|
Richard’s Correspondence On The Actual Freedom Mailing List With Correspondent No. 94
RESPONDENT: We all want to know. Why were you gone and what brought you back to the site? RICHARD: I have not written to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list for the last seven weeks as I was otherwise engaged; the reason why I have written again is because I am no longer otherwise engaged. RESPONDENT: Just before you disappeared from view I sent a missive with questions dear to my heart.
Reading your comment above, leads me to believe that your intent to self-immolate in toto was not accomplished immediately after the ‘brain stem’ event. In other comments you have spoken of the 6 seconds plus 11 years to achieve the original ends. Immediately after the ‘sensational’ experience did you become aware that more was needed to be done? Would others be able to learn from your mistake? 20+ years ago I too had a ‘sensational’ event that was triggered by the sincere contemplation of the possibility of my ‘soul’ leaving [or exiting] this body for the sake of the body and my immediate family members. In lieu of the death of both body and soul] At that time I had no concept that a body could function without an entity in toto, so the rationalization at that time was to allow a more advanced ‘walk-in’ to substitute for the original ‘me’. In the end, ‘I’ decided that not much would be accomplished by the substitution. ‘I’ would stay and try to live with the consequences of the decision. (…) I had ‘revelations’ subsequent to the event. However, none of them ‘stuck’ as final or revealed truth. The upshot was that I ‘knew’ how to deal with the original problem that precipitated the whole thing. Did I waste my only chance at freedom from self? The only reason I speak of my own experience is that it appears that there is some embedded physiological response of the body to the passionate contemplation of the entity leaving [whether as dying or just exiting]. I am assuming that the AF method is supposed to lead a person to this very event. It appears that in your case, the ‘final’ event wasn’t sufficient to lead directly to the unoccupied flesh and blood body. What more is needed? (...) RICHARD: The answers to your questions, in that missive you sent, are as follows (in the sequence asked):
RESPONDENT: I hope that you are now available for answers that are not from a dictionary or thesaurus. RICHARD: As the question [quote] ‘how do you define human nature’ [endquote] was specified as being asked in regard to the popular expression ‘you can’t change human nature’ then the way in which a particular individual defines it is irrelevant. Viz.:
Hence the ten dictionary definitions (so as to provide a randomly-chosen range of examples as to how it is popularly defined).
RESPONDENT: We all want to know. Why were you gone and what brought you back to the site? RICHARD: I have not written to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list for the last seven weeks as I was otherwise engaged; the reason why I have written again is because I am no longer otherwise engaged. RESPONDENT: Amusingly cryptic. RICHARD: Oh? For what it is worth: it was not intended to be either amusing or cryptic ... it is simply the case that I was occupied with other matters (which matters I am now no longer occupied with). RESPONDENT: I’ll just assume that you were swimming with sharks and had a wonderful time. RICHARD: Ha ... although I have indeed been in the water a lot lately (it is summer on this part of the planet) I am not inclined towards risk-taking. * RESPONDENT: Just before you disappeared from view I sent a missive with questions dear to my heart. (...) RICHARD: The answers to your questions, in that missive you sent, are as follows (in the sequence asked):
RESPONDENT: (...) Separating your answers from the original text makes it rather difficult to follow the thread of thought and is potentially rife with misunderstandings. Most readers of this site do read exchanges by others and jump in when interested. Why spoil the fun? (rhetorical). RICHARD: I answered as I did because I am currently having difficulty in posting to ‘Topica’ ... long HTML e-mails are incurring a ‘mail handler error’ (specifically a ‘451 qq write error or disk full’ error) and even when I resorted to the briefest of ‘text-only’ responses more than two-thirds of them did not get through (several of which are still sitting the pipeline somewhere). I am, therefore, keeping this as short as possible. RESPONDENT: (...) If your intentional self-immolation and the ‘sensational’ event was not effective in eliminating the ‘soul’ in toto, what part does the ‘sensational’ event play in the eventual elimination? RICHARD: There were two events which precipitated much sensational activity at the nape of the neck – at the top of the brain-stem/the base of the brain (popularly known as the ‘lizard brain’/ ‘reptilian brain’) – and it was in the first of such incidences, in 1981, that the ego/self (aka ‘the thinker) died whereas the soul/ spirit (aka ‘the feeler’), or ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself), did not similarly die until 1992 whereupon then, and only then, could it be said that identity in toto was extinct. RESPONDENT: (...) The ‘sensational’ event did not remove the survival drives? RICHARD: The event in 1981, which also precipitated much sensational activity at the nape of the neck, did not remove the basic survival passions (such as fear and aggression and nurture and desire) ... there was, in effect, a sublimation/ transcendence of them. RESPONDENT: Or if it did, somehow a vestigial self/identity remained? RICHARD: In essence what remained, as is the case with any spiritually enlightened/mystically awakened being, was the rudimentary animal ‘self’ (an inchoate affective presence, an embryonic feeler, an incipient intuiter), which virtually all sentient beings are per favour blind nature’s rough and ready survival software hereditarily endowed at conception, aggrandised like all get-out. RESPONDENT: (...) Did your ‘sensational’ event have any of the aspects of my event? RICHARD: Oh, yes ... for instance I can recall [quote] ‘flashes of light and crackles and pops of sound and feeling of pressure’ [endquote] as well as affective energy [quote] ‘flowing freely like 2 hoses left on the ground (waving and twisting in the space around my head)’ [endquote]. RESPONDENT: I ask because I am wondering if there are myriad types of events or they follow a certain pattern. RICHARD: Over the eleven years (1981-1992) I heard about/read of numerous accounts of similar events to the 1981 incident ... but none even vaguely like the 1992 incident (either before or since). RESPONDENT: Nice to see you back. RICHARD: Thank you ... nice to see your interest.
RESPONDENT: We all want to know. Why were you gone and what brought you back to the site? RICHARD: I have not written to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list for the last seven weeks as I was otherwise engaged; the reason why I have written again is because I am no longer otherwise engaged. RESPONDENT: Amusingly cryptic. RICHARD: Oh? For what it is worth: it was not intended to be either amusing or cryptic ... it is simply the case that I was occupied with other matters (which matters I am now no longer occupied with). RESPONDENT: The why in my previous question was more in the way of asking ‘what were you doing?’. RICHARD: Just for starters: I ceased writing, on Wednesday, the second of November, in order have an uninterrupted two-three days in which to put together a different version of the actualism screensaver (version ActualFreedomSS1.2), for inclusion in the DVDs that were, by then, about to be released by The Actual Freedom Trust, and I ran into some technical difficulties – not the least of which was a DVD burner/ reader causing the computer to freeze/ crash – and by the time all that was sorted out, what with one thing or another, something like ten days to a fortnight had passed by. (Editor’s note: The screensaver is no longer available due to its incompatibility with Windows 8) RESPONDENT: In the world I live in, asking somewhat personal questions is sometimes considered rude and indirect answers such as yours are considered to be another way of saying ‘none of your business’. RICHARD: I answered as I did – briefly – as I had not gone anywhere (let alone been brought back). RESPONDENT: In the past I have noticed that you are usually quite forthcoming about your activities and gave headsup when you were going to be off-line for awhile. Such was not the case this time. RICHARD: I had not intended to be off-line for a while – other than the two-three days already mentioned – and it was as much a case of days becoming weeks as anything else. * RESPONDENT: I’ll just assume that you were swimming with sharks and had a wonderful time. RICHARD: Ha ... although I have indeed been in the water a lot lately (it is summer on this part of the planet) I am not inclined towards risk-taking. RESPONDENT: I’m a chicken-shit too. RICHARD: Here is what that colloquial expression can mean:
I will draw your attention to the following:
RESPONDENT: If your intentional self-immolation and the ‘sensational’ event was not effective in eliminating the ‘soul’ in toto, what part does the ‘sensational’ event play in the eventual elimination? RICHARD: There were two events which precipitated much sensational activity at the nape of the neck – at the top of the brain-stem/the base of the brain (popularly known as the ‘lizard brain’/ ‘reptilian brain’) – and it was in the first of such incidences, in 1981, that the ego/ self (aka ‘the thinker) died whereas the soul/ spirit (aka ‘the feeler’), or ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself), did not similarly die until 1992 whereupon then, and only then, could it be said that identity in toto was extinct. RESPONDENT: The quote below doesn’t make it clear that the intention to fully self-immolate did not achieve the desired end. It in fact tends to reinforce the idea that the deed was done.
