29 April 2018

VINEETO: Hi Alan,

Getting closer indeed – and hence the utter importance of scrupulous honesty with yourself.

ALAN: There has been an interesting discussion on slack which I have copied to a word file you can access here

Does seriousness end upon self-immolation? I was certainly under the impression that it does. Similarly, is apperception an ongoing experience after becoming actually free? I do not see how it can be otherwise – as I posted on slack. In both questions I mean before becoming fully free.

VINEETO: As for the discussion on Slack you sent me – I can fully relate to No. 15’s statement that –

• [Respondent No. 15]: “I had the impression when I first became newly free that apperception was occurring all the time.”

This was exactly my experience just after becoming actually free (and not merely an impression), and it was so startling and so exactly as Richard had described it that I was just amazed, and revelled in this 360 degree awareness. The experience of apperception also included that everything (regarding knowledge and memory of experience) is at your fingertips but only activated when needed. There was an incredible clarity of mind, wonder and amazement, just as I described it in the first reports of the direct-route-mail-out.

However, as Richard reported on List D quoted below, as I interacted more and more with people and everyday affairs, I started to become aware of certain behaviour patterns continuing and a diminution of the startling clarity of the first few days after becoming free. In other words, the guardian, “the shadowy remnants of the social identity” established itself and influenced how I was behaving and experiencing myself.

This is not only understandable, given the radical change that an actual freedom from the instinctual passions is, but possibly also necessary to ensure a non-disruptive transition from feeling being to being fully actually free.

However, by the time Richard returned from India, I was ready and eager to put the ‘guardian’ to rest, and move towards a full actual freedom, and Richard and I had many intensive conversations to bring this about sooner rather than later.

About 6 weeks 9 days after Richard’s return a day came when, sitting at the dining table of his houseboat, I briefly experienced myself as two – the (shadow) identity of the guardian and the actual Vineeto. I experienced the relief of the guardian to be finally able to confidently lay down the burden of guarding over the newly-free Vineeto and then it faded with a sense of having a job well-done to the end and gladly being finally redundant. Suddenly there was only one me, the actual me, fresh and innocent, a bit like a kid alone in this wonderful playground of the actual world.

I was still not fully free then, and many more things had to happen, but a decisive event had occurred to bring me closer to a full actual freedom.

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Alan, 29 April 2018).

July 7 2024

Hi Leila,

(...)

VINEETO: As I am not in the position to make a judgement about your translation here are some tips how you yourself can assess them more accurately.

As an example, which may have influenced your translation of the word “apperception” – you wrote in June 2024:

LEILA: Richard used “wordless” in two of his sentences.
1 hietmoba becomes “a wordless attitude” toward life,
2 and apperception which is a “wordless appreciation” of being alive right now – of being alive and awake on this verdant planet.

Obviously, this is only the first part of Richard’s quote, which does not encapsulate everything that apperception means in actualism writings. Apperception only happens in a PCE or when actually free. Viz:

RICHARD: “Apperception is the clear and direct experiencing of being just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time – sans identity and its feeling-fed realities – and it is a wordless appreciation of being alive and awake on this verdant and azure planet. Apperception is where one is living in the already always existing peace-on-earth and is where one is blithe and carefree, even if one is doing nothing: doing something – and that includes thinking – is a bonus on top of the never-ending perfection of the infinitude which this material universe is. Apperception is where one is the universe being stunningly aware of its own infinitude.” (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 19a, 1 September 2001).

And from the Abditorium – which folder can be a great source of information for you when you translate –

RICHARD: The word ‘apperception’ literally means: consciousness being conscious of being consciousness... as distinct from the normal ‘self’-conscious way of perception (‘I’ being aware of ‘me’ being conscious). Viz.:

• ‘apperception (n.): the mind’s perception of itself […]

(Richard, Abditorium, Apperception).

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Leila, 7 July 2024).

Richard: ‘In the years I successfully made a living as a practising artist I never took any notice of the critics’ opinions ... indeed, if I had I would never had made a living out of it as my artistic output came about despite both the institutionalised training I received during three years fulltime study at art college and the two years fulltime application of same immediately following graduation (wherein I had to teach art part-time of an evening to supplement my then-meagre income).

