Kub933's Journal

Kuba: Wow I am having a blast lately. Things are constantly happening, and these are not just realisations, this is more akin to actuality “coming at me” without a break, not that I would want a break anyways! And this sense of actuality constantly “knocking on my door” is nothing to do with ‘me’, the momentum is not of ‘my’ doing. Oopsie… Looks like I am now solidly out from control .

Ah, the genuine article.

Kuba: There was one thing that happened about 30min ago which was especially precious. I was chilling on the sofa with Sonya and poncho (my dog). I went to cuddle poncho and all of a sudden it was like that veil of reality was pulled back and I saw both Sonya and poncho as actually existing. It’s hard to convey the importance of those words – “actually existing”. But it goes some way to consider that not a single one of the ‘events’ which ever happened in ‘my’ reality were genuine. That the entirety of ‘my’ life was never genuine.
And now that curtain got pulled back and an actually existing world was revealed, so precious to discover it!

I fully understand the importance of those words as I remember ‘Vineeto’s’ first experience of this happening, it was quite world-view-shattering for ‘her’ –

‘Vineeto’: The next vital and essential break-through in understanding was my first major peak experience (PCE). What had started off one evening as ‘a roaming in the vast chambers of my mind’, psychic experiences and an expanded state of consciousness suddenly took a turn from ‘inner reality’ to actuality. It happened when Peter looked at me and said ‘hello, how are you doing?’ {Perhaps vaguely similar to Richard asking Pamela, “how is it as you sit here now”? (13.53 min)}.
I popped out of my inner world of feelings and imagination and, questioning the very validity of all I felt and thought, entered the world beyond beliefs and feelings – the actual world. Here was another human being, a flesh-and-blood person without any particular identity {for me} and he wanted to talk to me. And here I was, also a flesh-and-blood person without a particular identity, sitting on an old couch and curious to talk to this man that I was meeting for the first time.
I had never met the actual Peter; I had only related to him through the curtain of my expectations and classifications, through the filter of my social identity, through the grey or rose-coloured glasses of my ‘self’. What was initially a shocking surprise quickly turned into fascination and delight to have discovered something so simple and so pure – actual intimacy with another person and the perfection of the actual world. Here we were, two human beings, meeting for the first time, without past or future. No grand feelings, in fact, no feelings at all, but the pleasure of mutual undivided attention as to what the other is going to say next… [square-bracketed inserts added]. (Actualism, Vineeto, AF-List, James2, 7.4.2000)

PS: At the time I didn’t actually know if Peter was in a PCE as well (he wasn’t), so the “two human beings (…) without past or future” is an incorrect description from ‘my’ memory. The “without past or future” experience was nevertheless the case for myself. (Interesting how the identity subtly colours the perception/ description in hindsight).

There was another experience, even more intimate than the above described , which Richard reported on –

Richard: The term ‘intimacy experience’ became part of the actualism lingo after a particularly instructive event in late spring, 2007, when at anchor upriver whilst exhorting feeling-being ‘Grace’ to no longer reserve that specific ‘way-of-being’ for those memorable occasions when ‘she’ was alone with me and to extend such intimacy to also include ‘her’ potential shipmates in order to dynamically enable the then-tentative plans for a floating convivium – which were on an indefinite hold at that time – to move ahead expeditiously (this was in the heady context of feeling-being ‘Pamela’ having already entered into an on-going PCE a scant five days beforehand due to ‘her’ specifically expressed concerns to me over the lack of intimacy between actualists). At some stage during this intensive interaction feeling-being ‘Vineeto’, who had been intently following every nuance, every twist and turn of the interplay, had what ‘she’ described as a ‘shift’ taking place in ‘her’ whereupon the very intimacy being thus exigently importuned came about for ‘her’ instead.
To say ‘she’ was astounded with the degree of intimacy having ensued is to put it mildly as ‘her’ first descriptive words were about how ‘she’ would never have considered it possible to be as intimate as this particular way of being – an intimacy of such near-innocence as to have previously only ever been possible privately with ‘her’ sexual partner in very special moments – when in a social setting as one of a number of persons partaking of coffee and snacks in a sitting room situation. Intuitively seizing the vital opportunity such intimate experiencing offered ‘she’ took over from me and commenced interacting intensively in my stead – notably now a one-on-one feeling-being interchange – and within a relatively short while feeling-being ‘Grace’ was experiencing life in the same, or very similar, manner as feeling-being ‘Vineeto’ (hence that 4th of December 2009 report of mine about how these intimacy experiences are potentially contagious, so to speak, for other sincere actualists as the atmosphere generated affectively-psychically can propagate a flow-on effect). (Richard, List D, Claudiu4, 28 Jan 2016).

The last one I remember happened during the ‘Second convivium meeting’ when ‘Vineeto’ was out-from-control. Richard had entered the room, holding a cup with a drink in each hand and I exclaimed “Richard, I have never seen you like this!” He was naturally puzzled, looked up and down his body and couldn’t see anything special or different. In the ensuing conversation it became clear that I was suddenly seeing the actual Richard, and was surprised and delighted by the imminence and intimacy to see him without the veil of ‘my’ outer world perspective.

Kuba: And since that event I keep getting that same experience but milder, that the veil of reality is so thin and this actually existing world keeps coming through. It’s almost slightly disorientating at times, not in an unpleasant way at all but rather it’s that things are shifting around at a very fundamental level, that I don’t know which way to place myself, but actually I’m not too concerned with that anymore anyways – I am having a blast on the one way ride (link)

This is wonderful to read. Now that you know that an actual intimacy is possible (and potentially contagious) you have the additional opportunity to explore the territory of Intimacy Experiences and/or actual intimacy as well.

Richard: Actual intimacy – being here now – does not come from love, for love stems from separation. The illusion of intimacy that love produces is but a meagre imitation of this direct experience of the actual. In the actual world, ‘I’ as ego, the personality, and ‘me’ as soul, the ‘being’ – both subjectively experienced as one’s identity – have ceased to exist; whereas love accentuates, endorses and verifies ‘me’ as being real. And while ‘I’ am real, ‘I’ am relative to other similarly afflicted persons; vying for position and status in order to establish ‘my’ credentials … to verify ‘my’ very existence.
To be actually intimate is to be without the separative identity … and therefore free from the need for love with its ever un-filled promise of Peace On Earth. There is an actual intimacy between me and my companion. Actual intimacy is a direct experiencing of the other. I am having a superb time … and it is a well-earned superb time, too. (Library, Topics, Intimacy)

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like

So for a while now I have been in talks with my mum about various aspects of the human condition, the specific situation which has brought this up is some personal problems that have come about for a family member.

We actually covered a lot of ground and today she messaged me with clear demonstration that she has seen through the “trap of compassion”. Which means that she no longer feels responsible/obligated/driven to help the family member, and that now her help is offered without an agenda. It was quite amazing that she has been able to suss this out!

But the main thing that caught my attention was something she said at the end. That this family member has the right to be happy in whichever way they please.

