|
Richard’s Selected Correspondence On How To Become Free of the Human Condition
RICHARD: Appended further below is the e-mail I was referring to, during our discussion yesterday afternoon, in regards to directing all of the affective energy into being the felicitous/ innocuous feelings. Also, here is quote which is particularly relevant:
Plus, I have summarised the way in which the actualism method works in practice as follows (the points numbered 6 and 7 are the ones which are pertinent to what was being discussed):
Incidentally, here is that very last paragraph (deliberately placed there for obvious reasons) in ‘Richard’s Journal’ which I was referring to:
RESPONDENT: Right now I can attend to my senses and thoughts but feelings seem more elusive. I don’t know if I’m really less able to ‘access’ them or if it is just the lacklustre or flat feeling in effect. The question haietmoba has the same effect: the senses are clear, feelings aren’t. (...) [Addendum]: To add to this: It’s as if I can’t find any feelings. If I ask: ‘how do I feel?’ I can give no clear answer. I certainly don’t feel good, neither do I feel terrible. I can deduce that I feel malcontent but no feeling seems apparent. This is why ‘lacklustre’ and ‘flat’ come to mind first. RICHARD: Just as a matter of interest: do you see how [quote] ‘the lacklustre or flat feeling’ [endquote] has now been stripped of its feeling-tone? If not, the following is how you described it less than twenty four hours ago (from further down this page):
RESPONDENT: At this point I’m so confused I can hardly remember what a feeling is. Am ‘I’ always experiencing a feeling of some sort? RICHARD: As an identity is, at root, an emotional/ passional being (‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’) then all experiencing is, essentially, affective in nature ... such as, for instance, feeling less than good. RESPONDENT: There is also confusion as to what should be done as soon as I find myself feeling less than good. RICHARD: The very first thing to do is to acknowledge that feeling less than good is an affective experience. RESPONDENT: Sometimes I read that I should get back to feeling good quickly before investigating the feeling, other times I read that I should track back and investigate first in order to feel good. RICHARD: The latter advice relates to consciously experiencing whatever it is which is preventing happiness and harmlessness (less it all be but a detached/ disassociated intellectual exercise) ... for example:
RESPONDENT: So far, tracking back and investigating has not made me feel any better. RICHARD: In a nutshell: one cannot examine something fully if one is busy denying its existence. (...) RESPONDENT: Since I last felt good (6/7 hours ago), I have been trying to re-commence feeling good with no success. RICHARD: Okay, it is all as simple as this ... trace back by asking yourself such questions as: what happened 6/7 hours ago which occasioned me to cease feeling good? Where was I, back then? What was I doing/what was happening? Was I by myself/ was I with company? Once you start to recall where you were/what you were doing/what was happening/ who was there, and so on, just prior to ceasing to feel good you will find it a lot easier to pin-point the precise moment when those felicitous/innocuous feelings came to an end ... and, thus, just what it was which did that. In short: go back (in memory) to when you were last feeling good and then come forward, step-by-step, until that moment. RESPONDENT: That sounds very difficult. RICHARD: Here is a word-of-the-day for you:
RESPONDENT: I can remember – just barely this time – that it was thoughts about tomorrow and decision-making that probably ended the felicitous feelings. RICHARD: Presumably by [quote] ‘this time’ [endquote] you are referring to the following:
Given that you have more recently reported that tracking back and investigating has not made you feel any better then on that earlier occasion, of seeing the silliness in letting thoughts about work to do for tomorrow (and a stream of similar future worries) impair your experiencing of this moment, did feeling good recommence? RESPONDENT: It was indeed silly to allow that to happen. RICHARD: Unless it really occurred – rather than it [quote] ‘probably’ [endquote] happened – that can only be
