|

Selected
Correspondence Peter
Imagination

In a recent post to Richard you asked a question
concerning me –
My first questions relate to
what is (apparently) lost in AF. If there is no imaginative faculty, no mind-space at all
in which to visualise objects and processes, how is it possible to understand systems and
processes that do not occur right before one’s eyes?
For example: could Peter continue being an architect
if he were to experience the final physiological transformation that Richard has undergone? By
what means could he design and mentally manipulate new architectural plans if he had no
imaginative faculty? How could he understand and discuss plans with a colleague, without seeing
an actual representation of them? How could he rearrange mental images if he has no ‘mind
space’, no inner eye? Would he become useless (as an architect) without his CAD software?
The reason I thought to respond was that I have made
a living as an architect whilst being a ‘normal’ person and continue to do so whilst being
virtually free of malice and sorrow. I have also had numerous PCEs so I know by experience what
it would be to be work as an architect free of the burden of passions and imagination.
As I remember it, when I was normal the design
process was a somewhat tortuous process – it was an essential part of the process to try and
form a mental image of what I was designing before I tried to convert the mental image into a
drawing. This forming of a mental image sometimes began even before the job started, before I
met the clients or saw the land. The mental image was then based solely on what ‘I’ wanted
to do, which was often at odds with what the client wanted to do or had the money to pay for or
what best suited the site, the climate, the local regulations, the ease of construction, and so
on. In other words the image of what I wanted to do was utterly selfist, passionate and
imaginary and not at all not rooted in actuality.
This process of forming a mental image and then
trying to actualize it in some form is often termed ‘the creative process’ and I very often
suffered angst and anguish going through this process – feelings that are well-documented as
being part and parcel of being a ‘creative’ person. Of course many self-aggrandizing
feelings also arise – there is no more smug feeling than ‘me’ feeling that ‘I’ am
being creative – particularly when ‘I’ receive the plaudits of others for being ‘the
creator’.
However this feeling of smugness always had a hollow
ring to it for me because ‘I’ was often aware that ‘I’ was claiming credit for something
‘I’ was not responsible for. Sometimes I would put this feeling into words such as ‘it
wasn’t me who did it’ and I have heard others do likewise. I have also heard people say
things like ‘there is a creative force that works through me’, often implying that ‘there
is a Creative, aka Divine, Force that works through me’ and the more megalomaniacal even get
to think and feel that ‘I am the Creative Force’. There is so much self-indulgent twaddle
that has been written about creativity as to make the word creative hackneyed and I was aware of
this even in my pre-actualist days.
When I became an actualist I started to become more
attentive to my feelings and this included the feelings that were happening when I was trying to
mentally conceptualize a design, as well as those feelings that were happening during the
putting-it-down-on-paper stage. I started to become attentive to not only the emotional ups and
downs that I went through but also to the effect these feelings had on others in my interactions
with clients and builders, as well as those most close to me.
Late one night in my first year as an actualist, as I
was working on the drawing board, I had a pure conscious experience whereby my mind became aware
of itself working. There was apperception happening in that there was no ‘me’ being aware
– there was simply the brain being aware of the brain in operation, in this case doing the
task of designing a house. The process that was happening was fascinating to observe – there
was a continual consideration of the parameters that governed the design: the client’s
requirements, past experience, site considerations, planning and building regulations,
structural considerations, climate considerations, budget, ease of building, appearance,
durability, workability and so on.
There was a repeated shuffling of ideas and
information operating – a trial and error process of working out the best solution – and it
was magical to observe, even more so because there was awareness of only part of the process
that was going on, there was a good deal happening ‘on the back burner’ as it were.
Sometimes a particular issue was set aside for a while whilst another issue was addressed and
when I returned to it later the best solution came instantaneously which made it apparent that
there was an awareness only of the surface activity of the brain in action.
The operation of the human brain is such an exquisite
intricacy as to be truly wondrous. With no ‘I’ in the road to agonize over the process, nor
a ‘me’ present to either exalt or despair at the outcome, there was simply the brain doing
what the brain does – think, plan, reflect, evaluate, compare, compute, assess and mull over,
as well as simultaneously being aware that this is what it is doing. And not only that, whilst
the brain is being apperceptively aware, it is also serving as the central processing unit for
the sensory perceptive system of the body – continually processing the myriad of sensate
information that is this flesh and blood body’s sensual sensitivity to whatever is happening
in this moment.
