90% of Krishnamurti’s teachings or twist the meaning of the word ‘actual’ into meaning spiritual and transcendental. ‘The key ingredient of [your] previous teachings is about having a direct experience’ of the divine, not the actual. Vis:
RESPONDENT: I was talking about the teachings themselves such as being aware of what I am actually doing, thinking and feeling from moment to moment and you have added a quote from his early years and what he may or may not have meant by truth at that period of his life. VINEETO: I find it interesting that you should object to the relevance of the above quote from J. Krishnamurti by saying that it was ‘from his early years’. This is one of the several stock standard responses that were used by several faithful followers of Krishnamurti when Richard introduced quotes on Mailing List B to prove a point he was making. Only in September last year Richard had a lengthy discussion with one correspondent about that very same argument ... ‘from his early years’ . You were also writing on the list at the same time but maybe you missed the exchange. I have copied the relevant correspondence at the end of this letter. I had posted this particular quote because I know from my thorough investigation into my years of spiritual dependency that you cannot separate the teachings from the teacher and just pick out a some advice that seem worth applying in your life and ignore the rest. The above quote shows clearly, as do many others from his later years, that J. Krishnamurti was a through and through spiritual person – ‘God-intoxicated’ – and his declared purpose was to teach people how to achieve this experience for themselves. Vis.:
Therefore, following his method can, at the most, lead you to what he achieved – becoming yet another spiritual teacher immersed in ‘that which is eternal’ – and not knowing anything about a ‘direct experience with the actual’. RESPONDENT: I have been spiritual in my life but I am not spiritual now. Truth to me is what I am actually doing, thinking and feeling from moment to moment. I’m sorry if I have wasted your time. I will continue to look and see if I have any spirituality. VINEETO: Personally, I was never attracted to J. Krishnamurti or his teachings
as I considered them too dry and theoretical at the time of my spiritual involvement. Instead, I got sucked into the emotional
indulgence and the escalating esoteric extravagance of Mr. Mohan Rajneesh. Yet the relationship that I had to him as my master
differs not from the relationship that other followers have to their particular master – is it invariably epitomized by
unquestioning adoration, deep felt loyalty, a love that excuses and defends the master’s every word or deed and the pride of
being a disciple of such rare outstanding and powerful personality. Krishnamurti’s claim that he did not want to be a master nor
want his followers to be devotees only created an apparent intellectual coolness but it never altered the fervent emotional ties
that each of his followers had, and still has, with him. If you take the time and read through some of Before I could learn, explore or even consider that there was any new approach to life I had to question this highly emotional relationship to the one teacher that I had considered to be the only authority and fountain of wisdom. My worldview was coloured and measured against the authority of his words and teachings. If others stated similar views and ‘wisdoms’, I considered them right, if not, they were wrong. My judgements had nothing to do with my personal investigation of facts at all; it was solely a ‘feeling right’ decision according to my preconceived convictions solely derived from the master’s viewpoint – and the fact that he had been dead for 10 years did not change my emotional dependency on his authority at all. An honest and in-depth investigation of the facts of the situation was only possible after I ‘tore Rajneesh out of my heart’, became a traitor to his message and his ‘sangha’ and thus became independent of his imagined approval or condemnation. Only then was I able to listen to his discourses and judge with my newly freed intelligence instead of ‘my heart’ and to discover his mindless twaddle and ‘compassionate lies’, his manipulation and deceit, his outright distortions and underlying ancient rotten Indian belief-system. Now I could start the long and fascinating journey of unravelling the intricate web of the psychic world – the Eastern spiritual fears of endless karma, the hope for transcendence, the reverence for intuition, love, compassion, bliss and enlightenment. Once one starts to see the psychic world and how it functions, the word ‘spiritual’ is revealed in its fuller and more comprehensive meaning. You felt moved to defend your teacher the moment I quoted him in order to prove that he is concerned only with the spiritual and the divine and not with the actual. This reaction indicates where to look when you want to ‘see if [you] have any spirituality’. So in order to ‘continue to look and see if [you] have any spirituality’, you will first and foremost have to consider and investigate your affective relationship to your ‘previous’ teacher and teachings. Otherwise any factual discussion about what Krishnamurti said or meant will be distorted by the emotions that are instigating automatic instinctual (or, as LeDoux calls them, ‘quick and dirty’) reactions rather than considered intelligent responses. RESPONDENT: I’m sorry if I have wasted your time. VINEETO: You did not waste my time at all. I am writing for my own pleasure. I delight in the opportunity to talk about my favourite subject – Actual Freedom – and enjoy the benefit of investigating the question of ‘how am I in relation to other people’. It is such fun to find out about myself in the process, to learn how to write, find out what I want to write and to watch the letter unfold in a matter of hours or days. Any benefit that you or someone else may get out of these letters is an extra, unexpected bonus. * VINEETO: Vis. Richard’s correspondence on mailing list B re Krishnamurti’s teaching of his ‘early years’ –
RESPONDENT: I feel we have gotten totally off base. I am getting good results running the question and doing it on my own. VINEETO: Ah, so you say that we have ‘gotten totally off base’? My ‘base’ for our correspondence is still the same as when you started writing on the list – exploring the instincts, given that your first question was: ‘I am not clear on how one eliminates the instincts.’ My responding to you has all along been relevant to that vital question of yours. In order to eliminate the instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire one has to investigate one’s social conditioning and identity and one’s beliefs, feelings and emotions. According to my understanding, that is what we have been doing in our correspondence and, in fact, that is the very purpose of this list. In case you have shifted the goal post and have now a new ‘base’, then I have missed that shift. RESPONDENT: I really don’t want an authority. If I have any questions hopefully I will be able to ask someone without them acting like an authority like they know what I said or meant and add to what I actually said and like they are an authority on what a previous teaching said or meant. VINEETO: I have been contemplating about the issue of authority a bit in the last few days. Apart from the discoveries I mentioned in my last post about authority I have found one basic theme that is common to all issues on authority. Whenever I have made someone an authority in my life and either sucked up to, loved or envied, it was for the simple reason that the person had something that I desired at the time. These qualities were mainly status, luck, money, fame, knowledge, power, enlightenment or freedom. Always combined with that desire was the belief that the other person could either give or withhold the desired quality, a belief that established my emotional dependency on the other. I always loathed being emotionally dependant on such an authority – which gave rise to either fight, rebellion and resentment or faith, trust, cow-towing and surrender. Yet I instinctually kept creating and maintaining such relationships while at the same time struggling to become free of them. It was only when I learnt about Actual Freedom and began investigating the underlying beliefs, emotions and instinctual passions that form my identity, did I start to understand the reason for my need of authority and was able to incrementally free myself of this very need for emotional dependency. In order to break free I had to overcome the fear of standing on my own feet, the need to belong to anyone or any group as well as my innate laziness. I had to learn to rely on facts rather than beliefs, and to use my capacity to think and investigate for myself rather than feel, trust and intuit my way in the world. It is an absolute fascinating adventure once one starts to debunk the big authorities, particularly the Gurus and God-men, and starts finding out for oneself. A whole new, factual and actual, world starts opening up. Knowing the facts for oneself gives a confidence that makes emotional authority issues utterly redundant. The second benefit of investigating the emotional part of authority was that I could finally fulfill my life-long yearning to live with a man in perfect peace and harmony, equity and intimacy. Before that, my instinctual reactions to seek and then reject authority had always spoiled the relationships with men and reduced the living together to shallow compromises, temporary ceasefires to the ongoing battle and the subsequent frustration. The third benefit was that I did not have to reject another’s expertise in a particular field for the mere fear of being dependant. I can now value expertise for what it is – a great support to discovering what I want to understand or accomplish. Richard was, and is, a perfect source of expertise because he has discovered Actual Freedom by using the method of ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ He has debunked the grand delusion of enlightenment – having been there and done that – and he continues to unveil, in his correspondence, all the so-called mysteries of the spiritual and pseudo-scientific world. Without an authority-problem we can simply stand on each other’s shoulders, learn
