|
(List D refers to Richard’s List D
Vineeto’s Correspondence with Chaz on Discuss Actualism Forum
HENRY: Your concern about psychic attack indicates to me that you are a self living in fear of psychic attack by others. CHAZ: When you go on forays into tropical forests, it is wise to wear appropriate clothing with protection for your feet and legs in case you step on a poisonous snake or thorns. It is precaution, not fear. It is prudence. HENRY: How precisely does a psychic (non-physical) force influence the (physical) internal organs with no extant psychic self? CHAZ: Simply because these psychic emanations projected onto the actually free man or woman who has abandoned anonymity silently and subtly cause a dissociation between the physical body and the mind (the brain in operation). The victim will ignore that he or she is being “vampirized,” and will confuse a gradual loss of health with an organic sensation of “calorific energy.” We are not invulnerable to everything, nor are we omnipotent. And we can still make mistakes in our best actions. 
VINEETO: G’day Chaz, If you believe that “psychic emanations” can be “projected onto the actually free man or woman” then you have not understood even the basic facts about an actual freedom from the human condition. The very reason that an actual freedom is the third alternative to both materialism and spiritualism is because it eliminates, eradicates, exterminates, annihilates, erases, wipes out the psychic/ affective identity in toto, forever, instead of merely transcending the dark passions as in a spiritual freedom. Once the identity disappears in its entirety, one realises that it never actually existed, it was but a passionate illusion. With the extinction of the identity in toto, the psyche There is no psychic web Your own careful avoidance (what you call “prudence”) of having a name,
any name, to avoid psychic forces which could “vampirize” you is nothing but a passionate psychic
construct, which you call “suprarational methodology that I created and tested”. It also exposes the lie of your claim of having attained “liberation”, having “freed
the native intelligence”, which “psychic emanations do not affect”. Back to the drawing board, Chaz. For a start, you could ask yourself your own question –
First, of course, you will need to access pure intent via activating your naiveté and connecting a golden clew to a clear memory of a pure consciousness experience. Despite your carefully chosen words pure intent is not apparent in your correspondence (for
instance: “Now, the rain has stopped. Time to put away my peace pipe.”) Cheers Vineeto
VINEETO: Hi Chaz, I will keep calling you Chaz because you are apparently too frightened by your own fantasies to give any name to use (and I prefer talking to a person, not a method or a ghost). Your main thrust of your writing here is about what you call anastasis and this is the way you have used it before you even explained what it means for you – PWR: the risk of an anastasis has been nullified VINEETO: According to Wikipedia anastasis may refer to: • Anastasis (Greek: ανάσταση), resurrection, most commonly
the resurrection of Jesus So very obviously this meaning of anastasis is all about religious superstition and/or fiction. Then, after five days of using an unsubstantiated term, you finally give the definition you have in mind – PWR: Anastasis (a term borrowed from medicine) is this re-emergence of a persona whose
vitality distributed throughout all the organs has been concentrated in the brain, whether driven by an altered state
of consciousness or by a consciousness manifested in the objective material world and its natural phenomena. VINEETO: Here is what anastasis refers to according to the National Institute of Health (NIH) –
Nowhere was there any mention of cells either dying or “rising to life” via an ASC or any other type of consciousness. This is your personal invention and on closer inspection nothing but spiritual gobbledygook –
As such your statement “anastasis, a law of Nature” is false. Further, according to your spiritual definition this term only applies to a “persona” As such it may apply to an identity, i.e. a “persona”, but never to an actually free flesh-and-blood body –
Now, as you use words like “vitality”, “organs” and “brain” indicating that by “persona” you may be referring to an actually free flesh-and-blood body. Nevertheless, despite the fact that medicine talks about material cells “rising to life”, you specify anastasis as being “driven by an altered state of consciousness” or by “consciousness manifested in the objective material world”. Again, neither description about this process based on a spiritual concept applies to an actually free person. Later you make this muddled definition more clear – PWR: …anastasis is a psychic force of external origin incapable of reaching pure
consciousness but capable of affecting the internal organs of an actual free body. VINEETO: In actuality there is no distinction between the flesh-and-blood body (including “internal organs”) and consciousness, i.e. the flesh and blood body being conscious –
In actuality, matter gives rise to consciousness – contrary to spiritualism which believes that “consciousness [is] manifested in the objective material world” –
So you see, Chaz, despite your claim of “liberation” and your “suprarational
methodology” This spiritual paradigm also is apparent in your first example for the supposedly dangerous effects of anastasis – PWR: U.G., unable to nullify the anastasis, ended up opting for suicide by starvation
(Prayopavesa). VINEETO: What anastasis? What resurrection? U. G. Krishnamurti was still a feeling being,
residing in the outer regions of Spiritual Enlightenment. As most of what you say this example only has an inkling of fact: U.G. Krishnamurti died after voluntary fasting, called “Santhara”, a Jain religious ritual of voluntary death by fasting, at the age of 90+ yrs –
Your reference to Richard is entirely uncalled for because none of the actual definition of anastasis nor your own definition of it apply to Richard – PWR: I did not have time to warn Richard about this side effect, and the anastasis caused
