Chrono's Journal

[Vineeto]

[quote=“Vineeto, post:259, topic:445”]

• [Vineeto]: “(…). Further it was obvious for me that it would be Richard who would facilitate and trigger my transition into an actual freedom because he was the most obvious person with whom a near-actual intimacy would change into an actual intimacy – simply because Richard had been my guide and mentor for the last 13 years and particularly so for the period since I stepped out-from-control.
As I have written to James recently –

‘The final clue was again about caring, a caring as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster. Only when I cared enough to give all of ‘me’ to another person, to give them what they want most, was I then ready to give it to the one I cared for most, the one I was closest to, and then I was able to leave all remnant concerns and inhibitions of my identity behind.
And that’s what happened”. (Direct Route, James, 17 January 2010).

Vineeto: (…) What is it about Richard’s follow-up comment which is not clear to you? (snip Richard’s quote) (snip Richard’s quote) [/quote]

Chrono: It wasn’t his comment that wasn’t clear but in the previous paragraph it sounded to me like there were two different people that you were caring for. You first cared enough to give all of ‘me’ to another person (which I understand as Richard) and then you were ready to give it to the one you cared for most. Or maybe you are describing a process rather than two separate people. I may just not be reading this correctly.

Hi Chrono,

I do understand your confusion because in the paragraphs before the above quoted words I was talking about caring for Peter –

Vineeto: Peter and I compared notes about our respective processes of becoming free and, making sense about it in hindsight, have determined what makes the process replicable for everyone.
The key component for both of us had been caring, a caring as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster.
To put it in context of my own experiences: Over the years I increasingly allowed myself to dare to care for my fellow human beings, and gave up dissociating, rationalizing and turning away from the plight of humanity, something which I had practiced as a kind of ‘self’-defence during my spiritual years. I instead gave myself permission to become acutely aware of their pain and suffering, which was also ‘my’ pain and suffering. This in turn increased the urgency to do something about the human condition in myself in order to set others free from my suffering and animosity with the added intention that after becoming actually free I would be able to show by example how others who are interested could do it for themselves.
I had also entered a contract with Peter to look at everything that stood in the way of peace and harmony/ intimacy between us. I discovered that I needed to perceive him not as an extension of ‘me’ (as is usual in normal relationships), a projection of ‘my’ needs and preferences, but as a fellow human being in his own right – and my caring for him meant whittling away my identity as much as possible in order to give him (and me) the intimacy we both yearned for.
When I finally overcame the wall of fear it initiated the process of being out-from-control and the resulting intimacy with my fellow human beings (not only Peter but everyone) became stunningly available as I have described in my last post (see above). My own agenda had become so irrelevant that ‘I’ was able to take a back seat and let events take care of themselves.
My only agenda then, the only thing that I wanted like I never wanted anything before, was to finish the process, to become actually free.
The final clue … (see quote above). (Direct Route, James, 17 January 2010).

However, in the last paragraph I was referring to Richard, describing who the most obvious person was to facilitate and trigger my transition by giving “all of ‘me’ to another person” to then understanding (in hindsight) that it was “to give them (Richard) what they want most” which resulted in ‘my’ immolation.

See, in actuality the actual event happens first and the sorting out of the whys and wherefores comes afterwards. You will be able to observe this yourself, when you naïvely dare to let go of the controls, and allow the universe to live you, then you can experience, each moment, what actually happens without concept, and sort out the whys and wherefores afterwards.

Chrono: I have been reflecting again on this addiction correspondence and it’s interesting how every time I go back to an article later, I can see things that I did not before. My current thinking on this is that every time I choose the conditional enjoyment and appreciation then I am choosing suffering. Could it be that to abandon the path of suffering, that I must also abandon conditional enjoyment and appreciation? The only way “out” of the real-world then is to exclusively choose the unconditional enjoyment and appreciation.
‘I’ do not like being ‘me’ but ‘I’ instinctually try to escape being ‘me’ through ‘good’ feelings. Which is more of ‘me’. ‘I’ am instinctually charged to survive. But what I can say from where I am at is that I prefer the quality of felicitous feelings over good feelings. I enjoy them more than I do the good feelings. It feels more simple and easy. I do want to be like that always.
It is strange that ‘I’ need so much reinforcement to give credence to ‘my’ existence. The good and bad feelings compel because of ‘my’ instinctual charge to survive.

