|
Richard’s Selected Correspondence On Virtual Freedom (Dynamic, Destinal Virtual Freedom)
RICK: How were you able to stop feeling either ‘good’ or ‘bad’? RICHARD: The identity in residence back then was able to stop feeling either the ‘good’ feelings – the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) – or the ‘bad’ feelings – the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) – by tracing back to the last time ‘he’ felt good (a general feeling of well-being) and seeing how silly it was to have that felicitous/ innocuous feeling be usurped by those other feelings. RICK: Right, right. And what would be the difference between feeling good (a general feeling of well-being) and ‘good’ feelings? RICHARD: The former is a felicitous/ innocuous feeling and the latter are the antidotally pacifying affectionate/
compassionate feelings ALAN: Turning to the PCE, you wrote: [Vineeto]: ‘In the interest of having clear, definable terms, a pure consciousness experience is just that – an experience of pure consciousness, where the ‘self’ is temporarily absent, completely. This means that there is no affective experience in a PCE whatsoever, no ‘love, bliss, rapture’ or the imagination of being ‘the saviour of mankind’. Whenever there is any feeling or emotion experienced whatsoever, it is not a PCE. For most people, the experience may well start as a PCE, but invariably ‘I’ will step in and seize the experience as ‘mine’ and interpret and feel it to be a spiritual experience. One needs to understand and practice Actualism to be sufficiently aware of one’s beliefs, feelings and instinctual passions in order to avoid the trap of Enlightenment on the path to Actual Freedom’ [endquote]. This seems to contradict what Richard wrote to me: [Richard]: ‘A ‘difference in degree’ sounds like an apt description ... I cannot, of course, recall with 100% accuracy what happened twenty-odd years ago (plus there is too much other stuff that happened which blurs precise recall), so I would have to say there was an affective response which varied from experience to experience from virtually non-existent to full-blown grandiosity’ [endquote]. VINEETO: Yes, I think, Richard is in trouble here. Joking aside, I’m sure he’ll explain it to you. RICHARD: (...) I see that this naming dialogue was re-opened when Peter suggested introducing the phrase ‘excellence experience’ to describe the penultimate virtual freedom experience ... and all this discussion is well worthwhile, eh? My companion, who is exacting when it comes to grading herself/her experiences, has classifications ranging from good, very good, very, very good, excellent ... and the perfection peak experience (PCE). She is most particular to not confuse an excellence experience with a perfection experience ... and the most outstanding distinction in the excellence experience is the marked absence of what I call the ‘magical’ element. What I describe as ‘magical’ she prefers to call ‘entering into the fourth dimension’ (not to be confused with the Hindu fourth state known as ‘Turiya’). This magical ‘other dimension’ is where time has no duration as the normal ‘now’ and ‘then’ and space has no distance as the normal ‘here’ and ‘there’ and form has no distinction as the normal ‘was’ and ‘will be’ ... there is only this moment in eternal time at this place in infinite space as this flesh and blood body being apperceptively aware (a three hundred and sixty degree awareness, as it were). Everything and everyone is transparently and sparklingly obvious, up-front and out-in-the open ... there is nowhere to hide and no reason to hide as there is no ‘me’ to hide. One is totally exposed and open to the universe: one is perennially just here right now ... actually in time and actually in space as actual form. This apperception (selfless awareness) is an unmediated perspicacity wherein one is this universe experiencing itself as a sensate and reflective human being; as such the universe is stunningly aware of its own infinitude. It may or may not be a useful phrase to others ... which is what Peter was asking. I cannot definitively say one way or the other as I am not an expert on virtual freedom ... virtual freedom is derived from what the ‘I’ that was lived from March to September in 1981 and was first put into practice by my previous companion. When she dropped the baton, so as to pursue other avenues, Peter and Vineeto had already taken up the challenge to pioneer the wide and wondrous path. They are the first couple to live together in peace and harmony – by being as happy and harmless as is humanly possible for twenty three hours and fifty nine minutes a day – and both they and Grace intimately know far, far more about the intricacies of the daily living of it than I do. By and large I go by their reports as to how effective it is. RESPONDENT: So, what makes it ‘highly possible’ to be actually free (in this quoted section), is not the information or knowledge you gathered, but a virtual freedom. For clarity and accuracy sake, ‘So, what makes it ‘highly possible’ to be actually free (in this quoted section), is not the information or knowledge [concerning an actual freedom from the human condition that you made to the public], but a virtual freedom. RICHARD: G’day Rick, The information or knowledge made publicly available is in regards to both an actual and a virtual freedom from the human condition. Neither freedom has any historical reference (as far as can be ascertained). That particular quote, located online in ‘Selected Writings’, is an extract from ‘Richard’s Journal’ wherein it goes on to say (five sentences later) that a virtual freedom is the essential precursor to the ultimate condition. The virtual freedom being referred to in ‘Richard’s Journal’ is, of course, the full-blown experiencing of it: an out-from-being-under-control and, thus, different way of being nowadays known as an ongoing excellence experience. (This ongoing excellence experience is what the methodological aspect of a virtual freedom – a persistent and diligent application of the actualism method – can morph into whenever that current-time awareness method has been applied to a sufficiency for that to occur/ have happen). This penultimate out-from-under-control/ different-way-of-being is barely distinguishable from a pure consciousness experience. (It was from this ongoing excellence experiencing that pure consciousness experiences occurred on a near-daily basis – sometimes two-three times a day – for the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago). Hence ‘highly possible’. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• P.S.: Incidentally, three paragraphs later, in ‘Richard’s Journal’, it is put as ‘highly likely’. Viz.:
Re: Different Way Of Being RICHARD: (...) The virtual freedom being referred to in ‘Richard’s Journal’ is, of course, the full-blown experiencing of it: an out-from-being-under-control and, thus, different way of being nowadays known as an ongoing excellence experience. (This ongoing excellence experience is what the methodological aspect of a virtual freedom – a persistent and diligent application of the actualism method – can morph into whenever that current-time awareness method has been applied to a sufficiency for that to occur/ have happen). This penultimate out-from-under-control/ different-way-of-being is barely distinguishable from a pure consciousness experience. (It was from this ongoing excellence experiencing that pure consciousness experiences occurred on a near-daily basis – sometimes two-three times a day – for the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago). RESPONDENT: If I had read about this at age 19, I would have been in, boots and all. Although at the time I didn’t carefully distinguish between PCEs, ‘excellence experiences’ and various other different-ways-of-being, I did take risks and go to considerable lengths to seek out these experiences. I knew (and of course am still convinced of it) this world could be experienced as a magical place, if only the state of mind-body (as I saw it then) were receptive to it. (That for me was always the prime motivation for drug use – as opposed to merely ‘getting out of it’ – hence the interest in psychedelics). Now with the approach of early middle-age I realise how relatively timid I’ve become ... clinging to human sorrow and its soothing / beautiful compensatory feelings, instead of trying all-out for something better. I’m inspired to give this another try. If I can approach it with the same intensity and optimism that I had back then, this time armed with the information/ knowledge/ sensibility that makes it actually viable, who knows? I’m willing to find out. RICHARD: For what it is worth, then, somebody of late middle-age, known to me personally, added another aspect to
