VINEETO: Hi,

You wrote to No 32 making comment about something I wrote to him –

RESPONDENT No 32: In the world today there are all sorts of currents (a normal thing for a big ocean such as our world) like spiritualism, which includes the monk-yogi-fakir subways, individualism, collectivism, communism, methodism, actualism all these -ism having in common the end.

VINEETO to No 32: Calling ‘our world’ ‘a big ocean’ is clearly reductionism on your part, as our world obviously consists of both land and ocean, otherwise we might live like Kevin Costner in Hollywood’s Water World.

RESPONDENT to No 32: 2. You compare the world to an ocean with currents. Fair enough, if you don’t take the metaphor too far or too literally (which Vineeto does) because it will break down (which she knew it would). She’s just point-scoring.

VINEETO: The metaphor ‘a big ocean’ for this physical universe is commonly used to imply that the world consists of energies, spirits and psychic currents. These non-physical energies may be real, as in capable of being emotionally experienced, but they are not actual. According to spiritual belief these psychic energies, currents and streams are Real and the physical world is deemed to be unreal, a dream or Maya only. One has only to attune oneself with the psychic stream to tap up into the divine energy, Source or Truth and bingo – you start to feel ‘your original identity’.

Just a note on ‘point-scoring’ as you have now mentioned it for the second time – I never write to score points as I find this game rather competitive, silly and antagonistic. I have come to enjoy a game that offers a win-win situation where all participants can potentially benefit from joining the game. I enjoy writing, sometimes to nut something out and largely to share my experience in using a method that works to make one happy and harmless. Others may benefit from these discussions so as to nut something out for themselves or to have the confirmation that there are actual flesh and blood human beings that are writing of their experiences on the website and not some cave-sitting philosophers or dreamers.

However, I am neither a pacifist nor an idealist and therefore I do not intend to appease every silly objection that is being announced. I have made the effort to become free from my own spiritual beliefs and my own gullibility and I now stand no nonsense from Gods, saints or wannabes. This list is set up to discuss how to become free from the Human Condition and not as a forum for people to indulge in blaming others for their own emotional predilections. If someone does not want to investigate their own emotional component of what it is that is bothering him or her, then they are simply missing out on the serendipitous opportunity these discussions provide for one’s own ‘self’-discovery.

*

RESPONDENT to No 32: [Actualism] It’s a method.

VINEETO: Maybe you are referring to my post to No 29 a month ago on the Listbot mailing list –

[Vineeto]: The longer I have conversations about actualism on this mailing list, the more I find the term ‘actualism’ useful specifically for the ‘ism’ part – it deflects those who seek an individual spiritual freedom and troll through the writings looking for useful terms and phrases to clip-on to their collection of spiritual medalets. The syllable ‘ism’ in actualism is the first challenge to those who sincerely want to explore their own beliefs rather than being fixated upon their awkward antagonism against ‘isms’. Vineeto to No 29, 15.7.2001

*

RESPONDENT No 32: My aim is to be myself and the beginning of real work requires mostly eliminating this stuff from one’s psyche. I wonder what are your practical experiences in coming face to face with the human (social) legacy.

VINEETO: I have followed the doctrine to ‘be myself’ or ‘be who I Really am’ for 17 years and it sucks.

My aim is to become completely free from being my ‘self’ as I have numerous times experienced in a pure consciousness experience that it is ‘me’ who is standing in the way of experiencing the peace and perfection that is already always here. Actualism is the specifically designed and tested method to reach this goal.

Facilitating self-immolation requires much, much more than mere ‘eliminating this stuff from one’s psyche’. First it requires investigating the facts of one’s sweeping generalisations and emotional reactions in order to understand what benefits one could in fact draw from actualism. If you are already so affected by the sound of a simple descriptive label that you are unable to find out what it means then that is indeed the first obstacle that needs to be removed.

The next requirement, if you want to come ‘face to face with the human (social) legacy’, is to turn the B.S. detector that is habitually and instinctively directed outwards, inwards towards yourself so that you are able to investigate what personal beliefs, personal morals and personal ethics are the initial triggers for one’s emotional hang ups. Once discovered, these beliefs, morals and ethics can then be questioned and eliminated one by one in order to dive even deeper into one’s psyche.

