List AF-P Correspondent # 23

Topics covered

The New Brotherhood ruled by a God or Goddess?, acknowledging the facts meant that I had to abandon ‘my’ precious beliefs, the dark underbelly of Humanity is indeed diabolical, I can assure you that Richard does in fact exist, this temporary ‘self’-less sensual experience of perfection and purity is what is known as a PCE, Richard acknowledged the failure of all previous human endeavour to find peace on earth, to believe that Richard is a Messiah is to miss the whole point of actualism, modern scientific empirical discoveries of neuro-biology and genetics with regard to the human brain, both guru and disciple know that the game they are playing is false, the Tibetan Lama-rama, there is in fact nothing good at all about spiritualism * monosyllabism * one can be sensately aware of one’s hand without affective feeling, the physical universe is infinite and perfect, one’s innate intelligence * looking forward when something happens to someone else only postpones the immediate opportunity you have for being happy and harmless right now

Sorry Peter for having changed the thread name. I’m sure you will treat this mail in a way that it will be presented as is meant to be so if you receive this as personal only please make sure that is available to all subscribers of AF.

By the very nature of this list anything posted to the list is sent to all subscribers and everyone then has the opportunity to read or not, reply or not and make comment or not on the matters being discussed regardless of whether it is addressed to them or not. The list is also uncensored, as you may have noticed.

Given that the post was addressed to me I have taken the opportunity to reply at length and in detail to the points you raised. To flag a warning, there is much in this post ‘you’, as a social and instinctual being, will not like, but it does offer food for thought as to how radically different actualism is to spiritualism.

Having rather closely watched the conversation between No 00 and Richard, I like to respond to what I have perceived so far.

Although it’s not really my concern, I just share my observation and conclude that there seems to be a failure to acknowledge (I’d say failure in reception.) I know it’s common ground among new age blissninnies to believe that this new age is going to bring the long awaited brotherhood and everything is going to be all right, however clearly this may be a possibility it is far from an actuality.

The idea that this New Dark Age is someday going to bring peace on earth is the equivalent of perennially waiting for Godot.

The first major question that would need to be confronted would be whether the New Brotherhood would be ruled by a God or Goddess? Would it be politically correct to call it a Brotherhood? What about a Sisterhood or a Neuter-hood or perhaps a Celibacy-hood? Would human beings worship only One God or many Gods? Would there be a Western New Order or an Eastern New Order or both? Is Buddhism going to win the battle of the religions, or Hinduism, or Taoism, or Christianity? Which branch of which religion will become the unifying faith and what then happens to the believers of other religions or will kathenotheism be the rule? If so, what about all the other theisms?

Is the New Order going to eventuate by an apocalypse, in whatever form, thereby obliterating all bar the ‘chosen ones’ and, if so, which group of ‘chosen ones’ will be ‘saved? Or is some Enlightened Being going to wave a magic wand and everybody will simultaneously see the light? And if so, which light? Will a Messiah return and, if so, which Messiah or will a spacecraft land with the Message and if so what is the Message and where will it come from?

If you are still holding on the belief that the New Dark Ages will bring forth salvation and redemption, these questions need definitive answers. Then, if you are at all sincere about spiritualism, you would need to throw your lot 100% in with whomever is going to bring ‘the long awaited brotherhood.’

I remember thinking as a kid what nonsense religion was but, true to form, as middle age came along and the real-world failed to bring any satisfaction or have any meaningfulness whatsoever, I ended up being sucked into religion – albeit of the ‘new’ Eastern variety. This act of surrendering to God is what is commonly known as acceptance – in desperation for an answer to the meaning of life I abandoned all common sense, pulled a blanket of denial over my head and accepted, or simply gave in, to believing what everyone else believed.

The action of surrendering one’s will to a mythical God – in whatever form and by whatever name – is the very antithesis of freedom.

Recently Mr. Bush (US president) visited Europe to announce his change in direction with regard to the ‘solution’ to some urgent problems in the world today. While I was watching him making this announcement I found myself jumping out of my chair screaming no!, you sob mf.

Though initially feeling rather comfortable with that powerful feeling, later on I realized that I had not by a long shot looked and understood why I jumped up and went into some freak-out like this and then suddenly it took me many hours of processing keeping using the 8-word sequence as to come closer to this eventually I discovered that this expression of my dislike was in fact a covering up of my sense of powerlessness...

For a comment on the curse of power and/or subservience see

‘Authority’ in the Glossary. You will also find it illuminating as to Richard’s role in the business of actualism.

You may well consider one day that Vineeto was not correcting you but was simply pointing out some facts. Not ‘her’ facts, but facts. If you feel you have been corrected, as in being right or wrong or good and bad, pretty soon you will not like feeling as though you are being always corrected and sullen resentment and anger will be the inevitable result. The only way to avoid this pitfall, which has sent many scurrying away from actualism, is to check out for yourself whether what is being written is a fact. If you don’t think it is a fact, then there is something further to discuss or investigate. If it is a fact then it is obviously silly to get upset or angry about a fact, after all actualism is about being happy and harmless given the facts of life as-they-are.

