RESPONDENT No 5 to Richard: How can I be sure? You explain in a way that everyone can understand?

RESPONDENT No 1: No 5, Richard uses an Oxford Dictionary for a pillow at night while he sleeps, and his PCE absorbs all the words and meanings which he altruistically uses to razzle-dazzle us into understanding his present state of mind (whatever that is). In other words, don’t worry about not understanding Richard, for he delights in being the only one of his kind in the world, of all time, and if you understood him, then he could not be the undisputed ruler and sole owner of all that he knows and understands.

VINEETO: No 1, this is such a silly comment that I was tempted to send in a reply. I have been reading on the list since months, but never wrote. Personally, I can understand what Richard writes, and the longer I read the easier it is for me to understand his explanations about animal instincts, the human condition and a way to peace-on-earth. I am applying the method that he has described on the list many times since two years, with great success.

Therefore your argument of him being ‘the undisputed ruler and sole owner of all that he knows and understands’ is simply a silly excuse – for if you actually understand what Richard talks about, peace-on-earth in this lifetime, then that understanding calls for unilateral action, for changing oneself. And who would want to give up their comfortable concepts and theories and start actually investigating themselves and changing their behaviour in order to become actually free of malice and sorrow? It is so much easier to find fault with the one who is talking about peace-on-earth than to get off one’s bum and investigate one’s own emotions, isn’t it?

RESPONDENT: Looks to me like you wanted to defend your guru, Vineeto.

VINEETO: Those living in the spirit-ual world can only see spiritual relationships, epitomized by love and authority.

My own ultimate authority is the pure consciousness experience where one can experience the actual world undistorted by any ‘self’ whatsoever. Given my intent to live this ‘self’-less experience 24 hrs a day I then proceeded to eliminate all that prevents this happening. I have left the self-deprecating reliance on authority as in a guru-disciple relationship behind a long time ago. It sucks.

Of course, Richard’s discovery of Actual Freedom enabled me to stop believing that you can’t change Human Nature. You can change human nature, radically and irrevocably.

There is nothing as valuable as expertise in all areas of life. Yet most people are not able to differentiate between an emotion-backed belief in Authority and drawing on the obvious expertise of a fellow human being who has discovered something far superior to Enlightenment.

8.8.2000

VINEETO: Of course, Richard’s discovery of Actual Freedom enabled me to stop believing that you can’t change Human Nature. You can change human nature, radically and irrevocably

RESPONDENT: So, Richard’s discovery of Actual Freedom ‘enabled’ you. Enabled is a word used by addicts in recovery.

VINEETO: Oh, do addicts now own the word ‘enable’? According to Mr. Oxford’s dictionary –

enable – a Give power to; strengthen; make adequate or competent. b Make able, give the means, to be or to do something. 2. Become able, gain strength or power. 3. Make (an action) possible or effective; make (a device) operational, turn on. Oxford Dictionary

Methinks, you are clutching at straws here.

RESPONDENT: Oh really, then let’s use your dictionary definition. You are then saying that Richard enabled you by ‘Giving power to, give the means, become able, gain strength or power, make an action possible’.

VINEETO: A guru’s authority relies on his divine energy – which is directly transmitted via the feeling of love as long as he is alive and by mystical communion after his death – and of his ‘knowledge’ of the Unknowable, the timeless, the unfathomable Truth. By that very ‘knowledge’ of the Unknown the master stays in power and remains the authority of what he ‘knows’. Should anyone realize the Unknowable himself, he then becomes an authority for others eager and willing to be a dependant follower. Many gurus do not leave others in their wake, thus their authority is irrefutable after death, while other gurus anoint successors who then become part of a lineage à la H.W.L. Poonja. Whichever way, the authority and the disciple’s dependency on the master’s teachings are perpetuated.

Whereas Richard’s discovery and method ‘made an action possible’, the action to free myself from the grip of the instinctual passions. With this action and the experience of the ongoing success I have become my own authority because I know by tangible, repeatable experience that and how the method works. Now I am neither run by my emotions nor driven by instinctual passions but free to sensately and sensibly enjoy a happy and harmless life.

By the way, the only power that someone has over you is when you willingly surrender to someone, which is such a demeaning thing to do.

*

VINEETO: This is great fun ... your turn, No 2 ...

RESPONDENT: This is not fun to me.

VINEETO: Since I finished this letter I have read your recent posts on the list and I appreciate your sincerity. I also understand now why this conversation is ‘not fun’ to you.

[Respondent to Co-Respondent]: I am feeling sorrow over my run in with Vineeto so I have already started running that through my filter of what is the impeccable thing to do about that instead of seeing this thing (sorrow) as a fact. If I see it as a fact, instead of what caused me to act out of malice and then how to deal with the sorrow, then there is nothing to be done about it. [endquote].

The spiritual solution to emotions and emotion-backed thoughts is to not label the feelings and thoughts, not judge them, stay with them and not attempt to make sense of their cause and source in order to practice ‘not-knowing’. In this way the spiritual seeker attempts to regain composure as quickly as possible and to resume the ‘not-knowing’ state of so-called innocence. In my experience this practice only worked for short periods of time until my cycle of emotional reactions kicked in again at the next similar occasion.

I was twigged by No. 1’s letter to write to her to report the success I had with a different kind of inquiry into emotions and instinctual passions whereby I clearly label the affective feeling by name and kind, trace it back to its trigger and then root around to work out why I felt the way I felt in the particular situation. Usually I would hit on some kind of belief, moral or ethic that was some aspect of my social identity – be it gender, racial, national, ideological, political, spiritual, professional, or belonging to a particular group – that I then investigated further. When brought to the light of awareness with the sincere intent to eliminate these facets of my identity they eventually disappeared out of my life. The next time the same situation arose that had made me angry or fearful or sad or frustrated, it was no longer aggravating or threatening, for that part of ‘me’, that part of my identity that automatically reacted, had been eliminated.

Now my interaction with people is fun, fair, considerate and delightful. What at first seemed to be an impossibility and too much of a challenge to sort out has now, after a considerable period of investigation, resulted in a change such that I am permanently relieved of the grip of malice and sorrow.

17.8.2000

VINEETO: So it looks as though now you want to continue our discussion that ended so abruptly on the Actual Freedom mailing list about exactly the same issue – emotion-backed belief in the spiritual teachings of an Authority versus drawing on the obvious expertise of a fellow human being who was Enlightened, emerged from the delusion to discover something far superior to Enlightenment.

RESPONDENT: I guess the main point you are trying to make is the difference in belief in the spiritual teachings of an Authority and drawing on the expertise of a fellow human being who was Enlightened, emerged from the delusion to discover something far superior to Enlightenment.

However, there are some major flaws in this statement:

1. Someone who claims to be the only one who has ever lived to have achieved the state of actual freedom and is the only one who is right can hardly be considered just another fellow human being.
2. You have assumed that I am a believer in the spiritual teachings of an Authority and that I am seeking Enlightenment. This is not true.

VINEETO:

1. I would be interested to learn about someone else who is permanently living in the state of actual freedom. As for being a fellow human being – so far I have only met people who are busy assessing others as friend or foe, follower or heretic. Only someone without identity can meet other people simply as fellow human beings, as is evidenced by the fact that you consider Richard as something other than a fellow human being.
2. If you say that you are not a believer and not seeking enlightenment, then that must be true for you. However, I will make my own judgements based upon what you write.

*

VINEETO: The image that you have made for yourself seems to be that Actual Freedom is interchangeable with any other spiritual teaching, as in ‘PCE = Authority, Ultimate, God, etc.’. <snip>

Back then [on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list], when you were trying to learn about the instincts you were saying that Krishnamurti’s teachings were ‘about the actual’. Today, you are saying that actualism is synonymous with ‘religions, cults’ and that pure consciousness experiences are the same as ‘Authority, Ultimate, God, etc.’ Your definitions of ‘the actual’ seem to be bending with the wind. On one list actualism is synonymous with Krishnamurti’s teachings and on another list the actualism is synonymous with religions and cults.

In each case, you have not even started to begin to try to understand what actualism and Actual Freedom are about.

RESPONDENT: This is another false statement because I do understand what actualism and Actual Freedom are all about.

