Hi, Kub933 (nice nick!)
It’s also funny that Richard was accused of this same “modus operandi”…
It was admirable how he chose the best words and composed the best sentences to respond to his accusers who collected all his answers to prove his “pompous” style…
But as you say in English, c’est la vie!
PWR
Hi PWR Chaz Eric[1],
Just a clarificatory question, if you will.
As it took you 13 years to self-reportedly become free according to your method (i.e. 2011 to 2024[2]), in what way would you say that your method “worked” to avoid what you call this “plateau” of getting ‘stuck’ at virtual freedom?
13 years certainly sounds like a lengthy amount of time. What if someone has been virtually free for, say, 5 years – if they then abandon their way-of-being characterized by 99.9% of their waking hours being spent enjoying and appreciating being alive to try your path instead, can they expect to succeed in just 8 years or does the counter re-set at 13?
Also I would appreciate a listing of all the actually free people today who have spent more than 13 years in virtual freedom, as none currently come to mind. As such it does seem like your advise here is… not based on any facts whatsoever.
Cheers,
Claudiu
Hello Claudus.
Since you insist on not accepting my privacy and my nickname in the form of an acronym, I will allow myself to give you another nickname as well (the Roman name Claudius comes from the Latin adjective claudus).
Virtual Freedom (i.e. living with only 1% resistance) was easily achieved in mid-2021, two years before I completed my own method (as a result of the pressure of the lockdown?). I only managed to complete my method in 2023. I invested my efforts during a decade of research and experiments until I formulated my own method of manumission and a few more months of pure iconoclasm that ended a few days after Richard’s death. My professional travels and other private matters also did not allow me to shorten this period, but better late than never and better safe than sorry.
That old intellect “reinvented the wheel”, but this time a rounder wheel.
Now everyone can prepare their own particular method.
This does not mean that my or your recipe will be perfect for everyone. In my case, it simply worked for the needs and quirks of a now-defunct person.
You can also reuse/adapt the fundamentals, but not the outdated scientific explanations, formulated by Richard, Peter and Vineeto to accelerate the creation of your own methodology, if you wish.
I was the guinea pig for my own experiments, not for others, and I survived intact and healthy!
Thank you,
PWR
To situate part of the content of my research from 2011 onwards, I suggest this text that I recently wrote for one of the members (who, like the other member requested, prefers to remain anonymous for the reasons already mentioned):
Actual Freedom is the next evolutionary leap that will create a supra human species.
And it is not a matter of natural selection.
When I began to investigate the social, historical and biological causes of the emergence of the first documented case of actual freedom, taking advantage of Richard’s testimony, I discovered that the main conditions for such a “mutation” were already present.
To explain this, I will compare this process to that of grasshoppers.
Grasshoppers become locusts only when their swarm reaches an overpopulation limit.
And since 1980, our world population has doubled in four decades.
Another determining factor in stimulating such a mutation in this insect is the change in its habitat.
And in the years 1980-1990, the rural exodus, urbanization and the technological revolution and services were reaching their peak.
However, unlike the transformation of a grasshopper into a locust, which can be reversed, the mutation in consciousness is definitive: just as we stop believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy at some point in childhood, we do not believe in them again either in adolescence or adulthood. The same goes for the mentality of the ancient man of 6,000 years ago who believed in the voices he heard, who currently represents only 1% of humanity (the so-called “schizophrenics”).
Other particularities of the first case of actual freedom are the country and the culture where it arose.
Australia is a young and relatively isolated and “innocent” country, like a new continent, with a culture inherited from both Western and Eastern mythologies thanks to immigration, as well as Aboriginal ones. And this mixture was unique and perfect!
With the right conditions for such phenotypic plasticity, for the first time in human history it was possible for the first modern man to go beyond the old consciousness and the divided mind that preceded it.
The path was opened!
And there is no turning back (fortunately!).
Good day, E.R.I.C.
Humm… “Claudus” might be better suited to one limping through a forum without a name, non?
Be that as it may, a few more follow-up questions have arisen in the mind of this ghostly intellect here.
In what manner was virtual freedom easily achieved – by using the actualism method, or something else? Your method was not complete by then so it could not have been that.
You appear to be shortening the 13 years it took from 2011 to 2024, into a few months, by separating out the 2011-2023 period of developing your own method (which is only applicable to you and nobody else on the planet). Thus claiming a few months to success for your method.
Nevertheless it did take 13 years from when you started to devise your own method until you were “liberated”. And as what you appear to be sharing with your fellow human beings is the advice to do the same thing you did – namely devise a method and then execute it – then the full 13 year period must be taken into account.
So I ask again, what advice do you have to someone who is virtually free, yet has not even started investigating into any “research and experiments” of devising their own method at all, which took you over a decade? I count at least 9 actually free people who had shorter periods from virtually free to actually free than 13 years. Even if you genuinely devised a new method, the track record weighs in favor of continuing on that which has demonstrably and repeatably worked, rather than strike out on one’s own. Especially as there appears to be no guarantee someone could devise their own method, sparse as the details you have given are.
Besides which there is the vital question of whether you are actually free, which it certainly appears not (I refer the readers to @Vineeto’s excellent posts detailing precisely how).
So again what you are proposing is, rather than the by-now well-tread path of:
You propose:
I just don’t see the appeal, perhaps you can clarify?
As you have not explained at all in which way Ledoux’s work is “outdated”, there is no compelling
reason for anyone reading along to do so… this does provide an opportunity for you to do just that now, though.
I think most people would question the mental health of someone too afraid to publish their own first name on the internet, due to fears it will cause total organ deterioration and failure leading to death, which would happen without you being able to perceive anything is going wrong with your body because of the way you have altered your state of consciousness to be.
In short it just doesn’t appear like you are putting out anything all that appealing. Perhaps I am missing something?
