|

Selected Correspondence Peter
Guilt

Keeping in mind that often the corrupting factor in a
sect mainly are money and/or power, also keeping in mind that the number of followers/ members/ supporters/ sponsors
(granted that they are militant) of a sect largely determines their potential destructive impact iow, the poorer the
followers the less harmful to their environment, the richer the more dangerous.
This does beg the question as to whether people living in poverty are less
harmful to their environment including their fellow human beings than the rich. From my visits to poor countries and
from my reading I see no evidence of this. There is currently far less pollution in wealthier countries than in poor
countries as well as marginally less overt crime and corruption, although the latter seems entirely due to the increased
likelihood of detection and punishment.
Also as the current issue seems to be ‘guilt’, this
being fairly acknowledged by me as to be a general, not a major issue of the human condition as it concerns equally the
male and the female aspects of being here as a being in 2002.
And the feeling of guilt is found in every culture as well as it is
fundamental to all religious/spiritual belief. Everyone is instilled with a social conscience, be they male or female,
white or black, Christian or Hindu, Rajneeshee or Krishnamurtiite. And beneath this social conscience, lies a more
fundamental guilt, the guilt that arises from being conscious of one’s underlying instinctual animal passions – the
compulsive urges of fear, aggression, nurture and desire.
Most of my life I have put the ‘blame’ on the male
part of humanity for making such a mess of this planet, hence my relationship with men always carried subtly traces of
either finding them guilty or feeling myself guilty but because of my ‘awareness’ that women were better I always
found myself a little better so less guilty.
Vineeto put it very well the other day when she wrote –
‘Quite a few men have adopted the female-generated
belief that women are naturally more caring whilst men are instinctually more aggressive.’
I fell for that one for quite a while and it was reinforced by my immersion
in Eastern spiritualism with its Ying-Yang belief. The male-female divide runs deep since most of the old spirit forces
and Gods were either male or female, most of the societal structures were divisively either male of female, most of the
responsibilities and tasks were split into either male or female.
But it’s a fascinating time to be alive since in an increasing number of
societies these old divides are crumbling and we can clearly see that nearly all of the supposed differences between
male and female are founded on belief and not on fact.

I too find that the partner relationship is where we
really test the mettle. At this juncture, I don’t have the child-rearing compulsion to interfere with the simple facts
of the nature of the relationship, and that has created (or exposed perhaps) some turmoil.
Semi-amusing anecdote: I’ve been pondering the questions raised by my
investigation into AF, particularly in the notion of ‘love’. My SO asks the loaded question ‘Do you love me?’,
and I responded innocently enough ‘I’m not sure what love is’. Wrong answer. The ensuing ‘situation’ may
however precipitate some earnest discussion. Without going into gory details, I did discover that some of my behaviour
of late has definitely included an element of malice towards her, cloaked in an air of righteousness.
I particularly like what you have discovered because it is an experiential
observation and understanding of your own feelings and not a mere intellectual understanding of someone else’s
experience – and there is a world of difference between the two.
I particular remember how shocked I was when, despite years of spiritual
practice, I became very angry over a trivial matter. It was as though a crack had suddenly opened up in my
oh-so-righteous persona and, although it was an uncomfortable experience, it provided an invaluable insight into the
hidden deep-seated passions that lay just under the surface.
If I can elaborate a bit on your observation – what normally prevents such
clear observations from occurring is the human social conditioning and the feeling of righteousness is particularly
common for those who have imbibed religious or spiritual conditioning. Because of these spiritual feelings, it is
extremely rare to find anyone who is capable of, let alone willing to, admit that they have malicious feelings towards
others. If they do admit to feeling malicious, it is almost always cloaked in some form of self-righteous justification,
as in ‘it was the other’s fault’, ‘I was simply sharing my feelings’, or even ‘I was doing it for their own
good’.
The other major factors that prevent such clear observations form occurring
are the socially imposed feelings of guilt and shame. As children, all humans are trained to feel guilty and shameful if
they think or feel wrong or evil thoughts and we subsequently learn the games of deceit and denial as a way of avoiding
blame and/or punishment. Because of the tenacity of this childhood programming it is vital for an actualist to both
understand and experientially observe that the feelings, emotions and passions that constantly arise are the human
condition in action and not one’s personal fault.
By conducting your investigations with this understanding in mind you are
conducting an investigation in a hands-on scientific down-to-earth manner, free of any moral or ethical judgements of
good or bad, right or wrong. By investigating the human condition in action in you – and as ‘you’ – you also
avoid the traditional spiritual trap of creating yet another identity, a superior ‘real you’ who then observes a
supposedly ‘illusionary you’.
You will find this business of becoming aware of your social/spiritual
persona is not a one-off understanding but an ongoing process. You will become continually aware of whenever you think
you are right and the other is wrong, when you feel as though you are being good and the other is being bad. You will
find that these feelings arise because of beliefs you have been taught to be universal truths and you will become
fascinated as you unearth and acknowledge the facts of how ‘you’ have been socially and instinctually programmed to
think and feel.
Of course, you have to be sure that this is what you want to do with your
life, because once you launch yourself into this process you will never be the same again.

