November 16 2025

ED:

‘Vineeto’: The way I approached the task of becoming harmless was that I first sought to stop any of my harmless harmful actions or verbal expressions of harm towards other people. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 49, 16.5.2003)

Heads up – I think you used ‘harmless’ when you meant harmful. “I first sought to stop any of my harmless [edit-harmful] actions or verbal expressions of harm towards other people.”

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

I appreciate you pointing out the mistake, undiscovered for decades – I have now corrected it on the website.

*

Richard: Not at all ... the word ‘harmless’ means ‘lacking intent to injure, devoid of hurtful qualities, marked by freedom from strife or disorder, innocuous free from guilt; innocent, blameless, faultless, irreproachable, lily-white; safe, non-dangerous, gentle, mild, peaceful, peaceable’. (Richard, List C, No. 4b, 7 May 2000a).

VINEETO: Are you really saying that all the above qualities are covered by the term “feeling harmless”?

ED: Yes – exactly. “Harmless” is defined by the qualities Richard listed. What is the difference between feeling and being? I don’t understand why “feeling harmless” would not include the above qualities but “being harmless” would.

I’m trying to understand how the two are being distinguished. Could you describe the qualities of being harmless vs feeling harmless, and point out where feeling harmless falls short? The following quote seems to clarify things more for me:

VINEETO: Being harmless also means to look at the practical consequences of your feelings, vibes, words and actions.

ED: I’m trying to understand the distinction between the two: being harmless vs feeling harmless. It seems what’s being pointed out is that being/ becoming harmless is a more encompassing affair than feeling harmless. That one doesn’t just consider how one feels, but also considers how those feelings effect their thoughts, actions, and other people. (And takes it beyond consideration into an actualization).

Is that it? That feeling harmless only takes into consideration how one feels?

VINEETO: Yes, “feeling harmless only takes into consideration how one feels”, not what is factually the case. If your arbiter (your feelings) consider it good enough when you merely feel harmless no matter if this is factually the case, that you are practically being harmless, then a lot of harmfulness flies under the radar, so to speak.

As Kuba said a few days ago –

Kuba: And just like one can attend to the smaller and smaller dips in enjoyment and appreciation I find in BJJ I am focused on progressively smaller things, in that an unexperienced opponent is looking at big and rudimentary motions whereas I am paying attention to whether I can feel the weight on the toes or the heels, or if the elbow is up or down etc.

So habituation is key to any skill, in that once something is habituated it takes care of itself and now the mind is able to attend to the next thing.

*

VINEETO: In other words, putting the bar so high that you won’t be harmless until you are actually free, you (inadvertently?) stymie yourself from the start – or perhaps have a valid-to-you justification to be content with merely feeling harmless.

ED: The bar isn’t set by me – the PCE makes it clear what it means to be actually harmless.

Becoming more a bit more harmless is only ever a small step away from where I’m at any given moment and much more realistic than a giant leap to become a lot more harmless.

VINEETO: Yes, actualising bit-by-bit is the way it works – you change yourself slowly to a more happy and more harmless person and notice the increasingly finer nuances where there is a diminution in feeling good or when there are occasions where you felt harmless but nevertheless thoughtlessly caused ripples in people’s life.

ED: I think part of my confusion in this matter stemmed from me considering “feeling” and “being” in a different context – such as how they are used here:

RICHARD: (…) it is also to no avail to vociferously state, for example, that [quote] ‘‘I’ have NEVER been king of the show’ [endquote] because it is ‘me’, at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself), who fundamentally determines behaviour/ appearance by ‘my’ very presence (‘my’ affective vibes/ psychic currents are ‘me’).

Put succinctly: there is more to identity than just the ego-self … much, much more.

RESPONDENT: Okay … then I want to find out what it is that’s more to it.

RICHARD: As simply as possible: it is who you feel yourself to be at the very core of your being (‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’). (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 103a, 14 October 2005).

VINEETO: I don’t understand how this quote from Richard causes confusion about the difference between feeling harmless (as a subjective feeling) and being harmless (as an objective reality)? Even though, whilst you are a feeling ‘being’ until you are actually free, you can nevertheless aim to become increasingly harmless until you are virtually without malice. A practical example might help.

Look, if you wanted to employ a driver for your company, would you choose one who feels that they are a good and careful driver or choose the one who demonstrates that they are a good and careful driver?

*

VINEETO: … or perhaps have a valid-to-you justification to be content with merely feeling harmless.

ED: Well don’t forget also feeling happy; which in conjunction means to be as free from malice and sorrow as humanely possible while remaining a ‘self.’ The innocuity and felicity that ensues is a different quality than my reactive feelings that depend on conditions.

But I think my issue is I’m failing to grasp the difference between merely feeling happy and harmless and being happy and harmless. Is merely feeling happy and harmless not enough because it’s a temporary affair, just aimed at feeling that way momentarily but not a fundamental change? Whereas becoming happy and harmless is something more involved, changing one’s very being?

VINEETO: There, you wrote it yourself “to be as free from malice and sorrow as humanely possible”, not just to feel as free from malice and sorrow as humanely possible. As I said at the beginning, feelings are not reliable arbiters of what is factual, whereas when you are being sincere, your own sincerity aims for “being aligned with factuality/ staying true to facticity”.

Cheers Vineeto

November 17 2025

ED: Thank you for the response, it’s afforded me a lot of clarification.

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

You are welcome and I am pleased a lot became clearer to you.

