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 Kuba on Discuss Actualism Forum

September 17 2025

KUBA: Things are still going well, I can see now what I have been doing the past year, in that ‘I’ would creep up to the possibility of something happening and then ‘I’ would immediately arrogate ‘myself’ over the whole process and it would all become stillborn once again.

Those things which you have mentioned to me Vineeto – such as standing still and letting the dust settle, this is making sense now. In that ‘I’ cannot end ‘myself’ but ‘I’ can actively set in motion a process that will result in ‘my’ demise.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Indeed – the way to “actively set in motion a process that will result in ‘my’ demise” is described here …

> Richard: … ‘I’ deliberately and consciously and with knowledge aforethought set in motion a ‘process’ that will ensure ‘my’ demise (‘I’ do not really end ‘myself’ in that ‘I’ do not do the deed itself for an ‘I’ cannot end itself). What ‘I’ do, voluntarily and willingly, is to press the button which precipitates an oft-times alarming but always thrilling momentum that will result in ‘my’ inevitable self-immolation. What one does is that one dedicates oneself to the challenge of being here as the universe’s experience of itself. Peace-on-earth is the inevitable result ... because it is already here. ‘I’ was merely standing in the way of this always existing peace-on-earth from becoming apparent.

> The act of initiating this ‘process’ is altruism, pure and simple. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 5, 8 January 1999).

KUBA: So what I have been doing is acclimatising myself to remain in that place where all is wonderful, without moving in either direction. It’s fascinating because ‘I’ am standing still and yet a lot is going on. But somehow in the past this is precisely where ‘I’ would feel this need to pull the trigger on something, to move somewhere, do something.

Perhaps because allowing this process is literally eroding at ‘my’ very foundations, it’s inviting the final situation where ‘I’ am exposed. There are still brief reversions into ‘me’ surviving again, but this is less and less now. I experience it as if there are no objections anymore but of course there must be something. BUT I understand now that whatever the last objection may be, ‘I’ am not to go looking for it/ solving it as the ‘doer’, it can come naturally to the surface whilst ‘I’ remain in the wonderful place.

VINEETO: The more objections fall by the wayside, and the more you are acclimatising yourself to “that place where all is wonderful”, the less ‘self’-centric you find yourself to be, because “that place where all is wonderful” is for everybody. In other words, such diminished ‘self’-centricity makes room for a genuine caring for your fellow human beings, who are all as much afflicted with being an alien identity as you are.

Here is something you can try just for fun and pure enjoyment –

> > • [Richard]: “(...) 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 to Srinath: You will surely notice how giving oneself 100% is all about the ending of self-centredness – self-centred as in being both ego-centric and soul-centric – and has nowt to do with placing another’s happiness before one’s own [a.k.a. being an unselfish ‘self’]. (Richard, List D, Srinath, 28 July 2016).

KUBA: I do have an inkling that it is related to the irrevocability of actual freedom, not that it is difficult or dangerous or anything of the kind rather that it is irrevocable – but that irrevocability, it is also wonderful… No way at all to ever go back to the land of lament. In fact if it was not irrevocable it would not be the final solution, it would not deliver the goods. Hehe Richard wrote that he would not change a single bit about the universe, I find that more and more these days, it is perfect.

> Richard: I would say to people, then, that were I to live that which the PCE’s had made apparent – as in an irrevocable permanency – for only five minutes I would then happily die. That is how precious an actual freedom from the human condition is. (Richard, List D, No. 7, 16 November 2009).

VINEETO: And now that you are gradually coming to terms with the once-in-a-lifetime-decision to leave your ‘self’ behind (which, once taken, cannot be undone) the intermediate playground becomes obvious and the next sensible step …

KUBA: It has become clear to me why stepping out from control is what happens prior to self-immolation, …

VINEETO: With increasing diminishment of self-centredness/ self-centricity this is where the real fun, delight, marvel and wonder can fully flourish and full benefit of the actualism way of living reveals itself. Appreciation expands into wonder, amazement, joie de vivre, amiability, bonhomie, relish, gusto and naïve sensuosity and intimacy.

Cheers Vineeto

September 18 2025

KUBA: Thank you for your wonderful reply.

It’s for sure much more fun when what is being discussed is based on my ongoing experience rather than some map ‘out there’.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

That’s good to hear.

It reminds me of a situation when we were leisurely cruising along a narrow creek in the little dinghy. It was a very picturesque stream with old rainforest trees arching over the water from both sides, gnarly roots exposed on the bank, some ducks swimming in the distance, which completed the amazing atmosphere in this wild and new to us stretch of the various waterways in our area. Suddenly we sighted a car driving close by, and it was explained as being the country road to the neighbouring village, which ‘Vineeto’ had travelled several times, which ran for a short distance along the bank of the creek.

At that moment, these two different worlds just didn’t mix, there the one on land which had clear points of reference for ‘her’, from ‘here’ to ‘there’, and the other, an astonishing world of deep green mixed with some blue, a hushed silence, light and shadow and gurgling water, full of wonder and delight for the senses, an unexplored, fresh and pristine wonderland.

*

VINEETO: And now that you are gradually coming to terms with the once-in-a-lifetime-decision to leave your ‘self’ behind (which, once taken, cannot be undone) the intermediate playground becomes obvious and the next sensible step …

KUBA: It has become clear to me why stepping out from control is what happens prior to self-immolation, …

VINEETO: And, with increasing diminishment of self-centredness/ self-centricity this is where the real fun, delight, marvel and wonder can fully flourish and full benefit of the actualism way of living reveals itself. Appreciation expands into wonder, amazement, joie de vivre, amiability, bonhomie, relish, gusto and naïve sensuosity and intimacy.

KUBA: Thank you, you wrote this so well – basically now that I have genuine confidence that living out from control is the way to go the “training wheels” can properly come off. Of course, ‘I’ cannot take full advantage of the “actualism way of living” if ‘I’ am still committed to the ‘tried and true’. I understood this the other day, that the answer cannot be located within the human condition, that ‘I’ can never generate the answer, which means that whatever control ‘I’ try to exert, it can only lead ‘me’ back deeper into the human condition.

VINEETO: This is an important realisation that the ‘real’ world and the actual world never ever meet and that there is no sliding progression from one to the other. ‘I’ will never experience actuality (full-stop). Once this is fully taken on board you also gradually realise the liberating nature of this irrefutable fact.

KUBA: So instead ‘I’ step out from control and allow the universe to live this life – this is where the genuine answer can be lived, and as you said – it is where “the real fun, delight, marvel and wonder can fully flourish”.

VINEETO: Allowing the universe to live you may also discover and recognize the various rules, principles, edicts, habits, dogmas and truths designed to keep you in the real world, and one by one you can undo their grip over you. They are easy to recognize – whenever enjoyment and appreciation diminish, the culprit is most likely one of those real-world dogmas.

As Richard says, “with pure intent the universe is with you all the way”. If in doubt, imitate the actual.

*

VINEETO: The more objections fall by the wayside, and the more you are acclimatising yourself to “that place where all is wonderful”, the less ‘self’-centric you find yourself to be, because “that place where all is wonderful” is for everybody. In other words, such diminished ‘self’-centricity makes room for a genuine caring for your fellow human beings, who are all as much afflicted with being an alien identity as you are.

KUBA: Yes the other day I was thinking about my work situation and it was regarding my wages. I was aware of the 2 failed options which ‘I’ have oscillated between thus far in ‘my’ life. Which was either to ‘put the other before oneself’ or to ‘take what is mine’ (typically at the expense of the other), I was feeling all the feelings associated with those 2 options and I realised that neither of them can ever work.

Again this was ‘me’ controlling ‘my’ life, and doing a bad job of it. It clicked then than what I always wanted deep down, and what I was always drawn towards was for each and every interaction with a fellow human being to be of maximum benefit to all. ‘I’ saw that ‘I’ am not capable of that, ‘my’ control can never operate in this manner, but that it was possible to live like that and that all ‘I’ have to do is allow the universe to live this life, because in the place where all is wonderful it is exactly like that, and effortlessly so.

VINEETO: Have you ever heard of a win-win situation?

When you find yourself caught between two unliveable options you can be confident that there is a third alternative. Instead of hope or despair there is confidence in the perfection of infinitude, instead of unselfishness or selfishness there is equity and parity, instead of love or hate or loneliness there is near-actual intimacy. Again, if in doubt, imitate the actual. It is so eloquently and extensively reported/ explained and described in Richard’s writings that you never have to be trapped by the dilemma of the traditional (materialistic or spiritualistic) paradigm again.

I can also recommend the Srinath-correspondence regarding the maxim of “putting the other before oneself”. I found it very informative, every time I have read it: Richard, List D, Srinath, 28 July 2016

Cheers Vineeto

September 18 2025

KUBA: Oh and I will just add with regards to the below :

> • [Richard]: “(...) 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).

In the past this was experienced as a severe threat, to consider allowing the above, this must be interesting for you to read, how ‘I’ make something so delightful into a threat but indeed it was scary to contemplate. The closeness and the delight of such proximity, that can be terrifying for ‘me’.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

What you say is no surprise as ‘Vineeto’ had similar feelings regarding more and more intimacy which meant being increasingly naked with less and less to hide, and this included an exploratory period after becoming basically free. And yet was so utterly delightful whenever a barrier is overcome and the bester time of my life.

KUBA: But it is not like so anymore, there is still something like a cautiousness there, but mixed in with this cautiousness there is also this possibility of something sweet to be found in that direction.

VINEETO: That’s good to hear. Grace’s gradations may be of help (or you make your own) and usually the process is a back and forth of daring and retreating and then caring and daring again. You might find the selected correspondence on sensuousness, on sex and on intimacy informative. And Sonya said “Magical sex sounds pretty fucking cool”.

Cheers Vineeto

September 18 2025

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

It’s wonderful when it all starts falling into place and all the originally puzzling mysteries finally makes sense.

In her first months of acquaintance with actualism, ‘Vineeto’ felt as if her brain was being turned upside down –

> Richard: Speaking in regards to the effects any and all attempts to fit this totally new paradigm into ‘her’ existing mindset were having, ‘she’ explained the process as being ... (1.) as if ‘her’ brain was being turned upside-down ... and how (2.) ‘she’ was having to relearn how to think all over again. (Richard, List D, Alan, 29 February 2016).

(The whole email is quite amusing).

Just one minor correction –

KUBA: But fear, aggression, nurture and desire, these are not genuine things. It is the perfection and purity of infinitude which is pre-eminent, the passions are an affective creation.

VINEETO: The instinctual passions are not “an affective creation” – they are the genetically encoded source of affections, emotions and passions (and with it the imaginative/ intuitive faculty) and they are the only way sentient life could develop and thrive … until human intelligence has evolved to the point of apperception being possible, which now can render the genetically encoded instinctual passions in human beings redundant.

Cheers Vineeto

September 20 2025

VINEETO to Chrono:

> Respondent: Is not the sense of being a human being tied up with the belief in permanence, i.e. the belief that ‘I’ am at the root of everything (as a permanent entity)

> Richard: As the (sensorial) ‘sense of being a human being’ is tied up with impermanence – as in mortality – you can only be referring to the intuitive ‘sense of being a human being’ (as in immortality) ... the affective feeling of being a ‘presence’ inside the body (aka ‘being’ itself), in other words, as a psychological/ psychic entity (a metaphysical identity) rather than the sensitive feeling of being this body as a sensate/ material entity (a physical creature).

> Hence spiritualism has it that, whilst the ego-self is impermanent, the soul-self is permanent and that ego-death, while the body is a living body, is essential to reveal who one really is – an immortal spirit-being – whereas actualism has that identity-death in toto (extinction) is essential to make apparent what one actually is (a mortal human being) ... and therein lies the rub: as a spirit-being one is so very real, so very, very real at times, one is prepared to do virtually anything – virtually anything at all – than go blessedly into oblivion so that what is actually permanent can become apparent. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 54, 7 November 2003).

(Actualism, Actualvineeto, Chrono2, 19 September 2025).

KUBA: I find this topic very fascinating, it’s somewhat all back to front for ‘me’ … I remember Richard wrote:

> Richard: ‘Being’ is the root-cause of the perceived tragedy of life. Life is seen to be tragic because it has death at the end; if it were not for death, according to the received ‘wisdom’, life would be good. In actuality, the concept of living forever, as a psychic entity, is the original cause of abject sorrow and malice … not extinction. [Emphasis added]. (Richard’s Journal, Article Sixteen)

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

I see you returned to the same topic that you started more than a year ago –

> Kuba: I guess it is somewhat funny that ‘I’ can feel resentful towards this universe for the fact of mortality, for not ‘getting enough time’ and yet ‘I’ am busy wasting each moment anyways.
> Furthermore it is this fact of mortality which makes life precious anyways, so what is it that ‘I’ am asking for? An eternity to suffer?
> I find this whole thing quite fascinating, what is kind of hanging in front of me now is – is it that mortality is actually a gift and not a curse? (15 Jul 2024)

And again:

> Kuba: And if ‘I’ was to get ‘my’ way and things were of a lasting importance, that is not a good outcome at all, life would be a serious business. And if ‘I’ was to live eternally, what about those other human beings that are yet to be born, they would never get to experience the joy of being alive. How weird that the thing which is felt/ believed to be at core what is ‘wrong’ with the universe – mortality – is what in the grand scheme of things ensures a happiness and harmlessness for all. (1 May 2025)

And yet you still say “it’s somewhat all back to front for ‘me’”, in other words ‘you’ still seem to look for a resolution in the real world, perhaps it’s hidden in fantasy and supernatural fiction? Somewhere deep down ‘you’ want to live forever, else why be object to ‘my’ extinction?

KUBA: Me and Sonya have been watching the show Supernatural, it’s about 2 demon hunters essentially. Currently in the show one of the hunters made a deal with the devil, that in order to bring his brother back from the dead he would sell his soul, and that in precisely 1 year he would be sent to hell for eternity.

And actually this makes Richard’s point exactly, death as extinction does not have any of these kinds of problems associated with it. It is only because deep down ‘I’ feel and believe that ‘I’ am eternal that heavens and hells have to be invented to continue on ‘my’ story, for eternity.

But it is exactly that which is what ‘I’ find so terrifying about death, that since ‘I’ am (apparently) immortal then ‘I’ will simply discard this body, but then where do ‘I’ go? Is it into some abyss where ‘I’ will exist alone for eternity? etc. Essentially ‘I’ cannot conceive of not ‘being’ so ‘I’ imagine ‘myself’ ‘being’ even past this body’s physical death, which of course cannot happen.

VINEETO: Here is the reason –

> Richard: … because of ‘being’ itself an atheistic materialist cannot help but be, to some degree at least, metaphysical in outlook … (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27h, 2 April 2004)

KUBA: So this is where the back to front thing comes in… In that accepting mortality would actually be a release for ‘me’, which is not how ‘I’ typically would experience it.

VINEETO: Something far more is needed than “accepting mortality”, accepting that you will physically die one day. What is required is to inquire with utter sincerity into the spiritual dream of being an immortal soul. Upon utterly genuine inquiry you might come to see, to apperceptively understand, that ‘you’ are standing in the way of perfection and innocence becoming apparent –

> Richard: ‘(...) by ‘my’ very nature ‘I’ am defiled; by ‘my’ very nature ‘I’ am corrupt through and through; by ‘my’ very nature ‘I’ am perversity itself. No matter how sincerely and earnestly one tries to purify oneself, one can never succeed completely. The last little bit always eludes perfecting. By ‘my’ very nature ‘I’ am rotten at the innermost core’. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 7, 22 August 1999).

