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 Selected Correspondence Death & Immortality 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, #oneevening). 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 November 27 2025 VINEETO: Ha, you discover something that could be life-changing – that life is meant to be fun – and what does the identity do, automatically, ‘you’ make it into a problem! It’s a natural ‘self’-protecting reaction, and only informs you how cunning ‘I’ am when feeling in danger of exposure. Recognize the silliness and humour in the situation and voilà, the problem disappears. CHRONO: Yes I allowed this seeing and I wondered in a gentle way “how would it be if life was meant to be fun from now on?” First it was felt that “life can be fun from now on” is boring (and this I found rather funny) but then that feeling dipped into a deeper feeling which I felt surging throughout my whole body. There was a deep feeling of dread. Basically I became aware that I am mortal. I am going to die and there is no escaping it. Perhaps some part of me has had the belief that ‘I’ could be immortal. That I would be able to cheat death somehow. Death is a fact and there’s no escaping it. It’s rather funny and not funny to me at the same time lol. All of this is connected somehow and one seeing here expands my seeing on the other beliefs. I can see how this relates to the “Tried and Failed”. VINEETO: The desire for immortality certainly relates to the “Tried and Failed”, but it also relates to the instinctual programming to survive at any cost and the fact that ‘I’/ ‘me’ have usurped the role of this body’s keeper. Here is a fascinating insight from Richard on the origin of the universal belief in ‘my’ immortality – Richard: As I understand it, in the on-going study of genetics the germ cells (the spermatozoa and the ova) have been classified as being of a somewhat different nature to body cells. This has led to speculation that each and every body is nothing but a carrier for the genetic lineage ... that the species, therefore, is more important than you and me or any other body. Now, whilst that theory is just a typically ‘humble’ way of interpreting the data, it did strike me, some years ago, that this genetic memory could very well be the origin of the immortal ‘me’ at the core of ‘being’ (as contrasted to ‘I’ as ego who will undergo physical death). Hence it occurred to me that the source of ‘who ‘I’ really am’ could very well be nothing more mysterious than blind nature’s survival software. I have always had a bent for the practical explanation ... and solution. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Vineeto, 30 September 1999). This information might not make it easier to face the “deep feeling of dread” when contemplating that you are mortal. For ‘Vineeto’ the other side of the coin was the very possibility that ‘my’ ‘immortal soul’ can go extinct *before* physical death, exactly what ‘Vineeto’ wanted more than anything else in ‘her’ life (after she learnt about an actual freedom and experienced the actual world in PCEs). So you can see that your fear of death and your search for freedom from the human condition are intimately linked. The fear of death is the ultimate weapon of defence each time ‘you’ feel in danger of being insignificant, diminished or exposed as a contingent being. Being this flesh-and-blood body only there is no fear of death at all. Richard: ‘The very fact of the propinquity of death became a pivotal element in taking the first step on the wide and wondrous path, back in 1981, when a neighbouring farmer’s fourteen-year old son was killed in a car crash. A woman from another farm, whilst telling me all about it, bemoaned the fact that his future as a potential concert-pianist was tragically cut short (quite a normal observation). What struck me rigid for the nonce was the more valid fact that this boy had virtually missed-out on a normal childhood through being forced, by well-meaning parents of course, into endless hours of piano-practice while his siblings and peers were outside playing games (as children are wont to do). And now he was dead – it had all been for naught – and he would never, ever be able to come out and play. From that moment on death was my constant companion; an ever-present reminder that to die without having ever lived fully as in totally fulfilled, completely satisfied, utterly content – was such a waste of a life. 