|
Richard’s Selected Correspondence On Buddhism
In view of the fact there are, nowadays, millions of words on The Actual Freedom Trust website and, literally, trillions of words extant world-wide about Buddhism, per favour the many and various sects formed over more than two millennia, the most simplest way of illustrating the fundamental difference betwixt Actualism and Buddhism is with the following quotes. Viz.:
That quote is but one example of the many reports/ descriptions/ explanations wherein Richard unmistakably states that he is the flesh and blood body/that the flesh and blood body is what he is. Whereas, for instance, in the Anuradha Sutta (SN III.116; PTS: SN iv.381), in the Pāli Canon, Mr. Gotama the Sakyan makes it abundantly clear that he is not the flesh and blood body/ that the flesh and blood body is not what he is. Here is the relevant portion of a regular online translation of the Anuradha Sutta (with the operative words emphasised and key Pāli words, sourced from the online text it was translated from and thus still in their grammatical form, added in square brackets):
In that exchange Mr. Gotama the Sakyan is unmistakably stating that he [tathāgato] is not the flesh and blood body/that the flesh and blood body is not what he [tathāgato] is. So, as Mr. Gotama the Sakyan is not the flesh and blood body/as the flesh and blood body is not what he is, then just what, exactly, is he (according to the suttas)? In the Vakkali Sutta (SN 22.87; PTS: SN iii.119), after first making it again abundantly clear that he not the flesh and blood
body – which he characterises as pūti (meaning ‘rotten, putrid, foul’) – Mr. Gotama the Sakyan then goes on to state that anyone who
sees dhammaṃ (‘Dhamma/ Dharma’) sees him and whoever sees him sees dhammaṃ
(‘Dhamma/ Dharma’) Viz.:
Some background information, which emphasises the import of that above statement in the Vakkali Sutta, is provided in the ‘Vakkali Thera Vatthu’ (the ‘Story of the Elder Vakkali’), in the Dhammapada Atthakatha (DhA 25.11/4:118 f), where it is explained how Mr. Vakkali was captivated by the physical beauty/ perfection of Mr. Gotama the Sakyan and became a Bhikkhu so as to be able to gaze at him (at his bodily appearance). Viz.:
Now, at one time when Mr. Gotama the Sakyan was staying at the Squirrels’ Feeding Ground, in the Bamboo Grove near Rājagaha, Mr. Vakkali fell sick, suffering, gravely ill, whilst staying in a potter’s shed and asked that the bhagavant (‘Blessed One/ Exalted One’) come and visit him out of compassion ... which he did. Viz.:
After some preliminary discussion Mr. Vakkali expressed how he had wanted to come and see Mr. Gotama the Sakyan (‘bhagavantaṃ dassanāya upasaṅkamitukāmo’) but had not enough strength to do so. Here is the relevant portion of the Vakkali Sutta (with key Pāli words, still in their grammatical form, added in square brackets):
It is unambiguously evident, then, that dhammaṃ (‘Dhamma/ Dharma’) is that which, by virtue of being niccaṃ, sukhaṃ and avipariṇāmaṃ, is surely fit to be regarded thus: ‘etaṃ mama, esohamasmi, eso me attā [this is mine; this I am; this is my self]’. (Both that particular phrase and its obverse – ‘netaṃ mama, nesoham asmi, na meso attā [this is not mine; I am not this; this is not my self]’ conveys the direct opposite to ‘etaṃ mama, esohamasmi, eso me’ [this is mine; I am this; this is my self]’ – appear so many times in the Pāli Canon as to have become known as pericopes; as such they are, quite evidently, fundamental to what the text is conveying). Now, all that remains to be illustrated, in regards the fundamental difference betwixt Actualism and Buddhism, is just what, exactly, dhammaṃ (‘Dhamma/ Dharma’) is. In the Madhupindika Sutta (MN 18; PTS: M i 108), for instance, Mr. Gotama the Sakyan makes it abundantly clear that not only is he dhammaṃ (the Pāli dhammabhūto, in that sutta, translates as ‘has become dhamma’) but is also the eye of wisdom/ gnosis [cakkhubhūto], is knowledge/ gnosis itself [ñāṇabhūto], is brahman [brahmabhūto] and is the bringer, the giver of the deathless [ninnetā amatassa dātā], or immortality, as well. Viz.:
Please note that the Pāli word brahma, in the word brahmabhūto (which means ‘become brahma’), is a neuter word, grammatically, not a masculine word (as is the Pāli word brahmā, which translates as the creator god, the world creator, who is not himself immortal) and refers to brahman, the impersonal ground of being, out of which all gods (and, thus, worlds) arise. That the *sectarian* Theravādan school of Buddhism – which is itself an offshoot (via the earlier Vibhajjavāda school) of the much earlier sectarian Sthaviravāda school – dogmatically maintains that the (neuter) word brahma refers instead to the supreme good, or a state like that of brahmā (as in incorporating the highest and best qualities of the divine without being that), is beside the point as sectarian disputes are a matter for the sectarians to debate. The point being, of course, that Richard unmistakably reports that he is the flesh and blood body only. Viz.:
That quote is but one example of the many reports/ descriptions/ explanations wherein Richard meticulously conveys, with
precise meaning given to terminology, that he is the flesh and blood body only. Re: Debunking Buddhism and Neo-Buddhism RESPONDENT: [...] Though I feel that as long as there is consciousness, there will be self no matter how diminished it gets. RICHARD: As this sentence of yours has caught my attention I will refer you to the following:
Further to the point, this is what you have written previously:
And you have also written this:
If you could clarify just what [quote] ‘not having a functioning mind’ [endquote] means to you – and provide some indication via such terms as 6th jhana, 7th jhana and 8th jhana – it should further elucidate this ‘zombie’ issue. As you have now said that ‘as long as there is consciousness, there will be self no matter how diminished it gets’ it would be appreciated if you could see your way clear, this time around, to clarify just what [quote] ‘not having a functioning mind’ [endquote] means to you ... and preferably by providing some indication via such terms as 6th jhana, 7th jhana and 8th jhana. Regards, Richard. P.S.: Perhaps it might help for me to advise how there is an intimate knowing on my part – having insider information so to speak – as to the very nature of what the summum bonum of the buddhistic meditation practice is. * RESPONDENT: Yes that is right that the type of experience you get with meditation is not something that can happen where there be walking about or in every day life. RICHARD: Thank you for affirming this as what it means, in effect, is that it cannot be the status quo of everyday life (as in living/ breathing, eating/ drinking, urinating/ defecating, walking/ talking, typing emails, and so on and so forth). RESPONDENT: The type of experience you get with meditation has a purpose and that is to get back to feeling felicitous after a hurricane has struck which you were unable to tackle in the moment of everyday life. It is to get to the eye of the hurricane and beyond that so that it settles down. RICHARD: Whereas the purpose of buddhistic meditation practice is outright dissociation (vippayutta RESPONDENT: ‘Zombie’ issue was raised by me to get the information from actualists as to the state of mind. Regarding the 6th, 7th and 8th jhana, that experience helps in tackling the highest strength hurricane that can ever strike oneself in life. It helps to tackle whatever it may be life throws at you. And further it helps you get back to your life after tackling whatever strength hurricane that might have struck you in the past. RICHARD: Whereas with buddhistic meditation practice the ultimate jhana is total dissociation (vippayutta RESPONDENT: If someone just stays in a jhana or wants to remain there all the time, then he can be termed as a zombie ... RICHARD: The term catalepsy is more apt. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: ... or who wants to be a zombie all the time. That person has misunderstood one stop on the way as the end. That person would be termed as not having functioning mind and stuck at a jhana as a zombie. RICHARD: Whereas with buddhistic meditation practice not having functioning mind (aka thoughtless) – along with being motorless (no motoric function), senseless (no sensation, insensate), affectless (no emotion/ passion), unconscious (devoid of consciousness) – is the summum bonum. RESPONDENT: There are examples of people doing samadhi suicide. You also mentioned earlier about withering away. Samadhi suicide would be an example of it. There are specific instructions to not let that happen but they can be overlooked by some because of the blissfulness of the experience. RICHARD: Thank you for confirming that not only do you not know what a PCE is (in actualism terminology) you do not know what the summum bonum of the buddhistic meditation practice is either. RESPONDENT: I guess this is what happened with you also. RICHARD: No, what happened on quite a few occasions during the eleven years of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment was the very same summum bonum of the buddhistic meditation practice ... to wit:
The first time such catalepsy occurred my then-wife panicked and called an ambulance to take me to an intensive care unit at the nearest hospital; after being examined by the resident doctor for all vital signs then all the whilst that state persisted a duty nurse would test for consciousness (holding open eyelids and shining an intense light for signs of pupil contraction, pinching an earlobe as tightly as possible for any sign of sensation, and so on) every 15 minutes to no avail. (Upon eventually coming out of that state so much bliss was radiating, spilling over into the ICU, that she became overwhelmed, in awe, with ruddy features and shining eyes testifying to her absorption into such an awesomely manifest presence). One other instance (too many to relate) occurred when sitting cross-legged upon a hillside overlooking the valley below and across to the mountain range opposite; there was incredible blissfulness just prior to that ultimate state – roiling waves of almost indescribable bliss – and ecstatic bliss immediately after yet for the event itself there was nothing, zero, zilch (hence ‘ineffable’, ‘unspeakable’, and so on) as the ultimate, the supreme by whatever name, is truly void. (The reason why I have singled-out that event (in 1985) from all the others is that, being born and raised on a remote farm in
