|
Richard’s Selected Correspondence On Psyche, Psychology and Psychiatry
RESPONDENT: You said some thing about vibes web between humans, like invisible threads. Only one free of psychic identity are also free of this psychic web, so, how to minimize this menace to avoid this subliminal effects after the lecture of your words and journal? RICHARD: First, an intelligent appraisal (such as ‘all throughout history’ above); second, becoming cognisant of your own affective vibes and, thus, psychic currents (some peoples are naturally more sensitive than others); third, then discerning when an affective vibe/ psychic current is another person’s and not yours (although be aware of projecting); fourth, being as happy and as harmless (free of malice and sorrow) as is humanly possible can be contagious so to speak); fifth, the courage of the conviction born of the PCE is always immensely beneficial; lastly, remembering that to care to dare is to dare to care. RESPONDENT: 5. Why all this collateral effects resemble an exotic psychic allergy in my previous social habits? And if my organism are rejecting this internal changes during this re-wiring of my nervous system? RICHARD: Nobody said that the process of becoming actually free of the human condition would not be
disturbing; indeed, such disturbance would have to be one of the primary reasons why it is entirely new to human experience/ human
history. RESPONDENT: Also – and this question is a bit out of left field – do you experience any flickering or flashing or shimmering in the visual field while gazing at an otherwise still scene? RICHARD: No. RESPONDENT: I’ve only really been noticing this since I started paying attention to impermanence. RICHARD: As there is no impermanence in actuality then it would be to your advantage to take a second look at whatever it is you are paying attention to. RESPONDENT: It seems to me that this vibrational aspect of sensations comes and goes in a cyclic fashion. Sometimes I notice that everything is solid and marvellous and clear and the world seems buoyant and peaceful – and wonder if this is what my most solid memory of a PCE is based on. RICHARD: As a PCE – the direct (unmediated) experience of actuality – is the immediate apprehension of infinitude (infinite space; eternal time; perdurable matter) and, thus, the absolute and utter permanence of the universe then it would also be to your advantage to take a second look at whatever it is your most solid memory is based upon. RESPONDENT: However, if I pay attention to anything for too long the flashing/ flickering appears. Is that anything you’re familiar with? RICHARD: Only in the months prior to the eleven years of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment (and, on occasion, during that period). RESPONDENT: In case you’re wondering if there is a medical basis to it, I have explained it to an optometrist, had an eye exam and got the all clear. RICHARD: Yes ... manifestations of that nature are more a feature of the affective faculty’s epiphenomenal psychic facility than anything else. For instance I had flashing lights ‘zapping’ in front of my eyes; electrical bolts of lightning dazzling on the eyeballs; rushes of energy surging up through my diaphragm; pressure-pains in the base of the neck; intense tingling sensations on the surface of my skin; liquid sounds ‘gurgling’ through my brain; convulsive twitching of limbs; surges of power travelling up the spine and up over the back and the top of the head down to the forehead; a vivid blue light, an internal blue of rapturous bliss, behind the eyebrows; singing in my ears; an all-knowing cyclopean eye in the sky watching my every move and many, many other weird things. I have been telepathic; I have been telemetric; I have accessed the ‘Akashic Record’; I have ... the list goes on and on. They all amount to nothing in the end. Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom RESPONDENT No. 25: [...]. Let me be clear, because it seems that you are not getting my point – or you are avoiding it, I don’t know which. RICHARD: I have snipped all of my words as they were getting in the way of what you want to say ... to wit: that Richard is either myopic or evasive. Yet, I got your point the moment you posted your first reply (Message No.
10xxx And I also did not avoid your point as I am in full agreement that the collective psyche (that psychic web/
psychic network connecting all feeling-beings) is paranormal; indeed, nowhere at all on The Actual Freedom Trust website do I ever
say otherwise; I even refer to the ‘James Randi Educational Foundation’, the ‘Indian Sceptic’, the ‘Australian Sceptic’,
as well as a now-defunct society in the UK, which all offer a large amount of money to the first person who can conclusively
demonstrate paranormal or supernatural phenomena. (Incidentally, those references in my writings do not even have to be searched
for as they are helpfully copy-pasted into the ‘Selected Correspondence’ section under the headings ‘Psyche RESPONDENT No. 25: The ‘metaphysical’ does not come in with your reference to ‘calorific energy’ or even the ‘quickening.’ RICHARD: I am pleased to know you comprehend that salient fact. RESPONDENT No. 25: Again, I can understand the ‘psychic web’ as ‘vibes’ passed between people when there is the potential to interact – or even in proximity. RICHARD: Oh? What physical mechanism, as in what scientists know about physics, would or could support the existence and function of what you can understand as ‘vibes’ passed between people when there is the potential to interact – or even in proximity? You do realise, do you not, that ‘vibes’ is a colloquial-ism for affective feelings – emotions/ passions – which have no existence in actuality? (If you do not then, next you may well be telling me how emotions/ passions have a physical existence and function, as in what scientists know about physics, and are not as what could or would be normally termed as ‘affective’). Also, if you are ‘way off base’ as to your understanding (as ‘vibes’ passed between people when there is the potential to interact, for example)– one can ask where else such a person who allows himself to use a ‘bizarre’ understanding strays unwittingly from the facts. Your current writing is just as ‘affective’ as what one finds on the Mills & Boon bookshelves. It is possible that some romanticists may be able to accept what you can understand, but this closes the door to those that begin with what is known scientifically about physics. If your understanding is correct, then science – as we know it – would have to be radically revised. If we see a radical revision is necessary to physics, then that would open the door to all manner of ‘affective’ phenomena – emotions, passions, feelings, affections, moods, vibes (love/ hate; fear/ courage; anger/ affection; gladness/ sadness), etc. Where does it end? I wrote my above words due to the fact that you stated what you can understand as ‘vibes’ passed between
people when there is the potential to interact – or even in proximity. Considering that I don’t know of any scientific
evidence for what you can understand as ‘vibes’ passed between people, would you mind venturing an hypothesis or theory as to
how those ‘vibes’ could have occurred in a purely physical manner? I am happy to rescind my description of the ‘affective’
nature of your current writings if you can provide a convincing case as to how those extraordinary events you can understand as
‘vibes’ can occur in the physical world. Ha ... ain’t life grand! RESPONDENT: Richard’s modus operandi: A: 1: Spout utter nonsense about world in ‘reality’ [...snip...]. 2: People say: [...snip...]. 3. Say that: [...snip...]. 4: Problem solved. B: 1. Spout utter nonsense about world in ‘actuality’ [...snip...]. 2: People say: [...snip...]. 3. Say that: [...snip...]. 4: Problem solved. C: 1. Spout misleading or patently false or confusing nonsense to promote [...snip...]. 2: People say: [...snip...]. 3. Make it even more confusing by [...snip...]. 4: Problem solved. RICHARD: G’day No. 2, I have snipped-out your above attempts to comprehend how things operate in actuality as it is all quite simple here, where flesh-and-blood bodies are already living, when contrasted to what feeling-beings make of it. For instance: A: 1. No. 25 wrote that without scientific evidence – evidence as to what physical mechanism (as in what scientists know about physics) would or could support both its existence and function – this ‘collective psyche’ (that psychic web/ psychic network connecting all feeling-beings) which Richard refers to is what would normally be termed as ‘paranormal’. 2. Richard wrote that he is in full agreement that the collective psyche he refers to – that psychic web/ psychic network connecting all feeling-beings – is indeed paranormal (and further advised that nowhere at all on The Actual Freedom Trust website does he ever say otherwise). 3. You assert, above, that Richard’s modus operandi is to spout utter nonsense about world in ‘reality’ (in your Section A, sub-section No. 1 assertion). 4. What is implicit your assertion is that No. 25 is spouting utter nonsense too. 5. Since he spouted that which you assert is utter nonsense first – and has been most insistent, throughout several emails, that Richard spout it too – then what you characterise as ‘Richard’s modus operandi’ would be better characterised by you, in this instance, as ‘No. 25’s modus operandi’, would it not? 6. Richard wrote that without scientific evidence – evidence as to what physical mechanism (as in what scientists know about physics) would or could support both their existence and function – those ‘vibes’ (the emotional/ passional feelings common to all feeling-beings) which No. 25 refers to are what would normally be termed as ‘affective’. 7. You assert, above, that Richard’s modus operandi is to spout utter nonsense about world in ‘reality’ (in your Section A, sub-section No. 1 assertion). 8. What is implicit in your assertion is that the categorisation of ‘vibes’ – those emotional/ passional feelings common to all feeling-beings – as being ‘affective’ is utter nonsense. 9. As it is simply not rational to characterise that categorisation (of those emotional/ passional feelings common to all feeling-beings as ‘affective’) as to be spouting utter nonsense it is, therefore, quite valid to infer that what you characterise ‘Richard’s modus operandi’ as – as to spout utter nonsense about world in ‘reality’ – would be better characterised by you, in this instance, as ‘Respondent’s modus operandi’, would it not? * B: 1. Richard wrote that ‘vibes’ is a colloquialism for affective feelings – emotions/ passions – which have no existence in actuality. 2. You assert, further above, that Richard’s modus operandi is to spout utter nonsense about world in ‘actuality’ (in your Section B, sub-section No. 1 assertion). 3. What is implicit in that assertion of yours is that anybody who is having, or can recall having, a PCE (a pure conscious experience) is, according to you, spouting utter nonsense as well. 4. You are on record (in the Yahoo Group forum archives) as stating you cannot recall ever having had a PCE. 5. Despite having no experiential understanding/no intimate knowledge of a PCE you nevertheless – and thus solely by the exercising of intelligence – categorise an actual freedom from the human condition as being ‘Mahasamadhi’ (in the Yahoo Group forum archives) and ‘Parinirvana’ (on your ‘Remains of the Day’ web log). 6. What is implicit in that intellectual categorisation of yours – that an actual freedom from the human condition is, therefore, an ASC (an altered state of consciousness) – is that all PCE’s are thus really ASC’s. 7. What is further implicit in that intellectual categorisation of yours – that all PCE’s are really ASC’s – is that anybody who is having, or can recall having, a PCE is, according to you, spouting utter nonsense as well. 8. As the primary characteristic of a PCE (the abeyance of the entire affective faculty/ the identity in toto) is quite distinct from the primary characteristic of an ASC (the sublimation of negative affections/ the transcendence of egoic identity) it is, therefore, quite valid to infer that your inability to recall ever having had a PCE is what is crippling your intelligence. 9. As it is simply not rational to categorise PCE’s as being ASC’s then what you characterise ‘Richard’s modus operandi’ as – as to spout utter nonsense about world in ‘actuality’ – would be better characterised as ‘Respondent’s modus operandi’, would it not? * C: 1. As he did not know of any scientific evidence for what No. 25 could understand as ‘vibes’ (affective feelings) being passed between people, Richard asked whether he (No. 25) would mind venturing an hypothesis or theory as to how those ‘vibes’ (emotions/ passions) could have occurred in a purely physical manner; Richard added that he was happy to rescind his description of the ‘affective’ nature of No. 25’s current writings if he (No. 25) could provide a convincing case as to how those extraordinary events he (No. 25) could understand as ‘vibes’ (those affective feelings labelled emotions/ passions) can occur in the physical world. 2. As there is no scientific evidence – evidence as to what physical mechanism (as in what scientists know