from past mistakes and failures, apply current cutting-edge knowledge and put into practice what someone else has already
discovered and investigated. After all, actualism is an empirical science, a practical brain-engineering process and not a
religion or a belief-system. (see Selected correspondence
on RESPONDENT: Krishnamurti does say accept no authority and I see this to be valid. If this makes me spiritual in your book then so be it. Right now you appear to be coming on as the ultimate authority. I’m not running with my tail between my legs just because I don’t accept your authority without seeing it for myself. If you or anyone wants to write me I will answer. VINEETO: Just as Richard is an expert and an authority on Actual Freedom and enlightenment, I am an expert on Virtual Freedom and on the method of how to eliminate the social identity and investigate the instinctual passions. I have ‘walked the walk’. Peter, Alan and I are pioneers on the direct path to an actual freedom from the human condition without taking the torturous route through enlightenment. You can make use of our expertise, hints and information for your own journey or you can object to it, reject it and try to do it solely on your own. The great thing about Actual Freedom is that everybody has to do it for themselves and thus nobody has any power over anybody else – either actual or psychic. There is nothing but a website with plenty of information and facts about the Human Condition and a mailing list with a few people sharing their discoveries and experiences on the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom. Unlike the spiritual path, there are no gurus and no psychic power except for the imaginary power-play that happens in people’s passionate hearts and recalcitrant minds. Krishnamurti seems simply to have been passing on his own authority problems to his followers due to his own torturous authoritarian upbringing. His advice also works as another version of ‘thou shalt not worship any other authorities except myself’. If you prefer to accept his authority rather than investigate the issue of authority for yourself, then that is your choice. RESPONDENT: I have learned a lot from actual freedom and I like it but I am not looking to become a part of what you say you are against. I will take what I’ve learned and go with that. VINEETO: You are welcome to try – but from the experience of numerous PCEs, I know that an actual freedom from the Human Condition is not possible unless one examines all of one’s beliefs, feeling and emotions. Therefore, I am intolerant towards all religious and spiritual teachings of enlightenment, including ‘that which is eternal, without beginning and without an end’ to quote Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti. It is a simple fact that all spiritual beliefs are a delusionary product of feverish imagination and the instinctual fear of death. But to verify this fact for yourself you will have to step beyond your reliance on your previous teacher’s authority and enter the fascinating iconoclastic territory of investigating facts. RESPONDENT: PS: I feel my instincts have been diminished but I really won’t know until I am tested. VINEETO: I enjoy our correspondence; it is an ongoing test for me of ‘how am I in relation to other people’. After all, every upcoming feeling is both evidence and expression of the underlying instincts in action. * VINEETO: PS: It is definitely a good idea to get out of the spiritual world. Here are two examples that I came across the other day that made the institutionalized insanity of spiritual belief-systems ever more apparent. The first is pure Buddhism from a Buddhist mailing list.
Isn’t it amazing to hear the opinion from an obvious expert on the subject matter. As a faithful student you are to put aside your common sense and practice denial and transcendence in order to become as much of a hypocrite as the Guru whose ‘apparent’ flaws you should not perceive. ‘Very subtle skill in means’ indeed! And the other quote is from a NDA mailing list, following Master H.W.L. Poonja’s spiritual approach of ‘Thou Art already That and All is an Illusion Anyway’
I particularly liked the ‘different notion of illusion’ – it says it all! The simple test to ascertain if the border that separates Mexico and the US is actual, is to stuff a suitcase full of drugs and try to drive across ‘the line on the Earth’ and experience what is an illusion and what is actual. Sitting in prison, he will have all the time in the world to intellectualize about a ‘different notion of illusion’. Peter has summed it up perfectly when he wrote on mailing list C:
RESPONDENT: There is so much misunderstanding at this point that I don’t know if I want to try and continue with the discussion. VINEETO: I wrote to
I have lived in the world of Eastern teachings and I have disentangled myself from the intricate web of all spiritual belief systems – and therefore I know spiritual practice very well. I was not only a committed participant and faithful devotee in the spiritual world but I have now broken through the ‘sacred ceiling’ and left behind ‘that which is sacred, holy’. Because I have encountered them myself I also know the objections, doubts and the various pitfalls when questioning the spiritual world-view – a necessary and unavoidable prerequisite to start on the path to Actual Freedom. That’s why I think that this is not a matter of misunderstanding. But there is certainly disagreement, which is inevitable because Actual Freedom lies 180 degrees opposite to all spiritual beliefs. As I see it, getting to the bottom of a matter is the very point of having a discussion. If one encounters disagreement, then a discussion facilitates an investigation of all the facts involved and accord is reached on the basis of facts. Then it is not a matter of personal opinion or a matter of right and wrong or merely an acceptance or rejection of some authority figure, but the facts can then speak for themselves. Or, in Peter’s words –
Regarding the unbridgeable difference between spiritual freedom and an actual freedom,
Richard has compiled
* When I look back to see what it was that gave me the first glimpses of the actual world as opposed to my only-known world of thoughts and feelings, I can say that it was a repetitious reading of Richard’s journal, extensive discussions with Peter to find out what his words actually mean and the desire to find out exactly what it was different to the spiritual teaching that I knew. I was looking for the difference, not for any seeming similarity. I was not satisfied with the outcome of my spiritual search, I was looking for something that worked – and Richard obviously had discovered something that worked. The next vital and essential break-through in understanding was I had never met the actual Peter; I had only related to him through the curtain of my expectations and classifications, through the filter of my social identity, through the grey or rose-coloured glasses of my ‘self’. What was initially a shocking surprise quickly turned into fascination and delight to have discovered something so simple and so pure – actual intimacy with another person and the perfection of the actual world. Here we were, two human beings, meeting for the first time, without past or future. No grand feelings, in fact, no feelings at all, but the pleasure of mutual undivided attention as to what the other is going to say next... All my churning questions from the weeks before as to what was right and what was wrong
had disappeared from my tortured head and heart; the experience of the moment was all that mattered. In the course of the evening
and the following night, insight upon insight occurred as the edifice of my beliefs system tumbled – the actual world, the world
beyond belief opened up. Unbeknown to me it had been here all the time, a world where everything was simply obvious, perfect,
pure, delightful, actual, factual and ‘wysiwyg’ (what you see is what you get). No deeper meaning, no God, no soul, no
philosophy – meaning and significance abounds when living this moment without the burden of the ‘self’. A
complete description of this PCE This pure consciousness experience became my reference point for what I wanted to achieve. It was also an essential reference point to understand what Richard was saying and writing. After all, this actual world is the very world he is living in all the time, and my PCE had just demonstrated how this world is usually tucked away behind the normal/ spiritual worldview. When you wrote to Richard on mailing list B, you related an experience of the actual –
The remembrance of this ‘self’-less perfection is the starting point to the dismantling of the ‘self’, first the outer layers of one’s social identity and then the core of one’s being, the instinctual passions. From the reference point of a PCE one is able to distinguish the actual from normal or spiritual, facts from beliefs and sensuous experience from affective feelings. One starts from an experience of the actual and daringly questions every truth, belief, faith, hope, trust and feeling. The clarity of a PCE is vital to distinguish facts from ‘truths’, and the PCE reveals feelings of fear and pride as unnecessary stumbling blocks and exposes the ‘self’ in action that is spoiling the already always-existing perfection. What adventure, what delight, what serendipity. I am happy and willing to further explore, discuss and investigate the basis of disagreements and ‘so much misunderstanding’ in order to achieve the clarity so evident in a pure consciousness experience. That is, after all, the very purpose of this mailing list. If you are interested, that is.
