How I Achieved Actual Freedom
May 05, 2008
GARDOL: Let’s continue.
RICHARD: The ‘it has got me beat’ response is, of course, addressed to why people spend so much time debating it (and not, as Gardol tries to make out, to the questioning itself). Vis.:
And the reason for that is this simple: there was a period where anyone at all could engage in a two-way discussion, on a daily basis, with a person actually free from the human condition – a unique period which is no longer available – and it simply defies sensibility that those particular respondents would continue to fritter away that vital opportunity on a futile academic epistemological argument.
GARDOL: ... elsewhere he says it has him ‘stumped’.
RICHARD: A computer search for the word ‘stumped’ does not return any instances of what Gardol alleges it does.
GARDOL: He calls it ‘peculiar’ ...
RICHARD: And the entirely valid reason for that is clearly explicated in the cure-for-cancer analogy. Vis.:
The word peculiar is, of course, meant in this way:
As is illustrated with this example:
As Gardol goes on to say, further below, that he [quote] ‘won’t touch’ [endquote] that cure-for-cancer analogy, which neatly exposes the remarkable peculiarity of this how-can-you-know-you-are-the-first-to-discover-it phenomenon, he again demonstrates his oft-repeated avoidance of attending to the substance.
GARDOL: ... and says it ‘defies sensibility’.
RICHARD: Of course it does ... look, Gardol himself wished for that opportunity to engage in a two-way discussion with a person actually free from the human condition:
RICHARD: Oh no, the reason for the objections and the questioning is so readily understandable even Blind Freddie should be able to see it ... to wit: the price of admission.
GARDOL: Well I can point out four problems just for starters: 1) He makes the claim based first on evidence of the psychic eye and cunning entity inhabiting his body prior to attaining actual freedom.
RICHARD: No, he does no such thing ... Richard reports (1.) that he already knew, from a four-hour PCE prior to the commencement of the path which would eventually lead to an actual freedom from the human condition, that such a freedom was entirely new to human experience ... and (2.) that because of many experiences of going beyond spiritual enlightenment, before becoming actually free from the human condition, he also knew this condition was entirely new to human experience ... and (3.) that he additionally knew, from penetration deeper and deeper into the state of being known as spiritual enlightenment, that no one had ventured thus far before ... and (4.) that he lastly conducted regular research (aka scouring the books), for 20+ years, to no avail.
Besides which ... those particular correspondents, who started that how-can-you-know-you-are-the-first-to-discover-it brouhaha, knew nothing at all about the evidence from penetration deeper and deeper into the state of being known as spiritual enlightenment – for the quite prosaic reason that the extraordinary way of knowing that an actual freedom from the human condition was new to human experience/ human history had not been made public before then – and were solely focussed on the academic epistemological argument.
For instance (from the person who orchestrated the entire affair):
All of which means that the first of these [quote] ‘four problems’ [endquote] Gardol is so ready to point out, evidently as a way of exhibiting intelligence, is most certainly a non-starter.
RICHARD: No, he bases it secondly on many experiences of going beyond spiritual enlightenment (as per Item No. 2 just above) ... that regular research was purely for the sake of verification, of what was already known experientially, by another means (for as far as it is possible to ascertain).
Which means, of course, that the second of these [quote] ‘four problems’ [endquote] Gardol is so ready to point out, evidently as a way of exhibiting intelligence, also bites the dust.
RICHARD: It speaks volumes about the nature of the human condition that the (well-detailed) account of the discovery of peace-on-earth is so glibly derided as being grandiose. Vis.:
There is nothing grandiose about what Richard has to report ... this is what a grandiose claim looks like:
For the sake of clarity in communication ... if, as Gardol says, he is indeed enlightened then everything (including Richard et al) comes from him.
Here is a useful word:
And just so that there is no misconstrual:
Feb 25 2009
Update (eleven months later): In the his-mind-jumps-to-solipsism section of his comeback, on the 18th of January 2009, Gardol completely ignores his own fully referenced words re-quoted above – [quote] ‘Gob is an Absolute or Ultimate Ground of Being. It includes everything. Space and time come from Gob’ [endquote] – so as to be able to declaim that Richard shows no evidence of understanding even unity consciousness because his mind jumps to solipsism. Vis.:
If the term unity consciousness=spiritual enlightenment (as Gardol has asserted), and if the Absolute or Ultimate Ground of Being includes everything (as Gardol has asserted), and if space and time come from that Absolute or Ultimate Ground of Being (as Gardol has asserted), then the application of the term solipsism (as in Metaphysical Solipsism of course) is entirely apt as the solipsistic experience is that space and time and form have no existence outside of the perceptive mind – no independent existence that is – and the solipsistic mind is the Universal Mind ... that Absolute or Ultimate Ground of Being. For instance:
May 05, 2008
RICHARD: The following pertains to that tendency:
The most likely guess, of course, is best represented by the following word:
Feb 25 2009
Update (eleven months later): Interestingly enough, in the ego-and-self-importance section of his comeback on the 18th of January 2009, Gardol disclosed that he had got caught up in some [quote] ‘ego and self importance’ [endquote] with his ‘mission’ to do something about The Actual Freedom Trust web site (to repudiate the whole website and enterprise). Vis.:
Please note that Richard is not, repeat not, prescient ... the fact that his most likely guess (above), about Gardol’s automorphic ascription of his own [quote] ‘ego or self importance’ [endquote] to Richard, came solely out of a profound understanding of the human condition, which an actual freedom from same automatically bestows, and nothing else.