about physics) would or could support both their existence and function – for those ‘vibes’ (the affective feelings labelled
emotions/ passions which are common to all feeling-beings) then one of the two primary characteristics of a PCE (the abeyance of
the entire affective faculty) is not contradicted by science 3. Therefore it is simply not rational to characterise Richard’s modus operandi as being to spout misleading or patently false or confusing nonsense, as in your Section C, sub-section No. 1 assertion, just because Richard wrote that ‘vibes’ – which is a colloquialism for affective feelings (emotions/ passions) – have no existence in actuality (and especially so given a PCE evidences it to be entirely factual and, thus patently, neither misleading nor confusing). 4. One of the fundamental and outstanding features of a PCE – which you are on record (in the Yahoo Group forum archives) as stating you cannot recall ever having – is that both the entire affective faculty and the identity in toto are but an illusion; similarly, one of the fundamental and outstanding features of an actual freedom from the human condition (about which you have no experiential understanding/ intimate knowledge of whatsoever), is that both the entire affective faculty and the identity in toto were indeed but an illusion. 5. Integral to what Richard wrote overall (in this email you are responding to) is that the term ‘affective faculty’ includes its epiphenomenal psychic facility – an integral factor made explicit via quotes to that very effect in the previous email – regardless of whether any particular feeling-being is (intuitively) sensitive to its epiphenomenal presence in their psyche or not. 6. Now, when Richard writes/ talks to a fellow human being, to a person who is living the illusion that they
really are a feeling-being/ really do have affections, he pays lip-service to their illusion 7. In this particular instance No. 25 is demurring over which parts of his reality/ reality itself (his illusion/ illusion itself) are real (aka ‘normal’) and which parts of it are not real (aka ‘paranormal’) and is insisting that Richard admit that the parts which to No. 25 are not real (as in ‘paranormal’) are indeed, in reality, not real; as Richard is in full agreement that there is no scientific evidence that ‘paranormal’ phenomena occur in a purely physical manner he thus also unreservedly agrees that ‘paranormal’ phenomena do not occur in the physical world. 8. What Richard does not agree with is No. 25’s point that, because he (No. 25) is not intuitively sensitive to the ‘paranormal’ phenomena in his (No. 25’s) psyche, Richard should also discount the ‘paranormal’ phenomena of some other feeling-beings (who were indeed intuitively sensitive to its epiphenomenal presence in their psyche) as being invalid in regards to being the reason why, all-of-a-sudden and within the hour of Devika’s/ Irene’s death, they had unrestricted access to the personification of that palpable life-force called ‘pure intent’ – that actually occurring stream of benevolence and benignity which originates in the vast and utter stillness that is the essential character of the universe itself – and, thereby, altruistically enabled/ facilitated access to the completely new consciousness (a totally original way of being conscious) for all humankind to avail themselves of. 9. As it is simply not rational to discount the ‘paranormal’ phenomena of other feeling-beings (who were indeed intuitively sensitive to its epiphenomenal presence in their psyche), solely because there is no scientific evidence for its existence and function, Richard provided a practical demonstration to No. 25 (by paraphrasing No. 25’s own words) how pointless it was to discount ‘paranormal’ phenomena via an appeal to scientific evidence because ‘affective’ phenomena – which for him (No. 25) is evidently part of his reality/ reality itself (his illusion/ illusion itself) – can be similarly discounted because there is no scientific evidence for the existence and function of ‘affective’ phenomena either. * As I said at the beginning, it is all quite simple, in actuality.
Regards, Richard. RESPONDENT: Firstly I would like to say hello, and to say that I’m glad I’ve found this place. The eliminating social identity technique actually works. RICHARD: Welcome to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list ... just what ‘eliminating social identity technique’ is it that you refer to? RESPONDENT: I’m aware that it [telepathy] is not a sympathetic subject here, but I still would very much care to talk about it. I had a few experiences with telepathy, and I just can’t deny them and what happened. RICHARD: Nobody is asking you to deny them ... on the contrary:
Nor will you be asked, for that matter, to deny ASC’s/ CCE’s, OBE’s/ NDE’s, egos/ souls, gods/ goddesses, imagination/ intuition, emotions/ passions, and so on, and so forth, either as such events/ entities/ experiences are all too real to be invalidated by mere denial. RESPONDENT: There was one time when I’ve dreamt about something very, very precise that actually happened in the future, and few other incidents, that just can’t be random, like synchronous me-calling-to-a-friend that haven’t been in touch with for some time, and he-calling-to-me. I’m a very critical person when it comes to these issues and spirituality. So how does Actual Freedom explains these phenomenon? RICHARD: As the words ‘Actual Freedom’ are a shortened way of saying ‘an actual freedom from the human condition’ then what you are actually asking is how do I explain intuitive/ psychic phenomena. RESPONDENT: It says that thought originates in the brain ... RICHARD: As that is something I wrote then, presumably, you are referring to this:
RESPONDENT: ... [It says that thought originates in the brain], and that everyone creates them ... RICHARD: As that is something I wrote then, presumably, you are referring to this:
RESPONDENT: ... [It says that thought originates in the brain, and that everyone creates them], so how can telepathy be explained? RICHARD: Quite simply: telepathy is a function of the affective faculty’s intuitive/ psychic facility. RESPONDENT: Yes, I’m aware that for actual freedom one doesn’t need telepathy. RICHARD: It is not a case of it being needed or not ... intuitive/ psychic phenomena have no existence in this actual world (the world of the senses). RESPONDENT: I’m struggling to glue the telepathy experienced and the Actual Freedom view of things that says thoughts are created within us ... RICHARD: It has nothing to do with any [quote] ‘view of things’ [endquote] ... it is an observable fact that a particular human brain in a particular human skull at a particular time at a particular place originates thought. RESPONDENT: ... [I’m struggling to glue the telepathy experienced and the Actual Freedom view of things that says thoughts are created within us], and so thought processes can’t be interconnected in between humanity. RICHARD: Perhaps the following exchange (posted four days before this e-mail of yours) will throw some light upon the matter:
RESPONDENT: Confused, please help. RICHARD: By way of explanation I will first draw your attention to this quote (also posted four days before this e-mail of yours):
Put briefly: a feeling being (an emotional/ passional entity within a body) imbues thought with affectivity and those affectively-tinged/ affectively-charged thoughts are involuntarily broadcast, as psychic currents/ energies, into the real world (the world of the psyche) ... thus another feeling being does not pick-up thoughts as such but, rather, intuitively feels what those psychic currents/ energies convey. Hence the inaccuracy inherent to psychic phenomena ... but that is another topic. RICHARD: In 1985 I had the first of many experiences of going beyond spiritual enlightenment (as described in ‘A Brief Personal History’ on my part of The Actual Freedom Trust web site) and it had the character of the ‘Great Beyond’ – which I deliberately put in capitals because that is how it was experienced at the time – and it was of the nature of being ‘That’ which is attained to at physical death when an Enlightened One ‘quits the body’ ... which attainment is known as ‘Mahasamadhi’ (Hinduism) or ‘Parinirvana’ (Buddhism). Thus I knew even before becoming actually free that this condition was entirely new to human experience while still alive ...... furthermore, in the ensuing years, as I proceeded to penetrate deeper and deeper into the state of being known as spiritual enlightenment, the psychic footprints, as it were, of those who had explored some of the further reaches of ‘Being’ itself gradually became less and less in number and finally petered out altogether leaving only virgin territory wherever the (psychic) eye would look. RESPONDENT No. 90: What did these psychic footprints ‘look’ like? RICHARD: They looked more or less like the footsteps to found in the metaphorical term ‘follow in another’s footsteps’. RESPONDENT No. 90: Can you explain to me what you mean by psychic footprints without recourse to idiom, simile, metaphor or figure of speech? What exactly is a psychic footprint? What is it comprised of? How and under what conditions are they left? How are they detected? How can you be sure they were left behind by someone else and not imagined or created? RESPONDENT: I am also interested in this question. RICHARD: The questions you go on to ask (psychic communication) – and the facility you refer to (psychical premonitions) – is not what is being referred to above (an apotheosised field of consciousness wherein metaphysical knowledge is directly attainable). RESPONDENT: Oh. I thought the term ‘psychic’ was common in both topics and maybe they have a common ground. RICHARD: As I am not a mind-reader all I can go by is what thoughts you choose to type-out and send ... and the questions you went on to ask (psychic communication) – and the facility you referred to (psychical premonitions) – are not what is being referred to above (an apotheosised field of consciousness wherein metaphysical knowledge is directly attainable). RESPONDENT: What kind of metaphysical knowledge is ‘directly attainable’ via this field of consciousness? RICHARD: In regards to what is being referred to above ... that no enlightened being/awakened one had ever explored the furthest reaches of ‘Being’ itself (let alone having gone beyond it). RESPONDENT: What is the validity of this knowledge? RICHARD: It has all the validity necessary for me to know that an actual freedom from the human condition is entirely new to human experience/ human history. * RESPONDENT: What exactly is psychic communication? We all know it exists in the real world, but what is it? Is it an electromagnetic wave? Is it an imaginative feeling? There is not much space devoted on the AF website to the phenomenon known as the psychic web. What is the medium in which this web is formed? How can psychic connections happen at a distance in space and time? RICHARD: You must have missed the following exchange a little over five weeks ago:
