Selected Correspondence Peter

Actualism and Actualists

I do like these types of conversations where we get to explore a topic over several posts. I remember when I first came across Richard, I was somewhat in awe of his encyclopaedic knowledge of the Human Condition and of his considerable talents as a wordsmith. It seemed to me that all I needed to do was read his words or sit in his company and imbibe his knowledge and I would get ‘it’. Soon it struck me that I needed to put actualism into action for it to work. I further discovered I needed to understand what he was writing about both in my own experience and in my own words. I started to jot down notes and insights which then led me to tell my story about becoming virtually free of the Human Condition.

In hindsight this was a fairly audacious thing to do because it was the first writing I had ever done and I was sticking my head above the parapet to be inevitably compared with someone who was actually free of the Human Condition, who was an expert in actualism and who wrote so well. What I found, however, was that the very process of having to document my experiences and understandings in my own words – not merely concoct experiences or parrot Richard’s words – was an invaluable method of learning to think for myself – something that is disparaged by our social conditioning and vilified in our spiritual conditioning.

Recently Gary and I had an exchange about the topic of intelligence that we pursued for several posts in order to come to an understanding that the human species is the only animal capable of exhibiting what could meaningfully be called intelligence. Richard no doubt could have contributed a few lines that would have been authoritative, incisive and revealing, but the excellent thing about our conversation was that it was us talking about our own experiences, our own observations and coming to our own conclusions, firmly based on the facts of the situation. This was not a mutual masturbation by a couple of devoted Richardites, but an active investigation of the Human Condition. T’was good fun.

To read or listen is one thing, to ponder and reflect is the next stage, to make sense of what is on offer – as in, come to your senses – is the next stage. And this is where mutual exchanges such as this, and questioning such as yours on this mailing list, are an invaluable aid in our making sense of what it is to be a human being.

We moved to a new flat last weekend, so I am now sitting at my almost-totally-new computer in our new flat, looking out over heath covered sand dunes at the Pacific Ocean. As I look out the windows, three hang gliders are hovering over the lighthouse on the cape and the palm trees in the street are being tossed in the coastal wind. The ocean is a steely blue-grey, today reflecting a seemingly paler autumnal sky. It is a scene of such everyday stillness and utter peace, repeated this very moment, in every nook and cranny, all over this vast paradisiacal planet.

As Vineeto is working today, it is one of those days that I often like to write, but I find myself oddly stuck for words. I remember when I first came across Richard he was in the process of putting the finishing touches to his Journal and he would often say that all he wanted to do was put his words out into the world, so that they would be available for anyone who was interested. It struck me as odd at the time for I imagined he would want to do far more than that. It was inconceivable to me at the time that he would not spend the rest of his life trying to change the world – to try and convince people that they could become both happy and harmless rather than stay miserable and aggressive.

I now know what he meant by ‘ all he wanted to do was to make the words of what he labelled actualism available for others ’, for I now find myself at a stage where I am experiencing the idea of changing the world or bringing peace to the world as like a sail with no wind in it. It seems that even my passion for actualism is now fading as it is finally dawning on me that I am running out of words to say and experiences to relate. It is as though I am no longer interested in actualism but I would say it is more accurate to say that I am no longer a practicing actualist for whenever I run the question ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ I can no longer muster a self-centred emotional or neurotic response. It is as though Peter the actualist has run his course, written his words, and is more than ready for retirement.

Richard wrote after the event of becoming actually free of the Human Condition via the torturous route of Enlightenment and out the other side, whereas I wrote of the direct process of becoming free of the Human Condition and I find myself more and more unable to write of a process that now seems to have passed its active phase where ‘I’ am in any way involved in it happening or continuing to happen.

It is as though my work is done both as an active actualist and as a documenter of the process of actualism. This stage has been going on for some months now and shows no sign of abating. At first I attributed it to laziness but I suspect it is more than that. I suspect it is the end of an era, the end of one extraordinary adventure and the beginning of another.

As I write this I am aware that I have written similarly before as an ongoing awareness or intellectual understanding but, as is often the case, some time later I find that an actual and tangible change has occurred. It requires patience, perseverance and confidence to go through these pregnant periods where awareness, understanding and insight coalesce into actual and tangible change – before you can chalk up another step out from the Human Condition. It’s a bit like leaning forward when you walk – every now and again you suddenly realize that what you had been busy with is now well and truly left behind ... and another issue comes swanning in to view, all by itself.

*

In hindsight, in similar types of conversations I see I was simply presenting the fact that the much-vaunted feeling of love didn’t work because it has always failed to bring about peace between human beings. The same is evident with the revered spiritual feeling of unconditional love-for-all – it also has failed miserably in eventuating anything remotely resembling peace on earth. I was not presenting a viewpoint nor taking a side, I was simply stating a fact ... and offering an alternative.

Yes, to me it is fact that love has failed to bring about peace between human beings. It does, however, bring about a kind of ‘pseudo-peace’, which is actually no peace at all. I am reminded of Scott Peck’s work with group development, when the group goes into an initial phase of ‘pseudo-community’: the people in the group have a cozy, amiable feeling of being connected and liking one another’s company, a feeling which on the surface passes for community but is shattered further down the line when the inevitable conflicts and in-fighting occur in the group. This is a dynamic one can easily observe in spiritual groups, when the members bask in the cozy ‘We are all one’ feeling. Which makes it all the more painful when these groups develop the characteristic power struggles and malicious in-fighting that all groups of humans are prone to. I easily recall the depth of the pain that Quakers went through, coupled with the denial of their part in the problems, when the Quaker group was torn apart by conflicts between the members.

My own adaptation to the problems at the time was a kind of stunned denial and detachment from what was going on, as I was still very much a religious person. It marked, however, the start of my retreat and eventual abandonment of religion/spirituality.

I like it that your area of experience and expertise is therapy and social work. At one stage Richard was interested in writing about actualism in terms of becoming free from the passions and neuroses that typify the Human Condition without using any spiritual terms such as ego, soul etc. – a sort of real-world approach to actualism. Of course, once you become sufficiently free of the spiritual world and its seductive lure, what is left is a much more pragmatic approach to eliminating the instinctual passions and self-centred neuroses that give substance to who you think and feel you are, as distinct to what you actually are.

Actualism is anathema to vested interests of spiritualism as is evident by increasingly hysterical responses and blatant denials of so many of the correspondents to date in objecting to being happy and harmless – but no doubt some of actualism will be adopted and distorted as a clip on as a way for spiritualists to be ‘more present in the market place’. Actualism will also be anathema to the vested interests of psychiatry, psychology and sociology, but no doubt again some of it will be adopted and distorted as a clip on as a way of being able to better cope with being in the real world.

All of this, while not being ‘the full monty’, can nevertheless only be beneficial to those involved.

Your expertise and experience in the therapy/social work field that comes through in your writing is serving not only to help dismiss the pathetic historic aberration of spiritual escapism but also fleshes out the process that leads to the progressive elimination of the psychosis and neurosis that is the Human Condition.

This business of becoming free of the human condition already feels tough enough at times but to beat yourself up for not succeeding simply means yet another moment of potential happiness and harmlessness has been squandered in ‘self’-indulgence. And again, this is not denial, because the next real thing to investigate, the next real issue to investigate, will come swanning in by itself.

In the market place, unlike the Monastery, Sangha or ‘inner’ cave, there is an ample supply of normal events and normal people to test one’s happiness and harmlessness.

Indeed. And this is one of the chief differences between actualism and spirituality’s ‘How to be in the world but not of it’, because in actualism there is no need for any allegiance to an exclusive group or clique, no identification of oneself being a member of any particular identifying belief system. One is free to be with people as-they-are, whatever their particular beliefs or religiosity or lack of religiosity. It seemed that when I was involved with a spiritual lifestyle, I was always looking for people who were friendly to my particular belief system, and I would befriend people based on whether or not their beliefs conformed to mine. In actualism, there is none of that, and one is free to have an actual intimacy with all people, regardless of where they are coming from. This is, as I think about it just now, one of the fundamental differences between actualism and so-called spiritual belief. As a spiritual believer, ‘I’ am dependent on the spiritual or the religious group for a continual reinforcement of my identity as a spiritual being or as a member of a spiritual community, and I seek this affiliation constantly as this reaffirms and supports ‘my’ existence. In actualism, one has to go it completely and totally alone, alone in the sense of depending on nothing else but one’s own common sense and intelligence as well as one’s own pure consciousness experiences as one’s guide.