In a PCE, it is wondrously apparent that the brain
itself is not doing the sensing, it is only interpreting or making sense of the sensory input
– and only doing so when and if it is needed to do so. There is an awareness that it is the
eyes that are doing the seeing – there is no image of what the eyes are seeing that is
transferred to the cerebral brain, there is an awareness that it is the ears that are doing the
hearing – there is no sound that is transferred to the cerebral brain, there is an awareness
that it is the skin that is doing the feeling and touching – there is no tactile response felt
in the cerebral brain … and so on.
In a PCE, the brain, bereft of any illusionary
identity together with its associated affective faculty, is incapable of forming mental images
or indulging in imaginary scenarios – it is either apperceptively aware that it is involved in
doing what it does, thinking and interpreting sensory inputs or it is not, in which case there
is no thinking or interpreting going on, simply a sensual awareness of being conscious of being
alive.
Now whilst such ‘self’-less experiences of
apperception only occur in a PCE, an actualist who has got to the stage of being virtually free
of malice and sorrow can operate and function with very little of the debilitating effects of
‘I’ stuffing things up or ‘me’ strutting the stage like some disembodied drama queen in
a dream, or a nightmare, of ‘my’ imagination. In virtual freedom it is readily apparent that
there is no need to indulge in imaginative fantasies nor to attempt to create mental images –
in fact should they occur they are quickly seen for what they are – a pathetic substitute for
the sumptuousness of actuality.
To bring this back to the business of being an
architect, it means that any attempt on ‘my’ part to form a mental image, either prior to or
during the design process, only inhibits the doing of the designing – a practical doing that
happens anyway and happens at its very best whenever ‘I’ am absent from the scene.
I don’t know if that answers your question but I
had fun writing of my experiences as an actualist. As I said, there is so much twaddle written
about so-called creativity that it is good to have some sense written about the actuality of
creating something.

In what way is, say,
Einstein’s physics inconsistent with actual observation of the actual universe’s behaviour?
Einstein’s physics has no relevance at all to the
actual objective observation of either the matter that is this actual universe or to the
qualities of that matter and this glaring anomaly is explained away by Einsteinian physicists
with the glib dismissal that Einstein’s physics do not apply to ‘locally-observable
phenomena’ or to any conditions that we can experience on earth lat alone those that we can
sensibly relate to our everyday lives. Local phenomena and objective observation are not the
realm of Einstein’s physics – a sure sign that His physics have nothing to do with
actuality. Einstein apparently has such a Guru status within the scientific community that few
dare to question his theories for to do so would be to dare to challenge the accepted current
status quo of science itself.
Better still, so as not to
get too far off track, how is it (Einstein’s physics) inconsistent with what one experiences
in a PCE?
In a PCE, there is no psychological or psychic
faculty present to be interested in, let alone capable of, indulging in imaginative scenarios or
fanciful thinking about the nature and properties of matter and energy.
Which says nothing at all
about whether the imaginative model is useful in describing, explaining and predicting the
behaviour of all observable phenomena (not just locally-observable, either).
I was replying to the question you asked me –
‘how is it [Einstein’s
physics] inconsistent with what one experiences in a PCE?’,
not the new question you had yet to ask me.
‘whether the imaginative
model is useful in describing, explaining and predicting the behaviour of all observable
phenomena (not just locally-observable, either).
I can’t provide an answer to a question you didn’t
ask me. Have you noticed that I replied to both of your questions about Einsteinian physics and
that you are now moving off-track again by rephrasing the question, replacing the words ‘Einsteinian
physics’ with the words ‘imaginative models’?
To make it clearer to you, I will rephrase my
response –
In a PCE, there is no psychological or psychic
faculty present to be interested in, let alone capable of, indulging in imaginative scenarios or
fanciful thinking (that which gave birth to Einsteinian physics and continues to sustain it)
about the supposed nature and properties of metaphysical (not locally-observable) matter and
energy.
As for your new question, in a PCE, whilst one is
able to speculate about down-to-earth matters as in – conjecture about, theorize about,
hypothesize about, guess about, take a guess about, surmise about, muse on, reflect on,
deliberate about, cogitate about, consider, think about – it is impossible to indulge in
imaginative scenarios or fanciful thinking because there is no psychic or affective faculty
operating that is able to do so.