RESPONDENT: I did miss it. You didn’t answer the co-respondent’s question as to how something non-actual can have, as-it-were, an effect in the physical world so as to wake up another person at night. RICHARD: The something that is not actual being discussed – the extrasensory transmissions conducted via affective vibrations – does not operate in the physical world ... psychic communication occurs only in the world of the psyche. RESPONDENT: These analogies [‘a whirlpool or an eddy of water or air’] are illustrative but not clarifying. RICHARD: I will put it this way, then: do you comprehend that an identity’s anger, for instance, can be affectively felt by another identity from a near-distance and, as such, can have an effect (and, quite often, the desired effect) despite the intervening physical space ... and that the same applies to love (for another instance) or virtually any other strongly-felt feeling? If so, then by experientially going deeper into those affective feelings it can be found that they swirl around, as it were, forming a whirlpool or an eddy and thus creating a centre (a vortex) which is the very stuff of the swirling as the one is not distinct from the other ... ‘you’ are ‘your’ feelings and ‘your’ feelings are ‘you’. It is that vortex – which is essentially ‘you’ at the core of ‘your’ being – that is the (affective) force known as a psychic force ... it is not for nothing that I say psychic currents are the most effective power plays. Viz.:
And:
And:
And:
RESPONDENT: Okay, let me phrase my questions more precisely: 1. Can the psychic vibes/currents be detected by non-psychic entity (for example a electro-magnetic detection device or a barometer)? As far as I understand, no. 2. Can the psychic vibes/currents be detected by a living flesh and blood body in which the identity is extinct? As far as I understand, no. In that case, you must be unable to detect the anger of another person if he is in the same room and there are no visible/audible signs of his anger? RICHARD: That is correct (nor their love, either, for another example) ... it is all so peaceful here in this actual world. RESPONDENT: 3. Can the psychic vibes outlast the death of the body? For example, is it possible to feel that the former (now-dead) occupants of a house were extremely distressed in their last hours? RICHARD: It is possible for another identity to feel the now-dead other identity’s terminal distress ... yes (some more so than others and some not at all). RESPONDENT: 4. Is it useful to have receptivity for the psychic vibes in order to make better judgements about the world? RICHARD: Speaking personally I operate and function far, far better sans both the affective faculty (and thus affective vibes) and its epiphenomenal psychic facility (and thus psychic energies) ... so much so that any notion of increasing their effect holds no interest for me whatsoever. RESPONDENT: I say this because you do agree that there can be valid information in the vibes (but that recognizing the validity of the information is ‘another matter’). Can there not be research into increasing the accuracy of the psychic reception? RICHARD: For what purpose ... so as to justify identity staying existent, perchance? * RESPONDENT: Is there valid information contained in the psychic medium, for example, that someone’s loved one is in grave physical danger? RICHARD: There can indeed be valid information communicated psychically ... separating the grain from the chaff is another matter, though. RESPONDENT: I have known one person who woke up in the middle of the night having an a undefinable premonition, and she did not have any actual information to support such a fear-drenched state, but it did happen that her son died in an accident that night at that very hour. RICHARD: The problem with psychical premonitions is that, when tested exhaustively under the scientific method the results are about 50-50 (the same as guesswork) thus they are not a reliable means of communication. RESPONDENT: Not really. RICHARD: Au contraire, they are really not a reliable means of communication. RESPONDENT: In my example, 50-50 guesswork that something bad is happening to a loved one is a great deal more information than oblivion to such a possibility (as in a normal day). One may try to call up one’s loved ones and try to call up a doctor in case something is wrong. In other words, a 50% probability about an extremely unlikely event is a lot of information. RICHARD: As I am not a gambler I do not profess to know very much about odds ... what I do know is that a 50% probability (such as in tossing a coin) does not necessarily mean that a guessed event will happen on every second occasion (a coin may come down ‘tails’ 49 times or more in a row, for instance, before it comes down ‘heads’). Indeed, the 50-50 odds requires hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of sequences before empirical validation can occur that it is actually so ... I recall reading somewhere, although I am vague about the details, that it is the advent of computers which have finally enabled enough ‘tosses’ of a coin to be done sequentially so as to finally prove it (other than mathematically that is). Transferred to your example it could mean calling-up one’s loved ones/a doctor so many times as to occasion
them to finally say ‘don’t call us, we’ll call you’. RESPONDENT: Richard, in the world of ‘Being’ what is it that populates the ‘landscape’ such that it becomes more featureless (like a physical landscape in a blizzard) the further you go toward its outer limits? RICHARD: A striking absence of not only the presence of other enlightened beings/ awakened ones but of any direction-markers denoting such having been there already (hence the ‘white-out’ analogy). RESPONDENT: Okay, thanks. I didn’t know the psychic maze was populated and sign-posted by other ‘Beings’ – although I might have remembered something like it from my early youth. RICHARD: You might be indeed remembering something from your early youth as the term [quote] ‘psychic maze’ [endquote] does not appear anywhere in that passage of mine which your initial query, regarding the world of ‘Being’, is obviously drawn from. The world of ‘Being’ itself has, of course, no spatio-temporal corporeality – it being a timeless and spaceless and formless realm – and the physical analogy is only to emphasise that the presence of other enlightened beings/ awakened ones deepening their enlightenment/ awakenment progressively lessens, and thus gradually weakens, the deeper the penetration is ... until even the lingering remnants of their (collective) energy-field finally peters out altogether. RESPONDENT: Those 11 years must have been a fascinating voyage. RICHARD: Maybe that is why reading/ watching science-fiction holds little, if any, interest for me –
even the occasional quest-type adventure-fantasy, no matter how extravagant the special-effects may be, soon palls as it almost
inevitably/ invariably devolves into being a good-triumphing-over-evil morality/ ethicality play – as the paucity of imagination
limits all such genre within its own self-confining/ self-perpetuating parameters. RESPONDENT: [So there’s the normal intelligence (crippled) in NCE, the supreme intelligence (which is an extraordinarily crippled normal intelligence) in ASC and freed intelligence in PCE]. How can you explain synchronicity events then? RICHARD: The way I can explain the simultaneous occurrence of events, which appear meaningfully related in the real-world but have no discoverable causal connection, is quite simple ... in a word: happenstance. RESPONDENT: Is it not a simplistic dismissal? RICHARD: As correlation in no way demonstrates the validity of an ‘acausal connecting principle’ (aka a pattern of connection that is not explained by causality) then ... no. The word ‘apophenia’ – the experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data – which was coined in 1958 by Mr. Klaus Conrad (who defined it as the ‘unmotivated seeing of connections’ accompanied by a ‘specific experience of an abnormal meaningfulness’) is a far more useful term than the word ‘synchronicity’ (a term coined by Mr. Carl Jung to describe the way an abstract world of potential, a psychophysical world where psyche and matter are connected in an undifferentiated unity and called the ‘unus mundus’ in the Middle Ages, operates and out of which causeless new creations can occur) to describe the simultaneous occurrence of events which, whilst having no discoverable causal connection, appear meaningfully related for certain peoples. Incidentally, although Mr. Klaus Conrad originally described the experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data in relation to the distortion of reality present in psychosis it has become more widely used to refer to that tendency in any person at all without necessarily implying the presence of neurological or mental illness or disorder. * RESPONDENT: I can understand synchronicity explained in regards to the human/animal world by the existence of the collective unconscious, but I can’t explain the seeing/ forecasting of future events exclusively related to inanimate matter as the work of the human/animal psychic web. Synchronicity in regards to the inanimate matter can only satisfactorily be explained if matter has ‘psychic’, aka ‘electric’ properties (I can’t find a better word). RICHARD: Matter, be it either in its mass phase or energy phase, has no psychic properties. For what it is worth: even though I use the term ‘psychic currents’, to refer to the extrasensory transmissions conducted via affective vibrations (colloquially known as ‘vibes’), and even though affective feelings are associated with electrochemical activity in brain scans, it does not necessarily mean they are electric currents ... and neither does it necessarily mean they are currents of water or air, either, as that word (literally meaning ‘to run’ as in ‘flowing’ or ‘streaming’) is nothing more than a convenient word to utilise. RESPONDENT: I still can’t comprehend how something that is not actual can have effects at an actual distance of 150 miles. RICHARD: Perhaps if you were to keep it simple to start off with, by examining what is colloquially known as ‘vibes’ (emotional/passional feelings), it may be more readily comprehended: another person’s anger, for instance, can be affectively felt from a near-distance and, as such, can have an effect (and, quite often, the desired effect) despite the intervening physical space ... and the same applies to love (for another instance) or virtually any other strongly-felt feeling. By going deeper into those affective feelings it can be found that they swirl around, as it were, forming a whirlpool or an eddy, somewhat analogous to a whirlpool or an eddy of water or air, creating a centre (a vortex) which is the very stuff of the swirling (a vortex of water or air is the very swirling water or air) as the one is not distinct from the other ... ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’. It is that vortex which is the (affective) force known as a psychic force. RESPONDENT: What is the ‘medium’ via which these psychic currents are transmitted if not the physical one? RICHARD: It is a psychic medium ... a vortical force-field, so to speak. RESPONDENT: Is there a notable difference between psychic vibes and psychic currents? RICHARD: Only in regards to a difference in the range of their effect. RESPONDENT: Richard, would you say that psychic communication happens purely through bodily cues? RICHARD: No. RESPONDENT: Say if you were around when two ‘beings’ communicated something, the only thing you would notice is the bodily communication (facial expressions, voice inflexions, choice of language, bodily movements) that gets interpreted by the recipient (using the ancient psychic genetic database that the ‘being’ has access to?) and [arguably] as intended by the originator (or somewhat closer?)? RICHARD: I only get to meet flesh and blood bodies here in this actual world (if that is what you mean) ... there are no psyches, and thus psychic webs, in actuality. Which is not to say they have no reality for either the purveyor or the recipient ... on the contrary it is quite real, so very real in practice, as to have more significance/consequence than ‘facial expressions, voice inflexions, choice of language, bodily movements’ and so on. For just one instance of this I can recall, many years ago when this flesh and blood body was possessed by a ‘being’, another person smiling in a jovial manner, with a relaxed posture, delivering a psychic coup de grâce ... which decisive finishing stroke put an abrupt end to any further discussion about the non-viability of a particular course of action they were adamantly proposing must be carried out. It was this, and many other such instances, which showed ‘me’ that, for as long as ‘I’ continued to exist, ‘I’ was vulnerable to the dictates of a more powerful purveyor (unless ‘I’ were to become the more powerful of course) ... and ‘I’ could remember many such episodes going all the way back into child-hood. The psychic ‘blow’, so to speak, came in through the solar-plexus (a complex of radiating nerves situated behind the stomach), about four-finger widths below the navel where one’s very ‘being’ is felt to be located, as an energetic current and inexorably travelled swiftly up the spinal-column whereupon, reaching the nape of the neck/base of the brain, it branched out to either side via the limbic system and (presumably) activated the amygdalae – two almond-shaped organs in from and just behind-below the ears – thus pumping fright/freeze/flight/fight chemicals throughout the brain and crippling rational thought. Which is why I say that the psychic currents are the most effective power plays. Viz.:
They have no existence outside of the psyche – which includes the imaginative/intuitive faculty of course – and whilst the psyche is in situ the psychic currents reign supreme ... albeit behind the scenes, as it were, and most often overlooked/unnoticed. Hence my observation regarding them being the most effective power plays. RESPONDENT: That is, everybody has this intuitive/ imaginative faculty with its ancient/ genetic memories acting as a vast database of imagination; and the physical attributes are translated into psychic messages by the ‘beings’; and importantly, since there is nothing other than physical except in imagination, such a communication has to be transmitted through the physical medium; and usually the body is the means ... is this correct? RICHARD: Perhaps if I were to put it this way: the colloquialism ‘vibes’ does not refer to body-language but to the affective feelings and gained currency in the ‘sixties (as in ‘I can feel your pain’ or ‘I can feel your anger’ and so on) – even the military are well aware of this as I had it impressed upon me, prior to going to war in my youth, that fear is contagious and can spread like wildfire if unchecked – and another example is being in the presence of an enlightened being (known as ‘Darshan’ in the Indian tradition) so as to be bathed in the overwhelming love and compassion such a being radiates. Behind the feelings lie the psychic energies which emanate from ‘being’ itself: it is not just the emotional/passional ‘vibes’ which constitute the ethereal network but the psychic currents – a network of intuitive/affective energies that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’ (aka ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’) – which stem from ‘being’ itself (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being is ‘being’ itself) irregardless of conscious intent. There are some peoples, of course, who cultivate these psychic currents such that they do become conscious intent (as in psychic powers). RESPONDENT: Can you say anything about the nature of the ancient/ atavistic/ genetic memory? RICHARD: Put succinctly: it is affective only and thus has no existence in this actual world. The
following link may be of further assistance: RESPONDENT: But a vast empty psychological space is still psychological space (a self) and still creates a feeling/distance barrier. In the PCE’s this emotion/feeling distance barrier (the self) dissolved and affected the way I (physically) experienced time, space and objects. In the PCE’s the security or confidence instilled by (physical) location in eternal time and infinite space is unmistakable. Everything exists in an absolute stillness and deep purity. Visually, the contrast of light and dark is heightened, colours are richer. Hearing is unrestricted, sounds are welcome. I could feel the nubbly fabric of the chair on my skin and I remember thinking I was in forbidden territory, that I was breaking a big taboo because everything was so easy and o.k. So those are the differences as I experienced them. Was attention/energy appropriated to the senses that otherwise would have been used by the psyche? RICHARD: It is the other way around: the naïve attention of the senses (a spontaneous awareness) is usually appropriated by the psyche ... and the psyche consumes a lot of calorific energy to maintain its dominance. Where the psyche is non-existent (either in abeyance in a PCE or extinct in an actual freedom from the human condition) sensory perception is freed to be what it has actually been all along ... an effortless delight. Nothing is being appropriated anywhere by anything. * RESPONDENT: No, I have not experienced this for myself, as you queried. You are the one who experienced the emotionally fabricated nature of your identity that day out in the pasture planting trees. RICHARD: As nowhere have I ever said that what happened in an abandoned cow-pasture had anything to with a psychic circuit which operates upon a particular frequency it is unreasonable to associate your speculation – let alone your speculative-based hypothesis – with my experience (which is why I have gone into the event in some detail further above). Just to refresh your memory this it what you wrote:
You see, in this is implied, not only that thoughts/ realisations operate at frequencies, but that the psyche is a (frequency-based) circuit as well ... and, furthermore, that a cognitive frequency (if there be such a thing) can be calibrated to counteract an affective frequency (if there be such a thing). Perhaps if I were to put it this way: the psychic facility is an epiphenomenon of the affective faculty (at root the instinctual passions) and thoughts/realisations are what the cognitive faculty does ... and neither the cognitive faculty nor the affective faculty (let alone its epiphenomenal psychic facility) are the means by which actuality becomes apparent. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: Can you tell me why my friend is psychic? RICHARD: I presume you are referring to the person you asked me about before in the following exchange:
Is this the devotedly religious limo driver you wrote about in July last year, who you experienced as having a fascinating humbleness, and who minded you of the supernatural being part of your everyday life (whereas before that you were an atheist or otherwise)? Every being is psychic to some degree ... why some people are more so is usually a matter of them developing that innate ability. RESPONDENT: Are you implying that this ‘innate ability’ to read each other’s thoughts to some degree exempt from any space-time association with each other is all part of the mystery and wonder of the unexplored areas human nature? RICHARD: Where I said ‘psychic to some degree’ I was referring to the basic intuitive facility each being has – as evidenced by ‘I have a hunch that ...’ or ‘my gut-feeling is that ...’ and so on – and, as such, does not necessarily include reading another’s thoughts ... indeed most psychic ability, even in those who have developed it more than the norm, does not centre around reading thoughts per se (as in reading each word on a page) but operates more as an intuitive understanding of the essence of what the other is thinking (intimations, images, a key-word here and there, snippets of concepts, and so on). As for it being unexplored: more than a few people have explored various aspects and much has been written about it ... and, yes, as it is an instantaneous event both time and space (duration and distance) play no part. RESPONDENT: So if I decided tonight to develop my innate ability then can I proceed to read your thoughts as well? RICHARD: No ... there is no psyche extant in this flesh and blood body (no ‘being’ whatsoever) to transmit anything at all. RESPONDENT: How would you like that? RICHARD: As there are no malicious or sorrowful feelings whatsoever in this flesh and blood body – nor any alien identity – to corrupt thought there is nothing to hide (if that is what you are enquiring about). RESPONDENT: Also, do you think that there can be a theory for how this medium of human communication might work? RICHARD: There are already many theories about how it works ... none of which touch on it being an epiphenomenon of the affective faculty (indeed the entire psyche – which includes the intuitive/imaginative facility – is rooted in the instinctual passions). Incidentally, it is not a very reliable medium of communication ... and tests done utilising the scientific method show it to have a 50-50 success rate (which is the same as guess-work). RESPONDENT: What is your take on communication with the dead (i.e. spiritual beings)? RICHARD: It is a crock (death is the end, finish). * RESPONDENT: Can you tell me how you know this [that every being is psychic to some degree and that some people have developed that ability]? RICHARD: Sure ... intrinsically (via ‘self’-observation, night and day, over an eleven year period) – an exploration of ‘my’ psyche is an exploration of the ‘human’ psyche) – and then extrinsically (via other beings verbal and written reports) for the sake of confirmation that it is indeed common to all beings. RESPONDENT: Is it something revealed by a PCE? RICHARD: No ... there is no psyche extant in a pure consciousness experience (PCE). RESPONDENT: I would also like to know, how do you process the opinions others have towards you without a psychological entity inside you? RICHARD: In a word: intellectually. RESPONDENT: Is your consciousness pure intellect? RICHARD: No, there is more to consciousness – the state or condition of a body being conscious –