the forties and fifties telling the time by the sun was second nature; it was about 8:00 AM according to its position upon commencement and about
2:00 PM upon completion; the very fact the sun still traversed the sky all the while timelessness was the reality was the thin edge of the wedge
eventually cracking open and exposing the solipsistic lie which enlightenment/ awakenment indubitably is). * RESPONDENT: [...] The type of experience you get with meditation has a purpose and that is to get back to feeling felicitous after a hurricane has struck which you were unable to tackle in the moment of everyday life. It is to get to the eye of the hurricane and beyond that so that it settles down. RICHARD: Whereas the purpose of buddhistic meditation practice is outright dissociation (vippayutta RESPONDENT: That is what your understanding and is different from mine. RICHARD: I simply copy-pasted those terms from a Buddhist Sutra (an English translation) entitled ‘Bahuna Sutta To Bahuna’. It is categorised as ‘AN 10.81; PTS: AN v.151’. Which means it is Mr. Gotama the Sakyan’s understanding (to use your phraseology) and, as you say, is different from yours. There is no prize for guessing just whose understanding (to use your phraseology) would be considered bona fide by Buddhists over the last two millennia. RESPONDENT: Ok, catalepsy would be true in your case because you ended up in trance state. RICHARD: As is true in Mr. Gotama the Sakyan’s case (and is also true in Mr. Venkataraman Aiyer’s (aka Ramana’s) case, in his early years, as well as is true in Mr. Gadadhar Chattopadhyay’s (aka Ramakrishna’s) case, to name but two well-known non-buddhistic personages). The word nirodh (cessation) can be a key to comprehension. For instance:
Here is a rather simplistic depiction (right at the bottom of the page): www.touchtheearthranch.com/thepaths.htm You could, of course, avail yourself of what is freely available on The Actual Freedom Trust web site (where all this has
already been discussed). For instance: RESPONDENT: [...] I approach meditation as a help to shine bright light of awareness/ attention nothing more than that. You had a different approach to it. RICHARD: I have never, ever meditated. Viz.:
RESPONDENT: I have tried HAIETMOBA like techniques as per cognitive therapy ... RICHARD: There is nothing remotely like the actualism method in the type of psychotherapy known as ‘Cognitive Therapy’ (CT). RESPONDENT: ... and they don’t work half as well as the attention I can get with meditation (my definition of it may not be the same as yours). RICHARD: As you have now strayed right off-topic into comparing a particular form of psychotherapy with whatever it is you call meditation – along with a transparently ignorant attempt to link the actualism method on to its coat-tails – it is obviously the end of focussed discussion. Speaking of straying off-topic (as is your wont) here are a couple of words you may find useful in that regard:
RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): [...] I would suggest that you read this book ‘Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life’ by Jon Kabat-Zinn. RESPONDENT No. 11: Thanks for that link to the book. I’ll be sure to check it out. RICHARD: Not surprisingly, that book fits into the self-help/ personal growth genre (the province of pop-psychology or pop-therapy) and, having been around since 1993, has many online reviews. As one such review begins with ‘I read this book after listening to Jon Kabat-Zinn on Oprah’s radio program ...’ I wonder if you are familiar with the term ‘The Oprahfication of America’ (as in the ‘no-fault moral universe of non-judgmentalism’)? RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): There are reviews about Actualism also that are not all positive. RICHARD: Ha ... it is quite telling how you would jump to the conclusion that the review was not positive just because of where the reviewer heard about the book from. Here it is again with the two sentences which followed:
Your next assertion is, of course, a non-sequitur RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): Your are picking and choosing what serves your purpose ... RICHARD: I am doing no such thing (I was expressively illustrating how that book fits into the self-help/ personal growth genre – the province of pop-psychology or pop-therapy – by the very fact its author chose to promote it on a programme such as that. RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): ... as you always do. Nothing new about this behavior of yours. RICHARD: Hmm ... given the amount of times you shoot yourself in the foot it is a wonder you have any left. * RICHARD: For instance, an editorial review depicts the book as being about ‘... living fully in the present, observing ourselves, our feeling, others and our surroundings without judging them’. Indeed, on page 88 Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn writes: ‘Meditation is a Way of being, a Way of living, a Way of listening, a Way of walking along the path of life and being in harmony with things as they are’. (As ‘things as they are’ of course includes wars, murders, rapes, tortures, domestic violence, child abuse, sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide the lie of being non-judgmental is readily exposed for those with the eyes to see). So, how is one to achieve this sleight-of-hand? RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): You also do the sleight-of-hand in your Actualism. RICHARD: I do no such thing (nowhere do I talk of actualism as a way of being in harmony with wars, murders, rapes, tortures, domestic violence, child abuse, sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide). RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): How is one supposed to bring peace on to earth with Actualism ... RICHARD: No one is supposed to [quote] ‘bring peace on to earth’ [endquote] with actualism. (The actualism method is a way of enabling the already existing peace-on-earth to be apparent). RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): ... when it is only oneself that one should be concerned about? RICHARD: As it is only ‘oneself’ who is standing in the way of the already existing peace-on-earth being apparent it is patently obvious that it be ‘oneself’ whom ‘oneself’ should be concerned about. (Unless, of course, you have a fool-proof way of surgically excising the 6.5 billion identities who are currently holding the 6.5 billion human bodies, on this otherwise paradise earth, in thralldom). RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): Watch Doing time, doing Vipassana to see the effects on hard-core criminals as to how it brings about peace. [snip link]. You may also watch ‘Dhamma Brothers’ which shows that Vipassana works in American prisons too. RICHARD: ‘Tis fascinating to observe how you want me to see the effects of Vipassana on people who wrought that very sleight-of-hand by going within to find their ‘soul path, a path with heart’ (page xvi). Or, even more to the point, by them ‘dwelling inwardly for extended periods’ (page 96) so as to ‘come to know something of the poverty of always looking outside ourselves for happiness, understanding and wisdom’. (page 96). * RICHARD: Simple: retreat from it all by going within to find your ‘soul path, a path with heart’. (page xvi). Or, even more to the point, on page 96 he says ‘Dwelling inwardly for extended periods, we come to know something of the poverty of always looking outside ourselves for happiness, understanding, and wisdom’. In regards to the ever-present problem of promoting a buddhistic mindfulness ‘dwelling inwardly for extended periods’ practice in a non-spiritual/ non-mystical way another editorial review says ‘The idea that meditation is ‘spiritual’ is often confusing to people, Kabat-Zinn writes; he prefers to think of it as what you might call a workout for your consciousness’. Regarding this ‘workout for your consciousness’ a customer reviewer writes ‘I read a lot of books on meditation, yoga, and buddhism, and this book doesn’t hold up to any of them’. Another one says ‘... because I have some familiarity with eastern thought I really didn’t connect with much in this book’. RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): I have already said that there is nothing spiritual about meditation that I do. RICHARD: As Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn did not write that there is [quote] ‘nothing spiritual about meditation’ [endquote] it matters not what you have already said as, according to the editorial review quoted above, what he wrote was that, as the idea that meditation is ‘spiritual’ is often confusing to people, he prefers to think of it as [quote] ‘what you might call a workout for your consciousness’ [endquote] instead. RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): That is why I suggested this book. RICHARD: Hmm ... as the subtleties of such devious thinking (thinking of a spiritual meditation as being, instead, a workout for consciousness) have eluded you it will be to your advantage to become cognisant of the fact that preferring to think about the colour black (for instance) as being white does not alter the facticity of the colour black being black in colour. RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): In the above paragraph, you have pasted a reviewers comment saying that he didn’t connect with what is said in the book with eastern thought and then later on in the paragraph