*

VINEETO: If your arbiter (your feelings) consider it good enough when you merely feel harmless no matter if this is factually the case, that you are practically being harmless, then a lot of harmfulness flies under the radar, so to speak.

ED: Yes I agree. What tends to fly under the radar are all those minor feelings of upset-ness that can be managed and overlooked by the arbiter. Instances of honest mistakes which lead to harm are one thing, but those cases are few-and-far between (hard to remember any!). At the centre of the majority of memories of being harmful is how I felt – no matter how it was managed or rationalized, or how beautiful or righteous it may have seemed.

VINEETO: Ok, you already gave indications where you can direct your affective attention regarding being harmless – whenever you ‘manage’ or ‘rationalize’ a negative feeling, the feeling is still there (including the vibes) and the cause of the particular feeling is not addressed and therefore will surface again at the next opportunity.

The other give-away are your words “how beautiful or righteous it may have seemed”. Neither “beautiful” nor “righteous” are felicitous/ innocuous feelings. Beauty is one of the qualities of godliness, stemming from the core philosophical/ religious concept of Hinduism and via trickle-down effect all religions –

Satyam Shivam Sundaram is a Sanskrit phrase meaning “Truth, Godliness, and Beauty” and is a core philosophical concept in Hinduism. It suggests that truth is divine, and divinity is beautiful, representing ultimate values and a path to spiritual enlightenment. It is a way of describing the nature of the Supreme Being and the ideal path of human existence, emphasizing authenticity, goodness, and the appreciation of beauty. (…)

Sundaram (Beauty): This represents excellence and all that is beautiful, not just physically, but also the inner beauty of a virtuous soul and the natural world. It is the manifestation of truth and goodness in its most alluring form. (Google: satyam shivam sundaram religion).

And:

Richard: As you can see Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti specifically says [quote] ‘do not think’ [endquote] which indicates there being no thinker when the outside is the inside ... meaning that there is no thinker when the observer is the observed.

Thus the ‘observer’ being referred to is the feeler, not the thinker ... for example (also from the same e-mail):

‘It is essential to appreciate beauty. The beauty of the sky, the beauty of the sun upon the hill, the beauty of a smile, a face, a gesture, the beauty of the moonlight on the water, of the fading clouds, the song of the bird, it is essential to look at it, *to feel it*, to be with it, this is the very first requirement for a man who would seek truth. (...) So it is essential to have this sense of beauty, for *the feeling of beauty is the feeling of love*’. [emphases added]. (‘Fifth Public Talk at Poona’ by J. Krishnamurti; 21 September 1958).

(Richard, List B, No. 42c, 30 December 2002).

As such the feeling of being beautiful can be quite misleading regards being harmless, for some people it is a tag for sexual attraction. Richard’s selected correspondence on Beauty will give you an overall understanding why the feeling of beauty is not a felicitous feeling.

As to “righteous” – the terms righteous anger and righteous indignation should give you a clue. It is one’s reliance on what one considers right or wrong, according to the real-world moral and ethical codes, which then gives one the ‘right’ to feel or act in a particular way.

Whereas when your aim of being harmless is informed by the PCE then it would not be backed up by being ‘right’ but rather in line with pure intent – 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.

ED: The method and its facilitatory practice are so effective because it puts each and every blip of malice and sorrow on the radar such that they can no longer be ignored. And calibrating oneself towards the absence of malice and sorrow is an excellent way to avoid the pitfalls of personally determining what happiness and harmlessness is (i.e. based on my pre-existing standards rooted in the instinctual passions and accompanying morals).

Cheers, it’s a wonderful journey.

VINEETO: This is excellent – when it gets to fine-tuning it is truly fun.

Cheers Vineeto

June 4 2026

VINEETO: However, nowadays pure intent can also be experienced from within the human condition (i.e., as a feeling ‘being’) when pure intent is experienced via that purity personified (i.e. those fully free human beings), reported by ‘Peter’, ‘Vineeto’ and ‘Pamela’ as “a sweetness that was palpable” – plus how ‘he’/ ‘she’ was “literally being bathed in this sweetness”. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba14, 30 May 2026a).

ED: Hi Vineeto, does that mean that a feeling being needs to be in proximity to a fully free human in order to experience pure intent as a feeling being?

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

No, “proximity to a fully free human” is not required. Viz.:

Richard:(…)

• [Richard]: (...). P.S.: Also, briefly, in regards to your ‘armed rebellion’ observations: please be assured that not only will there be a ‘bloodless revolution’ (i.e., non-destructive) but it will be a non-disruptive transition as well – e.g., no food-shortages or fuel-shortages; trains, coaches, planes, ships, and so on, still operating, no loss of creature-comforts, &c., &c. – when the global spread of actual freedom/ actualism eventually takes place’. ~ (Message № 19801, Richard, List D, No. 32a, 21 June 2015).

In other words, it is the consummate nature (i.e., the impeccable quality) of the overarching benevolence and benignity inherent to the utter purity of the pristine perfection welling ever-fresh as the vast and utter stillness of this universe’s spatial, temporal and material infinitude which informs, experientially, that a global spread of this completely original consciousness (a totally new way of being conscious) would, ipso facto, be both a non-destructive and non-disruptive transition.