Imagination – The action of imagining or forming mental images or concepts of external
objects not present to the senses; the result of this process. 2 The mental faculty which
forms images or concepts of external objects not present to the senses, and of their relations
(to each other or to the subject). Oxford Dictionary
Not only does the PCE reveal that imagination is a
passionate ‘self’-centred activity, mostly based on communally-accepted beliefs and fears
but an on-going astute observation of one’s own imagination in action also reveals this to be
the case.
*
What does become startlingly apparent about the
nature and properties of matter is that the matter that is the universe is not merely passive
– the very matter that is this universe is in a constant state of change and transformation,
often imperceptibly slowly, sometimes dramatically evident.
Sure, but none of this is
inconsistent with relativity, or the ‘Big Bang’.
I was referring to the ‘self’-less experiencing
that one has in a PCE – an experience which is objective – and as such has nothing at all to
do with the subjective thought-experiments that spawned and feeds so-called relativity
theory. The pure consciousness experience of the matter that is this universe is also completely
at odds with the ‘Big Bang’ theory – a theory that would have us believe that the matter
that is this universe is not constant, as in being in a constant state of change and
transformation, but that it ephemeral – i.e. was born (apparently out of nothingness) due to a
miraculous thus-far-inexplicable event and will therefore eventually die (apparently into the
very same nothingness again), again due to a miraculous thus-far-inexplicable event.

I still find it absolutely
fascinating to be writing to someone on the other side of the world and be able to compare notes
about experiences, which are to some extent universal to all humans. The potential of this
medium is astounding. As you say, it does take time to write, and it does take time to respond
to these posts, and I ordinarily go through cycles of interest and disinterest with it.
Generally reading a post and allowing it to infiltrate my consciousness for awhile before
responding, but working at it over several days in a slow, methodical way. And I must say that I
find myself forming mental images of the people with whom I am talking, and these mental images
crop up from time to time. It does seem to me, however, that the imaging process has gotten less
and less and I am more concerned with the content of the post and responding genuinely and
sensibly based on what is being written to me. Also there is the realization that one’s images
probably have little or nothing to do with the actual flesh-and-blood person. Why is it that we
form these images and why is it that they are important to us? One can see it happening with
this Internet medium, but one also sees it happening in more personal, face-to-face
interactions: one may make a friend, say, at work, and then one wonders about them, forms images
of them, wondering about what they are really like, with their family, with their lover, etc. It
clearly is an activity of the imagination.
I was watching a National Geographic program the
other day – one of those usual ones that always end with a doomsday guilt-laden scenario ...
unless we humans see the Light.
The Guru-scientist summing up at the end of the film
blatantly stated that it required imagination to see the worst – to be able to concoct a
doomsday scenario for something so robust, reliable, consistent, abundant, exuberant, copious,
resplendent and immense as this paradisaical planet. He didn’t say the last part of the
sentence – this is what is so obvious to me from watching these programs and from my own
observations ... even to the point of simply glancing about me as I sit at this keyboard.
Imagination – be it real-world fear-filled or
other-worldly bliss-filled – only serves to obscure the magnificence of what is physical,
palpable and sensately evident and to prevent a direct sensual intimacy with the people, things
and events that comprise the actual world we live in. Imagination always has an emotional
component to it – most commonly it is fear-fuelled or desire-fuelled or, if you are a
spiritualist, it often has a fantasy-escapist ‘I am a goody two shoes’ or ‘I feel so Good
I must be God’ bent.
The only effective way to eliminate imagination is to
progressively eliminate this emotional component – to take the wind out of its sails. As you
do this, you are more and more able to become aware of the brain functioning – the brain being
aware of itself in operation, which is apperception. This bare awareness then enables you to be
aware of what you are as opposed to ‘who’ society and blind nature fashioned you to think
and feel you are.
Apperception is not an innate quality in human beings
– it is a quality that is evident in a PCE and obtainable by anyone willing enough to
sacrifice all they hold dear for an actual freedom from malice and sorrow. An ongoing
apperception is something only ‘you’ can cultivate by dismantling ‘you’ as a social and
instinctual identity. There are no short cuts in the process, no quick fixes, no journey other
than the journey and who would have it any other way.
