Then, I suggest you stop calling it “actual intimacy”.
If there is a difference, then it is not actual.
Actual means there is no “you”.
If you keep calling things “actual” which are really feelings, then you will go in circles forever with this stuff.
Unless someone can correct me here, or you can explain it better?
Exactly.
For Richard there is no seperation.
For James there is seperation.
So James is not experiencing actual intimacy.
I was talking about an experience of when there is no separation there is still an experience that can’t be the same with another body.
I am talking about my own experience which is what I said in the op.
If you mean that in a PCE the nervous system in your body isn’t experiencing what another body is experiencing, then, of course!!
How is that even an issue?
Richard, or any actually free person, will see with their own eyes. Sense with their own hands.
Maybe it’s better to ask you;
What is the problem?
Yes, this is essentially what I am saying
Ok.
So is your expectation that you should be able to? See what they see through their eyes?
Or is there something else going on?
Perhaps there is a feeling happening that you are trying to describe here.
I know I have been jealous of others experience. There have been times when I really wished I could experience what they seemed to be experiencing.
Especially with women. They always seem to be having way more fun than me 
How can I put this? The experience with my own body is the ultimate. This can’t be experienced with another body. I am talking about the sensate experience
Yes, that makes sense.
What I am asking is what the problem is?
What is bothering you about this fact?
This bit doesn’t make sense though. Do you mean that as soon as someone else is near you, the experience changes?
Like you can experience an intimate feeling on your own, but not when someone is with you?
Nothing is bothering me about it. I think it’s great that I don’t need another flesh and blood body to experience the ultimate.
Oh, ok.
Still, that doesn’t really sound like what you said to begin with. It looks like you may have edited the original post.
It now says this, but still implies a you having intimacy with a body.
I didn’t want to ignore your posts. It seems though that because I am writing about things I read about actual intimacy, and you are writing about your experience, which you are calling actual intimacy, that I wonder why the difference?
Actual intimacy is with everything.
Otherwise, it’s not actual.
Yes, actual intimacy is with everything but it is not the same as I can have with my own body.
Hmm, I think from reading what you are writing, compared to what I read about actual intimacy, you are not experiencing actual intimacy.
It’s up to you.
Like I said, Alan called his experience by actualism terms, while not really experiencing them.
It’s up to you if you want to do the same thing.
I retract my use of the phrase actual intimacy. The point I tried to make is that intimacy with another is not the same as intimacy with oneself.
I am happy to read that you are not using “actual” to describe what you are feeling.
Funnily, I was just reading Alan’s website, and was appalled at the obvious misuse of actualist terms and general tone of it. A load of trash. I am glad you have decided not to waste any more time misusing terms.
So what is it that you are exploring in this thought / experience @jamesjjoo ?
It’s one’s own senses that make a difference. I cannot experience the senses of another.
Obviously, that is a fact.
So it is this?
It’s a great point for me to read. As my habit/dream/deeply held belief was that I did need “another…body” to experience the ultimate.
Thank you Andrew for helping me get to my point and then actually understanding my point for yourself. I really appreciate it.
I am glad too.
I am in the situation where such an report is very encouraging.