virtual freedom last year via an ongoing pure consciousness experience of 4 months and 28 days duration. (Prior to that the longest known so far
had been one of 3 weeks duration). * RESPONDENT: Wow! That’s great news for the rest of us too: the more these things happen, the less likely it is that the sustained PCE / AF has anything to do with genetic predisposition. That’s excellent. Even if the final mutation doesn’t happen, it’d be a pretty incredible life alternating between excellence and purity. (‘Way ahead of ordinary human expectation’ is a fair assessment). If you can speak on this person’s behalf, did that PCE end of its own accord, or was there a known trigger event that caused the instinctual passions to reassert themselves? Cheers, ... RICHARD: G’day No. 4, I have permission to speak on this person’s behalf – she features in the DVD video-shoot entitled ‘A Pure Consciousness Experience’ – on the understanding that no name or any other such details are divulged. Yes, there was a known trigger event: she was in a Japanese restaurant watching the waiter whilst he was cooking, quite taken by the fact he was so much in his own world, when a comment was made to her, which was incorrect, but she noticed that there seemed to be ‘something’ (as in slight reaction) in her response. It was from that moment she knew that something had changed, as it was the first sign of any emotion, and later in the day whilst watching a very violent movie she experienced fear. I am pleased you experience this sustained PCE as great news (for it certainly is that in itself in regards what is humanly
possible) as that ‘genetic predisposition’ issue would probably be quite something to be well rid of, eh? Re: Different Way Of Being RICHARD: For what it is worth, then, somebody of late middle-age, known to me personally, added another aspect to virtual freedom last year via an ongoing pure consciousness experience of 4 months and 28 days duration. (Prior to that the longest known so far had been one of 3 weeks duration). RESPONDENT: Wow! After contemplating this for a bit I have a few questions. 1) After having this giganto PCE for months on end, did the person at some point think something to the effect of ‘this is it, I’m actually free.’? RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Yes ... within the first 7-10 days, actually. The way she put it at the time – first to her spouse and then to me shortly after – was that she thought it was ‘all over bar the shouting’ (a popular expression meaning, according to the Oxford Dictionary, ‘bar none with no exceptions’). She also informed me that the difference between this sustained PCE and other, short-lived ones was that she was ‘at peace’ as opposed to having a sense of peace. RESPONDENT: 2) How long had the person been practicing actualism? RICHARD: She had first read ‘Richard’s Journal’ about twelve years ago, and had agreed with it without understanding the fundamental difference between spiritual and actual; around six years ago it was pointed out to her that she did not, in fact, understand what an actual freedom from the human condition was ... whereupon she read it again and started to put it into practice. RESPONDENT: On the one hand this is an amazing event and could be quite motivational. RICHARD: It is indeed an amazing event ... to say I was chuffed is to put it mildly as it is to everyone’s benefit to have somebody advance what is humanly possible. RESPONDENT: On the other, it could be kind of a downer to consider having been apparently actually free (PCE) for nearly 5 months and then back to virtually free (I assume VF). RICHARD: Oh no, not a downer at all – quite the obverse – and her exact words to me at the time were that she was excellent. Viz.:
In subsequent face-to-face conversations she has reported being even more keen than ever before ... which is quite understandable when you think about it. RESPONDENT: The closest I can relate to with this is that I considered myself to be living in a virtual freedom for 3-4 months and then due to certain events and ‘my’ reaction to them I lost it and my-self started strutting the stage to a larger extent again. This cycle has repeated itself a few times actually. Luckily no one in my real/actual life has suffered over this ... ‘I’ and ‘I’ alone have reaped the disadvantages of letting a VF slip through ‘my’ fingers once again. It does come down to intent, pure intent that is in the end. RICHARD: Exactly. RESPONDENT: I know I used to ask all kinds of questions about ‘methods’ and ‘techniques’ to you in the past and I always found you, P and V ‘stubborn’ to not be willing to add more ‘techniques’ to the AF method. I’ve learned the hard way that intent is the key and that intent is to be backed up by becoming obsessed enough with attentiveness to have it up and running near constantly and to investigate whatever issue that is keeping me from feeling excellent. RICHARD: Indeed so. RESPONDENT: Ha, so simple ... but quite a challenge. The challenge of a lifetime in fact. I’ve been off the wide and wondrous path and in so doing have come to a firm confidence that the only path I wish to traverse for the rest of my lifetime is the wide and wondrous one ... until ‘I’ am no more. I mention this because I think in the past ‘I’ was sometimes fabricating a somewhat ‘forced’ conviction that I wanted this thing called actual freedom. Kinda like how I would ‘convince myself’ that I believed in my former religions dogmas (albeit in far more subtle ways). RICHARD: Unless it is the number one priority in one’s life any results will, of course, faithfully reflect just what the degree of interest is. RESPONDENT: I used to think you were being a bit harsh to call the human condition ‘rotten to the core’, but alas as for myself I have no doubts about that statement whatsoever. Of course the human condition has its ‘endearing side’, nonetheless ... as a whole it is rotten. :) RICHARD: Precisely. RESPONDENT: Are you saying then that in order to eliminate the ‘I’ and the ‘me’ that the instinctual passions themselves have to be eliminated ... RICHARD: No ... and the reason why not is this simple: who would be doing the eliminating of the instinctual passions? As ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ it is an impossibility because the result of trying to do so would be a stripped-down rudimentary animal ‘self’ (seemingly) divested of feelings ... somewhat like what is known in psychiatric terminology as a ‘sociopathic personality’ (popularly known as ‘psychopath’). Such a person still has feelings – ‘cold’, ‘callous’, ‘indifferent’ and so on – and has repressed the others. RESPONDENT: ... and in order to do that the layers of the ‘I’ and ‘me’ have to be peeled back in order to uncover the raw