|
Richard’s Correspondence On The Actual Freedom Mailing List With Correspondent No. 76
RESPONDENT: Richard, my first mail to you and let me take this op to thank you for setting up this site and the list. RICHARD: You are very welcome ... the way the web site is set-up and maintained, other than my portion of it, is all Vineeto’s doing and the content of the web pages which do not have my name in the URL is either by Peter or Vineeto (unless otherwise referenced) – the entire library, for instance, or the introduction to actual freedom, for another, is not of my doing at all. RESPONDENT: Also extremely nice to see that you have not set yourself up as an authority figure, a guru but really just two people sitting together and discussing, albeit virtually! RICHARD: Hmm ... I see that you are familiar with the ‘Teachings’ which Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti brought into the world (who did not, as he had idealistically expressed on many an occasion, sit together as two friends under a tree discussing when it came to the real-life litigious relationship – still unresolved at his death – which he initiated with his erstwhile associate Mr. Desik Rajagopal). RESPONDENT: Now let me come to the main query regarding the AF way. RICHARD: The ‘AF way’ to ... to what? As the initials ‘AF’ are an acronymic means of referring to ‘Actual Freedom’, which is itself but a shorthand way of referring to an actual freedom from the human condition, here is an example of what you are, in effect, saying:
RESPONDENT: Could this lead to dissociative state ... RICHARD: The way of becoming actually free from the human condition which is presented on The Actual Freedom Trust web site – asking oneself, each moment again, how one is experiencing this moment of being alive (the only moment one is ever alive) – could not, provided one has their wits about them, lead to the dissociative state of being so prevalent in religious, spiritual, mystical, and metaphysical, circles. RESPONDENT: ... [Could this lead to dissociative state], a watcher, a sakshi and how do I avoid that. Is attention to oneself the only thing needed ... RICHARD: The attentiveness implicit in asking oneself, each moment again until it becomes a non-verbal attitude or a wordless approach to life, how one is experiencing this moment of being alive is in regards to experientially ascertaining just exactly what way or manner it is in which one is personally participating in the events that are occurring at that particular moment one is alive. RESPONDENT: ... [Is attention to oneself the only thing needed,] then that confusion based on reading those k & other stuff comes in, who is being attentive. RICHARD: As it is, of course, ‘me’ (the identity within in toto) who is being attentive there is no need for any such confusion whatsoever. RESPONDENT: I am being attentive to myself, my emotions, right. RICHARD: As ‘I’ am ‘my’ emotions and ‘my’ emotions are ‘me’ then being attentive to the one is to be aware of / attentive to the other. RESPONDENT: Then if I am feeling certain emotion, be it good or bad, I look into it completely and try to understand the cause of it intellectually and leave it at that? RICHARD: This is how I have explained it in an earlier article:
RESPONDENT: I say intellectually, as I am thinking of those eastern stuff n k etc where they say to watch the emotions go by, you know those clouds go by and then the sky is revealed analogy. So to avoid that, I intellectually try to understand the cause, I say, ok I am sad now, or I am loving now, why? what happened to get this feeling and then leave it at that? RICHARD: Not unless you want to remain the way you are ... no. RESPONDENT: Unlike in western psychology, I then don’t propose a solution i.e. if I am sad based on attachment to somebody, I don’t say, ok Mister, I got to be now be detached etc. RICHARD: If, as you say, western psychology does indeed propose solutions such as practicing detachment then the eastern dissociative methods have infiltrated further into western sensibilities than I had previously understood them to have done. RESPONDENT: I just understand how I am feeling in this moment, the working of ‘me’ and move on. RICHARD: Move on to ... to what (what is your intent)? RESPONDENT: I seem to be complicating what seems to be a simple thing! Do throw some light, will ya?! RICHARD: The article I quoted from (further above) goes on to say:
RESPONDENT: I am generally a happy chap, and so I think I have had what seems to be described in your site as ‘excellence experiences’. Comes often enough, I feel light-headed, see clearly, like a film before the eye has gone, so can see far ahead and sideways easily, when I am drinking tea that moment, I notice the liquid, the bubbles formation, the vibrant colour of it, things seem to slow down, focussed on the moment and all looks clear, like say rain has come down and washed up. There is some sort of softness to the vision and nothing mystical or any feeling like that. Just before this, you can sense that in the head, there is some sensation, a tuk, the strong emotions go away and then the light-headedness comes into being. Body also feels light. RICHARD: As you say ‘comes often enough’ then, presumably ‘goes often enough’ equally applies, non? RESPONDENT: By the way, during Vipassana as taught by Goenka, in those ten days I observed lots of physical sensations. first headache, pain etc., then those pain sensations went away, then there was this lot of tingling sensations, crawling of insect like sensation on the body (once I had to switch on the light and really see if there was some insect moving!), the left leg would shake/twitch involuntarily for a few minutes and then it would settle down. Body would feel very light, sometimes filled with air almost, other times, a electric current like tingling sensation ran throughout the body. What’s all that rubbish?! Any idea? RICHARD: The (perhaps inevitable) result of an artificially-contrived/ needlessly-forced situation and circumstance?
RICHARD: ... the way the actualism method works is to ask oneself, each moment again, how one is experiencing this moment of being alive (the only moment one is ever alive) until it becomes a non-verbal attitude towards life, a wordless approach to being alive, so that the slightest deviation from the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition – a way epitomised by a felicitous and innocuous naïve sensuousness – is not only automatically noticed almost immediately but the instance whereby the deviation occurred is readily ascertained such as to enable the resumption of one’s habituated blithesome and benign way again ... sooner rather than later. RESPONDENT: Richard, so does one even go deep into the investigation process, sit with the instinctual passions etc., or just simply see that for example say its sorrow, acknowledge it and just see the silliness of it (like you say in: [quote] ‘seeing the silliness at having felicity be usurped, by either the negative or positive feelings, for whatever reason that might be automatically restores felicity’ [endquote] then just get back to feeling happy)? RICHARD: That is the fundamental simplicity of the actualism method ... yes. RESPONDENT: No sitting out with the instincts, feeling the feelings, staying with it completely, alertly without trying to escape, etc.? RICHARD: Not unless you are stuck in them and cannot claw your way out ... no. RESPONDENT: Just see the loss of felicity and then escape back to being felicitous? RICHARD: Provided that by ‘escape’ you do not mean ignore, overlook, gloss over, brush aside, and so on ... yes. RESPONDENT: So no great investigation needed to be gone into, as some other actualists say? RICHARD: Oh, yes indeed so ... the greatest investigation of one’s life, in fact. RESPONDENT: And while you were practising actualism back in those days, what was your (the entity within’s) focus during normal activities? RICHARD: On how ‘he’ was experiencing the only moment ‘he’ was ever alive. RESPONDENT: Would you be tuned into the actual world ... RICHARD: No, an identity is forever locked-out of the actual world. RESPONDENT: ... [Would you be tuned into the actual world], since you nip in the bud all passionate emotional activities of the social and instinctual identity, what used to be your focus? RICHARD: Primarily ‘his’ focus was on getting out of the way of the actual being apparent ... preferably sooner rather than later. RESPONDENT: The sounds, the sights in that room in that moment? RICHARD: No, ‘he’ focussed on how ‘he’ experienced the sounds, the sights in that room in that moment (for example) with full attention onto why they were not being experienced directly ... as in a pure consciousness experience (PCE). RESPONDENT: You were not going to be obsessed about your ambitious social identity plans of career or dreaming about this and that or thinking about some person? RICHARD: No, ‘he’ was obsessed with, as in solely devoted to, bringing about the already always existing peace-on-earth sooner rather than later ... it was ‘his’ life’s work, ‘his’ greatest endeavour, ‘his’ crowning achievement (such as to render the most illustrious career choice a mere bagatelle by comparison). RESPONDENT: What were you doing and how would you suggest that one goes about practising this? RICHARD: As what ‘he’ was doing was to be going for it, boots and all, then I can only suggest, of course, that another goes about practising this in the same manner. It is so delicious to be dedicated to the only thing worthy of such total devotion.
