Actual Freedom – Mailing List ‘D’ Correspondence

Richard’s Correspondence On Mailing List ‘D’

with Claudiu / Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem


On Being Less Anonymous

CLAUDIU: Hello everyone, I’ve decided that instead of being known only as ‘Respondent No. 26’ on the Actual Freedom Trust website, I’d like to be known by my real first name, Claudiu, instead. The reason for this is that I see how much we feeling-beings influence each other, and if having my real first name prominent would increase the impact of reading about how I had my life turned around by visiting Richard in April 2012 then I am only too happy to help.

In order to further stress just how much I thought I knew what actualism was about and what an actual freedom from the human condition was, before April 2012, and how wrong that turned out to be, I’d also like my name unambiguously linked with my Dharma Overground screen name, ‘Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem’. A list of the posts I’ve participated in on that forum can be found here if anyone would care to go through the archives:.

I would advise not taking anything I said about actualism or actual freedom before April 2012 on that forum as being too accurate.

I’ve already written Vineeto and provided my request & permission for my name to be used instead of ‘Respondent No. 26’ on the Actual Freedom Trust website, and she has already done a quick job of de-anonymizing my name in the correspondences & indices. I’ve also asked that she put this very (at that point yet-to-be-written) email on the top of my correspondence page so that everybody can indeed see that it was done with my explicit permission.

Hehe, this is pretty exciting.

- Claudiu (Message 12916, 15 January 2013)


February 07 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

CLAUDIU: G’day Richard, A sincere practitioner here, first-time poster on this list. Ending ‘being’ seems like quite a sensible thing to do, and I’m working towards that. I’m not sure what to make of the following two snippets, referring to ‘the quickening’ and its clearer, finer version, and I’d like to ask some clarification questions – any answer would be much appreciated.

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, As the magical prodigy which became known as ‘the quickening’ is a feature peculiar to being the genitor of the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of – via that enabling/ facilitating feature – the most useful clarification in regards to what you say seems like quite a sensible thing to do is, rather, as follows:

1. Cease aiming to be aff, forthwith.

2. Stop listening to the affers, period.
(I am presuming, of course, that the affers pronounce those terms of theirs – those [quote] ‘AF’/’AFer’ [endquote] designators they use for their mongrel state of being – in the way that the first syllable of, say, the word affectation is pronounced).

3. Turn around 180 degrees from the direction you have been travelling thus far and come to your senses (both metaphorically and literally).

4. Put the actualism method – enjoying and appreciating being alive each moment again – into practice as the number one priority in your life.

5. Tap into pure intent and you will no longer be on your own in this the adventure of a lifetime!

Regards, Richard.

February 09 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

RICHARD: (...) As the magical prodigy which became known as ‘the quickening’ is a feature peculiar to being the genitor of the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of – via that enabling/ facilitating feature – (...)

CLAUDIU: Which ‘enabling/ facilitating feature’ are you referring to?

RICHARD: I am referring to that feature peculiar to being the genitor of the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of ... to wit: the magical prodigy which became known as ‘the quickening’.

CLAUDIU: Is that to say that ‘the quickening’ is something that has only happened, and will only ever happen, to the genitor of the completely new consciousness?

RICHARD: Purely by virtue of being the first male to become actually free from the human condition it comes with the territory, so to speak, that there be a way of enabling/ facilitating access to the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of.

CLAUDIU: What prevents it from happening to Vineeto, for example?

RICHARD: Given that she is the the first female to become actually free from the human condition there is, of course, nothing to prevent it from happening to Vineeto.

Indeed she has been interacting with me intensively with that very intention; an existential event of some considerable significance in regard to this intent took place between 3:30 and 4:00 AM on the 28th of August 2011, for instance.

For about three weeks prior to this she had been experiencing a near-constant pressure-pain in the nape of the neck, so she knew that something was imminent, as well as experiencing what she referred to as ‘an ambrosial immanence’ filling her up, inasmuch from time-to-time she could bear no more of it (such as to cause her to refrain from interacting intensively for two-three days until it dissipated) due to it being ‘too much’ or ‘too overwhelming’ for her.

Then, at the moment she became essentially the same as me (how I have been, on my own, all these years) there was a tremendous upwards surge of that energetic immanence, in and around my head and shoulders region, of such a potency, of such a strength, as would previously (on some occasion) render me utterly passive, completely immobile, and scarcely able to bear with it, to contain its immensity.

On this occasion, however, it was able to flow freely – it was as if a circuit had been formed betwixt the two of us – and a second, equally potent, surge of that existential immanence followed the first (again in an upwardly direction in and around my head and shoulders region) a short while later.

Regarding that reference to a circuit having been formed, I am reminded of first being shown, as a child in High School, how a magnet produces a magnetic field by holding a sheet of paper over it and sprinkling iron-filings upon its surface; as there is a potent field now operating it is as if the two of us, a male and a female, are the ‘north’ and ‘south’ poles of a magnet; alternatively, the effect could perhaps be likened to the ‘anode’ and ‘cathode’ of a battery generating an electric current (and thus producing an electric field) when a circuit is completed.

Be that as it may be: those potent surges were of such a magnitude that a rather remarkable man on another continent experienced what he had earlier reported as being a ‘gentle energy’ (which he had further described, then, as being ‘totally harmless’) pouring into him, transfixing him in a sort of immobility (not of the body) and overwhelming him to such an extent that he communicated with me four days later, via email, and we were able to establish, with all due care taken in respect to time-zone differences, that the two events were congruent.

CLAUDIU: I am still curious how ‘the quickening’ differs from a ‘blissful’/ ‘euphoric’ altered state of consciousness/ state of ‘being’.

RICHARD: Well, just for starters it is, of course, entirely non-affective.

(Contrary to all that made-up stuff circulating pseudonymously/ clandestinely, about a phantom ‘Richard’ of passionate imagination, this flesh-and-blood body typing these words is indeed as reported/ described/ explained on The Actual Freedom Trust website; for instance, having never met Mr. John Wilde – in fact I have never met anyone of that name in all my life – there is simply no way he could have ever consoled me, upon me having (purportedly) burst into tears, only to then hear me (purportedly) shouting at him for having done so; besides which even as a child, where some-such bursting into tears would occur, there would be a withdrawal from consolation into a hurt, sulking, moody silence which could last for two-three days as, being particularly sensitive as a child, aggressiveness was not a feature of being tearfully hurt).

Second, it is not even remotely similar to such coarse experiences as blissfulness and euphoria; it is of a quality of such fineness that a fine-champagne-bubbles type of word my second wife (de jure) made up all those years ago – ‘tintling’ – seems to be most apt.

