Actual Freedom – Mailing List ‘D’ Correspondence

Richard’s Correspondence On Mailing List ‘D’

with Correspondent No. 12


Continued from Mailing List ‘AF’: No. 68

May 14 2009

Re: Different Way Of Being

RICHARD: For what it is worth, then, somebody of late middle-age, known to me personally, added another aspect to virtual freedom last year via an ongoing pure consciousness experience of 4 months and 28 days duration. (Prior to that the longest known so far had been one of 3 weeks duration).

RESPONDENT: Wow! After contemplating this for a bit I have a few questions.

1) After having this giganto PCE for months on end, did the person at some point think something to the effect of ‘this is it, I’m actually free.’?

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Yes ... within the first 7-10 days, actually.

The way she put it at the time – first to her spouse and then to me shortly after – was that she thought it was ‘all over bar the shouting’ (a popular expression meaning, according to the Oxford Dictionary, ‘bar none with no exceptions’).

She also informed me that the difference between this sustained PCE and other, short-lived ones was that she was ‘at peace’ as opposed to having a sense of peace.

RESPONDENT:  2) How long had the person been practicing actualism?

RICHARD: She had first read ‘Richard’s Journal’ about twelve years ago, and had agreed with it without understanding the fundamental difference between spiritual and actual; around six years ago it was pointed out to her that she did not, in fact, understand what an actual freedom from the human condition was ... whereupon she read it again and started to put it into practice.

RESPONDENT: On the one hand this is an amazing event and could be quite motivational.

RICHARD: It is indeed an amazing event ... to say I was chuffed is to put it mildly as it is to everyone’s benefit to have somebody advance what is humanly possible.

RESPONDENT: On the other, it could be kind of a downer to consider having been apparently actually free (PCE) for nearly 5 months and then back to virtually free (I assume VF).

RICHARD: Oh no, not a downer at all – quite the obverse – and her exact words to me at the time were that she was excellent. Vis.:

[quote] ‘I am emailing to say that a feeling has arisen in the solar plexus. Apart from that I am excellent and have had a truly wonderful four months and 28 days living in absolute pristine perfection’. (Monday, 31 March 2008).

In subsequent face-to-face conversations she has reported being even more keen than ever before ... which is quite understandable when you think about it.

RESPONDENT: The closest I can relate to with this is that I considered myself to be living in a virtual freedom for 3-4 months and then due to certain events and ‘my’ reaction to them I lost it and my-self started strutting the stage to a larger extent again. This cycle has repeated itself a few times actually. Luckily no one in my real/actual life has suffered over this ... ‘I’ and ‘I’ alone have reaped the disadvantages of letting a VF slip through ‘my’ fingers once again.

It does come down to intent, pure intent that is in the end.

RICHARD: Exactly.

RESPONDENT: I know I used to ask all kinds of questions about ‘methods’ and ‘techniques’ to you in the past and I always found you, P and V ‘stubborn’ to not be willing to add more ‘techniques’ to the AF method. I’ve learned the hard way that intent is the key and that intent is to be backed up by becoming obsessed enough with attentiveness to have it up and running near constantly and to investigate whatever issue that is keeping me from feeling excellent.

RICHARD: Indeed so.

RESPONDENT: Ha, so simple ... but quite a challenge.

The challenge of a lifetime in fact. I’ve been off the wide and wondrous path and in so doing have come to a firm confidence that the only path I wish to traverse for the rest of my lifetime is the wide and wondrous one ... until ‘I’ am no more. I mention this because I think in the past ‘I’ was sometimes fabricating a somewhat ‘forced’ conviction that I wanted this thing called actual freedom. Kinda like how I would ‘convince myself’ that I believed in my former religions dogmas (albeit in far more subtle ways).

RICHARD: Unless it is the number one priority in one’s life any results will, of course, faithfully reflect just what the degree of interest is.

RESPONDENT: I used to think you were being a bit harsh to call the human condition ‘rotten to the core’, but alas as for myself I have no doubts about that statement whatsoever. Of course the human condition has its ‘endearing side’, nonetheless ... as a whole it is rotten. :)

RICHARD: Precisely.

Regards, Richard.

May 18 2009

Re: Different Way Of Being

RESPONDENT: G’day Richard,

*

RESPONDENT: 1. After having this giganto PCE for months on end, did the person at some point think something to the effect of ‘this is it, I’m actually free.’?

RICHARD: Yes ... within the first 7-10 days, actually.

The way she put it at the time – first to her spouse and then to me shortly after – was that she thought it was ‘all over bar the shouting’ (a popular expression meaning, according to the Oxford Dictionary, ‘bar none with no exceptions’). She also informed me that the difference between this sustained PCE and other, short-lived ones was that she was ‘at peace’ as opposed to having a sense of peace.

RESPONDENT: Hmm. ‘Having a sense of peace’ sounds more like a EE than a PCE.

RICHARD: As you might readily comprehend the exact nature of the experiencing was of vital interest to me.

(Were a second human being to genuinely have become actually free from the human condition – and of the female gender as an added bonus – it would have me duly impressed and thus dancing down the hallway, so to speak, as promised to another more than a decade ago).

Meeting up with her again eight days after the face-to-face interaction in which the event had been precipitated – plus a telephonic conversation six days after – enabled me to ascertain beyond all reasonable doubt, just as she already intimately knew from prior experiencing, that it was not an ongoing excellence experience (EE).

The question as to whether it was indeed an actual freedom from the human condition, and not a sustained pure consciousness experience (PCE), quite obviously exercised both of our minds – plus those of others in the know – and a rigorous watching brief then became the modus operandi in the weeks then months which followed.

Incidentally, the person concerned has all the necessary integrity to be outright scrupulous in regards qualitative assessment.

RESPONDENT: Nonetheless, I take it the main difference was that the small element of knowing the PCE is coming to a end was not present.

RICHARD: Indeed so ... plus an unprompted report, six weeks later during another face-to-face meeting, that it was qualitively different, although of a similar character, to previous and shorter-term PCE’s such as what she had experienced with me during the DVD video – shoot, for instance, a couple of years earlier – added considerably to the confidence required to make a provisional assessment that this was something to most certainly sit up take notice of.

Here is a (slightly edited) extract from an email, sent to others in the know shortly after that meeting, which conveys the rigorous caution being exercised at the time:

• [Richard]: ‘As the latest meeting to date – Sunday, the 9th of December, 2007 – has satisfactorily cleared away any previous question marks, has had quite a few sundry queries validated, and has verified both the definitive event and its actual date, then if it were to be still (cautiously) considered as a sustained PCE then it must be stressed that one of nigh on six weeks duration, and still counting, is quite extraordinary’. (Tuesday 11 December 2007).

*

RESPONDENT: 2. How long had the person been practicing actualism?

RICHARD: She had first read ‘Richard’s Journal’ about twelve years ago, and had agreed with it without understanding the fundamental difference between spiritual and actual; around six years ago it was pointed out to her that she did not, in fact, understand what an actual freedom from the human condition was ... whereupon she read it again and started to put it into practice.

RESPONDENT: Ah, that’s delightful to hear! It would appear there is still ‘hope’ for those of us still plugging away at this endeavour (especially for those of us who have commingled spirituality with actualism).

RICHARD: For what it is worth, then, the person concerned not only totally abandoned spiritualism but also tapered of all association with erstwhile compatriots, of that ilk, until the final ‘heart-string’ connection was severed a few months previously.

As her spiritual search had endured for many a long year, and encompassed nearly all her relationships, this left her virtually friendless as earlier materialist friends had, by and large, gone by the wayside many, many years prior to that.

Indeed, the dearth of intimacy was both the content of conversation and the precipitative feature at the interactive occasion which elicited (what turned out to be) the sustained PCE.

An actual intimacy (no separate identity) requires no reciprocation.

*

RESPONDENT: On the one hand this is an amazing event and could be quite motivational.

RICHARD: It is indeed an amazing event ... to say I was chuffed is to put it mildly as it is to everyone’s benefit to have somebody advance what is humanly possible.

RESPONDENT: Indeed, I was quite ‘jazzed’ to hear of this.

RICHARD: Ha ... good one!

*

RESPONDENT: On the other, it could be kind of a downer to consider having been apparently actually free (PCE) for nearly 5 months and then back to virtually free (I assume VF).

RICHARD: Oh no, not a downer at all – quite the obverse – and her exact words to me at the time were that she was excellent. Vis.:

[quote] ‘I am emailing to say that a feeling has arisen in the solar plexus. Apart from that I am excellent and have had a truly wonderful four months and 28 days living in absolute pristine perfection’. (Monday 31 March 2008).

In subsequent face-to-face conversations she has reported being even more keen than ever before ... which is quite understandable when you think about it.

RESPONDENT: Yes I see. She now knows she can live that selflessness for extended periods and she can remain in excellence back on her way to that destination. Ha, human pessimism must run deep for me to have even considered this situation a possible ‘downer’.

RICHARD: To have lived ‘a truly wonderful four months and 28 days’ in ‘absolute pristine perfection’ experientially removes absolutely any doubts whatsoever that it be (a) not possible for her personally and (b) not liveable for both practical and interactive purposes and (c) not possible/ not liveable for each and every human being alive today on this planet.

Consequently, she now has that oh-so-essential ‘magic elixir’ in munificent abundance ... in a word: destiny.

*

RICHARD: Unless it is the number one priority in one’s life any results will, of course, faithfully reflect just what the degree of interest is.

RESPONDENT: Indeed. For various reasons I wavered in making freedom the number one thing in my life to number two and even number 3 at times. Results have followed (or not followed) accordingly. Since the beginning of this year I’ve been more and more consistent with the ‘boots and all’ approach with increasingly good results. While myself still gets activated, I do almost always immediately notice ‘me’ in action and that really takes the wind out of ‘my’ sails indeed.

RICHARD: In which case, then, it apposite to mention that the person being discussed (further above) has her destiny firmly established as being the unqualified number one priority in her life.