Cheers,
Claudiu
Yes, this is the biggest problem with his claims - who would want to take so much risk with this one life and limited timespan to create a new method and expect it to succeed ? Already, even with a proven method like Actualism Method, things get confusing and rocky at times but atleast its a proven method !
Hi @PWR
You talk like a researcher with a lot of knowledge about many things yet you forget a simple point as a researcher/ scientist - that solid proofs about your claims of Richard’s health deteriorating due to anastasis is missing. We can make all sorts of claims based on what “appears” to be true. What you’re claiming here is akin to me saying Cancer is caused because of the presence of Mango trees on Earth🙃
You said that pure intent is not necessary now, so do you not experience it anymore or you have access to it but its not necessary ?
Do you experience infinitude of space, eternity of time and stillness of Universe ?
What about apperception - the mind being aware of itself ?
You seem to talk more in terms of eliminating different “I” that form ego…where does soul come into the picture for you and what about it’s elimination ?
Cheers
Shashank
Good day, Claudicus.
In what manner was virtual freedom easily achieved – by using the actualism method, or something else? Your method was not complete by then so it could not have been that.
— Virtual freedom requires only enough will power to definitively stop the mental ouroboros to which “I” had become “addicted”. Millions of people around the world apply this power of decision (“quit for good”) and stop drinking and using drugs instantly. As I have already explained, the path without resistance was a discovery and not an invention.
You appear to be shortening the 13 years it took from 2011 to 2024, into a few months, by separating out the 2011-2023 period of developing your own method (which is only applicable to you and nobody else on the planet). Thus claiming a few months to success for your method.
— Yes. Congratulations. Let’s move on.
Nevertheless it took 13 years from when you started to devise your own method until you were “liberated”. And as you appear to be sharing with your fellow human beings is the advice to do the same thing you did – namely devise a method and then execute it – then the full 13 year period must be taken into account.
— It took ten years of research (with intervals of several months due to the demands of my travels) to find the last missing links of consciousness. It was a matter of checking “my” personal objections and acting on them. Without a “Big Plan” no method fulfills its function. This is another topic that can accelerate your and others’ discoveries.
So I ask again, what advice do you have to someone who is virtually free, yet has not even started investigating into any “research and experiments” of devising their own method at all, which took you over a decade?
— Find your objections and systematically eliminate them until there are no objections left. Test it out. It’s not painful and very simple, like most things we learn, it all seems like rocket science at first…
I count at least 9 actually free people who had shorter periods from virtually free to actually free than 13 years. Even if you genuinely devised a new method, the track record weighs in favor of continuing on that which has demonstrably and repeatably worked, rather than striking out on one’s own. Especially as there appears to be no guarantee someone could devise their own method, sparse as the details you have given are.
— Richard’s actualism method will work for some and will not work for others. If it’s working for you, stick with it and let the process happen. Don’t waste valuable time counting the number of people actually free.
You propose:
1. Discard the actualism method
— No.
2. Prepare your own particular method
— Yes.
3. It might not work though
— It will work for sure! But exclusively for yourself, the author, and not for anyone else.
4. (And also it didn’t work for me.)
— Your zealous imagination is distorting my words again. Go to the corner of the room and stay there until you recover from this zealous relapse…
As you have not explained at all in which way Ledoux’s work is “outdated”, there is no compelling reason for anyone reading along to do so… this does provide an opportunity for you to do just that now, though.
— I have already indicated the most up-to-date sources for reference. Now everyone should do their homework and update themselves a little. It won’t hurt at all and it’s fun to learn!
I think most people would question the mental health of someone too afraid to publish their own first name on the internet, due to fears it will cause total organ deterioration and failure leading to death, which would happen without you being able to perceive anything is going wrong with your body because of the way you have altered your state of consciousness to be.
— Living the path without resistance will seem insane indeed. It is understandable. As for anastasis, this phenomenon requires two ingredients: a target and an archer. Without a name and address, the archer will have no target to aim at and hit with his/her arrows.
Remain anonymous while helping others without being harmed unintentionally or voluntarily by them.
In short it just doesn’t appear like you are putting out anything all that appealing. Perhaps I am missing something?
Yes, you are missing something: your precious life time that could be used to investigate your own objections. I have already resolved mine. Now it is up to you!
Salud,
PWR
Hello Sharkshank,
Yes, this is the biggest problem with his claims - who would want to take so much risk with this one life and limited timespan to create a new method and expect it to succeed ? Already, even with a proven method like Actualism Method, things get confusing and rocky at times but atleast it is a proven method !
Richard and other pioneers have already laid the groundwork for others to create their own manumission methodology. There is nothing to fear except the seduction of some ASC or wanting to expose yourself in the spotlight…
And no method is proven until you have applied it to yourself and completed its function.
You talk like a researcher with a lot of knowledge about many things yet you forget one simple point as a researcher/scientist - that solid proofs about your claims of Richard’s health deteriorating due to anastasis is missing. We can make all sorts of claims based on what “appears” to be true. What you’re claiming here is akin to me saying Cancer is caused because of the presence of Mango trees on Earth.
A researcher presents his hypothesis and a theory to explain it. It is up to the reader to conclude whether it is possible or not. And your conclusion is a private opinion that may or may not be useful to you. Asking for proof is maintaining a religious mindset, hoping to be convinced or persuaded. And this is definitely not the role of a scientist.
You said that pure intent is not necessary now, so do you not experience it anymore or do you have access to it but it is not necessary ?
Why would I need pure intent now?
Do you experience infinity of space, eternity of time and stillness of Universe ?
Poetic… Why don’t you answer me yourself instead of repeating ready-made phrases?
What about apperception - the mind being aware of itself ?
You have already answered your own question.
You seem to talk more in terms of eliminating different “I” that form ego…where does soul come into the picture for you and what about it’s elimination?
