Kuba: So things are once again going wonderfully, the levels of pure sensate delight which I am experiencing are really just off the charts. I can see that in actual freedom it is all that is left. As in there is only the direct sensate experience of the perfection and purity all around, with not a single bit of ‘dirt’ to get in the way. Words fail to describe just how delicious this is, indeed it seems something like this could blow one’s fuses if apprehended without prior acclimatisation. It’s almost like being “assaulted” from all possible angles by utter delight, it is in everything/ anything that is experienced, without cessation.
I am not sure how the last piece of pizza that is ‘me’ will go but for now it seems remaining in this utterly delightful place is the way to go.
Hi Kuba,
So the process which started for you on July 1 this year (link) is now expanding and flowering, so much so that you worry about too much delight. What a wonderful place to be!
Kuba: Something which Richard wrote in his journal has been on my mind, which is to allow this moment to live me as opposed to ‘me’ living in the present. This never made sense in the past but now I can see what this is about, it is exactly in this direction where I am proceeding. There is resistance at this prospect though, it seems like it could be almost too overwhelming to commit to fully. Where this moment lives me there is no buffer for the perfection and purity, like I could become that “psychological omelette” if I found myself fully locked into that utterly delightful place with nowhere else to escape to.
Indeed, allowing the moment to live me is equivalent to being here at this place now, in this only and ever-fresh moment that I can actually experience. As for “‘me’ living in the present”, you might enjoy this quote –
RESPONDENT: If you can, try asking that question without moving your tongue. Not moving your tongue is very effective in meditation. When we cease moving our tongue, our thinking quiets. As our thinking quiets, we merge more and more with the Now in the present
RICHARD: I have never meditated (either with or without moving the tongue) so I cannot comment on your advice. However, if you are advocating this technique as being an effective method to ‘merge more and more with the Now’ it does expose the lie of your protestations about how you ‘do not ‘become love’; you are already Love’. In other words:
• You do not merge more and more with the Now; you are already Now.
But never mind … you would make a good engineer. (see link for reference to engineer).
RESPONDENT: Richard, according to his own articulated dialogue, has not, in this lifetime, ever been in the Now.
RICHARD: Except that I repeatedly say that the ‘Me’ that was did live ‘in the Now’ for eleven years … thus I have intimate knowledge of what you speak of. The exchange you are referring to went like this:
• [No. 7]: ‘Awareness is in the Now’.
• [Richard]: ‘Everything is happening only at this moment in eternal time … there is nowhere or nowhen else than just here right now’.
• [No. 7]: ‘Try thinking you are in the Now. You can not do it’.
• [Richard]: ‘But I am not ‘in the Now’ … this flesh and blood body is already always just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time’.
This is because there are three I’s altogether … but only one is actual. (Richard, List C, No. 7, 1 Aug 2000).
As for “no buffer for the perfection and purity” – you only get what you can handle. Of course, any objection or resistance can make it feel too much to bear. To become a “psychological omelette” like U.G. Krishnamurti you first would have to be enlightened. He was lost in the upper echelons of the apotheosised field of consciousness (psychic maze). Well, your ‘sulky’ ‘me’ in the corner, instead of joining the party, is working full-steam to come up with worst-case scenarios. I can well understand from memory how inventive ‘I’ can be, when ‘my’ existence is more and more demonstrably at stake. Fear of insanity can be greater than fear of death.
Richard: Even more to that point is that those same sane peoples, who consider me insane, consider insanity (albeit institutionalised) to be the solution for all the ills of humankind – as in, all the ills of sanity – and deliberately leave it out of the DSM IV because of ‘religious sensitivities’.
So as to clarify the entire sanity-insanity issue I will draw your attention to the following quotes. Viz.:
• [Richard]: ‘I have not been sane for many, many years now’. (List B, No. 10e, 18 April 2003).
• [Richard]: ‘As I was insane for 11 years – and sane for the preceding 34 years – I can report from direct experience that there is a third alternative’. (Richard, AF List, No. 25, 10 Feb 2003).
• [Richard]: ‘When ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself) becomes extinct all its states of being, ranging from sanity through to insanity, also cease to be … there is no ‘presence’ whatsoever here in this actual world to be either sane or insane’. (List B, No. 19 l, 18 April 2003).
• [Richard]: ‘There is, of course, a third alternative to either sanity or insanity (insanity is but an extreme form of sanity) …’. (Richard, AF List, No. 60d, 6 Feb 2005).
Furthermore, I characterise that third alternative, to either sanity or insanity, as salubrity (and the third alternative, to either being sane or being insane, as being salubrious).
• ‘salubrity: the quality of being salubrious, healthiness, wholesomeness [conducive to general well-being]’. (Oxford Dictionary).
• ‘salubrious: favourable to health; healthy [salutary in effect], health-giving; esp. of surroundings, a place, etc.: pleasant, agreeable’. (Oxford Dictionary). […]
Moreover, as I clearly state that it is sanity which is the problem (and that insanity is not the solution). (List B, No. 19 l, 12 April 2003).
(Richard, List D, No. 29, 10 January 2013).
Kuba: So I guess it is kind of neat that ‘I’ won’t be there to have to suffer through all that delight (link)
Haha, Kuba, the flesh-and-blood-body will – what fate, what destiny!
Cheers Vineeto