When you let this understanding penetrate the very core of your ‘being’ something amazing starts to happen.

Cheers Vineeto

September 21 2025

KUBA: Me and Sonya have been watching the show Supernatural, it’s about 2 demon hunters essentially. Currently in the show one of the hunters made a deal with the devil, that in order to bring his brother back from the dead he would sell his soul, and that in precisely 1 year he would be sent to hell for eternity.

And actually this makes Richard’s point exactly, death as extinction does not have any of these kinds of problems associated with it. It is only because deep down ‘I’ feel and believe that ‘I’ am eternal that heavens and hells have to be invented to continue on ‘my’ story, for eternity.

But it is exactly that which is what ‘I’ find so terrifying about death, that since ‘I’ am (apparently) immortal then ‘I’ will simply discard this body, but then where do ‘I’ go? Is it into some abyss where ‘I’ will exist alone for eternity? etc. Essentially ‘I’ cannot conceive of not ‘being’ so ‘I’ imagine ‘myself’ ‘being’ even past this body’s physical death, which of course cannot happen.

VINEETO: Here is the reason –

> Richard: … because of ‘being’ itself an atheistic materialist cannot help but be, to some degree at least, metaphysical in outlook … (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27h, 2 April 2004)

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

Thank you, you hit the nail on the head here – I never thought to consider that side of it. ‘I’ have been busy looking at mortality as a physical phenomenon, which it probably had some benefits too. But I see your point loud and clear, in that ‘I’ am not physical/ material/ actual, ‘my’ existence as a ‘being’ is necessarily in some way metaphysical, even when by and large the various religious/ spiritual beliefs have been eradicated.

VINEETO: Here is the quote from Richard more explicitly explained by Peter –

> • [Peter]: ‘Spirit is the basis of the word spiritual and yet many spiritual people, when asked, somehow manage to deny that they believe in spirits or that a spirit lives within them that will be going ‘somewhere’ – after physical death. <snipped>

> As you know I was a full on-spiritualist for many years but when I started to disentangle myself from these beliefs I was surprised at the extent and the subtlety of the spiritual beliefs I had taken on in my life. And yet none of these beliefs were apparent to me as being beliefs before I started to investigate them – if that is what you mean by ‘no apparent spiritual beliefs’. (...)

> I have already explained that I had no trouble at all associating ‘me’ as a spirit being with my spiritual beliefs – indeed it is because ‘I’ am a spirit being that the imaginary freedom to be had in the imaginary spiritual world was so seductive. (...)

> I have already laid my cards on the table as to what I mean by the word spiritual – in short, although I have spent years ridding myself of all of my spiritual beliefs, ‘I’ am still a spirit-being until self-immolation happens’. (Actualism, Peter, Actual Freedom List, No. 60d, 07.4.2004).

And another – because this topic caused quite an indignant stir on the mailing list at the time –

> Richard: What Peter realised very early in the piece was that, as long as the flesh and blood body hosted an affective ‘being’, an intuitive ‘presence’ which is the instinctual passions in action, there was no way that anyone – and he means anyone – can actually be non-spiritual ... even though they do not believe either in a god or truth (by whatever name) or a post-mortem soul or spirit (by whatever name).

> This may be an apt moment to re-post something I wrote early last year:

> > • [Richard]: ‘... I am yet to meet an atheist who does not ponder, when questioned deeply, whether there may be something substantive post-mortem after all. For example, many years ago I went to see an accredited psychiatrist and established right from the beginning that he be an atheistic materialist – he said emphatically upon being questioned rather rigorously in this regard that everything was material and modifications of same including consciousness itself – because another psychiatrist I had previously seen was exigently talking about guardian angels looking after me within the first five minutes of our discussion ... yet when regaling this second psychiatrist of my on-going experiencing of life in this actual world his eyes opened in awe as the full import (of what he heard) struck home and he said ‘you may very well be the next Buddha we have all been waiting for’.
> > I kid you not ...’ (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27e, 24 January 2003).

> (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27h, 2 April 2004)

KUBA: In that sense one is only a genuine atheist upon actual freedom. I will see what I can find here.

VINEETO: Perhaps some new, non-spiritual, down-to-earth, actual questions regarding your concept/ idea of ‘your’ perception of the universe can reveal some sensible replies –

Is it infinite?
Is it physical?
If so, where in infinite space do the immortal souls reside?
Where does the devil (from your Supernatural fiction movie) physically reside?
Where do the dead reside from where the brother of the protagonist is brought back from the dead?
Where is hell located?

Here is a little story from feeling being ‘Vineeto’ –

> ‘Vineeto’: Finally one evening, when talking and musing about the universe, I fully comprehended that this physical universe is actually infinite. The universe being without boundaries or an edge means that it is impossible, practically, for God to exist. In order to have created the universe or to be in control of it God would have to exist outside of it – and there is no outside! This insight hit me like a thunderbolt. My fear of God and of his representatives collapsed and lost its very substance by this obvious realisation. In fact, there can be no one outside of this infinite universe who is pulling the strings of punishment and reward, heaven and hell – or, according to Eastern tradition, granting enlightenment or leaving me with the eternal karma of endless lives in misery.

> This insight presupposes, of course, that there is no place other than the physical universe, no celestial, mystical realm where gods and ghosts exist. It also implies that there is no life before or after death and that the body simply dies when it dies. I needed quite some courage to face and accept this simple fact – to give up all beliefs in an after-life or a ‘spirit-life’.

> But I could easily observe that as soon as I gave up the idea of any imaginary existence other than the tangible, physical universe, everything, which had seemed so complicated and impossible to understand became graspable, evident, obvious and imminently clear.

> When the enormous consequence and implication of slipping out of this insidious belief in any God or Higher Being dawned on me, I was at the same time free of anybody’s authority. (Actualism, Vineeto, A Bit of Vineeto).

It might also be informative to click on the small tool-tip on the Actual Freedom Homepage right after the word “Freedom” in the title where those first significant four words – new, non-spiritual, down-to-earth, actual are parsed in detail.

This is so you understand a bit better what ‘imitating the actual’ means in practice and in detail – should you on occasion not be able to recall the flavour and atmosphere of your PCE – so that you are able to nip in the bud, or sensibly investigate, any seductive fantasy, imagination, fiction, wishful thinking, intuition or any other interfering feeling regarding the job ‘you’ set out to do.

The following quote is for a chuckle and a helpful reminder –

> RESPONDENT: Earnest inquiry is to inquire into one’s own bias. As they say in Scotland, the rest is just Crrraap!

> RICHARD: Do you ever countenance an end to ‘earnest enquiry’ ... or do you intend to procrastinate for ever and a day?

> RESPONDENT: LOL – what is it that seeks an ending?

> RICHARD: The ‘earnest enquiry’ does ... else why so busy earnestly enquiring in the first place? (Richard, List B, No. 12h, 5 December 2000).

By the way, the Selected Correspondence on Spiritual(2) has quite a few enlightening interactions.

Cheers Vineeto

September 24 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

So I have been looking at this the past few days and it seems to me that there are no spiritual beliefs or fantasies masquerading as the truth.

All that I am able to locate is that very “intuitive ‘presence’ which is the instinctual passions in action”, the impression of being present and existing over time as an ‘entity’.
I have had this phrase on my mind a lot though – ‘my’ immortal soul… Because if ‘I’ did not somehow experience ‘myself’ to be immortal then why not allow ‘my’ extinction right now?
Running those questions which you suggested : (snipped)

All that comes up is that there is not even space for ‘my’ soul, that ‘my’ ‘being’ can only have an illusory/ delusory existence.

Is it that because ‘I’ feel/believe ‘myself’ to be genuine that ‘I’ remain? That weight of ‘being’ it requires belief in order to sustain it. The ‘drama’ requires a ‘believer’, in fact they are one and the same thing.

This is all I can find here.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Thank you for informative reply.

It appears that despite your fascinated contemplation your thinking and probing remained in the confines (the paradigm) of ‘me’ – how far ‘I’ can go in ‘my’ most sincere exploration. You could indeed say that ‘being’ and the ‘drama’ requiring a ‘believer’ are one and the same.

This might give you a clue why –

> RICHARD: I have generally found that, when the direct experience (actual intimacy) of being here now (pure consciousness experiencing) diminishes and one reverts to normal, the immediacy of being this flesh and blood body only in infinite space and eternal time as the universe’s experience of itself, vanishes completely ... and one (strangely) starts to settle for second-best. Why?

> ALAN: Good question. You are correct in saying that ‘it’ vanishes completely. The only reason can be that ‘I’ resume the controls. At this moment I have only a recollection of what a PCE is. ‘I’ do not believe that it actually exists – because ‘I’ cannot experience it. So for ‘me’ it is not ‘second best’ – it is the best there is.

> RICHARD: Yes, a virtual freedom is not to be sneezed at ... the wide and wondrous path to actual freedom is a win/win situation. Just like the spiritual path there is a glittering prize at the end ... yet here the similarity ends. With actualism one gains measurably along the way ... if actual freedom remains ever-elusive one winds up way ahead of normal human expectations.

> ALAN: Just yesterday, I had the thought ‘Why do you want any more?’ – I no longer experience anger, frustration, jealousy or any of the other ‘bad’ emotions (and not many of the ‘good’ ones either).

> RICHARD: If one were to proceed no further, one would have already achieved what a ‘normal’ person deems improbable. It cannot be stressed too much how highly desirable virtual freedom is. Any society based on pure intent, with its citizens living in virtual freedom, would be so superior to the current communities, that are based upon morality and control, that a virtual peace on earth would be most likely to be the over-all state of affairs. Although actual sagacity lies only in the ultimate condition, the wide and wondrous wisdom is sufficient to ensure that the optimum relative peace and prosperity prevails ... because virtual freedom, borne upon pure intent, does away with the need for control.

> One is, in effect, free enough to live life in an abundantly successful way.

> ALAN: Was this not enough? Was it not better to enjoy this life as ‘Alan’, the personality, than risk all on an unknown future?

> RICHARD: I can recall the ‘Richard’ that was considering this very question ... yet ‘he’ just knew that ‘he’ would not be able to look in the mirror of a morning if ‘he’ did not proceed. Is it an admixture of pride and dignity, perhaps? (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Alan-a, 16 September 1999)

You can read more of this excerpt if you want to discover what comes next.

KUBA: Just to add to the above, it is that impression of being present and existing over time as an ‘entity’ which is the source of ‘my’ belief in immortality. Belief doesn’t seem quite right here as ‘I’ don’t actually believe that ‘I’ will persist after this body dies, it’s more like a fundamental impression.

VINEETO: There is of course another approach. So far you have been contemplating from the perspective of ‘me’ and concluded that “there is not even space for ‘my’ soul, that ‘my’ ‘being’ can only have an illusory/ delusory existence”.

Now combine sensible reason and naiveté with commonsense about what is actual and be fascinatingly curious about the nature of actual time.

> Respondent: What is time?

> Richard: Time cannot be described in isolation as time and space and form are seamless in that they do not and cannot operate as separate or disparate units. Time and space and form are material inasmuch that they are actually existing and form can be material in its specific meaning as actual things (solid stuff) or active force (energetic stuff). Therefore time can be portrayed as the measure of the movement of form in space and the periodicity of its rearrangement; space is an arena in which form can exist, move and rearrange itself endlessly; form is matter (either in its solid aspect or energetic phase) occupying space (which is infinite) and taking time (which is eternal) to reconfigure itself (which is perpetual). The properties of eternal time and infinite space designate a vast and utter stillness and the properties of perpetual form designate liveliness; a scintillating, sparkling vitality. In a word: infinitude. When one directly ascertains (apperceptive awareness) the properties of infinitude (infinite and eternal and perpetual) the qualities of the property of infinitude become apparent (infinitude has no opposite): pristine and consummate and impeccable.

> These non-dual qualities are the source of the values of infinitude (benevolent and benign and blithe). (Richard, List B, No. 33c, 5 July 2000)

*

> RICHARD: Have you never noticed that it is never not this moment?

> RESPONDENT: Okay, I notice that ... and it’s fascinating.

> RICHARD: If I might suggest (before you go on with your ‘but’ immediately below)? Stay with that fascination and allow the marvelling, that it is never not this moment, to unfold in all its wonderment.

> RESPONDENT: But I’m wondering whether time can be experienced in a different manner by different people/animals. Bats, for example, see an action much slower then humans do. Also, in different emotional states time flows differently for me: when I’m annoyed waiting for someone time flows slower, when I’m excited/happy time goes faster then normal.

> RICHARD: Time itself – this eternal moment – does not flow (move) ... there is a vast stillness here in this actual world.

> RESPONDENT: We can talk about altered states of time then. What/who creates these altered states of time ...

> RICHARD: The identity within, of course (who is always out of time).

> RESPONDENT: ... and why are you so sure that ‘this moment’ is part and parcel of the physical universe properties?

> RICHARD: Where there is no identity the physical properties of the universe are startlingly apparent.

> And this is wonderful.

> RESPONDENT: Why is it that it cannot be measured (as in duration) and only experientially (which can be another name for subjectivity) understood?

> RICHARD: This (beginningless and endless) moment cannot be measured as measurement requires a reference point – a beginning and/or an ending – to measure against.

> Incidentally, where there is no identity (no subject) experiencing can never be subjective (as opposed to objective).

> (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 25f, 12 June 2004)

There is heaps more to get lost in when reading one or both pages of the selected correspondence on time (+2).

Note that naïve fascination, amazement, marvel and wonderment are essential for the exploration to catapult you into an experiential understanding of what is being said.

Infinitude, [infinite extent, amount, duration, a boundless expanse; an unlimited time] cannot be understood rationally from within the boundaries of ‘me’. For ‘me’ it is incredible, incomprehensible, unbelievable and unimaginable. One must come to one’s senses ... both literally and metaphorically.

Once you do, you will instantly grasp that there is neither space nor time for an immortal, i.e. eternal ‘something’ – hence it can only be a product of an impassioned imagination – because in actuality there is only now, only this moment exists.

By the way, there is no fear, including no fear of physical death, once the identity self-immolated.

KUBA: Aaand to add some more, I remember when I first read Richard’s writings years ago I thought “why on earth would ‘he’ have given up immortality for actual freedom”, immortality seemed precious. Whereas now this is the other way around, in that ‘I’ am happily searching for a way to become extinct, ‘my’ immortality has been exposed for what it is – suffering, and it is the possibility of ‘my’ extinction which is now precious.

VINEETO: That is excellent. Yet, it is not so much that “the possibility of ‘my’ extinction which is now precious” but what will become apparent by ‘your’ extinction –

> Richard: When one walks naked (sans ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul) in the infinitude of this actual universe there is the direct experiencing that there is something precious in living itself. Something beyond compare. Something more valuable than any ‘King’s Ransom’. It is not rare gemstones; it is not singular works of art; it is not the much-prized bags of money; it is not the treasured loving relationships; it is not the highly esteemed blissful and rapturous ‘States Of Being’ ... it is not any of these things usually considered precious. There is something ultimately precious that makes the ‘sacred’ a mere bauble.

> It is the essential character of the infinitude of the universe – which is the life-giving foundation of all that is apparent – as a physical actuality. The limpid and lucid purity and perfection of actually being just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time is akin to the crystalline perfection and purity seen in a dew-drop hanging from the tip of a leaf in the early-morning sunshine; the sunrise strikes the transparent bead of moisture with its warming rays, highlighting the flawless correctness of the tear-drop shape with its bellied form. One is left almost breathless with wonder at the immaculate simplicity so exemplified ... and everyone I have spoken with at length has experienced this impeccable integrity and excellence in some way or another at varying stages in their life.