While that whirlwind of I’s concentrates in the head area (mindspace), the psyche concentrates in the chest and belly area as a visceral ruler. Considering that the magnetic field of the heart is much greater than that of the brain, the veiled action of the psyche in the basements of the mind becomes evident. The psyche is always present and underlying the ego (the cluster of I’s). It is the psyche that sustains this legion of entities which in turn supplies it. Without the psyche there would be no ego. Therefore, to eliminate these parasites, apply the starvation technique. You can live without love, without friends and without actual freedom, but you won’t live long without water and food… Same goes for the ego and the psyche. Here’s another tip!
I hope that you and Claudus will be the next ones to be actually free, no matter what method you trust and use!
Hugs,
PWR
PWR: And my explanations about the various reasons for keeping my real name private continue to be ignored…
I have returned to answering some members’ questions out of consideration for them, even though they also ignored my request to send a private message directly to my email…
G’day Senhor “P”,
I still find it non-sensical to call you by the invention you present here, after all I don’t call any inventor by the name of their invention (which is either a thing or a philosophy/ hypothesis/ theory). Else one would call Mr. Einstein “RT”, for instance.
PWR: I “believe” (and hope I am not mistaken) that everyone here, except those who have already fulfilled their destiny, is interested in finding out more about another path to reach the same destination. It is possible to get to Australia by boat, but a plane flight will be much faster and more comfortable. Fortunately, there is not just one plane that goes to that destination!
You mean “Terra Actualis” (link). Flying to Australia is not part of the actualism method.
Thank you for confirming that “belief” and “hope” are still operating in you.
If you were actually free there would be neither belief nor hope nor any other feeling extant in you.
PWR: Now, I will take the opportunity to write about “beliefs” and “facts”.
Trading beliefs for supposed facts is equivalent to transforming facts into absolute truths.
Even if this is an absolute fact, if we cannot verify our existence/ perception/ reality as “absolute”, then we still cannot confirm any given “fact” as absolute.
What appears as a fact to us, may only be that based on our perception, of our knowledge, both of which may not be, and likely are not, absolute.
Until we can rule out all possibilities which leave possibilities such as this open, then we cannot conclude anything as an “absolute fact”.
Absolut fact = Truth
And truth is religion…
Ha, what a cheap way responding by redefining words and playing word games, instead of taking up the challenge of substantiating your beliefs with sound evidence and refuting the facts I presented. It demonstrates that all you present is just pith and wind.
“Absolute fact” is your invention. As you may not know the English meaning of the word ‘fact’, here are just three definitions (perhaps the Spanish or Portuguese language have a different definition) –
• ‘fact: something which is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information’. ~ (Cambridge Dictionary).
• ‘fact: a thing done; the quality of being actual; something that has actual existence; an actual occurrence; a piece of information presented as having objective reality’. ~ (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary).
• ‘fact [originally meaning ‘an act’, from Latin factum, from facere ‘do’]: a thing that is indisputably the case; (facts) information used as evidence or as part of a report’. ~ (Oxford Dictionary).
Richard: “A fact is actual, not a dream, an illusion or a delusion. A fact is patent, obvious, apparent, evident, tangible, palpable, substantial, tactile, verifiable and indisputable. The marvellous thing about a fact is that one can not argue with it. One can argue about a belief, an opinion, a theory, an ideal and so on … but a fact: never. One can deny a fact – pretend that it is not there – but once seen, a fact brings freedom from choice and decision. (…) A fact – and the seeing of actuality and living in it – brings freedom from imperfection.” (Richard, List A, No. 14, #No. 09)
You see, a fact stands on its own, a fact does not need a qualifier such as “absolute” which you added in order to denigrate a fact to a mere “Truth” – a dogma, a verity, a gospel, god’s truth, my truth and your truth, truthiness [• truthiness: the quality of being considered to be true because of what the believer wishes or feels, regardless of the facts. ~ (Collins English Dictionary).]
With your petty and insincere word-game you have reduced facts to “religion” and thus nullified (for you that is) factual reports, descriptions and explanations of an actual freedom which are something entirely new to human history, and denigrated it to a mere feature of religion, the “Tried and Failed”, the bane of humankind.
How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you claim an actual freedom for yourself? Is that also an “absolute fact” aka “religion”?
Can you not see that with every additional word you utter you are making more and more a complete fool of yourself in public?
PWR: Few people on the planet understand that what is fact for them is not necessarily fact for others because all facts are like truths, they are OPINIONS.
In the end, all you have left are opinions. And personal opinions are personal beliefs.
Yes, I can see that you are operating on this basis, forgetting that the inescapable result of your insincerity regarding facts makes everything you say yourself merely “opinions” and “personal beliefs”, unsubstantiated claims, empty promises, presented with swaggering grandstanding.
Fact is that a genuinely actually free person has no longer the faculty to believe because the act of believing requires both intuition and imagination, which are attributes of the soul/ psyche.
The facts I presented to you can stand on their own, substantiated by my own direct experience, by Richard’s apperceptive reporting and the experience of many others who have experienced facts for themselves for instance in their PCEs. You are welcome to question the content of each of them, but so far you prefer to evade such discussions by utilizing empty rhetoric and hollow euphuism.
PWR: As soon as I read Richard’s words in 2007, I understood that it was also necessary to believe in at least 0,000001% of what he was presenting, otherwise neither I nor anyone else would have any desire to delve into the topic of actual freedom. (…)
Ha, guess again. The correct figure is 0,0001%, and no believing is required –
RICHARD: It was Mr. Ken Wilber (writing in Mr. Andrew Cohen’s ‘What is Enlightenment’ magazine) who claimed, with some pride, that only about a thousand Enlightened Ones had emerged from 2,500 years of devout effort by millions of Buddhist monks. His estimate was, therefore, 0.0000001 of the population. (Richard, List B, No. 34a, 20 June 1999).
If you want to express that figure in percentage, you simply remove two zeros after the dot (0.00001%).