instinctual passions? RICHARD: In the end, only altruistic ‘self’-immolation, for the benefit of this body and that body and every body, will release the flesh and blood body from its parasitical resident and, as ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’, the end of ‘me’ is the end of ‘my’ feelings (aka the instinctual passions and all their cultivated derivations). RESPONDENT: Isn’t it the ‘I’ and the ‘me’ investigating itself which brings one to the point of self-immolation and isn’t it the ‘I’/‘me’ that makes the decision to self-immolate? RICHARD: Yes ... only ‘I’ can do it as it is all in ‘my’ hands and nobody else’s hands (nor is it in the hands of any god or goddess either, of course, despite some popular postulations to the contrary). RESPONDENT: You said above that the ‘I’/‘me’ cannot eliminate the instinctual passions but then you next said that the body is released from them by self- immolation. I am just trying to get a clear picture of it. RICHARD: Okay ... I was just making the point that, although it is hypothetically correct that the elimination of the instinctual passions would be the elimination of ‘I’/‘me’, it does not work that way in practice (for reasons such as already explained further above). Not only is it dangerous it is an impossibility ... only altruistic ‘self’-immolation will do the trick. Which is why I advise minimising both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ feelings and maximising the felicitous feelings – as far as humanly possible – as a salubrious modus operandi in the meanwhile rather than trying to eliminate them. Not only does this approach have the immediate benefit of feeling happy and harmless as one goes about one’s normal everyday life but it has the ultimate benefit of assisting in the rewiring of the brain’s habitual circuitry before the once-in-a-lifetime event happens which wipes out the identity in toto. To be more specific: what the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom is on about is a virtual freedom wherein the ‘good’ feelings – the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) are minimised along with the ‘bad’ feelings – the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) – so that one is free to be feeling good, feeling happy and harmless and feeling excellent/perfect for 99% of the time. If one deactivates the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings and activates the felicitous/ innocuous feelings (happiness, delight, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability and so on) with this freed-up affective energy, in conjunction with sensuousness (delectation, enjoyment, appreciation, relish, zest, gusto and so on), then the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness (unmediated perception). To be even more specific: delight is what is humanly possible, given sufficient pure intent obtained from the felicity/ innocuity born of the pure consciousness experience, and from the position of delight, one can vitalise one’s joie de vivre by the amazement at the fun of it all ... and then one can – with sufficient abandon – become over-joyed and move into marvelling at being here and doing this business called being alive now. Then one is no longer intuitively making sense of life ... the delicious wonder of it all drives any such instinctive meaning away. Such luscious wonder fosters the innate condition of naiveté – the nourishing of which is essential if fascination in it all is to occur – and the charm of life itself easily engages dedication to peace-on-earth. Then, as one gazes intently at the world about by glancing lightly with sensuously caressing eyes, out of the corner of one’s eye comes – sweetly – the magical fairy-tale-like paradise that this verdant earth actually is ... and one is the experiencing of what is happening. But refrain from possessing it and making it your own ... or else ‘twill vanish as softly as it appeared. RICHARD: I have generally found that, when the direct experience (actual intimacy) of being here now (pure consciousness experiencing) diminishes and one reverts to normal, the immediacy of being this flesh and blood body only in infinite space and eternal time as the universe’s experience of itself, vanishes completely ... and one (strangely) starts to settle for second-best. Why? ALAN: Good question. You are correct in saying that ‘it’ vanishes completely. The only reason can be that ‘I’ resume the controls. At this moment I have only a recollection of what a PCE is. ‘I’ do not believe that it actually exists – because ‘I’ cannot experience it. So for ‘me’ it is not ‘second best’ – it is the best there is. RICHARD: Yes, a virtual freedom is not to be sneezed at ... the wide and wondrous path to actual freedom is a win/win situation. Just like the spiritual path there is a glittering prize at the end ... yet here the similarity ends. With actualism one gains measurably along the way ... if actual freedom remains ever-elusive one winds up way ahead of normal human expectations. ALAN: Just yesterday, I had the thought ‘Why do you want any more?’ – I no longer experience anger, frustration, jealousy or any of the other ‘bad’ emotions (and not many of the ‘good’ ones either). RICHARD: If one were to proceed no further, one would have already achieved what a ‘normal’ person deems improbable. It cannot be stressed too much how highly desirable virtual freedom is. Any society based on pure intent, with its citizens living in virtual freedom, would be so superior to the current communities, that are based upon morality and control, that a virtual peace on earth would be most likely to be the over-all state of affairs. Although actual sagacity lies only in the ultimate condition, the wide and wondrous wisdom is sufficient to ensure that the optimum relative peace and prosperity prevails ... because virtual freedom, borne upon pure intent, does away with the need for control. One is, in effect, free enough to live life in an abundantly successful way. ALAN: Was this not enough? Was it not better to enjoy this life as ‘Alan’, the personality, than risk all on an unknown future? RICHARD: I can recall the ‘Richard’ that was considering this very question ... yet ‘he’ just knew that ‘he’ would not be able to look in the mirror of a morning if ‘he’ did not proceed. Is it is an admixture of pride and dignity, perhaps? ALAN: Yet, the knowledge of what is possible – even if only a recollection of the PCE – is sufficient to make ‘me’ continue reading, writing and exploring. RICHARD: Not to mention all the wars and murders and rapes and tortures and domestic violence and child abuse and sadness and loneliness and grief and depression and suicides ... if peoples were not harming themselves and each other in the most grisly ways possible then this would all be but a game. Peoples play ‘for keeps’ in the real world ... it is not fun. ALAN: It is, indeed, a strange state of affairs. RICHARD: It is ‘strange’ to the point of being bizarre ... weird, uncanny, eerie. ALAN: Am ‘I’ going to continue, in the knowledge that the end result is ‘my’ demise. Or, am ‘I’ going to give up and settle for ‘second best’. Perhaps this is where ‘pure intent’ comes in. It is not a phrase I have been entirely comfortable with or, rather, completely understood. RICHARD: Pure intent is derived from the purity of the PCE (which is when ‘I’ spontaneously cease to ‘be’) and everything is experienced to be perfect as-it-is at this moment and place ... here and now. Diligent attention paid to the peak experience gives rise to pure intent and with pure intent running as a ‘golden thread’ through one’s life, reflective contemplation about being here doing this business called being alive rapidly becomes more and more fascinating. When one is totally