No, I don’t recognize that I need to whole-heartedly agree to my demise. I was talking about a preliminary stage. Sorry for making it sound like a false alarm.
1 Like
James: The key for me is seeing that the fact of self-immolation is that the feeler is in the way.
Vineeto: When you (in vain) try to remove “the feeler”, remember that you are the feeler, just as you are your feelings and your feelings are you. Does “seeing that fact” have “an effect” on ‘you’? Do you recognize that ‘you’ need to whole-heartedly agree to ‘your’ demise because ‘you’ are “in the way”?
James: No, I don’t recognize that I need to whole-heartedly agree to my demise. I was talking about a preliminary stage. Sorry for making it sound like a false alarm. (link)
Let me say it in Richard’s words, because in October 2002 you understood the process, at least intellectually. Perhaps it can click now experientially as well, when, as Richard says, you read with both eyes open, i.e. with all your being.
Richard to James: It is this feeling of ‘self’ (and of ‘other’ of course) which is the illusion … and it is this feeling ‘self’, the feeler (‘me’ as soul), the ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself), who gives rise to the thinking ‘self’, the thinker (‘I’ as ego), which is where cognitive self-consciousness has become cognitive ‘self’-consciousness. (List B, James2, 17 Oct 2002).
James: Are you saying then that in order to eliminate the ‘I’ and the ‘me’ that the instinctual passions themselves have to be eliminated …
Richard: No … and the reason why not is this simple: who would be doing the eliminating of the instinctual passions? As ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ it is an impossibility because the result of trying to do so would be a stripped-down rudimentary animal ‘self’ (seemingly) divested of feelings … somewhat like what is known in psychiatric terminology as a ‘sociopathic personality’ (popularly known as ‘psychopath’). [emphasis added].
Richard: In the end, only altruistic ‘self’-immolation, for the benefit of this body and that body and every body, will release the flesh and blood body from its parasitical resident and, as ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’, the end of ‘me’ is the end of ‘my’ feelings (aka the instinctual passions and all their cultivated derivations).
James: Isn’t it the ‘I’ and the ‘me’ investigating itself which brings one to the point of self-immolation and isn’t it the ‘I’/‘me’ that makes the decision to self-immolate?
Richard: Yes … only ‘I’ can do it as it is all in ‘my’ hands and nobody else’s hands (nor is it in the hands of any god or goddess either, of course, despite some popular postulations to the contrary).
James: You said above that the ‘I’/‘me’ cannot eliminate the instinctual passions but then you next said that the body is released from them by self-immolation. I am just trying to get a clear picture of it.
Richard: Okay … I was just making the point that, although it is hypothetically correct that the elimination of the instinctual passions would be the elimination of ‘I’/‘me’, it does not work that way in practice (for reasons such as already explained further above).
Not only is it dangerous it is an impossibility … only altruistic ‘self’-immolation will do the trick. (List B, James2, 19 Oct 2002).
Cheers Vineeto
3 Likes
Thanks for this. I do understand what you and Richard are saying that only altruism can lead to self-immolation.
Let me try and clarify what I meant. In looking at what I see as the fact of self-immolation I noticed that the ‘me’ is what is in the way. In seeing this as a fact I noticed that the ‘me’ seemed to lose its grip. This is all that I am saying.
1 Like
I also found this below convo very instructive(and it was with you James hehe)…At some point in time this has to happen and I know from experience because around a decade back I had gone out from control for a day and there was a sense of abandoning humanity and pulled forward and attracted towards actuality
JAMES: Are you saying that when the time is right I simply abandon the instincts?
RICHARD: One abandons ‘humanity’. And one knows ‘when the time is ripe’ because one finds out these things as they are happening or after they have happened and the realisation that this abandon is actually happening is stimulating, to say the least (there are weird feelings such as ‘a rat deserting a sinking ship’ to feel for example). One will no longer belong anymore to the largest group there is … ‘humanity’ (which is way, way past all gender groups, racial groups, age groups and other social groups).
3 Likes
What’s interesting is that as a feeling being it may appear that abandoning humanity isn’t altruism so it’s the wrong approach lol
2 Likes
That is interesting. Are you saying then that abandoning humanity is altruism? I never saw that before but I can see the connection. Things are getting ‘thin on the ground’ for me as Richard called it.
1 Like
Vineeto: Let me say it in Richard’s words, because in October 2002 you understood the process, at least intellectually. Perhaps it can click now experientially as well, when, as Richard says, you read with both eyes open, i.e. with all your being.
