VINEETO: Hi,

PETER: Fair enough, I was just offering an alternative non-spiritual and down-to-earth solution to the Human Dilemma. So you are not interested, so why even bother to criticize if you haven’t even bothered to read my book. Guess you don’t even like the idea of what you ‘think’ it is about. Peter, List C, No 4, 26.11.1998

RESPONDENT: I don’t feel inclined to read your book. I read parts of yours, Vineeto’s and Richard’s sites. When I replied to you, it is from having read your mails. I don’t feel very eager to discuss with you, we have our different viewpoints and experiences and that is ok. The reason I answered was because you seem to have taken a position from where you look down on others, and that I find it strange that you can do that from your illuminated state of delight. Expansion beyond enlightenment should be able to offer a broader view to life than what you can. Also I find some of your words to be agreeable upon, but I don’t sense your heart through the words. Read Papaji or Gangaji here on the net, the flavour of their words is something totally different.

VINEETO: Yes, you observed it right – the flavours of Papaji (W.L. Poonja) and Gangaji Antoinette Varner) are very different, they have got ‘the heart’ in it.

The whole issue of actual freedom is the freedom from emotions, feelings and the instinctual passions. ‘Heart’-felt passions have been the source of both religious and tribal wars, of domestic violence, and of the misery and gulf between men and women. Any questioning of the love and devotion that the followers have for the enlightened ones and the religious leaders has led to emotional responses which you can now see happening on the sannyas mailing list.

Richard was indeed the first one to question the state of enlightenment because it did not match the way he experienced the world in the peak experience. In arduous years of investigation he discovered the massive delusion that enlightenment is and, by eliminating not only the ego but also the soul, all the heart-felt emotions, he managed to get himself out of this delusion. What was left after the complete elimination of ego, soul, identity and being was simply the physical human flesh-and-blood body, perfectly functioning in this magical fairy-tale like world. Without the Human Condition, without the overlaying fear, aggression, nurture and desire this world is experienced as-it-is, benevolent, friendly, easy and magically delightful.

As for your notion of us looking down on others – that is a curious matter. Of course, the actual world is superior to any state of enlightened delusion in that it is not merely a creation of human imagination but factual, obvious and perfect, as evidenced by the physical senses. If you have experienced it once in a peak experience – or remembered one you had, you would easily agree with me. Many people seem to have peak-experiences, if only for a short period of time. In my writing I am simply sharing the joy of having been able to clean myself up with Richard’s method and becoming virtually free. It is possible for everybody because I am nobody special. Everybody with enough intent and courage can indeed become happy and harmless.

I find it strange that most people seem to get stuck with their opinion, objecting to this freedom because of their personal feelings instead of investigating the contents and facts of what we are talking about. When Galileo first discovered the fact that the earth went around the sun, many people have objected, because this was contrary to the ancient beliefs. It took centuries until it became accepted as a fact. The same will be the case with actual freedom. For most people it is too radical a thought that emotions and even instincts might not be necessary for survival, but that they are, to the contrary, the very cause for all the misery happening on the planet.

I am simply telling my story in case someone becomes intrigued by the possibility of a third alternative to ‘normal’ and ‘spiritual’. I understand that many will want to stay in their particular belief system – I myself had rocky days to work myself out of the social and religious conditioning, before I could tackle the animal instincts every human is born with.

In case you want to discuss any further, I invite you to join our mailing list.

Otherwise I just leave you with a definition of perfection (people might call it superiority...)

Perfection – The condition, state, or quality of being perfect or free from all defect; flawlessness, faultlessness. An embodiment of this; a perfect person or thing. Oxford Dictionary

Peter: Perfection is readily apparent in the physical universe when one perceives a star-filled night sky, the delicacy of a passion flower, the smell of approaching rain on the wind, the taste of a strawberry, the touch of skin, the ever changing weather, the delight of human settlements, and the amazing things fashioned from the earth’s minerals. And it is perfect in that it is infinite and eternal , there is no outside to it, there is nothing to compare it to, it is incomparable– there is nothing finer or more pure. The imaginary ethereal worlds pale into insignificance in comparison to a stellar nebula millions of light-years across or a dew-drop in the early light of dawn. Human beings, with their in-built program of malice and sorrow , are painfully aware of their own shortcomings in the face of this perfection. Thus humans live in a state of constant turmoil and guilt about their collective and individual lot – to be forever attempting to cope with and control the feelings of being malicious and sorrowful in the face of this obvious perfection.