fascinated, reflective contemplation becomes pure awareness ... and then apperception happens of itself. It is the quality of pure intent which pulls one forward with impunity ... pure intent transforms into action one’s determination to live a life full of gladness, peace and harmony with oneself, with a person of the other gender, and with all peoples. Pure intent produces total dedication – it is experienced as an irresistible enticement – and it makes it impossible not to do what is required (or to sweep an issue under the carpet and to let sleeping dogs lie) and to continue to conform to the long-failed dictates of the status-quo. Pure intent is not to be confused with being a ‘do-gooder’, or being full of ‘righteousness’, or being ‘moralistic’ or being ‘principled’. Pure intent is the quality that encompasses what morals and ethics aspire to but never reach. Pure intent is a manifest life-force; a genuinely occurring stream of benevolence and benignity that originates in the perfect and vast stillness that is the essential character of the infinitude of the universe. Freed by pure intent from the very necessary social constraints – designed to control a wayward ego and a compliant soul – one can have generosity of character without striving. Pure intent guides one in each and every situation and circumstance – it is an essential prerequisite to ensure a guaranteed passage through the psychic maze – until the primacy of ‘me’ as a psychological or psychic entity withers away. With pure intent one will not rest until one has gone all the way. MARK: And how does one delete a part of one’s DNA (personally speaking my gene splicing skills leave a lot to be desired). I still don’t understand how one is to undo the deepest layers of instinct. RICHARD: Speaking personally from experience, eventually – and ultimately – all the instincts are undone instantly via psychological and psychic ‘self’-sacrifice. This is, purely and simply, altruism at its very best ... and altruism’s energy is an instinctual passion (this is indeed hoisting oneself by one’s bootstraps ... writ large). However, until the initiation of the process that leads to ‘self’-immolation is consciously triggered – whereupon the ending of ‘me’ happens of its own accord – one can become acutely aware of the operation of the instinctual passions as they are experienced moment-to-moment. It is but the same ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ investigation of beliefs and feelings ... only extended deeper into one’s psyche. Strangely enough, it does mean an exploration into the psychic realm ... which is why it is essential that one first establishes a firm base – called virtual freedom – to fall back upon when the going gets tough. A journey into one’s psyche – which is the human psyche – is not for the faint of heart or the weak of knee ... one must have nerves of steel to go all the way. The rewards for doing so are immense, however, and the ramifications far-reaching. It means peace-on-earth, in this life-time, as this flesh and blood body. MARK: But I do feel instinct and its grip weakening as my personal reality is exposed for the mirage that it is. This adds a little to the notion that the whole thing (the self) is an integrated package and a reduction in one area is a reduction across the board. Hence as we chip away at our belief system (the seemingly ‘most visible’ layer of the ‘being’, the outer most layer so to speak) then there are repercussions in our emotional and instinctual arenas as well. RICHARD: Yes, well said. It (‘self’) is an integrated package because it arises out of the instinctual software
package handed out by blind nature. At the core of ‘my’ being is the rudimentary animal ‘self’ that all sentient beings have. It is the
price paid/ trade-off for consciousness being able to arise out of matter. IRENE to Vineeto: To me freedom means to be free from the human conditioning (i.e. the belief in the man-made mistakes in their interpretations of being human and of nature in general). That what I had called ‘virtual freedom. RICHARD: Except that virtual freedom is derived from what Richard lived from March to September in 1981 and was epitomised by being as happy and harmless as was humanly possible ... for twenty three hours and fifty nine minutes a day. This was achieved by my asking myself the question: ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ ... for I had experienced the universe’s perfection – personified in a four-hour peak experience – and just knew that it was possible to achieve peace-on-earth in this life-time as this body. To live a virtual freedom one knowingly and deliberately imitates the actual inasmuch as is possible given that one is still human. It is the pure intent to ingenuously live the actual that imbues virtual freedom with its feeling of perfection and subsequent delight and joy. To be without this connection betwixt naiveté‚ and the perfection of the infinitude of this very material universe, then any freedom loses its dynamism, its lustre, its brilliance, its vivacity ... its very here and now aliveness. If you now wish to put a different slant on what you lived in the latter half of your time with me, then that is your business
... but maybe you could give it a different name so as to not confuse people. Just as a suggestion, perhaps you could use some other term ... like
‘relative freedom’ or something? RESPONDENT: When I try to comprehend it I get this meaning: The burning discontent is necessary to attain virtual freedom, but after once one is in virtual freedom, the burning discontent is no more possible (and no more necessary). Do you agree? RICHARD: In my personal experience in 1981, once I was fully launched on the one-way trip to freedom, discontent was left far, far behind. I said YES to life, the universe and what it was to be a human being – I embraced death – and the core resentment (as epitomised in the phrase ‘I didn’t ask to be born’) was eliminated upon the realisation that perfection was already always here ... now. I became as happy and as harmless as was humanly possible for twenty three hours and fifty nine minutes of the day ... this state is what the term ‘virtual freedom’ was drawn out of. At the time I considered that I had discovered the secret of living life successfully ... and boy oh boy, was I in for a surprise when it became apparent that there was more to come. Much, much more. ‘I’ did not know what it was to die ... in the peak experiences ‘I’ merely went into abeyance. RESPONDENT: Now the next question. If there is no discontent and one is happy most of the time in virtual freedom what keeps one still going towards actual freedom? RICHARD: Curiosity, fascination and what amounts to an obsession with finding out about oneself, about life, about the universe and about just what it is to be a human being living in the world as it is with people as they are. All this and more becomes obvious the further one proceeds ... one is inextricably drawn towards one’s destiny. It is intrinsically impelling, exciting, exhilarating, thrilling ... one is living life fully. And it keeps on becoming better and better ... one is constantly amazed at the magical quality of life itself. One experiences an ever-increasing excellence again and again ... and asks: ‘How can best get better?’ Yet it does ... and there is more ... and more ... and more. RESPONDENT: If your answer is the memory of peak experience, then I would say that even in virtual freedom one is discontent with the life as it is, maybe at more subtle level, and then this is no virtual freedom and hence the logical flaw. RICHARD: Yet ‘virtual’ means ‘almost as good as’ or ‘nearly the same as’ or ‘in effect comparable to’