RESPONDENT to No 32: Actualism is a method that works and does exactly what Richard, Vineeto, Peter and others say. It is important to read the rest of the site, apart from the mailing list, to see the importance of the PCE, Richard’s experiences with the ASC and the spiritual world, and the others’ experiences in living actualism. There’s a lot of lived life and work in it and it’s the most sense all in one place that I’ve ever seen.

VINEETO: It is great that you are enjoying the website and the information about the pitfalls of the spiritual world. The more I looked into what is spiritual, the more I found that every aspect of life is in some way or other steeped in spiritual beliefs, visions, truths, wisdoms, religious guidelines and moral-ethical values.

If you have a closer look you may discover that No. 32 is not alluding to eliminating his complete psyche, but only the ‘stuff’ that is ‘separating one from his original identity’. He said that his aim is ‘to be myself’ and he described in an earlier post what that means by this – ‘a state in which I had acquired real I, a Being made of light, ... a God’.

I am certainly not ‘playing with words’ when I say that facilitating self-immolation requires much, much more than mere ‘eliminating this stuff from one’s psyche’. The spiritual seeker aims to become his or her real I, God, ‘Real Self’, ‘Me’, Divine, enlightened, One with God, Love Agapé or whatever other name accords with the spiritual path one is following. Spiritualism is to merely prune the hedges – some unwanted or undesirable beliefs and feelings are suppressed or sublimated – while actualism is the method to strip away all belief so as to get at the root of the problem. Unless I have as my aim becoming free from my identity in toto then the method of actualism does not work.

I know it’s a hard pill for many to swallow, but actualism has got nothing to do with spiritualism – it is down-to-earth, i.e. not in any way or form other-worldly or meta-physical.

*

VINEETO to No 32: To publicly announce that ‘I hate every word that ends in -ism’ is to merely parrot borrowed psittacisms and pass the responsibility for your personal antagonism on to others. Humourism is certainly a useful and delightful asset that can assist you on your way to getting rid of your identity in toto.

RESPONDENT to No 32: This is the point where she starts to sound like Richard, not that there’s anything wrong with how Richard sounds, but she’s just parroting his words and phrases. For her to accuse you of ‘merely parroting borrowed psittacisms’ when that is exactly what she is doing, and missing the entire point of your post in the process, is a bit rich I see no ‘personal antagonism’ in your post, but quite a lot in Vineeto’s.

VINEETO: I said that No 32 is ‘merely parroting borrowed psittacisms’ because his ‘system of thought’ is directly derived from his spiritual teacher Gurdjieff and he interprets his other-worldly experiences according to this belief system. If presenting facts and calling a spade a spade is ‘hectoring, pedantry and showing-off’ for you, then you may have fallen for the spiritual trap of ‘we are all talking about the same thing’, ‘we all have the same goal’, ‘Truth is essentially the same’, etc.

The third alternative offers a method to eliminate one’s psyche completely and become free from both the real-world ‘self’ and the spiritual-world ‘Self’ so as to be free to experience the astounding sparkling actuality of the physical world we live in. The diagram on the library page ‘180 degrees opposite’ might make this distinction more clear to you.

30.8.2001

RESPONDENT: [Vineeto]: ‘The retribution from the ‘good’ guys that took place at the end of World War II was as cruel, uncontrolled and devastatingly disastrous as the actions of the ‘bad’ guys before.’ Vineeto, Selected Correspondence, Feelings

Evidence please.

VINEETO:

Peter: Another TV program I watched reported on the fire bombing of Dresden and other German cities during the war. Vast areas of these cities were turned into raging firestorms of such intensity that people were sucked off their feet into the inferno, and babies were ripped from their mothers’ arms. This was a deliberate policy of revenge for the German bombing of English cities. Civilians were deliberately targeted. The Americans similarly incinerated Tokyo, causing more deaths than both atomic bombs combined. Of some 50 million killed in the Second World War, 30 million were women and children.

When the Americans saw the German concentration camps after the Second World War, they put hundreds of thousands of German soldiers in open fields – in winter – and surrounded them with barbed wire.

They then fed them below minimum survival rations and slowly starved or froze thousands of them to death over the winter. To increase the torture they backed open truckloads of food up to the perimeter fence and left them there to rot. They were the ‘good guys’ and the other side had to be punished for their wrongs!

What we call justice is, after all, nothing more than revenge and retribution. An eye for an eye! Such is the appalling extent of malice and sorrow in this world. Peter’s Journal, Peace

I have watched various TV programs since the one that Peter described that have confirmed his report in the journal. Unfortunately the atrocities of Germans before and during WW II were by no means a unique incident in history and nor have people stopped committing similar atrocities to others since Hitler’s death.

