|
Others ~ Selected Correspondence Fact
Okay No 37, I will not ‘dick around’ myself about this. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of things I have said about actualism and/or actualists that I can’t substantiate with hard facts. You do realize, don’t you, that there is no difference between a fact and a ‘hard’ fact? To qualify the word ‘fact’ with the word ‘hard’ means nothing less than trying to weasel in ‘soft facts’ as ‘facts.’ I readily admit that [can’t substantiate with hard facts (No 37’s insertion)] (and wasn’t denying it in the first place). The reason is that things I disagree with actualists about (or rather the things that make me suss about the value of actualism as a way of life) are not the matters of demonstrable, specific fact or falsehood. My main reservations about it, and criticisms of it, are rooted in the psychological/social aspects of the practice and the way in which it is communicated, not so much the factual substance of actualism itself. Much of what I say, think, feel, intuit, imagine (but only unintentionally ‘invent’) is based on impressions concerning motive, intent, affect – which is necessarily speculative. But it is where the real action is. So, if I understand you correctly – you are saying the ‘real action’ is not of factual substance, but rather impressions that are necessarily speculative? Isn’t that what actualism is about getting rid of altogether? All I can say is that if you think that is where the ‘real action’ is, then it’s no wonder that actualism rubs you the wrong way. Obviously, the fact that something of that nature is in my imagination does not mean it is necessarily only in my imagination. Or that it is only in my imagination. Right – there is the possibility of you occasionally hitting the nail on the head, but what are the odds in most cases [with regards to actualism]? It is amazing to me how so many people get so easily sidetracked when it comes to getting actualism right – most people seem to veer off in one direction or another without just taking it in head on. It makes me think of what Richard talks about as human intelligence being ‘crippled.’ There appear to be certain facts that people just have a hard time swallowing, and will come up with all sorts of tricks rather than admit them. Why use your imagination at all – intentionally anyway? I find that if I give credence to my imagination – it very often leads me astray from the facts at hand. It is a good way to ‘tune in’ to the human condition, but beyond that imagination is virtually synonymous with ‘fantasy.’ If you agree that taking words entirely at face value is not always necessarily the best way to get the truest picture of what is happening on a psychological and / or social level, you already understand that. I would put it this way – when observing insincerity in action – aka, the human condition in action – it is important to understand that you cannot always take it at face value. But when observing sincerity in action, it is important to understand that you misunderstand it if you do not take it at face value. No 37 to No 60, 9.10.2005
Why are there so few people who have actually become enlightened? Same can be said about actualism. Again, to compare the ‘fruits’ of spiritual enlightenment and actualism is to compare apples and oranges. The same could be asked about actualism, but there is a ready answer – it hasn’t had the thousands of years that spiritualism has had – rather, it is brand new to human history. Let me rephrase my question – why, out of the millions or billions of spiritual people who have sought enlightenment in some thousands of years, have so few actually become enlightened? To ask a similar question of actualism, one would need to ask, why, out of the (unspecified) relatively small number of people who are aware of and have actually given actualism a try, has only 1 become actually free, and only a handful virtually free? Maybe you will see now that an actualist has a much easier time with that question? Even one enlightened being in a million is a great success as compared to actualism, which has only one till date. That is like saying that the book of Genesis story is a great success compared to Darwin’s theory of evolution, merely because more people have believed it to be true. When Darwin came up with the theory of evolution (before publishing), only a handful (if that) of people saw it to be a factual account – nevertheless, the more successful theory is not the one that millions have given credence to – rather it is the one that only a handful (if that) of people had discovered at the time. In other words, it is the fact that determines ‘success’. In evolutionary theory, it is posited that when a certain evolutionary mutation has to occur, it occurs sporadically in many individuals of that species in the same era. I.e. if the time for actualism has come, then we can ‘hope’ to see some more folks totally free from the human condition. But whether this is only a hope based on illusion or an actual anticipation based on facts, only time will tell. Hoping for actualism to spread is a waste of time. ‘I’ am the only one that can change ‘myself.’ Nobody else can save ‘me’ – it is up to each ‘me’ whether or not actualism spreads in the years to come. It is each person’s choice how they want to live. No 37 to No 71