Third, it all takes place here in this actual world – the world of the senses, the sensate world, the world where flesh-and-blood bodies already reside, as experienced in PCE’s – whereas a state of ‘being’, as experienced in ASC’s, takes place in the world of the psyche, the inner world, the world where flesh-and-blood bodies have no footing (as in ‘ettha āpo ca pahavī ca tejo vāyo na gādhati’, for instance, in D i.223 & S i.15).

Lastly, a ‘‘blissful’/ ‘euphoric’ altered state of consciousness/ state of ‘being’’ could never, ever, have enabled/ facilitated the epoch-changing events of late 2009/early 2010.

CLAUDIU: For example, if what you describe started happening to me ...

RICHARD: Rest assured that what I describe – a feature peculiar to being the genitor of the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of – will not start happening to you.

CLAUDIU: ... I would likely think that this is ‘feeling’ gone wild, a ‘blissful’ state, which I would have to stop fueling in order to get back to sensuousness.

RICHARD: Whereas what I thought, when it started happening to me, was how wonderful life itself is inasmuch, with human consciousness being plastic, malleable, a global peace and harmony is now a likelihood in my lifetime.

CLAUDIU: Or do you mean to say that a feeling-being need not worry about it – that a feeling-being should, indeed, avoid states that sound like that, get busy getting free from the human condition, and once that is done, see what happens?

RICHARD: No, I do not mean to say anything other than what I actually said; a fellow human being was interested in what took place within the hour of my second wife (de jure) physically dying so, having provided a report/ description/ explanation in regards specifically to those queries, I volunteered a report/ description/ explanation as to what transpired the following Monday (the 16th of November 2009) plus an update as to what has been occurring these last few months, beginning in the morning of Friday the 7th of October 2011.

Ain’t life grand!

Regards, Richard.

February 11 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

RICHARD: [...] 1. Cease aiming to be aff, forthwith.

CLAUDIU: Very well, I will then aim to be actually free from the human condition... which was my current aim anyways (to cease ‘being’ entirely).

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, In order to cease ‘being’ entirely (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being is ‘being’ itself) you will need to turn around 180 degrees from the direction you have been travelling thus far and come to your senses (both literally and metaphorically).

*

RICHARD: 2. Stop listening to the affers, period.

CLAUDIU: Then perhaps I should listen to people actually free from the human condition?

RICHARD: As an actual freedom from the human condition is entirely new to human experience/ human history – which means that the only time-tested reports/ descriptions/ explanations pertaining to it so far are to be found on The Actual Freedom Trust website – you would be well-advised to obtain whatever is conducive to becoming actually free from the human condition from what is freely available there.

The following, written in January 2005, is an example of what the term ‘time-tested’ (above) refers to. Vis.:

[Richard]: ‘Besides immediately knowing via direct apprehension, that this condition is both irrevocable and immutable, more than twelve years have elapsed, now, with nary a whiff of a hint of even a trace of a suggestion it could or would ever be or have been otherwise ... and I have been most relentless in my examination of myself. After all, I am going public with an outstanding, and outrageous, report that could – and should – set the squalid complacency of the religious, spiritual, mystical and metaphysical communities on their ears ... and after eleven years in the enlightened/ awakened state I was determined to be ‘squeaky-clean’ before doing so. Five years without a single hitch satisfied me beyond any doubt whatsoever – not just beyond reasonable doubt – that this is that which is the answer to all the ills of humankind ... and I started publishing my experience’. (Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 25h, 5 January 2005a).

CLAUDIU: In that case, I would appreciate your answers to my clarification questions as I find learning their answers to be helpful in my practice.

I was not aware that Tarin’s way of existing was different than your way of existing until his announcement, in which he stated that you said he was only ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ [...snip link...]. I was not aware that Tarin’s way of existing was not even that of being ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ until the latest Addendum on the Announcements page on the AFT site. I’m also not certain in what ways it differs, as the only thing mentioned on the Announcements page was what seemed to be a terminological dispute.

RICHARD: Yet it was made perfectly clear – via the points numbered 1 through to 5 on that webpage – how the way in which the [quote] ‘aims, and approaches found and developed by dho participants’ [endquote] differed so much from the [quote] ‘aims and approaches’ [endquote] on The Actual Freedom Trust website that he deemed it necessary to dissociate from the latter so as to protect their integrity.

Furthermore, it was equally made perfectly clear – via the points numbered 6 through to 8 – why the [quote] ‘aims, and approaches found and developed’ [endquote] by those buddhistic participants differed from both the buddhavacana (‘The Word/ Teaching of the Buddha’) and the buddhānasāsanaṃ (‘The Message/ Dispensation of all the Buddhas).

(Having lived that/been that which the Pali words amata and sambodhi properly refer to, night and day for eleven years (1981-1992), my words are thus informed by my intimate knowledge of the buddhānasāsanaṃ and it is this experiential understanding which illuminates just what the Pali text – which has been all there is to convey the buddhavacana since the last arahant died in the first century BCE – has been persistently communicating for nearly two and a half millennia).

Thus it has nothing to do with terminology (other than what the various terms properly refer to, of course, as is the case in any specialised area of human endeavour) and everything to do with [quote] ‘aims and approaches’ [endquote].

In other words, it is about the goals and the practises thereto.

CLAUDIU: It must be a similar way of existing, indeed, if he was confirmed to be actually free from the human condition on his visit to Australia ~2 years ago ...

RICHARD: No, it was the other way around; it was Tarin who confirmed it – some months after his visit to Australia – and if you were to look again at the announcement page you would see that what the directors did, upon receiving his confirmation, was to make the announcement reflect the fact that it was him who had confirmed it.

You will find the following (written in December 2000 regarding any acknowledgement of another person’s assessment and/or claim of a virtual freedom) to be so self-evident it requires no further explanation. Vis.:

• [Richard]: ‘As I have already said, any acknowledgement is entirely up to that person (I decline to be a probity policeman) and, if it be an inaccurate assessment – or a false claim – publicly made then such a fooling of others only makes a fool out of oneself (one’s suffering still goes on privately). Only a fool would fool oneself by trying to fool others ... ‘tis a fail-safe system’.(Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 18, 20 Dec 2000).

CLAUDIU: ... and if you more recently said he was ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’. Could you go into exactly what ways his way of existing differs from that of someone ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’?

RICHARD: As he has not shared with me ‘exactly what ways his way of existing’ is I have had no recourse but to wait and watch, these last two years, until more than enough textual evidence had appeared on public forums so as to be able to gather together, and thus present in a coherent form, the way in which it differs from what is freely available on The Actual Freedom Trust website.

And it is the way in which it differs which addresses your query about ‘exactly what ways his way of existing’ differs from that of someone ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ – nowhere on that announcement page is there any reference to whether he is ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ or not – as that requires a judgement-call.

Put succinctly: there is no way the directors are going to be sucked-in to being put into the position of being any such final arbiters – regarding both a virtual freedom and an actual freedom – either publicly or privately.