This is exactly how Vineeto and I came to live in peace and harmony, we stopped arguing as to whose point of view was right and whose was wrong – we put the issue on the table, thoroughly investigated it and came up with the facts. Seeing and acknowledging the facts meant that I had to abandon ‘my’ precious beliefs if I wanted to live with her without currying conflict and harbouring resentment. This is what is meant in practical terms by the phrase replacing beliefs with facts and the result of this process is an incremental demolishing of your social identity.

Just another point that may be worthwhile considering. What Richard said in regard to actual freedom in the Authority passage that I mentioned above, equally applies to Vineeto in regard to virtual freedom – she is an authority on virtual freedom, an expert, a trail-blazer.

These problems (mentioned by Bush) roughly can be summarized as dealing with security and pollution on a global scale. Considering that these problems are the fruits of humanity’s endeavour to survive on this planet throughout history.

All the problems that blight humanity can be sheeted home to the instinctual animal survival passions, genetically-encoded by blind nature in each and every human being. Security is only a problem because human beings are driven by fear, aggression, nurture and desire, and pollution is only an issue because of the relentless and senseless drive to procreate and proliferate, come what may. The seeing and understanding of this is one thing, the next and obvious question is – what am ‘I’ going to do about it?

Also considering that some collective ‘property’ i.e. the development of the formulae E=mc2 was done by one person Einstein. ... I said to myself could it be that?

The fleshbodybrain or bio-organism <Richard> goes through a series of sequences in order to extend itself by using a fully integrated apperceptive experience of the tool language using the internet as an extension. In this process the medium is the message if the medium is understood the message is received (added to the collective human consciousness as a new probability) ... (I’m not going into that, it’s too complicated).

If I have got it right, I think what you are saying is that you have read on your computer-screen some of what Richard has written, either on this mailing list or perhaps on the AF web-site as well. The medium is not the message, the words are the message and the words mean what they say. There is no hidden agenda here – the agenda is upfront and unambiguous. There are no psychic powers or psychic vibes hidden behind the words or transmitted through the words. The words convey a simple and direct message – that it is now possible to become actually free of the human condition and this freedom, being actual, has nothing to do with the metaphysical feeling of freedom engendered by following the traditional spiritual path.

As for ‘the message’ adding a new probability to the collective human consciousness – Humanity’s collective consciousness is already overflowing with probabilities, faiths, concepts, ideals, promises, viewpoints, hopes, fantasies and fairy tales. The collective human consciousness is simply the aggregate of all of the malevolence, suffering and utter despair of Humanity, of all the people on the planet and all those who have ever been. This dark underbelly of Humanity is indeed diabolical and is typified by the hellish realms that underscore all of the religious and spiritual myths and legends, not only in the West but also in the East. This abyss of endless suffering has spawned countless fairy-tales of otherworlds and metaphysical realms, Heavens, Paranirvanas, Maha-Parinirvanas and Further Shores.

Thus, from a universal human experience of the fiendish nature of the savage instinctual passions, was born the belief in a counter force of Goodness and Godliness – a universal belief fuelled by the tender instinctual passions. As a consequence the fictitious battle betwixt Good and Evil and Right and Wrong has raged for millennia – each imaginary force dependant on the other, both inexorably intertwined in the human psyche, both collectively and individually.

The message of actualism is about how to become free of this collective human consciousness. Actualism is about ridding oneself of all the beliefs, morals, ethics and psittacisms that sustain and support this ongoing mindless battle – all that one has been taught in order to make one an active participant, forever taking a side in the battle against ‘others’. Actualism is not about taking the Good or Godly side in this ongoing passionate war, but about leaving this passion-fuelled war behind entirely by aiming for the felicitous feelings such that eventually both the savage passions and the tender passions wilt on the vine, as it were.

It is impossible to get very far in the actualism process without examining one’s own cherished spiritual beliefs because sooner or later one will find oneself being offended when someone inevitably steps on one of them. Then one will feel far from felicitous and a vital decision will have to be made – to continue defending one’s precious beliefs or ditch them and make one’s sole aim in life to become happy and harmless, no matter what the cost.

For what it is worth, I can assure you that Richard does in fact exist and he does in fact type all of his words – with two fingers. Richard is not extending himself through his words with some psychic energy if that is what you mean by ‘such an extension’. The words mean what the words mean, i.e. they convey information ... for anyone who is interested. There is no mystical message behind the words or coming through the words or hidden in the words.

There is only a message from some fellow human beings to say you can stop fighting now, the struggle is over. It’s time to step out of the real world, and the spiritual world, and leave your ‘self’ behind where it belongs. It’s time to bail out, desert the ship if you will. We are not saying go back to grim reality, we are saying come here to the actual world.

Every body has had a glimpse of the actual world at sometime in their life. It might just have been a sudden sensation of déja vu – a heightening of the senses when you suddenly become aware of the sensation of the wind on your skin or suddenly become are of the sounds all around you as though the volume was suddenly turned up. During such heightened awareness every thing is perceived as being crystal clear and crisp, as if a veil has been removed.

