I have decided to rewrite the phrase which seemed to cause all the confusion in my op. Instead of saying ‘as long as I have a feeler’ I am saying ‘as long as I am a feeling being’. This way everyone knows what I mean.
I think this is a good example of discourse working as it should. Thanks to all of you for correcting my mistake.
2 Likes
This is interesting because I remember when I first started reading AFT years ago I got the impression that the actualists were nitpicking anything that anyone wrote.
Now I see what all this ‘nit picking’ was about though 
And it’s mostly to do with the fact that ‘I’ am very cunning indeed and the devil is always in the details, this is where ‘I’ hide.
3 Likes
I have a mixed view of the nitpicking because it can so easily devolve into a little battle: “I am right about the way this grammar should be used, and you are wrong” and it’s totally missing the moment of identity that the other is probably experiencing anyway. Over and over I’ve seen myself get caught on someone saying something in a way that didn’t match with actualism, but usually it’s just because people aren’t speaking in the highly technical way Richard developed (out of necessity because of the subtleties involved).
On the other hand there does indeed come a point where those subtle intricacies are exactly the important thing to tease apart. Maybe it’s that the ‘grammar person’ is doing that type of intricate investigation, but the other is not necessarily looking for that questioning. Sometimes they are, and an interesting mutual investigation can take place.
As always the energetic/vibe aspect is the most important: is the grammar correction coming from a pure place? Or is it just another way for me to flex ‘my’ superiority?
I know for myself that I’ve played that game many many times.
1 Like
Apologies that I didn’t read the entire convo.
But the physical body doesn’t have an agenda, doesn’t have values or beliefs and all that.
So it’s only the psyche that can split, like one part wants material comfort whereas the other part despises it because of some credos, or in other form of splitting, one part of the psyche is going through commotion while the other part observes it with placidity.
Separating physical body as a material existence and the psyche as a phantom doesn’t look incorrect at all. And I didn’t see it differently in my pce as well.
1 Like
@Kiman Yes it might be useful to read the whole convo as it will help to clarify what I am referring to specifically.
In short though, what you @Kiman the identity currently experience as the ‘physical body’ is not the actual flesh and blood body. Unless you are currently in a PCE or Actually free in which case great 
. That thing the identity experiences and calls the physical exists inside reality. I always remember the same nice surprise when entering a PCE, the joy at the seeing that I am actually, undeniably here! That place which is actually here is invisible to ‘me’ and the physical is not it.
2 Likes
Me too. Corrections don’t seem to help and when those corrections are semantic then they really fail. People just say 'oh that’s what I meant." And they very well may be truthful. Yet some of these semantic differences are critical. The difference between “staying in the present” and becoming fascinated how one is alive at this moment and only this moment is absolutely critical. I’m not sure if the difference between having feelings and being is as critical. Probably for self immolation purposes it is but I don’t know anything about self-immolation. It seems to me that I am my feelings and my feelings are me is not necessary to becoming fascinated with being alive. But knowing not to try and stay in the Now is necessary.
1 Like
@JonnyPitt Becoming fascinated with being alive means I must first stop resenting being alive. If I take the stance that I am a physical body with a feeler I have already split myself in two, and how will I allow myself to feel good if I am forever splitting myself away from those resentful feelings?
1 Like
It’s funny that @Kub933 ’s first post about what he used to perceive as nitpicking but now realizes is not nitpicking, has transformed into a conversation about whether “the nitpicking” is useful - meaning the initial point (that it’s not nitpicking) was missed and now people are debating whether the supposed (but not actually happening) nitpicking is useful.
For context, here is a workable definition of nitpicking from Wikipedia: “ Nitpicking is a term, first used in 1956, that describes the action of giving too much attention to unimportant detail.”
By definition nitpicking is not useful, as it is to give too much (as in unwarranted) attention to that which is not important.
