This habit has been ‘me’ doing exactly this 
“Let me tell you something about the actual world!!” (Although there is no screaming or kicking coming from ‘me’ anymore and neither am ‘I’ getting pushed off against ‘my’ desire)
1 Like
Vineeto: Ah, this is a valuable insight – the very reason why so many have resistance to enjoy and appreciate being alive – one could diminish one’s ‘bank account’ in the afterlife, the “other place”, if one has too much fun here on earth. [Emphasis added].
Kuba: Haha what a brilliant way to put it! This hits bullseye exactly why I cannot quite allow it fully, that if I was to fully enjoy and appreciate this moment of being alive I would be “diminishing my bank account elsewhere”. It seems it is the thrust of ‘surviving’ itself, that ‘I’ invest in ‘surviving’ as an identity, which means ‘I’ pay into that bank account ‘elsewhere’.
Hi Kuba,
Peter discovered early on that everyone has a spiritual outlook on life –
• [Peter]: ‘When I was leaving the spiritual world and began to really investigate what others had to say about the human condition, I was amazed to discover that everyone – and I do mean everyone – has a spiritual outlook on life. The spiritual viewpoint permeates philosophy, science, medicine, education, psychology, law, etc.’ [emphasis added]. (Library, Topics, Spiritual).
It was hotly questioned and discussed on the Actual Freedom Mailing List in 2004 – here are some examples –
(Richard, AF List, No. 60b, 13 Apr 2004) and follow-up correspondences
(Richard, AF List, No. 27h, 1 Apr 2004) and follow-up correspondences
(Richard, AF List, No. 67, 10 May 2004) and follow-up correspondence
In summary Richard explained –
• [Richard]: ‘Even though metaphysics has been spiritual from the very beginning, and in the long run it really does not matter which term is used to describe the instinctive/ intuitive outlook of ‘me’ as soul (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being … which is ‘being’ itself), the usage of the word ‘spiritual’ as Peter means it – ‘of, pertaining to, or affecting the spirit or soul’ (Oxford Dictionary) – is more direct and to the point. (Richard, AF List, No. 27h, 13 Apr 2004).
You are spot on with your discovery that “the thrust of ‘surviving’ itself, that ‘I’ invest in ‘surviving’ as an identity” is in order for your soul to survive in a ‘rewarding’ afterlife.
Kuba: The belief in god or the afterlife is gone, this kind of belief was also part of that ‘high achiever’ mentality, or what I called a ‘grind mentality’, or in fact even the thing of ‘delayed gratification’, it is all the same flavour isn’t it? It comes from the old paradigm where one is saving oneself for some other time/ place, one suffers now for a reward in the future. But as it is always now one ends up suffering forever and the future never comes, it cannot for it is not actual. (link)
Given that everybody has a spiritual outlook on life, due to the trickle-down effect of enlightenment having been considered the summum bonum of human experience, the “saving oneself for some other time/ place” can take many forms. In your case it is that of a “high achiever”, also very prevalent in Western countries is the ‘Protestant work-ethic’, suffering “now for a reward in the future”, whilst in Eastern countries people are waiting for a better incarnation or in Japan, Korea, China desire to take an honoured place amongst their ancestors. What they all have in common is that enjoying this moment of being alive is nowhere to be found. Ironically, the actualism method is often subverted into an ‘actualist’ morality to prevent the very enjoyment and appreciation which could facilitate their freedom from the human condition.
Vineeto: So, isn’t it finally time to take Geoffrey’s suggestion and “take off their clothes, and swim through the sea?” Time to abandon the limits and actualize your insights and go map-less. You have nothing to lose but your shackles.
Kuba: Yes you are correct, it is the time for this, and looking at my above post that was still sandpit actualism, more of second best. It looks like this is a habit but it is time for it to be broken. (link)
It is wonderful you found a way to break the spell. Now finally naiveté can fully flourish.
