Milito’s Journal

Journals
128

:+1:

I find it really odd to be arguing that we aren’t following in Richard & Vineeto & Srinath & Geoffrey’s footsteps. But maybe it’s a matter of how one chooses to express things.

“follow in someone’s footsteps”: to do the same things that another person has done before
Follow in someone's footsteps Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster.

So, Richard became free, we follow in his footsteps by becoming free. Vineeto, Srinath, etc… If you became free we should follow in your footsteps to also become free. If not then you are not free, it is something pernicious, and we should not follow in your footsteps.

This really is rather simple guys!

Sure. But it is easier and simpler to follow a reliable source. Tarin & Trent quoted AFT a lot and must have said some stuff that’s partially correct in some way. But it was easier just to discard it all.

I find it strange calling it an “intellectual exercise” when you’re quoting me talking about my PCEs!! Lol. Must be something in the air today.

As Richard puts it, there are three “I”'s - actual, affective, cognitive. When I was saying it behooves you to be highly discerning, obviously I’m directing it at whichever you you are - which would be the actual one if you are free or in a PCE. So that is the “you” that would be following the recommendation to be highly discerning.

It’s silly to say you don’t detect any affective/cognitive ‘self’ for my comment to be directed at, when if free there would be the actual you there for it to be directed to!

Not sure where the disconnect here is really. Yes in a PCE the doing of the things happens simultaneously with the decision to do them, there’s no separation there. But there’s still an existing actual me that is capable of consideration and reflection etc.

Ah okay I just didn’t think to read it that way, cause what is “safe” in this context was very obvious to me - being led astray from actuality by a likely well-meaning but ultimately misguided person (such as Tarin & Trent did to many). This can consume valuable years of someone’s life. Yes it is not physically dangerous as is being bombed in Gaza, but I don’t think the danger here should be downplayed.

Luckily, unlike a bomb which follows the laws of physics and embeds its shrapnel into someone’s cranium whether they like it or not, with words and choices it’s ultimately up to each person whether to follow or not :slight_smile:

Yeah, the big “if” there is “the utter reliability of being always happy and harmless”. If you are mistaken about being free, that will be absent.

Anyways I think it’s mincing words a bit (and I find it funny that you’re the one quoting the AFT at me while you & Kuba are saying I’m the dogmatic AFT-wielding one haha), I just meant that obviously if you are not free and you are saying you are, you will be misinforming people, and this will have negative consequences, more so than if you weren’t. I don’t think this is a difficult concept to grasp.

I know one of the things that struck home to me, when I realized in Australia that I had been led astray by Trent & Tarin, is that I was similarly leading others astray by what I was writing about actualism! It seems really strange for this not to be something to take into account at all. I was not even actually free then, not even really an actualist (as I didn’t really know what that was due to confusion), yet I was able to recognize this. It’s not some great act of actual caring required to see the point here.

Haha, well it just reveals that you really don’t know me. I love a good joke, but it has to actually be good. I just am not seeing what the set-up and punchline are here, that would combine with the context and situation, such as to lead one to become amused by the juxtaposition thereof.

If someone explains it to me it may become clearer, albeit certainly not funnier at that point lol.

Cheers,
Claudiu

129

I do wonder whether we are past the point where either Enlightenment or Actuality mimicking ASC’s are a danger.

When Richard became enlightened there was no precedent, the first wave who followed in his footsteps were well aware of the danger.

Then you had that whole Dharma Overground debacle, again there was no precedent for the weird blend of Vipassana and Actualism that they engaged in.

Then there was the whole thing with Craig, this one seems a bit more up in the air still but it is still enough to caution.

Since then any sincere actualists, especially the guys who have been around for a while are well aware of the dangers of both Enlightenment as well as any other weird dissociative states.

Personally I don’t see that danger anymore for myself, that radar is set for any weirdness.