Furthermore, there would also be the capacity at-that-moment to similarly apprehend, experientially, how it can now be said – as I happened to mention on a couple of occasions during the pre-arranged foregathering here, earlier this year, of half-a-dozen subscribers to this forum – that due to the overarching benevolence and benignity being demonstrably available immanently in human consciousness, nowadays both masculinely and femininely, and thus potentially accessible per favour naïveté regardless of spatial extension, there is no longer any reason why there cannot be a global spread of the already always existing peace-on-earth in our lifetimes. (More on this in those Footnotes № 5 and № 6). [Emphasis added].(Richard, List D, No. 4b, #profoundreappraisal).

And –

James: So it is just a matter of seeing clearly that the real-world is an illusion? I see it but perhaps not clearly enough? I see it most clearly when thinking stops and there is just a sensate body sitting/ laying here. That is the time to have a pce and see the vast stillness of the universe. Is the pce necessary? ps: Is the pce necessary for pure intent to come out of this vast stillness?

RICHARD: Prior to 11.25 AM (AEDST) on Saturday, the 14th of November, 2009, a pure consciousness experience (PCE) was indeed necessary for pure intent – that benevolence and benignity of the vast and utter stillness of the universe itself – and the reason why a PCE was essential is reported/ described/ explained both on The Actual Freedom Trust website and in ‘Richard’s Journal’.

However, since then a PCE has no longer been a vital factor in the process of becoming actually free of the instinctual passions/ the feeling-being formed thereof ... indeed, neither of the persons mentioned, as an example, in that first post of mine (Message No. 10532, Richard, List D, No. 6, 19 December 2011) to this forum in nearly two years could recall a PCE.

Also, what the feeling-being inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago experienced as an ‘over-arching benevolence and benignity’ was experienced by the feeling-being ‘Peter’, on the 29th of December 2009, as [quote] ‘a sweetness that was palpable’ [endquote] and that ‘he’ was [quote] ‘literally being bathed in this sweetness’ [endquote]. (Those quotes are from Peter’s report on the original ‘A Long-Awaited Public Announcement’ webpage).

James: Does the experiencing of the vastness and stillness of the universe bring on the ‘over-arching benevolence and benignity’ which then brings on the ‘sweetness’? Iow, does ‘experiencing the vastness and stillness’ of the universe come first?

RICHARD: G’day James, My response (above) was both in the context of your query as to whether a PCE is necessary for pure intent and your follow-up explanation to [No. 24] (Richard, List D, No. 24, 23 January 2012) about the last paragraph of ‘Addendum No. 7’ (that to be actually free from the human condition is to be that pure intent).

Prior to the physical death of my second wife (de jure) Devika/ Irene a PCE was indeed necessary for pure intent; since then it has no longer been a vital factor in the process of becoming actually free of the instinctual passions/the feeling-being formed thereof as the impenetrable psychic force-field which Devika had established to protect Richard from other people, and which Irene had transmuted into protecting other people from Richard, is no longer in existence (in existence psychically, that is, in the real-world).

Consequentially, that ‘over-arching benevolence and benignity’, which the feeling-being inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago experienced [via a PCE] and named ‘pure intent’, became immanently accessible to some select associates during a specific situational setting called ‘The Second Convivium Gathering’, in late 2009/early 2010, and was variously experienced by them as a ‘palpable sweetness’, for instance, and an ‘infinite tenderness’, for example, and has been more generally described as ‘being bathed in intimacy’.

It was also accessible at-a-distance (hence the thirty-day trial at that time), as a rather remarkable man on another continent has amply demonstrated, and has been described by him upon meeting in person as a ‘gentle energy’ and a ‘harmless energy’ which is ‘emanating all around (not directional, like a guru to a devotee, and not at all coarse)’.

Thus to answer your first question: the direct (as in, immediate or unmediated) experiencing of the vast stillness of this physical universe’s infinitude – where the word stillness refers to there being no movement of time whatsoever (as in ‘this moment has no duration’) – is the way in which the feeling-being inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago became consciously aware of pure intent [via a PCE] because, back in those days, there had not yet been someone of sufficient naïveté to enable that immaculate perfection to become purity personified.

Which means that, these days, when that ‘palpable sweetness’ (for instance) is experienced it is that ‘over-arching benevolence and benignity’ being experienced, by virtue of that immaculate perfection having become manifest in the everyday world as a flesh-and-blood body only, as they are both one and the same thing in essence. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, James, 6 Feb 2012).

*

James: Would it be possible to have this global spread online as we can’t all make it to Australia?

Richard: G’day James,

You raise two points there which can only be answered by mentioning the third point you left unspoken. (…)

Third, (the point you left unspoken): there already exists a world-wide network – requiring neither technological wizz-bangs nor competency in the English language – which has a truly global reach (inherently connecting every single man, woman and child alive today no matter what their age) and is instantaneous in its effect.

And, most importantly, it is where the real power-play takes place anyway – given that it by-passes both the cognitive and the affective filters – as its operation has the immediacy of ‘being’ to ‘being’ (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being is ‘being’ itself) directivity.

James: What would it take?

Richard: Ha ... enjoying *and* appreciating being alive/ being here, each moment again come what may, by being as happy and as harmless as is humanly possible via minimising both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ feelings and maximising both the felicitous *and* the innocuous feelings.

Put simplistically (for maximum effect): the way to bring about global peace and harmony, in our lifetimes, is by having fun.

(I am having such a ball here at the keyboard). (Richard, List D, James, 2 July 2013).

Cheers Vineeto

June 5 2026

VINEETO: However, nowadays pure intent can also be experienced from within the human condition (i.e., as a feeling ‘being’) when pure intent is experienced via that purity personified (i.e. those fully free human beings), reported by ‘Peter’, ‘Vineeto’ and ‘Pamela’ as “a sweetness that was palpable” – plus how ‘he’/ ‘she’ was “literally being bathed in this sweetness”. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba14, 30 May 2026a).