Richard: In the end, only altruistic ‘self’-immolation, for the benefit of this body and that body and every body, will release the flesh and blood body from its parasitical resident and, as ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’, the end of ‘me’ is the end of ‘my’ feelings (aka the instinctual passions and all their cultivated derivations).
Shashank: I also found this below convo very instructive (and it was with you James hehe) …
James: Are you saying that when the time is right I simply abandon the instincts?
Richard: One abandons ‘humanity’. And one knows ‘when the time is ripe’ because one finds out these things as they are happening or after they have happened and the realisation that this abandon is actually happening is stimulating, to say the least (there are weird feelings such as ‘a rat deserting a sinking ship’ to feel for example). One will no longer belong anymore to the largest group there is … ‘humanity’ (which is way, way past all gender groups, racial groups, age groups and other social groups). (Richard, List B, James, 16 Nov 1999).
James: Thanks for this. I do understand what you and Richard are saying that only altruism can lead to self-immolation.
Let me try and clarify what I meant. In looking at what I see as the fact of self-immolation I noticed that the ‘me’ is what is in the way. In seeing this as a fact I noticed that the ‘me’ seemed to lose its grip. This is all that I am saying. (link)
Shashank: What’s interesting is that as a feeling being it may appear that abandoning humanity isn’t altruism so it’s the wrong approach lol
James: That is interesting. Are you saying then that abandoning humanity is altruism? I never saw that before but I can see the connection. Things are getting ‘thin on the ground’ for me as Richard called it. (link)
Hi James,
It is good news that “the ‘me’ seemed to lose its grip”, as long as this occurrence is not based on dis-association.
Abandoning humanity is not altruism per se because the ‘self’ is still present. Richard called abandoning humanity the pen-ultimate step, the second-to-last step to ‘self-immolation, so it is certainly the right direction.
Richard: Then curiosity becomes fascination … and then the fun begins to gain a momentum of its own. One is drawn inexorably further and further towards one’s destiny … fascination leads to commitment and one can know when one’s commitment is approaching a 100% commitment because others around one will classify one as ‘obsessed’ (in spite of all their rhetoric a 100% commitment to evoking peace-on-earth is actively discouraged by one’s peers). Eventually one realises that one is on one’s own in this, the adventure of a life-time, and a peculiar tenacity that enables one to proceed against all odds ensues. Then one takes the penultimate step … one abandons ‘humanity’.
An actual freedom from the human condition then unfolds its inevitable destiny’. (Richard, List B, No. 45, 14 Nov 1999).
The answer to James’ question prior to the above presented correspondence explains in detail how to move towards your aim –
James: I’m not clear as to how one eliminates the instincts after one has become intimate with them and then has a 100% commitment. Does this happen on its own or is there something that I need to do?
Richard: It happens on its own in that, as ‘I’ am the instinctual passions and the instinctual passions are ‘me’, there is no way that ‘I’ can end ‘me’. What ‘I’ do is that ‘I’ deliberately and consciously and with knowledge aforethought set in motion a ‘process’ that will ensure ‘my’ demise. What ‘I’ do, voluntarily and willingly, is to press the button – which is to acquiesce – which precipitates an oft-times alarming but always thrilling momentum that will result in ‘my’ inevitable self-immolation. The acquiescing is that one thus dedicates oneself to being here as the universe’s experience of itself now … it is the unreserved !YES! to being alive as this flesh and blood body. Peace-on-earth is the inevitable result of such devotion because it is already here … it is always here now. ‘I’ and/or ‘me’ was merely standing in the way of the already always existing perfect purity from becoming apparent by sitting back and moaning and groaning about the inequity of it all (as epitomised in ‘I didn’t ask to be born’). How can one be forever sticking one’s toe in and testing out the waters and yet expect to be able to look at oneself in the mirror each morning with dignity.
The act of initiating this ‘process’ – acquiescence – is to embrace death.
The 100% commitment happens of its own accord too; unlike the commitment one normally makes as a vow or a resolution (which can be broken after a lot of ‘soul-searching’ and heart-ache) the 100% commitment cannot be undone. This means one is already committed to finding out and there is no pulling back – which is why most people do not want to start – because once one has started, one cannot stop … it is a one-way trip. (Richard, List B, James, 16 Nov 1999).
