Kuba: Thank you Vineeto, the initial (intellectual) answer which came up was that – “well those suffering others could clean themselves up”, it wouldn’t be an actual freedom but they could be virtually free. This is a demonstration of the kind of mindset which you wrote here :
Vineeto: Don’t you find it somewhat ironic that those who are affectively eager to try to help don’t know how to, and those who know what to do are hesitant?
Kuba: So for whatever reason ‘I’ have been able to clean ‘myself’ up enough that life is good (in that “in the meantime” manner) and so ‘I’ am now hesitant to accept full responsibility.
And yet it is back to front because if not for ‘me’ there would be no need for the method in the first place. It wouldn’t be a situation where some “manage to make it” and others don’t. It is clear that at the current state of affairs it takes an unusual person to even consider applying the method, and then to succeed and then to go all the way. But the way out of taking full responsibility for ‘me’ is that – “Oh well ‘I’ cleaned ‘myself’ up, so surely others can too”.
Hi Kuba,
It seems you have uncovered a major blackspot/ oversight in your investigations. I remember you wrote recently –
Kuba: It is more that ‘I’ am afraid to be seen, not anything specifically about ‘me’, rather ‘I’ am afraid to be seen full stop.
This seems to be part of the reason why I would always return to some kind of a ‘normal’ after all those extraordinary experiences. They would be precious but almost too precious to consider bringing them out into the open in my day to day living. So I would return to ‘normal’ which includes some kind of a ‘shield’, this is ‘me’ as the controller. (link)
Can it be that your regular returning to “‘me’ as the controller” is because your naiveté has been missing the aspect of “being a liker” (link) – liking others and caring about them as your fellow human beings, as epitomised by the ‘Theory of Mind’ (link, take also note of the last paragraph)?
Kuba: In short it is as if ‘I’ do not face the urgency of the situation fully because ‘I’ have managed to “do alright”. The one thing that stands out here is wow how incredibly selfish this is.
It makes me think back to the hierarchy, as if ‘I’ have (by chance) managed to land on a higher rung of a ladder and then ‘I’ am gladly looking at those below clawing for survival. ‘I’ can weave some kind of a story that goes – “oh well it’s because ‘I’ was a special ‘I’, that is why ‘I’ am here and ‘they’ are there”.
There is definitely some kind of complacency that I can see here, it’s not urgent for ‘me’, well not urgent enough to sacrifice ‘myself’ for clearly. But even so the entire mindset is wrong to even allow such a thing as sacrificing ‘myself’. For as long as ‘I’ am chilling out on that “alright” rung of the ladder ‘I’ am clearly only concerned with ‘myself’. (…)
It is of not use to blame yourself for being “incredibly selfish” – everyone is selfish, born with fear, aggression, nurture and desire. Now, that you have become aware of it, you can do something about it. I also wonder if your “it’s because ‘I’ was a special ‘I’, that is why ‘I’ am here and ‘they’ are there” is perhaps connected to what you once called the Messiah complex –
Kuba: So I have been having fun investigating self esteem / self worth. I can see this aspect of the human condition is what underpins most of the themes which remain. The archetype which I can narrow the thing down to is one of the ‘messiah’. […]
This desperate need to belong however is a beast that needs to be fed over and over, it never rests. Which means ‘I’ lock ‘myself’ in the never ending pursuit for the next ‘golden nugget’. This archetype of the ‘messiah’ is a tricky one to see for what it is, because this desperate need for a feeling of validation is masked by ‘doing good for others’ or ‘seeking excellence to uplift others’.
It’s like ‘I’ want to be Jesus, bringing light to those below ‘me’ and in doing so solidify ‘my’ place in the group forever, ‘I’ will then be forever needed.
The thing which I always wanted deep down was to be free to be me as I am, to be genuine, to be original and to be authentic. In short to exist completely outside of this structure of the ‘group’, of belonging, of identity etc. […] So ‘I’ have been keen to find that something ultimately precious which ‘I’ will be willing to give up ‘myself’ for. This seems to be in the right direction, the freedom to be me as I am for one and all. (link)
Now that you explained what being a messiah really means, it could well be that “the freedom to be me as I am for one and all” is an entirely different destination to being actually free, as in “the freedom to be ‘me’ as I am for one and all”?
The question is, has this possible re-interpretation of what it means to “be free” distorted/ corrupted pure intent all this while without you noticing it?
Kuba: It seems ‘I’ am chilling in that “alright place”, dissociated from the “dark soil of humanity”, from here any concern about actual freedom is primarily about what it would mean for ‘me’. As such it’s not a pressing matter for ‘me’, in the sense of a fire raging through. So sure ‘I’ will run at some invisible walls from time to time, then do some more cleaning up etc. But in all of this ‘I’ am as if blind to the role that ‘I’ play in this mess, to the fact that a fire is raging through right now.
So I can see that in the past the caring was almost like a means to the end? Something like – “Well ‘I’ want to reach ‘my’ goal and for that ‘I’ have to care”. Whereas it seems like the caring has to come as a first priority, otherwise it is ‘my’ existence that will take priority.
Yes, you can be having a grand time to a certain degree, but you can’t be confident that you are harmless, let alone innocuous, as long as caring about your fellow human beings is barely existent.
Kuba: Also I can see that any pride in ‘my’ success with the actualism method has to be a furphy, fundamentally and at core ‘I’ am no different at all to those other 'I’s. How is it that this particular ‘I’ made some kind of success and others have failed? It wasn’t ‘me’ that was special, ‘I’ am exactly the same as those other 'I’s, the success that ‘I’ am enjoying in this complacent manner is because of the circumstances that ‘I’ found ‘myself’ in. It’s not so different to being born into a rich family with great connections and then making podcasts about hard work leading to success whilst millions starve. (link)
Just think, if you were indeed a ‘messiah’ and everyone followed ‘your’ lead and did what you have done, chill in that “alright place”. People might be less sorrowful but callous nevertheless, and there certainly would be neither equity nor parity (link). In other words, as long as you are a feeling being, “this black/red blob” (link), as you perceived it, you are rotten to the core like every other feeling being, as you summed it up above – and that’s the ‘messiah’ would pass on.
Richard: As you are not separate from humanity/ as humanity is not separate from (you are humanity/ humanity is you) do you now see why I have kept on asking if you care about individuals, period?
Simply because blind nature does not care about individuals – essentially blind nature is only concerned with the survival of the species (and any species will do as far as blind nature is concerned) – and simply because only an individual can care about individuals then, unless/ until an individual does dare to care, all the misery and mayhem will go on forever and a day … just as it has done over the millennia which stretch back into the mists of prehistory.
And to dare to care is to care to dare. (Richard, AF List, Rick-a, 21 Jan 2006).
I can recommend to rememorate the flavour of your last outstanding PCE (not the interpretation the ‘controller’ inserted afterwards) and freshly connect to the genuine pure intent. Then daring to care and caring to dare is eminently possible.
Cheers Vineeto