> This preciosity is what one is as-one-is – me as I am in actuality as distinct from ‘me’ as ‘I’ am in reality – for one is the universe’s experience of itself. Is it not impossible to conceive – and just too difficult to imagine – that this is one’s essential character? One has to be daring enough to live it – for it is both one’s audacious birth-right and one’s adventurous destiny – thus the pure consciousness experience (PCE) is but the harbinger of the potential made actual.

> As I said earlier: there is an unimaginable purity which is born out of the stillness of the infinitude as manifest at this moment in time and this place in space ... but one will not come upon it by thinking about or feeling out its character. It is most definitely not a matter to be pursued in the rarefied atmosphere of the most refined mind or the evocative milieu of the most impassioned heart.

> One must come to one’s senses ... both literally and metaphorically. (Richard, List B, No. 21g, 26 October 2001a).

As Chrono pointed out in his most recent message to you – only altruism can do the trick because the instinct for individual survival is only exceeded by the instinct for group survival – the ‘group’ being “this body, that body and every body”. Once you are no longer concerned with ‘my’ survival, naiveté and an ever-diminishing ‘self’-centredness can flourish.

Cheers Vineeto

September 26 2025

> ALAN: Was this not enough? Was it not better to enjoy this life as ‘Alan’, the personality, than risk all on an unknown future?

> RICHARD: I can recall the ‘Richard’ that was considering this very question ... yet ‘he’ just knew that ‘he’ would not be able to look in the mirror of a morning if ‘he’ did not proceed. Is it an admixture of pride and dignity, perhaps? (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Alan-a, 16 September 1999)

KUBA: This quote from Richard has been on my mind, indeed it describes the situation well for ‘me’. I remember what ‘I’ was like 10 years ago and ‘I’ would have given anything to experience life in the manner that ‘I’ do now.

And yet ‘I’ know that it is still second best, the thing is the first place is not for ‘me’! So it is that either ‘I’ would continue to live the second best or ‘I’ give up all of ‘myself’ so that this body, that body and everybody can live the first place. It’s not ‘me’ giving up second place so that ‘I’ can have the first place, rather it is ‘me’ giving up the best that ‘I’ can have for something infinitely better for this body, that body and everybody.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

The fascinating aspect of your observation when comparing your life today with what it was ten years ago, is that without wanting to go all the way you wouldn’t be how you are today (as you say yourself further below). The pure intent garnered from your PCEs was part and parcel of your journey.

It may be different for everyone how they choose to live their lives but feeling being ‘Vineeto’ always knew that virtual freedom, both before and after being out-from-control, was a precarious stage and could be lost any time if/ when pure intent was lost. So even in those periods when ‘Vineeto’ was ‘running away’, procrastinating or feeling stuck, there was one grim determination that made ‘her’ persist and that was “don’t do a Devika”, i.e. don’t ever turn away completely. Devika, when transmogrifying into Irene gave ‘her’ an excellent demonstration of what not to do. It all helped to finally leave my ‘self’ behind.

KUBA: And it is odd that ‘I’ know that ‘I’ will do that exactly, as Richard wrote “Is it an admixture of pride and dignity, perhaps?” – After-all ‘I’ did set off on this adventure in order to go all the way, and furthermore how could ‘I’ ever settle for ‘my’ second best when ‘I’ know something so much better is available, just not for ‘me’ haha.

VINEETO: Indeed, and it’s more than “an admixture of pride and dignity” in ‘Vineeto’s’ experience, it is also the pure intent, even when temporary dormant. It can be resurrected any time you ask for it. After all, the beneficence and benevolence of the actual universe itself is right here now the moment you direct your attention to it.

KUBA: So I have been fascinated that there is this capacity which ‘I’ have, an aspect of the programming bestowed by blind nature which can be utilised in order to end the human condition. And that this aspect of the programming does not require any learning or cultivating or anything like that, it requires the correct situation in order to be triggered. And I don’t mean that ‘I’ passively sit back and wait for something to happen. Rather I mean that the gun is already loaded and the finger is on the trigger, it’s all set to go in other words (this is not in reference to any “special psychic gun” btw, just that ‘I’ am already capable of altruism by nature of being a ‘self’).

VINEETO: Instead of thinking about altruism as a programming or a “psychic gun” (i.e. conceptually), there is an easier way to approach it experientially – you can become aware of such situations whenever you have a choice of being less self-centric than you would habitually be, simply because it feels good. Being less ‘self’-centric is the natural consequence of more and more naïve enjoyment and appreciation. Increasing kindness, generosity, magnanimity, bonhomie, friendliness and consideration will noticeably decrease being concerned about ‘me’ and ‘my’ problems, and appreciation, marvel and wonderment widen the outlook and horizon about all the magnificent happening beyond ‘my’ own narrow horizon – and a magical fairy-tale-like world becomes more and more apparent.

Cheers Vineeto

September 26 2025

KUBA: Yes I can 100% remember those kind of instances, in fact I was thinking about this yesterday, that the good/bad feelings are identity enhancing, whereas in the direction of felicity and innocuity ‘I’ as ‘self’ become more and more… irrelevant? it’s like the good/bad feelings draw a deeper and harder boundary to ‘me’ as ‘self’, whereas with those felicitous feelings ‘I’ am almost as if slowly being rubbed out, of course never quite but it can lead to a marked diminishment in that feeling of separation.

So yes I can experience times when ‘I’ am being far less ‘self’-centric and it is always wonderful when it happens. But is this altruism? Or is your point that it can lead to where altruism can be activated?

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Softening the boundaries of ‘me’ allows you to consider everyone, who is not ‘me’, else why even contemplate an altruistic act.

Remember the long correspondence Richard had with Srinath regarding real-world compassionate/ non-compassionate caring and near-actual caring, which I recently recommended to you?

> • [Vineeto]: “The key component for both of us had been caring, a caring as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster. [...] my caring for him meant whittling away my identity as much as possible in order to give him *(and me)* the intimacy *we both* yearned for”. [emphases added]. (Direct Route, James, 17 January 2010).

> • [Vineeto]: “I sat in this group, as one of many, and my sole interest was that everyone present *(including me as one of those present)* enjoyed themselves/ obtained the maximum benefit from our meeting”. [emphasis added]. (Direct Route, James, 16 January 2010).

> Richard: Thus the “caring as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster” that Vineeto wrote about (as quoted by Claudiu much further above) – which appears to have become known as a ‘near-actual caring’ these days – is self-evidently a caring which prioritises an actual happiness over an affective happiness any day of the week (else it be a gussied up real-world caring masquerading as a caring which is as close to an actual caring as an identity can muster). (Richard, List D, Srinath2, 28 July 2016).

Perhaps a refreshing of this – and the follow up – correspondence on that page is helpful for you to recognize the correlation of being harmless, considerate, kind, gentle, generous, magnanimous, friendly, and therefore less ‘self’-centric and self-absorbed, and thus able to, and interested in, an increasing caring and inter-personal intimacy to the point of an acutely-empathic caring (equivalent to a near-actual-caring), which for ‘Vineeto’ motivated ‘her’ altruistic action.

Perhaps it’s also worth emphasising that being out-from-control is epitomized by a complete absence of self-centredness –

> Richard: 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). [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, Srinath2, 13 August 2016).

Point 4, 5 and 6 should complete the understanding for you how it is all related (if possibly without becoming a concept).

KUBA: So I seem to be a little confused here… Richard has written that altruism sets in motion a process which leads to ‘my’ self-immolation and you have written to me that once altruism is activated it can be all over in an instant.

Is it that as ‘I’ become less and less ‘self’-centric as an ongoing modus operandi that ‘I’ invite a situation where altruism is activated and ‘I’ am extirpated OR is it that “keeping the window open” of this ongoing progression into being less and less ‘self’-centric is altruism in operation, that this is the process which will lead to ‘my’ demise?

VINEETO: Being “less and less ‘self’-centric” is not altruism, it is thinning out the dominance of ‘me’ in order to allow the universe to live me. Altruism is a single act which leads to ‘my’ demise. ‘Vineeto’ didn’t even think about altruism at the end, it just happened when all fell into place.

Or to put it another way, you can’t think your way out of existence.

There is no either-or, the only process is as Geoffrey put it so brilliantly –

> Geoffrey: When one knows what it is one wants, and when one knows what it is one must sacrifice, then only the sensible action remains.

I simply suggested an experiential approach the way ‘Vineeto’ experienced and utilized it.

KUBA: Also is it possible to altruistically set the process in motion and then to obstruct it from completion? Furthermore is that what I have been doing by magically finding another ‘problem’ each time?

VINEETO: Yes, having read all of what you have written so far, this is entirely possible.

But then again, dealing with your objection to physical death one day, and giving up your dream of your soul’s immortality was certainly a necessary beneficial process.

Cheers Vineeto

September 28 2025

KUBA: So I woke up pretty excited about this new thing to explore – actual intimacy. It clicked yesterday that essentially I conflated an emotional intimacy with actual intimacy and then wrongly thought that to get close to the other meant to wade into the waters of emotional intimacy. So whatever resistance I had towards getting close to the other, it was based in a misunderstanding.

I have re-memorated the flavour of actual intimacy, a direct experiencing of the other. In short there is nothing that could go wrong there!

And it is a delicious thing, to experience the actuality of the other, that they are here now as a flesh and blood body.

Now I am genuinely excited at this possibility, to experience the other directly.

There is this rather cliche sign that hangs upon entrances to various martial arts academies – “Leave your ego at the door”, the door to actual intimacy has a similar sign but it reads – “Leave ‘your’ self at the door”.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

This is splendid. It is indeed a delicious enterprise to experientially explore with eventually having nothing to hide – where you can allow the universe to live you more and more and let the felicitous and innocuous feelings (kindness, gentleness, consideration, friendliness, appreciation and wonder, to name but a few) flourish. Remember, you cannot avoid feelings as long as you are a feeling being – you can only channel all occurring feelings into felicitous and innocuous feelings.

Here is what Richard means by ‘naked’ –

> Richard: By the word naked I do not necessarily mean ‘no clothes’ but, rather, much more than being merely nude; I mean having nothing to hide and everything openly on display for all to see (by those capable of having both eyes open that is) before embarking on an idyllic voyage through paradise … (Long Awaited Announcement, Tooltip after “naked crew”)

Cheers Vineeto

September 29 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your reply, I had quite a day yesterday! It is all clicking into place. I will start with the weird one…

You wrote to me a while ago that upon actual freedom one sees that there has been an existential joke there all along, in that ‘I’ never existed in the first place.

I was driving yesterday and all the while intensely focused on discovering what it means to be actually intimate. There is something that Srinath wrote shortly after becoming free which I read the other day, this I had in my mind and was fascinated by it :

> Srinath: I feel like my brain has been ‘uncapped’ and the magnificent universe – as oppose to ‘self’ and ‘other’ is my preoccupation.

And it clicked then that it is as I wrote “the door to actual intimacy has a similar sign but it reads – “Leave ‘your’ self at the door”.” In that ‘I’ am those clothes which need to be shed so that this body can experience “the magnificent universe” as Srinath wrote. Thinking about it now reminds me of Geoffrey’s post too because he was referring to the same thing :

> Geoffrey: 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?” (4 February 2023)

And I can see that this is what Richard refers to by “being naked” :

> Richard: By the word naked I do not necessarily mean ‘no clothes’ but, rather, much more than being merely nude; I mean having nothing to hide and everything openly on display for all to see (by those capable of having both eyes open that is) before embarking on an idyllic voyage through paradise … (Long Awaited Announcement, Tooltip after “naked crew”)

In short it is ‘my’ very self which is the “something to hide”, and this act of ‘me’ hiding in ‘my’ hiding place is what creates this uncrossable gulf which stands in the way of actual intimacy.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

So you understand from the quotes of three actually free people that ‘I’ “stand in the way of actual intimacy” – so far so good. ‘I’ am standing in the way of actuality becoming apparent. But then you immediately follow it up with a semantic (i.e. theoretical, rational) explanation why that is so, thereby avoiding the practical action of slowly enticing ‘me’ out of ‘my’ hiding place.

KUBA: And so at one moment I had 2 words in mind – “myself” and “a self”, I realised immediately that they are referring to 2 vastly different things, one refers to a fact and the other to a belief/ illusion. In that an actually free person might very well use the words “myself” when referencing the very flesh and blood body in question, whereas “a self” is what ‘I’ am as an ontological ‘being’, a ‘thing-in-itself’.

And then there was this seeing that this ‘thing-in-itself’ is completely and utterly an illusion, in that not only does it not actually exist, it never existed in the first place. This was not ‘me’ doing the seeing but rather it was happening to ‘me’.

VINEETO: Then you attempt to overcome the gulf between the real world and the actual world by convincing yourself that “‘thing-in-itself’ is completely and utterly an illusion”. The reason I wonder if this ‘seeing’ was anything more than a red herring is because until you become actually free ‘you’ are very real, passionately (and cunningly) so. As you contemplated yourself in your next message –

> Kuba: The other thing which I saw yesterday was quite cool to put a name to, it’s something ‘I’ have done a lot, which is to “recycle” what is initially an apperceptive seeing. In that there is initially a seeing which is not of ‘my’ doing and of course this has the effect of shaking things about, in a beneficial way.

> Later on when a similar issue comes up ‘I’ will look to “recycle” that same insight and force-feed it into the new situation. But at this point it is no longer an apperceptive seeing, it is more akin to a belief, of course it does not work.

While in hindsight – after the event of self-immolation – this is seen as factual, such line of inquiry, theoretically taking ‘me’ for a mere illusion, when experiential ‘I’/ ‘me’ am a very passionate entity, does nothing to remove ‘my’ fear of death for instance, as your follow-up panic attack demonstrated. Please also bear in mind that many who meditated on ‘I’ being an illusion ended up becoming self-realized or even enlightened –

> Richard: ‘I’ passionately believe in ‘my’ existence – ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – and will defend ‘myself’ to the death (of ‘my’ body) if it is deemed necessary. All of ‘my’ instincts – the instinctive drive for biological survival – come to the fore when psychologically and psychically threatened, for ‘I’ am confused about ‘my’ presence, confounding ‘my’ survival and the body’s survival. However, ‘my’ survival being paramount is not factual, for ‘I’ need play no part any more in perpetuating physical existence (which is the primal purpose of the instinctual animal ‘self’). ‘I’ am no longer necessary at all. In fact, ‘I’ am nowadays a hindrance. With all of ‘my’ beliefs, morals, values, principles, creeds, ethics and other doctrinaire disabilities, ‘I’ am a menace to the body. ‘I’ am ready to die (to allow the body to be killed) for a cause and ‘I’ will willingly sacrifice physical existence for a ‘Noble Ideal’ ... and reap ‘my’ post-mortem reward: immortality.

> That is how real ‘I’ am ... which is why both ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul must die a real death (but not physically into the grave) to find out the actuality. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 30, 17 June 2002).

As such, the powerful instinct for survival can only be overcome by the stronger instinct of altruism –

> Richard: No, I am more making the point that only altruism – self-sacrificial humanitarianism – will provide the enormous energy necessary for ‘self’-immolation ... the instinct for individual survival is only exceeded by the instinct for group survival.

> It takes a powerful instinct to overcome a powerful instinct. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List B, James3, 28 October 2002)

What I am endeavouring to emphasise is that as long as you avoid your feelings and passions – who you are – you cannot discover the vital clues, which prevent you from whole-heartedly agreeing to ‘your’ demise –

> Kuba: It clicked yesterday that essentially I conflated an emotional intimacy with actual intimacy and then wrongly thought that to get close to the other meant to wade into the waters of emotional intimacy.