If someone comes along and robs me from my money, do I
call the police on my cell phone? I, the social identity, am my country, I am the police and the army of my nation, as
these are an extension of ‘me’ saying this is ‘mine’.
Speaking personally, I concentrated on investigating my own feelings and
emotions about possessions, when and as they occurred. This way I was able to look at issues such as jealousy, envy,
desire, greed, resentment, hypocrisy, deceit, pride, etc. as they occurred, and by doing so I was able to work my way
through my social programming and down into the very survival passions themselves. This type of investigation is not
something you can only think about because it then becomes a philosophy and philosophy is about the pursuit of knowledge
and ‘truth’, not about experience and hands-on doing.
The moment I agree to have tasks assigned to a second
party with regard to ensuring, either my own security at large or my properties and/or possessions, I must allow for
hypocrisy. That’s how my social identity ticks. Demolishment of that ... ... is it possible at all?
The other alternative to having others do things for you is to do everything
yourself, for example making your own candy bars, building your own computer, catching the thief should someone steal
these things and so on. This is the ideal of self-sufficiency that is proposed as an alternative to the mutual trading
of food, goods and information between fellow human beings. The hills around here are alive with the sounds of people
building their mud brick homes and chopping wood for their log fires, in a desperate attempt to be self-sufficient. None
succeed completely for the ideal is unliveable – when the going gets tough they tend to rely on neighbours for help,
revert to modern technology for survival and comfort and, of course, call on the police for protection.
What you have discovered is that you feel yourself to be a hypocrite because
you fail to live up to an unliveable ideal. You may identify with this ideal as being ‘mine’, an integral part of
your social identity, but by holding on to this ideal you are holding on to feelings such as guilt, shame, blame,
self-righteousness, self-flagellation, perplexity and so on.
It might be useful to consider that actualism has nothing to do with the
failed pie-in-the-sky idealisms that are preached by the self-righteous – actualism offers a radical alternative to
the fantasy and hypocrisy of ‘if only everyone would …’. The process of actualism is pragmatic in that it is
solely – and I do mean solely – about changing yourself, the only person it is possible for you to change.
Living identified with a spiritual ego largely means
assuming that I no longer have the ‘bad’ qualities that can be ascribed to my instinctual nature, thus disowning
those qualities, calling it being unattached. In order to create the illusion of being without any social identity, I
have to suppress my hypocrisy which is indeed a very difficult task, as self-observation readily is to bring it to
light.
Why would you want to create the illusion of being without a social identity,
when this only creates the feeling of hypocrisy? Having discovered that your feelings of hypocrisy are due to ideals
that are an integral component of your social identity you now have a plain and simple choice.

Whenever an adult observes a child there can be a degree of envy at what
seems to be a carefree state. This is due to the fact that the instinctual animal ‘self’ is not substantially formed
until about age 2 in children, i.e. the instinctual passions of fear, aggression, nurture and desire are not yet fully
functioning. The other relevant aspect is that the child’s social identity – the befuddled mishmash of an
individualistic persona and a collective social conscience – is not yet fully formed until the age of about 7 years,
which means much of the childhood years are spent in ignorance of the grim everyday reality that every adult
experiences. <snip>
The envy can be for the child’s spontaneity and
energy – they seem to have an inexhaustible supply of spontaneity, wonder, and excitement. And children can say things
that are remarkably perceptive and ‘off the cuff’. This contrasts with the adult mode of functioning which seems to
be ever-vigilant lest one defies some social convention or one of one’s imbibed and socially inculcated ‘must’,
‘should’, ‘ought to’ irrational beliefs. The spontaneity of childhood is soon enough trained out of one by
one’s teachers, parents, etc. and the social identity becomes calcified and rigid. Then people try, through various
means, to regain that ‘lost innocence’ but never seem to succeed.
It has been a good many years since my days of being a father, but I have
recently had occasion to observe a 2½ year old, which rekindled my memory of my own children. What I observed is that
there is a ‘natural’ – as in instinctually programmed – emergence of a very distinct ‘self’-awareness at
about this age. There is a growing realization in all children that others think and feel differently to them – that
other children, parents and adults, are separate and alien beings who had thoughts and feelings that were not only
different but very often at odds with the child’s own thoughts and feelings. This stage of growing up sees the
emergence of a natural cunning in the child, whereby the child learns by trial and error to be controlling and
manipulative – to seek reward and avoid punishment by whatever means.
Whilst this ‘loss of innocence’ is to some extent socially learned by the
child’s observation of parents, siblings and other children’s behaviour, the underlying and primary impetus is
instinctual – the result of a natural development of rudimentary survival skills as opposed to imbibing social skills.
Observation of other animal species confirms that both cunning and forcefulness are essential qualities needed to
enhance the chances of any newborn animal’s survival and an observation of human infants reveals this same basic
animal functioning at work.
I remember seeing in my own children the emergence of what could be described
as an independent will at about age 2 – an independence that was definitely not taught, as it was very often displayed
in behaviour and moods that were contrary to the children’s social training and the best intentions and efforts of
both parents. This observation, combined with the fact that my two children had such distinct and divergent
personalities, first led me to be suspicious of the nurture-can-cure-all belief.
After my younger son died, I found that I really had to question and examine
this belief deeply or else I would have spent the rest of my life wallowing in guilt and sorrow because I had not been
‘loving’ enough as a parent. The belief that nurture can counter, cure or overcome the instinctual passions of
malice and sorrow serves to cripple all parents and child carers with guilt, as well as being an all-to-convenient
excuse for the human need to lay the blame at someone’s door rather than look deeply within themselves.
Having previously experienced that nurture fails to shelter children from the
ills of humanity, the death of my son convinced me that I needed to devote my life to seeking a way to open the
possibility for future children to escape from suffering the inevitable trails and traumas of being a human being within
the human condition. My father’s advice to me, post Second World War, was ‘be happy’ but he wasn’t able to tell
me ‘how to’. Standing beside my son’s coffin, I was suddenly faced with a task in life – I passionately wanted
to be able to pass on to the next generation the missing ‘how to’.
I know I am at risk of labouring the point about nurture as the cure-all, but
I do so with good reason. Understanding and acknowledging the fact that the genetically-encoded instinctual passions
were the root cause of human malice and sorrow – the root cause of every war, of every murder, of every child
molestation, of every rape, of every suicide, of every act of violence, of every bout of despair – was crucial to my
turning away from being a believer in the tried and failed truisms and beginning to looking deep within myself in order
to root out these instinctual passions.
I seem to recall, as a child, having times when I had
the most intense fascination with what I was doing at the time, whether I was playing with something or studying
something, or just experiencing something. Later, these experiences I tried to re-create through drug use. The ordinary
cares and woes fell away and there was this intense fascination and absorption in the moment and what I was
experiencing. Later, and more recently, I found in the Pure Consciousness Experience what I was looking for: this
incredible vibrancy, aliveness, scintillating, coruscating (all those Richard-words and more to describe the experience)
quality. It is the most amazing thing when one shifts into apperception, and one experiences naiveté.
It is not for nothing that Richard describes naiveté as ‘the closest
approximation to innocence one can have whilst being a ‘self’’. In this state of naiveté, there is such an
experience of wonder and one is in touch immediately with the purity and pristine-ness of the physical actuality of the
world around one. When this happens, one has connected with the long-sought Meaning of Life. The search is over –
there is nowhere else to go.
One thing about the spiritual path that did not sit well with me, apart from
feeling increasingly isolated and dissociated from the world of people, things and events, was the fundamental cynicism
that underpins all spiritual belief – that the human experience is one of essential suffering. Because of this
spiritual cynicism about life on earth meeting Richard, hearing of his experiences and reading his words was quite
literally a breath of fresh air.
By taking on board what he had to say, and being able to relate to what he
was saying by my own experience in a PCE, I was very soon able set off on the path to actual freedom. In doing so, I was
able to forgo my cynicism and reconnect with my naiveté, I was able to cease practicing dissociation and begin being
fascinated with being here, and I was able to begin the enthralling business of investigating all of ‘my’ beliefs
and passions that make ‘me’ an inseparable constituent of the human condition of malice and sorrow.
Cynicism is the pits. It’s so delicious to have abandoned cynicism, to get
in touch with my naiveté and devote myself fully to the business of becoming free from malice and sorrow.