130

Perhaps, but don’t forget this part too :slightly_smiling_face:

131

So here’s a genuine, inquisitive analysis @milito.paz

Basically you report the shift as having happened on March 16th. That is when there was a great “slowing down” as similar to how Geoffrey reported it (“I saw the vortex that is ‘me’ drastically slow down, as it could not move in the overarching stillness, and evaporate, as it had no substance but movement. / Then there was nothing left. And nothing missing.” Geoffrey - Report of Becoming Free)

But then you report the “MASSIVE rush of vibes” on March 25th. So clearly from 16th-25th you weren’t actually free.

However you report as if after the 25th was essentially the same experience as before the 25th: “Since Monday I am still yet to feel any vibes [i.e. similar to before “lack of vibes”] AND the rate of the increase in enjoyment and appreciation is increasing exponentially.”

Meaning a difference in degree only, not in kind – the enjoyment and appreciation is increasing even more than before, while the lack of vibes is the same.

And from the 27th when you reported you “might be on the brink of freedom, if not already there” (i.e. you weren’t really sure), until today, there has been no additional moment of something happening or a shift.

The question is simply: as from the 16th-25th you experienced no vibes and thought you were free, but weren’t (due to massive vibe rush on the 25th), how do you know that now, when you’re experiencing no vibes and think you’re free, it isn’t the same as from the 16th-25th?

Comparing notes with others’ reports they all seemed far more certain that what had happened had happened.

It seems entirely possible that you are in the same state (be it ASC or EE etc) now as you were from the 16th-25th, one can only speculate to the nature of it, but at a first glance a state where affect is being diverted away from conscious attention. It seems to be distinct from an EE as you wrote “But there has been no fear of losing control as my months long almost constant PCE/excellence experience back in 2016. Now it’s like, BRING IT ON!” which makes the actuality-mimicking ASC hypothesis more plausible.

Basically an altered state, not an EE or a PCE, where the underlying feeling-being still exists, who poked ‘his’ head out of it on the 25th briefly before being shunted back into it perhaps more vociferously than before.

What’re your thoughts on ^?

Cheers,
Claudiu

132

If it turns out this is an actuality-mimicking ASC that Milito is experiencing, then the answer will certainly be clear that it still is :smile:.

Weirdness radar is good. I don’t think the power of psychic currents and groupthink mentality ought to be underestimated. I don’t really know if it is a danger. Also it’s silly to try to be a ‘nanny’ and protect other people from themselves. Not seeking to do that here. I genuinely don’t experience myself as being hypervigilant or overly defensive or whatnot here, but perhaps it comes across this way as I do have a history of that. I don’t have a 100% definitive assessment here.

Perhaps I’ll put it this way: my radar is detecting weirdness so I’m voicing that here. If yours was detecting weirdness would you be saying something? And how would you respond to people saying to you but is there really a danger, are these the problematic forum dynamics the recently-free person voiced before distancing himself from the forum meanwhile trying to get people to distance themselves from Richard, are you not taking on a role of ‘protector’, you are wielding the AFT site like a sword, this is preventing fruitful forum interaction, etc? It would all be rather besides the point, wouldn’t it be, of: but there is some weirdness here! Why can’t we talk about it? And indeed what better place to talk about it than the claimant’s journal, where journals are set up for people to report their experiences and discuss them with other forum-goers?

Cheers,
Claudiu

133

Yes I would which is specifically why I wrote post Milito’s Journal - #124 by Kub933.

I guess the difference is that fruitful discussion for you in this case means doing exactly what you have been doing, discussing why in your opinion @milito.paz is not free, based on the weirdness you have noticed.

For me the fruitful discussion came in the form of furthering my own goal of becoming free via the interaction with @milito.paz, without such a heavy focus on falsifying the claims.

And the reason I am happy to put this falsifying to one side for now is because by now I have read Actually free people write all sorts of stuff that is weird to me :

There is a bit on the AFT where Richard responds to someone by suggesting that what he is doing, in Australia is called ‘being a bit of a wanker’.