Naturally, one can talk to others through the medium of this list, as well as read the readings, but there is no allegiance nor membership with a defining body of actualism ‘believers’. This further contributes to the dismantlement of the social identity because ‘I’ thrive on being a member of a group with certain defining beliefs. Without them, I experience first-hand that ‘I’ am nothing but a wayward social identity, an illusion, careering around in fear and confusion.

I always find it fascinating to think that I will never meet many of the people who write on this list face to face and that it is unnecessary. What needs to be conveyed about actualism and Actual Freedom can be conveyed by words alone. This fact in itself demolishes any Guru/disciple nonsense and the cosy insular-group syndrome. That way anyone who wants to gets to stand on his or her own two feet, any success is your own, earned by your efforts, and this fact then gives you the assuredness and confidence to proceed even further on the path to freedom.

*

In comparison with learning to use a computer, becoming free of malice and sorrow is a much more difficult task requiring much more patience and perseverance, which is why it makes no sense to allow any glitches or misses that occur to blossom into something bigger than they are.

Yes indeed. Having access to these discussions is an invaluable help because without the encouragement and ability to compare notes with others one might easily despair and give up. Few people that I come into contact with in my day-to-day life seem to be interested in ‘becoming free from malice and sorrow’. Having an infusion of the energy and enthusiasm of others from time to time for the process of actualism is an invaluable aid, and it is what this mailing list was set up for.

You are on your own in this business of actualism, but you are not alone. Countless people have and are seeking peace on earth – an end to the appalling violence and senseless suffering that human beings continuously inflict on themselves and others. Many have even sheeted home the cause of violence and suffering to the animal instinctual passions while others have addressed the issue of the ‘self’-centeredness, but all these efforts have failed to date simply because of the human obsession with the past. For some inexplicable reason humanity reveres the wisdom of shamans, witchdoctors and mystics and doggedly refuses to let go of the ancient fairy stories of good and evil spirits, Gods and demons and an ongoing life after death for the human spirit.

There are intrinsic fears to overcome in completely breaking free of spiritual belief , for the priests and God-men ultimately rule by peddling fear and superstition. But the stranglehold has now been conclusively broken and you and I and others are reaping the benefit not only from Richard’s discovery, but also from the cumulative efforts of many before who sought peace on earth.

You are on your own in this business of actualism, but you are certainly not alone.

I remember when I first read Richard’s Journal I had to read it very thoroughly and repeatedly in order to understand exactly what he was saying, and when I did, it was as if I was struck by thunderbolts of common sense, or realizations, or flashes of pure thinking unfettered by any beliefs, ethics, morals, values or passions. This was not the spiritual Truth I was reading, but the facts of how to become free of the Human Condition. My life-long longing for peace on earth meant I could not turn away – this was an opportunity to be seized with both hands. I needed to find out not only for myself, but for the many others I knew who longed for peace on earth, whether this worked or not.

I certainly knew what was possible from my pure consciousness experiences – glimpses of the vibrant sensuous purity and peacefulness of the actual world we live in. I eventually came to realize from these experiences that it was ‘I’ who stood in the way of the 24 hrs. a day, every day living of peace on earth.

The process of actualism happens in two consecutive stages – firstly a period of deliberate active dismantling of one’s social and instinctual identity such that you diminish this identity to the point where you are virtually free of malice and sorrow. This reasonable stable plateau is known as Virtual Freedom, whereby one is happy and harmless for 99.9% of the time. Virtual Freedom, with the bulk of the active work having largely been done, is a period of becoming accustomed to living in increasingly long periods of near self’-lessness. In this stage, apart from a few remaining issues and investigations, one’s social and instinctual identity, or ‘self’ – who I think and feel I am – has increasingly nothing left to do but to get out of the road. Eventually the ‘self’ becomes so thin and ethereal as to be understood, recognized and eventually unequivocally experienced as being non-substantial, i.e. non-actual.

The permanent experiencing of ‘self’-lessness is to be actually free of malice and sorrow – you then have arrived, sans ‘self’, permanently and irrevocably in the actual world.

This is sort of the same conundrum that I have with actualism. If one takes it up as a sort of banner or identity to hide behind, then one is not eliminating the identity and discovering the actual, one is adopting it as a ‘clip-on’ to one’s belief system, as you have said.

I noticed that I started to bring the terms actualism and actualist to the forefront of my writings recently and this coincided with realizing that actualism is now firmly launched in the world as a third alternative and is spread by word of mouth, it has already developed a life of its own as interest, controversy and debate is growing exponentially.

There have already been many objections of the petty put-down of ‘isms’ type usually based on the chronic human obsession with either blindly following authority or angrily rebelling against authority.

ism – A form of doctrine, theory, or practice having, or claiming to have, a distinctive character or relationship. Oxford Dictionary

So from this definition, actualism is a form of practice having a distinctive character – as in being neither materialism nor spiritualism but something new in human experience. It is neither doctrine nor theory but a practice, as in utilizing a method or undertaking a process.

I find it most useful to use the label actualist as a reminder that what I am practicing has a distinctive character – it is unusual, not common, different, extraordinary, rare. This is not a chest-puffing, identity-bloating exercise but a simple statement of fact. I am not a materialist, I am not a spiritualist, I am neither a believer nor am I a disbeliever – I am an actualist, should I ever be asked for a label, which is not very often.

*

Yep. Once anyone accepts that that ‘you can’t change human nature’ there are only two alternatives – stay normal and instinctually battle it out for survival in grim reality or turn away from reality and enter into an inner imaginary greater Reality of one’s own making.

If one is living in the actual, if one has a continuous and direct experience of the actual, then one is accused of being deluded, being insane. Sometimes such a person is regarded as being extremely dangerous, extremely subversive. For some reason, one who is gay and blithesome is a great threat to people who live in Reality. Such a one either becomes the but of jokes, scorned by so-called normal people, or dismissed as a lunatic. One of the basic reasons for this is that one who is actually free cannot be controlled by the herd.

It is serendipitous that the discovery of actualism as a tried and tested process for becoming free of the human condition has coincided with the development of the World Wide Web. The words describing this process can be read by anyone, anywhere, anytime and they are freely available for anyone to make of them what they will. In a free-wheeling uncensored forum such as this mailing list any objections, doubts, questions, fears, concerns, discoveries, benefits and successes are freely available for anyone to make of them what they will. The other, not insignificant, advantage is that any derision, scorn or anger can only be expressed in words and not in actions.

Much of psychiatry, psychology, and social work are really very conservative activities, concerned with dealing with extreme aberrations and returning the patient or client to ‘normality’ as soon as possible. As most social work students soon find out, much of their practice as social workers is going to be concerned with social control issues. As a social worker, you become a representative of so-called ‘normal’ society to your clients. You embody the time-honored ethics, values, and mores of the greater society, the society that subsidizes you by giving you employment. Were you not to represent these mores and values, you would not long find yourself employed in the field. Mental health work, I find, is extremely controlling and paternalistic. I have often been amazed at how condescending mental health workers, including myself, are towards their clients. While I can think of worse ways to make a living, there is a great deal about it that I am dissatisfied with. In the paragraph you wrote above, I think you have hit on why these activities do not work – they attempt to return the suffering client or patient to the pattern of normality valued by the society, the same pattern of normality that has produced the casualties in the first place. It is like treating war neuroses behind the lines in a tidy field hospital and then immediately returning your cured charges to the front lines. Changing the pattern of society, as the social engineers and politicians would have us do, would not work because we are that pattern. We are violent. We are aggressive. We are fearful and acquisitive, etc, etc.

Many professions or occupations have an idealistic impassioned undercurrent. I was trained as an architect and was imbued with the notion that good and pure architecture can ennoble the human spirit and thus change the world. I recently saw a comment in an architectural magazine that said ‘architecture challenges the belief that things were better in the old days’. The amazing thing is that now that I have stripped away all the emotion, passion and belief that surrounds my work it becomes the pragmatic, practical business that it is. I still do the best I can to design a building that suits the locality, the particular site, the owners needs, that is value for money and that looks good. I now do the same job, but it is totally different because there is no ‘me’ to stuff up the enjoyment of doing it or to battle others to do it ‘my’ way, as though ‘my creativity’ was of paramount importance.

