|
Vineeto’s Correspondence on the Actual Freedom List Correspondent No 59
VINEETO: You wrote to Richard – RICHARD: ... hundreds of people have been poking away at what is on offer, especially since coming onto the internet, trying to find the flaws they are convinced must be there – which is one of the reasons why all correspondence is archived – and this only goes to show how badly people have been sucked in for millennia by the many and varied snake-oil salespersons. I am not at all surprised that people be suspicious. RESPONDENT to Richard: Richard, this is well said. It’s why I am unsatisfied with your claims of being historically unique in being actually free from the human condition. That said, I’m finding your site useful and insightful. I’m grateful for the content and the attractive interface as well. Kind Regards VINEETO: Do I understand you right that when you say ‘it’s why I am unsatisfied’, you mean the reason you are unsatisfied is because you have been badly ‘sucked in’ ‘by the many and varied snake-oil salespersons’? If so, then you have arrived at the right place because actualism is an opportunity and a method to root out any and all beliefs that you have inadvertently taken on in the course of your life. But don’t expect anyone else to do it for you, only you can – by direct experience – determine the veracity of what is on offer on the Actual Freedom Trust website and only you can determine whether actualism is indeed brand new in human history. And if you did find out that actualism had nothing to do with any of the archaic spiritual traditions, the question of Richard’s discovery being unique would be satisfied. Going by my personal experience I am still surprised how people are so persistently suspicious because that is not how my own mind works. When I met Richard I was not particularly concerned that, or if, he was the first one to discover something that goes beyond enlightenment but I was more interested about the fact that he discovered something which I could confirm for myself as to whether or not it was utterly new and far better than spiritual enlightenment. I had previously been on the spiritual path for most of my adult life, looking for the meaning of life and the solution to the woes of humankind and here was someone who said he not only knows why spiritualism has failed to manifest peace on earth but also why. And not only that but the alternative he was offering was practicable, down-to-earth and worked instantly. Of course, in order to be able to take his words at face value it was necessary that I had a good look at what caused me to be doubtful and suspicious of the discovery of an alternative to spiritualism in the first place. I discovered with surprise how loyal I felt towards my previous spiritual group and master and that it was exactly this loyalty that caused me to be cautious towards anything new. I knew I could go on being suspicious forever and a day but I came to see that holding on to such an attitude was preventing me from finding out for myself how I can be happy and live with my fellow human beings in peace and harmony. As an actualist I discovered that in order to get to the roots of my feelings of suspicion I had to have a close look at my general attitude towards authority, something that had plagued me in most of my relationships during my life. I discovered that the only way to stand on my own two feet was to tackle and dissolve the emotionally charged issue of authority. I had to look at all of my feelings towards people who I ascribed authority to, particularly those who claimed a special knowledge of what was right and wrong, true and untrue, good and bad – in short a moral, ethical and spiritual authority. I realized their power over me was derived from and maintained by my belief that there is an ultimate authority in those matters, a Supreme Ruler of moral codes, a Weigher of Souls, a Divine Intelligence, a Higher Power of some sort who instated and enforced those values. It didn’t make any difference that I had abandoned the belief in a personal God because the belief in an all-encompassing divinity kept me obedient, dependant and fearful. The final realisation that finished my problems with authority forever is recorded in Peter’s Journal –
In the final analysis it is only you who can dare to put aside your world-weary suspicions in order to sufficiently to be able to practically and experientially determine whether what is on offer on the Actual Freedom Trust website is indeed as it says it is – new, non-spiritual and down-to-earth. As you said to Richard in your latest post – ‘it’s a shame that such doubts can detract from what’s on offer’ – it is a shame indeed to let your feelings of doubt and suspicion prevent you from putting into practice what is on offer.
RICHARD: ... hundreds of people have been poking away at what is on offer, especially since coming onto the internet, trying to find the flaws they are convinced must be there – which is one of the reasons why all correspondence is archived – and this only goes to show how badly people have been sucked in for millennia by the many and varied snake-oil salespersons. I am not at all surprised that people be suspicious. RESPONDENT: Richard, this is well said. It’s why I am unsatisfied with your claims of being historically unique in being actually free from the human condition. That said, I’m finding your site useful and insightful. I’m grateful for the content and the attractive interface as well. Kind Regards VINEETO: Do I understand you right that when you say ‘it’s why I am unsatisfied’, you mean the reason you are unsatisfied is because you have been badly ‘sucked in’ ‘by the many and varied snake-oil salespersons’? If so, then you have arrived at the right place because actualism is an opportunity and a method to root out any and all beliefs that you have inadvertently taken on in the course of your life. RESPONDENT: Hi Vineeto. Thanks for your reply. You’ve got it right. Children have little defence against virulent mind viruses such as Christianity. VINEETO: Oh, and not only Christianity but the whole range of Eastern religion
and spirituality as well. The monotheistic religions have a person-like god whom they worship while the pantheistic religions
largely found in the East have many gods, so many that everyone is invited to join the ranks of the gods by becoming one
themselves. I know, enlightened Zen Buddhists are a bit coy about calling themselves god but ‘the Eternal’ * VINEETO: But don’t expect anyone else to do it for you, only you can – by direct experience – determine the veracity of what is on offer on the Actual Freedom Trust website and only you can determine whether actualism is indeed brand new in human history. RESPONDENT: Very true. Have no problem with that – just Richard’s claims of uniqueness. VINEETO: If you had no problem with actualism being brand new in human history you would not object to Richard being the pioneer of this brand new discovery. What you really are saying is that you think actualism is not brand new because you compare it to the Tried and Failed spiritual methods of Byron Katie and Zen teachers, therefore to you Richard’s discovery is not unique. It is interesting that thus far only those who are well and truly disenchanted with all religious and spiritual teachings – and that includes Buddhism and Zen – have been able to discover the transparently palpable difference between practicing dissociation and the elimination of both one’s social identity and one’s instinctual ‘being’ that allows the actual world to become apparent. RESPONDENT: I am currently investigating Actualism and using the methods. VINEETO: There is only one method in actualism. If you think that actualism has any similarity to Byron Katie’s four questions or to Zen Buddhist teachings then you need to further investigate in order to discover the genuine actualism method. To give you a hint, the actualism method has an inherent non-spiritual and down-to-earth intent – to become happy and harmless in the world as-it-is, with people as-they-are. There is nothing other-worldly, nothing self-aggrandizing, nothing nihilistic, nothing negative, nothing dissociative and nothing self-centred about that intent. RESPONDENT: I’m also finding Byron Katie’s four questions (The Work www.thework.org) to be an excellent means of disengaging from all sorts of thoughts, stories and beliefs. Using feelings as a guide, you can investigate the stories you’ve attached to. Investigation uncouples complex intertwined stories and feelings. The mutual induction between story and feeling unlocks and they dissolve naturally. VINEETO: I read her website and the interview with Sunny Massad the first time
you mentioned her. Her method is very similar to other methods of Eastern spirituality – one is to disengage, i.e. dissociate