I am pleased to read that you see things you did not grasp before each time you go back to the ‘addiction correspondence’. I would warn though that the expression “I must also abandon conditional enjoyment and appreciation” sounds rather like the tenant of an ascetic, as if any and every conditional enjoyment was addictive and therefore leads to suffering. Why not keep it simple and watch out for the ‘good’ feelings, like love, compassion, pride, honour, loyalty, virtuousness, pacifism and the like?

Indeed, feeling felicitous and appreciative being alive is “more simple and easy” and that’s how you can always tell them apart from ‘good’ or ‘bad’ feelings, which always have strings attached.

Chrono: Some things also hit me recently. One of ‘my’ objections was something like ‘how could there be suffering if this universe is perfect?’. But there are other beliefs behind this notion. First was the belief that there is an ‘Intelligence’ behind this physical universe. But this physical universe is only intelligent as a flesh and blood human body. It is ‘me’ causing the suffering. ‘Me’ is blind nature in action and not the physical universe. Then the objection changed to “‘me’ is required for this physical body to survive”. Then I had a subsequent realization that blind nature (‘me’) only cares about perpetuating ‘me’ (as any species) and not this physical body.
There’s more to write but I will have to come back to it. (link)

Chrono: To continue on with this contemplation, I noticed in everyday events that ‘I’ am indeed a mediator claiming what is happening. I see how “matter is not merely passive”.
I noticed how this moment is consistently reliable. I can feel good because it is this moment. Being here at this moment is dynamic. As opposed to ‘me’. It’s like ‘I’ am trying to be in a state of stasis. Always trying to crystallize ‘my’ self in whatever way to show that ‘I’ exist. Whereas this moment which is dynamic requires no effort. I noticed the objects in my room, the trees outside, the light shining in, the sound of cars driving by. All dynamically existing. Matter has arranged itself in this way and is constantly re-arranging itself. Further to that, without ‘me’, matter as this body is here aware of all this, in this dynamic moment of being alive. This awareness of being alive is here effortlessly. A stark contrast to ‘me’, who is unsure of ‘my’ existence. This being here like this, this seeing, is unconditional enjoyment and appreciation.

What a great description and distinction of what is actual and what is synthetic/ real/ “unsure of ‘my’ existence”.

Chrono: I’ve been wondering what prevents me from allowing this experience more consistently. There are varying beliefs but I think it may be one belief that keeps changing. Maybe I have not seen what it really is. My belief that it is not possible (for me) is what pulls me back. It is made to be a fairy tale. But I think this is also cunning. Because by doing so, ‘I’ can perpetuate my existence. It is after all ‘my’ whole drive. I then became rather sorrowful when I realized just what it was that I was holding back (everything this body is aware of without ‘me’). It is of a precious nature. My belief morphed back to ‘I must protect this body’. I immediately remembered that this is not true and how ‘I’ only care about ‘me’ surviving and not this body. And that remembrance instantly got rid of that feeling. I was feeling it rather deeply as it was like there was a locality in the body to it. My whole head was focused on it in a visceral way and there’s the sensations of crackling inside of my head. There are some varying psychosomatic symptoms that go along with this when I reflect on it. It gives the impression ‘I’ am deeply embedded somewhere in the body.
I now have come back to the same feeling and the feeling of it not being possible is backed really by that ‘life is a vale of tears’ belief. Because of so much suffering in the world. And I cannot find the reason for it. I feel that I am going in circles. It’s why I had previously asked if ‘my’ absence would affect the psychic web. I’ll have to come back to it. (link)

“I must protect this body” is more than merely a belief. It is the very identity formed of the instinctual survival passions. As such it won’t work to try and abandon this as a ‘belief’. What you do instead is diminish the ‘self’, the identity.