an armchair assertion RESPONDENT: Meanwhile, here I am feeling ‘not-so-good’, lacklustre, flat, a little frustrated. RICHARD: Hmm ... it could be said that such is the lot of defeatists who speculate about what most likely occurred (rather than actively finding out). RESPONDENT: How do I get back to feeling good? RICHARD: Quite simply ... by actively tracing back to when you last felt good (a general sense of well-being) through literally asking yourself such questions as: what happened 6/7 hours ago which occasioned me to cease feeling good? Where was I, back then? What was I doing/what was happening? Was I by myself/was I with company? Once you actually start to recall where you were/what you were doing/what was happening/who was there, and so on, just prior to ceasing to feel good you will find it a lot easier to pin-point the precise moment when those felicitous/ innocuous feelings came to an end ... and, thus, just what it was which really did that. In short: consciously go back (in memory) to when you were last feeling good and then heuristically come forward (in memory),
step-by-step, until that moment. RESPONDENT: (...) When a feeling changes within a person, something supplants the feeling/belief. Feelings and beliefs don’t just disappear. What is the thought, memory, or whatever that is able to permanently eliminate a feeling/belief? RICHARD: Seeing the fact will set you free of the belief. RESPONDENT: Can someone please give me an example of this? RICHARD: Here is the way the actualism method works in practice:
Or:
Provided your answer to No. 5, in either instance, is in the affirmative you will now be back to enjoying and appreciating
this moment of being alive (the only moment you are ever alive) and thus the prospect of seeing the fact which will set you free of the belief will
be facilitated by being able to come upon it experientially ... and you will no longer be reduced to penning truisms (such as feelings not being
able to tell you anything actual) instead. RICK: Richard, could you list as many characteristics as possible that you would ascribe to the universe, please. Such as benign, infinite, wonderful, marvellous, eternal, a veritable perpetuus mobilis etc. As many as possible would be neat to look see. I’m just curious to read what the universe is and therefore what it isn’t from a pure consciousness experiencer. RICHARD: The fundamental characteristic, or nature, of the universe is its infinitude Having no other/no opposite this infinitude and/or absoluteness has the property of being without compare/incomparable, as in peerless/matchless, and is thus perfect (complete-in-itself, consummate, ultimate). And this is truly wonderful to behold. Being perfect this infinitude and/or absoluteness has the qualities (qualia are intrinsic to properties) of being flawless/faultless, as in impeccable/immaculate, and is thus pure/ pristine. And which is indubitably a marvellous state of affairs. Inherent to such perfection, such purity, are the values (properties plus qualities equals values) of benignity – ‘of a thing: favourable, propitious, salutary’ (Oxford Dictionary) – and benevolence (as in being well-disposed, beneficent, bounteous, and so on) ... and which are values in the sense of ‘the quality of a thing considered in respect of its ability to serve a specified purpose or cause an effect’ (Oxford Dictionary). And that, to say the least, is quite amazing. * RICK: Another thing: I am getting somewhat tired of applying your method and not experiencing a pure consciousness experience. RICHARD: The purpose of applying the method, which the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago devised, is two-fold – to be of an immediate benefit (an ongoing affective felicity/ innocuity) and an ultimate benefaction (an enduring actual felicity/ innocuity) – and is thus a win-win situation inasmuch as in the meanwhile, if the ultimate be yet to come about, a virtual freedom is way, way beyond normal human expectations. RICK: It has been about a year now that I’ve been diligently applying the method and have not been able to remember nor experience one yet. RICHARD: Maybe, just maybe, the activation of the amazement, the marvelling, and the wonderment, already mentioned above might be in order? And I only mention this because sensuosity is an integral part of the process of being as happy and as harmless as is humanly possible. RICK: I feel more at ease with life, yes. RICHARD: I have just now re-read our only other exchange (five months ago) wherein, regarding the application of the actualism method, you reported [quote] ‘it’s having some success in that it’s helping me cope’ [endquote] and what immediately springs to mind is that [quote] ‘feeling more at ease with life ’ [endquote] is streets ahead of merely being helped to cope. And I am not just ‘talking you up’ as experience has shown that, while peoples are quite ready to self-criticise and bemoan their fate, they are less likely to as readily self-congratulate and applaud their progression out of same. Try patting yourself on the back for each and every success ... as a boost to confidence a well-deserved accolade is a tonic like no other. RICK: But I’m still feeling lost and I feel a well deserved PCE is what I need to put some focus, clarity and motivation in ridding the ‘parasitical entity inhabiting this flesh