below you are saying that a dilettante (while referring to me) ... RICHARD: As I was clearly referring to Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn, in particular, and to peoples such as Ms Oprah Winfrey and her ilk, in general, it is edifying to see what type of peoples it is whom you identify with and/or relate to. RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): ... is trying to spread the ‘sickness’ of the east. RICHARD: By the word ‘sickness’ I am referring to the practice of dealing with all the wars, murders, rapes, tortures, domestic violence, child abuse, sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide by (quote) ‘dwelling inwardly for extended periods’ (page 96) so as to [quote] ‘come to know something of the poverty of always looking outside ourselves for happiness, understanding and wisdom’. (page 96) RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): Are you attentive enough? RICHARD: Indeed so (as demonstrated by all the above referenced by page-number quotes as textual evidence of my explication) ... the question is: are you? RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): You have made even greater fool of yourself this time around. RICHARD: As I go by what Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn writes (rather than by your assertions) it is patently obvious that it is you who has made an even greater fool of yourself this time around. * RICHARD: I could go on, and on, but I will leave you with what Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn has to say on that topic instead: on page 264 he opines that ‘meditation can be a profound path for developing oneself, for refining one’s perceptions, one’s views, one’s consciousness, but, to my mind, the vocabulary of spirituality creates more practical problems than it solves’. And thus do the dilettantes spread the sickness of the east. RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): Are you trying to prevent someone from trying out meditation ... RICHARD: No, not at all. What I am doing (not just ‘trying’ to do) is to explicate how dealing with all the wars, murders, rapes, tortures, domestic violence, child abuse, sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide by [quote] ‘dwelling inwardly for extended periods’ (page 96) so as to [quote] ‘come to know something of the poverty of always looking outside ourselves for happiness, understanding and wisdom’ (page 96) is not ever going to enable the already always existing peace-on-earth to be apparent. (Which already always existing peace-on-earth being made apparent is what this discussion forum was set-up to discuss). RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): ... for whom Actualism hasn’t worked? RICHARD: The person to whom you are referring has yet to put the actualism method into practice (as evidenced by all my
emails to him, suggesting that he do so, to the point of me thus being called a copulating female dog). RESPONDENT (Sock Puppet ‘I’): Don’t you want that person to benefit with something else that might work for him? RICHARD: As dealing with all the wars, murders, rapes, tortures, domestic violence, child abuse, sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide by [quote] ‘dwelling inwardly for extended periods’ (page 96) so as to [quote] ‘come to know something of the poverty of always looking outside ourselves for happiness, understanding and wisdom’ (page 96) is not ever going to enable the already always existing peace-on-earth to be apparent I would be doing my fellow human being no favour were I not point that fact out. (What the other does with that pointing out is, of course, entirely their business as it is their life they are living and not
mine). Re: Debunking Buddhism and Neo-Buddhism RESPONDENT No. 37 The type of experience you get with meditation has a purpose and that is to get back to feeling felicitous after a hurricane has struck which you were unable to tackle in the moment of everyday life. It is to get to the eye of the hurricane and beyond that so that it settles down. RICHARD: Whereas the purpose of buddhistic meditation practice is outright dissociation (vippayutta RESPONDENT No. 37: There are examples of people doing samadhi suicide. You also mentioned earlier about withering away. Samadhi suicide would be an example of it. There are specific instructions to not let that happen but they can be overlooked by some because of the blissfulness of the experience. RICHARD: Thank you for confirming that not only do you not know what a PCE is (in actualism terminology) you do not know what the summum bonum of the buddhistic meditation practice is either. RESPONDENT No. 37: [...] I guess this is what happened with you also. RICHARD: No, what happened on quite a few occasions during the eleven years of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment was the very same summum bonum of the buddhistic meditation practice ... to wit: a motorless (no motoric function), senseless (no sensation, insensate), thoughtless (no cognition at all), affectless (no emotion/ passion), unconscious (devoid of consciousness) state best described as cataleptic in western terms. The first time such catalepsy occurred my then-wife panicked and called an ambulance to take me to an intensive care unit at the nearest hospital; after being examined by the resident doctor for all vital signs then all the whilst that state persisted a duty nurse would test for consciousness (holding open eyelids and shining an intense light for signs of pupil contraction, pinching an earlobe as tightly as possible for any sign of sensation, and so on) every 15 minutes to no avail. (Upon eventually coming out of that state so much bliss was radiating, spilling over into the ICU, that she became over-whelmed, in awe, with ruddy features and shining eyes testifying to her absorption into such an awesomely manifest presence). One other instance (too many to relate) occurred when sitting cross-legged upon a hillside overlooking the valley below and across to the mountain range opposite; there was incredible blissfulness just prior to that ultimate state roiling waves of almost indescribable bliss – and ecstatic bliss immediately after yet for the event itself there was nothing, zero, zilch (hence ‘ineffable’, ‘unspeakable’, and so on) as the ultimate, the supreme by whatever name, is truly void. RESPONDENT: [...] for people who didn’t pick up this part, what Richard just described was two experiences of cessation (nibbana), not samatha-jhana (like the 4th jhana, or 5th jhana, etc). That is to say, he was not, as [No. 5] insinuates, being a bliss-junkie. This man hit nibbana, the real deal. RICHARD: G’day No. 16, A technical point, just in case you were to ever refer to this elsewhere, for the sake of
consistency in terminology: as nibbana (The nomenclature depends, of course, upon which form of Buddhism it is and whatever word is apt, other than nibbana/ nirvana, is fine). RESPONDENT: He writes that there was: ‘... ecstatic bliss immediately after yet for the event itself there was nothing, zero, zilch (hence ‘ineffable’, ‘unspeakable’, and so on) as the ultimate, the supreme by whatever name, is truly void.’ which lines up perfectly with my own experience with the same. theravadan buddhists hold that the peace known in cessation – nibbana in its utter totality in (living, everyday) life, and that a person, any person, even a person who is attained in all four paths (the paths of the stream-winner, once-returner, non-returner, and arahat), must still wait for the break-up of all mind and form at physical death in order to for the peace of what was experienced during cessation (nibbana, or nirodha) to become permanent and final – a condition known as parinibbana. As I know for myself that the peace of a pure consciousness experience – of a fully living, everyday experience, is not one iota short of that of cessation – that is, of utter oblivion, then it is clear to me that to hold as theravadan buddhists report that the buddha did (that such totally and utterly unfettered peace cannot be lived, here and now, as this very body) is to simply hold to nonsense. Death is reputed to be the only thing that can release the arahat completely... yet, such release is impossible in a PCE as there is just seriously nothing to be released from (nor anyone to experience such release). Perhaps it is all this oblivion which makes buddhists oblivious… to the obvious? RICHARD: What you say about parinibbana The main point of this particular email exchange of mine was to explicate how meditative practices do not result in a state sans the affections which can be lived in everyday life (as in living/ breathing, eating/ drinking, urinating/ defecating, walking/ talking, typing emails, and so on and so forth) as the affective faculty remains in situ – albeit somewhat rarefied – in nibbana. As a means of obtaining peace on earth a never-ending nirodh It would mean species extinction were all 6.5 billion peoples alive today ever to do what these bronze-age/ iron-age scriptures exhort them to do. (Which is the whole point of Buddhism, of course, as Buddhists do not want to be here:
And dilettantes – flush with scraps of very superficial book-learnt misrepresentations – who know not what it is they are promoting are the metaphysical equivalents of what Mr. Joseph Stalin called ‘useful idiots’ (in regards the spread of communism via a transitional socialism) as the western world embraces more and more of what is spreading out from the eastern world all the way around the globe. Regards, Richard. * Re: Debunking Buddhism and Neo-Buddhism RESPONDENT: For people who didn’t pick up this part, what Richard just describedwas two experiences of cessation (nibbana), not samatha-jhana (like the 4th jhana, or 5th jhana, etc). That is to say, he was not, as [No. 5] insinuates, being a bliss-junkie... this man hit nibbana, the real deal. RICHARD: A technical point, just in case you were to ever refer to this elsewhere, for the sake of consistency in