from one’s ‘stories’ or projections in order to become one’s true Self, which she calls ‘total love’ or being God Whereas actualism is paying exclusive attention to the business of being here in this physical universe in this only moment I can experience. * VINEETO: Going by my personal experience I am still surprised how people are so persistently suspicious because that is not how my own mind works. When I met Richard I was not particularly concerned that, or if, he was the first one to discover something that goes beyond enlightenment but I was more interested about the fact that he discovered something which I could confirm for myself as to whether or not it was utterly new and far better than spiritual enlightenment. RESPONDENT: I am concerned by such claims because it’s a hallmark of many cults to claim their approaches are unique and the only way. VINEETO: First you assume that actualism is a cult and then you raise concerns
that it claims to be unique. As long as you read the Actual Freedom Trust website with a Zen Buddhist’s eyes, you will never
find out how an actual freedom is 180 degrees opposite to all spiritual pursuits. 180 degrees opposite is not just a figure of
speech – it points to the diametrical opposites between actualism and spiritualism. The I admit that in the beginning the difference can appear obscure as I remember having first to grasp the full meaning of the word ‘spiritual’ as in ‘of, pertaining to, or affecting the spirit or soul, pertaining to or consisting of spirit, immaterial’ Oxford Dictionary, in order to understand the full implications of the word ‘non-spiritual’. However, a vital requisite is that one has to want to find what the differences are, instead of assuming that actualism is yet another spiritual teaching replete with a resident Guru and wanting to find fault from the start. RESPONDENT: I’ve also seen claims from other sources that are very similar to Richard’s and I will post some quotes shortly. I see no conflict in questioning Richard about his self proclaimed unique status and using the methods on offer. VINEETO: I read the sources you presented as being similar and Peter’s response might help you understand why they are 180 opposite to what actualism has to offer. As long as you continue to hold on to your suspicion of what you call Richard’s ‘self proclaimed unique status’ this difference, however, will remain obscure to you. That’s why I reported that I had to have a close look at my general attitude towards authority before I could crank up the naiveté necessary to consider that actualism might well be something new and unique in human history. RESPONDENT: I do realise that Actualism is something I can investigate and possibly confirm. VINEETO: Whatever you can ‘possibly confirm’ at this stage is definitely not actualism. * VINEETO: Of course, in order to be able to take his [Richard’s] words at face value it was necessary that I had a good look at what caused me to be doubtful and suspicious of the discovery of an alternative to spiritualism in the first place. I discovered with surprise how loyal I felt towards my previous spiritual group and master and that it was exactly this loyalty that caused me to be cautious towards anything new. I knew I could go on being suspicious forever and a day but I came to see that holding on to such an attitude was preventing me from finding out for myself how I can be happy and live with my fellow human beings in peace and harmony. As an actualist I discovered that in order to get to the roots of my feelings of suspicion I had to have a close look at my general attitude towards authority, something that had plagued me in most of my relationships during my life. I discovered that the only way to stand on my own two feet was to tackle and dissolve the emotionally charged issue of authority. I had to look at all of my feelings towards people who I ascribed authority to, particularly those who claimed a special knowledge of what was right and wrong, true and untrue, good and bad – in short a moral, ethical and spiritual authority. RESPONDENT: That’s a good tip. Authority needs to be thoroughly investigated but especially my responses and reflexes. It is indeed an emotionally charged issue for me too and I realise now it could be something of a gold mine to investigate. Thankyou, Vineeto. VINEETO: You are very welcome. When I said ‘authority needs to be thoroughly investigated’ I mean my feelings about authority and that is also all that needed to be investigated. When my emotional issues with authority disappeared so did the ‘authorities’ themselves, which leaves me free to relate to fellow human beings as what they are, fellow human beings. Then a man becomes a fellow human being with slight anatomical differences to a female, a policeman becomes a fellow human being who wears a uniform and maintains law and order, a politician becomes a fellow human being who is involved in the making of laws, a fellow human being who lives in another country is a fellow human being who lives in another country, the Pope is a fellow human being who wears funny hats, Mohan Rajneesh and Jiddu Krishnamurti were fellow human beings who became famous by teaching Eastern religion to Westerners who were disenchanted with Western Religion, and Richard is a fellow human being who happened to be the first to find a way to become actually free of the human condition. It is very simple really. * VINEETO: The final realisation that finished my problems with authority forever is recorded in Peter’s Journal –
RESPONDENT: Mine was dissolved over longer periods of time, intellectually at first, on an emotional/reflex level more slowly. Churches know how to condition their followers. VINEETO: When the belief in the God of the Churches is dissolved, then one can begin to question the God by any other name, such as the autotheism of the Enlightened beings, the pantheism of Advaita and Jiddu Krishnamurti, the geotheism of modern environmentalism, the belief in an amorphous existence of an eternal all-pervading divinity, the belief in the wheel of Karma, the belief n Nirvana, Samadhi, Mahaparinirvana, etc., etc. Most Westerners believe that by abandoning Christianity and taking on Eastern spirituality they have eliminated their belief in God whereas they have but moved from the frying pan into the fire, from a clear-cut belief into beliefs and teachings that are so amorphous and chameleon-like that any Tom, Dick or Martha can hang up a shingle and gather a crowd. Abandoning Christianity is merely scratching the surface of the over-arching human belief that Someone or Something has created and/or is running this physical universe. God not only exists in people’s passionate imagination because of the conditioning of the priests – the belief in some kind of a protective and guiding higher power arises from a deep instinctual need in every human being for a Big Daddy or a Big Mummy to look after them. Some choose to be aloofly agnostic about the existence of god, but in order to root out from one’s guts this ultimate need to rely upon, or rebel against, a higher authority one also has to eradicate the archaic passionate belief that there is a soul, or non-physical life force, within each and every human body – a soul or spirit that desperately craves union and unity, meaning and purpose in a mythical spirit-ual world populated by spirits and Higher Beings. This might give you a hint as to what a down-to-earth non-spiritual freedom implies. * VINEETO: In the final analysis it is only you who can dare to put aside your world-weary suspicions in order to sufficiently to be able to practically and experientially determine whether what is on offer on the Actual Freedom Trust website is indeed as it says it is – new, non-spiritual and down-to-earth. As you said to Richard in your latest post – ‘it’s a shame that such doubts can detract from what’s on offer’ – it is a shame indeed to let your feelings of doubt and suspicion prevent you from putting into practice what is on offer. RESPONDENT: Thanks for your concern but I am putting things into practice. For me, questioning is part of the process and not just questioning myself. VINEETO: Personally I found that questioning anyone but myself is a total waste of time. In fact I found it detrimental to my own happiness and harmlessness to question other people – it is none of my business. I found it entirely sufficient to focus on questioning my own beliefs, my own resentments, my suspicions and superstitions whenever they stood in the way of my being happy and harmless. The outcome is a virtual freedom from the human condition and there is only one thing better that this – an actual, permanent freedom from the lost, lonely, frightened and very cunning alien entity inside this flesh-and-blood body.