There is Geoffrey asking Leila if she is a child, when I read that post now I still detect (imagine) an angry Geoffrey telling her off, I still feel that psychic jab that he is apparently delivering.

There is the bit where Srinath did not answer in the affirmative that he does not buy into the Big Bang theory.

As @milito.paz mentioned there is the situation where Vineeto cries to get out of trouble with police.

There is Peters writing upon becoming free where he is talking about a compulsion to enable peace on earth.

So let’s just say I am happy with a bit of unorthodox behaviour until some kind of definitive picture starts to form. For example when I read Craigs writing mentioning god in one way or another, that was a big red light flashing.

1 Like
134

I think it comes down to, in my opinion, a lack of appreciation for just how relevant it is whether the other person really is free or not.

When I was in Australia with others for the purpose of becoming free, Vineeto pointed out how we should use her & Richard as goal-posts of a sort, as to be the thing we are aiming for, to help direct us towards actuality.

I don’t think I can overemphasize enough just how pernicious it is to be interacting with someone who you think is free, but isn’t. You will implicitly be taking cues, hints, messages from them, subtly changing what you do, to emulate how they are, to further your own goal of being free.

And this is the point: if they aren’t, then those hints will simply not be leading you to the direction you want to go into. Necessarily so, by the very fact of the matter.

Now it is possible all the weirdness is due to Milito adjusting to being newly free. I was being sincere when I said it wasn’t 100%. Personally I was getting swept up in the excitement and momentum, which even caused me to think I may have gone out from control (which got a lot of emoji likes in my journal), when I obviously hadn’t (Claudiu's Journal - #131 by claudiu). So, the bad influence had already had its effect on me haha (in misjudging myself).

(Of course Milito is not ultimately responsible for what I did etc yada yada we are all our own person, I could’ve done the same if he is genuinely free etc, let’s not abuse that horse’s poor corpse along with the others).

Anyway in short I find the minimization of this topic strange, and urge people to keep in mind what I’ve written in this post here.

Cheers,
Claudiu

135

Hey guys!

I’m taking at least some time off the forum. Not sure if I’ll be back. I want to express my appreciation for everyone’s contributions in particular Claudiu’s (for the most part) incisive contributions. They’ve been invaluable, and have served the purpose that the balance of powers theoretically does in a democracy. It was getting circular towards the end though.

You people reading these reports and the responses of scrutiny are the voters here. You evaluate what is being presented by each poster, make informed appraisals, and contribute to the ongoing dialogue.

Your engagement has fostered accountability and integrity within this community, creating a dynamic comparing of notes. Feel free to heed or disregard my parting advice:

Try not to make assumptions
Notice and take into account that your analyses as feeling beings is tainted by… feelings
Ask yourself how this might impact your conclusions regarding reports such as mine.

Best regards,
Milito

You can email me at el.pacificador456@gmail.com

“ The already always existing peace-on-earth is just here right now in this actual world of the senses.

All you have to do is:

Step Out Of The Real World Into This Actual World And Leave ‘Yourself’ Behind Where ‘You’ Belong.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

This Moment Of Being Alive

The past, although it was actual when it was happening, is not actual now; the future, although it will be actual when it happens, is not actual now; only this moment is ever actual.

As you are only alive at this moment in time ask yourself each moment again:

How Am I Experiencing This Moment Of Being Alive?”

1 Like
136

Hey Milito, thanks :smile: . I hope it’s not the last time you write here, but it’s up to you. Just want to say I’ve really enjoyed reading your descriptions of what’s happening for you. Actual freedom or not, it’s really interesting in its own right, and I like the way you express it.

But what’s this “balance of power” shit?? :laughing: The only power anyone has here is the power that anyone vests in anyone else. See that clearly and the solution is obvious. Then we can be fellow human beings again.

2 Likes
137

Just to provide a link to it here, Vineeto has clarified this rumor. I relayed her clarification here: Actual Vineeto's Encounter with a Cop, Clarified .