and blood body’. What to do? RICHARD: Again, and especially as you mention feeling lost, come to your senses – literally – as much as is possible so as to better enjoy and appreciate being alive on this verdant and azure planet, which is simply floating/ hanging effortlessly in infinite space at this moment in eternal time, by cultivating the awareness that everything and everybody is coming from nowhere and nowhen and is, similarly, going nowhere and nowhen as everything and everybody only ever actually exists right now. Put succinctly: there is nowhere/ nowhen else to be ... this is it! RESPONDENT: On a more practical and personal note, throughout this winter I’ve been applying your method with encouraging results. Mainly :- 1) I’m no longer blindly bouncing back and forth between the ‘bad’ feelings and their ‘good’ pacifiers. At first I found it hard to sit with the ‘bad’ feelings without immediately running into the waiting, welcoming arms of the ‘good’, but now I can understand how vitally important this is if one wants to cure the underlying condition instead of just treating the symptoms. I look for the ‘third alternative’ all the time now. RICHARD: Excellent ... although it is quite simple in hindsight to understand, that for the ‘bad’ feelings to cease their polar opposites the ‘good’ feelings must similarly come to an end, it can be rather difficult to initially comprehend that it is indeed as simple as that. RESPONDENT: 2) I’ve given up blaming other people for my feelings, no matter what the situation. Looking back it seems such a simple and obvious thing to do but it had escaped me. On the flipside I decline to make myself responsible for other people’s emotional hurts (unless I’m hurting them intentionally). RICHARD: Yes ... the reproachful ‘you have hurt my feelings’ works both ways. For instance:
RESPONDENT: 3) I’ve become very conscious of how people are enslaved by the need to belong, and how it is impossible to be unconditionally happy and harmless while we harbour this need. Consequently, I’ve begun to withdraw my psychic/social/emotional tentacles, replacing emotional demands/dependencies with a friendly, commonsense, ‘live and let live’ attitude most of the time. There is a long way to go along this path, and there are some daunting prospects ahead, but I am emboldened by the results of the first steps. RICHARD: Further to the ‘live and let live’ attitude ... the following may be of assistance:
RESPONDENT: 4) I’m learning how to be friends with myself. The very idea once struck me as corny and wishy-washy on a superficial level, and on a deeper level quite impossible because of my intimate familiarity with all the filth and scum in ‘me’. But after overcoming those initial reactions I’ve found out just how much and how often I persecute myself, and how self-defeating it is. There is only ‘me’ in here, and whatever is done to ‘me’ is ‘me’ doing it to myself. RICHARD: Indeed so. There is, however, an aspect of ‘me’ which is virtually unaffected by both ‘my’ vile and virtuous aspects ... and sincerity is the key to accessing it:
RESPONDENT: I’m sure there will be plenty more to come. RICHARD: That is for sure ... simply being alive is an adventure in itself. RESPONDENT: What is the answer to the haietmoba? RICHARD: In short ... it is an experiential answer. To explain: the whole point of 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 (the only moment one is ever alive) is to experientially ascertain just exactly what is the way or manner in which one is personally participating in the events which are occurring at this particular moment that one is alive ... after all, irregardless of whether one takes the back seat or not, we are all busy doing this business called being alive by the very fact of being a sentient creature known as a human being (with all that inheres in being and doing that). Thus the answer to your query – what the answer is to asking how one is experiencing this moment of being alive – is dependent upon, on each occasion again, just exactly what the way or manner it is that one is personally participating in the occurrences which are currently happening. RESPONDENT: Thanks for your lucid answer ... if I find that I am not feeling good or so, I can’t always find out why it is so, and soon the picture of my feeling bad tends to get very complex ... should I: a) suppress all this complex thinking and focus on the moment and try to feel good this moment; b) find out exactly what is preventing me from feeling bad however complex it is. RICHARD: This is how I have explained it in an earlier article:
Where you say you cannot always find out why it is so that you are not feeling good, and soon the picture of your feeling bad tends to get very complex, is the crux of the issue ... your subsequent queries (a) and (b) arise out of not tracing back to the last time you felt good (and thus pin-pointing what happened to end those felicitous/ innocuous feelings). Put succinctly: the aim is to feel good right now – at this very moment – and, as you felt good previously, it is but a matter of finding out how come that general sense of well-being ceased happening. RESPONDENT: Also, sometimes the ‘feeling bad’ comes in spikes ... I feel bad due to something and it is gone before I notice it ... should I poke it or leave it ...? RICHARD: This is what that earlier article goes on to say:
Thus as you are feeling good right now, at this very moment, and feeling bad ‘due to something’ has come and gone
in a spike, then right now is the opportune moment to look at what that ‘something’ was – so as to pre-empt more of the same happening
again – as feeling good is where clarity can flourish. 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/ innocuity 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. RESPONDENT: Richard, how long do you think will it take before it becomes automatic to have the question running? RICHARD: About as long as it takes to realise that feeling anything other than happy and harmless sucks ... and sucks big-time at that. RESPONDENT: Would it be correct to say that the method is essentially same as increasing the present-time awareness? RICHARD: No. RESPONDENT: How soon will the rewards can be reaped by the method (in getting rid of the ‘me’) so that the momentum can be acquired by the success rather than the veracity/power of your words? RICHARD: About as soon as it takes to realise that feeling anything other than happy and harmless sucks ... and sucks big-time at that. RESPONDENT: [I am asking about your judgement in these cases ... also if possible to mention how quick it was in your case]. RICHARD: I have located the following text:
RESPONDENT: As a proponent in actual freedom, can you hazard any guess why the final event has not happened for Peter/Vineeto in spite of their understanding/ sincerity? RICHARD: For the same reason why it is not happened for anybody else ... in the end all ‘I’ can do is
procrastinate. * RESPONDENT: Apart from practising the method diligently, how much intellectual understanding would you recommend for success? I ask this because a lot of statements in the website need a lot of resources from me for validation and I wonder if it is needed for success or all will become clear as time progresses? RICHARD: I have located the following:
And:
And:
There are more but maybe that will do for now. RESPONDENT: Richard, is it possible to be typing this mail and parallely running the question ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive’? RICHARD: It is more than just possible ... it is vital that it be run. RESPONDENT: At least in the beginning days when I practice, won’t it interfere? RICHARD: The article I referred to in a previous e-mail has this to say:
RESPONDENT: Also, if I forget to run the question for half hour because I became involved in the mail, will the method cease to give its results? RICHARD: It would appear you have answered this question already (immediately below). RESPONDENT: I keep day-dreaming/ thinking and get into fears and anxieties ... my mind slips away from a simple state (awareness of the moment) to some complex state (memories, feelings, thoughts, recollections) and I get confused. RICHARD: It is really very, very simple (which is possibly why it has never been discovered before this): one felt good previously; one is not feeling good now; something happened to one to end that felicitous/ innocuous feeling; one finds out what happened; one sees how silly that is (no matter what it was); one is once more feeling good. RESPONDENT: As to how to go about resuming to apply actualism method ... I forget the purpose and I have to go through the rote of repeating myself why I am doing the whole stuff again to bring back to the ground state ... can you provide any help in my case? RICHARD: Just listen to/watch a news bulletin and you will soon remember the purpose ... to wit: peace-on-earth, in
this lifetime, as this flesh and blood body. RESPONDENT: Implicit in actualism is the value judgement that the physical is superior to the metaphysical. RICHARD: Ha ... implicit in actualism (the direct experience that matter is not merely passive) is that there is only the physical in actuality and, as an appraisal requires comparison, no such value judgement as you speak of can take place in this actual world. RESPONDENT: ‘You’ (the metaphysical entity) decide this. RICHARD: If I may point out? In the direct experience that matter is not merely passive there is no ‘you’ (no ‘metaphysical entity’ whatsoever) ... there is only this actual world (aka this actual universe). RESPONDENT: And having decided this, the totality of the universe is then