VINEETO: If you understand actualism then how can you equal a Pure Consciousness Experience with Authority, the Ultimate and God and Actual Freedom with religions and cults? Either you understand Actual Freedom and then you would know that it is 180 opposite to all spiritual beliefs, or you think that Actual Freedom is interchangeable with religions and cults and then you have not started to understand the first bit of it.

RESPONDENT: Actually I do understand it and I have experienced it. The main problem I have with it is you have made it into an ‘ism’ which makes you the authority and essentially has shut almost everyone off from benefiting from it.

VINEETO: The outstanding feature of actualism, which sets it apart from every spiritual/ religious/ mystical teaching, is that there is only one ultimate guide and authority and that is one’s own pure consciousness experience of the actual world. A PCE is the glimpse one gets into the purity of the actual world, and PCEs have given me the insights, realizations and knowledge about my ‘self’ and about the way to explore and eliminate my ‘self’. Reporting about my own process may look like a belief and an ‘ism’ to you, unless you can verify my statements with your own pure consciousness experiences.

The moment somebody has expertise, new knowledge or makes a unique breakthrough in any field, there is a predictable emotional reaction – a propensity to follow or fight, appreciate or denigrate that is common to all human interaction and a major contributing factor to the ongoing battles and disputes. It is the emotional reaction to expertise that creates the problem, not the expertise itself.

Without emotional reaction I can assess and ascertain the facts presented and draw on the expertise of a fellow human being without losing my dignity or surrendering my independence. Then it is always me who decides what is useful information for my aim – the total eradication of my malice and sorrow – and what may, or may not, be applicable for this process.

Personally, I had to dig deep into my psyche in order to explore the root cause of the reoccurring problems that I had with authority figures in my life, which spoiled my relationship with every person I met, particularly with men. For me it was a stunning surprise to find that my belief in a higher Authority – God by any other name – was underpinning my emotional reliance and sticky dependency on authority, which inevitably resulted in feelings of gratitude and resentment. I had thought that my belief in the god of the religions had been left behind long ago for I had been involved in a spiritual search and not a formal religion, but I was surprised to find that the belief in a higher force had survived. This belief was that the Universe will take care of me but will also judge me one day if I don’t live according to the ‘universal laws’.

Acknowledging, then questioning and ultimately eradicating this passionate imagination or ‘instinctual knowing’ left me with the shocking realization that I am entirely on my own, without guard or guide. It also gave me the freedom to decide for myself what is silly and what is sensible, to walk upright in the world and be beholden to no one. Since then, the feeling of needing a higher authority has ceased to be an issue in my life.

From my experience, tackling one’s dependency on and resentment against authority is one of the major obstacles to be removed when one wants to relate to other people as fellow human beings.

RESPONDENT: The main problem I have with it is you have made [actualism] into an ‘ism’ which makes you the authority and essentially has shut almost everyone off from benefiting from it. How many years and how many people will it take before you realize it is not working under the authoritarian system you have set up?

VINEETO: I am simply reporting the results of applying a practical down-to-earth method. It is you who is making this report into a belief, who has a reaction to ‘ism’ and who considers me a supposedly stifling authority. You are making me far too important, for I have no power over anyone whatsoever.

The essential prerequisite for starting on the path to freedom is the understanding that it is useless to blame anybody else for my feelings, emotions, my behaviour or my situation. I am the one who wants to get rid of my identity and therefore I am my own detective setting out to find whatever causes me to react in a certain way. This approach has two obvious benefits – first, I can fix myself up and do whatever is needed to become happy and harmless, and second, I am free of being responsible for somebody else’s feelings if I have acted without malice or sorrow.

In short, I cease to blame anyone else for my feelings and emotions and I cease to impose my feelings and emotions on anybody else. This way, relating to people is imminently easy, benevolent and straightforward.

RESPONDENT: I am essentially telling you what No 12 and No 13 told you. [on The Actual Freedom Trust list]

VINEETO: I prefer to discuss their views on the Actual Freedom list where they have the option to join the discussion.

RESPONDENT: You have choked me with assumptions and preconceived notions. You have assumed that I am living in a spiritual world, which I am not. I don’t have any beliefs in life after death and such as that.

VINEETO: I have not assumed anything, you have told me about your spiritual view yourself. You said that PCE equals God and actualism equals religion. Further you said that Krishnamurti’s teachings were for you about ‘the actual’. Someone who describes himself as ‘God-intoxicated’ and teaches people how to reach this state simply does not live in the actual world and does not know the actual, which becomes only apparent when the affective entity inside the body has ceased to exist. The actual world is impossible to experience as long as there is a belief in God, Truth, Intelligence, etc. or if one is intoxicated by affective feelings.

RESPONDENT: Actually, I like Richard and I agree with most of what he says. I just don’t want to be labelled and bottled up by an ‘ism’ which to me represents a belief.

VINEETO: In the course of the last two years there has been quite a number of people who liked what Richard had to say and were eager to learn more about Actual Freedom. However, what to them first appeared to be an interesting new philosophy quickly faded the moment Peter and I joined the conversation, and their interest in Actual Freedom turned into finding fault with those who have actually applied the method in their daily life.

I take it that you are not one of those people – for to replace one philosophy or belief with another is of no use at all.

*

VINEETO: Since I finished this letter I have read your recent posts on the list and I appreciate your sincerity. <snip>

RESPONDENT: There is a question I would like to ask you. I didn’t feel that I was acting out of malice with my last reply to you. Mainly I was reacting to your attitude when you came blasting in here and causing a big stir to get attention which I think is something else you have learned from Richard.

VINEETO: A minor adjustment. I responded to No 1 saying that she was acting silly, which she later confirmed. I also said in that first post:

[Vineeto]: Personally, I can understand what Richard writes, and the longer I read the easier it is for me to understand his explanations about animal instincts, the human condition and a way to peace-on-earth. I am applying the method that he has described on the list many times, over a period of two years, with great success.

Therefore your argument of him being ‘the undisputed ruler and sole owner of all that he knows and understands’ is simply a silly excuse – for if you actually understand what Richard talks about, peace-on-earth in this lifetime, then that understanding calls for unilateral action, for changing oneself. And who would want to give up their comfortable concepts and theories and start actually investigating themselves and changing their behaviour in order to become actually free of malice and sorrow? It is so much easier to find fault with the one who is talking about peace-on-earth than to get off one’s bum and investigate one’s own emotions, isn’t it? [endquote].

I find it puzzling that you consider these simple statements of facts ‘blasting in’ and ‘causing a big stir to get attention’. Honestly, I did not realize how much of a storm in a teacup my simple statement of success would create. Do you see my confirmation that actualism works and is not just ‘razzle dazzle’ (as No 1 said) as ‘blasting in’? Is reporting practical, life-changing success considered inappropriate, immoral or a vice on this list?

Of course, my statement stands in stark contrast to ‘meditation is hesitation’ and the concept of not-knowing, silent heart, being humble and extolling the virtues of 100% confusion, but to me it offers an alternative that makes far more sense.

RESPONDENT: It didn’t feel like malice at the time I was replying because I felt what I was saying was the truth and I still do. However, I definitely felt sorrow afterwards.

VINEETO: So, my question is: If there is sorrow does that mean there was malice involved even if it didn’t seem like malice?

I have had quite a rave and it was such fun again on the keyboard, so the post has become rather long. I will start a different thread for your question in a following post.

19.8.2000

VINEETO: Since I finished this letter I have read your recent posts on the list and I appreciate your sincerity. <snip>

RESPONDENT: There is a question I would like to ask you. I didn’t feel that I was acting out of malice with my last reply to you. Mainly I was reacting to your attitude when you came blasting in here and causing a big stir to get attention which I think is something else you have learned from Richard. It didn’t feel like malice at the time I was replying because I felt what I was saying was the truth and I still do. However, I definitely felt sorrow afterwards.

So, my question is: If there is sorrow does that mean there was malice involved even if it didn’t seem like malice?

VINEETO: Nobody but you can know with certainty what you felt the moment you wrote. I have no way of knowing if you were acting out of malice or not. Also, it is not necessarily a valid indication if someone is feeling insulted that the other was malicious for we are instinctually programmed to always react fearfully and defensively whether the supposed threat is real, imagined or intuited. Personally, I do not feel insulted by anyone, because I have investigated and eliminated my own malice and sorrow to the point where I cannot be insulted any longer.