RICHARD: I did preface the above text with the qualifier ‘to cut a long story short’ as that was a response to a query about the amygdalae in relation to fear and the source of the instinctual self and/or of the instinctual passions ... rather than when and how extirpation of same happened. Here is the text in full:
And:
RESPONDENT: I do understand that the intention is to put the emphasis on the reptilian brain as the source of the instincts and the origin of beingness and ego selves. Am I all wet and the quote refers only to the final (1992) event? RICHARD: No, it is simply a composite of the two events, both of which precipitated much sensational activity at the nape of the neck, so as to not complicate the issue being discussed with unnecessary detail. Perhaps if I were to put it this way: the process whereby identity in toto went into oblivion was hijacked halfway through its course ... thus necessitating eleven more years before completion (before the hijacker, too, went into oblivion) as it is incredibly difficult to bring the massive delusion of being the source of everything (an institutionalised insanity known as spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment) to an end.
RESPONDENT: The ‘sensational’ event did not remove the survival drives? RICHARD: The event in 1981, which also precipitated much sensational activity at the nape of the neck, did not remove the basic survival passions (such as fear and aggression and nurture and desire) ... there was, in effect, a sublimation/transcendence of them. RESPONDENT: Was the experience of transcendence of the passions sufficiently entrancing enough to fool you into thinking that the passions were truly vanished and you had achieved the desired ends? RICHARD: No ... immediately after the 1981 event it was obvious that the nature, or character, of experiencing was not that of a pure consciousness experience (PCE) but of an altered state of consciousness (ASC) which I was soon to be made cognisant of as being popularly known as spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: Is it only in retrospect that you viewed your intended self-immolation as both ego and being selves dying? In other words, did you have the clear distinction of the two types of identity in mind when you originally chose to get rid of your SELF? RICHARD: Basically, all that I knew (from the four-hour PCE in mid 1980 which set the entire process in motion) was that there were two types of identity – specifically labelled, then, as a social ‘me’ and a grand ‘Me’ – and that there was someone/something else which had observed those two ‘me’s. * RESPONDENT: [The ‘sensational’ event did not remove the survival drives?] Or if it did, somehow a vestigial self/identity remained? RICHARD: In essence what remained, as is the case with any spiritually enlightened/ mystically awakened being, was the rudimentary animal ‘self’ (an inchoate affective presence, an embryonic feeler, an incipient intuiter), which virtually all sentient beings are per favour blind nature’s rough and ready survival software hereditarily endowed at conception, aggrandised like all get-out. RESPONDENT: Presumably, in spite of the ‘aggrandising’, it took you 11 years to get what was happening sufficiently to do something about it. RICHARD: I got what was happening after about six years ... for instance:
Somewhere around 1989-90 it increasingly dawned upon me that I was being dilatory – putting-off going that extra step – for a number of reasons ... the main one being that it was all uncharted territory/ untraversed terrain. ‘Twas no little thing to do, to venture where none had gone before, and the apprehension was considerable.
RESPONDENT: Did your ‘sensational’ event have any of the aspects of my event? RICHARD: Oh, yes ... for instance I can recall [quote] ‘flashes of light and crackles and pops of sound and feeling of pressure’ [endquote] as well as affective energy [quote] ‘flowing freely like 2 hoses left on the ground (waving and twisting in the space around my head)’ [endquote]. RESPONDENT: Presumably the 1992 sensational event had somewhat different qualities to it. RICHARD: Somewhat ... in most respects, though, it was more or less a repeat of the 1982 effects (only more so). RESPONDENT: What particulars about the two events seem to be significantly different? RICHARD: Oh, the finality of the 1992 event (as in the finality of death, when someone close dies, as contrasted to their temporary departure). RESPONDENT: Was passionate altruism as motivating as previously? RICHARD: Not at the moment, no. RESPONDENT: Or was disgust with the trap of ‘being’ more to the forefront? RICHARD: No. What specifically initiated the final event was the salutary realisation that the received knowledge of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ was but a house of cards ... an ornate edifice built upon shifting sands. Viz.:
Of course, the situation and circumstances (cutting down long grass in an abandoned cow-paddock preparatory to planting trees) were peculiar to me and my context at that time and had I been some other person in some other context I could very well have been washing the dishes, for example, or riding a bicycle. And had I been some other person in some other context the salutary realisation would have been different too ... meaning that only the particular person can know what they must do – and they will not know what that is until it happens – and when they do know what to do it will be too late to stop the happening. Hence all the procrastination – it means the end of ‘me’ – because it can, and will, happen just here right now. * RESPONDENT: I ask because I am wondering if there are myriad types of events or they follow a certain pattern. RICHARD: Over the eleven years (1981-1992) I heard about/read of numerous accounts of similar events to the 1981 incident ... but none even vaguely like the 1992 incident (either before or since). RESPONDENT: What in particular stands out as entirely unique to the 1992 event that makes you confident that it was unknown to all other humans? RICHARD: The resultant complete absence, and markedly so, of the entire affective faculty/the identity in toto. RESPONDENT: I have read your statements regarding the lack ‘psychic footprints’ as proof of the uniqueness of your state. RICHARD: That is how I can personally know that, prior to 1992, no one else had ever gone beyond spiritual enlightenment/mystical awakenment. RESPONDENT: Is it the sudden lack of basic survival drives and emotions? RICHARD: Yes, upon an actual freedom from the human condition one has no instinctual urges, drives, or impulses at all – the biological imperative is null and void – nor any emotions/ passions whatsoever. RESPONDENT: What other specifics are unique to Richard? RICHARD: Presuming you mean unique to an actual freedom from the human condition, and not what is idiosyncratic to this
flesh and blood body, the main characteristics are delineated at the following link:
RESPONDENT: Is it only in retrospect that you viewed your intended self-immolation as both ego and being selves dying? In other words, did you have the clear distinction of the two types of identity in mind when you originally chose to get rid of your SELF? RICHARD: Basically, all that I knew (from the four-hour PCE in mid 1980 which set the entire process in motion) was that there were two types of identity – specifically labelled, then, as a social ‘me’ and a grand ‘Me’ – and that there was someone/ something else which had observed those two ‘me’s. RESPONDENT: So this ‘third’ party observer is what remains? (or another way of looking at it: the ‘second’ party observer was able to see the two components of the self). RICHARD: What remains is, of course, this flesh and blood body being apperceptively aware ... but that is not what you asked: you specifically wanted to know whether there was [quote] ‘the clear distinction of the two types of identity’ [endquote] prior to the 1981 event wherein only the ego-self died. I did not know that what was then specifically labelled as a grand ‘Me’ was the genetically-inherited rudimentary animal ‘self’ (an inchoate affective presence, an embryonic feeler, an incipient intuiter) aggrandised like all get-out; I did not know that what was then specifically labelled as a social ‘me’ arose per favour that rudimentary ‘me’ irregardless of socialisation/ acculturation; I did not know that what I nowadays label as a ‘social identity’ (aka conscience) is layered over that ego/self which arises from the soul/spirit (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being or ‘being’ itself) which that inchoate affective presence/ embryonic feeler/ incipient intuiter automatically forms itself into as blind nature’s rough and ready survival package (‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’). Furthermore, nobody knew any of that: had there been such knowledge/ had there been such a precedent I would not have had to waste a large section of my life stuck in the institutionalised state of insanity popularly known as spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment as it could have all been over within, maybe, 6-10 seconds in 1981 ... instead of 6 seconds plus eleven years. Which is essentially why The Actual Freedom Trust web site/ The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list exists: I like my fellow human being and am only interested in their suffering coming to an end, once and for all, sooner rather than later. Nobody, but nobody, need ever venture up that blind alley ever again.
RICHARD: Perhaps if I were to put it this way: the process whereby identity in toto went into oblivion was hijacked halfway through its course ... thus necessitating eleven more years before completion (before the hijacker, too, went into oblivion) as it is incredibly difficult to bring the massive delusion of being the source of everything (an institutionalised insanity known as spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment) to an end. RESPONDENT: I think that you have failed to appreciate the necessity of your 11 years of ‘delusion’. RICHARD: I can assure you, for whatever that is worth, that I do indeed fully appreciate the necessity of that eleven-year journey through spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment ... and so did the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: And you do your readers a disservice in declaring enlightenment to be worthless. RICHARD: I would be doing my fellow human being no favour – and nor would I be being true to the legacy that identity left – were I not to continue to expose spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment for being the crock it is. RESPONDENT: It is the journey that can’t be totally eliminated. RICHARD: I can see no reason whatsoever why identity in toto (both ‘I’ as ego/self and ‘me’ as soul/spirit) cannot become extinct in one fell-swoop. RESPONDENT: In my opinion you have to meet the dragons on their own turf. RICHARD: As neither the dragons nor their turf are actual you do not have to do anything of the sort: just one short step and !poof! it is all over, done with, finished ... the end. ‘Twas all an illusion/ delusion ... I have been here, all along, simply having a ball.