No way at all.

Consequently, the textual evidence has been gathered together and presented in a suitably referenced and coherent form so as to prompt any reader/ listener to ask themselves such an obvious question as, for instance, ‘Why would a person ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ advise their fellow human being that what they want to have running is [quote] ‘i’ am pure intent [endquote], such as to have their fellow human being then take on the notion that [quote] ‘I’ was pure intent [endquote], when nowhere either on The Actual Freedom Trust website or in ‘Richard’s Journal’ is there any such advice/ any such notion?’

Or, for another instance, ‘Why would a person ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ inform their fellow human being that pure intent is now gone, extinguished, when both on The Actual Freedom Trust website and in ‘Richard’s Journal’ it is clearly articulated that pure intent is a palpable life-force, an actually occurring stream of benevolence and benignity, which originates in the vast and utter stillness that is the essential character of the universe itself?’

A further obvious instance would be: ‘Why would a person ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ so persistently advocate buddhistic [quote] ‘aims and approaches’ [endquote] when it is unambiguously spelled out on The Actual Freedom Trust website that Buddhism and Actualism are 180 degrees opposite?’

*

There are several more sections waiting to be published, yet, so you will eventually get to see the full account for yourself.

(Alternatively, you can do what I had to do and look through all the text which has appeared on public forums).

Also, at least one of those sections has more about Buddhism – not that it is of any personal interest to me – as too many people are of the opinion that what is on offer on The Actual Freedom Trust website is more or less the same as what Buddhism is.

It is not, of course, but because of what has taken place in the ‘Hardcore/ Pragmatic Dharma’ circles this last 2-3 years I have spent a very rewarding 5 and ½ months of this last year poring over the original Pali text, for eight-ten hours a day, finding out why the translators translate the way they do so as to be able to demonstrate, via this original text, that an actual freedom from the human condition is not even remotely the same.

For instance: the key Pali word dukkha – usually translated as ‘suffering’ or something similar – is a compound word (as in du + kha) where, etymologically, the du- prefix – an antithetic prefix, generally opposed to the su- prefix, such as in sukha – has connotations of ‘asunder, apart, away from’, and the kha syllable/ ending, which functions also as root, has the meaning ākāsa (pronounced a-cash-a).

Thus what the word dukkha denotes, fundamentally, is that abiding in the world of samsara is to be asunder, apart or away from kha (ākāsa).

And it is not for nothing that the first arupa samapatti is known in Pali as ākāsānañcāyatana ... which is also a compound word (ākāsa + ānañca + āyatana).

Incidentally, having lived that/been that which those Pali words amata and sambodhi properly refer to, night and day for eleven years, I also have intimate knowledge/ experiential understanding of the altered states of ‘being’ which Pali words such as viññāņānancāyatana, ākiñcaññāyatana, nevasaññānāsannāyatana, saññāvedayitanirodhasamāpatti, and so on, properly refer to, as well.

This is all such fun!

Regards, Richard.

February 12 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

RICHARD: 1. Cease aiming to be aff, forthwith.

CLAUDIU: Very well, I will then aim to be actually free from the human condition... which was my current aim anyways (to cease ‘being’ entirely).

RICHARD: In order to cease ‘being’ entirely (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being is ‘being’ itself) you will need to turn around 180 degrees from the direction you have been travelling thus far and come to your senses (both literally and metaphorically).

CLAUDIU: I was not going to reply this way initially, but a quite interesting experience last night lasting from 9:30PM to 2:00AM EST or so has caused me to realize that you are, indeed, correct. It seems 95-99% of what I have been doing has not been directed to the intended result (ceasing ‘being’ entirely). [...].

I was initially going to offer an in-depth point-by-point reply, as is my style (and yours as well – one I appreciate). However, what is far, far more important now, is for me to become actually free from the human condition of malice and sorrow, as soon as possible. It is so, so silly to continue feeling bad when perfection is humanly possible. [...].

Would it be possible to visit you in Australia, so that we can interact face-to-face, with my express intention being to become actually free from the human condition either before or during that visit?

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, Yes, certainly.

(I am responding to this latest email of yours first, rather than continuing to type out the last few paragraphs of the third part of my response to your second email, as your 9:30PM to 2:00 AM (EST) experience renders that redundant).

CLAUDIU: I understand that ‘there is no guarantee being made – be it either expressed or implied – other than to say that, when the conditions are ripe, magic happens.’ Yet, I think I would benefit greatly from visiting you. I am free from work April 21-29th, so somewhere in that period of time would be an ideal time (not necessarily all 8 days, though the more the better).

RICHARD: As I am free from commitments on both that date and during that period of time (all 8 days) I can pencil that into my schedule as awaiting confirmation.

CLAUDIU: Otherwise, I could visit just about any weekend for two or three days, given it is far enough in the future such that airplane tickets are not unnecessarily expensive.

RICHARD: Whatever date suits you best, of course, although I recommend the April 21st date due solely to the period of time (all 8 days) which you have available then.

Do you have a publicly-known email address (as in, an email address you can post on this forum) via which I can send you my private email address?

That way all the arrangements – the details about flight times and accommodation and so on – can take place privately.

Regards, Richard.

February 16 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

RICHARD: Whatever date suits you best, of course, although I recommend the April 21st date due solely to the period of time (all 8 days) which you have available then.

CLAUDIU: Let’s aim for that date, then.

I have confirmed with my employer and I am indeed free from April 21st to April 29th. Feel free to pencil me in, as I am most definitely coming, given that that time is still available for you. All that’s left now is to purchase plane tickets and figure out accommodations and other minutiae... let’s handle the details privately, as you suggested.

(Again, you can email me at [deleted]@... to establish private contact, and we can take it from there.) Very much looking forward to it,

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, Yes, both that date and period of time (all 8 days) are still available ... already pencilled in pending definite confirmation (in the form of the airline’s Flight Number and their designated Time of Arrival once you have purchased your ticket).

As you will see (above) the latter half of your public email address does not make it through the Yahoo Group’s security software (which automatically strips out anything after the ‘at’ symbol).

If you could post that latter half separately – the domain name half – or the whole of it sans the ‘at’ symbol I will then be able to conclude these arrangements privately.

Regards, Richard.

February 19 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

RICHARD: (...) As the magical prodigy which became known as ‘the quickening’ is a feature peculiar to being the genitor of the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of – via that enabling/ facilitating feature – (...)

CLAUDIU: Which ‘enabling/ facilitating feature’ are you referring to?

RICHARD: I am referring to that feature peculiar to being the genitor of the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of ... to wit: the magical prodigy which became known as ‘the quickening’.

