Claudiu: Hi Vineeto
Vineeto: Now the only (open) question remains – who or what do you want to give all of ‘yourself’ to?
Claudiu: The immediate answer I had for this question is – the very infinitude of the universe itself! It’s as I wrote to you in an email on Nov 18, 2024:
Claudiu in private email: Thank you for sharing that delightful conversation. I found it scintillatingly wonderful and brilliant.
The part that stood out to me most was this one:Richard: … Perhaps if I were to put it this way: if the infinitude directly experienced in a pure consciousness experience (PCE) is not the infinitude of the universe then what is it the infinitude of … a god (using the word ‘god’ in the ‘ground of being’ sense)?
In other words if it be not a physical infinitude then it falls into the realm of being a metaphysical infinitude. (List AF, No. 60a, 25 Jan 2004b) {emphasis added [in original email]}.
Claudiu in private email: Those last two paragraphs struck me. I can’t find the proper words to express it. It is so remarkably straightforward and matter-of-fact, and even logical in the simplest possible sense. Yet it points to an undeniable fact: that the infinitude experienced in a PCE is actual, and not metaphysical (and thus illusory/delusory).
Because infinitude is experienced in a PCE (or can be if not always) … so it must be an experience of something. And it is not an infinitude of a God or other such thing, because the very substance that Gods are made out of is gone. So what is it an experience of, then? It must be the infinitude of actuality.
The reason it struck me is that it drove home that this infinitude is actual – and thus that it is something worth sacrificing myself for. [emphasis in original email]. That bold and italic part is what struck me about it.
I don’t really know how else to put it. The magnitude and significance of that was stark, immediate, incredibly meaningful, and I don’t think the words I’m using here to describe it do it justice – but perhaps you can appreciate what I am getting at regardless.
Claudiu: What I find a bit strange is I can’t give a satisfying thought out reason as to “why” it makes sense to sacrifice myself for the infinitude. What would the infinitude — already perfect — benefit from it? And I would be no more and such not around to benefit from this sacrifice. Nevertheless, I know it’s what I want to do
Hi Claudiu,
Ha, it’s it interesting that when you have an experience of apperceptive direct seeing, ‘I’ want to make it into a reasoned rational thought-out argument. What struck you originally was the very actuality of infinitude, which by its very nature is incomprehensible, inconceivable, unimaginable and unbelievable. A ‘self’, limited by its own ‘self’-oriented boundaries can never comprehend the actuality of infinitude.
Claudiu: Interestingly upon rereading it, it wasn’t the part I bolded at the end that got to me but rather a part much further up:
Respondent: With regard to attaining ‘actual freedom from the human condition’, does it matter whether the universe is infinite and eternal?
Richard: It is infinitude which makes such a freedom possible … only that which has no opposite is peerless (hence perfect). (List AF, No. 60a, 24 Jan 2004) [emphasis added].
This is what struck me this time. The universe being infinite means there is nothing outside the universe and as such nothing that is not the universe / nothing other than the universe, against which to compare the universe. Hence it is peerless, it has no opposite, and it is thus intrinsically perfect.
Again I can’t explain why this makes sense in a rational thought-out way. A denizen of the real world would quibble that just because something exists with nothing to compare it to doesn’t make it perfect, it could be bad instead or some other thing. Nevertheless it makes perfect sense that the universe being peerless, having nothing other than it against which it can be measured, makes it perfect.
I can go further and see why, too. It’s intrinsic to the very nature of existence. Existence is intrinsically perfect, marked by benevolence and benignly. As such it could not be that the only thing to exist (the universe) is not perfect. Again to the philosopher this is remarkably unsatisfying and unfounded. If our template of a philosopher said this is unsophisticated, they’d be right of course. But unfounded it isn’t … it seems axiomatic or tautological but it comes down to it being experiential. Apperceptive experience along with the pure intent sourced thereof informs me as to the facticity of this which I write here.
Well, what you are looking for is not a thought-out answer but a deep passionate conviction and desire for which you are ready to give all of ‘yourself’ to. (Remember, one cannot self-immolate just because it seems like a good idea at the time or makes thought-out sense). As Kuba recently phrased it –
“to find something that ‘I’ deeply and passionately care about” … “something that ‘I’ have wanted so much all of ‘my’ life.”
What he personally found was –
“to offer (and demonstrate) a solid alternative to the “hypocrisy, the lack of equity, the ignorant irresponsibility and the harm that was being done by all”.” (link)
This deep and passionately-caring desire is what he re-discovered at the core of his ‘being’, his ‘presence’, which he described as “‘I’ am this imprint that feelings swirl around to form a ‘structure’ that has absolutely no substance, an intuited ‘presence’”. (link)
I had thought of you when I read Kuba’s description of experientially knowing “what ‘I’ am as ‘self’”, because only a few days ago you had informed me that –
Claudiu: It has really struck me and dawned on me experientially that I am nothing but feelings. (link)
With this in mind, you can explore an even deeper layer of ‘me’ to experientially discover the core of ‘being’ itself, “this imprint that feelings swirl around to form, a ‘structure’” (which if allowed to expand would become the ‘Self’, “the second ‘I’ of Mr. Ventkataraman Aiyer (aka Ramana) fame)”). (link)
Now, to answer your question –
Claudiu: “Does the above make sense as the “what” of it? I already know it does haha, but it’s odd not having the thought-out answer of why it makes sense. However, I don’t think I really need that piece of it … just to allow it to happen! (link)
Only you can know if to experience “the very infinitude of the universe itself”, which is “peerless (hence perfect)”, “marked by benevolence and benignity” is what you deeply and passionately care about to the point of ‘near-actual-caring’. This very ‘near-actual-caring’ will allow ‘you’ to gladly and unreservedly agree to ‘your’ irrevocable demise for the benefit of this body and every body.
Richard: Whereas the ‘I’ that was sacrificed ‘himself’ … and ‘sacrifice’ means to die as an altruistic offering, a philanthropic contribution, a generous gift, a charitable donation, a magnanimous present; to devote and give over one’s life as a humane gratuity, an open-handed endowment, a munificent bequest, a kind-hearted benefaction. A sacrifice is the relinquishment of something valued or desired, especially one’s life, for the sake of something regarded as more important or worthy … it is the deliberate destruction, abandonment, relinquishment, forfeiture or loss for the sake of something illustrious, brilliant, extraordinary and excellent. It means to forgo, depart from, leave, quit, vacate, discontinue, stop, cease or immolate so that one’s guerdon is to be able to be unrepressed, unconstrained, unselfconscious, spontaneous, free and easy, relaxed, informal, open, candid, outspoken, uninhibited, unrestrained, unrestricted, uncontrolled, uncurbed, unchecked, unbridled … (Richard, List B, Gary, 23 Nov 1999).
Cheers Vineeto