Apperception is the beginning of the end of ‘me’
– the alien parasitic spirit entity that dwells unhappily and resentfully within this
corporeal flesh and blood body. Once it starts to happen it does take a while to gain the
confidence that it is the real thing and not another figment of your imagination. As confidence
gathers it is from this solid base of bare non-emotionally-corrupted awareness that you can
quietly and anonymously slip out from control – and the freedom that was always here then
becomes more and more actual.

Imagination, still reveals
its actual effects to me in everything I do. It is how I make a living as a designer.
I came to realize how limited human imagination is
when I began to look at the Human Condition from a wider perspective.
Most of what humans treasure as great literature,
art, poetry, sacred texts, music, fables and legends has as their basis either malice or sorrow.
Most of what we regard as entertainment is based on violence or sadness. The test of greatness
of human imaginative stories is the extent that we are stirred to feel vengeful for the
aggrieved, pity for the underdog, saddened at loss, moved by hardship, outraged by the
offensive, angered at the hard done by, stimulated by violence, distressed by suffering, etc.
I also came to see that impassioned human imagination
was so meagre and paltry when compared to inventiveness, resourcefulness and ingenuity of the
electro-chemical brain that is the human body. One only needs to look out at the stars at night
to know that what is actual far, far exceeds human impassioned imagination. And yet when
cosmologists contemplate the universe they imagine black holes and dark matter – an escape
portal to other worlds or some ‘other-universe’ within this universe. This planet is
estimated to have between 2,000,000 and 4,500,00 plant and animal species, offering such a
variety as to be mind-boggling when compared with the fantasy alien life-forms from outer space
created by human imagination. The insect world has such a plethora of species that it may well
be an impossible task to ever categorize them. The oceans provide such an amazing multiplicity
of life forms that defy any limits of human imagination. Each day brings a new, fresh and unique
combination of weather conditions, each moment animate life is arranging and rearranging itself
into a myriad of new forms, and this occurs on a paradisiacal planet that is so huge that it is
impossible for a single human being to see all of it in a lifetime. The fact that the astounding
actuality of this infinite physical universe is beyond the comprehension of a ‘self’-centred
human mind has lead to wonder and amazement which has traditionally lead to feelings of awe and
reverence and humility – the seeds of the spiritual ‘Universe and I are One’ delusion.
Actuality is far, far bigger than mere feelings or
impassioned imagination for it is actual, patently palpable, infinitely varied, observably
tangible, manifestly obvious, always apparent, clearly evident, eternally existing and it is
happening right here and right now, under our very noses as it were.
*
For the following reasons I am
not yet convinced that the Actual Freedom perspective is such a wide and wondrous path. I do not
limit the imagination in the ways you referred to above, e.g. ‘stirred to feel vengeful for
the aggrieved, pity for the underdog, saddened at loss, moved by hardship, outraged by the
offensive, angered at the hard done by, stimulated by violence, distressed by suffering, etc.
etc?’ For me these are but momentary events or reflections and the majority of the day is
spent using the creative imagination happily and harmlessly.
For an actualist these ‘momentary events or
reflections’ are vitally significant for these bleed-throughs of instinctual passions are
opportunities to investigate one’s psyche in action. Some people do reasonably well in coping
with, or ignoring these momentary flashes of anger, irritation, or frustration, gloominess,
melancholy or despair, but for others these feelings can permeate for days or weeks or flare up
into more serious ‘events or reflections’ such as outbreaks of verbal or physical
aggression or experiences of overwhelming sadness or despair. These feelings and emotions that
directly arise from our instinctual programming are the root cause of all the violence that
humans inflict on each other and all the sorrow and despair so evident on the 7 o’clock news.
You do well to stick with ‘creative imagination’ for the ‘real’ world of human
interaction is a ferocious place.
Actualism is only for those who are unwilling, or
unable, to turn away to the imaginary spirit-ual world.

Humanity is genetically/ instinctually and
historically/ socially bound to consist of separate feuding tribes and families and religions.