Richard: “One minimises the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings and activates the felicitous/ innocuous feelings – happiness, delight, appreciation, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability and so on – in conjunction with sensuousness – then the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness.” (Richard, Articles, A Précis of Actual Freedom).

When you say you are going in circles, it might be that you are asking the wrong question, or thinking if only you find the correct belief to dismantle you can solve the puzzle of ‘me’. Whereas the direction to weakening ‘me’ is to gradually relinquish control and naïvely allow what you have already experienced on occasions, that the flesh-and-blood body combined with your native intelligence, as unsullied from ‘good’ and bad feelings as possible, can take care of itself – and enjoy and appreciate.

Cheers Vineeto

[cross.chrono]

@Vineeto

I do understand your confusion because in the paragraphs before the above quoted words I was talking about caring for Peter –

Vineeto: Peter and I compared notes about our respective processes of becoming free and, making sense about it in hindsight, have determined what makes the process replicable for everyone.
The key component for both of us had been caring, a caring as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster.
To put it in context of my own experiences: Over the years I increasingly allowed myself to dare to care for my fellow human beings, and gave up dissociating, rationalizing and turning away from the plight of humanity, something which I had practiced as a kind of ‘self’-defence during my spiritual years. I instead gave myself permission to become acutely aware of their pain and suffering, which was also ‘my’ pain and suffering. This in turn increased the urgency to do something about the human condition in myself in order to set others free from my suffering and animosity with the added intention that after becoming actually free I would be able to show by example how others who are interested could do it for themselves.
I had also entered a contract with Peter to look at everything that stood in the way of peace and harmony/ intimacy between us. I discovered that I needed to perceive him not as an extension of ‘me’ (as is usual in normal relationships), a projection of ‘my’ needs and preferences, but as a fellow human being in his own right – and my caring for him meant whittling away my identity as much as possible in order to give him (and me) the intimacy we both yearned for.
When I finally overcame the wall of fear it initiated the process of being out-from-control and the resulting intimacy with my fellow human beings (not only Peter but everyone) became stunningly available as I have described in my last post (see above). My own agenda had become so irrelevant that ‘I’ was able to take a back seat and let events take care of themselves.
My only agenda then, the only thing that I wanted like I never wanted anything before, was to finish the process, to become actually free.
The final clue … (see quote above). (Direct Route, James, 17 January 2010).

However, in the last paragraph I was referring to Richard, describing who the most obvious person was to facilitate and trigger my transition by giving “all of ‘me’ to another person” to then understanding (in hindsight) that it was “to give them (Richard) what they want most” which resulted in ‘my’ immolation.

See, in actuality the actual event happens first and the sorting out of the whys and wherefores comes afterwards. You will be able to observe this yourself, when you naïvely dare to let go of the controls, and allow the universe to live you, then you can experience, each moment, what actually happens without concept, and sort out the whys and wherefores afterwards.

Hi Vineeto,

Ah thank you I understand now and I also understand why I was confused. I think I was trying to find a “map” of sorts in your description, but your suggestion to sort it out afterwards cleared it up.

@Vineeto

I am pleased to read that you see things you did not grasp before each time you go back to the ‘addiction correspondence’. I would warn though that the expression “I must also abandon conditional enjoyment and appreciation” sounds rather like the tenant of an ascetic, as if any and every conditional enjoyment was addictive and therefore leads to suffering. Why not keep it simple and watch out for the ‘good’ feelings, like love, compassion, pride, honour, loyalty, virtuousness, pacifism and the like?

Indeed, feeling felicitous and appreciative being alive is “more simple and easy” and that’s how you can always tell them apart from ‘good’ or ‘bad’ feelings, which always have strings attached.

It did sound rather odd thinking and writing that too but at the same time it also seemed like it is the choosing of the unconditional enjoyment and appreciation which is going down the unknown path. But in practice I suppose it would amount to suppressing if I were to try to abandon the conditional enjoyment as well. Perhaps I am only going down the unknown path once there is no longer any choice to go back to the known.