It was only when ‘I’ got out of the way and the painting painted itself, so to speak, or the drawing drew itself/ the sculpture sculpted itself/ the pottery formed itself (and so on) that craft – all the painstakingly acquired skills – became art.

I clearly remember the opening night of my first one-man exhibition (in a major city of this country I reside in): it virtually sold-out on that first night and, of course, being the star of the show ‘I’ was the recipient of the judgements of those assembled who chose to voice their opinion ... yet what they did not realise, as only ‘I’ knew how that artistic output came about, was that their opinion was of no value to ‘me’ whatsoever either one way or the other.

The opinion of another identity did not mean a thing either’. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 90a, 3 July 2005).

… and ‘he’ then wished to live life in the same way –

Richard: ‘... all art is initially a representation of the actual and, as such, is a reflection funnelled by the artist so that he/she can express what they are experiencing in order to see for themselves – and show to others – what is going on ‘behind the scenes’ as it were. However, when one is fully engrossed in the act of creating art – wherein the painting paints itself – the art-form takes on a life of its own and ceases to be a representation. It is its own actuality. One can only stand in amazement and wonder ... this is what ‘I’ experienced back when I was a normal person.

Thus ‘I’ wished to live ‘my’ life this way – where my life lived itself – and consequently here I am ... now’. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 12a, 2 February 1999).

SONYA: It was like I was autopilot but aware I was on autopilot. Whereas in the past when I would be on ‘autopilot’ I would also be in fantasy land somewhere in my head. This time felt significant cause I was firmly right here.

VINEETO: That is a great description – “I was autopilot but aware I was on autopilot”. It refers to the same fascinating occurrence of apperception Richard describes: the mind’s perception of itself.

Richard: Apperception is another ball-game entirely and has nothing to do with any of the above. I take the Oxford Dictionary definition as an established ‘given’: ‘apperception is the mind’s perception of itself’. This means that there is not an ‘I’ being aware of ‘me’ being conscious, but it is an un-mediated awareness of itself. Thinking may or may not occur ... and apperception happens regardless. Thought does not have to stop for apperception to happen ... it is that the ‘thinker’ disappears. As for feelings in apperception; not only does the ‘feeler’ disappear, but so too do feelings themselves.

Apperception is the direct – unmediated – apprehension of actuality ... the world as-it-is. (Richard, List B, No. 20, 28 February 1998).

SONYA: Basically, all this made me really start to wonder if ‘I’ am really needed.

VINEETO: Indeed, and once you begin to wonder if ‘you’ are really needed, you put the first nail in the coffin of ‘me’ and ‘my’ importance. Then seriousness falls by the wayside and being alive in this modus operandi becomes more and more easy and fun.

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Sonya, 20 May 2025).

July 3 2025

HENRY: So anything that isn’t ‘absolute zero’ (which is supposed to be unreachable) is vibrating to some extent.

VINEETO: Hi Henry,

Very pretty images from Alaska.

Your above statement is based on the model of an atom with a supposed nucleus and electrons, positrons and neutrons swirling around the nucleus.

HENRY: I know that what we call an ‘atom’ is a theoretical structure, but is the vibrating also only a model?

VINEETO: As an atom is a theoretical postulate, what supposedly happens within this postulate is also conjecture.

Prof. Sir Alfred Brian Pippard (1920-2008), Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Cambridge, knighted in 1974, had this to say, something which is still as valid today as then –

‘It must be realised, however, that the world of experience and observation is not the world of electrons and nuclei. When a bright spot on a television screen *is interpreted as* the arrival of a stream of electrons, it is still only the bright spot that is perceived *and not the electrons*. The world of experience is described by the physicist in terms of visible objects, occupying definite positions at definite instants of time – in a word, the world of classical mechanics. When the atom is pictured as a nucleus surrounded by electrons, this picture is a necessary concession to human limitations; there is no sense in which one can say that, if only a good enough microscope were available, this picture would be revealed as genuine reality. It is not that such a microscope has not been made; it is *actually impossible to make one* that will reveal this detail’. [emphases added]. ~ (Prof. Sir Alfred Brian Pippard; ©1994; Encyclopaedia Britannica).