You only have to observe the fierce ongoing resistance to any attempts to break the stranglehold
this tribal conditioning has on human beings. The blind, senseless resistance to the ‘globalization’
of trade, commerce, communications, language and culture is fascinating to watch. A united
Europe is now a faded post-war dream, as every tin pot region seeks autonomy and independence,
every religious/ spiritual group declares their right to be different, and groups desperately
seek to preserve their cultural roots, traditions, language, beliefs, superstitions, sacred
places, buildings and holy relics. The only way to regard, and treat, others as fellow human
beings is to rid yourself of all this rubbish – a process of ‘self’-diminishing that can,
if undertaken with pure intent, lead to ‘self’-immolation.
That the way to an Actual
Freedom consists in a process of brain engineering/ re-engineering is given credence not only by
Richard’s findings but also neurological findings of the amazing plasticity of the nervous
system and human brain.
The brain adapts not only to changes in the
environment in response to certain types of stimulation but also changes in behaviour. In other
words, when I become more happy and harmless, the changes in my behaviour towards others is
actually producing further changes in my brain, which then leads to further changes in my
behaviour, etc, etc, through a continuous feedback-loop. While I am sure this may be hotly
debated by some, I think we are seeing that the human brain is capable of some amazing
adaptations and rearrangements, all of which signal the plasticity of the nervous system.
The most amazing thing about the human species is
that it is equipped with a brain that is uniquely capable of studying and understanding its own
operation. This study is in its infancy in understanding the electro-chemical circuitry but this
same capacity makes it possible for you and I to make our own studies of how we have been
genetically and socially programmed, compare notes and share our insights and discoveries.
Understanding this amazing ability, and experiencing it in action, is to experience that this
actual physical universe is far more magical and fantastic than any ‘self’-centred paltry
imagination can conceive or any ‘self’-centred inflamed passion can perceive.
What is actual is beyond belief and beyond
imagination.

I have already speculated a
bit in my mail to Vineeto – here is a bit more. We have been engaged, over the last months, in
examining and eliminating the beliefs and conditioning labelled as the ‘human constitution’,
by asking ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ As a result of the elimination
of this human constitution I no longer (or only very, very occasionally) experience any feelings
whatsoever. The necessary disconnections and reconnections in neural patterns have been made in
the neo-cortex and the software program has been un-installed. Now we are tackling the more
difficult job of erasing the hard disc (and the recycle bin) – of severing the link with the
amygdala – the basic instincts, the primal self. I suspect that all one can do is allow that
‘link’ to wither away through disuse and, when sufficient brain cells have died (or neural
pathways been disconnected), then this primal self will finally expire.
My favourite description of the process that happens
to the old pathways that have been forged since birth, and reinforced constantly since then, is
that when new paths are forged with common sense – sometimes painstakingly – the old ones
simply atrophy. This is easily attested by the observation – ‘Did I really believe in that
once upon a time?’ One can initially feel a fool but it gets really delicious when one cannot
remember ‘who’ it was who believed such a nonsense and why. One starts to realize that one
is becoming free to such an extent that one is fresh again every moment and that the very act of
believing is disappearing. With belief goes imagination, and only that which is actual becomes
apparent and obvious.

Mr. Reanney –
... quantum mechanics is par excellence the field of science where
commonsense breaks down completely. In particular, the link between cause and effect blurs. In
our everyday world of ordinary experience, we take it for granted that a ball will not move
unless some force (like a kick) is imparted to it. In the micro world of the quantum, an
electron on one side of a barrier can simply ‘reappear’ on the other, without physically ‘moving’
– an effect called quantum tunnelling.
Now we get to the crux of the matter as to why I
nearly fell off my chair – it was being ‘quantum tunnelled’ at the time. In a bid to
inject a degree of common sense (?) into this I’ll risk a quote from Paul Davies about
Quantum Theory.
‘The basis of this theory is
that in nature there is an inherent uncertainty or unpredictability that manifests itself only
on an atomic scale. For example, the position of a subatomic particle such as an electron may
not be a well-defined concept at all; it should be envisaged as jiggling around in a random sort
of a way. Energy, too, becomes a slightly nebulous concept, subject to capricious and
unpredictable changes.’ – ‘The Edge of Infinity’
... Beyond the Black Hole. Penguin, p 90
Now, if we note the word theory and Mr. Davies words ‘...
only on an atomic scale ..., ... may not be ..., ... should be envisaged ..., ... slightly
nebulous ...,’ then I am quite happy for them to imagine, invasive and theorize for all
they will, as long as the chair doesn’t fly across the room and the coffee cup becomes so
nebulous that it can’t hold coffee. It is a far, far stretch from Mr. Davies description of
the ‘theory of things so small that we can’t actually substantiate them’ to the
fantasies of Mr. Reanney and the Mystics. They are frantically clutching at straws in order to
turn the actual into an illusion, the substantial into the insubstantial, the obvious into the
apparent, the material into the ethereal – in short to escape from this actual world, as
evidenced by the senses into ‘another’ world of imagination.

