|
(List D refers to Richard’s List D
Vineeto’s Selected Correspondence Pure Intent
VINEETO: And to leave no doubt about the exact nature of pure intent –
JAMES: This quote from Richard posted by Vineeto above about pure intent really stuck with
me. Especially this part: “it cannot be affective (else it would not be pure).” JAMES: To sum it all up pure intent is the intent to experience the purity. VINEETO: Hi James, There are several ways for you to “crank up pure intent”. For one, you can read and contemplate all of Richard’s descriptions of his various pure consciousness experiences in his
selected writings
Your habit of summing up to a singular sentence of what Richard or I am saying is not enough now – it is the minimum approach. You want to understand it not just cognitively but experientially. In order to “crank up pure intent” to reach your destiny – something you have been on and off busy with for at least 25 years – it is now time to expand and extend yourself like never before. Viz.:
(Richard, Audio-taped Dialogues, Compassion Perpetuates Sorrow).
Notice the habit to contract or withdraw and nip it in the bud when you notice it. Expand into cognitively and then experientially understanding, contemplating and imitating the actual world which is right under your nose and all around, the exquisiteness and perfection of it. Enjoy it and then appreciate the enjoyment and thus extend and increase the marvelling and appreciating in this moment the very fact of being alive. The sights, the sounds, the sensate experiences, the very fact that the universe exists, that you exist as a flesh-and-blood body, that you are alive this very moment, the only moment you can actually experience. Instead of contracting, become interested, fascinated and finally obsessed by this one single aim you have in life. * As for “Which begs the question: Can I have intent w/o it being affective?”
– of course you can! You quoted the answer yourself recently
As a final guide to how you can experience being alive non-affectively, apperceptively, here is how Richard describes “mind in neutral” –
Cheers Vineeto
KUBA: Hi Vineeto, VINEETO: It bears well that you now know which direction you want to go. KUBA: Yes I do indeed and solidly from experience too, over the weekend and today I have been delighting in this mirificent flavour, I am glad that Claudiu got me onto this word but if not I would say it is a magical fairytale like flavour, this sense of endless wonder and amazement – “how can the universe exist, how can all this be so” etc. VINEETO: Hi Kuba, Ah, Richard was equally delighted when he found the word and created a long list of definitions
and samples of literary use for it KUBA: With the immediate reward being the wonder and amazement itself rather than any intellectual answer. I am amazed each time this flavour is tasted because it is just as wondrous every time. This flavour, what it is and where it leads is the direction I want to go in, and not as a means to an end but as an end in itself. It is what I want to do with my life. And there is a golden clew in place now back to this flavour, and it is so very worth it every time. Those obstacles are there – to be squarely addressed rather than gingerly walked around – but now there is such a
worthy goal, and such a pinpointed attention to it that I am confident it is possible to proceed. VINEETO: It’s wonderful you now have access to this flavour of “the wonder and amazement itself rather than any intellectual answer”. Intellectual answers are never successful in the long run standing against any onslaught of instinctual passions, whereas “wonder and amazement itself” are very potent and ultimately irresistible. You and Sonya seem to have infected each other with the joy and fun of considering obstacles “to be squarely addressed rather than gingerly walked around” – it needs a bit of daring at first but once your abandon your pride and acknowledge that ‘you’ are as bad and as mad as the person next door, then the fun of addressing any obstacle to feeling excellent begins, and as I said to Sonya, nothing succeeds like success, “and it is so very worth it every time”. By the way the terms ‘as bad and as mad’ comes from Peter –
KUBA: Oh and the other thing I can see now, the morning resentments and the evening gloom, these feelings were there as a result of me walking down the path which I know cannot deliver the goods. It’s because that flavour would be already gone, and then I would be going through the motions of the ‘real world’, knowing that it leads nowhere. There was always this sense to those feelings like ‘what is the point of all this’ and indeed what is the point of living anything but that which delivers the goods, especially when that thing has already been located. It’s like spending the day-time in paradise and then going to look for meaning in hell afterwards and wondering why something is off … It’s selling out that which is first place for something that doesn’t even compare. All of those feelings as well as the “high achiever” who would come in to assuage them, none of this is of any relevance when