terminology: as nibbana RESPONDENT: Hi Richard, The word ‘nibbana’ is also sometimes used in Buddhism to denote the kind of cessation to which you refer earlier in the same email:
Which event (including unconsciousness non-event), to the best of my understanding, happened at the very beginning of the on-going state that you lived day and night for 11 years, and was the first time you had experienced going beyond name-and-form. Is this correct? If so, then a usage of the term ‘nibbana’ seen frequently (and the way in which I used it earlier) would also cover that experience. An explanation of such usage: ‘Some have objected to the equation of this [consciousness-without-surface] with nibbana, on the grounds that nibbana is no where else in the Canon described as a form of consciousness ... There are passages in the Canon (such as AN 9.36) that describe meditators experiencing nibbana as a dhamma, but these passages seem to indicate that this description applies up through the level of non-returning. Other passages, however, describe nibbana as the ending of all dhammas.’ [emphasis added] accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.049.than.html#n-9 For further technical clarification: were you then experiencing (during that first catalepsy) a kind of consciousness-without-object, or was it ‘nothing, zero, zilch’ – as you describe about your 1985 hillside experience? RICHARD: G’day No. 16, First of all, and regarding your quoted gloss about such usage, in a footnote to the translated ‘Kevatta (Kevaddha) Sutta’, (ww.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html#t-1), the same translator, Mr. Geoffrey DeGraff, when referring to consciousness-without-surface (viññanam anidassanam) quite clearly states that [quote] ‘This term is nowhere explained in the Canon’ [endquote]. Thus it is a scholarly gloss – as in ‘a comment, an explanation, an interpretation, a paraphrase’ (Oxford Dictionary) – and, as such, is open to scholarly critique (indeed, it begins with the words ‘Some have objected to the equation of this ...’). Then, after some speculation about it differing from the consciousness factor in dependent co-arising by virtue of it lying outside of time and space, and how it raises the question as to whether consciousness-without-feature is not covered by all what is sensed growing cold after physical death, he then goes on to say how the Kotthita Sutta warns that [quote] ‘any speculation as to whether anything does or doesn’t remain after the remainderless stopping of the six sense media is to complicate non-complication, which gets in the way of attaining the non-complicated. Thus this is a question that is best put aside’. [endquote]. An extract from an online interview (circa 2004) shows why he would say it is best put aside:
As I have recently provided quotes from Mr. Alan Hefner, who says that ‘beyond the nirvana is the nirodh’, and Mr. Charles
Tart, who says that nirodh (Scholarly differences of opinion can be very useful at times). Viz.:
Now, unless Mr. Geoffrey DeGraff is saying that nibbana (Going by the time-span of the Pali Canon, and the numerous locations therein, Mr. Gotama the Sakyan was clearly walking/ talking, drinking/ eating, urinating/ defecating, waking/ sleeping, and so on). It is of no concern to me what name is applied; what is critical for the sake of clarity in communication is that there be a clear differentiation between an operative state (mobile, sensate, thoughtful, affective, conscious) and an inoperative (immobile, senseless, thoughtless, affectless, unconscious) one as the former is liveable (and communicable) whereas the latter is both an unliveable (wasting away) and incommunicado state. * To answer your specific questions: as the first-time event occurred in April, 1981, it was five months prior to the start of the eleven year period of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment; it was the turning-point, as far as PCE’s and ASC’s were concerned, as increasingly thereafter ASC’s took centre stage and PCE’s were shunted to the background (there being no precedent); the event itself was not identical with the 1985 hillside event as it fluctuated between a consciousness-without-an-object and a quite detached consciousness of some particular incidents. (For instance, as the ambulance was out on a call the resident doctor came to my farmhouse in his own car; as he and another person man-handled my dead-weight body into the back seat they accidentally hit my head quite forcibly against the upper door-frame; there is a memory of this totally painless incident along with the notion ‘that’s no way to treat a dying person’ (which is what he and my then-wife were of the opinion was happening); another memory is of being carefully carried into the hospital along with the notion ‘now, that’s much better’; another time was on the second-last occasion the duty nurse tested for sensation/ consciousness and the notion ‘it’s about time to come out of this’; fifteen minutes later consciousness properly returned, upon the intense light being shone in my eye, along with mobility, sensation, thought and, most obviously of all, the affections). A computer-search through all my writings showed how I have previously characterised this event as being catatonic (rather than cataleptic) in nature. * RICHARD: [...] What you say about parinibbana The main point of this particular email exchange of mine was to explicate how meditative practices do not result in a state sans the affections which can be lived in everyday life (as in living/ breathing, eating/ drinking, urinating/ defecating, walking/ talking, typing emails, and so on and so forth) as the affective faculty remains in situ – albeit somewhat rarefied – in nibbana. RESPONDENT: You’re welcome, and I will go one further and confirm that it is also the case that in nibbana (your usage to mean the enlightened state of consciousness), the affective faculty remains in situ, albeit in a somewhat rarefied form ... that is, until something or someone pushes ‘my’ buttons. RICHARD: Thank you for your confirmation. A couple of years ago I wrote to the author of an online article, entitled ‘Forgetting About Enlightenment’ (www.shaktitechnology.com/enlightenment.htm), which stated as a bald assertion that some arahants live in perfect, unending bliss and others are beyond all emotions even the positive ones. Viz.:
I received this incongruous reply:
I replied by saying [quote]
but never received a reply ... and the wording of that online article remains unchanged to this very day. * RICHARD: As a means of obtaining peace on earth a never-ending nirodh It would mean species extinction were all 6.5 billion peoples alive today ever to do what these bronze-age/ iron-age scriptures exhort them to do. (Which is the whole point of Buddhism, of course, as Buddhists do not want to be here: 1. Life sucks big-time; 2. Being born is the pits; 3. Escapism is cool; 4. The eight-step programme is tops). And dilettantes – flush with scraps of very superficial book-learnt misrepresentations who know not what it is they are promoting are the metaphysical equivalents of what Mr. Joseph Stalin called ‘useful idiots’ (in regards the spread of communism via a transitional socialism) as the western world embraces more and more of what is spreading out from the eastern world all the way around the globe. RESPONDENT: It is true that vast majority of modern-day Buddhists do not seem to realise (or even want to know) that a never-ending nirodh(a) (as in a parinibbana) is what the Buddha’s definition of total and utter peace was. When confronted with this, a good number I have encountered either deny it or profess agnosticism (along the lines of ‘I don’t know about that, I’ll know when I get there’) ... it would just be too blatantly life-denying to accept, I guess. RICHARD: Aye, yet the textual evidence is there, all throughout those voluminous scriptures, for anybody to read for themselves. Another example of ignoration is the portrayal of Mr. Gotama the Sakyan as not being an earthly manifestation of ‘The Supreme One’ (Maha-Pradhana) but, rather, as ‘The Awakened One’ (The Buddha) despite textual evidence to the contrary. For instance, several years ago I came across a scholarly article in a 1914 edition of ‘The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland’ by Mr. Lawrence Waddell (ex-professor of Tibetan, London University) in which he provided a compelling account of the divestiture of such supreme divinity prior to the Pali Canon being composed by monks who lived several centuries after Mr. Gotama the Sakyan’s death. The text of that article, first published nearly a hundred years ago, has been digitalised and is available online in Taiwan at this URL: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-ENG/wadd.htm Although scholarly it is quite readable. Regards, Richard. Re: Third ‘wife’ RICHARD: [...] you have made it clear, both in your postings prior to that frontal leucotome/ transorbital lobotomy
email RESPONDENT: It’s not so much that I don’t want to do the necessary work it’s just that I cannot detect ‘me’ and thus I don’t have a grasp of this unreal being. It is like dealing with an invisible being. Thus how do I detect ‘me’? Can you give an example of what you did to detect ‘you’ on a regular basis before your ultimate demise? RESPONDENT No. 37: I had posted earlier that for someone who doesn’t have meditation background, it will be very hard to follow Actualism. RESPONDENT: I see what you mean. RICHARD: As to [quote] ‘follow’ [endquote] actualism is to put what is nowadays known as the actualism method into practice – the way to an actual freedom first devised and put into practice in 1981 by the identity then inhabiting this flesh and blood body it is to your advantage to re-read the following exchange:
Now, as I am the only person thus far to have obtained the full benefit of the actualism method then how do you equate that with what you replied ‘I see what you mean’ to? Furthermore, do you now comprehend how such discrediting tactics work? More to the point, however, are you aware of just what type of meditation it is which your co-respondent is promoting? * RESPONDENT No. 37: [...] I would suggest that you read this book ‘Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life’ by Jon Kabat-Zinn. [...] RESPONDENT: Thanks for that link to the book. I’ll be sure to check it out. RICHARD: Not surprisingly, that book fits into the self-help/ personal growth genre (the province of pop-psychology or pop-therapy) and, having been around since 1993, has many online reviews. As one such review begins with ‘I read this book after listening to Jon Kabat-Zinn on Oprah’s radio program ...’ I wonder if you are familiar with the term ‘The Oprahfication of America’ (as in the ‘no-fault moral universe of non-judgmentalism’)? For instance, an editorial review depicts the book as being about ‘... living fully in the present, observing ourselves, our feeling, others and our surroundings without judging them’. Indeed, on page 88 Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn writes: ‘Meditation is a Way of being, a Way of living, a Way of listening, a Way of walking along the path of life and being in harmony with things as they are’. (As ‘things as they are’ of course includes wars, murders, rapes, tortures, domestic violence, child abuse, sadness, loneliness, grief, depression and suicide the lie of being non-judgmental is readily exposed for those with the eyes to see). So, how is one to achieve this sleight-of-hand? Simple: retreat from it all by going within to find your ‘soul path, a path with heart’ (page xvi). Or, even more to the point, on page 96 he says ‘Dwelling inwardly for extended periods, we come to know something of the poverty of always looking outside ourselves for happiness, understanding, and wisdom’. In regards to the ever-present problem of promoting a buddhistic mindfulness ‘dwelling inwardly for extended periods’ practice in a non-spiritual/ non-mystical way another editorial review says ‘The idea that meditation is ‘spiritual’ is often confusing to people, Kabat-Zinn writes; he prefers to think of it as what you might call a workout for your consciousness’. Regarding this ‘workout for your consciousness’ a customer reviewer writes ‘I read a lot of books on meditation, yoga, and buddhism, and this book doesn’t hold up to any of them’. Another one says ‘... because I have some familiarity with eastern thought I really didn’t connect with much in this book’. I could go on, and on, but I will leave you with what Mr. Jon Kabat-Zinn has to say on that topic instead: on page 264 he opines that ‘meditation can be a profound path for developing oneself, for refining one’s perceptions, one’s views, one’s consciousness, but, to my mind, the vocabulary of spirituality creates more practical problems than it solves’. And thus do the dilettantes spread the sickness of the east. Regards, Richard. Re: Better phrasings... RICHARD: [...]. Whilst on the subject of ‘better phrasings’ (as in the ‘I-Know-Better-Than-Richard’ titling of this thread), and the topic of there being no feelings in actuality ... RESPONDENT: Hello Richard, Good to see you are alive and well (at least well enough to write). Some time ago you talked about writing a novel and then there was supposed to be more writing in regards to Buddhism/Pali Canon and actual freedom. Are those projects still in the works? Since you are writing again, I’ll take this as an opportunity to ask a question that has been on and off in my mind since you started pointing out the discrepancies in Tarin’s writings in regards to being actually free. I ended up spending a considerable part of almost every weekend visiting Tarin for a number of months. In that time my impression of Tarin (and I’m an excellent read of people both innately and enhanced by training) was that he was extremely intelligent, very open-minded, as objective as one could be, sincere, honest, free from all suffering, emotions and sense of identity/self. Obviously I cannot be literally inside someone’s head/experience so I’m open to being mistaken. That being said he seemed to obviously know what a PCE and an actual freedom is and considered himself to be living that and nothing he said or did in our time together directly contradicted that. It is true that he was less lively and vibrant appearing then another person I was spending time with that became actually free, but I have always chalked that up to individual idiosyncrasies. So, what exactly do you think he is experiencing then, if not an actual freedom? Are you suggesting there is some condition where the person has no emotions nor sense of identity/ self that is somehow not quite yet an actual freedom? I see you’ve referred to the ‘AFers’ as being of a mongrel state of being. By this I’m taking it that you are saying by engaging in both Buddistic practices and actualist practices they have come across a ‘mixed’ condition where they are experiencing aspects of both Buddhist enlightenment and actual freedom but not either one in there purity (and hence not an actual freedom). That would make some sense with someone like Nik who practice both simultaneously. However, Tarin stopped practicing buddhistic practices and practiced only actualism to come to the condition he has (likewise for Trent). RICHARD: G’day No. 12, The pragmatic/ hardcore affers are neither experiencing aspects of awakenment/ enlightenment (Buddhism) nor of an actual freedom (Actualism); my usage of ‘a mongrel state of being’ stems, simply and solely, from Trent’s hubristic usage of ‘hybrid’ to describe an utter impossibility which has become known as ‘actualising the jhanas’. Viz.:
Because he introduced the term [quote] ‘buddhist-actualist hybrid’ [endquote] in that passage, which gained some currency amongst its ill-advised practitioners, it is apposite to point out that, whilst a cross between two pedigree species may properly called a hybrid, a cross between a watered-down-and-westernised Buddhism and a watered-down-and-bastardised Actualism can best be called a mongrel ... as in a ‘buddhistic-affer mongrel’. Viz.:
Words cannot properly express just how much of a dastardly act it was for them to co-opt Actualism, subsume it under a tawdry facsimile of Buddhism (there have been no arahants for more than two millennia because of sectarianism), and thus unnecessarily perpetuate the suffering of humankind. In a little over two weeks time the direct-route, to the already always existing peace-on-earth, will have been available for three (3) years ... and what do they do instead? Go sit on a cushion, withdraw from the physical, induce altered states, ‘dark nights’, depressions, anxieties ... there is even a jhana-jockey hospice being set-up to nurse the causalties. ‘Tis craziness run riot ... utter madness. * As you have written more in two other posts, about a person you were spending time with whom you say [quote] ‘became actually free’ [endquote], I will append that text of yours here first, to flesh-out what you wrote above, before responding to your questions. Viz.:
*
And here are your two questions again. Viz.:
First, obviously I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person sans identity in toto/the entire affective faculty is not actually free from the human condition (as that would simply be absurd). Second, I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person (newly) free of the instinctual passions/the feeling-being
formed thereof is not actually free ... albeit not yet fully-free due, in part at least, to some shadowy remnants of a lingering social identity (The social identity, being a culturally-inculcated societal/ familial entity, and not instinctually-based, is not necessarily rendered completely null and void at the definitive event/pivotal moment an actual freedom takes place; a period of accommodation and adjustment and acclimatisation, all throughout the normal day-to-day life, ensures the habituated patterns of a life-time cease). Third, I have written before (on my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust website) about personally experiencing a major dissociative state, of an extended duration during a period of my life in a war-zone as a youth, which was not unlike being in the centre of a cyclone – all about raged fear and hatred, anger and aggression – and in that unreality all was calm, peaceful (and ‘fearless’). I provided a link leading to a lengthy description/ explanation of it in the earlier part of the very email you responded to. Viz.:
It is the third quote, in the second email of that three-consecutive-email-exchange, and is preceded by the words ‘The
following will be of interest’ (and the operative words ‘my mind somehow created a new ‘reality’ built out of the extremities of
animalistic fear, which hallucination I would nowadays call ‘unreality’’ are highlighted) Fourth, and specifically in regards to your question, about my thoughts on what that aff state is (which affers such as Tarin write about): again I will refer you to quotes, and the link for them, a little further down in the very email you responded to. Viz.:
And:
Plus:
As briefly as possible: where Affer-Tarin says ‘weight’ can be given to any of the khandhā (i.e. the five components, in the buddhistic world-view, of which a person is comprised) he also uses the word ‘value’ elsewhere ... as in: a way to detach/ dissociate is to not value any of the khandhā (‘don’t give them any value’ or ‘don’t give any weight to them’) as the tendency to do so is inherent. Hence his ‘does one then delight in what is perceived?’ (The ‘not delighting in’ advice, from Affer-Trent, is the regular buddhistic way to detach/ dissociate from both your body and everything associated with it, within and without, including the world at large ... as in ‘all sensory-phenomena’). Put succinctly, there is no actual world in Buddhism (what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ
abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’ Ergo: it is impossible to marry Actualism and Buddhism. Regards, Richard. * Re: Better phrasings... RICHARD: [...]. Put succinctly, there is no actual world in Buddhism (what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ RESPONDENT: Now here is the meat of where actualism and Buddhism do seem to be at unavoidable odds. I do not think Tarin or Trent actually believe/ think this. RICHARD: Why do you say that you do not think Tarin or Trent actually [quote] ‘believe/think’ [endquote] this? RESPONDENT: For one there is nothing in either of their writings (after they claimed actual freedom at least) that suggests they affirmatively believe the above. RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Why I wrote [quote] ‘what is, in Buddhism, is ...’ [endquote] in the above is because that particular term (‘what is’) has gained considerable currency as an accepted English translation of the Buddhist yathābhutaṃ and the following quote, by being quite explicit, will demonstrate why I put it that way:
By putting that term in scare quotes he is conveying that meditation, in the specific way he means when he uses that word, is a mind ‘seeing actually’ absolute truth (aka yathābhutaṃ) or ultimate reality. Indeed, the pericope ‘yathābhūtam jānāti’ (where jānāti = to know/ to understand) in the Pali Canon translates as ‘he knows as an absolute truth or in reality’, according to the PTS Pali-English dictionary, and the pericope ‘yathābhutaṃ jānāti passati’ – where passati (to see) = to recognise, realise, know, only because it is in combination with jānāti – has a remarkable correspondence with what Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti is conveying (his usage of ‘seeing actually’ does not, of course, mean visually seeing). Thus what I am affirming, in the above, is how absolute truth/ ultimate reality (aka ‘what is’), in Buddhism, is ajātaṃ (‘not-born’) abhūtaṃ (‘not-become’) akataṃ (‘not-made’) asaṅkhataṃ (‘not-caused’). And, surely, anyone can see that I am not making that up – I quite obviously copy-pasted it from the Pali Canon – as I also provided a reference (Ud 8.3; Tatiyanibbana Sutta; PTS: Ud 80) as well as two regular online translations as a supplementary and in-context footnote. The reason why I referenced the Udana ‘Tatiyanibbāna Sutta’, and not the Itivuttaka ‘Ajāta Sutta’ (where that same ‘Exalted Utterance’ is also to be found) is because the preceding text in the Udāna version clearly shows that those four words – which are essentially synonymic adjectives in that context – are referring to ‘saupādisesā nibbānadhātu’ (or, colloquially, nibbāna). In fact, the fourth word (asaṅkhataṃ, ‘not-caused’) is an epithet of nibbāna elsewhere in the Pali Canon. Now, even without my eleven years of directly experiencing this, night and day, and thus having intimate knowledge of nibbana as being ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’, I would never say to anyone that I do not actually think this because it is quite evident that it is a central tenet of Buddhism. In fact, it is the fundamental core of Buddhism, in all its various sectarian iterations, as no escape (nissaranaṃ) from samsāra – as in ‘jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa’ as per that sutta – would be possible were it not that ‘there is’ (atthi), according to Mr. Gotama the Sakyan himself, ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’. RESPONDENT: As for Tarin, I’m quite certain he did not believe that as he was very explicit in person that he did not believe in a non-physical world. RICHARD: So what? I do not believe in a ‘non-physical world’ either yet it is undeniably obvious that what is, in
Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ’, is it not? Re: Better phrasings... RICHARD: [...]. As briefly as possible: where Affer-Tarin says ‘weight’ can be given to any of the khandhā (i.e. the five components, in the buddhistic world-view, of which a person is comprised) he also uses the word ‘value’ elsewhere ... as in: a way to detach/ dissociate is to not value any of the khandhā (‘don’t give them any value’ or ‘don’t give any weight to them’) as the tendency to do so is inherent. Hence his ‘does one then delight in what is perceived?’ (The ‘not delighting in’ advice, from Affer-Trent, is the regular buddhistic way to detach/ dissociate from both your body and everything associated with it, within and without, including the world at large ... as in ‘all sensory-phenomena’). Put succinctly, there is no actual world in Buddhism (what is, in Buddhism, is ‘ajātaṃ
abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ Ergo: it is impossible to marry Actualism and Buddhism. RESPONDENT No. 37 (Sock-Puppet ‘I’): ‘the already always existing peace-on-earth’ = ‘not-born, not-become, not-made, not-caused’ RESPONDENT:
if ‘ajatam abhutam akatam asankhatam’=‘not-born, not-become, not-made, not-caused’=‘the already always existing peace-on-earth’ then ending of ignorance (as i understand it, is the ultimate goal of Budhism) does not seem to contradict the ultimate goal (as i understand it to walk the ‘wide and wondrous path’) of Actualism). ergo it would be silly to even think of a marriage let alone a merging of the ‘two’. oh, silly ‘me’ oh silly ‘my’ RICHARD: G’day No. 3, What really is [quote] ‘silly ‘me’/silly ‘my’’ [endquote] is to take your co-respondent’s ill-conceived equation to be a valid premise for your conclusion. In my initial post I provided a reference for that quote from the Pali Canon (Ud 8.3; Tatiyanibbana Sutta; PTS: Ud 80). The reason why I referenced the Udāna ‘Tatiyanibbāna Sutta’, and not the Itivuttaka ‘Ajāta Sutta’ (where that same ‘Exalted Utterance’ is also to be found) is because the preceding text in the Udāna version clearly shows that those four words – which are essentially synonymic adjectives in that context – are referring to ‘saupādisesā nibbānadhātu’ (or, colloquially, nibbāna). Indeed, the fourth word (asaṅkhata, ‘not-caused’) is an epithet of nibbāna elsewhere in the Pali Canon. Viz.: • [Mr. John Ireland]: ‘Thus have I heard. At one time the Lord was staying near Sāvatthi in the Jeta Wood at Anāthapiņḍika’s monastery. On that occasion the Lord was instructing... the bhikkhus with a Dhamma talk connected with Nibbāna, and those bhikkhus... were intent on listening to Dhamma. Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance: There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned [Atthi bhikkhave ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ]’. (Ud 8.3; Tatiyanibbana Sutta; PTS: Ud 80). In other words, it is nibbāna which is not-born, not-become, not-made, not-caused. Thus, what your co-respondent is asserting is that nibbāna=the already always existing peace-on-earth. In order to do so he first snipped-off that which immediately preceded those four words ... namely:
Now, I know that ‘the already always existing peace-on-earth’ is to be found here in this actual world (the world of the senses, the sensate world, the sensorial world where flesh-and-blood bodies already reside, as experienced in PCE’s) but that is clearly not what is being referred to in what I wrote; on the contrary, what I was indubitably doing was contrasting the actual world, of an actual freedom, with [quote] ‘what is’ [endquote] in Buddhism. And ‘what is’, in Buddhism, is nibbāna. Therefore, what your co-respondent is really doing, in effect, is asserting that nibbāna = the actual world. Thus, what your ‘if this = that, then ...’ conclusion really looks like is as follows (for example):
If you can find nibbāna described, anywhere in the Pāli Piṭaka (or the Chinese Agama), as being the world of the senses, the sensate world, the sensorial world where flesh-and-blood bodies already reside, as experienced in PCE’s, it would surely be the discovery of the millennia. * It has got me beat how people can accept, on the one hand, that Richard was cluey enough to discover and live in (what he calls) the actual world all on his own accord – as in, not ever studying and practicing what another rediscovered and taught over two millennia ago – but, on the other hand, is too dumb to realise the very thing they all know, from studying and practicing that which another rediscovered and taught, to be true ... to wit: nibbāna = the actual world. What makes it doubly mind-blowing is how they have to dismiss what Richard lived night and day for eleven years – also all of his own accord, as in, not ever studying and practicing what another rediscovered and taught over two millennia ago – as somehow not being what he calls it (full-blown awakenment/enlightenment) but something else which they know of from their book-learning. * If I may ask? Could this also be, perchance, attributed to a [quote] ‘defective/ malfunctioning/ ill discriminating
factulty of the brain’ Regards, Richard. Re: Richard writes about two types of Actual Freedom RICHARD: [...] 1. Cease aiming to be aff, forthwith. CLAUDIU: Very well, I will then aim to be actually free from the human condition... which was my current aim anyways (to cease ‘being’ entirely). RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, In order to cease ‘being’ entirely (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being is ‘being’ itself) you will need to turn around 180 degrees from the direction you have been travelling thus far and come to your senses (both literally and metaphorically). * RICHARD: 2. Stop listening to the affers, period. CLAUDIU: Then perhaps I should listen to people actually free from the human condition? RICHARD: As an actual freedom from the human condition is entirely new to human experience/ human history – which means that the only time-tested reports/ descriptions/ explanations pertaining to it so far are to be found on The Actual Freedom Trust website – you would be well-advised to obtain whatever is conducive to becoming actually free from the human condition from what is freely available there. The following, written in January 2005, is an example of what the term ‘time-tested’ (above) refers to. Viz.:
