Please note that the correspondence below was written by the feeling-being subscriber from Mailing List D who was interested in the practice of Actualism and who met up with Richard and other Actualists from December 5-10, 2009. (The numbers of the correspondents match Richard’s D Mailing-list numbering).
Respondent No. 4 Report on Mailing List D about his First Meeting with Richard and other Actualists Prologue: December 09 2009 Re: Questions To Richard RICHARD: No, I do not intend to tape/ chronicle/ publish/ disseminate these forthcoming sessions ... just as the personal conversations which are currently taking place with an outstanding fellow human being, well-known to this forum, are not being recorded either. RESPONDENT No. 2: Hi Richard. Nevertheless, I (and perhaps most others on this list) look forward to your and the well-known-correspondent’s reports/ reminiscences on the meeting, if and when either of you is inclined to share them. RICHARD: G’day No. 2, Of course ... the well-known correspondent is free to say whatever he deems appropriate about me – other than any thing of a personal security/ physical privacy nature – but I will remain circumspect as always. Suffice is it to say, for the nonce, that I had the pleasure of spending five and half hours, yesterday afternoon, in the company of a remarkably sincere fellow human being (who was visibly moved to be the nearest a ‘self’ can get to innocence whilst remaining a ‘self’) strolling around the CBD of a provincial city, sitting together upon a park-bench in the shade of a tree, at the table of an outdoor café, and the such-like. Today we will be going boating on the nearby river – I have in mind a picnic-style luncheon at the confluence of two tributaries some distance upstream (an isolated and very picturesque lagoon thus formed completely enclosed by dense rainforest trees) – and tomorrow the two of us will be travelling some distance by bus to spend the day with Peter and Vineeto in differently picturesque surroundings. The itinerary for the few remaining days thereafter remains open as yet but may very well include meeting some other actualists (fellow travellers). It does bode well in regards to what I had characterised as being [quote] ‘all experimental at this stage’ and next year may very well usher in a new era in my life. (Richard, List D, No. 2, 5 December 2009). RESPONDENT No. 12: G’day Richard, Thanks for the fascinating glimpse into the encounter. [...] I will be interested in hearing whether or not the encounters are ‘life changing’ for No. 4 and particularly No. 2 (as someone who appears to have already reaped great benefit by the actualism process). Looking forward to No. 4’s ‘take’ on the experience if he so chooses to share. A rather fascinating (and unforseen) development! PS. The addition of meeting two people in the ‘deep waters’/end of the pool of a virtual freedom from the human condition is about the best bonus I could imagine. Beats going snorkelling hands down! :) RICHARD: G’day No. 12, Yes, the best bonus made all the more bester due to Vineeto being out-from-control/in a different-way-of-being such as to affectively/ psychically generate a felicitous and innocuous atmosphere – begotten in an ever-fresh affectless/ selfless ambience – which fostered a milieu where happiness and harmlessness could be the norm rather than the exception. Vis.: [Richard]: As to my intention in regards not only facilitating direct access to me but also enabling an informal interaction with some other actualists as well: 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. (For instance, my second wife would say, upon her return after an outing on her own into town, that it was like coming back in to a sanctuary. Even a stranger, a real-estate agent (known as a realtor in some places), after showing some potential clients around the duplex I was at the time renting, took me aside and told me how fresh and clean the ambience was; I said it must be because of no children, no cats or dogs, no wild parties, etc., but she looked straight into my eyes and said, ‘no, it’s you; it’s you who makes the ambience clean and fresh’). Now, 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, No. 14b, 4 December 2009). This fostering was convincingly made apparent when the well-known correspondent gratuitously (unsolicited) reported how the intimacy of the first meeting – due to being the nearest a ‘self’ can get to innocence whilst remaining a ‘self’ (as per the brief allusion much further above) – was the prevailing atmosphere for him with both Vineeto and Peter as well. (So much so that he advised, on the following day, how he had both endeavoured and succeeded to take that atmosphere with him later that evening whilst taking a stroll in the sunset to his motel-accommodation). As a direct result I spontaneously stayed overnight in Peter’s and Vineeto’s residence as that next day had been arranged in such a way so as to have the woman of the 5-month PCE and her spouse join the festivities; the ambience/ atmosphere/ milieu soon had her also out-from-control/ in a different-way-of-being (or affirmed/ confirmed how she already was as she tends to not rate her experiencing in actualist terminology). It was at this point there was much pleasure in me being able to point out the bleeding obvious ... to wit: that (excluding myself) there were five people present and it was the two women who were generating the atmosphere/ fostering the milieu in which happiness and harmlessness was the norm rather than the exception. (Today, being the last day of the well-known correspondent’s series of meetings, is being spent solely in the company of Vineeto and Peter as they have a lot to discuss; for me a report of how the day eventuates will be a matter of keen interest due to not being present to establish an ambience). (Richard, List D, No. 12, 9 December 2009). December 10 2009 8:02 am Message 8091 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 4: G’day all. After five days in the company of five remarkable fellow human beings, I just don’t know where to start writing about it. It’ll all come out in the days/ weeks/ months ahead, but for now I think it’s best if you all just hit me with your questions. Tell me what you’d most like to know, and it’ll give me the entry points I need to get started. Otherwise there’s just too much to tell. First of all, to everyone concerned: thank you so much for your hospitality and conviviality over these five days. It has made an unforgettable impression on me, and has made so much fall into place. (Yes, No. 12, ‘life changing’ would be a fair assessment ... though perhaps not in the way you might expect. I’ll tell you what I mean in time). Richard, to satisfy your immediate interest (above): yesterday was marvellous for me, and I’d be surprised if Peter or Vineeto enjoyed it any less than I did. Lots of laughs; fascinating conversation; some new insights to take away; same/similar ambiance as the previous day(s) ... if not bester; and a tangible demonstration of the value of happy/ harmless living together. If anything, that last day may have been the highlight for me. (More detail to follow in due course...) Cheers, The Well-Known Correspondent December 10 2009 9:38 am Message 8098 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 10: Hmm ... for starters: What did you do the first day? When you met with Richard, where did you go, what did you talk about? RESPONDENT No. 4: We had arranged to meet at/around Saturday noon at a bench near the bus station of a large town / small city in northern NSW. I was slightly hung over from drinking too much the night before, and felt very nervous. I felt uncomfortable about finally coming out from behind the safety and anonymity of a computer screen, and meeting a person I’d had so much emotion-charged interaction with (from ‘my’ side, at least). I tend to feel somewhat shy/ awkward/ self-conscious when meeting new people anyway, but that morning felt quite exposed. I paced around the block for an hour or so in advance, looking closely at every tall, bearded passer-by to see if I could recognise Richard. Then, right on time, I saw him approach a bench – looking exactly as he does in the DVD clips – and recognised him immediately. I put aside my nerves, went up to him, said ‘G’day Richard’ ... shook hands, sat down beside him on the bench, and off we went. After the intro, we plunged straight into the conversation... which is always the way I like it. He asked me about a certain