VINEETO: But don’t expect anyone else to do it for you, only you can – by direct experience – determine the veracity of what is on offer on the Actual Freedom Trust website and only you can determine whether actualism is indeed brand new in human history. RESPONDENT: Very true. Have no problem with that – just Richard’s claims of uniqueness. VINEETO: If you had no problem with actualism being brand new in human history you would not object to Richard being the pioneer of this brand new discovery. RESPONDENT: I haven’t accepted that actualism is brand new in human history, in fact I doubt it very much. However I do like the fact that there is a method which can be used to verify actualism itself. After my discussion with Richard I especially doubt that I can verify that actualism is new to human history and I fail to see how I could ever verify that Richard was the first – he tells me he hasn’t spoken to everyone in the world living and dead so how can he know? I don’t object to Richard being the pioneer – I just doubt it. Given that the search for freedom throughout human history has been long and intense by people of all intelligence and disposition I think there’s large room for doubt. Indeed, doubt is a duty when dealing ‘men of historical destiny’. The sheer number of seekers suggests strongly that many, many avenues have been explored. VINEETO: The word ‘doubt’ appears five times in this paragraph, an indication that doubt is an important feature to your way of approaching things. It corresponds with the excerpt you posted from Robert Linssen in which he recommends the ‘dynamism of absolute doubt’ as a method of dissociation and transcendence –
It becomes apparent that your application of the ‘dynamism of absolute doubt’ principle safely guards you from acknowledging the possibility that there might be something new to human history, let alone experimenting with it. RESPONDENT: Your mantra is ‘tried and failed’ but you cannot know that for sure. VINEETO: For you it may be a mantra, but to me it is blatantly obvious that spiritualism is tried and failed. Countless millions of people have trod the spiritual path over the 5000 years of recorded human history and none of the revered spiritual methods have succeeded in bringing peace-on-earth … because all of them are solely concerned with achieving a personal peace after death. RESPONDENT: I’ll grant that the freedom described by Richard is rare but it’s not unique to him. VINEETO: So far you have failed to provide any evidence that you have understood the nature of ‘the freedom described by Richard’ because you came to this list pre-armed with the assumption that actualism is but another version of spiritualism and that Richard’s claim to be the first man actually free from the human condition is preposterous. If you keep insisting on maintaining your attitude of dutifully applying ‘absolute doubt’ you won’t even come near to beginning to comprehend what an actual freedom from the human condition is all about. * VINEETO: What you really are saying is that you think actualism is not brand new because you compare it to the Tried and Failed spiritual methods of Byron Katie and Zen teachers, therefore to you Richard’s discovery is not unique. It is interesting that thus far only those who are well and truly disenchanted with all religious and spiritual teachings – and that includes Buddhism and Zen – have been able to discover the transparently palpable difference between practicing dissociation and the elimination of both one’s social identity and one’s instinctual ‘being’ that allows the actual world to become apparent. RESPONDENT: You don’t absolutely know what’s tried and failed. You only know what’s tried and failed for you. At this point I expect you to object and point out that the ‘tried and failed’ schools of thought have not brought peace on earth. True enough but considering that in the very large scale of evolutionary time, human consciousness is a very, very recent innovation, then I am not surprised. It will take time for humans to learn the immense complexities of their own minds, especially considering that the vast majority of people have very rudimentary education. I very much doubt that you have insider knowledge on how evolution should proceed and at what rate either. VINEETO: First you state categorically that ‘it will take time for human beings to learn the immense complexities of their own minds’ and then conclude that ‘I very much doubt that you have insider knowledge on how evolution should proceed and at what rate either’. From this it is clear that you don’t doubt at all – you categorically declare that it will take time (for spiritualism to work) and for it to bring peace on earth. So much for your principle of ‘absolute doubt’ and your practice of questioning ‘all sources, especially myself’, as you asserted at the bottom of your letter. A spiritualist’s duty to doubt is to doubt everything except one’s own cherished beliefs. If you want to wait for evolution to bring peace on earth maybe in another 5000 years or another 5 million years, then that is your business – you and I will both be long dead by then. By the way, thus far it has taken me seven years to experientially understand the complexities of the human mind, and I understand it very well indeed – such is the amazing capacity of human intelligence when combined with the effectiveness of the actualism method. * VINEETO: Going by my personal experience I am still surprised how people are so persistently suspicious because that is not how my own mind works. When I met Richard I was not particularly concerned that, or if, he was the first one to discover something that goes beyond enlightenment but I was more interested about the fact that he discovered something which I could confirm for myself as to whether or not it was utterly new and far better than spiritual enlightenment. RESPONDENT: I am concerned by such claims because it’s a hallmark of many cults to claim their approaches are unique and the only way. VINEETO: First you assume that actualism is a cult and then you raise concerns that it claims to be unique. RESPONDENT: I don’t assume actualism is a cult. However, it makes me suspicious when I hear claims of the ‘one true way to the one true freedom’. In fact, there are redeeming features to actualism as defined on the website that make me hesitate to call it a cult. VINEETO: If you ‘don’t assume actualism is a cult’ then why did you bother to write the sentence in the first place? * VINEETO: As long as you read the Actual Freedom Trust website with a Zen