But there is a solution. The diligent and intentional pursuit of the perfection evidenced in a PCE, while assiduously avoiding the pitfalls of Glory or Dread, will inevitably result in an actual freedom from the Human Condition – perfection in humans is possible. Not the deluded perfection of feeling Divine or the cerebral version of perfection as in ‘never make a mistake’, but the down-to-earth everyday perfection of being a mortal flesh and blood human, innocent of malice and sorrow. The very same perfection readily experienced in a Pure Consciousness Experience . If you can experience it for a moment, or a minute, or an hour then it is, of course, possible to experience the perfection of the world-as-it-is with people as-they-are as a constant on-going experience. And it is freely available for those who want it. It requires no special qualities, no super intelligence , no being ‘chosen’, no being coerced or cajoled – the only requirement is you have to want to do it, like you have never wanted anything else before. The Actual Freedom Trust Library

29.11.1998

RESPONDENT: You give a definition of perfection and as a librarian I like to know the source of any statement.

VINEETO: The first (italics) part is from the Oxford dictionary. The second part is written by Peter to explain how ‘perfection’ is used in his journal.

RESPONDENT: When I said that Papaji and Gangaji have got a heart, which can be felt – a transmission, it has nothing to do with human feelings as you describe in your mail. It is the heart of their being which is perceived, the sweetness coming from the divine. I don’t sense this in yours or Peter’s or Richard’s words. On the contrary, I find your words to be very firm and closed to the fact you want to deliver, your words are not flexible or poetic, they stem from the very logical world of materialism and don’t offer any juice to the spirit.

VINEETO: Yes, this is exactly the difference. The enlightened ones talk about and experience the heart of their being, juice to the spirit, poetry, sweetness and flexibility , all of which are qualities of the affective nature of their experience. You rightly don’t sense this kind of transmission in Peter’s or Richard’s words, because it is not part of actual freedom. Actual freedom is to experience the physical world – only. To experience this physical world without the Human Condition, without fear, aggression, nurture and desire, without the overlaying ‘self’, without the delusion of ‘soul’, is pure delight. If you would take the trouble to read a bit deeper into the matter you would understand that Richard is indeed the very first person who discovered the perfection of the actuality that is usually obscured by any kind of emotion, instincts and imagination, be it ‘normal human’ feelings or divine feelings.

I notice that you first assume that actual freedom falls into the same category as Papaji’s or Gangaji’s enlightenment, and then you criticise that our words don’t describe the state of enlightenment. Of course not. Actual freedom is something completely different altogether, in fact 180 degrees in the opposite direction of enlightenment. It is impossible to imagine the actual world – a world without concepts – and that’s why it is so important to remember one’s peak-experience. But then, we are not talking about the same experience. I will explain further down.

Richard described it best in his introduction to his journal:

Richard: For many years I sought genuine exploration and discovery of what it means to live a fully human life, and in October 1992 I discovered, once and for all, what I was looking for. Since then I have been consistently living an incomparable condition which I choose to call actual freedom – and I use the word ‘actual’ because this freedom is located here in this very world, this actual world of the senses. It is not an affective, cerebral or psychic state of being; it is a physical condition that ensues when one goes beyond Spiritual Enlightenment. In September 1981 I underwent a monumental transformation into an Altered State Of Consciousness which can only be described as Spiritual Enlightenment. I became Enlightened as the result of an earnest and intense process which commenced in the January of that year. At approximately six o’clock on the morning of Sunday 6^th September 1981, my ‘ego’ disappeared entirely in an edifying moment of awakening to an ‘Absolute Reality’. I lived in the Enlightened State for eleven years, so I have an intimate understanding of the marked difference between Spiritual Enlightenment and actual freedom. Richard’s Journal, Introduction

RESPONDENT: What you sense as emotional responses on the list are just plain human responses, emotions are alive in the human realm and can cause both pleasure and pain. One does never get rid of these unless one suppresses the human nature and seduces oneself into enlightenhood....

