Kub933's Journal

Journals
1676

What I can see now is that this “loosing ‘my’ way back to reality” is more along the lines of realising that it was never genuine. How could ‘I’ go back to that which does not genuinely exist, and never did. So it’s not that there is option A and option B and ‘I’ choose 1, rather ‘I’ proceed until it is realised that only actuality genuinely exists.

Actual freedom is not a choice of 1 world over another, it is the end of all illusion and delusion.

OK this is very good!

How could I speak to another when we are as if speaking from different worlds?
I realise this is what you are doing right now as you converse with us Vineeto :laughing:

In fact you are not doing this, you are speaking with a flesh and blood body and “paying lip service” to ‘me’ so that the conversation can be productive.

OK this seems to have cleared the way forward, something just went there. It’s essentially like - why would I assign any weight to the opinions and agendas of entities which have no existence in actuality.

1677

Kuba: Hi Vineeto,

Vineeto: You described living with/in naiveté in such a delightful way, and are even anticipating the prospect of having “only 1 direction left to travel” with no negative side effects in sight… (link)

Kuba: Yes this glimpse of what it would be like to only have 1 direction left to travel it happened yesterday and it reminded me of a writing from Richard where he compared a PCE to an experience where one travels deeper and deeper into a rainforest, until one comes across this “hushed stillness”. So this is how I saw it, as if I would walk deeper and deeper into that wonderland until the way back to ‘reality’ is lost and there ‘I’ would loose ‘myself’ too. It was very very wonderful and I realise this is what I deeply desire. (…)

Hi Kuba,

Is this the one you are referring to?

Richard: Sometimes a PCE is also known as ‘a nature experience’ … wherein one’s own personal experiencing is likewise the only proof worthy of the name. Being deep in a rain-forest goes some way towards making it all clearer … or any wilderness, for that matter. As one travels deeper and deeper into this – initially ‘other’ – world of natural delight, one experiences an intensely hushed stillness that is vast and immense … yet so simply here. I am not referring to a feeling of awe or reverence or great beauty – to have any emotion or passion at all is to miss the actuality of this moment – nor am I referring to any blissful or euphoric state of ‘being’. It is a sensate experience, not an affective state. I am talking about the factual and simple actualness of earthy existence being experienced whilst ambling along or sitting quietly without any particular thought in mind … yet not being mindless either. And then, when a sparkling intimacy occurs, do not the woods take on a fairy-tale-like quality? Is one not in a paradisiacal environment that envelops yet leaves one free? This is the ambience that I speak of. At this magical moment there is no ‘I’ in the head or ‘me’ in the heart … there is this apperceptive awareness wherein thought can operate freely without the encumbrance of any feelings whatsoever.
It is not my ambience nor yours … yet it is here for everyone and anyone for the asking … for the daring to be here as this body only. One does this by stepping out of the real world into this actual world, as this flesh and blood body, leaving your ‘self’ behind where ‘you’ belong … because the reality of the real world is an illusion ‘I’ create by ‘my’ very ‘presence’.
This ambience delivers the goods so longed for through aeons. (Richard, List C, No. 4b, #natureexperience).

Kuba: Then I considered whether it is the fear of ‘my’ death, I do notice that often what pushes me out of naive enjoyment and appreciation is something to the effect of what Richard called – grasping at redemptive straws – but I am not sure about that one either. (link)

Mmh, Richard talks about a “redemptive straw” or “one of several doomsday straws” in combination of a deep foreboding –

Richard: I have written about what can happen, regarding that fear so vast as to best be called dread, some years ago. Viz.:

• [Richard]: A deep feeling of dread, the abject intuition of impending doom, is fraught with foreboding, be it a grim, dire, or awful presage (link), and this intensely apprehensive trepidation is symptomatic of the existential angst (the anguish of the essential insecurity of being a contingent ‘being’) which underpins all suffering.
As such an occasion of profound dread is an opportune moment to plumb the depths of ‘being’ itself (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being) rather than avoidance through realisation of the portentous event as all manner of phantasmagoria can be manifested by such evasion.
With pure intent one can enable a movement into the existential angst, rather than despairingly grasping at doomsday straws, which movement facilitates the bright light of awareness being shone into the innermost recesses of ‘my’ presence … which is ‘presence’ itself.
Such an active perspicacity in ‘my’ moment of reckoning will reveal that ‘presence’ itself feeds off ‘my’ fear – it is its very life-blood as it were – and this functional acuity brings an abrupt end to its nourishment.
Whereupon all-of-a-sudden one finds oneself on the other side of the wall (to keep with the ‘cornered’ analogy for now) with the hitherto unseeable doorway to freedom closing behind one and one is walking freely in this actual world where one has already always been living anyway.
All what happened was that upon ‘my’ exposure dissolution occurred and the Land of Lament sank without a trace. (Richard, List B, James3, 21 Nov 2002).