RICHARD: In essence what remained [after the 1981 ego-death event], as is the case with any spiritually enlightened/ mystically awakened being, was the rudimentary animal ‘self’ (an inchoate affective presence, an embryonic feeler, an incipient intuiter), which virtually all sentient beings are per favour blind nature’s rough and ready survival software hereditarily endowed at conception, aggrandised like all get-out. RESPONDENT: Presumably, in spite of the ‘aggrandising’, it took you 11 years to get what was happening sufficiently to do something about it. RICHARD: I got what was happening after about six years ... for instance:
RESPONDENT: So you were learning things along the way. RICHARD: No, I was discovering things along the way ... I travelled the country – and overseas – talking with many and varied peoples from all walks of life; I watched television, videos, films, whatever media was available; I read about other people’s experiences in books, journals, magazines, newspapers, and so forth, during that period, in order to learn about what I nowadays call an actual freedom from the human condition, but to no avail. In short: there was absolutely no precedent ... the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago did not have the millions of words now available on The Actual Freedom Trust web site to refer to. RESPONDENT: It seems as if each and every one of us has to learn these same or similar things in our own way. RICHARD: There is a distinct difference between learning something and discovering something ... for instance, I can learn from what Mr. Galileo Galilei had to say about what he discovered when he looked through a telescope at the moon, Jupiter, Venus, and the sun, and see for myself that he was correct in saying that the moon has hills and valleys on it, that satellites orbit Jupiter, that the planet Venus has phases, and that the face of the sun has sunspots moving across it – and that, therefore, the earth must revolve around the sun – but I am in no way discovering that. RESPONDENT: It is helpful to know that the affective system is at the root of things. RICHARD: Hmm ... in the same way that it is helpful, for example, to know that malaria fever is caused by parasitic protozoans of the genus Plasmodium, transmitted by the bite of a mosquito of the genus Anopheles, and not by the exhalations of marshes to which such fevers were once ascribed? And the reason I ask is because, speaking personally, I would say it is essential to know that ... not merely helpful. RESPONDENT: But we can’t make progress just by believing you and your experience. RICHARD: Yet I do not ask anyone to just believe me and my experience ... I specifically warn against that. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: Or trying to replicate it. RICHARD: I would be inordinately pleased if somebody were to replicate my condition – become actually free from the human condition – as that would increase the possibility for others (nothing inspires quite like repeatable success). RESPONDENT: This whole class of information and experience is not as fully available to a person if they are not immersed in it. RICHARD: All it takes is to recall a PCE, which all peoples I have spoken to at length have had, and the information will all fall into place.
RICHARD: In essence what remained [after the 1981 ego-death event], as is the case with any spiritually enlightened/mystically awakened being, was the rudimentary animal ‘self’ (an inchoate affective presence, an embryonic feeler, an incipient intuiter), which virtually all sentient beings are per favour blind nature’s rough and ready survival software hereditarily endowed at conception, aggrandised like all get-out. RESPONDENT: Presumably, in spite of the ‘aggrandising’, it took you 11 years to get what was happening sufficiently to do something about it. RICHARD: I got what was happening after about six years (...) Somewhere around 1989-90 it increasingly dawned upon me that I was being dilatory – putting-off going that extra step – for a number of reasons ... the main one being that it was all uncharted territory/untraversed terrain. ‘Twas no little thing to do, to venture where none had gone before, and the apprehension was considerable. RESPONDENT: I fully appreciate the ‘daring to go where no one had gone before’. RICHARD: Your next sentence gives the lie to RESPONDENT: I think that you are mistaken about the singularity of your journey. RICHARD: I have travelled the country – and overseas – talking with many and varied peoples from all walks of life; I have been watching television, videos, films, whatever media is available; I have been reading about other people’s experiences in books, journals, magazines, newspapers (and latterly on the internet) for twenty four years now, for information on an actual freedom from the human condition, but to no avail. If you could provide web page links, book titles, magazine articles, newspaper reports, manuscripts, pamphlets, brochures or whatever it is that you are privy to, wherein the words of the people can be found who have written about being actually free