There is a freshness to everything and everyone, as if you are here for the first time. There is also a friendly familiarity and an immediacy that is a recognition that I, this flesh and blood body, belong in this actual world – whereas ‘he’ or ‘she’ – ‘who’ I thought and felt I was only moments before – can only ever be alien to this actual, physical world. This temporary ‘self’-less sensual experience of perfection and purity is what is known as a pure consciousness experience.

In a ‘self’-less experience there is a comfortable ease and an intimate sensuousness to being here. The experience is sensate-only, sensational in fact – the feel of the air on your skin, the flamboyant colours, the sounds all around you. There is a bare awareness of being here. There is an intimacy with one’s fellow human beings for they are precisely that – fellow human beings. Life in all its forms on this planet becomes fascinating, an inexplicable wonder.

There is a crystal clear clarity, a vibrant physicality to things. Objects are seen to be not passive, dead or dull, for they are all fashioned from the material of the universe and fashioned by the only intelligent life forms in the universe – human beings – and one marvels at the ingenuity of that intelligence. Not only do things become things to wonder at, but everyday events have an unrehearsed spontaneity that is fascinating to be a part of.

It is as though you are suddenly seeing and experiencing the world as it actually is, when there is no ‘me’ to prevent this sensual experiencing from happening. ‘He’ and his worries and moods are left behind as it were, it is as though a burden has been lifted from one’s shoulders, as if one has woken up from a bad dream or nightmare and as though you have entered another dimension – the actual sensate-luxurious world that this world really is.

The ongoing richness of sensate experiencing, be it touching, hearing, seeing, tasting or smelling, confirms the actuality of this world. This universe is perfect, it is incomparable in its majesty, being infinite it is unsurpassable, being eternal it is peerless. Being benign it is faultless, without malice. Being fascinating it is enchanting, without sorrow. It is the ongoing 24 hrs a day, every day, experiencing of the actual world that is on offer on this list, complete with a method to make this possible.

If this is of interest to you, then it pays to read what is written carefully, to make the effort to understand in order that you can take the necessary action such that you can become virtually free of malice and sorrow ... because it is obvious that it is impossible to become actually free from the human condition whilst nursing malice and sorrow in one’s bosom. If one is unwilling to make this level of ‘self’-sacrifice, then forget the whole business.

The process of actualism is pragmatic and down-to-earth and in no way theoretical, imaginary or spirit-ual. Actualism is about becoming happy and harmless in the world as-it-is, with people as-they-are.

And my answer is, after having gone through some heavy-duty paranoia thinking no, not anymore so... From that perspective I recognize and therefore can acknowledge the actual freedom method as presented as is, as: ‘the fruit of the collective endeavour of our species human beings.’

The collective human endeavour to find a way to end the incessant warfare between human beings has born no fruit whatsoever – you only need to watch the world news on television for a while to confirm this as a fact, take a look around you at relationships between people, and examine your own attitudes and actions towards your fellow human beings. Do you see peace and harmony, co-operation and consensus, equity and equanimity?

What Richard did was acknowledge the failure of all previous human endeavour to find peace on earth – including his own – and set off to discover exactly why it had failed. In that sense the method he discovered to eliminate malice and sorrow can be seen as the fruit of the failures of the collective endeavour of the human species. This also explains why those who still passionately believe in the failed ‘old ways’ find it nigh on impossible to comprehend that there is now something new on the planet and that it that works.

One of the most pathetic aspects of spiritual belief is that, deep down, nobody believes that peace on earth is really possible. Thus the spiritual path is not only totally ‘Self’-centred, it is also profoundly cynical about peace on earth between human beings ever eventuating.

Not only that I also acknowledge the fact that he as the first one in human history has realized actual freedom as a human possibility (brought to earth).

Could I ask where you imagine it, or he, has been ‘bought to earth’ from? A meta-physical otherworldly realm or some intergalactic address of some sort? As far as can be reasonably ascertained, there is no intelligence in the universe other than human intelligence and to believe in a Supreme Intelligence, in whatever form and by whatever name, is to regress into the traditional folly of believing that we are but pawns on God’s chess set.

To believe that Richard is a Messiah, or an alien from outer space, is to completely miss the whole point of what is on offer in actualism.

Therefore he can be considered as the missing link in human evolution hence it would be helpful to realize for any individual that lands on that AF-site to take notice of the significance of the message and to inquire into the validity of the suggested method.

Hmm. Perhaps the first step would be to thoroughly understand the nature of the message, lest you start looking for a Significance that does not exist.

It might be helpful to read the illustrated Introduction (here) which also has some useful schematics that attempt to diagrammatically illustrate what has been clearly stated countless times both on the web-site and on this mailing list – that actualism has nothing at all to do with the traditional Eastern spiritual path of denial and sublimation.

I.e. running of the sequence <How am I Experiencing this moment of being alive> (9 words, 40 characters) keeping in mind that this is an altruistic action that aims at eradication of any experience as me (being an entity in any whatsoever form as a result of self-centred activity of the brain.)