When I took the plunge and decided that I wanted to eradicate malice in me I had to sharpen my awareness as to the nature of my malice. I became aware that aggression and malice are not only contained in the wish or intention to physically hurt or verbally abuse, but I started to notice the subtler, more refined versions of aggression and malice in me. This included the desire to get the upper hand, to gloat over another’s failure, to cut others down to size, to use facts or so-called ‘truths’ to denigrate others, to pass the buck, to impose my bad moods on others and to feel resentment, blame, arrogance, ill-wishing, contempt or repulsion.

The relevant point to your question was that I did not stop making factual assessments or judgments – in fact, I found myself using more of my intelligence the more I questioned my feelings. The knack of finding out about malice was to stop and investigate the feeling that almost always came with the sensible judgement of the other, this automatic program of my identity which puts me up and the other down – or, in the spiritual perversion of humility, seeks to keep me low in order to be extolled by others as being most humble.

You said to your correspondent–

[Respondent to Co-Respondent]: I am feeling sorrow over my run in with Vineeto so I have already started running that through my filter of what is the impeccable thing to do about that instead of seeing this thing (sorrow) as a fact. If I see it as a fact, instead of what caused me to act out of malice and then how to deal with the sorrow, then there is nothing to be done about it. [endquote].

Considering sorrow to be a unassailable and unchangeable fact is but to accept one’s lot in life and resign that you always have to be sorrowful, whereas acknowledging sorrow as an affective feeling based on the instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire allows for the exciting possibility to do something about it. When it is happening, sorrow is very real but given it is an affective feeling it is not factual.

When I investigated sorrow in me I found many variations of being sad – resentment, guilt, regret, shame, fear, closing the door to my fellow human beings, unfulfilled desires and expectations, powerlessness etc, etc. At the core of each investigation I found ‘me’, who I think and feel myself to be, who was responsible for creating sorrow in my life.

As evidenced in a pure consciousness experience where the ‘self’ is temporarily absent, emotions are not a fact i.e. they can be eliminated. However, in order to successfully investigate sorrow I needed the firm intent to stop imposing both my malice and my sorrow on others. Malice, once one dares to acknowledge it, is a pretty clear emotion while we humans seem to be drenched in sorrow as if it was our daily bread. The deep-seated resentment at having to be here, as in ‘I did not asked to be born’, ‘life wasn’t meant to be easy’ or ‘life’s a bitch and then you die’ lies at the core of all the various forms of sorrow.

Without an instinctual self and a social identity there is no resentment at having to be here but a tremendous wonder and amazement at the magnificence and perfection of the actual physical world.

21.8.2000

RESPONDENT: There is a question I would like to ask you. I didn’t feel that I was acting out of malice with my last reply to you. Mainly I was reacting to your attitude when you came blasting in here and causing a big stir to get attention which I think is something else you have learned from Richard. It didn’t feel like malice at the time I was replying because I felt what I was saying was the truth and I still do. However, I definitely felt sorrow afterwards.

So, my question is: If there is sorrow does that mean there was malice involved even if it didn’t seem like malice?

VINEETO: Nobody but you can know with certainty what you felt the moment you wrote. I have no way of knowing if you were acting out of malice or not.

RESPONDENT: Upon further reflection I see that there was malice even though I felt what I said was true.

VINEETO: It’s a great opportunity to get the bugger (the emotion) by the throat while it is happening. Because when you are feeling malice you have the best chance of finding out what lies hidden underneath.

*

VINEETO: When I took the plunge and decided that I wanted to eradicate malice in me I had to sharpen my awareness as to the nature of my malice. I became aware that aggression and malice are not only contained in the wish or intention to physically hurt or verbally abuse, but I started to notice the subtler, more refined versions of aggression and malice in me. This included the desire to get the upper hand, to gloat over another’s failure, to cut others down to size, to use facts or so-called ‘truths’ to denigrate others, to pass the buck, to impose my bad moods on others and to feel resentment, blame, arrogance, ill-wishing, contempt or repulsion.

RESPONDENT: In this case with you it was most likely resentment.

VINEETO: The common acting out of resentment towards others are snide remarks to others, taking revenge, sulking, retreat, etc., etc. What I did was stop blaming others for my feelings simply because I cannot change six billion people, not even the two thousand or so that I come in contact with in my lifetime. I wanted a life free of resentment and the only way to achieve this was to become free of the emotion of resentment in me regardless of what others said or did. Naturally that included investigating the biggest resentment of all – the resentment at having to be here in the first place as in ‘I didn’t ask to be born’ or ‘why do I have to do all this?’

*

VINEETO: The relevant point to your question was that I did not stop making factual assessments or judgments – in fact, I found myself using more of my intelligence the more I questioned my feelings. The knack of finding out about malice was to stop and investigate the feeling that almost always came with the sensible judgement of the other, this automatic program of my identity which puts me up and the other down – or, in the spiritual perversion of humility, seeks to keep me low in order to be extolled by others as being most humble.

You said to your correspondent –

[Respondent to Co-Respondent]: I am feeling sorrow over my run in with Vineeto so I have already started running that through my filter of what is the impeccable thing to do about that instead of seeing this thing (sorrow) as a fact. If I see it as a fact, instead of what caused me to act out of malice and then how to deal with the sorrow, then there is nothing to be done about it. [endquote].

Considering sorrow to be a unassailable and unchangeable fact is but to accept one’s lot in life and resign that you always have to be sorrowful, whereas acknowledging sorrow as an affective feeling based on the instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire allows for the exciting possibility to do something about it. When it is happening, sorrow is very real but given it is an affective feeling it is not factual.

RESPONDENT: Seeing sorrow as a fact does not mean that it is unassailable and unchangeable.

VINEETO: Does ‘sorrow as a fact’ mean for you the acknowledgement of the present feeling, which then can be changed? Because you also said ‘If I see it as a fact ... then there is nothing to be done about it.’ I’m just not clear as to which of the two statements represents the meaning of the word ‘fact’ for you?

*

VINEETO: When I investigated sorrow in me I found many variations of being sad – resentment, guilt, regret, shame, fear, closing the door to my fellow human beings, unfulfilled desires and expectations, powerlessness etc, etc. At the core of each investigation I found ‘me’, who I think and feel myself to be, who was responsible for creating sorrow in my life.

RESPONDENT: I am perfectly clear that ‘me’ is at the core of it. When one is clear that this instinctual ‘me’ is at the core of it then are you saying that the only way to diminish it is through experiential understanding?

VINEETO: From my personal experience and from what others are reporting, only experiential understanding and deliberate action can diminish and eradicate ‘me’, because each single aspect of ‘me’ has to be brought to light, investigated and made redundant. The first thing for me was to decide to stop being malicious, whatever happens. For that I had to investigate the causes of my malicious feelings, whenever they occurred – otherwise stopping malice would have only resulted in repressing the feeling.

The urge to feel and act malicious most often occurs when ‘I’, the identity, feel threatened, attacked, ignored, denigrated, misunderstood, etc. The social identity is nothing but an emotion-based image of ‘me’, learnt and developed since childhood which overlays the animal instinctual passions. When I become aware of that identity by questioning the cause of my anger, resentment, bad mood, annoyance, etc., I can then become aware of the contents and program of this social identity – ‘me’ who I think and feel I am. Becoming aware of my multi-facetted identity bit by bit, combined with the clear intent to eradicate my malice and sorrow, allows me to diminish my feeling-fed social identity as each particular aspect is being explored and understood. This understanding, however, is far more than an intellectual-only understanding or mere reasoning, for one digs deep into the emotion itself and experientially and pragmatically follows its trace from trigger to the root cause in order to discover the instinctual ‘me’.

What makes this enterprise more challenging is the fact that the automatic survival program of the ‘self’ doesn’t easily reveal its secrets. It needs great determination and courage to persist and search beyond all kinds of ‘smoke-screens’ that ‘I’ produce in order to stay hidden and in existence. ‘I don’t feel it anymore’, ‘it’s not so bad after all’, ‘it wasn’t my fault’, ‘I have something important to do now’ – there are literally hundreds of schemes to evade oneself – this is all part of the same discovery game.