RICHARD: ... the way the actualism method works is to ask oneself, each moment again, how one is experiencing this moment of being alive (the only moment one is ever alive) until it becomes a non-verbal attitude towards life, a wordless approach to being alive, so that the slightest deviation from the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition – a way epitomised by a felicitous and innocuous naïve sensuousness – is not only automatically noticed almost immediately but the instance whereby the deviation occurred is readily ascertained such as to enable the resumption of one’s habituated blithesome and benign way again ... sooner rather than later. (...) RESPONDENT: Just see the loss of felicity and then escape back to being felicitous? RICHARD: Provided that by ‘escape’ you do not mean ignore, overlook, gloss over, brush aside, and so on ... yes. RESPONDENT: I see. Say anger arising or jealousy or sadness, etc. Acknowledge it while its occurring, get back to feeling good as soon as possible, not get drawn into the moral ethical guilt or drown in the feelings and carry it on, just side step the whole gamut of reactionary actions from the basic instinct to feeling good again. Right? RICHARD: The name of the game is to habituate an affective imitation of the actual each moment/ each place again – to consistently be as unconditionally happy and harmless (free of both malice and sorrow and, thus, their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion) as is humanly possible whilst remaining a ‘self’ – so as to enable the already always existing peace-on-earth to be apparent sooner rather than later ... therefore whenever/ wherever there is the slightest diminution of that uncaused felicity/ innocuity it speaks for itself that some creature, thing, or event, which has been constantly granted the power such as to customarily render that unqualified peace and harmony short-lived, has been permitted, via a lifetime of continuous/ routine ignoration, to wreak havoc once again. All it takes to expose same to the dissolutive capacity of the bright light of awareness is a sincere, dedicated attentiveness to whatever it might be ... nothing, but nothing, is worth getting angry about, being jealous for, becoming sad over, and etcetera, and thus perpetuating all the anguish and animosity, all the misery and mayhem, which epitomises human life on this azure and verdant planet we all live upon. * RESPONDENT: So no great investigation needed to be gone into, as some other actualists say? RICHARD: Oh, yes indeed so ... the greatest investigation of one’s life, in fact. RESPONDENT: I see and I do this investigation of my social identity – beliefs, feelings, ideas about life etc. ... just want you to go deeper into the investigation process of basic instincts. RICHARD: The investigative process of the basic instinctual passions is essentially the same as for the cultural conscience which has been imprinted so as to maintain some degree of control over those very feelings ... to wit: ascertaining what it is that is preventing the already always existing peace-on-earth from being apparent just here right now. It is the pure intent RESPONDENT: What I do is as happened yesterday, I felt jealousy and attention revealed immediately as a throbbing pain/sensation in the heart and it immediately stopped. It was like as you said about your experience of anger [quote] ‘the instant the anger would have otherwise arisen there was the delicious experience of it being stillborn’ [endquote]. It was some sensation from heart and plonk, plop it went down (fear seems to come from stomach btw!) and immediately a Excellence experience results. This is quite amazing/ puzzling! Let me recap my experience again. So there is a feeling bad due to some social identity belief, I can trace it and see the belief and seeing is the ending of it, I drop that belief upon identifying the reason for my not feeling good due to some social belief. RICHARD: Where the seeing is the ending there is nothing to drop ... there is only felicity/ innocuity. RESPONDENT: Now to the Basic instinctual passions. It is about to arise/arises, basically first see through all the moral/social reactionary reactions, SEE, FEEL the basic instinct in its raw form, and attentiveness results in the that scenario I described couple of paras above. It’s nothing to be feeling ashamed or proud or humble, its the human nature basic instinct in operation, just see it as it is ... RICHARD: Yes. RESPONDENT: ... the ‘what is’ ... RICHARD: No. RESPONDENT: ... of the human nature. Just learn how this instinct makes me tick, this is the investigation processes done within half an hour or so (as you said in another post recently). So far so good? Or rather right? RICHARD: Yes ... generally speaking the intricacies of any given situation or circumstance are only held in short-term memory for about that long (if that). RESPONDENT: What I am interested is in that you say anger disappeared for you after 3 weeks. RICHARD: You are, presumably, referring to the following text:
RESPONDENT: So this time period or rather the culmination of it in, say, that last moment in that 3rd week is what interests/puzzles me. Was it one final time of doing above (your quote above) and then it just never came back again? RICHARD: Yes ... it is not all that difficult to break a habit once the very reason for its existence, its underlying cause, is exposed in the bright light of awareness. * RESPONDENT: By the way can you go slightly deeper into actualist attention and Buddhist mindfulness in detail please. It would be of great assistance to me. RICHARD: Presumably you are referring to this:
The focus of the buddhistic ‘sati’ – a Pali word referring to mindfulness, self-collectedness, powers of reference and
retention Which is why it is another ball-game entirely.
RICHARD: The way the actualism method works is to ask oneself, each moment again, how one is experiencing this moment of being alive (the only moment one is ever alive) until it becomes a non-verbal attitude towards life, a wordless approach to being alive, so that the slightest deviation from the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition – a way epitomised by a felicitous and innocuous naïve sensuousness – is not only automatically noticed almost immediately but the instance whereby the deviation occurred is readily ascertained such as to enable the resumption of one’s habituated blithesome and benign way again ... sooner rather than later. (...) The name of the game is to habituate an affective imitation of the actual each moment/each place again – to consistently be as unconditionally happy and harmless (free of both malice and sorrow and, thus, their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion) as is humanly possible whilst remaining a ‘self’ – so as to enable the already always existing peace-on-earth to be apparent sooner rather than later ... therefore whenever/ wherever there is the slightest diminution of that uncaused felicity/ innocuity it speaks for itself that some creature, thing, or event, which has been constantly granted the power such as to customarily render that unqualified peace and harmony short-lived, has been permitted, via a lifetime of continuous/routine ignoration, to wreak havoc once again. All it takes to expose same to the dissolutive capacity of the bright light of awareness is a sincere, dedicated attentiveness to whatever it might be ... nothing, but nothing, is worth getting angry about, being jealous for, becoming sad over, and etcetera, and thus perpetuating all the anguish and animosity, all the misery and mayhem, which epitomises human life on this azure and verdant planet we all live upon. RESPONDENT: Yeah! Sounds very simple when you put it like that! RICHARD: It was even more simple than that in practice for the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago ... all ‘he’ had to say at the time was that emotions and passions were life’s way of letting you know, like a flashing red light, that you had gone astray. Speaking of practice I did notice, three months ago, that you wrote the following:
Then this a little less than a month ago:
Followed by this three weeks ago:
Plus this two weeks ago:
And now, a little over a week ago, this:
* RESPONDENT: Now to the Basic instinctual passions. It is about to arise/arises, basically first see through all the moral/social reactionary reactions, SEE, FEEL the basic instinct in its raw form, and attentiveness results in the that scenario I described couple of paras above. It’s nothing to be feeling ashamed or proud or humble, its the human nature basic instinct in operation, just see it as it is ... RICHARD: Yes. RESPONDENT: ... the ‘what is’ ... RICHARD: No. RESPONDENT: What I meant by ‘what is’ is ‘human nature as it is’ in moment to moment. Would you now say yes to this or is there something I have not understood/misunderstood? RICHARD: I replied in the negative because that term has considerable currency as an accepted English translation of the Buddhist ‘yathabhuta’ ... and the following quote, being quite explicit, will demonstrate why I responded that way:
Put succinctly: as a meditative mind is a mind in an altered state of consciousness (ASC) such a mind would *not* be seeing any basic instinctual passion as it is ... such a mind, having given way to the affections, is the very passions themselves (as a state of being). * RESPONDENT: What I am interested is in that you say anger disappeared for you after 3 weeks. RICHARD: You are, presumably, referring to the following text: [Richard]: ‘Speaking personally, the first thing I did in 1981 was to put an end to anger once and for all ... then I was freed enough to live in virtual freedom. It took me about three weeks and I have never experienced anger since then. The first step was to say ‘YES’ to being here on earth, for I located and identified that basic resentment that all people that I have spoken to have. To wit: ‘I didn’t ask to be born!’ This is why remembering a PCE is so important for success for it shows one, first hand, that freedom is already always here ... now. With the memory of that crystal-clear perfection held firmly in mind ... that basic resentment goes. Then it is a relatively easy task to eliminate anger forever. One does this by neither expressing or repressing anger when an event happens that would previously trigger an outbreak. Anger is thus put into a bind ... and the third alternative hoves into view’. [endquote]. RESPONDENT: So this time period or rather the culmination of it in, say, that last moment in that 3rd week is what interests/puzzles me. Was it one final time of doing above (your quote above) and then it just never came back again? RICHARD: Yes ... it is very easy to break a habit once the very reason for its existence, its underlying cause, is exposed in the bright light of awareness. RESPONDENT: Ok. If I understand correctly from that paragraph, your reason for getting angry was ‘I didn’t ask to be born’? RICHARD: No, the very reason, the underlying cause, for the existence of anger amongst the whole suite of affective feelings was the basic resentment at having to be alive in the first place (as expressed in popular phrases such as ‘I didn’t ask to be born!’ and ‘Life’s a bitch and then you die!’ and so forth) ... whereas the reason, the trigger, for getting angry varied according to a range of situations and circumstances. Here is what some dictionaries have to say about the word ‘resentment’:
RESPONDENT: My reasons seem to be different ... RICHARD: If I may interject? Do you not see there is a distinction between me saying ‘the very reason for its existence ...’ (as in the underlying cause of anger itself) and you saying ‘my reasons ...’ (as in the triggers for getting angry)? RESPONDENT: ... stuff like righteous anger or other person feeling superior and acting cocky and insulting/ castigating/ ignoring me, my point of view opposed, etc., or I feeling superior to the other and doing the same. RICHARD: Sure, there is a whole rage of reasons for getting angry (which vary according to different situations and circumstances) ... maybe the following will be of assistance in regards righteous anger (aka indignation):
Put simply: nature is neither fair nor just – a volcanic eruption (for just one instance) does not discriminate between who or what it obliterates/ destroys – and thus coupled with the basic resentment at having to be alive in the first place is the further grievance that life is inequitable/ iniquitous. * RICHARD: The words ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive’ simply refer the make-up of the attentiveness being applied ... as distinct from, say, the buddhistic ‘mindfulness’ (which is another ball-game entirely). In other words the focus is upon how identity in toto is standing in the way of the already always existing peace-on-earth being apparent just here right now. RESPONDENT: ... can you go slightly deeper into actualist attention and Buddhist mindfulness in detail please. It would be of great assistance to me. RICHARD: The focus of the buddhistic ‘sati’ – a Pali word referring to mindfulness, self-collectedness, powers of
reference and retention RESPONDENT: So far only you and UGK (of those I have come across in print or cyberspace) have talked about consciousness as part of body and it will cease after death, only that body’s atoms get reshuffled and live on. RICHARD: I never talk about a body’s [quote] ‘atoms’ [endquote] getting reshuffled and living on ... ‘atoms’, just like ‘molecules’, are mathematical models. And, as Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti is most specific that there is only one consciousness, it is somewhat difficult to comprehend how you can say he talked about consciousness ceasing after death. Viz.:
Then again, as Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti is also most specific that there is no such thing as consciousness at all, there is no need to even begin trying to comprehend how you can say he talked about consciousness ceasing after death. Viz.:
You do realise, do you not, that what you are (presumably) endeavouring to have a meaningful discussion about on this topic is the utterances of someone who does not know whether they are alive or dead? Viz.:
RESPONDENT: And yet of course there are differences between you two in other areas. RICHARD: Indeed ... the affective feelings:
Specifically:
And:
He may have done a lot of things ... but the extirpation of the genetically-inherited instinctual passions, such as fear and aggression and nurture and desire, is most certainly not one of them. On the contrary, he stresses their importance ... as well as the anger (aka aggression) and the empathetic suffering (aka nurture) already quoted above he has this to say (for example) about desire and fear:
And:
RESPONDENT: Is this the main departure point between what you report and what spiritualists (Ramana, Nisargadatta and others) report? Namely Consciousness. RICHARD: What I report is the absence of the entire affective faculty/identity in toto ... whereas consciousness (the suffix ‘-ness’ forms a noun expressing a state or condition) is nothing other than a flesh and blood body being conscious. RESPONDENT: You say it’s a result of brain’s neuronal activity, something that the individual flesh and body possesses and it will extirpate upon one’s death. They say it’s primary and everything including universe arises out of that capital Consciousness. Consciousness is infinite and timeless to them and for you it’s the physical universe that is infinite and eternal. Richard, can you slightly in detail regarding this consciousness. How it operates in you, and how and why does it appear to some as infinite and timeless and primary. How does one avoid the trap of that delusion. RICHARD: I posted the following, which perhaps summarises the nub of the issues you mention most succinctly, only last month:
To say that consciousness remains forever after physical death is as blatantly ludicrous as proposing that the warmness of the body (the state or condition of a body being warm) continues to subsist evermore even though it be as cold as ice (as in a morgue). * RESPONDENT: And wrt to your report of actual intimacy. How was it different from your enlightened state. What’s the essential difference? RICHARD: The essential difference is that, with the absence of the entire affective faculty/ identity in toto, there is no separative identity such as to necessitate the (affective) intimacy of union/ oneness. RESPONDENT: I remember you saying it’s an actual physical intimacy. By that what do you mean. Let’s say both of us are in a room at the opposite ends of the room, does the Space between us NOT exist for you? RICHARD: Space most certainly exists here in this actual world. RESPONDENT: Can you please explain? RICHARD: As this flesh and blood body only what one is (‘what’ not ‘who’) is these eyes seeing, these ears hearing, this tongue tasting, this skin touching and this nose smelling – and no separative identity (no ‘I’/‘me’) means no separation – whereas ‘I’/‘me’, a psychological/psychic entity, am inside the body busily creating an inner world and an outer world and looking out through ‘my’ eyes upon ‘my’ outer world as if looking out through a window, listening to ‘my’ outer world through ‘my’ ears as if they were microphones, tasting ‘my’ outer world through ‘my’ tongue, touching ‘my’ outer world through ‘my’ skin and smelling ‘my’ outer world through ‘my’ nose ... plus adding all kinds of emotional/ psychological baggage to what is otherwise the bare sensory experience of the flesh and blood body. That identity (‘I’/‘me’) is forever cut-off from the actual ... from the world as-it-is. Continued on Direct Route: No. 19
RETURN TO THE ACTUAL FREEDOM MAILING LIST INDEX RETURN TO RICHARD’S CORRESPONDENCE INDEX The Third Alternative (Peace On Earth In This Life Time As This Flesh And Blood Body) Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’ and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity, beholden to no-one.
Richard's Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