Buddhist’s eyes, you will never find out how an actual freedom is 180 degrees opposite to all spiritual pursuits. 180 degrees
opposite is not just a figure of speech – it points to the diametrical opposites between actualism and spiritualism. The diagram
RESPONDENT: I read with my own eyes. I’m not a Zen Buddhist but I find some Zen perspectives useful. VINEETO: Okay. I shall amend my comment in the light of new information –
* VINEETO: I admit that in the beginning the difference can appear obscure as I remember having first to grasp the full meaning of the word ‘spiritual’ as in ‘of, pertaining to, or affecting the spirit or soul, pertaining to or consisting of spirit, immaterial’ Oxford Dictionary, in order to understand the full implications of the word ‘non-spiritual’. However, a vital requisite is that one has to want to find what the differences are, instead of assuming that actualism is yet another spiritual teaching replete with a resident Guru and wanting to find fault from the start. RESPONDENT: Yes, I’ve done that. I’ve also seen similarities. I believe the differences are overblown. VINEETO: Spirituality and actuality have nothing at all in common. In case you
are interested in suspending your duty to doubt and really finding out the nature of Actual Freedom as compared to a spiritual
freedom then * RESPONDENT: I do realise that Actualism is something I can investigate and possibly confirm. VINEETO: Whatever you can ‘possibly confirm’ at this stage is definitely not actualism. RESPONDENT: It’s true to say I can’t confirm actualism at this stage but Richard assures me I can possibly confirm actualism. Sorry, just being linguistically picky. VINEETO: The reason I said that you can’t ‘possibly confirm’
actualism at this stage is because you haven’t begun to try to understand what actualism is. To understand actualism you would
have to recognize the vast difference to spiritualism. At Only if you are interested in confirming what actualism is about, that is. * VINEETO: I discovered that the only way to stand on my own two feet was to tackle and dissolve the emotionally charged issue of authority. I had to look at all of my feelings towards people who I ascribed authority to, particularly those who claimed a special knowledge of what was right and wrong, true and untrue, good and bad – in short a moral, ethical and spiritual authority. RESPONDENT: That’s a good tip. Authority needs to be thoroughly investigated but especially my responses and reflexes. It is indeed an emotionally charged issue for me too and I realise now it could be something of a gold mine to investigate. Thankyou, Vineeto. VINEETO: You are very welcome. When I said ‘authority needs to be thoroughly investigated’ I mean my feelings about authority and that is also all that needed to be investigated. RESPONDENT: That’s the meaning I took too. VINEETO: So what did you find out when you investigated your feeling of authority towards Richard – apart from your feelings of doubt? Seemingly you have yet to start investigating. In the last post to me you said –
and yet in this post you say –
It seems that your duty to feel doubt towards ‘men of historical destiny’ overrides your need to ‘thoroughly investigate’ the emotionally charged issues you have about authority. For me as an actualist, any investigation into my feelings – and any hang-ups or issues about authority are merely feelings – is only finished when the feelings disappear, and the feelings only disappear when the part of my identity that created and maintained such feelings is firstly understood and then abandoned. * VINEETO: When my emotional issues with authority disappeared so did the ‘authorities’ themselves, which leaves me free to relate to fellow human beings as what they are, fellow human beings. RESPONDENT: Well said. VINEETO: It’s one thing to like what is said, it is a completely different matter to emulate the process another describes. * VINEETO: Then a man becomes a fellow human being with slight anatomical differences to a female, a policeman becomes a fellow human being who wears a uniform and maintains law and order, a politician becomes a fellow human being who is involved in the making of laws, a fellow human being who lives in another country is a fellow human being who lives in another country, the Pope is a fellow human being who wears funny hats, Mohan Rajneesh and Jiddu Krishnamurti were fellow human beings who became famous by teaching Eastern religion to Westerners who were disenchanted with Western Religion, and Richard is a fellow human being who happened to be the first to find a way to become actually free of the human condition. It is very simple really. RESPONDENT: Simple to believe but impossible to verify. VINEETO: Oh, and why are you adamantly convinced that it is impossible to verify? I have verified it for myself, why can’t you? But then, I don’t subscribe to a duty to doubt or the ‘dynamism of absolute doubt’, I go by what are the facts of the situation … and facts can be verified. * VINEETO: In the final analysis it is only you who can dare to put aside your world-weary suspicions in order to sufficiently to be able to practically and experientially determine whether what is on offer on the Actual Freedom Trust website is indeed as it says it is – new, non-spiritual and down-to-earth. RESPONDENT: My suspicions aren’t world weary … VINEETO: The ‘magnificent dynamism of absolute doubt’ suggested by Robert Linssen is world-weary because an absolute doubt about ‘everything’ includes ‘the objects of the world’. Vis –
RESPONDENT: [My suspicions aren’t world weary] and they are not stopping me from using the resources on the Actualism website. VINEETO: That’s where you are mistaken. You cannot possibly use ‘the resources on the Actualism website’ whilst you insist on seeing them as just another spiritual teaching. The practice of actualism, i.e. ‘using of resources’, can free you not only from your ego, your social conditioning, but simultaneously from your soul, your being, ‘the Eternal’. You might want to reconsider if you are really ready to lose your soul. * RESPONDENT: Thanks for your concern but I am putting things into practice. For me, questioning is part of the process and not just questioning myself. VINEETO: Personally I found that questioning anyone but myself is a total waste of time. In fact I found it detrimental to my own happiness and harmlessness to question other people – it is none of my business. I found it entirely sufficient to focus on questioning my own beliefs, my own resentments, my suspicions and superstitions whenever they stood in the way of my