Are you really of the opinion that in the Second World War only one nation has committed atrocities while the other nations in the war were all humane and gentile and reasonable? Maybe you are familiar with what goes on in the world today? Because if you are, you might for instance recognize an eerie similarity of what is happening between the Jews and the Palestinians today and what happened between the Germans and the Jews sixty years ago. The human condition is common to all and nationalistic aggressive and retributive behaviour is not confined to some particular tribes, nations or races – like all instinctual passions, the territorial instincts lie dormant in every human being and can surface whenever the circumstances are fertile.

It is all so easy to find a culprit, a scapegoat and the one and only responsible person to blame for the ills and evils of humanity and then one does not have to look any further for the causes of all the wars, murders, tortures, rapes and genocides.

I am vitally interested in irrevocably ending in me the instinctual and social programming that is cause of all the wars, murders, tortures, rapes and genocides. I set out to find, and eradicate, the cause, ‘me’ – the alien entity inside this flesh and blood body, my feelings, emotions and instinctual passions, my very ‘being’. Despite everyone’s firm belief that you can’t change human nature it is now possible to investigate and subsequently eliminate one’s social conditioning and examine and observe one’s instinctual passions to such a degree that they no longer have any power and eventually atrophy.

However, this investigation is not undertaken by joining a popular mass-movement or a fashionable spiritual belief system – it is a journey that everyone does for himself, by himself. Once you decide to do it, it’s a grand adventure, unrivalled by anything I have done so far in my life.

30.8.2001

RESPONDENT: [Vineeto]: ‘Today I find it strange that none of all the ‘oh so wise’ spiritual teachers really were able to make a distinction between sensations and feelings.’ Vineeto, Selected Correspondence, Feelings 2

It is also obvious to any moderately intelligent child or adult.

VINEETO: The complete quote was from a correspondence about the difference between Vipassana and actualism. Buddhist teachings are particularly vague about the difference between sensations and feelings. For Buddhists both feelings and sensations are unwanted responses from ‘the body’ that need to be transcended and one is taught to watch them in order to dissociate oneself from both one’s unwanted affective and sensate bodily reactions. To put your snippet in context –

[Co-Respondent]: I think the main problem for me and also probably for most people is to overcome the habit of following emotions or impulses that habitually arise in one’s psyche. For a simple example if I sense an itch on my arm I usually scratch the itch instead of paying attention to the itch, investigating the sensation behind it. I think the itch is a good example because, at least in my case, when I start paying attention to it the itch intensifies before it goes away. Likewise when I feel unappreciated at work I tend to compensate with food or sometimes (especially in the past year) meditation!!! I would feel really calm and good after Vipassana. Chocolate and coffee with ice cream make me feel great, too. Speaking of which I have to run to the kitchen to brew us a couple of cups of this ‘divine’ liquid.

[Vineeto]: This question of yours fits in with the issue of the other letter about Vipassana, so I will combine the two letters. Today I find it strange that none of all the ‘oh so wise’ spiritual teachers really were able to make a distinction between sensations and feelings. I myself only learned to be precise when I came across Actual Freedom, and now the difference seems so obvious that I don’t know how I could have ever mixed the two!

Sensations are everything we perceive with our senses – touch, smell, taste, colour, form, sound, itch, pain, moisture, temperature, sexual pleasure, etc. Feelings are affective reactions to our surroundings.

When you have chocolate and coffee with ice-cream you mix sensation and feeling, the pleasure of the senses tasting sweet and bitter and then, consequently, you are ‘feeling’ good. But one doesn’t need ‘feeling’ to fully enjoy a cup of coffee with ice-cream, on the contrary, ‘me’ as a feeling identity acts as a buffer to the intensity of the sensate pleasure. ‘Feeling’ is only there as long as a ‘me’ is alive. ‘I’ am feelings and feelings are ‘me’, ‘I’ am fear and fear is ‘me’, ‘I’ am love and love is ‘me’. Check it out for yourself. You might find that you are conscious of the sensation and a split second later you have a feeling – or mixed feelings – about it. But in that first split second you were aware only of the physical sensation. Vineeto to No 7, 24.4.1999

As for Barry Long – he has blurred the distinction between sensations and affective feelings despite your affirmation that ‘this distinction also obvious to any moderately intelligent child or adult’. He taught that love is a sensation, which is pure nonsense. In a deliberate distortion of common sense Barry Long has arbitrarily chosen to label the desirable feelings ‘sensation’ and the undesirable feelings ‘emotion’, completely ignoring the fact that love is an emotion and, in the case of Enlightenment, an all-consuming passion.