VINEETO: Hi, How are you doing? How is summer on the other side of the world? RESPONDENT to Gary: Hi Gary, Long time no talk. In one of your recent posts you stated that you had looked into it and that this is not a cult. Everything you said above could have Richard’s, Peter’s, Vineeto’s or Alan’s name on it and I could not tell the difference. VINEETO: Your comment is a timely reminder that anybody who has tasted the actual world most usually can report about it in the same unambiguous and factual way, so there is no need or reason for me to write – I can simply follow my whim, telling my story or playing elsewhere. I do find it amazing though that you could not tell the difference between the various writings as I experience quite a difference in style from Richard, Peter, Gary and Alan. However, that is perhaps more considering the details rather than the first raw impression. Similarly, black people or Chinese people look all alike to a white man until one has closer contact with some individuals and can determine the particular features and nuances in their faces. RESPONDENT to Gary: This is a sure sign of a cult to me. VINEETO: Your conclusion you draw from your initial observation seems rather curious to me. Are you saying that when five people state the same fact, they automatically belong to a cult? Outside my window grows a lovely thick six-metre high palm tree, at least 100 years old. Now if a group of ten people gathered around that palm tree and nine of them would say ‘this is a palm tree’ and one of them would say, ‘this is a goddess’ – are the nine people then members of a palmism cult and the one who sees a goddess is the true individual? Unfortunately this example is no mere invention. In fact, most people I have talked to believe in some kind of spirit or disembodied divinity that manifests in trees, rocks, mountains and in some special human beings. Curiously enough there are only very few people who are ready to investigate this notion of divinity as being a belief arising out of their own instinctual programming. And even more curious – exactly those few daring individuals are then accused of belonging to a cult. Not that I mind that you see me belonging to be cult – I have belonged to a notorious cult for 17 years – and now I am considered belonging to the cult of the happy and harmless. I am simply suggesting broadening your perspective so as to facilitate having a glimpse of how I am experiencing this marvellous universe. Isn’t listening seeing with another’s eyes? Upon closer inspection you may be shocked to discover that an actualist is completely and utterly on his or her own – for the first time in one’s life. RESPONDENT to Gary: Here is one example: ‘And the pioneering discovery of Actual Freedom is that the sense of being can be eliminated, extirpated in toto.’ VINEETO: Your example of Gary saying that ‘that the sense of being can be eliminated, extirpated in toto’ is simply him stating a fact, just as Richard or Peter do. Everyone who has had a self-less pure consciousness experience can verify by their own temporary experience the fact that it is indeed not only possible but utterly delicious to live without a self. I admit, it’s a scary fact that such self-less existence is a permanent possibility, but it nevertheless has been proven to be a fact. RESPONDENT to Gary: I speak with personal experience because I have been in two cults in the past. One of them was very similar to this one which is why I think I initially identified with this one so well. VINEETO: I wonder if you would like to share where you see the similarities and significant qualities of the two cults, and how they compare with actualism. And one more question, if I may – do you consider Krishnamurtiism to be a cult? I am asking because I have been a very committed member of a cult myself and in that period I completely ignored and denied that I should belong to a cult. As a sannyasin I believed that only jealous old-time religious people considered us to be a cult and that I was part of a movement that was to change the world and bring about the New Man. After Rajneesh had died, I began more and more to blame the obvious flaws of Rajneeshism on my fellow followers and the organization for diluting and blemishing His Message until it finally dawned on me that it is the Message itself that was to blame for the failure and not the followers. Actualism is not a message for me but a method, a recipe, if you will – and it works. By experiencing the success of my own effort in applying the simple recipe I am at the same time autonomous – not dependent upon the discoverer of the recipe but guided by my own pure consciousness experiences. My own experience of ongoing happiness and harmlessness confirms the fact that the recipe incrementally delivers what it promises – peace on earth. RESPONDENT to Gary: I have extreme reservations about sending this to this list because I am sure it will be denied and I will be called silly. I am interested in observing my instincts in action so this looks like a good way to do it. I feel as if I am entering the beast’s lair (cult) by posting this but what the hell. One never knows what the outcome might be. VINEETO: Good on you. You stick your head in what you consider the ‘beast’s lair’. Certainly not an easy thing to do. But, as you say ‘what the hell’, one cannot feel safe and discover new territory at the same time. Your description reminds me of the time when I wrote * VINEETO: PS: I don’t know if you will find the time to answer this letter as you have said to Alan –
I do find it amusing though, that you have plenty of time to answer Richard’s posts ten to forty-five minutes after he sent them off, five times a day. Above you stated to Gary that everyone’s words are interchangeable, as in ‘everything you said above could have Richard’s, Peter’s, Vineeto’s or Alan’s name on it’, yet you only chose to talk to who you consider to be the leader of the cult, while dismissing the pawns, so to speak. Isn’t that somewhat cultic behaviour on your part? Just curious.
RESPONDENT: Hi Vineeto, I feel like I totally don’t belong here and don’t want to be here and that I am not welcome here as I have no intention of being a bonafide actualist. However, I am curious about this belonging issue. Can you shed some light on belonging such as which instinct that it is associated with, etc.? VINEETO: Since asking me about instinctual passions, you have posted the following to the list. Vis:
I do find it intriguing that, first asking me about instinctual passions, you now consider me ‘a complete robot’, as a real robot, being just a machine, does not know about feelings, emotions and passions. However, as you have asked, I will give you my two cents on my experience with ‘this belonging issue’. All my life I wanted and needed to belong – to a family, a country, a group of mates, a boyfriend, a political movement, a therapy group and, most dedicated of all, a spiritual movement. When I had a strong sense of belonging to one particular spiritual group – Rajneeshees – I began to question other groups, religions and tribes I had belonged to before, thinking I was doing great liberating investigation. However only when I questioned the act of believing itself, which is the cornerstone of belonging to any spiritual movement, did I come to realise that all my questioning of belonging so far had not even scratched the surface of my identity. Investigating the act of believing itself, of course, brought up all kinds of fears, the strongest of which was that then I would not belong to anyone or any group – I would be on my own. As I said to Gary, when I was questioning my spiritual belief of being a Sannyasin there was great concern that I did not replace one belief with another – I wanted something tangible, stable, permanent, something that I would never ever have to question again, something that did not depend on me believing in it to be true. Therefore I had to investigate my emotional reactions to stepping out of that protective group as I was leaving behind all my friends, my spiritual identity as a Rajneeshee and the security of feeling as though I belonged to a close-knit community. Those emotional reactions were not only my fear of being lonely and unprotected, but I was also haunted by my own adopted spiritual morals and ethics – was I doing the ‘right’ thing?, would I be punished if there was a God or an afterlife?, what if I was wrong and Rajneesh was right?, who am I to decide the ‘right’ path? ... and so on. It was just as well that I did not blame Richard or Peter – or actualism per se – for these fears and distressing emotions that arose from my own questioning, otherwise I would have never been able to investigate my own spiritual values and my need to belong to a protective spiritual tribe. Now I belong to no group and to no one and by investigating not only my social identity of beliefs, morals and ethics but also my instinctual survival passions, I am leaving behind ‘who’ I thought and felt I was. For me, the notion that practicing actualism is the equivalent of belonging to a cult is complete and utter nonsense because by taking apart my social identity I am free from the debilitating need to belong to any group, family, nation, race and gender, and by investigating my instinctual passions I am free from the biggest club of all – humanity itself. Actualism is about becoming autonomous for the first time in one’s life.