being happy and harmless. The outcome is a virtual freedom from the human condition and there is only one thing better that this – an actual, permanent freedom from the lost, lonely, frightened and very cunning alien entity inside this flesh-and-blood body. RESPONDENT: So you don’t question your doctor when they prescribe medicine to you? VINEETO: No, I don’t feel compelled to question my doctor, he is the expert in his field and knows far more about medicine than I do, so I tend to take on board what he says. I only know my symptoms, he might know the cause, and more importantly, he may well know the remedy. I then observe what his prescribed medicine does to me and if it helps I keep taking it. If it has side effects I weigh the pros and cons and maybe have another consultation or get another opinion. If the medicine does not work within a reasonable time, I abandon it. RESPONDENT: If someone claims to be an authority then I question them to learn. VINEETO: Richard claims to be an authority with regards to an actual freedom from the human condition and yet you clearly haven’t questioned him to learn about actual freedom, you have thus far done nothing else but question his authority. In other words, you are not doing what you say you do. If someone is as obviously an expert in his field as Richard is about the human condition and how to become free from it, then I try and gain as much information as possible in order that I can also become free from the human condition. It’s all very simple, really. RESPONDENT: My questioning is for my own benefit and I question all sources, especially myself. VINEETO: It appears that you have had a change of motive in your questioning because previously you said that the reason for questioning Richard was for the benefit of others, ‘to inspire some doubt in other minds’ as you put it –
Methinks your claim that ‘I question … especially myself’ is still a long way from being put into practice. As for ‘questioning’ for your ‘own benefit’ – I still can’t see how questioning others is for your ‘own benefit’ – extracting information yes, but I found that objecting and questioning others only fed my malice and sorrow, so I gave it up. Also, when I question myself I do so with the sole intent to become happy and harmless, for no other purpose. I don’t question myself without rhyme or reason because I found that this leads me nowhere fast. When I am not happy now I question when I stopped being happy and inquire into what prevents me from being happy now. Then I investigate the causes for having stopped being happy. Very often I found that it had to do with not having been harmless, so becoming happy and becoming harmless are really one and the same thing. Once I made my goal in life to be unconditionally happy and harmless, everything else fell into place – I had an anchor point, a touchstone, a measure by which I needed to change. And then I changed, step by step.
RESPONDENT: You’ve made incorrect assumptions of what I’m on about. Essentially, you have been attacking a straw man. Let’s see how wrong you are... VINEETO: To clarify a misconception, I am not attacking you but I am responding to your claims and your objections. Also, I am not getting ‘excited’ about scoring points, as you suggested several times further down in the part of your post that I snipped. For me this conversation is about sharing my experience and trying to help you to understand – in case you are interested – that so far you are missing the essential point that actualism is new and diametrically opposite to any teaching you have ever heard of. I do this because I assume that you would want to benefit from discovering what actualism really is. If you are not interested, just let me know. As for ‘incorrect assumptions’ – I took it that you were prepared to stand by the quote you volunteered as evidence in support of your stance, because nowhere did you distance yourself from it. In fact the statements you made about your having ‘a duty to doubt’ indicated that you agreed with the quote you provided. If you are now distancing yourself from the quote that is another matter entirely. * RESPONDENT: I haven’t accepted that actualism is brand new in human history, in fact I doubt it very much. However I do like the fact that there is a method which can be used to verify actualism itself. After my discussion with Richard I especially doubt that I can verify that actualism is new to human history and I fail to see how I could ever verify that Richard was the first – he tells me he hasn’t spoken to everyone in the world living and dead so how can he know? I don’t object to Richard being the pioneer – I just doubt it. Given that the search for freedom throughout human history has been long and intense by people of all intelligence and disposition I think there’s large room for doubt. Indeed, doubt is a duty when dealing ‘men of historical destiny’. The sheer number of seekers suggests strongly that many, many avenues have been explored. VINEETO: The word ‘doubt’ appears five times in this paragraph, an indication that doubt is an important feature to your way of approaching things. It corresponds with the excerpt you posted from Robert Linssen in which he recommends the ‘dynamism of absolute doubt’ as a method of dissociation and transcendence –
RESPONDENT: So you’ve read a quote I posted and concluded that I subscribe to the idea of ‘dynamism of absolute doubt’. Wrong. I don’t. Do you even understand why I posted the quote? It certainly wasn’t to say that I totally agree with it! Operating with absolute doubt as a generalised rule is absurd. You wouldn’t trust the sun to rise tomorrow if you did. In previous posts I have had positive things to say about actualism, which is not the behaviour of someone who doubts everything. Nice to see that an actualist can still harbour imaginary constructs. VINEETO: Oh? So you posted a quote in support of your arguments and now you proceed to tell me that I have made a wrong assumption, that I am ‘attacking a straw man’, that I ‘harbour imaginary constructs’ because you now reveal that you don’t stand behind the words you posted. Am I to take it then that the quotes have no substance as evidence, that they are made of straw? Should I in future ignore anything you post to the list because you don’t necessarily subscribe to the quotes and don’t necessarily agree with what you post? Are you merely arguing for the sake of arguing? * RESPONDENT: Your mantra is ‘tried and failed’ but you cannot know that for sure. VINEETO: For you it may be a mantra, but to me it is blatantly obvious that spiritualism