In short: what happened was that the existential angst of discovering how one is nothing but a contingent ‘being’, and how one will cease to ‘be’ unless one of several doomsday straws be grasped, resulted in the redemptive straw being grasped so firmly as to bring about an ASC (which waxed and waned in intensity) which endured for more than just a few weeks.
(Hence her abrupt about-face, as made into public knowledge in both ‘Richard’s Journal’ and on The Actual Freedom Trust website, and her out-of-character blackguarding of actualism and bad-mouthing of me). (Richard, List D, No. 6, 16 Nov 2009).

I don’t know if this applies.

Kuba: Initially it almost seemed like a “naughty thing” to be doing, to proceed into the wonderland whilst everyone else is ‘back there’ – but I don’t think this is the reason. (link)

Kuba: Hmm actually I wonder if it is this one, I am still worried about what those other identities will make of where I am proceeding. Like I can just hear those identities chattering “what a fool” all the while I am lost in the wonderland.
But at the same time I do remember what I discovered recently, that those identities are not the target of all this, it is the flesh and blood bodies that all this is for.
It seems perhaps ‘I’ am yet to abandon ‘humanity’, to not only be an utter fool in their eyes but also a complete deserter, and to proceed anyway. Because once ‘I’ am lost in that wonderland, with no way back to ‘reality” then ‘I’ am completely and utterly on ‘my’ own.

It sounds like a wonderful way to ‘get lost’.

Kuba: This being on my own I am not afraid of because in that wonderland there is the perfection and purity with me all the way. It is more that by virtue of even daring to enter the wonderland I am going against the whole thrust of ‘humanity’, every step taken transgresses some rule in ‘reality’. How could I speak to another when we are as if speaking from different worlds?
I realise this is what you are doing right now as you converse with us Vineeto. (link)

Ha … it is very easy to “speak to another”. They don’t know I am in a different world, I am entirely anonymous. Automorphism fills in the gaps. For instance, I am almost daily having coffee and chatting with a lively and mostly cheerful lady about my age who lives a few boats further up the wharf. We talk about life on the river, how lucky we are to live here in this paradise, comparing what we had for lunch/ dinner and what goes on in the world. She has no idea that I am different in that I only meet her as a flesh-and-blood body. She just says she enjoys the calming effect our chats have for her.

It’s only on this forum, set up to discuss actualism and an actual freedom, that I talk about my favourite topic.

So, in actuality it is quite different to your imagination.

Cheers Vineeto

2 Likes
1678

Thank you for sharing this Vineeto, I am not sure why but this in particular I enjoyed reading, how you spend some of your time as a fully free human being, it sounds very wonderful.

Anyways it looks like I am now sold, I am ready to get lost with no way back. Watch this space :grin:

Yes this is the one.

Yes it is interesting that resistance, anxiety, stress, fear, dread etc all these play little to no role lately, and I got a rather big mouthful of those at one point :laughing:

1 Like
1679

So driving home just now I realise that this whole problem only exists because ‘I’ still take ‘myself’ to be the epicentre of existence. That ‘I’ am that important for the whole world to notice that ‘I’ disappeared - here comes the messiah again lol.

Looks like there is more to that pride, ‘I’ want to be seen, to be important, and so ‘I’ cement ‘my’ existence.

I can see that it is possible to be anonymous, in fact the world wouldn’t even notice. It is more that ‘I’ have a stake in being “someone in particular”.

‘I’ do not wander off into exile because ‘I’ want to remain a ‘someone’ in relation to ‘others’. Going into the wonderland there is only anonymity.

It looks like this is it - ‘I’ am not ready yet to no longer be a ‘someone’.

Of course this makes so much sense, ‘I’ need ‘humanity’ to affirm the ‘who’ that ‘I’ am. In that wonderland there is no one to do that anymore.

This is rather silly and yet it seems to be the reason - pride and humility - ‘I’ don’t proceed into exile because ‘I’ want to be a ‘someone’.

1 Like
1680

So I remember Leila shared some private correspondence she had with Geoffrey a while back regarding the need for validation. There was a certain phrase which Geoffrey used - Seeing ‘myself’ in the mirror of the eyes of ‘others’ - it is just like that.