@Vineeto

“I must protect this body” is more than merely a belief. It is the very identity formed of the instinctual survival passions. As such it won’t work to try and abandon this as a ‘belief’. What you do instead is diminish the ‘self’, the identity.

Richard: “One minimises the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings and activates the felicitous/ innocuous feelings – happiness, delight, appreciation, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability and so on – in conjunction with sensuousness – then the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness.” (Richard, Articles, A Précis of Actual Freedom).

When you say you are going in circles, it might be that you are asking the wrong question, or thinking if only you find the correct belief to dismantle you can solve the puzzle of ‘me’. Whereas the direction to weakening ‘me’ is to gradually relinquish control and naïvely allow what you have already experienced on occasions, that the flesh-and-blood body combined with your native intelligence, as unsullied from ‘good’ and bad feelings as possible, can take care of itself – and enjoy and appreciate.

I think perhaps it is because I am trying to find the correct belief to dismantle to solve the puzzle of ‘me’. I actually had this realization yesterday that if I’m trying to “push” or “pull” myself or try to “figure it out” (which pretty much always is dampening or blocking any felicitous feelings), then I am being insincere. If I am feeling anything other than feeling good, then that is what I am feeling. There’s no reasoning around it. I can name that tactic as denial. It’s simply a ‘how can I get back to feeling good’ and asking why I felt bad. So there’s the feeling of impatience. To get to the end and to side-step what I viscerally know/feel will be ‘my’ end. It’s another case of being split in two in that one part of me desires oblivion while the other part (hiding in the shadows) acts in a way to avoid it. Also to keep in the context of caring, I cannot care for others or humanity if I do not care for myself. And if I am feeling bad and allowing myself to feel bad (or good feelings), then I do not care for myself. Diverting, impatience, trying to jump to the end, etc. are all instinctual cunning in action.

[Vineeto]

@cross.chrono

@Vineeto

I do understand your confusion because in the paragraphs before the above quoted words I was talking about caring for Peter –

Vineeto: Peter and I compared notes about our respective processes of becoming free and, making sense about it in hindsight, have determined what makes the process replicable for everyone. (…) (Direct Route, James, 17 January 2010).

However, in the last paragraph I was referring to Richard, describing who the most obvious person was to facilitate and trigger my transition by giving “all of ‘me’ to another person” to then understanding (in hindsight) that it was “to give them (Richard) what they want most” which resulted in ‘my’ immolation.

See, in actuality the actual event happens first and the sorting out of the whys and wherefores comes afterwards. You will be able to observe this yourself, when you naïvely dare to let go of the controls, and allow the universe to live you, then you can experience, each moment, what actually happens without concept, and sort out the whys and wherefores afterwards.

Chrono: Hi Vineeto,
Ah thank you I understand now and I also understand why I was confused. I think I was trying to find a “map” of sorts in your description, but your suggestion to sort it out afterwards cleared it up.

@Vineeto

I am pleased to read that you see things you did not grasp before each time you go back to the ‘addiction correspondence’. I would warn though that the expression “I must also abandon conditional enjoyment and appreciation” sounds rather like the tenant of an ascetic, as if any and every conditional enjoyment was addictive and therefore leads to suffering. Why not keep it simple and watch out for the ‘good’ feelings, like love, compassion, pride, honour, loyalty, virtuousness, pacifism and the like?

Indeed, feeling felicitous and appreciative being alive is “more simple and easy” and that’s how you can always tell them apart from ‘good’ or ‘bad’ feelings, which always have strings attached.

Chrono: It did sound rather odd thinking and writing that too but at the same time it also seemed like it is the choosing of the unconditional enjoyment and appreciation which is going down the unknown path. But in practice I suppose it would amount to suppressing if I were to try to abandon the conditional enjoyment as well. Perhaps I am only going down the unknown path once there is no longer any choice to go back to the known.