You say that “‘things are getting thin on the ground’ for me” and as such it is vitally important that you are giving your “unreserved !YES! to being alive as this flesh and blood body”. This “unreserved !YES!” activates a joyful naiveté, an exuberant anticipation, resulting in experiencing the pure intent, which will safely guide you in the direction you want to proceed – an actual freedom outside of the human condition.
Cheers Vineeto
2 Likes
Aah yes…Thanks for clarifying this distinction !..I thought as much that its a penultimate step indeed
1 Like
I watched a video on ‘you tube’ about why most people don’t live long after 80 yrs. The body goes through a lot of physiological changes at this age which causes weakening.
It said that perhaps the best thing that one can do to offset this is to keep a positive mindset.
I thought of things I have to be positive about:
-
I can still enjoy and appreciate by experiencing my senses.
-
I can still be on my feet and walk.
-
I can still have great sex.
-
My pain is still tolerable with the help of some pain meds that my doctor is prescribing me.
-
I have a good doctor.
-
I can still become actually free before I die.
More to come when and if I think of it.
-
I can still make plenty money w/o working by investing from my home.
-
I am still feeling good.
3 Likes
I have faced the fact of physical death and I am not afraid of dying. The fact of physical death is that it is the end - kaput. It is approaching and will be here sooner or later. I can’t stop it.
Since I have faced the fear of physical death I surely should be able to face psychological and psychic death of the ‘I/me’. Actually, It should be easy in comparison. Why is it not? What is stopping me?
What is stopping me is the ‘me’ itself. It is programmed to survive no matter what. What is the fact of ‘me’? I think the fact of ‘me’ is that it is a belief. In fact it is the ultimate belief. We have been programmed since birth to believe that it is real. In fact, we are even programmed to believe that it will live forever even after the death of my body.
This puts me in touch with the feeling of ‘me’. A feeler is what it is. I need the right open question to live with this feeler and expose it for what it is. It is a chimera as Richard would say.
The body is flesh and blood and that is what dies. The ‘me’ is a feeling. It is not flesh and blood. It is not actual. This brings me to the fact of ‘me’: It is real but not actual.
Possible open questions that seems right to me is: Can I do it? (Extinguish the {'I/me.) , Why can’t I do it? , How can I do it?
How can I do it?, seems the most relevant now.
3 Likes
James: I have faced the fact of physical death and I am not afraid of dying. The fact of physical death is that it is the end – kaput. It is approaching and will be here sooner or later. I can’t stop it.
Since I have faced the fear of physical death I surely should be able to face psychological and psychic death of the ‘I/me’. Actually, it should be easy in comparison. Why is it not? What is stopping me?
What is stopping me is the ‘me’ itself. It is programmed to survive no matter what. What is the fact of ‘me’? I think the fact of ‘me’ is that it is a belief. In fact it is the ultimate belief. We have been programmed since birth to believe that it is real. In fact, we are even programmed to believe that it will live forever even after the death of my body.
This puts me in touch with the feeling of ‘me’. A feeler is what it is. I need the right open question to live with this feeler and expose it for what it is. It is a chimera as Richard would say.
The body is flesh and blood and that is what dies. The ‘me’ is a feeling. It is not flesh and blood. It is not actual. This brings me to the fact of ‘me’: It is real but not actual.
Possible open questions that seems right to me is: Can I do it? (Extinguish the {'I/me.) , Why can’t I do it? , How can I do it?
How can I do it?, seems the most relevant now. (link)
Hi James,
I remember you having asked that question before – “Can I do it? (Extinguish the {‘I’/ ‘me’}
JAMES: Isn’t it the ‘I’ and the ‘me’ investigating itself which brings one to the point of self-immolation and isn’t it the ‘I’/‘me’ that makes the decision to self-immolate?
RICHARD: Yes … only ‘I’ can do it as it is all in ‘my’ hands and nobody else’s hands (nor is it in the hands of any god or goddess either, of course, despite some popular postulations to the contrary).
JAMES: You said above that the ‘I’/‘me’ cannot eliminate the instinctual passions but then you next said that the body is released from them by self- immolation. I am just trying to get a clear picture of it.
RICHARD: Okay … I was just making the point that, although it is hypothetically correct that the elimination of the instinctual passions would be the elimination of ‘I’/‘me’, it does not work that way in practice (for reasons such as already explained further above).
Not only is it dangerous it is an impossibility … only altruistic ‘self’-immolation will do the trick.
