Actual Freedom – Audio-Taped Dialogues

R: People can find what I have to say rather confronting – but then again, when you first approached spirituality, you must have found that confronting. Was it not a challenge to your religious beliefs? Your church-going beliefs?

Q(1): No, it was refreshing, in a way, because at that time I had given up God and Heaven and Hell ... I had given up a lot of stuff and I was comfortably numb. All of a sudden, here was an alternative that I hadn’t discovered before. There was a flash of ... wow! ... here was ‘The Answer’! And off I went.

R: So if I understand you correctly, you gave up church and heaven and hell – you saw that as mythical – and in enlightenment you saw that it was possible to be happy here on earth.

Q(1): Well, no ... what was it? Okay, here was a man who was – as I saw him – free; and it was possible for me. He was teaching enlightenment and it was possible for me.

R: When you became more involved in it, what did you discover?

Q(1): When I got further into it, it was obvious that I wouldn’t ... it became obvious that we were talking about only .00001 percent of the population becoming enlightened ... and I would never be that. Then I learned about reincarnation, so whatever you didn’t get this life-time, at least you were moving on. It was never conceivable for me that I would become enlightened.

R: You knew that?

Q(1): Well it’s like ... you are waiting for a bolt of lightning. That is essentially what you are doing.

R: Then after some period of time, disillusionment and discouragement set in? I have noticed with other people that it takes about ten to twelve years.

Q(1): It became more impossible, in a way, and nobody around me was obviously any different than I was. There were no concrete examples of people who were actually ... I think that gradually became clear as I got to know more people – particularly in the hierarchy. They hadn’t changed, there was no proof of the pudding. And then, of course, there was all of the corruption and that sort of thing. Then he died and there was nothing else, so I went back to the ashram a few times.

Then there was another Master I discovered who offered a Teaching about Man and Woman, and I thought: okay, here is a western man – and somebody who is talking about relationship. About love between man and woman ... not just love but also the practice between man and woman.

Then I had some realisations about his Teachings ... about surrender and things like that ... and I turned to another Master. What attracted me to him was that he was saying that unless you give this one hundred per cent – forget it! I thought: ‘Well, I haven’t been giving it a hundred per cent’. I immersed myself in it ... that is what I got from him. But when I visited his commune I thought: No! I’d already done that for ten years, or whatever, in the ashram. I had done all that, given my money, lived in communes. I thought: ‘Is there nowhere?’ What next? I went back to the Western Master, but that did not set me on fire at all.

Then I met you two. Richard said: ‘You’ve wasted twelve years on ‘The Teachings’. Everything there is wrong’ I said: ‘Everything is wrong??!!’ It was like some sort of key. ‘Everything?’

R: But it is never too late to change – once one knows. You took to it like a duck to the water.

Q(1): It’s extraordinary. But, then again, the circumstances had built to that. I was totally confused about the whole enlightenment thing.

R: Let us be realistic, though. When you talk about .00001 percent ... we have not yet demonstrated that anyone can replicate my condition. What (Q) experiences, she says, is beyond normal human expectations anyway. No bolt of lightning has had to hit her. She has demonstrated that something is possible for a human being whilst remaining a self. One can do something that improves one’s life out of sight.

Q(1): Yes, I have no concept about how I was before now ... it’s sort of like ... I have to pinch myself and ask: ‘Is this really this good? This what is happening to me?’ It’s as if I’m waiting for something to go wrong – but it keeps on getting better. I keep getting more and more comfortable.

When I first started coming here I felt very nervous, very uncomfortable – particularly coming from the spiritual thing, you know. By that time you are so wary of a situation like this.

Q: It has made you sceptical. There is nothing wrong with that, however long that scepticism takes. It is not up to anybody to decide in advance. It has to work itself out.

Q(1): The incredible thing for me is in my daily life; I have the evidence of this working for me in relationship. So much of the gender stuff: love, sex and ... so many things. ‘Love and Authority’, for example, that really struck me because I had been an authority. It’s the ‘man’ thing ... it’s a conditioning, isn’t it? Yes, it’s that I relate to a woman in terms of authority. And it’s I either give away that authority or I have that authority. In some cases I’ve actually given it away ... often. For a man that’s a lot of ...