But that is just how it is for me. There are no rules, or rights and wrongs in actualism – others may find they want to change jobs or do something different. It is the same with my decision to find a companion to prove that I could live with at least one other person in peace and harmony as a starting point to test out whether the process worked or not. Others may prefer to live by themselves, others will be happy to not change their existing circumstances; others may even change partners, or whatever.

*

It does seem that you have understood, and are experiencing, that actualism is about becoming autonomous. Understanding is the first step, experiencing it is the next. Autonomy is an inevitable essential part of the process, which is why I always chuckle when someone says I am a disciple of a Guru. Actual Freedom is squeaky clean.

I suppose given the propensity of humans to form groups based on hierarchical principles it is natural for people to think that the same thing occurs in Actual Freedom or with the Actual Freedom Trust. I remember imagining such things myself, for instance, that you, Richard, and Vineeto were plotting or planning to do such and such, or so and so, that you had some type of steering committee or planning meetings. In hindsight, that appears ridiculous of course. There was also the tendency on my part to view Actual Freedom as some sort of Heaven or cultic activity with Richard being the Sun, and Peter and Vineeto revolving around the Sun in some sort of Actual Freedom firmament. Given that hierarchy occurs in any group, it is not surprising that one would have such thoughts or even wonder where one fits into such imagined hierarchy oneself. Becoming autonomous is becoming free from all such outlandish hierarchical notions as well as any tendency to subvert oneself to the authority (as in power) of another.

I went through exactly the same thing with Richard. I remember at one stage saying – ‘Okay, I’m hooked. You can let me in on the secret now’. I figured that if he was a super intelligent being seeded from outer space and seeking recruits, I was ready for the spacecraft to land. It’s all a hoot when I look back but given the human condition and our predilection to blindly follow or senselessly rebel, it is all par for the course, grist for the mill or fuel for the imagination – or the spacecraft in this case.

It is an extraordinary thing to take the words of actualism at face value. I found I had to abandon all my cynicism, crank up my naiveté yet be wary of being gullible as I had been in the past. This is only something that you can do for no one can take you by the hand and lead you down the path. It’s your own journey to being free and autonomous, but then again, that’s obvious isn’t it.

When I first came into contact with my scientists, they were talking about how they could not tell the difference between madness and creativity. I thought they were referring to the old cliché about genius being next door to insanity. It took me a while to comprehend that they were referring to the activity of neuro-transmitters in the brain: that fMRI scans of a normal brain doing a creative task was indistinguishable from scans of a schizophrenia-affected brain doing the same task. The problem was that they could not eliminate the madness without also eliminating creativity.

What human beings lovingly label as creativity is in fact madness – it is both neurotic and psychotic, driven by blind passions and emotions as in competitiveness, fear, greed, anger and angst, to name but a few. The creative world of architecture is full of brutes and narcissists, vanity and insecurity, backstabbing and backslapping, feuding and fighting. It’s an architect eat architect world, to put it plainly. I now do architecture much, much better without these neurosis and psychosis running all the time.

Similarly, your lizard has other talents than malice and sorrow – so even if you could modulate its output, you might flush the baby out with the bathwater.

You seem to have got the gist of actualism. That’s exactly what we are talking about – throwing the baby out with the bathwater. To train the baby such that it believes it is God is madness in the extreme ... (picture adapted from P. Livingston, The Flacco Files, Allen & Unwin 1999)

Well, best of luck with it, Peter. I’ll pop into the site now and again to see how you’re going.

Actualism is in its infancy but it does work and this means that skepticism and cynicism as well as moral and ethical objections will eventually wilt. Any practical empirical discoveries have fittingly had to run the gauntlet of peer review and most of them have been fought tooth and nail by the shamans, witchdoctors, healers, priests, Gurus, Popes and God-men.

You will probably find you will go through the same process of being confronted by your peer’s skepticism, conservatism, cynicism and outright denial of facts in your attempts to find a way to curtail the instinctual passion excesses that are at the root of most neurotic and psychotic conditions. So you can imagine the fuss that a process that eliminates these passions entirely will cause, but peace on earth is such a prize that eventually actualism will win out.

But I’m just teasing you again, as you may have guessed. I liked some of what you were writing on the WIE list and assumed you might be interested in something that was non-spiritual. I also assumed you might have had a scientific background as the instinct section of the AF site could certainly benefit from a good dose of peer review. Wrong on both counts, but who knows what the future brings.

Despite being censored from the WIE list, I am still subscribed and I will remain interested in what you post, so I’ll be able to see how you are going, as it were.

Do I now reinforce a desperate alien psychological or psychic entity by entertaining my dilemma?

Having a dilemma sounds good to me, because a dilemma presents a challenge that can always be resolved.

Wank – ‘to maintain an illusion: deceive oneself; behaviour which is self-indulgent and egotistical.’ Macquarie Dictionary.

As can be seen from the definition, wanking is endemic in the spiritual world. I know, for I wanked with the best of them.

So your ‘inherent common sense’ tells you that a dilemma ‘sounds good’ because ‘a challenge can always be resolved’ and it is ‘thrilling stuff’? This challenge is superior, (better), to lying down, giving in, self-delusion, denial, etc. (but this is not best as you know from a PCE). This is all good sense to me ... and not spiritual in nature.

The usual Eastern religious/ spiritual approach is to abandon the dilemma posed by being an alien psychological and psychic identity and opt for transcendental wanking – developing, cultivating and finally becoming a new Grand Identity. The new challenge is to not turn away from the challenge of peace on earth, in this lifetime, and this challenge is definitely good sense and definitely 180 degrees opposite to the search for an illusionary feeling of inner peace and the delusionary feeling of immortality.

Why then, Peter, as ‘a committed actualist aspir[ing] to an end’ to end your ‘own instinctual malice and sorrow’ do you defeat yourself before you start with ‘self-improvement would never be sufficient, never be enough’?

Firstly I am way beyond the start of this process, I am into the challenge of bringing it to an end. At the start I very soon understood that this process was about ‘self’-immolation and not ‘self’-improvement for I knew ‘I’ could never be pure and perfect. This fact is obvious in a PCE. The world is full of ‘self’-improvement programs and watered-down Eastern spirituality that offer nothing other than a feeling of ‘self’-improvement.

Having said that, I do not want to discourage your interest, far from it. But to confuse what is on offer with spiritual freedom or a feeling of freedom is to miss the whole point of actualism. The only way for you to discover the difference is to read what both offer and then reflect about the differences between the two. That is what I did – find the differences, not the similarities.

The other reason I write the way I do is to encourage you to consider the full actualism program rather than Actualism-Lite, to use a computer analogy. The full program leads to irrevocable and permanent change. The Lite version gives some improvements – and definitely valuable improvements for others if you become more harmless – but experience has shown the beneficial effects are not necessarily enduring and total reversions to ‘normal’ can even happen.

Do you believe in permanent ‘self’-immolation and that all challenges can ‘always be resolved’? Is this not wishful thinking?

If it is possible for one person it must be possible for others, especially given the fact that everybody has had brief glimpses of this ‘self’-less state in PCEs. As for wishful thinking – it has driven the spiritual search for millennia and I see good sense in searching for freedom, peace and happiness. It is simply time to abandon the ancient ways, old fairy-tale stories and search for ‘self’-fulfillment, and set our sights for something that will bring an end to instinctual malice and sorrow, once and for all.

Sounds to me as if this ‘being happy and content with my lot in life’ was less important than ‘a healthy suspicion about the traditional spiritual illusion of ‘freedom’’ and perhaps the identity you gain with such a search, ie. becoming the anti-guru Guru perhaps?

My search for freedom, peace and happiness was always the primary aim in my adult life and this became even stronger in my latter years. As for being an ‘ anti-guru Guru ’ – you might have missed my recent conversation with Gary where I scrupulously avoided anything that even hinted at such a role. Not that the trap of Guru-ship did not arise during the process and I wrote about my Saviour of Mankind phase in my Journal so as to inform others of this instinctually-driven compulsion.