Once you get the knack, it is great fun.

24.8.2000

VINEETO: Hi No 2,

RESPONDENT: I am perfectly clear that ‘me’ is at the core of it. When one is clear that this instinctual ‘me’ is at the core of it then are you saying that the only way to diminish it is through experiential understanding?

VINEETO: From my personal experience and from what others are reporting, only experiential understanding and deliberate action can diminish and eradicate ‘me’, because each single aspect of ‘me’ has to be brought to light, investigated and made redundant. The first thing for me was to decide to stop being malicious, whatever happens. For that I had to investigate the causes of my malicious feelings, whenever they occurred – otherwise stopping malice would have only resulted in repressing the feeling. The urge to feel and act malicious most often occurs when ‘I’, the identity, feel threatened, attacked, ignored, denigrated, misunderstood, etc. The social identity is nothing but an emotion-based image of ‘me’, learnt and developed since childhood which overlays the animal instinctual passions.

RESPONDENT: I understand this and realize that it may have nothing to do with you at all. The ‘old brain’ may be reacting to you who it perceives as a threat because of a childhood memory of an authority figure such as a parent.

VINEETO: Our memory is a curious thing. Scientists seem to have found out that the ‘old brain’ has its own separate memory of events, which are mainly emotional-only reactions of our psyche to factual events. Further, memory works in a way that we only recall the last time we remembered the event rather than remembering the original event and, as such, our memory is very unreliable. What I found when I cautiously asked my mother about certain events that I had remembered in a therapy session, my memory didn’t match with her report of the events. But because my memory was an emotionally valued memory, I held it to be true and refused to take on board her report of events.

I could probably say that for a few years I was a therapy-junkie, going through many groups in which I was emoting and expressing anger and sorrow, hitting imaginary parents in the form of pillows, only to start to feel love, forgiveness and compassion for them a few hours or days later. I could never work out why all this hard ‘transformational’ work never showed the desired result – to free me from my ongoing problems in relationships with people. I had maybe dented the authority of my parents but I had never questioned the reason for my need to divide other people into categories of higher and lower powers and then feeling and acting according to my categorization.

Only when I discovered Actual Freedom, and experienced that animal instinctual passions were at the core of my emotions, did I begin to understand why therapy didn’t work. Psychoanalysis is built on the false premise that our ‘unconscious’ emotional memories consist of repressed childhood memories. Analysts presume that by uncovering childhood memories all problems should be solved. Freud and his colleagues were completely unaware of the programming of the instinctual passions in every newborn baby which exist before parents and peers even begin to apply their influence and to add yet another layer – our moral and ethical values – to the program of the human psyche.

*

VINEETO: When I become aware of that identity by questioning the cause of my anger, resentment, bad mood, annoyance, etc., I can then become aware of the contents and program of this social identity – ‘me’ who I think and feel I am.

RESPONDENT: I am aware of this identity yet sometimes I still have no control over its automatic reactions.

VINEETO: Yes, control over automatic instinctual reactions through morals and ethics doesn’t work. Only eradication will do the trick.

*

VINEETO: Becoming aware of my multi-facetted identity bit by bit, combined with the clear intent to eradicate my malice and sorrow, allows me to diminish my feeling-fed social identity as each particular aspect is being explored and understood.

RESPONDENT: I understand the bit by bit part such as this incident with you. However, I am not sure about this approach, as it seems to be a never-ending process to explore each particular aspect of it.

VINEETO: My experience is that when I investigate a particular aspect of ‘me’ to the core the issue eventually disappears after a few months of thorough investigation – as happened in tracing my belief in authority back to the belief in some spurious ultimate protective and punitive universal ‘Energy’. I now stand on my own two feet and decide according to what is silly and what is sensible.

Linking an unwanted automatic behaviour or emotional reaction to a childhood memory is the traditional approach to looking at emotions but it doesn’t reveal the functioning of one’s instinctual program. But as you explore a particular emotional reaction and come to experientially understand how ‘you’ at your core is functioning in this particular aspect, then you will eventually see the switch to turn this function off.

For instance, once I know by experience that I am, like all human beings, instinctually programmed to automatically and instantly react in ‘self’-defence, then I can focus my awareness to this instant automatic reaction until ‘I get a foot in the door’, de-automatize my instinctual reaction, understand that it is silly to act that way, until it stops occurring by itself. But the exploration needs to be experiential – cognitive knowledge doesn’t scratch the surface.

*

VINEETO: This understanding, however, is far more than an intellectual-only understanding or mere reasoning, for one digs deep into the emotion itself and experientially and pragmatically follows its trace from trigger to the root cause in order to discover the instinctual ‘me’.

RESPONDENT: I have discovered the instinctual ‘me’ and obviously I have much less malice and sorrow than I once had. However, I have obviously not ended malice and sorrow and I am not sure that I ever can through a slow and tedious process of investigation. At some point I should be able to see the fact of this and end it but that has not happened.

VINEETO: The fast and effortless blinding flash of light that changes one’s life forever is part of the spiritual fairy tale of enlightenment. All enlightened ones whose life I read about have worked hard for their achievement – except one, who became famous for ‘getting it’ through a poisoned lolly near-death experience.

The realizations I had in my spiritual years were great insights in themselves but did not change me. Only when I activate my awareness of my feelings and emotional reactions and put into practice my insights about them, can I bring about effective and permanent change.

*

VINEETO: What makes this enterprise more challenging is the fact that the automatic survival program of the ‘self’ doesn’t easily reveal its secrets. It needs great determination and courage to persist and search beyond all kinds of ‘smoke-screens’ that ‘I’ produce in order to stay hidden and in existence. ‘I don’t feel it anymore’, ‘it’s not so bad after all’, ‘it wasn’t my fault’, ‘I have something important to do now’ – there are literally hundreds of schemes to evade oneself – this is all part of the same discovery game.

RESPONDENT: This could be happening now as I can’t really see a complete resolution of it through the process you have described. It seems that since I see that the instinctual ‘me’ is at the bottom of it that it could be ended by seeing the fact of this. What has helped in this case with you is that I am not blaming you and I fully realize that ‘I’ am responsible for my own malice and sorrow and that it has nothing to do with you personally.

VINEETO: This realization that no-one else is to blame for one’s feelings is the 180 degree turn away from one’s first instinctual defensive reaction, and it will give you the necessary momentum for further exploring the upcoming issues. What I noticed was when I stopped blaming other people or the weather or the situation for my moods and actions, the ‘heat’ of my emotions had nowhere to go. Literally sitting on a bombshell of emotional energy I could then put this energy into exploring first the trigger and then the underlying cause of my feelings or emotions and thoroughly investigate my moral and ethical beliefs that act to cover up the raw instinctual passions. I uncovered a lot of taboos and moral and ethical considerations that I first had to explore and remove before I experienced the underlying bare instincts soaring to the surface.

There is no instant ‘seeing’ as a main switch for the program of animal instinctual passions as far as I know. But whatever ‘switch’ you have turned through experiential investigation is a reliable step closer to being happy and harmless.

And what more exciting thing could there be to do with one’s life?!

27.8.2000

RESPONDENT:

[quote]: Observing thought I must love the very thing I am studying. If you want to understand a child, you must love and not condemn him. You must play with him, watch his movements, his idiosyncrasies, his ways of behaviour; but if you merely condemn, resist or blame him, there is no comprehension of the child. Similarly, to understand what is, one must observe what one thinks, feels and does from moment to moment. That is the actual. J. Krishnamurti, from: The Book of Life

This is what K means by the actual to me. I don’t see anything divine about this. It is what I am actually thinking, feeling and doing from moment to moment. This is ‘what is’. It is not what I want it to be or what it should be but what I am actually thinking, feeling and doing from moment to moment. What do you say?

VINEETO: The actual that is evidenced by a pure consciousness experience is what is left when the ‘believer’, the ‘feeler’ and the ‘thinker’ – all of the ‘self’ – is in abeyance, when all ‘my’ input has ceased. Then a tree is simply a tree, a coffee cup is a coffee cup and street noise is simply street noise without any emotional or spiritual relevance to the eyes seeing and the ears hearing. There is no malice and sorrow, no love and condemnation, no affective or philosophical meaning in anything actual. This is the actual world, which only becomes apparent in its utter magic and ever-fresh exuberance when the ‘self’ is either temporarily absent or permanently extinct.