This got me wondering about the difference between the “pursuit of happiness” and the goal of being happy and harmless, why is it that 1 fails and 1 delivers the goods? Because this idea of “trying to be happy” has been around for a long time and has been applied by many well meaning people, so why is it that it fails?

It clicked then that it is the harmless aspect which provides the stable element to one’s ongoing enjoyment and appreciation, there is no other way. What happens when ‘I’ set out on the quest for ‘my’ happiness is that ‘I’ inevitably gravitate towards the good feelings and these can include a variety of things - Love, compassion, pride, authority, desire, even aggression! These feelings will initially provide the illusion that ‘I’ am succeeding in ‘my’ quest, they are feelings of a positive hedonic tone and so there is immediate gratification, ‘I’ am hooked.
Of course this is all a self-centred and tunnel visioned involvement, caring and consideration is thrown out the window as ‘I’ become passionately driven for another fix of ‘my’ good feelings.
And not only is it that those good feelings are unstable for ‘me’ directly, they are also unstable on an interpersonal level. This “pursuit of happiness” cannot provide happiness :laughing: as it inevitably stirs up conflict. It actually fails on all levels, it cannot sustain an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation for ‘me’ and it cannot sustain an ongoing peace and harmony with others, and those 2 things are closely linked anyways.
Of course the end product of such “pursuit of happiness” is driven, self-centred and tunnel visioned identities trying to “get theirs”.

But this can be solved so easily, one only has to add this very important element which is that the goal is to be both happy and harmless. Now this harmlessness has nothing to do with morality, or with sacrificing one’s happiness for others etc. No this harmlessness benefits all, it benefits others of course but it also allows for an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation for ‘me’, it wins at all levels. If ‘my’ goal is to be both happy and harmless then ‘I’ will very quickly notice that the good feelings hurt both ‘me’ and others so ‘I’ will not continue travelling down that path which leads to nowhere fruitful. With the focus on both happiness and harmlessness ‘my’ vision opens up from the previous self-centred and tunnel visioned approach, ‘I’ become caring and considerate. With the focus on both happiness and harmlessness ‘I’ notice that only the felicitous and innocuous feelings deliver the goods, that they are the only ones stable enough to provide an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation for ‘me’ as well as an ongoing interpersonal peace and harmony, and as above these feed between each other.

This has clicked big time now, that it is the goal of being happy and harmless that delivers the goods, it delivers the goods for all. This has surfaced some aspects of ‘my’ life where there has been exactly that drive for “my happiness” and I see now that it is completely a dead end. It not only fails for ‘me’ but it fails for others too.

3 Likes

Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for those replies, I did read them but there has been a lot going on recently. There was in particular 2 events which happened over the past few days that “shook the boat” quite significantly so I have been somewhat all over the place.

It seems it is quite a precarious place to be in when the controls are let go of, I remember around Christmas time last year it also seemed like ‘I’ was on the verge of disappearing and then an event involving a fellow actualist also shook ‘me’ significantly.
It seems like there is a risk of going out of control, like ‘I’ am very vulnerable.

Also with regards to intimacy experiences I find something similar, that when a lot is “going on” and I don’t quite know where to place myself, it is quite difficult to allow such interaction, it is like I am operating with a fragmented mind :laughing:

1 Like

I am always amazed at Richard and his mettle, how he went through insanity to end up in the actual world, and with no precedent at all, what an incredible achievement. But it seems like when I am in that precarious place it could fall one way or another, actuality or insanity :laughing:

Kuba: So for a while now I have been in talks with my mum about various aspects of the human condition, the specific situation which has brought this up is some personal problems that have come about for a family member.
We actually covered a lot of ground and today she messaged me with clear demonstration that she has seen through the “trap of compassion”. Which means that she no longer feels responsible/ obligated/ driven to help the family member, and that now her help is offered without an agenda. It was quite amazing that she has been able to suss this out!
But the main thing that caught my attention was something she said at the end. That this family member has the right to be happy in whichever way they please.
This got me wondering about the difference between the “pursuit of happiness” and the goal of being happy and harmless, why is it that 1 fails and 1 delivers the goods? Because this idea of “trying to be happy” has been around for a long time and has been applied by many well meaning people, so why is it that it fails?

Hi Kuba,

It’s a great question to compare the real-world goal of “the “pursuit of happiness”” with the goal of “being happy and harmless”, and the ‘harmless’ aspect is indeed vitally important.

Kuba: It clicked then that it is the harmless aspect which provides the stable element to one’s ongoing enjoyment and appreciation, there is no other way. What happens when ‘I’ set out on the quest for ‘my’ happiness is that ‘I’ inevitably gravitate towards the good feelings and these can include a variety of things – Love, compassion, pride, authority, desire, even aggression! These feelings will initially provide the illusion that ‘I’ am succeeding in ‘my’ quest, they are feelings of a positive hedonic tone and so there is immediate gratification, ‘I’ am hooked.
Of course this is all a self-centred and tunnel visioned involvement, caring and consideration is thrown out the window as ‘I’ become passionately driven for another fix of ‘my’ good feelings.
And not only is it that those good feelings are unstable for ‘me’ directly, they are also unstable on an interpersonal level. This “pursuit of happiness” cannot provide happiness as it inevitably stirs up conflict. It actually fails on all levels, it cannot sustain an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation for ‘me’ and it cannot sustain an ongoing peace and harmony with others, and those 2 things are closely linked anyways.
Of course the end product of such “pursuit of happiness” is driven, self-centred and tunnel visioned identities trying to “get theirs”.

However, a note of caution to present it only this way. In this own journey, Richard was imitating the actual, yet, because of the lack of a precent, ‘he’ was captured by Love and Compassion and ended up enlightened, despite ‘his’ intent of being harmless (demonstrated by his story how ‘he’ rid ‘himself’ of full-blown anger (link). Those people who are following the “pursuit of happiness” are also not aware of the third alternative.

Hence I would suggest an addition to your suggestion of adding being harmless and that is to not overlook the investigation of ‘good’ feelings when attempting to being happy and harmless, enjoying and appreciating. The reason is because all the morals and ethics, principles and beliefs of the real world are derivatives of the value-set of spiritual enlightenment and are therefore the hardest ones to question. (When you have love and compassion and pacifism you will go to heaven/ become immortal).

Kuba: But this can be solved so easily, one only has to add this very important element which is that the goal is to be both happy and harmless. Now this harmlessness has nothing to do with morality, or with sacrificing one’s happiness for others etc. No this harmlessness benefits all, it benefits others of course but it also allows for an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation for ‘me’, it wins at all levels. If ‘my’ goal is to be both happy and harmless then ‘I’ will very quickly notice that the good feelings hurt both ‘me’ and others so ‘I’ will not continue travelling down that path which leads to nowhere fruitful. With the focus on both happiness and harmlessness ‘my’ vision opens up from the previous self-centred and tunnel visioned approach, ‘I’ become caring and considerate. With the focus on both happiness and harmlessness ‘I’ notice that only the felicitous and innocuous feelings deliver the goods, that they are the only ones stable enough to provide an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation for ‘me’ as well as an ongoing interpersonal peace and harmony, and as above these feed between each other.
This has clicked big time now, that it is the goal of being happy and harmless that delivers the goods, it delivers the goods for all. This has surfaced some aspects of ‘my’ life where there has been exactly that drive for “my happiness” and I see now that it is completely a dead end. It not only fails for ‘me’ but it fails for others too. (link)

Of course, once you know that neither love nor compassion are harmless, and nor is pacifism (another strong moral imperative, including not to be judgemental for instance), then the being harmless as well as happy encompasses the whole range of investigations into the obstacles of enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive.