and so on Nevertheless, I cannot recall any discontent whatsoever in 1981 ... yet I wished to go all the way. I would not settle for
second-best – having experienced the best on numerous occasions – and there was also the pressing matter of all the suffering of my fellow
human beings. All the wars and rapes and murders and tortures and domestic violence and child abuse and sadness and loneliness and grief and
depression and suicides had impinged themselves indelibly upon my consciousness and provided the necessary ‘back pressure’ to encourage me to
proceed poste-haste. Also, logic has its uses in mathematical and mechanical areas of life – human’s creature comforts are dependent upon it
– but I have yet to meet a logician who enjoys and appreciates virtually each moment again and essentially lives in peace and harmony with a
person of the other gender, day after day after day, through the application of logic to the problem of the human condition. Sensible reason and
naiveté coupled with commonsense – practical, down-to-earth, sensitive rationality – triumphs over logic any day. RESPONDENT: Secondly what about a person who has no memory of PCE. Is he/she in danger of getting trapped in virtual freedom itself as the ultimate? RICHARD: If one cannot remember a PCE then one is not in virtual freedom ... it simply cannot work that way. The PCE is vital ... otherwise one is left no alternative to believing the words and writings of actualism. And if one does so believe, then the best one can do is live in some dream-world fantasy conjured up out of imagination ... and fondly believe it to be the ultimate, yes. RESPONDENT: Then would you suggest that such a person should not try for virtual freedom before having a PCE? RICHARD: Indeed, I can only suggest ... what another does with my suggestions is, of course, entirely up to them. It is they who either reap the rewards or pay the consequences for any action or inaction that they may or may not do. I can but offer tips, hints, pointers, clues – inside information – and in my experience I discovered that in order to shift from the self-centred licentiousness to a self-less sensuousness one must have confidence in the ultimate beneficence of the universe. This confidence – this surety – is gained from the PCE wherein life is seen and experienced to be already perfect and innocent ... one is physically experiencing first-hand, albeit temporarily, this actual world – a spontaneously benevolent world – that the normal world (the real world or reality) is pasted over. RESPONDENT: Or is it that virtual freedom may help in having a PCE? RICHARD: When one remembers a PCE – or precipitates another – then one is well on the way to freedom ... this is what actualism is all about. Scattered along the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom are as many PCE’s as one may need ... repeated peak experiences may very well be brought about on maybe a daily basis with constant application of reflective and fascinated contemplation. In such pure contemplation, ‘I’ cease seeing and seeing takes place of its own accord. ‘I’ can never be here now in this actual world for ‘I’ am an interloper, an alien in psychic possession of the body. ‘I’ do not belong here. All this is impossible to imagine which is why it is essential to be confident that the actual world does exist. This confidence is born out of knowing, which is derived from the PCE, and is an essential ingredient to ensure success. One does not have to generate confidence oneself – as the religions require of one with regard to their blind faith – the purity of the actual world bestows this confidence upon one. The experience of purity is a benefaction. Out of this blessing comes pure intent, which will consistently guide one through daily life, gently ushering in an increasing ease and generosity of character. With this growing magnanimity, one becomes more and more anonymous, more and more self-less. With this expanding altruism one becomes less and less self-centred, less and less egocentric. Eventually the moment comes wherein something definitive happens, physically, inside the brain and ‘I’ am nevermore. ‘Being’ ceases – it was only a psychic apparition anyway – and war is over, forever, in one human being. RESPONDENT: So, your experience is always fresh and no boredom or fear is possible. RICHARD: No boredom or fear whatsoever. This moment has never happened before and never will happen again ... thus life is always ever-fresh, novel, original, unique, peerless, matchless and impeccable. RESPONDENT: And because there is no ‘I’ in you, there is nobody to worry about anything or correct, improve anything? RICHARD: There is no worry, no, but I am not too sure that this is because there is no ‘I’ ... it is simply silly to worry as worrying does nothing whatsoever to get an event changed. I correct – and thus improve – what can be corrected ... according to a preference for creature comforts and ease of life-style. For example: if I can sit upon a cushion instead of the brick pavers of the patio I will ... that is a preference. But if a cushion is not available it does not matter ... I thoroughly enjoy being alive at this moment in eternal time and this place in infinite space irregardless of what is happening. I could be just as happy and harmless on bread and water in solitary confinement in some insalubrious penitentiary ... but I would be pretty silly to act or behave in such a way as to occasion that outcome! The ‘I’ that used to inhabit this body did everything possible that ‘I’ could do to blatantly imitate the actual in that ‘I’ endeavoured to be happy and harmless for as much as is humanly possible. This was achieved by putting everything on a ‘it doesn’t really matter’ basis. That is, ‘I’ would prefer people, things and events to be a particular way, but if it did not turn out like that ... it did not really matter for it was only a preference. ‘I’ chose to no longer give other people – or the weather – the power to make ‘me’ angry ... or irritated ... or even peeved, if that was possible. It was great fun and very, very rewarding along the way. ‘My’ life became cleaner and clearer and more and more pure as each habitual way of living life was consciously eliminated through constant exposure. Finally ‘I’ invited the actual by letting go of the controls and letting this moment live ‘me’. ‘I’ became the experience of the doing of this business of being alive ... no longer the ‘do-er’. Thus ‘my’ days were numbered ... ‘I’ could hardly maintain ‘myself’ ... soon ‘my’ time would come to an end. An inevitability set in and a thrilling momentum took over ... ‘my’ demise became imminent. The moment of the death of ‘me’ was so real that it was experienced as being that one was going into the grave physically
... that is how real ‘I’ am. RESPONDENT: But on the whole, life is just me, here, now, seeing, hearing, smelling (not so much, my nose seems a bit weak!), tasting and touching. And thinking. Except that’s possibly the wrong word because it gives the impression of mental effort. Your ‘reflection’ is a better word, or ‘meditate’ in the western sense of considered contemplation. RICHARD: Yes, considered contemplation combined with fascination leads to reflective contemplation. Then – and only then – apperception can occur. Apperceptive awareness can be evoked by paying exclusive attention to being fully alive right now. This moment is your only moment of being alive ... one is never alive at any other time than now. RESPONDENT: Yes. What you say makes sense to me. My sense of fascination is growing constantly. I am paying attention to this moment and as I do, the experience of the moment is enough in itself. There is no need for me to process the experience through a thinker or through a feeler. RICHARD: Good. The essence of success in actualism – the wide and wondrous path to actual freedom – is to fully