Uncovering the Love
When I look at people, I have the knack of seeing beyond the personal
identities that most of you confuse for yourself. And all that I see is love. That is what I see and that is what I have
to share. You are in pain and you do not need to suffer. You are in distress and there is no need for it, for you are
love. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
Sounds a lot like a judgement to me but I guess it’s a ‘loving’
judgement.
There is nothing you can do about love, because that is
who you are, that is what you are made of and every cell in your body vibrates in love. You have forgotten this, but one
day you will remember. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
Literally billions of people have attempted to remember and practiced
assiduously to become this love again and the success rate is estimated at .0001% – those who have managed the
delusion of Enlightenment compared with those who have suffered on the spiritual path. The facts belie the myth that
humans are ‘love’, they cannot even manage to live together in anything remotely resembling peace and harmony and
the spiritual people are amongst the worst examples of peace and harmony in action. The ‘Holier than Thou’ Masters
then blame their followers for not getting ‘it’ and the guilt that arises quickly silences any questioning of the
message and any scrutiny of the messenger.
The encouragement is for us to be more present, more
aware of what is going on, all the time. The difficulty is this: the mind functions on the premise that it has to think
about things and so the mind is identifying and naming everything continuously, registering whether it is safe or
threatened. The mind does not see reality, it sees its concept of reality. It sees everything in terms of good and bad,
right and wrong, appropriate and inappropriate that it has learned from someone else. It labels everything according to
other people’s ideas. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
This primitive view of the mind directly results from the ancient ignorant
view that the mind is the source of evil thoughts and the heart or soul is the source of good feelings. The mind – the
functioning brain – is a physical organ in the body that is the central processing unit for an astonishing sensorial
input of sight, sound, smell, touch and taste, and it has the ability, unique among the animal species, of being able to
think, plan, reflect, communicate and be aware of itself in operation. And this is what Eastern religion would
have us ignore! This collecting of living cells that is so complex, so wondrous, so astounding is to be ignored in
favour of identifying with the good instinctual passions and imagining oneself so good, so above it all and so
disconnected that one believes oneself to be the ‘source’ – God by another name.
*
As a support in realizing whatever anger or resentment
you may have with someone that you are ready to let fall away, consider this gentle active meditation:
Are you carrying any anger or resentment; are you blaming someone for your
pain? If you are, take a look at letting go. It is almost certain that the pain is hurting you more than them. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
Wow! This is self-centredness in the extreme. What he is saying is – ‘If
you are angry or resentful towards someone then … ‘it is almost certain that the pain is hurting you more than
them.’ What about the person you are angry with or resentful towards? Whether this anger is physically or verbally
expressed, or is just an unexpressed feeling, is this not still malice in operation? Is this not causing harm to another
human being?
To inflict suffering on another human being and then declare that ‘it is
hurting me more than it is hurting you’ is an abysmal and pathetic act of self-centred myopia. It may be an effective
way of assuaging and letting go of one’s own feelings of guilt but, in fact, it is an act of breathtaking selfish
denial.
Let your side of it go. Feel your heart. Take a few
minutes. As you look, you might find an intense feeling inside because in that incident you felt pain. You felt your
aloneness, your unworthiness, your indignation. <Snip> Take a look at letting it all go now. Experiment with not
holding on to it any longer and see how you feel. Paul Lowe ‘In Each
Moment’
One would have felt aloneness for the simple reason that humans are angry and
resentful at those they are supposed to love. The instinctual passions of fear and aggression very often override the
feelings of nurture and desire, most particularly when the initial chemical rushes decline with time and familiarity. By
unworthiness, I take it, he means guilt for exhibiting such base feelings as anger and resentment despite our societal
training to be good and repress these passions. By indignation, I take it, he means taking offence from what was done,
said or thought by another human being to you.
Feelings are the bane of Humanity and it is time to be rid of the whole
rotten lot, rather than practice these games that do nothing but indulge and gratify one’s ‘self’ as a
transcendental being – who feels ‘above it all’.
It’s a bit like wading through a cesspool, ignoring the really bad and
claiming the better pieces for oneself.
One stage you may move through is forgiveness. Another
stage is gratefulness. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
By practicing forgiveness one then expands the feeling of compassion for
those still concerned about and ‘attached to’ their anger and resentment – one then feels sorry for, and pity
towards, those ‘less conscious’ than you.
From practicing gratitude comes the feeling that there is a something or
someone that one needs to bow down and prostrate oneself before. Gratitude is a way of turning away from the ‘real’
world and pumping up feelings of unconditional love directed at an imaginary ‘source’. This love is unrequited for
there is no chance of it being returned, and unconditional for there is no-one or no-thing to put conditions upon it. No
wonder it is so popular – you get to feel good about loving nothing. Pity about the loyalty, jealousy, resentment,
dependency, etc., that inevitably come with this love and gratitude … and that cause the religious persecutions,
discriminations, fanaticism, wars, etc.
Somewhere inside ourselves we are all looking to let
go, to finish with the unpleasant past. Then we can start again. Right now, you can start your life anew. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
The spiritual Gurus preach that human anger, violence and aggression are the
result of the inevitable conditioning of one’s pure soul since birth, that anger, violence and aggression are an
unchangeable part of the ‘design of this dimension’, and that one can transcend these bad feelings simply by letting
them go. Put even more bluntly – ‘acceptance and the expansion produce the good feelings.’ Good feelings
can then be expanded into Grand feelings and Grand feelings can expand into … ‘Oh God, I am feeling Good’ then
‘Oh good, I am feeling God’, and for the chosen few – ‘Oh God, I am God … oh ... Very Good!’
Of course, this is the world of institutionalized insanity – the spiritual
world – and, as such, it’s so easy to poke fun of. It would all be a joke except for the fact of the appalling human
suffering and misery that is enshrined and perpetuated by the God-men and their followers.
Up until now the only escape from the real world has been into a world of
fantasy – the spiritual world. There is, however, a third world, this actual world of purity and perfection that is
inaccessible to the alien entity that dwells within the human flesh and blood body – ‘who’ you think and feel you
are. The usurper, the impostor, the spoiler, the fake, the sham, the phoney, the charlatan, the fraud.
*
There is no discipline from the outside. Everything
comes from the inside, from consciousness. <Snip> Conscious, gentle reminders of our unconscious patterns are
offered among us all about posture, about facial expressions, how we dress, tone of voice and any other habits. They are
soft, supportive reminders, all of us are together in this. Paul Lowe ‘In
Each Moment’
To translate – One adheres to the moral and ethical codes that come from
Eastern religious conditioning, and when they break down, or when one becomes ‘unconscious’, then the morals and
ethics are consciously and gently reinforced by peer pressure. Sounds awfully like the ‘real world’ to me. This
inner discipline is what is known as conscience – not consciousness. A conscience is instilled by parents, peers and
society to keep its group members from running amok. Whether this is a Christian conscience, a Buddhist conscience or a
Lowellian conscience is irrelevant. With a programmed conscience in operation, one feels guilty if one breaks the rules
of the group … ‘all of us are together in this’ … and even more so if one dares to leave the group.
We are disconnecting from competition, disconnecting
from approval, disconnecting from the fear of disapproval. There is a total dissolving of all levels of authority.
Everyone is taking responsibility. There are no morals, no taboos, no rules. There is only consciousness, sensitivity
and appropriateness. Paul Lowe ‘In Each Moment’
No. One’s personal position, and power, in this type of community is judged
on loyalty, goodness, givingness, lovingness, etc. and the competition is usually fierce. One’s participation in this
type of community is dependent on the approval or disapproval of one’s peers and, as such, the usual sucking up, power
plays and manoeuvring are part and parcel of all spiritual communities. It is , of course, all nicely sugar-coated but
scratch beneath the surface, or dare to take a clear-eyed look, and it is obvious that the Human Condition is sublimated
not eliminated.
When these communities form there is a strict hierarchy of authority as they
are centred around an ultimate authority – God or a living God-man. If it is a living God-man then his authority is
direct, obvious and supreme, even if it is unspoken. The curious thing is that, while the God-man’s authority is
supreme, his responsibility is nil for if anything goes wrong it is always the disciple’s fault for not being
conscious enough, not being surrendered enough, not being loyal enough, not being aware enough, etc.
When the Guru or God-man dies then some other person rules the roost by
assuming the mantle of being the earthly representative of the dead God and he or she usually usurps the God’s power
by lineage, channelling, faithfully carrying on ‘the work’, etc. All of the members of these communities literally
surrender and bow down to this ultimate authority and this act of sublimation forms the very glue of the community.
One’s own interests are surrendered to a higher cause and one surrenders all responsibility for one’s own actions,
so much so, that, when push comes to shove, one is even willing to kill or be killed in order to protect one’s God or
Guru, or to protect their reputation.
As for ‘there are no morals, no taboos, no rules’ … these
communities inevitably abound with morals, taboos and rules which are all reinforced and maintained by one’s peers,
albeit in a ‘conscious gentle’ way.
As for ‘there is only consciousness, sensitivity and appropriateness’
… to be a member of any these exclusive communities is to deliberately disassociate oneself from the world as-it-is;
from people, things and events in the ‘outside’ world. One becomes obsessively ‘self’-conscious and in order to
balance this one is encouraged to adopt a ‘group’-consciousness, as in feeling at-one-with everyone else in the
group. The exclusive feeling of oneness is born of this action. One’s consciousness becomes awash with emotion and
feeling and one’s awareness is totally ‘self-centred to the point where one becomes a feeling entity only. One
deliberately moves one’s identity from ‘who’ one thinks one is to ‘who’ one feels one is. To use the spiritual
terms, one dissolves one’s ego and becomes one’s soul – ‘who’ you feel you really and truly are, deep down
inside.
One also becomes cut-off, or insensitive to the world as-it-is, and to those
who believe in another God than your beloved God. One does what is appropriate and loyally and faithfully obeys the
particular set of morals, taboos and rules that the God-man establishes or that are embellished and amended after his
death. I use the male gender in writing of the Gods for simplicity’s sake but the same applies to the followers of
God-women, Guru-esses, Mothers, etc.
All religious communes suck, be they Eastern or Western. In the traditional
form they were more like harsh prisons whereas nowadays it is fashionable to dress their image more as holiday camps.
Changing the packaging doesn’t change the content … all religious
communes suck. So much rubbish and twaddle is passed off as profound wisdom in spiritual belief, all in blatant denial
of facts and the lessons of human experience. To read this wisdom is literally mind-boggling, which is, after all, the
aim of anything spiritual.