Hi Chrono,

Ah well, this thinking out beforehand in a logical way in that either-or way is not very practical. You just talked yourself into waiting to be more naïve until “there is no longer any choice”. Yet only three days ago you made this observation –

Chrono: I noticed in everyday events that ‘I’ am indeed a mediator claiming what is happening. I see how “matter is not merely passive”.
I noticed how this moment is consistently reliable. I can feel good because it is this moment. Being here at this moment is dynamic. As opposed to ‘me’. It’s like ‘I’ am trying to be in a state of stasis. Always trying to crystallize ‘my’ self in whatever way to show that ‘I’ exist. Whereas this moment which is dynamic requires no effort. I noticed the objects in my room, the trees outside, the light shining in, the sound of cars driving by. All dynamically existing. Matter has arranged itself in this way and is constantly re-arranging itself. Further to that, without ‘me’, matter as this body is here aware of all this, in this dynamic moment of being alive. This awareness of being alive is here effortlessly. (link)

This is possible now, you don’t have to wait, it is always this moment.

Vineeto: “I must protect this body” is more than merely a belief. It is the very identity formed of the instinctual survival passions. As such it won’t work to try and abandon this as a ‘belief’. What you do instead is diminish the ‘self’, the identity. (snip quote)
When you say you are going in circles, it might be that you are asking the wrong question, or thinking if only you find the correct belief to dismantle you can solve the puzzle of ‘me’. Whereas the direction to weakening ‘me’ is to gradually relinquish control and naïvely allow what you have already experienced on occasions, that the flesh-and-blood body combined with your native intelligence, as unsullied from ‘good’ and bad feelings as possible, can take care of itself – and enjoy and appreciate.

Chrono: I think perhaps it is because I am trying to find the correct belief to dismantle to solve the puzzle of ‘me’. I actually had this realization yesterday that if I’m trying to “push” or “pull” myself or try to “figure it out” (which pretty much always is dampening or blocking any felicitous feelings), then I am being insincere. If I am feeling anything other than feeling good, then that is what I am feeling. There’s no reasoning around it. I can name that tactic as denial. It’s simply a ‘how can I get back to feeling good’ and asking why I felt bad. So there’s the feeling of impatience. To get to the end and to side-step what I viscerally know/feel will be ‘my’ end. It’s another case of being split in two in that one part of me desires oblivion while the other part (hiding in the shadows) acts in a way to avoid it. Also to keep in the context of caring, I cannot care for others or humanity if I do not care for myself. And if I am feeling bad and allowing myself to feel bad (or good feelings), then I do not care for myself. Diverting, impatience, trying to jump to the end, etc. are all instinctual cunning in action. (link)

Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ knew that impatience well.

‘Vineeto’: I started my investigation about the feeling of impatience. Impatience has always been one of the driving forces in my life and kept me going, counteracting the innate inertia to get me back on the track of what I wanted to achieve. But the more I am actually here and enjoying life, the more the feeling of impatience becomes a nuisance and is, in fact, preventing me from enjoying what is happening here in this moment. (…)
The main fuel for this feeling of impatience comes from the notion that there is something better ‘out there’, in the future – that magic ingredient that will then make life as perfect as the ending of children’s fairytale – and then they lived happily ever after. And yet it is this very feeling of impatience, that particular bit of my ‘self’, that prevents me from the sensate-only experiencing the perfection of this moment.
Impatience is the ‘self’ telling the ‘self’ to go away in order for life to be perfect thereafter. What a furphy! Who am I trying to fool? This is what cunningness in action looks like. It is fascinating to see the self splitting itself into two yet again in order to pretend that there is change happening without really having to change anything. Seeing through the charade, I experience the thrill that accompanies the shift from a furphy to an actual experience, from ‘feeling impatient’ to actively dismantling the ‘self’, from stepping out of the ‘real’ world to arriving here. I understand that the only way to approach self-immolation is by welcoming the death of ‘me’ with free will, open arms and a full YES. It is a magic formula, that turning around 180 degrees again, a yes to immolation rather than a no to life as it is.
When death is welcome with the same thrilling anticipation as a sexual playmate then I know I am on the right track.
So impatience gets replaced by an understanding of redundancy – the more I experientially understand about the human condition the more ‘I’ become redundant because life in the actual world is utterly safe and already perfect. ‘I’ am not needed to stay alive. The more I understand the chemical, psychological and psychic programming of the brain, the more I can see that this programming is outdated, faulty and redundant in every single aspect – ‘I’ am not needed at all. Virtual Freedom is the ongoing increasing experience of ‘my’ redundancy, kind of getting used to not interfering with perfection. (Actualism, Vineeto, Alan-d, 21.5.2000)