We are fellow human beings writing on this list.

Is the ‘thrilling stuff’ more important than the end ... or ... is the goal and the journey one and the same in the perfect moment?

No. Firstly comes the desire for a genuine freedom, peace and happiness that arises from a discontent from one’s lot in life. Then comes the checking out the options stage, which up until now has only been the spiritual option, for there has never been a third alternative available before. Then comes the decision stage – stay spiritual, or chuck it in and try something new. Then comes the process, which is the thrilling stuff. The whole point of the process is to get to an end – an end of ‘me’, the lost, lonely, frightened and very, very cunning alien entity that dwells in this flesh and blood body.

On the spiritual path it is oft said that the journey and the goal are one, and usually for two reasons. For those who never become Enlightened or give up, the statement serves as a comfortable sop to their lack of achievement. Even for those who achieve the Enlightened state, their final reward and their ultimate freedom lie beyond physical death – so they say they are still journeying.

Perhaps being a ‘committed actualist’ (at the present) is simply better than your spiritual life?

There is no perhaps about it at all. It is so vastly superior that I find it amazing that people still desperately cling to their religious/ spiritual beliefs, failed morals, unliveable ethics and precious feelings. They pay a terrible price in running with the herd.

These questions/ observations are given with the same sincerity that they are asked/ observed and in the context of your initial observations about mine re mentoring/ mindfulness. This is all good sense to me ... and not spiritual in nature.

What always attracted me to actualism was the good sense of it all. As for ‘not spiritual in nature’, I am well aware I could be accused of being excessive in attempting to drive a wedge between actualism and Eastern spiritualism. Given that they both offer freedom, peace and happiness it is important to investigate and look for the differences between the offerings. I had sufficient in-depth, first-hand experience to know that an ‘inner’ spiritual freedom was a bogus ‘self’-indulgence and its historical track-record is appalling, to say the least. Taking on something new is a daunting prospect but what was written about actualism at the time – which was only Richard’s Journal – made such good sense to me that I was encouraged to dig in to find out what was really on offer.

Getting back to your question about a common denominator amongst the people seriously following actualism, I see the quality of stubbornness or bloody-mindedness as vital. So far, some people have taken an interest in actualism to a certain point where some change has happened in their lives and then backed away from further pursuits. For some, their spiritual beliefs are too strong to abandon, for some the prospect of leaving a comfortable hope, ideal, relationship or group is too daunting and some have even suffered from what could be called stage fright – the fear of the consequences of being actually free is too much. There is an initial flushed enthusiasm of discovery, understanding and change in the early stages and this is typified by my writings in my journal. What follows, after this initial stage, can be intimidating as the putting into practice of what one understands is the real test, and the real work, on the path to an actual freedom.

*

The spiritual path is the pursuit of emotional events and altered states, whereas the path to Actual Freedom is the pursuit of irrevocable actual change. For an actualist, the real work is in having the courage to maintain an ongoing awareness of how you are experiencing being alive, of cultivating a naïve fascination with being alive and developing a resounding YES to being here.

It seems that people on a religious and/or (these words are interchangeable) spiritual path are always caught up in their feeling of uniqueness or differentness from ordinary ‘wordly’ people. When I was into the spiritual lifestyle, I always had a sense of mission or a feeling of being special compared to the average heathens around me. Take most Christian people, for instance, with their ingrained persecution complex – it seems to me that they are always looking to be persecuted by others, and are rarely cognizant of their self-righteous, pious attitude towards ‘non-believers’ and their downright persecutory attitude towards others who are not members of their little coterie.

The eventual aim in actualism is not to feel different, but to be different – to be free of instinctual malice and sorrow and thus to be a flesh and blood body only, free of any psychological or psychic entity whatsoever. To get to this stage, my experience was that I passed through all of the ‘normal’ stages of feeling an outsider and all the ‘spiritual’ stages of feeling driven to be a messenger, or Messiah, for others who needed freeing. It was such good fun to personally experience and therefore understand the instinctual lust for psychic power that fires the priests, teachers, Gurus, God-men and Goddesses.

I found people and events always challenged me in the process such that feelings and emotions automatically arose and all I had to do was observe them to become familiar with how I had been programmed to operate, both socially and spiritually. Observation led to awareness, awareness led to knowledge and knowledge led to experience, practical change and confidence. As you progress further on the path, confidence leads to surety, which, in turn, overcomes doubt and fear.

Combine that surety with stubbornness, bloody mindedness and patience and success is guaranteed.

A most interesting development is that Richard’s reputation is beginning its inexorable spread in the spiritual world. He has started writing on another mailing list, the DeRuiter Mailing List. DeRuiter is the new kid on the block in the Guru business. In very-American style he manages to re-invent the mythical Mr. Jesus as a misunderstood, and obviously very misinterpreted and misreported, Enlightened One. The ‘spiritualization’ of Western One-God religions is fascinating to observe – the gall and the blatant two-faced denial of historical fact and record is quite breathtaking.

From the comments that are flying around on the DeRuiter and another associated list, Richard is becoming a figure of growing interest and controversy. The cat is amongst the pigeons and the feathers are flying. It’s good news for those willing to read and think and daring enough to investigate beyond the sacred ceiling that inhibits and limits the search for an actual freedom from the human condition. One hears a lot about a glass ceiling that inhibits women’s freedom to rise up the business ladder and the other day I heard the expression ‘concrete ceiling’ to describe a bureaucratic ceiling that inhibited a free investigation into corruption.

A similar ‘ceiling’ exists for anyone searching for freedom, peace and happiness. There is a sacred ceiling in operation, franticly maintained and policed by the Gurus, shamans and holy men and their followers. All sorts of tactics, threats, dimwitticisms and inanities are strutted out to enslave the spiritual searcher as a loyal suppliant and stop him or her from searching anywhere else.

As an example of this sacred ceiling in operation I came across one of the plethora of Mailing Lists devoted to spiritual enquiry and investigation the other day. They posted an introduction to the list that is atypical of the current state of the human search for freedom –

Group Description:

A moderated list ... to share spiritual ideas, sentiments, queries etc for people of all religions and sects. Agnostics, atheists and skeptics are welcome as long as they share a spiritual world view. Differences of opinion are welcome, but flamings are not.’

I joined another spiritual mailing list the other day that proudly trumpets ‘a spirit of open dialogue and inquiry’ and I was most interested to find that it was, in fact, a ‘moderated’ list. I waited a bit and read the usual spiritual ‘mutual admiration society’ in operation, complete with the usual humble pride and mindless parroting of the Master clearly evident in the posts. I was twigged to write when someone wrote in and very clearly and concisely described a Pure Consciousness Experience (or peak experience) that had seemingly followed the usual twist to become a full-on Altered State of Consciousness (or Satori). It proved a too-tempting opportunity for me to describe to a sincere seeker the difference between the two experiences and I will be curious to see the reaction from the List Moderator. There are two chances of it being posted – Buckley’s and none – but it is such good fun to poke another hole in the sacred ceiling. I already observe that Richard has put some whopping stress cracks in it and it won’t be long before some breaches are made by other intrepid pioneers.

A little reading of the experience of pioneers and first-timers in any field of human endeavour will reveal that one’s own instinctual fear and the fear of ostracization by one’s peers are among the major hurdles to overcome. All the pioneers who dared to break the shackles, who refused to kow-tow to ignorance and superstition, who broke from the herd, who found it impossible to compromise and live a second-rate life, who acted altruistically and not selfishly, had to overcome these hurdles. In our case the sacred ceiling has been breached by Richard but it is up to each of us to make our own journey to freedom. By doing nothing one remains a spectator, an interested by-stander or curious onlooker, but not a player in the game. To think one is free or to feel one is free is not an actual freedom. An actual freedom comes from action and change not thinking and feeling.

Many, many women were pioneers in women breaking free of the yoke of domesticity and their hard-won free access to education, business, government, law, professional work, sport, armed forces, etc. Each of those women did it by themselves, for themselves, yet many had altruistic motives as well. Each gained support from others doing it, each stood on the shoulders of those who went before, but each had to do it for themselves. What was an extraordinary upheaval and a hard slog has now largely succeeded in many parts of the world, and curiously it is religious dogma that is proving a final recalcitrant hurdle to progress in many countries. Even more curious is the female response of current stoking the fires of feminist religion as the Goddesses arise to do battle with the male Gods.