CLAUDIU: Ah, got it. I got mixed up with the grammar a bit there. Sometimes it takes multiple passes to parse your sentences properly, though when the pieces have been fitted together the meaning flows together nicely. Here I have to question your usage of the word ‘genitor’. You say you are ‘the genitor of the completely new consciousness.’

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, Yes, indeed ... as the flesh-and-blood body typing these words – being sans the entire affective faculty/ the identity in toto – is being conscious (aka sentient) in a completely new/ totally original way (never before in human experience/ in human history has any body been able to be conscious/ able to be sentient thus sans the very psyche itself) then that epithet is a most apt descriptor inasmuch it explicitly conveys the radical nature inherent to the genesis of this epoch-changing consciousness.

(Please bear in mind that, in actualism terminology, the word consciousness refers to a flesh-and-blood body being conscious (the suffix ‘-ness’ forms a noun expressing a state or condition), as in being sentient, and not to some mystical/ psychic entity, which ‘quits the body’ at physical death, as is so prevalent in religio-spiritual/ mystico- metaphysical terminology).

CLAUDIU: Genitor means ‘a biological parent’, or ‘a generator; an originator’ (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/genitor); I don’t have access to a copy of the OED; all definitions taken from the wiktionary. Tossing the irrelevant ‘biological parent’ definition, ‘generator’ leads to ‘one who, or that which, generates, begets, causes, or produces’, that is ‘to bring into being; give rise to’. ‘Originator’ leads to ‘someone who originates, creates or founds something’.

To originate: ‘to give an origin or beginning to; to cause to be; to bring into existence.’

RICHARD: Yes, the word genitor comes from Latin (from genitus, past participle of gignere, to beget) and means to give existence to, to produce; to bring into existence (a situation, quality, result, etcetera); to give rise to; to bring about, to generate, and so on.

As the noun for the verb ‘beget’ is begetter my choice of the word genitor instead not only avoids any biblical connotations but carries with it that very ‘biological parent’ denotation you tossed (which is what ‘begetter’ denotes anyway).

Put specifically: this flesh-and-blood body is generating a totally new way to be conscious (a completely original consciousness) for all humankind to avail themselves of.

CLAUDIU: Prior to hearing you use that phrase, I thought an actual freedom from the human condition was your *discovery*.

RICHARD: To be precise: it was the identity inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago (in 1980, during a four-hour PCE, where it was indelibly imprinted into ‘his’ memory) who discovered what later came to be known as an actual freedom from the human condition. Vis.:

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘You have qualities. In the main page of the actualfreedom website, is written: ‘in this area are miscellaneous correspondents with the DISCOVERER of the method’ so you are something.

• [Richard]: ‘You can only be referring to the following (copy-pasted from the main page): ‘This website [‘The Third Alternative’] encompasses selections from the writings of the ‘discoverer’ of actual freedom and includes a substantial, wide-ranging correspondence. The journey into the institutionalised insanity of Spiritual Enlightenment and the emergence of actual freedom is clearly described in unambiguous terms’.

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘You are a discoverer ...

• [Richard]: ‘The word ‘discoverer’ is put in scare-quotes because I never discovered anything – it was the identity within that did all the work – as well you already know. Vis.:

[Co-Respondent]: ‘Richard, one sentence attracted my attention in your email. [quote]: ‘I never discovered anything ... the ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul discovered both the actualism method and the wide and wondrous path’.’

(../richard/listafcorrespondence/listaf44g.htm#08Jul04).

CLAUDIU: That is, you found something that was *already always available*, to wit:

[Richard]: ‘This is because the already always existing peace-on-earth has nothing to do with me ... I only happened to discover it.’ (...listaf22.htm).

Thus anyone could have discovered it before you and arrived at the same place – you just happened to be the first – and anyone still can discover it ...

RICHARD: I am interjecting mid-sentence here only to point out that when someone discovers something then everyone else thereafter utilises that person’s discovery ... they do not, each and every one of them thereafter, discover it.

Just to illustrate: when the aeroplane you are on lands in Australia are you really going to say, when you alight and set foot on the tarmac, that you have discovered Terra Australis Incognita?

Similarly, the actual world – hereafter known as Terra Actualis (to coin a unique name for it) – is already discovered and, as a direct consequence, is increasingly becoming populated.

CLAUDIU: ... and arrive at the same place, even without coming in contact with the AFT or with you or Vineeto or any actualist at all.

RICHARD: As the discovery that the instinctual passions/the identity formed thereof can be dispensed with requires sapience (aka sagacity or intelligence) in their stead then what you are saying, in effect, is that although it took 100,000 years for Homo Sapiens to evolve, to the point that one of them could figure out how to have that happen, each and every one hereafter still has to evolve to that point of figuring out for themselves.

Put simplistically, as the already always existing peace-on-earth is located in the already always existing Terra Actualis (ha ... used it already) then what has been required all this while is access to it, non?

Hence a totally new way of being conscious (a completely original consciousness) for all humankind to avail themselves of. (Hence also, of course, that feature known as ‘the quickening’).

CLAUDIU: The word ‘genitor’ implies something entirely different, though ... it implies that you *constructed* a new form of consciousness (as opposed to *discovered* a new form of consciousness), one which did not exist before (as opposed to one that was already always existing) ...

RICHARD: I am again interjecting mid-sentence as what you have there in your second parenthesis should have given you the clue ... to wit: just whereabouts exactly has this ‘one that was already always existing’ been all this while, then? (As your word ‘one’ refers back to your ‘a new form of consciousness’ phrasing then what your second parenthesis reads, when fully spelled-out, is ‘a new form of consciousness that was already always existing’).

Because the word consciousness refers to a flesh-and-blood body being conscious (the suffix ‘-ness’ forms a noun expressing a state or condition), or sentient, then how on earth could it have been already always existing? (Put succinctly, flesh-and-blood bodies are usually conscious, or sentient, for only 70, 80, 90 or 100-odd years).

Also, as the word ‘constructed’ (or ‘construct’ or ‘constructing’) does not appear in those dictionary words you provided further above then try ‘generating’ instead.

For example (leaving off your non sequitur second parenthesis):

[example only]: ‘The word ‘genitor’ implies that you are *generating* a new form of consciousness (as opposed to *discovered* a new form of consciousness), a new form of consciousness which did not exist before ...’. [end example].

Whereas, if the word constructing is used it looks like this:

[example only]: ‘The word ‘genitor’ implies that you are *constructing* a new form of consciousness (as opposed to *discovered* a new form of consciousness), a new form of consciousness which did not exist before ...’. [end example].

CLAUDIU: ... and one which you now bring people into (as opposed to showing them how to see that which was already there).

RICHARD: First, I do not ‘bring people into’ it; it is their own bodily consciousness – their own flesh-and-blood body being conscious or sentient – which is radically changed (via total and complete ‘self’-immolation).