It is exactly this shying away from “emotional intimacy” which obscures the possibility for near-actual intimacy (actual intimacy only happens when there is no ‘self’). These emotions hovering in the background when getting close need to be felt in order to for you to recognize and untangle them as per the actualism method and channel them into felicitous and innocuous feelings. Only approaching intimacy when the ‘self’ is temporarily absent, or a mere rational exploration via exclusion of what is obviously still extant as a potential (else why fear and reject them) is not going to remove this obstacle to experience intimacy.

KUBA: And so for the remainder of the drive I was utterly fascinated by just how close an actual freedom is! It is so very close because the entity which needs to be extirpated does not actually exist in the first place. I understood then why (as seen by ‘me’) you have been so optimistic throughout my correspondence with you, that step towards actual freedom it is such a short step, it could happen to anyone at any time because all that happens is that an illusion is no more.

Of course somehow ‘I’ evaded the totality of this seeing because ‘I’ am writing these words. But ‘I’ have confidence in bucket-fulls now that it is for sure possible for ‘me’ to become extinct.

Later on this wonder turned into something like a mini panic attack, but I was able to ride this out rather easily this time around.

VINEETO: Here the panic attack confirms that there are still powerful feelings to look at – don’t push them away or avoid them. You will find once you don’t fight them but acknowledge them as who you are, they diminish and can be easily untangled. Treat ‘me’ as an ally rather than an antagonist, who can eventually be enticed to recognize/ fully comprehend the best solution for this body, that body and every body –

> Richard: No, blind nature lost ... the identity got precisely what ‘he’ wanted more than anything else (the blessed release into oblivion) thereby allowing intelligence to operate unimpeded. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 68d, 10 Oct 2005).

KUBA: Today things have been excellent since the morning, and now I am wondering what is it that ‘I’ am still hiding, or what is it that ‘I’ am still hanging around for. In that ‘I’ have seen that ‘I’ am not genuine and yet some part of ‘me’ wanted to stick around clearly …

When ‘I’ consider ‘my’ life, what is left of it and what ‘I’ could possibly be saving ‘myself’ for there is only 1 possibility left it seems, all other things have been resolved. It may also be the reason why ‘I’ have not been able to give all of ‘myself’ to Sonya. And it is related to the work I do as a hen party entertainer and the feelings this brings about. Those events they can get somewhat “wild” and I have always enjoyed the high of such a situation. And yet there is something not quite with all this in that ‘I’ am addicted to the high, ‘I’ prioritise the high over an actual intimacy and furthermore the whole thing it scatters ‘my’ intent to get as close as possible to the person I am closest to – Sonya.

It seems there is something here, even just typing the above out and fully admitting it to myself things have got even more wonderful, reminding me of what I experienced a while back, of the world being as if a shimmering jewel.

VINEETO: All your passions can and need to be garnered in the process of becoming actually free, i.e. all good and bad feelings channelled into felicitous feelings and appreciation, and nothing can be swept under the carpet –

> Richard: … Finally ‘I’ invited the actual by letting go of the controls and letting this moment live ‘me’. ‘I’ became the experience of the doing of this business of being alive ... no longer the ‘do-er’. Thus ‘my’ days were numbered ... ‘I’ could hardly maintain ‘myself’ ... soon ‘my’ time would come to an end. An inevitability set in and a thrilling momentum took over ... ‘my’ demise became imminent. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 7, 27 January 1999).

You still seem to be trying the all-or-nothing or the instant-transition approach. An out-from-control freedom is not to be sneezed at, in fact it is delicious. Here is the last paragraph of Geoffrey’s message you quoted above just as a reminder –

> Geoffrey: Wouldn’t you rather see for yourself?

> And the answer comes:

> “How could we set foot on any boat before it is established, in absolute and certain terms, how many masts should a proper boat have? And what color its sails? How could we leave the Society’s walls before a map is drawn, an exact and perfect map with words attached to it like statues to temples? How are we to take even a step without having in our minds the picture of every rock, tree, bird, and wind we might encounter on the way?”

> How indeed.

(4 February 2023)

Cheers Vineeto

September 29 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your reply, I agree with the main thrust of your message however just with regards to the below:

*

KUBA: And so at one moment I had 2 words in mind – “myself” and “a self”, I realised immediately that they are referring to 2 vastly different things, one refers to a fact and the other to a belief/ illusion. In that an actually free person might very well use the words “myself” when referencing the very flesh and blood body in question, whereas “a self” is what ‘I’ am as an ontological ‘being’, a ‘thing-in-itself’.

And then there was this seeing that this ‘thing-in-itself’ is completely and utterly an illusion, in that not only does it not actually exist, it never existed in the first place. This was not ‘me’ doing the seeing but rather it was happening to ‘me’.

VINEETO: Then you attempt to overcome the gulf between the real world and the actual world by convincing yourself that “‘thing-in-itself’ is completely and utterly an illusion”. The reason I wonder if this ‘seeing’ was anything more than a red herring is because until you become actually free ‘you’ are very real, passionately (and cunningly) so. As you contemplated yourself in your next message …

KUBA: There was no convincing myself, those 2 words came to mind and then the seeing happened as a result of a fascinated attention – this is the most accurate way I can describe what happened. Perhaps it appears that way as I wrote about what happened after the fact and was trying to make sense of it.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

I much appreciate your clarification. I now understand better what happened. I will rephrase my cautionary note then.

Self-immolation can not happen from a moment of apperception or from a PCE, or even several PCEs in a row, it is a definite job ‘I’ have to do, as an identity, when all of ‘me’ is in agreement with ‘my’ final demise. Hence my emphasis that ‘I’ need to be an all-inclusive ally in this task – the only and most important task of one’s life. Hence ‘your’ job involves channelling all your affective energy (your libido for instance) into felicitous and innocuous affective energy via naïve enjoyment and abundant appreciation.

KUBA: But the main thrust of what you wrote I can see – in that I have been side-stepping those uneasy feelings around intimacy. And an imagined flight into ‘actual intimacy’ is how I can kid myself that something productive is being done, whilst those feelings remain unresolved.

So it is more that I need to go “through” rather than “around”.

VINEETO: I am very pleased you can see that. It’s also useful to keep in mind to differentiate between the felicitous feelings and the ‘good’ feelings, which you called “addicted to the high”. It helps to put everything that happens on a preference basis –

> Richard: A general rule of thumb is: if it is a preference it is a self-less inclination; if it is an urge it is a self-centred desire. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, 25d, 14 January 2004)

KUBA: I am seeing where the thing with the sex drive is coming into the picture, it’s because I am unable to be intimate (due to those uneasy feelings that I have been avoiding) that I go for the high provided by the sex drive instead.

VINEETO: It’s fortuitous that you can see that “those uneasy feelings” make you “go for the high” because you already know what prevents you from being naïvely intimate. Via actualistic awareness and attentiveness you can choose, each moment, between pursuing the high, or enjoying and appreciating the sexual intimacy with the fellow human being you are closest to. With a bit of practice and courage you will find it increasingly easy to choose the latter – it is way, way more delightful, enjoyable, and naively and exquisitely intimate. When adding the appreciation of being physically intimate, with the person who chooses to spend her life with you, there is simply no comparison. Perhaps you can refresh your memory from Richard’s description

(Richard, List D, 20, 9 December 2009) how supreme sexual enjoyment needs no drive or libido to be utterly exquisite, once you dare to care.

> Richard: Put succinctly, this intimity, this most intimate of intimacies, has been beyond the ken of humankind since forever! (Richard, List D, No. 46, 7 February 2016).

It’s yours for the taking.

Cheers Vineeto

September 30 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your reply, I will consider your latest response as well as the previous one. As a side note I wanted to say how much I appreciate the way in which you have been speaking with me over the past year. Of course this process of working out how to arrive at my destiny, it involves stumbling into various dead ends, diversions and even me being outright cunning. But all these times, through hundreds of messages I have experienced nothing but goodwill and more from you. I can’t tell you just how deeply I appreciate this, and it is something I will remember for the rest of my life, just what is possible in terms of relating to one’s fellow human being.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

I do appreciate your feedback, primarily for your sake as you seem to be benefitting mightily from appreciating my comment – but also because your perspicacity makes the interaction particularly delightful when facilitating another becoming free from suffering forever.

By the way, when I mentioned “cunning” in my message yesterday (“‘you’ are very real, passionately (and cunningly) so”), I said that not as a criticism (because all identities are by instinctual necessity cunning from time to time) but as a warning to what to look out for once you recognize the pattern.

You may have already noticed how appreciation is its own reward facilitating and enhancing the enjoyment of what or who you appreciate. After all, to appreciate means

1) recognize the full worth of and
2) understand (a situation) fully; grasp the full implications of. (Oxford Dictionary).

It also means adding value to what / who you appreciate.

KUBA: I can see that this challenge of being intimate is what I have been avoiding, there is a joke I saw online that goes something like “men would rather go to war than therapy” of course neither war nor therapy is needed for the third alternative but this gets the gist of my resistance. It’s like I found it easier to turn actualism into some battle against dragons and demons as long as I could avoid this challenge of being intimate.

VINEETO: Ha, now that you have understood this (instinctual) pattern you never need to fall into this trap again.

Cheers Vineeto

October 1 2025

KUBA: Richard wrote in his journal that it is the man’s identification with authority as the ultimate and the woman’s identification with love as the ultimate which is what stands in the way of intimacy. Indeed I can see this is the case, with authority in my case.

In that there is the ‘me’ that ‘I’ assert ‘myself’ to be in relation to ‘others’ – this I can see is an immediate obstacle in the way of intimacy.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Indeed, this is the instinctual and conditioned way – but now you chose to do it the other way, the third alternative. And intimacy is not assertive but inclusive, enticing, friendly, benevolent.

> Richard: Unless one can live with just one other person, in peace and harmony twenty four hours of the day, nothing is ever going to work on any other scale’. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 25b, 19 July 2003).

Also, this snippet from Richard’s extensive articles on ‘Peasant Mentality’ caught my attention because it applies to all of one’s “relation to ‘others’” –

> Richard: Sure ... something [No. 32] recently posted is worth bearing in mind whilst you do so. Viz.:

> > • [Respondent No. 32]: ‘The cherry on the top came yesterday – whilst watching television and having these thoughts running at the back of my head, all of a sudden it struck me, that not only is this earth a ‘free-range’ place in actuality but the entire universe is like this – that there is in actuality no *ownership* of anyone/ anything over anyone/ anything else – everything in this universe is literally free – as in, has no ownership... all ownership exists in the head in the ‘real’ world’.

> (Richard, List D, No. 38, 31 May 2015).

At some point you might find it useful to familiarise yourself on the topic, perhaps in instalments, because it relates to most, if not all of one’s social identity issues and thus being “a ‘someone in relation to others’”.

Again, a “self-less inclination” in order to imitate the actual does away with the need for being someone, let alone asserting yourself and then it’s much easier to allow naiveté come to the fore which you had been shying away from.

KUBA: I can see that in my life I invested into becoming a ‘someone in relation to others’, this is ‘my’ apparent individuality. So initially when allowing intimacy it seems as if I am giving up my very individuality, yet when I look at just what this ‘individuality’ consists of, it is based in separation.

Whatever place ‘I’ have carved for ‘myself’ within the hierarchy it is actually what reinforces ‘me’ as a separative entity and gets in the way of intimacy.
I can very much see that this has been ‘my’ major gripe with getting close to others, in that ‘my’ “splendid isolation” as Devika put it, would have to go. And for ‘me’ as the ‘high achiever’ this meant giving up all that ‘I’ worked for in order to distinguish ‘myself’.

And so to consider allowing intimacy it is experienced as if ‘I’ am disarming ‘myself’, in that ‘I’ will no longer be a ‘someone in particular’ with the power and authority that this might entail.

VINEETO: It’s a strange instinctual habit (though unavoidable at first) that when encountering a new possibility of being in a different, more intimate way, one first lists all the things you might loose if you do that, which when you look at those ‘losses’ closely they are not worth anything in regards to what you really want, certainly not the time to worry about it.

Whereas you could nourish and foster a naïve excitement of a beneficial discovery operating – think of how young children are eager to learn about the world they find themselves in (until their enthusiasm gets more and more stifled and oppressed. This is the kind of naiveté albeit with adult sensibilities which is the next exploration, and don’t be discouraged when you feel a bit shy or foolish – it’s part of the package – as you quoted Richard in your next message.

Just so there is no misunderstanding, lust is not the driver of longing for intimacy –

> Richard (to № 04): “(...) it is pertinent to note that libido (Latin, meaning ‘desire’, ‘lust’, and referring to the instinctual sex drive, urge or impulse to procreate and perpetuate the species) is not, and never has been nor ever will be, the driver of the longing for intimacy, the yearning for an end to separation, the vital interest in loss of self ... nor even the means whereby altruism trumps selfism”. (Richard, List D, No. 4a, 23 June 2013).

Cheers Vineeto

October 2 2025

KUBA:

> Richard: As for your query regarding how the intimacy experience (IE) differs from an excellence experience (EE): qualitatively they are much the same, or similar, insofar as with both experiences there is a near-absence of agency – the beer rather than the doer is the operant – whereupon *naïveté has come to the fore *, such as to effect the marked diminishment of separation, and the main distinction is that the IE is more people-oriented, while the EE tends to be environmental in its scope. (…)

> For instance, the degree of intimacy experienced with minera, flora and fauna upon strolling through some botanical gardens with either near-PCE occurring – as in, with rocks, trees and birds, for example – is to the same gradation as when in a social setting such as a typical sitting room situation (as in, with ashtrays, flowers and humans, for instance) yet it is the ‘fellow human being’ element which exemplifies the already astounding diminishment of separation which ensues upon the blessed onset of this *near-innocent intimacy of naïveté. [Emphasis by Kuba]. (Richard, List D, Claudiu4, 28 January 2016)

It’s interesting because I remember a while back Claudiu wrote something which I related to experientially, it was essentially that he is able to go across that whole range of the wide and wondrous path from good, great, excellent and that perhaps something else was needed.

And it is interesting because I personally have plenty of experience in what Claudiu wrote, however to tie in Richard’s above quote – I only have plenty of experience where it concerns a progression to an excellence experience.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

It’s interesting that you should say that “I only have plenty of experience where it concerns a progression to an excellence experience”. It seems that your focus has primarily been chasing extraordinary experiences, wonderful in themselves, but have not contemplating to up-level your default state of happiness to the next level as Richard explained –

> Richard: And, of course, once one does get the knack of this, one up-levels ‘feeling good’, as a bottom line each moment again, to ‘feeling happy and harmless’ ... and after that to ‘feeling excellent’. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive).

And he explains it in detail in the last article he wrote –

> Richard: Furthermore, blind nature has provided what the Positive Psychology Network, and the ilk, refer to variously as an “affective adaptation set-point”, or a “hedonic adaptation set-point”, or a “treadmill adaptation set-point” to designate the observed tendency of humans to quickly return to a relatively stable level of well-being despite major positive or negative events or life changes. The process of affective adaptation is often conceived as a treadmill since no matter how hard a person tries, in their life-long pursuit of happiness, they will inevitably return to the same neutral set-point after a significantly emotional life event. (Richard, Personal Webpage, Various, Marvelling How Well-Equipped Human Beings Are).