Yep. Both only function the way they have been programmed to function. In the case of the computer I am using, it is programmed to function as a word processor, an e-mail processor, a web-browser, a photo editor, a CAD drawing producer, etc, i.e. it only functions the way it has been programmed to function.

With regard to the human brain, modern scientific empirical discoveries of neuro-biology and genetics have revealed two very fascinating aspects as how it is programmed –

This is good news because it means freedom form this programming is in our hands and our hands alone, provided you ditch the notion that there is a God running the show.

From that perspective the logical consequence of the availability of a program line that actually is working as a tool to reprogram the brain in such a way that although, fully capable of functioning with regard to survival-functions of the human being <as a highly vulnerable to outward circumstances organism>, it is able to preform without the necessity to generate a me as an experiencer of I as Ego or Soul.

The availability of a method to reprogram one’s own brain is one thing – daring to use the method on an ongoing basis is quite another.

One would need to willingly acknowledge the futility of continuing to follow the traditional failed ways and most people, thus far, are too proud to even be open to the possibility that they may be wrong ... let alone freely and willingly acknowledge that they are.

Needless to say that as the very essence of the problem is also present in the sequence <H?A(I)ETMOBA> There maybe the danger of an I that is seeking gratification *or glorification*.

Unless you totally abandon your previous spiritual conditioning, it is absolutely certain that ‘I’ will still be ‘seeking gratification and glorification’ , as in God-realization. To paraphrase a saying ... ‘Seek and ye shall find ... the Power and the Glory’.

To merely replace the letter ‘I’ with the letter ‘i’ in the question ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ does bugger all to reduce ‘the danger of an I that seeking gratification or glorification .’ In fact it is apparent that those who use the term ‘i’ are the very ones who are seeking gratification and glorification for the big ‘I’ inside.

The desire/need for either one of these <**>, needs to be recognized as qualities being rooted in the basic need for love (love being here dismantled as a survival strategy that has proven to be insufficient to realize actual freedom.

The desire for gratification and glorification is not driven by the need for love as is commonly believed – it is a blatant and not-at-all subtle lust for power over others and for glory for oneself. How better to lord it over others than to have them believe you are God-on-earth with all the accompanying trappings of divine powers and celestial connections ... and how more glorious than to feel one’s self to be that, omnipresent, omnipotent and immortal God.

As love is strongly dependent on gender condition hence rooted in a rather primitive part of the brain.

As gender conditioning is primarily a result of our socializing process, it is best to do first things first and begin to investigate one’s own social conditioning as a male or as a female, and all that entails, before leaping to any theoretical conclusions. Actualism is not about book learning theory, actualism is about carefully reading the instructions and applying the method in the everyday world of people things and events.

It takes indeed nerves of steel to really question this world wide ages-old highly cherished belief in love as a solution.

People have been busy questioning the human condition from the time the ability to think and reflect materialized in the human species – estimated by some to be in the order of ten thousand years. Questioning is relatively easy. You only need to rely on your own life experiences and observe what is going on around you in order to begin to question. Finding answers that work requires nerves of steel because you will find yourself on a path headed in the opposite direction to those still believing in the old solutions.

A life spent in endless questioning is a wasted life, whereas it is answers to questions that an actualist seeks – and down-to-earth experiential answers to boot.

Undoubtedly the first step in this sequence is fundamental; that’s why there needs to be a fundamental understanding of this first part of the sequence. In other words, the word HOW needs to be understood as the basic capability of the human brain for inquiry. YET how needs to be vitalised by one’s own apperceptive experience which seems to me one of the difficulties that may occur when confronted with the challenging sequence <H?A(I)ETMOBA>. Although I have no doubts that when practiced with pure intend this method is failsafe even if the first part of the sequence is not fully understood. The job will be done in time but the question is how long need one to experiment in order to stabilize the PCE, from which one starts off to arrive at ‘virtual Freedom (99% of one’s day) one has the experience of feeling great.

I would suggest the first question is not ‘how long need one to experiment’, but if one is going to start at all.

As soon as I discovered that the demand for effortlessness is a myth and can be a great hinder as it may dismiss oneself from self-responsibility and postpone immediate action, I realized that I needed to redefine ‘effort’. As the only effort is simply picking up the sequence (this can be hardly called effort).

You certainly have redefined the word effort ... all the way back to being effortless. However, redefining the word does not alter the fact that actualism requires effort. Not wanting to dampen your enthusiasm at all, perhaps we could re-visit the issue in say six months time and you can report on how much success you have achieved relative to how much effort was required.

It’s called giving a practical report, compared with offering a theoretical conjecture.

In doing so there is an artificial GAP created between the observer and the observed and the brain becomes attentive to that, that the apperceptive process is not, or only very little distorted so that it is easy to answer the question in terms of: I am this or that i.e. {<a (German, Aussi, Dutchman)> angry, horny, spiritual, loving, happy, resentful}.