Cheers Vineeto
2 Likes
So this was such a great way to put it but whilst allowing this today I remembered that I already understood this a while back, when I wrote this :
In fact this has become a bit of an inside joke between me and @Sonyaxx now. Whenever things appear to be complicated/stressful and apparently requiring ‘my’ planning, scheming etc
I always say “I’m just gonna let the universe do it” and it has worked perfectly so far, 10/10! ps it was always going to happen that way anyways
What didn’t click back then is that not only does this apply to ‘my’ daily life but it also applies to ‘my’ self-immolation. Funny right? That I was allowing the universe to live me with regards to daily things and yet when it concerned self-immolation ‘I’ was digging ‘my’ claws in so strong.
But Richard did write that the means to the end and the end are the same - it is enjoyment and appreciation, so why would this drastic departure from the method be warranted or needed?
Peter wrote that if one cannot even contemplate a virtual freedom from sorrow and malice then any interest in an actual freedom would remain a purely cerebral exercise. Well in the same way if ‘I’ am not even willing to allow the actualism process to unfold without ‘my’ involvement then how on earth can ‘I’ agree to disappear for good?
It was all back to front! How could ‘I’ the controller be responsible for a process that is ‘my’ undoing? How could more control lead ‘me’ in the direction of ‘my’ willing departure?
Of course just as the method is an affective enjoyment and appreciation which segues into an actual enjoyment and appreciation, the same with regards to control - stepping out from control is the step before ‘my’ self-immolation, it is ‘my’ willing retirement which is as if a prelude to ‘my’ death. Again it is all pointing in the same direction.
So all those things which you were saying to me over the last 10 months Vineeto are making sense . The process is already underway, ‘I’ don’t ‘do’ anything more, ‘I’ only remain out from control, when things come up, these are ‘my’ objections, ‘my’ attempts to regain control. When this happens ‘I’ don’t go in the direction of more control, of dictating what and how should happen, instead those objections are removed so that ‘I’ can remain out from control.
In September 2024 you wrote :
I didn’t see this at all! Instead ‘I’ went through this big circle of all the things that wouldn’t work, perhaps this had to happen haha. That is one way to get things right and that is to try every single wrong way first
1 Like
So yesterday I was having these thoughts about just what the affective faculty is, why it is not actual. I had this example in mind of a baby in distress.
What came to mind was one of the definitions of ‘drama’ that Vineeto posted the other day - “drama, synonyms: play, show, piece, spectacle, dramatization, screenplay, theatrics, performance”
This distress which the baby is expressing it is a ‘spectacle, theatric, performance’ aimed at eliciting a response from the caregiver. Of course there is actual screaming and crying etc taking place but the ‘distress’ in question, it is not actual, the body is acting in line with the theatrics.
What happens though is that the feeling being - the ‘me’ - arises out of / is that affective faculty in operation. As such ‘my’ theatrics are very real, this is ‘my’ life and ‘my’ world, all that ‘I’ have access to.
I thought then also of the fact that any action which ‘I’ am capable of (by virtue of the above) is not genuine, it can only ever be a theatric, no matter how deeply felt the feeling it is forever a show, as Richard wrote it is ultimately an emotional play in a fertile imagination. That is why ‘I’ am forever removed from the actual, from the genuine.
So in this sense one cannot be a mature adult - in the actual sense of the word - as long as there is an ‘I’ in residence inside this flesh and blood body. The real world which all entities live in, it is a projection of this dramatic entity, the entity who is never genuine. So yes it is funny on one hand, the mayhem that is caused by something so silly and yet on the other hand it is not a laughing matter either when it is considered that the wars and rapes and depressions and suicides etc happen because of this entity acting out it’s dramatic (and never actual) existence.
And the same applies to ‘my’ self-immolation, it makes sense in light of this why altruism is not actual and yet it is something that is very real, ‘my’ death is not actual either and yet it is very real. All this what is ultimately an emotional play in a fertile imagination must take place nevertheless in order for this body to be free of ‘my’ dramatic existence.