It was nice to re-read through that message and indeed I notice this has been a core theme in my life :

Geoffrey: Regarding your “walking over boundaries”, on the forum for example, your conscious intention was never in doubt: it was to help. So you were distressed when people reacted poorly to some of your actions, because you only wanted to help! You might ask yourself though, whether what you really wanted was rather to appear helpful. To be seen as helpful. And as such accepted, validated…
But it’s not the slight disregard for people’s boundaries that is the issue, it’s this unexamined drive for validation…
Now you’re saying that you can’t feel good because there is this issue of what you think I or others on the forum think of you, or of what you think the neighbor thinks of you… In fact you’re saying you can’t feel good because you don’t feel validated (by I, others, or the neighbor)… or in your particular case because you don’t see yourself as a ‘good person’ in the mirror that I, others, and the neighbor seem to turn towards you (that this validation takes the form of being considered a ‘good person’ in your case - and not ‘successful’ or ‘brilliant’ or ‘beautiful’ or whatever - is to your merit btw). And surely, it must be the case that many unnamed others, in your life, have given or still give you that impression too. So at the root, your feeling good appears to depend on what you think people think of you, on the image of yourself you see in their eyes. I’m sure you’re seeing how unsatisfactory this is, or you wouldn’t have been interested in actualism, which is about unconditional happiness.

What stands out here most obviously is exactly what Geoffrey summed up with - seeing how unsatisfactory this whole game is. It’s like there is no way for this kind of involvement not to end up messy. Just the sheer amount of mental and emotional energy it takes to continually look for ‘my’ reflection in that mirror of others, to continually adjust ‘myself’ so that the reflection shows what ‘I’ need it to show, the constant questioning of ‘myself’, the need to assert ‘myself’ onto others so that the reflection is how ‘I’ want it to be etc. And all this simply so that ‘I’ can appear in a certain way.

But it seems this is not just about vanity, it is more that ‘my’ very existence requires such a mirror. It is like Richard wrote that - Pride and humility stands in the way of ceasing all self-centred activity. But this self-centred activity of maininting ‘myself’ is a burden for ‘me’. I am happy that I have managed to get this bugger by the throat now. I noticed that even resolving this whole business around being out from control removed some of this burden, with no label to live up to ‘I’ was freed to be more sincere and more naive. Now I see that it is possible to be anonymous - that choice is freely available.

It seems I still haven’t seen - beyond a shadow of a doubt - that I simply don’t want to play this game anymore, which is to say ‘I’ am not ready yet to give up being a ‘someone’ and instead to disappear into anonymity. Who would have thought that this is what the obstruction was haha.

Yesterday I had these very fascinating glimpses of what it means to be anonymous, it clarified what the goal is, what actual freedom is like. It is not like what ‘I’ have been imagining at all. It is the end of all self-centred activity, a blessed release into anonymity.

Whereas as the messiah, actual freedom would be like ‘my’ final form of recognition - of ‘being’ - of course this is the completely wrong direction.

2 Likes
1681

I always found the grammar a bit odd here, can you clarify Vineeto?

What I gather he is saying is that when facing profound dread, it’s better to plumb the depths of ‘being’ itself rather than avoid the dread, because avoiding the dread can lead to manifesting various phantasmagoria, while using the opportunity to plumb the depths of ‘being’ will be fruitful.

But the ”avoidance through realisation of the portentous event” is confusing, why is ”realisation of the portentous event” a form of ”avoidance”?

Or is it more like ”As such an occasion of profound dread is an opportune moment to plumb the depths of ‘being’ itself (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being) through realisation of the portentous event, rather than avoidance, as all manner of phantasmagoria can be manifested by such evasion.”?

Cheers
Claudiu

1682

Ohhhh or wait is he saying that

Rather than trying to realize or figure out what the foreboding event might be that is causing a deep feeling of read (ie I am dreading something, what am I dreading?)…

Instead of that (looking ‘outward’ at what the event might be) it is instead an opportune moment to look inward, at the depths of ‘my’ very ‘being’ itself, which (with pure intent) " can enable a movement into the existential angst […] which movement facilitates the bright light of awareness being shone into the innermost recesses of ‘my’ presence … which is ‘presence’ itself" – and this can then “reveal that ‘presence’ itself feeds off ‘my’ fear” which “functional acuity brings an abrupt end to its nourishment”

So it is kinda funny in that ‘realizing’ the event-that-I-am-dreading ends up being the “avoidance” of looking at the dread itself/why dread manifests in the first place/‘my’ being itself

1 Like
1683

Vineeto:
RICHARD: A deep feeling of dread, the abject intuition of impending doom, is fraught with foreboding, be it a grim, dire, or awful presage (link), and this intensely apprehensive trepidation is symptomatic of the existential angst (the anguish of the essential insecurity of being a contingent ‘being’) which underpins all suffering.
As such an occasion of profound dread is an opportune moment to plumb the depths of ‘being’ itself (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being) rather than avoidance through realisation of the portentous event as all manner of phantasmagoria can be manifested by such evasion. (Richard, List B, James3, 21 Nov 2002).

