 |
Could you clarify what you mean by the above. It appears that you are saying that ‘it’ (‘self-centredness’)
must have a powerful motivation to bring an end to itself. If I do understand this correctly then please explain further this ‘powerful
motivation’. Specifically I am referring to what this motivation is (and its goals, if any) and from where does it come?  |
|
Was this not enough? Was it not better to enjoy this life as ‘Alan’, the personality, than
risk all on an unknown future? Am ‘I’ going to continue, in the knowledge that the end result is ‘my’ demise. Or, am ‘I’ going
to give up and settle for ‘second best’. Perhaps this is where ‘pure intent’ comes in. It is not a phrase I have been entirely
comfortable with or, rather, completely understood. Perhaps it is this ‘pure intent’ which keeps ‘me’ going, which insists that it
‘ain’t over till the fat lady sings’, which is the knowledge that this is not perfection, and perfection is possible. |
|
In writing this and the other things I wrote this weekend somehow there is no effort involved
(perhaps that shows!). My experience is just deep, round, soft, full, still, pleasure of moments of being here, and of understandings
building on each other. What do you now mean by introducing the concept of reaching out? Extending myself? I do not recall you using these
terms before. Reach out to people? |
|
Yes, two things stand out: pure intent and don’t possess it. I am looking at pure intent to
see if I have it and I am on guard to not pursue it or possess it. I don’t have pure intent. Possessing and pursuing looks the same I’m
living with the question ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ and it is making a difference. I want to live as my
senses. |
|
What motivated your liberation? |
|
Hi Richard, from what I understand, pure intent is the over-arching benevolence and
benignity which can be experienced temporarily in a PCE, and is still experienced by an actually free person but now on an ongoing basis
(and that benevolence and benignity inheres to the purity and perfection of the vast stillness of the infinitude of the universe –
that vast stillness being the stillness / non-movement of time). Naivete can result in a benediction (which acts as a connection with
the purity and perfection mentioned above), but which can result in an immanent manifestation / variation of this pure intent as a “palpable
sweetness” an “infinite tenderness” or “being bathed in intimacy”. I’m curious what made you equate these two experiences
(the two forms of pure intent) as being “both one and the same thing in essence”? Do other actually free people experience
benevolence and benignity on an ongoing basis? Has that replaced the experiences of palpable sweetness? Or do temporary experiences of a
palpable sweetness still arise (and if so is this in the absence of an ongoing experience of benevolence and benignity)? Also, is there
any relation in your opinion between these forms of pure intent and what you call “the quickening”?[1]. Thanks. [1][Richard]: “...it
is of a quality of such fineness that a fine-champagne-bubbles type of word my second wife (de jure) made up all those years ago – ‘tintling’
– seems to be most apt”. [endquote]. |
|
G’day Richard, I’m a bit confused about Pure Intent here – since it is a
life-force, does it exist only in living organisms ? Basically I’m confused with the usage of the word life-force because it is
pretty obvious that Pure Intent is not just in living organisms but all the matter of the universe. |
|
My understanding of this is that pure intent is the connection to the
perfection and purity. Pure intent is not the perfection and purity. Others here seem to be misinterpreting this and saying that pure
intent is perfection and purity. Am I correct about this? |
