Claudiu: If Andrew goes ahead with his unilateral command to effectively do whatever he (self-centrically) wants without regards to any consequences and without the capacity for anybody else to do anything whatsoever to change his mind about any of it, without pure intent in place… the effect will most likely be for that “wayward self” to … go wayward .
Josef: I don’t think that’s what he said at all. He said he would give himself permission to feel good, happy & harmless unilaterally. I don’t see any mention of doing whatever he wants (self-centrically) without consideration for anyone else.
And even in practice, I have found that the actualism feeling good (not good feelings), is so blithesome and benign in its nature that it is always accompanied by harmlessness. If it’s not, usually there is some good feeling (like greed, or power, or pride) that is tainting the feeling good.
Hi Josef,
I am pleased to read you know by experience that “the actualism feeling good” needs to include being harmless in order to be untainted by “greed, or power, or pride”. Perhaps you simply assumed that Andrew would experience it the same way? In fact, this is what feeling being Vineeto expressed as well –
‘VINEETO’: The reason I said that there is a remarkable difference between feeling harmless and actually being harmless is because it is easy to assess one’s happiness by checking if I am feeling happy whereas many people may feel themselves to be harmless when they are not experiencing feelings of aggression or anger against somebody. Yet they are nevertheless causing harm via their thoughtless ‘self’-oriented instinctual feelings and actions, something that all human beings are prone to do unless they become fully aware of their instinctual passions before these translate into vibes and/or actions.
It was about a year into my process of actualism when I became aware of how much my outlook on the world and on people had changed in that my cloak of myopic ‘self’-centredness began to lift and I no longer saw the world only ‘my’ way and my judgments and actions no longer revolved around ‘my’ interests, ‘my’ beliefs, ‘my’ ideas, ‘my’ ideals, ‘my’ fears, ‘my’ desires and ‘my’ aversions. Consequently I have learnt to judge harmlessness by the amount of parity and consideration I apply to others whom I come in contact with, both at work and at play, and not by merely feeling myself to be harmless.
Tarin: Can you say more about this? I usually feel harmless but have been thinking lately that I somehow still do harm simply by not paying attention and applying parity and consideration to others with whom I come into contact. How did you do this more and more? And how did you notice that you’re still harming someone even if you don’t have feelings of anger or aggression or the like? And how do you know it’s you harming them? Can you give a few examples? I’m finding it possible to consider this matter more now that I’m happier as its given me breathing room to be less self-centred, but it’s a pretty new subject to me. What keeps your mind on being considerate? Is it just a close scrutiny on the feelings and passions that arise? Are you more perceptive of others because the feelings and passions that are now arising are diminished so you’re naturally more attentive to other things as well, like what’s going on with other people?
‘VINEETO’: Sure. When I met Peter I was full of good intentions to make our living together work, i.e. to be as happy and peaceful as possible, but I had continuous clashes of opinion with him, frustrations of foiled expectation, hurt feelings and revenge of hurtful remarks. I realized that in order to be able live with Peter in peace and harmony I had to sort out a lot – my beliefs, my ‘truths’, my loyalties, my gender ideas, my problems with authority and all other sorts of feelings.
I remember well the first evening when I looked at Peter and saw him as just another human being – not as a partner, a mate, a member of the other gender, a lover, a sexual object, a valuable addition to my circle of friends, and not as someone who would approve or disapprove of me – simple another fellow human being. Suddenly the separation I felt was gone and there was a delicious intimacy, as ‘I’ was no longer attempting to force him to fit into ‘my’ world.
I was astounded and shocked by this experience, being outside of my so familiar ‘self’-centred and ‘self-oriented skin, because I realized that never before, not once in our 3-months acquaintance, had I been able, or even interested, to see him as a person in his own right. I was shocked at how all of my perception and consequently all of my interactions were driven by what I wanted, what I expected and what I believed him to be and how much I was therefore constantly at odds with how he actually was. From then on I paid as much attention as possible to become aware of situations when my feelings, beliefs, expectations and general attitude were standing in the way of recognizing another person, first Peter and later anyone I came in contact with, as equal fellow human beings, as persons in their own right, who live their own life, follow their own goals and aspirations, have their own preferences and tastes, and also, have their own set of morals, ethics and beliefs.