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: This quote from Richard’s journal (Richard’s Journal, 1997, Article Two) is a real eye-opener, how the dichotomy of all the moral and ethical injunctions one so obediently follows dates back to the qualities of enlightenment (the ‘Self’ or ‘God’) being the only acceptable alternative. And whenever you consider the third alternative of being naïvely and sensately/ sensuously intimate, doing something entirely new, those injunctions will do their utmost to keep you on the straight and narrow path. It all ties back to that life-changing discovery – that life is meant to be fun. Enjoy the thrill and adventure. Yes, “just another human being” is more than a “belief” – when ‘I’ am in charge, that is how ‘I’ perceive and assess everyone, including oneself – nothing special, either with grey-coloured glasses – gloomy and hostile to ‘me’ – or rose-coloured glasses – loving and trusting towards ‘me’, and hence extensions of ‘me’ “part of ‘my’ world”, as ‘Vineeto’ said. In the second quote ‘she’ described what happened during a PCE, an apperceptive seeing. It was very startling and entirely new to ‘her’ experience. Indeed, it is excellent you start seeing the bigger pattern, and how ultimately all ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, ‘good’ and ‘bad’ injunctions stem from the ‘Tried and Failed’ paradigm Richard described in his Journal, Article Two, you quoted above. When you understand this in its totality, it loses its virtue, attraction and power over you. CHRONO: The level to which these injunctions and perhaps spirituality itself have seeped into every nook and cranny of everyday life is astounding. It’s so all-encompassing that you would initially not even be able to conceive of another alternative. VINEETO: It is indeed “all-encompassing” and has not just “seeped” in – spirituality is part and parcel of being a ‘being’ because ‘being’ itself is not actual and as such ‘you’ are ‘a spirit being’, so to speak. Peter described it like this – Peter: ‘When I was leaving the spiritual world and began to really investigate what others had to say about the human condition, I was amazed to discover that everyone – and I do mean everyone – has a spiritual outlook on life. The spiritual viewpoint permeates philosophy, science, medicine, education, psychology, law, etc. (Actual Freedom Library, Topics, Spiritual). This caused a stir of protests on the mailing list, so Richard explained it further – Richard: In order to understand what Peter is referring to it is essential to comprehend that he is using the word ‘spiritual’ as a catch-all word to describe that which is not material – the primary antonym for the word ‘spiritual’ in a dictionary is the word ‘material’ – and is best explained by his observation in his journal (page 86) that, when he met me, he realised that [quote] “Richard was the only atheist I had met and seemingly the only one that has ever been”. [endquote]. It is the same for a person who does not believe in the spiritualist’s soul, either (and no materialist does believe in one): not believing in a soul does not mean that ‘me’ as soul (aka ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being ... which is ‘being’ itself) has become extinct ... and that includes an actualist on the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27h, 1 April 2004). CHRONO: So I decided to turn away from following my usual way of being about intimacy. And I was simply allowing a “what if?”. Like just suspending ‘my’ path temporarily just to see. Then my eyes were seeing into the softness of being here. I became aware of that sweetness. This sweetness was not directional as if for one person. It was here for everyone. It was markedly different from the usual way of being intimate. It didn’t have to be on a special occasion. It’s always here. I am wondering now if I could always be like this. What’s standing in the way? VINEETO: Ah, this is delicious – it’s the very sweetness of the imminence of pure intent (see Actualvineeto, Articles, Sweetness). It is indeed “always here”, always accessible, whenever you allow it to happen. The only thing standing in the way is any objection to whole-heartedly being here. * VINEETO: Ah, this is wonderful. Diminishing ‘self’-centricity allows you to be increasingly naïve, liking yourself and others and discovering how much fun being alive really is. Here is a snippet from ‘Vineeto’ you might relate to – ‘Vineeto’: (snipped) Friendships in the real world are by and large emotional allegiances against an adversarial world – where there is neither sorrow nor enemies, there is also no need for loyal and emotionally supportive friends. (Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, No. 60f, 7.2.2005). CHRONO: Yes I can relate to that. Sometimes though I feel in people’s sad stories it can flip to compassion. But I can more easily see now how it’s not harmless. I am perpetuating both mine and the others’ suffering when I am being compassionate. But it still feels like a “tug at the heart strings” like I am abandoning everyone. VINEETO: That is the dichotomy of the old paradigm as laid out in Richard’s Journal, 1997, Article Two you quoted in your last message. The third alternative always becomes apparent when you follow neither one or the other of the real-world alternatives. CHRONO: It does make sense now that I think about it. It seems much of my childhood hurts have been held on passionately deep down and are the source of much of my railing against “the system”. I was on a trip with my partner this past week and we finished watching “Mr. Robot” and I related very deeply with the protagonist especially towards the end. I felt his hurts as my own and the indignation and hurt reached fever pitch. This post from Richard is indeed very familiar and timely as it helped backing out of it. I find myself sometimes thinking that I