If you are creating a GAP between the observer and the observed you are practicing dissociation as in ‘I am not that’. ‘I’ then create a new disembodied observer identity, dissociated from or separated from ‘my’ unwanted attributes, as in ‘(German, Aussi, Dutchman) angry, horny, spiritual, loving, happy, resentful’ , by the creation of an artificial GAP.

The whole point in running the question ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ is to become aware of how you are experiencing the world ... as a flesh and blood experiencer, and most definitely not as a dissociated observer. If you run the question sincerely you will find that most often you will be having an affective or cerebral experience – as in resentful, annoyed, frustrated, bored, worried, anxious, sad, melancholic, distanced, aloof, ecstatic, blissed out of it, etc.

The aim of actualism is to become a happy and harmless player in the delightfully sensual game of being alive, not to become a disembodied observer watching ‘my’ body-mind going through the motions of being ‘angry, horny, spiritual, loving, happy, resentful and so on’ .

From my own experience I can say that bliss experiences or ASC (enlightenment) are in fact temporary (not lasting) distortions of the apperceptive process.

A bliss experience or ASC is a temporary distortion of grim reality, whereby ‘I’ feel get to feel divine rather than normal human.

Apperception is not a process. Apperception only operates in a completely ‘self’-less state. As such, apperception only occurs for the interim of a PCE or as an ongoing experiencing in Actual Freedom. Apperception is to know by direct experience that grim reality is an illusion and that any spiritual experiences are a delusion – a further fantasy-world illusion, ‘self’-created in order to escape from the nightmare of the primary illusion.

This AF-method can be applied virtually everywhere at any time that is in bed or even in the supermarket.

Given that what you have described above is not the AF method but a method of dissociated observation, your comment is baseless.

Needless to say that these ASC (experiences although highly pleasant at times, can be the source of self glorification and also can and will work out destructive in relationships with fellow beings as they may give rise to the sense that I am/(have the ASC-experience) and you are/have it not. Which is indeed obvious because ‘I’ has entered a state of self-delusion (though highly pleasant) that does not allow for a sense of fellow beingness because in some way there will be a game of guru disciple set in motion. When this is triggered it eventually will result into all kind of unconscious interaction (mutual delusion). Archetypal bondings.

‘Self’-centred spiritual experiencing proves not only to be ‘destructive in relationships’ between spiritual people and normal people, between spiritual people of different faiths and beliefs, between gurus and disciples but also between gurus and gurus. There is, in fact, nothing good at all that can be said about spiritualism.

Given that a picture is supposedly worth a thousand words, Vineeto fashioned a little diagram that clearly delineates the spiritual process. (here )

Even worse is the fact that in this process the possibility of looking deeper at one’s own social, cultural, racial, religious aso conditioning is destroyed because one thinks one has arrived whereas one rather has become completely blind to one’s own contribution to malice and sorrow on this planet. In fact there has been a (persistent) disowning of, or suppressing, certain qualities which one carries in oneself.

Whereas in actualism, it is essential to not fall into the trap of thinking that one knows everything and is arriving, or has arrived, before really understanding that the very first step is to acknowledge that one knows nothing about actualism. The only way you can know what is on offer in actualism is to have a memory of a PCE and then you will have experiential first-hand knowledge and experience of the paradisiacal nature of the actual world.

The process of actualism is brand new in human history, so one can’t know anything about actualism unless one firstly sits down and makes the effort to read in order to understand and secondly, then diligently applies the method until thirdly, one experiences the results. Even if you can’t remember a PCE before starting using the method you are bound to facilitate a PCE by your own ‘self’-investigation process. Then you have a first-hand experience of the actual world and you know that actualism works by first-hand experience.

As this game is basically a rather immature way of relating and rooted in the need to be special in some way or another, it can and need to be de-masked as in essence to be a power-play, in which one has entered into a self-sustaining illusion, in other words, a false sense of security. As this illusion is mutual it is virtually impossible to wake up from it.

And yet both guru and disciple know, deep down inside, that the game they are playing is false. Why else do spiritualists need to maintain their trust in the face of doubt, uphold and defend their faith in the face of adversity, keep hoping so as not to despair, remain surrendered so as not to feel resentful and keep believing in the face of the continued failure of spiritualism to deliver peace to a distraught Humanity?

What I did was turn around and act on my doubts about the spiritual path, which soon woke me up. I didn’t go back to into grim reality for that would be silly, but what I did was aim my sights at becoming virtually free of malice of malice and sorrow, i.e. happy and harmless, as an entrée, as it were, to becoming free of the human condition in toto

It simply depends whether one really wants to wake up, ‘get real’ and start living for the first time ... or continue on dreaming the spiritual dream.

Incidentally, as it has been more or less customary (on this list among others like i.e. <k-lists> to nitpick on spiritual leaders.

What people miss is the fact that the spiritual teachers are mere pawns in the spiritual game – they have literally sold their soul to become mouthpieces for some mythical God. To question the teachers as in ‘this one’s better than that one’, or ‘my teacher’s a true teacher and your teacher’s a phoney’ is to completely miss the main issue – to question the revered spiritual teachings themselves.