Second (and again for emphasis), how on earth can I show people how to see a *new* form of a flesh-and-blood body being conscious, or sentient, which was *already* there?

CLAUDIU: Did you create this new consciousness, or merely discover it?

RICHARD: Neither ... by being this flesh-and-blood body only (‘only’ as in sans the entire psyche) I am *generating* this new consciousness/ this new way of being sentient (each moment again, in real-world time terminology, or perennially, in actual world terminology).

And, because this flesh-and-blood body is generating it – and generating it autonomously by the way – it is being generated calorifically (as in it is a calorific sentience).

CLAUDIU: If the latter – why the use of the word ‘genitor’?

RICHARD: ‘Tis no wonder all the criticasters writing on this forum began airing their ignorance in public with expressions like ‘Mr. Genitor’ and ‘O Genitor’, and so on, after reading this post of yours.

Perhaps if I were to put it this way: currently there are close to 7.0 billion flesh-and-blood bodies on this planet all generating their own consciousness, their own sentience, and yet each and every one of them (bar a mere handful so far) has an usurper – an alien entity/a feeling-being – lurking within and arrogating that consciousness, that sentience, by making out it is ‘their’ consciousness (as in ‘my’ consciousness).

Hence, of course, those ‘Mr. Genitor’ and ‘O Genitor’, and so on, expressions.

*

‘Tis all so simple, eh?

Regards, Richard.

--------------

P.S.: Again, please bear in mind that, in actualism terminology, the word consciousness refers to a flesh-and-blood body being conscious (the suffix ‘-ness’ forms a noun expressing a state or condition), as in being sentient, and not to some mystical/ psychic entity, which ‘quits the body’ at physical death, as is so prevalent in religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical terminology.

February 21 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

CLAUDIU: [...] Your message is frightening enough as it is, to an identity, as the message spells the total extinction of said identity.

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, When I read through your recent response to my latest post your above sentence stood out as such an oddity I am sending off this brief note so it will get to you soonest.

I draw your attention to the following (from the original Announcement Page which sat there, in plain view for two whole years, as being the latest words available) and, as you read through it this time around, bear in mind all the way through that word ‘frightening’ you have sent to me, above, because I am going to be asking a ‘reading and comprehension’ query at the end of it. Vis.:

[Peter]: ‘Some time in the evening of a day of delightfully relaxed reminiscings, reflections and musings, I leaned forward wondering what it was like for Richard living in the actual world of people, things and events as distinct from living in a self-created illusionary bubble of one’s own making. Wondering about the nature of his experiencing, I suddenly became aware of a quite extraordinary sweetness – a sweetness that was palpable rather than feeling based. I heard the words ‘This is not only for me, this is for everybody’ as I was literally being bathed in this sweetness.

[Richard]: ‘(...) as he reported becoming aware of a quite extraordinary sweetness his features were suffused with a radiant glow (not dissimilar to a sunburnt face ruddy with gleaming epidermal heat); as he advised of being literally bathed in that palpable sweetness his shining face shimmered with bands of iridescent pinks and mauves, subtly chasing each other upward from bottom to top, which more than amply conveyed the radical range and extent of his experiencing; as he had profound intimation of words portraying the philanthropic nature of altruistic ‘self’-sacrifice he expressed how sweet ‘his’ ending was to be; he spoke with soft intensity of how ‘he’ would go gladly into a sweetness of such all-consuming magnitude, of how sweetful a demise it was such that no human could ever have possibly wished for; of how there was no (expected) fear so vast as to best be called dread whatsoever; of how there was no darkness, no blackness, no abyss, no whatever, at all but, instead, only this incredible all-encompassing sweetness to go blessedly (my word not his) into oblivion with.

[Peter]: ‘This all-consuming experience of sweetness lasted perhaps less that a minute but this precursor left me with the utter confidence to proceed further into the actual world (...). The following evening, I found myself back on my couch, leaning across the little table that separated us, explaining to Richard that I experienced him as being on the other side of a veil – with only his face bulging through as it were. As was I explaining this to him, I was waving my hand in front of my face so as to illustrate the veil and I happened to look down at the table in front of me. On the woven table mat my attention was drawn to a dark blue plastic cigarette lighter, an empty glass, a tobacco pouch and other sundry items. All of a sudden, Richard’s phrase ‘the actual world of people, things and events’ came to mind and I found myself acknowledging that the things on the table existed in actuality, i.e. did in fact actually exist, and this being the case, here I was waving my hand in front of ‘people’, in this case Richard, saying that I experienced him as if behind a veil, i.e. not actually existing. It took only a few more seconds of switching my attention from the things on the table and my waving hand for the whole illusion of a separating veil to collapse – along with my illusory self-centred identity as I was gradually becoming aware of.

The whole experience was like a seamless transition between two worlds – from being a feeling being trapped within an illusionary all-encompassing self-created and sustained bubble to being here in the actual world. There was no dramatic end for ‘me’, no death-like traumatic experience, no prior psychic events or escapades, no ‘wall of fear’, no ‘abyss’ – rather there was a profound experience of sweetness, a ready acknowledgement of my destiny and a final understanding that the feeling of separateness was nothing other than an illusion of ‘my’ own making.

(www.actualfreedom.com.au/announcement1.htm).

Here is my ‘reading and comprehension’ query: whereabouts amongst those words did you gain the impression from that the total extinction of identity is ‘frightening’?

CLAUDIU: Perhaps greater care should be taken in getting it across?

RICHARD: I draw your attention to the following (from Sunday the 22nd of January 2012):

[Richard]: ‘It is this simple: a flesh-and-blood body is perfectly safe in regards flying to Australia on a prearranged agreement to meet in person (apart from the regular hazards associated with flight of course) and it is only ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself) who is at risk.

And as the transition from the real-world to this actual world is a seamless transition – all what happens is that an illusion is no more (somewhat analogous to Santa Claus, et al., ceasing to appear real upon the illusion being exposed) – it is thus all much ado about nothing ... literally!

It is quite magical, though.

I simply cannot comprehend why you are telling me that ‘greater care should be taken’ in getting it [the message spelling the total extinction of identity] across?

Here is another account I wrote only a few months back (on Monday 19 December, 2011). Vis.:

[Richard]: ‘(...) a couple of months ago a person of Indian birth and upbringing flew into Coolangatta Airport late one night on a prearranged agreement to meet in person so as to talk about her life and to gain clarity in her life-style/ her livelihood situation.

Less than 24 hours after landing she was actually free of blind nature’s instinctual passions/the feeling-being formed thereof.

In other words, the person who landed at the airport (that feeling being who needed to gain clarity in her life-style/ her livelihood situation) vanished without a trace, in a matter of seconds, the following afternoon. She is now living the ‘peace-on-earth’ actual freedom (...)’.