ED: Hi Vineeto, does that mean that a feeling being needs to be in proximity to a fully free human in order to experience pure intent as a feeling being?

VINEETO: No, “proximity to a fully free human” is not required. Viz.: [snipped]

ED: Thank you Vineeto, I should have known better and upon reflection I think I didn’t hone in on my question well enough. The part I’m still trying to comprehend is: “When pure intent is experienced via that purity personified (i.e. those fully free human beings) …”

It’s all very fascinating and I do not know how it all works. I am under the impression that the best/only way I can make myself sensitive to pure intent is via being naive; so that is what I will continue to approach as much as humanly possible. I do believe that it is working in me, but that said, it still remains invisible to “me”. Perhaps all the better for now lest I make it one of my accomplishments.

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

Neither do I, I only know that it does happen that way.

Your “impression” is correct insofar that one needs to be sensitive regarding pure intent, and being as felicitous and innocuous as possible (because it makes sense) means you are becoming more benevolent and benign, which are exactly the qualities you want to experience when you are looking for pure intent. What Richard said about a PCE applies equally to experiencing pure intent –

Richard: A happy and harmless person has a much better chance of precipitating a PCE ... which is the essential pre-requisite for an actual freedom (otherwise this is all theory). It goes without saying, surely, that a grumpy person locks themselves out of being here ... now. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 3, 14 February 1999).

*

Richard: Just this: the more one enjoys and appreciates simply being alive – to the point of excellence being the norm – the greater the likelihood of a PCE happening ... a bored, nervous, scared, regretful, and etcetera, person has no chance whatsoever of allowing the magical event, which indubitably shows where everyone has being going awry, to occur.

It really is as straightforward as that. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Rick-a, 4 March 2006).

*

Richard: In order to facilitate a PCE happening, one needs to see the place pride and humility plays in one’s life. ‘I’ am proud of ‘my’ major achievement … which is maintaining ‘myself’ as an identity. ‘I’ will do anything but relinquish ‘my’ grip on this flesh-and-blood body, including humbling ‘myself’ before some God in order to ameliorate the pernicious effects of pride. However, humility is merely the antidote to pride … and they feed of each other, continuously. For example, one cannot but feel proud of one’s accomplishment of self-abasing humility ... it is in the nature of the entity to do so. A humbled self is still a self, nonetheless, leaving one proud of one’s performance. When one realises how silly all this is; when one sees that pride and humility are standing in the way of freedom from all self centred activity, something astounding occurs. ‘I’ vanish. I am simply here where I have always been ... and pride, with its companion in arms, humility, has disappeared along with all the other feelings. I am free to be here now in 127 the world as-it-is. Unadorned and unencumbered, I can stand on my own two feet, owing allegiance to no-one. (Richard’s Journal, Article Seventeen, p. 127)

ED: It also seems like a very rare occurrence on a feeling-being’s journey towards a basic actual freedom. Feeling-being Vineeto only experienced it once(?) or twice? Namely, in the out-from-control dvd and the lead up to becoming basically free. For feeling-being Peter it happened in the lead-up to becoming basically free. But then there is this other gentleman in a different location that also experienced it at the same time as you and Richard – fantastic. Does it rise-and-fall in intensity?

VINEETO: Ha, you just reiterated yourself that “because Devika is no longer manifesting a force-field in the psychic-web protecting all from Richard”, which manifestation ended with her death on 15 Nov 2009. Hence there was not much time to experience the benefit of Richard being pure intent personified before both Peter and myself became actually free. For you to be able to access it, it makes no difference if it happened rarely or was “very rare” but if you are sensitive to it or not. For the pioneers in 2009/2010 it had primarily to do with a near-actual intimacy, as you can see in the “Sweetness” Article.

You yourself spent a whole week in the presence of two fully actually free people and did not experience it once, nor did many others of the visitors. It’s a matter of “allowing it to happen” (not of demanding/ expecting it on some statistical precedence). You can read more in the many answers Richard gave to “How do I Induce a PCE”.

ED: I’ve read much of what Richard wrote about pure intent as well as what feeling-beings Peter and Vineeto wrote and I notice a difference between the two. Often, what feeling-being Peter and Vineeto wrote makes more sense to me, while what Richard wrote does not. I believe it’s is an experiential issue on my end and I eagerly look forward to the day where I can verify and make sense of what Richard reports. For example:

‘Vineeto’: When you have the intent to become free from your insidious good and bad feelings in order to experience the felicitous feelings each moment again, then the investigation into your beliefs and feelings has a purpose and a direction and as such will show incremental success. (Vineeto – SC Sincere Intent, Pure Intent).

Is more understandable to me than:

Richard: Pure intent is a palpable life-force; an actually occurring stream of benevolence and benignity which originates in the vast and utter stillness that is the essential character of the universe itself. Once set in motion, it is no longer a matter of choice: it is an irresistible pull. (Actual Freedom Library, Topics, Pure Intent).

VINEETO: Naturally, what a feeling being has written is more relatable for a feeling being. However, in the quote you gave, ‘Vineeto’ only talked about the sincere intent “to become free from your insidious good and bad feelings” not of experiencing “a palpable life-force; an actually occurring stream of benevolence and benignity”. It is indeed “an experiential issue”.

