Well, that was just a misunderstanding (I truly seem to be oblivious to the social signals in this context), and we will indeed be getting together in about 3 days time (I’ll be occupied during the next two days, and she wants to see me before going on vacation for the weekend).
As a honest description of my emotional state:
Last week upon hearing of her continued interest (in response to me emailing her, thanks indirectly to Vineeto’s reply), it brought back the old set of feelings albeit not at the same intensity. Stemming from the ‘being-to-being passions’ I wrote of above, there was also sexual desire, possessiveness, fear, etc. as part of it. I explored it all by staying with the feelings wherever those day-dreams took me. My intention has always been to become aware of every corner of affectional intimacy sufficiently enough to willingly and cheerfully step into enabling a near-actual intimacy instead, ideally derived from the memory of my PCEs (lest it be a calculated/ planned move towards controlled failure).
Fast-forward today, upon learning of the same continued interest, I see that the being-to-being passion is still there, creating ‘scenarios’ of the same (sexual desire, fear, etc.) but in an even milder intensity. That is to say, it is ‘easily manageable’ without overwhelming me. And that gives me further insights into it: underlying this affectional intimacy, there is a great sense of control - wanting to control her to be such and such (mainly, to remain affectionately connected to me forever and ever), and the day-dreams are but a ‘rehearsal’ of this. I now realize that to simply be here, sensately enjoying the physicality of it all, being thrilled of not knowing what’s gonna happen next (the ‘cutting-edge of reality’), and being unconcerned about her modus operandi[1] means giving up on that “control”.
Have said all that (and I’m being as sincerely aware of this affectionality as I can), I’m also ‘brushing up’ on my understanding of what near-actual intimacy means when put into practice. I wish to put into words what I understand so far, mainly so others can point to any errors or anything I’ve overlooked, which would indeed be beneficial for me such that I don’t go astray on Thursday night. There seems to be two components to near-actual intimacy:
- It is sensate, not affectional.
- The being-to-being passions, which wrap up/ cover up sexual desire, would be non-existant.
- Even sexual desire (as distinct from the sensuality of sexual arousal) would have naturally given way to the current-time awareness with increased sensuosity / closeness.
- In lieu of such affectionality, and in conjunction with the supplanted sensuosity, the experience/ awareness is (will be) such that there is an immanence-in-consciousness of the other
- “Immanence” refers to “the physical presence of a fellow human creature/ of fellow human creatures, proximately pervading each other’s field of consciousness/ each other’s sentiency field such as to be, in effect, part-and-parcel of a consciousness-in-common (a.k.a. ‘common consciousness’)”
- This mutual physicality of immanence-in-consciousness overrides/ supplants the usual affectionality/ union between separative ‘selves’ (which the being-to-being passion seeks to enable), such that in consciousness there is mainly an ongoing sensuos perception and increasing awareness of ‘common consciousness’ (and thus more of a self-less/ less self-centric experience).
- Thus, naturally, in consciousness, there is less consideration of me as, say, a ‘man’, a ‘neurodivergent’ or any of the other social identities. I came across actually-free Vineeto’s “Source Experience”[2] and strangely I’m able to connect the dots to what she’s saying there, in regards to this ‘common consciousness’ being “genderless, formless, ageless and vast” (thus, less consideration of me as those social identities, and more experiential awareness of me as this genderless, formless, ageless ‘consciousness’ in action) with one’s “sense of fixed physicality falling apart (including the experience of two bodies, Richard and [herself])”.
- Reading all of this twiged something in me, and I ‘stepped back’ and acknowledged how this ‘common consciousness’ can happen on its own with me letting go of the usual ‘control’ (over events, situations, people).
So, that’s where I’m. This letting myself go into ‘common consciousness’, while seems to be a delightful way of being to the nth degree, is also a bit … disconcerting at times, mainly because of unfamiliarity, and also because of the temptations of affectionality.
I wonder what Richard means exactly by " Fear is the barrier to being intimate … yet fear is the doorway into intimacy". Actual Intimacy; Artificial Intimacy; Pseudo Intimacy
From Actual Intimacy; Artificial Intimacy; Pseudo Intimacy
- In an actual freedom, intimacy is not dependent upon cooperation
- An actual intimacy (no separate identity) requires no reciprocation.
From Basic Actual Freedom to Full Actual Freedom Part 3
↩︎VINEETO: There is not much written down about the next events preparing me and leading me further into the mysteries of exploring and experiencing the infinitude of the universes – for instance on 30.11.2010 something happened which Richard and I called the Source Experience. I was able to allow the fundamental characteristic, or nature, of consciousness to fully be revealed and embraced – genderless, formless, ageless and vast. It was truly magnificent. Interestingly enough it was followed by/accompanied with the experience of my own sense of fixed physicality falling apart (including the experience of two bodies, Richard and myself) and since then a perception of physicality in flux ensued. The magic of exploring actual intimacy is truly wondrous.