than intellect * RESPONDENT: I spoke to my psychic friend today for a while on the phone. RICHARD: Why RESPONDENT: FACT: Psychics are for *real*. (snip) RICHARD: Aye ... but not actual RESPONDENT: Richard, I use the words ‘mind’ and ‘psyche’ interchangeably, but I see you do not. Could you please clarify the difference between them, as you see it? RICHARD: Put simply: the mind is physical (material) and the psyche is metaphysical (non-material). To explain: the word ‘mind’ (Middle English ‘minde’/‘münde’), from the Gothic ‘gamunds’ (via Old English ‘gemynd’ which corresponds to Old High German ‘gimunt’) and meaning ‘memory’, basically refers to the human brain in action, in the human skull, remembering, reflecting, and so on (giving heed to, perceiving, noticing, contemplating, being careful about), and which ceases to operate at physical death ... whereas the word ‘psyche’, a Latin word from the Greek ‘psukhe’ meaning ‘breath’, ‘life’, ‘soul’ (relating to ‘psukhein’ meaning ‘breathe’, ‘blow’), is associated with breath and breathing and thus to life and living (as in ‘taking your first breath’) as opposed to death and dying (as in ‘taking your last breath’). Such a focus on breath and breathing has corollaries in other cultures (‘chi’ in China, pronounced ‘ki’ in Japan) and is also known as ‘vitalism’ (popular in Europe in the early twentieth century) or ‘vital élan’ ... also the Indian word ‘prana’ (meaning ‘vital air’, from the root ‘pran’ meaning ‘to breathe’), refers to what is known as the vital energy or vital force or life principle. For many early peoples what animated the body was breath (air, vital air, vital force, life force, life principle and so on) because when a person stopped breathing they were dead ... their soul, their very ‘being’, had left their body *as* their last breath. In the animistic religions of the Bronze Age, and earlier, spirit was everywhere, especially in the air (aka in the ‘ether’), and it is no coincidence that the ‘etheric body’ is considered the ‘vital body’ or ‘essential body’ (the Sanskrit ‘akasha’ means the same as the Greek ‘ether’ ... hence ‘akashic’ and ‘etheric’ refer to a similar psychic phenomenon). Speaking of psychic phenomenon, and just as a matter of related interest, someone once asked for an explanation of my usage of the word ‘psychic’:
RESPONDENT No. 59: Vineeto, here in Mexico people are No. 1 at seeing words as having double meaning ... this is mainly how humour is expressed here, it is even seen as a desirable quality, and there are contests where people try to convey the best hidden meaning in words which imply something else. I have seen that taking words at face value gives others the impression of me being innocent but in an ignorant way ... and thus they sometimes try to take advantage of me; however, at the same time, most feel they can trust me. The thing is, I have seen how Actualists always take words for exactly what they mean, should I continue strictly attending to the words of others without ‘imagining’ or trying to find out what the hidden double meaning is? What others are really thinking? I am still distrustful of the words of some but because of several past and present experiences. VINEETO: I remember that in the early years of writing about actualism I tried to figure out ‘the hidden double meaning’, the emotional agenda, the context of feelings and beliefs in which the post was written and I got hopelessly entangled in the psychic web of other people’s malice and sorrow and was consequently unable to give a clear response. I found I first had to untangle myself from the emotional web in order to be able to think straight and write clearly about my experience of freeing myself from my spiritual beliefs and emotional burdens. Taking people’s word’s at face value has nothing to do with trust or mistrust, but is a matter of a simple and straight-forward way to communicate. A ‘hidden double meaning’ is almost always an emotionally charged meaning and trying to second-guess what this is in any situation does nothing to enhance sensible communication. Nowadays I always assume that if people find it important that I take notice of any ‘hidden’ meaning then they will tell me – it is not my responsibility to discern what another is trying to convey through unmentioned hints and allusions. As for being ‘distrustful of the words of some’ – the good news for me was that by examining and understanding my own social and instinctual identity I had less and less reason to fear that people would emotionally hurt me with insinuations or outright sarcasm – identity-slashing intimations from others now rarely reach a target. RESPONDENT No. 59: Understood. My problem is that I sometimes forget to focus on the content because of distractions of how it is conveyed. VINEETO: Of course, that is the very purpose of people conveying a message in an emotional way. Those ‘distractions’ are the very stuff to explore in order to determine how you are in relation to other people. Other than the words themselves there is usually a whole layer of invisible and inaudible interaction happening and this is how Richard explained it: [quote] ‘All sentient beings, to a greater or lesser extent, are connected via a psychic web ... a network of energies or currents that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’. Feeling threatened or intimidated can result from the obvious cues – the offering of physical violence and/or verbal violence – or from the less obvious ... ‘vibe’ violence (to use a ‘60’s term) and/or psychic violence. Similarly, feeling accepted can occur via the same signals or intimations. Power trips – coercion or manipulation of any kind – whether for ‘good’ or ‘bad’ purposes, are all psychic at root ... the psychic currents are the most effective power plays for they are the most insidious (charisma, for example).’ [endquote]. RESPONDENT No. 23: This could explain why I have a sense of not belonging here or anywhere else for that matter because there is no psychic connection. I am an actualist in the sense that I have seen that matter is animate thru a PCE although I am not positive of this because it could be a physiological process in my own body that makes matter look that way. Also, I don’t practice Actualism per se because it seems that would connect me to the group I see here. I also don’t feel I belong on any spiritual list or group. Not having any psychic connection could explain why I don’t belong and don’t want to belong as opposed to the usual use of belonging which means one wants to belong. Makes sense? RESPONDENT: I think that’s a legitimate question. The PCE could be, in fact, what else could it be, a product of my own body experiencing itself without the usual imaginary filters. A question to Richard: What about this psychic web? It seems at odds with the here and now down to earth stuff. Especially when it refers to ‘vibes’ between people who are present. I was taught in psychology classes that the verbal message is only 20 percent of the message, the rest being expression and body language. I do think I’ve observed some patterns that aren’t explainable by obvious physical forces such as synchronicity – the seeming grouping of events in themes, sometimes seeming to have meaning, sometimes not, but this is a separate subject. RICHARD: As I am none too sure what your question to me is actually about I have situated the quote of mine back into the discussion it was first used in as it is quite self-explanatory in reference to the subject then under discussion ... please correct me if I am in error but you do seem to have taken it as a given that there is in fact [quote] ‘the group’ [endquote] which another sees which does in fact require a [quote] ‘psychic connection’ [endquote] in order to in fact [quote] ‘belong’ [endquote] to and are then asking me if this is not at odds with the ‘here and now down to earth stuff’ as if it were a legitimate question I can meaningfully respond to. There is no group (aka ‘cult’) to connect with/belong to – either emotionally/ passionally or
intuitively/ psychically – as the word ‘actualism’ refers to the direct experience that matter is not merely passive (which,
incidentally, does not mean that matter is animate) and the word ‘actualist’ refers to the experient. RESPONDENT: I was asking about the psychic web Vineeto writes of in her post that you supplied. I had read it as some sort of ethereal network connecting all minds or universal flow or some such – Vibes. I was asking if that is what is meant. I wanted to know if you, Richard say that. RICHARD: It is not just the emotional/passional ‘vibes’ which constitute the ethereal network but, more insidiously, the psychic currents – a network of intuitive/affective energies that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’ (aka ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’) – which stem from ‘being’ itself (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being is ‘being’ itself) irregardless of conscious intent. There are some peoples, of course, who cultivate these psychic currents such that they do become conscious intent (as in psychic powers). RESPONDENT: I assumed that Vineeto was – maybe I am mistaken about what she meant. I was saying that consciously or unconsciously perceived body-language can be an explanation for much of the ‘vibes’ perceived in close range to another person. RICHARD: The colloquialism ‘vibes’ does not refer to body-language but to the affective feelings and gained currency in the ‘sixties (as in ‘I can feel your pain’ or ‘I can feel your anger’ and so on) – even the military are well aware of this as I had it impressed upon me, prior to going to war in my youth, that fear is contagious and can spread like wildfire if unchecked – and another example is being in the presence of an enlightened being (known as ‘Darshan’ in the Indian tradition) so as to be bathed in the overwhelming love and compassion such a being radiates. Yet behind the feelings lies the psychic energies/ currents which emanate from being itself. * RICHARD: Put succinctly: there is no psychic web in this actual world – the world of this body and that body and every body; the world of the mountains and the streams; the world of the trees and the flowers; the world of the clouds in the sky by day and the stars in the firmament by night and so on and so on ad infinitum – to be at odds with the ‘here and now down to earth stuff’. RESPONDENT: So I understand this to mean that the psychic web is something in the real world as opposed to the actual world and as such has no actual existence outside imagination. RICHARD: It has no existence outside of the psyche – which includes the imaginative/ intuitive faculty of course – and whilst the psyche is in situ the psychic currents reign supreme ... albeit behind the scenes, as it were, and most often overlooked/ unnoticed. Hence my observation regarding them being the most effective power plays. RESPONDENT: Finally your use of the word ‘supernatural’ is unclear to me. Is there a link to ‘non-material’. RICHARD: Yes there is ... generally speaking the word ‘supernatural’, as contrasted to ‘natural’,
refers to anything of or pertaining to the psyche RESPONDENT: In case you feel like picking up on any of these topics, or – perhaps better – some other non-solicited items, I’d greatly appreciate it. RICHARD: Basically, I have only one topic: peace-on-earth, in this lifetime, as this flesh and blood