But three facts clearly indicate a new approach is necessary –
- Firstly the continual failure of moral and ethics to bring anything vaguely resembling peace and harmony to any
human interactions and, if one is honest, in one’s own life.
- Secondly, the fact that the self-imposition of morals and ethics – one’s social identity – in reality becomes
a straight-jacket that one yearns to be free from.
- Thirdly, we know from our pure consciousness experiences that purity and perfection is possible when ‘me’ and
all ‘my’ passions are temporarily absent.
The first point means that the honest seeker of freedom, peace and happiness
will not settle for a suppression or transcendence of unwanted or undesirable emotions.
The second point means that the honest seeker of freedom, peace and happiness
will not merely swap one set of morals and ethics for another for he or she will be acutely aware that the ‘becoming
spiritual’ option is merely adopting another identity and another even more insidious form of entrapment. All people
are instilled with spiritual-based morals and ethics and everyone who has sought freedom has developed a spiritual
identity to varying degrees which is why the elimination of one’s social identity is the primary focus of an
actualist. The clue to morals and ethics in action are feelings such as guilt, shame, embarrassment and resentment on
the one hand and pride, piousness, arrogance and condescension on the other. So much conflict, dissension, confusion and
obscuration is caused by a stubborn unwillingness to rigorously examine the facticity and effectiveness of the morals,
ethics and beliefs we are instilled with since birth. Most of the objections to being happy and harmless on the AF
web-site go no deeper than obstinate and superficial objections on the basis of right and wrong, good and bad rather
than a mutual discussion based on what is silly and what is sensible, what is belief and what is fact.
Only by eliminating one’s social identity can one eliminate the constant
flood of minor feelings, emotions and worries thus leaving one free to tackle one’s instinctual being, ‘me’ at my
core.
The third point means the pure consciousness experience gives one the
knowledge and confidence that not only is it possible to live without the burden of ‘self’-centred instinctual
passions, it is essential to do so in order to directly experience the already and always existing peace on earth.
It is interesting to look back on the process and the stages I went through
in investigating feelings, emotions and instinctual passions. With each emotion I investigated it was always an
essential first step to investigate the goods and bads, the rights and wrongs, and all the things I had been told and
thus assumed to be true – my beliefs. I know we keep flogging this aspect but unless one undertakes this process any
investigation will be superficial and offer only a temporary relief of the symptoms without ever tackling the underlying
cause of the instinctual passions.
What I am suggesting is to be alert to the feelings that arise from one’s
instilled morals, ethics, beliefs and values, for these are the first line of ‘self’ defence that needs to be
tackled. This is where labelling and making sense of the feelings and emotions is vital for then you can make sense of
the apparently arbitrary and chaotic jumble that arises. One begins to see patterns and traits that are common to all
human beings and that give rise to the human condition in operation in yourself as well as others. My experience was
that these feelings associated with my social identity were the easiest to tackle and the confidence gained from the
success in tackling them was fuel for digging deeper – and the freedom gained was deliciously palpable.