divided up into the ‘actual’ and the ‘real’. RICHARD: I would hazard a guess that it is ‘you’ (the ‘metaphysical entity’ who decides) who has decided that ‘the ‘actual’’ and ‘the ‘real’’ together make up a whole ... otherwise known as ‘the totality of the universe’. RESPONDENT: The ‘real’ is minimised to the point where only the ‘actual’ remains. RICHARD: In the actualism process, as detailed on The Actual Freedom Trust web site Hence, with the actualism method, when one deactivates the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings and activates the felicitous/ innocuous feelings (happiness, delight, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability and so on) then with this freed-up affective energy, in conjunction with sensuousness (delectation, enjoyment, appreciation, relish, zest, gusto and so on), the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness (unmediated perception) ... and apperception reveals that there is only this actual world/universe. In short: there is no ‘the ‘real’’ in actuality to minimise (let alone to the point that only ‘the ‘actual’’ remains). RESPONDENT: So this (actually non-existent) division between the physical and the metaphysical becomes a concept in the mind of ‘you’, a metaphysical entity. RICHARD: As there is no ‘the metaphysical’ in actuality, as evidenced in a pure consciousness experience (PCE), there is no division to be either existent or non-existent ... the entire argument being presented (above) is but a conceptual contention created in the feeling-fed mind of ‘you’ – ‘a metaphysical entity’ – for reasons as yet unstated but bearing at least some of the hall-marks of the ‘Tried and True’ (as in when the division is seen to be false there is only the totality/whole) as made popular by Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti. RESPONDENT: The division only exists in the minds of metaphysical entities. The universe knows nothing of such divisions. RICHARD: Possible translation: that which is the totality (the whole) knows nothing of such divisions. RESPONDENT: From your place in the ‘real’, ‘you’ decide that there should be no metaphysical entity in the body ... RICHARD: It could also be said that, from your place in the real-world, ‘you’ – ‘a metaphysical entity’ – decide there should be no division between the physical and the metaphysical. RESPONDENT: ... and so you aim to strip away the naturally-occurring metaphysicality because you think it is ‘better’ that way. RICHARD: May I ask? Are you of the school of thought which maintains that, just because something is natural, it is somehow better than that which is unnatural? I only ask because it is natural, for example, to injure, maim, or kill one’s fellow human being in a fit of anger and I am somewhat nonplussed as to how that is better than, say, there not being any anger in the first place (nor any ‘self’ which is the anger in motion of course) such as to occasion that course of action. RESPONDENT: The question is why? RICHARD: Is it because it is actualism which is being discussed, and not spiritualism in yet another guise, perchance? RESPONDENT: This may be the great flaw with AF ... the premise that the identity (often incorrectly called the Human Condition) can be eliminated. For instance, pain can’t be eliminated, but the attachment to pain (aka suffering) may be. RICHARD: It is not a ‘premise’ ... it is an experiential report, written as it is happening, that no identity whatsoever has residence in this flesh and blood body (and this has been the case, ever since a seminal event at a particular time and place witnessed by another, for more than a decade now). It is not ‘often incorrectly called the Human Condition’ ... simultaneous with ‘self’-immolation in toto, more
than a decade ago now, the human condition Your analogy to physical pain conveys that identity cannot be eliminated but the attachment to identity can ... which, apart from being yet more of the ‘Tried and True’ (attachment-detachment-dissociation-enlightenment), amounts to being a foregone conclusion and effectively shuts the door on that which is actual ever being apparent. ‘Tis not for nothing identity is described as being very, very cunning. RESPONDENT: The problem with HAIETMOBA is H. RICHARD: Spelt out in full what you are saying looks something like this:
As Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti, for instance, has made a big thing about not asking ‘how’ – and his admonitions not to have passed into modern-day spiritual lore – it may be apposite to point out that ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive’ could just as easily be formulated as ‘in what way am I experiencing this moment of being alive’. RESPONDENT: As soon as one is aware of a feeling or thought manifesting, the questioner kicks in to action. RICHARD: Hmm ... how about ‘as soon as one is aware that one is no longer happy and harmless that very awareness kicks sensibility into action and one is soon back to being happy and harmless again’? RESPONDENT: This triggers the whole labelling and subsequent analytical process. RICHARD: As Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti, for instance, has made a big thing about not labelling – and bags analysis like all get-out – it may very well be worthwhile to trace the source of your (borrowed) wisdom. RESPONDENT: At that point you’re screwed because you have suckered for the same old trap. RICHARD: Do you see just how far you have moved away from the actualism method ... and only in three short sentences? Perhaps the following may be of interest to you:
RESPONDENT: What if you were to merely be aware and observe without labelling? RICHARD: Hmm ... ‘merely be aware’ of what? The way in which this moment of being alive is being experienced, perchance? RESPONDENT: If fear arises, and you don’t call it ‘fear’, what is it? RICHARD: It is anything but being happy and harmless (which is the whole point of asking how one is experiencing this moment of being alive), eh? RESPONDENT: This has proven to be very interesting to me. RICHARD: But has it enabled happiness and harmlessness at this moment of being alive? RESPONDENT: Small observation: Number of people living in actual freedom = 1. Number of people arriving at actual freedom by following a process = 0. RICHARD: If I may interject? The number of people actually free from the human condition ‘by following a process’ is 1 (one) and not 0 (none). RESPONDENT: It just occurred to me that not one person has arrived by following the official procedure. RICHARD: As I am the living evidence that the actualism method – what you call ‘the official procedure’ – does deliver the goods then what just occurred to you would have been better off still-born. RESPONDENT: Not that I want to beat a dead horse ... RICHARD: Then why beat it? RESPONDENT: It just may shed light on the nature of processes in general, which have a certain concrete-ish characteristic. RICHARD: Be that as it may ... what I have to report certainly sheds light on the nature of one process in particular,
however, and it has no such characteristic as you (intellectually) propose. * RESPONDENT: HAIETMOBA is analytical. RICHARD: Since when? RESPONDENT: Simple awareness of the arising feeling/emotion is non-analytical. Seriously, when these things arise, go back to what it was before you slapped the label on it. RICHARD: Too late ... you have already slapped the label ‘the arising feeling/emotion’ on it. RESPONDENT: It turns out to be nothing like what you ‘thought’ it was. RICHARD: Oh? Was it not an ‘arising feeling/emotion’ after all? RESPONDENT: Caveat – HAIETMOBA is useful in learning more about your psychological makeup ... RICHARD: Hmm ... what about your psychic make-up (which is part-and-parcel of your instinctive make-up)? RESPONDENT: ... but it is an inadequate tool as the gross layers are removed. RICHARD: So once the ‘gross layers’ are removed one can cease being attentive to how one is experiencing this moment of being alive, then? RESPONDENT: Then you need a different swiss army knife. RICHARD: Ha ... let me guess: it is one that does not have a thingamajig for removing stones from horse’s hooves but would have, instead, a nifty little device for eliminating the attachment to identity? A device called ‘detachment’, perchance? RESPONDENT: Richard, the method of freedom in actualism seems reliant upon the conscious repetition of what has been granted the acronym, HAIETMOBA. RICHARD: Whereas what the actualism method is really reliant upon is patently obvious to anyone who takes the time to actually read what is on offer on The Actual Freedom Trust web site (or even, for that matter, to the most one-eyed cynic). Viz.:
RESPONDENT: Which is in my understanding, only truly accomplished in mantra-style format requiring powers of concentration. RICHARD: Whereas real understanding could have been readily gained, for example, from what I re-posted only two weeks before you sent this e-mail:
RESPONDENT: Hence, time more than effort is the main means of achieving this goal. RICHARD: As both your primary and secondary premises are erroneous your conclusion has (not all that surprisingly) no validity ... sincerity of intent is the key to success. * RESPONDENT: Alternatively, the effort in the methods expressed under eastern concepts such as Taoism and Buddhism can be theoretically as effective. RICHARD: None of the concepts in either Taoism and Buddhism have ever brought about (nor ever will) an actual freedom from the human condition ... peace-on-earth is just not on their agenda. RESPONDENT: Though it is uncertain how long the effects of those methods can be sustained. RICHARD: They could be sustained until one turns blue in the face yet they will never, ever, bring about an actual freedom from the human condition ... peace-on-earth is simply not on their agenda. RESPONDENT: Idealism seems to be the underlying proprietary by which they are explicated. RICHARD: Whereas what really is the underlying proprietary, by which they are explicated, is solipsistic narcissism. RESPONDENT: Compromising the verisimilitude of the encroaching self sometimes as much as actualism. RICHARD: On the contrary ... the self-centric/self-aggrandisement of eastern concepts enhances the verisimilitude of the encroaching self like all get-out. RESPONDENT: Whereas actualism finds that self and freedom are irreconcilable, idealism does not. Hence, one’s imaginative powers are spared for use in human subjects such as art and psychology. Which, I acknowledge may not have value in the actual world, but in the common, human world. RICHARD: Possible translation: even though, thanks to idealism, all the wars and murders and rapes and tortures and domestic violence and child abuse and suicides, and so on, have continued/will continue on unabated one can always take refuge in some held-to-be-worthy make-believe sanctuary. * RESPONDENT: Idealism may help achieve a way of life that bears some semblance to actualism ... RICHARD: If I may interject? In what way can idealism – ‘the theory that the object of external perception, in
itself or as perceived, consists of ideas’ (American Heritage® Dictionary) – even begin to help
achieve a way of life that bears even the faintest semblance to the direct experience that matter is not merely passive RESPONDENT: ... but does so through altruistic focus as opposed to the capitulation of the self. RICHARD: Just what does the word ‘altruistic’ mean to you (such that you can glibly go on to speak about it being *opposed* to capitulation of self)? RESPONDENT: A devotion of mentality to something until the point of self-abandonment so to speak. RICHARD: How on earth can something (putatively) opposed to the capitulation of the self mentally bring about a point of self-abandonment? RESPONDENT: However, this is all speculative so I cannot say anything on its success with absolute authority. RICHARD: Am I to take it, then, that you have not even tried devoting yourself mentally to something until the point of self-abandonment? * RESPONDENT: There are two major differences that I perceive to be the results in the case between actualism and idealism. That is, firstly, that actualism gives rise to a true sense of environmental appreciation as understood by the phrase, ‘happy and harmless’ instead of merely the feeling of appreciation. RICHARD: As the phrase ‘happy and harmless’, as used on The Actual Freedom Trust web site, refers to the absence of malice and sorrow – and thus their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion – then in just what way, according to you, does that give rise to a true sense of environmental appreciation (whatever that means)? RESPONDENT: Secondly, actualism is an inhibitor to desire and hence a sense of time wasted can result from focussing on subjects that are in no way inclusive to happiness and harmlessness. RICHARD: Could you be referring to focussing on subjects such as being anywhere but here at this place in space,
anywhen than now at this moment in time, as anything but a flesh and blood body, and designating such focus as truly being here and now, perchance? RICHARD: Look, ‘he’ [the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body back in 1981] was just a simple boy from the farm (not at all sophisticated) and what ‘he’ set about doing, consciously and with knowledge aforethought, was to deliberately imitate the actual – as experienced six months prior in a four-hour pure consciousness experience (PCE) – each moment again for as far as was humanly possible ... and there is nothing freakish about that, quite prosaic, action of consciously channelling all ‘his’ affective energy into the felicitous/ innocuous feelings whilst simultaneously being conscious [i.e., affectively aware] of the slightest diminution of such felicity/ innocuity. Indeed, as success begets success it becomes so laughably easy, to be happy and harmless, one does wonder what all the fuss is about. RESPONDENT: The way Richard put it, it sounded like he was able to simply *choose* the way he felt, and seemed surprised that others could not. RESPONDENT No. 68: It does sort of give that impression. RICHARD: It does far more than merely give that impression ... it is precisely what I am saying. For a recent instance:
RESPONDENT: That being the case, all that would be necessary is to stay aware, stay alert to what is felt, and if one catches oneself feeling something less than <good, excellent, perfect> one could just elect to feel <good, excellent, perfect> again. Gosh. No wonder you say this method is so simple, and you wonder what all the fuss is about. RICHARD: Aye, it is so very simple that some find its radicality hard to understand ... for instance:
Or that its utter simplicity escapes them:
RESPONDENT: Speaking for myself alone now ... it does not work/has not worked that way. Why I do not know, but I would like to find out. RICHARD: Simply this: the method you have been applying is not the method on offer on The Actual Freedom Trust web site. (...) RESPONDENT: I do not experience it as possible to choose how I am feeling at any given moment. RICHARD: If it be not you who is doing that choosing then who is? For instance: who was it who chose to [quote] ‘feel continually wretched and frustrated and miserable’ [endquote] whilst trying to hoist themself into the air by their shoelaces if it was not you? And who, for another instance, preferred to [quote] ‘gradually yet persistently add feelings of frustration and bewilderment’ [endquote], at the fact that the method you have been applying was not working, if not you? Or, for yet another instance, who is it that decides, on occasion, to deal with the vicissitudes of life by [quote] ‘throwing
a tantrum’ [endquote] if it be not you? * RESPONDENT: Nay. Feelings happen involuntarily ... RICHARD: You may have missed the following yesterday as it was in a post to another:
RESPONDENT: ... incidentally, Richard, how can they be ‘an hereditary occurrence’ and be of my choosing at the same time? RICHARD: You do comprehend that you are your feelings/ your feelings are you (‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’) do you not? Viz.:
And again there is a reference to how ‘almost too easy’ actualism is. * RESPONDENT: Richard, *IF* it is possible for anyone to feel excellent simply by choosing to feel excellent, why aren’t they? RICHARD: Why ask me (and not them)? RESPONDENT: It is not as if people through the ages have not wanted/ tried to feel good, is it? RICHARD: No ... yet mostly when I have asked others they generally come out with some variation on the hoary ‘you can’t change human nature’ adage. RESPONDENT: What was the difference between you and them? RICHARD: I am none too sure there was any difference: I was a normal person; I was born of normal parents; I had normal siblings; I had a normal upbringing; I attended a normal (state) school; I obtained a normal occupation; I had a normal wife; I had normal children ... and so on and so forth. RESPONDENT: The way you describe it, it wasn’t even that much of a struggle for you (found the secret to life inside the first three months???). RICHARD: It was inside the first few weeks, actually, of putting into action what was startlingly evident in the four-hour pure consciousness experience (PCE) which had finally provided the direction my otherwise following-the-herd way of living was singularly lacking (although there was a six-month incubation period between the PCE and the application thereof). I distinctly recall informing my then-wife at the time that I had ‘done it their way’, for 34 years and to no avail, and that it was high-time I did it my way (and when she asked what way that was I said that I did not know but that it would become progressively apparent with each step I took). RESPONDENT: So why haven’t millions of others discovered that they can feel excellent by choosing to ... RICHARD: Quite possibly – and I am not being facetious here – they were/ are waiting for someone else to do it/ show the way (for, despite many peoples huff-and-puff about leaders, there have always been pioneers, who have blazed the trails others follow, and always will be). RESPONDENT: ... unless, of course, they can’t ... RICHARD: It is not so much a case of they can not but, rather, that they will not. RESPONDENT: ... [unless, of course, they can’t] without a radical shift in their understanding of self/ world/ reality *engendering* such change? RICHARD: My experience with the peoples who have chosen to give felicity/ innocuity a go is, as a generalisation, that the necessary paradigm shift has usually been a gradual process of comprehension – not necessarily an instantaneous shift – and which paradigmatical change commences because of that choice ... and that choice mainly comes after a gestation period (which itself follows intelligent appraisal/ thoughtful consideration). And, by way of personal example, I need only point to the six-month incubation period already mentioned. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• P.S.: For what it is worth: a true rebel wears their motorbike helmet (for instance) without any protest/ without any
resentment whatsoever.
SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE ON HOW TO BECOME FREE (Part Six) 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 |