138

@Kub933, Vineeto also wanted to address this point, which I reproduce here:

1 Like
139

Again I can’t agree with this response because the quote that Vinneto posted is not the one I was referring to.

The one I was referring to is below, the one which Vineeto posted I was not even aware existed. I did read the quote (the one I was referring to) a couple of times and still could not easily get what Richard was getting at :

https://www.actualfreedom.com.au/richard/konradcorrespondence/pagesix.htm

RICHARD: Perhaps a few quotes from these long-time spiritual seekers might enable you to see – by seeing how others are playing with themselves – just what you yourself are doing here. Vis.:

  1. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘The notion of an ‘I’ that is here seems to be added by thought and cannot be found with close observation’.
  2. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Thought falsely attributes the true existence of a ‘me’.
  3. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Thought conceives the true existence of separate things, when, in fact, life is basically undivided’.
  4. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Thought creates the notion of a ‘me’ and a ‘not’ me. A ‘me’, a watcher, a detached something could never see this since it is what thought creates. The existence of a ‘me’ or an idea of some detached position is merely imputed by thought, so it can never see or observe anything. That is the meaning of ‘the observer is the observed’.
  5. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘By what signs would this self be known to be existing as more than passing phenomenon? It seems that passions or feelings are just changing phenomenon that seemingly arise and pass away in awareness just as thoughts’.
  6. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘To label that ever-changing phenomenon as an instinctual self seems to be the addition of thought’.
  7. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘If I see a real lake and look closer and closer, there is still a lake. If however, I see a mirage of a lake, the closer I get, its lack of existence is clarified. Likewise, the existence of a real self would be clarified with close exposure. What happens, though, is that no substantial self can ever be found’.
  8. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Since there has never been a real ongoing self from the first (only action based on the assumption or belief in one) there is an appearance of something ending when in fact it is exposing and dropping of the beliefs and misconceptions concerning an ongoing self’.
  9. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Your belief that there is someone that experiences feelings is a misconception’.
  10. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Does there need to be a ‘who’ at all to be angry? Anger comes and goes in awareness. Thought may imagine an ‘I’ that is angry, but that seems to be an added label’.
  11. [Spiritual Seeker]: ‘Looking now, this moment, there is no one to be angry and nothing that can be labelled angry. There are memories of anger that have arisen and dropped out of exposure. There is no thought of a someone that can proceed anywhere. It is just observing what comes up. It is not a goal, path or method. It is just what occurs naturally’.

Does all this help somewhat, Konrad, to throw some light upon the subject? In Australia, this kind of behaviour is called ‘being a wanker’.

140

And I am sure that there is a reason and if this gets broken down into all the little details I will understand why Richard used these specific words (“In Australia, this kind of behaviour is called ‘being a wanker”).

But this is exactly my point that what might appear kind of weird, might make a lot more sense upon understanding the context and the nuances of what is going on.

141

In fact isn’t it a bit ironic that the Chinese whispers are also being played between me you and Vineeto? This all seems a bit of a weird way to communicate as clearly important details are being missed - In this instance I am referring to Vineeto posting a completely different quote then the one my post was regarding.

142

Humm well just at a high level… do you see how you are in a sense currently ‘anchored’ at a point where what actually free, fully meaning-of-life-free Vineeto writes, you are disagreeing with, and finding what she does “weird”, while at the same time you are finding yourself in defense of and agreeing with the allegedly newly-free Milito, discounting any “weirdness” from his part, when he has already had various warning signs, his hasty departure from the forum being just the latest?

Isn’t it interesting at least? Which is more likely to be the correct direction for you to continue in? And whence the “pull” away from the direction towards Vineeto and instead into the direction towards Milito? What is the nature of this “pull”? If Milito were aligned towards the same direction as Vineeto is, would there be this (psychic) tension that is palpably happening?