‘She’ had most things right – impatience being a way to re-introduce ‘me’ into the picture when everything is going well without ‘me’. Impatience, despite its appearance is nothing noble or virtuous, it’s a spoiler of allowing the enjoyment and appreciation of this moment – just like all the other feelings ‘I’ throw up to remain in existence.

Cheers Vineeto

[cross.chrono]

@Vineeto

Hi Chrono,

Ah well, this thinking out beforehand in a logical way in that either-or way is not very practical. You just talked yourself into waiting to be more naïve until “there is no longer any choice”. Yet only three days ago you made this observation –

Chrono: I noticed in everyday events that ‘I’ am indeed a mediator claiming what is happening. I see how “matter is not merely passive”.
I noticed how this moment is consistently reliable. I can feel good because it is this moment. Being here at this moment is dynamic. As opposed to ‘me’. It’s like ‘I’ am trying to be in a state of stasis. Always trying to crystallize ‘my’ self in whatever way to show that ‘I’ exist. Whereas this moment which is dynamic requires no effort. I noticed the objects in my room, the trees outside, the light shining in, the sound of cars driving by. All dynamically existing. Matter has arranged itself in this way and is constantly re-arranging itself. Further to that, without ‘me’, matter as this body is here aware of all this, in this dynamic moment of being alive. This awareness of being alive is here effortlessly. (link)

This is possible now, you don’t have to wait, it is always this moment.

I was more trying to convey that maybe I am only going down the unknown path when the actualism process takes hold and it is no longer of ‘my’ doing. Also that until then there’s always a way “back” into the known (because only the unknown path is a one-way ticket). Is my understanding correct on this? I have no intention to wait to be more naive but I also don’t want to fool myself.

It seems that almost all the obstacles that I encounter are simply a result of me fighting myself. ‘Me’ trying to do something about ‘me’. Which can only be done by splitting myself. Maybe it hasn’t quite hit home that ‘I’ can never be perfect. Peace-on-earth exists without ‘me’. I feel much more motivated now to embrace every part of ‘me’ and see that it is always ‘my’ choosing. If I don’t feel it to be easy and simple, then it means I’ve reverted back to the ‘normal’ ways. Yet I also find a certain incredulity (which I recognize as an objection by ‘me’) when it becomes so simple. Like those objections in some correspondences where they are asking why it has never been discovered before if it was so simple. And it only occurs to me now why. The whole world so far has been a battle between ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’. Only the naive ‘me’ can enable peace-on-earth. Only that part of ‘me’ can do it. And I can only be naive if every part of ‘me’ is embraced each moment again as ‘me’. Thus the responsibility falls on me. I decide how I feel. No more futilely shaking my fist at the sky. Ah there is something so refreshing when I can feel good like this!

@Vineeto

Chrono: I think perhaps it is because I am trying to find the correct belief to dismantle to solve the puzzle of ‘me’. I actually had this realization yesterday that if I’m trying to “push” or “pull” myself or try to “figure it out” (which pretty much always is dampening or blocking any felicitous feelings), then I am being insincere. If I am feeling anything other than feeling good, then that is what I am feeling. There’s no reasoning around it. I can name that tactic as denial. It’s simply a ‘how can I get back to feeling good’ and asking why I felt bad. So there’s the feeling of impatience. To get to the end and to side-step what I viscerally know/feel will be ‘my’ end. It’s another case of being split in two in that one part of me desires oblivion while the other part (hiding in the shadows) acts in a way to avoid it. Also to keep in the context of caring, I cannot care for others or humanity if I do not care for myself. And if I am feeling bad and allowing myself to feel bad (or good feelings), then I do not care for myself. Diverting, impatience, trying to jump to the end, etc. are all instinctual cunning in action. (link)

Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ knew that impatience well.