So this is where ‘I’ see ‘myself’ these days, that ‘I’ know ultimately ‘I’ am living out an existence which amounts to “play, show, piece, spectacle, dramatization, screenplay, theatrics, performance” and yet this is where ‘I’ am forever trapped. ‘I’ do not make the mistake anymore of believing that ‘I’ can know the actual, the genuine. The full understanding of the above means that ‘I’ don’t have to take ‘my’ life or ‘my’ death seriously anymore, and yet the theatrics must play out all the way to the final scene. Which means that ‘I’ am free to enjoy and appreciate the final scene, that it is all ultimately safe.
And where it concerns ‘me’ progressively stepping back from any kind of involvement, this is much easier to allow when the above is understood. There is an entire world as well as an actual flesh and blood body which exist so safely outside of any of ‘my’ theatrics, and all that is already here and happening, just what ‘essential function’ could ‘my’ theatrics bring to the table anyways?
Looking from this angle I can see how Geoffrey found it all so hilarious, because those theatrics don’t just end with the baby in distress, they are the basis of all the beliefs, all the creeds, even the way society is structured etc And this has been going on for thousands of years. All those very serious belief systems and structures, all the ‘human wisdom’ etc This is what it is all based upon.
So secure in this knowledge ‘my’ final scene can be played out.
3 Likes
Kuba: So this is where ‘I’ see ‘myself’ these days, that ‘I’ know ultimately ‘I’ am living out an existence which amounts to “play, show, piece, spectacle, dramatization, screenplay, theatrics, performance” and yet this is where ‘I’ am forever trapped. (link)
Hi Kuba,
‘You’ are not “forever trapped” – all that is required is to willingly, joyously, and altruistically agree to go into oblivion to end the burden of ‘your’ seriously maintaining of control and futile solemnity. When all of ‘you’ is on board magic is bound to happen.
Richard: …the ‘I’ that was took full responsibility and an action that was not of ‘his’ doing resulted. (Richard, List B, No. 13, 14 Jun 1999)
All ‘my’ thinking – intellectualising, mentalising, philosophising and theorising is merely postponing the inevitable.
Kuba: I can see this same feature happens with anything that the mind processes. In that some new information will be presented, perhaps some problem requiring a solution and immediately ‘I’ want to grab onto the process, ‘I’ demand an answer now and so ‘I’ end up manufacturing something as opposed to allowing this information to “swish” around the brain until a genuine answer is located.
It is the difference between pure contemplation and ‘me’ thinking about something. In pure contemplation there is thinking without the ‘thinker’ whereas normally ‘I’ arrogate responsibility over thinking and ultimately only get in the way of clarity. (link)
Telling yourself that you are “forever trapped” is writing the very “play, show, piece, spectacle, dramatization, screenplay, theatrics, performance” or charade you choose to play out – until you see the silliness of it.
Perhaps fascinated attention to the very act of believing your own creations might be the way out of feeling “forever trapped”.
Richard: To repeat: I stopped believing, period. All sorrow and malice stems from the activity of believing … which arises from the believer. ‘I’, as a psychological entity, can only believe – or disbelieve – in possibilities and impossibilities. (…) By believing perfection to be possible ‘I’ perpetuate ‘myself’. ‘I’, by ‘my’ very presence, inhibit that splendid perfection becoming apparent.
Perfection is already always here. Yet ‘I’, by believing in a remembered perfection, chase an ever-elusive chimera into an ever-receding future. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, Private email, March 1999)
Cheers Vineeto
Hi Vineeto,
Thank you for your reply, I have been contemplating what you are saying here. Just to check with you, is what happens at self-immolation exactly that, that having given permission with the entirety of ‘my’ being to go into oblivion ‘I’ am seen in ‘my’ totality to be nothing but a belief. That is to say ‘I’ am seen to have never actually existed in the first place. So the ‘believer’ himself is eradicated, then there is no possibility to ever go back into ‘being’. ‘I’ do not do it as ‘I’ am the ‘believer’, instead ‘I’ allow ‘myself’ to be seen and the seeing (which is not of ‘my’ doing) is what ends ‘me’?