Even more interesting, however, was Gardol’s futile attempt to turn the tables on Richard (via his misapplication of that word Richard introduced, above, back at him as if it were from someone else). Vis.:
Why person after person would consider they could try out smart-aleckry on Richard, when the evidence of so many e-mails in the archives demonstrates that each and every such attempt has invariably resulted in each and every one of them coming off a pathetic second-best (if that), simply defies comprehension.
May 05, 2008
RICHARD: That fanciful hypothesising of Gardol’s (about egoic/ selfist gratification/ self-importance) is but incongruous grandstanding because it is made abundantly clear, at numerous places on the website, that Richard was examined by two accredited psychiatrists (one of which was over a three-year period), face-to-face in their rooms – as well as by an accredited psychologist, for the same three-year period, person-to-person in his own home – and professionally diagnosed, by those two experts in the field, as being chronically depersonalised (as in no ‘self’ by whatever name).
These [quote] ‘four problems’ [endquote] Gardol is so ready to point out, evidently as a way of exhibiting intelligence, are looking sillier by the minute ... his next one (immediately below) is a doozie.
RICHARD: If this diatribe of Gardol’s is an example of what such an examination is (a deceitful,
fraudulent, cherry-picked, sneaky, misleading, ignorant beat-up) then it may very well be the case that he would not recognise a
fact even if it suddenly sat up in front of him with a flashing neon sign gaudily displaying the words ‘This Is A Fact’.
Editorial Note: As that tongue-in-cheek response evoked a brief flurry of interest
on a public discussion list it is worth noting that if such facetiae as that (even
though it be both factually-based and with apposite textual evidence preceding it) is deemed not permissible, upon an actual
freedom from the human condition, then what a strait-laced, dull and dreary place the actual world must be, in the minds of those
who stridently condemn such expressive jocosity as malicious and aggressive/ combative correspondence, and what a stark contrast
that censorious attitude is to its fun-filled, bright and cheery actuality (as evidenced in a PCE).
RICHARD: Mmm ... and as Richard has demonstrably drawn no conclusions with very little evidence, on this one topic, then it follows that Gardol has no reason to doubt his others facts as well, eh?
GARDOL: I call it a critical examination, which Richard highly recommends. (see above).
RICHARD: By way of a timely reminder – and just so there is no misapprehension – it has been made as plain as a pikestaff that what Richard does highly recommend (to use Gardol’s phraseology) is making a critical examination of the words he advances so as to ascertain if they be intrinsically self-explanatory – and only when they are seen to be inherently consistent with what is being spoken about do the facts speak for themselves – then there will be reason to remember a PCE and thus verify by direct experience the facticity of what is written.
And thus does the fourth of those [quote] ‘four problems’ [endquote] Gardol was so ready to point out, evidently as a way of exhibiting intelligence, sink back into the miasmic morass it surreptitiously slimed its way up out of.
RICHARD: There is no mere [quote] ‘attempts’ [endquote] about it – he does indeed explain the remarkable peculiarity of that how-can-you-know-you-are-the-first-to-discover-it phenomenon – and because the cure-for-cancer analogy neatly exposes that remarkable peculiarity it is quite telling that Gardol will not touch it.
Here is a useful word:
GARDOL: ... but I will comment on his concluding paragraph. In it he denigrates his questioners on this subject with words like ‘addled’, ‘straight-jacketed’, ‘invidia’, and ‘knee jerk reaction’. So someone taking his recommendation to make a critical examination by asking a perfectly sensible and intelligent question ...
RICHARD: Nowhere in that (full) paragraph does it even remotely imply, let alone say, anything at all about asking Richard a question.
RICHARD: No, as was plain to see earlier on, Gardol’s condemnatory judgement of [quote] ‘denigrated’ [endquote] for those four instances is not really warranted.
RICHARD: As nowhere in that (full) paragraph does it even remotely imply, let alone say, anything at all about asking Richard a question Gardol’s conclusion (albeit couched as a question) is a non-sequitur.
RICHARD: As nowhere in that (full) paragraph does it even remotely imply, let alone say, anything at all about asking Richard a question then Gardol’s follow-up query, being based upon his invalid conclusion, is nothing but a cheap debating trick.
RICHARD: All Gardol is doing here is, once again, airing his ignorance in public. Vis.:
Just in case that is not clear enough there is this:
As contrasted to this:
Here is a useful term:
The Third Alternative
(Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body)
Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.
Richard's Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.