Indeed, as recently as a few weeks ago she informed me, in no uncertain terms (and with her spouse sitting opposite), that reading my writings/listening to my words has been and is the most significant thing in her entire life ... over and above family, marriage, children, and all else.

Regards, Richard.

November 14 2009

Re: Third ‘wife’

RESPONDENT: Hey list and hello Richard, There has been a lot of activity on the list lately, with much of it of little interest to me, so it seems somewhere along the line I’ve missed something.

RICHARD: G’day No 12, Ha ... that somewhere along the line where you missed it was when you were busy with setting an all-time record for the longest un-snipped email exchange ever. (As I transfer all the emails into a word-processor, for ease of access as an archive, it is a simple matter to let you know that your message numbered 7451 was fifteen pages long).

RESPONDENT: At some point someone started talking about Richard being single, which was news to me as I never remember reading anything about Richard dissolving his relationship with his third ‘wife’.

RICHARD: There is nothing amiss with your memory about what you have read as I never wrote anything at all about my third wife purchasing her own residence, so as to have a place to live in by herself, about eighteen months ago (the 5th of May 2008 to be precise).

Just so there be no misunderstanding: we still maintain our association (albeit platonic) and have regular contact on a weekly basis, at the very least, plus telephonic communication in between.

RESPONDENT: Richard later confirmed that, but I’m wondering where did I miss that initial information in the first place?

RICHARD: Your wondering would be best answered by the person who first raised the topic, in Message No. 7286, as I have no idea where he read about it/ heard of it.

RESPONDENT: Which leads me to my question to Richard: Did your third wife discontinue the actualism process?

RICHARD: She informs me that she is just as interested in an actual freedom as before and cannot conceive ever not being so.

The primary reason why we are both residing in our own abodes is because to have remained living under the same roof – with all of what is implied in that – would have been detrimental to her continued progress.

RESPONDENT: As she was someone who sounded like they had achieved remarkable results with the actualism process, it could be informative if she discontinued it and why.

RICHARD: In view of the publicised fact of my second wife’s abrupt about-face I can readily comprehend just why your question came about.

Incidentally, the two of them meet up once a fortnight (they both rent-shared a house way back before either of them ever knew me).

Regards, Richard.

*

Editorial note: Thirty minutes later there was an email from the person who first raised the topic saying that ‘No mystery. I discovered it here: Richard, Articles, Richard’s Resume

November 21 2009

Re: Third ‘wife’

RESPONDENT: Hello Richard,

RICHARD: G’day No. 12.

*

RESPONDENT: Did your third wife discontinue the actualism process?

RICHARD: She informs me that she is just as interested in an actual freedom as before and cannot conceive ever not being so.

The primary reason why we are both residing in our own abodes is because to have remained living under the same roof – with all of what is implied in that – would have been detrimental to her continued progress.

RESPONDENT: Hmmm ... another case of the bird needing to leave the nest, eh?

RICHARD: No, on the contrary (‘needing to leave the nest’ was an analogy for my second wife going her own way) there is no flying away at all as she informs me that she is just as interested in an actual freedom as before and cannot conceive ever not being so.

Residing in our own abodes, whilst still maintaining our association (albeit platonic) by having regular weekly contact, at the very least, plus telephonic communication in between, is primarily to do with breaking an impasse brought about by the very intimacy implied by living under the same roof/ eating at a communal table/ sharing the marital bed.

All what is required to be living communally with me is to have an out-from-control/ different-way-of-being virtual freedom as a status quo (rather than a still-in-control/ same-way-of-being modus operandi).

She is totally in accord with this determination (she came up with that ‘same way of being’ phrase herself) as she has had umpteen experiences which demonstrate how the issue is all about being still-in-control/ the same-way-of-being (aka the known, the habitual, the familiar and, thus, safe way of being).

My favourite description of this comes from her where, very early on in our association in one outstanding PCE (and as soon at it became apparent) I was quick to ask her: ‘what happened to that concerned woman sitting on the couch who I was talking to just a minute ago?’ ‘Oh, her’, quoth she, without batting an eyelid, ‘she’s full of problems!’ The day proceeded famously from then on.

*

RESPONDENT: As she was someone who sounded like they had achieved remarkable results with the actualism process, it could be informative if she discontinued it and why.

RICHARD: In view of the publicised fact of my second wife’s abrupt about-face I can readily comprehend just why your question came about. Incidentally, the two of them meet up once a fortnight (they both rent-shared a house way back before either of them ever knew me).

RESPONDENT: Indeed and thanks for the clarification. I found your post to No. 6 about intimacy was very illuminating by the way.

RICHARD: Why the ‘another case of the bird needing to leave the nest’ observation, then?

RESPONDENT: Your idea about a secular presentation of AF is interesting as well. While the AF Trust site already has more than what is necessary to become free, I’m still appreciative of the fact that you have continued to share very insightful new information in regards to becoming free. Good to know third wife is still on AF path ... and still a candidate for second person free from human condition. The 5-month PCE lady though is strong evidence that others will indeed replicate your condition.

Truly this is the greatest time in all of history to be alive. It will take time to bear collective fruit, but I think your discovery will gradually wash over humanity in due time, if humanity doesn’t destroy itself first (which is a very real possibility).

RICHARD: Ha ... as what you are saying, in effect, is that every single man, woman and child on the planet – all 6.5 billion – are going to be destroyed, as a very real possibility, by every single man, woman and child on the planet (aka species extinction) then here is a ‘word of the day’ for future reference:

hyperbole: a figure of speech consisting in exaggerated or extravagant statement, used to express strong feeling or produce a strong impression and not meant to be taken literally; [synonyms] exaggeration, overstatement, excess, overkill. (Oxford Dictionary).

Regards, Richard.

November 27 2009

Re: Third ‘wife’

RICHARD: [...] [...] she has had umpteen experiences which demonstrate how the issue is all about being still-in-control/the same-way-of-being (aka the known, the habitual, the familiar and, thus, safe way of being).

My favourite description of this comes from her where, very early on in our association in one outstanding PCE (and as soon at it became apparent) I was quick to ask her: ‘what happened to that concerned woman sitting on the couch who I was talking to just a minute ago?’ ‘Oh, her’, quoth she, without batting an eyelid, ‘she’s full of problems!’ The day proceeded famously from then on.

RESPONDENT: I appreciate the fascinating glimpse into the interaction between you and your third wife. I can relate to her last line ‘she’s full of problems!’ as I have said/wrote similar things about ‘[Respondent]’ to my ex-wife and a friend when having a very pure peak experience. I said ‘While ‘[No. 12]’ could talk about your present lover with you, it would be painful to ‘him’ where for me it is experienced as two individuals just talking about life without the felt sense of all the past history between ‘us’.’ Even to this day, my capacity of talking to her about her lover (the man she left me for) is an excellent marking stick for whether or not I’m on the wide and wondrous path.

RICHARD: Ahh ... that is quite familiar.

Over the years I have oft-times discussed my third wife’s marriage (de facto) with her husband as two individuals just talking about whatever issue she was currently engaged by as there is no other person – psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist, counsellor, whatever – she could have a useful discussion with. (As I have discussed domestic issues on many an occasion with peoples from various walks of life it is essentially no different for me to be like that).

‘Twas the same with my second wife: she would sometimes say there was no one she could turn to in order to facilitate an understanding of how a marriage (de jure) with a man like no other person living or dead (as far as can be ascertained) could be lived in an optimum manner. (The optimum manner when still in the human condition is an out-from-control/ different-way-of-being virtual freedom, of course, but there was no counsellor of any description who could advise her of that).

*

RESPONDENT: It will take time to bear collective fruit, but I think your discovery will gradually wash over humanity in due time, if humanity doesn’t destroy itself first (which is a very real possibility).

RICHARD: Ha ... as what you are saying, in effect, is that every single man, woman and child on the planet – all 6.5 billion – are going to be destroyed, as a very real possibility, by every single man, woman and child on the planet (aka species extinction) then here is a ‘word of the day’ for future reference: hyperbole: [snip dictionary definition].

RESPONDENT: Yes, that was a ill considered overstatement. It would have been more accurate to have said: if humanity is not destroyed first. That taking into account all of the various ways that humanity could come to an end like the sun dying out, the environment becoming inhospitable to life, etc.

RICHARD: Obviously I cannot comment on an etcetera but, as the astronomical evidence of stars with similar magnitude to the star at the centre of our solar system shows there is about another 4.5 billion years left in the sun, it is reasonable to assume humankind is not about to be destroyed en masse that way in the foreseeable future.

For the environment to become so inhospitable to life as to destroy humankind in toto it would require the planet becoming colder than where humans have lived/are living (the arctic circle, for instance, often reaches lows of -50ºF and the lowest temperature on record is -90ºF in Siberia; the antarctic circle, the coldest and windiest area on the planet, has a record -129ºF and a mean winter range from -40ºF to -94ºF plus winds commonly up to 200 miles per hour) or hotter than where humans have lived/are living (the highest annual mean temperature, of 94ºF, was recorded in Ethiopia from 1960 to 1966; the hottest temperature ever, 136ºF, was recorded in Libya with 128ºF in Queensland coming a close second; an unconfirmed 188ºF occurred during a ‘heat burst’ in Iran).

Put succinctly: provided the temperature remains somewhere between those extremes – and there are many, many millions of years worth of proxy evidence in regards to temperatures remaining well between that range – it is reasonable to assume humankind is not about to be destroyed en masse via an inhospitable environment in the foreseeable future.

RESPONDENT: Humanity could certainly destroy a large part of itself via something like nuclear warfare ...

RICHARD: As chemical warfare existed long before nuclear warfare (the 17th century Strasbourg Agreement banned the use of ‘perfidious and odious’ toxic devices; the 1899 Hague Declaration, and the 1907 Hague Convention, forbade the use of ‘poison or poisonous weapons’ in warfare), as well as biological warfare (the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibited the use of ‘Bacteriological Methods of Warfare’), there is adequate historical reason to assume that humankind will continue to show such restraint in regards to both the radioactive fallout (ionising radiation) and the substantial explosive capacity of nuclear weapons.