stressful situation in my personal life (involving the health of someone close to me), and I told him how I was handling it. Then we went off together to find an open air cafe for a cold drink (it was a hot day) and a smoke. We soon found a convenient place, and we talked for what seemed like several hours ... and probably was. It was great to talk to him. The first thing that struck me about Richard himself, as distinct from what he was saying, is how benign he is. There is intelligence, there is easy comprehension, there is courtesy and ease and pleasantness, but no vibes at all. This is hard to convey in words. The expression that occurred to me later, which still seems appropriate now, is that there is simply ‘no charge’ in him. I did not find this at all disconcerting; it just verified what he has told me/us about himself for years. The fact that he has ‘no charge’ makes it very easy to speak with him as a fellow human being ... and anyone who is looking for a man with great charisma, mystique, grandeur, power, is looking in the wrong place. [Guru effect, No. 17? No way. More on that later (11 December 2009)]. Yet this quality of ‘no charge’ is not in any way a dullness or deadness; his mind and features and gestures are supple, lively, interested, and interesting. Quite remarkable, and yet so very ordinary at the same time. (Could say much more about this, and will later). RESPONDENT No. 10: What did we talk about on that first day? RESPONDENT No. 4: Hmm.... all sorts of stuff. Eg. psychic vibes and currents, the real power plays; how people affect each other for good and ill by being part of a vast psychic web; how the pervasiveness of this web and its effect on the individual is only fully noticeable by its absence (in a PCE/AF). I also asked Richard about your ‘direct path’ query. I, too, was interested in it, and was a little puzzled by what seemed like contradictory information on the website. I’ll give you a detailed account of the content of that discussion later; this is just a brief synopsis of the topics we covered that first day. Ok, what else... yes, the two kinds of virtual freedom: the in control VF and the out-from-control VF; naiveté (at length) ... and much more. Where did we go? From that cafe we went in search of a pub with a beer garden where we could sit in the open air, under shade, with option to smoke. Remarkably, we couldn’t find any such place... but while we were trying I made a point of observing Richard in his everyday interactions with ordinary people in ordinary situations ...and, surprisingly, that became one of the most important aspects of the day for me. (Again, more detail later). RESPONDENT No. 10: What was your initial reaction/ first impression of Richard when you met him and what is your now current reaction/impression of him? RESPONDENT No. 4: The early impressions has been enriched/deepened by seeing him in public (in ordinary situations) in private in his own home (one on one), and in company of like-minded people. The impression of someone who is cheerful, affable, intelligent, considerate, benign and utterly contented has been confirmed in every instance. The biggest surprise has been his lightness of touch and lack of seriousness. This just doesn’t translate well into written words, but once you’ve seen him chugging along the river like a big kid in his dinghy, or sitting stark naked at complete ease with his fellow human beings after a dip in the river, talking about anything and everything with the utmost ease, it’s impossible to take him seriously (as I used to). Which does not diminish his credibility in any way whatsoever ... it’s just a different tone. This surprised me. It gets lost in the translation. RESPONDENT No. 10: Were all your experiences/ encounters with the actualists positive? RESPONDENT No. 4: Yes. The only difficulties were mine alone ... again, caused by stepping out from behind the safety and anonymity of a computer monitor and presenting myself as the person who has been writing as ‘No. 4’ all these years. Each of the five people I met was great to be with, each in their own way. I was at one time slightly, and temporarily, disconcerted by something I couldn’t put my finger on ... in relation to TLWHT5MPCE. It didn’t last long, but it had me a bit nonplussed for a while. Afterwards I figured out what had happened. I had, almost unbeknownst to myself, been putting out ‘feelers’ that just fell off this person. She was friendly, completely unaffected, yet I was subtly perplexed for a while in her presence because I could not ‘feel her out’, and consequently could not tell what she thought of me. (This happens subliminally; it takes some time to tune in to what ‘we’ do on this level). (I had expected this with Richard, so had no problem; and perhaps the fact that this other person was a woman made a difference too). Other than that ... no problem at all. Each day I left the environment reeling (in a good way). The atmosphere these people create (or allow) is a different paradigm of interaction. [Group effect No. 17? Yes... that’s actually the point. More on this later (12 December 2009)]. RESPONDENT No. 10: Any particular disappointments or, in the obverse, any particularly remarkable pleasant surprises? RESPONDENT No. 4: No disappointments. Many pleasant surprises. To have had such good times with Peter and Vineeto is top of my list here. Vineeto struck me as an extremely perceptive person (in a way that would seem like ‘tuned in’ in the real-world), and her benevolent intent was unmistakable. And Peter ... one of my most enduring impressions from this holiday is of our laughter together ... several times when we looked at each other’s faces, close up, in detail, separated by nothing, we laughed to remember ‘butting heads’ in some other world, as some other people, once upon a time. Funny stuff. Hope that gives you a bit of taster anyway. Will go into more detail about any of this on request. (I’m just going to splurge this stuff out, off-the-cuff, as needed, without revision while it’s still fresh). RESPONDENT No. 10: Thank you, No. 4, for giving us your time and being considerate enough to share your experiences. I look forward to the unfolding of ... whatever will be unfolded. RESPONDENT No. 4: My pleasure. Cheers, No. 4. December 10 2009 10:59 am Message 8100 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 4: It has made an unforgettable impression on me, and has made so much fall into place. RESPONDENT No. 10: Oh, and could you throw out a few things which fell into place? I am curious about what you mean in that statement. RESPONDENT No. 4: Every aspect of actualism now fits together snugly like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, now that I’ve seen the finished picture. I’ve seen how all the parts relate to the whole. (And my impression is that it makes everything else seem positively archaic and primitive). Realised that harmlessness / unconditional benignity is the foundation for all the excellent stuff to follow. A unilateral commitment to being benign / harmless has both individual and social benefits. Socially: you’re no longer perpetuating the malice and misery. You’re enabling a ‘cleaner’, more pure psychic atmosphere for yourself and everyone around you. You’re setting other people free from you, and replacing the natural malicious/ sorrowful/ fearful defaults with benignity. This is so important. Previously I had seen actualism not only as a DIY business but also as a do-it-in-isolation business too ... which it’s not... this stuff goes far beyond the personal, even though one’s action is unilateral. So that’s the social benefit. Then there’s the individual benefit. Being benign/harmless frees you up for an out-from-control happiness, and that’s when the magic really starts to take over, and it’s all doing itself. A few weeks prior to going up north for this visit, I had an experience of this on the beach. In itself, it was no fundamentally different or better than experiences I’ve had in the past, but this time there was a few important differences. Firstly, no drugs. Secondly, no in-principle objections to actualism any more. Thirdly, no further interest in the alternatives. So this experience is one that I can ‘hammer a nail in to hang my hat on’, as Peter put it, or connect to with a golden thread / clew, as Richard put it. It is, for me, a new gold standard of what is possible in both virtual and actual freedom. And the path to it is clear. At times when one’s head is spinning it can seem as if the whole thing is a dream, a fantasy, a mindfuck. But at times when these out-from-control experiences occur and the veneer of reality is tissue thin (and easily rent), you can be confident that, wow, unbelievable, this is *actually is the case!