PWR: PS: “non-physical phenomena” such as the psychic “vibes” proposed by Richard do not occur… In the case of phenomena between the interaction of two or more concepts, there will still be a living brain and a physical body operating.
“Phenomena between the interaction of two or more concepts”? This makes no sense whatsoever unless you consider human beings merely as “concepts”. And why do you keep describing “a living brain and a physical body” as two items – they are one and the same.
PWR: And as for electromagnetic phenomena that occur without the need for direct contact between bodies and objects, these will still be occurring in the actual world and will continue to occur even when there is no human consciousness (in a living and awake body, of course) to contemplate them. (link)
You have stated that your much-utilised word “anastasis” is “is also known as psychic attack” (link), and is “a psychic force of external origin” (link) and “psychic emanations” (link). Further you asserted that “a similar insensitivity can manifest itself in different ways and can be psychically induced from what I investigated” (link), that “the same happened with several other famous victims of psychic attacks” (link) and that “the most insidious of all forms of poisoning is psychic” (link).
Now you have changed your “opinion” that “psychic “vibes” (…) do not occur” but instead present a new opinion that instead “electromagnetic phenomena” “will still be occurring in the actual world and will continue to occur” – again without presenting any evidence whatsoever for your most recent change of opinion.
But then that is the nature of unconsidered opinions, especially when the previous opinion becomes untenable. If you were to use this modus operandi in your real-life job, you would soon have a “leadership” without followers and a “position of command” (link) without authority and/or audience.
I will stop commenting on your conceptualisations, theories and impromptu inventions – you have already made it plain that all of what you write are opinions, which you will change any time someone points out a flaw in your supra-rational methodology (link) (per definition “beyond rational” and/or “transcendental” methodology) (link).
Oh, what a tangled web they weave when first they practice to deceive.
Cheers Vineeto
Haha…I was already expecting a name coming from as you did for Claudiu…but I was thinking something like Shawshank’s Redemption 
Quite frankly, I’m considering you as a really weird fellow…From the replies that you wrote about infinitude, eternity, stillness of the universe ( aka that its poetic), its pretty clear you aren’t describing an Actual Freedom from the Human Condition as described in the AFT - I needed just one PCE to ascertain all that is written in the AFT and its certainly not poetry - which is an emotive realm and not the actual world
Thank you…and hugs and wishes to you too. I’m actually chuckling a lot after this reply…atleast delight is good to have 
Cheers
Shashank
Ha and yet your writings and Richard’s are diametrically opposed. For his meticulous writing style was utilised in order to foster clarity and to invite his fellow human beings to discover those same facts for themselves, the goal being to bring about peace on earth sooner rather than later.
Your words only have the potential to lead others astray.
The only thing I cannot quite understand is whether you are simply confused or whether this is a deliberate attempt to prevent the spread of peace on earth.
Dear whoever-you-are,
Thank you for confirming, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are not actually free from the human condition, as depicted on the Actual Freedom Trust website, with meticulous attention paid to detail and accuracy of reporting.
You are not the first one to falsely claim (either wilfully as part of a trolling campaign to prevent the spread of peace-on-earth, or ignorantly from not knowing that of which you speak yet which nevertheless works towards that same prevention-of-peace-on-earth aim) to be actually free and to thus misunderstand what pure intent is. Tarin (along with the other ‘affers’ at the time) made the same mistake in 2010:
• [Tarin]: (…) by the way, not being an identity, i don’t experience pure intent (it has been fulfilled/ been extinguished). [emphasis added]
(RE: In preparation for the Actual Freedom thread - Discussion - www.dharmaoverground.org).
The key point, of course, is that to be actually free from the human condition is to be that pure intent, personified:
[Richard]: And, speaking of which, the directors of The Actual Freedom Trust hereby recommend, publicly, that Tarin taps into that palpable life-force, that actually occurring stream of benevolence and benignity, which originates in the vast and utter stillness that is the essential character of the universe itself, because to be actually free from the human condition is to be that pure intent … as in, to be that benevolence and benignity as a flesh-and-blood body only. [original emphasis]
Put succinctly: there is no other way, than to be that, because there is no other actual freedom from the human condition (than being that) [emphasis added]. [link]
As there is no way that someone who is pure intent personified (which is the only way to be actually free from the human condition) would state that pure intent is no longer necessary and rhetorically ask why they would need it now, there is only one possible conclusion to make, to wit: that you are not that, and thus are not actually free.
(The entire announcement is well worth reading for anyone for whom the above quotes alone are not sufficient. It is notable to add that Tarin, along with all the other affers, one by one eventually fully renounced their claims of having ever been actually free from the human condition.)
Your entire reason for posting here is predicated upon this crucial point – namely, that you are actually free. All the rest follows from that – namely, that you’ve discovered a new method to do it (or rather a recipe with which to make new methods), that this is an improvement over using the actualism method (ie that it’s a better alternative for some), that there are multiple ways to become actually free, etc. As an example only:
Richard discovered a remarkably effective and efficient way to distinguish facts from fiction, theories, beliefs, misinformation, etc.:
The “capstone” here is, of course, your claim to be actually free from the human condition.
As this claim fails, the entire edifice comes crumbling down, and there is therefore no need to engage any further with specific points, diversions, distractions, tactics, misinformations, paranoias, misunderstandings, and etc. etc., that permeate every one of your posts.
If you have been trolling this whole time: the jig is up.
If you genuinely believe you are actually free, and are just confused: I do encourage you to read all the above carefully, read the announcement in full, and gain an understanding of what pure intent actually is (first an intellectual one, just enough to see that what you call “pure intent” is nothing of the sort, which will open you up to the possibility to actually find it; and then later an experiential one) as you are going to need it if you ever want to pull yourself out of the bizarre psychic hole you have managed to put yourself in. And if this is indeed what you have done: it may very well have been a well-intentioned but ultimately misguided endeavour. If so, there’s no need to beat yourself up about it… now you are presented with an opportunity to correct course and attain to that which you actually want, a genuine actual freedom from the human condition, rather than the faux imitation you find yourself in due to various missteps you have made over the years.