*

Ain’t life grand!

Regards, Richard.

February 23 2012

Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom

CLAUDIU: [...] If the latter [merely discover it] – why the use of the word ‘genitor’?

RICHARD: ‘Tis no wonder all the criticasters writing on this forum began airing their ignorance in public with expressions like ‘Mr. Genitor’ and ‘O Genitor’, and so on, after reading this post of yours.

CLAUDIU: I do not think the other members of this list began commenting on the phrase ‘the genitor’ after reading my post.

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, Au contraire ... look, your post is now archived online as Message No. 10939. Vis.:

• Claudiu wrote: ‘Here I have to question your usage of the word ‘genitor’. (Thu Feb 9, 2012).

Then, 6 days later (109 messages after yours), this forum’s only ((((-: ‘uber-intellectual’ :-)))) criticaster began publicly airing his outstanding ignorance on the topic with that aforementioned expression ‘O Genitor’ (in Message No. 11xxx). Vis.:

• [Respondent No 2] wrote: ‘It is not about your fellow human being, o genitor of actual freedom’. (Wed Feb 15, 2012).

Then, within two days of his post (8 days and 194 messages after yours), this forum’s chief ((((-: ‘snappy one-liners’ :-))) criticaster began airing his multifaceted ignorance in public with the aforementioned expression ‘Mr. Genitor’ (in Message No. 11xxx). Vis.:

• [Respondent No. 27] wrote: ‘Pure ungrounded mysticism, Mr Genitor’. (Fri Feb 17, 2012).

I am, of course, using the word criticaster to refer to anyone silly enough to present to me for my perusal – and in public mind you – an ill-informed and, thus, ill-advised critique of something they evidently know either nothing or next-to-little about (and also have, quite often, not even bothered to do some preliminary research on the topic via all those freely available words on The Actual Freedom Trust website). Vis.:

‘criticaster (rare): a minor or inferior critic’ (Oxford Dictionary).

(The suffix -aster forms nouns denoting either poor quality (as in criticaster, poetaster) or incomplete resemblance (in botany, for example, an oleaster); the earliest cited usage of the word criticaster, initially referring to ‘an inferior and pretentious critic’, was in 1684).

CLAUDIU: As a feeling-being, I can tell you that the phrase ‘the genitor’ most certainly implies an ‘identity’, and a sense of ownership – as in, ‘this actually free consciousness is *my* consciousness; *I* (as identity) created it’.

RICHARD: Whereas the 30+ month-long process whereby the totally new way of being conscious (a completely original consciousness), for all humankind to avail themselves of, came into existence was entirely involuntary (as in ‘not due to conscious volition’ according to the Oxford Dictionary). For instance (written in May 2006):

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘Has anyone ever gone crazy from using the AF method?

• [Richard]: ‘Yes, I have been duly diagnosed by two accredited psychiatrists as suffering from a severe and chronic psychotic disorder ... the symptoms of which are as follows (with the official description parenthesised): 1. Depersonalisation (no sense of identity) ... as in no ‘self’ by whatever name. 2. Derealisation (lost touch with reality) ... as in reality has vanished completely. 3. Alexithymia (unable to feel the affections) ... as in no affective feelings whatsoever. 4. Anhedonia (inability to feel pleasure/pain) ... as in no affective pleasure/pain facility.

Moreover, I have that most classic symptom of craziness ... that everyone else is crazy but me.

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘ ... is there a link where you talk about your psychiatric experience?

• [Richard]: ‘No ... copy-paste the following, as-is, into the search-box at Google: accredited psychiatrist site:www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/ Then left-click ‘search’ (or tap ‘enter’) ... you should get about 31 hits.

• [Co-Respondent]: ‘If not I am very curious to know how you ended up being professionally diagnosed as ‘crazy’.

• [Richard]: ‘The official term for insanity these days, due in no small part to the medicalisation of psychiatry, is mental illness/mental disorder ... and it was mainly because of such medicalisation that professional diagnosis came about.

As briefly as possible: at one stage during *a thirty-month involuntary and incessant excitation of the brain cells* (officially diagnosed as being ‘an excess of dopamine in the post-synaptic receptors’) after becoming actually free from the human condition I vaguely recalled, from my art-college days, that a person experiencing what was colloquially known as a ‘bad trip’ on lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) could be brought down with an injection of some medication or another so I popped into the nearest medical centre to where I was then residing and an elderly general practitioner (with very shaky hands) referred me to a specialist as a matter of course.

For more details about that neuronal agitation copy-paste the following, as-is, into the search-box at Google: excitation of the brain cells site:www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/ You will get you about 17 hits’. [emphasis added]. Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 111, 6 May 2006

Put succinctly: it was that ‘thirty-month involuntary and incessant excitation of the brain cells’ – otherwise known as ‘neuronal agitation’/ ‘cerebral agitation’ – which brought the totally new way of being conscious (a completely original consciousness) for all humankind to avail themselves of, into existence.

(Hence that epithet ‘genitor’ being a most apt descriptor inasmuch it explicitly conveys the radical nature inherent to the genesis of this epoch-changing consciousness).

As it was altogether a ghastly/ horrendous period – I refer to it as being ‘macabre and gruesome’ in ‘Richard’s Journal’ for instance – I was well-pleased that none of that daring handful of pioneers, circa late 2009/early 2010, underwent anything of that nature.

(So as to convey some idea of what it entailed I have, on occasion, likened the intensity of that involuntary and incessant synaptic reconfiguration to what it would be like, after having physically gashed an arm or leg deeply, to then spend the next 30+ months dragging the sharp point of a sewing-needle back-and-forth through that gash 24/7, without any let-up whatsoever, and with all of modern medicine’s arsenal of drugs only exacerbating/ magnifying the intensity).

CLAUDIU: It was only until you mentioned that it is the actual flesh-and-blood body that generates consciousness that I (think I) understood what it is you were saying.

RICHARD: I am pleased to know that you comprehend that most salient fact.

Regards, Richard.

December 18 2012

Re: Better phrasings...

G’day Richard, Just wanted to drop in and say it’s good to see you writing again! I do find I benefit from your continued correspondence and wanted to point that out explicitly as it’s clear that not everybody on this mailing list does.

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, Thank you ... it does indeed make for a change to not only be reading adversarial feedback.

CLAUDIU: I thought I’d share something with the list seeing as how a few people reading this still seem interested in becoming free from the human condition. What helped me most recently is what you wrote here:

[Richard to Srid]: ‘Does your experiential understanding – that affective feelings come prior to those hormonal physical reactions – include the experiential understanding that it is those affective feelings which trigger off those hormones (the hormones which produce those physical reactions)? As in:

no affective feelings = no hormonal production; no hormonal production=no physical reaction. [endquote]

Though I had noticed this in my own experience, I hadn’t formed it quite so succinctly in my mind. I noticed that, thanks to many months of training myself to do so following the advice written in MCTB and given to me by the DhO participants, is that I had reduced everything to physical sensations – touch, sight, sound, etc., with thoughts thrown in as well (though there was debate as to whether thoughts can also just be reduced to one of the five senses).