CLAUDIU: In that case, I would appreciate your answers to my clarification questions as I find learning their answers to be helpful in my practice. I was not aware that Tarin’s way of existing was different than your way of existing until his announcement, in which he stated that you said he was only ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ [...snip link...]. I was not aware that Tarin’s way of existing was not even that of being ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ until the latest Addendum on the Announcements page on the AFT site. I’m also not certain in what ways it differs, as the only thing mentioned on the Announcements page was what seemed to be a terminological dispute. RICHARD: Yet it was made perfectly clear – via the points numbered 1 through to 5 on that webpage – how the way in which the [quote] ‘aims, and approaches found and developed by dho participants’ [endquote] differed so much from the [quote] ‘aims and approaches’ [endquote] on The Actual Freedom Trust website that he deemed it necessary to dissociate from the latter so as to protect their integrity. Furthermore, it was equally made perfectly clear – via the points numbered 6 through to 8 (Having lived that/been that which the Pali words amata and sambodhi properly refer to, night and day for eleven years
(1981-1992), my words are thus informed by my intimate knowledge of the buddhānasāsanaṃ and it
is this experiential understanding which illuminates just what the Pali text – which has been all there is to convey the buddhavacana since the
last arahant died in the first century BCE Thus it has nothing to do with terminology (other than what the various terms properly refer to, of course, as is the case in any specialised area of human endeavour) and everything to do with [quote] ‘aims and approaches’ [endquote]. In other words, it is about the goals and the practises thereto. CLAUDIU: It must be a similar way of existing, indeed, if he was confirmed to be actually free from the human condition on his visit to Australia ~2 years ago ... RICHARD: No, it was the other way around; it was Tarin who confirmed it – some months after his visit to Australia – and if you were to look again at the announcement page you would see that what the directors did, upon receiving his confirmation, was to make the announcement reflect the fact that it was him who had confirmed it. You will find the following (written in December 2000 regarding any acknowledgement of another person’s assessment and/or claim of a virtual freedom) to be so self-evident it requires no further explanation. Viz.:
CLAUDIU: ... and if you more recently said he was ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’. Could you go into exactly what ways his way of existing differs from that of someone ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’? RICHARD: As he has not shared with me ‘exactly what ways his way of existing’ is And it is the way in which it differs which addresses your query about ‘exactly what ways his way of existing’ differs from that of someone ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ – nowhere on that announcement page is there any reference to whether he is ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ or not – as that requires a judgement-call. Put succinctly: there is no way the directors are going to be sucked-in to being put into the position of being any such final arbiters – regarding both a virtual freedom and an actual freedom – either publicly or privately. No way at all. Consequently, the textual evidence has been gathered together and presented in a suitably referenced and coherent form so as to prompt any reader/ listener to ask themselves such an obvious question as, for instance, ‘Why would a person ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ advise their fellow human being that what they want to have running is [quote] ‘i’ am pure intent [endquote], such as to have their fellow human being then take on the notion that [quote] ‘I’ was pure intent [endquote], when nowhere either on The Actual Freedom Trust website or in ‘Richard’s Journal’ is there any such advice/ any such notion?’ Or, for another instance, ‘Why would a person ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ inform their fellow human being that pure intent is now gone, extinguished, when both on The Actual Freedom Trust website and in ‘Richard’s Journal’ it is clearly articulated that 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?’ A further obvious instance would be: ‘Why would a person ‘newly-free of the instinctual passions’ so persistently advocate buddhistic [quote] ‘aims and approaches’ [endquote] when it is unambiguously spelled out on The Actual Freedom Trust website that Buddhism and Actualism are 180 degrees opposite?’ * There are several more sections waiting to be published, yet, so you will eventually get to see the full account for yourself. (Alternatively, you can do what I had to do and look through all the text which has appeared on public forums). Also, at least one of those sections has more about Buddhism – not that it is of any personal interest to me – as too many people are of the opinion that what is on offer on The Actual Freedom Trust website is more or less the same as what Buddhism is. It is not, of course, but because of what has taken place in the ‘Hardcore/ Pragmatic Dharma’ circles this last 2-3 years I have spent a very rewarding 5 and ½ months of this last year poring over the original Pali text, for eight-ten hours a day, finding out why the translators translate the way they do so as to be able to demonstrate, via this original text, that an actual freedom from the human condition is not even remotely the same. For instance: the key Pali word dukkha – usually translated as ‘suffering’ or something similar – is a compound word (as in du + kha) where, etymologically, the du- prefix – an antithetic prefix, generally opposed to the su- prefix, such as in sukha – has connotations of ‘asunder, apart, away from’, and the kha syllable/ ending, which functions also as root, has the meaning ākāsa (pronounced a-cash-a). Thus what the word dukkha denotes, fundamentally, is that abiding in the world of samsara is to be asunder, apart or away from kha (ākāsa). And it is not for nothing that the first arupa samapatti is known in Pali as ākāsānañcāyatana ... which is also a compound word (ākāsa + ānañca + āyatana). Incidentally, having lived that/been that which those Pali words amata and sambodhi properly refer to, night and day for eleven years, I also have intimate knowledge/ experiential understanding of the altered states of ‘being’ which Pali words such as viññāņānancāyatana, ākiñcaññāyatana, nevasaññānāsannāyatana, saññāvedayitanirodhasamāpatti, and so on, properly refer to, as well. This is all such fun! Regards, Richard. * Re: Better phrasings... G’day Richard, Just wanted to drop in and say it’s good to see you writing again! I do find I benefit from your continued correspondence and wanted to point that out explicitly as it’s clear that not everybody on this mailing list does. RICHARD: G’day Claudiu, Thank you ... it does indeed make for a change to not only be reading adversarial feedback. CLAUDIU: I thought I’d share something with the list seeing as how a few people reading this still seem interested in becoming free from the human condition. What helped me most recently is what you wrote here:
Though I had noticed this in my own experience, I hadn’t formed it quite so succinctly in my mind. I noticed that, thanks to many months of training myself to do so following the advice written in MCTB and given to me by the DhO participants, is that I had reduced everything to physical sensations – touch, sight, sound, etc., with thoughts thrown in as well (though there was debate as to whether thoughts can also just be reduced to one of the five senses). RICHARD: Surely a debate, as to whether thoughts can also be just reduced to physical sensations, could be resolved by recourse to the same place – the buddhavacana (‘the word/teaching of the Buddha’) – from which the advice ‘written in MCTB’ and given to you by ‘the DhO participants’ came from, no? I only ask as the initials ‘MCTB’ are a shorthand way of referring to a book entitled ‘Mastering The Core Teachings Of Buddha’ and if that reduce-everything-to-physical-sensations advice, which is at the very core of that pragmatic/hardcore dharma practice, is not drawn from the buddhavacana then that title is obviously a lie. (Apart from that: perhaps a somewhat more accurate title, anyway, might be ‘Mastering The Core Teachings Of Buddhaghosa’ as modern-day Theravadan Buddhism stems mostly from him and his ilk). CLAUDIU: Thus, when I felt something unpleasant in my body, or some persistent tension, the only recourse, meditatively, was to put my attention on it, and notice it as being ‘impermanent’ (that is, as according to MCTB, vibrating in real-time at a certain frequency), ‘not-self’ (that is, as according to MCTB, happening on its own without a ‘self’ involved), and ‘dukkha’ (that is, according to MCTB, unsatisfactory in some fundamental way). The affect itself is taken completely out of the picture. It is noticed, but it is noticed strictly as a physical sensation, and the solution is to do something about that physical sensation. Here is where entering altered states of consciousness helps as it made the psyche more readily able to do something with those sensations. RICHARD: I cannot help but observe that, when you put ‘my attention’ on it vibrating in real-time at a certain frequency (and thus attentively notice ‘anicca’, ‘anatta’, ‘dukkha’), both ‘my attention’ and ‘me’ (whose very attentiveness it is) are not included in that noticing of ‘anicca’, ‘anatta’, ‘dukkha’. CLAUDIU: However, I had always noticed that if I was distracted by doing some work or being engrossed in a movie or engaging in a conversation or simply doing something fun, the tension would disappear. It would only come