* And that’s the point at which you’re no longer alone; it’s doing itself. The actual world is not something you have to generate, not something you do ... it’s a stunning fact that actually there. And that does ‘you’ in! (Then peace-on-earth is no longer something to work/ hope/ strive for; it’s simply there; and then social peace/ harmony – and a whole lot more – is an inevitable side-effect). So the whole thing comes together: benign interactions in every sphere of life –> safety to come out-from-control –> on-going excellence experience –> frequent glimpses of the actual world –> enjoy the ride –> everyone benefits. I hope this makes sense. I want to just get it all out there in spontaneous chunks and clarify it later if necessary. Cheers, No. 4. December 10 2009 8:47 pm Message 8113 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 4: Every aspect of actualism now fits together snugly like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, now that I’ve seen the finished picture. I’ve seen how all the parts relate to the whole. (And my impression is that it makes everything else seem positively archaic and primitive). RESPONDENT No. 7: If it’s not too personal, do you plan on (verbally) sharing this remarkably upbeat enthusiasm with those in your life that have previously had less than positive things to say about actualism? RESPONDENT No. 4: Dunno yet. I just want to live according to my understanding, and speak with others (if at all) on a per person / per situation basis. The main thing I’m interested in right now is these ordinary, everyday interactions with everyone and everything. In the ‘real world’ we’re continually picking up and emitting affective signals that are so pervasive that we hardly notice them ... except by their absence or by marked contrast with something different. I want to take a different atmosphere everywhere I go, onto the bus, into the shop, etc. (It seems ironic that there’s currently so much fuss about cleaning up the earth’s actual atmosphere, while the psychic one we live in is a deadly, choking miasma that we hardly even notice). RESPONDENT No. 7: The intimacy... were you able to recognise it (was it comparable to the delightful stranger of your past, or more like the physical proximity of being with a woman prior to love) ? RESPONDENT No. 4: Neither comparison seems entirely apt for my experience of it – though others might experience it that way. I’d best characterise it as the loss of barriers, with two aspects. First, there’s the mutual willingness/ ability to blamelessly explore whatever makes us human. (It’s great to act unilaterally, yet be among others who are doing the same thing. No compact of trust is needed, yet something more dependable than trust, and cleaner than trust, arises out of it). Second, there’s the immediacy of being just here, doing just this, with another person, with nothing in the way. It’s like the social equivalent of a nature experience. RESPONDENT No. 7: When ‘observing Richard in his everyday interactions with ordinary people’, did any of them notice anything unusual about him (and how did the grumpiest/ shyest (excluding you ;-) of the lot react to him)? RESPONDENT No. 4: I don’t think anyone overtly noticed anything different about him. He’d come across to a stranger as perfectly ordinary ... courteous, light, pleasant, easy ... but it’s not like ‘charm’, because there’s ‘no charge’. People responded well to him: shop assistants, bar staff, bus conductors, methadone addicts queuing for their medicine at a pharmacy, schoolboy on the bus. He was the same with everyone, and seemed to elicit the same kind of responses from everyone. ‘No charge’. Sensible. Friendly in a light / non-intrusive / non-clinging way. His manner seems to be disarming rather than charming. RESPONDENT No. 7: What specific features clearly distinguished Richard from other fellow actualists RESPONDENT No. 4: Richard isn’t looking for anything or striving for anything. He’s free to be at ease, as-he-is, under all circumstances, and he’ll never have to work at it again. That makes a subtle difference. RESPONDENT No. 7: (and were they noticeable when compared to Virginia Beach (the 5-month-PCE lady))? RESPONDENT No. 4: Hard to say. ‘Virginia Beach’ came across differently from what I had expected, based on the DVD clip. In her immediacy, she’s perhaps the most unaffected person I’ve come across, and what I remember most about her is the deep, pure, whole-body laughter. Yes, she was different from Richard, but I can’t think of the difference in terms of AF / non-AF. Just different people. RESPONDENT No. 7: Did Bob Apple (the husband of the 5-month-PCE lady) … RESPONDENT No. 4: ‘Bob Apple’! Ha! He’s a great bloke, and that name is somehow really appropriate. RESPONDENT No. 7: … appear comfortable with the fact that the woman ‘he’ presumably fell in love with no longer existed)? RESPONDENT No. 4: Funny thing about this, now that you ask, neither ‘Bob Apple’ and ‘Virginia Beach’ nor Peter and Vineeto seemed like couples. We were six people all together, not as two couples plus two individuals. (Also, on the same note, no sense of insiders/ visitors). I didn’t ask ‘Bob Apple’ directly about his own feelings in response to Virginia Beach’s 5-month PCE, but asked him (in a roundabout, rambling way) whether he liked what he saw, whether he would like it for himself, and whether he was satisfied that it’s mutually beneficial to be in that condition indefinitely. He answered yes to all three. (There would of course be more to it than that, but that’s what we talked about). RESPONDENT No. 7: Were there idiosyncrasies to Richard that you found peculiar to him – possibly unrelated to an actual freedom – apart from the obvious beard? RESPONDENT No. 4: None that I can think of, except for the (necessarily idiosyncratic) life story and set of interests that make him what he is. RESPONDENT No. 7: Have you had any cynical thoughts about these meetings since you left. RESPONDENT No. 4: That’s a good one. Some days I did have twinges of misgiving from time to time ... but I soon understood what was happening. When you’re with people who are unusually free from negativity and who talk a lot about a certain approach to life, it’s easy to interpret it in terms of religious belief, some other kind of groupthink, or perhaps as well-meaning insanity (because these are the only precedents) ... and you momentarily wonder: hey, what the hell am I doing here? There has been so much of it in human history that it’s impossible not to superimpose it from time to time. But here’s the thing: when what they’re saying makes perfect sense, and it concurs with your own experience, and they’re truly living it, and you can tell that they’re thoroughly sincere and intelligent individuals who have investigated all sorts of doubts and resistances similar to your own ... the impression is quickly dispelled. RESPONDENT No. 7: (putting nice-guy No. 4 aside, is there anything you would like to get off your chest... speak now or forever hold your peace ;-) ? RESPONDENT No. 4: No. RESPONDENT No. 7: P.S. I loved reading the part about you and Peter... an instant classic! RESPONDENT No. 4: Yeah, it was one of those moments you don’t forget. I could tell straight away that Peter is benign/ harmless; he lives what he writes about, and you can’t help but like him. On the first two of the three days we were together, he was quite laconic, laid-back and funny ... while Vineeto was vivacious and always on-the-ball / right on-target. On the fifth and last day Peter really got warmed up, and spoke at length and in depth... and it has left me with a whole lot to think about. (So glad I met them all!). Cheers, No. 4 December 11, 2009 3:09 am Message 8127 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 10: [..] Here’s another question for you: Whose company did you feel more at ease with? Richard’s or the actualists? And why do you think so? Also, of the actualists (minus Richard), who did you gel with best/feel most at ease with? And why do you think so? RESPONDENT No. 4: OK, first some background: Day 1: whole day with Richard alone downtown (various places). Day 2: met in a difference place, then a boat ride on the river, then whole day alone with Richard at his residence. Day 