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like

Lol it clicked just now that actual freedom is by all means insanity (based on the ‘human’ psychological/psychic models and beliefs) that by all means a person from the real world would find a flesh and blood body devoid of any identity to be insane. Of course any ‘real world’ distinction between sanity/insanity is itself ignorant to the existence of actuality.
But that doesn’t seem so scary anymore haha. Of course when there is that fear of insanity, of “loosing it” then ‘I’ jump back to ‘safe ground’, which is back to the real world. But the fear is of that which is categorically different to the “sanity of the real world” and actual freedom is indeed insanity when viewed from this lens.

1 Like

Kuba: Hi Vineeto,
Thank you for those replies, I did read them but there has been a lot going on recently. There was in particular 2 events which happened over the past few days that “shook the boat” quite significantly so I have been somewhat all over the place.
It seems it is quite a precarious place to be in when the controls are let go of, I remember around Christmas time last year it also seemed like ‘I’ was on the verge of disappearing and then an event involving a fellow actualist also shook ‘me’ significantly.
It seems like there is a risk of going out of control, like ‘I’ am very vulnerable.

Hi Kuba,

You feel vulnerable because with the sophisticated ‘doer’ being descendant you can no longer automatically rely on your socio-cultural inwit, a.k.a. conscience, to not get into trouble, hence you now need to orient yourself to, and rely upon, the compass of pure intent.

Ha, Richard used to say –

Richard: The identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago was wont to say, whenever ‘he’ would get a bit cocky about being on top of it all, that an everyday life situation would invariably tap ‘him’ behind the knees, so to speak, and bring ‘him’ back down-to-earth … and that, furthermore, life was very good at doing just that. (Richard, AF List, No. 68d, 17 Oct 2005)

Kuba: Also with regards to intimacy experiences I find something similar, that when a lot is “going on” and I don’t quite know where to place myself, it is quite difficult to allow such interaction, it is like I am operating with a fragmented mind (link)

Mmh, why do you need to “place myself” – isn’t your aim, informed by pure intent and especially in intimacy, to lose ‘yourself’?

The “fragmented mind” could to be indicator of a remnant hesitation to lose ‘yourself’. That’s where the tyre meets the road, so to speak.

Kuba: I am always amazed at Richard and his mettle, how he went through insanity to end up in the actual world, and with no precedent at all, what an incredible achievement. But it seems like when I am in that precarious place it could fall one way or another, actuality or insanity (link)

I suggest to first get back to feeling good before you make an assessment about your state of mind.

Then find your connection to pure intent and experience the beneficence and benevolence issuing forth from the purity of the stillness of this infinite universe. In this stillness you will find the confidence and certainty that nothing can go wrong.

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like

Haha thank you for this quote Vineeto, this is indeed exactly what happened!

Yes that is the goal, I think I have got to the bottom of this now. This “not being able to place myself” it’s that fear of insanity, of “loosing it”, but actually ‘I’ am “loosing it” in that sense :laughing:

It’s just that with pure intent it is safe to “loose it”.

But just to put more context to this, this is why those 2 situations shook me like so, because one was a training partner getting injured in training and another was a complaint from a customer. And it was like “oh shit” maybe ‘I’ am going to be dangerous. And it was the same kind of theme around Christmas last year, this sense of “maybe I have got it all wrong” and that if ‘I’ don’t resume control ‘I’ will be dangerous.

Actually I’m not sure if it was that ‘I’ would be dangerous or in danger. It seems like both, in that operating outside of sanity seems like it could get me in trouble as well as be dangerous for others. If anything this shows just how successful the social/moral conditioning is, and perhaps for good reason.

1 Like

So as I was driving to work today I was contemplating on the conversation we had and something quite incredible happened. I saw the ‘guardian’, it was like this blanket that had been covering ‘me’ forever and up until today it was invisible, but invisible in the way of “hiding in plain sight”. But this wasn’t that a certain belief or moral was seen, it was that the entire structure of the conscience was seen.

When I saw it there was this sense of a burden being greatly reduced, because this guardian is a collection of all the various moral truths. It also consists of the shame, the fear of ostracisation, isolation, punishment, damnation etc As well as all the various “worst case scenarios” that will apparently happen when/if ‘I’ fall out of line. Essentially all that has been inculcated into ‘me’ in order to control the instinctual passions. This guardian is a little like a strict parent that will only accept straight A’s across all subjects or the child is a failure. It is not an intelligent process and as such it is not capable of consideration.

However when I saw this construct I was actually quite glad to find it! Because it was seen with absolute certainty that this thing needs to be in place unless pure intent is active. That it is no joke what can happen if the instinctual passions are allowed to run amok.

But then at the same time I saw that this guardian has been ruling with an iron fist. That any time ‘I’ did not conform perfectly to the moral dictates that a whole mechanism would swing into action, and various nightmare scenarios would seem as if guaranteed! It’s like if I got to the end of using a self-checkout machine and realised that I did not scan a plastic bag (which costs 30p), and ended up just taking one. As I am walking past the security there are scenarios being played out of police arrests, and courts and being fired from my job etc :laughing: And it’s funny but this is literally how ‘I’ have experienced it ‘my’ whole life.

This is the kind of control that the guardian enforces.

So this is why when I saw the entire structure of my conscience there was this feeling of a burden being released, because I saw that actually such ruling by an iron fist has not been needed for a long time and yet ‘I’ have been punished by it day in and day out.
It was almost like that child that has only known the strict and unforgiving parents finally being told that “you are doing great”.

With this feeling of the guardian being as if “lifted off” a little, there was also this incredible sense of pure intent being accessible, like a broadband connection had just opened. When I arrived at the hen party I was able to spend 2 hours with them with my conscience being as if irrelevant. I was operating outside of the dictates of my conscience.

3 Likes

Vineeto: You feel vulnerable because with the sophisticated ‘doer’ being descendant you can no longer automatically rely on your socio-cultural inwit, a.k.a. conscience, to not get into trouble, hence you now need to orient yourself to, and rely upon, the compass of pure intent.

Kuba: So as I was driving to work today I was contemplating on the conversation we had and something quite incredible happened. I saw the ‘guardian’, it was like this blanket that had been covering ‘me’ forever and up until today it was invisible, but invisible in the way of “hiding in plain sight”. But this wasn’t that a certain belief or moral was seen, it was that the entire structure of the conscience was seen.
When I saw it there was this sense of a burden being greatly reduced, because this guardian is a collection of all the various moral truths. It also consists of the shame, the fear of ostracisation, isolation, punishment, damnation etc. as well as all the various “worst case scenarios” that will apparently happen when/if ‘I’ fall out of line. Essentially all that has been inculcated into ‘me’ in order to control the instinctual passions. This guardian is a little like a strict parent that will only accept straight A’s across all subjects or the child is a failure. It is not an intelligent process and as such it is not capable of consideration.
However when I saw this construct I was actually quite glad to find it! Because it was seen with absolute certainty that this thing needs to be in place unless pure intent is active. That it is no joke what can happen if the instinctual passions are allowed to run amok.
But then at the same time I saw that this guardian has been ruling with an iron fist. That any time ‘I’ did not conform perfectly to the moral dictates that a whole mechanism would swing into action, and various nightmare scenarios would seem as if guaranteed! It’s like if I got to the end of using a self-checkout machine and realised that I did not scan a plastic bag (which costs 30p), and ended up just taking one. As I am walking past the security there are scenarios being played out of police arrests, and courts and being fired from my job etc. And it’s funny but this is literally how ‘I’ have experienced it ‘my’ whole life.
This is the kind of control that the guardian enforces.
So this is why when I saw the entire structure of my conscience there was this feeling of a burden being released, because I saw that actually such ruling by an iron fist has not been needed for a long time and yet ‘I’ have been punished by it day in and day out.
It was almost like that child that has only known the strict and unforgiving parents finally being told that “you are doing great”.
With this feeling of the guardian being as if “lifted off” a little, there was also this incredible sense of pure intent being accessible, like a broadband connection had just opened. When I arrived at the hen party I was able to spend 2 hours with them with my conscience being as if irrelevant. I was operating outside of the dictates of my conscience. (link)

Hi Kuba,

Whilst it is illuminating to see “the entire structure of my conscience” and had the effect of “this feeling of the guardian being as if ‘lifted off” a little”, it nevertheless might be beneficial at some point to identify the specific aspect which started the whole sequence. You said in the previous message –

Richard: The identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago was wont to say, whenever ‘he’ would get a bit cocky about being on top of it all, that an everyday life situation would invariably tap ‘him’ behind the knees, so to speak, and bring ‘him’ back down-to-earth … and that, furthermore, life was very good at doing just that. (Richard, AF List, No. 68d, 17 Oct 2005)
Kuba: But just to put more context to this, this is why those 2 situations shook me like so, because one was a training partner getting injured in training and another was a complaint from a customer. And it was like “oh shit” maybe ‘I’ am going to be dangerous. And it was the same kind of theme around Christmas last year, this sense of “maybe I have got it all wrong” and that if ‘I’ don’t resume control ‘I’ will be dangerous.
Actually I’m not sure if it was that ‘I’ would be dangerous or in danger. It seems like both, in that operating outside of sanity seems like it could get me in trouble as well as be dangerous for others. If anything this shows just how successful the social/ moral conditioning is, and perhaps for good reason. (link)

According to your report two incidents caused you to question if you are “going to be dangerous”, which in itself is a worthwhile subject for investigation for these specific incidents. But because those incidents themselves caused “shame, the fear of ostracization, isolation, punishment, damnation etc.” and then escalated, as feelings tend to do, into imaginings of “all the various “worst case scenarios””, you never had an opportunity to get back to the original trigger. This situation of strong doubt and fear you then “followed by a general contemplation that “operating outside of sanity seems like it could get me in trouble as well as be dangerous for others” in order to de-escalate those feelings. Yet these contemplations still left you at arm’s length of the original feelings by placing them into the overarching category of ‘sanity vs. insanity’ and the workings of conscience in its general structure.

Now that those strong feelings have subsided and “this incredible sense of pure intent being accessible”, it is beneficial to trace the situation back to its origin so that a similar situation won’t be tapping you “behind the knees” again, as Richard said.

Specifically, you might want to ascertain if have you been in fact careless to contribute to the two incidences, or you perhaps just blame yourself just-in-case because you were not sure?

I had a similar question running after I had become newly free –

Vineeto: Personally, when I negotiated my way towards freedom from the (overall well-meaning but now inadequate) ‘guardian’ (i.e. the social identity), the main question was – will I be able to be safe and harmless without the guardian watching over me? So I checked myself out in interactions, in various social situations with the intent to determine if I would be safe, and harmless, without the rules and regulations (morals and ethics), preconceived notions and automated behaviour patterns and eventually determined that I will be. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Srinath, 1 Jan 2019)

As shame was your initial feeling for unleashing a ‘feast of fears’ I also recommend Richard’s correspondence with Jonathan on this topic from August 2013 after Jonathan’s visit to Australia – (Richard, List D, Jonathan, 4 Aug 2013).

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like

Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your reply :

I will have to go into some specific detail here because I have been puzzling over this myself. And yes even thought this ‘guardian’ was experienced to be temporarily lifted the contents of it have remained.

So situation 1 :

I was sparring with a partner that has been training roughly as long as me (about 10 years) and is by all means very experienced/skilled. It was a competitive training round, with both of us working pretty hard to gain the slightest advantage over each other in order to score a win. The injury happened during a takedown as I had my hands locked around his waist and was behind him. He was training to insert one of his arms into the circumference of my lock in order to break it, and noticing this I hit a quick throw which took him backward with the arm still trapped in the lock. As the arm was trapped in the lock he fell without a post and knocked his head on the mat and was knocked out from the momentum. Now what I did is not an illegal move by any means but it is something that can be potentially risky, and in this case it did eventuate in an injury. It’s probably the kind of technique that I would not do against a beginner at all but in this scenario going against a seasoned grappler and amidst a competitive round this is what I did.

The main “nightmare scenario” here was something along the lines of him dying from the concussion and me being sent off to prison for manslaughter. I was very scared of this because I understand that without any context one would simply say “well you shouldn’t have thrown him with a trapped arm” and yet anyone who trains BJJ at a high level would understand what is required in order to control/score against a skilled opponent.
I think this more or less sums up situation 1.

Situation 2 :

This is the one that has stayed with me even more, and it was a complaint from one of the customers for a hen party which I worked recently (I don’t know which one as the company understandably will keep their privacy). The complaint was to say that my behaviour at the hen party resulted in the bride being in tears after I left and that she was extremely upset. Now this one completely blindsided me because I have done these for 8+ years and have probably accrued about 1000 parties, and in all of this not a single negative review, never mind a complaint. Now the nature of the job is by itself quite cheeky, this is what it is. So the compass I have always gone by is primarily to pay close attention to each individual to ensure that they are having a great time. That if the people present there are laughing, smiling and by all means having a great time then all is well. And of course I would increase/lower the “cheekyness” of it all depending on this feedback and also on what the group clearly wanted. There are times when I turn up to a group that are particularly shy and I can see this, of course they still hired me to provide a specific service so I proceed, but in those cases I will lower that “cheekyness” level to something that is acceptable for them. And of course in any case of an explicit lack of consent for anything I don’t proceed at all. Now I cannot recall any situations in the past months where I could have the slightest inkling that anyone present was upset, never mind extremely upset and leading to tears! There was not any case of me going against an explicit lack of consent and yet clearly something happened somewhere that resulted in this outcome.

The “nightmare scenario” here was something along the lines of being made out to be some kind of a sexual predator. This one particularly put the breaks on because it completely blindsided me. It’s like the compass that appeared to have been working so fabulously all of sudden it had this major oversight.

And so basically this is where I thought was the danger of no longer working to the various morals, principles and creeds. Because yes I operate within the legal laws and protocols but in a situation where one’s character is judged it seems to be a tick in my favour if I also demonstrably live to the various moral and ethical creeds. Like in scenario 2 if I explicitly ask for consent every 2 seconds then it would work in my favour, whereas going by implicit consent of observing someone’s responses etc would not be considered as good. And the same with situation 1, I could just never do any technique that is even a little risky which would certainly prevent these events and yet it would mean that I could never hang with anyone experienced, as it’s just not how it works, there is a certain level of tenacity required to score against a seasoned opponent, but the general public does not know these things. Hence those nightmare scenarios surrounding some kind of public damnation.

Essentially it’s something like a fear of being put under a witch hunt and not having this “oh look but I’m a moral citizen” to assist me.

And so to add to this, this is why I went on this additional exploration in this post. That I wanted to triple check that there isn’t any of this pursuit of “my happiness” which is actually not harmless. That I wanted to have the utmost certainty that it is safe to operate amorally, that it is safe to “step out of line” with regards to no longer conforming to the various moral creeds. Now whether those 2 situations would have happened if ‘I’ was not around I am not sure, perhaps there would be even more caring and even more consideration so that even these rare events would not take place. But then even Srinath wrote that he had someone try to throw a punch at him! And even Richard experienced all manner of attacks on his character.

I mean I have even spoken with forum members here and they have said some outrageous things about Richard and Vineeto, about what they apparently did, of course with this isomorphism in place the actions of actually free people are simply viewed through that ‘normal’ lens. The post written by Richard’s grandson a while back really demonstrates this, that Richard was this “kind of crazy dude living on a broken down boat” to him.

Now even me and Sonya at a certain time around the “rift thread” had seen / projected ‘Vineeto’ as some kind of “HR lady” character :sweat_smile:

So update about situation 2 :

I did check with the agency and they explained the situation further, it was a job where the group were by all means having a great time (so my compass was not incorrect), I do remember that through all this the bride was sort of “to the side” though, and it appears that the situation was just a little too much for her / not to her liking, even though she had not been personally involved. So with this information at hand I don’t know if this was a lack of caring, perhaps I should have seen that she specifically was not having the greatest of times and not focused so much on the rest of the group instead. But I also do remember arriving at the venue to begin with and when saying hi to the bride noticing that she was quite overwhelmed by the whole situation, that it “was not her thing”, so it seems like a situation that is just doomed to fail from start.

Kuba: Hi Vineeto,
Thank you for your reply :

Vineeto: Specifically, you might want to ascertain if have you been in fact careless to contribute to the two incidences, or you perhaps just blame yourself just-in-case because you were not sure?

Kuba: I will have to go into some specific detail here because I have been puzzling over this myself. And yes even though this ‘guardian’ was experienced to be temporarily lifted the contents of it have remained.
So situation 1 :
I was sparring with a partner that has been training roughly as long as me (about 10 years) and is by all means very experienced/ skilled. It was a competitive training round, with both of us working pretty hard to gain the slightest advantage over each other in order to score a win. The injury happened during a takedown as I had my hands locked around his waist and was behind him. He was training to insert one of his arms into the circumference of my lock in order to break it, and noticing this I hit a quick throw which took him backward with the arm still trapped in the lock. As the arm was trapped in the lock he fell without a post and knocked his head on the mat and was knocked out from the momentum. Now what I did is not an illegal move by any means but it is something that can be potentially risky, and in this case it did eventuate in an injury. It’s probably the kind of technique that I would not do against a beginner at all but in this scenario going against a seasoned grappler and amidst a competitive round this is what I did. (…)

Hi Kuba,

Thank you for your detailed report.

It is quite simple – what were you feeling at the time and shortly before the incident?

Where there is no feeling of malice of any kind – as in the definition on the website (link) – then there is no reason for feeling guilty, ashamed or any similar remorse. You have to sort out where/ if competitiveness/ winning at the cost of caution and consideration fits in.

Personally, I would contemplate if I wanted to remain in a situation where competitive fervour can lead to unintended accidents, though, but then that was never neither my hobby nor livelihood.

Kuba: Situation 2 :
This is the one that has stayed with me even more, and it was a complaint from one of the customers for a hen party which I worked recently (I don’t know which one as the company understandably will keep their privacy). The complaint was to say that my behaviour at the hen party resulted in the bride being in tears after I left and that she was extremely upset. (…)
And so basically this is where I thought was the danger of no longer working to the various morals, principles and creeds.

A clarification here –

Richard: There is a marked distinction betwixt spontaneity and impetuosity (aka impulsiveness) … acuity and/or perspicacity, in the applied form of discrimination, discernment (as in being expedient, provident, judicious, prudent) in conjunction with pragmatism, practicality, sensibility, simplicity, and so forth, gives ready access for any introspective/ creative process to take place. With no identity in situ/ no affective faculty extant, to stuff things up, it is all quite effortless. (Richard, AF List, No. 103, 1 Oct 2005d)

Given that you still have an affective faculty in situ, and without the previously strict guidance of inculcated morals and ethics, a structure with fixed rules no matter the circumstance, you instead rely on pure intent.

Richard: Pure intent is the quality that encompasses what morals and ethics aspire to but never reach. (…) Freed by pure intent from the very necessary social constraints – designed to control a wayward ego and a compliant soul – one can have generosity of character without striving. Pure intent guides one in each and every situation and circumstance – it is an essential prerequisite to ensure a guaranteed passage through the psychic maze … (Richard, AF List, Alan, 16 Sep 1999)

You seem to want it both ways –

Kuba: Because yes I operate within the legal laws and protocols but in a situation where one’s character is judged it seems to be a tick in my favour if I also demonstrably live to the various moral and ethical creeds. Like in scenario 2 if I explicitly ask for consent every 2 seconds then it would work in my favour, whereas going by implicit consent of observing someone’s responses etc would not be considered as good. And the same with situation 1, I could just never do any technique that is even a little risky which would certainly prevent these events and yet it would mean that I could never hang with anyone experienced, as it’s just not how it works, there is a certain level of tenacity required to score against a seasoned opponent, but the general public does not know these things. Hence those nightmare scenarios surrounding some kind of public damnation.
Essentially it’s something like a fear of being put under a witch hunt and not having this “oh look but I’m a moral citizen” to assist me. (…)

You now seem to put the responsibility for your fears on “the general public” while you are upholding your own inner guardian, your social identity, unless you have a blank cheque guarantee in advance. Only the active pure intent of naiveté can guide you and give you the confidence and certainty. As I said to you before –

Vineeto: Then find your connection to pure intent and experience the beneficence and benevolence issuing forth from the purity of the stillness of this infinite universe. In this stillness you will find the confidence and certainty that nothing can go wrong. (link)

And like Ian perspicaciously observed recently –

Ian: Also fascinatingly, I am society – the rules I suffer under, I also enforce. (link)

Kuba: And even Richard experienced all manner of attacks on his character.

Yes he did – after all an actual freedom is most subversive – and how well and carefully phrases, mailing list members more often than not do object to the message itself, and then blame the messenger.

Richard: ‘Tis just as well I did not have you advising me back in 1997 when feeling-being ‘Peter’ suggested I go public with my discovery, on-line, for all the world to potentially access – else these words would not be available for you to peruse and neither would actualism/ actual freedom have a world-wide footprint – as my tendency is to be so bold as to render being ‘as bold as brass’ to be but the faintest of hues on the boldness scale.
(Being arguably the most subversive man on the planet – for those who read with both eyes open – would surely make any feeling-being quail). (Richard, List D, Jonathan2, 1 Jun 2015).

Kuba: I mean I have even spoken with forum members here and they have said some outrageous things about Richard and Vineeto, about what they apparently did, of course with this isomorphism in place the actions of actually free people are simply viewed through that ‘normal’ lens. (…)

Oh, vitriol from others does not automatically cease because one is free of the human condition. What always mattered most to feeling being ‘Vineeto’ was that ‘she’ was as free of malice (the intent to harm) as much as possible, especially when answering antagonistic messages.

Kuba: So update about situation 2 : (…) (link)

You may find that the more you allow pure intent to operate and suffuse you in the sweet tenderness of benignity and benevolence, the more caring and considerate you become, and possibly change situations with the foresight to avoid risks of inadvertently causing harm. It becomes second nature.

Richard: Thus the pure intent of naiveté provides the collateral assurance ‘I’ require to safely give ‘myself’ permission to allow this moment to live me (rather than ‘me’ trying to live in the present) and to let go the controls. Yet it is the direct experience itself which is the fundamental factor when it comes to making the curious decision to abandon both one’s present course and that of one’s peers and plunge into the adventure of a lifetime. Viz.:
• ‘I was outside watching a bird fly/flutter through a background of blue sky and the green leaves of trees and I was taken away by the utter fullness of it!’
This is what is important. (Richard, List B, No. 25f, 22 Jun 2000)

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like

Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your reply, I very much appreciate you wading through this territory with me.

I sat for about 20min just now and I don’t know if I can provide an accurate answer here. I have certainly observed how competitiveness can segue into aggression during hard sparring. It’s a little like when one plays with a dog and as the intensity builds there can be this ‘switch’ that happens when all of a sudden it’s no longer play. But it get’s pretty difficult to distinguish these shifts during competitive sparring rounds. What I can say that there was certainly a sense of intense competitiveness which means it is likely there was aggression underlying it, although I don’t even know if at this level competitiveness can be distinguished from aggression. As in as soon as I enter that competitive mindset - of winning at all cost - then likely I am already ‘being’ aggression.

Well this is exactly where I have been somewhat all over the place. It’s like do I continue training at the kind of intensity where these things can happen, where it is all part and parcel of high level competition. I was talking with Sonya about this the other day and indeed it is a rather rough sport, that the goal is to make the other quit and allow themselves to be caught in a submission, which often means forcing your opponent into exhaustion, inflicting pain to elicit reactions and in general doing all that is possible to break them down. That in a competitive round there is no space to think about the fact that their arm is trapped, there is a tiny window to pull the trigger in order to score any kind of advantage. When I am sparring with guys not as skilled as me then that skill discrepancy allows for something more like play but when it comes to competing with an equally skilled opponent this window of play seems to very quickly close.

But anyways this does not seem like something you can answer for me.

I will reply to the second bits soon also.

Actually I remember in one of the private emails Vineeto shared recently there was mention of @geoffrey on his way to martial arts practice. I don’t know if you read this forum much Geoffrey but at the off chance I would be fascinated to understand how you find this martial arts practice as a fully free human being? Although depending on the kind of martial art there may or may not be live sparring involved.

1 Like

Yes so this is precisely what I was contemplating whilst I was driving yesterday, before I saw the guardian. I wanted to find something that is impeccable and the answer is pure intent. But I can see now that this conscience which I saw is absolutely necessary as long as ‘I’ am a feeling being. It is a fail-safe in that way because as long as ‘I’ am in existence as a passionate being then there is always a chance for malice to be activated.

So when I arrived at the party yesterday after the guardian was as if lifted off a little and there was the experience of pure intent being readily accessible, there was this sense that nothing could go wrong, that as long as pure intent is active then it is certain that I will behave in a manner that is safe for all.

So what I understand now is that it is this connection to pure intent which needs to be maintained, and that when that connection is severed for whatever reason that this is as if a red flashing light. That the goal is then to resume allowing pure intent, because only then am ‘I’ able to live in a way which is safe whilst being amoral.

Essentially that is to say that there is no other way to safely operate outside of the morals and ethics than via pure intent. Pure intent is the anchor to that which is safe and impeccable.

And linking this back to my previous post, it is this connection to pure intent that will answer my question of how/whether to proceed with competitive training and what it will look like in practice.

1 Like

Hmm actually I wonder if I have this wrong and this is what this whole drama is about. That I no longer have the strict guidance of the moral/ethical imperatives to fall back upon but at the same time I have not given way to pure intent fully. Hence this whole thing of a fragmented mind.

1 Like

Also this was a very long winded and cunning way of saying that there was aggression there. I was feeling aggression, and in fact this competitiveness is driven by aggression. So of course when an incident happens there is the guilt, shame etc

The other thing is that I don’t enjoy those kinds of rounds, of course not becasue that competitiveness is driven by aggression and it can have all those ugly outcomes as well.

The reason I could be cunning about it is becasue it is like a “sanctioned aggression”, it can be explained away “due to the nature of the sport” etc But it is aggression nevertheless, it is far from clean.

And seeing first hand what my aggression is capable of causing (no matter if sanctioned or not) swung all the rest of the drama and the avoidance tactics in. And now the above posts are basically demonstrations of that cunning and the avoidance tactics.

But yes to answer the question which unravels this whole sorry mess is that it was aggression, and it was coming face to face with the outcomes of my aggression that caused such a shock.

And the same with situation no2, it was coming face to face with the outcomes of my pursuit of the good feelings that caused such a shock.

1 Like

Vineeto: Given that you still have an affective faculty in situ, and without the previously strict guidance of inculcated morals and ethics, a structure with fixed rules no matter the circumstance, you instead rely on pure intent.

Kuba: Yes so this is precisely what I was contemplating whilst I was driving yesterday, before I saw the guardian. I wanted to find something that is impeccable and the answer is pure intent. But I can see now that this conscience which I saw is absolutely necessary as long as ‘I’ am a feeling being. It is a fail-safe in that way because as long as ‘I’ am in existence as a passionate being then there is always a chance for malice to be activated.

Hi Kuba,

Conscience is never “fail-safe” as you can see by the amount of the mayhem and suffering which continues despite the rules of the social identity.

Living within the human condition is never “fail-safe” until/ unless pure intent is operating uninterrupted.

Kuba: So when I arrived at the party yesterday after the guardian was as if lifted off a little and there was the experience of pure intent being readily accessible, there was this sense that nothing could go wrong, that as long as pure intent is active then it is certain that I will behave in a manner that is safe for all.
So what I understand now is that it is this connection to pure intent which needs to be maintained, and that when that connection is severed for whatever reason that this is as if a red flashing light. That the goal is then to resume allowing pure intent, because only then am ‘I’ able to live in a way which is safe whilst being amoral.
Essentially that is to say that there is no other way to safely operate outside of the morals and ethics than via pure intent. Pure intent is the anchor to that which is safe and impeccable.
And linking this back to my previous post, it is this connection to pure intent that will answer my question of how/ whether to proceed with competitive training and what it will look like in practice. (link)

Presently you place your confidence of being able “to safely operate outside of the morals and ethics” on an ongoing active pure intent, which at least during the two incidents wasn’t active or ongoing – else those incidents would not have had the impact on you that they did.

Kuba: I sat for about 20min just now and I don’t know if I can provide an accurate answer here. I have certainly observed how competitiveness can segue into aggression during hard sparring. It’s a little like when one plays with a dog and as the intensity builds there can be this ‘switch’ that happens when all of a sudden it’s no longer play. But it get’s pretty difficult to distinguish these shifts during competitive sparring rounds. What I can say that there was certainly a sense of intense competitiveness which means it is likely there was aggression underlying it, although I don’t even know if at this level competitiveness can be distinguished from aggression. As in as soon as I enter that competitive mindset – of winning at all cost – then likely I am already ‘being’ aggression. (link)

Kuba: Also this was a very long winded and cunning way of saying that there was aggression there. I was feeling aggression, and in fact this competitiveness is driven by aggression. So of course when an incident happens there is the guilt, shame etc.
The other thing is that I don’t enjoy those kinds of rounds, of course not because that competitiveness is driven by aggression and it can have all those ugly outcomes as well.
The reason I could be cunning about it is because it is like a “sanctioned aggression”, it can be explained away “due to the nature of the sport” etc. But it is aggression nevertheless, it is far from clean.
And seeing first hand what my aggression is capable of causing (no matter if sanctioned or not) swung all the rest of the drama and the avoidance tactics in. And now the above posts are basically demonstrations of that cunning and the avoidance tactics.
But yes, to answer the question which unravels this whole sorry mess is that it was aggression, and it was coming face to face with the outcomes of my aggression that caused such a shock.
And the same with situation no. 2, it was coming face to face with the outcomes of my pursuit of the good feelings that caused such a shock. (link)

This is a sincere appraisal – affective aggression is just that, no matter if it is happening during “sanctioned” activity such as competitive sport or not. And you have perspicaciously identified situation No. 2 as “my pursuit of the good feelings” – those ‘good’ feelings, which so often get overlooked in one’s pursuit of being happy and harmless.

A month ago you quoted part of Claudiu’s report of his meeting with Geoffrey (link) –

Claudiu: Another interesting thing he imparted to me was just how much social identity can remain even for the basically free people. In other words, the ‘bar’ to basic actual freedom is really not that high. You don’t have to clean up all or even nearly all of your social identity issues… that being said, simultaneously it is still absolutely everything for me to self-immolate, as I (the feeling-being) am indeed fully going extinct, make no mistake about it. But you don’t have to clean up every last thing. It’s more a matter of seeing the way to oblivion and going there, full-on. (link)

Now here is a thought – what about becoming actually free first before making further assessments and potentially life-changing decisions on how much you can rely on being actively and continuously connected to pure intent?

Wouldn’t this be a worthwhile cause to sacrifice ‘yourself’ for the benefit of all the people who might potentially be hurt or harmed by ‘you’ when/if your own pure intent occasionally slips? If anything, these two incidents, which rocked you to the core, have experientially demonstrated to ‘you’ the imperative that remaining an instinctually driven identity is inherently unsafe for everyone concerned.

Geoffrey: I (…) realised in a flash that the unknown path is the safe path. That the known is the unsafe. That ‘I’ am the unsafe. (Geoffrey, Becoming Free Report)

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like

Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your reply :

Yes indeed this is exactly what happened and furthermore as you said :

So the social/moral conditioning cannot provide safety either, basically there is no safety where ‘I’ am in existence.

And yes whilst pure intent is active there is safety but as long as ‘I’ am in existence there is always a possibility of something happening. Those situations which happened they are still quite luke warm events, for example in a life or death situation the full extent of ‘my’ survival passions could be activated, such as the example Richard gave of people stampeding others to death during a fire. And I know that no matter how diminished ‘I’ may be, the potential for a full blown passionate response is always there, this ‘I’ cannot do away with. I think this is why it took so long for me to accept and see situation 1 and 2 clearly and sincerely, that I was shocked that these things still happen, and if those smaller things can happen then the worst things can happen too, it would just take the correct situation to trigger.

So with regards to proceeding towards actual freedom now, it is just this last question of how on earth to trigger altruism, I say question but it’s not that I am lacking the intellectual understanding, more like how to actually have it happen. Me and Sonya were watching a zombie movie (28 weeks later) yesterday and it actually gave a very good example of altruism, I mentioned this to Sonya during one of the scenes.

Because in the movie there is (of course) a zombie outbreak which is tearing through what is left of the population, there is a boy and a girl that are known to have potential immunity to the zombie virus. During all the commotion a soldier and a medic abandon their posts and set off on a mission to ensure that the boy and girl survive and make it out.

But the point is that both the solider and medic having learned “what is at stake” not only abandoned their prior responsibilities/obligations but furthermore they automatically/thoughtlessly/instinctually set off on a mission that would likely end in their death (which it does for them both), and they did so without any deliberation. As the medic said in one of the scenes “their lives are way more important than mine”.

That it was not a question to be deliberated or weighted up, it was “seeing the stakes” and then an automatic readiness to sacrifice their life. There was simply no consideration for ‘my’ survival when the survival of the species was at stake. So the altruism which they displayed it was out of their hands, it was activated by the situation. Not to say that I am now waiting for a zombie apocalypse :laughing:

Now the other thing is that once this altruism was activated it allowed for them to act in a way that would be seen as heroic, something that sometime down the line could be emulated by others in the way of morality.

That ‘I’ could act in a heroic way in order to claim ‘my’ rewards, and yet when altruism is activated it has nothing to do with this. Whatever heroic behaviour happens because of the complete lack of consideration for ‘my’ survival when the survival of the species is at stake.

Is this what morality is at core? A bastardisation of what happens when altruism is activated? That ‘I’ can “put the other before myself” in order to claim ‘my’ rewards? Whereas when altruism is activated ‘I’ sacrifice ‘myself’ for the survival of the species without any other consideration.

The other thing is that altruism is clearly not an intelligent response, it is an instinctive response. Which is also why it does not exist in actuality, which is good as there are many silly reasons one could instinctively sacrifice oneself for - I remember reading a story of a man jumping into a hot spring after his dog for example. Now sacrificing ‘myself’ for the benefit of this body, that body and everybody is certainly sensible.

But this is all good because altruism is essentially something that is already a part of ‘my’ repertoire, furthermore it is activated instinctively by the situation and not deliberated about by ‘me’, also once activated it causes a behaviour which is out of ‘my’ hands and whatever heroic qualities that are displayed are part and parcel of sacrificing ‘myself’ for the greater thing which is at stake.

So it’s like the situation is already set up for all that needs to happen, to happen. Essentially the universe has set it up so that ‘I’ can disappear, and any ‘I’ can disappear.

Oh wow and something else which I had not seen this clearly before, that altruism is literally the flip side of selfism. Basically there is the drive for the survival and continuation of the species and normally this takes the form of selfism - the survival of the individual. Altruism is based in the same core drive which fuels selfism (which is the very drive for the survival and continuation of the species), it is just that with the survival of the species at stake the survival of the individual is no longer of concern.

And now the other important question - Am ‘I’ as ‘self’ the very mechanism of selfism in operation? That it is ‘my’ survival that takes precedence over all else? Now ‘I’ may have expanded ‘myself’ into ‘humanity’ but it is the same drive for the survival of ‘me’ at all cost?

Vineeto: If anything, these two incidents, which rocked you to the core, have experientially demonstrated to ‘you’ the imperative that remaining an instinctually driven identity is inherently unsafe for everyone concerned.

Kuba: Yes indeed this is exactly what happened and furthermore as you said :

Vineeto: Conscience is never “fail-safe” as you can see by the amount of the mayhem and suffering which continues despite the rules of the social identity.

Kuba: So the social/ moral conditioning cannot provide safety either, basically there is no safety where ‘I’ am in existence.
And yes whilst pure intent is active there is safety but as long as ‘I’ am in existence there is always a possibility of something happening. Those situations which happened they are still quite lukewarm events, for example in a life or death situation the full extent of ‘my’ survival passions could be activated, such as the example Richard gave of people stampeding others to death during a fire. And I know that no matter how diminished ‘I’ may be, the potential for a full-blown passionate response is always there, this ‘I’ cannot do away with. I think this is why it took so long for me to accept and see situation 1 and 2 clearly and sincerely, that I was shocked that these things still happen, and if those smaller things can happen then the worst things can happen too, it would just take the correct situation to trigger.
So with regards to proceeding towards actual freedom now, it is just this last question of how on earth to trigger altruism, I say question but it’s not that I am lacking the intellectual understanding, more like how to actually have it happen. Me and Sonya were watching a zombie movie (28 weeks later) yesterday and it actually gave a very good example of altruism, I mentioned this to Sonya during one of the scenes.

Hi Kuba,

Even though you appear to agree with what I said, you have successfully pushed the decisive event of action away by transforming it, yet again, into a “last question”. Apparently, the two incidents haven’t given you enough demonstration to recognize “that ‘I’ am the unsafe”.

Kuba: Because in the movie there is (of course) a zombie outbreak … then an automatic readiness to sacrifice their life. There was simply no consideration for ‘my’ survival when the survival of the species was at stake. So the altruism which they displayed it was out of their hands, it was activated by the situation. Not to say that I am now waiting for a zombie apocalypse.

This can only be the cunning ‘me’ talking, having succeeded in surviving another day and another threatening shock to ‘my’ existence. If only ‘I’ could be the saviour …

Kuba: Is this what morality is at core? A bastardisation of what happens when altruism is activated? That ‘I’ can “put the other before myself” in order to claim ‘my’ rewards? Whereas when altruism is activated ‘I’ sacrifice ‘myself’ for the survival of the species without any other consideration.
The other thing is that altruism is clearly not an intelligent response, it is an instinctive response. Which is also why it does not exist in actuality, which is good as there are many silly reasons one could instinctively sacrifice oneself for – I remember reading a story of a man jumping into a hot spring after his dog for example. Now sacrificing ‘myself’ for the benefit of this body, that body and everybody is certainly sensible.
But this is all good because altruism is essentially something that is already a part of ‘my’ repertoire, furthermore it is activated instinctively by the situation and not deliberated about by ‘me’, also once activated it causes a behaviour which is out of ‘my’ hands and whatever heroic qualities that are displayed are part and parcel of sacrificing ‘myself’ for the greater thing which is at stake.
So it’s like the situation is already set up for all that needs to happen, to happen. Essentially the universe has set it up so that ‘I’ can disappear. (link)

It’s your philosophy (derived from the imagination so ripe in the real world) which turns the altruism of the Actual Freedom Trust website into a “bastardisation”

Richard: Thus when ‘I’ willingly and irremunerably ‘self’-immolate in toto – both psychologically and psychically – then ‘I’ am making the most noble sacrifice that ‘I’ can make for this body and that body and every body … for ‘I’ am what ‘I’ hold most dear. It is ‘my’ moment of glory. It is ‘my’ crowning achievement … it makes ‘my’ petty life all worth while. It is not an event to be missed … to physically die without having experienced what it is like to become dead is such a waste of a life. (Richard, Abditorium, Altruism).

Your conjecture that nothing can be done (as in “is already set up for all that needs to happen”) is presently lacking one vital element – pure intent.

Kuba: This is also nice to read, how ‘Vineeto’ approached ‘her’ quest, because ‘I’ have had the very same approach from the very start, and still do – that there is absolutely no possibility that ‘I’ will give up. (link)

Today your above post from 29 June could have a different meaning than when you wrote it – it seems it is ‘you’ who won’t give up ‘his’ rotten-to-the-core existence despite recent experiential knowledge of the harm ‘he’ could cause. Not yet anyway, you say, ‘I’ am waiting for the “zombie apocalypse”.

Is this really what you want?

Just to give an inkling of what you, the actual Kuba is missing out on –

Geoffrey: I watched the 3 videos, ‘yours’ was my favourite. Although I couldn’t help being surprised at seeing this ‘Vineeto’ person. Constantly on my mind while watching was what a sad state of affairs it was, for the actual Vineeto sitting right there on that chair, to have ‘Vineeto’ in residence, however nice and funny and happy she may have been, ‘her’ presence was so obvious. I was looking completely fascinated – realising it was the first time I was seeing the effect of the ‘person’ of an actually free person I had met. The before/ after was striking! Then the thought couldn’t help but being: what an astoundingly wonderful thing an actual freedom is, freeing what one is from who one is! For there is indeed all the difference in the world. (Private email 3 July 2025)

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like