I am allowing that mirificent flavour. And at the same time nothing at all in the ‘real world’ can make up for what is missing when that flavour is lost. VINEETO: Ah you recognized what caused “the morning resentments and the evening gloom” – according to Geoffrey’s metaphor “being lost in the woods nearby”. Naturally that also means you were not “spending the day-time in paradise”, they were feelings of a conditional happiness or perhaps good feelings. This paradise was a real-world paradise, not actuality or near-actuality. I can say this with confidence because if you had spent the day in actual “paradise” you would not have experienced “the evening gloom” and “morning resentments” day after day. The meaning you were looking for was not in the day-time “paradise”, those feelings ended when the conditions/ activities causing your happiness ended. As you said yourself – “it’s selling out”. Now that you found the genuine flavour, the “mirificent flavour” of pure intent, you know what you had been missing. It is from the ongoing experience of the actual world that Richard says –
Some people objected to his standard of the actual world – perfection –
KUBA: It looks like (and I don’t know when exactly) but I already signed the contract, in that I have already seen what is possible, so how could anything but that ever compare. I see now how for ‘Vineeto’ virtual freedom was never an indefinite platform to remain but rather a dynamic stepping stone to the ultimate. VINEETO: Indeed, although ‘Vineeto’ had a long period when ‘she’ ran away from even contemplating going out from under control (the genuine virtual freedom). It was only ‘her’ determination not to “do a Devika”, and never to give up when the best was so obviously achievable (because of her own PCE and because Richard lived it day after day), that ‘she’ eventually dared, and cared, to stop running and leave ‘her’ fear behind in lieu of near-actual-caring. KUBA: Of course ‘I’ would look for steeples within the ‘real world’ when that flavour was lost and yet knowing deep down it is pointless. Having experienced pure intent ‘I’ can never fully forget the experience, the wheels are in motion and ‘I’ can either kid ‘myself’ or press on. So the warning, not to “do a Devika” this is relevant, it looks like at least I had my endless stubbornness
that would never allow it. VINEETO: Yes, “never fully forget the experience” of “wonder and amazement”, tie a golden clew to it each time you experience it. And don’t castigate yourself for your “endless stubbornness” – more than likely it’s not only the deep fear of venturing into the unknown but also the fear of leaving behind everything which is dear/ familiar to you and common to all. And the moment you dare to look the fear in the eye, acknowledge its existence and refuse to be beaten, fear will instantly lose a large portion of its power (because fearing fear is feeding it) and then you can look for the thrill of the adventure of a lifetime. It bears well indeed. Cheers Vineeto
CHRONO: So I decided to turn away from following my usual way of being about intimacy. And I was simply allowing a “what if?”. Like just suspending ‘my’ path temporarily just to see. Then my eyes were seeing into the softness of being here. I became aware of that sweetness. This sweetness was not directional as if for one person. It was here for everyone. It was markedly different from the usual way of being intimate. It didn’t have to be on a special occasion. It’s always here. I am wondering now if I could always be like this. What’s standing in the way? VINEETO: Ah, this is delicious – it’s the very sweetness of the imminence of pure intent
(see Actualvineeto, Articles, Sweetness CHRONO: I am still reading through this correspondence but I always thought it interesting that words like sweetness, delicious, and ambrosial are used as they seem to be words related to taste or smell. But I see they could be related to “delight”. Initially I couldn’t understand what the word sweetness meant because I can only relate it to tasting something sweet. Also I relate very much with what you wrote here:
Although this was after you became actually free, I’ve had a few
experiences which I would describe with the exact same words used here. Another word that came to mind was
“precious” or “preciosity”. VINEETO: This sweetness was mainly experienced by feeling being ‘Vineeto’, especially during ‘her’ out-from-control period and later when I endeavoured to become fully free. It is the pure intent – experienced as “an actually occurring stream of benevolence and benignity that originates in the vast and utter stillness that is the essential character of the universe itself”. It is tangible when you experience that you are not alone in this adventure of a lifetime. Follow this ambrosial sweetness and you can’t go wrong. And as Kuba recently said –
When you say “precious” I am instantly reminded of my all-time favourite piece of writing in Richard’s Journal –
Whereas the fervent feeling of one’s ‘precious’ identity is a mere, and troublesome, bauble by comparison. Cheers Vineeto
[Emphases added]. 