The first thing is the business of finding out the facts of the human condition we find ourselves born in to, as opposed to what we have been told is the truth about the human condition. What we have come to believe and commonly accept as the truth is what has been passed on to each and every human being from their parents and peers ... who got it from their parents and peers ... who got it from their parents and peers ... stretching back into the dark mists of time. Our bondage to the human condition can be summed up as – ‘This is the way it is, because this is the way it is, because this is the way it has always been and this is the way it will always be’. In order to become free of the human condition it is essential to laboriously crack through these shackles – the beliefs, morals, ethics, values, viewpoints and psittacisms that bond humans to a life of essential suffering and heart-wrenching misery. The easiest and most direct method to do this is to read the AF web-site and confirm what is written by your own life experiences and your own investigations. The method I used to confirm that what Richard was saying about the human condition was factual and sensible was to read, watch TV and browse the internet for further information. This process of finding the facts does involve a fair bit of work and investigation. One needs to check many sources, look for contradictions, be very wary of the source of the material and the bias of the authors or presenters, seek out the data behind the conclusions others are making, etc. Initially I ran a little game whereby I simply assumed that I, and everyone else, had got it wrong and looked for why and where – this way the investigation became exciting and thrilling – not daunting and fearful. Pretty soon I was able to confirm that I and everyone else had got it wrong – I had been searching for freedom and meaning 180 degrees in the wrong direction. I would say it takes considerable work and investigation to uncover the facts of a situation, but the rewards are immediate, tangible, and lasting. In this investigative work, everything is up for scrutiny and one cannot rely on the ‘time-honoured’ truisms and psittacisms that one usually falls back on to explain what is happening in life. At one stage in my investigations, I think I ran square up against a fearful and daunting aspect of the work, and it was the fear itself that needed to be examined for what it is. I needed to examine thoroughly what this fear was made of, what its’ origins were, and what function it served. I cannot say that I have totally surmounted the fear or that I am totally free of it, but I have noticed that it has greatly diminished. The fear itself is part and parcel of the beliefs that have been taught to one or that one has imbibed from one’s parents, one’s culture, etc – the fear reinforces and demands obedience to Humanity’s trusted beliefs, it reinforces the notion that ‘This is the way it is, because this is the way it is...’, etc. The primitive survival instinct of fear beats one back when one actually starts digging into this work, at least that is what I have found. One needs to crank up all the pure intent, grit and determination one can muster to hang in there and weather the atavistic fears. It is this that I believe Richard meant when he said that it takes nerves of steel to do this work of delving into one’s psyche. Fear is the stick part of the carrot and stick that Humanity uses to enforce obedience to its’ ways and means of doing business, and as ‘I’ am Humanity and Humanity is ‘me’, I wield the stick against myself and others who stray from the time-tested ways of society. Society enforces obedience at the point of a gun, if necessary. I found the advice I got on this list to be extremely helpful in experiencing these fears, and I found that the fears do indeed wear themselves out if one stays in the stream of fear and does not try to escape or go back. One’s imagination will dream up all kinds of fearful consequences as a result of the fear, and I must say I have imagined all kinds of things that have no basis in fact whatsoever while I was in the throws of these fears. Gary to Peter
I find it remarkable that I gave up talking to people I met about actualism because I realized that they would most likely only get offended or misunderstand it as spiritualism. I did so because I was sensitive to other people and I realized that the only way it was possible to communicate anything about actualism was if someone was sufficiently dissatisfied with the spiritual path and was willing to question deeper. So upon setting up an actualist mailing list as a home turf for those who are interested in actualism, what do we have – people deliberately signing on so they can remonstrate that they feel offended and/or so they can tell us that they Know and we don’t. Still in all, I must say that I have found some of the points raised by the protestors to be worthy of examination. For example, they have accused actualists of having a ‘point of view’, having traded one belief system for another. This is something that I have wondered about myself. Rather than levelling it as an accusation, however, I think it is an interesting question. Approaching actualism, I think one may fall into the trap of adopting it as a belief system, and it is not a belief system. I think we have talked of this before. Another accusation levelled by the protestors has been that Actual Freedom is a cult. I do not think there is anything wrong with examining whether there is any cult-like basis to what goes on, on this list. Personally, I have looked at the question from all angles, and I do not think there is a shred of evidence of any cult-like phenomenon going on here. It is when accusations are levelled such as ‘actualists are like Milosevic’ that things really seem to get out of control. That assertion is preposterous and shows how desperate the protestors are. Yet within that assertion are contained some commonplace fears and objections of people to actualism – for instance, if feelings, emotions, and passions are eliminated in toto, then one fears that one will become a psychopath, devoid of any human emotion and capable of butchery without guilt or remorse. It is the fear of irrevocable change that prevents one from going further and finding out the fact of the matter. Gary to Peter