him to ignore signs of a rapid deterioration in his health that even occasional check-ups do not usually diagnose
accurately. VINEETO: Besides, you blatantly make up a narrative of Richard’s death, which is not in
accord with the facts. Here is everything that was ever been published about Richard’s death (Richard's Journal, Article 16) Either you are really muddle-headed, not being able to know the difference between spiritualism and actualism, as well as not knowing the difference between medical facts/ definitions and your own fantasy … or the purpose of your appearance here and your warning (of both actually free people and practicing actualists) is neither benevolent nor benign but intended to stop peace-on-earth in its tracks. I leave it to you to sort that one out. (Continued).
PWR to Shashank: The fact that outdated scientific explanations are still available on the
website www.actualfreedom.com.au indicates that anastasis has fulfilled its function. VINEETO: Despite your repeated mentioning of “outdated scientific explanations” you have never provided a snippet of evidence for this – not that it has any relevance because Richard experientially confirmed that feelings come before thought, and so can everyone else, if and when they want to. Now we come to the second topic of your ongoing thrust about anastasis – to plant fear of endangering health threats in practicing actualists, telling them to stop informing others about the epoch-changing news that there is now a third alternative to being materialist or spiritualist and an opportunity for peace-on-earth. PWR to Shashank: … warning your fellow human beings that there is a risk of anastasis and that it is enough to remain anonymous in order to avoid a dangerous dissociation with the physical organism is not a nurturing instinct. There are people who refuse to believe that they need to be rescued under any circumstances, and receive training in a method only as a necessary formality to achieve an end. And then they perish in catastrophes, because what mattered to them was to be in control and to be free. They never considered that they were shortening their longevity because they violated a law of the universe such as gravity. Even if they ignore the law of gravity, or act as if only they were capable of defying it, the law of gravity is always in force. It never changes. The same goes for anastasis. (…) They want to do whatever they want, whenever they want, but not be held responsible for the
subsequent disasters that so often occur… PWR: … you will understand that anastasis is a psychic force of external origin incapable of reaching pure consciousness but capable of affecting the internal organs of an actual free body. Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote above about the role of preserving anonymity and not starting a campaign,
whether on land or at sea, of travel and personal meetings. It is safer and smarter to operate behind the scenes if
and when necessary. Not everyone needs to be a mentor at the risk of becoming an evangelizing apostle. Or a martyr.
Think about that. PWR: Living in the objective material world of the path without resistance requires
perpetual anonymity. VINEETO: And all this alarmist brouhaha (who is the “evangelizing apostle” here?) because of a “a term borrowed from medicine” referring to cells “rising from death” and applied to the spiritual concept that “consciousness [is] manifested in the objective material world”, whilst advertising a method leading to a spiritual “liberation”. Ah well, Chaz, you are on the wrong forum with your analysis, your method and your dire warnings. Better look for some more gullible pastures. Cheers Vineeto
PWR: And my explanations about the various
reasons for keeping my real name private continue to be ignored… VINEETO: G’day Senhor “P”, I still find it non-sensical to call you by the invention you present here, after all I don’t call any inventor by the name of their invention (which is either a thing or a philosophy/ hypothesis/ theory). Else one would call Mr. Einstein “RT”, for instance. PWR: I “believe” (and hope I am not mistaken) that everyone here, except those who have already fulfilled their destiny, is interested in finding out more about another path to reach the same destination. It is possible to get to Australia by boat, but a plane flight will be much faster and more comfortable. Fortunately, there is not just one plane that goes to that destination! VINEETO: You mean “Terra Actualis” Thank you for confirming that “belief” and “hope” are still operating in you. If you were actually free there would be neither belief nor hope nor any other feeling extant in you. PWR: Now, I will take the opportunity to write about “beliefs” and “facts”. Trading beliefs for supposed facts is equivalent to transforming facts into absolute truths. What appears as a fact to us, may only be that based on our perception, of our knowledge, both of which may not be, and likely are not, absolute. Until we can rule out all possibilities which leave possibilities such as this open, then we cannot conclude anything as an “absolute fact”. Absolut fact = Truth VINEETO: Ha, what a cheap way responding by redefining words and playing word games, instead of taking up the challenge of substantiating your beliefs with sound evidence and refuting the facts I presented. It demonstrates that all you present is just pith and wind. “Absolute fact” is your invention. As you may not know the English meaning of the word ‘fact’, here are just three definitions (perhaps the Spanish or Portuguese language have a different definition) – • ‘fact: something which is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information’. ~ (Cambridge Dictionary). • ‘fact: a thing done; the quality of being actual; something that has actual existence; an actual occurrence; a piece of information presented as having objective reality’. ~ (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary). • ‘fact [originally meaning ‘an act’, from Latin factum, from facere ‘do’]: a thing that is indisputably the case; (facts) information used as evidence or as part of a report’. ~ (Oxford Dictionary).