SYD: This is more or less what I had in mind when I wrote “thinning ‘me’ … have
the space … simply enjoy & appreciate” … and even more specifically I was thinking of rememoration of
my PCEs (how else can that “beyond one’s favourite” come about?) … and rememoration
and pure intent seems inextricably linked per this discussion: Connection with Pure Intent = Rememoration VINEETO: Whilst you only focus on the words “allow to” I also saw the word “analogous”, (i.e. not exactly, comparable, similar, related) – and so the watering-down process happens. Your analytical, singling-out process does not do you any service when it comes to understanding pure intent, which is always outside of ‘me’. Nothing an identity can experience is in any way comparable to the actual world. It is a different paradigm. A feeling being can only ever lean into the direction of imitating actuality, being well aware that, except in a PCE, it is never the same to the feeling being’s experience. Hence my suggestion below to start by living the sincere intent to become harmless (and thus genuinely happy). When you look closely at the thread you provided for your definition of what pure intent is, here is how you started – SYD: Per Miguel’s paraphrasing, Geoffrey defines [the connection to] Pure Intent as
the very “revival” (rememoration) of one’s PCE in this moment right now. VINEETO: Whereas Miguel correctly said – “That “revival” would be the connection with pure intent, the ‘golden thread’ mentioned by Richard.” Be careful not to water down the meaning of pure intent for yourself – from revival (rememoration) being “the connection” to pure intent, by putting “[the connection to]” in square brackets. From there it is easy (for the cunningness that one’s identity is) to forget the words in square brackets and equate “the connection” with pure intent itself. Firstly, I recommend to take your understanding of what pure intent actually is from the source, reading it over and over with you whole being, until you experientially get it, and not other people’s rephrasing or paraphrasing from what Geoffrey said in a video meeting. They could be correct but they could also not be. The very fact that you presently cobble together your understanding from many different quotes speak for the fact that you do not experience pure intent yourself. The acknowledgement of this fact is vital to not settle for any certitude until you unambiguously experience it for yourself. Here is the original definition of pure intent – don’t forget to access the tool-tips as well –
When you read the article, don’t pick out phrases to memorize but rather immerse yourself experientially in the flavour of what Richard is conveying. Once you get the knack, it might help you having an excellence experience or a PCE. Secondly, I also recommend before trying to genuinely experience pure intent to first aim for understanding, and living, sincere intent, which is to be harmless and happy as much as humanly possible. I put ‘harmless’ first, because for many it is the more difficult aspect of an actualist’s sincere intent. (Btw, sincere, as used on the website, does not mean ‘true to your feelings’ but true to facts and actuality – and feelings are not facts). When this intent is firmly imbedded and actualised, i.e. apparent to yourself and others in your daily actions you are in a much better position to grasp the experiential meaning of pure intent. In other words, you can only experience this “genuinely occurring stream of benevolence and benignity” when in your daily life you are as benevolent and benign as a feeling being can be – because that “genuinely occurring stream” is always outside of ‘you’. Cheers Vineeto
VINEETO to Syd: Now this may not be the situation in your case but your recent reposting CLAUDIU: Mmm that’s interesting, Vineeto. I did think sensuousness referred to something ‘I’ do, a way of ‘me’ experiencing the world, which leads to apperception – at which point, while apperceptive, there is an actual sensuousness that is intrinsic, but the ‘me’ being sensuous is what allows ‘me’ to allow that PCE to happen. VINEETO: Hi Claudiu, I have no problem with your writing, and of course for a feeling being there is always in identity operating so the scare quotes are often purely academic. But when Syd singled out this single paragraph for reposting I wanted to avoid a misunderstanding in his mind so as to not emphasise ‘my’ action in the experiencing of a general sensuousness, as in ‘look at me I am being sensuous here’ because that would be counterproductive. It turned out that he needed this nudge in order to recognize that being sensuous is not “dry” at all, like in the spiritual/buddhistic practice, but can be full of joie de vivre and delight –
CLAUDIU: Reading the whole article VINEETO: The article is about how attentiveness and sensuousness can lead to apperceptiveness. CLAUDIU: Can you clarify for the record which it is? You did write (emphasis added):