In science, however, infinity is frequently
encountered, sometimes with dismay. Long ago mathematicians began attempts to get the measure of
the infinite and to discover rules which would enable infinity to join the ranks of other
mathematical objects as a well understood and disciplined logical concept. <snip>
Even in science, for many purposes, infinity is
only an idealization for a quantity which is actually so large that to treat it as strictly
infinite involves negligible error. From time to time, though, the appearance of infinity in a
physical theory denotes something much more dramatic – the end of either the theory, or the
subject of its description. This is the case with spacetime singularities. There we are brought
face to face with infinity, and it seems to be telling us something profound: that we have
reached the end of the universe.
The ‘end of the universe’, in spacetime
terms, is an illusion built upon an illusion. Spacetime is an imaginary ‘other dimension’
invented by Mr. Einstein – so whatever is theorized to happen in spacetime is twice removed
from the actual universe (with actual time and actual space) that we live in. All this nonsense
is based on the stubborn and instinctual fear of acknowledging the fact that the physical
universe is infinite and eternal – no other worlds, no other place, no other dimensions.
None of the results quoted will be rigorously
proved, for the proofs would require many years study of advanced mathematics to comprehend. It
is important to realize that the subject of discussion is not a theory about the world, but
mathematics.
A little disclaimer he slips in here but then
proceeds to apply his mathematical theories to the real world – predicting the existence of
black holes and singularities in the physical universe despite a stunning lack of any factual
evidence.
Given the fundamental axioms on which all
mathematics ultimately rest, the results are therefore correct, beyond any possibility of doubt,
as all the proofs rest on concrete and universally accepted logic. This point is stressed
because the results often seem impossible to believe; yet they are true. We shall see that
measuring infinity can be a very strange experience indeed.
‘... impossible to believe, yet they are true’. ‘True’
is a word that is currently so abused as to be useless. Christians believe the virgin birth was
true, NDA-followers believe that inert planets hurtling through space affects their moods and
behaviour, Trekkies believe in Warp-speed and wormholes, and Mr. Davies believes in an edge to
the infinite universe. Strange tales, but ‘true’ ...?

I have read your mail, and
it seems for now you have found your third alternative of searching after having tried searching
in the spiritual and in the material. Isn’t it all about searching? If this third one works
for you, fine, if Osho works for me, fine, it is all about searching, and what are we searching
for? You seem to look for enlightenment, so do I, I guess so do we all, within our own concepts
of what enlightenment is. But when the search is something on the outside, it will fail. When
you say that the world of Osho is like another eastern religion, it is because you think the
happenings, like white robe, meditations etc. are the main stuff. Well, in my experience it is
not. They are only means to take us into the realms of ourselves, tools to dig out the direction
inwards, they are nothing in themselves. Screaming Yahoo in front of an empty chair – didn’t
you scream Yahoo for yourself? To see what it did to you? If you don’t have your focus on
yourself, you can go on searching for the third and then the fourth and fifth alternative, you
are searching on the outside just the same, and that doesn’t take you anywhere.
Believe me!
I suggest that what you will find in searching ‘inside’
is vast and limitless. There seems no limit as to what the human mind can imagine depending on
the input. Human superstition and fears have conjured up countless good and evil spirits and
gods in almost every possible form, resulting in about 6,000 religions on the planet. Within the
‘inner’ world of every human a passionate Ancient battle rages, while the physical outer
world has moved on.

or be spiritual/religious.
Now this is really, really
crap, you don’t know what are you talking.
The ‘perfect world’ that the spiritual/religious
people talk of is for many a but a temporary touchdown spot on their cosmic tour of bliss (Never
Born, Never Died, Just Visiting... – See you Guys...!). Or it is merely a place for us to
suffer rightly in, thus earning brownie points for the after death stage. Or they trumpet
doomsday, some judgement day or final annihilation of the world, or at least the humans, and
only the chosen ones will survive, – at least their spirit/soul/essence will. It is amazing
what stories human imagination has concocted over the millennia.