But I’m straying from the point, which is the role of pioneers in the search for an actual freedom, peace and happiness. The major force in resisting human change and progress has always been the shamans, priests and Popes, God-men and Gurus. Always they look backwards for the answers, desperately clinging to the musty trite and dogma of a long distant past. Always cleverly trying to be seen to move with the times, adapting their message, window dressing it to current fashion and demand. Thus we see the Western religions adopting trendy Eastern concepts and all religions adopting the Earth-as-God religion of the Environmentalists, the modern day worshippers of earth spirits. The foundation and driving force of all religious belief is fear – fear of death is transformed into a passionate belief in an after-life and fear of inevitable approaching death is transformed into a doomsday outlook and a desperate fear of the future and change. Consequently, any human progress in leisure, pleasure, comfort and safety have been fearfully resisted throughout history and any attempts at finding a genuine, actual freedom have been met by the sacred ceiling of spiritual and religious beliefs.

This sacred ceiling is as real as the ceiling facing women a century ago – they had to shed the shackles of their upbringing, they had to free themselves of the imposition of moral taboos and ethical rules and they had to run the gauntlet of the abuse and disapproval of others, thus breaking free of much of their instilled social identity. Secondly, they had to overcome their own instinctual fears and many risked much in their striving for freedom. Many did it as rebellion, many actively sought fame and notoriety, many riled merely for the sake of expressing their anger and frustration, but many just got on and did it anyway. When I was in England some 30 years ago, I remember meeting a woman who was in her 80’s who had been the first registered district nurse in Devon. She was a pioneer at a time when women were not in any of the professions and certainly not in an autonomous and responsible position in the community. Hearing her stories I was struck by both her integrity and her altruistic motives. She did it for herself and the fun and adventure of it, but she also did it to be of practical help to others and for the thrill of pioneering – being amongst the first, being at the forefront, the cutting edge. Hers was not a story that will be known, she was not famous, yet the women who have followed and emulated women like her were able to stand on her shoulders – follow in her footsteps.

It is exactly the same with becoming free of the human condition. There is a sacred ceiling that is being broken by pioneers and it will be broken only by people doing it, and the subsequent subversive spreading of the word that it is now possible. Those who firmly believe in the sacred believe the sacred ceiling to be actual, inviolate and impenetrable. For those who don’t believe it doesn’t exist – it is an illusion constructed by human beings themselves, given credence by ancient fear-ridden fairy stories and one’s own instinctual passions. How to break through? Make it your passion, your ambition, your goal, your work. Devote yourself fully to the task, ride upon the thrill of pioneering, take up the challenge and in my experience you will find altruism – right there with you, as an innate companion.

Ah, Alan. Another rave. I met someone the other day who had read my Journal. There is a copy that is limping around the local spiritual community and his comment was that my life ‘didn’t sound all that great’. I was curious until I discovered that he was one of the few spiritual seekers who were honest enough to say he wanted to become Enlightened. As such, a life free of the psychic power of being a Guru would have been most unappealing for him – no glamour, glory and glitz, ...‘no money for nothing and your chicks for free’. Just a life of carefree sensual pleasure, delightful companionship, ease and comfort. Vineeto and I sometimes look at each other in utter bewilderment that so many people raise so many trite objections to being happy and harmless, free of malice and sorrow. We sit here knowing that the sacred ceiling is in fact an illusion, and are oft moved to the pleasure of trying to tease other people to at least dare to stick their head through the ceiling and experience the actual world of utter perfection.

The other suggestion you made is in regard to what I wrote about realizations –

For a spiritualist, realizations are the be all and end all, the knowledge gained remains intellectual, usually translated into feelings, any experiences are [savoured], and ‘I’ claim the credit, becoming even more strengthened and aggrandized. For an actualist, [realizations are simply a serendipitous by-product of their investigations into their ‘self’.

These discoveries will usually be accompanied by a feeling of ‘how could have I been so stupid not to have seen this before? How could I possibly have believed that for all those years? There is an acknowledgement of success firmly based on the tangible evidence of becoming more happy and more harmless. No longer are one’s reactions to others motivated by instilled passions of anger, fear, love, jealousy, greed etc. And so one’s progress is confirmed by the increasing ease of interactions with one’s fellow human beings.]

I take it that you are suggesting to delete everything in brackets in this section.

In the first section about realizations being a serendipitous by-product of an actualist’s investigations, it is clear that it is ‘I’ who have realizations or startling insights into the Human Condition in general, and about ‘my’ feelings, emotions and behaviour in particular. These realizations, if combined with an uncorrupted objective in life, can lead to irrevocable change and it is actual change that an actualist seeks – not just imagining or feeling that one has changed.

On the spiritual path, realizations lead to a change in consciousness – i.e. a change in how ‘I’ think and feel about life as-it-is. These spiritually conditioned realizations, or insights, about the ‘real world’ invariably lead to affective experiences, which in turn can lead to temporary altered states of consciousness or, for those rare few who lose all grip on reality, a permanent ASC, aka Enlightenment.

This difference, yet again, points to the fact that the spiritual process is diametrically opposite to the process of becoming actually free of the Human Condition.

The reference to feeling a fool relates to the issue of pride, which is perhaps the most significant feeling that inhibits those who have trod the spiritual path. It is a shattering blow to one’s pride to admit that ‘I’ am neither happy nor harmless, to admit that ‘my’ relationships are not perfect and to admit that ‘my’ dearly-beloved spiritual beliefs are based on nothing more than puerile Bronze Age superstition and ignorance. At some point, this understanding must come as a shattering realization, a crushing blow to one’s pride, or else one is kidding oneself, indulging in ‘self’-deceptive cleverness or treating actualism as a clip on, a philosophy, a theory, a concept, an ideal, a belief.

It is at this point that one begins to turn around and to really begin to question one’s spiritual roots and programming. I would suggest that such is the strength of this realization that the whole spiritual world is a vast illusionary construct, and such is the turmoil created, that a break-through or glimpse of the actual world – a significant PCE – can occur at, or near, this time.

It is obvious from the recent posts on this list that, despite the fact that some people are initially attracted to Actual Freedom, at some point they find it impossible to admit that ‘I’ am wrong and Richard is right. This is pride in operation and then silliness sets in to point of blatant denial that they are on the spiritual path, that they ever have been on the spiritual path, or that there is such a thing as spirituality, even to the very extreme, by now common, inanity of calling actualism a religion. There are none so proud of their feelings of superiority than a ‘humble’ spiritual person, so much so, that this programming causes them to be very defensive, retreat into denial, become silly and even feel angry when they come across someone who is what he says is. There are literally scores of examples of this pattern in operation documented in the correspondence to date such that I may well have made light of the insidiousness of pride in my formulation of the ‘map’.

You’re quite a fundamentalist yourself, Peter. Now you ditch theoretical science and philosophy! I must say that you’re doing very well in taking YOUR position at least. Nobody can accuse you of not standing up for your views.

An actualist is a more accurate term, for it is not ‘me’ taking a position but the facts speaking for themselves. You could add pragmatist to the description but I’ll leave the word fundamentalist for the religious crowd.

But as I pointed out before I think that you might be going a bit too far in being that categorical and narrowing everything down to the extreme. I mean, if you don’t watch yourself you’re going to find yourself in the same predicament as the spiritual teachers, they also have a habit of oversimplification and trying to narrow down their worldview to fit their purpose. I’m just sceptical of that kind of approach, it only leads to division amongst human beings.

The teachings of the spiritual teachers, particularly those espousing Eastern religion and philosophy, are anything but simple and anything but narrow. The Western theological discussions about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin are nothing compared with the Eastern obscurations about what is Enlightenment, is Enlightenment a perfect state, what is ego, what is illusion and what is real, who or what survives after death, etc. What a confusing and bewildering mess it all is, and it is only clear to me now that I am outside the spiritual world, why this is so. They are indeed attempting to describe the indescribable for the spiritual world does not exist beyond their impassioned imaginations.