VINEETO: Those emotional reactions were not only my fear of being lonely and unprotected, but I was also haunted by my own adopted spiritual morals and ethics – was I doing the ‘right’ thing?, would I be punished if there was a God or an afterlife?, what if I was wrong and Rajneesh was right?, who am I to decide the ‘right’ path? ... and so on. It was just as well that I did not blame Richard or Peter – or actualism per se – for these fears and distressing emotions that arose from my own questioning, otherwise I would have never been able to investigate my own spiritual values and my need to belong to a protective spiritual tribe. Now I belong to no group and to no one and by investigating not only my social identity of beliefs, morals and ethics but also my instinctual survival passions, I am leaving behind ‘who’ I thought and felt I was. For me, the notion that practicing actualism is the equivalent of belonging to a cult is complete and utter nonsense because by taking apart my social identity I am free from the debilitating need to belong to any group, family, nation, race and gender, and by investigating my instinctual passions I am free from the biggest club of all – humanity itself. Actualism is about becoming autonomous for the first time in one’s life. RESPONDENT: I am not sure if belonging is my issue. I don’t have I need to belong. It is more of a feeling of I don’t belong and I really seriously feel like I don’t belong here. I am sure that fear is at the base of it but it becomes confusing from there. I am now reminded that I have had a feeling of I don’t belong through my entire life. I don’t have a fear of not belonging. It is more like I don’t belong and I don’t want to belong especially to this group that you are calling not a group. VINEETO: It is completely up to you if you want to explore why through your entire life you ‘have had a feeling of I don’t belong’ . It is of little use when I tell you the outcome of my own explorations about the topic because that only leaves you with the option of believing me or not believing me whereas an experiential understanding of your own beliefs and emotions about belonging will give you the confidence to assess if what others are saying is factual or not. When I wanted to explore a particular issue, in this case belonging, I asked myself very specific questions in order to experience and explore the feeling around this issue and the particular reasons why I was feeling what I was feeling about the issue . Some of those questions were – why did I feel lonely, why did I need someone or some people to believe what I believed and confirm what I believed, why did I want to belong to a group of people who believed what I believed , why was I afraid of being mixed up with the ‘wrong’ crowd? Why was I afraid of finding out facts, particularly those that went against what everyone believes? Why did I feel the need to conform to one group and take distance from another? Why was it so important to have like-believing friends? The issue of belonging would inevitably bring me to the question why my beliefs, all beliefs, could not stand by themselves. I seemed to always need others to confirm my beliefs, I needed the help of a group to defend my beliefs, I was touchy about my beliefs, they were something holy and too close to the bone to be polluted by other’s opinion and questioning. When I applied the method of actualism I found out that exploring facts and knowing something for a fact is a completely different matter. When I know something for a fact, the fact speaks for itself, I don’t need support from anyone for ‘believing’ a fact because a fact does not require belief or faith. With every fact that I discovered and that I acknowledged as a fact, the fear of being exposed by others for my whimsical beliefs was incrementally diminished. You say ‘I am sure that fear is at the base of it but it becomes confusing from there’ – fear stands at the threshold of every new discovery and the trick is to rise to the challenge and keep inquiring despite the fears. What helped me to face my fears was to look at each fear separately as it occurred – at one time it was my fear to investigate a touchy belief, another time it was my fear to be rejected, at yet another time it was my fear to be sucked in, or to be wrong, or to be punished for wrong beliefs or unfaithful behaviour, or to end up in the gutter if I don’t follow what others follow. These are only some of the fears that occurred during my investigations into my social identity and my instinctual passions and each of these fears I examined carefully for factual dangers. However, if I found no practical reason to be careful or afraid, I then was emboldened to move into even deeper waters of my psyche despite my fears. Of course, you can forever ask others about their findings and experiences and learn about what others have explored but that will always keep you in the realm of thought and feeling as in ‘that this sounds right’ or ‘I don’t believe you’. Until you verify or falsify what another says is a fact or not by your own experience and by repeatable, tangible, visible evidence, any such theoretical or feeling appraisal is as limp as a dishcloth. RESPONDENT: Vineeto, I woke up this morning and there is something here I can’t get off my mind so I thought I would write a follow-up. In your last post to me you said: ‘Now I belong to no group.’ I don’t know how you could possibly expect me to somehow believe that actualism is not a group. You can’t even show me one of your dictionary definitions that this is not a group. I have serious doubts about anything you say if you could be this blind. VINEETO: And to Richard you said – If there is nothing to belong to here then why do I feel like I don’t belong? Vineeto is even saying this is not a group and I am for sure not buying that one. You had said ‘I am not sure if belonging is my issue’ but now your issue has become that ‘I feel like I don’t belong’ and Vineeto must be blind saying that ‘I belong to no group and to no one’. Isn’t it you who insists that actualism is a cult and a group because the word has
‘-ism’ at the end of it and because a handful of people want to be free of the human condition? Isn’t it you who is then
saying that you don’t want to belong to this cult and claim that actualists somehow insist that you should, despite clear
statements to the contrary If you consider the people writing on this mailing list to be a group that somehow belong together, then maybe you could take the time to look at some facts. Everyone very obviously does his and her own thing with Richard’s discovery and with the method of actualism – some apply the actualism method, some chose to feel offended, some blow with the wind, some create their own path to actual reality or mystic Reality and some desperately want to stay as they are. The thirty odd people who are subscribed to this list are living all over the planet, most have never met each other and supporters may turn into objectors any day of the week. How can you somehow believe that actualism is a group, even a cult? What is this cultic thing that people of this supposed group do here? Why do you invent a cult that you then declare you don’t want to belong to? This thread started with the issue of belonging, and belonging is about feeling part of a group for emotional support, for security of one’s beliefs and for company in loneliness and misery. I have experienced and examined my beliefs, emotions, instinctual passions, urges, needs and fears around this issue in me and they no longer have any impact on me. I don’t belong to any group and I have dared to acknowledge the fact that I am on my own – in fact, I as this flesh-and-blood body have been on my own all my life despite my feelings of belonging or not belonging. For the path to an actual freedom I rely on my own pure consciousness experiences to know what I want to achieve and I found that the method of actualism works to make me happy and harmless. There is neither belief nor devotion nor gratitude nor security nor following an authority figure – none of these emotional needs and bondages exist anymore. The issue here is not if you believe me or if you don’t believe me but if you are interested to use a method that is designed for exploring exactly the topics you say you are interested in. You are perfectly free to do this in any way you like, quietly by yourself or sharing with others who are also exploring their own issues of the Human Condition. As my experience of being autonomous and standing on my own two feet is seemingly inconceivable to you, you will simply need to experience this autonomy for yourself in order to find out if what I say is factual or not.