Claudiu: I always found the grammar a bit odd here, can you clarify Vineeto?
What I gather he is saying is that when facing profound dread, it’s better to plumb the depths of ‘being’ itself rather than avoid the dread, because avoiding the dread can lead to manifesting various phantasmagoria, while using the opportunity to plumb the depths of ‘being’ will be fruitful.
But the “avoidance through realisation of the portentous event” is confusing, why is “realisation of the portentous event” a form of “avoidance”? (link)

Perhaps I should have included the follow-up sentences in that quote (the link was also faulty but is fixed now) –

Richard: As such an occasion of profound dread is an opportune moment to plumb the depths of ‘being’ itself (‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being) rather than avoidance through realisation of the portentous event as all manner of phantasmagoria can be manifested by such evasion. With pure intent one can enable a movement into the existential angst, rather than despairingly grasping at doomsday straws, which movement facilitates the bright light of awareness being shone into the innermost recesses of ‘my’ presence … which is ‘presence’ itself.
Such an active perspicacity in ‘my’ moment of reckoning will reveal that ‘presence’ itself feeds off ‘my’ fear – it is its very life-blood as it were – and this functional acuity brings an abrupt end to its nourishment. Whereupon all-of-a-sudden one finds oneself on the other side of the wall (to keep with the ‘cornered’ analogy for now) with the hitherto unseeable doorway to freedom closing behind one … and one is walking freely in this actual world where one has already always been living anyway.
All what happened was that upon ‘my’ exposure dissolution occurred and the Land of Lament sank without a trace. (Richard, List B, James3, 21 Nov 2002).

Perhaps a comma after “avoidance” and after “portentous event” makes for an easier comprehension.

Claudiu: Ohhhh or wait is he saying that –
Rather than trying to realize or figure out what the foreboding event might be that is causing a deep feeling of dread (i.e. I am dreading something, what am I dreading?) …
Instead of that (looking ‘outward’ at what the event might be) it is instead an opportune moment to look inward, at the depths of ‘my’ very ‘being’ itself, which (with pure intent) “can enable a movement into the existential angst […] which movement facilitates the bright light of awareness being shone into the innermost recesses of ‘my’ presence … which is ‘presence’ itself” – and this can then “reveal that ‘presence’ itself feeds off ‘my’ fear” which “functional acuity brings an abrupt end to its nourishment”.
So it is kinda funny in that ‘realizing’ the event-that-I-am-dreading ends up being the “avoidance” of looking at the dread itself/ why dread manifests in the first place/ ‘my’ being itself. (link)

Excellently put. You found the description of how to proceed when a deep feeling of dread makes its appearance.

At some point plumbing the depths of ‘being’ itself is most likely unavoidable on the way to self-immolation at this point in the pioneering stage.

Cheers Vineeto

2 Likes
1684

Vineeto: Mmh, Richard talks about a “redemptive straw” or “one of several doomsday straws” in combination of a deep foreboding…
…I don’t know if this applies.

Kuba: Yes it is interesting that resistance, anxiety, stress, fear, dread etc. all these play little to no role lately, and I got a rather big mouthful of those at one point. (link)

Hi Kuba,

You reported lots of explorations into strong fear, it is excellent that “all these play little to no role lately”.

Kuba: So driving home just now I realise that this whole problem only exists because ‘I’ still take ‘myself’ to be the epicentre of existence. That ‘I’ am that important for the whole world to notice that ‘I’ disappeared – here comes the messiah again lol.
Looks like there is more to that pride, ‘I’ want to be seen, to be important, and so ‘I’ cement ‘my’ existence.
I can see that it is possible to be anonymous, in fact the world wouldn’t even notice. It is more that ‘I’ have a stake in being “someone in particular”.
‘I’ do not wander off into exile because ‘I’ want to remain a ‘someone’ in relation to ‘others’. Going into the wonderland there is only anonymity.

More than anonymity, you will no longer exist which includes all ‘your’ emotional and imagination-fuelled memories. The anonymity is an aspect of living in the actual world. ‘You’ will not only cease to exist but when I became actually free I knew I had always been here as me, this flesh-and-blood body – it’s a seamless transition.

Kuba: It looks like this is it – ‘I’ am not ready yet to no longer be a ‘someone’.

Ha, I can hear you saying that, over and over. But ‘your’ days are numbered nevertheless.

Kuba: Of course this makes so much sense, ‘I’ need ‘humanity’ to affirm the ‘who’ that ‘I’ am. In that wonderland there is no one to do that anymore.
This is rather silly and yet it seems to be the reason – pride and humility – ‘I’ don’t proceed into exile because ‘I’ want to be a ‘someone’. (link)

Pride and humility are a rich field for investigation, aren’t they.