I fail to see how it’s “Chinese whispers” (“a game in which a message is distorted by being passed around in a whisper.”). Vineeto read what you wrote, in full, and responded to it, which response she posted, in full, on the AFT site, and which I reproduced here for ease-of-access, in full.

You didn’t provide the link or full reference to which quote you were referring to, so there was no detail for Vineeto to have “missed”. She cannot read your mind, actual freedom does not grant this supernatural power :slight_smile: . And what she posted was relevant anyway.

Does reading the quote Vineeto posted shed some light on the quote you were referring to, or help you see what Richard was getting at?

Alas despite Milito heavily praising this forum, and even explicitly highlighting the value and incisiveness of my critical posts in particular, stating that all this engagement fosters accountability and integrity… he left the forum, thus meaning there can be no further clarifying or understanding of context or nuances or what he wrote here. Thus he evades any further scrutiny… and leaves his personal contact info so people can talk to him without any “accountability and integrity” for what he says!

I’ll just repeat what I wrote before: I urge people to keep in mind what I’ve written here if and when they communicate with or come into contact with Milito!

Cheers,
Claudiu

143

Are you referring here to the crying with the police incident or my comment that this way of communicating is weird?

The crying with the police I don’t find weird in the sense that it makes me question Vineeto’s condition of actual freedom. I used it to make the point that a few actually free people (both fully free and newly free) have written things which appear odd (to feeling beings reading the words) unless the full context and nuance is understood. And even then it can still continue to appear weird, as with my example of Geoffrey’s response to Leila still being experienced with an ‘affective jab’.

Also you are only contrasting Milito with Vinneto or Richard here, what about the example of Srinath (who is regarded as indeed being actually free) and the Big Bang?

With regards to this way of communicating being weird, I could have (and probably should have) used a different word. So let me rephrase and say that I find this way of communicating to be ineffective, Vineeto does not actively participate on this forum which means there is less possibility to clarify things, clearly this resulted in her quoting the wrong bit of writing and basing a whole response on it.

Perhaps a more effective way would have been if she enquired as to which bit I was referring to specifically as opposed to making an incorrect assumption.

1 Like
144

The palpable psychic tension (on my part anyways) seems to be almost a shock in response to what I have read and the way the communication is happening. It’s like I remember reading some of Srinath’s responses and this curtain of the respect/authority I had towards him disappearing, it’s the same thing now but there is no-one left that I could place this respect/authority on, it’s just this big rift.

Which is kind of cool actually because I am free to make up my mind.

1 Like
145

And this psychic tension has the flavour of excitement/thrill, it’s like new territory for me. Firstly the stepping outside of authority and secondly the ability to be at odds with another (what I would always experience as conflict and avoid at all costs) without malice.

1 Like
146

It was just a general impression of push-back against what Vineeto was saying, in favor/defense of Milito.

Perhaps – if you want to have a more back-and-forth with her it’s probably most effective if you reach out via e-mail to her.

I’m curious your experience of it. For me after I wrote my last message, in maybe 5-20 minutes I experienced it as completely diffusing (I did some stuff on Twitter, then checked and no reply, then went to shave, and felt it shift as I was shaving. I came to check back and still no replies at that point). I found this often happens after I voice the psychic currents nature of an exchange explicitly on the forum! :smile:

Now there is still a bit of it left but without that heaviness from the initial exchanges. Did anything change for you when you wrote my last reply? Does the timing line up?

147

So nothing has changed with regards to this rift I mentioned. As in it seems it is all at odds at the moment, without being able to place myself this way or that way.
But I guess the thing which changed is noticing that despite the fact that there are many things I don’t agree with here, I don’t find myself at conflict with you. And I don’t need to be at conflict because I am not taking allegiance.

But this whole rift thing is more interesting to me, am I the only one who has been sensing it by the way? It seems it goes further back to before Srinath left the forum. If I was to make a caricature of it I would say it’s like the old school actualism versus the new school actualism.