acknowledge that one is ‘human’ and to imitate the actual as far as is humanly possible. Whilst the ultimate goal is to be actually here –
now – for the twenty four hours of a day, the immediate goal is to feel good each moment again. Continuing success then leads to feeling happy
each moment again ... and then up-levelling it to feeling perfect for twenty three hours fifty nine minutes (99%) of the day. Thus, although
thought and feeling are operating, the ‘thinker’ and ‘feeler’ hardly get a look-in other than this seductive cooperation in their own
extinction. Occasionally they rise up and demand recognition ... but the habitual self-gratifying orgies of self-piteous indulgence lose their
attraction. RESPONDENT: Richard, as usual I am reading a lot more than I am writing. I love it when a new Actual Freedom posting appears in my in-box. I am curious to hear more from you about three things that have arisen recently. First thing: in your article ‘Attentiveness and sensuousness and apperceptiveness’ I first came across the term ‘Virtual Freedom’. Virtual Freedom seems a strange term for you to use given that you stress actuality. ‘Virtual’ refers to things that are not actually such. So you are now talking about a freedom that is not actual? RICHARD: Aye ... the wide and wondrous path to actual freedom is a win/win situation. Just like the spiritual path there is a glittering prize at the end ... yet here the similarity ends. With actualism one gains measurably along the way ... if actual freedom remains ever-elusive one winds up way ahead of normal human expectations. [Dictionary Definition]: ‘virtual’: That is so in essence or effect, although not recognised formally, actually, or by strict definition as such; almost absolute. Possessed of certain physical virtues or powers; effective in respect of inherent qualities. Capable of producing a certain effect or result’. RESPONDENT: From my reading of you, it is a stage on the way to Actual Freedom. Is that so? RICHARD: It is well-nigh essential. As I wrote in my very last post to you:
RESPONDENT: Can you explain more about this? RICHARD: I could indeed ... but may I suggest typing <virtual> into the ‘search’ or ‘find’ function of your computer and check out the more than half-a-million words on the three linked actual freedom pages? Here is what I found taking only three minutes:
RESPONDENT: The other selfless buffs toy with the ‘no me’ game, which you are playing for broke. RICHARD: Yes indeed ... enter into a discussion with me with an argumentative attitude and the bovine faecal matter really comes into contact with the rapidly whirling blades. However, if you wish for a reasoned dialogue ... here is where you may be able to be what you actually are: perfection personified. RESPONDENT: You abolished the reviled ‘Human Condition’ and exited to become the actual flesh-and-blood body. RICHARD: Yes ... a new way to live life on this verdant planet has been discovered which eliminates the need to humble
oneself in a degrading surrender and servitude to some imagined deity. One eliminates the sense of identity that has been overlaid – from birth
to the present day – over the self. With cheerful diligence and application born out of pure intent, one whittles away at the persistent social
identity, abandoning the desire for unity, until one arrives at a virtual freedom. In virtual freedom one is ninety nine percent free and the other
one percent causes very little trouble – if any – and with virtual freedom operating in every human being there could be a global
peace-on-earth. Finally the day of destiny dawns wherein one is catapulted into actual freedom ... one has escaped one’s fate and universal peace
and tranquillity emerges. Being free from malice and sorrow, innocence and benignity are one’s constant condition. In consummate purity and
perfection, which wells up from the utter stillness of the infinitude of this material universe, one is this very actual universe experiencing
itself in all its magnificence as a sensate and reflective human being. RESPONDENT: You said actualism is an effective method compared with spiritual ones (that is, one which really works) if applied in practice (it’s probably a failed act ;)) with sufficient diligence and pure intent, in order to make one happy and harmless. RICHARD: The actualism method, first put into action in 1981, is indeed an effective method, when practiced with application and diligence and patience and perseverance, and guided by the pure intent to enable peace-on-earth in this lifetime as this flesh and blood body, as it resulted in this flesh and blood body being actually free of the human condition ... this is the method which delivered the goods. There is no valid comparison with spiritual methods ... spirituality does not have peace-on-earth on its agenda. RESPONDENT: First, how many people have attained virtual freedom apart from your close associates Peter and Vineeto? RICHARD: How each and every person is experiencing this moment of being alive, each moment again, is a matter for themselves to determine ... I long ago declined to be a probity policeman (for obvious reason). RESPONDENT: What do you think is the core reason that a person like Konrad hasn’t got it? RICHARD: The core reason why anyone does not ‘get it’ is because the actualism method does deliver the goods (total dedication to peace and harmony means that the end of ‘me’ in ‘my’ entirety is inevitable). RESPONDENT: I ask this as there are now almost 6 years since you went public with your discovery and the method to achieve it, you must have some feedback ... RICHARD: The only feedback is what can be read publicly ... I rarely, if ever, conduct a private correspondence these days. RESPONDENT: ... or is it a perfect method needing no improvement? RICHARD: There may be other methods, yet to be discovered, but this is the only one so far which has delivered the goods. RESPONDENT: I’m also curious about your former partner, Devika, the one who got away with an enlightened man (after spending approx. 10 years in your company) ... RICHARD: Golly ... this is the information I supplied to you:
I neither said ‘enlightened’ nor ‘man’ ... or even said she ‘got away’ with this other person. RESPONDENT: ... what happened to her after leaving you? RICHARD: She set up a home for herself, by herself, so as to experience the nature of love, and its power, free of my influence ... and, as far as I know (as of March 2000), she is still waiting for what she called ‘the true peace of true love’ (a love which she further informed me is ‘matrilineal love and not patrilineal love’ that she said ‘only a female can manifest via true intimacy’) to manifest itself. She already had a leaning towards mystical feminism long before we met. RESPONDENT: Was the virtual freedom she experienced (for how long?) not satisfactory enough for her? RICHARD: Oh yes, and she wrote extensively about it in ‘Richard’s Journal’ (in the italicised paragraphs of Articles 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33) ... what happened after that is detailed in Article 36 of ‘Richard’s Journal’ (presumably you have not read that far yet):
The transcription of the taped conversation mentioned above can also be found at the following URL: My explanation of the event follows on immediately after the transcription of the taped conversation:
‘Tis only my explanation of course ... if, as you say, you are curious as to how it was for her she wrote to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list in October, November and December 1998 (under her given name ‘Irene’) which correspondence you can find in the archives if you are so inclined:
I had loaned her one of my computers so as to get at least some of the things she was then saying about me, and actualism, on the public record ... it does help to get both persons’ explanation of what happened. * RESPONDENT: Can you determine whether someone is living a virtual freedom ... RICHARD: It is entirely up to the person concerned to determine how they are experiencing this moment of being alive each moment again ... if another wishes to fool me, by reporting something which is not the situation then, when all is said and done, they only end up fooling themselves (when I go to bed at night I have had a perfect day and upon waking another perfect day is presenting itself). RESPONDENT: ... or is enlightened (one with the Absolute, for there are many who pretend and the bar is lowering) when meeting face-to-face? RICHARD: It makes no difference whether I hear their words or read their words (there are no ‘energies’ here in
this actual world). RESPONDENT: So – I also wonder whether you think that this ‘state’ I find myself in after the ‘ego death’ could be something similar or identical to what you describe as ‘virtual freedom’? RICHARD: No. RESPONDENT: I’m not quite sure I understand what that is. RICHARD: This is what the word ‘virtual’ means to me (not to be confused with ‘simulated’ connotations that the virtual reality of cyberspace has):
A virtual freedom is what is humanly possible, given sufficient pure intent, before the magical event occurs which renders all such attentiveness to being as happy and harmless (virtually free from malice and sorrow) as is practicable unnecessary ... and naïveté (the nearest to innocence an identity can be) is what makes it possible. And the key to being naïve (not to be confused with being gullible) is sincerity. RESPONDENT: And here I thought Grace had dumped your supposedly free ass and in return you revoked her virtually free status ... like you did to Irene. RICHARD: As I am on record as declining to be a probity policeman RESPONDENT: You are most certainly a probity cop when it suits your agenda. RICHARD: No, I most certainly do not determine and/or assess how a person is experiencing each moment of being alive ... and for a patently obvious reason: such a thing is a sheer impossibility. RESPONDENT: Your previous companion Irene, got her virtually free license revoked upon the demise of your relationship. Twasn’t that true? RICHARD: No, my previous companion changed her determination/ assessment of how each moment of being alive was to be experienced, after she stopped living with me, into it entailing her being free of [quote] ‘the belief in the man-made mistakes in their interpretations of being human and of nature in general’ [endquote] ... rather than her living in [quote] ‘something resembling that intimate place in some familiar time that I had visited and walked around in more than once before in various peak experiences’ [endquote]. RESPONDENT: Sorry bro, but she came to the conclusion that after testing out your theories for quite some time, that you were wrong. RICHARD: As my experiential reports/ descriptions/ explanations are not [quote] ‘theories’ [endquote] your apologetic reply, to my response to your query about whether I revoked a determination/ assessment which I never made in the first place (for the patently obvious reason that such a thing is a sheer impossibility) cannot be commented on in its present form. Sufficient is it to say for the nonce that my previous companion’s own words re-quoted just above clearly demonstrate the extent to which she changed her determination/ assessment, of how each moment of being alive was to be experienced, after she stopped living with me (she used the term ‘peak experiences’ for what the term ‘pure consciousness experiences’, or PCE’s for short, nowadays refer to). And, as she had had a three-week PCE many years before ever meeting me – on the other side of the world where she lived prior to emigrating to the country I currently reside in – there is no way that your apologetic opinion (that she came to the conclusion, after testing out my reports/ descriptions/ explanations, that they were wrong) can even begin to come close to what actually happened. RESPONDENT: Oh sure, I’ll just have to take your word for what actually happened and not what she wrote. RICHARD: I do understand that you would rather take my previous companion’s word for it than mine ... yet I have never said that I want anyone to take my word for it (aka believe me). On the contrary:
And that is exactly what happened for my previous companion: she had had a three-week PCE many years before ever meeting me – on the other side of the world where she lived prior to emigrating to the country I currently reside in – and thus knew from that direct experience what my experiential reports/ descriptions/ explanations referred to ... hence her depiction of a virtual freedom (already quoted further above) as being where she was living in [quote] ‘something resembling that intimate place in some familiar time that I had visited and walked around in more than once before in various peak experiences [aka PCE’s]’ [endquote]. That she changed from depicting a virtual freedom that way, after she had fallen in love and consequently packed her bags and moved out, into it having been free of [quote] ‘the belief in the man-made mistakes in their interpretations of being human and of nature in general’ [endquote] demonstrates the extent to which her being in love coloured her recollection ... and which further demonstrates the value printed and dated words have inasmuch any attempt to rewrite history will amount to nothing. (...) RESPONDENT: [Irene to Vineeto]: ‘When Richard used to come out with a statement that would go totally against my own sense of right, true, correct, I would always do a scientific experiment: I would ask myself to go and find out who of us was ultimately right. To be unbiased (which is the true meaning of scientific) I would allow, for a while, the possibility that I had been wrong so that I could be indeed open to Richard’s statement being right. Often I was convinced by his common sense and logical approach and decided to change my old mind, or I discovered, by giving him the benefit of the doubt, that his opinion was a result of repressed feelings. For a long while I favoured his outlook over my own, but more and more I had to admit that it was not me who was wrong but Richard’. (actualfreedom.com.au/sundry/commonobjections/CRO24a.htm). RICHARD: Now here is a notion for you to consider: why would those words (faithfully duplicated in ‘Commonly Raised Objections’ with my carte blanche permission) from my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust web site – the portion only I have authorial access to and which I have total editorial control over – be publicly on display if they be so damaging (else why quote them) as to render what is on offer on the entire web site [quote] ‘wrong’ [endquote] in one short paragraph? A trifle curious, non? For your information: what my previous companion wrote in that quote (and elsewhere) was written whilst under the influence of
the love which occasioned her to no longer live with me ... and a transcript of a conversation betwixt the two of us on that very subject, recorded
only two weeks before she moved out, can be found at the following URL: And here is how I introduce that conversation in ‘Richard’s Journal’:
Speaking personally, I have found it always pays to research an issue thoroughly before mounting a critique. RESPONDENT: Sure Richard ... I guess that’s how actual intimacy works in your world; record a conversation so you can have some dirt on your fellow human being and throw it in their face should the need arise, and promote your agenda all at the same time. That’s just priceless. How intimate indeed! How insanely actually intimate. RICHARD: Whilst I appreciate you taking the time to demonstrate how your mind works, when confronted with information such as I provided, the purpose of this discussion would be better served if I were to point out that it was at my previous companion’s request that our conversation be recorded (so as to have something factual – other than one’s notoriously unreliable memory of what it is to have come to one’s senses – to fall back upon in the times of love’s stress). ‘Twas all to no avail, however, as the power of love surging through the bloodstream was too strong to deny – as a body can be persuaded to produce quite an array of chemicals a veritable cocktail is available to the insidious entity who has a psychological and psychic residence within – and the salubrity of our eleven years together was swept away per favour the atavistic affective inheritance which persuades many an otherwise intelligent person that they are the latest and the greatest in a long line of massively deluded beings stretching back into the mists of prehistory. RESPONDENT: What is most apparent about your recorded conversation is your Svengali hold over her. You waited with your tape recorder for that moment where she would say what would further your own agenda. Apparently, little did she know of your pure intent. RICHARD: It is fascinating how the (archived) words a person typed out carry more weight with you than the (recorded) words they spoke. RESPONDENT: Her conclusion is what’s important and not some conveniently taped conversation by you at the exact moment where she would say what would work for you. RICHARD: Ha ... try this on for size and see if it fits:
(...) RICHARD: Speaking personally, I have found it always pays to research an issue thoroughly before mounting a critique. RESPONDENT: One of your favourite trite outros. RICHARD: No, it is what I tend to say whenever it becomes blatantly obvious that a would-be critic has not researched the very issue they are purporting to critique. RESPONDENT: Of course you can only speak personally ... which is why I will let Irene’s words speak for themselves ... RICHARD: And as it will be no surprise at all, as to just which words they might be, I will pass without further comment. RESPONDENT: ... and not the ones made while you were pressing a tape recorder button to record the actual intimacy your fellow humans experience in your presence of pure intent. However, those recorded words are symptomatic of all relationships where there is no actual intimacy, where the only thing actual, is one exploiting ones power over his fellow human being for personal gain. RICHARD: Meanwhile, back at the subject under discussion, what are you going to do with the words she typed (about a virtual freedom) where she was living in [quote] ‘something resembling that intimate place in some familiar time that I had visited and walked around in more than once before in various peak experiences’ [endquote] as contrasted to her other typed words where she recalled it (a virtual freedom) as being free of [quote] ‘the belief in the man-made mistakes in their interpretations of being human and of nature in general’ [endquote]? Or, to put that another way, which one of those two sets of typed words most closely fits how a virtual freedom is described on The Actual Freedom Trust web site? For instance:
RESPONDENT: Richard, I surfed your website for one day only and the clarity you have found is amazing. RICHARD: Welcome to The Actual Freedom Trust mailing list ... being sans the entire affective faculty/ identity in toto the clarity you refer to is simply the outcome of (human) intelligence no longer being crippled by same. RESPONDENT: Your approach to the whole problem is very simple and direct and not couched in mysterious phrases or delusions. RICHARD: That is because life here in this actual world is very simple and direct ... being actual it can be reported/ described/ explained, unambiguously and unequivocally, as-it-is. RESPONDENT: Reminds me of all great science, magnificent in its insights but expressed with breathtaking simplicity. RICHARD: This is an apt place to point out, right up-front and out-in-the open, that what I have to report/ describe/ explain is experiential and not scientifical. RESPONDENT: It is rather amazing as you assert that nobody else has ever approached the problem this way. RICHARD: As I was born and raised on a farm being carved by hand out of virgin forest by pioneer settlers with few means, where initiative and ingenuity were the order of the day, I have always had a practical bent and all through the eleven years of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment my general rule of thumb was: if a proposed solution to all the ills of humankind has no universality (a global application) it is not worth pursuing ... ‘tis then a selfish solution. RESPONDENT: To realize that all the great spiritual teachers and even from such traditions which ask one to question everything still held delusions within their bosoms is a rather frightening prospect. RICHARD: The implications and ramifications are quite staggering for it not only means that all the trillions upon trillions of words by the much revered and venerated saints and sages and seers from all cultures stretching back into antiquity are not even worth the paper they are written on (or the clay tablets they are impressed upon, the stone blocks they are carved into, the papyrus/ palm-leaves/ rice-paper/ wood-pulp/ vellum/ parchment they are inscribed upon) but even more to the point it means that one can now stand on one’s own two feet, beholden to no one at all, as a fully autonomous individual. RESPONDENT: Is it probable that peace is a realistic prospect for the whole of humanity given the power of these animal passions of delusions and ego (even in the famously enlightened). RICHARD: Presuming you mean a global peace – as contrasted to an individual peace – it must be borne in mind that each and every baby is born biologically endowed, via blind nature, with basic instinctual passions (such as fear and aggression and nurture and desire) as a rough and ready survival package ... just as it must be also borne in mind that the way children are raised is in accord with the prevailing wisdom of the time (currently in the form of values/ principles and morals/ ethics per favour the trickle-down effect of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment/ self-realisation). Therefore, it is the flow-on effect of the words and writings of an actual freedom from the human condition – as in
practically anyone now being able to be as happy and as harmless (virtually free of both malice and sorrow and their antidotal pacifiers love and
compassion) as is humanly possible – which is the most probable and realistic prospect, in the foreseeable future, for all of humankind ... and
which is why I stress the importance of a virtual freedom Although that is, of course, according to the current situation ... the moment another becomes actually free from the human
condition (especially if it be a female) that scenario may very well undergo a profound reappraisal GARDOL: I don’t want to end up acting like Richard. Or Vineeto. Or Peter. RICHARD: Possible translation: Because I’d rather stick to the real world I’ll just make out that Richard, Vineeto and Peter act in a way I don’t want to end up acting like. GARDOL: And I don’t want to try to bootstrap myself into ‘virtual freedom’. RICHARD: Just for the record, then, the following exchange contains one of the better (unsolicited) descriptions of what Gardol does not want to even try to bring about:
SELECTED CORRESPONDENCE ON VIRTUAL FREEDOM (Out-from-Control/Different-Way-of-Being) 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 |