RESPONDENT: ... but yes, not everyone would be destroyed. Though, society as we know it could be radically altered.

RICHARD: As societies in general have not altered radically despite massive loss of life in warfare stretching all the way back into hunter-gatherer societies (where upwards of 25% of the population were regularly killed by warfare as compared to about 2% of the population in twentieth century warfare) there is no historical reason to assume that any modern-day or future societies would all-of-a-sudden radically alter were humankind not to continue to show such restraint as has been historically demonstrated in regards both chemical and biological warfare.

In fact, were the remarkable restraint shown over the last 65 years to continue – a bit too short to yet call it a trend – as a thus-far enduring result of the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) Doctrine, then the twenty-first century may very well end with the percentage being measured in the tenths of a percent. (Especially so with nearly 60% of the world’s population now living under democratic governance).

RESPONDENT: I’m actually quite pleased you pointed this out as I think some people could get the wrong impression that you think that humanity could destroy itself, and now you are on record saying that you think such a scenario to be nonsense.

RICHARD: I am already on record as saying there is neither an historical nor foreseeable reason to presume humankind will not continue to prevail. Vis.:

• [Respondent]: Given the magnitude of the problems you detailed above [all the wars and murders and rapes and tortures and domestic violence and child abuse and sadness and loneliness and grief and depression and suicides and so on], and thus a certain urgency or at least importance which you convey to exist for application of actualism ...

• [Richard]: If I may interject? The application of the actualism method is neither urgent nor important (as humankind has not only survived and multiplied but has become the dominant species worldwide over millennia without it there is no historical/ foreseeable reason to presume humankind will not continue to prevail) ... it is your choice, and your choice alone, each moment again as to how you prefer to experience this moment of being alive (the only moment you are ever alive).

And it goes without saying, surely, what the identity in residence all those years ago preferred? (Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 103b, 24 Oct 2005b)

*

I know I have said it before but it is worth saying again: as it is an historical fact that democracies do not go to war against each other (with minor exceptions depending on the way war is defined and how a democracy is structured) there is reason to foresee a world-wide peace (cessation of warfare) in the not-too-distant future as the democratisation of nations gains more momentum.

Furthermore, just as the ‘Green Revolution’ has enabled a burgeoning population to be fed, the ‘GM Technology’ (the advances in genetically modified crops) will ensure food for all until the population stabilises (already foreseeable) and the rising standard of living in impoverished nations brings an end to the population explosion.

(Please note: these are neither prophecies nor predictions but rational projections based upon historical and empirical fact).

*

The only way societies will radically alter is by radical change on an individual level as it is individuals collectively who make society what it is.

And this is where actualism is pivotal as it must be borne in mind that the way children are raised is in accord with the prevailing wisdom of the time (currently in the form of values/ principles and morals/ ethics per favour the trickle-down effect of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment).

Thus it is the flow-on effect of the words and writings of an actual freedom from the human condition – as in practically anyone now being able to be as happy and as harmless (virtually free of both malice and sorrow and their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion) as is humanly possible – which is the most probable and realistic prospect, in the foreseeable future, for all of humankind ... and which is why I stress the importance of a virtual freedom.

Although that is, of course, according to the current situation; the moment another becomes actually free from the human condition (especially if it be a female) that scenario may very well undergo a profound reappraisal.

Regards, Richard.

December 09 2009

Re: Questions To Richard

RICHARD: No, I do not intend to tape/ chronicle/ publish/ disseminate these forthcoming sessions ... just as the personal conversations which are currently taking place with an outstanding fellow human being, well-known to this forum, are not being recorded either.

RESPONDENT No. 2: Nevertheless, I (and perhaps most others on this list) look forward to your and the well-known correspondent’s reports/reminiscences on the meeting, if and when either of you is inclined to share them.

RICHARD to Respondent No. 2: G’day No. 2, Of course ... the well-known correspondent is free to say whatever he deems appropriate about me – other than any thing of a personal security/ physical privacy nature – but I will remain circumspect as always.

Suffice is it to say, for the nonce, that I had the pleasure of spending five and half hours, yesterday afternoon, in the company of a remarkably sincere fellow human being (who was visibly moved to be the nearest a ‘self’ can get to innocence whilst remaining a ‘self’) strolling around the CBD of a provincial city, sitting together upon a park-bench in the shade of a tree, at the table of an outdoor café, and the such-like. Today we will be going boating on the nearby river – I have in mind a picnic-style luncheon at the confluence of two tributaries some distance upstream (an isolated and very picturesque lagoon thus formed completely enclosed by dense rainforest trees) – and tomorrow the two of us will be travelling some distance by bus to spend the day with Peter and Vineeto in differently picturesque surroundings.

The itinerary for the few remaining days thereafter remains open as yet but may very well include meeting some other actualists (fellow travellers). It does bode well in regards to what I had characterised as being [quote] ‘all experimental at this stage’ and next year may very well usher in a new era in my life.

Thank you for your obvious interest ... it makes for a most refreshing contrast to the sourpuss cynicism of ... um ... of the conjoined twins (Messages 7952 and 7958) ‘Heckle and Jeckle’.

RESPONDENT: G’day Richard, Thanks for the fascinating glimpse into the encounter. The ‘heckle and jeckle’ part was quite amusing as well. I got a good chuckle from that. :) I will be interested in hearing whether or not the encounters are ‘life changing’ for No. 4 and particularly No. 2 (as someone who appears to have already reaped great benefit by the actualism process). Looking forward to No. 4’s ‘take’ on the experience if he so chooses to share. A rather fascinating (and unforseen) development!

PS. The addition of meeting two people in the ‘deep waters’/end of the pool of a virtual freedom from the human condition is about the best bonus I could imagine. Beats going snorkelling hands down! :)

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Yes, the best bonus made all the more bester due to Vineeto being out-from-control/in a different-way-of-being such as to affectively/ psychically generate a felicitous and innocuous atmosphere – begotten in an ever-fresh affectless/ selfless ambience – which fostered a milieu where happiness and harmlessness could be the norm rather than the exception. Vis.:

[Richard]: As to my intention in regards not only facilitating direct access to me but also enabling an informal interaction with some other actualists as well: being sans identity in toto/ the entire affective faculty (plus its epiphenomenal psychic facility) any residence or venue of mine is marked by an absence of both affective vibes and psychic currents ... a pristine ambience made all the more marked, for many a person, upon returning from the ‘real-world’ environs after a previous visit.

(For instance, my second wife would say, upon her return after an outing on her own into town, that it was like coming back in to a sanctuary. Even a stranger, a real-estate agent (known as a realtor in some places), after showing some potential clients around the duplex I was at the time renting, took me aside and told me how fresh and clean the ambience was; I said it must be because of no children, no cats or dogs, no wild parties, etc., but she looked straight into my eyes and said, ‘no, it’s you; it’s you who makes the ambience clean and fresh’).

Now, this pristine ambience is conducive to a sincere actualist activating their potential – albeit temporarily – as in some form of an out-from-control/ different-way-of-being (to whatever degree of intimacy they be comfortable with at the time). Furthermore, experience has shown that these intimacy experiences can be contagious, so to speak, for other sincere actualists also present as the atmosphere generated affectively/ psychically by the first to be out-from-control/in a different-way-of-being can propagate a flow-on effect, on occasion.

In short: a felicitous and innocuous atmosphere, begotten in an ever-fresh affectless/ selfless ambience, fosters a milieu where happiness and harmlessness can be the norm rather than the exception. List D, 14b, 4 Dec 2009.

This fostering was convincingly made apparent when the well-known correspondent gratuitously (unsolicited) reported how the intimacy of the first meeting – due to being the nearest a ‘self’ can get to innocence whilst remaining a ‘self’ (as per the brief allusion much further above) – was the prevailing atmosphere for him with both Vineeto and Peter as well. (So much so that he advised, on the following day, how he had both endeavoured and succeeded to take that atmosphere with him later that evening whilst taking a stroll in the sunset to his motel-accommodation).

As a direct result I spontaneously stayed overnight in Peter’s and Vineeto’s residence as that next day had been arranged in such a way so as to have the woman of the 5-month PCE and her spouse join the festivities; the ambience/ atmosphere/ milieu soon had her also out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being (or affirmed/ confirmed how she already was as she tends to not rate her experiencing in actualist terminology). It was at this point there was much pleasure in me being able to point out the bleeding obvious ... to wit: that (excluding myself) there were five people present and it was the two women who were generating the atmosphere/ fostering the milieu in which happiness and harmlessness was the norm rather than the exception.

(Today, being the last day of the well-known correspondent’s series of meetings, is being spent solely in the company of Vineeto and Peter as they have a lot to discuss; for me a report of how the day eventuates will be a matter of keen interest due to not being present to establish an ambience).

*

Thank you for your obvious interest also ... I have in mind to respond to your post about letting go of the controls next as there is a major point in it which needs my clarification before you or your co-respondent proceed (otherwise an excellent email sequence).

This is all going so well that to say I am chuffed would be far too inadequate an expression.

Regards, Richard.

December 09 2009

Re: Begginer’s Question

RESPONDENT: Hi No. 15, maybe we are speaking of different things. Lets see.

RESPONDENT No. 15: Hi No. 12, I don’t see any reason why this would relate only to those in virtual freedom. I wouldn’t say I’m there, yet letting go of the controls is key to my practice of actualism. I have found it relevant at all levels of my practice in the past 5 years and it keeps deepening. Has it been different for you?

RESPONDENT: Ok, first lets establish that only in a PCE are the controls actually let go of. In a very pure excellence experience the controls are virtually let go of. So, this aspect of ‘letting go’ has been a experience of mine from the early days of actualism when I was either allowing or provoking peak experiences. However, it has never been customary for me to intentionally ‘let go’ of the controls. It naturally happened at times when I focused on what I was sensing. It also happened when I focused on what I was feeling. Of course there was the over a decade of spiritualist practice prior to actualism.

RESPONDENT No. 15: Is it possible you stumbled upon it after you were in VF?