Kuba: But it seems this is not just about vanity, it is more that ‘my’ very existence requires such a mirror. It is like Richard wrote that – Pride and humility stands in the way of ceasing all self-centred activity. But this self-centred activity of maintaining ‘myself’ is a burden for ‘me’. I am happy that I have managed to get this bugger by the throat now. I noticed that even resolving this whole business around being out from control removed some of this burden, with no label to live up to ‘I’ was freed to be more sincere and more naive.

This is excellently put “with no label to live up” – and you said it well the other day –

Kuba: … it’s more like ‘I’ am speedily loosing all ‘my’ feathers and ‘my’ cap (link)

Kuba: Now I see that it is possible to be anonymous – that choice is freely available.

Maybe it’s just the way you phrased it – ‘your’ future is not to be living in anonymity – upon becoming free ‘you’ will disappear like Santa Claus in ‘your’ world vanished into thin air many years ago. Santa Claus is not “living in anonymity”.

Kuba: Yesterday I had these very fascinating glimpses of what it means to be anonymous, it clarified what the goal is, what actual freedom is like. It is not like what ‘I’ have been imagining at all. It is the end of all self-centred activity, a blessed release into anonymity.

Ha, that’s great – it put an end to ‘your’ future imaginings. Just don’t add any new ones such as “the anonymous messiah”. :wink:

Kuba: Whereas as the messiah, actual freedom would be like ‘my’ final form of recognition – of ‘being’ – of course this is the completely wrong direction. (link)

Yes, it would be, the ultimate feather in ‘your’ cap.

• [Richard]: I found out where I had been going wrong for eleven years … self-aggrandisement is so seductive’. (Richard, AF List, No. 16, 8 Jan 2001).

• [Richard]: ‘I set my sights further than being a mere saviour of humankind, all those years ago when I was determined to be free of the human condition, and I am not likely to fall back into that position now that I have succeeded’. (Richard, List B, No. 34a, 8 June 1999).
• [Richard]: ‘I also say (repeatedly) that I set my sights further than merely being (yet again) another of the long list of failed Messiahs and Masters, Gurus and God-Men, Saints and Sages, Avatars and Saviours and that I am not likely to fall back into that position now that I am free from the human condition’. (Richard, List B, No. 25e, 13 Oct 1999).
• [Richard]: ‘I set my sights further than being yet another embodiment of that ‘supreme intelligence’ all those years ago, when I first began my journey into ‘my’ psyche (which is the ‘human’ psyche), so I am not likely to fall back into that position now’. (Richard, List B, No. 40, 3 Oct 1999).

Isn’t it wonderful and confidence-inspiring that actuality is so pure that nothing dirty can get in?

Richard: It is life in the real-world (being normal) which has the dark underbelly – and thus, albeit sublimated and transcended, so too has life in the unreal-world (being abnormal) – not life here in this actual world … the pristine perfection of the peerless purity the infinitude this universe actually is ensures nothing dirty (‘being’ or ‘presence’) can get in. (Richard, AF List, No. 27f, 24 Oct 2003).

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like
1685

Ah excellent Claudiu, I get it now too. Will keep that one in the toolbox if/when needed :grin:

1686

Hey Kuba, it was really interesting to read what you said about the possibility of having autism. Very coincidental too because it’s been a question for me too.

My housemate is a clinical psychologist and he is adamant that I have it. That being said, he knows I’m into actualism and considers it my “special subject” (akin to an autistic person having a fascination with trains lol). Leaving aside his judgemental views about actualism, he thinks I have level 1 autism - so high functioning but with some deficits.

I chatted about it briefly with Srinath - he was adamant that he doesn’t think I have it, that it’s overdiagnosed, and he considers it an attempt to put people in boxes (I don’t think he’ll mind me mentioning this). I spoke to my actual psychologist about it - she does think I’m “neurodivergent” and suggested we could do a full assessment.

From my point of view, I think if I do have it, it’s mild - I.e level 1” autism. A lot makes sense to me when I consider the possibility that I do have it (against the set criteria). I have always been…at odds with the way everyone else wants to do things I guess haha. Very high performing in some areas, but struggling with areas of life others would consider basic.

That being said, there is also childhood trauma there - but I think the autism hypothesis explains hypersensitivity to things in my childhood. As an example, having had 3 children already, my parents seemingly wanted to force me (with discipline, control…bordering on abuse) to be like they had been. They could not work out what to do other than to be harsh, and it wasn’t until I started to excel academically that they started to let me off the hook somewhat. I’ve come to realise my Mum is a narcissist and literally cannot empathise or care in a felt sense so that no doubt had an impact too. That doesn’t mean she didn’t carry out the role of “mother” - just that there wasn’t warmth/care.

I don’t wear any of this stuff too seriously - it’s something explanatory that can help pop a few bubbles of confusion, and it can help others understand too. But that’s about it.

When it comes to actualism, I’ve asked myself similar questions to you - regarding possible “deficits” that could be making it harder. As an example, I have not been one to find it easy to properly/deeply connect with others. I’m always running my own race haha.

So another fact might just be that “type A” thing, that we seem to share. I’ve always been “a man on a mission” - huge goals, driven, competitive, obsessional, self-castigating. The idea that this the best thing ever discovered and the most important thing to ever pursue (and I’m not saying those things aren’t true!) is also very enticing, and in turn kind of a stressful thing to not be able to just achieve on the spot.

What is really working for me at the moment is separating out my ideas about actualism (and my sense of identity around actualism), from the experimental side. I find the experimental side to be very gentle and fun, not requiring intense thought or obsession or analysis.

Otherwise, actualism becomes just a lofty goal like anything else (e.g wanting to be famous or a football player or rich) that almost serves as a form of dissociation and shows a desire to escape. A kind of future “dream” that keeps one forever motivated and….not feeling good.

But the autism thing, regardless of whether valid or not, really helped me to find a sense of friendliness towards myself lately - seeing that I am sensitive in some ways, like a kid. Counterintuitively, this sensitivity and care has taken me into feeling friendly and gentle - and further, a permission to be naive and childlike :). Something I could not access when I was being cruel to myself in the name of my ambition. This has changed things more than any amount of dedicated effort I applied in x years of being obsessed about actualism.

Cheers,

Felix

2 Likes
1687

damn that’s so funny, i had such a similar experience. i was watching “love on the spectrum” with my partner recently and i felt like i really understood the autistic people and their experience bc i had experienced some mild flavor of that, and seeing them loved and celebrated exactly as they were helped me forgive myself for so much of my awkwardness and failure to understand people. i basically taught myself social skills via shame and compartmentalization and mirroring.

i was just like you, really really sensitive. i think my mildly autistic-like disposition developed due to this heightened sensitivity, where i basically learned to deeply bury my emotions to avoid being overwhelmed and misunderstood. this made me pretty robotic and i also had a really hard time understanding other people because i didn’t understand emotions at all, i was completely cut off from my own. i tried to figure them out with logic and rules but it was hard and i was very awkward for most of my life

i also totally related to what you wrote in your journal about starting to feel your feelings fully. the journey has been the same for me, i finally feel fully in touch with this part of my psyche i have severed connection to. what has followed is the messy job of learning to make sense of them and observe them for what they are rather than being blindly dragged.

i’ll be curious to hear how your experience continues to evolve!

3 Likes
1688

above comment intended re: this

1689

So I have had this really interesting thing going on since yesterday. There is this wave of significant muscular relaxation which spreads from the very nape of the neck and out to the sides, then down all the way to the jaw, as this is happening it also sends this tingling sensation down the shoulders and to the rest of the body. It is pretty much happening all the time but at times it increases even more, quite bizarre but very pleasurable. Like the tension/obstruction which I have been holding for a lifetime has released.

5 Likes
1690

Thanks for all the quotes Vineeto. Yes this clarified it a lot. I must have come across it before but just didn’t remember it. Having that terminology and way of seeing what I’m doing is helpful.

Is it correct to say there is no psychological component to the beer? It’s just feeling at its core?

1691

Alexander: Thanks for all the quotes Vineeto. Yes this clarified it a lot. I must have come across it before but just didn’t remember it. Having that terminology and way of seeing what I’m doing is helpful.

Is it correct to say there is no psychological component to the beer? It’s just feeling at its core? (link)

Hi Alexander,

You are welcome.

It is not correct. When Richard says the ‘doer’ is descendant whilst ‘beer’ is ascendant, it means the sophisticated controller, the one who philosophises, plans, maps, directs and interferes into what is happening of its own accord, is substantially diminished and thus the naïve ‘beer’ is able to allow dynamically life living itself (or let the universe live one) with pure intent pulling one forward to one’s destiny, i.e. an actual freedom and the demise of ‘me’.

As being out-from-control in a different-way-of-being is still within the human condition, the instinctual passions and the psychological/ psychic/ imaginative identity formed thereof is still operating. It only ceases with ‘my’ extinction.

The best way to understand this is to be naïve, even better, be an excellence experience, and from this different way of being contemplate how you are experiencing yourself when your own ‘doer’/ controller is temporarily in the background.

Cheers Vineeto

3 Likes
1692

So dealing with a customer at work just now it clicked experientially what Richard wrote in his journal - “It is possible to be sensitive without being vulnerable”.

I can see in the past there were 2 choices (apparently) either to care and in the process of it to become emotionally tangled up with the other or to apply some kind of a callous distance that would prevent the tangling up but also stop the caring.

The problem with the first option was that even if I did care, there was that aspect of empathic burnout, as in there is only so much I could take before their hurt would become almost as if an irritant to me. And then whatever caring was in place would swiftly turn into malice. This feature is not my personal shortcoming but rather an inevitable outcome of relating in this manner, that it to say it will happen sooner or later.

The second option - a callous distance - really needs no further explanation on why it does not work :laughing:

But indeed there is the third alternative of being sensitive without becoming vulnerable, that is to say that my caring can be cranked up without it becoming an emotional involvement. And that is a wonderful thing! It means there is no reason anymore to hold back on genuine caring and consideration. It also means that I do not require the other to change, which means that for the first time assistance can come freely.

2 Likes
1693

So contemplating on what I wrote here - Felix's Diary - #407 by Kub933

I am now wondering, is it that ‘I’ was never ‘doing’ life to begin with? After-all all of ‘my’ plans and schemes as the ‘doer’ never came to fruition. I wrote about this before that ‘I’ have woken up thousands of times and planned what the day would be like, not once did ‘I’ get it right :laughing:

Is it that all of that ‘activity’ which ‘I’ carried out as the ‘sophisticated doer’ was something like psychological masturbation :thinking::laughing:

And if so then what is left to do at this point? Or rather what is left to ‘be’ :sunglasses:.

1 Like
1694

So it seems I keep coming back to this fascinated thought/possibility. Is it that at the end of all this one is almost as if slapped with a joke - that life was already always happening of its own accord. That what ‘I’ amount to in the end is like a cloud of illusion directing this flesh and blood body to act in this and that way. But ‘I’ can already see that as the ‘doer’ ‘I’ never had any genuine agency, and as the ‘beer’ ‘I’ am not in charge of life either.
This is fascinating to contemplate because a fact brings freedom from deliberation.
After-all it was this very experiencing (of the breath breathing itself) which got me back on the wide and wondrous path. I saw in that moment (about 5 years ago now) that just as the breath breathed itself, life lives itself.

It is like what Richard wrote, that it is when ‘I’ come to feel/believe that ‘I’ know better than the universe how life should be lived that the problems begin. And it is weird also because ‘I’ experience ‘myself’ to be separated from the rest of existence and yet ‘I’ feel that ‘I’ am somehow in charge of what happens. It seems this is how ‘I’ substantiate ‘myself’, ‘I’ try to have an import on what happens and in this way ‘I’ can appear to be genuine - this is what pride is no?

That in order to exist ‘I’ must assert ‘my’ role in what happens, but this goes against the facts. ‘I’ am maintaining ‘myself’ against the facts - no wonder it is a painful endeavor.

And yet as I write this now pride still remains, and what I mean by this is this fundamental feeling/belief which states that ‘I’ am somehow required, that ‘I’ know better than the universe, that this moment is incomplete if not for ‘my’ tinkering with it. But really this is like a self-fulfilling prophecy, because it is ‘I’ who is the arbiter of how this moment should apparently happen and then when it does not go according to ‘my’ demands ‘I’ take it as proof that ‘I’ am required.

This thing of pride it really does seem to be a key aspect of how ‘I’ maintain ‘myself’, in fact can any identity exist without pride? It is like Richard wrote that ‘I’ am proud of ‘my’ biggest achievement which is maintaining ‘myself’ as an identity.

2 Likes
1695

Kuba: (…) But indeed there is the third alternative of being sensitive without becoming vulnerable, that is to say that my caring can be cranked up without it becoming an emotional involvement. And that is a wonderful thing! It means there is no reason anymore to hold back on genuine caring and consideration. It also means that I do not require the other to change, which means that for the first time assistance can come freely. (link)

Hi Kuba,

An excellent discovery! It can foster allowing an unprecedented openness and let the other be as close as they like without fear to get entangled and intimacy can flourish like never before.

Kuba to Felix: So with feeling good as a baseline (something that can come to be expected as an “of course”) moving into the “bester” territory will no longer be an escape or a fix, but rather something even more wonderful than what is currently experienced. And then if all else fails you are back to a general sense of well-being.
I do remember at some point on the forum it was as if the methodological, in-control virtual freedom – as pioneered by feeling being ‘Peter’ and ‘Vineeto’ – went out of fashion. Which was kind of odd, of course Richard never went through this and also Geoffrey wrote about aiming for an actual freedom only.
But taking myself as an example, the kind of person I was, with the kind of tendencies that I had – it was the most obvious and immediate thing to focus on. Still when I think about it now I would take a general sense of well being each moment again over an oscillation from anxiety into excellence every time.
The other thing which I can write about from experience is that something incredible can happen when feeling good is established as a baseline and so much so that there is less and less of a ‘normal’ to fall back to. Then that movement into the “bester” territory is not a temporary escape (with the feelings associated with this) and rather it has that delicious flavour of going into gay abandon – and then the socks can be safely blown off (link)

I much appreciate you are putting in a plug for the in-control-virtual freedom and that you pursued it yourself. This is eminently doable and has enormous felicitous consequences not only for the person doing this but has a ripple-effect for everyone they are in contact with. The happy-and-harmless vibes are contagious (as Sonya recently reported (link)) and success breeds success.