VINEETO: I presume you might not have got Richard’s message that we changed the list because Listbot has some technical errors. The new list address is actualfreedom@topica.com (now closed) – it is very easy to subscribe and the message about belonging for you is on the new list. Looking forward to further conversations with you. RESPONDENT: I read your message about belonging, Vineeto and I am stunned into silence by your claim that actualism is not a group. I have decided not to subscribe to the new list and continue the conversation at this time. Thanks for the invitation. Good luck with your new list. VINEETO: I have never denied that actualism may look like a group to you – and in particular, one that you don’t want to belong to. Is your issue of not-belonging now resolved by not subscribing to the new list and continuing your conversations on the old Actual Freedom Mailing list? However, as you have inquired about the issue of belonging and the related instinctual passions I was trying to convey that neither belonging nor not-belonging is an issue for me any longer – I have examined and resolved my feelings, beliefs and instinctual passions related to belonging, per se. Actualism for me is what it has always been from the very beginning – a sensible and practical recipe to become happy and harmless. You could say that for you the cooks using the recipe are forming a group that you don’t want to belong to and you prefer to talk to the originator of the recipe only on another list. Fair enough. But as you continue to refuse to take my words at face value you are thus closing the door on the possibility of using the recipe for your own happiness and harmlessness because the only thing I am repeatedly saying is that I used Richard’s recipe and it works. The real question behind belonging for me has been ‘am I ready to stand on my own two feet and instigate irrevocable change, despite my own fears and beliefs and despite everyone else’s obstinate objections and impassioned accusations.’ The trouble is that once I have seen and experienced a fact as a fact, there is no way of going back to believing what everyone else believes, despite my fears of leaving the comfort zone of ‘my’ identity.
RESPONDENT: I read your message about belonging, Vineeto and I am stunned into silence by your claim that actualism is not a group. I have decided not to subscribe to the new list and continue the conversation at this time. Thanks for the invitation. Good luck with your new list. VINEETO: I have never denied that actualism may look like a group to you – and in particular, one that you don’t want to belong to. Is your issue of not-belonging now resolved by not subscribing to the new list and continuing your conversations on the old Actual Freedom Mailing list? RESPONDENT: No, I got a message from No 7 which I thought was a very good message and I decided to reply to it. He explained in terms of his own understanding and I decided to reply. VINEETO: My question was if your not-subscribing to the new Actual Freedom Mailing List has done anything to resolve your issue about belonging. I have found that in order to dissolve an emotional issue I had to remove the obstacles in me – my beliefs and feelings around that issue – rather than passing on the opportunity to examine the problems by avoiding situations that challenged my beliefs and feelings. Therefore I was wondering if your method – not subscribing and not continuing the conversation – is satisfactory for you. * However, as you have inquired about the issue of belonging and the related instinctual passions I was trying to convey that neither belonging nor not belonging is an issue for me any longer – I have examined and resolved my feelings, beliefs and instinctual passions related to belonging, per se. Actualism for me is what it has always been from the very beginning – a sensible and practical recipe to become happy and harmless. You could say that for you the cooks using the recipe are forming a group that you don’t want to belong to and you prefer to talk to the originator of the recipe only on another list. Fair enough. But as you continue to refuse to take my words at face value you are thus closing the door on the possibility of using the recipe for your own happiness and harmlessness because the only thing I am repeatedly saying is that I used Richard’s recipe and it works. RESPONDENT: I thought I was taking your words at face value. You said: ‘Now I belong to no group.’ VINEETO: Some of your thoughts on ‘taking your words at face value’ have been so far –
According to these statements you are not taking my words at face value at all, but you express disbelief, dismissal and restate your firm conviction that actualism must be a cult. * RESPONDENT: Standing on my own two feet is what I am talking about. VINEETO: And in your second letter you said – RESPONDENT: The reason I feel I don’t belong and don’t want to join the new list is because it is a list for actualists to practice actualism. I want to learn about the instincts but I don’t want to practice actualism. Therefore I feel I don’t belong here. Also, I am deeply disturbed about your claim that actualism is not a group. This is obviously a group by any definition. VINEETO: According to the welcome message ‘this is a forum for discussion about an end to malice and sorrow forever and an actual freedom for all peoples’. If you want to experiment with another way to bringing about an end to malice and sorrow – and fear – then that is your prerogative and I wish you well. Personally I only know of one way that works – the actualism method – and therefore I might not be of much assistance to your wanting to learn. As for actualism being a group – maybe it would help our mutual understanding if you could tell me what you mean by ‘this is obviously a group by any definition’ because as I see it everyone writing on this list is doing his or her own thing and most people are outspokenly opposed to even beginning to use the method of actualism. I still can’t see what would make these people a group one belongs to. For a cult one needs a belief in a divine message and a divine messenger who personifies that belief. First, it is impossible to worship a thorough-going atheist as a divine messenger – some have even tried and had to give up. Second, actualism is the process of questioning and investigating every single one of my beliefs and their underlying feelings, emotions and passions, and it can therefore, by its totally do-it-yourself methodology, never be a cult. It is telling that everyone who considers actualism to be a cult has not yet applied the method of actualism to the point of personally examining his or her own beliefs. Belonging has only apparently something to do with others, with some group, some cult, some tribe, some nation – to get rid of the issue of belonging I had to dig into all my own values, feelings and beliefs of my social identity that caused me to automatically need to feel part of a group, a nation, a race and a spiritual belief system or to continuously rebel and rile against this conditioning. For example, although I still have a German passport per default, I neither belong to the German nation nor to any other nation because I have eliminated my social and instinctual issues about belonging. Similarly, my gender is female but I don’t belong to the woman’s camp or the ‘sisterhood’. RESPONDENT: I am looking now to see if fear is ‘who I am’. That is what it looks like. Would you agree with that? How do you see it? It looks like at the bottom of it all is fear and that is ‘me’. If I see that fear is ‘who I am’ then what else is there to do but understand it experientially? VINEETO: When I started to explore my identity I found that ‘who I am’ was primarily my beliefs and my feelings of belonging to a particular group of like-believers, my values and morals, my identity as a woman, as a member of a group of friends, etc, that formed a certain image and persona that is ‘me’, which I built up and adjusted over the years. In the process of uncovering and removing one bit of this identity after the other, replacing my morals and values with a discernment of what is silly and what is sensible and replacing my beliefs with solid facts, I then discovered that there is yet another layer to ‘me’. Unfettered and undistorted by moral and ethical restrictions I experienced ‘me’ as the whole range of the raw instinctual passions, our animal heritage of ‘what can I eat and what can eat me’. I discovered that fear and aggression are very closely interlinked, as are the so-called tender passions of nurture and desire. As long as I was ruled by the moral and ethical straightjacket of my social-spiritual conditioning, I would sweep any upcoming emotions and passions under the carpet or cover them up with loving feelings. Fear was usually the only acceptable feeling to experience within the strict moral code of social and spiritual rules as aggression is taught as being unacceptable and usually punished if overtly expressed. Eliminating my social identity allowed the various animal passions to come to the surface and enables me to experience and examine them. Thus I experientially come to know, time and again, that it is ‘me’, the very core of my ‘being’, that keeps these passions alive. Each time, as I become aware of a passion arising and stay on its trail without repressing and without expressing, I have the bugger by the throat – I have become aware of ‘me’ in action. The more experience I have in experientially examining ‘me’ in action, the quicker I am in detecting ‘me’ yet again and then swoosh – at this point of keen awareness it is possible to step out of being a ‘self’ for a short period and experience a ‘self’-less freedom from the human condition. When you ask ‘would you agree with that?’ I wonder what use it is for you if I agree or not. Whatever I say will be either believed or doubted. I can share my experience with the method of actualism with you but an intellectual-only understanding of my experiences does not cause you to become free from fear, let alone free from ‘self’. In order to confidently be your own authority and stand on your own two feet you would need to persistently dig into your own psyche in order to be able to confirm or deny what I am reporting. You say – How do you see it? It looks like at the bottom of it all is fear and that is ‘me’. If I see that fear is ‘who I am’ then what else is there to do but understand it experientially? The traditional approach so far has been to question and then sublimate one’s savage passions – fear and aggression – and to enhance the tender passions of nurture and desire (love and compassion). If you do this persistently and tirelessly, you can reach an Altered State of Consciousness as described by many saints and sages. However, an ASC is not the end of the instinctual passions, the passion cards have only been shuffled a bit and one has moved from the physical so-called evil world further into the meta-physical so-called tender realms. Actualism is the method that questions, examines and tackles all of the instinctual passions, both savage and tender, as they all belong to the same animal survival program. In order to eliminate fear completely I need to eliminate ‘me’ completely, all of my social identity, all of my spiritual beliefs, all of my good and bad feelings and eventually the very core of ‘me’ as a feeling ‘being’. To get rid of fear completely it is not enough to just ‘see that fear is ‘who I am’’ and then become fearless as in rising above fear. There is no such thing as a shortcut of a blinding flash of light as the spiritual myths and fables have us believe. There is no fairy wand or Grace of Existence or a helping hand of God that interferes with human destiny and freedom. Becoming free from the instinctual passions is all in your own hands and it is a process of chipping away at one’s self-centredness and fearfulness and passionate survival automatism, bit by bit, experience by experience, in an ongoing attentiveness of how am I experiencing this moment of being alive. Again, what I say is something you might possibly take at face value and then begin to discover for yourself as you diligently nibble away at your social conditioning such that you can begin to observe your instinctual passions in action in yourself. It is a fascinating journey once one takes the plunge. Good to talk to you again.
