Vineeto to Claudiu: Is the “feeling driven” a close cousin to the “‘gung-ho yeah!!’ self” – a diversion from that funny feeling in the belly when anxiousness sets in? If so, I can recommend to stay with that ‘funny feeling’ as long as you dare, without fighting it or expressing it as being driven (both options give the anxiousness extra energy), and experiment a bit. This will reduce the intensity and ‘whoosh’, you are back to feeling good. (link)
Kuba: Hehe this is a cool way of describing ‘my’ anxiety – “a funny feeling in the belly when anxiousness sets in”, doesn’t sound so serious when you put it this way (link)
Kuba: 1 - “things are happening” – this is where there isn’t any of that kind of feeling, ‘I’ am ‘being’ supremely naive and it seems that ‘I’ am well on route to meeting ‘my’ destiny.
2 - “Funny feeling in the belly” – This is where there is still this dynamic aspect all around but also this anxiousness which is as if wanting to halt what is going on.
3 - “towards ‘normality’” – This is where ‘I’ have allowed the anxiousness to do its thing and now ‘I’ have reverted back to some kind of ‘normality’ in order to ease the pressure. (link)
Vineeto: So, when No. 2 or No. 3 happens you don’t repress and don’t express, i.e. don’t feed the feeling, acknowledge that you are the feeling and get back to No. 1. That’s the natural dynamic of the vortex of swirling feelings, until you are ready to let pure intent take over completely (link)
Kuba: What a fruitful discussion this was! Thank you Claudiu and Vineeto. You know something has clicked when there is that sense of – “How could I have not seen this all this time!?” Of course the answer was hiding in plain sight. I’m very happy that these discussions are on the World Wide Web for fellow human beings to make use of and to avoid various pitfalls.
What you wrote Vineeto it really hit bullseye with regards to what has been going on for me. It seems too simple typing it out now But just like ‘I’ can get back to feeling good by seeing that ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and thus ‘I’ can ‘be’ the felicitous/ innocuous feelings as opposed to the sorrowful and malicious feelings. Well the same thing can be done with these “jitters” – I think this is actually a pretty cool term for these.
Hi Kuba,
Well, well, I was literally astounded that this was so eye-opening for you. At first, I thought it was too trite to write it out, it being the actualism method 101. What an effect a choice of a different expressions can make! Perhaps it has something to do with the serious conditioning of mainly the male of the species to not show or express fear of any kind – and therefore not to feel fear – whatever the circumstances. I am pleased to see you could unlock this secret door with the more acceptable label of “a funny feeling in the belly when anxiousness sets in” and/or “jitters” – well done.
Kuba: Somehow what ‘I’ did was separate ‘myself’ from those jitters. ‘I’ would see them as “screams of a dying entity”, as if the screams and the entity were not ‘me’. At the very worst of all this (and Vineeto you might remember this) ‘I’ was writing about ‘me’ kicking and screaming, as if this “dying entity” was to just go in the corner and die in silence, and stop being such an inconvenience. Of course this entity that ‘I’ had separated ‘myself’ from is – ‘me’.
Yes, I remember you writing that. Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ at first had qualms to admit that fear was happening, and serendipitously it was recorded on the AFT when Richard called a spade a spade –
‘VINEETO’: Senses are operating but nobody is seeing or hearing and then there is no difference between me and the desk I am seeing, no distance, no ‘I’. Last night I experienced life beyond ‘being’, in a strange way hollow, but very alive and sensate. Now I slowly, slowly can examine the plastic between the stubbies, what it is made of, because recognised it disappears. Sometimes it is fear, sometimes a feeling, sometimes a sense of continuity, of having past and future and definition. (…)
‘VINEETO’: With the stubbies I meant in this incident my actual senses including the brain, fully functioning, better than with the ‘plastic’, but they had no definition or identifiable form, hence the description ‘formlessness’. It is more an idea of a form that was missing. I seemed to be made out of the pieces of information that the senses gave me, the seeing, hearing, thinking, but it had no continuity, no person as such, no identity.
RICHARD: Ah … now I am with you. I remember the first time I experienced being the senses only during a peak experience. There was no identity as ‘I’ thinking or ‘me’ feeling … simply this body ambling across a grassy field in the early-morning light. A million dew-drenched spider-webs danced a sparkling delight over the verdant vista and a question that had been running for some weeks became experientially answered: without the senses I would not know that I exist. And further to this: I was the senses and the senses were me. With this comes an awareness of being conscious … apperception.
Is it not staggering to realise that the identity is felt to be so very real that when it goes into abeyance one initially experiences oneself as having no form … ‘formless’? (…)
RICHARD: It would appear that the experiential study of fear is germane to any examination of the ‘plastic between the stubbies’ so as to ensure a life beyond ‘being’.
‘VINEETO’: Yes, I agree, although often it does not appear as fear, rather a certain hesitancy to fully enjoy the moment, to lash into the sparkles and to become yet more alive – a safe place of ‘this is already enough happiness and pleasure, let’s not rock the boat!’ But since I have nothing else important to do, I might as well rock the boat and become entirely mad!