The advertisement is for a 4-day workshop entitled ‘Dis-identification’
– Letting Go of Self Hatred.
He writes in his introductory section –
As I was driving yesterday, I remembered something that
made me feel anger arising – not angry – still far away from me, like you would see a theatre actor getting angry. I
know that if I start to get closer to ‘it’, getting identified little by little, soon it will be racing towards me
like an avalanche. The feeling of anger will start reaching me, then my jaw will start clenching …But now is not the
case, as long as I don’t identify. An easy way for me is to start feeling receptive, feminine in that moment –
pulling, – as I play with the rising anger. Suddenly there is a moment when where I laugh, making a funny face to the
thought and the anger, and immediately something else arises like joy and clarity with great power though, getting the
energy from the anger that would be. Big insight, BANG!
This actually happened. It’s good as an example. The rising feeling can be
one of the lot.
It starts far away inside of us and if we cannot stay with awareness we will
identify and soon we will become that. <Snip> During the work, as if magically, the space inside would start
getting bigger and the idea of time getting less. Suddenly in that new time-space, the emotion, the suffering would feel
unreal and would drop. Something of the beyond would shine through – Ram,
Tibetan Pulsing, Here&Now 5/2000
This description very well describes the spiritual practice of disidentifying
from unwanted and undesirable emotions and identifying with the wanted and desirable emotions. The undesirable
real-world identity is transcended and a new desirable spiritual identity is created. The newly formed spiritual
identity dis-identifies with the old identity and becomes aware of and suppresses, pushes away or ignores the unwanted
emotions. This is not a bare awareness operating but an identity splitting itself into two – one good half being aware
of the other bad half. To call this action awareness is to misuse the term as the awareness is so selective it would be
best termed as occultation or denial. It is this very labelling and judging of feelings and emotions as good or bad,
right or wrong, desirable or undesirable that prevents an active and equal investigation of all emotions and their
instinctual roots.
It is more than that. Emotions do feel physically bad,
that is why most people can justify why they have to keep those bad things at bay.
With morals and ethics firmly in place we also get a double whammy – the
physical sensations of chemical surges related to the passions and then the associated bad feelings due to our ethics
and morals – anger comes with guilt and shame, love comes with duty, responsibility, resentment and possessiveness,
fear comes with withdrawing, denial, false bravado or frustration, desire comes with competitiveness or guilt, etc. This
observation is the very key to investigating both the tender and the savage emotions. It is only by making sense of
one’s own psyche in action that freedom is at all possible.

What I found was that the harmless part of wanting to be happy and harmless
was the key in pushing myself beyond what I considered safe limits – beyond the normal definition of aggressiveness
into questioning the need for ‘me’ to be assertive in order for ‘me’ to survive, to get what ‘I’ wanted, to
get ‘my’ way in every situation. In order to move into these areas of ‘self’-examination it is clear that one
needs to firstly investigate and abandon the moral and ethical restraints that cause the welling-up of feelings of shame
and guilt simply for having felt these savage passions in the first place. Guilt and shame are crippling and
debilitating feelings, an integral part of one’s instilled social identity.
To go beyond these feelings is a daring action and a clue is to see one’s
inner investigation as an investigation of the Human Condition in operation in one’s own psyche. To see the
instinctual passions as no fault of yours; you are not bad or evil for thinking these thoughts, for having these
feelings, for being blindly driven to want to act this way. Keep your hands in your pockets, neither expressing nor
repressing the passions, but observing them in action inside – knowing that what is going on is only in your head and
your heart.
What fascinating explorations – to see how ‘I’ operate and to actually
feel ‘me’ in action.
This seeing, this investigation, is the very ending of ‘me’ for all the
mystique, mystery, cunningness and deviousness is exposed to the light of sensible understanding.
There is an enormous dare in being here, in the world as-it-is with people
as-they-are – free of the instinctual passions, held to be necessary in order to survive, and free of the crutch of
having ‘God by one’s side’ for protection.

