Ed: I’ve enjoyed the discussion on this topic immensely and it’s brought up a lot of questions, some that I’ve wondered about for some time.
- What does out-from-control refer to? Specifically, what is one out-from-control from? My vague understanding is that the feeling-being is no longer under the control of social conditioning. All of those controls have been let go of, however, the feeling-being is still present. But it seems like a touch more than that as there is a shift from the “do-er” to “be-er.” Why are we not the “be-er” right now?
Hi Ed,
You are a being with the “controller” in charge to regulate all your thinking and feeling towards remaining exactly as you are, to keep the status quo. To keep your beliefs, your ‘truths’, your natural, i.e. passionate tendency for genetic and socially inculcated feelings and actions intact, as they are, to not change human nature. In order to be able to question these tenets of your social identity, whenever any of them interfere with consistently enjoying and appreciating being alive, you need, of course, actively pure intent operating.
There is plenty of information in the website, for instance reading attentively Richard’s selected correspondence, Richard’s and Vineeto’s out-from-control reports, and of course the latest correspondence on this forum.
- How did Richard impress it upon you? What does one look for / aim for that is different than what you were already doing at the time? Could you even understand what he was asking you to do?
He specifically asked me to. Of course, I knew what Richard was asking me. The topic had been discussed and explained for weeks the topic of the Topica mailing list discussion. We were gathered for the ‘First Convivium Gathering’ at the navigable end of the Bungawalbin river to further all participants to be, sooner rather than later, in a different way of being –
RICHARD: No mechanism prompted me; it was my select associates at the time – feeling-beings all of them – who all-of-a-sudden no longer had an impenetrable psychic force-field barring their access or blocking them from getting (existentially) close to me.
Thus the impetus for me being as if lifted forward by a cresting wave (to utilise surfing terminology) came from them; after all, setting into motion plans for intensifying their actualism practice is what we had all gathered together there for, in that remote river wilderness area on that weekend in November, 2009 (in what became known as ‘The First Convivium Gathering’), and it was Vineeto’s existential proximity in particular which was the keenest impetus.
(Hence me impressing upon her, and not another, the necessity of being out-from-control/ in a different-way-of being).
–
On the following Monday (the 16th of November), the day after being notified of my second wife’s death, shortly after that ‘First Convivium Gathering’ had concluded and my select associates had all gone back to their respective residences thus leaving me once again on my own at the navigable head of that remote river system, this impetus resulted in a profound event occurring – the first of what became known as magical prodigies – whilst I was contemplating the significance of her death; a tremendous surge of calorific energy travelled from the lower solar-plexus, from just above the sex-centre, up through the rib-cage diaphragm, suffusing the entire thoracic region with a sparkling effervescence and generating a golden hue in the visual field; this prodigy, which came to be known as ‘the quickening’, remained operating 24/7 all through both the epoch-changing events of late 2009/early 2010 and those other magical prodigies, already made public knowledge, which enabled/ facilitated those events.
These last few months, beginning in the morning of Friday the 7th of October 2011, a clearer, finer version of ‘the quickening’ has been subtly making itself noticed more and more; by ‘clearer, finer’ I mean the visual field is marked by a distinct crystalline character, rather than a golden hue, and the sparkling effervescence, which is more full-body this time around, has a much finer quality to it such that a fine-champagne-bubbles type of word Devika made-up all those years ago – ‘tintling’ – seems to be most apt.
‘Tis all quite marvellous. (Richard, List D, No. 25, 6 Feb 2012)
The tooltip in that 4th paragraph of the quote (when accessed in the original) explains much of what you asked about pure intent and out-from-control.
- Does being out-from-control guarantee you’ll feel good? My understanding is that during this period the mutiny took place, am I correct? Can you elaborate on the potential for the “bad” & “good” emotions while being out-from-control?
Personally, I was consistently being naiveté/ being in an ongoing excellence experience, due to having traversed the wall of fear and having unequivocally agreed to ‘my’ impending demise for 4 and a half weeks, with a disruption of 3 days. You can work out the percentage for yourself.