Buddhists label both feelings and sensations as ‘feelings’ from which one should watchfully distance oneself in order to become one’s eternal Higher Self. Vis –

[quote]: ‘There is the case where a monk, when feeling a painful feeling, discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling. When feeling a pleasant feeling, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling. When feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, he discerns that he is feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. When feeling a painful feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling of the flesh. When feeling a painful feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a painful feeling not of the flesh. When feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling of the flesh. When feeling a pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a pleasant feeling not of the flesh. When feeling a neither- painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling of the flesh. When feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh, he discerns that he is feeling a neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling not of the flesh. In this way he remains focused internally on feelings in & of themselves, or externally on feelings in & of themselves, or both internally & externally on feelings in & of themselves. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to feelings, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to feelings, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to feelings. Or his mindfulness that ‘There are feelings’ is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on feelings in & of themselves. http://world.std.com/~metta/canon/majjhima/mn10.html

Practicing actualism, however, one becomes more and more sensuously aware of being alive as the affective filters that overlay the senses are being investigated and removed, i.e. as less affective feelings intrude, then more sensuous sensations are able to become evident. When no fear, desire, aggression or feelings of nurture interferes with me sensately experiencing the world around me, then the magic and abundance of this actual physical world we all live in becomes stunningly apparent in its utter exquisite deliciousness.

Barry Long has been getting this wrong for years because he’s just preaching old time religion.

30.8.2001

RESPONDENT: Both quotes from: http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/actualism/vineeto/list-c/corr01.htm

Well – which is it?

VINEETO: When you deliberately take quotes out of context in order to attempt to make them seem contradictory, then they might well be seen to be contradictory.

The first quote is from a correspondence about humour and my reference to my German upbringing is clearly pointing to being handicapped with English/American humour firstly because you often can’t translate jokes from one language to another without losing the nuances of the humour and secondly jokes very often depend on a specific cultural/social background in order to be funny. To put your selected snippet in context –

[Co-Respodent]: You say that you don’t find my jokes funny where I used the names of Peter and Vineeto. Have you forgotten? Osho used to make fun of his sannyasins and everyone used to have a good laugh. Nobody was offended.

No wonder you like those two dried-up old fossils, Peter and Vineeto.

P.S.: I find that Vineeto still has a little humour left in her. I loved those two pictures she sent. They were funny.

[Vineeto]: ... I have thought quite a bit about humour lately and about your statement that there is a little humour left in me. I might be a bit handicapped by my German upbringing – and with English being my second language I am not good with puns. But there is more to it than that.

Most jokes I can’t laugh at. Most jokes are built on either the suffering of people or them being malicious. I just can’t find the joke. Also, there is neither boredom nor any other emotional tension that needs to be ‘healed’ or relieved with a joke. Living in delight, laughter is simply part of the day, as are interesting conversations, thrilling investigations, juicy sex and tasty food. Humour may not be something you find much in my writing – but then, my intent in writing something is different. When I write here on the list, my intent is to convey something of the magic I experience being free of beliefs and emotions, and to describe how I got here. Vineeto, List C, No 1

The second quote – ‘there is not a trace of nationalistic or religious conditioning left today’ – is about national conditioning in general, the nationalistic belief that people are ready to kill and die for the country they call their own and feel they belong to.

Given that the correspondent quoted Rajneesh as classifying Germans being humourless because they were fooled by Hitler, I told him how I had expunged both my nationalistic and religious-spiritual conditioning. To put your snippet in context –

[Co-Respondent]: I remember Osho saying that German’s have a hard time getting a joke because of what happened to them during Hitler’s time. He said that Germans are very intelligent people but somehow Hitler was able to fool all of them to believe in his stupid idea that Jews were the cause of all the misery and suffering in Germany.

Osho used to joke that it takes Germans a few days before they get a joke and start laughing ... is that true, Vineeto? hahaha.