Last century, when the last world war after the ‘War to end all Wars’
finished and yet another (Cold) War developed with each side playing a game called MAD – Mutually Assured Destruction
– many people who were desperate for peace on earth turned their backs on Western Religion and adopted Eastern
‘spirituality’ with open-hearts and lofty expectations. Given that any belief demands faith, trust, hope and
unquestioning agreement, none bothered to stop and investigate the basic tenets of this ‘spiritual movement’ –
Eastern religion and philosophy. The core belief that underpins Eastern religion and philosophy is that
‘who-one-truly-is’ is spirit only and one is most definitely not the body. To sustain this belief one needs to deny
the body and its functions, as in ‘I am not the body, I am not the mind’, etc. This belief, if fully indulged, can
lead to a state of solipsism –
‘the view or theory that only the self really
exists or can be known’ Oxford dictionary
– which is the most extreme form of denial, pathological dissociation. This
denial represents an abdication of any and all actions that ‘the body’ and ‘the mind’ happen to do for they are
not ‘me’, they are but vessels for ‘my’ earthly journey or even ethereal manifestations of the real, substantive
‘Me’. This core belief in the East is most graphically seen in the teachings of Ramesh Balsekar and the wisdom and
culture of Zen Buddhism.
A bit from Ramesh Balsekar which you may think of as extreme, but it is
nothing other than a ‘tell it like it is’, unambiguous description of the deep-seated belief that ultimately
prevents a spiritual believer for taking full responsibility for their malicious and sorrowful words, thoughts, feelings
and behaviour –
WIE: Do you mean to say that if an individual
acts in a way that ends up hurting another, then the person who did it, or, as you say, the ‘body/mind organism’ who
did it, is not responsible?
Balsekar: What I’m saying here is that you know
that ‘I’ didn’t do it. I’m not saying I’m not sorry that it hurt someone. The fact that someone was hurt will
bring about a feeling of compassion and the feeling of compassion will result in my trying to do whatever I can to
assuage the hurt. But there will be no feeling of guilt: I didn’t do it!
The other side of this is that an action happens which the society lauds and
gives me a reward for. I’m not saying that happiness will not arise because of the reward. Just as compassion arose
because of the hurt, a feeling of satisfaction or happiness may arise because of a reward. But there’ll be no pride.
WIE: But do you literally mean that if I go and
hit someone, it’s not me doing it? I just want to get clear about this.
Balsekar: The original fact, the original concept
still remains: you hit somebody. The additional concept arises that whatever happens is God’s will, and God’s will
with respect to each body/mind organism is the destiny of that body/mind organism.
WIE: So I could just say, ‘Well, it was
God’s will that I did that; it’s not my fault.’
Balsekar: Sure. An act happens because it is the
destiny of this body/mind organism, and because it is God’s will. And the consequences of that action are also the
destiny of that body/ mind organism.’
Interview with Ramesh Balsekar from ‘What is
Enlightenment’ magazine, Moksha press.
The most telling expose of Zen Buddhism I have come across can be found and,
in the interests of brevity and non-repetition, I’ll let you follow it up if you are interested.
As a rough rule of thumb it is useful to bear in mind that when Western
religions talk of peace they talk of ‘Rest in Peace’ as in peace after death. Peace on earth is usually only
referred to when a day of reckoning happens and whichever of the ‘I-am-the-one-and-only’ type Gods returns to earth
and saves His people and wipes out rest, usually in some horrific cataclysmic slaughter. When Eastern religions talk of
peace they talk of ‘inner’ peace only – retreating ‘in’ to find one’s true self as a way to escape from the
suffering of the material physical world. In this scenario earthly existence is seen as suffering, i.e. as earthly
suffering is essential and end to it is neither desirable nor possible in this belief -system therefore peace on earth
is not on the spiritual agenda. As such, to hold any skerrick of Eastern spiritual belief is to renounce the possibility
of peace on earth for the utterly self’-ish feeling of ‘inner’ peace (Nirvana) and the promise of an eternal peace
after death (Parinirvana).
Some interesting recent correspondence I had on a spiritual mailing list
about spiritual teachings and peace can be found.
I know that some people regard Actualism as an endless repetitive
denunciation of religion and spirituality but they miss the point entirely for one cannot begin to come to grips with
instinctual aggression, let alone sorrow, while at the same time holding on to any religious/spiritual belief, whether
it be Western or Eastern, Earth-bound or inter-Galactic.
Becoming aware of anger in oneself is a great start – acknowledgement is an
essential first step in any cure. For those who have trod the Eastern spiritual path this step seems almost an
impossibility for they have been so immersed in the practice of denial that the program has become both automatic and
overwhelming. Not only did I have to take this step of abandoning the spiritual path, but then I came across the
suppressed underlying Western-spiritual feelings of guilt and shame that shrouded, inhibited and crippled my common
sense investigations of aggression and anger.
These investigations are not for the faint of heart, but the reward of an
actual peace on earth, in this lifetime, as this flesh and blood body, is now, for the very first time, alluringly
available … and the tantalizing prospect that this could spread like a chain letter around the world over time is
breathtaking in its implications.