Cheers and best regards,
Claudiu
P.S. It should be “Saúde” not “Salud”, eh?
Hello everyone, including the censors on duty.
My three basic messages have been delivered:
1. There is more than one method and technique for you, who are still on the plateau, to discover and apply to yourself. It is possible for everyone to take the next evolutionary step by acting on yourself without depending on any authority. Fortunately!
2. Find all your objections and resolve them one by one, relentlessly. They are all self-protection mechanisms created by that legion of entities and sustained by a psyche operating behind the scenes. Detect these barriers and systematically demolish them until no resistance remains. If you lack the willpower to carry out this plan, find the particular behavior or habit of yours that you need to quit immediately, forever and for good, to avoid further loss of mental vigor. It is easy!
3. And when you are living 24 hours a day, every day, free in the material and objective world, remain anonymous and do not make the same mistake that both the Enlightened and the actually free have made. It is perfectly possible to help others without revealing your name and address or organizing meetings. It is your right and a useful security measure in the face of so many people who are determined to distort your words and reveal your details and place of residence.
Peace on earth began by acting on myself, with my own means and resources, and success is always invisible. Remember: you also do not need third-party approval or to become a celebrity.
I appreciate your attention and will continue to be available to answer any questions and doubts pertinent to the path without resistance that you send directly to my email pathwithoutresistance@proton.me
To conclude, a short story.
A surfer was once asked what he did to catch the perfect wave.
“Always be in the sea”, he replied with a smile.
Stay on your surfboard instead of hitching a ride on others and enjoy the uninterrupted flow of vitality that will accompany you from the beginning to the end of this journey and after it until your last breath.
A hug to everyone, including those who tried to prevent the announcement of these other new, more up-to-date, efficient and faster alternatives to achieve – and maintain – peace on earth for this and future generations!
PWR
PS: Vineeto: “As most of what you say this example only has an inkling of fact: U.G. Krishnamurti died after voluntary fasting, called “Santhara”, a Jain religious ritual of voluntary death by fasting, at the age of 90+ yrs –”
The correct term is “Prayopavesa”, as I wrote. U.G. Krishnamurti was not from a Jain family, but rather a Hindu Brahmin family… Facts that occurred do not change.
PWR: Hello everyone, including the censors on duty.
Hello Mr. ‘P’,
It is rather telling that you consider everyone questioning the content of your messages or criticizing them for incorrect, misleading and outright false information being a censor. The correct term is ‘fact checking’. Censorship means the suppression of frank, honest and open communication, and it is you who is opposed to a frank, honest and open discussion by asking people to write to you privately/ surreptitiously, and by not answering the messages pointing out flaws in your claim of being actually free and your so-called improved method.
PWR: My three basic messages have been delivered:
1. There is more than one method and technique for you, who are still on the plateau, to discover and apply to yourself. It is possible for everyone to take the next evolutionary step by acting on yourself without depending on any authority. Fortunately!
2. Find all your objections and resolve them one by one, relentlessly. They are all self-protection mechanisms created by that legion of entities and sustained by a psyche operating behind the scenes. Detect these barriers and systematically demolish them until no resistance remains. If you lack the willpower to carry out this plan, find the particular behavior or habit of yours that you need to quit immediately, forever and for good, to avoid further loss of mental vigor. It is easy!
3. And when you are living 24 hours a day, every day, free in the material and objective world, remain anonymous and do not make the same mistake that both the Enlightened and the actually free have made. It is perfectly possible to help others without revealing your name and address or organizing meetings. It is your right and a useful security measure in the face of so many people who are determined to distort your words and reveal your details and place of residence.
Those messages have indeed been delivered over and over, and found lacking in honesty, sincerity, forthrightness and clarity, let alone factuality. Even your call to be “acting on yourself without depending on any authority” is contradicted by your own behaviour, because you are considering yourself to be the unquestionable authority, else one is accused and condemned being a “censor”, a “biased moderator”, a “dogmatizing Guardian”. (link)
You see, even your little snide remarks are revealing.
PWR: Peace on earth began by acting on myself, with my own means and resources, and success is always invisible. Remember: you also do not need third-party approval or to become a celebrity. (…)
Whatever this “Peace on earth” is, which “began by acting on myself”, it has nothing at all to do with actuality/ factuality. You cannot be referring to pure intent, which only becomes an irresistible pull when you tap into it with naiveté and sincerity.
You confirmed in your last post that your “Peace on earth” is not the same as pure intent because it can be discarded like a redundant tool –
Why would I need pure intent now? (link)
As Claudiu already pointed out (link), when you tap into the genuine pure intent (link) and become genuinely actually free you are pure intent personified.
Have you ever experienced the purity and perfection of the vast stillness of infinitude, for instance, when watching a mill-pond-still river at night with fish jumping vivaciously all around? It is magnificent.
This is not a matter of not using the correct words but exposes that you really have no clue what an actual freedom is.
Your very announcement also makes it unambiguously clear that you don’t know pure intent, which everyone experiences when the passionate identity (both ‘I’ and ‘me’) are either temporarily abeyant or permanently extinct.
This quote of yours is equally revealing –
PWR: Now, pure intent is no longer necessary because all traces of resistance (objections created by an intellect hijacked by the ego) have been eliminated from this nervous system. (link)
What you are basically saying is that one should use the “Method without Resistance” (PWR™) in order to eliminate “all traces of resistances” and this concomitantly eliminates pure intent as well, as it is “no longer necessary”.
This is more than a circular argument – this is a tangled web of phantasmagorical proportions.