I do find your change of tack a bit abrupt, for you were speaking somewhat in actualist terms in your last post when you said –

‘I’m interested in seeing everything clearly and as untainted as humanly possible, if there is going to be any hope for mankind we have to be able to rid ourselves of every false notion and face the stark reality of life as it is and to be able to see what we’re actually doing.’

Something in our recent conversation does seem to have changed your mind a bit from your previous stance.

You of course would argue that your point of view is evidently more sane since you have the empirical proof to back it up. But I can’t see the use of dismissing the theoretical side of science and everything else that isn’t possible to verify directly by empirical methods.

The problem I found with believing others’ theories and ideals was that they are changeable over time as more factual evidence became available, or as fashioned changed. Further theories and ideals are culturally and spiritually influenced and the many variations only open up rich avenues of conflict, confusion, fantasy and fear, hope and hopelessness. Believing theories merely added more fuel to the fire of my instinctual passions, imaginations, dreams and nightmares – which is why I eventually abandoned the very act of believing.

Give me a fact any day.

What I’m trying to say is that you must be aware that many people might see you as an empirical fascist, stubbornly claiming your view and disregarding everything else.

What I’ve come to see is that people will do anything but face the facts and calling me ‘ an empirical fascist ’ is but mild compared with some of the comments I have had. It is no coincidence that this message – that

It is strange that I write in this way. I had started to compose a similar reply and then deleted it all, it seemed too personal to send out over cyber space. It helps to have read portions of your book, particularly the chapter on sex, and I related too much that you spoke of. I am afraid I have not broken through yet to the sheer sensual enjoyment of sex and I blush like a schoolboy to say so.

A couple of things come to mind. One is how excellent it is to have someone else who has taken on actualism as a practical down-to-earth method rather than play safe by regarding it as a philosophy to be intellectually discussed and argued about. This was the very reason I wrote my journal and the reason it came out the way it did – as a personal account of a very ordinary, common and garden type human being becoming free of the Human Condition. I wrote it for another Peter or another Vineeto, to describe how to apply the actualism method and I am well pleased that it has been of use to you. I also see that although it was written as a personal account, it refers to situations, events, feelings, emotions and passions that are common to everybody.

When you say you started to write a reply that seemed too personal, I wondered why? It would seem to me that the value of this list is in sharing and talking about these common-to-all experiences rather than too-personal accounts that may well involve others who are, for whatever reason, best left out of the discussions. Does this make sense to you?

I remember when I did a number of emotional sharing type groups in my spiritual years, what I eventually found most fascinating was the remarkable similarity in the emotional problems and life predicament expressed. I was eventually able to relate to all the issues that emerged – a sort of ‘Oh yeah, I know that one ... yep, and that one too’. What this did was make me realize that ‘I’ was not special or unique at all – for I was as equally socially conditioned as everyone else, I was as equally affected by emotional issues and I was equally blindly driven as everyone else.

I would suspect you have had similar experiences with traditional therapy type approaches and that this has served you well to give you the incentive to dig below the more personal surface layers and get into the common-to-all deeper layers. My experience is that if one makes the investigation into one’s own psyche purely personal it can too soon run aground on pride, guilt and shame, rights and wrongs, goods and bads of one’s social identity. One way to move through this minefield is by widening one’s viewpoint from being purely self-centred and this is where an overview of the common-to-all affections that constitute the Human Condition is an essential perspective. The other trap is to make the investigation too impersonal and the end result of this would be an intellectual-only approach, which would elicit no change.

What I am proposing is neither a too impersonal nor a too personal investigation and this is where pure intent, altruism, a good sense of humour and this list will stand you in good stead.

I am back involved in my business a bit more lately and I am having fun writing on another mailing list, both of which keep me fairly occupied. As such, I don’t seem to be writing on the AF list much lately but it great to see it bopping along extremely well.

Good to have you on board the good ship ‘actualism’.

As stated previously, it is preferable to have the inevitable questions that must arise when pursuing the opportunity and right to follow the injunction to study actualism answered by someone less capricious,

Welcome to the AF mailing list. When I first saw your post I thought you had wandered on to the wrong list, given your unwavering defence of spiritualism in your previous voluminous correspondence with Richard.

You certainly have an opportunity and right to study actualism – this is the very reason that the AF trust has set up the web-site – to allow the unrestricted opportunity for anyone to read about actualism and make up their own mind whether what is on offer makes sense. This reading has lead some people to come to a prima facie conclusion that actualism is worthy of further investigation and some have begun to utilize the method in their daily lives. Some have even begun the difficult and painstaking work of actively investigating their own cherished beliefs, indoctrinated morals and ethics in order that they may become aware of both their repressed or sublimated savage feelings as well as their precious dearly-held tender feelings.

However, to get to the stage of applying actualism in daily life it is essential that the person has a burning discontent with their life as it is – both their normal worldly life and their spiritual other-worldly life. Having ‘nothing left to lose’ was the expression I used in my journal. In your extensive previous correspondence with Richard you have shown not a skerrick of being discontent with either your life or your exalted state of Godship. This does leave me wondering if you have come to this list to enquire and discover or whether you have come merely to attack actualism and defend the spiritual status quo.

The purpose of this mailing list is to question beliefs, investigate feelings and uncover the facts appertaining to the human condition we all find ourselves born into, absorbed by and totally identified with. Given that the human condition is exemplified by malice and sorrow, the function of this enquiry and investigation is to become free of malice and sorrow – to become free of the human condition in total. This list is for sincere enquiry into the human condition in total – both the real world and the spiritual world. As such, it is meaningless to participate in this list unless you are eager and willing to enquire into the psychic nature of the spiritual world and the narcissistic nature of your spiritual beliefs and feelings.

In spite of the reservations I have about your inflexible track record of being either unwilling or unable to participate in this type of enquiry, I repeat my invitation –

Should you have any questions regarding the process of actualism I would be only too pleased to share my expertise but I have zilch interest in indulging in meaningless dialogues with recalcitrant defenders of their own personal version of Godship.

I guess you think by repeating the phrase ‘the worldview called actualism’ you will somehow change a practical process of ‘self’-investigation into something much less threatening – a theory, a doctrine, a system of principles, a worldview. It is you who insists on making a pragmatic process aimed at eliminating one’s own malice and sorrow into a head-banging philosophy.

At this point, in completing the advice ‘I thoroughly recommend the study of actualism’ and following the advice at the actualism website (An illustrated complete introduction to Actual Freedom, recommended for all newcomers), there has been no pragmatic process aimed at eliminating one’s own malice and sorrow mentioned.

You obviously not only missed reading the opening page of the AF Web-site but also the very first opening sentences of ‘An illustrated complete introduction to Actual Freedom, recommended for all newcomers’ where what is on offer, as a practicality, is explained clearly and upfront –

Introducing Actual Freedom –

For thousands of years, human beings have searched for genuine freedom, peace and happiness.

Now, for the first time, a proven method has been devised to eliminate the genetically-encoded instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire, the very passions that are the root cause of human bondage, malice and sorrow.

Actual Freedom has nothing at all to do with the traditional spiritual path of transcendence and avoidance – the promise of a mythical ‘freedom’ in an imaginary life-after-death.

This new, non-spiritual method produces an actual freedom from our instinctual animal passions, here and now, on earth, in this lifetime. Introduction into Actual Freedom, Introduction

Methinks you are far more interested in ‘Who’ or ‘What’ created animate life rather than in the question as to why so-called intelligent conscious animate life – the 6 billion or so human beings currently on the planet – are still involved in a grim instinctual and senseless battle for survival.

In short, actualism directly addresses the question of why are human beings are in an almost constant state of war with each other and offers a pragmatic solution.

*

You are missing the point of what actualism is about, exactly as you did in all of your previous correspondence with Richard.

Thus far in the study, the point of the world viewed being called actualism is about the process of the universe giving rise to the circumstances that resulted in inanimate matter becoming animate matter. This point has not only not been missed, it is being thoroughly examined as to not be misunderstood.

‘The process of the universe giving rise to the circumstances that resulted in inanimate matter becoming animate matter’ has nothing at all to do with the very-recent discovery of the process of actualism.