Thus when you start with feeling good as your starting default set-point, already better than the more common feeling-neutral state of most people, you can still up-level it to a default set-point of feeling great, feeling excellent and then, with allowing the hidden-away-during-puberty childhood naïveté, you can make being out-from-control your default feeling state.

KUBA: And in fact that was always my primary focus, of course intimacy with others was explored here and there but never as a sole focus. So that when I present this same thing to myself as a question of “do I have plenty of experience travelling the gradations of intimacy all the way to an intimacy experience”? Then the answer is a big fat no.

So it seems there is plenty to discover here still. And the benefit of the focus on the “fellow human being” element is that ‘I’ am not doing it merely for ‘myself’.

VINEETO: Well, what exciting and delicious adventure you are embarking upon now that intimacy has come into focus. Here again you can explore the levelling up in grades of intimacy as detailed elsewhere. (Richard, Abditorium, Intimacy Scale).

There is a whole new ‘world’ of sensuousness and naïve intimacy to discover. Here is my favourite of Richard’s stories to give you a taste of what is possible. (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Intimacy).

Cheers Vineeto

October 2 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

I will go in bits because there is a lot in your message which clicks.

I really like how you wrote this – “intimacy is not assertive but inclusive, enticing, friendly, benevolent”. And with authority ‘I’ am doing exactly that – asserting ‘myself’. Asserting ‘myself’ immediately cuts the possibility of intimacy at the root, this is exactly the ‘edge’ I was talking about.

> Richard: Unless one can live with just one other person, in peace and harmony twenty four hours of the day, nothing is ever going to work on any other scale’. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 25b, 19 July 2003).

This clicked in such an obvious way, I think it’s because of what you wrote about intimacy not being assertive. In that when I allow intimacy with another then I cannot help but take them into consideration, whereas when I assert myself there is an absence of caring and consideration. But I never saw this before, that by asserting myself I am getting in the way of intimacy and therefore peace and harmony. It can be such a small step too that I missed it in the past, where I assert myself and turn the situation into my way vs their way, now it’s a battle and peace and harmony is nowhere to be found.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

It’s cute because you yourself gave me the clue –

> Kuba: In that there is the ‘me’ that ‘I’ assert ‘myself’ to be in relation to ‘others’ – this I can see is an immediate obstacle in the way of intimacy.
> I can see that in my life I invested into becoming a ‘someone in relation to others’, this is ‘my’ apparent individuality. So initially when allowing intimacy it seems as if I am giving up my very individuality, yet when I look at just what this ‘individuality’ consists of, it is based in separation.

Remember, whenever you are confronted with two (affective) non-reconcilable alternatives – in this case being assertive or powerless as a male identity – there is always a third alternative which you usually only discover when you are back to feeling good. This particular third alternative now allows you to discover more of imitating actuality – consideration, caring, closeness, naiveté (first experienced as vulnerability) and, of course, sensuousness.

As such it is not “my way vs their way” but the way which enables intimacy for both of you.

KUBA: I never thought to question assertiveness, in fact I even remember as a kid in school being taught how it is so very important…

Also to tie it into Richard’s quote about preference, if I am asserting myself it means that I have already made it serious, which means it is no longer a self-less inclination, it is now a self-centred urge. This is exactly how I have observed conversations turn into arguments too.

VINEETO: Yes, you will be surprised how much effect it has on your whole outlook in life when you deliberately and consistently replace any self-centred urge which occurs with what is to happen as just being a preference. This quote from Richard might give you encouragement –

> Richard: An anecdote might best illustrate what I mean: many years ago my then-companion Devika would oft-times say to me that I should stand up for myself and not let peoples (such as you describe) push me around ... indeed, it was one of the reasons she created a psychic force-field in her psyche (which is, of course, the human psyche) so as to protect what she saw, experientially, back then as innocence personified.

> (She was wont to exclaim, on occasion, how ‘Richard brings something marvellous – something absolutely wonderful – into the world and yet everyone deposits ordure on it’ ... albeit not expressed quite so politely as that).

> What she did not realise – except during a PCE of course – is that innocence itself (the genuine article and not the so-called innocence of children) requires no affective vibe/ psychic current protection whatsoever and, therefore, in vain would I explain to her that, in everyday situations such as you report (where the whole point of the exercise is to walk out the door with the goodies which those in a position of power and control can either dispense or withhold), I had no interest whatsoever in futilely striving to win a puny ego-battle with some officious power-tripper but, instead, walk away with the said goodies each time. (Richard, List D, No. 32, 7 July 2013).

> Richard: … the counsel I consistently offered to Devika – vis-à-vis her insistence on ‘standing up for oneself’ to all and sundry – came from feeling-being ‘Richard’ (i.e., from ‘his’ success) and not from this flesh-and-blood body typing these words. (Richard, List D, Srid2, 14 January 2016).

KUBA: I can’t believe I’ve never seen this, that the very action of asserting myself is rotten.

VINEETO: It was obviously the perfect time to see it, now that you are ready to put it into action.

KUBA: It makes sense now, there is a seriousness and a forcefulness to it, it has aggression at its root.

VINEETO: Indeed and a ‘man’ has to be aggressive or so you are taught. You discovered the way to channel the affective energy of aggression into affective felicitous and innocuous action.

It’s all so marvellous.

Cheers Vineeto

October 3 2025

VINEETO: It’s interesting that you should say that “I only have plenty of experience where it concerns a progression to an excellence experience”. It seems that your focus has primarily been chasing extraordinary experiences, wonderful in themselves, but have not contemplating to up-level your default state of happiness to the next level as Richard explained –

> Richard: And, of course, once one does get the knack of this, one up-levels ‘feeling good’, as a bottom line each moment again, to ‘feeling happy and harmless’ ... and after that to ‘feeling excellent’. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive).

KUBA: Hmm yes I have to admit that this is the case, even yesterday I was already thinking about this PCE I had 9 months ago where I glimpsed actual Sonya and how utterly extraordinary it was – and I have only just begun looking at intimacy!

I can see that it would be quite different if there was not a neutral to go back to. Whereas right now it’s like oscillating between neutral and extraordinary experiences. Like I am running from something… I am running from that in-between where ongoing feeling good can take place. It’s weird, actually I don’t quite know what it is. Even as soon as feeling good happens there is this inclination to take it into something extraordinary as opposed to just letting the feeling good sit there, feeling good.

I remember talking with Felix about this kind of oscillating, and it’s weird, it’s almost like being addicted to that up and down motion. Perhaps because if ‘I’ just allow feeling good to happen then ‘I’ have nothing else to do.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

You have just revealed why you never want to arrive at your destination. Your concern is that there would be nothing to do but enjoying and appreciating simply being alive – no excitement, no thrill, no ups and downs. Do the variation of oscillating feelings present themselves as the true meaning of life to you?

KUBA: I just observed it now, there is feeling good which happens and there is this almost fanatic need to ‘go somewhere with it’, like it has to be the launching pad to the next extraordinary experience, as opposed to just luxuriating in this feeling good for its own sake.

Ha so what seems to be the way to go, for now at least – is to just have feeling good without moving in either direction, this in itself is interesting to allow, not what I would normally do …

VINEETO: Again, this is where the quote from Richard I presented in my last message gives a clue in which ‘direction’ to move –

> Richard: A general rule of thumb is: if it is a preference it is a self-less inclination; if it is an urge it is a self-centred desire. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, 25d, 14 January 2004)

So far you seem to prefer obeying the commands of the self-centred-inspired urge for excitement. Is it a lack of continuous attentiveness or are you perhaps fooling yourself that becoming actually free from the human condition is your number one priority?

Whatever your predisposition, as an intelligent human being you can make a determined choice to give up the addiction to being ‘me’ with lots of elation, agitation, intensity … and the inevitable suffering when the ‘high’ subsides.

> James: The addiction to being ‘me’ is stronger because it always wins out.

> Richard: If ‘I’ am to be honest ‘I’ will have to acknowledge that the addiction to being ‘me’ has only always won out so far because so far ‘I’ have always sought escape from being ‘me’ via a path that ‘I’ know will not deliver the goods. (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Addiction).

Cheers Vineeto

October 3 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

Thank you for your replies, there is so much here I don’t know where to start!

Well maybe with the objection I just had whilst reading the quote about Richard’s innocence and how others would “deposit ordure on it”. I have certainly observed this with the writings of all the actually free people, in that they cannot ‘bite’. I remember even some discussions on here between Srinath and Claudiu, and although there was perhaps aspects of peasant mentality which were displayed in Srinath’s writings there was still no possibility for him to ever ‘bite’. Which of course this is incredible because it means that peace is guaranteed.

But something does not sit well with ‘me’ here, in that ‘I’ clearly still have some investment into ‘standing up for myself’, in that it is not just about walking away with the goodies but it is about winning the ego-battle.

And it seems it is because I cannot allow the other to continue on with their modus operandi. That yes I understand that I can walk away with the goodies and yet in the process of walking away with the goodies I don’t want to re-affirm the modus operandi of the other as being correct, sensible etc.

I will give an example, the other day I was driving out of the area near my house which has a 20mph speed limit, I got to a junction and I looked to see a car quite a distance ahead and so made the judgement to pull out. Now had the car been going at anywhere near 20mph I would have had sufficient space to come out, and yet because they were clearly going way past the limit the car ended up being rather close to me and beeping at me. So this was just a complete reversal of accountability, in that the speeding driver is beeping at someone for a problem that only exists because they are themselves going way past the speed limit.

So my response in this situation was to slow down to exactly 20mph so the speeding driver would be forced to follow me at the correct speed. So it is like trying to change the other, but then on the other hand how can I allow someone to be rewarded for acting in such a way? (2 Oct 2025 20.59)

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

You are presenting lots of reasons for your righteous indignancy but it is nevertheless an affective righteous anger. No wonder you hesitate putting everything on a ‘it doesn’t matter’ basis – righteous anger when slighted is such a self-enhancing feeling. (Btw, the real-world solution of pacifism is not the solution either).

Here is what you have written to Chrono, only two hours before the above message (2 Oct 2025 18.50) –

> Kuba: Reading your post I had a similar experience this morning, that a place exists where everything is in its rightful place, which is amazing to say the least. But then how ‘I’ experience ‘myself’ is never like that, no matter how hard ‘I’ try ‘I’ can never be right. And I am wondering now is it precisely because ‘I’ am forever out of time. ‘I’ am all those things which are not actual, not happening now and so ‘I’ can never experience life in that manner – where everything is in its rightful place.

> But the interesting thing is that the normal way to approach this feeling is to try to correct things, perhaps by pursuing a moral excellence, but when that “flicker” happens there is nothing at all that had to change, other than ‘me’ going into abeyance. So it is that everything is already in its rightful place now, the universe does not have to change 1 bit.

> So it is like Richard wrote in that the last bit will always elude correcting, ‘I’ cannot be made right, ‘my’ very ‘being’ is forever out of time. Which I have previously seen this as a curse – in that ‘I’ can’t fix ‘myself’, not to the degree of what the PCE demonstrates. But actually it’s a blessing, in that what the PCE shows, of everything being correct, this is already always the case and it is ‘me’ that simply has to disappear.

What happened to that experience “that everything is already in its rightful place now” and all the other experiences you reported which inform you of the same perfect actuality. It seems that in your steeple-chasing modus operandi for extra-ordinary experiences you omitted to establish a golden clew to pure intent, which could inform and aid you when you are affectively feeling, and justifying, indignation about other people’s wrongs and thus forgetting about your commitment to being happy and harmless, if it was ever there in the first place.

Here is how Richard responded to a similar situation –

> RESPONDENT: When I feel righteously angry I consciously want to go back to ‘feeling good’, but since I feel justified in my anger, it feels good to be angry, making it difficult to get back to ‘feeling good’.

> RICHARD: One of the major issues the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago attended to very early in the piece was the indignation – ‘anger excited by a sense of wrong, or by injustice, wickedness, or misconduct; righteous anger’ (Oxford Dictionary) – which had dogged him from almost as early as ‘he’ could remember (‘he’ was often moved to indignancy because of injustice/ unfairness whilst still in grade school for instance) as righteousness, being oh-so-readily justifiable, is such an insidious feeling.

> RESPONDENT: To me, corrupt has always meant, by definition, being evil. But how do I see this anger as corrupt when I accept that there is no good and evil?

> RICHARD: Just for starters: try seeing how the (readily justifiable) righteous anger, with all its feel-good virtuosity, precludes one from enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive – the only moment one is ever alive – through being as happy and as harmless as is humanly possible via felicitously/ innocuously feeling good (rather than virtuously feeling good) ... instead of seeing righteousness as corrupt (and therefore, by a definition, evil) which depravity is further complicated by choosing to accept there is no good and evil even though the real-world, the world that maybe 6.0 billion peoples live in, is rife with it.

> RESPONDENT: Most things that are corrupt can be seen as survival strategies, which means they could be seen as neither good or evil.

> RICHARD: Indeed they could ... yet it is undeniable that maybe 6.0 billion peoples nurse malice and sorrow – and thus the antidotal pacifiers love and compassion – in their bosom.

> RESPONDENT: How can I make myself see corruption when I don’t see things as good or evil?

> RICHARD: Perhaps if I were to put it this way? Now that you have neatly solved the existential dilemma which has bothered theologians/ metaphysicians for centuries (simply by redefining good and evil out of existence) ... where are you at?

> Here is a clue:

> > • [Respondent]: ‘... I feel righteously angry (...).

> (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 79, 9 February 2005).

*

> Richard: As a matter of related interest ... one of the most persistent forms of anger is indignation (or righteous anger/ justifiable anger): it can be eradicated rather simply by the realisation that its raison d’être – a guardian against injustice, unjustness, unfairness, inequality (partiality, discrimination, and so on) – is as much a human invention as those concepts it defends ... justice, justness, fairness, equality (impartiality, indiscrimination, and so on). (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 66, 27 April 2005a).

*

> Richard: ... the term ‘cognitive dissonance’ would be better described as a ‘feeling-fed cognitive dissonance’ as it is not just a mental blockage which causes people to be unable to grasp innovative things that are to their own advantage and to fight so hard to retain the existing belief systems which are inimical to their welfare.
> It is the strangest of incongruities in regards to human pertinacity that peoples will invent reasons and struggle to maintain a state of affairs that is detrimental to their own advancement ... even those conditions which enslave them. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 30, 22 October 2003).

Perhaps you can now begin to understand more comprehensively why your identity so strenuously objects to agreeing to ‘your’ demise despite frequent experiential knowledge of the purity and perfection of the actual world.

Cheers Vineeto

October 3 2025

KUBA:

> Richard: The question to ask oneself is: why does one require any nervous stimuli at all? Why does one endlessly seek excitement? It is an adventure and a delight to simply be alive, when one is free from the ‘I’ that has taken control of one’s body; the hunt for the “thrills and spills” that is so endemic in the real world is over. It is ‘I’ who is easily bored, incessantly pursuing excitement. As ‘I’ am not actually here, one needs to feel that ‘I’ am real … that one is “alive”. The body can be persuaded to produce quite an array of chemicals; a veritable cocktail is available to the insidious entity that has taken up psychological and psychic residence within. Whereas I am already alive for I am actual. I am never bored, because being here now as-I-am is an escapade in itself. (Richard’s Journal, Article 25, pg 181)

This explains ‘my’ addiction quite well, the addiction to excitement is because it makes ‘me’ feel ‘alive’, the “thrill of the search” provides the buzz ‘I’ am looking for in order to feel that ‘I’ exist.