3: met Richard early morning in same place as Day 1, then rode by bus together to another town. Richard had a brief appointment, then we met Vineeto who escorted us by boat to another location. From there moved on to Peter and Vineeto’s residence where we spent the day. Peter ferried me back by boat in the evening. Day 4: whole day with Richard, Vineeto, Peter, Virginia Beach and Bob Apple at same location as Day 3. Day 5: whole day alone with Peter and Vineeto at their home. So ... which was the more comfortable arrangement? Who did I feel most comfortable with? Who did I ‘gel’ with most? I really couldn’t single anyone out ... and this isn’t any sort of misplaced diplomacy on my part, it’s just the way it happened. You’ll see from the above sequence that there were three times that I had the discomfort of stepping out from anonymity, meeting people who knew me only by my writings on a computer screen. I felt that discomfort all three times... mainly in advance, and only very briefly thereafter. As soon as the conversations got underway, all else was forgotten, left behind. From the first hour with Richard I felt quite at ease with him, and was too interested in the conversation to feel reserved, except at odd moments. But by the end of the first afternoon we were sitting together on a bench with no reserve whatsoever, going deep into life/ universe/ what it is to be a human being as if we’d been doing it all our lives. It was great. Truly excellent. Next encounter was with Vineeto. Richard had called her by phone to pick us up, and naturally I expected her to arrive by car. When she arrived by boat I was taken by surprise... and the first meeting was thus enlivened by skimming across the local waterways with the wind in our hair. Pretty invigorating! Then when we disembarked and went to her residence (where Peter was waiting), we broke the ice pretty quickly ... and again plunged straight into the conversation. Any/all unease quickly disappeared. Next day, same location, with Bob Apple and Virginia Beach there too. Same story: after the intros, straight into the conversation and I experienced it pretty much the same as on previous days, with the one brief exception that I mentioned in a previous message. (I only noticed later that I had tried, and failed, to ‘feel out’ Virginia Beach – which momentarily put me off balance). On Day 4 the rapport (if that’s the right word) with Vineeto was so good that Richard observed that if he were absent Vineeto would be able to handle the situation just as well as him. Vineeto observed that .... well, can’t I remember exactly what she said, but I understood it in terms of Richard being a kind of facilitator / safety net (sorry if I’ve got that wrong, Vineeto), or – as I saw it – our lightning rod through which any affective charge could be safely grounded/ neutralised. So, to meet with Peter and Vineeto alone on Day 5 was an interesting experiment. (I chose it, by the way. I was offered the option to spend another day with Richard, Virginia Beach and Bob Apple... but I wanted to continue exploring with Peter and Vineeto, and I’m glad I did). Day 5 was terrific. As it turned out, Richard wasn’t needed to mediate or discharge any tension, because there wasn’t any. The ambiance was ... from my perspective ... just the same, if not better. (Perhaps better from my perspective because I had decided early that morning that I would leave ‘Respondent No. 4’ behind and go as ‘me’ – with whom they were now acquainted. Thus, one step less far removed from actuality). So, there you go. Every encounter was an interesting and rewarding one in its own way, and each had a similar flavour. RESPONDENT No. 10: I know this takes a bit of guts to share certain bits of information as it may leave you feeling rather exposed and/or a bit like a gossiper (maybe not). I know I’d be feeling like that. Please know that your sharing is immensely appreciated, by me personally at least as I am sure it is by everyone else on this forum. RESPONDENT No. 4: No worries ... it’s fun for me to write about it too. Cheers, No. 4 December 11, 2009 8:12 am Message 8129 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 2: You may know this already, but No. 4, if all these requests for details seem impositions (if at all!) ... RESPONDENT No. 4: Not at all; I enjoy writing about these things. RESPONDENT No. 2: ... please remember that you went there in the Actualist hinterland as an ambassador of humanity, having had the doubts and emotionally charged reactions that are common to almost anybody who comes across actualism, and since most of us may never have the chance to meet Richard or his close associates, your reports are rather ... invaluable and precious. This is perhaps the first time someone deeply interested in actualism, but on the way, has met Richard and is able to intelligently report his rendezvous. I would have been interested, for example, to read about that spiritual teacher’s report of his meeting with Richard that Richard has written about. RESPONDENT No. 4: I’m glad to be of some help, then. There have been many times when I wanted to ditch the ‘Respondent No. 4’ identity and come back as someone else, someone new, to make a fresh start without the weight of the past. But each time, I decided it would be a disservice to the people I had been writing to if ‘Respondent No. 4’ stalked off to forge his own destiny, and then a different, trouble-free, actualism-friendly identity emerged in his place. Better for the historical record to show what really happened. RESPONDENT No. 2: PS: Since you knew you were going to meet Richard and would need your wits about you (so to speak), why the drinking the night before? Apologies if the question is too private. RESPONDENT No. 4: Nah, that’s fine, easy to explain. It was a longish journey by train and bus, and when I arrived it was still a warm evening. I checked into a nearby hotel/ motel, and went for a stroll around town to have a cold beer or two, and something to eat. I’d had a couple of beers and was about to have ‘one for the road’, when in came a fellow who had been seated across the aisle from me on the train journey. We got into a bit of conversation and one thing led to another. A band started up in the pub, and we couldn’t hear ourselves talk, so we went off and bought a case of bottles and drank a few of them outdoors. Spent a few hours drinking and talking. I actually drank less than I normally might – knowing that I was going to meet Richard at noon the next day. But even so, enough to make me slightly hung-over. No big deal. Cheers, No. 4 December 11, 2009 9:26 am Message 8130 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 17: Could your experience be due to a guru/group type effect? RESPONDENT No. 4: You couldn’t make a guru out of Richard if you tried. (And more than a few people have tried, apparently). It was obvious in the first hour that what Richard says about having no power or powers is true. I’ve never actually met a guru (nor ever wanted to seek one out) but I’ve known some charming and charismatic people, so I know what power and charisma looks and feels like. The only persuasive power that Richard wields is the power of good sense. The man himself has no psychic ‘charge’. Sure, he’s intelligent, has loads of experience, can tell a lot of interesting stories, is likable, but ultimately he’s ‘just a bloke’. He actually asked me (rhetorically, with a grin) on the second day as he was in the kitchen of his home cooking up some seafood: ‘could you put me on a pedestal?’ No way. It was just a happy and harmless biped standing there (an impression that persisted throughout my stay). As for the group effect ... yes. I’ll have a go at that one later. (12 December 2009). Cheers, No. 4 December 11, 2009 8:57 pm Message 8138 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 6: Greetings, No. 4, thanks for sharing. In fact the atmosphere created by 6 people meeting Down Under has generated a lot of felicity, reverberation galore here as well. Looking forward to hear more from your experiences and interaction. I do not have any specific queries about the meeting, but will like to know as to what issues were you able to unravel, through conversations, about the method and practice. RESPONDENT No. 4: G’day No. 6. I got more insight into the ‘method and practice’ from observation and participation than from conversation. (I guess this is what’s called ‘situated learning’). The main consequence is: I’m more aware of how one can be benign and carefree in ordinary, everyday situations ... with everyone. And it’s something that can be done unilaterally, right now (to whatever degree). But a couple of useful tips gleaned from conversation: When you’re feeling good, *appreciate* feeling good, because that’s how you give ‘feeling good’ your seal of approval. That’s how you fully endorse it and make it into your everyday modus operandi. Don’t be sheepish about patting yourself on the back rather than beating yourself up. I’ll post more verbal tips as I remember them, but the main thing for me was observing/ participating, seeing how everything comes together. It all starts with being as fundamentally benign as possible. That’s the bedrock on which you can base an in-control happiness ... which can then lead to an out-from-control happiness/ delight/ wonderment ... which leads to more and more direct experiences of the actual world ... where everything is doing itself. And once you tap into this often enough, and the sheer (f)actuality of the universe is what eventually does ‘you’ in. I am confident now that actualism is a win-win situation each step of the way, for you and everyone else. Cheers, No. 4 December 12, 2009 2:46 am Message 8145 Re: Questions To Richard JAMES: Could your experience be due to a guru/group type effect? RESPONDENT No. 4: You couldn’t make a guru out of Richard if you tried. […] As for the group effect ... yes. I’ll have a go at that one later. JAMES: Ok. RESPONDENT No. 4: People’s moods and feelings and intentions affect each other, yes? Well, in most social gatherings, behaviour is tempered by the (necessary) conventions of civility: good manners, moral decency, etiquette ... but this is a fairly thin veneer under which the whole range of natural human feelings are operating, often subliminally. There is subtle bonding and exclusion going on. People are jockeying for status, trying to ‘out-do’ each other in various ways. People feel fundamentally uneasy, and try to bond with each other for mutual security and/or prestige and/or sex, etc. People are trying to maintain an image. Even in humour there is often mockery, subtle put-downs, sugared cruelty, and so on. It is just not feasible to ‘let it all hang out’ as a normal person in normal company because you know you cannot trust yourself to let go the controls. You know you are (fundamentally, and on many more superficial levels) a fake, and you know all the nasty stuff that is in you. Civilisation keeps a (much needed) lid on all this, and convention greases the wheels of everyday social interaction. But nobody is truly free from either their own or other people’s feelings, so it requires constant watchfulness. It is an uneasy compromise between license and restraint. And sometimes when that uneasy compromise is disturbed, all hell breaks loose. (It’s no wonder that people want to either lose themselves in each other, or escape from each other, or become powerful/ invulnerable, or leave the whole arena in whatever way they can). When you’re among people who are aware of all this in themselves, and are unilaterally taking care of it *in themselves* as/when necessary, and you’re doing the same, it allows for a blameless exploration of whatever issues come up. This is different from trust; it’s actually cleaner and more dependable than trust. And that’s a good platform. Then, when there’s a prevailing atmosphere of intelligent, autonomous, unilateral (but mutual) benignity (as distinct from trustful oneness), it allows for a different paradigm of interaction. (This is new to me; I am just scratching the surface; but I must say I was so impressed by the ‘ambiance’ that I wanted to take it with me everywhere ... to set everyone else free from ‘my’ problems, to no longer reciprocate the malice and sorrow that is already out there in circulation, is the best thing I can do for the world at large, as well as being obviously beneficial to me too. At the end of each day, I made a point of taking this attitude with me everywhere I went, and it worked. (After seeing it in action, it’s much easier to emulate). In a nutshell ... just as ‘good’/ ‘bad’/ fearful vibes rub off on each other, so do happy/ harmless ones ... and it’s mutually beneficial. (If enough people do this, it changes the tone of society at large, because we all act as tuning forks that hum at certain emotional frequencies and pass on those vibrations. It permeates every interaction. At present, the ‘vibes’ we receive and transmit are archaic, primitive, instinctual... but this can change). Will stop here for now. Will go into more detail if you have any questions. Cheers, No. 4 December 12, 2009 3:05 am Message 8146 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 4: … several times when we looked at each other’s faces, close up, in detail, separated by nothing, we laughed to remember ‘butting heads’ in some other world, as some other people, once upon a time. Funny stuff LOL... very funny indeed. RESPONDENT No. 19: .Thanks for the great account No. 4... keep writing. So glad that you are so articulate... and expressive. It confirms so many things we have come to know from the ‘face value’ of the written words… RESPONDENT No. 4: G’day No. 19: ... yeah, amazing that the ‘face value’ content was the real deal after all. Fancy that! ;-) Cheers, No. 4 December 12, 2009 8:12 pm Message 8158 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 2: I am curious about one thing. In many of my experiences with normal people, I hear about their reactions to other people. Someone is considered nice, another is considered self-centered. The nice people have a vibe around them, which makes others feel safe and accepted and acknowledged. RESPONDENT No. 4: Yes ... and there are various kinds of ‘nice’, depending on the combination of qualities we find pleasing. I think naïveté is always pleasing. (It doesn’t always make people feel accepted and acknowledged, but the complete absence of their opposites makes them unnecessary). Some people have more naïveté on tap than others ... or, rather, some people’s inherent naïveté is less clouded over by other feelings. Beyond naïveté, the nice people are the ones who have mastered their dark side one way or another, usually (in my experience) through humour or wisdom or work. These people tend to have a ‘charge’: either positive/humorous, or sad/sweet/gentle/melancholy, or humming with a sense of vital interest and purpose. Corresponding with those ‘charges’: Some people have a knack for making uncomfortable things seem funny in a non-threatening way. Others have a gentle, kindly quality that lends itself to wisdom. And others overcome petty egocentricity by pouring all of their energy into a vocation. (I guess the latter kind are more often interesting/fascinating/charming than ‘nice’, though they can be both). RESPONDENT No. 2: I wonder if you could compare your meeting with the actualists and Richard with some of the nicest people you have ever met otherwise. RESPONDENT No. 4: In the actualists there is naïveté, intelligence and friendliness, but with no hooks, no bonds. This gives interaction with them a sense of being more clean and light than with ‘nice people’ in the real world. RESPONDENT No. 2: Do you, after these days, consider being ‘nice’ and ‘warm’ etc. in the real world as better or worse than an actual caring and benignity? RESPONDENT No. 4: I prefer the latter. Whereas ‘nice’ and ‘warm’ is the best humanity has been able to do so far, being burdened as it is by the human condition, naïveté and benignity and actual caring is the future. (For me now, there is an ‘of course’ to it). Cheers, No. 4 December 12, 2009 8:42 pm Message 8160 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 2: Do you, after these days, consider being ‘nice’ and ‘warm’ etc. in the real world as better or worse than an actual caring and benignity? RESPONDENT No. 4: Everything else (including ‘nice’ and ‘warm’, etc) is an uneasy compromise between the ‘good’ the ‘bad’ that we have inherited. I’ve had enough of that. I want to come out into the actual air, live under an actual sky (with infinite space just beyond the thin azure eggshell), not muddle along in a dream, breathing in the psychic fumes of a half-crazed species that is living far below its capabilities. I think the future (of me, and of humanity) can be a whole lot more bright, clean, free and fun than the past. I have wanted that, and knew it was possible, ever since I was about 17 years old. Actualism seemed to promise it, but my dark