The specific point is this: If sensuousness is something from which apperception / apperceptiveness can occur, then it is something which occurs before apperception, i.e. outside of a PCE. And if it’s outside of a PCE – it is, necessarily, something ‘I’ do. Or, at the very least, something ‘I’ allow to happen (analogous to allowing pure intent to increase in its potency for action). If sensuousness only occurs inside a PCE, then it does not make sense that it is something from which a PCE can occur, since it already would be occurring. VINEETO: I was simply going by what Richard wrote, for instance here –
If you analytically take apart the words and try to fit them into a logical concept you will always get into trouble with actualism – it is experiential and the words are describing the experiential event. For instance, when Richard wrote in the 1st paragraph of the 2nd section “When one first becomes aware of something there is a fleeting instant of pure perception of sensum” apperceptiveness occurs a split second “before one affectively identifies with all the feeling memories (…) and also before one cognitively recognises the percept”. So you might say there is a logical contradiction because sequentially it more often occurs when one has allowed attentiveness first. What is your own recollection when you experience sensuousness? Does it only occur in a PCE? Or can you delight in sensual and sensuous experiencing when feeling happy or feeling excellent? CLAUDIU: What I was attempting to convey in the initial quote is it’s something ‘I’ do, but not for the purpose of furthering ‘myself’ (i.e. tilting away from actuality), but rather something ‘I’ do for the purpose of tilting towards actuality, i.e. of allowing pure intent, allowing ‘myself’ to marvel at this wonder of being alive, which naive felicity readily lends itself to an EE (if one is not already occurring) and thence to a PCE. VINEETO: As I said at the beginning, I have no problem with your writing to Adam-B CLAUDIU: Let me know if that clarifies anything. As I write this now it seems to make sense to think of sensuousness as more analogous to pure intent, i.e. something ‘I’ allow to happen but not something ‘I’ do – and when a PCE is happening it is automatic. That does seem to track much better with my experience. Cheers Claudiu VINEETO: It’s curious that you now say you “think of sensuousness as more analogous to pure intent” whereas in the beginning of this post you wrote “I did think sensuousness referred to something ‘I’ do”. In either case, pure intent is not something ‘you’ do. You may find my post to Syd of today informative –
Sensuousness can be analogous to pure intent but you would know that it is not pure intent per se. Otherwise I fully agree and it is delightful how easy fully enjoyed and appreciated sensual and sensuous experiencing can lead to excellence experience and PCE. Cheers Vineeto
CLAUDIU: Hi Vineeto, VINEETO: I have no problem with your writing, and of course for a feeling being there is always in identity operating so the scare quotes are often purely academic. But when Syd singled out this single paragraph for reposting I wanted to avoid a misunderstanding in his mind so as to not emphasise ‘my’ action in the experiencing of a general sensuousness, as in ‘look at me I am being sensuous here’ because that would be counterproductive. CLAUDIU: Ok, that makes sense now. The point of confusion is if you were saying that sensuousness is something only occurring in a PCE. And then I found this quote (emphasis added):
i.e. that “sensuousness” has an “in-built apperceptive awareness”, and thus I thought it may be actual only. VINEETO: Hi Claudiu, I am delighted that it makes sense to you now. When you say “actual only” – being actually free automatically includes “apperceptive awareness” as the “vivifying facet”. That also means that the more the identity is in the background, the more one experiences the utterly delightful enjoyment and appreciation of sensuousness. I remember Kuba recently saying –
CLAUDIU: However I see now that you were just drawing an emphasis away from ‘me’ and towards the object/ point of sensuousness, rather than saying it can’t happen outside of a PCE – and of course, Richard was in that quote describing sensuousness as it occurs whilst apperceptive (PCE or actually free), not excluding that there is a feeling-being sensuousness that a feeling-being can make use of in order to lead towards apperception (much like enjoyment and appreciation itself being actual during a PCE/when actually free, and affective when outside of a PCE!) VINEETO: Yes, I am pleased you can see that. * CLAUDIU: Reading the whole article I can see now how it could be referring to just something that occurs in apperception. VINEETO: The article is about how attentiveness and sensuousness can lead to apperceptiveness. CLAUDIU: Yes, that is what I had thought before! VINEETO: I think the first sentence of the article specifies it most precisely –