ED: Though I can relate to the irresistible pull, I cannot detect a stream of benevolence.

Thanks for your continued responses and also thank you, Kuba, for putting yourself out there. These exchanges have lead to some exceptional pointers. I had a good chuckle at your comment about taking a break from actualism because in my experience such an attitude does not last very long. It is like Richard says:

Richard: Once launched it is impossible to turn back and resume one’s normal life … one has to be absolutely sure that this is what one truly wants. (Richard, General Correspondence, Page 9, 31 March 2000).

VINEETO: It’s good to hear you experience an “irresistible pull”, what I once called the “Fatal Attraction Syndrome” with someone who fervently fought against this “irresistible pull”. ‘Peter’ once said “it becomes an obsession” and ‘Vineeto’ was definitely irrevocably hocked once ‘she’ had ‘her’ first PCE. It’s the most intelligent response when finding and recognizing something so incomparably superior to life in the real world.

Make good use of this “relating to the irresistible pull” – because being vitally interested in becoming actually free from the human condition is a necessary ingredient for success.

Cheers Vineeto

June 6 2026

VINEETO: It’s good to hear you experience an “irresistible pull”, what I once called the “Fatal Attraction Syndrome” with someone who fervently fought against this “irresistible pull”.

ED: I will be well forewarned should any fatal attraction syndrome develop. It is sobering that people who have had significant success with actualism found themselves in this situation.

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

This particular example was an unfortunate occurrence and can serve as a warning because as far as I know, this particular respondent has not (yet) changed their mind. When we coined the term it was meant as a jocular nudge for them to come to their senses because when one dares to experience an irresistible pull and follow it through, it will be fatal for ‘me’ and liberating for this particular flesh-and-blood body. There is nothing wrong with being fatally attracted to an actual freedom – everyone who succeeded in becoming actually free was, in fact, fatally attracted.

Also, you may have overlooked what I said afterwards, to “make good use of this “relating to the irresistible pull” – because being vitally interested in becoming actually free from the human condition is a necessary ingredient for success”. Any lukewarm dabbling in actualism will only result in a lukewarm outcome.

Cheers Vineeto

June 7 2026

VINEETO: There is nothing wrong with being fatally attracted to an actual freedom – everyone who succeeded in becoming actually free was, in fact, fatally attracted.

ED: Indeed and I did not get that impression. I understood you to be describing two different things: the fatal attraction itself, and the fatal attraction syndrome which is an identity’s reaction of repulsion to said fatal attraction. Am I comprehending properly?

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

I would not put too much weight on the term ‘syndrome’ as it was something that afflicted the first pioneers before the Direct Route was opened by Peter, so there may well be no reason to give the expression of ‘fatal attraction’ a scary connotation. The post to No. 4(List D) I linked to, the “FAS” was a bit of black humour, indicating that I could understand their dilemma because ‘Vineeto’ had had a comparable experience.

Richard used the expression “fatal attraction” only once on the AF list and once on List D (then it was copied as a quote into various correspondence), referring to the quality of ‘his’ pure intent required to succeed. Viz.:

Richard: Incidentally, just before/ just as the PCE starts to wear off, if one unravels (metaphorically) a ‘golden thread’ or ‘clew’, as one is slipping back into the real-world, *an intimate connection is thus established betwixt the pristine-purity of an actual innocence and the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté*.

At least, that is the way it worked for the identity inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body, all those years ago, inasmuch ‘his’ recall of PCE’s was a naïve remembrance [i.e., rememoration & presentiation; see Message № 19775 (Richard, List D, No. 32a, 19 June 2015) for context], rather than a cognitive memory, and ‘he’ thus experienced a constant pull, each moment again, into the immaculate perfection of the actual world ... and thus away from the contaminated imperfection of the real-world.

Being a ‘fatal attraction’, so to speak, it rendered the entire process virtually effortless”. [emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, No. 13, 21 May 2009)

ED: I have come to appreciate this fatal attraction and its persistence. It took some time and some more ingredients (developing sincerity) but it has allowed me to stop pushing myself – something which if left up to me I doubt I’d be able to maintain. (As well as taint by doing things my way). That pushing would make the actualism method unenjoyable and would lead to all sorts of internal complaints akin to, “the actualism method is too hard” or “I can’t do this”, etc.

One thing I’ve never attempted to do is repress it, as I’ve always seen it as helpful. But I also consider that there may still be unexpected holdouts that could pop up and replace that enticement with alarm. Or perhaps not. I will be pleased to meet any unexpected hold outs sensibly, rather than nurture their apparent reality.

VINEETO: It is indeed one of the most common obstacles and “hold outs” to get the actualism method up-and-running that one overlooks the term “entirely new” and automatically interprets Richard’s reports and explanations into the familiar parameters of the human condition in general and one’s previous practices and experiences in particular. Hence cleaning the workbench and starting afresh is the most effective way of avoiding misunderstandings and getting swift results.

After you understand that the whole actualism process is about diminishing the ‘self’ – both ‘I’ and ‘me’, controller and soul, good and bad feelings – and that enjoyment and appreciation is the successful way to do that, then you can more easily recognize (and decline) where and why ‘I’ cunningly step in to sabotage the endeavour. Then complaints such as “the actualism method is too hard” or “I can’t do this” are part of the same attempted sabotage and can be explored intelligently.