RESPONDENT: The reason I feel I don’t belong and don’t want to join the new list is because it is a list for actualists to practice actualism. I want to learn about the instincts but I don’t want to practice actualism. Therefore I feel I don’t belong here. Also, I am deeply disturbed about your claim that actualism is not a group. This is obviously a group by any definition. VINEETO: Actualism is the process of questioning and investigating every single one of my beliefs and their underlying feelings, emotions and passions, and it can therefore, by its totally do-it-yourself methodology, never be a cult. It is telling that everyone who considers actualism to be a cult has not yet applied the method of actualism to the point of personally examining his or her own beliefs. RESPONDENT: I am looking now to see if fear is ‘who I am’. That is what it looks like. Would you agree with that? How do you see it? It looks like at the bottom of it all is fear and that is ‘me’. If I see that fear is ‘who I am’ then what else is there to do but understand it experientially? VINEETO: When I started to explore my identity I found that ‘who I am’ was primarily my beliefs and my feelings of belonging to a particular group of like-believers, my values and morals, my identity as a woman, as a member of a group of friends, etc, that formed a certain image and persona that is ‘me’, which I built up and adjusted over the years. In the process of uncovering and removing one bit of this identity after the other, replacing my morals and values with a discernment of what is silly and what is sensible and replacing my beliefs with solid facts, I then discovered that there is yet another layer to ‘me’. Unfettered and undistorted by moral and ethical restrictions I experienced ‘me’ as the whole range of the raw instinctual passions, our animal heritage of ‘what can I eat and what can eat me’. I discovered that fear and aggression are very closely interlinked, as are the so-called tender passions of nurture and desire. As long as I was ruled by the moral and ethical straightjacket of my social-spiritual conditioning, I would sweep any upcoming emotions and passions under the carpet or cover them up with loving feelings. Fear was usually the only acceptable feeling to experience within the strict moral code of social and spiritual rules as aggression is taught as being unacceptable and usually punished if overtly expressed. Eliminating my social identity allowed the various animal passions to come to the surface and enables me to experience and examine them. Thus I experientially come to know, time and again, that it is ‘me’, the very core of my ‘being’, that keeps these passions alive. Each time, as I become aware of a passion arising and stay on its trail without repressing and without expressing, I have the bugger by the throat – I have become aware of ‘me’ in action. The more experience I have in experientially examining ‘me’ in action, the quicker I am in detecting ‘me’ yet again and then swoosh – at this point of keen awareness it is possible to step out of being a ‘self’ for a short period and experience a ‘self’-less freedom from the human condition. RESPONDENT: How do you see it? It looks like at the bottom of it all is fear and that is ‘me’. If I see that fear is ‘who I am’ then what else is there to do but understand it experientially? VINEETO: To get rid of fear completely it is not enough to just ‘see that fear is ‘who I am’’ and then become fearless as in rising above fear. There is no such thing as a shortcut of a blinding flash of light as the spiritual myths and fables have us believe. There is no fairy wand or Grace of Existence or a helping hand of God that interferes with human destiny and freedom. Becoming free from the instinctual passions is all in your own hands and it is a process of chipping away at one’s self-centredness and fearfulness and passionate survival automatism, bit by bit, experience by experience, in an ongoing attentiveness of how am I experiencing this moment of being alive. Again, what I say is something you might possibly take at face value and then begin to discover for yourself as you diligently nibble away at your social conditioning such that you can begin to observe your instinctual passions in action in yourself. It is a fascinating journey once one takes the plunge. RESPONDENT: I guess this pretty much answers my question. I have been observing my instinctual passions in action for quite some time and I see that fear is at the bottom of all of it. So what there is to do is keep observing the instincts in action and chipping away by understanding it experientially. I was asking if there was anything else to be done other than that but apparently not. VINEETO: When you say that apparently there is nothing other to be done than observe one’s instinctual passions you have apparently not read all of my post. Vis:
You might deem it unnecessary to examine all your beliefs and social-spiritual values but it is impossible to clearly observe one’s instinctual passions with an unbiased and unrestricted awareness unless one has first done the work of becoming aware of and eliminating one’s beliefs and one’s moral and ethical values. Yesterday I met an old friend who asked me what I do with fear. He said often he wakes up in the morning and feels fearful for no apparent reason. He could well relate to when I told him that in my spiritual days I had an underlying fearfulness of not doing the ‘right’ thing and of being punished or struck by the wrath of Existence in some way or other for my ‘wrong doing’. He said there was a kind of mantra going round in his head searching for the next ‘right’ thing to do. We talked about morals and ethics as being ingrained into human beings since earliest childhood. When I left home I was busy replacing my parent’s set of morals and ethics with another, then another and finally with the Sannyas Eastern spiritual set of morals and ethics. As my friend was a Sannyasin, he duly protested and said that Rajneesh did not teach any rules of right and wrong. I suggested that when one has an emotional investment in keeping the image of one’s master pure, one is likely not to notice that the ‘Truth’ is but another set of moral and ethical values. Even the ultimate ‘Good’ and the ultimate ‘Right’ are nothing but human-made values fuelled by ancient superstition and blind devotion to a Higher Being somewhere in the universe. Rajneeshism has its own set of morals, rights and wrongs, goods and bads, rules and social codes, as does Krishnamurtiism, Christianity, Buddhism, etc. I said that had I questioned not only my own ideas as to what is right and wrong but also the very source of all moral and ethical codes – the belief in a God or Higher Power who enforces good and bad, rights and wrongs by a system of divine reward and punishment. Being good and right brings the reward of good karma, good fortune, respectability and a permanent berth in Parinirvana or Heaven and being bad and wrong brings punishment of bad karma, bad luck and condemnation to suffer endless rebirths or to plunge into the abyss of Hell. When I began to replace these fear-ridden spiritual beliefs with facts most of my fears began to permanently disappear. Real-world fears are mostly based on religious or spiritual fairytales but it is also necessary to question all of the beliefs that would have us believe that life on earth is a fearful and miserable existence. One needs to question psittacisms such as ‘one needs to fight for one’s rights’, ‘it’s a tough world’, ‘life’s a bitch’, any of the multitudinous doomsday scenarios that are currently in fashion, the insidiousness of rumour and innuendo, the fear-propagating role of protest movements and the continual beat-up of the media in promulgating fear, angst and mass hysteria. To believe all that one is fed by one’s fellow human beings is to give substance and fuel to one’s fears. To make the effort to find out for oneself the facts of each situation is to cut away at the roots of these socially instilled fears ... and this is the very work that an actualist initially has to do in order to become free of the human condition. The other kind of fear, however, is the raw animal survival fear that only comes to the surface when one’s beliefs and one’s moral and ethical codes have been substantially eliminated, and this kind of fear is indeed something one can only be aware of, and recognize, as the genetically-encoded survival program in action. This very attentiveness is the ending of fear’s ferocious grip. Or, as Richard puts it –
RESPONDENT: I have used the AF method of running the question in the past and found it to be a good method as I have had extensive experience with similar methods in the past. The problem I have with a method of this type is it tends to become mechanical. VINEETO: As you say that you had extensive experience with methods similar to the actualism method in the past, this indicates that you have not yet understood the difference between actualism and other – spiritual – methods of observing one’s feelings. The method of watching and observing one’s thoughts and feelings, common to many spiritual teachings, is derived from the Buddhist teachings of Vipassana and consists of becoming aware of your unwanted or undesirable feelings in order to dis-identify from them and successively become detached from all earthly phenomena so as to bolster and make Real one’s true and immortal ‘self’. Buddha describes the method of watching and discernment very well –
