Quotes

Actualism
305

For completeness, the rest of this quote requires the insertion of the mystery of why conformity society fails.

The premise is clear. When we have conformity to society, we feel good feelings. Yet, even in conformity, the desire for freedom arises.

So, perfect conformity would result in good feelings for all. Yet, that doesn’t happen? Or it stopped happening?

We have some ancestral memory, al la Richard’s expose of “disfranchisement” of a freedom which involves a conformity?

What stopped that?

Ok,

So the answer has to be in the order of the premise.

Good feelings predate morality and ethics.

Just as this video demonstrates that the feeling self if not uniquely human;

The rules of the forum mean I must edit this post, rather than post again.

So, Vineeto calls them ‘good’ emotions. Which is of course the literary way chosen to denote that feelings are ultimately the object of question.

We don’t feel great when we feel good. We are actually closer to drunk, or high, or hallucinating when intense ‘good’ feelings happen. They have a euphoric peak, with the correct circumstances, but otherwise are nauseating and disorienting.

The trigger then is intelligence. Somewhere in our ancestral past, in those lost eons of time, we “got smart” and started to experience the “edge”.

The question is how and why do we want to be free? Why do we suffer? How do we suffer? How is it that I am suffering now?

I am now the apostle of “accepting emotionally the intellectually unacceptable “. :joy::joy::joy:

I am not going to get an answer am I? Haha

It’s entertaining to feel the reality of that. To feel myself accepting it.

306

>>‘Vineeto’: If one wants to be actually free of the Human Condition, one has to examine and recognize that ‘good’ simply means ‘morally acceptable’ and ‘right’ is just another ethical value, both of which vary from tribe to tribe and from society to society. (Actualism, Vineeto, AF List, James, 11.1.2000)

Andrew: This reaffirms the startling and terrible premise; if for the most extreme, and historically accurate example, a child is sexually exploited and then slaughtered on an altar, both the child and the sexual exploiter and slaughterer would have experienced good feelings.
All conformed to the morality of the tribe and group. (…)
So, this requires some consideration. If all involved are experiencing good feelings, because they are morally in alignment with the tribe, how is that something to be free of?
I am not objecting to actual freedom here. I am not objecting at all, honestly! This just seems so bizarre!
Good feelings arise through the fact that an individual is completely conformed with the moral code of the tribe.
Or is that a misunderstanding? (link)

Hi Andrew,

Why do you find it bizarre that ‘good’ feelings arise from feeling virtuous (obeying the general moral (and ethical) code of the tribe?

Have you really understood what the aim of the actualism method is – being happy and harmless (experiencing the felicitous and innocuous feelings)? You cannot be genuinely happy unless you are harmless. ‘Good’ feelings, such as love, compassion or being virtuous is not equivalent to feeling good the way it is used on the AFT site.

Richard: (‘feeling good’ is an unambiguous term – it is a general sense of well-being – and if anyone wants to argue about what feeling good means … then do not even bother trying to do this at all). (Richard, This Moment of Being Alive).

Richard: Here it is, again, at its most basic: it is nice to feel good (whereas feeling bad is not nice).
Many years ago, now, I was sitting out to the side of my cave-site on a steep hillside, in the rain-forested hinterland to the north-west of where my dwelling is currently located, conversing with someone known to me from my art-college days – we had met-up on the Indian sub-continent a year or so before and had travelled together up into the foothills of the Himalayas (staying for a few months on a ridge about ten kilometres above Almora, Uttarakhand, known as Kasar Devi after a 2nd Century temple situated there) where many a deep and meaningful discussion had taken place (about life, the cosmos, and what it was to be spiritually enlightened/ mystically awakened, as he had been a spiritual-seeker of many years standing) with some profound experiences happening for him, thereof, including a three-day peak experience which settled into an unmistakable ASC thereafter – when all-of-a-sudden he stopped mid-sentence and, looking at me with head tilted quizzically, asked: ‘Why would you want to feel good all the time’?
Quite frankly, I sat there in near-astonishment, for a moment, before answering with what probably sounded to him somewhat tautologous: ‘Because it feels good to feel good’, and then adding, upon seeing him looking askance as if at listening to a simpleton, ‘whereas feeling bad doesn’t feel good, it feels bad; feeling good doesn’t feel bad, it feels good’. And, furthermore, for good measure: ‘It really is as simple as that … and, as feeling good is a nice feeling to be feeling, all of the time, why would you want to feel bad instead’?
To this very day, thirty years hence, it is still somewhat astounding that there be so many who do not grasp this simple fact which the naïve boy from the farm had embraced whole-heartedly. (Richard, List D, No. 4b, 4 July 2015).

Andrew: To go further, to prove this isn’t written with an adversarial intent; I have never examined “good feelings”.
Shocking as that may be, I never really got beyond any of the bad feelings.
I genuinely find that funny!! Like it’s really funny to me that it’s true!
Indeed, I am having a thought now that I will continue to explore. “Good feelings” especially the compassionate, empathetic, and loving kind are so deeply embedded in the fabric of who I am, I am starting to wonder if it was always going to be a challenge for me to question anything.
The thought being, I find anger so refreshing! Sadness too. I have not had motivation to be free of being “mad” and “sad” as they are a holiday for me.
That’s a conjecture, and speculation. Questioning “good feelings” especially in the context of this quotation, is radically new to me!
Thanks for the quote. Hopefully all can see my smiling and perplexed face in writing this. (link)

To save you further speculations here is what Richard has to say –

Richard: The words ‘good feelings’ – which refer to the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) – and the words ‘bad feelings’ – which refer to the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) – are but a way of describing the effect of those feelings both on oneself and others.
Sometimes they are called the positive and negative feelings. (Richard, AF List, No. 44e, 1 Oct 2003).

And to make the difference clear between feeling good and ‘good’ feelings –

Jonathan: [Richard]: What actualism – the wide and wondrous path to actual freedom – is on about is a ‘virtual freedom’ (which is not to be confused with cyber-space’s ‘virtual reality’) wherein the ‘good’ feelings – the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) are minimised along with the ‘bad’ feelings – the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) – so that one is free to feel good, feel happy and feel perfect for 99% of the time. I make this very clear in my writing: [snip]. What I am reading here is, ‘good feelings along with bad feelings are minimized so that one is free to feel good feelings and thereby make a PCE more likely. Could you clarify?
Richard: Sure … the [quote] ‘good’ [endquote] feelings mentioned are the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) and the [quote] ‘bad’ [endquote] feelings mentioned are the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) whereas feeling good/ feeling happy/ feeling perfect are the felicitous and innocuous feelings (those that are delightful and harmonious).
Thus what you are reading – ‘good feelings along with bad feelings are minimised so that one is free to feel good feelings and thereby make a PCE more likely’ – would look something like this when spelled-out in full:
• [example only]: ‘the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting), along with the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful), are minimised so that one is free to feel the felicitous and innocuous feelings (those that are delightful and harmonious) and thereby make a pure consciousness experience (PCE) more likely’. [end example].
Furthermore, as I say in that text of mine you quoted, I make this very clear in my writing:
• [Richard]: ‘… by asking ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive’ the reward is immediate; by finding out what triggered off the loss of the felicitous/ innocuous feelings, one commences another period of enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive. It is all about being here at this moment in time and this place in space … and if you are not feeling happy and harmless you have no chance whatsoever of being here in this actual world (a glum and/or grumpy person locks themselves out of the perfect purity of this moment and place). And by having already established feeling good (a general sense of well-being) as the bottom line for moment-to-moment experiencing then if, or when, feeling happy and harmless fades there is that comfortable baseline from which to suss out where, when, how, why – and what for – the feeling of being happy and harmless ceased happening … and all the while feeling good whilst going about it. (…) These are all feelings, this is not perfection personified yet … but then again, feeling perfect for twenty three hours and fifty nine minutes a day (a virtual freedom) is way beyond normal human expectations anyway. Also, it is a very tricky way of both getting men fully into their feelings for the first time in their life and getting women to examine their feelings one by one instead of being run by a basketful of them all at once. One starts to feel ‘alive’. Being ‘alive’ is to be paying attention – exclusive attention – to this moment in time and this place in space (…)’. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive).
(Richard, AF List, Jonathan, 4 Jan 2006).

The admission that “The thought being, I find anger so refreshing! Sadness too. I have not had motivation to be free of being “mad” and “sad” as they are a holiday for me” may well be an explanation why you have a certain resistance to examine “good feelings”.

I have given you these extensive quotes so that you can base your exploration on factual information and experiential reports, and thus your investigation into your psyche can be more sincere (in accord with the facts).

‘Vineeto’: As humans we don’t want to lose the other’s affection and reassurance, the appreciation of our peers, the cozy safety of being part of a family or group, the comforting knowledge of doing what everyone considers the ‘right’ thing or the ‘good’ deed.
Freedom lies in the opposite direction. (Actualism, Vineeto, AF List, James, 11.1.2000)

Andrew: So, there is something missing in this thought between the “cozy safety” and the thought that one would want to be “free” from it.
Why?
If the good feelings arise from doing what ever “every one else considers the right or good deed” then completely conforming to the same will result in perpetual good feelings.
Where is the trigger that anyone would want to be free? (link)

This is such a silly question. Have you been having continuous ‘good’ feelings doing “the right or good deed”? If not, why not? I am genuinely wondering about your intent of writing this?

Weren’t you once relieved to understand your guilt, the feeling of not “good”?

Andrew: It’s always been a huge source of guilt, that I would desire there to be something “wrong” with me. Whilst these entire time, there was indeed always something that was “off” but it was not directly those things at all. (21 Oct 2025)

Andrew: Thank you Vineeto!
I appreciate your time on this topic, as it has been so central to me, even when I didn’t know it was!
This quote above, supports something that has been in my thinking lately, at least it’s a similar insight. That ‘being’ uses ‘morality’ and indeed any ‘value’ system at all, as a tool. the ‘self’ is surviving through the very tools which are “supposedly” keeping it in check! (22 Oct 2025)

I can somehow understand you are not interested enough to read other people’s posts here on the forum, who lately talked a lot about the role ‘good’ feelings play in the scheme of their investigations of being able to enjoy and appreciate being alive, but to forget your own significant insights is quite an achievement.

Cheers Vineeto

Chrono's Journal
Unlocking the power of being empowered to be you
307

Sensuousness

308

Hi Vineeto!

Firstly, so there is no misunderstanding, none of my expressions of finding things “bizarre” were objections. So as to frame this current reply correctly, I was “riffing” on the quotation and exploring it in the open, mostly for fun. Hence the repeated sentences about “not objecting to actualism”. In that spirit, I will reply to some of your questions even though they seem to have been written rhetorically.

I more accurate description was “startled”, as in “wow, I had never made that connection like that!” following that thought was that someone could, in the most objectively brutal circumstances, be experiencing “good feelings” (which you say arise from feeling virtuous).

So that I am not further replying, when there maybe (yet another) example of my writing style and skill (and tools) misrepresenting the spirit and intent of my posts:

I am well read in much of actualism and much of the forum. My posts were “thinking” out loud, as in openly looking at the premise.

Cheers :slight_smile:
Andrew

1 Like
309

Kuba: It looks like I have projected this ‘inner mother’ onto you Vineeto, an authority still (link)

Syd: Funny you say that because this is also what I did, in the last two years in particular, and it all came crashing down recently. Then I learned to think for myself, and I quite like it. I still value Vineeto’s perspective, of course, but at the same time independent intelligent thinking has begun replacing authority/ trust/ faith/ belief. (link)

Hi Syd,

To give you the benefit of “Vineeto’s perspective”, you might find this informative –

Jonathan: You mention authority and the fear of punishment (…). I think that autonomy plays a big part in dismantling these things. Richard, in particular, was so adept at getting me to begin thinking for myself. It started towards the end of the first trip when he sat down and poked a hole in my superiority complex. And it continued to the very last night of the final trip when he talked about a peasant mentality. (…). (Message № 19410). *
(…)*
Richard:** (…) Of course, going by what you later wrote in Message № 19554 – which I will respond to in its chronological order – it might be that ‘a peasant mentality’ was not really a topic you thought worthy of elaborating on despite having introduced it.
I raise this ‘might be’ hypothesis because the following is how you finished-off that paragraph of yours to your co-respondent (partly re-presented near the top of this page). Viz.:
• [Jonathan]: (…). There are so many things that Richard said, which I wasn’t even able to respond to because, to me, they were so far out in left field. But after many months, I find that he was just thinking for himself. And I can do that same thing. (Message № 19410).
Would it be impertinent of me to suggest that your ascription of that adverbial diminisher in your [quote] ‘he was *just* thinking for himself’ [emphasis added] explanatory note which, you add, you can do [quote] ‘that *same* thing’ [emphasis added] yourself, is an instance of your self-acknowledged ‘superiority complex’ in action?
(Richard, List D, Jonathan2, 1 Jun 2012).

The rest of this conversation illuminates how Jon’s ‘thinking for himself’ in this instance is littered with misunderstandings.

Now this may not be the situation in your case but your recent reposting (link) of a quote from Claudiu seems to be an example of a misunderstanding I like to straighten out –

Richard: “Sensuousness is the wondrous awareness of the marvel of being here now at this moment in time and this place in space.”
Claudiu: (…) It helped me to think of ‘sensuousness’ as more of a quality or type of ‘me’ being aware, as opposed to being a quality or type of sensing or way or manner in which the senses operate. It’s when ‘I’ am aware of what ‘I’ am seeing in a delighted/ wondrous/ thoroughly enjoying-of-the-senses manner. It doesn’t matter per se if what I am looking at is visually stunning… it’s about how ‘I’ am relating to what ‘I’ am seeing, not about what I am seeing per se.
Of course when I am wondrously aware in such a manner I am naturally drawn to visually appealing things (if what I am seeing is most appealing at the time) (link)

Your reposting of this one particular section is an approval/ a highlighting of what Claudiu wrote. However, I noticed how Richard’s statement is miraculously transmogrified into making sensuousness all about ‘me’ – how “‘I’ am seeing in a delighted/ wondrous/ thoroughly enjoying-of-the-senses manner”. Even though Claudiu says “It doesn’t matter per se if what I am looking at is visually stunning” he nevertheless is “naturally drawn to visually appealing things”, which again emphasises ‘me’, “how ‘I’ am relating to what ‘I’ am seeing, not about what I am seeing per se”.

You could have easily chosen the follow-up section of Claudiu’s post which is more true to the facts and actuality of Richard’s quote –

Claudiu: I suggest to then find a way for yourself to wonder and marvel at that, as it will really ratchet up your enjoyment and appreciation! When being particularly sensuous at one point I was nearly overwhelmed at how delightful it was simply to exist, to the point where I even experienced the act of breathing as a ‘bonus’ of something to be doing to enjoy, on top of the fact that I was simply existing and being alive! (link)

By choosing to highlight the first section, which emphasis ‘me’, your presentation is diametrically opposite to Richard’s statement that “sensuousness is the wondrous awareness of the marvel of being here now at this moment in time and this place in space.” The interpretation is making sensuousness all about ‘me’ rather than emphasising “the wondrous awareness of the marvel of being here now at this moment in time and this place in space”, which is applying one’s attentiveness to the already always existing perfection of “being here now at this moment in time and this place in space.” It is expanding one’s awareness and wondrous attention beyond one’s favourite “visually appealing things” from which self-less awareness – apperceptiveness – can occur.

Richard: Sensuousness is the wondrous awareness of the marvel of being here now at this moment in time and this place in space. Attentiveness is the fascination of the reflective contemplation that this moment is one’s only moment of being alive – and one is never alive at any other time than now. Wherever one is … now … one is always here … now … even if one starts walking over to ‘there’ … now … along the way to ‘there’ … now … one is always here … now … and when one arrives ‘there’ … now … it too is here … now. Thus attentiveness is an attraction to the fact that one is always here – and it is already now – and as one is already here and it is always now then one has arrived before one starts. This delicious wonder fosters the innate condition of naiveté (which is the closest one can get to innocence) the nourishing of which is essential if the charm of it all is to occur. The potent combination of attentiveness – fascinated reflective contemplation – and sensuousness produces apperception, which happens when the mind becomes aware of itself. One is intimately aware that this physical space of this universe is infinite and its time is eternal … thus the infinitude of this very material universe has no beginning and no ending and therefore no middle. There are no edges to this universe, which means that there is no centre, either. We are all coming from nowhere and are not going anywhere for there is nowhere to come from nor anywhere to go to. We are nowhere in particular … which means we are anywhere at all. In the infinitude of the universe one finds oneself to be already here, and as it is always now, one can not get away from this place in space and this moment in time. By being here as-this-body one finds that this moment in time has no duration as in now and then – because the immediate is the ultimate – and that this place in space has no distance as in here and there – for the relative is the absolute.
In other words: One is already here as it is always now.
(…)
Apperceptiveness is sensuous awareness of only what is currently occurring and in precisely the way it is happening now – there is neither tolerance nor intolerance – with no acceptance or prejudice. Apperceptiveness is non-predictive observation in that it is this ability of the mind to regard experience without fault-finding feelings. With this ability, one sees things without assumption or opprobrium … and one is surprised by everything being extraordinarily ordinary. In apperceptiveness everything is in equipoise and one’s interest in things is for them to be exactly as they are in their actual condition. One does not have to estimate or establish … one totally acknowledges with delight. (Richard, Articles, Attentiveness, Sensuousness, Apperceptiveness).

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like
Question on Sensuousness
Question on Sensuousness
Question on Sensuousness
310

Andrew: Hi Vineeto!
Firstly, so there is no misunderstanding, none of my expressions of finding things “bizarre” were objections. So as to frame this current reply correctly, I was “riffing” on the quotation and exploring it in the open, mostly for fun. Hence the repeated sentences about “not objecting to actualism”. In that spirit, I will reply to some of your questions even though they seem to have been written rhetorically.