It’s helpful to remember that ‘I’ am a lost, lonely, frightened and very, very cunning entity and will invent and engender any trick to prevent one diminishing the scope of ‘my’ dominion. For ‘Vineeto’ it became more and more like a fascinating puzzle or mystery-solving game to discover and dismantle ‘her’ tricks, lies and furphies, which were preventing ‘her’ from feeling (unconditionally) good. Like a chess-game of intelligence vs. human nature.

*

VINEETO: Also, you may have overlooked what I said afterwards, to “make good use of this “relating to the irresistible pull” – because being vitally interested in becoming actually free from the human condition is a necessary ingredient for success”. Any lukewarm dabbling in actualism will only result in a lukewarm outcome.

ED: Thank you, I intend to.

It is now 2026, and I have been at this for 7 years. There has not been a single day where I didn’t think about actualism/ peace on earth in that time.

VINEETO: I do remember (if I may mention it) your hesitation in the early stages to come down to earth and not only “think about actualism”. One could call it the gestation period.

ED: With an affective awareness up-and-running it segued into a moment-to-moment participation – as in, I’m not just going to think about it, I will also do something about it.

VINEETO: Your description reads as if “an affective awareness up-and-running” did not yet include “participation”. Just to head a possible misunderstanding at the pass, the actualist affective awareness, which Richard emphasises wherever he explains the actualism method, is far more than sitting on the sidelines watching one’s thoughts and emotions go by – the affective awareness is employed for the sole purpose of taking action whenever one’s mood dips below feeling good and needs attention. I posted something on this very topic a few days ago (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba14, 4 June 2026).

With most people having had some previous experience in various forms of buddhistic practice it may well be of use to clear any remnants of one’s ‘workbench’ to freshly understand the actualist usage of affective awareness –

Richard: The more one enjoys and appreciates being just here right now – to the point of excellence being the norm – the greater the likelihood of a PCE happening ... a grim and/or glum person has no chance whatsoever of allowing the magical event, which indubitably shows where everyone has being going awry, to occur. Plus any analysing and/or psychologising and/or philosophising whilst one is in the grip of debilitating feelings usually does not achieve much (other than spiralling around and around in varying degrees of despair and despondency or whatever) anyway.

The wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition is marked by enjoyment and appreciation – the sheer delight of being as happy and harmless as is humanly possible whilst remaining a ‘self’ – and the slightest diminishment of such felicity/ innocuity is a warning signal (a flashing red light as it were) that one has inadvertently wandered off the way.

One is thus soon back on track ... and all because of everyday events[1]. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive)

Footnote:
[1]What the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago would do is first get back to feeling good and then, and only then, suss out where, when, how, why – and what for – feeling bad happened as experience had shown ‘him’ that it was counter-productive to do otherwise.

What ‘he’ always did however, as it was often tempting to just get on with life then, was to examine what it was all about within half-an-hour of getting back to feeling good (while the memory was still fresh) even if it meant sometimes falling back into feeling bad by doing so ... else it would crop up again sooner or later.
Nothing, but nothing, can be swept under the carpet. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 68c, 31 May 2005).

VINEETO: Your description reads as if “an affective awareness up-and-running” did not yet include “participation”. Just to head a possible misunderstanding at the pass, the actualist affective awareness, which Richard emphasises wherever he explains the actualism method, is far more than sitting on the sidelines watching one’s thoughts and emotions go by – the affective awareness is employed for the sole purpose of taking action whenever one’s mood dips below feeling good and needs attention. I posted something on this very topic a few days ago (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba14, 4 June 2026).

With most people having had some previous experience in various forms of buddhistic practice it may well be of use to clear any remnants of one’s ‘workbench’ to freshly understand the actualist usage of affective awareness – (snipped quote)

Can you see how the very activity of affective awareness includes your active participation else it be a variation on the ‘noting’ technique of buddhistic flavour? (…)

ED: Reading back what I wrote I can see why you would say that. I attempted to encapsulate a 7-year journey into a few short sentences and did a clumsy job. You would be right to characterize those early days (hah, years) as coming back down to earth. I think what you see as “hesitation,” I see more as pride, ignorance, and a know-it-all pattern.

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

Indeed, from the onlooker’s perspective the hesitation in putting the actualism method into down-to-earth practice was obvious, whereas you would know better which feelings caused the delay, and they are not easy to admit at first, even to oneself. I commend your courage to do so.

ED: Regarding affective awareness – it is like you say. An actualist uses that awareness to take action (with an actualist intent) when they notice an affective dip. Simply noting thoughts and feelings doesn’t actually lead to any change and in my opinion can be dissociative and lead to creating a new identity (the watcher / awareness as an identity). As in, “I’m not the feelings/ thoughts, I’m what’s watching them.”

VINEETO: I am pleased you can understand this clearly – it is often a long-lasting misunderstanding when attempting to fit this totally new paradigm into ones existing mindset, which consequently stymies any progress with the actualism method. Richard described it this way, using ‘Vineeto’ as an example –

Richard: … such tergiversation reminds me of what feeling-being ‘Vineeto’ reported after the first few weeks of listening to me/ reading my words.

Speaking in regards to the effects any and all attempts to fit this totally new paradigm into ‘her’ existing mindset were having, ‘she’ explained the process as being ... (1.) as if ‘her’ brain was being turned upside-down ... and how (2.) ‘she’ was having to relearn how to think all over again. (Richard, List D, Alan, #1)

*

VINEETO: It’s helpful to remember that ‘I’ am a lost, lonely, frightened and very, very cunning entity and will invent and engender any trick to prevent one diminishing the scope of ‘my’ dominion. For ‘Vineeto’ it became more and more like a fascinating puzzle or mystery-solving game to discover and dismantle ‘her’ tricks, lies and furphies, which were preventing ‘her’ from feeling (unconditionally) good. Like a chess-game of intelligence vs. human nature.