Of course, such a method becomes sensately dulling and mind-numbing mechanical, as it is designed to completely dissociate from one’s unwanted feelings and one’s earthy sensual experiences. Vipassana and other practices of spiritual awareness are based on the premise that I don’t want to be here in the physical world and that I want to get out of here as soon as possible, and the method offered is to dis-identify from one’s thoughts, feelings and bodily sensations and become a disembodied Self existing as Consciousness only. The actualism method is designed to do exactly the opposite. Actualism is about being here in this physical sensual paradise where we flesh and blood humans actually live. By asking myself ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ I become aware of what is preventing me from fully sensuously enjoying being here – ‘me’, the alien entity inhabiting this flesh and blood body, consisting of all of my beliefs, feelings and instinctual passions. In order to become free from those feelings and passions ‘I’ will have to die in ‘my’ totality. In actualism I don’t disidentify from my beliefs, feelings and passions but I sincerely acknowledge that ‘I’ am the problem and then proceed to facilitate ‘my’ demise. I have used the actualism method for four years to assiduously examine the source of my emotional upsets, the depth of my beliefs, the cunning of my alien entity inside, the reasons for my resistance to question further, the details of my social concerns, the insidiousness of my spiritual values, the contents of my affective relationships with people. There is nothing mechanical whatsoever to the in-depth exploration of one’s psyche, it is utterly thrilling to find out how ‘I’ tick and how to successively become free from ‘my’ automatic instinctual reactions. If you are finding the method you have been using dulling and mechanical, you have not yet discovered the genuine article. RESPONDENT: The problem I have with being an actualist is that is taking on another identity. You say you have lost your other identities but now you are identified with and as an actualist which is another identity. VINEETO: There is no need to worry about your identity as an actualist. As you said you ‘have had extensive experience with similar methods in the past’, it is obvious that you have not practiced actualism yet because actualism is 180 degrees opposite to all spiritual and religious methods taught in the past. Actualism is brand new to human history and any similarity to any spiritual method is purely imaginary. Further, the actualism method is designed to take all of one’s identity apart, without replacing any of it with any new beliefs, credos, values, wisdoms, etc. and – practiced diligently and sincerely – actualism works to minimize the possessive personal concept of ‘I’ or ‘me’ to such a degree that ‘I’ become almost non-existent. If one merely replaces one identity with another, one has not understood the method at all. I am as much identified with being an actualist – ‘one who practices actualism’ – as I am identified with using a car, a kitchen knife or this computer. I don’t need to emotionally identify with something that works, I simply use it because it works. It is indeed possible to live without any psychological or psychic identity whatsoever and pure consciousness experiences verify that fact each time again. Living without identity is the very aim of actualism.
VINEETO: When you say that apparently there is nothing other to be done than observe one’s instinctual passions you have apparently not read all of my post. Vis: 28.7.2001 You might deem it unnecessary to examine all your beliefs and social-spiritual values but it is impossible to clearly observe one’s instinctual passions with an unbiased and unrestricted awareness unless one has first done the work of becoming aware of and eliminating one’s beliefs and one’s moral and ethical values. <snip> Real-world fears are mostly based on religious or spiritual fairytales but it is also necessary to question all of the beliefs that would have us believe that life on earth is a fearful and miserable existence. One needs to question psittacisms such as ‘one needs to fight for one’s rights’, ‘it’s a tough world’, ‘life’s a bitch’, any of the multitudinous doomsday scenarios that are currently in fashion, the insidiousness of rumour and innuendo, the fear-propagating role of protest movements and the continual beat-up of the media in promulgating fear, angst and mass hysteria. To believe all that one is fed by one’s fellow human beings is to give substance and fuel to one’s fears. To make the effort to find out for oneself the facts of each situation is to cut away at the roots of these socially instilled fears ... and this is the very work that an actualist initially has to do in order to become free of the human condition. The other kind of fear, however, is the raw animal survival fear that only comes to the surface when one’s beliefs and one’s moral and ethical codes have been substantially eliminated, and this kind of fear is indeed something one can only be aware of, and recognize, as the genetically-encoded survival program in action. This very attentiveness is the ending of fear’s ferocious grip. Or, as Richard puts it –
RESPONDENT: This is the fear that I was talking about. So being ‘attentive’ to this fear in action is what there is to do. There is nothing left to analyze or uncover once one is experiencing this fear in action. I understand Richard to be saying that this fear is who I am as posted below:
VINEETO: As you have not even started to ‘analyze or uncover’ your social conditioning and spiritual beliefs that are the initial trigger for most of human fear, ‘nothing left’ is a bit of an understatement. I do find it amazing how you continue to refuse to ‘uncover’ as in become aware of and ‘analyze’ as in examine anything about the outer layer of your ‘self’, your spiritual and social identity, all the while imagining that you can identify and be ‘‘attentive’ to this fear in action’. How do you plan to be attentive to this (instinctual) fear in action if you haven’t yet investigated the guardian of the instinctual passions, the moral and ethical conditioning that is instilled in each and every human being as a panacea for these raw animal survival instincts? For instance, what about your fear of belonging to a cult or ‘another authoritarian system of truths’ you mentioned when you recently subscribed to the Actual Freedom Mailing List? Vis:
[Respondent to Richard]: My issue is that I don’t want to belong because I feel that is a restriction to freedom. Respondent to Richard 18.7.2001 [Respondent to No 13]: I could be wrong but I do see ‘another authoritarian system of truths’ in actualism. Respondent to No. 13 24.7.2001 [Respondent]: The reason I feel I don’t belong and don’t want to join the new list is because it is a list for actualists to practice actualism. I want to learn about the instincts but I don’t want to practice actualism. Therefore I feel I don’t belong here. Also, I am deeply disturbed about your claim that actualism is not a group. Respondent to Vineeto 28.7.2001 It is practically impossible to experientially ‘learn about the instincts’ if one has not first examined and removed the restricting and distorting outer layer of spiritual, moral and ethical codes that every human being is inevitably taught very early on in life. It is as if you wanted to examine and eradicate the core root, let’s say, of a big ancient Sequoia tree without first cutting its branches and felling its trunk. Given that you said in an earlier post that you are not interested in reading Peter’s
posts What you call ‘preaching the actualism gospel’ However, if you prefer to follow your own traditional method of ‘being attentive’ to your feelings, fondly imagining them to be instinctual, then that is entirely your business. I merely share my comprehensive experience that this kind of attentiveness doesn’t lead to the ending of fear. At best it can lead to a feeling of fearlessness – or omnipotent Godliness – the pathetic traditional substitute for an actual ending to fear. The trouble most people have with actualism is that it is a pragmatic method that requires effort and commitment to do a step by step investigation into every aspect of one’s own psyche in order to bring about visible, tangible and irrevocable change, whereas all spiritual solutions propose an effortless salvation by senseless acceptance of ancient twaddle – ‘Knowing’ – and an imagined passionate realisation of a narcissistic state – ‘Being’. ‘Both the ego (‘I’ in the head) and the soul (‘me’ in the heart)’ are actively investigated by the diligent and persistent examination of who I think and feel I am. Brought to the bright light of awareness both ego and soul incrementally diminish to allow ‘what I am’ – this sensate physical flesh and blood body – to become more and more apparent. The disappearance of beliefs and their associated fears go hand in hand and with the resultant diminishing of the affective faculty an ongoing delicious sensuous attentiveness starts to prevail and being alive becomes a delightful enjoyment of the copious magnificence and ever-fresh splendour of this pure and perfect universe.