By all the available evidence the process of inanimate matter becoming animate matter first happened on this planet billions of years ago. As such, the initial process has already happened, it is a fait accompli, it is a given, it is a fact. Believe it or not, you and I are animate matter – what is known as live matter, living things, sentient beings, flesh and blood, corporeal, or to use cyber-jargon, ‘wetware’ as opposed to hardware or software.

We can discuss the myriad of human beliefs and theories about how this process happened, why it happened or which God made it happen and why He/She/It made it happen, if you insist, but it has bugger all to do with the fact that it happened and still is happening this very moment all over this planet.

These types of philosophical discussions, so-called examinations, posits and postulations, theories, beliefs and flights of imagination are a furphy – a distraction from the main event of actualism, which is about a method of freeing conscious animate matter – flesh and blood humans – from its archaic bio-heritage of ‘self’-centred malice and sorrow.

*

*deep bow*

If you will, when using quote marks, please be certain that the material included therein is an actual quote. In the case of ‘error in text’, you have indicated you are quoting from the material of this conversation, when in fact the phrase ‘error in text’ has not been offered. You may be intending to refer to ‘... error in the text’ that was offered to indicate that there was no interest in pursuing the mistake in category encountered in the previous communication until such time as ‘...we encounter a similar error in the text under study’. Thank you.

*Mind the keyboard ...*

It’s a good thing you have told me you are not interested in semantics or we would never get anywhere in this conversation. I’ll take your advice and try to be more careful with my p’s and q’s ... and the’s ... in future. By the way, I note you have made a similar mistake in misquoting because the phrase I used was ‘errors in text’ – as in the present error and future ‘similar error’ – and not ‘error in text’ as you quoted.

One of the attributes of an actualist is a willingness to admit to making mistakes – indeed, how else would you become an actualist? Otherwise you would stubbornly remain a ‘self’ insisting you are right, while at the same time knowing you are wrong ... or you could end up a God-man, as in infallible, and then you would be really stuck on ‘Self’-righteousness.

But in the interest of moving on, can we take my answer to your question as being my answer to your question and tick this one off as well? I know it might be unsatisfactory to you but maybe you can create an ‘unsatisfactory answer’ folder in your database.

Just a suggestion.

*

You are obviously perfectly at peace as your Self, being one of the fathomless all-mighty God-men within the human condition. As such, you do not even recognize, let alone ‘own’, your fear, anger, doubt, sorrow, frustration, aloofness or ‘above and beyond’ sanctimony. Which is why you prefer to remain within a delusion of your own creation and prefer to ‘ not bother with what must be the immensely stressful, frustrating, and quite dirty business of digging out of a hole ’.

May I suggest that from this point forward the conversation not include personal opinions, commentary on respective personalities, critiques of respective philosophy, nor any material not directly related to establishing or refuting the facts immediately under study? Thank you.

Ah, you’ve noticed that I tend to divert from your strictures every now and again and try to slip in a bit about what actualism is really about. I know these diversions don’t get entered in your database component but there are others on this mailing list and they may be interested in my experience of, and expertise in, actualism. The process of actualism is about recognizing, owning and examining the feelings of fear, anger, doubt, sorrow, frustration, etc.

To remain aloof from or ‘above and beyond’ this process relegates any supposed study of actualism to the category of a faking an orgasm.

Have just been thinking about virtual freedom for the masses...

There must be a far better way to publicly examine and share our experiences and ideas than this primitive type-written listbot method?

I for one can’t think of a better one at the moment. I can write heretically without the threat of physical retaliation or retribution, I can write to anyone, anywhere in the world, the medium is largely and remarkably un-censorable and anonymous. And the act of writing itself has multiple advantages. Writing avoids the traps of ‘energy’ transmission, authoritarianism or Guru-ism, it necessitates thinking and clearly expressing oneself – an experiential exercise in ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ Writing on the list gives me a chance to get down in words what I have been thinking – rather than let the thoughts simply wander around uncommitted and unformed – in a way that makes sense to another. What we glibly call communication and fail at so often as human beings. As you can see I am a fan of writing – I find it a useful freedom tool and an excellent hobby.

Richard’s, Peter’s and Vineeto’s books are really excellent but limited to only a few who discover the AF Web-site. This is not only a personal revolution, is it?

Yes. It is only a personal revolution – which is what makes it 180 degrees different to every other so-called revolution which are really revolutions, as in go round and round in circles within the Human Condition. They are revolutions of the ‘if only everybody ...’ type, as in ‘if only everyone would stop fighting there would be peace on earth’ – the ideal of pacifism. Or the ‘if only everyone was of a higher consciousness, like me’ – the ideal of everyone following one God, that one God being Me-as-God or my God. AF is about changing No. 13 – full stop. There may well be some flow on from that – certainly you will stop being sorrowful and stop being malicious to those around you. This is of incalculable benefit to those you come in contact with, not that they will necessarily see it that way.

If our brain washing was a mass insane socialization then the solution might be a mass deprogramming ... or at least a mass awareness of the alternative... to find a critical mass to speed up the sleeping masses?

I do like and encourage your enthusiasm. This same enthusiasm was what encouraged me to sell my car and buy a computer to write my journal. I wanted to let my friends know about AF, but the direct result was nil. What I quickly came to realize was that I was really writing for me – to make sense of the Human Condition, my role in it and how to become free of it. Any side benefits for others will be a bonus, but not the main event.

I remember someone explaining that to save an endangered species one needed to exploit the species commercially, to ensure its survival. An unconvincing argument for anyone interested in the species’ quality of life, but it had a pragmatic kind of logic.

I think there is no doubt that the human species is an endangered species but not from external threat, nor from any ‘environmental’ disaster or earth resources’ depletion, but from the simple fact that human beings cannot live together in anything remotely resembling peace and harmony. As a practicalist, when I came across Richard, I chose to disprove the logic of Ancient Wisdom that you can’t change Human Nature. Otherwise a human existence of perpetual malice and sorrow is indeed a sick joke. I saw in a PCE that the universe is too magnificent, too grand, too perfect and too pure for me to continue to be sorrowful and malicious. So I set out to change the only thing that was wrong – as in silly and senseless – and that was a ‘me’ inside this flesh and blood body.

As for ‘endangered species’, I realized I was not alone in this exercise of seeking peace on earth. It is an almost universal hope and wish, but everyone looks to others to bring it about, to actualize it. Peace on earth is already here, of course, and only you can find it for yourself.

*

An actualist stands on the shoulders of many, many who have gone before in a grand exercise of finding peace on earth. This is no small thing we do.

*

It would be faster with ICQ, telephone, or even multimedia productions, I think? If we are serious about sharing and promoting AF with the world let us stir the mass media...? Television, magazines and newspapers are where most people are. Why must the powerful determine what ‘we’ see, think or what is possible?

Well, in the world as-it-is, that is the way it is. Even the mild-mannered loving ladies at the local New Dark Age book shops did not want to stock my journal. I did get one very mild article printed in a newspaper but when I ‘upped the ante’ to be just a touch heretical it was no go. I am at present trying the same exercise with a local New Dark Age magazine, so I am still on the case. It is really that AF is not a popular subject. No one wants to change themselves. It is much more convenient to blame others for one’s own misery and unhappiness and then one can have the fun of battling with and being angry at others. In the Human Condition anger is a pleasing self-gratifying emotion.

The other point is that there is no ‘we’, as in a group, who promote AF. Richard has his experience, interests and ‘style’, I have mine, Vineeto hers, Alan his. Each person who becomes interested in AF and takes it on will no doubt make their own contribution – in proving that it is possible to become free from the Human Condition something will spin off that will be valuable for others. The world is full of those who don’t live what they teach and unless one proves it is possible for oneself ‘tis but more piss in the wind.

I include writing about being virtually free of the Human Condition in that I experience that ‘not quite, but almost’ state I live as eminently worthwhile trumpeting about. Thus, I write from practical, down-to-earth, everyday experience not from theory or wishful thinking.

*

‘I’ realize the delusion of community but can the delusion become aware of itself?

Most have too much invested in their escape into the spiritual world to be aware of what is actual and the Truly Deluded are beyond being aware of their delusion, as in ‘Above and Beyond’. An actual freedom is up to you and you only – that is both its purity and its perfection.

Any ideas? Workshops without the tried and failed God, guru or ego-centered methods?