am supposed to hold onto these hurts and slights, otherwise I will let people walk all over me and take advantage of me. But I am an adult now aren’t I? Something further to unfold here which I will come back to. VINEETO: (…) CHRONO: It feels like my biggest current block is those childhood hurts. I am aware of it operating in many situations now. The indignation keeps the hurt in place that I can see. But without the indignation there is only hurt. I’ll try your suggestion and not rely on emotional reactions but instead look at each individual situation intelligently. VINEETO: I quoted something to Andrew yesterday about letting go of childhood hurts, which you might have already read (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Andrew2, 26 November 2025). Here is another related quote – Richard: Until one wakes up to implications and ramifications of the factuality of already being here on this planet earth anyway, whether one wants to be or not (‘I didn’t ask to be born’), one is fated to forever seek consolation and commiseration in the arms (both metaphorically and literally) of another similarly afflicted. Yet the simple fact is that, despite the ‘I didn’t ask to be born’ rhetoric, one does want to be alive (else one would have committed suicide long ago) and all that it takes is to fully acknowledge this and thus unequivocally say !YES! to being here now as this flesh and blood body ... and this affirmation is an unconditional agreement/ approval of life itself as-it-is. I did not ask to be born either (truisms can be so trite) ... but I am ever-so-glad that I was. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Gary, 24 June 2003). At the beginning of that correspondence Richard talks about “the need for a friend” which might be informative for you as well. * Richard: (…) the human species has been doing its thing for at least 50,000 years or so – no essential difference has been discerned between the Cro-Magnon human and Modern-Day human – and may very well continue to do its thing for, say, another 50,000 years or so … it matters not, in what has been described as ‘the vast scheme of things’ or ‘the big picture’, and so on, whether none, one or many peoples become actually free from the human condition (this planet, indeed the entire solar system, is going to cease to exist in its current form about 4.5 billion years from now). All these words – yours, mine, and others (all the dictionaries, encyclopaedias, scholarly tomes and so on) – will perish and all the monuments, all the statues, all the tombstones, all the sacred sites, all the carefully conserved/ carefully restored memorabilia, will vanish as if they had never existed … nothing will remain of any human endeavour (including yours truly). Nothing at all … nil, zero, zilch. Which means that nothing really matters in the long run and, as nothing really does matter (in this ultimate sense) it is simply not possible to take life seriously … sincerely, yes, but seriously? No way … life is much too much fun to be serious! (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 25g, 22 December 2004). CHRONO: Ha I find it funny that death is what makes everything not serious but also is so serious for ‘me’. VINEETO: Here is another one for fun – Respondent: Or as it happened in my case of inquiry, did you mean that ‘if one doesn’t see the fact of physical death as an end all, one could not be happy ... let alone harmless’? Richard: Yes, I have sometimes asked peoples of a ‘Jehovah’s Witness’ persuasion, when they come knocking on my door and showing me paintings of their imagined paradise on earth after their god has annihilated 5,993,000,000 of the 6,000,000,000 human beings currently alive by treading them in a winepress, whether they have ever considered what it would be like in fact rather than fancy to be the flesh and blood body they are for ever and a day (locked into being a specific body-type, a female, for instance, endlessly giving birth to baby after baby for all eternity). Which means for billions upon billions of years ... and still more billions to come! (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 30, 19 January 2004). Cheers Vineeto December 9 2025 Richard: ‘The very fact of the propinquity of death became a pivotal element in taking the first step on the wide and wondrous path, back in 1981, when a neighbouring farmer’s fourteen-year old son was killed in a car crash. (…) 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). CHRONO: What I take away from this is how “death was my constant companion; an ever-present reminder that to die without having ever lived fully as in totally fulfilled, completely satisfied, utterly content – was such a waste of a life”. Which perspective seems to be the key. VINEETO: The propinquity of death is indeed a sobering reminder, whenever you allow it, with the capacity to cut through every subterfuge ‘I’ contrive to stay in existence. But it is also an exquisite reminder how immensely precious an actual freedom from the human condition is. * VINEETO: The desire for immortality certainly relates to the “Tried and Failed”, but it also relates to the instinctual programming to