It is the notion that there is a super natural God, Intelligence, Force, Power, or Essence running this universe that prevents human beings from taking the necessary steps towards eradicating their own malice and sorrow ... and that is why the sacred spiritual teachings need to be questioned first before one can begin to eradicate one’s own malice and sorrow.

The Dalai Lama comes to mind in this context as the top of the nowadays Spiritual Hierarchy. Although not having met him personally, I know that his spiritual authority is acknowledged by all lamas as such, which brings to mind a memory of a meeting in Amsterdam where I listened to a lama of which I don’t recall the name. He explained the meaning of the expression FULL is empty and empty is full, yet after a certain point one comes to realizes that full is full and empty is empty. Once that has been done one has understood/attained enlightenment. Indeed I experienced enlightenment for a few days.

Which only goes to prove that the only way to feel Godly is to abandon common sense, as in the spiritual saying ‘leave your mind at the door.’ Or in this case ‘empty your mind and feel FULL of your ‘self’.’

Also he mentioned that Buddha was long ago and if Buddha could do it then, it must be a piece of cake for us nowadays to reach that point in fact we should go much further and manage it to do it quicker. This I found rather encouraging and challenging so from that I conclude that even among genuine spiritual leaders there maybe a sense that the teachings are subject to doubt to produce the desired result.

The term ‘genuine spiritual teacher’ is oxymoronic given that spirits, be they good or evil, Godly or Demonic are but figments of one’s own imagination reinforced by one’s own cultural conditioning.

For some, the Jesus of Nazareth was the only Son of the only God while for others Gautama Siddhartha is a legendary figure of authority, and yet the only reports we have of either of them ever having existed as flesh and blood humans are contained within the hand-me-down fairy stories of those who believe the mythology to be genuine. This closed-loop, nature of the various cultures’ spiritual beliefs is so incestuous that it defies credibility.

The only way to maintain one’s own particular faith in lieu of credibility is to invent categories such as good and bad beliefs, right and wrong religions, genuine and false teachers, real Gods and phoney Gods, etc. This self-centred prejudice then necessitates the need to practice tolerance lest personal prejudices bubble over into anger and resentment and inter-faith rivalries, hostilities and violence break out. And on and on the cycle has been going for millennia, actively perpetuated by those who fervently believe in spirituality.

From an AF perspective it is obvious that these monks are merely a result of a mixture of their religious/social condition and do not come to the point of questioning the issues that are touched at AF.

No, it is not ‘an AF perspective’ but a fact that someone who is brought up to be a Buddhist believes that Gautama Siddhartha actually existed as a person and that his supposed teachings are infallible. Likewise someone who is bought up to be a Christian believes that Jesus of Nazareth actually existed as a person and that his supposed teachings are infallible. Similarly, a Hindu will believe in the actual existence of all the Hindu Gods and Goddesses and their fairy-tale stories and accept them as being Wisdom.

Even as a child I thought the notion that there were so many competing Gods on the planet to be patently silly. I just got suckered into spirituality for want of being able to follow something better ... simply because the process of actualism hadn’t been discovered at the time.

Nevertheless, if one seeks enlightenment one might try to come in touch with the Dalai Lama as this spiritual source has not been corrupted unlike the present Neo or new age movement where all kinds of so called spiritual mumbo jumbo is being displayed, advertised or sold.

If you are saying the older the belief the better you are treading on very thin ice.

Tibetan Buddhism is steeped in primitivism, animism, evil, ignorance and fear. The Dalai Lama was both God and King to the Tibetan people and he lorded it over a superstition-ridden populace who mostly lived in abject poverty whilst the lamas lived a life of consummate luxury. All of the wealth of the country was drained into the coffers of the monasteries, so much so that the bodies of the dead head lamas were coated in gold.

The Lama-rama not only sucked the country dry, they left it utterly defenceless. When push came to shove, the God-King and his entourage took the money and fled, leaving his people to suffer their own fate. Tibetan Buddhism is arguably the most despotic of all the religions and the Dalai Lama is arguably the most hypocritical of the God-Kings.

Now if you are feeling offended by what I write, you may well ask would you have been offended if I had said the same thing about the Church of Rome and the Holy Father, the Pope. If not, then you may consider that passionately holding such a selective and subjective viewpoint is what fuels all of the religious wars that have ever been and are still being fought on this fair planet. The only sensible way to cease being culpable is to cease being prejudiced and the only way to do this is to stop believing in a God, in whatever form and by whatever name.

Also the late Krishnamurti needs to be accredited for that (being an uncorrupted spiritual teacher) because he never wanted to charge money, even the meals at meetings were for free if I remember well.]

And yet the same J. Krishnamurti was reliably reported as having a long-standing secret affair with his best friend’s wife and was involved in a bitter court battle aimed at preventing his letters to her from ever being made public. The term ‘uncorrupted spiritual teacher’ is oxymoronic, unless one believes the legends and ignores the facts.