RESPONDENT: Just to be clear, I’ve never claimed to be VF. What I’ve claimed is I’ve experienced VF days, weeks and even months. I’ve yet to stabilize a virtual freedom.

RESPONDENT No. 15: I’m not sure how that could work. Here is how it seems to me at the moment: I think it’s a prerequisite to the practice of (as distinct from an interest in) actualism.

RESPONDENT: In the beginning the practice of actualism is mostly about getting attentiveness up and running habitually and investigating and discards one’s beliefs. Sure, a certain degree of letting go (of beliefs and old patterns) is naturally involved in this. This is not the same thing as Richard has been calling an out of control virtual freedom as opposed to a in control virtual freedom.

RESPONDENT No. 15: Without it, we’re in the unenviable position of being powerless to feel good, left at the mercy of our whimsical nature to only feel good when the fates are aligned and life is a breeze or everything goes our way – all too rare occurrences.

RESPONDENT: Applying attentiveness/ the bright light of awareness and investigating and discarding one’s beliefs (particularly the light-hearted seeing the silliness of wasting this moment by emotionally suffering) even from the beginning defuses a hole heap of emotional suffering without any intentional ‘letting go’. Somewhere Irene says something like ‘no I don’t ‘let go’. In the seeing it just goes’.

RESPONDENT No. 15: Letting go of the controls is a skill that needs to be developed in response to discovering the persistent gripping of the controls. The mechanism of gripping starts out as an unconscious behaviour. Once the gripping of the controls is seen for what it is, letting go is as simple as loosening the grip of our hand.

RESPONDENT: Maybe we are getting a little lost in the metaphor. In my experience the very act of being attentive and seeing the silliness renders any conscious/ intentional ‘letting go’ unnecessary. Plus, the phrase ‘letting go’ has quite the spiritualist history and there are even spiritualist methods that are almost exclusively based on this (i.e. the Sedona Method/ The Release Technique). Plus ‘letting go’ of the controls only happens virtually fully in the out from control virtual freedom and not as much in the in control virtual freedom. I do not have much time spent in this ‘out from control’ stage save for peak experiences. The in-control-virtual freedom where one is happy and harmless 99% of the time, but attentiveness must be ‘guarded’ and still slips, is what I have experienced for prolonged periods of time.

RESPONDENT No. 15: Feeling good is only available to me once the controls are let go of.

RESPONDENT: Feeling good to me is a relatively simple and easy state to achieve. It takes nothing more then dropping seriousness for carefreeness. Feeling good is not a state where the controls are let go of. Feeling good is much more like what I recommended to No. 21, when I said ‘I can see the benefit of having a more loose grip on them thar controls.’ Did you happen to miss that?

RESPONDENT No. 15: Hence it is a prerequisite to practice. Now I must make the habit stick and go from good to great etc.

RESPONDENT: Perhaps this goes some way into why I don’t see ‘letting go of the controls’ as a prerequisite to the practice of actualism. Actually having let go of the controls is to be having a peak experience and while that is a important thing, it doesn’t necessarily involve any conscious/ intentional letting go and is not the main task of a fledgling actualist. The main tasks for a beginning actualist is to get attentiveness up and running and to investigate all of one’s beliefs, seeing the silliness of prolonging suffering (for any reason). To put much emphasis on ‘letting go of the controls’ in the beginning of the practice of actualism may very well lead to one practicing something other than the actualism method (as the Sedona Method/the Release Technique is very much similar to buddhism, it would seem this could be yet another way that spiritualism slips into actualist practice). This may intellectually sound subtle, kind of like the difference between ‘choiceless awareness’/ passive awareness/ awareness watching awareness versus actualist attentiveness/ awareness but it is a noticeably different on a experiential level. I’m not sure if I have succeeded in clarifying this, but I gave it a go.

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, I appreciate you giving it a go to clarify and a timely word from me will make your clarification complete. First of all, it is probably inevitable the phrase out-from-control be (incorrectly) expressed as ‘letting go of control’ yet the fact remains that the controller, being the controls, cannot let go of that which they are.

Secondly, the hyphenated term you mention as me having been calling [quote] ‘an out of control virtual freedom as opposed to a in control virtual freedom’ [endquote] clearly has the hyphenated term different-way-of-being immediately after the forward slash betwixt the two hyphenated terms. Vis.:

[Richard]: [...] being sans identity in toto/the entire affective faculty (plus its epiphenomenal psychic facility) any residence or venue of mine is marked by an absence of both affective vibes and psychic currents ... a pristine ambience made all the more marked, for many a person, upon returning from the ‘real-world’ environs after a previous visit.

[...] this pristine ambience is conducive to a sincere actualist activating their potential – albeit temporarily – as in some form of an out-from-control/ different-way-of-being (to whatever degree of intimacy they be comfortable with at the time). Furthermore, experience has shown that these intimacy experiences can be contagious, so to speak, for other sincere actualists also present as the atmosphere generated affectively/ psychically by the first to be out-from-control/in a different-way-of-being can propagate a flow-on effect, on occasion.

In short: a felicitous and innocuous atmosphere, begotten in an ever-fresh affectless/ selfless ambience, fosters a milieu where happiness and harmlessness can be the norm rather than the exception. List D, 14b, 4 Dec 2009.

Upon reflection it will be seen I am not – repeat not – referring to a PCE as ‘being’ is in abeyance then (the very fact not ‘being’ renders any different way of ‘being’ impossible).

Thirdly, and most importantly for any flow-on effect, in a PCE there is similarly a marked absence of both affective vibes and psychic currents – a pristine ambience – to that of an actual freedom. (As an aside: the 5-month PCE was as useless in regards affectively/ psychically fostering a milieu, where happiness and harmlessness can be the norm rather than the exception, as is an actual freedom).

An obvious out-from-control/ different-way-of-being virtual freedom is an on-going excellence experience (EE) but an on-going intimacy experience (IE) may very well be the most likely state as an EE, being so close to a PCE as to be barely distinguishable is not so likely to readily occur sooner rather than later.

(Being out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being is quite daunting to contemplate as an on-going EE marks the end of the beginning of the end of ‘me’ and the commencement of the actualism process – as distinct from the actualism method – wherein a momentum not of ‘my’ doing takes over and an inevitability sets in; in an on-going EE the actual world has the effect of impelling one towards it – like a moth to a candle as the overarching benignity and benevolence of the actual increasingly operates such as to render ‘my’ felicity/ innocuity increasingly redundant; this is where being the nearest a ‘self’ can be to innocence – the naiveté located betwixt the core of being and the sexual centre (where one is both likeable and liking) – is attached as if with a golden thread or clew to the purity of actual innocence; an on-going EE is, thus, where one becomes acclimatised to benignity and benevolence and the resultant blitheness because the purity of the actual is so powerful that it would ‘blow the fuses’ if one was to venture into this territory ill-prepared).

Fourth, as any being out-from-control/in a different-way-of-being (and there are varying degrees of such intimacy experiences) implicitly requires pure intent – which renders the necessity for morals/ ethics/ values/ principles null and void – it is certainly not the territory a fledgling actualist (to use your phraseology) has any business venturing into precipitously.

Fifth, as any ‘letting go of the controls’ by the controller means, ipso facto, the controller still remaining in situ it can only refer to – just as you do – something of the nature of a [quote] ‘certain degree of letting go (of beliefs and old patterns)’ [endquote] else it does indeed bring a spiritualist practice into an actualist practice ... complete with the still in situ controller cunningly morphing into the watcher of religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical lore and legend.

Sixth, regarding your comment about somewhere Irene (pronounced ee-rain-uh incidentally) saying something like ‘no I don’t ‘let go’; in the seeing it just goes’ you might be recollecting the following excerpt from ‘Richard’s Journal’ (the only instance a computer search through my second wife’s writings for the word seeing came up with):

• [Devika]: ‘One of my peak experiences happened on the fore-shore. All of a sudden, unpremeditated, ‘I’ and ‘my’ world-view had disappeared and an immediate intimacy became apparent. Although I had lived in this village before and had grown very fond of it and its residents, there had always been a distance between me and other people, which had to be bridged by temporary feelings of love and affection which were never satisfying for long. Now a shift in seeing had occurred, and looking at the people around me, I noticed that the distance between me and others had miraculously vanished. Not only between me and other people but equally between me and the trees, me and the houses on the boulevard, even between me and the ocean. Nowhere was there a boundary.

Another dimension had taken its place, which I initially experienced as a closeness closer than my own heartbeat, yet it was certainly not love for all or oneness with everything. It was another paradigm than the one in which the opposites play their major role (...)’. Richard’s Journal 1997 Ch Thirty, pp 192

If it is not then I do not know what you are referring to but one thing is for sure: Irene (as distinct from Devika) never spoke in such a manner as to bring about the out-from-control/ different-way-of-being virtual freedom which Devika lived for thirteen months, from November 1996 to December 1997, such as to occasion me to coin that term (and during which she penned those now-italicised passages of hers specifically for inclusion in what was to become ‘Richard’s Journal’). (At the time of writing it was titled ‘The Actualism Journal’ and was written in such a manner as to make it impossible to know which of the two persons featured – an unnamed man and a woman – was the one actually free and the one virtually free as we had figured the whole focus on something better than love and compassion would be more palatable if the gender of the actually free person remained unknown).

*

Lastly, I will take this opportunity to suggest that your own classification system – mini-PCE and virtual-PCE for just a couple of instances – may be worth a revisit as to their necessity (or validity for that matter) as they can be confusing to others, just as they are to me, because the term mini-PCE, for example, was first used by Respondent No. 27, simply to refer to a PCE of only a few seconds duration (and not to some peak experience in which a not-quite-abeyant being’s imagination/ visualisation is occurring).

‘Tis just a suggestion, mind you.

Regards, Richard.

*

(Postscript):

RICHARD: [...] Oops ... both a typo and a mis-spelling in one post:

‘ ... the very fact not ‘being’ renders any different way of ‘being’ impossible ...’.