dreams and projections got in the way. Cheers, No. 4 December 12, 2009 8:54 pm Message 8161 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 2: I wonder if you could compare your meeting with the actualists and Richard with some of the nicest people you have ever met otherwise. RESPONDENT No. 4: Peripheral to this: I did not find a whole lot of difference between interacting with Richard and other actualists. Richard said earlier that an actually free person cannot create an infectious happy/ harmless psychic atmosphere, but after some reflection I am not convinced of that, simply because automorphism can compensate. When you’re sitting there deep in conversation with someone who has benign understanding, but ‘no charge’ ... what else is it going to evoke (via automorphism) than the nearest affective approximation? (rhetorical question; on reflection that’s how I felt a lot of the time). Cheers, No. 4 December 13, 2009 5:16 am Message 8173 Re: Questions To Richard JAMES: You seem to have gotten rid of your animosity toward Richard and his associates through your meetings with them in person that you had not done previously. Although I’ve never had animosity toward Richard, I still harbour some deep seated hatred toward his secretary. While you now see this person as a facilitator, I still see her through my memory of being a dishonest destroyer. My memory is that she basically terrorized myself and others while Richard stood behind her and still does. This is based on my lengthy disastrous discussions with her from which I still haven’t recovered. I’m not interested in being right about it. I just want to root out this hatred in myself as you seem to have done. Any suggestions as to how I can do this without a personal meeting which is what seems to have worked for you? What is coming up right now is that it is my hatred of authority that is at the root of it. Especially when someone assumes or flaunts their authority over me even if they are being dishonest to do it. I’m hesitant to send this because of the scorn that I might encounter as I am going against authority here. However, I don’t care because I am trying to root out ‘me’. RESPONDENT No. 4: I’m glad you brought this up. What you and I didn’t see, in the early days, were the struggles and doubts that Peter and Vineeto went through. We only got to see them as committed actualists who had (apparently) already made up their minds, which made them seem to us like ‘true believers’, blind followers, know-it-alls, would-be teachers, religious types, etc. I know you resented being ‘spoken at’ by people who you regarded as self-appointed authorities/ experts ... and so did I. And once that image was created in our minds, fuelled by ongoing controversy over this and that, it took a lot of overcoming. I’m not going to try to persuade you to see it my way now, but I can tell you this much right from the start: the two people I met recently are nothing like the ones we both imagined. They are both intelligent, sincere, friendly people who are disarmingly frank about the doubts they endured and traps they fell into over the years, which we on the old list seldom got to see. Peter, for example, told me that at one point he wished he could withdraw every copy of his journal from circulation. Vineeto told me how she had, in subtle ways, continued to put Richard on a pedestal, and defend actualism without fully realising what she was doing. But hey ... they’re human beings like us. They weren’t any better equipped than we are to deal with actualism (except that they had the benefit of seeing how Richard operates in daily life). Be that as it may ... you rightly put the focus on your own feelings ... so what can you do about them? You specifically mentioned the ‘flaunting of authority’ as one thing that bugged you. Vineeto WAS flaunting her authority. Vineeto WASN’T flaunting her authority. If (1) is true ... what’s the sensible way to handle it? If Vineeto was using ‘actualism’ as a platform for exercising her power / flaunting her authority, that’d be her problem. If she was at all sincere she’d eventually notice it and do something about it herself. (It’s all about changing oneself, no? Not about public trial, recrimination, mea-culpa and forgiveness – that’s the old way). And if she’s not at all sincere, then you – as a presumably more genuine person – could simply smile and leave her to her fate, and decline to be affected by her shenanigans. If (2) is true ... there never was a problem ... it was all happening between the ears. In that case, have a chuckle and move on. RESPONDENT No.17: Even *if* the truth lies somewhere in the middle, the solution is pretty much the same. So what else is there to do? RESPONDENT No. 4: But now, here’s the clincher. In order to flaunt authority, there has to be some authority to flaunt. In actual fact, Vineeto has no power/authority over you whatsoever. You are fellow human beings. The only power/ authority Vineeto has over you is the power you invest in her. Cheers, No. 4 December 13, 2009 8:50 pm Message 8202 Re: The Floating Convivium Project RICHARD: [Richard]: As the mailing list format had reached its use-by date more than a few years ago (having out-lived its usefulness), and as already signalled, it is more than likely that the personal way of knowing about me will become available, albeit selectively, some time in the new year; although it is way too early to publicly say more, at this stage, plans are afoot (subject to the funding being finalised) to not only facilitate this direct access but enable an informal interaction with several other actualists as well. (Richard, List D, No. 19, 30 November 2009). As I have just had a pleasant day engaged in a very fruitful discussion with The-Lady-Who-Had-The-Five-Month-PCE and The-Spouse-Of-The-Lady-Who-Had-The-Five-Month-PCE – henceforth known as Pamela and Tom – this is an apt moment to publicly say a little more about the abovementioned plans as Tom has today confirmed (dependent upon the funding being available) his intention of making them happen sooner rather than later. In doing so he becomes an actualist benefactor. Over the years the directors of The Actual Freedom Trust have expended tens of thousands of scarce dollars of their own moneys (plus tens of thousands of unpaid hours) to create, maintain, and provide the millions of words available for free on the internet as philanthropic contribution to the advancement of human knowledge, experience and thus civilisation itself. Tom’s contribution involves hundreds of thousands of dollars. * To explain: although I had declined each and every personal-meeting request for twelve years, for a number of reasons, I was not oblivious to the fact how the persons concerned might benefit, in whatever way it may be for them individually, from personally interacting (rather than just by either the written or spoken words in pixels/ print or video format). (Richard, List D, To the List at Large, 13 December 2009). RESPONDENT No. 2: Bravo, to all the people who envisaged the project! RESPONDENT No. 4: Tangent: Speaking of ‘[envisaging] the project’, I was talking to Richard (on the second day of my visit) about what it’s like to think/ plan/ design without an imaginative faculty. Later that day – unrelated to said discussion – he showed me the detailed plans for the ‘floating convivium’ ... which has, once and for all, resolved any doubts I might’ve had about the ability of a human mind to design, plan, conceive of things without imagination. (Peter co-designed and fleshed out the plans with his CAD tools, too, but no imagination was needed for the initial design). Cheers, No. 4 December 14, 2009 11:23 am Message 8215 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 10: OK. Is there anything else you can recollect and mention regarding his mind/features/whatever-else was remarkable/so very ordinary about him? (I know, it’s a somewhat cheap catch-all-question) RESPONDENT No. 4: Perhaps the most remarkable thing that I haven’t already mentioned is that, when you’re with Richard, you have all of his attention. He’s never elsewhere, daydreaming, never seems bored or restless or uncomfortable with what’s happening. It’s not as if he’s sitting there staring at you intently, or always on full-beam, or is drilling down into your soul with piercing eyes or anything like that ... his attentiveness is not at all intrusive ... but he’s fully there, always available. It’s funny how the most remarkable qualities exist side-by-side with