survive at any cost and the fact that ‘I’/ ‘me’ have usurped the role of this body’s keeper. Here is a fascinating insight from Richard on the origin of the universal belief in ‘my’ immortality – (…) CHRONO: Ah yes that makes sense that the “Tried and Failed” itself is a function of the instinctual programming. I remember reading that fascinating quote and it reminded me of the book “The Selfish Gene” but at the time I had never thought of ‘me’ as being the very genetic memory. As for dread, I find that it’s the looking away from that feeling which makes it churn. But I also don’t know how to stop looking away. VINEETO: Denying, pushing away or fighting fear in any way including being afraid of being afraid always adds fuel to the feeling of fear or dread. Look for the thrill. Here is a little story – ‘Vineeto’ to Alan: It reminds me of a weird and fascinating experience I had just two nights ago. I had had a light smoke, when I suddenly started to feel nauseous and very dizzy in the head. The physical symptoms came along with an acute fear to throw up, to black out, in short, to lose control over my body and my life. While Peter kept inquiring if there maybe was also some fear involved, not just a physical reaction, I was desperately trying to obtain control over my body. At the same time I was, of course, suspicious that it was all a play up of the ‘self’ trying to survive, but didn’t know how to deal with it. When I finally laid down on the floor and ‘surrendered’ to the option of being unconscious and was actually getting interested and thrilled by the possibility of observing the experience, it very quickly disappeared like a ghost. It left me astounded about the power of ‘reality’, the vividness of the experience that fear created with all the ingredients of a ‘serious’ disease, becoming unconscious. Only by accepting it as an adventure and at the same time doubting its actuality it lost its power over me, leaving me battered but proud like after a victorious, well-fought battle. The next night it happened again but was all much less dramatic, the temptation was there to delve into the fear, the physical symptoms were ready to emerge again, but this time I didn’t believe in the actual danger and it quickly went. (Vineeto, Actual Freedom List, Alan, 28.7.1998). * VINEETO: It is indeed “all-encompassing” and has not just “seeped” in – spirituality is part and parcel of being a ‘being’ because ‘being’ itself is not actual and as such ‘you’ are ‘a spirit being’, so to speak. (…) Richard: It is the same for a person who does not believe in the spiritualist’s soul, either (and no materialist does believe in one): not believing in a soul does not mean that ‘me’ as soul (aka ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being … which is ‘being’ itself) has become extinct … and that includes an actualist on the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom from the human condition. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 27h, 1 April 2004). CHRONO: It’s very interesting how one can be this spirit being while also denying one is a spirit being. Perhaps some self-survival strategy. I realized this was also the issue with the Buddhist ‘no-self’ crowd. They equate ‘no-self’ with there being no spirit while denying that they are that very spirit which is doing the looking. Once again, all eyes off ‘me’. Richard’s whole exposition of modern and ancient Buddhism was a real eye opener. There is a useful word for it – cognitive dissonance. It is a most fascinating phenomenon of the instinctual survival passions in that one (unconsciously) will be overlooking, forgetting, disavowing, detaching from information or insight which appears to be threatening ‘my’ existence. An ever-increasing attentiveness will eventually sweep out all dark corners of one’s psyche and make cognitive dissonance redundant so that naiveté can flourish. Richard: To enable apperceptiveness to haply occur it is essential to allow a reflective attention – attentiveness – to one’s psychological and psychic world. It is impossible for one to intelligently observe what is going on within if one does not at the same time acknowledge the occurrence of one’s various feeling-tones with attentiveness. (…) A contemplative attention views all feelings as commensurate – nothing is suppressed and nothing is expressed – as attentiveness does not play favourites. Attentiveness gets not infatuated with the good feelings nor sidesteps the bad as attentiveness is a non-feeling awareness; a sensuous attention. Attentiveness is not sentimental susceptibility for it does not get involved with affection or empathy or get hung up on mercurial imaginations and capricious intuitions or ephemeral auguries. Attentiveness does not register feelings and compare the validity of experience according to it ‘feeling right’ or ‘feeling wrong’. (…) Please note that last point: in attentiveness, there is an observance of the ‘reality’ within, and such attention is the end of its embrace ... finish. Here lies apperception. (Richard’s Journal, Appendix Five). Cheers Vineeto
Selected Correspondence Index | 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