Krishnamurti’s ‘actual’ is a different experience – it is polluted by love. His imperative is ‘you must love’ in order to ‘understand what is’. This ‘observing thought’, according to Krishnamurti’s imperative, is actually an observation of feelings and he is making a preconditioned judgement of what is to be considered good and what is to be considered bad, as in ‘you must love and not condemn him’. According to Krishnamurti one must love ‘what one thinks, feels and does from moment to moment’. Thus the lover as an identity does not disappear but is only strengthened by this highly conditional method of observation. Therefore the understanding and experience of ‘what is’ is not the pure ‘self’-less actuality of this moment – it is the traditional love-enhanced viewpoint, the divine Reality of ‘What Is’, overlaying and corrupting the experience of the purity and perfection of the physical universe.

If you want to conduct a sincere and fruitful investigation into your instinctual passions you will have to abandon any preconditioned and preconceived ideas of what is right or wrong, good or bad.

To discover the actual world beyond my beliefs, feeling and instinctual passions I don’t merely observe what I think, feel and do from moment to moment, but I actively and unconditionally investigate into the cause, the core, the root, the why and how and when of ‘who’ I think, feel and instinctually know ‘I’ am. When I arrive at the root of an emotion or emotion-backed thought and see the passionate investment of my identity wanting to stay in existence through feeling and emotion, I can then deliberately abandon my investment and step out of this particular aspect of ‘me’.

Once you do this with diligence, honesty and persistence for a year or so, there is not much left of ‘you’, neither the loving ‘you’ nor the condemning ‘you’. Already this much is a truly remarkable freedom.

31.8.2000

VINEETO: If you want to conduct a sincere and fruitful investigation into your instinctual passions you will have to abandon any preconditioned and preconceived ideas of what is right or wrong, good or bad.

To discover the actual world beyond my beliefs, feeling and instinctual passions I don’t merely observe what I think, feel and do from moment to moment, but I actively and unconditionally investigate into the cause, the core, the root, the why and how and when of ‘who’ I think, feel and instinctually know ‘I’ am. When I arrive at the root of an emotion or emotion-backed thought and see the passionate investment of my identity wanting to stay in existence through feeling and emotion, I can then deliberately abandon my investment and step out of this particular aspect of ‘me’.

Once you do this with diligence, honesty and persistence for a year or so, there is not much left of ‘you’, neither the loving ‘you’ nor the condemning ‘you’. Already this much is a truly remarkable freedom.

RESPONDENT: What I meant by the actual is this. If I am thinking and feeling in the moment that is what is actual. If there is emptiness that is what is actual. If there is a PCE that is what is actual. I understand that what you mean is the actual world when one is having a PCE. As I am not always having a PCE I have to deal with what is actually happening. I am currently questioning if the instincts actually exist other than the thought I have that they do.

VINEETO: The way you are using ‘actual’ is merely an acceptance of whatever is happening in you without having the intent to change it in any way. If that is how you choose to live your life then that indeed requires no further investigation into your thoughts, feelings or instinctual passions.

In other words, now that you have re-defined ‘actual’, are you without malice and sorrow in your life?

*

Just a suggestion as to how to determine what is actual and what is merely ‘self’-centred feelings and worries is to take some time out and sit on a park bench or someplace similar. Just sit and relax and take some time to take in the scene around you. Casually watch and observe the sky, trees, grass, clouds, birds, etc. – whatever physical activity is going on. Check out the smells, listen to all the sounds and feel the air or wind on your skin. This sensate experience is what is actual and you may even begin to experience the innate peacefulness and purity of this verdant planet.

Now watch and observe any of the people around you, and you would know by personal experience, that some would be feeling sad, some would be worried, some would be feeling stressed, some would be bored, etc. It is obvious from your observation that these ‘self’-centred feelings and worries are not actual – you can’t see them, touch them, smell them, taste them or hear them – and that these feelings and worries are preventing those people from sensately experiencing the actual world around them. They are ‘self’ obsessed introverted human beings, continually at the mercy of their own feelings and passions.

Then you may have an idea of what it is inside your body – ‘you’ as a non-actual identity with ‘your’ associated feelings – that is preventing you from directly experiencing and delighting in the actual physical world that is always everpresent.

14.9.2000

RESPONDENT:

[quote]: Where is this conditioning you talk of ...? Where are the thoughts located?

They are not in the brain. Thoughts are not manufactured by the brain. It is, rather, that the brain is like an antenna, picking up thoughts on a common wavelength, a common thought-sphere. Mind is a Myth, chap 3, UG Krishnamurti

Does anyone understand what he is saying here? Theories and opinions are also ok. Maybe we can come up with something. If anyone out there does understand this I would appreciate it if you would tell me about it. I am listening.

VINEETO: In my experience, what UG Krishnamurti is talking about is that there is a psychic web, consisting of the thoughts, feelings and passions of all human beings. Some people are more sensitive to picking up these types of feelings than others, be they euphoria, excitement, empathy, sadness, anger, revenge or fear, but everyone does this automatically to some extent.

Although it is common belief, particularly on this list, that it is thoughts and conditioning which are the cause of the problems in the world, there is overwhelming anecdotal, empirical and personal observational evidence that it is the genetically-encoded instinctual passions that produce feelings, i.e. emotions-backed thoughts, of fear and aggression in each and every human being. Therefore, this ‘common thought-sphere’ that UG Krishnamurti speaks of is, in fact, a collective feeling-sphere.

All sentient beings, to a greater or lesser extent, are connected via this feeling-sphere or psychic web ... a network of energies or currents that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’ and from the Divine to the Diabolical. When ‘you’, the ‘self’, actively practice expanding from a personal consciousness into the collective consciousness, those vibes, energies or currents are more clearly and distinctly noticed and the instinctual battle for survival is then fought on another, ‘higher’ and grander scale.

With apperception, the brain’s ability of being aware of being conscious, one becomes aware of the folly of this collective consciousness and one becomes aware of the psychic powers and grand feelings that are wielded by the gurus as part and parcel of this collective consciousness. In that clear awareness of the nature of collective consciousness itself one is then able to step outside of this psychic web, outside of humanity. Only by stepping outside of the psychic web or the common feeling-sphere is there complete freedom from emotion-backed thoughts.

15.9.2000

RESPONDENT No 3: But I know that until I address the real spanner there’ll be no intelligence coming from me. I noticed in post 00290 how much more conducive to discussion an unemotional response is. My passion is also acutely aware of Richards, Vineeto’s and Peter’s irritability and responds to them in kind.

RESPONDENT: I didn’t experience Richard, Vineeto and Peter as being irritable. I experienced them as having a need to be right. I find it hard to have a discussion with somebody who is ‘always right’ and everybody else is always wrong.

VINEETO: It was only because I questioned everything that I felt, and ‘knew’, deep down to be right that I was able to learn something new that was not a fashionable rehash of the religious and moral conditioning that I had grown up with. The exploration lead me to a point where everything that I believed or felt to right was questionable for the very reason that it was a belief or an affective feeling.

Now I am writing about facts and about my personal experiences and discoveries. Now facts are facts and have nothing to do with ‘a need to be right’, and my personal experiences and discoveries can be assessed by the success in regard to my goal in life. However, when the main focus is about how one feels about a situation or point of view, then the judgement of anything is solely based on one’s feelings and not on the facticity or sensibility of the content. And every feeling response is inevitably based on the instinctual survival program.

I was simply tired of being dependant on other’s behaviour for my own well-being, which meant that I had to investigate my feeling-response towards others in order to get rid of that feeling-response in me. I explored my pride, my precious feelings, my numerous beliefs, my reliance on intuition and feelings, my wanting to be right, my playing the victim, my dependence on love and authority, my wanting to belong. To do this I had to face the fears that arose as I proceeded in this investigation.