‘ ... the very fact of not ‘being’ renders any different way of ‘being’ impossible ...’.

*

‘ ... we had figured the whole focus on something better than love and compassion would be more palatble if the gender of the actually free person remained unknown ...’.

‘ ... we had figured the whole focus on something better than love and compassion would be more palatable if the gender of the actually free person remained unknown ...’.

Ha ... perhaps it signals a retirement from writing as being in order.

*

(Postscript 2):

Golly ... a mis-dating as well:

‘ ... from November 1996 to December 1997 ...’.

‘ ... from November 1995 to December 1996 ...’.

(No smart-aleck comment this time around).

Regards, Richard.

December 12 2009

Re: Questions To Richard

RESPONDENT: [...] G’day Richard, The addition of meeting two people in the ‘deep waters’/ end of the pool of a virtual freedom from the human condition is about the best bonus I could imagine. Beats going snorkelling hands down! :)

RICHARD: Yes, the best bonus made all the more bester due to Vineeto being out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being such as to affectively/ psychically generate a felicitous and innocuous atmosphere – begotten in an ever-fresh affectless/selfless ambience – which fostered a milieu where happiness and harmlessness could be the norm rather than the exception.

RESPONDENT: After reading this, I can’t help but wonder ‘where’ this leaves Peter.

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, It leaves him being one of the two most advantaged men on the planet, of course (what some not in the know might call the luckiest), as their womenfolk are experientially demonstrating – not just saying so or intellectually agreeing – how they will not settle for second-best (affection, empathy, love and all the rest) but want only the best, both for themselves and for their spouses, which life has to offer. (See Message No. 7585, for instance, for a fuller explication).

RESPONDENT: Would I be correct in assuming then that Peter is in a in-control/ same-way-of-being virtual freedom?

RICHARD: What Peter has been doing, in conjunction with Vineeto, is what he characterised as beating down all the long, dry grass (and every single bit of persistent regrowth) leading up to and obscuring the gate in the fence separating it from the greener pastures on the other side.

As such they have both done a sterling service for their fellow human beings – having written prolifically about it all whilst they were doing it (rather than after the fact from memory) – in ensuring an in-control virtual freedom is now possible for any normal person/ normal couple simply by applying the actualism method – as distinct from the actualism process – in their everyday life (both at work and at leisure).

In other words, they have both shown and documented the way how a virtual freedom which does not require being out-from-control – let alone something peculiar happening in the nape of the neck – can spread exponentially around the globe without disrupting civilisation (as a bloody revolution would, for example, in a futile attempt to change society).

I will refer you to a previous exchange of ours. Vis.:

• [Richard to Respondent]: ‘The only way societies will radically alter is by radical change on an individual level as it is individuals collectively who make society what it is.

And this is where actualism is pivotal as it must be borne in mind that the way children are raised is in accord with the prevailing wisdom of the time (currently in the form of values/ principles and morals/ ethics per favour the trickle-down effect of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment).

Thus it is the flow-on effect of the words and writings of an actual freedom from the human condition – as in practically anyone now being able to be as happy and as harmless (virtually free of both malice and sorrow and their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion) as is humanly possible – which is the most probable and realistic prospect, in the foreseeable future, for all of humankind ... and which is why I stress the importance of a virtual freedom.

Although that is, of course, according to the current situation; the moment another becomes actually free from the human condition (especially if it be a female) that scenario may very well undergo a profound reappraisal.

RESPONDENT: I understand that you may not be at liberty to discuss that.

RICHARD: I appreciate your sensitivity – and I am always circumspect where other persons are concerned – yet in this case both Peter and Vineeto are already public figures (having gone public with the most revealing details of their lives) and are thus liable to attract public scrutiny.

They both have my highest regard for establishing not just a wide path for their fellow human beings to travel, if they so choose, but a wide and wondrous one with all the otherwise rank undergrowth on either side gentrified as well.

And now the second stage of their odyssey unfolds.

RESPONDENT: Again, thanks for sharing this and I look forward to No. 4 writing about it in his enjoyable style of writing if he so chooses.

RICHARD: As he has so chosen, since you sent this reply, it would be redundant for me to add anything other than to endorse what he has posted to date as being a remarkably accurate rendition of both what took place and his understanding of actualism in action (with the possible exception of that safety net/ lightning rod analogy).

His summary at Message No. 8138 contains the most succinct way I have seen to deliver the essence of how actualism operates (the second last paragraph).

*

I will leave the remainder of your response for another day as ... um ... as The-Lady-Who-Had-The-5-Month-PCE and The-Spouse-Of-The-Lady-Who-Had-The-Five-Month-PCE will be arriving shortly to spend the day with me.

Regards, Richard.

January 07 2010

Subject: Re: A Long-Awaited Public Announcement

RESPONDENT: Hey Big Boy,

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, I have re-inserted a preceding exchange solely so as to facilitate my response to your queries (further below).

• [Respondent No. 2]: By the way, how did you conclude that the striking event was a consequence of your wife’s ‘Being’ and not simply due to her influence, so to speak?

• [Richard]: An apperceptive awareness of the nuances in the way or manner in which this flesh and blood body operates and functions – which the awareness of the actualism method seeks to imitate – whilst interacting with fellow human beings is more than sufficient to conclude what the striking event was a consequence of. Vis.:

[Richard]: ‘( ... ) although I was not advised of her death until the following day within the hour I was as if lifted forward by a cresting wave (to utilise surfing terminology), impressing upon Vineeto the necessity of being out-from-control/in a different-way-of-being (most unusual of me to do so) ...’.

*

• [Respondent No. 2]: As an (ostensibly) actually free person, how do you deduce the psychic causation in the real world?

• [Richard]: :-))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((-: Ha ... magically, of course. :-))))))))))))))))(((((((((((((((((-:

<< o >>

~~~~~~~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~after~actual~freedom~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RESPONDENT: While a gather all the above is said jokingly ...

RICHARD: The Q&A immediately above my signature/ sign-off is indeed said jokingly – hence the 4 (slightly hypnotic) big smilies top and bottom – but the ASCII art signature line is most certainly not a joke. And the reason why I replied jokingly is because I had already answered that query with my response in the (re-inserted exchange) preceding it.

What I should have said is that it has to be experienced, as a flesh and blood body only (as in here in this actual world) in order to understand how things operate in actuality. And, just as stone-age natives thought of cameras/ photographs as ‘magic’ boxes/ ‘magic’ pictures (and not as the readily explicable technology it is) so too is the way in which things can operate here quite ‘magical’.

*

Furthermore: even though there is no psyche in actuality – and even though I only get to meet flesh and blood bodies here – the feelings ‘beings’ those bodies unwittingly host can utilise their host body’s vocal chords (for instance) and inform me as to their experience of what is happening in the real-world.

I have spoken of these kind of things before ... for example:

• [Richard]: ‘When empathy works to resolve another’s suffering an empathetic caring occurs – this is not under dispute – but it is occurring as a feeling activity ... in the form of affective vibes and/or psychic currents. However, it is only occurring in the real world – there is no empathetic caring here in this actual world – which is a salutary point few comprehend.

For instance, some ‘born-again’ people bailed me up in the street some time ago in order to save me from their devil (only they called it ‘The Devil’ so as to make their fantasy universal): as the conversation waxed they grew more and more intense, their words became loving words, their eyes became radiant eyes, their faces became soft and suffused with a glowing shade of pink, and if my companion had been with me at the time she could have verified, as she has on other occasions, that feeling vibes and psychic currents were swirling and eddying all about.

Eventually they gave up as they could not `reach’ me (aka establish a feeling connection)’. (Actual Freedom Mailing List, No.27d, 6 Dec 2002).

RESPONDENT: ... the ‘~after~actual~freedom~’ part gave me pause.

RICHARD: It is representative of a yacht under full sail (an underscore, a forward slash, a closing parenthesis) on an open ocean (the several rows of the tilde character) with a full sun (a lower-case o enclosed by the greater-than/ less-than symbols) riding clear above the oceanic horizon.

RESPONDENT: Just to be clear ... you’re not now ‘beyond an actual freedom from the human condition’ are you?

RICHARD: Goodness me, no ... that ASCII art signature line represents what the convivialists, of the very first convivium ever to emerge on this verdant and azure paradise called planet earth, are doing/ will be doing after an actual freedom from the human condition happens.

There is nothing beyond actuality, as this physically infinite, eternal and perdurable universe, being a veritable perpetuus mobilis, has no other ... there is no (timeless, spaceless and formless) beyond whatsoever in actuality.

RESPONDENT: Of course I figure/ assume/ KNOW this is a joke ... just checking ... kinda:)

RICHARD: Sure ... with the inevitable implosion of both spiritualism and materialism actualism will also cease to exist (it has no existence in actuality); the end of actualism (which exists only in the real-world) means the end of actualists (a convenient label which is only useful as a counterpoint to the convenient labels spiritualist and materialist); in the meanwhile the name convivialist – for a person living convivially in a convivium – will serve to distinguish them from those isolated nuclear couples living in separative nuclear households/ lifestyles (a convivium can also take up residence on land, in suitably designed housing, of course).

For instance:

• [Richard]: ‘ ( ... ) it is appropo to mention that the pivotal factor in my turnabout was the incontrovertible fact that a fellow human being had a 5-month PCE which was triggered solely by, and during, a personal conversation with me in a casual setting.

There was no way I could deny it/ ignore it/ dismiss it and/or brush it aside – even if I had wanted to – as she was quite clear to others that, were it not for this interaction, it would never have happened.

It thus became obvious that by continuing to keep myself locked away, so to speak, in an exclusive nuclear couple/ nuclear family type of living arrangement there would continue to be a denial of access, to my fellow human beings at large, for any such potentially potent interactions’.

And (more specifically):

• [Richard]: ‘As the ship (the MSV Actualis) will serve as a residence as well as a venue, with the potential to travel virtually anywhere in the world if need be, it was apposite to call it ‘The Floating Convivium Project’ (from the Latin for ‘feast’ as in the enjoyment of jovial banquets and good company; the quality of being convivial; the relishing of festivity and so on).

There is more to both an actual and a virtual freedom from the human condition than nuclear couples living in separate homes; the overall aim is to provide the genesis of peoples living peacefully and harmoniously together on a community-wide basis. I just happen to particularly like the boating life-style’.

So as to provide some idea of what is planned: the MSV Actualis has eight cabins – in four suites each with a common washroom (with basin/ shower/ toilet) plus common tea- and coffee-making facilities à la motels, betwixt each – with wall-to-wall beds (king-size beds in popular parlance) with one cabin for each (nominal) crew-member and at least one cabin always reserved for guests ... a guest cabin, in other words. Put simplistically: no married couples; only single people living intimately as one big happy (and harmless) convivium.

(Many more details, at a later date, on the new website).

Regards, Richard.

P.S.: I can just as easily put the ship’s name below the signature line. Vis.:

<< o >>

~~~~~~~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~ msv actualis ~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Continued on Direct Route: No. 10

Continued from Direct Route: No. 10

December 10 2012

Re: Better phrasings...