back when I went back into my default meditative state. Of course, the advice was so pathological as to indicate that one should be meditating in some manner even during such activities. I did do so to a large degree but I could never bring myself to do it 100% because I knew that those persistent tensions and unpleasant feelings were being accentuated, if not caused, by that very meditation. So, although I would tell people that I was ‘always meditating’, which was somewhat true in that I was almost-always cultivating an altered state of consciousness, I would still distract myself quite often to get away from the pain. RICHARD: In regards to continuing the meditative practise during activities, are chairs, desks, buildings, windows, sidewalks, bricks, rocks, trees, flowers, mountains, and so on, all independently (in and of themselves) vibrating in real-time at a certain frequency as well? I only ask because I am sitting here, currently sipping from a glass of water in one hand whilst typing with the other, and I am unable to notice – via being this very tasting, touching, smelling, seeing and listening – either the glass or the water to be vibrating in real-time at all (let alone at a certain frequency). Or is it, perchance, an intuitive noticing (meaning that only an identity has that capacity)? CLAUDIU: After seeing the ‘affective feeling –> hormonal production –> physical reaction’ bit above, however, it’s become clear what was happening. By focusing exclusively on the physical reactions, what is happening is that the affect is being purposefully ignored. RICHARD: An affective ignorer purposefully ignoring affect, via exclusive focus on physical reactions, is more a sure-fire method of ‘self’-survival than anything else. CLAUDIU: Thus there seems to be a tension with a weird and unknown cause because that very cause is something that one is denying exists. The tension is painful in and of itself but is made further painful by actively identifying it as unsatisfactory. This naturally leads to aversion and one tries one’s hardest to make those sensations go away however one can, which ends up being an attempt to suppress the affect. This then leads to ‘dark nights’ which one then tries to get oneself out of by being equanimous to those sensations – that is, a lack of caring that they hurt anymore. This does ‘work’ temporarily but the ‘dark nights’ come back to bite you again and again, as is amply documented in MCTB and on the DhO. I put ‘work’ in scare quotes because the problem was self-caused in the first place – a direct result of not realizing what affect is! I found that, although I understood after my visit to Australia that affect is something besides a physical sensation – rather it is that intuitive felt sense manifesting in any number of ways – I was still plagued by tensions that wouldn’t go away. RICHARD: That ‘intuitive felt sense’ you are referring to is those conjoined twins hedonic-tone (vedāna)
and agnition (sāñña); every experience or state – including its emotions/ passions and sentiments/ moods – has hedonic-tone (a degree of
affective pleasure or displeasure) CLAUDIU: The only thing I could do was distract myself by doing something fun – which I did do and which helped a lot. No more tai chi and no more meditation freed up more time to do things like hang out, play video games, solve puzzles, watch TV shows, drink with friends, etc. The tensions were still there when I was not doing anything in particular, though, thanks to my aforementioned months of mental training. I found, though, that if I simply asked myself what the problem was, I would soon get an answer! I had noticed this before but it hadn’t quite hit home in the same way – whenever I felt that tension it simply meant that something was bothering me! It was remarkably difficult at first to figure out just what that was, though. The overwhelming unpleasantness of the physical tension made it hard to keep a cool head and actually look at what was going on. It was a fear of seeing what was actually wrong, likely because of the suppressive nature of the meditation I had been doing (even though I was self-describing it as not being suppressive). I found I thought of a metaphor wherein I had to undunk my head from my body in some intuitive way – to back off morbidly focusing on the physical sensations – to allow the affect to be felt. This took some active doing but it was well-worth it. RICHARD: It reads as if you have found a way to extricate yourself, or back out from, what some key pragmatic/ hardcore
dharma proponents have called the ‘Insight Disease’ (aka ‘Dharma Disease’) because previously the only way out of it was to ‘get this
done’ CLAUDIU: And the message of yours I quoted above, Richard, served to remind me of all that again and to clarify the above even further. I still experience these tensions occasionally but now I’m actually able to say as much without causing the tension to arise/get any worse. Now I know that whenever something like that starts up, there’s simply something bothering me, and it’s just up to me to either sit down and figure out what it is on the spot, or, if I’m too tired or unwilling or lazy, to distract myself and put it off until later. The latter option is becoming less and less appealing as time goes on, however. RICHARD: I will copy-paste here what I wrote in Message No. 11929
Regards, Richard. RICHARD to Claudiu: Be all that as it may: the specific reason why you had to fly to meet me, in person, so as to understand what I had already written, about an actual freedom, on many occasions, was – as I recall and as confirmed just now by Vineeto – my verbal explication of Buddhism as per the buddhānasāsanaṃ (usually translated as ‘The Message/ Dispensation of all the Buddhas’). Along with considerable reference to the buddhavacana (usually translated as ‘The Word/ Teaching of the Buddha’), as per the Pāli Canon, that was what the turning point for you was as I had not yet begun to write at that level of detail on my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust website back then. To briefly explain, en passant, that last point: the vast majority of my on-line writings about Buddhism at that time – being mainly responses to queries and objections from non-Buddhist practitioners – were rather general; quite encyclopaedic in nature, in fact, and thus reflected the remarkably erroneous yet commonly-accepted English translations of key Buddhist words ... key words such as ‘mindful’/ ‘mindfulness’, for sati (instead of ‘rememorative’, ‘rememoration’); ‘heedless’/ ‘negligent’, for pamada (rather than ‘(worldly) intoxication’); ‘feeling’/ ‘sensation’, for vedāna (in lieu of ‘hedonic-tone’); ‘fabrications’/ ‘formations’, for saṅkhāra (instead of ‘(wilful) conations’); ‘defilements’/ ‘taints’/ ‘cankers’, for āsava (rather than ‘(worldly) intoxicants’); ‘sense’/ ‘perception’, for sāñña (in lieu of ‘agnise’, ‘agnition’); ‘suffering’/ ‘stress’/ ‘ill’, for dukkha (instead of ‘asunder, apart or away from ākāsa’); ‘space’/ ‘air’, for ākāsa (rather than ‘aether’, ‘etheric’, ‘ethereal’) and so on. Specifically, it was whilst chatting about what both the Pāli word ākāsa (=the Greek aether; as in that hoary
‘luminiferous aether’ of pre-Einsteinian yore for instance) referred to, and how the first of the five arūpa samāpatti (aka
anupubbavihara) – namely, akasanancayatana, in Pali, or the ‘boundless etheric plane, luminous/lustrous all throughout’ (as in ‘lit.
shining forth’ according to the PTS Pāli-English Dictionary’s etymology of ākāsa) – served as the mystical *interface*
betwixt the physical world (as in the Pāli rūpabhava As these pre-buddhistic altered states of consciousness (ASC’s) – and quite evidentially pre-buddhistic because the unenlightened/ unawakened Mr. Siddhattho Gotama learnt to attain to them from the Vedic śramaṇa/ religieux Mr. Alara Kalama and Mr. Uddaka Ramaputta – are intimately familiar to me (from those eleven years of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment between 1981 and 1992) it would be conducive to clarity in communication to point out what the ‘Monier-Williams’ Sanskrit-English Dictionary, first published in 1899 by Oxford University Press, has to say (so that no-one need just take my word for it):
And the ‘MacDonnell’ Sanskrit-English Dictionary says this:
Furthermore, and as I have observed before (in #10949 Thus what the word dukkha denotes, fundamentally, is that abiding in the world of samsāra is to be asunder, apart or away from kha (akasa). Consequently, it is not for nothing that the first arūpa samāpatti – the religieux’/ mystics’ contemplative/ meditative interface betwixt the physical world and the metaphysical world – is known in Pāli as ākāsānañcāyatana (i.e., ākāsa + ānañca + āyatana) as that is the region/ sphere/ realm/ dimension/ world/ etcetera where dukkha ceases. * All of the above – and, of course, more – was the reason why you had to fly to meet me, in person, so as to understand what I had already written about an actual freedom on many occasions. In effect, during that chat you had an insight – via the word *interface* (you repeated it, ruminatively, several times) – into the deceit of both the western ‘Secular Buddhism’ (which more resembles a buddhistic-flavoured therapeutic humanism with phenomenological overtones, per favour Mr. Edmund Husserl et al., than anything canonical) and the sectarian ‘Theravādan Buddhism’ (an impossible-to-achieve orthodoxy institutionalised, by many and various unawakened/ unenlightened practitioners, commentators, translators, scholars/pundits, and so on, around an uncanonical ‘diṭṭhi’/ ‘drsti’ known as the anatta/anatma doctrine) and thus cleared the way, for yourself, to be able to read with both eyes open. Over the years I have come to appreciate ‘turning point’ instances and have learned to be on the look-out for them.
SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE ON BUDDHISM (Part Three) RETURN TO RICHARD’S SELECTED 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 |