ED: Speaking of clearing the work-bench. I most certainly had a spiritual hangover for some time in regards to thinking and thought.

VINEETO: Everyone interested in actualism has a materialistic/ spiritualistic mindset of some description – it is part and parcel of the disease called the human condition. Both ‘Vineeto’ and ‘Peter’ had a long history in Eastern spiritual indoctrination and practice, and both wrote a lot about the process of disentangling themselves from the various aspects of this old mindset. For ‘Vineeto’ one of the first stumbling blocks which touched a chord was loyalty, which is recorded here –

R: I remember you and I having a conversation about loyalty the second or third time you came here. You were realising that you had loyalty to hold you back

Q2: Yes, it took a while for me to work through. It is a feeling of belonging, and when I dismantled what loyalty is made up of then it loses its virtue.

R: It is connected with belonging? To a particular group? So all these group therapies that people do, they would not question that loyalty, would they? Because they belong to that very group that is running the therapies. The whole thing of the commune.

Q(2): It’s a new loyalty – away from the family and toward the commune.

R: Whereas I am only interested in being rid of loyalty altogether – however strange that may initially seem. (Richard, Audiotaped Dialogues, Compassion Gained through Forgiveness Binds)

It continues here (Richard, List D, No. 32a, 19 June 2015).

Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ wrote about this course of events –

‘Vineeto’: I remember this course of events very well, I remember that feeling being ‘Vineeto’ sat on the floor next to Richard, leaning against the wall in his living room when ‘she’ had this fascinating discussion with him about loyalty. ‘She’ was telling him about ‘her’ concerns that ‘she’ was being traitor to ‘her’ community of Rajneeshees, including the people ‘she’ worked for as an employee, when ‘she’ was doubting and questioning the validity and efficacy of ‘her’ belief in, and dedication to, ‘her’ Master and spiritual enlightenment, after ‘she’ had had a glimpse from the conversations with Richard that there might be something superior on offer. Richard listened intently and at the end of the conversation said to ‘her’ “Ah, you are talking about loyalty”.

This really had hit a chord. Was ‘her’ apparently multifaceted concern really only about loyalty? Loyalty was something ‘she’ could understand, and ‘she’ recalled many times in ‘her’ life where ‘she’ had changed loyalty to something which suited ‘her’ search for meaning better than ‘her’ previous pursuit, for instance as Richard described it in the above correspondence. And ‘she’ had landed here, in Richard’s living room, in a small seaside town in Australia. It was quite amazing.

It still took several more months, in which ‘she’ discovered that there was something presented to ‘her’ which was utterly fresh, sensible, sincere and, contrary to spiritual belief, appealed to ‘her’ intelligence. Besides, ‘she’ realized eventually that ‘she’ had nothing to lose but ‘her’ weakening spiritual dreams and ‘her’ devotion for a dead master. ‘Vineeto’ wrote about one decisive incident – (continued Actualism, Articles, Basic to Full Freedom, #loyalty).

As you can see it wasn’t an overnight process to “clear the workbench and start afresh” but took several months to find and disentangle from the various feelings which connected ‘Vineeto’ to the spiritual world and the ‘Sannyas’ community.

ED: When you told me that I’m more than just a feeler, I’m also a thinker and senser, it caused me to take note of thought and how it had been crippled by self-imposed boundaries. I gave myself full permission to use it. (Again, with an actualist’s intent.)

VINEETO: When I looked through our previous correspondences, I am not clear what you are referring to? I found this quote containing the words “feeler” and “thinker” from 7 April 2025 (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Ed, 7 April 2025).while the word “senser” was nowhere to be found –

Richard: Thus attention becomes a fascination with the fact that one is always here ... and it is already now. Fascination leads to reflective contemplation. As one is already here, and it is always now ... then one has arrived before one starts.

The potent combination of attention, fascination, reflection and contemplation produces apperception, which happens when the mind becomes aware of itself. Apperception is an awareness of consciousness. It is not ‘I’ being aware of ‘me’ being conscious; it is the mind’s awareness of itself. Apperception – a way of seeing that can be arrived at by reflective and fascinating contemplative thought – is when ‘I’ cease thinking and thinking takes place of its own accord ... and ‘me’ disappears along with all the feelings. Such a mind, being free of the thinker and the feeler – ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul – is capable of immense clarity and purity ... as a sensate body only, one is automatically benevolent and benign. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive)

I also wrote regarding being the feeling in contrast to having the feeling –

Vineeto: So, your challenge is to pay affective attention to how you experience this moment – and it is in this moment where you can experience being the feeling you feel and fully being it (without objection or endorsement) choose to be. For instance if you experience being angry (or fearful, or sad) you recognize and acknowledge that you are this feeling (that is all you are as an identity when you are ruthless honest with yourself). Experiencing that you are this feeling then you have the choice to be a felicitous feeling instead (recognizing that it is silly to be anger or fear or sadness). (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Ed, 17 April 2025).

If you can point me to the quote from where you gained the understanding that “I’m more than just a feeler, I’m also a thinker and senser” it will be appreciated.