thoroughly ordinary ones. He’s just a bloke sitting there in T-shirt and shorts, rolling a smoke, etc, talking about life. (If any more relevant details come to mind I’ll let you know, but – as you suspected – this is the kind of stuff that is verging on ‘gossipy’ ... and I’d prefer to draw the line at that). Cheers, No. 4 December 15, 2009 2:57 am Message 8240 Re: Imagination faculty RESPONDENT No. 14: Hi No. 4, Sometimes I designed cover books and logotypes without any imagination necessity or its intervention, without visualization of the picture in my ‘mind screen’ or consult whatever visual reference to borrow one idea. Anyway, in body performance of any human motor skill like self-defence manoeuvres, driving one car, typing, etc, we need some previous ideo motor response in this tasks. So, unlike you, I still having some doubts based in my inconscient/ subconscious use of some mental representation to perform this physical actions. One British martial fellow, Mr. Steve Morris (http://www.morrisnoholdsbarred.co.uk), show me his alternative to avoid abstract thinking to be counterproductive in concrete physical action/behaviour: http://stevemorris.livejournal.com/3593.html. If possible, I would like to read your view about this imagination faculty issue. Sincerely, No. 14: RESPONDENT No. 4: Oi No. 14! First off: I’m no cognitive scientist, so I come at this from a purely experiential point of view. When I first read that Richard has no imaginative faculty I thought it would be difficult, if not impossible, to do high-level abstract reasoning, or to design a complex system, without the capacity to visualise it somehow. When I’m engaged in designing something or thinking about a (concrete or abstract) system, I tend to create mental images ... so I just assumed this ability is actually necessary for creative/scientific work. Apparently Richard gets by perfectly well without it. (He has always said so; but now after seeing the design specifications for the ‘floating convivium’ I have concrete proof of this). Also, when we were riding on the bus one morning, criss-crossing various parts of a river system in various places, Richard was able to explain where this section of river fits in with other parts of the system, what it connects with, and so on. So clearly he has the ability to know where things are located in relation to each other without having to create a mental map. Now just to speculate: the absence of an imaginative faculty doesn’t necessarily mean that the brain has no visuo-spatial representational faculty. The actually-free brain may still be representing the world spatially (and conceptually), but without it being an inner-vision kind of thing as it normally is. (But I dunno about this; all I know is that, in practice, everything seems to work OK. The floating convivium is a lot better design than I could come up with, and I can see how it has been thought-out with much care). Cheers, No. 4 December 15, 2009 3:38 am Message 8242 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 4: By the way, No. 17: ... it wasn’t the face-to-face meeting with Peter and Vineeto that finally dispelled those old grudges for me. They had already fallen away quite some time ago. (I’d come to realise how much courage and integrity it required to publicise actualism and to stand up to the inevitable assaults without being intimidated or softening the message. So – while bearing in mind that no-one is flawless, including them – I came to admire them more than I resented them). I’ve already mentioned how Peter and I had a good laugh about it. To give you a better idea of what Vineeto is like in real-life: I mentioned being a bit nervous about meeting them both. Vineeto asked whether it was because of the past animosity. I said no, I had pretty much dealt with that already. Vineeto said (words to the effect): ‘that was over for me years ago; I’ve wanted to meet you for about three years now’ ... and gave me a spontaneous hug. Pretty cool, eh? After all the viciousness I unleashed on them both... Cheers, No. 4 * Message 8143 RESPONDENT No. 4: And lest that seem like a ‘forgive and forget’ kind of thing, it was more like a mutual enjoyment at being free from all that crap! December 18, 2009 8:56 pm Message 8350 Re: Questions To Richard RESPONDENT No. 4: I also asked Richard about [Respondent No. 10’s] ‘direct path’ query. I, too, was interested in it, and was a little puzzled by what seemed like contradictory information on the website. I’ll give you a detailed account of the content of that discussion later. More on this later ;-) RESPONDENT No. 10: You bastard. I should have prioritized the list. RESPONDENT No. 4: OK No. 10, here is the essence of that conversation ... to the best of my recollection: I could understand someone freaking out and pulling back from the brink of oblivion (and rationalising that pulling-back in any number of ways), as has been discussed with Richard’s wives, for example. But, as frightening as the prospect of annihilation must be to an identity, I wondered if there is *only* fear (and other feelings) to contend with at that point ... or whether there are actual dangers too. I know nobody can be assured of complete safety in this process, and I guess it’s unlikely that any such opportunity would arise in the first place unless one were prepared to risk everything – considering that the survival instincts themselves must be overcome by something even more powerful – but still I was curious about the nature/ extent of the actual risks involved, if any. I wanted to know: if an opportunity arises to ‘self’-immolate, does this in itself provide some assurance that the necessary groundwork has been done and that the nervous system is sufficiently prepared for what will ensue? Or if ‘Richard’ had taken an earlier opportunity to ‘self’-immolate (which at the time ‘he’ chided himself for not taking), could he thereby have fritzed out his nervous system by prematurely (and thereafter inescapably) coming into direct contact with ‘the vast stillness of infinitude’? I ask this because the following passage seemed to imply both, and I could not reconcile the two: [Richard]: ‘There is a rapid (and sudden) way to actual freedom and a gradual (then sudden) way ... and the rapid (and sudden) way does by-pass self-examination. There are certain dangers inherent: [Richard]: An actual freedom happens of itself *only when one is fully ready, and not before*. One has to become acclimatised to benignity, benevolence and 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*. To precipitously apprehend the vast stillness of infinitude would be too much, too fast, too soon ... one could go mad with the super-abundance of pleasure that pours forth. [Emphasis added]. (‘Richard’s Journal’ © 1997 The Actual Freedom Trust. Page: 150). (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 12b, 16 February 1999). I could read the latter (precipitous apprehension) as a hypothetical scenario ... but, then I could not understand what Richard meant about the ‘certain dangers inherent’. To cut to the chase: the essence of Richard’s answer is that, if this is what you really want, you needn’t wait. When Richard finally became actually free in 1992, he understood that he could have done it years earlier... like way back in 1981. (As it turned out his 11-year detour was invaluable for the historical record, but otherwise not). To an identity, the condition of actual freedom seems so extreme that it would blow the circuits, but after the event all is well. The warning in the passage above is to remind people (remember that he’s writing to people of all of kinds of backgrounds, with all kinds of temperaments, strengths, weaknesses, vulnerabilities, neurological/ psychological histories), that this is not a walk in the park ... your sanity, and indeed your entire ‘being’, is on the line. (Aside from that, hey, it’s a breeze!) When Richard talks about a path that by-passes the investigations, he’s talking about getting to, and remaining in, an out-from-control virtual freedom. Cheers, No. 4 January 13, 2010 2:48 am Message 8733 Re: A Long-Awaited Public Announcement RICHARD: I wish to advise that The Actual Freedom Trust web site is currently undergoing review. Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible. (Richard, List D, To the List at Large, 30.12.2009). * RICHARD: I can now advise that normal service has been resumed – with a new-look revamped website (still a work in progress on the third and fourth layers) and some nifty java-scripted ‘Tool Tips’ for close-at-hand footnotes (which requires, of course, one’s web- browser to have java-scripting enabled) – plus more up-to-date information as applicable. Vis.: https://www.actualfreedom.com.au/ Please stand by for a long-awaited public announcement, due to be made early in the new year, the consequences of which will have far-reaching implications and ramifications for anyone vitally interested in both an actual and a virtual freedom from the human condition. * That long-awaited public announcement can now be accessed by clicking on the heading ‘A Long-Awaited Public Announcement’ (to be found only three paragraphs below the ‘Actual Freedom’ logo). Please be prepared to be either shocked, appalled or delighted. (It depends upon whether the title ‘The Third Alternative’, and all what it signifies, has been properly understood, in view of the truly magical nature of a PCE, or not). * Lastly, my apologies for the delay, these last few days, during which further confirmation was being sought. Regards, Richard. (Richard, List D, To the List at Large, 30.12.2009 2:12 am, Message 8732). RESPONDENT No. 4: Oh, this is just TOO GOOD!!!!! Oh man! What fantastic news for the people concerned, and for the world at large! I am so thrilled that it turned out to be BOTH Peter and Vineeto! Had it been either one of them, it would have been compelling enough, but both! ... well ... now we *know* that this is possible for all of us. I am so happy for you both, and for everyone. Thank you, Peter and Vineeto, for ‘your’ sacrifice... and thank you for showing the way. Congratulations!!!! This is so great! * And the manner in which it happened ... this is truly fantastic news for humankind. I am struck dumb with joy! Being one of the last people to see ‘you’ alive, I am so glad that I had the opportunity to know you as normal ‘selves’, because there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that what you say is true: this is possible for anyone, given sufficient determination and intent. * Message 8734 RESPONDENT No. 4: Ah! Fantastic! * Message 8735 RESPONDENT No. 4: And it is so great to know that virtual freedom is the very means of self-immolation... it affirms the validity of everything you have written. January 13, 2010 11:57 am Message 8740 Re: A Long-Awaited Public Announcement RESPONDENT No. 27: I am shocked and delighted to hear this news! I have been reading the list for the last few weeks since No. 4 got in touch with me since his visit with you – and I have been waiting on pins and needles for the news. I am so very pleased to hear of the ease of the transition for both of you and that intent was the key to bringing about this monumental event. It didn’t just happen randomly or hit you unexpectedly like a bolt of lightning. You played a vital role in bringing it about – which bodes well for the rest of us. RESPONDENT No. 4: Yes. I find this deeply satisfying and reassuring. It’s not a fluke, not the result of rare talent, not a supercharged libidinal energy that few possess, not an electro-chemical lightning storm that fritzes out the brain stem.... all just pure intent, good sense, and willingness to do what’s necessary at each step of the way. And fun! And so mutually beneficial to self and world, each step of the way. It is fantastic news. (Maybe not exaggerating to say it’s the best ever published). On the same days that Peter was smoothly gliding in from virtual to actual freedom, ‘I’ was also trying to ‘self’-immolate ... by force, trying to muster the courage to ‘die’ (to get it over with once and for all) without backing down. Heh. I didn’t back down, but nothing much else happened either... despite the gritted teeth, clenched fists, screwed up face, headache/ pressure pains, moments of dark swooning, panic attacks, and feelings of being altogether pathetic and ridiculous when ‘I’ was still there, despite these histrionics. ;-) Heh. After this I came to the conclusion that best the way to ‘self’-immolate is to continue the process of being happy and harmless ... to whatever degree is currently possible, and to allow the increasing clarity and enjoyment and benevolence thus enabled to reveal what needs to be done next. And now, to see this actually confirmed, proven in practice, by not just one but TWO people who I recognise as normal fellow human beings... I am just blown away, delighted. (Far more pleased by this news than by my initial discovery of AF.... for various reasons). Wow. I’m still reeling from this news. My own progress with actualism has stagnated over the last number of years and I wasn’t hearing of much progress from the pioneers, so seeds of doubt and difficulty were starting to embed themselves ever deeper in my daily life. This indeed has status-quo crushing implications! I am so pleased to be alive to witness the beginnings of a stampede into the actual world! Same here, but now with a sense that there is time enough... not to waste/ delay/ procrastinate, but to enjoy, to be thorough, to lay the foundations well, and to thoroughly enjoy the process as well as the anticipated end... Cheers, No. 4 January 14, 2010 8:48 am Message 8755 Re: A Long-Awaited Public Announcement RESPONDENT No. 6: hmm...are you suggesting that the TWO people whom you recognized as normal fellow human beings were only Peter and Vineeto? Are you implying that Richard is not normal? :-) RESPONDENT No. 4: Heheh... Richard assured me that ‘he’ was a normal/ ordinary bloke... but considering his extraordinary life and accomplishments I found it a bit hard to believe. (It is much more believable now, mind you). RESPONDENT No. 6: I could not help but notice how Peter’s and Vineeto’s account of the process, as posted on the AFT website now, was so differently written/ reported. Not only do they differ from Richard’s account but their is a clear variation from each other. The syntax is so clearly different even if the message is contiguous – the process of becoming free. RESPONDENT No. 4: Yes, they’re actually different people ... and now that their psychic identities have disappeared it’ll be fascinating to learn more about *what* they are and how they operate (as opposed to *who* they were (or seemed to ‘be’)). Their reports so far have been so invigorating to me that it’s almost like being there. RESPONDENT No. 6: I liked how Peter mentioned touching Richard’s face and Vineeto mentioned the sweetness of intimacy. If the description is so joyful, i can only wonder in awe how experiencing the perfection & freedom must have been, for them. RESPONDENT No. 4: Yes, and it’s only just begun. I already have the impression from Peter’s mail that actual freedom is a beginning as well as an end; the end of ‘humanity’, but just the beginning humankind’s discovery and exploration of *what* we actually are, and how we actually operate under conditions of continuous, unadulterated apperception. It’s the end of loyalty to pathos, and the beginning of a caring that is so much more genuine and intelligent and free. I am fascinated to see how this unfolds, and I so much want to join in the adventure. (This has been such a shot in the arm for me; I feel an immense gratitude to the three people concerned. But, I’m aware of how gratitude can become adulation (etc), so I am trying to channel this energy into enthusiasm for the process). RESPONDENT No. 6: If you will entertain a late question, No. 4 ( regarding your visit). What was the most striking and hence the most obvious thing that you noticed, while you met the actualists? (just curious, :-), i know this has little to do with AF method/ practice). RESPONDENT No. 4: I’m happy to answer any questions you’d like answered ... but can you be a bit more specific about what exactly you’d like to know? (The most striking impressions I’ve already written about ad-hoc, but if there’s a particular aspect you’re interested in I’m more than happy to go into detail). Right now, the most striking lingering impression is that, compared with the conviviality I witnessed/ experienced, every other way of being together seems archaic and primitive. (This is not a superficial impression; it’s not based on appearances; it is the real substance of what happened during those days). Cheers, No. 4 Actual Freedom Homepage
Report of Respondent No. 4 Part 2 | Personal Reports Index

Richard Index Mailing List D

Actualism Homepage

Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless

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

Disclaimer and Use Restrictions