is tried and failed. Countless millions of people have trod the spiritual path over the 5000 years of recorded human history and none of the revered spiritual methods have succeeded in bringing peace-on-earth … because all of them are solely concerned with achieving a personal peace after death. RESPONDENT: 5000 years is infinitesimal compared to the preceding millions of years in evolution that led to the human mind. VINEETO: Are you proposing that because it took millions of years for the human mind to evolve, it will have to take millions of more years for the human mind to become free from malice and sorrow? If so, then it is no wonder you react in suspicion when Richard reports that he has succeeded in bringing the evolution of the human mind to its next stage by freeing himself from the genetically inherited instinctual passions – complete with a method to replicate his pioneering discovery. Contrary to popular belief, evolutionary development is not a gradual imperceptible process but has always been the result of changes bought about by singular abrupt mutations. Today circumstances have changed for human beings in that humans are no longer reliant on their instinctual programming in order to survive because human intelligence unobstructed by instinctual passions can do the job much more efficiently and far more beneficently. The adaptation that needs to happen for human beings now – and is already happening for practicing actualists – is to accept the challenge of being happy and harmless – to put an end to the instinctual battle to survive and to rid ourselves of malice and sorrow. But in order to want to change one needs to admit that the methods of the past have indeed failed – they did not go far enough. * RESPONDENT: I’ll grant that the freedom described by Richard is rare but it’s not unique to him. VINEETO: So far you have failed to provide any evidence that you have understood the nature of ‘the freedom described by Richard’ because you came to this list pre-armed with the assumption that actualism is but another version of spiritualism and that Richard’s claim to be the first man actually free from the human condition is preposterous. RESPONDENT: No, I came to the list ready to have my preconceptions changed, however, nothing that Richard said on the topic of his uniqueness was convincing. VINEETO: Nobody can change your ‘preconceptions’ but you, and suspicion and an attitude of ‘doubt is a duty when dealing [with] ‘men of historical destiny’ ain’t gonna help. To hold to a duty to doubt is to have a preconception where I come from but if you come to understand that it would be sensible to abandon this self-imposed obligation then at least you would have changed some of your ‘preconceptions’. If you sincerely want to change your ‘preconceptions’, you would be far better off, i.e. more prone to succeed, to set aside your duty to doubt sufficiently in order to see whether there is a prima facie case that can be established as to the sensibility and coherency of actualism. From there you could proceed to set about to *experientially* find out whether there indeed exists an actual world. RESPONDENT: Indeed, his defensive stance added to my suspicion. VINEETO: Have you ever heard of the word ‘automorphism’ RESPONDENT: What does he get out of being the ‘one and only’? VINEETO: Not living in denial. If you read * VINEETO: If you keep insisting on maintaining your attitude of dutifully applying ‘absolute doubt’ you won’t even come near to beginning to comprehend what an actual freedom from the human condition is all about. RESPONDENT: That would be true if I was dutifully applying absolute doubt. VINEETO: You did say ‘doubt is a duty when dealing [with] ‘men of historical destiny’’ – are you now not standing by this statement as well? I have no trouble at all with you abandoning your preconceptions as your doing so can only help you in understanding the sincerity of what is being offered here. However, if you write something to me I will take what you write at face value and make comment on your statement based on my experience as an actualist. If you then change your stance in the next post, it seems silly to me for you to then proceed to claim that I am somehow misinterpreting or making false assumptions about what you originally said. I remember in the early days of writing, I found it essential to sit down and think about what I wrote before I wrote so as to make it clear what I really wanted to say and make clear what I really meant. Nowadays I tend not to need to do so because I know by experience what I am saying and as a consequence can stand by what I say. Even a non-absolute doubt will prevent you from comprehending what an actual freedom from the human condition is all about. After all, doubt is a feeling and feelings are the motor, the oil and the fuel of the human condition. RESPONDENT: Also, can you tell me why reasonable doubt, in a reasonably open mind, should preclude a growing experiential understanding of actualism? VINEETO: In the years of exploring my psyche, both in my pre-actualist years of spiritual-based therapy and in the beginning of my interest in actualism I experienced in me, and even more so observed in others, what is termed cognitive dissonance – a powerful characteristic of ‘me’, the lost, lonely, frightened and very cunning entity inside this body, primed to surface in order to defend ‘my’ beliefs and ‘my’ existence at all cost. This is what Richard has written about it –
It takes great determination, constant attentiveness and a sincere, naive intent to become happy and harmless in order to be able to break through this archaic means of ‘self’-survival. To deliberately add feelings of doubt and suspicion to the already existing ‘self’-preserving defence mechanism would be foolish, to say the least, because it will only exacerbate any chances of your becoming free from human condition. One only has a chance to discover something so exquisitely new to human experience as the possibility of permanently becoming free from the instinctual survival passions when one suspends both belief and disbelief, rekindles one’s naiveté and expands one’s felicitous/ innocuous feelings along with sensuousness whilst minimizing both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ feelings. A grumpy or suspicious person has no chance of ever discovering the magic of this actual paradise. Why not give the opposite approach to doubt and suspicion a go such as being naively open-minded, taking someone’s words at face value and rekindling amazement and wonder. What have you got to lose?