If I am understanding/seeing it correctly then it seems very simple indeed. The ending of ‘me’ is the seeing of ‘my’ existence for what it is - an emotional play in a fertile imagination. This is also how I have entered PCE’s in that an instant of fascinated thought would trigger the (temporary) seeing that ‘I’ am not actual and then I as this body would already be here, where I have been all along.
The difference is that in the PCE ‘I’ go into abeyance, whereas with self-immolation there is the decision which takes some considerable preparation, in that ‘I’ am agreeing to be eradicated.
It seems for ‘me’ that period of “considerable preparation” has been done, and now it is literally just about it happening, it seems the part of it happening is the easy part.
It seems if not for the ‘human wisdom’ the very fact of self-immolation would be so easily available for all, that is the hard part, sorting through all the tried and failed masquerading as the tried and true.
Also in light of the above it makes complete sense that one does not attempt to eliminate the passions directly, rather ‘I’ as ‘self’ am eliminated and then there is ‘no-one’ left to ‘be’ those passions. I am reminded of what Richard wrote (to paraphrase) that ‘being’ is a heart-felt corruption of the mind - that is to say all this is because ‘I’ believe that ‘I’ exist. The tricky aspect is that ‘I’ cannot cease believing in ‘my’ existence whilst retaining ‘myself’, which also means that ‘I’ cannot be the one to do the expunging, it can only be something that happens to ‘me’ with ‘my’ permission.
So yes indeed ‘I’ am not trapped forever, rather ‘I’ am but an instant away from ‘my’ release.
2 Likes
Kuba: Thank you for your reply, I have been contemplating what you are saying here. Just to check with you, is what happens at self-immolation exactly that, that having given permission with the entirety of ‘my’ being to go into oblivion ‘I’ am seen in ‘my’ totality to be nothing but a belief. That is to say ‘I’ am seen to have never actually existed in the first place. So the ‘believer’ himself is eradicated, then there is no possibility to ever go back into ‘being’. ‘I’ do not do it as ‘I’ am the ‘believer’, instead ‘I’ allow ‘myself’ to be seen and the seeing (which is not of ‘my’ doing) is what ends ‘me’?
Hi Kuba,
When ‘you’, the identity ‘you’ presently are, says “‘I’ am seen in ‘my’ totality to be nothing but a belief. That is to say ‘I’ am seen to have never actually existed in the first place” it can only be ‘my’ belief, as you will not know this experientially/ existentially until you are actually free. As such ‘you’ cannot “allow ‘myself’ to be seen” – ‘you’ can only fully agree to go into oblivion for the benefit of all. It is literally a step into the unknown.
There is no way for ‘you’ to know/ believe/ anticipate how ‘your’ extinction will happen because the real world of ‘me’ and the actual world never meet. There is no knowing in advance only “a superb confidence and an over-weening optimism” in the perfection of the actual world.
Your habit of wanting to know in advance, to have a map, a blue-print of future events is standing in the way of ‘your’ unconditional agreement to ‘your’ demise. It keeps the believer in existence.
I can recommend gay abandon.
To repeat for emphasis –
Richard: In short, one’s superb confidence and over-weening optimism precipitates ‘my’ demise … ‘I’ do not make freedom happen … ‘I’ allow the universe to “disappear” the ‘me’ that I was … and perfection has become apparent. ‘I’ did not invoke perfection, for it already is here … and it is here now, not off into the future. It may have taken some time to eventuate, as ‘I’ got whittled away, yet when that time came, it was already here … because it is always now.