The reason I am telling this story is because this experience was the beginning of a slow and wide-ranging realization that as long as I live in ‘my’ world – made up of ‘my’ worldview, ‘my’ beliefs, opinions, feelings and survival passions – I cannot help but struggle to fit everyone into ‘my’ world, as actors on the stage of ‘my’ play, so to speak, as family and aliens, as friends and enemies, as ‘good people and ‘bad’ people. And not only am ‘I’ busy trying to do this, everyone else – all six billion of us – are equally struggling to fit everyone into ‘their’ world.
It then comes as no surprise that being actually harmless is out of the question – until ‘I’ more and more leave centre-stage, stop resenting being here, stop being stressed, take myself less seriously, take notice of other people the way they are and start enjoying life. (Actualism, Vineeto, Selected Correspondence, Harmless).
Claudiu: Pure intent will ensure that sensibility will prevail (…)
Josef: Again, the feeling good come what may that I’ve been having success with recently has a lack of malice as a quality, so consideration for others is also a part of it.
Claudiu: I don’t think this is really a very high bar, (…)
Josef: This is why I called it gatekeeping.
Knowing the human condition as well as I do (having experienced as a feeling being the full extent of ‘I’ am humanity and humanity is ‘me’) I am much more careful to make a-priory assumptions.
As is now the second time that you used the word “gatekeeping” I wonder if there is perhaps an emotional issue/ investment for you such as frustration that you have trouble to experience a PCE or a resentment against authority? So that this post doesn’t get too long, I simply refer you to a link, if you discover that this is the case.
You have stated yourself you discovered that to be genuinely feeling good requires “a lack of malice as a quality, so consideration for others is also a part of it”. This is excellent. It seems to me that a sincere intent is operating for you in regards of enjoyment and appreciation. Richard’s warning (and mine), what you call “gatekeeping”, is specifically designed regarding the inculcated rules of society which curb the excess of the instinctual passions, i.e. the “wayward self”.
In the absence of the experience of the overarching stream of benignity and benevolence originating – not in ‘your’ fears and desires but outside the human condition – in the vast and utter stillness of the universe, the socialized conscience and principles of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ cannot be safely whittled away – you would harm both yourself and others following only ‘your’ self-centric guide.
Josef: I don’t have pure intent if the strict definition is that is has to be born of a PCE. I don’t have a good memory of a PCE. But I do have the intent that I don’t ever want to feel miserable again. That I want to be in a good mood each and every moment again. I’ve seen how beneficial it is for myself and others when I am feeling good. But should I not start on this path unless I meet the strict definition of having pure intent? (link)
Here is what you wrote in October 2022 as the first entry of your journal –
Joseph: I had what I think is a PCE yesterday while on a high dosage edible. I was just sitting on the couch, and suddenly the inside of my house began to look completely different. It was as if I was seeing everything for the first time again. There was very little affect, and I noticed that while I could think, the thoughts were disjointed from “me”. There was a very high level of sensuous appreciation. But the key aspect for me was time. Past and future were completely gone and it felt like I could stay in this moment forever. That there was nothing else. Again, very very little affect, but I’m reluctant to say a complete absence because I was also pretty intoxicated and hence a little confused.
It was a new way of experiencing entirely, and it was very pure and I would say close to perfect. It was the same world but like a different one within that same one. Like a veneer being pulled back. (link)
Does this experience perhaps give you a clue why you are able to recognize that genuinely feeling good requires “a lack of malice as a quality”, and “consideration for others”?
It is the source of your intent which defines the quality of ‘feeling good’ and informs you which one is genuine and which one is dictated by the “wayward self”. As long as you pay attention to this qualitative difference of your intent and rememorate the distinct flavour of this “new way of experiencing” you had during the PCE, you are precisely acting according to Richard’s warning.
Cheers Vineeto