P.S. The night before last I
had a wonderful dream that is still yanking my chains. I was traveling in a mini van type of bus
with a group of people and Osho. We were going to meet up with a large group of people and we
were asking Osho if he was willing to speak to the people...He turned around and looked deep
into my eyes and said: ‘I’m amazed that after all these years you are still attached to my
words!’ and I responded, ‘oh, no, it’s not for me...It’s just that so many people there
have never heard you speak’... and he just smiles and turns back around in his seat...
But of course I do have attachments to his words. And
I watch them all the time, the attachments and the words floating around in my brain. But two
days later from that dream, I still feel that love stuff from him and from me for him swelling
my chest...how can I let go of an attachment like that? It feels the same as it did many years
ago...
It’s weird too...I’ve never owned a white robe
and no plans of getting one.
The whole Eastern spiritual world is based on ‘feeling’
devotion and love, either for a god or a Master. This feeling good, when practiced assiduously,
leads to bliss, Divine Love, Universal Compassion, and Timelessness, Oneness with the Whole,
Truth, That, God or whatever. If successful one becomes One, self becomes Self, separation
becomes Unity, and away we go again as yet another Divine Saviour is born, to eventually ‘leave
the body’, leaving yet another Religion on earth. It is all a passionate dream which most
people can see clearly played out in other Religious beliefs but love, loyalty, devotion and
gratitude prevent from seeing let alone acknowledging it in themselves. It is an insidious trap,
one at which the Enlightened Ones are indeed Masters at playing.

Vivian, Mabel, Winnifred and
Florian, among others, have reported a different reality than the one you espouse about being
soulless .
Never heard of these people or there reports. I am
interested in anyone who has described their experiences.
Can you give me some references as to where I can
read of them?
But then you have probably not
had any direct experience with the DIVINE yet.
Yes I have had many experiences, a description of the
strongest experience I will post below (there goes brevity).
Not to worry though, it can and
will happen without any effort on your part.
No, there is no chance of the Divine entering this
body. I have lost my faculty to imagine such experiences any more.
I have come to my senses both literally and
figuratively.
*
And as was written, ‘...you
have probably not had any direct experience with the DIVINE yet.’ Your description attests to
this.
The writer 2 is confused again. The writer 2 guesses
that it is because the writer 2 cannot channel. Thus the experiences are not DIRECT experiences
and are only imaginary.
*
Vivian, Mabel, Winnifred and
Florian, among others, have reported a different reality than the one you espouse about being
soulless.
Never heard of these people or their reports. I am
interested in anyone who has described their experiences. Can you give me some references as to
where I can read of them?
These are women who have
described to the writer, their existence after dying; between days and years following the
event.
The writer 2 is confused again. Does the writer 1
mean that the writer 1 is channelling these women after physical death or is the writer 1
referring to their spiritual death as in Enlightenment?
Neither. It refers to their
visual and audible manifestation.
Do you mean that you their ‘hear’ voices in your
head and you ‘see’ them in your imagination? If, on the other hand, you have videos, photos
or tape recordings you should let the scientific community know as they have been searching for
almost a century trying to find actual authentic evidence of life after death.
*
Does the writer 1 mean that the writer 1 is
channelling these women after physical death or is the writer 1 referring to their spiritual
death ... as in Enlightenment?
Neither. It refers to their
visual and audible manifestation.
Do you mean that you ‘hear’ their voices in your
head and you ‘see’ them in your imagination?
One hears all sounds inside
the head. That is how the human body is constructed. These women have appeared as physical
manifestations within the context of consensual reality both in private and public settings. The
manifestations were as real as an upside-down rainbow, or the end of a rainbow; both of which
have been experienced without recording them. The lack of recording did not make any of these
experiences less authentic.
One hears all sounds within the head. The ears are
indeed the ‘stalks’ or sense organs by which sound is directly transmitted to the brain. In
the case of the fans running in this room, an occasional car going by, and my fingers tapping on
the keyboard – the source of the sounds, the scientifically measurable sound waves, my ears,
as well as my brain are all actual – no ‘consensual reality’ or illusion here.
By the way, isn’t the tiny little click of the
space bar cute, or is it only my bar that makes that noise?