RICHARD: Surely a debate, as to whether thoughts can also be just reduced to physical sensations, could be resolved by recourse to the same place – the buddhavacana (‘the word/ teaching of the Buddha’) – from which the advice ‘written in MCTB’ and given to you by ‘the DhO participants’ came from, no?

I only ask as the initials ‘MCTB’ are a shorthand way of referring to a book entitled ‘Mastering The Core Teachings Of Buddha’ and if that reduce-everything-to-physical-sensations advice, which is at the very core of that pragmatic/ hardcore dharma practice, is not drawn from the buddhavacana then that title is obviously a lie.

(Apart from that: perhaps a somewhat more accurate title, anyway, might be ‘Mastering The Core Teachings Of Buddhaghosa’ as modern-day Theravadan Buddhism stems mostly from him and his ilk).

CLAUDIU: Thus, when I felt something unpleasant in my body, or some persistent tension, the only recourse, meditatively, was to put my attention on it, and notice it as being ‘impermanent’ (that is, as according to MCTB, vibrating in real-time at a certain frequency), ‘not-self’ (that is, as according to MCTB, happening on its own without a ‘self’ involved), and ‘dukkha’ (that is, according to MCTB, unsatisfactory in some fundamental way). The affect itself is taken completely out of the picture. It is noticed, but it is noticed strictly as a physical sensation, and the solution is to do something about that physical sensation. Here is where entering altered states of consciousness helps as it made the psyche more readily able to do something with those sensations.

RICHARD: I cannot help but observe that, when you put ‘my attention’ on it vibrating in real-time at a certain frequency (and thus attentively notice ‘anicca’, ‘anatta’, ‘dukkha’), both ‘my attention’ and ‘me’ (whose very attentiveness it is) are not included in that noticing of ‘anicca’, ‘anatta’, ‘dukkha’.

CLAUDIU: However, I had always noticed that if I was distracted by doing some work or being engrossed in a movie or engaging in a conversation or simply doing something fun, the tension would disappear. It would only come back when I went back into my default meditative state. Of course, the advice was so pathological as to indicate that one should be meditating in some manner even during such activities.

I did do so to a large degree but I could never bring myself to do it 100% because I knew that those persistent tensions and unpleasant feelings were being accentuated, if not caused, by that very meditation. So, although I would tell people that I was ‘always meditating’, which was somewhat true in that I was almost-always cultivating an altered state of consciousness, I would still distract myself quite often to get away from the pain.

RICHARD: In regards to continuing the meditative practise during activities, are chairs, desks, buildings, windows, sidewalks, bricks, rocks, trees, flowers, mountains, and so on, all independently (in and of themselves) vibrating in real-time at a certain frequency as well?

I only ask because I am sitting here, currently sipping from a glass of water in one hand whilst typing with the other, and I am unable to notice – via being this very tasting, touching, smelling, seeing and listening – either the glass or the water to be vibrating in real-time at all (let alone at a certain frequency).

Or is it, perchance, an intuitive noticing (meaning that only an identity has that capacity)?

CLAUDIU: After seeing the ‘affective feeling –> hormonal production –> physical reaction’ bit above, however, it’s become clear what was happening. By focusing exclusively on the physical reactions, what is happening is that the affect is being purposefully ignored.

RICHARD: An affective ignorer purposefully ignoring affect, via exclusive focus on physical reactions, is more a sure-fire method of ‘self’-survival than anything else.

CLAUDIU: Thus there seems to be a tension with a weird and unknown cause because that very cause is something that one is denying exists. The tension is painful in and of itself but is made further painful by actively identifying it as unsatisfactory.

This naturally leads to aversion and one tries one’s hardest to make those sensations go away however one can, which ends up being an attempt to suppress the affect. This then leads to ‘dark nights’ which one then tries to get oneself out of by being equanimous to those sensations – that is, a lack of caring that they hurt anymore. This does ‘work’ temporarily but the ‘dark nights’ come back to bite you again and again, as is amply documented in MCTB and on the DhO.

I put ‘work’ in scare quotes because the problem was self-caused in the first place – a direct result of not realizing what affect is! I found that, although I understood after my visit to Australia that affect is something besides a physical sensation – rather it is that intuitive felt sense manifesting in any number of ways – I was still plagued by tensions that wouldn’t go away.

RICHARD: That ‘intuitive felt sense’ you are referring to is those conjoined twins hedonic-tone (vedāna) and agnition (sāñña); every experience or state – including its emotions/ passions and sentiments/ moods – has hedonic-tone (a degree of affective pleasure or displeasure); intrinsic to hedonic-tone is its intuitive feeling of ‘being’, an affectively felt subsistence, and agnition is a mostly-subliminal/ partly-perceptive acknowledgement-recognition of ‘my’ existence, subsisting reflexively as ‘being’, or ‘presence’, as in being present-to-itself each and every moment again.

CLAUDIU: The only thing I could do was distract myself by doing something fun – which I did do and which helped a lot. No more tai chi and no more meditation freed up more time to do things like hang out, play video games, solve puzzles, watch TV shows, drink with friends, etc.

The tensions were still there when I was not doing anything in particular, though, thanks to my aforementioned months of mental training. I found, though, that if I simply asked myself what the problem was, I would soon get an answer! I had noticed this before but it hadn’t quite hit home in the same way – whenever I felt that tension it simply meant that something was bothering me! It was remarkably difficult at first to figure out just what that was, though. The overwhelming unpleasantness of the physical tension made it hard to keep a cool head and actually look at what was going on. It was a fear of seeing what was actually wrong, likely because of the suppressive nature of the meditation I had been doing (even though I was self-describing it as not being suppressive). I found I thought of a metaphor wherein I had to undunk my head from my body in some intuitive way – to back off morbidly focusing on the physical sensations – to allow the affect to be felt.

This took some active doing but it was well-worth it.

RICHARD: It reads as if you have found a way to extricate yourself, or back out from, what some key pragmatic/ hardcore dharma proponents have called the ‘Insight Disease’ (aka ‘Dharma Disease’) because previously the only way out of it was to ‘get this done’.

CLAUDIU: And the message of yours I quoted above, Richard, served to remind me of all that again and to clarify the above even further.

I still experience these tensions occasionally but now I’m actually able to say as much without causing the tension to arise/get any worse. Now I know that whenever something like that starts up, there’s simply something bothering me, and it’s just up to me to either sit down and figure out what it is on the spot, or, if I’m too tired or unwilling or lazy, to distract myself and put it off until later. The latter option is becoming less and less appealing as time goes on, however.