‘Vineeto’: I started my investigation about the feeling of impatience. Impatience has always been one of the driving forces in my life and kept me going, counteracting the innate inertia to get me back on the track of what I wanted to achieve. But the more I am actually here and enjoying life, the more the feeling of impatience becomes a nuisance and is, in fact, preventing me from enjoying what is happening here in this moment. (…)
The main fuel for this feeling of impatience comes from the notion that there is something better ‘out there’, in the future – that magic ingredient that will then make life as perfect as the ending of children’s fairytale – and then they lived happily ever after. And yet it is this very feeling of impatience, that particular bit of my ‘self’, that prevents me from the sensate-only experiencing the perfection of this moment.
Impatience is the ‘self’ telling the ‘self’ to go away in order for life to be perfect thereafter. What a furphy! Who am I trying to fool? This is what cunningness in action looks like. It is fascinating to see the self splitting itself into two yet again in order to pretend that there is change happening without really having to change anything. Seeing through the charade, I experience the thrill that accompanies the shift from a furphy to an actual experience, from ‘feeling impatient’ to actively dismantling the ‘self’, from stepping out of the ‘real’ world to arriving here. I understand that the only way to approach self-immolation is by welcoming the death of ‘me’ with free will, open arms and a full YES. It is a magic formula, that turning around 180 degrees again, a yes to immolation rather than a no to life as it is.
When death is welcome with the same thrilling anticipation as a sexual playmate then I know I am on the right track.
So impatience gets replaced by an understanding of redundancy – the more I experientially understand about the human condition the more ‘I’ become redundant because life in the actual world is utterly safe and already perfect. ‘I’ am not needed to stay alive. The more I understand the chemical, psychological and psychic programming of the brain, the more I can see that this programming is outdated, faulty and redundant in every single aspect – ‘I’ am not needed at all. Virtual Freedom is the ongoing increasing experience of ‘my’ redundancy, kind of getting used to not interfering with perfection. (Actualism, Vineeto, Alan-d, 21.5.2000)

‘She’ had most things right – impatience being a way to re-introduce ‘me’ into the picture when everything is going well without ‘me’. Impatience, despite its appearance is nothing noble or virtuous, it’s a spoiler of allowing the enjoyment and appreciation of this moment – just like all the other feelings ‘I’ throw up to remain in existence.

Yes now I am seeing impatience is also because ‘I’ believe deep down that ‘I’ will somehow survive. Another instance of ‘me’ trying to be perfect in that there’s a belief that ‘I’ can “clean” myself up. It’s interesting how felicitous feelings are way better than the others, yet ‘I’ would spoil it just to remain in existence. Because the more ‘I’ feel them, there’s more of the seeing of becoming redundant.

[Vineeto]

@cross.chrono

@Vineeto

Hi Chrono,

Ah well, this thinking out beforehand in a logical way in that either-or way is not very practical. You just talked yourself into waiting to be more naïve until “there is no longer any choice”. Yet only three days ago you made this observation –

Chrono: I noticed in everyday events that ‘I’ am indeed a mediator claiming what is happening. I see how “matter is not merely passive”.
I noticed how this moment is consistently reliable. I can feel good because it is this moment. Being here at this moment is dynamic. As opposed to ‘me’. It’s like ‘I’ am trying to be in a state of stasis. Always trying to crystallize ‘my’ self in whatever way to show that ‘I’ exist. Whereas this moment which is dynamic requires no effort. I noticed the objects in my room, the trees outside, the light shining in, the sound of cars driving by. All dynamically existing. Matter has arranged itself in this way and is constantly re-arranging itself. Further to that, without ‘me’, matter as this body is here aware of all this, in this dynamic moment of being alive. This awareness of being alive is here effortlessly. (link)

This is possible now, you don’t have to wait, it is always this moment.