Which is why I advise minimising both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ feelings and maximising the felicitous feelings – as far as humanly possible – as a salubrious modus operandi in the meanwhile rather than trying to eliminate them. Not only does this approach have the immediate benefit of feeling happy and harmless as one goes about one’s normal everyday life but it has the ultimate benefit of assisting in the rewiring of the brain’s habitual circuitry before the once-in-a-lifetime event happens which wipes out the identity in toto. (Richard, List B, James2, 22 Oct 2002)
JAMES: That is a good question. What comes to mind is I keep treading the same path over and over because that is what I know. That is what is familiar.
RICHARD: Indeed it is … so in order to successfully escape one needs to abandon the known path, the familiar path, the path that does not deliver the goods, so that the energy one is frittering away fruitlessly is available for the unknown path, the unfamiliar path, the path that does deliver the goods.
JAMES: Upon looking at it further it appears that I am addicted to ‘me’ (suffering) but that I am also addicted to the escapes from the ‘me’.
RICHARD: Okay … is the addiction to being ‘me’ stronger than the addiction to escaping from being ‘me’?
I only ask because if the addiction to being ‘me’ is the more powerful addiction then successful escape is the last thing ‘I’ am looking for (and thus ‘I’ will keep on re-treading the known path, the familiar path, the path that does not deliver the goods).
Whereas if the addiction to escaping is the more powerful addiction then successful escape can (and will) happen. (Richard, List B, James3, 1 Nov 2002)
RICHARD: I only ask because if the addiction to being ‘me’ is the more powerful addiction then successful escape is the last thing ‘I’ am looking for (and thus ‘I’ will keep on re-treading the known path, the familiar path, the path that does not deliver the goods).
JAMES: Actually, the known is ‘me’. That is what I know. I don’t know how to not tread the same path.
RICHARD: Is the reason why ‘I’ do not know how to not tread the same path none other than because successful escape is the last thing ‘I’ am looking for (and thus ‘I’ will keep on re-treading the known path, the familiar path, the path that does not deliver the goods)?
In other words: do ‘I’ not continue to temporarily escape from being ‘me’ because permanent escape from being ‘me’ is the last thing ‘I’ am looking for?
RICHARD: Whereas if the addiction to escaping is the more powerful addiction then successful escape can (and will) happen.
JAMES: The same escapes are also ‘me’. They are the known.
RICHARD: Perhaps if I were to put it like this: somehow, somewhere deep in the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself), ‘I’ already know, as ‘I’ always have known and ‘I’ always will know, just what it is that is to happen. In fact, all ‘I’ have been able to do, and all ‘I’ am able to do, and all ‘I’ will be able to do, is to keep on putting it off for another time … any other time will do, in all reality, provided that it not be now.
Yet when the time comes it will be now … because there is only now in all actuality. (Richard, List B, James3, 5 Nov 2002)
Perhaps the time has come now because you know with certainty that you can’t put it off much longer.
Are you willing, with utter sincerity, to give up the addiction of being ‘me’ and venture into the unknown?
Perhaps you can read this whole page now with new eyes and get a vital clue.
Geoffrey said this whole page of correspondence was one of his three favourite sources to study how to bring about self-immolation – he succeeded spectacularly.
Cheers Vineeto
1 Like
Yes, in rereading all of this things are shaping up. What I have gathered so far:
By accepting the fact of my impending physical death I have opened the door to self-immolation.
Richard said above that only altruistic self-immolation will do it and that in the meanwhile minimizing both the ‘bad’ and ‘good’ feelings and maximising the felicitous feelings is better than trying to eliminate them because this will have immediate benefit of feeling happy and harmless while rewiring the brain before the once-in-a-lifetime event happens which wipes out the identity in toto.
In summary: By accepting the fact of my impending physical death I can now be happy and harmless while readying myself for an altruistic self-immolation.
I will keep rereading the whole page in the discussion with Richard as you suggested.
By accepting the fact of my impending death I have given up the addiction to being ‘me’ and am ready to venture into the unknown as you suggested. It is noted that you suggested ‘with utter sincerity’. I have always been sincere but not utterly sincere. Thanks for posting this discussion with Richard. I have finally gotten what he said all those years ago that it is the addiction to being ‘me’ that has to be given up and I have finally done that.
5 Likes
James: Yes, in rereading all of this things are shaping up. What I have gathered so far:
By accepting the fact of my impending physical death I have opened the door to self-immolation.
Richard said above that only altruistic self-immolation will do it and that in the meanwhile minimizing both the ‘bad’ and ‘good’ feelings and maximising the felicitous feelings is better than trying to eliminate them because this will have immediate benefit of feeling happy and harmless while rewiring the brain before the once-in-a-lifetime event happens which wipes out the identity in toto.