ED: It is very much like a fascinating puzzle. For a time when I would find myself lost in fantasies or fears, upon becoming aware I’d shift gears and use all that thinking to consider said puzzle. Either what was behind all these fantasies or fears, or upon earlier events in the day that caused affective dips. I could write more but I have to go. These days I’ve been very busy and by the evening I find it can be challenging to write.

VINEETO: Remember, that one’s thinking is both polluted and crippled by one’s feelings, and as such it is far more productive to first get back to feeling good so that thinking does not merely revolve around those feelings, “fantasies or fears”. You might find that when you are feeling good, and more so when you enjoy and appreciate being alive, there are no fantasies at all to distract you from being here.

Cheers Vineeto

June 11 2026

ED: When you told me that I’m more than just a feeler, I’m also a thinker and senser, it caused me to take note of thought and how it had been crippled by self-imposed boundaries. I gave myself full permission to use it. (Again, with an actualist’s intent.)

VINEETO: When I looked through our previous correspondences, I am not clear what you are referring to? I found this quote containing the words “feeler” and “thinker” from 7 April 2025 (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Ed, 7 April 2025).while the word “senser” was nowhere to be found –

ED: Apologies to cause the needless looking: You said this to me on the last day I visited as I was leaving. Perhaps not best to recount an exchange that cannot be referenced so please let me know if this is a misrepresentation and I can amend my post.

VINEETO: Hi Ed,

Thank you for a bit more context. What I might have said is that when there are no feelings or emotions occurring then thoughts are clearer and sensuousness can come to the fore – and I could have phrased it badly in trying to compact it into one sentence. In any case, I recommend taking your information regarding actualism from the written word rather than obscure or even distorted memories from what was said several years ago.

Here I came across a short and brilliantly explanatory quote from Richard which gives you a guide when and why you would want to minimise both the ‘bad’ feelings as well as the ‘good’ feelings without turning the very method into an identity of its own –

Richard: Look, the whole point of minimising both the malicious/ sorrowful feelings (the ‘bad’ feelings) and their antidotal loving/ compassionate feelings (the ‘good’ feelings) whilst maximising the felicitous/ innocuous feelings (the ‘congenial’ feelings) is to make for a potent combination when this untrammelled conviviality operates in conjunction with a naïve sensuosity – whereby one is both likeable and liking – such that the benevolence and benignity of pure intent may increasingly become dynamically enabled for one purpose and one purpose alone ... to wit: for the already always existing peace-on-earth to become apparent, in this lifetime, as this flesh-and-blood body. [Emphases added].(Richard, List D, Martin, 6 March 2016)

You can stick it on your fridge, if you like, to remind you that purposelessly ruminating about this or that feeling for the sake of it is a waste of time when you could be maximising the felicitous/ innocuous feelings instead.

*

VINEETO: Remember, that one’s thinking is both polluted and crippled by one’s feelings, and as such it is far more productive to first get back to feeling good so that thinking does not merely revolve around those feelings, “fantasies or fears”. You might find that when you are feeling good, and more so when you enjoy and appreciate being alive, there are no fantasies at all to distract you from being here.

ED: Yes, when feeling good fantasies or fears (fearful fantasies) do not arise. As far as I can tell such imaginations are triggered by a good feeling or a bad feeling. Once I become aware that I’ve wandered off into imagination, I’ve noticed I can interrupt it with some thinking about what it is that I am presently involved in doing – i.e. imagining being somewhere/ somewhen else. “Ah, I’m thinking about such-and-such fantasy again…” “Where did this train of thought begin / what feeling is involved/ what triggered off that feeling?” “This is similar to this other fantasy/fear I recall, I notice a pattern.” “Is this how I want to spend my time when I could be feeling good or perhaps even having a PCE instead?”

There was one that occurred today and it started due to a good feeling triggered upon receiving some news. I was swept away for approximately 3-5 minutes until I noticed what I was doing and that feeling good had be usurped by good feelings of mild euphoria. I suppose when you notice such a thing, how could you not think about it?

VINEETO: The question is how you think about it. Is it in a ruminating way (see Kuba’s post 5 June 2026) or is it with the specific purpose to find out how you tick so that you can see/understand the concept/ belief/ desire which caused the euphoria, and recognize the silliness of it for the purpose of declining it next time it happens in a similar situation. Otherwise your ‘thinking about it’ is another form of ‘self’-centric absorption.

*

VINEETO: ... and more so when you enjoy and appreciate being alive…

ED: I think I am having a fine time at feeling good/ getting back to feeling good, but I could be doing better in regards to up leveling it to enjoying and appreciating being alive. I haven’t quite cracked the code to be able to access that reliably. Currently, enjoying and appreciating being alive is an exception as opposed to the norm.

When I think back on today, there were a handful of interruptions to feeling good, with one major 5-20 minute period into feeling bad. So there is obviously room to raise the bar and extend the periods that I am capable of feeling good. I’ll investigate these interruptions and what caused them, where I was, etc. Many were small things but the 5-20 minute period has to do with a persistent pattern of worrying / feeling overwhelmed by future tasks.

VINEETO: Unless you remove the cause of what interrupted your feeling good period by dissolving the accompanying concept/ pattern of the diminishment of it, it will happen again and again. To give you a simile: a fuse blows in your electric system and stops those appliances to work which are on the same circuit. You replace the fuse and they work again. But unless you find out which particular appliance has the electric fault which caused the fuse to blow in the first place, and then properly fix that (or remove it whatever the case may be), the fuse will blow again the next time you use the faulty appliance.

Actualism is down-to-earth, very practical, in the same way.

Cheers Vineeto