Well, I personally have no interest in ‘changing the world’. The Human Condition is unchangeable – it simply needs to be abandoned for it is rotten to the core. The only people I could possibly help would be those who are interested in changing themselves. And even then, all I can do is relate my personal experience and success at applying the method to becoming free from the Human Condition.

Having said that I also have the ‘sheep in the field’ theory. I see everyone as ‘sheep in a field’ busy doing what they have been told to do and programmed to do – fighting with each other and being miserable. One sheep manages to break free and finds that he can be happy and harmless but it does mean he is no longer a sheep and he is on his own. A few other sheep look over the fence and see that this sheep is having a good time on his own – he suffers not, quite the contrary he is having a bloody good time of it. So, a few more break out and as even more break out a momentum builds up, as it seems more and more silly to stay with the fighting, feuding miserable herd. But it’s always a free choice – whoever wants to break out can – you just have to be willing to pay the price of leaving the herd.

So my ‘breaking out’ means freedom for me and it encourages others by proving it is possible and adding to the numbers on the other side of the fence.

It’s a win, win and more win situation.

Perfect, in fact.

Like all analogies and metaphors, the story is a little flawed for one does not ‘escape’ from it all into a ‘next field’ but an actualist mixes, mingles, works with and lives with, one’s fellow human beings as-they-are in the world-as-it-is. The trick is to do this while being free of the shackles of feeling and being part of a group – of needing or having a social identity. The next level is to be free of being blindly, obsessively and instinctually driven to impassioned acts of fear, aggression, nurture and desire that give rise to malice and sorrow. For this to happen one needs to have lived a virtual freedom in the world-as-it-is with people-as-they-are in order to gain confidence that one can stop being a being who is instinctively on-guard or ready – and eager – to attack one’s fellow human beings.

This confidence, surety and experience also means, when the moment of self-immolation occurs, one will not instinctively grab for the delusion of freedom – feeling one is free rather than being actually free. The simple check is that those who merely feel themselves to be free are inevitable ‘up themselves’ and passionately feel themselves to be so, so superior that they truly believe themselves to be God-on-Earth. It is a ‘sincere’ and commonly held delusion, given credence both by Ancient Wisdom and impassioned feelings – but a delusion never the less.

*

But there is no doubt that I am interested in different aspects of the path to freedom than Richard, will make different contributions, will write and do different things. As will Alan, and whoever else manages to get off their bums, or out of the lotus position, and does something about the Human Condition as it is manifest in themselves. I am currently putting together a PowerPoint audio visual computer presentation that will give a simplified introduction as to what Actual Freedom is on about. Richard is prolifically writing on the Krishnamurti mailing list, Vineeto is doing wonders with the AF web-site and Alan is establishing an AF ‘toe-hold’ in Europe. The field for innovation, individual contribution and initiative is wide, wide open. The scope is limitless, the opportunities endless.

So, I am not discouraging you – quite the opposite, my experience is that you will find the experience of investigating and communicating invaluable. I certainly appreciate your enthusiasm and writing as it gives me an opportunity to enthuse and write as well.

After all, naiveté beats cynicism, communication beats silence and being an actualist in the world-as-it-is with people as-they are beats escaping to an ‘inner world’ – by much more than a country mile.

Hi Peter/Vineeto, Would you agree that the ‘me’ becomes thinner and thinner as you apply actualism and for you it must have become so thin that it is impossible to detect? Richard took a different path (or is it the same towards the end?) – so the identity was visible (in fact stupendous) when deciding to self-immolate... What I am thinking is that the decision to self-immolate might need to occur when the ‘me’ is still substantial instead of thinning out too far – for better success?

It is important to keep in mind that there are two aspects to actualism – firstly that it is an alternative to both materialism and spiritualism and secondly that it elucidates a method whereby it is possible to become actually free from the human condition in toto.

Of the two aspects, the most important aspect is the first because the spread of actualism will inevitably lead to a decline of both materialism – the mindless pursuit of power, fame, wealth and possessions – and spiritualism – the even more mindless pursuit of power, fame, wealth and possessions in a supposed spiritual realm. Actualism unabashedly offers a robust and sensible alternative to the traditional human pursuits that have existed up until now – rather than battling it out with one’s fellow human beings in a grim instinctual battle for survival or falling into the eons-old trap of indulging in any one of the myriad fantasies of a spirit-ual ‘other world’, one sets one’s sights on becoming as happy and as harmless as is possible, each moment again.

Therein lies the significance of actualism because as more and more people make being happy and harmless their primary aim in life, the less need will there be for human beings to be antagonistic towards their fellow human beings and the less need there will be for them to feel resentful about being here. The stealth-like, word-of-mouth, spread of actualism will be what eventually brings an end to more insidious facets of the human condition – genocide, warfare, murder, infanticide, rape, child abuse, torture, corruption and so on.

Whilst I do acknowledge that it is an outrageous claim that the world-wide spread of actualism will inevitably result in the desperately longed-for peace on earth, it behoves one to take a clear-eyed look at what are commonly referred to as the ‘ills’ of humanity as well as make a dispassionate assessment of the continued failure of the traditional proposed solutions … and then to ask yourself, is it not high time to try something radically different and does it not make sense that this something involves you doing whatever is needed to eliminate malice and sorrow from your own life, to do your part to actualize peace on earth?

So as you can see, the first aspect of actualism will be of interest to those who are moved to do something practical about bringing about peace on earth by doing whatever they can to be as happy and as harmless as they possibly can, each moment again. Some people will however be attracted to take this pursuit even further and for those the second aspect of actualism is then available – an actual freedom from the human condition of malice and sorrow. You will notice that the first and second aspects of actualism are sequential – the first is the means to the second. To put it succinctly, it is obvious that one cannot expect to become actually free of malice and sorrow unless one is prepared to do everything possible to eliminate malice and sorrow from one’s life.

One of the attractions of actualism to me was that it is not an ‘all-or-nothing’ business and that it is not a group business. Anyone who is interested in actualism can take it as far as they want, or as far as they dare, and they will be the judge of their own success depending solely upon their own aspirations and expectations … whether that is to be a little more happy being here doing whatever it is they are doing as well as being a little more harmless to their fellow human beings, or whether it is to become actually free of the human condition.

As for your comment about a thinner ‘me’, my experience is that the incremental diminishing of the usual feelings of malice and sorrow certainly results in the feeling that ‘I’ am thinner or less substantial and yet – despite the fact that to live virtually free from malice and sorrow is way beyond human expectations – ‘I’ remain an ‘I’ until ‘I’ am no more.

No glamour, glory nor glitz to be found hereabouts.

Why can’t you enjoy the ‘fickle spotlight of fame’? As long as you don’t get addicted to it, what difference does it make? What kind of freedom is it if a little media spotlight can ruin it? It is mentioned here about being altruistic – what kind of altruism is it when one won’t give up their foxhole to further their stated goals of peace on earth? Why not go out and promote actualism on the Oprah Show like Deepak Chopra? Why not go mainstream?

Well for a start, it was only a few hundred years ago that human beings burnt other human beings at the stake for being heretics and actualism is heretical. The fanaticism of the self-righteous is not something to be taken lightly. Galileo was forced to recant his discovery that confirmed that the Bible was wrong and the earth rotated around the sun. Charles Darwin agonized for decades before going public with his discovery that God didn’t create all the creatures on earth and then he made sure he avoided the spotlight of fame thereafter. And there are many people who are more than willing to kill others in order to defend their beliefs if they feel them to be threatened. Need I go on?

Richard stated in a recent post that in a few years he will go off to a secluded retreat to enjoy the rest of his life in ‘paradisaical obscurity’: I am not saying anything against doing that but if one really believed that their method could bring peace on earth, why not go on a promotional tour? Maybe you all should get off your backsides and start competing with the tried and tired and failed methods and religions around the globe instead of remaining anonymous and in your comfort zones hidden from the glamour, glory & the glitz as you say?

It obviously hasn’t yet occurred to you yet as to why actualism is not popular – actualism it is not popular because it is non-spiritual and spirituality in some form or another is de-rigueur within the human condition. As such, actualism will only appeal to those who are disenchanted with spiritualism and want to become free of the human condition in toto.


Peter’s Text © The Actual Freedom Trust