body. RESPONDENT: I am writing vis à vis one and only one word you use and I do not understand its usage by you. From your site (a very good paragraph indeed): ‘The second discovery accords with the practical experience of eliminating one’s innate ‘being’ – the primitive ‘self’ and the associated instinctual passions that cause our animal survival behaviour to kick in whenever we, or our kin, ‘feel’ threatened (which is almost always...). This program is automatic and often psychic in nature, it is programmed within the primitive or reptilian brain, and ‘felt’ in the body due to the resulting chemical surges arising from the primitive brain. This blind and senseless survival program can now be safely deleted for the human species has not only survived ... it is now beginning to flourish’. Would you mind explaining, Richard, your usage of the word ‘psychic’ in this context, thank you. RICHARD: All sentient beings, to a greater or lesser extent, are connected via a psychic web ... a network of energies or currents that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’. Feeling threatened or intimidated can result from the obvious cues – the offering of physical violence and/or verbal violence – or from the less obvious ... ‘vibe’ violence (to use a ‘60’s term) and/or psychic violence. Similarly, feeling accepted can occur via the same signals or intimations. Power trips – coercion or manipulation of any kind – whether for ‘good’ or ‘bad’ purposes, are all psychic at root ... the psychic currents are the most effective power plays for they are the most insidious (charisma, for example). Generally speaking, the word psychic or psychical in virtually any context refers to anything of or
pertaining to the energies of the psyche It can refer to anything occult, arcane, esoteric or ghostly – anything to do with witchcraft, sorcery or wizardry (be it either white magic or black magic) – everything supernatural, supernormal, preternatural, preternormal, transcendental or numinous ... anything religious, spiritual, mystical or metaphysical. The metaphysical includes the hallowed, consecrated, sanctified, deified, beatific, holy, divine, heavenly and sacred – including anything saintly, cherubic or angelic – and the sinful, black-hearted, damnable, sinister, fiendish, infernal, diabolical ... anything demonic, devilish, hellish, satanic and evil. Terror and respect – awe and dread – are the ultimate rule in the human world. RESPONDENT: As well, any and all exchanges of pleasantries regarding weather and cafes welcomed. I am doing fine right now amidst working on my major disability which is DNA based. The sky is blue punctuated by clouds. RICHARD: Ahh yes ... I am especially enjoying this early spring weather – the time before sunrise and just prior to sunset are particularly exquisite – and some of the cafés, closed for winter during the daylight hours, will soon be opening again as more peoples venture forth. Plus the ahead of schedule ‘daylight saving’ this year means the evenings are warmer for dining out already. This DNA-based disability – the human condition – is the very stuff for derring-do, eh? * RESPONDENT: Richard, the other week ‘you’ answered a question from me about the dynamics of the ‘self’. You explained, or I think you explained, that the self is a vortex for psychic energies and that that vortex – which we call ‘I’ (or is it ‘me’?) – largely runs on automatic just being pushed around within the psychic web. Is that a fair enough approximation of what you said?? RICHARD: Yes (apart from the fact that there is no ‘you’ (‘me’) extant in this flesh and blood body to have answered) ... and a ‘vortex’ of psychic currents, as in an eddy or a whirlpool of affective energies, is an apt description of ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself). Yet not only ‘being pushed around’ but also ‘pushing others around’ (the psychic currents are the most effective power plays for they are the most insidious). It is just as important to be aware of what ‘I’ do to others as it is to be aware of what others do to ‘me’. Interestingly enough, when ‘I’ cease taking offence (being hurt) it is nigh-on impossible to be offensive (being hurtful). RESPONDENT: So ... assuming it is, am I to understand: a) a person like you who seems to believe only in the tangible actual stuff ... believes (is that the right word) in the psychic world as well?? RICHARD: Oh no, there is no psychic world here in the actual ... I am talking from remembered prior experience and other people’s reports regarding the psyche, the psychic and the psychical. Also, there is no need to believe ‘only in the tangible actual stuff’ where one is free of the human condition ... there is nothing else happening but the direct experience of the actual world: the world of this body and that body and every body; the world of the mountains and the streams; the world of the trees and the flowers; the world of the sky by day and the stars by night. RESPONDENT: And that this self you refer to has in the past been called the soul? RICHARD: Yes. The word ‘soul’ is a commonly used English word corresponding to ‘psyche’, ‘self’, ‘spirit’, ‘being’, ‘atman’ and so on (when not getting hung-up on doctrinal distinctions and cultural characteristics). RESPONDENT: b) when you say you have no self I take it that means that ‘you’ are no longer effected by the psychic energy field that we are all creating together on the planet. Is that how it is? RICHARD: There is no ‘you’ (‘me’) to either be affected or to affect others when one is free from the human condition. The affective energies are a two-way street ... mostly peoples initially overlook the ‘harmless’ part of my oft-used ‘happy and harmless’ phrase. In other words: how can I live freely in the world as-it-is with people as-they-are whilst ‘I’ nurse malice and sorrow to ‘my’ bosom? One cannot be happy unless one is first harmless ... and one cannot be harmless unless one is first happy. This is because all sentient beings, to a greater or lesser extent, are connected via a psychic web ... a network of energies or currents that range from ‘good’ to ‘bad’. To be actually free one abandons ‘humanity’ in oneself – one cuts the umbilical cord – which means that the ability to connect or relate vanishes ... life is not ‘a movement in relationship’ (as one enlightened being was wont to say) here in this actual world. Completely on one’s own one walks tall, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter perfection and peace, beholden to no-one. RESPONDENT: Also could you explain what you mean when you say ‘this DNA-based disability – the human condition – is the very stuff for derring-do, eh?’ ‘Derring-do’ ... what do you mean? Is it fun? RICHARD: Yes, it is fun – sincere and thrilling fun but fun nevertheless – to embark on the voyage of a lifetime ... and an exploration into ‘my’ psyche is a journey into the ‘human’ psyche as ‘I’ am ‘humanity’ and ‘humanity’ is ‘me’. The phrase ‘derring-do’ means ‘daring to do’ ... anybody still run by the instinctual passions – specifically fear – coincidentally has recourse to the valour to match (where there is no fear there is no courage). It requires great audacity to fly in the face of the ‘Tried and True’ ... after all, could it really be so that 6.0 billion peoples now living (and maybe 4.0 billion having once lived) have all got it wrong? RESPONDENT: Please forgive me if this is kindergarten stuff and has been covered on the list previously. RICHARD: Exploring the psychic world is not ‘kindergarten stuff’ at all and unless one has successfully removed the need for a social identity (a conscience) such a journey is fraught with danger ... one may become enlightened. Unless it be but an intellectual excursion, of course. RESPONDENT: And please reply at your convenience as I have other interesting conversations going to entertain and illuminate myself whilst I wait patiently for your reply. It is dark here in Sydney; being well into the evening. I still have a DNA disability and still believe and enjoy the entire compass of directions ... including the 180 degrees that is the focus of this list. RICHARD: Yes, a comparative study is well worthwhile ... and computers – plus the internet – makes research possible in an unprecedented way through access to a unprecedented range and quality of material. RESPONDENT: It is wondrous that there are other lists as well! RICHARD: I do consider that mailing lists are second to none in regards to a largely uncensored contact with a breadth of experience and views. The ‘free for all’ approach – reminiscent of parliamentary privilege – allows for an uninhibited expression and questioning in that (apart from being subject to ‘Greeks Bearing Gifts’) discussion cannot devolve into the scratching, clawing, wrestling, fisticuffs or whatever other way peoples traditionally go about their search for freedom, peace and harmony. RESPONDENT: P.S. I forgot the other question I had intended to ask you ... perhaps it was not important. Let’s hope so. RICHARD: Life is so perfect that whatever is overlooked or forgotten or omitted has the habit of
reappearing until it is finally eliminated forever. RESPONDENT: I am still curious. Are these sensual experiences ‘hallucinations’ or the creation of a transmogrified ‘I’? RICHARD: This sensual experience is actual. By actual, I do not mean the real-world of normal human experience. Actuality is only seen by people in glimpses ... it is as if everyday reality is a grim and glum veneer pasted over the top of this actual world of the senses. When ‘I’ vanish in ‘my’ entirety – both the ego and the soul – the normal everyday reality disappears and the underlying actuality becomes apparent. It was here all along. To experience the metaphysical Reality – usually with capitalisation – is to go further into the illusion of normal everyday reality, created by ‘I’, and further create a supernatural ‘True Reality’ ... which one could call an abnormal reality. Thus normal everyday reality is an illusion and the abnormal metaphysical Reality is a delusion born out of
the illusion ... a chimera, as it were. This is why only about .000001 of the population ever become enlightened ... it is
extremely difficult to live in a hallucination permanently. Speaking personally, I was so deluded, that for eleven years I lived
in humanity’s greatest fantasy, before the dissolution of ‘me’ as soul finally brought salubrity through release from the
human condition itself. RESPONDENT: Is enlightenment a more useful or evolved place to be than pre-enlightenment? RICHARD: No, to be enlightened is to be anti-life ... peace-on-earth is scornfully discarded so as to secure a vainglorious after-death ‘Peace That Passeth All Understanding’. In other words: selfish immortality. RESPONDENT: Richard, is enlightenment a thing at all? RICHARD: It is certainly possible to be enlightened ... therefore it is ‘a thing’ inasmuch as an altered state of consciousness can and does happen, but it is not actual. RESPONDENT: Is it a biological condition, a belief? RICHARD: It is ‘a biological condition’ as enlightenment occurs in the psyche and the
psyche is born of the genetically inherited instinctual passions (such as fear and aggression and nurture and desire) ... which
passions are indisputably biological. Likewise is ‘a belief’ biological as the activity of believing per se – along
with imagining, intuiting, visualising, conceptualising, trusting, hoping, having faith and so forth – also occur in the psyche
(all of which can give rise to epiphenomenon such as prescience, clairvoyance, telepathy, divination RESPONDENT: Does it exist? RICHARD: It does ‘exist’ as a metaphysical ‘Reality’ in the psyche but it is not actual (actual as in the sensate world of this body and that body and the mountains and the streams; the trees and the flowers; the clouds in the sky by day and the stars in the firmament by night and so on and so on ad infinitum). It is a delusion born out of the illusion of the ‘real-world’ reality – everyday reality is a grim and glum veneer pasted over the top of this actual world of the senses – which is why only .000001 of the population have ever become enlightened. It is extremely difficult to live in a hallucination full-time. ALAN: The feeling of ‘love’ I described to you previously, in the heart, solar plexus region, appears to have been fear, as I experienced it earlier today. RICHARD: Now this I find interesting for it is a subject that I was discussing with Vineeto on Sunday.