RICHARD: [...]. Whilst on the subject of ‘better phrasings’ (as in the ‘I-Know-Better-Than-Richard’ titling of this thread), and the topic of there being no feelings in actuality ...

RESPONDENT: Hello Richard, Good to see you are alive and well (at least well enough to write). Some time ago you talked about writing a novel and then there was supposed to be more writing in regards to Buddhism/Pali Canon and actual freedom. Are those projects still in the works?

Since you are writing again, I’ll take this as an opportunity to ask a question that has been on and off in my mind since you started pointing out the discrepancies in Tarin’s writings in regards to being actually free. I ended up spending a considerable part of almost every weekend visiting Tarin for a number of months. In that time my impression of Tarin (and I’m an excellent read of people both innately and enhanced by training) was that he was extremely intelligent, very open-minded, as objective as one could be, sincere, honest, free from all suffering, emotions and sense of identity/self. Obviously I cannot be literally inside someone’s head/experience so I’m open to being mistaken. That being said he seemed to obviously know what a PCE and an actual freedom is and considered himself to be living that and nothing he said or did in our time together directly contradicted that. It is true that he was less lively and vibrant appearing then another person I was spending time with that became actually free, but I have always chalked that up to individual idiosyncrasies.

So, what exactly do you think he is experiencing then, if not an actual freedom? Are you suggesting there is some condition where the person has no emotions nor sense of identity/ self that is somehow not quite yet an actual freedom?

I see you’ve referred to the ‘AFers’ as being of a mongrel state of being. By this I’m taking it that you are saying by engaging in both Buddistic practices and actualist practices they have come across a ‘mixed’ condition where they are experiencing aspects of both Buddhist enlightenment and actual freedom but not either one in there purity (and hence not an actual freedom). That would make some sense with someone like Nik who practice both simultaneously.

However, Tarin stopped practicing buddhistic practices and practiced only actualism to come to the condition he has (likewise for Trent).

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, The pragmatic/ hardcore affers are neither experiencing aspects of awakenment/ enlightenment (Buddhism) nor of an actual freedom (Actualism); my usage of ‘a mongrel state of being’ stems, simply and solely, from Trent’s hubristic usage of ‘hybrid’ to describe an utter impossibility which has become known as ‘actualising the jhanas’. Vis.:

• [Trent]: ‘(...) the limited information i have told a few people about this is simply a jhana-terminology tweaked approach to attentiveness/ senuousness, for use in eliminating the core/raw instinctual passions, and will be quite ineffective at any other time (if it is possible to use at all). this alludes to a primary reason i have not discussed this outside of one-on-one conversations; the reason being that i think this sort of late-path-appropriate buddhist-actualist hybrid methodology will likely confuse or distract more people than it informs or focuses, and so i have found it best left outside of the appropriately circumscribed advice i offer others (...)’. (Re: Trent’s recent AF advice; 8/5/11 http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/2126936#_19_message_2129170).

Because he introduced the term [quote] ‘buddhist-actualist hybrid’ [endquote] in that passage, which gained some currency amongst its ill-advised practitioners, it is apposite to point out that, whilst a cross between two pedigree species may properly called a hybrid, a cross between a watered-down-and-westernised Buddhism and a watered-down-and-bastardised Actualism can best be called a mongrel ... as in a ‘buddhistic-affer mongrel’. Vis.:

• mongrel: in botany, a mongrel may refer to the offspring of varieties of a species which was in contrast to a hybrid; (among pets): one whose parentage is of unknown or mixed breeds as opposed to purebred; (among humans): mongrel and mongrelize are derogatory terms for the mixing of ‘races’, known as miscegenation. (Wikipedia Dictionary).

• mongrel (synonym of bastard): a term for a variation that is not genuine; something irregular or inferior or of dubious origin; ‘the architecture was a kind of bastard suggesting Gothic but not true Gothic’ (WordNet Dictionary).

Words cannot properly express just how much of a dastardly act it was for them to co-opt Actualism, subsume it under a tawdry facsimile of Buddhism (there have been no arahants for more than two millennia because of sectarianism), and thus unnecessarily perpetuate the suffering of humankind.

In a little over two weeks time the direct-route, to the already always existing peace-on-earth, will have been available for three (3) years ... and what do they do instead?

Go sit on a cushion, withdraw from the physical, induce altered states, ‘dark nights’, depressions, anxieties ... there is even a jhana-jockey hospice being set-up to nurse the causalties.

‘Tis craziness run riot ... utter madness.

*

As you have written more in two other posts, about a person you were spending time with whom you say [quote] ‘became actually free’ [endquote], I will append that text of yours here first, to flesh-out what you wrote above, before responding to your questions. Vis.:

[Respondent]: ‘One thing I noticed immediately [in two online colour photographs] was that Pamela and Vineeto both look considerably more healthy and vibrant here after becoming actually free than they did in the DVD’s where they were experiencing virtual freedom (under the assumption that Pamela was virtually free at the time). Not that surprising of course as being free from all psychological/ emotional stress would take a unimaginable burden off the body/brain. This was something I noticed with my eyes when someone I was spending time with became actually free. The change in them was certainly very actual as it showed up visibly and in other ways in the body that I’m not at liberty to discuss (and not a ‘mindfuck’ as another has written on another forum)’.

*

[Respondent]: ‘The condition of a virtually free person and a actually free person is of such staggering difference that the two cannot really even be compared. While a virtually free person is supposedly free of suffering ‘99%’ of the time, they are still relatively ‘normal’ in that they are still a feeling-being.

In the time I spent with the person going from VF (and being in a PCE much of the time we were interacting) to actual freedom, there was a huge difference in my experience of them after the actual freedom event. I experienced them changing into almost an entirely different person in the blink of an eye so to speak.

I recall thinking of them being ‘body snatched’ so to speak. Becoming actually free (or whatever is happening to some of these folk that seems nearly identical to an actual freedom) is not a mental ‘mindfuck’, it is a radical bodily/brain change. It is organic in some way. Even an out-from-control virtual freedom is not this. They are qualitatively different to a considerable degree’.

[Co-Respondent]: ‘Are you at liberty to discuss the name or forum ID of the person who you say became actually free? Is that person officially actually free or unofficially?’

[Respondent]: ‘I am not presently. I do not recognize the distinctions of ‘official’ nor ‘unofficial’ actual freedoms. I will try to say something that might speak to your query without revealing too much. While, I still can’t really see how Tarin is not actually free (experientially at least, apart from the political/ social/ theoretical bizarre aspects to the situation), I am considerably more confident about this other unnamed person’s condition.

They seemed entirely absent of any emotions/ sense of self and they had a lively vibrancy (yet utterly relaxed) that jives well with my understanding of what an actual freedom is.

They also used just the actualism method to get where they got. However, like almost every person who has practiced actualism, they too had a past history of spiritual practice (which they stopped soon after starting to practice the actualism method)’.

And here are your two questions again. Vis.:

[Respondent]: ‘So, what exactly do you think he [Tarin] is experiencing then, if not an actual freedom? Are you suggesting there is some condition where the person has no emotions nor sense of identity/self that is somehow not quite yet an actual freedom?

First, obviously I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person sans identity in toto/the entire affective faculty is not actually free from the human condition (as that would simply be absurd).

Second, I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person (newly) free of the instinctual passions/the feeling-being formed thereof is not actually free ... albeit not yet fully-free due, in part at least, to some shadowy remnants of a lingering social identity.

(The social identity, being a culturally-inculcated societal/ familial entity, and not instinctually-based, is not necessarily rendered completely null and void at the definitive event/pivotal moment an actual freedom takes place; a period of accommodation and adjustment and acclimatisation, all throughout the normal day-to-day life, ensures the habituated patterns of a life-time cease).

Third, I have written before (on my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust website) about personally experiencing a major dissociative state, of an extended duration during a period of my life in a war-zone as a youth, which was not unlike being in the centre of a cyclone – all about raged fear and hatred, anger and aggression – and in that unreality all was calm, peaceful (and ‘fearless’).

I provided a link leading to a lengthy description/ explanation of it in the earlier part of the very email you responded to. Vis.:

[Richard to Srid]: ‘Indeed, the topic of that ‘better phrasing’, by feeling-being ‘Peter’ circa 1999, was specifically addressed to me back in December 2004:

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘[quote] ‘The arising of instinctually-sourced feelings produces a hormonal chemical response in the body, which can lead to the false assumption that they are actual’. [actualfreedom.com.au/library/topics/feelings.htm].

From the above phrase I understand that feelings (out-sourced by the instinctual program) produce hormonal substances, not the other way around.

From the TV documentaries I’ve watched, it is because of the physical hormonal substances in the body that certain good/bad feelings arise.