[Vineeto]: What your master said about Germans and what I found out about being conditioned as German is a hell of a difference. Yes, I found the ‘Hitler’ in me after I realised that I would have killed to defend my master and my devotion for him with the same passion that Germans had when they marched to conquer and ‘save the world’. Hitler simply played on the instincts of Germans in a way that they followed him and that they were ready to die for him, for their country, for their Christian belief, for their Arian race – exactly as Osho played on my – and everybody’s – instincts so that I was ready to kill and die for ‘Him’ on the Ranch.

There is no point blaming somebody else for my misery or suffering, I am made of the same stuff as any other human being, I am equipped with the same software of instincts, conditioning and sense of ‘self’. And I can do something about it. After I recognised and acknowledged the ‘Hitler’ in me as well as the ‘follower’ in me, it left such an impact that I was determined to eradicate these aspects of the Human Condition in me.

And I succeeded. There is not a trace of nationalistic or religious conditioning left today. And I can see this conditioning and the underlying instinctual passions operating in everybody – the Human Condition – with different labels, for different reasons, but nevertheless as power and aggression, fear and willing obedience. When it comes down to the animalistic instincts of fear, aggression, nurture and desire, there is no difference between a German and a Jew, an Indian and a Muslim, a Serb and a Rajneeshee. Everybody, without fail, is inflicted with this disease – the Human Condition.

This is what Osho omitted in his discourses. Vineeto, List C, No 1

When you read both quotes in their context, they describe very well what was meant by ‘handicapped by my German upbringing’ in terms of humour on one hand and ‘not a trace of nationalistic or religious conditioning left’ as in eradicating my social conditioning on the other hand.

I have noticed that you have not responded to the content of my last post to you re No 32 on the topic of the difference between a spiritual pursuit and an actual freedom from the human condition. Instead you now seem to have gone off on a witch hunt looking for out-of-context contradictions in lieu of having a sincere discussion about the topics raised in that post or, for that matter, any of the topics being discussed in the posts you select your snippets from.

I’m only asking because a sincere discussion is far more interesting, sensible, beneficial and much more fun than quibbling only for the sake of quibbling.

7.9.2001

RESPONDENT:

Richard: ‘I have ceased being ‘human’ ... I am a fellow human being’. Richard, The Actual Freedom Trust Mailing List, Irene, 28.11.1998

Or, to put it another way: If you understand what Richard is clearly saying despite the apparent contradictions that can be found in his words due to the structure and vocabulary of the English language that he uses, why do you pretend not to understand what other people are quite clearly saying and, instead, waste time nit-picking the apparent contradictions that can be found in their words due to the structure and vocabulary of the English language that they use?

VINEETO: You can stop being surprised. I have ‘picked up’ on ‘the apparent contradiction’ a long time ago and have examined and understood exactly what it is that Richard is saying a long time ago.

If you ‘understand what Richard is clearly saying despite the apparent contradictions’ then why can’t we start to have a sensible conversation instead of your persistent posting of one-liners picked out of context to show some ‘apparent contradiction’? Are you still point-scoring?

Given that you have not yet replied to Richard’s perfectly sensible explanation but only found more points to object to, I take it that this ‘apparent contradiction’ has not dissolved for you. And given that you also have not replied to the content of my last letter to you ‘re practice of actualism’ from August 28, I take it that the factual difference between the spiritual pursuit of Godliness and actualism is still a mystery to you.

I do not ‘pretend not to understand’ what No 32 is saying – I understand No. 32’s descriptions of his search perfectly well and I have read quite a bit of Gurdjieff myself. I was also full-on engaged in the spiritual search myself for almost 20 years, so I know the spiritual world through and through. I am able to very clearly understand the difference between what is spiritual and what is actual because I have made the effort to completely disentangle myself from the spiritual web of Love, Truth, Compassion, Glory, Psychic Powers, Higher Self, Authority, and Spiritual Hierarchy in order to experience the actual paradise we are living in.

The differences between spiritual teachings of any kind and actualism are obviously not ‘apparent’ to you nor are the differences ‘nitpicking’ – they are fundamental and profound and should you be interested to find out in what way actualism is diametrically opposite to spiritualism, you will find following web-page and its related correspondence of great help.

As for your claim that I ‘waste time nit-picking the apparent contradictions that can be found in their words’ – one of the purposes of this mailing list is to be able to mutually investigate and examine the efficacy and other-worldly nature of religious-spiritual teachings, concepts, theories and beliefs so as to be able to become free of all their insidious influences. If you find that a waste of time then you have not understood the meaning of the word non-spiritual.