VINEETO: To clarify a misconception, I am not attacking you but I am responding to your claims and your objections. Also, I am not getting ‘excited’ about scoring points, as you suggested several times further down in the part of your post that I snipped. For me this conversation is about sharing my experience and trying to help you to understand – in case you are interested – that so far you are missing the essential point that actualism is new and diametrically opposite to any teaching you have ever heard of. I do this because I assume that you would want to benefit from discovering what actualism really is. If you are not interested, just let me know. RESPONDENT: I’m interested in Actualism. I’m just objecting to a couple of assertions that seem very unlikely. You seem to be telling me that I must swallow all claims about Actualism before Actualism will work for me. This sounds dogmatic to me. VINEETO: What I am saying is that unless you begin to question your firm conviction that actualism is just another spiritual teaching and Richard is just another spiritual teacher, you will have zilch understanding of actualism. As you said below you consider actualism as ‘one approach amongst many’, i.e. many spiritual approaches, therefore whatever you consider ‘will work’ for you will be spiritually based and will have nothing to do with actualism. If stating the fact that actualism is utterly non-spiritual and that an actual freedom is a freedom from the exalted states of the venerated spiritual teachers sounds ‘dogmatic’ to you, so be it. RESPONDENT: I’d like to ask you this question directly – must I dispose of all doubt for Actualism to work for me? VINEETO: Of course – only 100% commitment to becoming happy and harmless will do the trick. Doubt will only serve to sabotage any well-meaning efforts you may have in this regard. RESPONDENT: Please tell me which doubts are non-obstructive. VINEETO: The only doubts that are useful at the start of investigating the impediments to one’s own happiness and harmlessness are doubts in regards to the cunningness of one’s own identity. As far as doubting ‘my’ beliefs and ‘my’ objections was concerned I found examining the facts a far better and a more effective tool than remaining a doubter because doubt, being only a feeling, can never give the confidence that a fact can give. * RESPONDENT: Your mantra is ‘tried and failed’ but you cannot know that for sure. VINEETO: For you it may be a mantra, but to me it is blatantly obvious that spiritualism is tried and failed. Countless millions of people have trod the spiritual path over the 5000 years of recorded human history and none of the revered spiritual methods have succeeded in bringing peace-on-earth … because all of them are solely concerned with achieving a personal peace after death. RESPONDENT: 5000 years is infinitesimal compared to the preceding millions of years in evolution that led to the human mind. VINEETO: Are you proposing that because it took millions of years for the human mind to evolve, it will have to take millions of more years for the human mind to become free from malice and sorrow? If so, then it is no wonder you react in suspicion when Richard reports that he has succeeded in bringing the evolution of the human mind to its next stage by freeing himself from the genetically inherited instinctual passions – complete with a method to replicate his pioneering discovery. RESPONDENT: No, I’m not. I simply don’t know what the pace of evolution (or more precisely, change) should be. I am suggesting that given the length of time it has taken for minds to evolve it should not be surprising that a freedom from the human condition has not become widespread yet. VINEETO: If you look at the above dialogue you can see that it was you who introduced ‘the pace of evolution’ in order to justify that the spiritual methods have not yet failed to bring peace to this verdant planet. The question relevant to this conversation is how much longer do you want to wait before you consider questioning the effectiveness of your spiritual methods in bringing about peace-on-earth for you? RESPONDENT: The writings on the Actualism website suggest that this is a failing of all systems and approaches prior to that of Actualism. Given the underwhelming interest in Actualism so far, should I conclude that it has failed? Of course not. It’s one approach amongst many. Given the hurdles in the way of attaining freedom from the human condition it could take hundreds or thousands of years for benefits to emerge in a majority of humanity. VINEETO: Can you see how your firm conviction that actualism is ‘one approach amongst many’ obstructs any further understanding of what actualism is about and how it leads you into ever increasing circles of questions of ever decreasing relevance to the nub of what is actually on offer on in actualism? As a temporary experiment, a working hypothesis only, you could apply naiveté and gay abandon in lieu of your preconception of ‘reasonable doubt’ and see how the writings on the Actual Freedom Trust website make sense if you simply take the words at face value. * VINEETO: Contrary to popular belief, evolutionary development is not a gradual imperceptible process but has always been the result of changes bought about by singular abrupt mutations. Today circumstances have changed for human beings in that humans are no longer reliant on their instinctual programming in order to survive because human intelligence unobstructed by instinctual passions can do the job much more efficiently and far more beneficently. The adaptation that needs to happen for human beings now – and is already happening for practicing actualists – is to accept the challenge of being happy and harmless – to put an end to the instinctual battle to survive and to rid ourselves of malice and sorrow. But in order to want to change one needs to admit that the methods of the past have indeed failed – they did not go far enough. RESPONDENT: That is certainly not the consensus view in scientific circles. Such a contentious view has been propagated by popular writers like Stephen Jay Gould. Having said that, I agree that it’s possible that something like a freedom from the human condition may take off quickly once a ‘critical mass’ is reached. The 100th monkey theory comes to mind. However, let’s be careful with terminology here – we’re not talking about evolution in scientific terms when we talk about the spread of methods and ideas. VINEETO: As I understand ‘the consensus view in scientific circles’, the recent mapping of the DNA sequence makes it even more clear that evolutionary changes within species and the changes that produce successful sub-species are the result of random, as in accidental, mutations in the DNA sequencing only when and only as strands of DNA combine. However, the point of this conversation is the possibility of change for No 59, available immediately and not in some millions of years for some yet-to-be-born people via some hypothetical ‘spread of methods and ideas’. The ‘critical mass’ you are talking about is a mythical fantasy – the assumption that everyone living at the time will miraculously all get it at once that ‘we all’ better stop battling it out with each other in a grim and senseless battle for survival. Actualism is an individual and unilateral solution to a universal problem, applicable this very moment. As for ‘we’re not talking about evolution in scientific terms’ – the evolutionary change that happens in my brain when I use the method of actualism is that my brain is being rewired, which is a scientific and repeatable process. This is how it is described in the Introduction to Actual Freedom – Introduction to Actual Freedom, Actual Freedom 1 * RESPONDENT: No, I came to the list ready to have my preconceptions changed, however, nothing that Richard said on the topic of his uniqueness was convincing. VINEETO: Nobody can change your ‘preconceptions’ but you, and suspicion and an attitude of ‘doubt is a duty when dealing [with] ‘men of historical destiny’ ain’t gonna help. To hold to a duty to doubt is to have a preconception where I come from but if you come to understand that it would be sensible to abandon this self-imposed obligation then at least you would have changed some of your ‘preconceptions’. If you sincerely want to change your ‘preconceptions’, you would be far better off, i.e. more prone to succeed, to set aside your duty to doubt sufficiently in order to see whether there is a prima facie case that can be established as to the sensibility and coherency of actualism. From there you could proceed to set about to experientially find out whether there indeed exists an actual world. RESPONDENT: Again, I do not hold absolute doubt on this issue. I hold reasonable doubt – I believe it’s unlikely that Richard is the sole discoverer of an actual freedom from the human condition. It’s not an absolute preconception for this reason – my mind could be changed on this issue IF there was a way to verify Richard the First’s claim of uniqueness. VINEETO: As I said in my last post, nobody can change your mind for you – that is solely your responsibility. In order to understand what an actual freedom entails nothing short of doubting your ‘self’ will do, doubting your own belief that ‘it’s unlikely that Richard is the sole discoverer’. What you consider ‘reasonable doubt’ is more likely ‘information’ that ‘contradicts existing knowledge, attitudes, beliefs or feelings’, in other words, cognitive dissonance in action. Here is the relevant quote from my last post (full text see below) –