RICHARD: I will copy-paste here what I wrote in Message No. 11929 as my co-respondent has dismissed it with what is known in the trade as ‘verbal hand-waving’ (even whilst specifically referring to you by name). Vis.:

• [Richard]: ‘Words cannot properly express just how much of a dastardly act it was for the affers 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 eleven days 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 casualties.

‘Tis craziness run riot ... utter madness’. List D, No. 12, 10 December 2012

Regards, Richard.

December 27 2012

Re: it is impossible to marry Actualism and Buddhism

RESPONDENT No. 32: I see how conveniently the AFT has edited and pasted the correspondence to it’s advantage. Shallowness indeed runs deep !

..and it is precisely for these reasons Actualism is going to fail as a long term solution..I’m unsubscribing from this group and I’m off Actualism practise until I see and hear that Actualism is indeed a successful practise to follow.

Good luck to everyone here !

RICHARD: Despite what you say you [quote] ‘see’ [endquote] it is not the case that The Actual Freedom Trust has edited and pasted my correspondence to The Actual Freedom Trust’s advantage (whatever that means). [...] List D, No. 32, 27 December 2012

RESPONDENT No. 32: I have catalogued the points of interest from this conversation on the Dho. This will help prevent another fool like me to waste time discussing such things with you. Right, eh ?

RICHARD: Whilst I am pleased to see you are trying to make it clear to pragmatic/hardcore dharma practitioners that Buddhism is not Actualism (your emphasis on the fact I do *not* point out dukkha and the cessation of dukkha might very well drive it home to them) was it really necessary to resort to lying? Vis.:

[Respondent No. 32]: ‘Keep in mind however , the above link on the AFT does not depict everything that was spoken..in fact *several things I’ve said have been totally removed*’. [emphasis added].

Nothing, absolutely nothing you said in any of my five (5) emails to you on the ‘Yahoo Groups’ forum has been edited-out ... let alone [quote] ‘totally removed’ [endquote]. List D, No. 32, 27 December 2012a

CLAUDIU: I think there’s been a simple misunderstanding here, not intentional deceit (which the word ‘lying’ connotates). I believe No. 32 was referring to the parts of his emails to you that you did not reply to and thus did not quote in your responses to him. As it’s just your responses that are archived on the AFT website and not also the responses of the respondents, those parts of your conversation with No. 32 are not archived on the AFT site. [...].

I just thought I’d chip in because it’s clear to me this wasn’t a case of lying (intentional deceit) but rather two different yet reasonable understandings of the same situation.

RESPONDENT No. 37 (Sock Puppet ‘I’: how can Richard’s omission of a correspondent’s query re: the emotion of ‘wonder’ be a ‘simple misunderstanding’? [...]. this pussyfooting insincerity wasn’t worth dumping all that jet fuel for [Respondent]. call a spade a spade least you to be read as just another gullible patsy [...]. wake up man!

CLAUDIU: Chill out, yo. [...]. All of Richard’s emails are reproduced faithfully on the AFT. And yet, some of No. 32’s words are not on the AFT because No. 32’s emails are not reproduced there at all – only the parts Richard quoted for context in his own emails are. Neither party is lying, here.

Just a simple misunderstanding.

RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, How nice it would be were it all ‘just a simple misunderstanding’ where ‘neither party is lying’ (despite the fact ‘all of Richard’s emails are reproduced faithfully’ in the website’s archives), eh?

Here is the essence of the matter:

• [Respondent No. 32]: ‘(...) infact several things I’ve said have been totally removed’ [endquote].

Now, in order for those [quote] ‘several things I’ve said’ [endquote] to have even possibly been ‘totally removed’, before being ‘edited and pasted’ into the website’s archives, they do have to have been there in those posts of mine, at the ‘Yahoo Groups’ forum, in the first place.

Hence my ‘was it really necessary to resort to lying?’ query.

More to the point, what my co-respondent has done/is doing is quite nasty. Vis.:

1. He falsely asserted guile (‘see how conveniently the AFT ...’)

2. He falsely attributed deceit (‘... has edited and pasted’).

3. He falsely ascribed profiting (‘... to it’s advantage’).

4. He falsely asserted pelsy (‘shallowness indeed runs deep!’).

5. He falsely ascribed culpability (‘precisely for these reasons’).

6. He falsely attached malfunction (‘... Actualism is going to fail’).

7. He falsely appended suspicion (‘this has laid a serious doubt’).

8. He falsely attributed miscreation (‘the validity of the claims’).

9. He falsely asserted malice (‘more war-like than peace-like’).

Here is a useful term:

• [Smear Tactics]: smear tactics differ from normal discourse or debate in that they do not bear upon the issues or arguments in question. A smear is a simple attempt to malign a group or an individual and to attempt to undermine their credibility.

Smears often consist of ad hominem attacks in the form of unverifiable rumours and are often half-truths, distortions, or even outright lies; smear campaigns are often propagated by gossip spreading.

Even when the facts behind a smear are shown to lack proper foundation, the tactic is often effective because the target’s reputation is tarnished before the truth is known. Smears are also effective in diverting attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group. The target of the smear is typically forced to defend his reputation rather than focus on the previous issue.

Smear tactics are considered by many to be a low, disingenuous form of discourse; they are nevertheless very common’. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign).

Did you notice how all this has indeed had the desired effect of ‘diverting attention away from the matter in question and onto the individual or group’?

In other words, what happened to his clearly expressed interest in ‘knowing the answer’ to that ‘very good question’ another had asked? Vis.:

• [Respondent No. 32]: ‘A very good question imho and I’m also interested in knowing the answer to this’ [endquote].

*

Lastly, for just one example of a classic smear tactic (posted onto another forum):

10.

• [Richard to Respondent No. 32]: ‘As there is nothing, absolutely nothing, to prevent you from practising the actualism method (enjoying and appreciating being alive, being here, each moment again), whilst you are typing those words/whilst you are reading these words, that is a go-sit-on-a-cushion-and-withdraw-from-physicality kind of cop-out’.

• [No. 32’s comments]: ..and what kind of cop outs would want to sail away on a private boat named MSV Actualis, eh?)
(dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/3819845#_19_message_3819859).

That ‘sail away on a private boat’ comment is, of course, totally at odds with what was unambiguously advertised: Vis.:

• http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfreedom/message/8190 Richard to the List at Large, 13 December 2009

Do you still maintain that ‘neither party is lying’?

Regards, Richard.


CLAUDIU (Part Two)

RETURN TO MAILING LIST ‘D’ INDEX

CLAUDIU’S REPORT OF VISITING RICHARD AND VINEETO

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