- I hate to ask but does this out-from-control state relate to enlightenment in any way, hence the caution to proceed without pure intent fully in place? I notice the “doer” features a lot in their discourse, however the “Absolute” doesn’t feature in being out-from-control.
If you hate to ask this you probably already know the answer. It does not. Without “pure intent fully in place” you still have to be weary of the temptation but then you need pure intent operating to be in a different way of being. Only Richard, in the absence of a precedent, had to go through enlightenment – this is no longer necessary and it would be very silly to allow oneself to become enlightened due to being seduced by unexamined ‘good’ feelings.
- Similar to the above in regards to caution – I’ve often contemplated the difference between out-of-control and out-from-control. Might you be able to offer a comparison of the two? It almost seems like out-from-control is free license to be however you want, but the qualitative difference is the pure intent to make peace on earth apparent – thus one can trust oneself to ‘be’ however one wants. (There seems to be a massive dissociation here, creating an “entity” that controls and another “entity” that needs to be controlled.") (link)
Out-from-control is a different way of being as explained in the above given links.
Out of control is anyone giving way/ expressing excessive feelings.
Yes, “pure intent to make peace on earth apparent” is gained from the intimate connection betwixt the pristine-purity of an actual innocence and the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté. When you have this connection you apperceptively know.
Neither trust, nor belief, hope or faith is required, in fact they are detrimental. Beware whenever someone tells you, in such typical new-age lingo, to “trust oneself to ‘be’ however one wants”.
As regards creating an “entity” – the entity is not created, you are genetically endowed with the instinctual entity which makes the inculcation of a social identity a life-and-death necessity. Therefore, what you call “massive dissociation” is every feeling being’s way of operating, including your own.
Richard: To begin at the beginning: every new generation – the latest recruits to the human race – have a veritable mish-mash of cultural folkways and social mores (=French moeurs) insistently impressed upon them from the earliest age. And the primary reason for the unremitting instillation of all those beliefs, ideas, theories, concepts, maxims, saws, proverbs, aphorisms, dictums, truths, truisms, factoids, philosophies, axioms, posits, postulates, values, principles, ideals, standards, credos, doctrines, tenets, canons, morals, ethics, customs, traditions, psittacisms, superstitions, myths, legends, folklores, imaginations, divinations, visions, fantasies, chimeras, illusions, delusions, hallucinations – and whatever other schemes and dreams there may be which constitutes human wisdom – is essentially because of each sentient being having been born with connaturally puissant survival instincts, which, when operating and functioning as a group, are potentially a danger to all concerned.
And this is because what is known colloquially as “blind nature” endows each and every human being with the selfish instinct for individual survival and the clannish instinct for group survival – be it the familial group, the tribal group, or the national group – and, as it takes a powerful instinctive impulse (altruism) to overcome a powerful instinctive impulse (selfism), the newest recruits to humankind needs must be socialised and culturalised. Viz.:
• culturalise: to expose or subject to the influence of culture {viz.: culture = the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another}; (n.): culturalisation. [curly-bracketed insert added] ~ (Webster’s College Dictionary).
• socialise: to make social {viz.: social = friendly or sociable; agreeable in company; companionable}; make fit for life in companionship with others; (n.): socialisation. [curly-bracketed insert added] ~ (Webster’s College Dictionary).
This ad hoc socialisation and culturalisation, this extempore implantation of socially and culturally approved mores and folkways, increates an incorporeal socio-cultural inwit or conscience – (an in situ affective-psychic guardian inculcated as a preventative measure to restrain and/or contain the wayward self which lurks deep within the human breast per favour blind nature’s inherent survival passions and preclude gaols from being filled to over-flowing by inhibiting offences from occurring in the first place) – which invariably forms itself into a socio-cultural identity.
This increated socio-cultural inwit a.k.a. conscience a.k.a. guardian – colligated under the rubric “social identity” for convenience – encompasses various bodiless personae as well. (Richard, the Formation and Persistence of Social Identity)
You can read the rest of this excellent article including explanatory tool-tips at the above link.
Cheers Vineeto