PWR: PS: Vineeto: “As most of what you say this example only has an inkling of fact: U.G. Krishnamurti died after voluntary fasting, called “Santhara”, a Jain religious ritual of voluntary death by fasting, at the age of 90+ yrs –”
The correct term is “Prayopavesa”, as I wrote. U.G. Krishnamurti was not from a Jain family, but rather a Hindu Brahmin family… Facts that occurred do not change. (link)
Ha, this is the only item you chose to answer from the long list of your beliefs and errors which I highlighted (link). This makes it obvious that you have neither explanations nor clarifications nor corrections to substantiate/ rectify those beliefs I pointed out.
Does this perhaps indicate that you agree that these are mere beliefs, your ‘truths’ and your opinions and as such not factual?
Regarding the term for U.G. Krishnamurti’s death – both Jainism and Hinduism have the tradition of voluntary death. Jainism calls it “Santhara” (and the author of the link I accessed used this term), whereas Hinduism calls the same event “Prayopavesa”. As U.G. Krishnamurti was born into a Hindu Brahmin family, I suppose the Hindu term seems more appropriate.
What you have failed to comprehend/ comment on, however, is that U.G. Krishnamurti still had a ‘Self’ and therefore his psyche was intact. Hence your self-modulated term of anastasis with its contrived life-threatening influence has, according to your own definition, no application for U.G. Krishnamurti or any enlightened person –
Richard: Yes, and he makes this explicit in the first of the initial quotes I provided in order to demonstrate that he was basically spiritual … I will re-post it here as you may be inclined to take notice of it this time around:
• Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti: ‘There is nothing which exists ‘outside’ or independent of our minds’. (from Chapter Five, ‘Mind Is A Myth’; Published by: Dinesh Publications, Goa, 403 101 INDIA. 1988: Cover Page: Mind is a Myth and Table of Contents).
It is quite clear that for him the physical world – the world of this body and that body and every body; the world of the mountains and the streams; the world of the trees and the flowers; the world of the clouds in the sky by day and the stars in the firmament by night and so on and so on ad infinitum – does not exist outside of his mind.
In a word: solipsism (link) (Richard, AF List, No. 27, 12 Jan 2002).
Respondent: … Richard’s experience seems to contradict U.G.’s central thesis that ‘direct sense experience’ is impossible. This stipulation by U.G. that all ‘experience’ involves thought and knowledge seems untenable. There are many other indicators that other than the disappearance of the psyche, Richard’s and U.G.’s state may be worlds apart.
Richard: Yes, 180 degrees in the opposite direction in fact … Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti has it that nothing exists outside of his mind (consciousness gives rise to the universe) whereas the on-going experiencing for this flesh and blood body is that the mind does not exist outside of time and space and matter (the universe gives rise to consciousness). (Richard, AF List, No. 27a, 15 Jan 2002).
Cheers Vineeto
Hello Frau “V”,
Fact-checkers have already fallen by the wayside, since the fiascos and abuses they caused on social media since 2020 and for which they were punished and forced to reconsider the “facts” that only those Big Techs approved. In other words, censorship is what censorship does.
As for a frank, honest and open conversation, just read the first responses to my first post here. While some members were polite and courteous, only one more bully zealot chose to accuse me of being a “sock puppet”…
And I’m also not here to jump through hoops at anyone’s command.
Since there’s no point in politely asking to accept my anonymity and not track my IP (shame on you, Claudus) in the face of the threat of revealing my private address and compromising my security, I’ll limit myself to responding to members who are genuinely frank, honest and willing to communicate openly.
Invasion of privacy is a ________.
Following:
I am an expert in my own method, just as a professional mechanic knows more about car repairs than an amateur.
Whatever this “Peace on earth” is, which “began by acting on myself”, it has nothing at all to do with actuality/ factuality.
— If you don’t start by acting on yourself, where do you start then?
You cannot be referring to pure intent, which only becomes an irresistible pull when you tap into it with naiveté and sincerity.
— “Pure” intent… what is the reason for such a superfluous adjective? If the intent is not pure, then it is not intent. And no intent arises when there is not enough willpower to sustain it. Intention and willpower, two sides of the same coin. This is an important topic that I have already discussed and only one member paid due attention to (maybe because most are already indoctrinated by outdated concepts?).
Starting my own manumission project was an act of sincerity and naiveté towards this body. My old “self” acted instead of just “feeling”. Fortunately!
You confirmed in your last post that your “Peace on earth” is not the same as pure intent because it can be discarded like a redundant tool –
— Intention sustained by an unbreakable willpower has been used since 2011 for a single purpose that has already been achieved more than 9 months ago (enough time to gestate a child). Why continue to focus intention on doing something that has already been done successfully? Once a method has fully fulfilled its function, it should be discarded. I never carry excess baggage. And if a self-declared immaculate consciousness still depends on pure intent to be maintained, then that consciousness is still quite fragile and volatile…
What you are basically saying is that one should use the “Method without Resistance” (PWR™) in order to eliminate “all traces of resistances” and this concomitantly eliminates pure intent as well, as it is “no longer necessary”.
— More and more a lack of intellectual integrity in this straw man fallacy, insisting on personal interpretations instead of definitions of the key words presented. Eliminating all traces of resistance does not “concomitantly” eliminate intent because intent is not resistance. Think a little before your next move.
This is more than a circular argument – this is a tangled web of phantasmagorical proportions.
— Since you are attacking the phantasm of a straw man, there is nothing to respond to here.
The U.G. Krishnamurti was born into a Hindu Brahmin family, I suppose the Hindu term seems more appropriate.
— You “suppose”…?
If admitting a simple mistake due to lack of knowledge or attention is already difficult, imagine how difficult it will be to admit that there are other methods besides the one proposed by Richard… Or, even more difficult, that other people can reach the same destination without depending on third-party methods.
Richard discovered a method for himself from the experiences of pure consciousness he had. I discovered a method for myself from the systematic resolution of MY own particular objections. Both are methods customized by and for their own authors. Which does not prevent them from being applied, improved or adapted by others with the same objective.