I found that ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ are man-made ethical rules that vary from tribe to tribe, from culture to culture and from religion to religion, and they are often so vehemently defended that people continuously squabble and argue with each other, fight court cases and even wars over what is right and what is wrong. Whereas a fact is an indisputable fact – if not so, it can be clearly disproved as non-factual – and commonsense, intelligence freed from one’s emotions and instinctual passions, is a fantastic tool to decide what is silly and what is sensible.

Using common sense and relying of facts makes life imminently easier and much more fun.

17.9.2000

RESPONDENT:

[quote]: Where is this conditioning you talk of ...? Where are the thoughts located?

They are not in the brain. Thoughts are not manufactured by the brain. It is, rather, that the brain is like an antenna, picking up thoughts on a common wavelength, a common thought-sphere. UG Krishnamurti, Mind is a Myth, chap 3

Does anyone understand what he is saying here? Theories and opinions are also ok. Maybe we can come up with something. If anyone out there does understand this I would appreciate it if you would tell me about it. I am listening.

VINEETO: In my experience, what UG Krishnamurti is talking about is that there is a psychic web, consisting of the thoughts, feelings and passions of all human beings. Some people are more sensitive to picking up these types of feelings than others, be they euphoria, excitement, empathy, sadness, anger, revenge or fear, but everyone does this automatically to some extent.

RESPONDENT: He may be talking about psychic thoughts although he didn’t make that distinction. I guess that would explain his statement.

VINEETO: Yes, he used the term ‘common thought-sphere’ because he, like all other Eastern spiritual teachers, derives his wisdom from the philosophical tradition of Eastern teachings which fails to make the distinction between thinking and feeling.

I offered a different experience, a fresh viewpoint to the Eastern belief, which proposes it is thought only that is supposedly responsible for human misery and anguish, aggression and fear. In fact, the psychic world is a web of psychic feelings, not thoughts. What UG Krishnamurti is talking about is picking up psychic fear, psychic anger and collective euphoria, and this is most evident when a large group of people gather together. Mass hysteria, mass grief, mob riots, national fervour or patriotism, sporting crowds, religious/spiritual gatherings, etc., all attest to the overwhelming power of these common psychic feelings.

*

VINEETO: Although it is common belief, particularly on this list, that it is thoughts and conditioning which are the cause of the problems in the world, there is overwhelming anecdotal, empirical and personal observational evidence that it is the genetically-encoded instinctual passions that produce feelings, i.e. emotions-backed thoughts, of fear and aggression in each and every human being. Therefore, this ‘common thought-sphere’ that UG Krishnamurti speaks of is, in fact, a collective feeling-sphere.

RESPONDENT: If this is true that might explain our subconscious reactions in that the instincts are reacting to this collective feeling-sphere.

VINEETO: What is your personal observation and experience of your ‘subconscious reactions’ ‘reacting to this collective feeling-sphere’? Maybe you recall incidents where you had the distinct impression that the feelings you experienced were also feelings picked up from the people around you, either in a mass-event, an election campaign or in a gathering of friends where a sudden shift of atmosphere calls for you to shift your feelings about something so as to fall in line with the collective? There are many more examples where one can observe ‘ this collective feeling-sphere ’ in action, if only one shifts the focus of attention and awareness from a thoughts-only perspective to one’s feelings and emotions.

RESPONDENT: However, my most recent personal observational evidence is that thought does control the instincts.

VINEETO: Indeed. The only way up to now has been thinking and acting in accordance with a strict moral and ethical code in order to control one’s instinctual passions. These morals and ethics are socially and spiritually conditioned thoughts, underpinned by peer instilled feelings of guilt, fear and shame – ‘this is good’, ‘this is bad’, ‘this is right’, ‘this is wrong’, ‘you are bad’, ‘you are wrong’, ‘you will go to hell’. This straight-jacketed restraint and training is so strong that one can control one’s instincts to a certain degree, until push comes to shove and control is temporarily lost – a flare of anger, a sexual flash at the ‘wrong’ moment, an overwhelming fear, a feeling of desperation ... everybody knows those moments when control is lost or overcome or even in some cases readily abandoned.

RESPONDENT: This could be related to the ‘switch’ that you previously mentioned.

VINEETO: I had said –

[Vineeto]: Linking an unwanted automatic behaviour or emotional reaction to a childhood memory is the traditional approach to looking at emotions but it doesn’t reveal the functioning of one’s instinctual program. But as you explore a particular emotional reaction and come to experientially understand how ‘you’ at your core is functioning in this particular aspect, then you will eventually see the switch to turn this function off.

For instance, once I know by experience that I am, like all human beings, instinctually programmed to automatically and instantly react in ‘self’-defence, then I can focus my awareness to this instant automatic reaction until ‘I get a foot in the door’, de-automatize my instinctual reaction, understand that it is silly to act that way, until it stops occurring by itself. But the exploration needs to be experiential – cognitive knowledge doesn’t scratch the surface. [endquote].

In order to find the ‘switch’ to permanently rid oneself of a particular emotional reaction one needs to first become aware of it in order to explore the origin of this reaction. That origin is very often related to one’s social identity like national pride, gender identity, religious, spiritual or philosophical viewpoints, belonging to a family, a professional self-image, etc, etc. Finding the source of one’s emotional behaviour, i.e. finding the part of identity that is related to this particular emotional behaviour, is not merely a thought activity, one will have to conduct an experiential dig into the psyche, a ‘feeling it out’ while being aware of one’s feelings at the same time. A control via thought will repress (stop) the instinctual reaction for the time being and thus avoid its investigation and prevent one from eliminating the cause of the reaction.

*

VINEETO: All sentient beings, to a greater or lesser extent, are connected via this feeling-sphere or psychic web ... a network of energies or currents that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’ and from the Divine to the Diabolical. When ‘you’, the ‘self’, actively practice expanding from a personal consciousness into the collective consciousness, those vibes, energies or currents are more clearly and distinctly noticed and the instinctual battle for survival is then fought on another, ‘higher’ and grander scale. With apperception, the brain’s ability of being aware of being conscious, one becomes aware of the folly of this collective consciousness and one becomes aware of the psychic powers and grand feelings that are wielded by the gurus as part and parcel of this collective consciousness. In that clear awareness of the nature of collective consciousness itself one is then able to step outside of this psychic web, outside of humanity. Only by stepping outside of the psychic web or the common feeling-sphere is there complete freedom from emotion-backed thoughts.

RESPONDENT: Are you saying that the only way to step outside of this psychic web is to eliminate the instincts?

VINEETO: Yes. ‘Who I think and feel I am’ is a psychological and psychic entity. Unless this entity is totally eliminated one is forever trapped in this psychic web.

RESPONDENT: Are you saying that the instincts are what connect us to this psychic web?

VINEETO: Yes. All human beings have the same set of animal instinctual passions, the survival instincts. The core of these passions is the instinctive psychic self – who we feel we really are, deep down inside.

RESPONDENT: This could be true but also could be illusion.

VINEETO: I am reporting ‘personal observational evidence’ and the evidence of other pioneers who have explored and investigated their emotions and instinctual passions. The only way for you to find out how the psychic web functions, is to experiment and gather ‘personal observational evidence’.

The psychic web is an illusion in the sense that it is not actual as in tangible, audible, visible, etc. But it is very, very real for every human being, evidenced by the unmistakable grip that emotions and instinctual passions have on people and on humanity as a whole. Unless one becomes aware of the psychic web’s functioning in oneself this illusion is one’s everyday reality.

Yesterday I watched the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games and found it an excellent example of the psychic web in action. A band of 2000 musicians from all over the world was playing, all nationalities wearing an identical blue-red-beige uniform, everyone marching in exact formations while playing the various national hymns from all over the world. The audience’s spirit was soaring high, cheers and tears, overwhelmed by the feeling of ‘we are all one’, ‘we are the world’, feeling unity, glory, bliss and love. It is amazing how simple methods – heart-stirring music, uniforms and people marching in formations – can cast an effective spell on the collective human psyche.

However, the feeling of ‘unity’ immediately dispersed as soon as the athletes of all the countries started marching into the stadium wearing their national costumes, under individual flags . Then the psychic scene changed, the feeling was now of individual national pride. Each nation was now separate from the other and soon each athlete will be competing against the others for the glory of their particular country and for their own personal fame. The feeling of Unity is but a short-lived feeling ... the psychic vibe changes readily when the music changes.