Btw, I read in this thread, in a conversation you had with Kuba earlier, that you “never did like” the article (link). I understand you well because ‘Vineeto’ also did not particularly like the article, it was too confusing for ‘her’. However now, especially when I read only a few sentences here and there, I am impressed at the detail and precision of Richard’s observations and descriptions of how human consciousness operates. Now that there is no identity that might obscure what I read with previous concepts or ideas so as to confuse the content of Richard’s writing, it is treat to read it. * VINEETO: If you analytically take apart the words and try to fit them into a logical concept you will always get into trouble with actualism – it is experiential and the words are describing the experiential event. CLAUDIU: Yes, in this case it made sense though, the from which is logical (and aligns with experience) that it’s something that leads to a PCE as well, not only something in a PCE. VINEETO: What is your own recollection when you experience sensuousness? Does it only occur in a PCE? Or can you delight in sensual and sensuous experiencing when feeling happy or feeling excellent? CLAUDIU: It was a matter of what the words refer to – there is something that I was experiencing outside of a PCE that I was calling “sensuousness”, and then I became unsure that that was what to call it. Now I am sure again that it had been the correct word all along. Sensuousness really beings to shine during an excellence experience, where it takes on an aspect of that magical quality that is intrinsic to PCEs. At that level it really is a wide-eyed wonder at just how amazingly, thoroughly delightful and enjoyable being alive really is! It continues to knock my socks off. VINEETO: Yes, sensuousness can operate at any time, and the quality of it varies the less ‘you’ the identity interferes with feelings and classifications, and the more magical it can be. * VINEETO: It’s curious that you now say you “think of sensuousness as more analogous to pure intent” whereas in the beginning of this post you wrote “I did think sensuousness referred to something ‘I’ do”. In either case, pure intent is not something ‘you’ do. CLAUDIU: Haha oops. The ‘analogy’ was in the sense of sensuousness being something ‘I’ allow rather than something ‘I’ do. Sensuousness is more like an “allowing” rather than a “I can do it like I can move my hand” kind of thing. It does seem to really take on a life of its own once pure intent is in the picture, which imbues it all with that ‘magical quality’. VINEETO: Ah, that’s wonderful, especially when it takes on “a life of its own once pure intent is in the picture, which imbues it all with that ‘magical quality’”. That’s what is drawing you irresistible closer and closer to your destiny. *
CLAUDIU: Incidentally and for similar avoiding-watering-down purposes, I don’t like that
phrasing of “rememoration is the connection with pure intent” (as I wrote here Thus we would have it that “rememoration is the connection with the intimate connection betwixt the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté and the pristine-purity of that actual innocence which is inherent to living life as a flesh-and-blood body only”. Indeed it would be too easy to drop the first ‘connection’ and be left with the erroneous “rememoration is the connection betwixt the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté and the pristine-purity of that actual innocence which is inherent to living life as a flesh-and-blood body only”. I think a better phrasing would be that rememoration is the key to allowing pure intent (my only hesitation is that I’m not sure if it is the only key, so perhaps “one of the keys” is better). VINEETO: Yes, “one of the keys is better”. You certainly have a gift with words. CLAUDIU: In any case then we would have that “rememoration is the key to allowing that intimate connection betwixt the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté and the pristine-purity of that actual innocence which is inherent to living life as a flesh-and-blood body only”, as well as “rememoration is the key to allowing the experience of that manifest life-force; that genuinely occurring stream of benevolence and benignity that originates in the perfect and vast stillness that is the essential character of the infinitude of the universe”. VINEETO: And once the connection is firmly established, pure intent (the universe, so to speak) can run one’s life, as in letting go of the controls, and interruptions or interference by dominant feelings happen less and less. CLAUDIU: Although it is true all this is experiential and the words can only describe it, it
is so much nicer when we can have our cake and eat it too, such that the words used are also more resilient and
robust in the face of an analytical taking-them-apart. It won’t matter much for those already with a firm
experiential basis (whether actually free or still a feeling being), nor for those feeling-beings who are more
intuitive in nature [e.g. the ~90% of the population that is not an “NT” type on the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator], but it can perhaps benefit the more analytically-inclined among us [e.g. the ~10% of the population