from the human condition, I would be most pleased. We could compare notes, as it were, so as to determine what is idiosyncratic, and what is species specific, and thus advance human knowledge. RESPONDENT: But that doesn’t discount the daring in the least. RICHARD: To venture into uncharted territory/untraversed terrain, where none have gone before, is distinctly different to setting off with a guide-book/travel-guide, maps/charts, compass bearings/points of reference, recommended route options/warnings of possible dangers, and the sure knowledge, from having had some form of interactive correspondence with them, that another human being is alive and well at one’s intended destination. RESPONDENT: Taking your first sky-diving jump isn’t much easier just because others have gone before. RICHARD: As no others had gone before, into the uncharted territory/untraversed terrain beyond spiritual enlightenment/mystical awakenment, your analogy to what Mr. Fauste Veranzio made possible about 500 years ago has no application to what is being discussed ... to wit: one of the reasons (the main one) why the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago was dilatory, for a couple of years, after getting what was happening regarding what remained after the 1981 ego-death event sufficiently to do something about it. RESPONDENT: The departure from the general consensus and the human condition is as radical as a person can get. RICHARD: Aye, and as no such radical departure had ever been made before it was no little thing, for the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago, to do ... the apprehension was considerable. RESPONDENT: I get the heebie jeebies just contemplating it. RICHARD: Sure ... now multiply same by, say, a factor of ten and you may very well gain that full appreciation this time around.
RESPONDENT: Presumably the 1992 sensational event had somewhat different qualities to it [the 1981 sensational event]. RICHARD: Somewhat ... in most respects, though, it was more or less a repeat of the 1981 effects (only more so). RESPONDENT: What particulars about the two events seem to be significantly different? RICHARD: Oh, the finality of the 1992 event (as in the finality of death, when someone close dies, as contrasted to their temporary departure). RESPONDENT: Was passionate altruism as motivating as previously? RICHARD: Not at the moment, no. RESPONDENT: I find this to be more significant than you seem to think. RICHARD: Oh? I had better set the record straight, then, because it does not have the significance you attribute to it at all. RESPONDENT: You can do the altruism trick once. RICHARD: Just as, when as a youth (replete with a full suite of affective feelings and instinctual impulses, drives and urges) that self-sacrificing trait had impelled me to go to war for what was then experienced as ‘my’ country – as in ‘to readily lay down one’s life for kith and kin’ – so too was it altruism which had set in motion the process which led to that moment. I have written about this before ... for example:
RICHARD: In essence what remained [after the 1981 ego-death event], as is the case with any spiritually enlightened/mystically awakened being, was the rudimentary animal ‘self’ (an inchoate affective presence, an embryonic feeler, an incipient intuiter), which virtually all sentient beings are per favour blind nature’s rough and ready survival software hereditarily endowed at conception, aggrandised like all get-out. RESPONDENT: Presumably, in spite of the ‘aggrandising’, it took you 11 years to get what was happening sufficiently to do something about it. RICHARD: I got what was happening after about six years (...) Somewhere around 1989-90 it increasingly dawned upon me that I was being dilatory – putting-off going that extra step – for a number of reasons ... the main one being that it was all uncharted territory/untraversed terrain. ‘Twas no little thing to do, to venture where none had gone before, and the apprehension was considerable. RESPONDENT: You were convinced that it was uncharted terrain. RICHARD: I knew that is was all uncharted territory/untraversed terrain. (...) RESPONDENT: I am not being flip when I say I admire your gumption for ‘going where no one had gone before’. RICHARD: You did not say [quote] ‘I admire’ [endquote] ... you specifically said [quote] ‘I fully appreciate’ [endquote]. Viz.:
Look, all I was doing when responding to what you freely acknowledged as being a presumption (that it took eleven years to get what was happening sufficiently to do something about it) by providing information as to what did occur – and when and how – was to clarify why it took another five years after getting what happened to actually do something about it. If, as it appears, you are not really interested in just what exactly happened – and when and how and why – but would rather hold on to your version instead then just say so. It sure would save a lot of to-ing and fro-ing of e-mails.
RETURN TO THE ACTUAL FREEDOM MAILING LIST INDEX RETURN TO RICHARD’S CORRESPONDENCE INDEX 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.
Disclaimer |