VINEETO: I am not talking about suppressing the Human Nature or the Human Condition, and I am not talking about ‘seduction’ into enlightenment. Richard discovered that it is possible to completely eliminate the Human Condition, instincts, emotions, the whole lot. Enlightenment happens when you get rid of the ego and become divine feeling – the Self one with God, while actual freedom is the state when every bit of identity, ego, soul, being, Self, That, Truth, Divine Love, Universe and God have altogether disappeared. What remains is just the body with its senses and its wonderfully functioning intelligence.

RESPONDENT: ...by merely living in the dry land of mind

VINEETO: ‘Mind’ is a word very much used in the spiritual understanding as something to ‘get out of’. In its dictionary definition it means:

mind – that which thinks, feels and wills, exercises perception, judgment, reflection, etc, as in a human or other conscious being; the psyche, the totality of conscious and unconscious activities of the organism; the intellect or understanding, as distinguished from the faculties of feeling and willing; the intelligence. Oxford Dictionary

Mind as ‘that which feels and wills’, as ‘the psyche’ is indeed something that needs to be extinguished to become actually free. Mind as ‘the intellect or understanding, as distinguished from the faculties of feeling and willing; the intelligence’ , however, is highly recommendable when one wants to live a sensible, pleasurable, considerate, beneficent and comfortable life. The East, as in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Tibet, Nepal, Bhurma shows clearly what happens if intelligence gets thrown out of the window – poverty, repression of women, overpopulation, corruption, illiteracy and ignorance are only a few obvious facts. After giving up my spiritual practice I had to re-start my brain and exercise my rusty intelligence in order to distinguish between silly and sensible, between facts and mere beliefs. Intelligence and awareness combined are the tools that one can re-wire the brain from its conditioning, beliefs and instincts. To use pure intelligence – and to be aware of its happening – unobstructed by social and religious conditioning or instinctual fear is a magnificent and exquisite function of the human brain.

RESPONDENT: There are two ways, as I see it, to become free from our nature. One: suppressing – which is illusive freedom, and two: stay a witness to one’s nature, don’t identify but enjoy. The third, which you may think I have missed, is not something one can do, it is a happening, which happens in spite of our personalities.

VINEETO: Yes, you do describe the two known ways of dealing with the Human Condition. Richard’s discovery is the third alternative, a method to actively become free. Your description of the ‘third’ is simply an extension of the second, the spiritual transcendence.

*

VINEETO: Any questioning of the love and devotion that the followers have for the enlightened ones and the religious leaders has led to emotional responses which you can now see happening on the sannyas mailing list.

RESPONDENT: I think you take quick conclusions. Maybe it is your words leading to these emotional responses????

VINEETO: Of course, my words evoke those emotional responses. I am questioning dearly held beliefs, I am shaking the very foundation of spirituality. But once I have rid myself of emotions, no words from others can evoke them in me. Everybody has the potential of emotional responses, it is part of our birthmark. Unless one sets out to rid oneself of the very source of those emotions, one by one, anybody can spark off an emotional reaction, anger, envy, fear, etc.

*

VINEETO: Richard was indeed the first one ...

RESPONDENT: ‘Indeed’?? Could it be others have talked about enlightenment in many different ways, which you have missed out on? What is this need to point out some superiority here?

VINEETO: As I have said, Richard does not talk about enlightenment. He talks about something far superior to enlightenment.

*

VINEETO: ...to question the state of enlightenment because it did not match the way he experienced the world in the peak experience. In arduous years of investigation he discovered the massive delusion that enlightenment is and, by eliminating not only the ego but also the soul, all the heart-felt emotions, he managed to get himself out of this delusion.

RESPONDENT: Well, this is all very good for Richard, but why – WHY – from where comes the need to say that what it is like for me, so must it be for the others and when they don’t agree with me, they are emotional and wrong?

VINEETO: Richard talks about facts. The fact is that everybody by birth and conditioning is inflicted with the Human Condition. Those facts are the same for everybody. That is the superiority of facts. A tree is a tree, fullstop. Not some mysterious product of Mother Nature, filled with divine energy, of some creation of God’s grace. When someone does not agree with a fact, he/she usually has emotional reasons and is wrong in that he/she denies facts – or lives in imagination. The Macquarie dictionary states:

fact – what has really happened or is the case; truth; reality: in fact rather than theory, the fact of the matter is; something known to have happened; a truth known by actual experience or observation: scientists work with facts. Oxford Dictionary

Enlightenment, on the contrary is an affective state, an experience of the psyche, which is another word for imagination. Therefore everybody experiences it different, there exists ‘my Truth’ and ‘your Truth’ and a million ways to reach this elusive Truth.