Scientists have managed to identify and link certain hormonal substances to particular feelings, giving the impression that a feeling cannot arise without an associated body-produced ‘chemical’ (...)’. Richard, The Actual Freedom Trust Mailing List, No. 25, 1 December 2004

The resultant exchange goes on for three consecutive emails (before straying off-topic).. List D, Srid, 7 December 2012

It is the third quote, in the second email of that three-consecutive-email-exchange, and is preceded by the words ‘The following will be of interest’ (and the operative words ‘my mind somehow created a new ‘reality’ built out of the extremities of animalistic fear, which hallucination I would nowadays call ‘unreality’’ are highlighted).

Fourth, and specifically in regards to your question, about my thoughts on what that aff state is (which affers such as Tarin write about): again I will refer you to quotes, and the link for them, a little further down in the very email you responded to. Vis.:

• [Nikolai]: ‘Vedana does not disspaear in a PCE nor at what some are calling af. It continues. (...)’.

(Subject: Re: Nikolai’s Practice Journal; Posted: Oct 14, 2011; 7:57am).

And:

• [Nikolai]: ‘Hi AFer, do you still experience vedana?

• [Tarin]: ‘of course (...) from a buddhist perspective, the khandhas don’t go away’.

Plus:

• [Nikolai]: ‘(...). ok , Other AFer just reminded me he told me to investigate ‘delight’. Delight still arises for vedana, preference for vedana

• [...snip...].

• [Nikolai]: ‘(...) so in the sequence of DO, concerning the arising of shadow being, trent seems to point to not delighting, is this what you point to to?

• [Tarin]: ‘what trent is referring to is ‘delighting in’

• [Nikolai]: ‘ah, a distinction

• [Tarin]: ‘the question that matters: perceiving clearly, does one then delight in what is perceived?

• [Nikolai]: ‘delighting in would refer then to a sankharic mental movemnt to affectively enjoy the vedana?

• [...snip...].

• [Tarin]: ‘is old age delightful? (...). is perceiving the aging, decaying, inevitable dying, delightful?

• [Nikolai]: ‘(...) obviously no (...). anicca is dukkha so then , trying to work out where ‘delight’ falls into this, would it be wise to take note of any tendency to ‘delight in’ the feeling tones that arise?

• [Tarin]: ‘weight can be given to any of the khandas, not only vedana, the tendency is inherent

• [Nikolai]: ‘meaning the tendency cannot be stopped until death?

• [Tarin]: ‘if you want to be a real stickler about it, it will clear up what vedana might be (http://the-hamilton-project-forum.2294154.n4.nabble.com/Nikolai-s-Practice-Journal-td3662485i40.html).

As briefly as possible: where Affer-Tarin says ‘weight’ can be given to any of the khandhā (i.e. the five components, in the buddhistic world-view, of which a person is comprised) he also uses the word ‘value’ elsewhere ... as in: a way to detach/ dissociate is to not value any of the khandhā (‘don’t give them any value’ or ‘don’t give any weight to them’) as the tendency to do so is inherent.

Hence his ‘does one then delight in what is perceived?’

(The ‘not delighting in’ advice, from Affer-Trent, is the regular buddhistic way to detach/ dissociate from both your body and everything associated with it, within and without, including the world at large ... as in ‘all sensory-phenomena’).

Put succinctly, there is no actual world in Buddhism (what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’; as in, ‘not-born, not-become, not-made, not-caused’).

Ergo: it is impossible to marry Actualism and Buddhism.

Regards, Richard.

December 13 2012

Re: Better phrasings...

RICHARD: [...]. Put succinctly, there is no actual world in Buddhism (what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ; as in, ‘not-born, not-become, not-made, not-caused’). (Ud 8.3; Tatiyanibbana Sutta; PTS: Ud 80). Richard to Respondent 10 December 2012

RESPONDENT: Now here is the meat of where actualism and Buddhism do seem to be at unavoidable odds. I do not think Tarin or Trent actually believe/think this.

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Why do you say that you do not think Tarin or Trent actually [quote] ‘believe/think’ [endquote] this?

After all, back in 2009 they both made it public knowledge they had become arahants, did they not?

In other words, what is the value of arahantship if an arahant does not have immediate knowledge of this (as in, an on-going, ever-fresh, direct experiencing)?

RESPONDENT: In fact I recall Tarin saying something about there being nothing but the actual world in his experience.

RICHARD: ‘Tis just as well we do not have to rely upon your recall of what is ‘in fact’; it only took around three minutes to locate what he wrote to you at 3:54 pm on December the 16th, 2009. Vis.:

[Tarin to Respondent]: ‘regardless, i got enlightened and i am now working toward a virtual freedom, largely using haietmoba and the golden thread.. that sweet spot between my sub-navel centre and sex centre, anterior to the spinal column, enticing me to be sincerity and naivete, and pulling me toward the actual world’. (Message No. 8958).

His own words there (‘pulling me toward the actual world’) are distinctly different to your recall (‘nothing but the actual world’).

RESPONDENT: I don’t think even Nik believes the above statement ...

RICHARD: Once again for emphasis: of what value is arahantship when an arahant is not directly knowing that (as in, an on-going, ever-fresh, immediate experiencing)?

(In saying all the above I am, of course, speaking from my own personal experiencing, night and day, for eleven years).

Regards, Richard.

December 17 2012

Re: Better phrasings...

RICHARD: [...]. Put succinctly, there is no actual world in Buddhism (what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’; as in, ‘not-born, not-become, not-made, not-caused’). (Ud 8.3; Tatiyanibbana Sutta; PTS: Ud 80).

RESPONDENT: Now here is the meat of where actualism and Buddhism do seem to be at unavoidable odds. I do not think Tarin or Trent actually believe/ think this.

RICHARD: Why do you say that you do not think Tarin or Trent actually [quote] ‘believe/think’ [endquote] this?

RESPONDENT: For one there is nothing in either of their writings (after they claimed actual freedom at least) that suggests they affirmatively believe the above.

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Why I wrote [quote] ‘what is, in Buddhism, is ...’ [endquote] in the above is because that particular term (‘what is’) has gained considerable currency as an accepted English translation of the Buddhist yathābhutaṃ and the following quote, by being quite explicit, will demonstrate why I put it that way:

• [Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti]: ‘So meditation is a mind seeing actually ‘what is’ ...’. [endquote]. (p. 93, ‘Talks and Dialogues’; Saanen 1968).

By putting that term in scare quotes he is conveying that meditation, in the specific way he means when he uses that word, is a mind ‘seeing actually’ absolute truth (aka yathābhutaṃ) or ultimate reality.

Indeed, the pericope ‘yathābhūtam jānāti’ (where jānāti = to know/ to understand) in the Pali Canon translates as ‘he knows as an absolute truth or in reality’, according to the PTS Pali-English dictionary, and the pericope ‘yathābhutaṃ jānāti passati’ – where passati (to see) = to recognise, realise, know, only because it is in combination with jānāti – has a remarkable correspondence with what Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti is conveying (his usage of ‘seeing actually’ does not, of course, mean visually seeing).

Thus what I am affirming, in the above, is how absolute truth/ ultimate reality (aka ‘what is’), in Buddhism, is ajātaṃ (‘not-born’) abhūtaṃ (‘not-become’) akataṃ (‘not-made’) asaṅkhataṃ (‘not-caused’).

And, surely, anyone can see that I am not making that up – I quite obviously copy-pasted it from the Pali Canon – as I also provided a reference (Ud 8.3; Tatiyanibbana Sutta; PTS: Ud 80) as well as two regular online translations as a supplementary and in-context footnote.

The reason why I referenced the Udana ‘Tatiyanibbāna Sutta’, and not the Itivuttaka ‘Ajāta Sutta’ (where that same ‘Exalted Utterance’ is also to be found) is because the preceding text in the Udāna version clearly shows that those four words – which are essentially synonymic adjectives in that context – are referring to ‘saupādisesā nibbānadhātu’ (or, colloquially, nibbāna).

In fact, the fourth word (asaṅkhataṃ, ‘not-caused’) is an epithet of nibbāna elsewhere in the Pali Canon.

Now, even without my eleven years of directly experiencing this, night and day, and thus having intimate knowledge of nibbana as being ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’, I would never say to anyone that I do not actually think this because it is quite evident that it is a central tenet of Buddhism.

In fact, it is the fundamental core of Buddhism, in all its various sectarian iterations, as no escape (nissarana) from samsāra – as in ‘jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa’ as per that sutta – would be possible were it not that ‘there is’ (atthi), according to Mr. Gotama the Sakyan himself, ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’.

RESPONDENT: As for Tarin, I’m quite certain he did not believe that as he was very explicit in person that he did not believe in a non-physical world.

RICHARD: So what? I do not believe in a ‘non-physical world’ either yet it is undeniably obvious that what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’, is it not?

*

I will wait for your response to this before proceeding lest this discussion about the affers, and their aff, becomes even more weird than it already is.

Regards, Richard.

January 6 2013

Re: it is impossible to marry Actualism and Buddhism

RESPONDENT: Hello Dea Listmembers,

Since [No. 4] has mentioned my name and [No. 4’s] credibility/ honesty as been questioned, I’d like to just say that No. 4 is mostly right in saying that I don’t care about Richard’s behavior. [...]. I would like to add, having ‘known’ [No. 4] since 2004 via his writings, I have *never* known him to be a liar. I often don’t agree with his conclusions nor the thought processes(involving his unique to himself biases that *we all* have) he uses to get there, but I have no doubts to his honesty. [...].

RICHARD: G’day No. 12, I have known since early-to-mid 2005 that this ‘[No. 4]’/ ‘John Wilde’/‘[Sock Puppet ‘PW’]/ ‘[Sock Puppet ‘PD’]/ ‘[Sock Puppet ‘R’]’ character is a liar and have thus had more than mere doubts about his honesty.

For instance:

From: [Respondent No. 4]
Sent: Friday, 17 December 2004 1:12 AM
To: actualfreedom@...
Subject: RE: Year In Review

• [Respondent No. 4]: [...]. My best judgement tells me that Richard’s method *did* work for him, because he was driven by an absolute certainty and a 100% commitment. (Unless as [No. 64 (List AF)] reckons the whole sequence of events was a product of some bizarre and extremely rare pathology – but I doubt that). [...].