The nature vs. nurture debate in psychology and sociology has raged for
centuries, yet the curious thing is that it has always really been a one-sided debate. Moral and ethical considerations,
combined with spiritual and religious beliefs, have always prevented a sensible and clear-eyed assessment of the primary
and overarching role of genetically-encoded instinctual passions in human behaviour. That we were ‘born in sin’ is
acknowledged in many religions as an excuse for the earthly behaviour of God’s creatures which only gives rise to
primal feelings of guilt and shame in many Western societies. The current fashion for Eastern spiritual belief has given
a shot in the arm for the Nurturists with the popularization of the Tabula Rasa theory, whereby we are supposedly born
‘innocent’ and corrupted by wrongly identifying with the physical world.
This Tabula Rasa revival has given rise to many psycho/spiritual therapies
that offer to dredge up memories of past childhood hurts, on the basis that a healing, resolution or ‘completion’,
with a subsequent wiping the slate clean feeling of regaining lost innocence. This practice has been the subject of much
controversy as to the validity and accuracy of many memories recalled, the motives and competency of the practitioners,
and the effectiveness of either emotional release or hidden memory recall in bringing about any healing, resolution or
change.
Personally in my investigations into my psyche, I found it unnecessary to go
back into childhood memories or past hurts. ‘How am I experiencing this moment of time’ has always served to keep me
busy with the immediate and I found that the most I ever had to skip back was a few days to discover what was causing me
to be either unhappy or malicious. Then, when I recognized the incident, reaction, onset of a mood, etc. and I could
label it as jealousy, resentment, feeling inferior etc. I was then able to recall similar events and times when exactly
the same event had arisen to make me sad or make me angry at someone. Then it simply became a matter of – ‘how long
am I going to go on doing this same thing, how many times is this going to go on before I stop’. Once one dares to
acknowledge, recognize, and catalogue the debilitating role that feelings play in one’s life it then becomes
impossible to be the way you were – one has begun the process of radical and irrevocable change.
One of the more curious aspects of the human brain, if I have understood it
properly and if it is indeed factual, is that the primitive brain seems to have its own separate memory which is an
emotional-only memory of past events. There is also evidence that any long-term memory recall is very short on factual
detail and further, that we only recall the last time we remembered the event rather than being able to trace back to
the original event. Thus it is that these past memories are primarily psychological and psychic in nature, i.e. they are
‘my’ often irrational and largely emotional memories. When a present event triggers an automatic kick-in of an
instinctual reaction it activates aa feeling in the neo-cortex, and this often opens a floodgate, as it were, and we get
past emotional memories flooding in as well. Many people also access these emotional memories deliberately as they like
the bitter-sweet feelings of sorrow or grief, or lusty feelings of anger and revenge.
But generally what happens with a triggering event is that we get a first hit
of feeling reinforced by feelings from the past which serves to create and affirm a very-real chemical-backed ‘me’
stretching out over a time period we fondly, or despairingly, call ‘my’ life.
To actively dredge up past memories does nothing but keep ‘me’ in
existence as a psychological and psychic entity. They are best nipped in the bud as quickly as possible so that one can
focus one’s attention and awareness on the main event – one’s happiness and harmlessness now.

For instance, castration does not obliterate the sexual
drive in humans but does in animals. Apparently there is a lot about sex that goes on in the higher brain centres.
I have no knowledge at all about sexual physiology in animals, but given they
have an instinctual-only brain, if one obliterated the sex drive, end of story. Presumably, by what you are saying,
castration can completely remove the sex-drive in animals. The question would then be, does castration remove the
instinctual sex-drive in humans? I have heard that castratos remain interested in sex, but I don’t know if their
sexual interest is instinctive or cerebral-only. I guess the only way to determine this would be to wire someone up who
had been castrated so as to see whereabouts in the brain the lights lit up.
My experience when ‘I’ was normal was that it was impossible to
distinguish between feelings arising from the instinctual passions and what was sensate pleasure and clear thinking, for
they were all one muddled intertwined mess. The whole point of the Actualism method when investigating the sexual
instinct is to unravel this mess and eliminate the brutish senseless passion such that sensuous sexual pleasure is free
to be what it is – innocent frivolous play. Sex certainly is one of the most interesting investigations for it is one
of the most physical, and if you are having sex regularly, the investigation can be intense with no time-off, so to
speak. It also directly involves another person, which means there is no place to hide, no avoidance possible. I
encountered very intense periods particularly when tackling the morals and taboos that have enshrouded human sexuality
in shame and guilt, fear and trepidation, imagination and fantasy. It was as though I had literally stirred up the whole
of the church and faced its awesome psychic powers of condemnation, and then it was as though I stirred up the Devil and
encountered hellish realms of perversion and damnation. Beneath this again was a level of brutal animal aggression and
bestiality. Once I had discovered the raw instinctive level the only thing remaining was investigating imagination and
fantasy and then daring to be let my guard down and be intimate during the most direct one to one activity two human
beings can do. Skin on skin and sharing and mixing bodily fluids is as intimate as it gets and the transition from raw
and naked to free mutual playfulness took a while.
I have written of this before, whereby there is an initial exciting
breakthrough with investigations and then there is a remaining ghost-like weirdness that prevails that could be
described metaphorically as deleting the substance of a computer program but a few files float around for a while
causing trouble and confusion. There is a strangeness that is not only disconcerting but disorienting, as familiar
program after program falls to pieces to be replaced by nothing – no new psychological or psychic program at all. The
only orientation one has is what is actual and that can only be experienced in this moment.
My question is this: if the sexual instinctual drive is
eliminated, with the other instincts, what is left? Is there enjoyment of sex? Is one rather indifferent about sex? I
doubt then that there would be a ‘drive’ underlying sexual behavior, the ‘drive’ having been eliminated. One
would not fantasize about sex, as one often does many times, because the intuitive/imaginal faculty would have been
eliminated. With the sexual instinctual drive gone, eliminated, I would think that one would be rather indifferent to
sex. What do you think?
What I have discovered is when the sexual imperative disappears it becomes
utterly clear that sex is not an essential need such as food or sleep. When it is not an essential need and there is no
blind drive to have or want it, then it becomes an optional pleasure in a literal cornucopia of sensate pleasures. The
particularly delicious thing about sex freed of the instinctual drive is that it is not a necessity for then it becomes
what it is – one on one intimate innocent play. It is body pleasuring body, mutually agreed, freely given and taken,
sensuous pleasure, never the same, always fresh. And the sheer sensual overload results in a post-sex looseness and
limpness of the body, with the brain awash in serotonin or dopamine or whatever chemical it is.
I always wanted to get to the core of my inevitable frustration and failure
with sex, and now I get to reap the rewards of my efforts every time we play.
Good hey.