*

VINEETO: What was left after the complete elimination of ego, soul, identity and being was simply the physical human flesh-and-blood body, perfectly functioning in this magical fairy-tale like world.

RESPONDENT: This was not what I experienced after my peak experience. So then, who is right and who is wrong???? This is really my whole point, there are many ways to freedom and I find it strange that you and Peter, marketing your freedom with many words, are not more inclusive, more broad-minded, more acceptable and more understanding. It is obvious you are clinging to the truth you have found, and by clinging you are not free.

VINEETO: As I pointed out before, you are talking about a different experience when you use the word ‘peak experience’. Peak experience refers to a pure consciousness experience without any affective qualities whatsoever, without the conditioned notion of divine-ness or love. see definition below...

*

VINEETO: Without the Human Condition, without the overlaying fear, aggression, nurture and desire this world is experienced as-it-is, benevolent, friendly, easy and magically delightful.

RESPONDENT: Absolutely. And I understand the need to share this with others. Just – the responses you get, both positive and negative, can tell you something if you are willing to stay open in an communication, without any defences, which it seems to me you put up in front of the truth you have found. You want to share it, with NO objections what so ever. You put the truth upon people by telling them they are wrong, who is interested in listening to your truth when you come from that perspective? We are all, ALL, on the search and we are all, ALL, wrong from time to time. But when we are right, we are right according to ourselves only, no one can confirm that for us. Be more tolerate, more compassionate (which has nothing to do with emotions), more understanding. I know you would have been, if you came from the Source. I don’t think you do.

VINEETO: I have not found ‘the truth’, which is indeed different for everyone. I talk about facts, about experiencing the world without notions of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, true and false. You can be maybe ‘right’ according to your affective experience, but the physical senses without emotions and feelings give a clear experience of the world-as-it-is. You cannot call a coffee-cup a chewing gum. This is where actual freedom differs from spiritual truth in that it is definable, describable, factual, physical, obvious and perfect, as evidenced by the physical senses.

RESPONDENT: But the physical senses differ from human to human, so everybody have their own facts, their own obvious perfection., so it occurs to me you are deluding yourself here.

VINEETO: Exactly, our physical senses are not fit to respond to the divine, and there is no need to. The ‘divine’ is a product of our imagination, like everything else that cannot be evidenced by the physical senses. God is a mere fiction of the human psyche, the ignorant human invention based upon the dualistic need to explain anything and everything in terms of cause and effect. And what human energy is powerful enough to give birth to this imaginary god? Passionate human energy, of course, all in a desperate search for immortality, a denial of physical death.

*

VINEETO: If you have experienced it once in a peak experience – or remembered one you had, you would easily agree with me.

RESPONDENT: No, I cannot because my peak experience was beyond my physical senses.

VINEETO: This sentence proves that we are talking about different peak experiences (pure consciousness experiences). There is nothing beyond physical senses when I talk about a PCE. Here is how Richard describes it:

Richard: A PCE is when one’s sense of identity temporarily vacates the throne and apperception occurs. Apperception is the mind’s perception of itself ... it is a pure awareness. Normally the mind perceives through the senses and sorts the data received according to its predilection; but the mind itself remains unperceived ... it is taken to be unknowable. Apperception is when the ‘thinker’ and the ‘feeler’ is not and an unmediated awareness occurs. The pure consciousness experience is as if one has eyes in the back of one’s head; there is a three hundred and sixty degree awareness and all is self-evidently clear. This is knowing by direct experience, unmoderated by any ‘self’ whatsoever. One is able to see that ‘I’ and ‘me’ have been standing in the way of the perfection and purity that is the essential character of this moment of being here becoming apparent. Here a solid and irrefutable native intelligence can operate freely because the ‘thinker’ and the ‘feeler’ is in abeyance. One is the universe’s experience of itself as a human being ... after all, the very stuff this body is made of is the very stuff of the universe. There is no ‘outside’ to the perfection of the universe to come from; one only thought and felt that one was a separate identity. Apperception is something that brings the facticity born out of a direct experience of the actual. Then what one is (‘what’ not ‘who’) is these sense organs in operation: this seeing is me, this hearing is me, this tasting is me, this touching is me, this smelling is me, and this thinking is me. Whereas ‘I’, the identity, am inside the body: looking out through ‘my’ eyes as if looking out through a window, listening through ‘my’ ears as if they were microphones, tasting through ‘my’ tongue, touching through ‘my’ skin, smelling through ‘my’ nose, and thinking through ‘my’ brain. Of course ‘I’ must feel isolated, alienated, alone and lonely, for ‘I’ am cut off from the magnificence of the actual world – the world as-it-is – by ‘my’ very presence. Richard, List B, No 26, 13.11.1998