A brief explanatory note: the person he refers to as ‘[No. 64]’ was also subscribed to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list forum, as ‘[No. 64]’, and had never hesitated to ‘throw his weight around’ (to use a colloquialism) when interacting with the actualists.

From: [Respondent No. 4]
Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2005 1:06 PM
To: actualfreedom@...
Subject: [No. 56 (List AF)] RE: Year In Review

• [Respondent No. 4]: [...]. My bro has argued that first came a pathological process, and then came the method to rationalise it as a voluntary process. It isn’t hard to find examples of the sincere misattribution of volition to involuntary pathological processes, but they don’t prove anything with regard to Richard. Is this arse-about cause-and-effect similar to what you’re suggesting? Frankly, I don’t know what to make of it at this stage. [...].

A brief explanatory note: the person he refers to as ‘my bro’ is the same-same person he referred to as ‘[No. 64]’ in Dec 2004 (the same-same person subscribed as ‘[No. 64]’).

From: [Respondent No. 4]
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2005 12:47 PM To: actualfreedom@...
Subject: RE: [No. 12] re 100% certainty

• [Respondent]: As for myself, I already know actualism ‘works’ in making me happier and more harmless, ...
• [Respondent No. 4]: As for myself, I know that it doesn’t. My experience, observation and reasoning tells me that unless it’s accompanied by an actual pathological process that causes damage to the brain (maybe even be random damage at that), the actualism process is naught but wishful thinking and (at best) a powerful placebo effect. It causes changes, sure ... but those can (best, IMO) be attributed to: (a) finding a meaningful purpose to pursue; (b) being fully committed to a single goal; (c) doing it with a like-minded individual; (d) practising a happy/ harmless morality (because that’s all it is unless/ until ‘self’-immolation occurs). [...].

An explanatory note: as those in initials ‘IMO’ are a short-hand way of saying ‘in my opinion’ you may well comprehend my surprise as he had previously said, on two occasions, that it – i.e. ‘actual pathological process’ – was [No. 64’s] opinion/his bro’s opinion (the same-same person subscribed as ‘[No. 64]’).

Quite evidentially, he was either lying on the earlier two occasions (Dec 2004 & Jan 2005) or he was now lying (May 2005) as there is no way both versions can be true.

Anyway, I responded by asking if he were intending to write ‘in my bro’s opinion’ but had inadvertently written ‘in my opinion’ instead. I also added numerous quotes, from the person subscribed as ‘[No. 64]’, to demonstrate that my query was well-founded. Vis.:

From: [Richard]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2005 1:49 PM
To: Actual Freedom
Subject: Re: 100% Certainty

• [Respondent No. 12]: As for myself, I already know actualism ‘works’ in making me happier and more harmless ...
• [Respondent No. 4]: As for myself, I know that it doesn’t. My experience, observation and reasoning tells me that unless it’s accompanied by an actual pathological process that causes damage to the brain (maybe even be random damage at that), the actualism process is naught but wishful thinking and (at best) a powerful placebo effect. It causes changes, sure ... but those can (best, IMO) be attributed to: (a) finding a meaningful purpose to pursue; (b) being fully committed to a single goal; (c) doing it with a like-minded individual; (d) practising a happy/ harmless morality (because that’s all it is unless/until ‘self’-immolation occurs).
• [Richard]:  May I ask? Where you intending to write IMBO ... and inadvertently wrote IMO instead?

For instance:

• [Respondent No. 4]: ‘It [the actualism process] causes changes, sure ... but those can (best, IMO) be attributed to:
(a) finding a meaningful purpose to pursue’.
• [Respondent No. 4’s brother]: ‘People who dedicate themselves unreservedly to a cause or a course of action, sometimes out of sheer necessity but usually because they regard it as the most meaningful thing to do with their lives, often find themselves much happier for it, or at least greatly energised by it.’ (Tuesday 5/10/2004 10:22 PM AEDST).

For another instance:

• [Respondent No. 4]: ‘(...) those [changes] can (best, IMO) be attributed to: (b) being fully committed to a single goal’.
• [Respondent No. 4’s brother]: ‘(...) people benefit from actualism because (a) they’re committed, and commitment in itself brings benefits’. (Tuesday 5/10/2004 10:22 PM AEDST).

And again (twice):

• [Respondent No. 4]: ‘(...) those [changes] can (best, IMO) be attributed to: (d) practising a happy/ harmless morality (because that’s all it is unless/until ‘self’-immolation occurs)’.
• [Respondent No. 4’s brother]: ‘Even if no neurological changes occur, actualism ‘works’ just as well as other religions. And why wouldn’t it? It’s simply a moral injunction to avoid ‘malice’ and ‘sorrow’ at all costs, and to arrange your life accordingly’. (Saturday 2/10/2004 8:25 AM AEDST).

• [Respondent No. 4’s brother]: ‘[people benefit from actualism because] (b) they have made a very simple moral principle out of emulating some of the features of your condition (‘happy and harmless’). And that’s religion old boy, albeit devoid of metaphysical dogma and *overt* moral trappings’. (Tuesday 5/10/2004 10:22 PM AEDST).

Lastly:

• [Respondent No. 4]: ‘My experience, observation and reasoning tells me that unless it’s accompanied by an actual pathological process that causes damage to the brain (maybe even be random damage at that) ...’.
• [Respondent No. 4’s brother]: ‘Certain features of your pre-AF experiences (...) all suggest that you [Richard] were in the grip of a pathological process which eventually brought about ‘your’ demise’. (Tuesday 5/10/2004 10:22 PM AEDST).
• [Respondent No. 4’s brother]: ‘Let’s look at some facts: Richard is insane. He has a severe and incurable psychotic disorder of unknown aetiology’. (Saturday 2/10/2004 10:24 PM AEDST).

Just for the record, here is what a dictionary has to say:

• ‘pathological: involving, caused by, or of the nature of disease or illness’.
• ‘aetiology: the causation of disease (usu., of a specified disease), esp. as a subject for investigation’. (Oxford Dictionary).

Richard to No. 4 on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list, 18 May 2005

A brief explanatory note: you will have seen that I had also added a few footnote quotes, from the person subscribed as ‘[No. 64 (List AF)]’, so as to demonstrate that an older sibling can have an undue influence on a younger one (as a child my older brother was always six years ahead of me and rarely failed to demonstrate that fact).

Anyway, realising he was caught in a trap of his own making – it was either his opinion or his bro’s opinion but not both at once – he chose to brazen it out with me. (Why peoples think they can out-smart me, when the archives clearly show that smart-aleckry comes off a pathetic second-best, has got me beat).

Vis.:

From: [Respondent No. 4]
Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2005 4:47 PM
To: actualfreedom@...
Subject: RE: 100% Certainty

• [Respondent No. 4]: [...] My experience, observation and reasoning tells me that unless it’s accompanied by an actual pathological process that causes damage to the brain (maybe even be random damage at that), the actualism process is naught but wishful thinking and (at best) a powerful placebo effect. It causes changes, sure ... but those can (best, IMO) be attributed to: (a) finding a meaningful purpose to pursue; (b) being fully committed to a single goal; (c) doing it with a like-minded individual; (d) practising a happy/ harmless morality (because that’s all it is unless/ until ‘self’-immolation occurs).
• [Richard]: May I ask? Where you intending to write IMBO ... and inadvertently wrote IMO instead?
• [Respondent No. 4]: Am I my brother’s speaker? The possibility that a rare neurological condition was the driving force behind the remarkable events of your post-1980 life, and that your ‘followers’ were having themselves on, occurred to me right from the start. [...]. Richard to No. 4 on The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list, 23 May 2005

Fast-forward to 2012 and he is still lying. Vis.:

• [John Wilde]: ‘I have it on good authority that while in India Richard experienced a certain mall as a ‘toy town’ with people as robots, and children as toy dolls. (Quite common among trippers and psychotics). I’m told he was staring transfixed by the sight of two porters who were glowing with golden energy. Too much coffee that morning, apparently. Add hallucinations to the list of classic psychotic symptoms’.
(dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message _boards/message/3694814#_19_message_3708849; 11/18/12 9:35 PM as a reply to Srid).

Almost needless is it to add that the ‘good authority’ on whom he relies to, supposedly, authenticate his assertion (and thus justify his snide remarks about ‘trippers’ and ‘caffeine’) is ... um ... is Someone Universally Recognised By Her Inventions. Vis.:

#10750
From: [Respondent No. 6 (Sock Puppet ‘A’)]
Date: Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:46 am
Subject: Re: Mr Moderator tear down this forum

• [Respondent No. 6 (Sock Puppet ‘A’)]: [...] I have found him much more imaginative and given to speculations and concocting stories than an average person; have been astounded by description of his experiences of light coming out of people, or comparing the town of Shimla with that of a toy town and people in it as toy people ...’. [...].

Here are the two versions juxtaposed for ease of comparison (both versions are lies, of course, but that is another matter):

1. ‘(...) two porters who were glowing with golden energy ...’.

2. ‘(...) his experiences of light coming out of people ...’.

He was on a roll, that day, with his totally fabricated golden energy/ golden glow theme. Vis.:

• [John Wilde]: ‘Magical prodigies. Perhaps we could ask Claudiu if he managed to take a photograph of the ‘actual’ ‘caloric energy’, the fine golden energy emanating from Richard that Justine experiences on the other side of the world when Richard is having his magical prodigies. I doubt it though. I was on-site in December ‘09 and February ‘10, and the only thing I saw that remotely resembled a golden glow in Richard was a slight jaundice. (In February he looked tired and ill compared with when I’d seen him in December). (dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message _boards/message/3694814#_19_message_3708849; 11/18/12 9:35 PM as a reply to Srid).

And, of course, he even lied about such trivial things as that ‘slight jaundice’ and ‘tired and ill’.

It is as if he cannot help but make stuff up.

Regards, Richard.


RETURN TO MAILING LIST ‘D’ INDEX

RICHARD’S HOME PAGE

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 and Use Restrictions and Guarantee of Authenticity