Courage and intelligence has a way of eventually winning out over brute fear
and superstition – a brief view of the facts of history attests to this. We don’t live in caves and hunt like
animals anymore, we just instinctually act as if we do because that is the way we have been programmed to act. It is if
of no use at all to feel guilt or shame about this genetic programming, or feel resentful or be cynically embittered
about one’s lot in life – the situation we find ourselves in calls for an unfettered investigation and the
instigation of sensible action such that we can become free of this condition we are all inevitably born into.
You are optimistic. Usually when I look at the facts of
history, I see brute fear and superstition winning out over courage and intelligence. I say that because I see that the
human species has been unable to, despite the ardent hopes of many for a solution, end war and eliminate violence. If we
as a species were so intelligent, we would have learned something from all this bloodshed down through the ages. Perhaps
I am being a pessimist. It is true that we don’t live in caves and hunt like animals anymore, but doesn’t the
observation that we instinctually act as if we do negate your observation about courage and intelligence? Maybe, though,
I am taking this the wrong way.
I am neither optimistic nor pessimistic, neither a soothsayer nor a
doomsdayer, neither gullible nor cynical. What I am is naïve. For whatever reason I could not fully turn away into
acceptance and the escapist fantasy of the spiritual world, nor was I sucked into resignation and the fatalistic
cynicism of the real world.
Methinks you are thus far underestimating the significance of Actualism and
its tried and tested method of eliminating malice and sorrow, which is more than understandable. This is no little thing
we do here – the very beginnings of the ending of war, rape, murder, torture, child abuse, corruption, despair and
suicide is being forged on this mailing list.
It’s the only game to play in town.

Once you begin to really get a grip on the fact that it is only ‘me’ who
is ruining my only chance of being happy in this moment, you simultaneously begin to break the ingrained habit of
blaming others and being angry at others for seemingly causing me to be unhappy … and by doing so you then begin to
become more and more harmless towards others.
And as you have more and more tangible success with running the question
‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ you soon discover that, despite ‘my’ fears, ‘I’ am
happily agreeing to ‘my’ demise – which is what you referring to in your comment to Gary.
I recall that when I first start running the question
some 2 years ago (I think) there was a great objection to running the question. Now it is more than not, an immediate
reward with the exception of the occasional guilty feeling when I realize that I had dropped the ball for some time.
Guilt I know well. I was amazed to find, when I started to abandon my
spiritual beliefs, morals and ethics, that they had simply been layered over my Christian beliefs, morals and ethics.
And guilt belongs in the stick part of the carrot and stick in the Christian religion – typified by the pathos-ridden
fairy story of the Son of God dying for our sins. Personally I didn’t worry about guilt too much because by becoming
aware that I had dropped the ball for sometime I was instantly back in business again, which was clearly a success and
not a failure.

You clearly have the opinion that I, No 12, am
responsible personally for all the wars and rape and sorrow on the planet – I must be according to your ideal,
mustn’t I?
This is perhaps one of most extreme extrapolations you have yet come up with.
No single person is at fault, no single person is guilty. Everybody, without
exception, is born with a genetically-encoded animal/instinctual compulsive program which is then overlaid by
social/religious conditioning – we all had no say in the matter at all.
What Richard discovered is that you can safely undo all this programming,
such that you can become what you are, as opposed to ‘who’ blind nature fated you to be and ‘who’ your peers
insisted you should be. Nothing spiritual in this at all – it’s the equivalent of hitting the delete button every
time you come across a bit of this programming until it ceases to function as a cohesive whole. The remaining bits float
around for a while causing only minor nuisances and eventually even these disappear, leaving one totally free from any
social/religious or animal/instinctual programming whatsoever, i.e. free from the human condition of malice and sorrow
Actualism is about freeing oneself from the programming that gives rise to
such debilitating and crippling feelings as guilt, shame, resentment, anger, sorrow, despair, loneliness and fear such
that one can become what one is rather than ‘who’ you think and feel you are. To take this instinctual and social
programming personally is to take one’s self far too seriously.

I have stated repeatedly that your attitude is what is
STANDING in the WAY of peace on earth. Get rid of the attitude that our system of belief, or our path or our master or
our Richard is the DEFINITIVE WAY ... and we are well on the way to peace on earth. When I was a child I was Baptist. I
was taught to believe I was guilty (responsible for all the war and rape and sorrow on earth) and that I could be saved
(get rid of self); and that Jesus is the only one who is perfectly acceptable to god (Richard).
Then why would you want to stay feeling guilty by inventing yet another God
(Richard) simply in order to feel guilty, yet again? It is you who keep insisting that actualism is somehow spiritualism
in disguise and who keeps imagining Richard to be God and deriding me for being a Disciple. It is all your own invented
viewpoint that has nought to do with what is on offer on this mailing list.
To reiterate, Actualism is about freeing oneself from the programming that
gives rise to such feelings as guilt, shame, resentment, anger, sorrow, despair, loneliness and fear such that one can
become what one is rather than ‘who’ you think and feel you are. To take this programming personally is to take
one’s self far too seriously.
But I do totally agree with you about believing in Gods – holding any such
beliefs can only perpetuate misery and suffering, guilt and shame. Holding any spiritual/religious beliefs can only
stand in the way of peace on earth.
As I wrote to No 3 the other day –
The belief in God is so insidious that it permeates every aspect of the human
condition. If people haven’t got a God they invariably feel that their life is meaningless, if they don’t like their
parents’ God they invariably devote their latter years searching for a God they like, if they don’t like any of the
human-type Gods they invariably revert to making things or animals or the planet itself into Gods.
Love them or hate them, praise them or damn them, pursue them or flee from
them – these imaginary little critters or ethereal spirits or father figures or mother figures or departed souls or
guiding lights or supreme intelligences or manifestations of goodness or God-realized beings so dominate the human
psyche that it is nigh on impossible for human beings to clearly see the world as it actually is.
It’s so good to be free of the God trap and to be aware that either
believing in an imaginary God, in whatever form and by whatever name, or riling against an imaginary God, in whatever
form and by whatever name, is patently nonsensical … and an utter waste of time that could be better be spent becoming
happy and harmless in the world as-it-is, with people as-they-are. Peter, List
AF, No 3, 27.6.2001
Actualism Homepage
Freedom from the
Human Condition – Happy and Harmless
Peter’s Text © The Actual Freedom Trust
|