In my writing I am simply sharing the joy of having been able to clean myself up with Richard’s method and becoming virtually free. It is possible for everybody because I am nobody special.

RESPONDENT: There is a little missionary hiding in you. See her??? :-)

VINEETO: Don’t hope for that! Once understood, everybody has to do it for themselves. I have better things to do with my time than playing the saviour for ‘lost souls’. Actual freedom is something everybody has to earn for themselves by cleaning themselves up, nobody can clean you up but you.

RESPONDENT: You can share and see that people are suffering because you have left that plane, but you can only shine your truth. This is the case with the people today, that those who could make use of your alternative, are holding on tight to their individual right to think and believe for themselves. They don’t like to be told. People has to come down from their ivory towers – by themselves – and you have to have patience, shine on and wait from them to ask you for help. And this is how it should be, people should not be told, but be allowed to search and search until they find some master that fits.

VINEETO: I am only telling my story. It is completely up to each individual if they are intrigued, curious, thrilled or disgusted. Nothing to do with me. I have neither the need nor the responsibility to save anyone. Otherwise I would not be free. But I won’t just hide under the blanket because someone might feel offended – and a lot of people have been and will be. It is very understandable. I have been upset and offended myself, until I saw in a peak-experience that there is a world beyond beliefs. Here is my description of this mind-blowing experience:

[Vineeto]: Finally, a minor car-accident shocked my spinning mind to a halt. It was followed by a peak-experience on the same evening that shed some light on my dilemma. Having smoked some marijuana I wandered off into the vast spaces of my imagination, exploring the ‘psychic world’, as I tried to make sense of the diametrically opposed options that had presented themselves in my life.

I seemed to perceive my questions in a wider context and had intense sensations about pains and processes in different parts of my body. Watching the people around me I had a deeper understanding of their behaviour and how they related to each other. I could even see the ‘energy-lines’ between the people relating to each other. Each presented a protective shield of a particular personal image, and this ‘image’ would act and operate, relating to the others while the actual, fearful and aggressive person remained hidden.

At the same time that I was watching this I was distinctly aware of my thinking and my journeying in this magical ‘inner’ world. At one stage I even experienced what it is to be mad. I understood the temptation of staying forever in an easy, illusory world of psychedelic wonders, where the mad person is the magician in his own world enjoying the power and safety of his dream. But anybody who dares to question this dream has to be considered a deadly enemy. However, I was always aware that I had the choice to stay in this imaginary world or not.

When I tried to tell Peter about my experiences and insights his simple response gave me quite a shock. ‘But all this is just inside your mind, it is simply your own interpretation, it may appear to be real, but it is not actual.’ Yes, that was true. I could easily see that I was inside the ‘mind’, roaming about in the different chambers of my assembled beliefs-systems, trying to find the one that was ‘right’ and ‘true’ – while in fact, I was just having a little grander and unusually complex perception of this huge labyrinth of thoughts and feelings! I could see more of my ideas or concepts and other people’s ideas, but they were simply ideas. None of them had any relevance to the actuality of the physical world!

In seeing the fact, everything stood still and the whole construct of beliefs suddenly disappeared. Then, for the first time in all my years of the spiritual search, I experienced several hours outside of the ‘psychic world’. Being outside, I could see that this ‘world’ is a huge, all-encompassing construct, created and held in place by the dreams, beliefs, bonds, power-battles, emotions and different spiritual ideas of all of humanity. Everyone is part of it, weaving and reproducing bits of this ‘psychic carpet’. The more people believe in one particular version the more that version becomes ‘real’ or ‘true’. Intuitive or ‘psychic’ people are simply a little better acquainted with the rules and occurrences of this ‘other-world’. It is never actual though, because it relies on constant re-creation through imagination and belief. The moment people cease to believe in a particular religion, idea or value, that very concept eventually disappears from the earth. Actual, on the contrary, is what is already here without anybody applying a feeling, an interpretation, a belief or any other ‘psychic effort’. It is simply here, visual, tangible, audible and tastable.