The AF archives are littered with correspondents who have been initially attracted to some straight talking about spiritualism but who have turned tail when their own favourite teacher, Guru or belief is not exempted. The willingness to question the spiritual teachings per se, without prejudice, is the litmus test as to one’s sincerity in being interested in actualism.

So inquiring into the first part of the sequence HOW and using the H? as an abbreviation I found a way to vitalize this ie: <H(eroin) (appiness) (orny) (oly)> ^note0^ It is interesting to consider that heroine (not that I have experience with this drug thank god) when straight injected into the vain produces (that is for a junky) immediate results. In that way the AF sequence can be also considered as an immediate quick-fix. One can do it immediately. ^note1^ There is no linear order in this sequence (<H(eroin) (appiness) (orny) (oly)>) H is a centre and around that centre the words are constructed (currently I write this on the wall) ^note2^ I’m not making any suggestions here I mainly report what I have done and found so far. And I heartily welcome any comments or suggestions from serious respondents.

PS. As the header reads ‘to all’ I leave it to anybody who has taken the ‘trouble’ to bear with me so far to consider what it means to be a serious enquirer/ explorer into AF and as such may find this message worthy to respond to or not.

It is impossible to become an actualist whilst remaining a spiritualist. One has to fully understand that actualism is diametrically opposed to spiritualism and all it stands for. See

diagram.

While actualism is available for anyone, it is really only for those who already have some substantive doubts about the efficaciousness of the spiritual teachings in toto, doubts that are firmly rooted in their own life experience at having experienced failure first hand. The most difficult issue for anyone who has an initial attraction to actualism is to recognize and be able to freely acknowledge the insidious nature of spiritual belief. Unless one is prepared to ditch the old habitual traditional ways of doing things, it is impossible to learn anything new.

I am certainly not out to dampen your enthusiasm, but you need to be clear that actualism is not a spiritual-type belief to be learned and clipped-on to one’s other favourite beliefs. However, should you, upon further exploration, come to the conclusion that it is time to abandon all spiritual belief, then you will find that the actualism method does work – it produces tangible, verifiable and repeatable results, as is testified by the practical reports from actualists on this mailing list.

Just a comment about your observation that may aid the ‘coming to one’s senses’ that is aim of actualism. Firstly it makes no sense to separate the word hand from the object it is describing just as it makes no sense to separate the words computer monitor from the object it is describing. The word is a description of the object and in that sense they are one in the same thing. The moment I read the word hand I knew what it was you were describing. There is a common psittacism that floats around in philosophical circles that the word is not the thing, which is but a clever ruse designed to give credence to intellectual-only discussions devoid of any down-to-earth meaning or factual evidence.

It is also common in Eastern philosophy and is used as intellectual support to that ultimate dissociative mantra – ‘I am not the body’. You will have noticed that this is the whole basis of No 22’s philosophy of denying the existence of anything physical in order to argue that only that which is meta-physical is real.

It is possible to look at something and appreciate the visual quality of a thumb without thinking the word thumb but this does not mean that it is not a thumb. Similarly you can touch your thumb with your other thumb and feel the warmth and texture of the skin without thinking the word thumb or having any affective feeling about your thumb.

One can be sensately aware of one’s own hand without an affective feeling operating and if you then contemplate upon exactly what it is you are seeing can even give you a glimpse of the fact that what you are is the flesh and blood body. I mention this because I well remember the experience of first really looking at my hand and seeing the corporeal nature of it. It was physical in the sense that it is matter, albeit animate matter, and it was also actual in that it was not merely passive, it grew from matter, it is sustained by the input of matter, it is now showing signs of aging and decaying and it will inevitably die and decompose and the cells that are left will again become the inanimate matter of the earth.

I’ll post a bit that I wrote a while ago which might give a clue as to the delights of sensate-only experiencing as distinct from one’s normal experiencing that is both constantly pre-empted and totally dominated by affective feelings –

Maybe this is of use to you in understanding the striking difference between sensate-only experiencing and affective feeling.

Another way of understanding the process of actualism is that if one makes a conscious effort to distinguish, separate and eventually remove affective feelings from one’s sensate experiencing of the physical world then one can more and more sensually experience the delight that this actual world really is.

Similarly, if one makes a conscious effort to distinguish, separate and remove affective feelings from one’s thinking then more and more one’s innate intelligence – down-to-earth common sense – is able to operate freely.

You may doubt but I don’t. Do you really think human beings will forever continue to ignore the obvious direct connection between their own malicious and sorrowful feelings and the genetically-encoded instinctual passions? Do you really think that human beings will forever continue to believe the ancient fairy tales that malice and sorrow is caused by Good and Evil spirits?

From where I come from – an almost constant experiencing of the paradisiacal perfection of this planet we live on – it is cynical to doubt that intelligence will not eventually supersede blind instinctual passions and archaic superstitions.

Let’s be a little realistic. Only time will tell whether actualism will have great impact on the course of human history.

Actualism is not about changing the course of human history – it is a do-it-yourself method designed solely for individual change. The world is full of people hoping that someone else, or something else, will somehow change the course of human history, all the while being despairing realistic about the prospect of a mass miracle happening. It is an essential prerequisite for an actualist to fully realize that the only person one can change is oneself.