22.9.2000

RESPONDENT:

[quote]: Where is this conditioning you talk of ...? Where are the thoughts located?

They are not in the brain. Thoughts are not manufactured by the brain. It is, rather, that the brain is like an antenna, picking up thoughts on a common wavelength, a common thought-sphere. UG Krishnamurti, Mind is a Myth, chap 3

<snip>

UG may not have been making a distinction between thinking and feeling. He is far from like all other Eastern spiritual teachers. He is not a spiritual teacher at all. K makes a definite distinction between thinking and feeling (which he calls psychological thoughts).

VINEETO: What a fascinating interpretation. So J. Krishnamurti was all along talking about observing one’s feelings – psychological thoughts – and nobody has listened? I have not seen much discussion about observing and becoming aware of one’s own feelings on this list so far. Did Krishnamurti also talk about the instinctual passions that underlie our feelings and emotions?

As for UG Krishnamurti – he was like every other Eastern teacher in that he purely talked about stopping thought in order to reach ‘our natural state’ and not about thoroughly investigating our instinctual passions in operation. This aim of reaching one’s natural state presupposed that human beings are born innocent and only became ‘corrupted’ as a product of their cultural upbringing. His teachings do not consider that, as the latest scientific research clearly proves, all human beings are born with instinctual animal passions namely fear, aggression, nurture and desire. Vis:

[quote]: But, how can one understand the limitations of thought? Naturally, the only instrument we have is the instrument of thought. But what is thought? I can give you a lot of definitions, and you know a lot of definitions about thought. I can say that thought is just matter; thought is vibration; and we are all functioning in this sphere of thought. And we pick up these thoughts because this human organism is an electro-magnetic field. And this electro-magnetic field is the product of culture. It may sound very inappropriate on this occasion to say that in order to be in your natural state, all that man has thought and felt before you must be swept aside and must be brushed aside. And that means the culture in which you are brought up must go down the drain or out of the window. Is it possible? It is possible. But, at the same time, it is so difficult, because you are the product of that culture and you are that. You are not different from that. You cannot separate yourself from that culture. And yet, this culture is the stumbling block for us to be in our natural state. First and Last Public Talk of U.G. after his Calamity

*

VINEETO: Although it is common belief, particularly on this list, that it is thoughts and conditioning which are the cause of the problems in the world, there is overwhelming anecdotal, empirical and personal observational evidence that it is the genetically-encoded instinctual passions that produce feelings, i.e. emotions-backed thoughts, of fear and aggression in each and every human being.

RESPONDENT: I agree that the instincts produce feelings (emotion-backed thoughts). Is the thought added to the feeling when we translate the feeling or does the thought associated with the feeling exist in the old brain also?

VINEETO: The amygdala comes with a genetically-implanted, instinctual self, ready and primed to develop. This primitive self we share with our closest genetic ‘cousins’, the primates, and a self has been well documented in both chimpanzees and apes. This primitive self is part and parcel of the survival instincts – they are an integral inseparable package. The survival instinct is first and foremost for the survival of the species, hence the willingness of the adult to sacrifice his or her own life for the offspring. A close second comes self-survival, the survival of one’s self – a physical-only act of fear and aggression, flight or fight, in non-cognitive animals – which is translated into psychic and psychological fear and aggression in humans.

With the unique ability of human beings to think and reflect upon their own mortality, this ‘reptilian brain’ rudimentary ‘self’ is transformed into being a feeling ‘me’ (as soul in the heart) and from this core of ‘being’ the ‘feeler’ then infiltrates into thought to become the ‘thinker’ ... a thinking ‘I’ (as ego in the head). No other animal can do this. This process is aided and abetted by those human beings who were already on this planet when one was born ... which is conditioning and programming. It is part and parcel of the socializing process.

According to studies from Joseph LeDoux and others, the sensory input to the brain is split at the thalamus into two streams – one to the Amygdala (the instinctual brain) and one to the neo-cortex (the thinking brain). The input stream to the Amygdala is quicker – 12 milliseconds as opposed to 25 milliseconds to the neo-cortex. Less information goes to the Amygdala – it operates as a quick scan to check for danger. Indeed LeDoux regards the Amygdala as the alarm system, although its function is perhaps better described as being concerned with bodily safety – hence a quick scan. This has been described as the ‘quick and dirty processing pathway’ and results not only in a direct automatic bodily response, but the Amygdala has a direct connection to the neo-cortex – causing us to emotionally experience the danger – i.e. we feel the fear a split-second later than the bodily reaction.

These scientific findings also substantiate the fact that no matter what degree of thought-control is exercised by the neo-cortex in terms of morals, ethics, good intentions, etc., when ‘push comes to shove’ we revert to type – and reverting to type means animal-instinctual. This is clearly verified by the being ‘overcome’ by rage, fear or sadness and being unable to stop it.

What Richard has discovered is a way that one can weaken the ‘signalling’ from the amygdala to the frontal cortex to such an extent that eventually the ‘signalling’ ceases altogether. With the cessation of this ‘signalling’, the chemical flows from the amygdala, comes the extinction of the instinctual ‘self’ – one’s very ‘being’ and its associated instinctual passions. Reference: The Actual Freedom Trust Library, Our Instinctual Passions

*

VINEETO: Therefore, this ‘common thought-sphere’ that UG Krishnamurti speaks of is, in fact, a collective feeling-sphere.

RESPONDENT: If this is true that might explain our subconscious reactions in that the instincts are reacting to this collective feeling-sphere.

VINEETO: What is your personal observation and experience of your ‘subconscious reactions’ ‘reacting to this collective feeling-sphere’?

RESPONDENT: I was referring to the old brain (‘me’) reacting to someone or something as a threat which is not a threat at all.

VINEETO: Yes, that is one of the most obvious situations, when by our automatic thoughtless instinctual reaction we perceive someone as an ‘enemy’ or a threat, when a later considered investigation of the facts reveals that the perceived threat is altogether non-substantiated. This is the effect of the instinctual ‘self’-survival program that translates into psychic and psychological fear and aggression.

*

RESPONDENT: However, my most recent personal observational evidence is that thought does control the instincts.

VINEETO: Indeed. The only way up to now has been thinking and acting in accordance with a strict moral and ethical code in order to control one’s instinctual passions. These morals and ethics are socially and spiritually conditioned thoughts, underpinned by peer instilled feelings of guilt, fear and shame – ‘this is good’, ‘this is bad’, ‘this is right’, ‘this is wrong’, ‘you are bad’, ‘you are wrong’, ‘you will go to hell’. This straight-jacketed restraint and training is so strong that one can control one’s instincts to a certain degree, until push comes to shove and control is temporarily lost – a flare of anger, a sexual flash at the ‘wrong’ moment, an overwhelming fear, a feeling of desperation ... everybody knows those moments when control is lost or overcome or even in some cases readily abandoned.

RESPONDENT: This could be related to the ‘switch’ that you previously mentioned.

VINEETO: In order to find the ‘switch’ to permanently rid oneself of a particular emotional reaction one needs to first become aware of it in order to explore the origin of this reaction. That origin is very often related to one’s social identity like national pride, gender identity, religious, spiritual or philosophical viewpoints, belonging to a family, a professional self-image, etc, etc. Finding the source of one’s emotional behaviour, i.e. finding the part of identity that is related to this particular emotional behaviour, is not merely a thought activity, one will have to conduct an experiential dig into the psyche, a ‘feeling it out’ while being aware of one’s feelings at the same time. A control via thought will repress (stop) the instinctual reaction for the time being and thus avoid its investigation and prevent one from eliminating the cause of the reaction.

RESPONDENT: I was talking about an incident in which I was feeling the feeling of sorrow. The feeling became very intense and then there was a sudden flash of insight and the feeling of sorrow immediately vanished. This could be likened to a switch but I don’t know if this is what you were talking about.

VINEETO: I cannot tell if this ‘sudden flash of insight’ was an understanding of the source of your emotional behaviour and of the part of your identity that had caused your feeling of sorrow. Humans also have the possibility to opt out of, or temporarily disassociate from, intense feelings of sorrow or fear.