That night I had stuck my head beyond the blanket of beliefs – including good and bad, right and wrong, love and evil. In the first moments, with the ‘psychic world’ disappearing, this new place was stark, black, scary, a big hole and a bottomless abyss. Suddenly the ground under my feet wavered as the very existence of beliefs ceased. For a while I was lost, frightened and bewildered.

After a minute or two that appeared to contain an eternity of complex understanding, Peter said to me, ‘Hello, how are you? Good that you are here!’ ‘Here’ obviously meant that there existed a place outside the belief-systems! I turned round, out of my shock and bewilderment, into the actual world, and saw that I was simply sitting on the couch with Peter. Here was someone sitting next to me, another human being, not particularly a man, lover or boyfriend. Just a human being, smiling and pleased to meet me, eager to explore with me the next event in life. He is interested. And I am interested. Who is this person? What will happen next? What will he say next? What will we do next? It is exciting, alive, right here and a great pleasure!

The pure and immediate adventure of experiencing this moment of being alive was so utterly superior to everything I had come across in the name of meditation, bliss or ‘satori’ that it spoke for itself. Being in the actual world, everything is simply obvious, needs no explanation or theory, and contains no emotional memories of any past struggle or fear. There is nothing that blurs or edits the experience of the world around me, which is both wondrous and delightful. Freedom is living each moment as it happens, without any objection. It is not the end-product of years of building up a structured belief-system; it is the opposite – destruction of everything that lies between me and the experience of the actual world. Freedom is simply what is left after I rid myself of every layer of the emotional and instinctual ‘self’, which is the only obstruction to my direct experience of the universe.

The next morning, when the effects of the drug had long faded, the understanding of the night before was still vividly present. I clearly remember walking around a crowded out-door market, looking at all the different stalls with people offering their products together with their particular belief-systems, as they tried to convince the customers of the reality of their particular version of ‘truth’.

There were all kinds of proposals to find ‘truth’ or meaning, whether religious, spiritual or secular. Feral feathers and karmic wheels, goddesses and herbs, ways of natural living and an impressive array of spiritual bookstalls, offering a hundred different solutions to life. Colourful Turks were selling their local hot coffee and delicious cakes; a black boy was playing romantic songs on his guitar, selling them by the hour. He was successful – people bought his dreams, his love songs! A woman in purple dyed feral clothes was selling self-made dream-catchers, talismans and other symbols of her particular conviction.

There were traders of organic vegetables, Indian farmers and food-vans with a wide variety of exotic meals – all served with the conviction of their producer: healthy or hearty, plain or spicy, Italian, Thai or Indian, home-made or magically healing. Hippies from the hills sold their produce along with their dreamy, chaotic life-style; drumming ferals with uncombed tasseled hair presented their life as the most juicy and happy of all. Ecologists proclaimed that only purely native rainforest trees should be planted to save the environment. Everyone was utterly convinced of what they were offering, complete with their corresponding outfit, make-up, special ‘language’ and music. I was quite taken aback by the enormity of what I saw. Being outside of all those beliefs made me see what they consisted of – merely ideas, thoughts, constructs, dreams and hopes; nothing was factual about any of them.

This peak-experience proved to be the most significant turning point in the last turbulent year. It began to dawn on me that perhaps I also had just another belief-system – my particular search for enlightenment with this ‘special’ master and group of people. I could no longer completely deny that possibility. However, it took another two months until I gathered the courage to actually investigate my dearly held conviction. I had already one foot in the actual world while the other foot was still stubbornly trying to march in the direction of the spiritual search. Up to now I had not found a reliable compass to decide the course, but now the very idea of believing anybody else became questionable. I decided that I wanted more of this actual freedom. Now, for a change, I would start relying on facts and actual experiences instead of someone else’s vision or dream. A Bit of Vineeto

I just leave you with a definition of perfection (people might call it superiority...)

perfection – The condition, state, or quality of being perfect or free from all defect; flawlessness, faultlessness.