In summary: By accepting the fact of my impending physical death I can now be happy and harmless while readying myself for an altruistic self-immolation.
I will keep re-reading the whole page in the discussion with Richard as you suggested.
By accepting the fact of my impending death I have given up the addiction to being ‘me’ and am ready to venture into the unknown as you suggested. It is noted that you suggested ‘with utter sincerity’. I have always been sincere but not utterly sincere. Thanks for posting this discussion with Richard. I have finally gotten what he said all those years ago that it is the addiction to being ‘me’ that has to be given up and I have finally done that. (link)
Hi James,
This is a good exegesis and it is significant that you recognized the difference between sincerity and ‘utter sincerity’, between being sincere and being utterly sincere. It has already shown some results.
Now you have something inspiring to live for, and a dedicatory aim which makes your remaining days thoroughly fascinating in your utterly sincere exploration of whatever is preventing you from feeling excellent, naïve, daring and caring, and appreciative of living on this wonderful planet earth. There is nothing tepid or lacklustre in the felicitous feelings of benignity and benevolence, exuberance and passionate caring.
Whilst you can investigate the operation of the instinctual passions, you cannot eliminate them until self-immolation. Instead, you channel all those passions into exciting, thrilling determination to keep exploring the deepest corners of your psyche whenever you find anything impeding your feeling wonderful, buoyant and on top of the world. You desire finding ‘the meaning of life’ like you never desired anything before.
Richard: Speaking personally from experience, eventually – and ultimately – all the instincts are undone instantly via psychological and psychic ‘self’-sacrifice. This is, purely and simply, altruism at its very best … and altruism’s energy is an instinctual passion (this is indeed hoisting oneself by one’s bootstraps … writ large). However, until the initiation of the process that leads to ‘self’-immolation is consciously triggered – whereupon the ending of ‘me’ happens of its own accord – one can become acutely aware of the operation of the instinctual passions as they are experienced moment-to-moment. It is but the same ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ investigation of beliefs and feelings … only extended deeper into one’s psyche.
Strangely enough, it does mean an exploration into the psychic realm … which is why it is essential that one first establishes a firm base – called virtual freedom – to fall back upon when the going gets tough. A journey into one’s psyche – which is the human psyche – is not for the faint of heart or the weak of knee … one must have nerves of steel to go all the way. The rewards for doing so are immense, however, and the ramifications far-reaching.
It means peace-on-earth, in this life-time, as this flesh and blood body. [Emphases added]. (Richard, AF List, Mark, 18 May 1999).
Richard: It is such a monumental thing to have happen: this event is the pivotal point wherein all the wars and murders and rapes and tortures and domestic violence and child abuse and sadness and loneliness and grief and depression and suicides and the such-like in one human being come to an end permanently.
In a word: innocence. (Richard, List B, No. 33c, 23 June 2000)
Your explorations and dedication to peace-on-earth may well be an inspiration for others too.
Cheers Vineeto
4 Likes
Those 3 links above to my discussion with Richard about being addicted to ‘me’ from 2002 aren’t working. Is there another way to link to that discussion?
Hi James,
Oops I stuffed up.
Thank you for letting me know. I fixed them now and checked that they work.
Cheers Vineeto
2 Likes
I have been rereading the whole discussion with Richard on addiction from the links that you posted above. I think the meat of it and what @geoffrey was referring to is the part toward the end from October 28, 2002 where he said essentially: I am addicted to being ‘me’ ,which is suffering, and it is this addiction which is why there is no peace on earth.
Iow, humanity is addicted to ‘me’ (suffering) which is why there is no peace on earth.
Reading the whole discussion as you recommended thoroughly explains how he comes to that conclusion.
Maybe you could give the link to the whole discussion on the AFT website.
1 Like
Hi James,
What is the specific address/ url you want me to link to your correspondence on List B with Richard?
Cheers Vineeto
OK, if anyone wants to read the whole discussion its on the AFT website under Richard’s Selected Correspondence by Topic on addiction. I don’t know what the link is but it can be found there so no need for a link. Apologize for the confusion.
Hi James,
Thank you for clearing it up 
The link is [Selected Correspondence: Addiction]
Cheers Vineeto
1 Like
My current objection to pure intent and self-immolation: How can I experience pure intent and self-immolation when I am hurting all the time?
1 Like