Soon you will be telling me that these words that
appear on my screen, and soon on yours, are illusionary as is this communication, and then I
know it will be time to stop writing and adding more illusory to your authentic consensual
reality.
The other day, I had a man tell me that God is
everything, and I pointed to our television set and asked him, ‘does that mean the television
set is God?’, and he just looked a little blank. If you had been there you could have
re-assured him that the television set was just a consensual reality. But, then again, what he
calls ‘God’, you would call ‘consensual reality’ while I would call it a television
set...

It does take time to write and I have always
preferred quality to quantity, interest to disinterest, vitality to weariness, down-to-earthness
to holier-than-thouness and talking common sense rather than exchanging hackneyed and rehashed
platitudes. Which is why I particularly enjoy writing to you given that we are able to talk
freely about any-thing at all.
I still find it absolutely
fascinating to be writing to someone on the other side of the world and be able to compare notes
about experiences which are to some extent universal to all humans. The potential of this medium
is astounding. As you say, it does take time to write, and it does take time to respond to these
posts, and I ordinarily go through cycles of interest and disinterest with it. Generally reading
a post and allowing it to infiltrate my consciousness for awhile before responding, but working
at it over several days in a slow, methodical way. And I must say that I find myself forming
mental images of the people with whom I am talking, and these mental images crop up from time to
time. It does seem to me, however, that the imaging process has gotten less and less and I am
more concerned with the content of the post and responding genuinely and sensibly based on what
is being written to me. Also there is the realization that one’s images probably have little
or nothing to do with the actual flesh-and-blood person. Why is it that we form these images and
why is it that they are important to us? One can see it happening with this Internet medium, but
one also sees it happening in more personal, face-to-face interactions: one may make a friend,
say, at work, and then one wonders about them, forms images of them, wondering about what they
are really like, with their family, with their lover, etc. It clearly is an activity of the
imagination.
It has been a fascinating to experience the demise of
my imagination and it has been most evident in my work and in relating to other people. As an
architect, it is taken for granted that the faculty of imagination is vital in the process of
designing –
Imagination – The action
of imagining or forming mental images or concepts of external objects not present to the senses;
the result of this process. Scheming or devising; a device, a plan, a plot; a fanciful project. Oxford Dictionary
I remember a particularly vivid experience of
designing a building during a pure consciousness experience and observing my thinking during the
process. Rather than having a pre-conceived imaginary idea of what the end result would be, I
was able to develop and formulate a plan based on the physical constraints – client
requirements, site, budget, orientation, layout, materials, construction, etc and include client
preferences of appearance and style combined with a few of my personal quirks. A constant flow
of ideas was proposed, tested, evaluated and either proceeded with or rejected as unworkable and
this progression gradually led to a design that was then readied for client review.
There was a gradual building up of a plan from
initial idea to final result – most definitely not a blinding flash of imagination that
produced a mental image of the finished result. What this experience made clear was that the
brain does its job extremely well when ‘I’ am absent from the process of thinking, when ‘I’
stop imagining that ‘I’ know best and when ‘I’ stop insisting that ‘my’ feelings are
the most important thing on the planet.
Since this experience I have had the hands-on
practical experience of more and more experiencing ‘me’ being absent in my work. It has been
a daunting experience as all ‘my’ passions, professional pride, ‘my’ creativity, ‘my’
usefulness and worth has been relentlessly beaten out of me. Whenever I did experience the pain
of becoming emotional about an issue with a client, I simply knew that ‘I’ was yet again
objecting to what was happening and that I had something to investigate. Even when I was asked
or instructed to do something that in my experience did not work, or was not the best solution,
I came to see that emotionally objecting to the situation only served to make me unhappy and
therefore most likely to sabotage the situation so as to seek revenge.
This relates to yet another of Richard’s questions
that I recently mentioned to No 23 –
‘Can I emotionally accept that which is
intellectually unacceptable?’ Peter, List AF, No 23,
12.5.2002
The experiential answer to this question is a
constant in-your-face business in the world as-it-is, with people as-they-are, and no more so
than in the workplace. If it were not for the challenges that came up in my work these issues
and these emotions would not have come to the surface to be investigated.
Actualism Homepage
Freedom from the
Human Condition – Happy and Harmless
Peter’s Text © The Actual
Freedom Trust
|