Chrono: I was more trying to convey that maybe I am only going down the unknown path when the actualism process takes hold and it is no longer of ‘my’ doing. Also that until then there’s always a way “back” into the known (because only the unknown path is a one-way ticket). Is my understanding correct on this? I have no intention to wait to be more naive but I also don’t want to fool myself.

Hi Chrono,

When you say “I am only going down the unknown path when the actualism process takes hold” and “only the unknown path is a one-way ticket” you are creating conceptual/ logical conditions. This is how the sophisticate would approach the subject.

In reality/ actuality it is experiential – when you allow yourself to slip into a naïve frame of mind, you feel/ do/ say something you have never done before (unknown) and that is at first scary but also delicious and fun. You may feel a bit foolish at first but then it is so much fun that this does not matter. First once in a while then more often you let go of concepts and allow life to live you (in line with your intent to be happy and harmless) – and then discover that it is enjoyable to be like that. Sure, at the beginning, before you are confident in this new way of being, “there’s always a way “back” into the known” but the more your confidence grows the more you are drawn to be naïve for longer.

Chrono: It seems that almost all the obstacles that I encounter are simply a result of me fighting myself. ‘Me’ trying to do something about ‘me’. Which can only be done by splitting myself. Maybe it hasn’t quite hit home that ‘I’ can never be perfect. Peace-on-earth exists without ‘me’. I feel much more motivated now to embrace every part of ‘me’ and see that it is always ‘my’ choosing. If I don’t feel it to be easy and simple, then it means I’ve reverted back to the ‘normal’ ways. Yet I also find a certain incredulity (which I recognize as an objection by ‘me’) when it becomes so simple. Like those objections in some correspondences where they are asking why it has never been discovered before if it was so simple. And it only occurs to me now why. The whole world so far has been a battle between ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’.

This is an excellent insight and others have reported great success with allowing the feeling to be felt closer and closer until it becomes obvious that ‘I’ am my feeling and this feeling is ‘me’. Then it is really simple. When ‘I’ am no longer divided, ‘me’ fighting against ‘me’, when I truly become a friend to myself, then naiveté is possible.

Chrono: Only the naive ‘me’ can enable peace-on-earth. Only that part of ‘me’ can do it. And I can only be naive if every part of ‘me’ is embraced each moment again as ‘me’. Thus the responsibility falls on me. I decide how I feel. No more futilely shaking my fist at the sky. Ah there is something so refreshing when I can feel good like this!

It is not that there is a naïve part – when one is naïve this is all of ‘me’. When ‘I’ am resentful and embrace it, this is ‘me’ – and in that moment I have the choice to be naïvely enjoying that I am no longer fighting with myself. There is no point in cutting oneself into various pizza pieces and trying to fight/ hide certain pieces but embrace others. All your feelings are ‘you’ and all can become allies in the grand game of moving towards ‘self’-immolation.

Vineeto: Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ knew that impatience well. (snip quote Actualism, Vineeto, Alan-d, 21.5.2000)
‘She’ had most things right – impatience being a way to re-introduce ‘me’ into the picture when everything is going well without ‘me’. Impatience, despite its appearance is nothing noble or virtuous, it’s a spoiler of allowing the enjoyment and appreciation of this moment – just like all the other feelings ‘I’ throw up to remain in existence.

Chrono: Yes now I am seeing impatience is also because ‘I’ believe deep down that ‘I’ will somehow survive. Another instance of ‘me’ trying to be perfect in that there’s a belief that ‘I’ can “clean” myself up. It’s interesting how felicitous feelings are way better than the others, yet ‘I’ would spoil it just to remain in existence. Because the more ‘I’ feel them, there’s more of the seeing of becoming redundant. (link)

It’s very perspicacious to discover this mental-instinctual trick “that ‘I’ will somehow survive”. Being aware of this will help you to avoid going round in circles trying to become a perfect ‘self’, when there is a perfect and pure actual world right under your nose.

Cheers Vineeto