To sum up: ‘I’ do not make perfection happen because it is already always here. What ‘I’ do is to “stand still” and unreservedly allow ‘my’ eventual demise to occur. To do this, ‘I’ cease believing, hoping, trusting and having faith … without falling into disbelief, despair, distrust or doubt. ‘I’, having the courage of ‘my’ convictions – which is the confidence born out of the solid knowing as evidenced in the peak experience – thus developing a superb confidence and an over-weening optimism. Thus nothing can stand in ‘my’ way in this, the adventure of a life-time. [Emphases added]. (Richard, Private email, March 1999)
Kuba: It seems if not for the ‘human wisdom’ the very fact of self-immolation would be so easily available for all, that is the hard part, sorting through all the tried and failed masquerading as the tried and true. (link)
Yes, and the quickest and sure-fire way to “sorting through all the tried and failed” is to allow yourself to become thoroughly naïve – ranging “from being sincere to becoming naïve and all the way through being naïveté itself⁽⁰¹⁾ to an actual innocence.”
Richard: ⁽⁰¹⁾To be naïveté itself (i.e., naïveté embodied as a childlike persona with adult sensibilities), which is to be the closest one can to innocence whilst remaining a ‘self’ (innocence is where ‘self’ is not), one is both likeable and liking for herewith lies tenderness and/or sweetness and togetherness and/or closeness whereupon moment-to-moment experiencing is of traipsing through the world about in a state of wide-eyed wonder and amazement as if a child again (guileless, artless, ingenuous, innocuous) – yet with adult sensibilities whereby the distinction betwixt being naïve and being gullible is readily separable – simply marvelling at the sheer magnificence of this oh-so-material universe’s absoluteness and unabashedly delighting in its boundless beneficence, its limitless largesse, as being the experiencing is inherently cornucopian (due to the near-absence of agency which ensues when the controlling doer is abeyant and the naïve beer is ascendant), with a blitheness and a gaiety such that the likelihood of the magical fairy-tale-like nature of this paradisaical terraqueous globe, this bounteously verdant and azure planet, becoming ever-so-sweetly apparent, as an experiential actuality, is almost always imminent. (Richard, A Quaint Clay-Pit Tale)
Cheers Vineeto
1 Like
Yes it seems that “standing still” or “doing nothing” is ‘my’ kryptonite . I cannot explain just how difficult this is for ‘me’, and I am not sure if this is idiosyncratic to me or not.
What I can say is that the past year or so I have been talking with my mum about this at length. For her it is much more extreme, a core theme in her life, we did discover a while ago that this impulse to ‘do something’ is triggered by a drive to survive. That she may be enjoying a walk for example and then this feeling will arise, it commands to ‘do something’ in order to gain security. This ‘something’ though is never here and now, it is always something ‘out there’ and so she is then off on another mission, another scheme, all the while constantly running on nervous energy.
I have had many conversations with her about this and now I can see that I am essentially doing the same thing! It is just way less extreme.
As I am now writing this there is a sense of calm and stillness all around and yet there is this need to ‘do something’, it is a command, a must, that ‘I’ deal with this thing ‘out there’. This drive it does not allow ‘me’ to simply enjoy and appreciate being here, the message is delivered with a sense of danger, that ‘I’ must obey for ‘my’ survival is at stake.
I wrote it just now in my notes and it is exactly that ‘I’ need to ‘do something’ in order to survive, that if ‘I’ “stand still” ‘I’ will die. Then I remembered that this is the goal
But ‘I’ cannot force ‘myself’ to do this, then I am going back to having ‘me’ screaming around and kicking against ‘my’ desire.
So perhaps there is something to be found here🤔 This fear of “standing still” - that it is dangerous, that survival is at stake, that something ‘out there’ demands ‘my’ attention, that ‘I’ must engage with it in order to maintain ‘my’ security. Now I might as well remove the scare quotes because the feeling is that a genuine danger will eventuate.
Looking at this thing whilst also allowing the possibility of no longer ‘doing something’ at all it seems to be in the right direction because it is where enjoyment and appreciation is - only enjoyment and appreciation.
So in this direction there is only enjoyment and appreciation but also this sense of genuine danger, of guaranteed death.