I can see this, that it is because ‘I’ do not actually exist that ‘I’ need some “synthetic assistance” let’s say, and the powerful buzz of excitement is like the best hit for ‘me’. It is like a direct and raw wave of affect to make ‘me’ feel that ‘I’ am real, and this is very addictive, how on earth to overcome such an addiction.

Well they say the first step is admitting that one is addicted so there is that. But then there is the gratification that the ‘hit’ provides and the fact that ‘I’ enjoy it. It seems it must be about seeing what this addiction is doing as a totality.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

As an addiction is an acquired habit, often indulged in for many years, to shed this addiction takes a bit more than “seeing what this addiction is doing as a totality” to be done with it once and for all. I suggest patient and diligent application of the actualism method and each time you are tempted by the affective thrills, recognize the pattern and sensibly decline. Given the addictive nature of feelings it requires more an ongoing attention to your feelings and declining consequent behaviour rather than a one-off cognitive turn-about.

Cheers Vineeto

October 6 2025

KUBA: Ok so got some movement on this front, at least the indignation part for sure. I realised that what is needed is not merely looking at various concepts such as justice or fairness but an altogether different paradigm, the clue being in the word benevolence. Basically it is about stepping out of that old way altogether, of right and wrong, punishment and justice, score-keeping, expectations etc.

With benevolence there is no calculation to decide if one is deserving of beneficence, there is only beneficence, rooted in fellowship regard, and this is just a far better way of living, actually it’s very charming.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Indeed. There is an actual benevolence as well as equity and parity, magnanimity and generosity – nothing is missing when any of the rigid real-world principles and virtuous/ sinful concepts are being abandoned (as long as you live by the legal laws and social protocols of the country you are residing in). Besides –

> Richard: There is only one person in this whole wide world that one can change ... myself. This is the most important point to understand thoroughly, otherwise one endlessly tries to change the other ... and as there are billions of ‘others’ it would be a life-time task with still no success at the end. If one grasps that the way to peace-on-earth is by changing oneself – and oneself only – then all of one’s interactions with others will undergo a radical transformation. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive).

Isn’t it a wonderful and innocuous aim to become free from animosity and anguish –

> Richard: When the psychological ego and psychic soul willingly relinquish their sovereignty and take their leave, the senses can act in the optimum. Just as when a normal person becomes blind and all their other senses are heightened, so too does the abdication result in a phenomenal increase in the pleasurable and luxurious sensitivity of being a corporeal body in this very physical world. The resultant benevolence produces easy good-will, kindness and altruism, for one is living in a friendly world … made all the more amiable because of the innate munificence and magnanimity of the purity of the perfection of the infinitude of the universe as is evidenced only at this moment in time. (Richard’s Journal, Article 34, pg 252)

KUBA: There is some movement on the thrills part too although it is not resolved. My mum the other day told me of some old stories when I was young and I got some new roller blades. I actually skipped school the following day and rode right up to the school entrance during lunchtime to show off. Now she mentioned this story as part of a point she was making that she has always nurtured my individuality. However I see now that what she was actually nurturing was licentiousness. And indeed I have come to associate license with freedom, and freedom to be ‘me’ as ‘I’ am is nothing at all like what the words actual freedom refer to. So it is like I am untangling this slowly, of this weird association where ‘I’ have been habitually giving free reign to self-centred urges and thinking that this means freedom. But the ‘freedom’ of licentiousness is more like anarchy, and this is where the hook is, ‘I’ get to operate without bounds and there is this thrill associated with it.

Actually I should probably clarify that my actual behaviour certainly does not verge into anything like anarchy or antisocial behaviour, but that is what the energy of those thrills is all about.

VINEETO: Even though you don’t act it out, this is a good insight to never confuse freedom with licentiousness. Anarchy is born of resentment against the restrictions of one’s social identity (and as such merely the other side of the coin), whereas benevolence and magnanimity inherent to the perfection and purity of the infinite universe, experienced as pure intent, allows one to safely dismantle all the rules and concepts of the social identity, one by one.

KUBA: It’s funny because yesterday I wrote that I need to decide what I want to do with my life, but the truth of it is that I already know, actually it’s not even an option that it could go any other way than towards the ending of the human condition. But this modus operandi of giving reign to self-centred urges, this is a major stumbling block in that it is impossible to be happy and harmless whilst it remains. In fact, to link it back to benevolence, this is like trying to mix oil and water, to give reign to self-centred urges and to be benevolent is literally 2 different directions.

Yesterday as I was working a hen do this really clicked on a deep level, the group had such a great time that they were naively jumping about and squealing by the end of it all. And it was so lovely to observe this, but all throughout this particular job I was well aware of how ‘my’ self-centred urges would only dirty this and so they played no part. When I got back in my car I could really see that these are 2 different directions to travel now, that if I want to enable more of what I saw during that job then ‘my’ self-centred urges will have to be left behind.

VINEETO: Excellent – now with this unambiguous clarity you can act, i.e. set out to whittle away at the addiction for excitement, thrill and buzz with an ongoing affective attentiveness, whenever and wherever the temptation arises –

> Richard: And thus was it that ‘attentiveness’ became actualism’s designator for a particular tool for facilitating the actualism method – as distinct from and contrasted to ‘mindfulness’ being the buddhistic method, in and of itself, even unto secularised versions – so as to further distinguish the fact of the actualism method being so totally different to anything else (or, put another way, that the buddhistic ‘mindfulness’ method is another ball-game entirely).

> (Please note: once it becomes second-nature – a non-verbal attitude to life; a wordless approach to living – an intuitive awareness, as in an affective monitoring of mood and temperament, dispenses with that initial diligence and perseverance). [emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, Andrew, 28 February 2016).

It is such an exciting adventure in itself to be a pioneer in pursuing something so new to human consciousness – what other thrill do you need!

Cheers Vineeto

October 19 2025

KUBA: Hi Vineeto,

> Vineeto: When an intense feeling such as the fear of extinction is encountered for the first time, it sometimes requires an affective exploration to identify what it is really about before one can see the silliness of this existential fear and be able to return to feeling good for further contemplation. Besides, this example of the affective exploration into stuckness, fear and the addiction of being ‘me’ could result in the courage to proceed for James or other readers via garnering sufficient pure intent.
> Similarly, your own affective experiences of “limerence” revealed that you are “addicted to being it”, that there was “a ‘good’ side where I felt fulfilled …” and “the dream of ‘love’”.

> However, there is no point in going into these limerences once you know what they are about or into the feelings of the fear of ending ‘me’ again and again unless ‘I’ am prepared, via discovering and dissolving the last bastions of ‘me’ objecting to ‘my’ demise, especially when you already found out that you “would go in circles” [Emphasis by Kuba]. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Chrono, 18 October 2025)

So this is how I am experiencing this, and in fact this is precisely what happened yesterday. That ‘I’ have set up a base camp somewhere on the periphery of normalcy, periodically ‘I’ will take a daring outing away from the base camp and “up the mountain” let’s say. And what I found yesterday is that there is a tether that connects ‘me’ back to base camp, that deep down ‘I’ know ‘I’ am only going to go so far, scout out the territory from what ‘I’ can see and then return to what appears as the warmth of the known.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Good, you have come to appreciate the limitations of taking special excursions from the “base camp” – what I had called “your steeple chasing modus operandi” in an earlier message –

> Vineeto: What happened to that experience “that everything is already in its rightful place now” and all the other experiences you reported which inform you of the same perfect actuality. It seems that in your steeple-chasing modus operandi for extra-ordinary experiences you omitted to establish a golden clew to pure intent, which could inform and aid you when you are affectively feeling, and justifying, indignation about other people’s wrongs and thus forgetting about your commitment to being happy and harmless, if it was ever there in the first place. [Emphasis in original]. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba10, 3 October 2025a)

Perhaps you could consider as your next practical step upgrading to camp 2, the “Advanced Base Camp” in Everest-climbing lingo. Their final summit push is from Camp 4, being in the “death zone” where bottled oxygen is essential (Uphill Mountaineering). ;)

For actualists the next step from ‘base camp’ is the “pragmatic, methodological, still-in-control/ same-way-of-being virtual freedom” –

> Peter: This process, if undertaken with a sincere intent, will inevitably lead to a state of a pragmatic virtual freedom. One then goes to bed in the evening knowing that one has had a virtually perfect day, and knowing that tomorrow, without doubt, will also be a virtually perfect day. Unless one is willing to contemplate being happy and harmless, free of malice and sorrow, 99% of the time – then forget the whole business. One is then merely aiming for some ‘pie in the sky’, some miracle event to ‘make it all better’. (…) A pragmatic virtual freedom is available for everyone and anyone who has the sincere intent to be happy and harmless. (Library, Virtual Freedom).

KUBA: I experienced this yesterday as the variations of the fear of extinction, or perhaps of abandoning humanity, something like leaving behind all that is known and familiar and setting off into exile, into an unknown land. But the thing is I have experienced these feelings before, it’s not like any of this was new to me, which means I have travelled this 2 way journey before.

VINEETO: So then since yesterday I thought that it is this “tether back to base camp” which needs to be examined, because it will never allow me to set off on the genuine one way journey to ‘my’ extinction. So this is what pricked my ears when you wrote :

> Vineeto: However, there is no point in going into these limerences once you know what they are about or into the feelings of the fear of ending ‘me’ again and again unless ‘I’ am prepared, via discovering and dissolving the last bastions of ‘me’ objecting to ‘my’ demise, especially when you already found out that you “would go in circles”.

Sometimes one needs to go round in circles a few times to realize what is happening, and perhaps this time your realisation is sufficiently firm for taking action and do something practical and down-to-earth about it.

Upgrading your present situation to pragmatic virtual freedom will give you a new confidence that being increasingly felicitous and innocuous (happy and harmless) is possible to live every day, in every situation – provided you sincerely and honestly leave no stone untouched. It means trying it out in real life what you often may have only rationally or conceptually understood but not yet applied in everyday living.

To add another plug for Virtual Freedom, which ‘Peter’ and ‘Vineeto’ lived and documented until the epoch-changing events in 2009/2010, here is how Richard summed it up –

> Richard: What Peter has been doing, in conjunction with Vineeto, is what he characterised as beating down all the long, dry grass (and every single bit of persistent regrowth) leading up to and obscuring the gate in the fence separating it from the greener pastures on the other side.

> As such they have both done a sterling service for their fellow human beings – having written prolifically about it all whilst they were doing it (rather than after the fact from memory) – in ensuring an in-control virtual freedom is now possible for any normal person/normal couple simply by applying the actualism method – as distinct from the actualism process – in their everyday life (both at work and at leisure).

> In other words, they have both shown and documented the way how a virtual freedom which does not require being out-from-control – let alone something peculiar happening in the nape of the neck – can spread exponentially around the globe without disrupting civilisation (as a bloody revolution would, for example, in a futile attempt to change society).

> I will refer you to a previous exchange of ours. Viz.:

> > • [Richard]: ‘The only way societies will radically alter is by radical change on an individual level as it is individuals collectively who make society what it is.
> > And this is where actualism is pivotal as it must be borne in mind that the way children are raised is in accord with the prevailing wisdom of the time (currently in the form of values/ principles and morals/ ethics per favour the trickle-down effect of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment).

> > Thus it is the flow-on effect of the words and writings of an actual freedom from the human condition – as in practically anyone now being able to be as happy and as harmless (virtually free of both malice and sorrow and their antidotal pacifiers love and compassion) as is humanly possible – which is the most probable and realistic prospect, in the foreseeable future, for all of humankind ... and which is why I stress the importance of a virtual freedom.

> > Although that is, of course, according to the current situation; the moment another becomes actually free from the human condition (especially if it be a female) that scenario may very well undergo a profound reappraisal. (Richard, List D, No. 12, 27 Nov 2009).

> [...] They both have my highest regard for establishing not just a wide path for their fellow human beings to travel, if they so choose, but a wide and wondrous one with all the otherwise rank undergrowth on either side gentrified as well. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, No. 12, 12 Dec 2009).

Should you actually decide to do take the path to a pragmatic virtual freedom you might find out, experientially and over time, that your present assessment of “experientially ‘I’ cannot see yet that this is the best course of action to take, for everybody concerned” is incorrect. Besides, if Richard and myself had made the assessment you made we wouldn’t have this conversation right now.

KUBA: Richard summarised the experience of that “tether back to base camp” in his journal (article 9) :

> Richard: It requires great fortitude and finesse to fly in the face of the social commandment: to remain a member of society at all costs. There is a pull of loyalties; old allegiances to relatives, friends, colleagues and acquaintances will tug at the heart, pulling one back, urging one to remain where one is. Loyalty, however, is a two-edged sword for it can cut two ways; there is the new allegiance to the purity of the peak experience, pulling one forward relentlessly, for herein lies release … and genuine peace-on-earth. The pull in two directions can be excruciating. On the one side is the sense of belonging, the warmth of relationship and the being acknowledged by the peoples one has always known. There is the loss of all that, with its ensuing grief – and guilt – at leaving them all behind. On the other side there is the knowledge that one will have reached one’s destiny, that one will have that perennial cheerful contentment with life as-it-is subtly buzzing inside one, and that the actuality of peace-on-earth and prosperity for all humankind is now possible. All this one knows, with a crystal-clear certainty, from the perfection of one’s PCE. (Richard’s Journal, Article Nine)

Actually this feeling I experienced yesterday it reminded me of experiences in the past where a relationship would break down, and there would be this deeply sorrowful feeling, that this person with whom I have been so close for all those years would now disappear never to be met again – this is the flavour of that ‘tether’.

VINEETO: When you look closely and sincerely, “that ‘tether’” is not just one ‘tether’, it is a whole bundle of tethers, and you cannot cut this bundle in one swoop (else you would have done that by now). This is where the pragmatic virtual freedom comes into play, you examine each tether (whenever it interferes with your being happy and harmless every moment of the day), perhaps multiple times until it dissolves for good, by finding it to be another facet of being ‘self’-centric, ‘me’-enhancing. (Please note, being less ‘self’-centric is not putting the other before oneself but having a preference to imitate actuality rather than ‘me’ being the centre of all thoughts and actions.) In this way ‘I’ become thinner and thinner, more felicitous and more gentle, magnanimous, benevolent, kind, tender and naive until ‘self’-centricity disappears altogether.

You might find a whole range of aspects of life where you automatically still follow the old paradigm of principles and concepts which now need re-examining, aspects of your social identity and of dreams of sudden redemption. Remember, actual freedom is new, down-to-earth, non-spiritual and actual. If any your many insights have not changed your day-to-day behaviour, towards yourself and others, they still need to be actualised. And there is not even the excuse that ‘self’-immolation is too much of a tall order because this is not required for living a pragmatic still-in-control virtual freedom.

> Richard: Human beings eat corporeal food, drink physical water and breathe molecular air, in order to be here, to be alive at all. Humans are here only because of sexual intercourse: the joining of the spermatozoa and the ova … there is no other way of becoming a human being and living in this world. All this living is necessary in order to discuss these very matters. One has to just try putting a spring clip upon one’s nose and a large piece of sticking plaster over one’s mouth for a few minutes to discover what actuality is. As one rips the plaster from one’s mouth and gulps in that sweet and actual air, one knows that one is certainly here on earth, living this life. And this earth, this life, is already perfect ... if only one will start living it instead of waiting in vain – and sorrow – for some Supernatural miracle to occur. (Richard’s Journal, Article Nine)

And –

> Richard: What I have is a complete confidence in is the purity and perfection of the infinitude of this universe which, to my never-ending delight, brings about serendipity.