Here Richard comments on the important role vibes play in feeling beings’ lives –

RICHARD: However, I will take this opportunity to stress just how vital this matter of affective vibes is, in regards to successful actualism practice, as it is central to the ‘feeling harmless’ aspect of such practice (as in the phrase ‘happy and harmless’ that is) inasmuch the whole point is the minimisation – and the ultimate cessation via extirpation of ‘being’ itself – of any malicious feelings and, thus, their resultant transmission as affective vibes throughout the human psyche. (Richard, List D, No. 15, 28 Oct 2013)

Kuba: So a question from me now… why the ‘doer’ in the first place? What happens to cause this? Is the ‘doer’ a creation of the social conditioning, a myth that is taught so that one lives with responsibility and is thus under control of the tenets of society?
That in order for morality to function effectively one must exist as a ‘doer’, because if ‘I’ am apparently pulling all these levers then ‘I’ can be held under obligation and responsibility.
It seems for me the ‘doer’ is a bit like the appendix at this point

Ha, it seems the ‘doer’ is indeed weakening substantially to even let you write such a sentence uncontested.

Kuba: It seems it was something along these lines, that human beings observed that there were these instinctual passions which were a liability when living in a group and so a make-shift approach was to devise the ‘doer’. Because the ‘doer’ and responsibility/ obligation go like peas and carrots. It ‘worked’ so far as to control the excesses of violence and yet it inevitably leads to separation, resentment, duplicity etc. So it can never be a lasting solution.

It wasn’t even planned like this. As soon as human beings live in a group they have to work out behavioural rules where everyone needs to fit in. Even stone-age people were not free of responsibility and restrictive rules, else human beings would not have survived and thrived. But as you observed, “it can never be a lasting solution” because nothing in regards to living together in peace has eventuated despite sophisticated morals and ethical dictates and technological advances.

Kuba: But not only that, this ‘doer’ cements the human condition in place. For if ‘I’ am not ‘my’ feelings then human nature is apparently set in stone.
Huh so if ‘I’ am indeed ‘my’ feelings then ‘I’ can altruistically sacrifice ‘myself’. If ‘I’ am separated from ‘my’ roots no such thing will ever take place. Furthermore the human condition is not something that happens to ‘me’, not something ‘I’ am a victim to, rather the human condition is what ‘I’ am. (link)

Yes, well said. If ‘I’ don’t acknowledge/ recognize that ‘I’ am my feelings then the actualism method won’t work, then ‘I’ am stuck with believing that ‘I’ am having feelings, and they won’t budge. Only when you can see that freedom is in ‘your’ hands can you start doing something about your situation and unravel the mess which is the human condition.

Kuba: That in order to exist ‘I’ must assert ‘my’ role in what happens, but this goes against the facts. ‘I’ am maintaining ‘myself’ against the facts – no wonder it is a painful endeavour.

The ‘doer’ plays an important role when you start doing something so radically different to your nature and conditioning until you get to the point where you can access pure intent – then you can begin to naïvely allow the universe to live your life.

Kuba: And yet as I write this now pride still remains, and what I mean by this is this fundamental feeling/belief which states that ‘I’ am somehow required, that ‘I’ know better than the universe, that this moment is incomplete if not for ‘my’ tinkering with it. But really this is like a self-fulfilling prophecy, because it is ‘I’ who is the arbiter of how this moment should apparently happen and then when it does not go according to ‘my’ demands ‘I’ take it as proof that ‘I’ am required.
This thing of pride it really does seem to be a key aspect of how ‘I’ maintain ‘myself’, in fact can any identity exist without pride? It is like Richard wrote that ‘I’ am proud of ‘my’ biggest achievement which is maintaining ‘myself’ as an identity. (link)

Ah, the last bulwark against ‘your’ disappearance! And yet Richard also tells you what happens when pride abdicates –

Richard: Without the defences of the identity I can stand proud, as I do not need to maintain myself as ‘someone’ in particular with relation to others. An unusual anonymity has freed me from the ‘normal’ responsibility and onerous task of sustaining ‘myself’. (Richard’s Journal, p. 100).

Now that you discovered that your “caring can be cranked up without it becoming an emotional involvement” (link) any day now the instinctive altruistic impulse can be activated and take the place of your ‘self’-maintaining pride for the benefit of every body. In the meantime the game of how close can we get is still a fun challenge.

Cheers Vineeto

3 Likes