VINEETO: As you have not even started to ‘analyze or uncover’ your social conditioning and spiritual beliefs that are the initial trigger for most of human fear, ‘nothing left’ is a bit of an understatement. I do find it amazing how you continue to refuse to ‘uncover’ as in become aware of and ‘analyze’ as in examine anything about the outer layer of your ‘self’, your spiritual and social identity, all the while imagining that you can identify and be ‘‘attentive’ to this fear in action’. How do you plan to be attentive to this (instinctual) fear in action if you haven’t yet investigated the guardian of the instinctual passions, the moral and ethical conditioning that is instilled in each and every human being as a panacea for these raw animal survival instincts? RESPONDENT: Vineeto, I am not a beginner at this. As you continue to claim to know more about where I’m at than I do and to assume that I am a complete beginner at this I don’t see any use in trying to continue this discussion. Good luck with your job as librarian for this religious organization. VINEETO: I can only go by what you write. Despite extensive correspondence with
Richard and others you have maintained your concern that actualism is a cult and a ‘religious organization’. This
clearly shows that you have not used the method of actualism at all, because the method is designed to investigate the source of
such concerns in oneself and replace one’s aversion to, or predilection for, religious beliefs with facts. As far as actualism
is concerned you have not yet begun to apply the actualism method and as such cannot even be called a ‘complete beginner’ yet.
You have to begin something to be a beginner, whereas you clearly still have objections to even wanting to begin. You are
certainly not a beginner as an objector, however, Given that you consider actualism a ‘religious organization’, any
information about the instinctual passions you were seeking and receiving from actualists is therefore religious information for
you. I don’t quite understand in what way such ‘religious’ information is going to help you to become free from fear,
including your fear of cults and ‘another authoritarian system of truths’ There is simply no shortcut to eliminating fear without eliminating the ‘identity in
toto’
VINEETO: My so-called assumption today is that you have yet to understand the difference between spiritualism and actualism and between the spiritual world and the actual world. Without understanding and acknowledging the difference between the two, you cannot genuinely begin to practice actualism. Actualism by its very nature has nothing at all to do with spiritual practices aimed at discovering the ‘fountain of Truth’. RESPONDENT: Your assumption is based on your interpretation of what was said in the past. Here and now I thoroughly understand the difference between the spiritual and the actual and I am definitely not spiritual. You sound no different than a street corner preacher to me. You keep trying to shove your religion down my throat even though I have clearly stated that I don’t want it. I don’t have to use the actualism method to investigate myself. VINEETO: Whatever method you have used so far to investigate has not helped you to recognize what is meant by the word non-spiritual, otherwise you would recognize the silliness of your religious concepts about actualism. In Actual Freedom you won’t find God or Love or a Higher Self or life after death or any kind of spiritual non-physical energy or any Supreme Intelligence. This absence is not a clever linguistic ploy but a direct result of the fact that in the actual world there is no God nor Love nor a Higher Self nor life after death nor any kind of spiritual non-physical energy nor any Supreme Intelligence. That you ignore all this factual evidence and still keep persisting in you own religious concepts of actualism may well be because you want your teacher Jiddu Krishnamurti to appear non-spiritual despite the fact that his teachings are littered with spiritual-religious words. Here are only two examples of J. Krishnamurti’s spiritual teachings –
I make this assumption on the basis of experience with many people who I have talked about abandoning the spiritual path and so many of them have immediately said they are non-spiritual as well and then talked about Rajneesh, Krishnamurti, Buddhism, and the like as saying exactly what I am saying. I can only assume that too many years on the spiritual path means that words get to have no meaning whatsoever. Spiritual methods are based on the idea that one only needs to change one’s concept of oneself and then Everything, or better, God, the Truth, the Good and the Beauty will be revealed. The Advaita method of ‘You are already That’ and you only need to remember this often enough makes the spiritual concept of no change most obvious. When one applies the actualism method one does not merely change one’s concepts but investigates every inkling of spiritual-religious belief, concept, idea and all its related feelings. In actualism one dedicates oneself to bring about actual and irrevocable change in one’s software programming, both the social-spiritual conditioning and the instinctual survival program. Only continuous practical commitment and stubborn effort will bring about an actual change and free one’s senses from the social shackles we grow up with and the instinctual passions we are born with, and that is one of the main reasons why actualism is so unpopular. However, the rewards are beyond my wildest dreams.
RESPONDENT: Your assumption is based on your interpretation of what was said in the past. Here and now I thoroughly understand the difference between the spiritual and the actual and I am definitely not spiritual. You sound no different than a street corner preacher to me. You keep trying to shove your religion down my throat even though I have clearly stated that I don’t want it. I don’t have to use the actualism method to investigate myself. VINEETO: Whatever method you have used so far to investigate has not helped you to recognize what is meant by the word non-spiritual, otherwise you would recognize the silliness of your religious concepts about actualism. In Actual Freedom you won’t find God or Love or a Higher Self or life after death or any kind of spiritual non-physical energy or any Supreme Intelligence. This absence is not a clever linguistic ploy but a direct result of the fact that in the actual world there is no God nor Love nor a Higher Self nor life after death nor any kind of spiritual non-physical energy nor any Supreme Intelligence. That you ignore all this factual evidence and still keep persisting in you own religious concepts of actualism may well be because you want your teacher Jiddu Krishnamurti to appear non-spiritual despite the fact that his teachings are littered with spiritual-religious words. RESPONDENT: K is not my teacher. I haven’t mentioned K once whereas you continually quote and talk about your teacher and your actualism. Your credibility is near zero with me at this point. VINEETO: How come you still give me some credibility? Haven’t I made myself clear enough? You have declared many times that you don’t like actualism, that actualists are followers of a religious cult, that I only preach religion and that you don’t need to practice actualism to investigate yourself. According to you I represent everything that you reject – so how come my credibility is only near zero? As for you not having ‘mentioned K once’ – there have been several
posts between you and me about the topic of Jiddu Krishnamurti’s teachings last year and you can look them easily up In case you have forgotten, this is the actualism mailing list, and of course I am talking about actualism. It is neither my actualism nor your actualism but an effective method to become free from the shackles of one’s emotions and feelings. I have mentioned Jiddu Krishnamurti because you keep referring to actualism as being a
religious organization. If you think that Jiddu Krishnamurti, an acclaimed and well-known spiritual teacher, is teaching ‘about
the actual’ Actualism is indeed in every aspect diametrically opposite to what Jiddu Krishnamurti teaches. Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer |
