Please note that Vineeto’s correspondence below was written by the actually free Vineeto
(List D refers to Richard’s List D and his Respondent Numbers) Vineeto’s Correspondence with Ed on Discuss Actualism Forum December 6 2024 VINEETO: In her period of being out-from-control Pamela commented on how much better this experience (of being in an ongoing excellence experience) was compared to her 5-months PCE, and she explained that her PCE was a static experience while being out-from-control was exemplified by the progress of coming closer and closer to the actual world. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Ian, 5 December 2024). ED: Is it considered dynamic because there are still dips in affect? VINEETO: No, it’s because one is moving closer and closer to one’s final goal. * VINEETO: From here you can look closer at what possible objections there might be for ‘you’ to abdicating the throne, and whatever else prevents you from allowing the final transition to happen. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Ian, 5 December 2024). ED: Is it because these objections are present as presence in the excellence experience? Thus preventing the PCE but a presence to reflect upon & explore? VINEETO: No, they are not “present as presence”, they simply can make themselves felt unlike in a PCE where ‘I’ am in abeyance. * ED: Feeling-being Vineeto must have been feeling good before her immolation, but can you recall the dirtiness that you were still dealing with at the time? Might you be able to recall any objections or worries you had moments before becoming free? Hours before? Days before? [I blew the last remaining cobwebs of seriousness, cautiousness and social correctness out of the corners of my psyche. – were there any beliefs behind the seriousness, cautiousness, and social correctness you can recall?] VINEETO: You can read more details in my answers in the Direct Route correspondence, where I recorded the events at the time. All I remember now is what has been written on the AFT website. ‘Her’ emotional memories (“the dirtiness”) have disappeared along with ‘her’ identity. Besides, everyone has their own sequence of dismantling their social identity and remnant obstacles to becoming free. Viz.: Richard: Of course, the situation and circumstances (cutting down long grass in an abandoned cow-paddock preparatory to planting trees) were peculiar to me and my context at that time and had I been some other person in some other context I could very well have been washing the dishes, for example, or riding a bicycle. And had I been some other person in some other context the salutary realisation would have been different too ... meaning that only the particular person can know what they must do – and they will not know what that is until it happens – and when they do know what to do it will be too late to stop the happening. Hence all the procrastination – it means the end of ‘me’ – because it can, and will, happen just here right now. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 94a, 30 December 2005) ED: And did this out-from-control excellence experience (?) cease being excellent during the mutiny – which seemed to cause alarm for feeling-being Vineeto? Did the out-from-control experience lose its excellence during this time and was it just a matter of ‘coming-down’ from the initial high of the alarm? Was there any contemplation going on, conflict between staying or going? VINEETO: You are probably referring to this – Vineeto to [List D, No. 4]: “In the early morning of December 29, 2009, feeling-being ‘Vineeto’ was overtaken by a panic attack, which convinced ‘her’ that, although everything written on the website was coherent, correct and a valid description of the actual world as ‘she’ had experienced it in ‘her’ own PCEs, seeing Richard to be insane who needed to be feared and avoided. (The reason why Peter wasn’t infected was because he had seen it all before when this happened to Devika/Irene). This second panic only lasted for 3 days but because it happened during the out-from-control virtual freedom it turned into an out-of-control panic mode. Only ‘her’ decade-long training in keeping ‘her’ hands in ‘her’ pockets and neither repress nor express the intense feelings racing through ‘her’ allowed the extreme situation to subside so soon afterwards … and look where I am today.” (Actualism, ActualVineeto, No. 4(D), #fas) The explanation for it can be found in the first third of that message I wrote to [List D, No. 4] on January 7 2013 and it is self-explanatory – Vineeto: Now I know, from personal experience, what the underlying cause is for [No. 4’s] whole elaborate international campaign. First let me present it in his own words – Epitaph [No. 4]: ‘The principal ‘mutineers’ were Pamela and Vineeto, both of whom are now actually free. They were experiencing something that seems to be almost mandatory at some point on the road to actual freedom: *seeing Richard as a dangerous lunatic*. Welcome aboard ;-) Cheers, [No. 4.]’ (Message 9229, 5.3.2010) [emphases added]. It appears that this “almost mandatory” experiencing is no longer “mandatory” because several people have become actually free since 2009/2010 and none of them reported a significant fear of insanity. Ha, can you see how it becomes easier and easier for each subsequent pioneer? Cheers Vineeto March 6 2025 Richard: I was therefore commenting that (in this specific instance) Indias’ paramount contribution to the retardation of evolution over the last 3,000 to 5,000 years (in that after maybe the millions of years of evolution necessary to evolve thought, thoughts and thinking (intelligence) in one animal species alone, the Masters and the Gurus and the Avatars and all the God-Men would have us value being thoughtless and mindless as if that is the highest virtue one can aspire to) is part of the mosaic of the evolutionary process and would soon become superseded when a mutation more fitted for survival takes precedence over such fantasy. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List B, No. 33b, 29 November 1999). (Actualism, ActualVineeto, Kuba 5, 19 February 2025). KUBA: There is no reason why those holy men could not have gone all the way, instead they became enlightened and brought insanity back with them. ED: Many of those men were uneducated and steeped in religious beliefs during a time-period lacking the scientific discoveries we enjoy. It’s possible they had strong religious beliefs in place before their enlightenments, and would have little to no reason to question it if they did not have a memory of the PCE. Richard on the other hand was barely catholic, had access to information, enjoyed more independence, and was reasonably wealthy. He likely had little preconceived ideas to shape his journey – he never even thought to get enlightened or read about it like many of us. It doesn’t seem like he ever considered the idea of escaping or ending the human condition until his 4-hour long PCE experience that kicked everything off. So he just went for that, with little to-no religious baggage or spiritual guidance. These other men, lived in a time where people could be brutally killed for going against convention. They were likely inundated in religion from a very young age. And it’s possible their enlightenment validates their previous beliefs, even though it may not have turned out to be what they originally expected. Religions would have existed with or without enlightenment as a means to explain the world. And feeling beings would have fought to protect those beliefs. It’s hard to separate the enlightened men from it as they were influenced by religion and they influenced religion. VINEETO: Hi Ed, You gave an exonerative speech why nobody before Richard could have discovered an actual freedom but your facts are incorrect. For instance, Richard was not “reasonably wealthy” – he had to work hard for his living, including from early childhood. Richard: Having been born and raised on a dairy farm in the south-west of this country I have an affinity for the remote lifestyle (my progenitors were pioneer settlers carving a farm by hand out of virgin forest and sowing grasslands for animal husbandry). In this context I had a normal birth and upbringing (a bucolic lifestyle); I was educated in a normal state-run rural school (where being dux of the class came easy); I took on a typical occupation at age fifteen (full-time farming) becoming a high-school dropout in the process; I volunteered for a six-year stint in the military at seventeen (in a water-transport unit); I served my time in an overseas war at nineteen (on an army landing ship); I entered into a commonplace marriage upon my return (a knobstick wedding); I had a regular family, just as most peoples do, and, although I had about forty-to-fifty different jobs during my post-military itinerant-lifestyle working life – such as First Mate on an Arnhem Land landing craft, for instance, and as barman-cum-deckhand on a Coral Coast tourist ship, for example – my main occupation, having obtained a tertiary education with certified accreditation in the fine arts in my late-twenties, was as a part-time art teacher and a practicing artist (mainly in ceramics). As both a boy and as a youth I personally used hand-held cross-cut saws and axes to help cut down and/or ring-bark the trees to make pasture land; I was involved in the fencing and ploughing and sowing and harvesting; I hunted game in the forest and helped raise domesticated animals; I tended the gardens and orchards and crops; I assisted in building sheds (barns) and outhouses from forest timber and learned improvisation from the ingenuity required in ‘making do’ with minimal commercial supplies. There was no plumbing, sewage, telephone, or electricity umbilicals (in effect, living the ‘off-grid’ lifestyle some forty years before the term was coined) – I went to bed with a candle and to the outdoor latrine with a kerosene lantern – thus no freezer, no electric kitchen gadgets, no record players, no videos, no television, no computer, and etcetera. (Richard, Personal Web Page) He also had to work up to 12-14 hrs a day 6-7 days a week to support a family of six – Richard: I found myself in a situation where I was married and raising four children. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27e, 5 April 2003). Richard: I gradually transformed myself from an itinerant worker (I worked at maybe 40-50 different jobs during my peregrinations) into a full-blown artist by enrolling at an art-college, full-time for three years, and practising same 12-14 hours a day 6-7 days a week, in the years after graduating, so as to support and provide for five other peoples as well as myself. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 25j, 7 May 2006). After he became enlightened, he was even less “reasonably wealthy” to the point where he had Richard: “... whittled my worldly possessions down to three sarongs, three shirts, a cooking pot and bowl, a knife and a spoon, a bank book and a pair of nail scissors. I possessed nothing else anywhere in the world and cut all family ties. During that period I was homeless, itinerant, celibate, vegan, (no spices; not even salt and pepper), no drugs (no tobacco, no alcohol; not even tea or coffee), no hair cut, no shaving, no washing other than a dip in a river or the ocean ... in short: whatever I could eliminate from my life that was an encumbrance and an attachment, I had let go of.” (Richard, List B, No. 21b, 23 March 2000). Richard always maintained the Saints and Seers and Holy Men had ‘Feet of Clay’ because just like Richard they would be well aware at some instances of their enlightened state that there was a flaw, in that they experienced occasional bouts of anger or sadness, and furthermore that enlightenment was only a ‘perfect’ solution after death and therefore useless to every single human being still living. As Richard reported that everyone he spoke to at length could remember a PCE, often from childhood, your absolvitory argument falls flat on its face on that account as well. And as for certain recent discoveries, at least the enlightened masters of the last century since Darwin could have made use of this knowledge. In, short, it was not the extraneous circumstances, which enabled Richard to go all the way, no matter the difficulties involved, but ‘his’ personal mettle. Additionally ‘he’ had the plain common sense not to fall for the fallacy, which “would have us value being thoughtless and mindless as if that is the highest virtue one can aspire to”. After all, it was the mailing list established to discuss Jiddu Krishnamurti’s Teaching on which he wrote the above paragraph. This attitude of disparaging thought and thus human intelligence, and not religion in general, is what made India stand out in its “paramount contribution to the retardation of evolution”. Why are you so eager to exonerate the enlightened masters and the ancient wisdom they peddled for 3000-5000 years of human history, and why you even try to argue that only Richard’s circumstances were propitious enough, of the 12-15 billion people who have lived until now and/or are alive now, that he was the only person to be not “influenced by religion”? I just want to have it on record that it’s not extraneous circumstances, with all the modern technology thrown in for good measure, which allow a person today to become free from the human condition. Something else is required. Cheers Vineeto March 7 2025 Richard: I was therefore commenting that (in this specific instance) India’s paramount contribution to the retardation of evolution over the last 3,000 to 5,000 years (in that after maybe the millions of years of evolution necessary to evolve thought, thoughts and thinking (intelligence) in one animal species alone, the Masters and the Gurus and the Avatars and all the God-Men would have us value being thoughtless and mindless as if that is the highest virtue one can aspire to) is part of the mosaic of the evolutionary process and would soon become superseded when a mutation more fitted for survival takes precedence over such fantasy. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List B, No. 33b, 29 November 1999). Vineeto: I just want to have it on record that it’s not extraneous circumstances, with all the modern technology thrown in for good measure, which allow a person today to become free from the human condition. Something else is required. (Actualism, ActualVineeto, Ed, 6 March 2025). ED: I appreciate you going on record to clarify that it’s not extraneous circumstances which allowed Richard to become actually free in case someone else might be confused. I don’t want my comments on circumstances to appear reductionist. VINEETO: Hi Ed, Thank you Ed. What I appreciate about Richard’s original quote is that it emphasized the wide-spread presence of the teachings and ramifications of enlightenment having been the summum bonum for millennia. Out of this arose the morals and ethics, many of which still hold sway world-wide. Love/ Divine Love, and compassion/ Divine Compassions were not just mere ‘human’ values to choose or not to choose but inherent features of the human condition itself and as such almost universally valued. That means, if one goes far enough into the ‘good’ feelings then one automatically transfigures malice and sorrow into Love and Compassion, i.e. enlightenment. Hence it took Richard 11 years to investigate the powerful ‘holy cows’ of those highly passionate feelings of Divine Compassion, Love Agape, pacifism, Beauty and timelessness (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Enlightenment Resume) until he finally arrived at the actuality which had been apparent in his pure consciousness experiences. As Kuba said: Kuba: I remember when I first read Richard’s journal I wondered why he wrote so much about spirituality, of course it was a huge aspect of his dissolving of the enlightened state but initially I thought it does not apply to me. But it is clearer and clearer now just what role it played in the current state of affairs and just how deeply it runs. That the very parameters of reality were set up by those enlightened beings, the ‘wisdom’ they brought back was rooted in hallucination. Human kind has since been refining those truths into various belief systems, trying to refine that which has its roots in madness, so of course ‘humanity’ is well and truly lost, it cannot be fixed. Wow it is really something, it must have been the most peculiar (this is way too lukewarm of a word actually) experience for Richard when he dissolved the entire psyche. He would have lived as the only person existing outside of the sanity/ insanity spectrum which itself is based in madness. He was a classified madman and yet what exactly was the rest of the population living? These divine feelings being inherent in the human condition is the reason why feeling beings ‘Vineeto’ and ‘Peter’ were well aware and weary of the ‘Rock of Enlightenment’ during their actualism period, before a direct route was established when they became actually free. It was indeed an “epoch-changing event”. (Long Awaited Announcement). I like what Claudiu wrote to Andrew – Claudiu: You will really have to uncover the naiveté you have buried under all this cynicism and recognize just what a wonderous, unique, and fleeting opportunity we are all presented with. The universe in no way will guarantee that the world will become actually free – we are among the most well-positioned humans on the planet to be able to do everything we can to have it happen. Possibly fleeting, depending on how many daring pioneers take up the challenge and pass on reports of their success. Cheers Vineeto April 7 2025 ED: With the recent discussion regarding Pure Intent and rememoration, I thought a thread sharing PCE stories might be a good exercise to do from memory. Additionally, I’ve been wondering about some of the discussion specifically revolving around different flavors of PCEs. Having only one from memory, I have no other point of comparisons. I also wonder about the reports where one wonders about potentially being in a PCE – perhaps an EE experience so close to a PCE that it’s hard to differentiate. I think I struggle understanding this because for me the PCE was so profound that it was night-and-day difference between feeling-being mode. Specifically it was the meaning-of-life quality that the experience had due to the perfection, purity, and stillness that I couldn’t miss. It was everywhere. The experience was worlds beyond feeling excellent and I can’t imagine how things could get better. Ultimate fulfillment. I sometimes wonder due to the profundity of the experience if I’ve set the PCE up to be something out of reach. It seems so extreme and radically different. BUT, it is also everything I have ever wanted from life. Double-back to this later. VINEETO: Hi Ed, Thank you for your long and extensive description of your memorable PCE. It indeed sets an excellent benchmark for you to access pure intent by comparing your experience during the height of the PCE against your real-world experience, knowing that what you are aiming for is “night-and-day difference between feeling-being mode”, the “ultimate fulfillment” and “everything I have ever wanted from life”. Even though not every PCE is a meaning-of-life experience, this experience nevertheless represents your ultimate destiny – the meaning-of-life freedom aka full freedom. ED: I believe I’ve shared details but have never written a complete report so I’ll do that now. There will be spiritual details since that was where I was at, at the time: 2017? – I’m about 2-3 years into my quest for spiritual enlightenment and have never heard of actualism. During this period, I was pretty depressed which was a big motivator for finding a radical solution for my suffering and hence my interest in spirituality and enlightenment. One evening while home alone I decided to try some LSD and contemplate life. (…) Eventually the emotional movement came to an end and I sat on the couch silently – staring ahead at my desk but not looking at anything in particular and not thinking about anything. My usual running thoughts about whatever agenda I was interested in seemed like it had burned itself out for the moment. So I was just sitting there, kind of exhausted but relaxed and at peace. I continued relaxing. It wasn’t like I was trying to relax or had an agenda on how to do it, it was more akin to unknowingly enjoying the relaxation. Like I was marinating in it instead of trying to do it. Somewhere during this period the first remarkable thing happened. An extremely pleasant feeling arose in the solar plexus. At the time, I described it as being completely fascinated with what was happening – but also at the time, I took this feeling to be something other than myself. It seemed like it was coming from me but also something other than me. Trying to comprehend this feeling of total fascination, I concluded that this must be what pure love is. VINEETO: If ever you are wondering how to provide the conditions for a PCE to happen without drugs, here are some clues in your own description how it started – “I was marinating in it [the relaxation] instead of trying to do it”. … “I described it as being completely fascinated with what was happening”. And you allowed the fascinated contemplation to continue even though “it seemed like it was coming from me but also something other than me”. When you compare this to the following description you understand why I picked out those sentences of yours – Richard: Thus attention becomes a fascination with the fact that one is always here ... and it is already now. Fascination leads to reflective contemplation. As one is already here, and it is always now ... then one has arrived before one starts. The potent combination of attention, fascination, reflection and contemplation produces apperception, which happens when the mind becomes aware of itself. Apperception is an awareness of consciousness. It is not ‘I’ being aware of ‘me’ being conscious; it is the mind’s awareness of itself. Apperception – a way of seeing that can be arrived at by reflective and fascinating contemplative thought – is when ‘I’ cease thinking and thinking takes place of its own accord ... and ‘me’ disappears along with all the feelings. Such a mind, being free of the thinker and the feeler – ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul – is capable of immense clarity and purity ... as a sensate body only, one is automatically benevolent and benign. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive). ED: It was the coca-cola can on my desk which first caught my attention. Something was different about it. It was like it had come to life and this fascination was embedded in its very fabric. This fascination was embedded in everything. Everything was alive somehow. Scintillating. Bright. The next few moments I do not remember. I suppose what was going on was a mix of me experiencing what was happening and trying to comprehend it. I would have been better served just trying to get a good look at it, but wasn’t prepared. Truly, as an identity I was eager to claim it and understand it for myself – trying to make a grab at things. Still, I was enjoying the relaxation. At some point I decided to go outside and it was on the steps of my apartment when everything stopped and was still. I said out loud, “you mean I’m already here?” Ha, ha. VINEETO: You probably figured it out already – this is where the PCE proper starts. ED: Things were utterly perfect. The perfection was experienceable. I was completely fulfilled. All of my aching desires, concerns, responsibilities, were gone and replaced with this perfection that was everywhere. It was so clean and still. It was so enjoyable and invigorating. And it had been here this whole time. That was another conclusion I came to. It was me that was missing out on it. I actually considered maybe everyone had been enjoying this perfection my whole life except me. VINEETO: I do appreciate your conclusion at the time, especially the first one that you had been “missing out”. In a PCE, when you are actually here, at this moment in time, you can realize that you have always been here – as flesh-and-blood body that is – and only the ‘loudmouth’ of an identity had been standing in the way of experiencing this actuality. That you then “considered maybe everyone had been enjoying this perfection my whole life except me” looks like an assessment made by the returning identity. It is indeed a totally different perspective when you are in the actual world than when ‘you’ live in the real world. I know, from the perspective of being actually free, that everyone is missing out, every moment again, because actuality is available right here, right now – but I also know that they don’t know this, because I remember well how it was for feeling being ‘Vineeto’. ED: At the time it was occurring, I considered this experience to be the meaning of life. That is to say, the meaning of life isn’t some sort of secret explanation to be revealed, but rather a way of experiencing being alive that is perfect. A gift but also a birthright in stark contrast to the alienation I typically felt in regards to the world and others. VINEETO: Well said. ED: I can see why some describe this experience as otherworldly but clearly upon reflection I was not in another world. I was right here. I even said it out loud. While otherworldly may give some indication to how radically different it is, I think it is a confused way of describing the situation and setting the actual world up to be somewhere distant when it’s not. VINEETO: During the experience itself the actual world is not “otherworldly” at all – during the experience one is right here in the actual world. From the real-world perspective, of course, the actual world seems to be far away – another world altogether. ED: This perfection didn’t last long. I didn’t even notice it diminish because I was too busy trying to make sense of what was happening. What happened next was the oceanic experience and I became everything. It’s experienced to be real, but much like the real-world or a belief is experienced to be real. It is like a belief with no doubt involved. Where as the perfection seemed to be the result of an absence of something, this was more like an exotic feeling state. A shift in one’s reality. Devolving this state further, I thought that I may be god and decided to test out if I had any newfound power but I did not. The oceanic experience didn’t last long and I went back inside and laid down on the floor where I had a really terrible thought – that I must die to enter that dimension of perfection. It was an intuitive apprehension and considering oblivion caused a lot of dread. I noticed how much I wanted to live which betrayed the previous months of depression and wishing for death. VINEETO: While your PCE devolved into an ASC, most likely inspired by memories of religion and your spiritual quest you nevertheless focussed on one significant insight – “that I must die to enter that dimension of perfection”. Naturally, this triggered the identity to return in full force and this insight was accompanied by the ‘appropriate’ and natural passionate emotion when ‘you’, the identity experiences a threat to ‘your’ survival. ED: Nothing much happened for a while but one more remarkable event did occur. While I was laying on the floor and my thoughts were winding down I was staring at the ceiling fan. Again, not thinking about much. All of a sudden it was as-if an invisible layer was peeled away. My problems, worries, responsibilities were gone as-if they never existed. I could hear how quiet and still everything was. It was like a noise I had become used to had stopped and its absence is what alerted me to its former presence. BUT, there was no meaning-of-life perfection. It was still tremendous and a wildly better way of being alive than normal. There was nothing to hide. But the perfection and purity wasn’t present. VINEETO: It could have been a short-lived excellence experience or something similar but not quite, certainly not the lodestone experience you described before. ED: (…) I think the moment of perfection ceased when I began wondering/ believing that everyone else had been enjoying this perfection except me. I think that’s when I came back into the picture in a big way and I remember feeling confused, but still feeling amazing. (…) VINEETO: Yes, you are correct and “in a big way” as well, the identity returned vindictively and ‘with a vengeance’, as the saying goes, creating the perfect ‘me’ against ‘me’ scenario designed to keep one locked in under the control of ‘me’. ED: In the ensuing years much investigation has taken place, my baseline has raised significantly, and I’m a more liking and likable person. But I think what I’m missing is that connection to pure intent. I haven’t been able to develop it. VINEETO: As I detailed above, there is certainly much potential to forge a clew to pure intent if the re-vivified flavour of your memory of this PCE is as clear as your excellent verbal description. ED: For similar reasons to Josef, I haven’t spent significant time rememorating that night. Only recently have I started to cipher out the meaningful qualities in an attempt to hone in on them. The current discussion has been motivating and I think it could be more useful to work with what I got than try to resolve these questions and concerns that breed like rabbits and seem sillier by the day. Regardless of how it happened, it serves as my peak experience to benchmark everything against. Perfect and effortlessly enjoyable – if only I had the muscle of appreciation and down-to-earth attitude at the time. VINEETO: You can still apply “the muscle of appreciation” for this memory and can choose to enjoy that you had the opportunity and remembrance of such an outstanding experience. ED: The one thing that I have been curious about in regards to recent discussion is the moments where one wonders if they’re in a PCE only to evaluate that they’re not. I have had moments of feeling still, happy and harmless, almost perfect. At times I’ve wondered if I might be near a PCE and perhaps in one. But that perfection isn’t there, and so it’s obviously not a PCE. Is it that there are more milder forms of PCEs? Perhaps the second moment when my ‘invisible layer’ was pulled off was such. Things were “perfect” so to speak because all of my problems, sense of time, and responsibility were gone, but the experiential perfection was missing. However, even that was night-and-day different to how I normally am and unmistakable. VINEETO: The “milder forms” you are asking about are better described as excellence experiences in order to have a clear distinction between an outstanding delectable experience of well-being and a PCE, where purity and perfection and magicality are experientially obvious (and not just in comparison to real world experiencing). ED: Finally, I think I may have set the PCE up to be unreachable due to not only how profound it was, but also due to feeling threatened by it. It seems so immense. I’ve heard it described as a down-to-earth perfection but the only part the seems down-to-earth about it is that it’s happening right here. (And would be immensely sensible to be, damnit it is down-to-earth but it’s so amazing too.) (…) VINEETO: Why should “the PCE […] be unreachable” because it was “profound”? You have certainly described the actual world in great detail and quality and other actualists can confirm this. And it is not necessary to allow yourself to continue feeling threatened by it – it is natural/ intrinsic for the identity to fear for ‘your’ continued survival but that is the very nature of the purity and perfection – that nothing dirty can get it. This is why purity and perfection are the “utter fulfillment” which you aspire to. In regards to “feeling threatened” – this is where the actualism method comes in handy. By observing and acknowledging the fear when it comes up, and being the fear instead of having fear, it will substantially diminish when you stop objecting to it. This allows you to eventually recognize that the perfection you experienced is worth every sacrifice, all of ‘me’, in order to live the purity and perfection 24/7. Watering down the standard would be equivalent to settling for second best. Cheers Vineeto April 10 2025 VINEETO: And it is not necessary to allow yourself to continue feeling threatened by it. ED: During my path thusfar, the PCE has actually been a REALLY threatening thing. “I” would get scared at times when my baseline would improve, or when I would feel happier. “Scared” that I could slip into a PCE or die at any moment. All irrational but felt! VINEETO: Hi Ed, Every feeling is irrational, no matter if common wisdom says that some fear is rational. Today I saw a clip from Elon Musk on another matter and one quote of his at the 1 min mark struck me – he said “when thinking about fear, look fear straight in the eye and it will disappear, (…) look at it directly and it will be gone.” I was struck by his insight because I so far have heard nobody say anything like this except in the AFT writings. ‘Vineeto’s’ experience was that when she stopped objecting to fear, running away from fear, fighting against fear, it would diminish substantially and eventually subside. However, at the end of the post, you say – ED: I’m constantly on the lookout for a PCE. VINEETO: How can you be “constantly on the lookout for a PCE” and simultaneously consider “the PCE has actually been a REALLY threatening thing”? Is it any wonder that the PCE is so far unattainable – or rather that you avoid the PCE like the plague despite your constant lookout for it at the surface level. Unless you face the fear – stop objecting to it, stop running from it, and allow to feel it as what you are, the experience you are constantly looking out for will remain elusive. ED: A pang of fear would pop up and diminish the movement towards happy & harmless – presenting a boundary for the happiness and harmlessness. It was like I kept having to see it was safe to go a little-bit further. Or kept having to see that what was keeping me in place wasn’t what I wanted at all, providing some needed gumption to move forward. VINEETO: Instead of inching forward towards being happy and harmless tiny step by tiny step you also have the option to take the bull by the horns, as the saying goes, and face the core of your feeling of fear – Richard: What I did was face the fact of my mortality. ‘Life’ and ‘Death’ are not opposites ... there is only birth and death. Life is what happens in between. Before I was born, I was not. Now that I am alive, I am. After death I will not be ... just like before birth. Where is the problem? (Richard, List B, No. 21, 10 March 1998). And – Richard: Now, whilst the word ‘fear’ is not the feeling itself, the feeling is very, very real whilst it is happening (as real as any ‘I’ is). By ‘being with it’ as it was happening – without moving in any direction whatsoever with escapist thoughts, feelings or urges – ‘I’ would come to experience ‘being it’ ... and ‘I’ am this fear and this fear is ‘me’. Thus ‘I’ came to experience ‘myself’ in all ‘my’ nakedness. All ‘I’ am, is this fear ... and fear is but one of the instinctual passions that blind nature genetically encodes in all sentient beings at conception in the genes ... ‘I’ am the end-point of myriads of survivors passing on their genes. ‘I’ am the product of the ‘success story’ of blind nature’s fear and aggression and nurture and desire. (Richard, List B, No. 33a, 8 October 1999). I presume you read this yourself at one time or another, so what I ask you, what is it that prevents you looking at the one obstacle which so obviously stands in the way of what you presently want most (a PCE) and what you want for the times in between PCEs – feeling happy and harmless? * VINEETO: – it is natural/ intrinsic for the identity to fear for ‘your’ continued survival but that is the very nature of the purity and perfection – that nothing dirty can get it. ED: Let me see if I understand what you’re pointing out. The nature of purity and perfection provides the security I’m looking for since nothing dirty can get into it. Since it provides security, there is no need to fear it as something that is a threat to my survival as I have been doing thusfar? VINEETO: What I am confirming is that what you are looking for – “the security I’m looking for since nothing dirty can get into it” is also the reason for your greatest fear, because in order to live where nothing dirty can get in, ‘you’, the identity, will have to die in its totality. However, ‘you’ don’t have to die to have a PCE, ‘you’ only have to go into temporary abeyance. And ‘you’ don’t have to die in order to become more happy and harmless, ‘you’ only have to give up some, or a lot, of the control ‘you’ have at present over your flesh and blood body and Ed’s life. * VINEETO: Why should “the PCE […] be unreachable” because it was “profound”? You have certainly described the actual world in great detail and quality and other actualists can confirm this. ED: I think the unreachable element may have something to do with feeling like an imposter. I think there’s more to talk about and respond to but I’m about to go off to work. One last thing I wanted to mention is this: I’m constantly on the lookout for a PCE. I both want to have one, and secretly avoid it (as made clear by feeling threatened.) I can find myself attempting to evaluate how close I am – usually happens when making progress and can spoil it. Or all of a sudden becoming momentarily scared and begin wondering what’s behind the fear. Feeling like I’m falling into a repeated trap here and like I have to let something go but I can’t because my mind is always on these things. VINEETO: How close you are is not measured in inches or feet or hundreds of feet – existentially it is a very short step – Richard: In other words: ‘I’ am fear and fear is ‘me’ (and ‘I’ am aggression and aggression is ‘me’; ‘I’ am nurture and nurture is ‘me’; ‘I’ am desire and desire is ‘me’). The direct experiencing of this is the ending of ‘me’ ... and I am this flesh and blood body only being here now as only this moment is. (Richard, List B, No. 33a, 8 October 1999). If that is too scary for now, which is natural, then you can begin with, bit by bit, letting go of aspects of control and start allowing yourself to first feel the feeling (instead of merely thinking about it) and then begin to acknowledge that you are the feeling you feel instead of having the feeling. From there it is easy to be a different feeling. Cheers Vineeto April 17 2025 VINEETO: How can you be “constantly on the lookout for a PCE“ and simultaneously consider “the PCE has actually been a REALLY threatening thing”? ED: I think there are two issues in one here. The first is that I think that this relates to what y’all talk about when you refer to getting “all of your being” on-board. It feels like I’m split here. There’s a part of me that’s fearful. I’ve been examining this topic lately and it’s hard to find the objections. The one I keep coming back to is, “it’s weird” and the more I dig into that the more silly it seems. You may recall when I visited you a short exchange we had. I believe we were talking about an experience of sweetness that occurred to a handful of people at the same time. I said something like, “The universe is so weird”, and you corrected me saying that, “It’s the human condition that’s weird”. I have things 180-degrees backwards here, because even a brief examination of the human condition reveals it’s perverse. It’s so easy to project oneself onto actuality and find blame where there is none. The second issue is this “being on the lookout”. Since starting the method, I’ve been more aware of how I’m feeling, thinking, etc. I think about PCEs and immolating every day. At times as I swing more into the direction of feeling gooder and gooder, “I” can get excited and then slip into reverie. I’ve been catching it more, and writing about it certainly helps to recall. VINEETO: Hi Ed, You are certainly onto something here – every “reverie“ takes you away from this moment where life is happening and where you can be attentive and change. The past is a memory and the future a reverie (or fearful fantasy) – only this moment is ever actual. So, your challenge is to pay affective attention to how you experience this moment – and it is in this moment where you can experience being the feeling you feel and fully being it (without objection or endorsement) choose to be. For instance if you experience being angry (or fearful, or sad) you recognize and acknowledge that you are this feeling (that is all you are as an identity when you are ruthless honest with yourself). Experiencing that you are this feeling then you have the choice to be a felicitous feeling instead (recognizing that it is silly to be anger or fear or sadness). * VINEETO: Instead of inching forward towards being happy and harmless tiny step by tiny step you also have the option to take the bull by the horns, as the saying goes, and face the core of your feeling of fear – Richard: What I did was face the fact of my mortality. ‘Life’ and ‘Death’ are not opposites … there is only birth and death. Life is what happens in between. Before I was born, I was not. Now that I am alive, I am. After death I will not be … just like before birth. Where is the problem? (Richard, List B, No. 21, 10 March 1998) ED: I remember in your video with Richard the two of you talking about the absolute end of everything. Was oblivion on your mind back then? How were you relating to it at the time? VINEETO: I remember that well. Oblivion was on ‘her’ mind, as you put it. ‘She’ yearned for oblivion. However, when Richard and ‘Vineeto’ had met to talk about the video shoot a week after it was taken and ‘she’ unsuspectingly came close to the actual world territory, so to speak. Richard said to ‘her’, encouragingly, ‘you are really close-by right now’ and within a split second, ‘Vineeto’ pulled back, closed up and avoided any in-depth discussion about becoming actually free with Richard for more than 2 years. Obviously more had to happen. ED: After the PCE and when I thought that I must die, even though I knew it wasn’t to be a physical death, it felt like the absolute end of everything. But that seems like a trick – because immolation isn’t the absolute end of everything. Life continues on. The body continues on. VINEETO: Oh, but it is “everything” because ‘you’, the identity, has such a complete hold and control over you that nothing else exists and nothing else matters but the survival of ‘me’. The only time you can experience life without identity is during the identity’s abeyance. So it is not “like a trick”, it is the deeply felt truth (albeit not a fact). As such, the only way to deal with the fear is to take the bull by the horns in that you stop fighting the fear – it will instantly diminish because you stop feeding it (via the resistance). Respondent: When I feel fear, fear seems to reinforce itself and stays put. Richard: It is not all that uncommon to feel fear feeding off itself, as it were, and mounting in intensity almost exponentially – as in a panic attack for instance – yet closer inspection reveals that it is none other than ‘me’, a fearful ‘me’, who is fuelling/ refuelling the fear (‘I’ am fear and fear is ‘me’) with ‘my’ own affective energy. Respondent: When I think of any belief about the fear trigger, the fear seems to reinforce the belief. Richard: Oh, indeed so ... that is a phenomenon well-known by many a draconian. Respondent: Each fear is a self perpetuating. Richard: The key to success lies in realising that fear does not go anywhere (meaning that nothing ever happens except more fear). [Emphasis added]. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 79, 21 June 2005) ED: I guess I wonder if you ever resolved that fear of oblivion or if instead you took that leap of faith. Maybe it looks like a mix of two. I wonder if the immanence of immolation at that moment brought this resistance up. VINEETO: ‘Vineeto’ did not take “a leap of faith” at all but relied on and strengthened ‘her’ connection to pure intent. Without pure intent one is trapped in the human condition, but with pure intent operating there is an alternative way of experiencing life and a way out. The problem you describe is directly connected with this all-or-nothing approach, and of course such a leap is too big, impossible to achieve and hence you are stuck with fear. Whereas the actualism method offers a way to diminish the bulk of the identity you are, peeling off layer by layer of identity-enhancing feelings and replacing them with identity-diminishing felicitous feelings until ‘I’ grow so thin and feeble that at some point ‘I’ will agree to relinquish control and go out-from-under-control, the different-way-of-being virtual freedom Richard has described many times. (Library, Topics, Virtual Freedom). I particularly recommend the last tool-tip for your consideration. ED: This fear of oblivion feels like what I am at the core. I understand this echoes Richard’s language, but I can remember a few years before my PCE lamenting to an enlightened guy that all I am is fear. A fear-driven problem-solving machine. To me, it’s like resolving this fear would mean immolating altogether. But I can see that there’s more room in the meantime for naiveté. There’s room to contemplate and lean into the fact that it is actually safe here. Fear seems to be why we lose touch with naiveté and fear seems to birth control. I had a chat with my girlfriend a few days ago about death/ oblivion. She mentioned she wasn’t so much scared of oblivion but rather the prospect of suffering – i.e. a painful death. I agreed that I felt the same way. But reflecting on this, I can’t help but to wonder if I am tricking myself. I suspect that if I were in a painful situation, I’d still rather live than die to relieve my suffering. To me, the issue of oblivion seems like a big deal – like if I could resolve it, there’d be nothing left to keep me around. VINEETO: Ha, here you demonstrate it again, this all-or-nothing approach. Has it ever occurred to you that this is exactly how ‘you’ avoid ever doing something practical, something tangible, which would bring about a change for the better in your life, which would work to diminish the control ‘you’ have over your life? By telling yourself that “all I am is fear” and imagine that this is the sign that you are close to immolation (“if I could resolve it, there’d be nothing left to keep me around“) you remain stuck in fear and imagination. You are indeed “tricking” yourself but not by your intellectual projection into the future but by avoiding to even start the first step in actively applying the actualism method – “the ongoing enjoyment and appreciation of this moment of being alive” – and start feeling good/ looking at the obstacles to feeling good now. * VINEETO: From there it is easy to choose to be a different feeling. ED: My experience of this thus far is that I don’t have the ability to immediately control how I feel. VINEETO: Of course you don’t, nobody asked you to “have the ability to immediately control how I feel”. What I said was – Vineeto: “… start allowing yourself to first feel the feeling (instead of merely thinking about it) and then begin to acknowledge that you are the feeling you feel instead of having the feeling. From there it is easy to be a different feeling.” Please read these two sentences again and tell me if you see the difference between what I suggested and what you made of it. If not, read it again until you do. Then put it into practice before dismissing it out of hand, or out of past experiences. In case you have trouble understanding my summary suggestion with the relevant words made bold here is a more detailed description from a co-respondent when the penny had dropped for them – Respondent: ... incidentally, Richard, how can they be ‘an hereditary occurrence’ and be of my choosing at the same time? Richard: You do comprehend that you are your feelings/ your feelings are you (‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’) do you not? Viz.: • [Respondent]: ‘It has taken me a hell of a long time to understand the difference between *having* feelings and *being* those feelings. Because I have not clearly understood this, I’ve never quite got the hang of paying attention to feelings without praise or blame, and without notions of innocence and culpability, right and wrong, etc getting in the way. This makes things very interesting. The moment I regard my ‘self’ as ‘having’ a feeling, I’m split down the middle and there’s a secondary reaction on the part of the social identity (an urge to “do something“ about the feeling, which in turn evokes more feelings, and so on). Conversely, if I recognise that I *am* the feeling, it most often dissolves into thin air – and usually pretty quickly too. This is great. It’s especially helpful with regard to anger and frustration which have been two of my biggest hurdles to date. Previously, when I caught myself being angry, annoyed or frustrated, identifying and paying attention to this feeling would NOT cause it to disappear. On the contrary, the feeling and the awareness of myself as ‘having’ it would sometimes become like a microphone and amplifier locked into a screaming feedback loop. I’m really pleased that this is no longer happening. It seems almost too easy’. [emphasis in original]. (Thursday 28/10/2004 6:55 PM AEST). And again there is a reference to how ‘almost too easy’ actualism is. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 60g, 30 October 2005a). ED: (…) But I can’t necessarily choose from that point to start feeling excellent. Or can I? If that’s the case, why not choose to go into a PCE or immolate? VINEETO: Here it is again – the all-or-nothing approach, or the search for a short-cut, just so you don’t have to apply yourself to do it step by step. How much longer do you want to procrastinate doing something practical and tangible that has worked for others? Why waste all this time waiting/ searching for instant gratification when you take your life into your own hands and start feeling good now, the only moment you can actually experience. I highly recommend re-reading Richard’s Article of This Moment of Being Alive, including the very helpful tool-tips. Cheers Vineeto May 2 2025 VINEETO to Claudiu: … and this is exactly what will eventuate once you give your partner all of you, in order to free both yourself and her from the crippling emotional reactions that inevitably happen from time to time as long as you are a feeling being. Giving her all of you will finally enable the actual intimacy she deserves and thrives in as the very fellow human being who decided to share her life with you. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Claudiu5, 1 May 2025) ED: Can you give examples or elaborate on what it means to give all of yourself to another person? What did that mean for feeling-being Vineeto? VINEETO: Hi Ed, Richard: … exploring sex and sexuality is enormously beneficial: there is no better way, in my experience, for a man and a woman to approach such intimacy than sexual congress. For instance, back when I was a normal man I came close to the loss of self already mentioned on several occasions (in my first marriage) only to instinctively pull-back, out of instantaneous fear at such imminence, as it intuitively seemed she would thus take over my mind and make me her slave for ever and a day. It was not until after the four-hour PCE, which initiated the process resulting in an actual freedom, that it became obvious to me what such loss of self actually meant. Accordingly, I deliberately set out to induce a PCE via giving myself completely to her – totally and utterly – whilst hovering indefinitely on that orgastic plateau which precedes an orgasm (something which I had discovered whilst pubescent). And then ... !Hey Presto! ... no separation whatsoever. (Incidentally, rather than that intuitive fear of thus being her slave coming true it was quite instructive to have her then relate how she had been fantasising about a current heart-throb pop singer all the while I was giving myself to her totally). (Richard, List D, No. 6, 10 November 2009). * Richard: As Vineeto’s reports/ descriptions/ explanations of a near-actual caring are scattered throughout her ‘Direct Route Mail-Out’ emails some background details presented numerically will aid clarity in communication. 1. When feeling-being ‘Vineeto’s everyday feeling of caring first shifted into what has since become known as a near-actual caring the qualitative difference was so marked in its effect ‘she’ initially mistook it to be an actual caring (as per ‘her’ memories of PCE’s). 2. This shift occurred when ‘she’ transitioned from ‘her’ pragmatic, methodological virtual freedom into being out-from-control – a dynamic, destinal virtual freedom – for the remaining four-and-a-half weeks of ‘her’ life (albeit with a melodramatic three-day out-of-control interlude towards the end). 3. Due to ‘her’ naïve intent to be as intimate and without prejudice as possible – which, in conjunction with the absence of self-centredness/ self-centricity that is part-and-parcel of being out-from-control had resulted in the actualism method segueing into the actualism process – ‘her’ cheerful and thus willing concurrence allowed pure intent to dynamically pull ‘her’ evermore unto ‘her’ destiny. (Hence the “dynamic, destinal virtual freedom” nomenclature). 4. This moment-to-moment experiencing of a caring which is not self-centred/ self-centric provided ‘her’ with the experiential convincement that actualising such caring, via ‘self’-immolation, was the only solution to the human condition; this ‘hands-on’ understanding as a dynamically present feeling-being – an impressively distinct contrast to having been abeyant during PCE’s – left ‘her’ with absolutely no choice (lest ‘she’ be forever “rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic”). 5. Since a near-actual caring is, of course, epitomised by a vital interest in the suffering of all human beings coming to an end, forever, as a number one priority, then ‘her’ single-minded focus was essentially centred upon the most immediate way of ensuring this long-awaited global event could begin to take effect the soonest ... to wit: bringing ‘her’ own inevitable demise, at physical death, forward into a liminal imminence. 6. Because the means ‘she’ elected to utilise towards these ends was the near-actual intimacy which goes hand-in-hand with a near-actual caring (per favour that afore-mentioned absence of self-centredness/ self-centricity which typifies being out-from-control) it is apposite to defer to what Vineeto herself wrote on the 20th of January 2010, only fifteen days after her pivotal moment/ definitive event, as its refreshingly simple directness speaks for itself. Viz.: • [Vineeto]: “(...). Further it was obvious for me that it would be Richard who would facilitate and trigger my transition into an actual freedom because he was the most obvious person with whom a near-actual intimacy would change into an actual intimacy – simply because Richard had been my guide and mentor for the last 13 years and particularly so for the period since I stepped out-from-control. As I have written to James recently – ‘The final clue was again about caring, a caring as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster. Only when I cared enough to give all of ‘me’ to another person, to give them what they want most, was I then ready to give it to the one I cared for most, the one I was closest to, and then I was able to leave all remnant concerns and inhibitions of my identity behind. And that’s what happened”. (Direct Route, James, 17 January 2010). (Direct Route, No. 20, 20 January 2010) (Incidentally, her words “to give them what they want most” refers to my oft-expressed emphasis on the necessity of a female replicating my condition – for those oh-so-vital ‘core of civilisation itself’ reason spelled-out elsewhere on my portion of the web site – and it speaks volumes, to those males having reservations about going all the way due to the popular wisdom that what women want is loving relationships, that in the handful of daring pioneers women out-numbered men by a 4-to-1 ratio). (Richard, List D, Srinath2, near-actual-caring). Cheers Vineeto June 10 2025 ED: I’ve enjoyed the discussion on this topic immensely and it’s brought up a lot of questions, some that I’ve wondered about for some time. 1. What does out-from-control refer to? Specifically, what is one out-from-control from? My vague understanding is that the feeling-being is no longer under the control of social conditioning. All of those controls have been let go of, however, the feeling-being is still present. But it seems like a touch more than that as there is a shift from the “do-er” to “be-er.” Why are we not the “be-er” right now? VINEETO: Hi Ed, You are a being with the “controller” in charge to regulate all your thinking and feeling towards remaining exactly as you are, to keep the status quo. To keep your beliefs, your ‘truths’, your natural, i.e. passionate tendency for genetic and socially inculcated feelings and actions intact, as they are, to not change human nature. In order to be able to question these tenets of your social identity, whenever any of them interfere with consistently enjoying and appreciating being alive, you need, of course, actively pure intent operating. There is plenty of information in the website, for instance reading attentively Richard’s selected correspondence, Richard’s and Vineeto’s out-from-control reports, and of course the latest correspondence on this forum. ED: 2. How did Richard impress it upon you? What does one look for / aim for that is different than what you were already doing at the time? Could you even understand what he was asking you to do? VINEETO: He specifically asked me to. Of course, I knew what Richard was asking me. The topic had been discussed and explained for weeks the topic of the Yahoo mailing list discussion. We were gathered for the ‘First Convivium Gathering’ at the navigable end of the Bungawalbin river to further all participants to be, sooner rather than later, in a different-way-of-being – Richard: No mechanism prompted me; it was my select associates at the time – feeling-beings all of them – who all-of-a-sudden no longer had an impenetrable psychic force-field barring their access or blocking them from getting (existentially) close to me. Thus the impetus for me being as if lifted forward by a cresting wave (to utilise surfing terminology) came from them; after all, setting into motion plans for intensifying their actualism practice is what we had all gathered together there for, in that remote river wilderness area on that weekend in November, 2009 (in what became known as ‘The First Convivium Gathering’), and it was Vineeto’s existential proximity in particular which was the keenest impetus. (Hence me impressing upon her, and not another, the necessity of being out-from-control/in a different-way-of being). * On the following Monday (the 16th of November), the day after being notified of my second wife’s death, shortly after that ‘First Convivium Gathering’ had concluded and my select associates had all gone back to their respective residences thus leaving me once again on my own at the navigable head of that remote river system, this impetus resulted in a profound event occurring – the first of what became known as magical prodigies – whilst I was contemplating the significance of her death; a tremendous surge of calorific energy travelled from the lower solar-plexus, from just above the sex-centre, up through the rib-cage diaphragm, suffusing the entire thoracic region with a sparkling effervescence and generating a golden hue in the visual field; this prodigy, which came to be known as ‘the quickening’, remained operating 24/7 all through both the epoch-changing events of late 2009/early 2010 and those other magical prodigies, already made public knowledge, which enabled/ facilitated those events. These last few months, beginning in the morning of Friday the 7th of October 2011, a clearer, finer version of ‘the quickening’ has been subtly making itself noticed more and more; by ‘clearer, finer’ I mean the visual field is marked by a distinct crystalline character, rather than a golden hue, and the sparkling effervescence, which is more full-body this time around, has a much finer quality to it such that a fine-champagne-bubbles type of word Devika made-up all those years ago – ‘tintling’ – seems to be most apt. ‘Tis all quite marvellous. (Richard, List D, No. 25, 6 Feb 2012) The tooltip in that 4th paragraph of the quote (when accessed in the original) explains much of what you asked about pure intent and out-from-control. ED: 3. Does being out-from-control guarantee you’ll feel good? My understanding is that during this period the mutiny took place, am I correct? Can you elaborate on the potential for the “bad” & “good” emotions while being out-from-control? VINEETO: Personally, I was consistently being naiveté/ being in an ongoing excellence experience, due to having traversed the wall of fear and having unequivocally agreed to ‘my’ impending demise for 4 and a half weeks, with a disruption of 3 days. You can work out the percentage for yourself. ED: 4. I hate to ask but does this out-from-control state relate to enlightenment in any way, hence the caution to proceed without pure intent fully in place? I notice the “doer” features a lot in their discourse, however the “Absolute” doesn’t feature in being out-from-control. VINEETO: If you hate to ask this you probably already know the answer. It does not. Without “pure intent fully in place” you still have to be weary of the temptation but then you need pure intent operating to be in a different way of being. Only Richard, in the absence of a precedent, had to go through enlightenment – this is no longer necessary and it would be very silly to allow oneself to become enlightened due to being seduced by unexamined ‘good’ feelings. ED: 5. Similar to the above in regards to caution – I’ve often contemplated the difference between out-of-control and out-from-control. Might you be able to offer a comparison of the two? It almost seems like out-from-control is free license to be however you want, but the qualitative difference is the pure intent to make peace on earth apparent – thus one can trust oneself to ‘be’ however one wants. (There seems to be a massive dissociation here, creating an “entity” that controls and another “entity” that needs to be controlled.) VINEETO: Out-from-control is a different way of being as explained in the above given links. Out of control is anyone giving way/ expressing excessive feelings. Yes, “pure intent to make peace on earth apparent” is gained from the intimate connection betwixt the pristine-purity of an actual innocence and the near-purity of the sincerity of naiveté. When you have this connection you apperceptively know. Neither trust, nor belief, hope or faith is required, in fact they are detrimental. Beware whenever someone tells you, in such typical new-age lingo, to “trust oneself to ‘be’ however one wants”. As regards creating an “entity” – the entity is not created, you are genetically endowed with the instinctual entity which makes the inculcation of a social identity a life-and-death necessity. Therefore, what you call “massive dissociation” is every feeling being’s way of operating, including your own. Richard: To begin at the beginning: every new generation – the latest recruits to the human race – have a veritable mish-mash of cultural folkways and social mores (=French moeurs) insistently impressed upon them from the earliest age. And the primary reason for the unremitting instillation of all those beliefs, ideas, theories, concepts, maxims, saws, proverbs, aphorisms, dictums, truths, truisms, factoids, philosophies, axioms, posits, postulates, values, principles, ideals, standards, credos, doctrines, tenets, canons, morals, ethics, customs, traditions, psittacisms, superstitions, myths, legends, folklores, imaginations, divinations, visions, fantasies, chimeras, illusions, delusions, hallucinations – and whatever other schemes and dreams there may be which constitutes human wisdom – is essentially because of each sentient being having been born with connaturally puissant survival instincts, which, when operating and functioning as a group, are potentially a danger to all concerned. And this is because what is known colloquially as “blind nature” endows each and every human being with the selfish instinct for individual survival and the clannish instinct for group survival – be it the familial group, the tribal group, or the national group – and, as it takes a powerful instinctive impulse (altruism) to overcome a powerful instinctive impulse (selfism), the newest recruits to humankind needs must be socialised and culturalised. Viz.: • culturalise (tr.v.; culturalised, culturalising): to expose or subject to the influence of culture {viz.: culture = the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another}; (n.): culturalisation. [1955-60]. [curly-bracketed insert added] ~ (Webster’s College Dictionary). • socialise (tr.v.; socialised, socialising): to make social {viz.: social = friendly or sociable; agreeable in company; companionable}; make fit for life in companionship with others; (n.): socialisation. [1820-30]. [curly-bracketed insert added] ~ (Webster’s College Dictionary). This ad hoc socialisation and culturalisation, this extempore implantation of socially and culturally approved mores and folkways, increates an incorporeal socio-cultural inwit or conscience – (an in situ affective-psychic guardian inculcated as a preventative measure to restrain and/or contain the wayward self which lurks deep within the human breast per favour blind nature’s inherent survival passions and preclude gaols from being filled to over-flowing by inhibiting offences from occurring in the first place) – which invariably forms itself into a socio-cultural identity. This increated socio-cultural inwit a.k.a. conscience a.k.a. guardian – colligated under the rubric “social identity” for convenience – encompasses various bodiless personae as well. (Richard, the Formation and Persistence of Social Identity) You can read the rest of this excellent article including explanatory tool-tips at the above link. Cheers Vineeto June 12 2025 ED: 4. I hate to ask but does this out-from-control state relate to enlightenment in any way, hence the caution to proceed without pure intent fully in place? I notice the “doer” features a lot in their discourse, however the “Absolute” doesn’t feature in being out-from-control. VINEETO: If you hate to ask this you probably already know the answer. It does not. Without “pure intent fully in place” you still have to be weary of the temptation but then you need pure intent operating to be in a different way of being. Only Richard, in the absence of a precedent, had to go through enlightenment – this is no longer necessary and it would be very silly to allow oneself to become enlightened due to being seduced by unexamined ‘good’ feelings. ED: I found this quote you included in response to Ian to be very helpful: Richard: Lastly, because the terms ‘doer’ and ‘beer’ are utilised in religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical literature to refer to ‘ego’ and ‘soul’, respectively, it is apposite to point out here that those terms are not ;being used thataway when referring to the doer being abeyant, and the beer ascendant, in either a near-PCE – else IE’s and EE’s would instead be ASC’s (i.e., egoless) and thus not near-PCE’s – or when in an out-from-control virtual freedom. (Richard, List D, Srinath2, #out-from-control) VINEETO: I thought of your question when I found and posted the above quote to Alexander. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Alexander, 11 June 2025) At any time you read what actualists write, especially Richard, Geoffrey and myself, keep in mind that actualism is the third alternative to materialism and spiritualism and has nothing at all to do with the concepts of either materialism and spiritualism. They both operate within the human condition. The sooner you grasp that actualism is something entirely new to human consciousness, the sooner you will understand more of what is written and be able to clear the workbench and start afresh, i.e. unlearn/decline what you have been taught as “the Truth”. Cheers Vineeto June 13 2025 VINEETO: The sooner you grasp that actualism is something entirely new to human consciousness, the sooner you will understand more of what is written and be able to clear the workbench and start afresh, i.e. unlearn/decline what you have been taught as “the Truth”. ED: I can remember one of our earliest exchanges where you gave me the advice that it’s more helpful to look for the differences between spirituality and actualism than the similarities. That advice went a long way in clearing things up but I’ve never looked closely at the literature surrounding out-from-control as I consider that to be beyond me at this point. The recent discussions have been causing me to take a closer look. I think there’s a temptation to try to understand where the two “schools” overlap as they both deal with matters of consciousness. But the end results are so drastically different that it makes no sense to take advice from a path that leads to undesired results. I often wonder about the spiritualist’s use of naivety & innocence, as they often emphasize these qualities. But this seems to gets translated to a ‘sexual innocence’ where abstinence is recommended. It was always odd to me they never addressed the desire and objectification driving the behavior. (As well as it still seemingly present in them). I guess in the end it doesn’t conflict with their Truth, and thus there’s no reason to fundamentally change. There’s more I’d like to say but it’s a challenge to put it together coherently. VINEETO: Hi Ed, I wonder why you would want to spend more of your most valuable asset, your time, to give way to your “temptation“ to search for theoretical semantic “similarities” between spiritualism and your concept of actualism. Because this is what it can ever be, a concept, until you actually do it. If you had a comprehensive grasp what the experiential understanding of actualism is you would see right away that there is no similarity at all. (Richard, Articles, 180 Degrees Opposite). Besides, as long as you consider actualism as one of the “schools” which “deal with matters of consciousness” you will never understand actualism because it is not a “school” but experiential. A more fruitful investigation would be why you have this temptation (=feeling) in the first place? Is it perhaps to justify having spent so many years of your life in a fruitless endeavour and have difficulties (or pride) to admit that it was a futile enterprise? Or is it to delay dedicating your life doing something worthwhile? * VINEETO: Personally, I was consistently being naiveté/ being in an ongoing excellence experience, due to having traversed the wall of fear and having fully agreed to ‘my’ impending demise for 4 and a half weeks, with a disruption of 3 days. You can work out the percentage for yourself. ED: Were you no longer out-from-control for those 3 days? I guess I wonder if being out-from-control played a part in you getting swept into the emotions of the event – with no boundaries or limitations to control how you should feel. No loyalty to Richard or the image of yourself that had been a practicing actualist. VINEETO: And I wonder why you keep asking (3 times now) about those 3 days during my actualism process rather than asking how I succeeded to become actually free, especially as this particular event most likely won’t have any relevance any longer for those aspiring to become actually free? To explain: For the very first pioneers ‘insanity’ played a prominent role for several reasons – * Richard described his enlightenment period also as 11 years of institutionalised insanity and repeatedly warned everyone about it. * Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ was at times witness to both Richard’s second wife (de jure) and his third wife (de facto) being fearful of Richard being insane (his second wife responded to this fear by living in and out of an ASC (“The Goddess all humankind had been expecting“). (Richard, List D, No. 6, 16 November 2009). Their occasional suspicion was only natural Richard being the first person (and the only one at the time) having not affective, psychic and imaginary faculty, i.e. being free from the human condition. * Several people on the mailing list went on and on about Richard having particular forms of insanity based on their own amateurish long-distance diagnoses. (Common Objections “Richard is insane“). ‘Vineeto’ had never been (consciously) affected by these quite ridiculous amateurish long-distance claims and ‘she’ had plenty of PCEs of ‘her’ own to know what ‘she’ was aiming for … until the mutiny occurred – Richard: As this had been my experience twice before – once on the previous night, when another feeling ‘being’ had inadvertently slipped bodily through[1] [1]The reason why the word inadvertently is apt is because that feeling ‘being’ – just as was the case with my second wife (de jure) many years previously – was not of sufficient qualification to be the direct-route pioneer essential for global peace and harmony; indeed, this inadvertent access was of an ‘innocent abroad’ nature, to use a popular expression, and the dilettante quality of such a privileged access – despite being complete, as it was, with the most perfect bodily touching (a physical caressing of absolute perfection) – led to their worldview-shattering discovery of my actual age (worldview-shattering only for ill-informed/ ill-prepared dabblers); this worldview-shattering shock of theirs, accompanied by much wide-eyed staring and the plaintive crying-out of the words ‘Two worlds!?! Two worlds!?!’ instigated the panic-stricken dash for (presumed) safety from an (assumed to be) insane man – as concluded from an amateurish ‘split-personality mental disorder’ diagnosis (based solely upon an automorphically ascribed adult personality who was, supposedly, co-existing with a ‘left behind’ teenager) – and the consequent mutiny as others were affectively-psychically sucked, willy-nilly, into a collective panic. As the word collective here refers to blind nature’s affective herding/ flocking survival package a shipboard insurrection/ insurgency is essentially no different to any such seditious/subversive civic disorder, whether on land or at sea, whereupon the much-touted ‘community spirit’/ ‘communal rallies’ can abruptly turn, in a collective flash of affective-psychic power-play, into the notorious ‘mob riots’/ ‘mob violence’ which ruling classes through the ages have feared so much (as in peasant uprisings/ working-class revolutions). The solution? None other than the extirpation of the entire affective faculty/ the identity in toto formed thereof – whereby all hierarchical civic order via civic control becomes instantly redundant – leaving only equity and parity (not equality) where previously there was an instinctual jostling for pecking order. (Announcement1, #magic, [R] tooltip Footnote [1]) Here is another statement about the mutiny – Richard: (…) the primary reason – indeed the sole cause – for the mutiny (…) was the utter panic which ensued, upon having inadvertently had direct access to me as I actually am, pursuant to the revelation that the writer of these millions of words is but an innocent youth … (Richard, List D, No. 2, 6 January 2010). ‘Vineeto’ was one of the people infected by the “panic-stricken“ strong vibes, which corresponded to ‘her’ own atavistic fear of being insane/ Richard being insane after all, which ‘she’ had not been aware of all this while – a fear which ‘she’ experienced as being more dire than death itself. Hence it took three days for ‘her’ to come to ‘her’ senses. However, upon her return to the convivium, before ‘she’ had even spoken with Richard, an event happened which I recently relayed – Vineeto to Claudiu: To expand on ‘Vineeto’s’ experience “that ‘she’ was ready to give up anything and everything ‘she’ had valued“ – ‘Vineeto’ had returned to the remote wilderness where the houseboats were moored (still under the frightening impression that Richard had a “split-personality mental disorder’ (Announcement1, #magic, [R] tooltip Footnote [1]) to pack ‘her’ office paraphernalia and other necessities into the dinghy to take to a temporary location elsewhere until ‘she’ knew what to do next. She met the other two mutineers a few hundred meters upstream, only to then be informed they wanted to disassociate themselves from the whole affair right then and there and would not take ‘her’ in their car. So ‘Vineeto’ found ‘herself’ abandoned at nowhere in that ancient rainforest, her belongings in the dinghy, which at that point had run out of petrol, and stark naked (as everyone was on their holiday). Strangely enough, this last shocking turn of events, instead of freaking ‘her’ out, brought an unexpected calm, ‘she’ slipped into the warm water of the creek and, floating along, looked at the sky and ‘her’ only thought was “if this is what it takes to become actually free so be it.“ (During the 2-3 out-of-control days, although ‘she’ questioned Richard’s state of mind ‘she’ never doubted his words written on the website, nor the PCEs nor ‘her’ intent to become actually free despite the emotional turmoil). The last turn of events resulted in a surprising peacefulness after the emotion-filled events of the last two-and-a-half days – no more struggle, only the full permission and endorsement to let the universe run ‘her’ life, as all ‘she’ had tried had come to naught. ‘She’ eventually made it back to the houseboats, towed by two roaming fishermen (there was no room to be self-conscious then) yet it took another few hours to gather the courage to talk to Richard about the whys and wherefores of what happened – by this time not knowing anymore if Richard was insane or ‘she’ ‘herself’ had lost the plot completely. In hindsight it was all utterly hilarious. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Claudiu5, 12 March 2025). As such, it was all a necessary precursor (necessary because it happened) to clean out the last remnants of any resistance to becoming actually free, which happened only a few days later. The reason I said that “this particular event most likely won’t have any relevance any longer for those aspiring to become actually free“ is because the Direct Route has been opened, so demonstrably no one needs to venture close to enlightenment (institutionalised insanity) in order to become actually free. Also because it has been, again demonstrably, proven that an actual freedom is replicable by several people so far, the fear of going insane never needs to come up at all. ‘Nough said. ED: Or alternatively, with the diminishment of naivety & presence of fearful feelings, did the out-from-control different way of being cease only to be restarted at the end of the 3 days? VINEETO: As I said, there was a disruption of an ongoing excellence experience for 3 days – do you not to know what the word “disruption“ means? [Synonyms]: interruption, suspension, discontinuation, stoppage, delay (Oxford Languages). ED: Or a 3rd option? VINEETO: Nope. Cheers Vineeto June 15 2025 VINEETO: I wonder why you would want to spend more of your most valuable asset, your time, to give way to your “temptation” to search for theoretical semantic “similarities” between spiritualism and your concept of actualism. ED: In this case it’s wondering if the ‘doer’ / ‘beer’ word choice had anything to do with the ‘doer’/ ‘beer’ language in spirituality. There are plenty of cases of Richard using spiritual vocabulary. What’s becoming clear is that any spiritual understanding of a word cannot be useful since the words and understandings stem from spiritual experiences and not from entirely new to human experience experiences that actualist pioneers are navigating. (…) VINEETO: Hi Ed, The ‘doer’/ ‘beer’ terminology does has nothing to do with any of the spiritual definitions, and I already sent you a quote explaining that which you commented on. Viz.: Richard: Lastly, because the terms ‘doer’ and ‘beer’ are utilised in religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical literature to refer to ‘ego’ and ‘soul’, respectively, it is apposite to point out here that those terms are not being used thataway when referring to the doer being abeyant, and the beer ascendant, in either a near-PCE – else IE’s and EE’s would instead be ASC’s (i.e., egoless) and thus not near-PCE’s – or when in an out-from-control virtual freedom. (Richard, List D, Srinath2, #out-from-control) The ‘doer’ is the sophisticated (philosophising, rational, conceptualising and controlling) ‘doer’ whereas the ‘beer’ is a benign naïve ‘beer’ within the scales of naiveté ranging from being sincere to becoming naïve and all the way through being naïveté itself to an actual innocence (in a PCE), such as described in Grace’s scale of intimacy – Richard: (…) A richness (aka an excellence experience) is where sweetness segues into a near-absence of agency via letting-go of control and one is the sex and sexuality (the beer and not the doer). (…) ‘Excellent’ related to richness (a near-absence of agency; with the [sophisticated] ‘doer’ abeyant, and the [naïve] ‘beer’ ascendant, being the experiencing is inherently cornucopian); [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, Claudiu4, 28 January 2016). (see also Richard, Abditorium, Intimacy and Intimacy Experience). More on not mixing spiritual practice with actualist practice – Richard: Fifth, as any ‘letting go of the controls’ by the controller means, ipso facto, the controller still remaining in situ it can only refer to – just as you do – something of the nature of a [quote] ‘certain degree of letting go (of beliefs and old patterns)’ [endquote] else it does indeed bring a spiritualist practice into an actualist practice ... complete with the still in situ controller cunningly morphing into the watcher of religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical lore and legend. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, No. 12, 9 December 2009). * VINEETO: A more fruitful investigation would be why you have this temptation (=feeling) in the first place? Is it perhaps to justify having spent so many years of your life in a fruitless endeavour and have difficulties (or pride) to admit that it was a futile enterprise? Or is it to delay dedicating your life doing something worthwhile? ED: The mistake is equating Richard’s use of the words “beer/doer” to the spiritualist’s use of the words and thinking that something could be gleaned from their writing. I can tell you that it’s neither of the options you present me but there are other avenues worth exploring. I’d be happy to navigate that with you in good faith if you’re interested. Because you didn’t answer the initial question directly, “does being out-from-control guarantee you’ll feel good? ... VINEETO: As there were multiple quotes presented which describe that being out-from-control is dynamic and that Devika relapsed from her dynamic virtual freedom I wonder why you still have to ask if feeling good is either guaranteed or permanent. Only the complete disappearance of the instinctual passions and the identity formed thereof is irrevocable, i.e. guaranteed and permanent. ED: Can you elaborate on the potential for the ‘bad’ and ‘good’ emotions while being out-from-control?” Looking back on the correspondence, you don’t address that question. VINEETO: I did not address this question specifically because the answer regarding “‘bad’ and ‘good’ emotions” is inherent in every description of what being out-from-control is – an ongoing excellence/ intimacy experience – Richard: An obvious out-from-control/ different-way-of-being virtual freedom is an on-going excellence experience … (Richard, List D, No. 12, 9 December 2009). An excellence experience is clearly explained as feeling excellent (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Excellence) which is per definition feeling better than good. Of course it is a precursor to an actual freedom, hence less than excellent experiencing occasionally can happen, but with pure intent fully activated less than excellent feelings will flush out the last remnants of whatever prevents an actual freedom now, “pulling one evermore unto one’s destiny”. Thus one is back to feeling excellent, (so near to being a PCE as to be almost indistinguishable from it), in a very short period of time. Richard: What sets the ongoing near-PCE known as “a dynamic, destinal virtual freedom” apart from ever other way of life/ manner of living is, as is expressed in that paragraph, by being in full allowance of the benignity and benevolence inherent to pure intent being dynamically operative – whereby the actualism method segues into the actualism process – such as to be pulling one evermore unto one’s destiny. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, Claudiu4, 15 August 2016). And here is why you perhaps have difficulties to wrap your mind around the experiential aspect of this topic – Richard: (Being out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being is quite daunting to contemplate as an on-going EE marks the end of the beginning of the end of ‘me’ and the commencement of the actualism process – as distinct from the actualism method – wherein a momentum not of ‘my’ doing takes over and an inevitability sets in; in an on-going EE the actual world has the effect of impelling one towards it – like a moth to a candle as the overarching benignity and benevolence of the actual increasingly operates such as to render ‘my’ felicity/ innocuity increasingly redundant; this is where being the nearest a ‘self’ can be to innocence – the naiveté located betwixt the core of being and the sexual centre (where one is both likeable and liking) – is attached as if with a golden thread or clew to the purity of actual innocence; an on-going EE is, thus, where one becomes acclimatised to benignity and benevolence and the resultant blitheness because the purity of the actual is so powerful that it would ‘blow the fuses’ if one was to venture into this territory ill-prepared). (Richard, List D, No. 12, 9 December 2009). ED: Can you elaborate on the potential for the ‘bad’ and ‘good’ emotions while being out-from-control? Looking back on the correspondence, you don’t address that question. VINEETO: I did answer the question but you were dissatisfied – ED: 3. Does being out-from-control guarantee you’ll feel good? My understanding is that during this period the mutiny took place, am I correct? Can you elaborate on the potential for the “bad” & “good” emotions while being out-from-control? VINEETO: Personally, I was consistently being naiveté/ being in an ongoing excellence experience, due to having traversed the wall of fear and having unequivocally agreed to ‘my’ impending demise for 4 and a half weeks, with a disruption of 3 days. You can work out the percentage for yourself. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Ed, 10 June 2025). As for “potential”, synonyms: possible, prospective, future, probable (Oxford Languages) – this is a hypothetical question, a thought-out projection about potential into the future and cannot be answered. In other words, it is the controller who want to map out every step and ascertain the risks before experientially putting the first toe in the water, taking the first step into naiveté. As the way to being out-from-control is only when the controller, the ‘doer’ is descendant, i.e. moving into the background, such a map will not only be useless but counterproductive to naiveté. Perhaps Geoffrey’s apposite ditty expresses it most succinctly and to the point – Geoffrey: Ok here we go. My first reaction, when some notification appeared that my name had been uttered, was: WhO dIsTuRbS My sLuMbEr? (joy)That joy had me sit, and write the following: For I had been exploring the unknown continent, its golden cities and living clouds, for weeks, without a word. When some letter found its way to me, its ink faded from the sea voyage, enquiring about matters so home-bound as to appear foreign: a quarrel about definitions, from the Royal Society of leathery armchairs, asking for my judgment. My ruling. Please differentiate! they ask. Please settle our quarrel! We wish to classify, exactly, those birds we’ve never seen! So the golden city and the living clouds laughed and danced and sang: “Won’t they open the windows? Won’t they bathe in the stream? Won’t they take off their clothes, and swim through the sea?” (Geoffrey, Beer and Doer, February 2023). ED: You state you were consistently being naiveté for 4 1/2 weeks with a disruption of 3 days and then tell me to work out the math as if I care about the length of the disruption. I’m not presenting a “gotcha” question. You told me you were being naiveté for 4 and 1/2 weeks with a disruption of 3 days. I’m asking if being out-from-control was disrupted for those 3 days. Obviously being naiveté was disrupted. Are they one-in-the-same? Perhaps that’s where the confusion on my end is and you can tell me as much. VINEETO: What I can say is that being out-from-control was disrupted (=interrupted by being out-of-control) but the fact that ‘Vineeto’ had been out-from-control and could easily pick up ‘her’ connection to pure intent) and was fully committed to become free, the turning into an out-of-control period was only short and being out-from-control recommence with “being in full allowance of the benignity and benevolence inherent to pure intent being dynamically operative” after that particular disrupting issue (the fear of Richard being insane) had been settled. ED: I’m trying to understand if it’s a permanent state or not. And if it is permanent why the detour and can being out-from-control include the ‘bad/good’ feelings? Or, does one cease being out-from-control the moment they arise? Why is it different from an ongoing EE to necessitate it’s own vocabulary? Even at the end of your last post you describe it as a disruption of an ongoing excellence experience – not a disruption of being out-from-control. If the two are the same, then an EE is synonymous with being out-from-control. Given what you’ve said, am I understanding correctly that you were out-from-control, and then no longer out-from-control for 3-days, only to resume being out-from-control? VINEETO: Yes. The reason why I didn’t answer that is because it was already clear from the links I provided (if you read them with attention that it is not permanent as Devika had clearly demonstrated that anyone can abandon pure intent at any time and take back control over ‘my’ life. This is not like buying an item with a ‘money-back guarantee’ – it is your life and freedom is in ‘your’ hands and ‘your’ hands alone. Life is not all black and white and neither is the process of working one’s way out of the maze of the human condition. As I said, it’s experiential. ED: If you’re wondering why I’m asking questions then the best way to find out is by answering directly so the conversation can proceed. While it may be obvious to you that the event (a disruption during the best example of being out-from-control) most likely won’t have any relevance to those aspiring to become actually free – it may not be so obvious to me. I don’t know what to tell you other than my questions are coming from a genuine place. VINEETO: Perhaps this clear and extensive description/ clarification from Richard will settle your theoretical query until you have enough experiential expertise to settle it for yourself (it is from a file called “Richard’s Selected Correspondence, Dynamic Virtual Freedom” for which I provided the link to you in my first response to your queries on this topic, which you obviously failed to grasp) – RICHARD: G’day No. 12, I appreciate you giving it a go to clarify and a timely word from me will make your clarification complete. First of all, it is probably inevitable the phrase out-from-control be (incorrectly) expressed as ‘letting go of control’ yet the fact remains that the controller, being the controls, cannot let go of that which they are. Secondly, the hyphenated term you mention as me having been calling [quote] ‘an out of control virtual freedom as opposed to a in control virtual freedom’ [endquote] clearly has the hyphenated term different-way-of-being immediately after the forward slash betwixt the two hyphenated terms. Viz.: [Richard]: [...] being sans identity in toto/ the entire affective faculty (plus its epiphenomenal psychic facility) any residence or venue of mine is marked by an absence of both affective vibes and psychic currents ... a pristine ambience made all the more marked, for many a person, upon returning from the ‘real-world’ environs after a previous visit. [...] this pristine ambience is conducive to a sincere actualist activating their potential – albeit temporarily – as in some form of an out-from-control/ different-way-of-being (to whatever degree of intimacy they be comfortable with at the time). Furthermore, experience has shown that these intimacy experiences can be contagious, so to speak, for other sincere actualists also present as the atmosphere generated affectively/ psychically by the first to be out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being can propagate a flow-on effect, on occasion. In short: a felicitous and innocuous atmosphere, begotten in an ever-fresh affectless/ selfless ambience, fosters a milieu where happiness and harmlessness can be the norm rather than the exception. (Richard, List D, 14a, 4 December 2009). Upon reflection it will be seen I am not – repeat not – referring to a PCE as ‘being’ is in abeyance then (the very fact not ‘being’ renders any different way of ‘being’ impossible). Thirdly, and most importantly for any flow-on effect, in a PCE there is similarly a marked absence of both affective vibes and psychic currents – a pristine ambience – to that of an actual freedom. (As an aside: the 5-month PCE was as useless in regards affectively/ psychically fostering a milieu, where happiness and harmlessness can be the norm rather than the exception, as is an actual freedom). An obvious out-from-control/ different-way-of-being virtual freedom is an on-going excellence experience (EE) but an on-going intimacy experience (IE) may very well be the most likely state as an EE, being so close to a PCE as to be barely distinguishable is not so likely to readily occur sooner rather than later. (Being out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being is quite daunting to contemplate as an on-going EE marks the end of the beginning of the end of ‘me’ and the commencement of the actualism process – as distinct from the actualism method – wherein a momentum not of ‘my’ doing takes over and an inevitability sets in; in an on-going EE the actual world has the effect of impelling one towards it – like a moth to a candle as the overarching benignity and benevolence of the actual increasingly operates such as to render ‘my’ felicity/ innocuity increasingly redundant; this is where being the nearest a ‘self’ can be to innocence – the naiveté located betwixt the core of being and the sexual centre (where one is both likeable and liking) – is attached as if with a golden thread or clew to the purity of actual innocence; an on-going EE is, thus, where one becomes acclimatised to benignity and benevolence and the resultant blitheness because the purity of the actual is so powerful that it would ‘blow the fuses’ if one was to venture into this territory ill-prepared). Fourth, as any being out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being (and there are varying degrees of such intimacy experiences) implicitly requires pure intent – which renders the necessity for morals/ ethics/ values/ principles null and void – it is certainly not the territory a fledgling actualist (to use your phraseology) has any business venturing into precipitously. Fifth, as any ‘letting go of the controls’ by the controller means, ipso facto, the controller still remaining in situ it can only refer to – just as you do – something of the nature of a [quote] ‘certain degree of letting go (of beliefs and old patterns)’ [endquote] else it does indeed bring a spiritualist practice into an actualist practice ... complete with the still in situ controller cunningly morphing into the watcher of religio-spiritual/ mystico-metaphysical lore and legend. [Emphasis added]. (Richard’s Selected Correspondence, Dynamic Virtual Freedom) In regards to your first question, “in this case it’s wondering if the ‘doer’/ ‘beer’ word choice had anything to do with the ‘doer’/ ‘beer’ language in spirituality. There are plenty of cases of Richard using spiritual vocabulary” – When Richard is “using spiritual vocabulary” it is obvious from the context, when reading attentively, that he is talking about his enlightenment or another’s spiritual experience. Additionally, you need to take into consideration that Richard first wrote to a Buddhist mailing list (List A), then to a Krishnamurti mailing list (List B) and several correspondences to a John-de-Ruiter spiritual mailing list. He naturally adapted his writing to have his co-respondents understand what he was saying but always made it clear where the difference lay to an actual freedom. So your throw-away justification has no substance. Whereas when you are attentive to where you (automatically/ inadvertently) insert your own spiritual interpretation into Richard’s words and/or overlook the context in which the correspondence was written, then there is no reason to blame Richard for his use of language as being the cause for your own mix-up, and/or skipping over information that does not instantly answer your specific question. And now, again you say it is my fault that I “didn’t answer the initial question directly” where the answer was in plain sight in the various links I provided all along. For instance – RICHARD: (...) The virtual freedom being referred to in ‘Richard’s Journal’ is, of course, the full-blown experiencing of it: an out-from-being-under-control and, thus, different way of being nowadays known as an ongoing excellence experience. (This ongoing excellence experience is what the methodological aspect of a virtual freedom – a persistent and diligent application of the actualism method – can morph into whenever that current-time awareness method has been applied to a sufficiency for that to occur/ have happen). This penultimate out-from-under-control/ different-way-of-being is barely distinguishable from a pure consciousness experience. (It was from this ongoing excellence experiencing that pure consciousness experiences occurred on a near-daily basis – sometimes two-three times a day – for the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago). (Richard’s Selected Correspondence, Dynamic Virtual Freedom) * RICHARD: Vineeto recently spoke of this feature of the actualism method as being essential for feeling-being ‘Vineeto’, when ‘her’ out-*from*-control virtual freedom turned into an out-*of*-control panic mode (in Message No. 12614). Viz.: [Vineeto]: ‘This second panic only lasted for 3 days but because it happened during the out-from-control virtual freedom it turned into an out-of-control panic mode. Only ‘her’ decade-long training in keeping ‘her’ hands in ‘her’ pockets and *neither repress nor express* the intense feelings racing through ‘her’ allowed the extreme situation to subside so soon afterwards ... and look where I am today’. [emphasis added]. And, once the third alternative hove into view for ‘her’, ‘she’ was once again tapping into pure intent personified – per favour ‘the quickening’ – and thereby got back to being (safely) out-*from*-control once more. [Emphasis added]. (Richard’s Selected Correspondence, Dynamic Virtual Freedom) * RICHARD: In other words, someone genuinely out-from-control is constantly (i.e., consistently) ‘feeling excellent’, come-what-may, by the very nature of what that term refers to. (Richard’s Selected Correspondence, Dynamic Virtual Freedom) * RICHARD: In effect, the actualism process is what ensues when one gets out from being under control, via having given oneself prior permission to have one’s life live itself (i.e., sans the controlling doer), and a different way of being comes about (i.e., where the beer is the operant) – whereupon a thrilling out-from-control momentum takes over and an inevitability sets in – whereafter there is no pulling back (hence the reluctance in having it set in motion) as once begun it is nigh-on unstoppable. Then one is in for the ride of a lifetime! (Richard’s Selected Correspondence, Dynamic Virtual Freedom) Your high-handed dismissal of my replies (as in blaming Richard and myself for your own mis-understanding/ non-understanding) are not conducive to gaining a broader comprehension of what constitutes a dynamic, different-way-of-being. All I can do now is to recommend approaching the topic sincerely and naïvely, allowing yourself to think outside the box of both spiritualism and materialism, and perhaps even experientially find out for yourself what a different-way-of-being is like. To put it differently, if you read the AFT website with full affective attentiveness (with all your heart) and better still, with all your being and a connection with pure intent, then something can happen and shift in your understanding. People have reported having PCEs resulting from reading it with this attitude. Then apperceptive awareness can provide clarity. In short, I cannot do the thinking for you. Regards Vineeto November 14 2025 VINEETO to Chrono: I also found ‘Vineeto’s’ correspondence with Tarin on being harmless instead of merely feeling harmless useful. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, Tarin, 13.8.2006). (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Chrono3, 13 Nov 2025) ED: Hi Vineeto, I was wondering if you could help me understand this a bit better as I don’t see a difference between feeling harmless and being harmless. I think it’s because I equate feeling harmless with both the absence of malice and sorrow, as well as the absence of their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion. Therefore I equate feeling harmless and being harmless as one in the same – the absence of any self-centred instinctual passion. VINEETO: Hi Ed, The trouble with taking one’s feelings as arbiter of what is going on is that feelings are not only entirely self-centric by nature, and as such biased, but also utterly unreliable as to the facts of the matter. That’s why Richard keeps emphasising that one needs to be ruthlessly honest with oneself – ‘I’, the identity, is not only lost, lonely and frightened but also very, very cunning. ‘I’, the identity, do not want to change the status quo. ‘You’ may be feeling harmless (because that is what ‘you’ want to be) but overlooking all the instances where your feelings, words and action are not harmless. If you are honest and sincere (in accord with the fact), then you check your feeling of being harmless if you are in fact being harmless. ‘Vineeto’ explained some of it in the paragraph you quoted – ‘Vineeto’: The reason I said that there is a remarkable difference between feeling harmless and actually being harmless is because it is easy to assess one’s happiness by checking if I am feeling happy whereas many people may feel themselves to be harmless when they are not experiencing feelings of aggression or anger against somebody. Yet they are nevertheless causing harm via their thoughtless ‘self’-oriented instinctual feelings and actions, something that all human beings are prone to do unless they become fully aware of their instinctual passions before these translate into vibes and/or actions. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, Tarin, 13.8.2006). This recorded incident demonstrates how ‘Vineeto’ discovered the difference in practice – ‘Vineeto’: I remember the last time when I tried to influence others by ‘sharing’ what I felt. I did some work for an old acquaintance who lived in a town about 25 km away. As a favour she asked me if someone could drop off a parcel at my house so that I could then deliver it to her. However, when this person rang very early in the morning to ask when it would be convenient to drop off the parcel, I became a little upset. I thought how dare he be so inconsiderate as to wake me up so early for something that wasn’t even urgent. When I later delivered the parcel to my colleague, I mentioned that her friend had rung me up very early in the morning. She profusely apologized to me and then became really upset herself. She said she had instructed him not to ring before 9am and that she would immediately ring her friend to tell him off. At this point I realized that my seemingly calm mentioning of my emotional reaction to receiving an early morning phone call had created palpable ripples in two other people’s lives and that it was now out of my control and irreversible in its consequences. This incident demonstrated very clearly that sharing my emotions, even in a calm way, inevitably caused ripples in other people’s lives and that I could never be harmless as long as I involved other people in my problems by sharing my emotional reactions. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 37b, 15.2.2002) Here is more from ‘her’ exploration into being harmless – ‘Vineeto’: It was about a year into my process of actualism when I became aware of how much my outlook on the world and on people had changed in that my cloak of myopic ‘self’-centredness began to lift and I no longer saw the world only ‘my’ way and my judgments and actions no longer revolved around ‘my’ interests, ‘my’ beliefs, ‘my’ ideas, ‘my’ ideals, ‘my’ fears, ‘my’ desires and ‘my’ aversions. Consequently I have learnt to judge harmlessness by the amount of parity and consideration I apply to others whom I come in contact with, both at work and at play, and not by merely feeling myself to be harmless. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 71b, 9.8.2006) * ‘Vineeto’: When I made it my goal to become harmless, in the early days I sometimes felt toothless, castrated and helpless, particularly in situations where I felt I was being ‘wronged’ or I was being treated ‘unjustly’. But once these feeling subsided and I looked at the situation as it really was, I could see how silly it would have been to waste my time passionately fighting other people or riling against the beliefs, morals or ethics of other people in order for ‘me’ to be right or for ‘me’ to feel justly treated. The simple act of becoming aware of having antagonistic and/or indignant feelings inevitably caused me to look at my own ideas and ideals of what I thought and felt was ‘right’ and ‘just’ and ‘fair’– after all the only person I need to change, and can change, is me. And this process of discovery is still in action as I am still finding sly remnants of the ‘good’ variety of humanistic ethics extant which sometimes cause distress or indignation – clear indications of how ‘I’ tick. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 75, 23.4.2005) Here is what Richard had to say about being harmless – Martin: ‘I’ am fundamentally selfish and unless I temper this to some extent there’s no chance of being close to someone or liked as ‘my’ resentful urges are unrestrained (and affect my mood / disposition even if I don’t act out on them). Is becoming actually free a combination of becoming unselfish in a normal sense, and being harmless in an unconditional sense? Richard: First of all, each and every identity is “fundamentally selfish” by nature – which is why it takes a powerful instinctive impulse (altruism) to overcome a powerful instinctive impulse (selfism) – insofar as blind nature endows each and every human being with the selfish instinct for individual survival and the clannish instinct for group survival (be it the familial group, the tribal group, or the national group). (Hence the religio-spiritual practice of countering selfishness – as per the unliveable ideal of each and every ‘self’ being an unselfish ‘self’ via the nonsensical edict of each and every ‘self’ putting each and every ‘self’ before one’s own ‘self’ – is basically an institutionalised elaboration of the most primal of blind nature’s instinctual drives, urges, and impulses and, as such, is not at all intelligent). Second, as “being harmless in an unconditional sense” is to be actually free it makes no sense to ask if becoming actually free is a combination of being that and becoming an unselfish ‘self’. Third, rather than having to restrain your “resentful urges” forever and a day – so as to have a chance of “being close to someone or liked” as exemplified by intimacy experiences (IE’s) – why not find out why there is resentment in the first place? Speaking personally, the identity inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago first located the root source of all ‘his’ anger – the basic resentment at being alive (as expressed in the “I didn’t ask to be born” type of plaint) – and was thus able to rid ‘himself’ of (full-blown) anger within three weeks. (Richard, List D, Martin, 2 August 2016). There is more in that correspondence if you are interested. Richard: Not at all ... the word ‘harmless’ means ‘lacking intent to injure, devoid of hurtful qualities, marked by freedom from strife or disorder, innocuous free from guilt; innocent, blameless, faultless, irreproachable, lily-white; safe, non-dangerous, gentle, mild, peaceful, peaceable’.(Richard, List C, No. 4b, 7 March 2000a). Are you really saying that all the above qualities are covered by the term “feeling harmless”? ED: Feeling-being Vineeto is pointing out that some people consider the absence of aggression and anger to be adequate enough to classify themselves as feeling harmless – while overlooking other thoughtless ‘self’-oriented instinctual feelings and actions. VINEETO: Yes, here is what else ‘she’ said about how she approached ‘her’ aim of being more and more harmless – ‘Vineeto’: The way I approached the task of becoming harmless was that I first sought to stop any of my harmless actions or verbal expressions of harm towards other people. When I got to the stage when I could rely on my attentiveness such that I could detect my aggressive mood before I verbally expressed it to those around me, I then raised the bar to detecting any aggressive moods or vibes as soon as they arose. It became readily apparent that a bottled up aggression or resentment towards others only served to make me unhappy and did not count as being really harmless because any such feelings are detectible by others and have an influence on others. This meant that I increased my attentiveness such that I became able to recognize sullen or resentful thoughts, quiet complaints, silent accusations, automatic suspicions, unfounded misgivings, subtle revenges, sneaky deceptions, surly withdrawals, petty one-upmanships, deft sabotages, malicious gossip and the like. Of course, applying this fine toothcomb of attentiveness to my thoughts, feelings, moods and vibes brought to light many hidden patterns of belief and sources of malice in my relating to people, all of which had to be investigated. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 49, 16.5.2003) ED: Whereas being harmless would mean the absence of not only the anger and aggression, but also any other instinctually-driven feelings that often fly under the radar or even appear as “good” such as love. VINEETO: ‘Vineeto’: The process of actualism is not one big heroic jump into oblivion, not at the start anyway, but about *practically* doing something about all the little things in daily life that prevent me from being harmless and considerate. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 60g, 6.8.2006) In other words, putting the bar so high that you won’t be harmless until you are actually free, you (inadvertently?) stymie yourself from the start – or perhaps have a valid-to-you justification to be content with merely feeling harmless. ED: Am I following correctly? VINEETO: Being harmless also means to look at the practical consequences of your feelings, vibes, words and actions. I am not writing about theoretical philosophy but about changing oneself radically, experientially to become virtually harmless. Cheers Vineeto
This Correspondence Continued | Actual Vineeto’s Correspondence Index
Actualism Homepage
| Actual Freedom Homepage

Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless

Vineeto’s & Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust: 1997-
. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer and Use Restrictions and Guarantee of Authenticity