Vineeto: Why do you find it bizarre that ‘good’ feelings arise from feeling virtuous (obeying the general moral (and ethical) code of the tribe?

Andrew: I more accurate description was “startled”, as in “wow, I had never made that connection like that!” following that thought was that someone could, in the most objectively brutal circumstances, be experiencing “good feelings” (which you say arise from feeling virtuous).
So that I am not further replying, when there maybe (yet another) example of my writing style and skill (and tools) misrepresenting the spirit and intent of my posts:
I am well read in much of actualism and much of the forum. My posts were “thinking” out loud, as in openly looking at the premise.
Cheers
Andrew (link)

Hi Andrew,

Thank you for letting me know that your posts on the forum are “‘thinking’ out loud, as in openly looking at the premise”, so I’ll refrain from butting into your thought processes or “riffing” unless you have a specific question.

I am also pleased to know that you are “well read in much of actualism and much of the forum” so you know more than you let on in your musings.

I was particularly delighted to read this paragraph in your last contribution –

Andrew: The goal is peace on earth. the end of malice and sorrow. the end of wars, rape, murder, child abuse, general exploitation and being sold stale donuts. (link)

And yes, stale donuts in that sentence are indeed funny.

Cheers Vineeto

2 Likes
311

Courage of the convinctions born of the PCE

RICHARD: One has to have an extreme conviction that it is imperative that it is me who will evince a final and complete condition that will ‘deliver the goods’ so longed for by humanity for millennia. There is a curious decision made, deep in your psyche, that it is you who will dedicate your life to solving ‘The Mystery of Life’ by actually living it. This decision makes this goal the number one priority – all other matters are secondary and are used to serve this primary purpose.

At times this audacity – that it will be me who does it – approaches megalomania … after all, one thinks, who am I to think that I can break through the impasse that has baffled humankind for millennia? As long as one does not succumb to delusions of grandeur, a healthy dose of what appears to be megalomania is appropriate … otherwise one is held back by the mediocrity of those who say you can not do it. You can. The only requirement is that one be a human being – and that I hereby devote my entire life to breaking through to the perfection and peace that is lying open all around right now … if only I had the eyes to see it. It takes great courage and fortitude to fly in the face of all those ‘would be’s’ and ‘want to be’s’ who, alas, only talk about it. One has to do it … because, after all is said and done, it is my life that I am living. Mailing List 'A' Respondent No. 8

RICHARD: It is very important to have confidence in your own ability to discriminate between current human knowledge and what you personally know from your own peak experiences. This will give you that optimism that is the ability to plough on regardless of whatever stands in your way until you evoke your destiny. It is not a matter of having faith or believing that it is possible; it is not a matter of trusting or hoping that it will happen to you; it is all to do with the solid knowing, born out of the peak experience, that it is here for you and anyone … if only you will act upon your knowing. This ‘action’ amounts to – at times – ‘talking yourself into it’, for the other alternative is to let doubt and disbelief and distrust and despair eat away at your resolve. Only you can manifest your own freedom.

However, once embarked upon the ‘wide and wondrous path’, you are not on your own: the perfection of the infinitude of this physical universe is with you all the way … but if you waver, you are indeed on your own. It is a matter of having the courage of your convictions and letting nothing stand in your way; determination and perseverance are the essential prerequisites to ensure success … coupled with application and diligence. Having the ‘courage of your convictions’ has nothing to do with believing, trusting, hoping or having faith that it be possible. I, for one, never believed, trusted, hoped or had faith that it was possible, for such an action of believing, trusting, hoping and having faith perpetuates the believer, the truster, the hoper and the faithful. On the contrary, I could no longer believe that it was not possible – which is a different action entirely to believing, trusting, hoping and having faith that it is possible – thus dispensing with the believer, the truster, the hoper and the faithful. Do you see this? Selected Correspondence: How to Become Free

RESPONDENT: You said some thing about vibes web between humans, like invisible threads. Only one free of psychic identity are also free of this psychic web, so, how to minimize this menace to avoid this subliminal effects after the lecture of your words and journal?

RICHARD: First, an intelligent appraisal (such as ‘all throughout history’ above); second, becoming cognisant of your own affective vibes and, thus, psychic currents (some peoples are naturally more sensitive than others); third, then discerning when an affective vibe/ psychic current is another person’s and not yours (although be aware of projecting); fourth, being as happy and as harmless (free of malice and sorrow) as is humanly possible can be contagious so to speak); fifth, the courage of the conviction born of the PCE is always immensely beneficial; lastly, remembering that to care to dare is to dare to care. Mailing List 'D' Respondent No. 14

2 Likes
312
1 Like