> What one discovers, time and again, is that the personal boundaries that one feels so safely protected by, are made up of ‘my’ accrued beliefs as to who ‘I’ am. This is ‘my’ outline, as it were, shaped by other people’s description of ‘me’ … a construct which gives ‘me’ asylum in each different group into which ‘I’ wish to enter. Yet the outline of this construct creates, simultaneously, an enormous distance between ‘me’ and the world outside. [Emphasis added]. (Richard’s Journal, Article Nine)

Cheers Vineeto

October 19 2025

KUBA: Richard summarised the experience of that “tether back to base camp” in his journal (article 9) :

> Richard: It requires great fortitude and finesse to fly in the face of the social commandment: to remain a member of society at all costs. There is a pull of loyalties; old allegiances to relatives, friends, colleagues and acquaintances will tug at the heart, pulling one back, urging one to remain where one is. Loyalty, however, is a two-edged sword for it can cut two ways; there is the new allegiance to the purity of the peak experience, pulling one forward relentlessly, for herein lies release … and genuine peace-on-earth. The pull in two directions can be excruciating. On the one side is the sense of belonging, the warmth of relationship and the being acknowledged by the peoples one has always known. There is the loss of all that, with its ensuing grief – and guilt – at leaving them all behind. On the other side there is the knowledge that one will have reached one’s destiny, that one will have that perennial cheerful contentment with life as-it-is subtly buzzing inside one, and that the actuality of peace-on-earth and prosperity for all humankind is now possible. All this one knows, with a crystal-clear certainty, from the perfection of one’s PCE. (Richard’s Journal, Article Nine)

The additional aspect of this is something like this :

That as ‘humanity’ ‘we’ are all huddled around that fire and suffering, and within that intrinsic suffering ‘we’ have made various bonds which would soothe (but never eliminate) the suffering – that is the bond of ‘humanity’, the relationships of the various identities to each other. And from within that bond, it is experienced as a selfish act, to proceed towards this new land and to leave all those ‘others’ still huddling together in the land of lament.

I understand intellectually that this is the exact mistake made by buddha, that ‘he’ would not proceed towards extinction until all ‘others’ were saved and as a result ‘humanity’ has persisted and suffering has persisted.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

What you overlooked in your analysis of ‘humanity’ –

Abandoning ‘humanity’ means ‘you’ abandon ‘your’ own humanity, which is ‘you’, the identity, who you have previously recognized as being rotten to the core. It means abandoning ‘your’ social identity, which ties you to everyone else’s appraisal, everyone’s praise and criticism, ‘your’ loyalty to kin, country and class, ‘your’ identity as a man, son, husband, employer, member of class, race, club, religio-spiritual and political identity and all the other groups you feel loyalty, connection and/or obligation to. For instance –

> Kuba: I can’t believe I’ve never seen this, that the very action of asserting myself is rotten.

> Vineeto: It was obviously the perfect time to see it, now that you are ready to put it into action.

> Kuba: It makes sense now, there is a seriousness and a forcefulness to it, it has aggression at its root.

> Vineeto: Indeed and a ‘man’ has to be aggressive or so you are taught. You discovered the way to channel the affective energy of aggression into affective felicitous and innocuous action. (2 October 2025)

Do you now prefer to retain your aggression, your desire (for the sake of the ‘highs’), your fear and nurture, your territoriality, your sense of belonging and, above all, your social identity? You experience, as a member of ‘humanity’, it being selfish to abandon humanity but you don’t even consider looking at it with pure intent, where the purity and perfection of the actual world is plain to see and yours for the taking – for the benefit of your body, that body and everybody.

This is what fear does to you – it defends mischief and misery and clouds your mind.

KUBA: But it is this unilateral and extreme action which is required which ‘I’ cannot quite accept, that this is the only way out, the way to end the ‘land of lament’ is for the next and then next identity to become extinct.

VINEETO: Are you looking for a new “way out” which leaves the identity intact?

KUBA: But it is that final and irreversible abandoning of ‘others’ that ‘I’ am not willing to contemplate. It still seems selfish to ‘me’, how could ‘I’ leave ‘them’ ‘back there’ suffering.

VINEETO: What you are really saying is that you rather remain an identity, rotten to the core, than demonstrating by action that it is possible to live totally free from malice and sorrow, blithe and benign for 24hr a day, every day for the rest of your life, for everyone’s encouragement and confirmation that this is possible.

What you are also suggesting is to do nothing about all the wars and murders and child abuse, the lies and hypocrisy and treachery arising from the human condition (which is humanity in action) because it is supposedly “selfish to ‘me’”. “Back there” they are suffering already and there is nothing ‘you’ can do about it because you are, as ‘you’ are, still contributing to their suffering.

This is what fear does to you, the fear to do something unchartered, unmapped, unprecedented for ‘you’. You forget what you then “deeply and passionately care about” back in March –

> Kuba: In short what ‘I’ deeply and passionately care about is to be innocence personified. To live that which the PCE demonstrated and in doing so to offer (and demonstrate) a solid alternative to the “hypocrisy, the lack of equity, the ignorant irresponsibility and the harm that was being done by all”. This innocence is what I (and I am sure others on this forum) detect from you and if I had not experienced it first hand I would probably have believed it to be impossible. (8 Mar 2025)

It’s ok, it is a natural reaction when you try to break through before you are ready – though it means that your arguments don’t make sense. It’s too early to even contemplate it, you could go to the “advanced base camp” first, then “camp 3”. (Uphill Mountaineering) Plenty of time to worry later. There is still an in-control virtual freedom available even if you never want to take the ultimate step.

Here is a reminder that ‘your’ morality what is ‘selfish’ is hopelessly skewed (being unselfish is not the same as ‘self’-lessness or non-‘self-centric) –

> R: Most Religions and Spiritual Paths advocate putting the other before oneself ... it is their way of preventing selfishness – which they assume to be identical with self-centredness. Yet it is self-centred to want to be a ‘good’ person and therefore gain one’s post-mortem reward in some after-life. Immortality for the self has to be classified as being the ultimate self-centredness. Self-centredness is translated as egotism ... is there such a word as ‘soultism’? There should be!

> Let us have a look at the practice of putting the other before oneself: Take us four sitting here – and presume we are all ‘good’ people – and I am not going to be ‘selfish’ at all. Therefore I am going to totally look after (Q) ... I will put her before me in all circumstances. Now, (Q) is also a ‘good’ person and she is not going to be ‘selfish’ either ... so she is going to put Q(1) before herself. However, you have also been brought up with this religious and humanitarian concept of putting the other before oneself ... therefore you will put Q(2) before yourself ... and Q(2) will be putting me before himself. We have come a full circle; do you see the nonsense that is going on? Because the end result of putting the other first is that eventually you get looked after anyway. If we all just stop this charade and start looking after ourselves then we will be a lot better off. It makes much more sense.

> Q: Then nobody owes anybody anything ...

> R: There is no investment.

> Q: ... and nobody owes me anything, either.

> Q(2): There is no relationship.

> R: No relationship ... right! It is a free association.

> Q(2): The other way that happens is with love. It is like you are always relating ... well one of the ways of relating is mainly through love. If you love another you put your love on them and they put their love on you.

> R: And it intrinsic to the nature of love to put the other before yourself – it is part of love itself. However, if one digs deeply into love, one finds that love is so selfish that it is almost unbelievable that one could have been deceived by the apparent altruism displayed. It is utterly selfish; if you dig down under the layers of the ‘selflessness’ of love ... it is so very selfish.

> Q(2): Because there is this ‘I’ll love you if you’ll love me’ thing going on. It is a bargain. And if one stops the bargain you get the hatred ... if the love is cut ... or ...

> Q: Or just the absence of love.

> Q(2): With the absence you get the cold ... the cold treatment.

> R: Dig another layer deeper and one finds that love supports the very sense of identity it purports to transcend. And with love, the self survives ... to live another day. Everything that comes out of the self is designed to keep that self in existence ... all the morality, all the humanitarian ideals ... they all keep the self alive. The whole structure of society ...
> *
> R: Years ago I had some religious people bail me up and attempt to convert me to their belief – it would often happen in those days – and they were saying that I should always help people; that that is what we are all here for is to help other people; to put the other person before oneself. I said to them: ‘Who are these people to be helped? Who are these ‘others’? What is going to happen to them?’ I would ask this because if one does do all this – only help others and never oneself – then one goes into an After-Life of some description. I said: ‘What about those people who are being helped? Where are they going to go to?’

> Q: (Laughing) Oh! I like that question!

> Q(1): Good question!

> R: Well, if one wants to be a helper – a ‘good’ person – one needs a ready supply of victims, of helpless people. And where are those helpless people going to go to after they die? They are not going to go into some glorious After-Life because they have not been helping people ... in fact, they have been sucking upon the helpers. So ‘do-gooders’ need a steady supply of victims in order to reach their After-Life of Rapturous Bliss.

> And then I would say to them ... because they would tell me I was being selfish ... I would say to them: ‘But you want to go to your heaven when you die?’ And they would say: ‘Yes’. And I would say: ‘You are only helping other people in order for yourself to attain your After-Life of Heavenly Bliss. And is this not selfish?’ They would not like that one. The whole structure of morality hangs upon stuff like this ... that is why there is something really going wrong within society. The whole morality is back-to-front. (Audio taped Dialogues, Putting the Other before Oneself).

You can also watch the Out-from-Control video where Richard very clearly says to ‘Vineeto’ “it is selfish to stay”. ‘Vineeto’ had tears in her eyes because the sweetness ‘she’ experienced was extraordinary –

> Vineeto: I had known this sweetness from previous occasions – one such experience happened during the video-shoot of the ‘Out-from-Control’ DVD we present on the website. This sweetness always accompanied an experience of closeness, barely any separation to the other person (usually Richard), but also an experience that I was close to my destiny and an awareness that what I am doing/ longing for is not merely for my ‘peace of mind’, but that it is for everybody, for every single man, woman and child on the planet – for peace on earth.

> This sweet longing has always propelled me forward to go all the way, to overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles and fears and now I had the privilege to experience this sweet intimacy day after day, morning to night. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Articles, Sweetness).

Cheers Vineeto

October 21 2025

VINEETO: It’s ok, it is a natural reaction when you try to break through before you are ready – though it means that your arguments don’t make sense. It’s too early to even contemplate it, you could go to the “advanced base camp” first, then “camp 3”. (Uphill Mountaineering) Plenty of time to worry later. There is still an in-control virtual freedom available even if you never want to take the ultimate step. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba10, 19 October 2025a).

VINEETO: Upgrading your present situation to pragmatic virtual freedom will give you a new confidence that being increasingly felicitous and innocuous (happy and harmless) is possible to live every day, in every situation – provided you sincerely and honestly leave no stone untouched. It means trying it out in real life what you often may have only rationally or conceptually understood but not yet applied in everyday living. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba10, 19 October 2025).

KUBA: So yes I actually experienced this answer the evening after writing the post to you. That evening I did find myself in a more wide and wondrous place and from that place I actually did look back at the argument I made and it had no substance, it was irrelevant when considering from the wide and wondrous place. So I can actually see this point, that with increasing felicity and innocuity there is a solution which becomes obvious, a solution for everybody.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

I am very pleased this is settled for you for now. It is indeed a good recognition that when “increasing felicity and innocuity” is possible for you, not as a high achiever, but a normal human being, then it is also possible for others.

KUBA: But your other point is relevant too :

> Vineeto: Good, you have come to appreciate the limitations of taking special excursions from the “base camp” – what I had called “your steeple chasing modus operandi” in an earlier message.

Those daring excursions form “base camp” are too brief, unstable and desperate to allow ‘me’ to contemplate actually doing something about the human condition. So I completely understand your suggestion to proceed towards a pragmatic in-control virtual freedom. Also those excursions from “base camp” they are done by ‘me’ as ‘I’ am now, too mired in the human condition, looking with the eyes of ‘humanity’ rather than felicitous and innocuous eyes. Then ‘I’ can only try to, as you said, proceed towards some escape fantasy whilst keeping ‘myself’ intact.

So it is eminently sensible to do something practical and down to earth now, which is to establish feeling good (general sense of well-being) as a bottom line of experiencing in all circumstances and at all times – and it is this bit specifically which I have omitted because I was too busy with the steeple chasing modus operandi. Just as an aside, when I first read that phrase I had to google it just to make sure I get you and as soon as I saw the below image I thought “yup that is spot on”.

VINEETO: Now you begin to understand why the term “down to earth” is right under the title on the homepage. It is very significant to take note that an actual freedom from the human condition is no high-flying spiritual escapade. As such your experiencing will eventually be genuinely “in all circumstances and at all times”.

It’s great you looked up “steeple casing” – I picked up the term from a reference in an English movie where they alluded to a particular form of obstacle horse racing but church steeples are far more apt as a metaphor, reminiscent also of the art of parkour.

KUBA: And the interesting thing is that I already know how to get back to feeling good, it’s that I have got distracted over and over again by going on the special excursions instead, and in that steeple chasing modus operandi I would forget about affectively monitoring my mood, in fact even feeling good would become irrelevant from that place.

VINEETO: In due course you will discover that the actualism method is not merely to get back to feeling good, but that by sincerely and thoroughly (if necessary) investigating the triggers you can remove/ dissolve those triggers – be they habits, social identity issues, unhelpful attitude or what not – which are all components of what ‘I’ and ‘me’ consist of and what keeps ‘me’ in place. Doing this ‘I’ get thinner and thinner and less and less substantial, and thus feeling excellent and naiveté start to flourish in a consistent way.

KUBA: And the other thing worth adding is that perhaps arriving at an in-control virtual freedom I might decide this is what I want for the rest of my life, and that would be already incredible. But the thing is that steeple chasing modus operandi would not have this. That if it is not ultimate then it is not even worth considering, and yet it is my life I am living. So this is nice to see now also.

VINEETO:

> Richard: Ahh ... then you would be understanding why I oft-times say that a virtual freedom is not to be sneezed at (and that it is way beyond normal human expectations), then? Because this is how you described it:

> > • [Respondent]: ‘There is an increase in sensory clarity, especially visual acuity. Along with this increase in clarity there is a ‘purity’ in everything one perceives. The words ‘immaculate’, ‘perfect’, ‘pure’ capture it quite well; everything is wonderful. Strangely, though, the word ‘beautiful’ does not apply. There is no (felt) affect whatsoever. The purity of perception (and the marvellousness of what is perceived) goes beyond affect, leaving only pure, calm wonder. It’s sensory delight without any emotional resonance at all. The sensory delight I’m talking about is not the usual kind of sensuousness/ sensuality that one enjoys in an ordinary state. Rather than being ‘pleasurable’, it is appreciation of the perfection that seems to be inherent in what one is perceiving, which leads to enjoyment of a very different kind.

> > This is quite extraordinary. There is a sensation of softness in the air, which has a pellucid, jelly-like quality (metaphorically speaking). I’m reminded of something you once wrote about the eyes ‘lightly caressing’, as if one is seeing from the front of the eyeball. I also remember you saying ‘nothing dirty can get in’, and that’s exactly the way it is. Objects that would seem drab, dirty, sullied, soiled in ‘reality’ are immaculate in themselves; any ‘dirtiness’ is overlaid by ‘me’. (‘Richard, are you familiar with this?’; May 20, 2004 17:34 PDT).

> (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 60c, 15 July 2004)

KUBA: And the other thing is that I don’t experience the fear of being a fraud, or a failure etc like I did in the past, and I am no longer afraid of writing to you, and it seems it is because I am slowly stopping the “fake it till you make it”. So this is all beneficial already.