Your comparison between ‘Richard and George’ Gurdjieff is a very good example to make this difference more apparent –

RESPONDENT: Gurdjieff’s ‘self remembering’ method (bad name): ‘be aware, as often as possible, with each breath, of your thoughts, emotional reactions, actions and perceptions in the most objective impartial manner possible.’

Actualism’s method: continually run the question ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’

VINEETO: Only at a superficial glance does Gurdjieff’s method read as being similar to the actualism method, but at closer examination you will discover that the aim of his ‘work’ is to increase ‘self’-presence in order to achieve spiritual superiority to the ordinary man – man No. 1, 2, 3 in contrast to developed man No. 4, 5, 6 – and to more fully develop one’s soul, whereas actualism aims at ‘self’-immolation, eliminating the ‘self’, both ego and soul completely – two diametrically opposite methods aimed at producing two diametrically opposite results. To quote George –

[George Gurdjieff]: The Work is a spiritual discipline. It carries a core of great ideas and practices, which are at the heart of all religions and all ways. This way of inner development, to be pursued by ordinary people in everyday life, has been passed down by word-of-mouth from ancient times to our own through many generations of teachers and students. It requires great self-discipline. Gurdjieff, http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/1236/index.html#thework5

Gurdjieff believed that his teachings needed to be transmitted in person so that the special energy emanating from the teacher is utilized. Vis:

[George Gurdjieff]: The Way of Gurdjieff is an oral tradition. The understanding of his work can only be received by direct contact between teacher and pupil, and by the work of pupils together in organised groups. Under conditions of a special atmosphere of trust that can exist in such a group, people working together learn to face their own inner poverty and confusion. Working in this way, conscience is awakened along with consciousness. Consciousness, Conscience, and Sensation form the tripod upon which an integrated development of human potential must be based. Gurdjieff prepared a nucleus of people to be able to transmit his teaching after his death. Gurdjieff, http://www.bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/misc/G.html

Actualism is perfectly transmittable through words alone, no direct contact between teacher and pupil, no work of pupils together in organized groups, etc, and practicing actualists all over the world can testify to that. Actualism consists of a scientific do-it-yourself method and the website is simply an aid to any do-it-yourself-er in that it sets out the facts about the human condition, documents the experiences from practicing actualists and provides answers to the stereotypical objections from numerous spiritualists.

Once you have made up your mind that you want to make becoming happy and harmless the most important thing in your life, you no longer need to prostrate yourself to any authority, suck up on any master’s energy or wait for anybody’s blessing to get on with the ‘work’, or, as we like to call it, the only game to play in town. All the information that you need is freely available on the website and this mailing list provides the opportunity to then share your experiences in applying the method with other like-minded people, swap stories or pick their brains for useful information.

So far, not many have woken up to the immense freedom that such a non-spiritual method of disseminating information offers in marked contrast to the traditional spiritual enslavement via the master-disciple or priest-congregation relationship.

RESPONDENT: Yes, the words are obviously quite different (Vineeto!) but the action and the result are the same. Richard’s formulation is just a lot snappier.

VINEETO: Once you start practicing the actualism method you will find that ‘the action’ is not the same at all, because by examining every single one of your beliefs, emotions and feelings your ‘self’ will become less present, not more present as is the intention of George’s ancient method.

As for the results being the same – the Fourth Way can only produce spiritual believers because that is what it is designed for.

You recently said to No 12 –

[Respondent]: ‘I actually think actualism is probably the best thing since sliced bread, so if your metaphor is implying that Richard is trying to ‘suck people in’ then I’d disagree’ Respondent to No 12, 3.9.2001

If that is what you genuinely think, then why don’t you stop wasting your time objecting to ‘the best thing since sliced bread’ and commit yourself to getting on with the ‘work’ of ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’

You will find that once one gets ‘sucked in’ into the game of scientifically examining one’s own psyche in action, it is more exciting than bungee jumping and more fun than anything one has ever done so far. It is the ride of a lifetime.

9.9.2001

RESPONDENT to No 12: Do you know a good way of getting an olive oil stain out of a silk shirt?

VINEETO: You could dip the whole shirt in olive oil, then there won’t be any stain left.

Usually, when I don’t know something, I ask an expert. For silk shirt that would be the dry cleaner, I suppose.

Good luck.

Actualism Homepage

Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless

Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.