As it is critically important to understand that I am my feelings and my feelings are me - and that no part of ‘me’ will survive self-immolation - then this conversation is clearly not a matter of nitpicking.
As @jamesjjoo said: “I have decided to rewrite the phrase which seemed to cause all the confusion in my op. Instead of saying ‘as long as I have a feeler’ I am saying ‘as long as I am a feeling being’. This way everyone knows what I mean.
I think this is a good example of discourse working as it should. Thanks to all of you for correcting my mistake.”
Thus this is indeed an example of helpful, clarificatory and efficacious communication having occurred.
All without any battle having had to occur!
2 Likes
And yes I must agree I am actually having a lot of fun with these discussions and as much as it could appear to be nitpicking what it actually does is helps to clarify things for all. I’ve been having really good success just from the afterburn of these conversations as what’s being spoken about is clarifying itself experientially.
3 Likes
Yes @claudiu but we can’t know if @jamesjjoo is truly aware of his error or if he’s just conforming to the accepted language here. So we really don’t know if it’s helpful. Nor can we know if the “nitpicker” (yes I know it may not be nitpicking - let’s call it pointer-outer) truly knows the difference or is really just enforcing the standard language. So whether it’s nitpicking or not and whether it’s helpful or not can’t be known. Sometimes I point-out and sometimes I don’t. I pointed-out to @Miguel once and he got all huffy. So next time, I didn’t and chose to assume he had misspoke. I think you made a good point and the conversation has been fruitful.
That’s a pretty good point.
2 Likes
@JonnyPitt Yes I agree sometimes it is hard to tell whether it just the word chosen or if the word refers to a lack of clarity in terms of experiential knowledge, this is why the first time @jamesjjoo mentioned the feeler in his journal I took it as just that, a word he chose, but when he mentioned it again it seemed like there was something there to bring up/dig into.
That’s true - but if we say nothing it is guaranteed not to be helpful. If we say something, it might be.
That’s also true. Ultimately it is up to each participant to know whether they know or not. Sincerity is the key to this.
We can know whether it’s nitpicking by looking at whether the topic under discussion is an unimportant detail or not. As to whether it’s helpful… with this argument we may as well not say anything, since it “can’t be known” whether any meaningful information is ever communicated.
And yet, since Richard went public, people have been able to become free by reading the words, communicating, etc. We can see in aggregate that it is helpful - and the aggregate is just the sum of the parts - so we may as well attempt to be helpful by pointing out what we think are important things to each other. This way we have a shared cognitive system, in a sense, and we can all figure it out together.
Sure, we can all evolve and become better communicators, which is best achieved by gaining the experience of communicating via doing so.
I’m glad to hear it!
1 Like
Would it be the case, that an ultimate seeing/realisation/getting of the premise “i am my feelings and my feelings are me” be the end of/ for ‘me’?
I try to use the correct language, but i can’t say i have 100% seen/realised/got this particular point.
Logic would say that the seeing/realising/getting of this premise would be the end of ‘me’, considering that feelings come and go, if all feelings are me, i am as likely to go?
Edit: asking for a friend. 
1 Like
I don’t follow the logic to be begin with. But feelings change in our day to day. They are never extinguished. So seeing our feelings as me wouldn’t lead to extinction even if your logic is valid.
premise
It may be used as a premise if you like. But it can be experienced directly too.
May be. Can you specify where?
kuba:
The physical body trying to get rid of the feeler is just another way the identity splits itself, it’s another way to dissociate me from another part of me in this case the physical body is splitting itself from the feeler. In actuality neither of them have any existence outside of the psyche.
When ‘I’ go into abeyance as in a PCE, this can be experientially ascertained. That the physical(body) is as false as the real, it is all part of the bubble that ‘I’ exist in.
,
Thanks Kuba, for pointing this out. This point is very interesting and very important to grasp,
I would not have thought about it on my own, we are so lucky to have everyone contributing
their understanding ( very valuable insight ) ! 