‘I don’t yet accept that this is a ‘now for the first time’ kind of a deal. We’ve got some people exiting Plato’s Cave here, and claiming that ‘now for the first time’ the sun in shining. They haven’t yet made an exhaustive investigation of all the other places it might have been shining up until now (though they might THINK they have). I mentioned some places to look above, for starters.’ I have looked high and low and have never found anything like what Richard is offering. I’ve spent years trying to understand people like Suzanne Segal, Bernadette Roberts, Meher Baba, U.G. Krishnamurti, Da Free John, Douglas Harding, Ramana Maharshi, Ken Wilber, and various traditions around the world and have NEVER run into ANYTHING resembling actualism. The closest would be U.G. Krishnamurti, yet even he is miles away. The following may look like an intellectual indulgence to you, but I tell it to make a point. Bertrand Russell used to try to get his student Wittgenstein to admit that there was no elephant in the room – when there was no elephant in the room – and Wittgenstein wouldn’t admit it. His problem is that he couldn’t definitively PROVE there was no elephant in the room. In other words, he couldn’t rule out EVERY possibility – so he couldn’t state the fact that there was no elephant in the room. He also had a problem with physical laws – Wittgenstein’s problem was equivalent to the problem of induction. How do you prove that a physical law holds in ALL cases? A corollary is how do you prove something does NOT exist? The answer is you can’t. At some point you take something as fact, and at what point that happens has to do with your personal judgement and warrant you have. So, in the same way there is no elephant in my room right now, actualism is new to human experience. Maybe there was another culture somewhere, maybe someone has discovered in another time and place or whatever – but that is all irrelevant – the point is that Richard and others have made a thorough investigation of mystical traditions, contemplative, altered states, etc and have come up empty. You will see if you continue on that Richard’s knowledge of the mystical traditions of the world and writings of people like J Krishnamurti is extensive – this is not to put him up on an unquestionable pedestal, only to state a fact. Besides, Richard has stated repeatedly that he would be happy to find another person in actual freedom – to compare notes. The point in making the claim that actualism is entirely new is not (in this case) ‘actualist calenture,’ but a statement of fact as we know it. If another person in actual freedom showed up somewhere, that would then contradict that claim and it would have to be modified. I don’t see that anyone would have a problem with that – and it would indeed be welcomed. No 37 to No 54
…regarding Richards claim of being the 1st to be fully free of the human condition ( I will use the actualist term) … how can Richard or anyone know whether there was not some American Indian, Mayan, Incan, Aboriginal or any other from such an uprooted, extinct or rubbed out indigenous culture and peoples who hadn’t accomplished the very same thing? Clearly the writings of Carlos Casteneda point to the Indians of the Mexican peninsula devoting their entire existence to such goals. One is not likely to find such evidence scouring the internet. Living in Mexico and having been brought up interacting with more than a few Natives – of diverse backgrounds-, I have had direct experiences, as well as indirect ones, that clearly demonstrate how the romantic view we have about secluded civilizations is flawed. The Indians I have come to know from different tribes/cultures are not as happy and peaceful as we would make them out to be. I remember how disappointed I felt when I spoke with a Mazatec Indian and expressed my deepest admiration for their way of life and the beauty of nature. He looked at me as if I were some kind of nut ... he then continued to explain that he knew about cities and would prefer to live in one. Another time I asked somebody else from the Lacanja jungle, who had already visited a city more than once, if he felt the same way and he assured me that if he had the money, a place to go, and could take his family with him, then he would not even think about it. Naturally, many were proud of where they lived, but this didn’t keep them from fighting off one another for the best merchandise me and my father had taken them as an act of good will. And as a final note, I have an aunt who is a doctor and dedicates herself to the task of curing mostly natives who get sick from all around these parts, Mexico to Nicaragua, this has always made me wonder why the shamans, sorcerers, witches and witch doctors cannot cure a simple cholera or salmonella case without the help of a certified, normal and ordinary doctor ... but then again, there exists a quick fix for everything – I was told – one could always take a ‘magical mushroom’ and this would seemingly to do the trick. Well, at least for a while. No 47 to No 58