Most emotions – and some passions – are felt in the chest region. The ‘deeper feelings’ – wherein one goes into
intuition and the psychic arena – occur in the solar plexus ... a ‘hunch’ is not called a ‘gut-feeling’ for nothing. As
all psychic phenomenon is fear-based, it is most readily experienced at the ‘seat of being’ in the solar-plexus. The Japanese
locate their ‘Hari’ three fingers below the naval ... hence – just maybe – you feeling it previously as love (the nature
of ‘being’ is love, of course). RICHARD: The entire intuitive faculty is non-existent in an apperceptive human being ... and the actual meaning of life is apparent as an on-going experiencing. RESPONDENT: You seem to assume that your way of experiencing is the same as the way others experience. RICHARD: It is not an assumption ... this is something I have checked at length with many of my fellow human beings when discussing the characteristics of the pure consciousness experience (PCE). RESPONDENT: But there is no reason to assume that any way of being is ‘right’ for anyone else or some kind of ideal for humanity to pattern itself after. RICHARD: There is every reason in the world ... there is the on-going experiencing of the perfection of the purity of the already always existing peace-on-earth. RESPONDENT: The psyche is established in the known. RICHARD: Also in the unknown ... primarily in the unknown, in fact. RESPONDENT: It is a certain kind of development. RICHARD: Basically ‘the psyche’ is a state of being ... it is the source of ‘being’ itself. RESPONDENT: If there is a highly developed intuition, that operates in an apperceptive human. RICHARD: Again ... the entire intuitive faculty is non-existent in an apperceptive human being (‘the psyche’ itself disappears). RESPONDENT: If there is a more highly developed analytical capacity, then that function will more naturally be employed. RICHARD: The ability for analysis has nothing to do with ‘the psyche’ ... intellectual
scrutiny is but one of the functions of human intelligence. RESPONDENT: About a year and a half ago I was watching a PBS TV program – something about the caves in France where the first cave drawings were found. The narrator said that those men were modern men, identical to us in every detail. He said that if you took a child from that time and whisked him into the present, there is nothing that child wouldn’t be able to do in terms of learning, technology, etc. Blew me away. I thought ‘Well, what’s taken all the time? What’s taken 10 or 20 thousand years’. And my answer was culture. RICHARD: Yep ... hence my ‘crusade’ (as others have been known to call it) with regard to all the Gurus and the God-Men, the Masters and the Messiahs, the Avatars and the Saviours and the Saints and the Sages who have perpetuated human suffering. But it is an exposé on enlightenment itself that I am actually ensuring takes place. RESPONDENT: Nothing more unpalatable than a great, big, overstuffed Self, with a capital S, is there? RICHARD: Not with the sanctioning and the perpetuating of all the misery and mayhem to be held accountable for ... no (and I can only say this because of my own involvement in same). RESPONDENT: Regarding [Mailing List ‘C’] conversation – People believe what they believe because it makes them feel real now, and gives hope for continuity into the eternal future. No. 3, in my opinion, represents what I would call the worst of the East. Blind regurgitating of fantastic theories of astral beings, and planes of existence, of ancient wisdom un-critiqued, of ascended beings, and enlightened masters, of you can’t know the awakened state until you have awakened. It’s a horrid, elitist viewpoint that sees others as less evolved, and thus less worthy, perhaps, of happiness. Gods who punish and reward, allow evil but aren’t evil. Saviours and Purushas and on and on. RICHARD: There is a term for this stubbornness against facing up to facts and actuality: cognitive
dissonance. The ‘cognitive dissonance theory’ suggests that when experiences or information contradicts existing knowledge,
attitudes or feelings, differing degrees of mental-emotional distress is the habitual result. The distressed personality is
predisposed to alleviate this discord by reinterpreting (distorting) the offending information. Concurrent with this
falsification, core beliefs tend to be vigorously defended by warping discernment and memory ... such people are prone to
misinterpret cues and ‘remember’ things to be as they wish they had happened instead of how they actually happened. They may
be selective in what they recall, overestimating their apparent successes, while ignoring, downplaying, or explaining away their
failures. The scientific method has evolved, in a large part, to reduce the impact of this human penchant for jumping to such
amenable yet erroneous self-justifying conclusions. RESPONDENT No. 39: I do understand about minimising both the good and bad feelings as I have been down the road of trying to eliminate the bad while maximising the good. It is clear that I can’t have the good without the bad. RICHARD: Exactly ... and thus the way is cleared to be launched upon the adventure of a lifetime. RESPONDENT: ‘Good’ and ‘bad’ feelings happen. RICHARD: They do not happen here in this actual world: they only happen in the human world and, to a certain extent, in the animal world. RESPONDENT: Any attempt to eliminate, minimize or to do anything else to those feelings is an exercise in futility. RICHARD: As it was not ‘an exercise in futility’ for the being inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago you are now mistaken twice over. RESPONDENT: A wise person sits on the shore and watches the ebb and flow of these waves. RICHARD: Yet, as ‘a wise person’ is a being residing inside the body, irregardless of whether the being persuades the body to physically act or not, the being involuntarily transmits ‘these waves’ – these emotional and passional vibes (to use a 60’s term) – into the human world in particular and the animal world in general: therefore the being is not harmless even when the being refrains from inducing the body into physical action ... which is why pacifism (non-violence) is not a viable solution. There is nothing that can stop other beings picking up these vibes and/or picking up what are sometimes called psychic currents. This is because there is an interconnectedness between all the emotional and passional beings – all emotional and passional beings are connected via a psychic web – a network of invisible vibes and currents. This interconnectedness in action is a powerful force – colloquially called ‘energy’ or ‘energies’ – wherein one being can either seek power over another being or seek communion with another being by affective and/or psychic influence. For example, these interconnecting ‘energies’ can be experienced in a group high, a community spirit, a mass hysteria, a communion meeting, a mob riot, a political rally and so on ... it is well known that a charismatic leader rides to power on such ‘energies’. A charismatic leader such as ‘a wise person’ usually is, for example. RESPONDENT: You say that there is no soul or self but just flesh and bones therefore no life after death. Therefore how do you explain Outer body experiences (OBE’s) and near death experiences where people report seeing events and their own physical bodies in Real Time. It would be impossible for a thought or a feeling (self) to experience an OBE. Happy days. RICHARD: (...) I would explain OBE’s (out of body experiences) and NDE’s (near death experiences), where the identity residing inside the flesh and blood body locates itself outside the flesh and blood body, in the same way I explain altered states of consciousness (ASC’s) and any other paranormal, supernatural or suprasensory experiences ... they are all the product of identity, the psychological and psychic entity (‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul), parasitically inhabiting the flesh and blood body. Why do you say that it would be impossible for ‘a thought or a feeling (self)’ to experience an OBE? * RESPONDENT: You say that there is no soul or self but just flesh and bones therefore no life after death. Therefore how do you explain Outer body experiences (OBE’s) and near death experiences where people report seeing events and their own physical bodies in Real Time. It would be impossible for a thought or a feeling (self) to experience an OBE. Happy days. RICHARD: ... I would explain OBE’s (out of body experiences) and NDE’s (near death experiences), where the identity residing inside the flesh and blood body locates itself outside the flesh and blood body, in the same way I explain altered states of consciousness (ASC’s) and any other paranormal, supernatural or suprasensory experiences ... they are all the product of identity, the psychological and psychic entity (‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul), parasitically inhabiting the flesh and blood body. Why do you say that it would be impossible for ‘a thought or a feeling (self)’ to experience an OBE? RESPONDENT: To experience an OBE I would have to exist separate from the body then I could leave the body (OBE) and still function (think) while apart from the body which is what many people who OBE experience. RICHARD: Whereas all what does happen is that the identity locates itself outside of the body – there is no leaving of the body – which is not to deny that the experience of leaving the body is very realistic (more realistic than night-time dreaming). There is a simple way to test this for validity: typically the identity (seemingly) hovers above the body – up at the ceiling level say – meaning that it should be able to see what is on top of a tall cupboard, for example, where previously someone else has taped a piece of paper with words on it that only they know. There have been umpteen tests done apparently, of a more thorough nature than this simple example, with no conclusive results. Mr. Keith Augustine, for instance, has this to say:
Ms. Susan Blackmore, a former parapsychologist who has personally investigated the subject over thirty years, has published books and articles ... some of which articles are available on-line: http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/ Her interest in the subject started when she had an OBE in 1970 whilst at Oxford University ... a fascinating account of which, written three days after the event, can be found here: http://www.issc-taste.org/arc/dbo.cgi?set=expom&id=00075&ss=1 It is well worth a read, if you can get access to it, as not only did she (seemingly) drift about at ceiling level but over the roof tops of the college as well and off to various places – the Mediterranean, Italy, Switzerland, France, New York, South America, through the planets of the solar system, the whole galaxy itself, many other galaxies, the limit of the universe, another dimension and finally a whole new set of dimensions – before the OBE was over. She was suspicious about various aspects of the experience though ... here is what she has to say, in part, towards the bottom of that web page:
Furthermore, there is a reward in excess of $1,000,000, offered by the James Randi Educational Foundation, for the first person who can conclusively demonstrate any paranormal phenomena. Viz.: http://www.randi.org/research/index.html In case you do not get to access that web page the most pertinent part is this:
There is also 100,000 rupees offered by Mr. B. Premanand, of the Indian Sceptic, for ‘any psychic, supernatural or paranormal ability of any kind’. Viz.: http://www.indian-skeptic.org/html/rules.htm And the Australian Sceptics offer $100,000 ... Viz.: http://www.skeptics.com.au/features/challenge.htm Plus, if my memory serves me correctly, there was a society in the U. K which offered something like 20,000 pounds or thereabouts some years ago ... and nobody ever claimed it. * RESPONDENT: My beef is – If one is not free from ego at the time one physically dies (99.9% population) doesn’t then the ego continue to exist apart from the body (as in an OBE) and experience life after death with all its ramifications (heaven, hell, reincarnation) until it too dies or dissolves. RICHARD: No ... as the identity is born of the instinctual passions, genetically endowed at conception by blind nature, then when the body dies the identity ceases to exist. There is nothing to beef about ... death is the end, finish. * RESPONDENT: To experience an OBE I would have to exist separate from the body then I could leave the body (OBE) and still function (think) while apart from the body which is what many people who OBE experience. RICHARD: Whereas all what does happen is that the identity locates itself outside of the body – there is no leaving of the body – which is not to deny that the experience of leaving the body is very realistic (more realistic than night-time dreaming). RESPONDENT: Thoughts and feelings (identity) are products of the body and therefore should exist only within that domain of the body (brain and nervous system). How then could ego dislodge itself from this framework (body) and locate it self outside of this cable wiring (body) unless it had its own power source that did not rely on the body for its existence. RICHARD: Maybe it is the word ‘locates’ which is not conveying what happens too well ... the word ‘orientates’ might serve better:
RESPONDENT: Also during sleep, the experience of falling just before you wake up (very common) – is that not the soul falling back into the body as you return from the astral (dream) to the physical body? RICHARD: No ... the sensation of falling is a physiological event called either an hypnic jerk or a myoclonic jerk. RESPONDENT: However its explained it still feels like I’m falling backwards and then I wake up. RICHARD: I am only too happy to re-phrase my response:
And just in case one is lying face down when the sensation of falling occurs:
* RESPONDENT: My beef is – If one is not free from ego at the time one physically dies (99.9% population) doesn’t then the ego continue to exist apart from the body (as in an OBE) and experience life after death with all its ramifications (heaven, hell, reincarnation) until it too dies or dissolves. RICHARD: No ... as the identity is born of the instinctual passions, genetically endowed at conception by blind nature, then when the body dies the identity ceases to exist. There is nothing to beef about ... death is the end, finish. Kaput. RESPONDENT: There is only two possible beliefs or scenarios regarding when the body dies. 1) There is yours in which self is non-existent, not knowing anything at all (includes saying ‘I told you so!’). Therefore creating a negative attitude of living a self indulgent life at everyone else’s expense, because once I’m dead I’ll be non-existent (non-accountable) anyway. Or: 2) Self continues its existence and is held accountable for its time and actions while on the earth. Thereby creating a positive attitude of living to help others. RICHARD: First of all you are repeating the straw man premise you started this thread with as I do not say that ‘self is non-existent’ at all ... and the very response of mine which you are commenting on clearly shows this where I say that ‘when the body dies the identity ceases to exist’. The only situation where the identity is non-existent before death is where one is actually free from the human condition ... then when the body dies all that happens is that the body dies (as there is no identity extant to die along with it). For such a person your belief or scenario about a ‘self indulgent life’ does not apply as, being sans ‘self’, it is impossible to be ‘self indulgent’ (or indeed any other ‘self’-centred thing you may come up with). If this issue is now cleared up satisfactorily the remainder of what you say can be addressed on its own merits: you seem to be sketching out what could be called a fairly typical religious belief that if the identity does not survive death such a person will live in an unsociable way ... whereas if the identity does survive death such a person will live in a sociable way. Yet this very sociability is a contrived sociableness based upon an after-death reward (obtained by fear of punishment) ... which is ‘self’-centred to the extreme as the god-fearing identity’s pseudo sociability is motivated by post-mortem consequences and not because of fellowship regard for other human beings. To put that another way: the ‘living to help others’ dictum turns fellow human beings into
commodities to be used as a means to an end. RESPONDENT: I’ve read most of your journal, you have a ‘cultic style’ of writing, many times repeating words and ideas. RICHARD: Oh? As I was trained to be an instructor in the military – plus I am a qualified art teacher – I would have said the repetition is more an instructive style of writing, if anything, as in being mnemonical ... plus I have a penchant for alliterative phrases which roll easily of the tongue anyway. I like words ... communicating is so much fun. RESPONDENT: The style is favourable for a cult development, ‘in the name of actualism you are neither a man nor a woman, nor an ego nor a Self, but a flesh-and-blood being’ ;) RICHARD: When a person gets off their backside, rolls up their sleeves, and actually puts the actualism method into practice they discover that there is no way it can ever be other than a DIY project. RESPONDENT: That’s why I would never subscribe to the idea of 6 billion people starting to practice actualism. RICHARD: For as long as you see it as an ‘idea’ – rather than experientially seeing the practical possibility it actually is – then the essential ingredient called altruism will remain forever elusively out of reach ... just as an actual freedom from the human condition will. It is impossible to be selfishly free. RESPONDENT: You seem to be too far-away from the real world, as to consider such a possibility ... as global peace-on-earth. RICHARD: It is the other way around: you are ‘too far-away’ from this actual world, as it were, to see that it is entirely possible ... as any pure consciousness experience (PCE) will verify. Not that I advocate anybody hold their breath in anticipation. RESPONDENT: I find myself in the position of this body graciously and gradually turning in the direction you point to, yet at the same time with my head turned the other way around ... eager to understand why and how it was possible to get enlightened. RICHARD: In a word: gullibility ... in several words: credulity stretched to the max. RESPONDENT: I have trouble in understanding the difference between the words ‘sense’ and ‘direction’ when comparing the AF method with spiritual ones. RICHARD: The oft-repeated ‘180 degrees in the other direction’ phrase simply means coming to one’s senses rather than going further away (withdrawing from the senses) from the world as-it-is than one already is ... everyone is already detached and to practise detachment is to be twice-removed from actuality. RESPONDENT: I’ve noticed that you use the word ‘merge’, does it mean that the Absolute is a separate entity? RICHARD: No, my experience is that when the ego dies there is only ‘The Absolute’ ... and my usage of terms other than ‘die’ (such as ‘merge’) has been an accommodation to different peoples’ experience for the sake of clarity in communication. Some say the ego collapses, some say it dissolves, some say it expands, some say it realises who it really is ... it all amounts to the same thing. RESPONDENT: I’ve personally tried in the past to discover a more scientific method to achieve enlightenment, stripped of any religiosity, as the woman we spoke about had a certain talent in enlightening people, (matrilineal love?). Is a person Self the same when experienced by various people? RICHARD: At root it is the same ... there are many variations, however, apart from a gender distinction (some cultural, some racial, some personal, some epochal, and so on). RESPONDENT: Is this not a proof that is a separate entity and not a projection? RICHARD: At root it is the same ... this sameness is what ecumenicalism is on about, for example. RESPONDENT: I know that both in my case, and a guy she met during a vacation in Pattaya, Thailand, the ASC was identical both in intensity and the way her Self looked and was experienced. I’ve said she had a ‘certain talent’ as the process of getting people enlightened was mostly her contribution, as she entered a state named ‘alpha’ (her terminology) and from there sending brain waves which were perceived by the receiver already in a state of heightened emotional receptivity, which in turn led to the ASC. RICHARD: Hmm ... this could be an example of what I would call ‘psychic currents’. RESPONDENT: It seems that the receiver had to be in the optimum state in order to be profoundly influenced by these vibes. There are 4 known scientifically? measured states for the brain waves, that is alpha, theta, delta, beta; here is a link you might find of use, sorry but no valuable links found for the 4th way description of consciousness states: www.hollys.com/cyber-psychic/alpha.htm RICHARD: I accessed the web page, and the other you supplied later, and read what is on offer ... this is what the Encyclopaedia Britannica has to say in part:
RESPONDENT: Is this classification applicable to your present condition? RICHARD: As it has very little validity in consciousness studies it would have very little, if any, applicability. RESPONDENT: And if not, on what frequency does your brain operate anyhow? RICHARD: I have never had reason to find out.
RETURN TO RICHARD’S SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE INDEX The Third Alternative (Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body) Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.
Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