You see, a fact stands on its own, a fact does not need a qualifier such as “absolute”
which you added in order to denigrate a fact to a mere “Truth” – a dogma, a verity, a gospel, god’s
truth, my truth and your truth, truthiness With your petty and insincere word-game you have reduced facts to “religion” and thus nullified (for you that is) factual reports, descriptions and explanations of an actual freedom which are something entirely new to human history, and denigrated it to a mere feature of religion, the “Tried and Failed”, the bane of humankind. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you claim an actual freedom for yourself? Is that also an “absolute fact” aka “religion”? Can you not see that with every additional word you utter you are more and more making a complete fool of yourself in public? PWR: Few people on the planet understand that what is fact for them is not necessarily fact for others because all facts are like truths, they are OPINIONS. In the end, all you have left are opinions. And personal opinions are personal beliefs. VINEETO: Yes, I can see that you are operating on this basis, forgetting that the inescapable result of your insincerity regarding facts makes everything you say yourself merely “opinions” and “personal beliefs”, unsubstantiated claims, empty promises, presented with swaggering grandstanding. Fact is that a genuinely actually free person has no longer the faculty to believe because the act of believing requires both intuition and imagination, which are attributes of the soul/ psyche. The facts I presented to you can stand on their own, substantiated by my own direct experience,
by Richard’s apperceptive reporting and the experience of many others who have experienced facts for themselves for
instance in their PCEs. You are welcome to question the content of each of them, but so far you prefer to
evade such discussions by utilizing empty rhetoric and hollow euphuism PWR: As soon as I read Richard’s words in 2007, I understood that it was also necessary to believe in at least 0,000001% of what he was presenting, otherwise neither I nor anyone else would have any desire to delve into the topic of actual freedom. (…) VINEETO: Ha, guess again. The correct figure is 0,0001%, and no believing is required –
If you want to express that figure in percentage, you simply remove two zeros after the dot (0.00001%). PWR: PS: “non-physical phenomena” such as the psychic “vibes” proposed by Richard do not occur… In the case of phenomena between the interaction of two or more concepts, there will still be a living brain and a physical body operating. VINEETO: “Phenomena between the interaction of two or more concepts”? This makes no sense whatsoever unless you consider human beings merely as “concepts”. And why do you keep describing “a living brain and a physical body” as two items – they are one and the same. PWR: And as for electromagnetic phenomena that occur without the
need for direct contact between bodies and objects, these will still be occurring in the actual world and will
continue to occur even when there is no human consciousness (in a living and awake body, of course) to contemplate them. VINEETO: You have stated that your much-utilised word “anastasis” is “is
also known as psychic attack” Now you have changed your “opinion” that “psychic “vibes” (…) do not occur” but instead present a new opinion that instead “electromagnetic phenomena” “will still be occurring in the actual world and will continue to occur” – again without presenting any evidence whatsoever for your most recent change of opinion. But then that is the nature of unconsidered opinions, especially when the previous opinion
becomes untenable. If you were to use this modus operandi in your real-life job, you would soon have a “leadership”
without followers and a “position of command” I will stop commenting on your conceptualisations, theories and impromptu inventions – you
have already made it plain that all of what you write are opinions, which you will change any time someone points out
a flaw in your supra-rational methodology Oh, what a tangled web they weave when first they practice to deceive. Cheers Vineeto