I remember the first few months I corresponded on this list I felt Actualists to be offensive and/or defensive. To my great surprise, I later found out that these were all ‘my’ feelings and had not to do with what was actually going on. I am not an expert Actualist but I do have a lot more common sense now then I did before I started practicing Actualism… so there is a chance that you might find something I write useful; that is the only reason why I replied to your post. * Living in Mexico and having been brought up interacting with more than a few Natives – of diverse backgrounds-, I have had direct experiences, as well as indirect ones, that clearly demonstrate how the romantic view we have about secluded civilizations is flawed. I have no overall romantic view of these cultures or civilizations as a whole. There is romance to be found in every culture. Yes I agree… so do you think romance would be needed if one were ‘fully free of the human condition’? …regarding Richards claim of being the 1st to be fully free of the human condition ( I will use the actualist term) … how can Richard or anyone know whether there was not some American Indian, Mayan, Incan, Aboriginal or any other from such an uprooted, extinct or rubbed out indigenous culture and peoples who hadn’t accomplished the very same thing? Clearly the writings of Carlos Casteneda point to the Indians of the Mexican peninsula devoting their entire existence to such goals. The Indians I have come to know from different tribes/cultures are not as happy and peaceful as we would make them out to be. Who is making them out to be happy and or peaceful? Someone who is ‘fully free of the human condition’ is of course peaceful and, in order to become irrevocably peaceful first, had to first be happy in order to arrive at ‘such goals’. When you write ‘I will use the actualist term’ and ‘fully free of the human condition’ and ‘how can Richard or anyone know whether there was… peoples who hadn’t accomplished the very same thing?’ and ‘devoting their entire existence to such goals’ …well, it leads me to think that you are the one who is ‘making them out to be happy and or peaceful’. One is not likely to find such evidence scouring the internet. That is why I am letting you know about my personal experience with these Indians. Thus adding to the knowledge that can be found on the internet so as to make it easier for other human beings to know what I know and let them do what they want with my reports; and I expect anybody else who is considerate towards his fellow human beings to do likewise, especially if he is or knows of somebody free from the human condition. And as there is virtually no unexplored territory anywhere anymore, where one would find a civilization – or at least someone in it – actually free of the human condition, and no available documentation, on or off the internet, about anybody tackling the instinctual passions and becoming free of them… I then conclude that it is safe to say that Richard is the first and will not be the last. Just as I find it safe to say that I am alive and well, despite not having talked to everyone in existence, and that ever existed, to prove me otherwise. * I remember how disappointed I felt when I spoke with a Mazatec Indian and expressed my deepest admiration for their way of life and the beauty of nature. He looked at me as if I were some kind of nut... Can one blame him for such a reaction? No, when fantasy is faced against fact, there is often ‘such a reaction’. * He then continued to explain that he knew about cities and would prefer to live in one. Another time I asked somebody else from the Lacanja jungle, who had already visited a city more than once, if he felt the same way and he assured me that if he had the money, a place to go, and could take his family with him, then he would not even think about it. Naturally, many were proud of where they lived, but this didn’t keep them from fighting off one another for the best merchandise me and my father had taken them as an act of good will. I don’t know how all this is related to finding one individual who found actual freedom for themself. I think I know why, I assume these are your words: Posted – 2003 Oct 17: 03:52:05 http://www.julius.it/forum/topic.asp?whichpage=3&ARCHIVEVIEW=&TOPIC_ID=231
* And as a final note, I have an aunt who is a doctor and dedicates herself to the task of curing mostly natives who get sick from all around these parts, Mexico to Nicaragua, this has always made me wonder why the shamans, sorcerers, witches and witch doctors cannot cure a simple cholera or salmonella case without the help of a certified, normal and ordinary doctor ... but then again, there exists a quick fix for everything – I was told – one could always take a ‘magical mushroom’ and this would seemingly to do the trick. Well, at least for a while. So there you have it? Case closed? That is like saying an alien spaceship landed in Australia to look for an actually free person and they went to the local mall and didn’t see one after conducting a survey of lets say 300 people. Then they went to a local public health centre and discovered the primitive healing techniques administered by the so-called brightest of the bright human doctors. So they flew off confident that there were no humans free of the human condition. Peter mentioned that no one was interested in Richard when he became free. Perhaps that has always been the case and such people died in utter anonymity, obscurity and left without a trace. The internet, global communication and global travel is a recent innovation & invention. The odds are great that if such a person lived, they may have left without a trace. Such people may not have had neon signs, marketing and advertising agencies, trusts or other such organizations, set up to keep the word alive for future generations. This topic has been beaten to a pulp here and I don’t wish to keep it going ... but what hell ... it’s a good topic. Maybe if you were to actually give Actualism a try, prove that it works – and undoubtedly see the changes that occur – it would be easier for you to understand. Note that I write ‘prove’ and not ‘believe’ … I gave believing in Actualism a try once and all it ever accomplished was to subtly perpetuate the human condition and create an image of Actualism that has nothing at all to do with Actualism. No 47 to No 58 Web page designed by The Actual Freedom Trust |