RESPONDENT: Whose definition is this?

VINEETO: The Oxford dictionary.

RESPONDENT: Mine is that even a fault can be perfect, a perfect fault. There is nothing unperfect, only our mind judging. And as such, the judging mind is also perfect.

VINEETO: Your interpretation of perfect is derived from the spiritual interpretation that the world is illusory and has to be transcended. Of course, Eastern religion preaches that you have to transcend body and mind and disappear completely into the grand state of imagination and delusion. In its affective experience this is seen as very real, seductive and engulfing, but nevertheless a product of the ‘universal’ imaginative psyche, not based on facts. As I said before, intelligence is a very good tool to judge silly and sensible. You, however, seem to use the word ‘judging’ as in ‘rejecting’, not as in ‘discriminating’. Rejecting is ineffective, useless and silly, discriminating a necessary quality to make down-to-earth decisions about one’s life.

*

VINEETO: ...perfection in humans is possible.

RESPONDENT: Whatever is, is perfect. It cannot be any other way. But there can be more.

VINEETO: One of those insidious spiritual beliefs. If you look around in the world, human beings are anything else but perfect. Murders, rapes, domestic violence, religious and tribal wars, child abuse and suicides tell enough of a story. This belief that everything is perfect is one of the reasons why people think they don’t have to change, just wait for the grace of god or the master, or the universe to miraculously remove them from this miserable realm of the body. But then you have to deny the body, all its pleasures, its intelligence, its physical senses. Then, the only place you can have peace is in some imaginary world of the psyche.

Actual freedom means living in this physical world, as this physical body with its marvellous intelligence. But it also means living without a psyche, without affective qualities – human or divine, without instincts, without imagination, without any sense of self or Self, ego, soul and idea of who you are. Actual freedom is to discover what you are – a flesh-and-blood body, one of 5.8 billion on the planet – completely ordinary with only one difference: one is completely harmless and as such a non-contributor to malice, and one is completely happy and a such a non-contributor to sorrow.

I have answered all your objections as clearly as possible. One thing strikes me as curious: You seem interested enough to engage in a detailed and inquiring conversation with Peter and me. Yet you have enough objections to not investigate any further into what actual freedom is all about.

There is another option, though. You could put your objections – which are more than understandable – aside in order to investigate scientifically, rather than emotionally. With a more informed understanding your questions will be more to the point and have more the quality of questions instead of objections.

Since I am not a missionary, I prefer the second option.

4.12.1998

RESPONDENT: I end my discussion with you with this:

[Vineeto]: I have answered all your objections as clearly as possible. One thing strikes me as curious: You seem interested enough to engage in a detailed and inquiring conversation with Peter and me. Yet you have enough objections to not investigate any further into what actual freedom is all about. [endquote].

Aren’t you beyond curiosity?? I am not interested in discussing, I have already told Peter that. And since you two seems to be one, I have mailed either one of you, not bothering whose name was on top. My only issue all along has been – and you haven’t answered that: why do you criticise what doesn’t work for you but which might work for others? why put Osho and his Sannyasins down? what makes you think you and you only, has the truth?

VINEETO: Curious that you are ending the discussion when you run out of objections. For me, that would be the point when to really start the discussion.

What you may perceive as a criticism, for me is simply a presenting another option. That this option is so radically different to everything else I have come across in life seems to be the thing that’s bothering you – if Osho works for you, if you have no doubts about it, than that’s fine.

I don’t have the truth, because truth is different for everyone. I had similar objections in the beginning, having been a devout Sannyasin, and therefore I understand the various objections. But after thorough investigation and experiencing both the realm of enlightenment and the actual world I am now able to confidently state that they are opposite states to live in – truth and enlightenment are faculties of feeling and imagination, while actual freedom is an experience of the physical senses and apperception.

It is not a matter of criticising Osho or Sannyas, actual freedom is a different, non-spiritual approach to life altogether. I am saying everybody got it 180 degrees wrong. I understand that this statement is offensive to almost everybody – who wants to admit that they barked up the wrong tree? You could compare Richard’s discovery to what Galileo discovered a few centuries ago. With his self-built telescope Galileo proved the theory of Copernicus, that the earth is actually revolving around the sun and not vice versa – as everybody believed then. He was persecuted, mainly by the Church, and it took a few centuries until his discovery became general accepted knowledge.