Personally, I started to pay particular attention to those deep feelings of sorrow in order to fully understand the implication and causes of my sorrow in order that I could practically apply the understanding when the next incident of feeling sorrow occurred. I began to extensively explore for myself in order to experientially understand how the programming of my brain works. After all, the human brain’s function is to think just as the eye’s function is to see and non-affective thinking combined with non-spiritual awareness is capable of immense clarity.

*

VINEETO: All sentient beings, to a greater or lesser extent, are connected via this feeling-sphere or psychic web ... a network of energies or currents that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’ and from the Divine to the Diabolical. When ‘you’, the ‘self’, actively practice expanding from a personal consciousness into the collective consciousness, those vibes, energies or currents are more clearly and distinctly noticed and the instinctual battle for survival is then fought on another, ‘higher’ and grander scale. With apperception, the brain’s ability of being aware of being conscious, one becomes aware of the folly of this collective consciousness and one becomes aware of the psychic powers and grand feelings that are wielded by the gurus as part and parcel of this collective consciousness. In that clear awareness of the nature of collective consciousness itself one is then able to step outside of this psychic web, outside of humanity. Only by stepping outside of the psychic web or the common feeling-sphere is there complete freedom from emotion-backed thoughts.

RESPONDENT: Are you saying that the only way to step outside of this psychic web is to eliminate the instincts?

VINEETO: Yes. ‘Who I think and feel I am’ is a psychological and psychic entity. Unless this entity is totally eliminated one is forever trapped in this psychic web.

RESPONDENT: This could be true.

*

RESPONDENT: Are you saying that the instincts are what connect us to this psychic web?

VINEETO: Yes. All human beings have the same set of animal instinctual passions, the survival instincts. The core of these passions is the instinctive psychic self – who we feel we really are, deep down inside.

RESPONDENT: My own personal observation is that this is most likely true.

VINEETO: The question now is how to move from this ‘most likely true’ view of possibilities to a certainty that allows an active change in one’s life. ‘This could be true’ could establish a basis for further investigation in order to find out whether it is a fact, as in ‘really, really unequivocally, indisputably, unambiguously, undeniably true’. A maybe hypothesis will keep one pondering forever, whereas establishing something for a fact can bring about real change. It’s like when you want to buy a car – as long as you have two or three equally attractive most likely options, there will be no new car. One needs to make a choice, take a stand, in order to move forward.

*

RESPONDENT: This could be true but also could be illusion.

VINEETO: I am reporting ‘personal observational evidence’ and the evidence of other pioneers who have explored and investigated their emotions and instinctual passions. The only way for you to find out how the psychic web functions, is to experiment and gather ‘personal observational evidence’.

RESPONDENT: What I meant was that no matter how correct my own ‘personal observational evidence’ seems it could still be illusion.

VINEETO: Emotions and instinctual passions, although they are not actual, are real, very real, to the point that people are willing to fight, kill and die for their instinctual passions. With a loyal commitment to ‘not knowing’, these animal instinctual passions will always remain the real and very effective reactive illusion they are now.

Personally, I wanted to know and therefore gathered all the information about emotions and passions that I possibly could, from others and from meticulously observing ‘me’ in operation, moment to moment. I wanted to establish verifiable facts as to how I could stop being a slave to my own psychic ups and downs and a slave to the psychic ups and downs of other people.

Now I know.

10.10.2000

VINEETO: The amygdala comes with a genetically-implanted, instinctual self, ready and primed to develop. This primitive self we share with our closest genetic ‘cousins’, the primates, and a self has been well documented in both chimpanzees and apes. This primitive self is part and parcel of the survival instincts – they are an integral inseparable package. The survival instinct is first and foremost for the survival of the species, hence the willingness of the adult to sacrifice his or her own life for the offspring. A close second comes self-survival, the survival of one’s self – a physical-only act of fear and aggression, flight or fight, in non-cognitive animals – which is translated into psychic and psychological fear and aggression in humans.

With the unique ability of human beings to think and reflect upon their own mortality, this ‘reptilian brain’ rudimentary ‘self’ is transformed into being a feeling ‘me’ (as soul in the heart) and from this core of ‘being’ the ‘feeler’ then infiltrates into thought to become the ‘thinker’ ... a thinking ‘I’ (as ego in the head). No other animal can do this. This process is aided and abetted by those human beings who were already on this planet when one was born ... which is conditioning and programming. It is part and parcel of the socializing process.

According to studies from Joseph LeDoux and others, the sensory input to the brain is split at the thalamus into two streams – one to the Amygdala (the instinctual brain) and one to the neo-cortex (the thinking brain). The input stream to the Amygdala is quicker – 12 milliseconds as opposed to 25 milliseconds to the neo-cortex. Less information goes to the Amygdala – it operates as a quick scan to check for danger. Indeed LeDoux regards the Amygdala as the alarm system, although its function is perhaps better described as being concerned with bodily safety – hence a quick scan. This has been described as the ‘quick and dirty processing pathway’ and results not only in a direct automatic bodily response, but the Amygdala has a direct connection to the neo-cortex – causing us to emotionally experience the danger – i.e. we feel the fear a split-second later than the bodily reaction.

These scientific findings also substantiate the fact that no matter what degree of thought-control is exercised by the neo-cortex in terms of morals, ethics, good intentions, etc., when ‘push comes to shove’ we revert to type – and reverting to type means animal-instinctual. This is clearly verified by the being ‘overcome’ by rage, fear or sadness and being unable to stop it.

What Richard has discovered is a way that one can weaken this ‘signalling’ from the amygdala to the frontal cortex to such an extent that eventually the ‘signalling’ ceases altogether. With the cessation of this ‘signalling’, the chemical flows from the amygdala, comes the extinction of the instinctual ‘self’ – one’s very ‘being’ and its associated instinctual passions. Reference: The Actual Freedom Trust Library, Our Instinctual Passions

RESPONDENT: I think there are times when we still need this ‘flight or fight’ response from the amygdala even in this modern world. For example: I was walking along a trail across some abandoned property. While looking down I noticed scratch marks in the ground along the trail. As I looked up there was a large vicious looking dog coming at me full speed in attack mode. My instant reaction was ‘flight’ and I turned and began running but I had no chance as the dog was already on me. At the last instant, having no other choice but to ‘fight’, I turned and faced the dog as I began growling ferociously. The dog stopped in its tracks with a surprised and frightened look and then turned and ran away. I then grabbed a large ragweed and started swinging it back and forth and strutting around while yelling at the dog to come back and fight.

VINEETO: My aim in pursuing Actual Freedom is to eliminate ‘me’, the genetically-encoded instinctual passions together with the social identity developed after birth. The physical startle reaction that we have in moments of actual danger stays intact even after the ‘self’ is eliminated, as confirmed by Richard’s experiences. That means, when a car is fast approaching, there is an automatic physical reaction of jumping back but no fear, resentment, aggression, shock, etc. In Actual Freedom the non-affective part of the brain, the neo-cortex, is freed to find the quickest and best solution for the situation after the immediate danger is averted – and often there is nothing needed after one has jumped out of the road or, in your case, chased the dog away.

Your story is a brilliant example to observe both the immediate physical reaction that saved you from being hurt and the following emotional response. Do you remember any passions in the situation of fleeing or facing the dog, or did you experience emotions only after the immediate dangerous situation was over?

From my own experience and from reports from others I found that when physical danger is imminent, emotions and passions would only get in the road of efficiently saving one’s life or health. The emotions, which kick in afterwards, are then stored in the emotional memory, situated in the amygdala, and then cause us to fearfully avoid or aggressively confront such situations in the future. However, this emotional memory prevents me from responding appropriately to the actual situation in this moment – for instance, it might be a completely different and non-aggressive dog this time.

What we are talking about is eliminating the instinctual passions, the psychological and psychic responses of fear and aggression. The instinctive non-passionate bodily response to danger remains fully intact.

The actual world is utterly safe because ‘my’ own fear for ‘my’ psychological and psychic survival is what makes my life insecure, stressful and complicated. As your story has evidenced, in an actual threatening situation one is acting upon facts, not feelings, and can therefore usually find a safe and sensible solution.

Continued on The Actual Freedom Trust Mailing List, No 16

Actualism Homepage

Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless

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

Disclaimer and Use Restrictions and Guarantee of Authenticity