that is an “NT” type, i.e. those of type INTJ/INTP/ENTJ/ENTP]. VINEETO: Ha, I didn’t even look up all those acronyms. But I remember when studying social sciences and psychology at university in my twenties, and after, I jumped at every possibility to figure out how to classify myself according to body-type, emotional or psychological make-up, even in the astrological category and many others. While discovering patters is what the human brain enjoys and is good at, to make certain patterns into ‘self’-classifications/ categorizations (make them a designated feature of one’s identity, like hanging a certificate on the wall) is not very practical when whittling away one’s identity. The human brain is, after all, malleable, else one would not be able to change human nature. Cheers Vineeto
SYD: I. I’ve been looking into what it means to be ‘happy and harmless’ when the rubber meets the road. It obviously means both absence of sorrow and malice as feelings, both the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings. Somehow it helps me to think of this in subtractive (rather than additive) terms. Knowing what is not there, makes evident what is there in its place (feeling good, a felicity and innocuity, all the way to an enjoyment & appreciation). II. Based on my learnings from the WomanFromNov, I made a pact with myself to be as honest as to my desires as possible with any subsequent woman. No games, just being frank from the get go. The idea being that if there’s a mismatch in our desires, we can part ways amicably instead of wasting weeks/months playing layered narratives. Onfray’s Solar Erotics VINEETO: Hi Syd, I cannot help but comment on your latest plan after “looking into what it means to be ‘happy and harmless’ when the rubber meets the road”, especially since at least one other person wholehearted approved of your choice of proceeding. From the AI summary you provided of the philosophy of this obscure French philosopher Michael Onfray –
Michael Onfray, in his various suggestions, stays true to the “reasoned hedonism”, in particular the stripping away of guilt – the conscience put in place by society to curb the excesses of the animal instinctual passions. Regarding stripping away of guilt –
Here is what Richard has to say to someone equating the actualism method (feeling good) with hedonism. (The respondent’s elder brother was by disposition an unapologetic narcissist, hence his own strong objection to feeling good) –
SYD: III. But Onfray’s Solar Erotics overlooks the ‘happy and harmless’ part. By playing the Solar Erotics game, I’m still be operating under the paradigm of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings, and in particular the ‘good’ feeling of (unilateral) attraction, which doesn’t feel good at all. VINEETO: Indeed, Michael Onfray does not only overlook “the ‘happy and harmless’ part”, he rejects it altogether by suggesting “stripping away of guilt” which disregards the other person as a fellow human being – they are to be merely business partners in a negotiated contract of exchanging goods. SYD: This attraction (an instant hedonic pleasure) is one final aspect of the socialized desire I had been holding on to, and now – with the sincere intent to be happy and harmless (because duh) – I’m ready and willing to decline it once and for all. VINEETO: Do I understand you correctly that you are saying that you now disregard the hedonistic contracts à la Onfray? So is the ‘French Cuisine’ is not all it’s made out to be? However, your theoretical summary and ‘plan’ makes no sense because you are not merely “operating under the paradigm of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings” – you are your feelings, both ‘good’ and ‘bad’, and remain so unless/ until you are actually free. Hence you cannot merely rationally decide to stop doing it. How do you ‘plan’, “once and for all” to decline attraction, i.e. your sexual desire, without repressing it – it is an instinctual feeling after all? SYD: And open myself to intimacy aka ‘closeness’ akin to the immediacy of my PCEs. VINEETO: How will you open yourself “to intimacy aka ‘closeness’ akin to the
immediacy of my PCEs” when you haven’t experienced any ‘closeness’ with another person in your PCEs.
You were on your own in your room when they happened. I distinctly remember that you reported about the first ‘Microsoft
PCE’ that you left the house for a short period and the PCE stopped, and then started again when you returned home.
Hence you have no experiential information regarding “intimacy aka ‘closeness’” so far, only an “immediacy
experience” with the objects in the room SYD: I quite like all of this. Contrary to what I had thought,
it is radical … and I like being radical. VINEETO: What would be radical – radically different from how you operated most of your life – is to leave/ quit ‘the philosophy and planning department’ and naïvely experimentally and experientially explore the world of people and events, with the sincere intent firmly in mind to be harmless and happy as much as humanly possible. I put ‘harmless’ first, because for many it is the more difficult aspect of an actualist’s sincere intent. (Btw, sincere, as used on the website, does not mean ‘true to your feelings’ but true to facts and actuality – and feelings are not facts). Cheers Vineeto
Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual
Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