Procrastination is postponing what we know needs to be done. When I understood this, the doors that were never closed revealed themselves, and they had no portal at all! The path to actual freedom is always open and present! Without resistor, without resistance.
What you have failed to comprehend/comment on, however, is that U.G. Krishnamurti still had a ‘Self’ and therefore his psyche was intact. Hence your self-modulated term of anastasis with its contrived life-threatening influence has, according to your own definition, no application for U.G. Krishnamurti or any enlightened person
— Anastasis is an organic phenomenon of psychic origin (there is no “soul” without a living body) that virtually affects the physical and electromagnetic human body of any person, whether they are a captive of modern normosis or a victim of some altered state of consciousness, as well as people who are actually free and who ignore it (not anymore, because the warning has been given and the most prudent will slow down on the curve ahead…). This is my hypothesis and theory. The cases I used as examples are not proof, but serve as statistics for each person to analyze, test and draw their own conclusions.
Here is a typical symptom of anastasis, ignorance or alienation with one’s own precarious state of health, as you yourself wrote:
“It was actually amazing how long he [Richard] held out with all of this going on, partly unbeknownst to him or me until he got to hospital.”
Facts that have already occurred cannot be changed. We will make the same mistakes only when we are unaware of where we went wrong or when we refuse to accept that we did.
Now it is a matter of testing my hypothesis and theory. The conclusion and consequences thereof will be the responsibility of each one.
Remember: happiness is still an emotion, while joy is a constant natural state of the human body free from an imaginary happy/unhappy being. And being harmless means protecting one’s own body and the other bodies around you (and this is not a nurture instinct or altruism, but pure common sense: who would want to get on a plane whose pilot is on the verge of a breakdown?).
For all this, it is understandable and expected that I am receiving more emails from members who understood my words and who do not want to be intimidated by the “fact-checking moderators”.
Vineeto, we are not superior, we just stopped making the same same old mistakes. However, we can still – and probably will – make new mistakes (no one is infallible) and that is why I am discreet in not teaching my particular method, but only the basic principles behind it.
If all this helps you understand my words and change your bias so that we can have a more productive conversation, I remain at your disposal.
If you continue to insist on not calling me by the acronym I chose as my nickname, you will be wasting an opportunity for us to learn together and from each other.
Talking to others who are actually free, incapable of issuing any psychic attacks (premeditated or involuntary), is not a problem for me.
Best regards,
PWR
PS: If someone introduces themselves to me as actually free man or woman, I will congratulate them and celebrate with them, because it is a game in which we all win. If the person in question is mistaken or trying to deceive me, this is not a problem for me, but for them. It is that simple. I have no need to attack anyone or ask them for proofs. Actions speak louder than words where I am.
Thank you for confirming again that you know not what the term ”pure intent” refers to in actualism lingo (despite having extensively been reading the AFT site and actualism discussion groups for over a decade), neither intellectually (as in what it is literally defined to mean in plain language) nor experientially.
There is not a clearer marker I can think of that you are not actually free from the human condition.
As you yourself aren’t actually free, there’s no evidence that there is another way to reach that same destination, than those that have already been shown to work and replicated.
It makes it easy, now people will know if they follow what you say that it won’t lead to actual freedom. Thank you again for making it simple!
Cheers,
Claudiu
Pure intent (as defined by Richard as “a palpable life-force”) and willpower are not the same. Without willpower, pure intent vanishes, and without pure intent, willpower has no purpose. Two sides of the same coin. I won’t complicate things. I’ll just explain.
There is not a clearer marker I can think of that you are not actually free from the human condition.
Your thoughts and doubts related to this writer are mere forms of procrastination, lack of pure intent, and certainly a lack of willpower to make the final decision and get off the “plateau.”
I can help you with that.
You are not using the term “pure intent” in the same way Richard does.
Here is one depiction of it that Richard has made:
He is not being metaphorical here! He is not describing some aspect of ‘me’ (ie particular to this feeling-being or that feeling-being) as being what this stream is. He is depicting it literally. If I were to break it down:
From the above, the following should be obvious:
I would suggest, for clarity of communication, that you use a different term for what you are describing when you currently use this term, as it is muddying matters. Perhaps “wilful intent”?
This is not a matter of semantics. If you were genuinely actually free, you would know what is being talked about here, you would recognize it, from your own experience, and already have said “oh, that! oh I have been using the word ‘X and Y’ to describe that, but I know what you are talking about, yes of course this is essential, this is what I am” etc. etc.
But instead you put it on the same plane as “willpower” which is something totally different. N.B.: “Pure intent produces total dedication […]” – it is not that dedication in and of itself.
Have you really never experienced anything like it? Not once in your life? Nothing rings a bell? If you dedicate and read these words (and more likely, Richard’s) with all your ‘being’ then it will be possible for you to get a whiff of it, and then you can follow it towards actuality, and then we can all be talking about the same thing finally.
Cheers,
Claudiu
RICHARD: 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.
Yes, Richard and I are not talking about the same intention. For him, willpower was not necessary… These differences are natural since I discovered the path without resistance by applying my own method and my own definitions.
Richard’s descriptions and definitions of “pure” intent, which have become dogma and one of the sacred cows of his actualism, are poetic metaphors: “stream of benevolence and benignity” are some examples.
But this is all too obvious and fortunately, once again, I did not believe everything I read from Richard. I recommend the same to everyone here.
Claudus wrote: “…and then we can all be talking about the same thing finally.”
Only if you are speaking from an actually free and anonymous condition (without an ego and psyche to be recreated by others). But from your zeal to quote Richard instead of thinking for yourself, we are still different species. So I need to come down to your level to try to help you take the next step. And I can assure you, it is very easy, you just need to have intellectually resolved all your resistances (or objections, if you prefer).