In order to tackle one’s own cognitive dissonance – the feelings and beliefs that prevent one from taking on board new information that is contrary to the previous information that one has assimilated – one needs a clear incentive to want to move past one’s ‘existing knowledge, attitudes, beliefs or feelings’. In my case this incentive was the dawning of a recognition that my ‘existing knowledge, attitudes, beliefs or feelings’ had made me neither happy nor harmless nor enabled me to live with my fellow human beings in peace and harmony. RESPONDENT: You and I know that there is NO way to verify that Richard was the sole discoverer. VINEETO: You can leave me out of ‘you and I know’ because I do know, experientially. Once I had a pure consciousness experience (PCE) I knew that everybody has got it 180 degrees wrong and that nobody teaches, or has ever taught, how to live a PCE 24/7. RESPONDENT: You are asking me to accept this as an article of faith. From what you have said so far, it sounds to me that I will not benefit from Actualism until I take this article of faith onboard completely. VINEETO: You must be joking. In the time you have been on this list it has been
said numerous times that actualism is not a matter of faith. Just look up the selected correspondence for the words You seem to think that the opposite of doubt is faith whereas doubt and faith are merely two sides of the same coin. Rather than remaining trapped within the flip-flop of doubt and faith I relied on naiveté, common sense, sensibility, intelligence and the confidence gained from knowing the facts of the matter. RESPONDENT: Why can’t I benefit from Actualism without a fundamental faith in Richard the First? Consider this – I HAVE already benefited from Actualism without swallowing the party line! Imagine that! I’d appreciate your comment on this point please. VINEETO: Seeing that you consider a statement of fact – that Richard has discovered a way to become free of the human condition in toto – to be the ‘the party line’, whilst busily ignoring every answer I have provided so far on this topic, not to mention Richard’s numerous posts on the same topic, clearly shows that you have an either/or emotional approach to actualism – either maintaining a duty to doubt with its accompanying impulse to denigrate, or envisage a necessity to trust with its accompanying requirement to have blind faith. This was the very reason I told you the story about how I discovered that I needed to investigate my emotional issues with authority before I could take someone’s words at face value, i.e. with naiveté, common sense, sensibility and intelligence. Reasonable-ness only comes into play when the emotions are out of the way. As for ‘I HAVE already benefited from Actualism without swallowing the party line! Imagine that!’ – I can’t imagine how you have benefited because I am not a mind reader. But you are welcome to provide more detailed information as to how you ‘already benefited from actualism’. * RESPONDENT: Indeed, his defensive stance added to my suspicion. VINEETO: Have you ever heard of the word ‘automorphism’ RESPONDENT: From www.dictionary.com
So I’m defending myself from knowledge of Richard’s uniqueness? How then am I to be illuminated? Shall I rub bullshit in my eyes? Will the scales on my eyes fall off on the Road to Byron Bay? VINEETO: No. Automorphism suggests that when you engage in a conversation in an adversarial, suspicious, aggressive and sarcastic frame of mind then you automatically conceive the other to have the same attitude. The ability to recognize that the other is entirely sincere only eventuates when you yourself cease being adversarial. Then you can really begin to benefit from what actualism has to offer. * VINEETO: Even a non-absolute doubt will prevent you from comprehending what an actual freedom from the human condition is all about. After all, doubt is a feeling and feelings are the motor, the oil and the fuel of the human condition. RESPONDENT: Also, can you tell me why reasonable doubt, in a reasonably open mind, should preclude a growing experiential understanding of actualism? VINEETO: In the years of exploring my psyche, both in my pre-actualist years of spiritual-based therapy and in the beginning of my interest in actualism I experienced in me, and even more so observed in others, what is termed cognitive dissonance – a powerful characteristic of ‘me’, the lost, lonely, frightened and very cunning entity inside this body, primed to surface in order to defend ‘my’ beliefs and ‘my’ existence at all cost. This is what Richard has written about it –
It takes great determination, constant attentiveness and a sincere, naive intent to become happy and harmless in order to be able to break through this archaic means of ‘self’-survival. To deliberately add feelings of doubt and suspicion to the already existing ‘self’-preserving defence mechanism would be foolish, to say the least, because it will only exacerbate any chances of your becoming free from human condition. One only has a chance to discover something so exquisitely new to human experience as the possibility of permanently becoming free from the instinctual survival passions when one suspends both belief and disbelief, rekindles one’s naiveté and expands one’s felicitous/ innocuous feelings along with sensuousness whilst minimizing both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ feelings. A grumpy or suspicious person has no chance of ever discovering the magic of this actual paradise. Why not give the alternative approach to doubt and suspicion a go such as being naively open-minded, taking someone’s words at face value and rekindling amazement and wonder. What have you got to lose? RESPONDENT: Yes, unreasonable doubt tends to cloud things. VINEETO: Cognitive dissonance is something quite different to ‘unreasonable doubt’ and by its very nature it is not easily recognized when it occurs. It is important to consider and recognize that cognitive dissonance is a significant defence mechanism to understanding anything new and even more so when the something new is as radical as actualism. Cognitive dissonance is an automatic defensive reaction that takes place before one even becomes aware of what information has been ‘distorted’, ‘reinterpreted’ or ‘warped’. One needs determination and sincere intent to want to forego one’s own feelings of apprehension – to want to go into the lion’s den, so to speak – in order to be able to investigate the information that one’s cognitive dissonance has ‘warped’ and which, upon seeing clearly, may cause ‘mental-emotional distress’. Quite a few people on this mailing list have reported that recognizing the scope and the wide-ranging ramifications entailed in an actual, non-spiritual freedom were ‘a big thing’, not easy to take, difficult to understand at first, caused them to have head-aches, were a blow to their pride, shattered their existing beliefs, questioned their present life-style, and so on. Actualism is no little thing to take on. RESPONDENT: Are you suggesting that because doubt is a feeling that all doubts are wrong to have? VINEETO: It all depends upon what you want from life. If you are content with second best, i.e. reasonable, conditional, fickle happiness, then doubt comes with the territory. If you want to become unconditionally happy and harmless, then every single feeling needs to be investigated as it occurs because feelings are ‘me’ and as long as ‘I’ am strutting the stage the illimitable perfection that is this physical universe will remain forever obscured. Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