PWR: Hello everyone, including the censors on duty. VINEETO: Hello Mr. ‘P’, It is rather telling that you consider everyone questioning the content of your messages or criticizing them for incorrect, misleading and outright false information being a censor. The correct term is ‘fact checking’. Censorship means the suppression of frank, honest and open communication, and it is you who is opposed to a frank, honest and open discussion by asking people to write to you privately/ surreptitiously, and by not answering the messages pointing out flaws in your claim of being actually free and your so-called improved method. PWR: My three basic messages have been delivered: 1. There is more than one method and technique for you, who are still on the plateau, to discover and apply to yourself. It is possible for everyone to take the next evolutionary step by acting on yourself without depending on any authority. Fortunately! 2. Find all your objections and resolve them one by one, relentlessly. They are all self-protection mechanisms created by that legion of entities and sustained by a psyche operating behind the scenes. Detect these barriers and systematically demolish them until no resistance remains. If you lack the willpower to carry out this plan, find the particular behavior or habit of yours that you need to quit immediately, forever and for good, to avoid further loss of mental vigor. It is easy! 3. And when you are living 24 hours a day, every day, free in the material and objective world, remain anonymous and do not make the same mistake that both the Enlightened and the actually free have made. It is perfectly possible to help others without revealing your name and address or organizing meetings. It is your right and a useful security measure in the face of so many people who are determined to distort your words and reveal your details and place of residence. VINEETO: Those messages have indeed been delivered over and over, and found lacking in
honesty, sincerity, forthrightness and clarity, let alone factuality. Even your call to be “acting on
yourself without depending on any authority” is contradicted by your own behaviour, because you are
considering yourself to be the unquestionable authority, else one is accused and condemned being a “censor”,
a “biased moderator”, a “dogmatizing Guardian”. You see, even your little snide remarks are revealing. PWR: Peace on earth began by acting on myself, with my own means and resources, and success is always invisible. Remember: you also do not need third-party approval or to become a celebrity. (…) VINEETO: Whatever this “Peace on earth” is, which “began by acting on myself”, it has nothing at all to do with actuality/ factuality. You cannot be referring to pure intent, which only becomes an irresistible pull if you tap into it with naiveté and sincerity. You confirmed in your last post that your “Peace on earth” is not the same as pure intent because it can be discarded like a redundant tool –
As Claudiu already pointed out Have you ever experienced the purity and perfection of the vast stillness of infinitude, for instance, when watching a mill-pond-still river at night with fish jumping vivaciously all around? It is magnificent. This is not a matter of not using the correct wording but exposes that you really have no clue what an actual freedom is. Your very announcement also makes it unambiguously clear that you don’t know pure intent, which everyone experiences when the passionate identity (both ‘I’ and ‘me’) are either temporarily abeyant or permanently extinct. This quote of yours is equally revealing –
What you are basically saying is that one should use the “Method without Resistance” (PWR™) in order to eliminate “all traces of resistances” and this concomitantly eliminates pure intent as well, as it is “no longer necessary”. This is more than a circular argument – this is a tangled web of phantasmagorical proportions. * VINEETO: “As most of what you say this example only has an inkling of fact: U.G.
Krishnamurti died after voluntary fasting, called ”Santhara“, a Jain religious ritual of voluntary death by
fasting, at the age of 90+ yrs”. PWR: PS: The correct term is “Prayopavesa”, as I
wrote. U.G. Krishnamurti was not from a Jain family, but rather a Hindu Brahmin family… Facts that occurred do not
change. VINEETO: Ha, this is the only item you chose to answer from the long list of your beliefs
and errors which I highlighted Does this perhaps indicate that you agree that these are mere beliefs, your ‘truths’ and your opinions and as such not factual? Regarding the term for U.G. Krishnamurti’s death – both Jainism and Hinduism have the
tradition of voluntary death. Jainism calls it “Santhara” (and the author of the link What you have failed to comprehend/ comment on, however, is that U.G. Krishnamurti still had a ‘Self’ and therefore his psyche was intact. Hence your self-modulated term of anastasis with its contrived life-threatening influence has, according to your own definition, no application for U.G. Krishnamurti or any enlightened person –
Cheers Vineeto
Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual
Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