ANTHROPOCENTRISM, ESSENTIALISM AND OTHER ISMS
The word “universe” is an insidious term. Be careful.
Swap this word for a more common one (God, for example), and you will have another religion, even without the material and/or spiritual underpinnings associated with it.
The universe is the totality of what exists and of phenomena that are constantly occurring. Only objects exist. To exist is to have shape and location, as defined in my suprarational methodology. Borrowing and applying a Taoist or Aristotelian view of the concept of the objective universe is a common and harmful practice. This is the food of the “I”: irrational definitions lead to irrational conclusions and actions.
Human beings follows an essentialist view of the world. Mix this ism with any other and you will get the explosive byproducts that cause a trail of destruction and afflictions.
An example inspired by the controversial Milgram and Stanford Prison Experiments:
Divide people into two groups, prisoners and jailers, using a dogmatic criterion borrowed from a book or website, it doesn’t matter. You will be favored by the side of those who obey orders and claim some advantage. Jump forward a few years and, mutatis mutandis, we have a sophomoric fundamentalist wing ready to engineer the next holocaust.
In the book “How Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain” (2017), by the professor of psychology Lisa Feldman Barrett, anger, happiness, fear and sadness are constructed emotions. There are no universal feelings, but predictions manifested according to the culture in which we have been conditioned. That is, emotional reactions are concepts learned by imitation and transmitted through education. On the other hand, instincts are reflexes genetically conditioned and encoded in the nervous system and boil down to two: aversion and appetite. Fighting, paralyzing, running away, intending, procreating, breastfeeding are innate survival instincts, we were born with them. To satisfy instincts by self-fulfilling emotions, even those considered “good”, is to feed the ego and supply the psyche. And the ego, like that mythological beast, needs this emotional maze to hide in. This conceptual labyrinth is a band of permanent conflict between thoughts and instincts, with minotaurs remembering and recreating the same old emotions in a vicious and degrading loop cycle for the organism.
That is why practices derived from mindfulness are like polishing glass to fake diamond: it will shine, but it will never resist the pressure of everyday use. And the side effects of stoning will be pathological narcissism, violent pride, and messianic complex. The recipe for disaster.
Dedicating every precious moment of life in a frantic search for happiness as the body fades away was irrational to me. I preferred to experience every opportunity to be alive by uniting the sensory systems and allowing the body’s native intelligence to be guided by them. A spontaneous altruism derived from this attitude without depending on pure intent and mantras, exceeded my expectations!
The seed of the path without resistance germinated.
To be continued…
Good day, Peace-Wrecking Reactionary,
As you insist upon being called by an acronym[1], I have adopted one more suitable for you given your behavior here.
Your latest message leaves no doubt that what you are doing is intentional. I did not realize how dedicated you were to stopping the spread of peace-on-earth, spreading misinformation, attempting to lead the forum-goers astray, and even taking advantage of Richard’s demise to further your aims.
What better term for someone who reacted to the news that it is now possible to be free from the human condition, and peace-on-earth is very well a possibility in our lifetimes, by attempting to lead others away from it and casting aspersions on those who have this as their aim?
Fact: Richard’s descriptions are neither “dogma” nor “poetic metaphors” but experiential reports which are literal depictions of his experience. I have confirmed his reports of descriptions of pure intent with my own experiences and they line up marvelously, as have many others such as Vineeto, Peter, Kuba, Geoffrey, etc. That which is referred to by the term “pure intent” is something actual, which you have evidently never experienced or have long-ago forgotten.
Fact: My experiential corroborations of the actual existence and accessibility of pure intent are not derived from “believ[ing] everything I read from Richard” or from a “zeal to quote Richard” but from experientially probing and seeing for myself (viz.: Andrew - #1290 by claudiu).
Fact: That the universe actually and objectively exists is not a “view” or a “concept” but a fact, experientially ascertainable by anybody via having a genuine pure consciousness experience, wherein the actual flesh and blood body they actually are apperceives their own existence along with that of the universe itself.
Question: At this point I just have to stop and ask (and this is a genuine question): why on earth do you claim to be actually free, as in, experiencing the same actual freedom that Richard did and Vineeto, Peter, Geoffrey, Srinath, etc. do?
You claim “pure intent” is just a “poetic metaphor” and that it’s an incorrect view or concept to say that the universe (i.e. actuality) actually exists. Actuality is literally the place where actually free people live!
It sounds like you are experiencing some sort of condition that is just something totally different than actual freedom! Nothing you have written here indicates that you are experiencing the same thing. On what basis have you ascertained yourself to be experiencing the same thing?
If you are just straightforward and describe yourself as having reached some other end-goal that you think is more valuable than actual freedom, you can just go ahead and say that, and everyone will be far better informed and there will be no misleading. Instead you mingle words and mash concepts and attempt to mislead your fellow human beings. Why do this?
Fact: This level of egregious obloquy[2] beggars belief. Now Richard, Vineeto, Claudiu, Kuba, and anybody else who accurately describes their own experiences, actual freedom, PCEs, pure intent, and factually points out where others are misleading or being deceitful, are a “fundamentalist wing” that will “engineer the next holocaust”?? This is just the ages-old (beaten-to-death) “actualism is a cult” misconception, raised to the nth degree.
You have really shown your hand with this one. Your gimmick of being a neutral observer, graciously granting that people may follow what is written on the AFT site but are merely offering an alternative just for consideration, has been shattered. You clearly have a huge bone to pick with actualism proper and actual freedom itself.
Fact: The actualism method is not a “frantic search for happiness” that is done “as the body fades away”. Indeed this does sound irrational. The actualism method is simply the continuous enjoyment and appreciation of this moment of being alive, as outlined here and in various other places.
Conclusion: As you evidently not only are not actually free, but don’t even know what the actualism method is, it is clear that whatever this “path without resistance” is, it does not lead towards actual freedom.
But then again, this has been evident for some time already.
Cheers,
Claudiu