RICHARD: It may not appear as fear but ‘a certain hesitancy’ and ‘a safe place’ and ‘let’s not rock the boat’ all go to indicate fear … in this paragraph the fear of going mad. Now, some people say: ‘Richard is mad’. From the real world point of view, this observation is entirely correct. The ‘Richard’ that was so very real back in 1981 was deathly afraid of experiencing where I am now … yet he opened the door marked ‘madness’ and walked through. Then he panicked at his daring and sought to go back … but the door had vanished. He had no choice but to proceed.
There is a thrilling aspect to fear … and it is the source of courage. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, AF List, Vineeto, 5 Aug 1998).
Then Richard’s writing on the topic made a lot more sense to ‘her’.
Kuba: So these jitters were seen as happening to ‘me’, and so all ‘I’ could apparently do is ride them out, as if waiting for a storm to pass, helpless. Then it clicked today that of course those jitters and all the rest of it – ‘I’ am ‘being’ those things when they are happening, it is ‘me’ after-all.
And what a wonderful thing to discover, because now seeing that ‘I’ am ‘being’ those jitters, ‘I’ am able to get back to ‘being’ naivete. And now ‘I’ see what a callous way it was to behave towards ‘myself’ in this way.
Ha, not for nothing did Richard emphasise that “nothing can be swept under the carpet”. It’s great you found out that you are “those jitters and all the rest of it”, expressions of the basic instinctual passion of fear, “encircling all of humankind”. There is no shame in admitting that they are surfacing from time to time in this most daring of enterprises in human consciousness.
Kuba: And spending the day today in the bester territory but without this fear of the jitters anymore, it has been incredible. (link)
You said it well – “fear of the jitters” – it is the fear of fear which is the largest aspect of it, and once you allow the feeling itself without feeding it with fear of fear then what remains is mostly small potatoes.
Here is something I read today, which you might find relevant explaining that ‘not expressing the feeling’ (or even being unaware of the feeling) nevertheless will involuntarily radiate its accompanying vibes/ currents.
Of course, felicitous/ innocuous feelings will respectively radiate felicitous/ innocuous vibes and psychic currents.
RESPONDENT: Also, what is the relative importance with the actualism method of ‘not expressing’ an emotion as opposed to feeling happy and harmless, thus putting out happy and harmless vibes?
RICHARD: As there is no such [quote] ‘actualism method of ‘not expressing’ an emotion’ [endquote] it is difficult to determine just what it is you are asking … and why you are.
If what you are referring to is to neither express nor suppress any of the ‘good’ or ‘bad’ feelings/ emotions/ passions – and thus put them into a bind so the third alternative (felicity/ innocuity) may hove into view – then the relative importance (to use your phrasing) is the resultant involuntary extrasensorial emanation of those happy and harmless vibes into the human psyche, in particular, and the animal psyche in general.
RESPONDENT: If good and bad vibes are felt by others regardless of emotional expression, why is it important not to express the good and bad feelings if they will be felt regardless of expression?
RICHARD: As nowhere is it advised that it is [quote] ‘important not to express the good and bad feelings’ [endquote] then I am unable to answer your query as-is.
(It is, essentially, a matter of choice/ personal preference as to what feelings are expressed).
What I can say is this: as the many and various emotions/ passions are the same affective energy, at root, then directing all of that affective energy into being the felicitous/ innocuous feelings (that is, ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being, which is ‘being’ itself), via minimisation of the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings and maximisation of the happy and harmless feelings, will have the effect of involuntarily radiating felicitous/ innocuous vibes and currents as a matter of course.
RESPONDENT: Isn’t it possible to hide what one is feeling?
RICHARD: If you mean ‘hide what one is feeling’ as in disguising the physical effects such feeling has on one’s vocal chords/ one’s physiognomy/ one’s posture (as per the tone of voice/ facial expression/ body language mentioned further above) then, yes, of course one can … peoples everywhere do so regularly on a daily basis.
(Diplomats, for an obvious instance, elevate doing so into a high art-form as part and parcel of their job-description).
If, however (going by your follow-up question below), you mean is it possible to hide the affective vibes which all feeling-beings involuntarily transmit, extrasensorially, by virtue of affectively/ psychically existing as a ‘being’ then, no, one cannot … and the word ‘involuntarily’ should explain why.
RESPONDENT: Is it a matter of sensitivity whether or not a vibe is picked up if it is not expressed?
RICHARD: As a vibe is not [quote] ‘expressed’ [quote], but is involuntarily transmitted regardless of whether feelings are expressed or suppressed, your query cannot be answered as-is.
What I can say is this: it is a matter of sensitivity whether affective vibes are consciously discerned or not.
The vast majority of feeling-beings experience other feeling-being’s vibes as if they are their own feelings – and are, of course, totally oblivious to the very existence of psychic currents [The actualism term ‘psychic currents’ unlike affective ‘vibes’) are new to human knowledge/ human history] – as is evidenced with people like yourself denying there is any such thing as is reported/ described/ explained on The Actual Freedom Trust website (and repeatedly talking about physical cues/ physical means as if those physical effects which feelings display bodily were the vibes themselves).
A feeling-being, by virtue of being an affective/ psychic ‘being’, involuntarily emanates/ transmits/ radiates affective vibes (and psychic currents), extrasensorially, regardless of whether they express or suppress feelings and/or whether they display or conceal any physical effects feelings may have on their tone of voice/ their facial expression/ their body language. (Richard, List D, No. 25c, 29 Oct 2013)
Cheers Vineeto