Q: A lot. A man has no other choice; a woman is ultimately in power in a relationship and the only thing a man can do is take some control back when the woman goes overboard and takes too much power. Then you become authoritative to put her back in her place. Because when she rules the roost it’s not mutual any longer. Then it comes down to being either her way or your way. It’s most often her way, yet it has been projected onto men that it’s the man who is egotistical – you rarely hear about a woman having a big ego. It’s almost always ‘man’ ... and that label comes from ‘woman’. That’s pure projection for women have, likewise, a big ego.

When someone calls you ‘egotistical’ you automatically retreat. It’s like the accusation: ‘You’re being judgmental’; it makes you stop what you are saying. It’s such an imposition, an injunction; you are gagged at that moment and you are not to question whether it’s appropriate or not. Everybody goes along with this – it’s like, this is where we humans stop. Why not ask: ‘It’s all right for you to have your opinion and not for me?’

Q(1): Now, in my relationship, I feel I have some say for the first time in my life. But is this me being an authority? I want the relationship to be equitable.

Q: Yes, you want equity rather than authority or subservience .

Q(1): So what I’m questioning now is: Is it equitable?

R: One can eliminate the authority-subservient bit easily. Remember you now have the third alternative. See, whenever you are in doubt, start looking for the third alternative.

Q(1): Yes, okay. So what is ...

R: The third alternative for authority-subservience is: The fact. Always look for the fact. No-one can argue with a fact. One does not have to be authoritative – the fact speaks for itself. One is quite able to point out the fact to another ... then you do not have to put yourself in the invidious position of being an authority. Authority means there is a ‘power’ in the interaction – one wants to be rid of any power whatsoever.

This does not mean to imply that one does not know anything, or that what you are saying is incorrect. It means, simply, do not be authoritative. There is no need, if you see the fact. You can point that out to another person, but let the fact speak for itself. If you speak without authority, the other person is more willing to see the fact for themselves. The fact tells them what to do, not you. You do not have to be an authority once you twig to the fact that facts speak for themselves. The sky is blue – that is a fact. Gravity is a fact. These are known as ‘givens’ in the scientific community, and the advantage of them is that they can not be argued with.

Q: Women tend to make the man into an authority.

R: Any woman. A woman will make a man into an authority and then complain ...

Q(1): I was just going to say that ... that they complain.

R: ... about him being authoritative.

Q(1): Now, opinion. Opinions is a subject that springs to mind because ... oh yes, if I’m saying something that is a fact then ... it’s a fact. If it’s an opinion ...

Q: If it’s an opinion, then you have an investment in it.

Q(1): Then you become authoritative – you exercise authority.

Q: Then you exercise authority to win the argument. If your opinion is strong enough and you have enough power then your opinion can win. Women, however, mostly talk in feelings: ‘It doesn’t feel good’ or ‘My intuition tells me ...’. It is all so unreliable; you can’t use feelings as an arbiter when it comes to making big decisions.

Q(1): Yet it is becoming increasingly encouraged as being the way. Like the man said yesterday: ‘Follow your heart’. It all gets further away from the fact. All this New-Age stuff, healing and so on, they only have to hear a rumour and it’s onto the next thing. There is no need to prove anything, that would get in the way of ...

Q: ... of a good story ...

Q(1): ... of the mystique. This is a good example of what I mean about you two – what you say works. I see it working for me.

R: What I do is come out with practical things; things that one can do in their daily life, moment to moment, to improve one’s current situation. I do not ignore the big picture, however, for whatever I say comes out of freedom. Everything has the long term effect of whittling away at the sense of identity until there is nothing left – or virtually nothing left. Then one is in some kind of state that is one’s own equivalent of where (Q) is at – which I call virtual freedom. Then we will see what happens regarding actual freedom. Can my condition be replicated? Who knows? Only time will tell. (Q) has oft-times said that if it never happens ...

Q: If it never happens, I’m fine ... I find this already perfect ...

Q(1): I can understand where you are coming from and I want that for myself.

Q: Oh, that’s good.

R: So we can say that we can demonstrate that something is actually possible, but it has not yet been demonstrated that it is possible to replicate me. I may be a freak.

It is very amusing, when one thinks about it. This is why I talk about megalomania – I am saying that I have got it right and everybody else has it wrong. All five billion humans – not to mention the untold number now dead – that is a big thing for a person to comprehend. The whole world is wrong and only Richard is right? Who is this man? He must be a megalomaniac ... or an egomaniac or whatever the expression is. For me to say that I am right and everybody else is wrong is either that ... or insanity.

This is an actual freedom – going beyond enlightenment – it is a new paradigm.

There is a third alternative.