If enough people take up the challenge of being an actualist then the course of human history may well change in the next millennia or two. What ‘I’ realized was that if that was to happen then it was up to ‘me’ ... for I was one of the very few people who had serendipitously come across actualism, i.e. ‘I’ could only either be a pioneer, an objector or a fence sitter.

I realized the buck stopped with me, as they say – and integrity meant I couldn’t keep on passing the buck, nor the blame, on to others.

First of all we can observe that change comes only very slowly, i.e. radical change. Self-immolation the like I understand Richard talks is yet to happen to any second person in human history.

Change does indeed come slowly. It is now over one hundred and fifty years since Charles Darwin’s publication of his theory that it was genetic mutations, and not God, that spurned new animal species. His findings were but the beginnings of a radical change in understanding the evolution of animate life and their publication was met with vitriolic hostility from all spiritualists.

It took the recent discovery and mapping of DNA to provide the final irrevocable proof of his theories and to cement the general acceptance by scientists that human beings are indeed genetically-encoded animals by nature. And the spiritualists are still fighting a desperate, and often vitriolic, rear guard action in order to avoid the full repercussions of this radical change in human understanding taking root.

Given human beings’ eons-old obsession with believing the ancient fairy stories of Good and Evil spirits and their narcissistic fascination with self-aggrandizement and God-realization, it is a great leap forward to find some down-to-earth people who are daring enough to investigate how that animal instinctual passions operate in humans in general and themselves in particular.

Virtual freedom (99% happy and harmless) seems to be achieved by some of the current actualists, yet I wonder would 100% not be a completely different ballgame.

If you are acknowledging that the incremental process of eliminating one’s social identity and instinctual identity seems to be successful, then I take this as good feedback. I, for one, daily reap the rewards of my own efforts – which only leaves me wondering why the majority of people, who have so far come across actualism, either ignore it, sit on the sidelines or vehemently reject it.

As for ‘a completely different ballgame’ – personally I find the experience of being 99% happy and harmless to be extraordinary compared with how I was when I was normal or spiritual.

No. The process of actualism is incremental – you progressively extricate yourself from humanity by progressively eliminating the beliefs and passions that bind you to humanity. Becoming free of the human condition does not happen effortlessly in a blinding flash of light – an actual freedom from malice and sorrow is earned by one’s own efforts, otherwise one would end up being obliged to, or grateful to, Something or Someone for one’s freedom. You could hardly call such a state of bondage freedom, though many do.

The bottom line of being virtually free of malice and sorrow is that 99% is not 100%, but 99% is a darn sight better than zilch. Unlike the all or nothing approach of spiritual freedom – either becoming so deluded that one feels like God-on-earth or humbly surrendering and accepting that life on earth is essentially a suffering existence –actualism delivers the goods incrementally – one becomes incrementally free of malice and sorrow.

It might just be that this 1% is crucial to come to realize that I as an ego or I as a soul are both illusions of the mind. Likewise is the entity that thinks that he can change that however that is a rather pleasant illusion.

‘I’ as ego can be experienced as an illusion of the mind but ‘me’ as soul is a different story. ‘Me’ as my soul or my instinctual ‘self’ is a very passionate entity that is given both credence and substance by the hormonal chemicals that surge through the brain and other organs. These chemical surges are a function of the crude animal survival and propagation program and, as such, are triggered in the primitive part of the human brain. It is these chemical surges that humans experience as deep feelings, emotions, passions and instinctual drives – ‘I’ am these feelings and these feelings are ‘me’.

The difference between actualism and spiritualism is that spiritualist aim to suppress, sublimate or transcend their instinctual fear and aggression and thereby create a new, holier than thou, identity centred upon their instinctual nurture and desire, whereas an actualist aims to progressively eliminate his or her social identity as well as his or her instinctual identity.

The experience of living in virtual freedom means that ‘I’ as ego and ‘me’ as soul are so weakened that they very rarely interfere with experiencing the perfection and purity of the actual world. The proof for me that this change is not ‘a rather pleasant illusion’ is that the chemical flows that give credence and substance to me have also weakened to the point of being rarely experienced in day-to-day normal life.

So I’m looking forward to the day that someone else other then Richard will speak from experience and say now I have realized ACTUAL FREEDOM so it is really possible for more than one person. Who is it going to be, Peter or Vineeto or perhaps ... ... Gary?

You have raised this point before in your correspondence to this list. Given that you seem to be dismissive of the ground-breaking advantages of living virtually free of malice and sorrow, I am left wondering what difference another person, or persons, being totally free of malice and sorrow will make to your interest in actualism?

What I found was that turning my initial interest in actualism into action was totally up to me. It was clearly my decision, and my decision only, to prove that life on earth is not essential suffering, as spiritual belief would have it, and to prove that it is possible for human beings to live together in peace and harmony.

Looking forward to the day when something happens to someone else can only postpone the immediate opportunity you have of doing something about being more happy, and more harmless, right now.