VINEETO: Ha, the instant reward of honesty and sincerity. The more “you make it” the less you need to fear exposure – and all this because you gave up chasing steeples and are coming down to earth. Life is so much simpler and eminently enjoyable this way.

Cheers Vineeto

October 21 2025

KUBA: So what I can see already is that all this what I am focusing on now is about increasing my affective set point, and I can see that I have been approaching this the wrong way around in the past.

Effectively I can see that there is no pushing required, hence the advice has always been to return to feeling good. It is when feeling good takes care of itself due to habituation that “something more” hoves into view. But if that “something more” is not in view, it’s probably because feeling good is not even habituated yet. And this is where the various excursions would normally begin to take place.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

When you say feeling good is not habituated yet that may well be that there is something brewing in the background which you haven’t acknowledged/ identified yet. For instance –

> Respondent: Now coming to the method. I tried asking ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive’. Most of the time I get the answer ‘happy’, or when I stress upon ‘this moment’, I get blank with no answer, because in this moment there is no feeling. The feeling is only in the moment just passed by. But still ‘I’ do not have that experience all the time. Because ‘I’ is the heap of all the passed moments!

> ‘Vineeto’: I found that the interesting thing started when I got the answer ‘not happy’ or ‘no feeling’. I knew then I had something to look at. Upon closer look I always found a lurking feeling or fear disguised as ‘no feeling’ – the cunning entity inventing whatever trick to keep me from exposing it. It takes a lot of persistence, bloody-mindedness and ruthless honesty with oneself to dismantle one trick after the other. Sometimes I would sit days with that ‘no-feeling’ of numbness until I gathered courage and determination to examine it deeper. This process may take months until you are free of one particular emotion. But with the pure consciousness experience in mind you always have a comparison that keeps you going. (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 4, 23.1.1999)

> Alan: Vineeto, I am interested to hear more of what you call ‘no feeling’ in your mail to No 4. Is this the same as ‘stuckness’ or something different?

> ‘Vineeto’: With ‘no feeling’ I mean a kind of neutral-dull, non-responsive outlook on life. It may start with having ‘no feeling’ but then I quickly get bored with it not being quite alive and annoyed about wasting my time. It is usually fear in its first stage when I try to push it away. Digging deeper I usually find feeling, emotion, fear and holding on to dear ‘self’.

> It is very different to ‘no feelings and emotions’ where there is simply the delight to be alive.

> Does that make sense to you? (Actualism, Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, Alan-b, 2.2.1999)

KUBA: So actually it’s very simple, in that all I have to concern myself with is getting back to feeling good when feeling good has ceased, and that is very doable for sure and also very rewarding. And then when that “something more” naturally hoves into view, great, but it happens without any pushing or desperation at all, and it makes it that much sweeter when it does happen. It’s like “I have all that I need already and look there is even a little bit more here”.

VINEETO: As for enjoying and appreciating feeling good being a backward-oriented approach here is something to think about –

> Richard: By virtue of the fact you now have the beginnings of at least some degree of influence, over how you feel each moment again, your own interest in how you experience yourself can start to quicken (there being nothing which succeeds like success) and the more your own interest is piqued the more your awareness will increase of its own accord; eventually you can become almost eager to see what else will show up under the bright light of awareness.

> So, starting where you are at (always the best place to start from), you can become aware of the less obvious irregularities in your daily feeling of regularity/ the majority experience of being a regular person, such as feeling slightly better than before until you start to recognise and acknowledge each moment of feeling somewhat better; those moments provide a base for you to build upon until you can say to yourself (and anyone who may be listening) that you are feeling good. (Feeling good is a generic term for a general feeling of well-being).

> And this is where the fun begins: the aim is to enjoy and appreciate being alive each moment again; when you are feeling good then enjoy and appreciate feeling good; such enjoyment and appreciation is the way in which you consolidate what you have established (feeling good) and sets up an automatic signalling device (a flashing red light as it were) to let you know of the slightest diminishment of feeling good; as it is easier to remain feeling good than having to claw your way back out of feeling bad (a general feeling of ill-being) you have a vested interest in remaining attentive all the while you are feeling good.

> The more you feel good the more feeling good happens; the more feeling good happens the better you feel; the better you feel the more feeling better gets ... and so on and so on ... gradually increasing ever-incrementally until one day you can get to the stage the identity in residence all those years ago got to where ‘he’ would say how ‘he’ had to invent a new word (‘bester’) because how on earth could best keep on getting better.

> (Be warned: the sky is not the limit). [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, No. 11, 25 November 2009).

KUBA: Hmm and I wonder if this is why especially for someone with a ‘high achiever’ persona, it can be so tricky to get the simplicity of the method.

Because for the high achiever, the hard worker, the dragon slayer etc when things go awry that is apparently a signal to do more, to go forward at all cost, to do the new thing etc. Whereas what is required is actually just to return to where ‘I’ was 5min ago before that thing happened.

But it’s this sense of “taking a step back” which is so counterintuitive to such a persona. As in things were evidently going well 5min ago and something happened to cause them to go awry, it seems like ‘I’ need to push forward and yet what ‘I’ actually need to do is simply go back to where ‘I’ was them 5 minutes ago lol.

VINEETO: Yes, and for a “high achiever” any other way than ‘his’ way is classified as going backward.

Ha, if it wasn’t counterintuitive to ‘you’, the persona, you would have already used the actualism method the way it was intended. Think again – when you pay attention to the aggression inherent in the urge to “push forward” you can see why this cannot be conducive to an ongoing state of feeling good, let alone feeling excellent. The urge to “push forward” means something essential is missing according to ‘you’, is not good enough according to ‘your’ concept of life and you are at loggerheads with yourself and with actuality.

Also, it is generally not helpful to create a concept of what virtual freedom means by merely making a carbon copy of what you are doing now, then adding new wall-paper, before you take some practical down-to-earth steps in the new direction. It spoils and distorts the whole adventure of naïvely exploring new territory.

KUBA: And of course it is the habituation of feeling good in this manner which will actually lead to a movement forward, in terms of doing something productive. As well as taking a look at what that thing was that caused the issues, but only from the position of having already returned to feeling good.

VINEETO: You might find this amusing and instructive – there is far more to explore than what you can ascertain by just thinking about it –

> Respondent: I guess there are no shortcuts.

> Richard: What I find telling – and this is a general observation – is just how much peoples object to being happy and harmless ... the vast majority of the correspondence in the archives is, in fact, a cutting indictment on the human condition itself.

> Do you realise – and this is a personal observation – you have just said, in effect, that you guess you will have to become a happy ‘being’ before you can become actually free from the human condition (as if were there a way to be thus free without having to do so you would not)?

> Whereas it is actually such a delight to finally be able to be happy (and harmless) ... and a relief. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 54, 27 November 2003).

Cheers Vineeto

October 22 2025

KUBA: Also to keep in line with this conversation would it be correct to say that Richard was able to apply the method in quite a remarkable way, in that he immediately entered an out from control virtual freedom and from what I understand he remained there consistently until the diversion into enlightenment.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

Yes, Richard was able to get to an out-from-control virtual freedom very quickly, getting in touch with his buried-since-childhood naiveté by retaining the ‘holiday atmosphere’ after his three-weeks honeymoon holiday –

> Richard: In 1981, as the new year dawned, I took the first step on what I would later choose to call the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition. I was a married man, then, with a wife and four children to support and their grandmother had offered to have all of her grandchildren stay with her in the city for a three-week holiday (which left my then wife and myself together, on our own, for the first time since the birth of the first child). I grasped the opportunity with both hands to, not only regain the honeymoon intimacy of 1966, but to enable the actual intimacy experienced six months prior during the four-hour perfection experience which had indubitably evidenced that peace-on-earth was already always here. What I set about doing, consciously and with knowledge aforethought, was to deliberately imitate the actual—as so mirifically manifested in those experiences of pristine purity—each moment again.

> I did everything I could to be as happy and harmless (as free of sorrow and malice) for as much as is humanly possible. This was achieved by first putting everything on a does-not-really-matter-in-the-long-run basis. That is, I would prefer people, things and events to be a particular way, but, if it did not turn out like that, it did not really matter for it was only a preference. I chose to no longer give other people—or the weather even—the power to have me annoyed, irritated, irked, or even peeved, if this was possible.

> Then, as it was patently obvious in those experiences of pristine purity how this very moment of being alive is the only moment of ever actually being alive, I began to treat each moment again as precious. After all, it is not as if we have an unlimited amount of moments and—unlike a bank account which can be replenished—our supply of such moments is our most valuable (albeit dwindling) asset. In practical terms this meant being aware of how each precious moment was being experienced; if feeling good (felicity and innocuity) was the prevailing experience then this attentiveness ensured enjoyment and appreciation, of the sheer fact of being alive, each moment again; if feeling bad (unhappy and harmful) was the prevailing experience then whatever had displaced feeling good became readily apparent, upon such attention, with so much at stake. (Richard’s Personal Web-page).

As you can see, if you read carefully and further on, ‘his’ pure intent to imitate the actual was not only continuously active but also the willingness to make all the changes to ‘his’ attitudes, feelings and consequent behaviours, necessary to make the actual world apparent sooner rather than later.

This aspect significant is worth keeping in mind –

> Richard: In the same way that excellence experiences (EE’s) were a notable feature of feeling-being ‘Richard’s virtual freedom experiencing circa March-September 1981, although of course not named as such back then, so too did intimacy experiences (IE’s) play a similarly significant role even though increasingly overshadowed by the insistent emergence of love – and, especially, Love Agapé – in the later months due to a marked lack of precedence and, thus, of any praxeological publications (nowadays made freely available on The Actual Freedom Trust web site) on the distinction betwixt the near-innocent intimacy of naïveté and the affectional intimacy of romance lore and legend. [Emphases added]. (Richard, List D, Claudiu4, 28 January 2016).

According to Rick’s careful time-line analysis the overshadowing “by the insistent emergence of love” already started in April 1981. Rick’s verifying tooltips:.

KUBA: Whereas for the majority of people it seems to take a route more similar to ‘Peter’ and ‘Vineeto’ in that there is this whole bit that Richard never even went through. Which is the progression from ‘normal’ and towards a pragmatic in control virtual freedom.

VINEETO: What Richard had to go through instead, “due to a marked lack of precedence”, was the pioneering task of extracting himself bit by bit from the institutionalised state of insanity known as spiritual/ mystical enlightenment. It took altogether 11 years. Here I have collected a history of this mammoth enterprise from Richard’s various reports (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Enlightenment Resumé).

The aftermath of Richard’s historical breakthrough to an actual freedom is collected here (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Severe Mental Agitation).

You can watch ‘Peter’s’ video on Virtual Freedom, recording as to what were ‘Peter’s’ own initial obstacles to being happy and harmless. (Video Index)

KUBA: The bit that Richard skipped over (somehow :)) is what ‘Peter’ and ‘Vineeto’ pioneered and it seems this is the bit that will be relevant for the majority of people – well certainly me.

VINEETO: The “somehow” (which you carelessly brush aside with a laughing face as if it was not worth sincere investigation) is explained in the paragraphs quoted above –

> Richard: I did everything I could to be as happy and harmless (as free of sorrow and malice) for as much as is humanly possible.

What Peter and Vineeto did is not as relevant for you as you think – they were paving the way to become actually free via not following in Richard’s footsteps, avoiding enlightenment. The looming rock of enlightenment certainly had a great impact on ‘Vineeto’ as well as on ‘Peter’. Whereas you now have no excuse to dither since the Direct Route by-passing enlightenment (which Richard rightly called the “epoch changing opening in human consciousness”) has been made accessible and proved to be successful and easy.

> The directors of The Actual Freedom Trust take great pleasure in making public knowledge of a direct route at the end of the wide and wondrous path (now both gentrified and rendered secure) to an actual freedom from the human condition – a down-to-earth manumission hitherto only available dangerously via spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment – which has been pioneered by Peter, on the 30th of December 2009, thus making him the first person to become actually free of the instinctual passions/ the identity formed thereof after Richard’s paradigm-shattering breakthrough in 1992.

> The directors are also as equally pleased in making public knowledge of how Vineeto experientially confirmed the accessibility, safety and utter simplicity of this direct route, on the 4th of January 2010, thus making her the first woman to be actually free of the instinctual passions/ the identity formed thereof. (It is now readily apparent that, where the menfolk went, there too did a woman go ... and sooner rather than eventually)!

> As such, these two once-in-a-lifetime altruistic actions have ushered in a brand new era in human experience/ human history. (A Long-Awaited Announcement)

Perhaps you have not read it?

It is unfortunate that most of the next generation and the one after is apparently lacking the naïve enthusiasm and yearning for peace-on-earth, which inspired the first pioneers (you can read more here if you are interested: Richard, List D, Andrew, 28 February 2016, including tool-tips).

The person of Indian birth and upbringing mentioned below certainly took advantage of the newly opened Direct Route tout-de-suite and became free from the instinctual passions and the identity formed thereof without analysis what chances she might have compared to the way the other pioneers achieved an actual freedom. She just went ahead and did it –

> Richard: For instance, a couple of months ago a person of Indian birth and upbringing flew into Coolangatta Airport late one night on a prearranged agreement to meet in person so as to talk about her life and to gain clarity in her life-style/ her livelihood situation.

> Less than 24 hours after landing she was actually free of blind nature’s instinctual passions/the feeling-being formed thereof.

> In other words, the person who landed at the airport (that feeling being who needed to gain clarity in her life-style/ her livelihood situation) vanished without a trace, in a matter of seconds, the following afternoon.

> She is now living the ‘peace-on-earth’ actual freedom (as per the reports on The Actual Freedom Trust website) … (Richard, List D, No. 6, 19 December 2011)

Cheers Vineeto

October 22 2025

KUBA: What I do not see yet, is quite how to make away with those persistently entrenched themes still. And I am not sure if it is that they are actually difficult to remove or more because I simply cannot and will not contemplate a life of ongoing and consistent happiness and harmlessness. It’s like I have planted a flag in a 60/40 arrangement and the 23h 59m a day arrangement seems too much to consider.

KUBA: Hmm ok I see the bottom line of this is that I am not willing to change myself. This makes a lot of sense, why I would rather go on excursions, because then I get to remain intact as I am now and fool myself into an escape fantasy.

VINEETO: Hi Kuba,

As recent experience has shown that after a rash comment you tend to amend or even retract you instant reaction, so I’ll wait for a more considered response.

Here is what Richard wrote to a correspondent who had been persistently unwilling to change himself –

> Respondent: You assert it will bring ‘an end to all ills’ – have you done an experiment: have you cleared up the problems outside your own doorstep?

> Richard: Yes ... by neither creating nor perpetuating ‘the problems’ there are no ‘the problems’ either inside or outside my own doorstep. Other than a handful of people, of course all the others still stubbornly insist on doing life the hard way ... but that is their business. In actual freedom, life is experienced as being perfect as-it-is here on earth. One knows that one is living in a beneficent and benevolent universe – and that is what actually counts. The self-imposed iniquities, that ail the people who stubbornly wish to remain denizens of the real world, fail to impinge upon the blitheness and benignity of one who lives in the vast scheme of things. The universe does not force anyone to be happy and harmless, to live in peace and ease, to be free of sorrow and malice. It is a matter of personal choice as to which way one will travel. Human beings, being as they are, will probably continue to tread the ‘tried and true’ paths, little realising that they are the tried and failed ways. There is none so contumacious as a self-righteous soul who is convinced that they know the way to live as revealed in their ancient and revered scriptures ... or in their much-prized secular philosophies and psychologies.

> So be it. (Richard, List C, No. 4b, #choice).

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