So, our discovery is similarly radical, new and a quantum leap in evolution, and as such will appeal to those with a pioneer-spirited.

*

VINEETO: There is another option, though. You could put your objections – which are more than understandable – aside in order to investigate scientifically, rather than emotionally. With a more informed understanding your questions will be more to the point and have more the quality of questions instead of objections.

RESPONDENT: You say here that you don’t hear me. Ok, but why can’t you say so, instead of TELLING me what to do? Can’t I think for myself??

VINEETO: The trouble with thinking is that is goes round in circles, because humans have learned certain ‘truths’ that they take as facts. To question something that everybody believes to be the case – for instance that there is something like truth, or a life after death, or that Human Nature cannot be changed – is not something that would occur in normal thinking. At least, it did not occur in my thinking, trained by society and spiritual wisdom, and it did not occur in anybody else I have talked to. As long as thinking is edited and distorted by instincts, emotions and beliefs, our innate intelligence does not have much chance to operate.

Also, I am not telling you what to do, I am suggesting another option. From my own experience at the start I know quite well how the Human Condition reacts in most of us. But since you said you were only curious, not vitally interested in finding an alternative to Ancient Wisdom, I will stop wasting your time now.

10.12.1998

RESPONDENT No. 10: Hello everyone, I just wondering if there is anyone on this list who is attracted to Peter and Vineeto? What is it you admire about their writing?

RESPONDENT: They have a peculiar way of expressing experiences which I can share and recognize. What I wonder about, is what they call fact. And I must ask you, Peter, what is a fact, when that which is a fact to you is not a fact to me?

VINEETO: From this different view of understanding the fact of death without an after-life, I can see facts as naked as they are, without the embellishing veil of love, compassion, hope, right and wrong, soul and inner world. I had taken all those feelings for facts before I met Richard, but after closer and honest investigation they could not stand the scrutiny of my discrimination. I had had strong experiences or ‘realisations’ about truth, love, hope etc. and that had made it all the easier to believe them as real – I don’t deny that those experiences are real. But they are not actual, which means, you cannot see, touch, hear, smell or taste them. They exist in the head and only in the head (or are felt in the heart) and they are a bit different for everybody. A Christian sees Jesus in a vision, a Sannyasins may hear Osho talk ‘truth’ in their minds.

Facts are material facts, physical facts, sensual facts, scientifically proven facts (in opposition to a scientific theory like a black hole), what has really happened or is the case, as the Oxford dictionary says.

The so-called facts of the ‘real world’ are mere beliefs. That millions of people believe them does not make them facts. And belief can have amazing results. I have had wonderful spiritual experiences and psychic understandings. But in comparison with the peak-experiences of the actual world it is evident and obvious that they are mere passionate imaginations.

15.1.1999

RESPONDENT: Can you give me the references to the dictionary you are referring to?

VINEETO: Yes, I can. I appreciate your scrutiny.

The sentence that you are referring to was in a post to No. 12:

... belief per dictionary means ‘fervently wishing to be true’, while fact means ‘what has really happened or is the case’.

The reference for the definition of fact is from the Macquarie dictionary:

[quote]: what has really happened or is the case; truth; reality: in fact rather than theory, the fact of the matter is; something known to have happened; a truth known by actual experience or observation: scientists work with facts.

The reference for belief is from the Oxford Concise Dictionary Of English Etymology published by ‘The Oxford University Press’ (c) 1996.

I quote the part in question:

[quote]: The etymology of the word ‘believe’ comes from the Old English ‘belefan’ (from ‘gelefan’) derived from the Gothic ‘galaubjan’ meaning ‘hold dear’ or ‘trust in’. (This is from ‘be + lief’ and the Old English word ‘lief’, ‘leof’, ‘liob’, ‘liub’ – from the Germanic ‘lieb’ and Gothic ‘liufs’ – means ‘to love’ or ‘beloved’ as in ‘dear’ meaning ‘desirous’). [endquote].

Hence ‘believe’ means ‘hold dear’ as in ‘love desirously’. Thus ‘believing’ means ‘dearly trusting or desiring to be true’. Thus the word ‘believe’ means ‘fervently wish to be true’.

Does that answer your question?

15.1.1999