HENRY: edit: I found this article which describes the first imaging of molecular vibration. In the article they describe that prior to this imaging, the vibrations had been theoretical:

“To date, molecular vibrations have been pictorially explained using wiggling balls and connecting springs to represent atoms and bonds, respectively. Now we can directly visualize how individual atoms vibrate within a molecule. The images we provide will appear in textbooks to help students better understand the concept of vibrational normal modes, which till now had been a theoretical concept.” (…) (Article, Scientists observe, image all-important molecular vibrations)

(…) But this cannot replace the fact that these eyes are actually seeing, these mechanoreceptors are actually touching, and so on. Any further explanation to this potentially apperceptive sensing remains interpretation, and frequently if not always leads away from what is actually happening as fact.

“A mechanoreceptor, also called mechanoceptor, is a sensory receptor that responds to mechanical pressure or distortion. Mechanoreceptors are located on sensory neurons that convert mechanical pressure into electrical signals that, in animals, are sent to the central nervous system.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanoreceptor)

VINEETO: Regarding mechanoreceptors actually touching – the word “touching” here describes a mechanical device making contact, and not the sense of touch experienced by a sensate human being. Hence, I don’t know what you refer to when you say “mechanoreceptors are actually touching”.

What is called “mechanoreceptors” are in fact living sensory neurons being manipulated by mechanical pressure or distortion and this can in no way be called apperceptive sensing just because some mechanical pressure is involved. I also don’t know what you mean by “potentially apperceptive sensing”.

Apperception is a function of an identity-free consciousness, i.e. when you are being apperceptively aware, regardless of receiving mechanical pressure, or not. A mechanical device is neither sentient nor conscious let alone apperceptive.

Perhaps the definition of actualism might clarify it for you – “the theory that nothing is merely passive (now rare)” (Oxford Dictionary) – and the experience that nothing is merely passive.

Richard: Actualism is the direct experiencing of the meaningful, vibrant, dynamic, effervescent, sparkling, pulsating, amazing, marvellous, wondrous and magical happening that is this very physical universe in action. (Richard, List C, No. 3, 16 Mar 2000).

I only briefly looked into the article of AAU.edu and in the first paragraph it says:

“By focusing light down to the size of an atom, scientists at the University of California, Irvine have produced the first images of a molecule’s normal modes of vibration – the internal motions that drive the chemistry of all things, including the function of living cells.” (https://www.aau.edu/research-scholarship/featured-research-topics/scientists-observe-image-all-important-molecular).

Now, you cannot focus “light down to the size of an atom” nor produce images of molecules because atoms and molecules are not actual but mathematical postulates. As such the images they speak of are interpretations (quantum mathematics in quantum-language). When they say “a molecule’s normal modes of vibration” they refer to a postulate’s (molecule’s) mode of conjectured operation, in this case labelled “vibration”.

To quote again Emeritus Professor of Physics, Sir Alfred Brian Pippard –

“The process of transformation from a classical description to an equation of quantum mechanics, and from the solution of this equation to the probability that a specified experiment will yield a specified observation, is not to be thought of as a temporary expedient pending the development of a better theory. It is better to accept this process as a technique for predicting the observations that are likely to follow from an earlier set of observations. Whether electrons and nuclei have *an objective existence in reality is a metaphysical question to which no definite answer can be given*. There is, however, no doubt that *to postulate their existence* is, in the present state of physics, an inescapable necessity if a consistent theory is to be constructed to describe economically and exactly the enormous variety of observations on the behaviour of matter”.

“The habitual use of the language of particles by physicists *induces and reflects the conviction* that, even if the particles elude direct observation, *they are as real as any everyday object*”.[emphases added]. ~ (Prof. Sir Alfred Brian Pippard; ©1994; Encyclopaedia Britannica).

(see Richard, Abditorium, Prof. Sir Alfred Brian Pippard). A list of related correspondence at the bottom of the page.

As such, I take all their discoveries and interpretations with a large dose of salt. When I became actually free, I lost any ability to believe as well as the ability to imagine.

You so rightly said above, in the part I elided –

HENRY: Part of what is significant here is the demonstration that sense data is the supreme way to experience and interpret actuality. I have found that ‘my’ reality depends on many of these theoretical constructs in which understanding and interpretation of ‘what is happening’ is outsourced and dominated/ controlled/ owned by an authoritative constructed reality. Where there is interpretation there is room for mistakes, and the model can never be actuality. In a slight-of-hand, our own sense-data is hustled off to a closet and ignored, replaced by these models (which are given the official stamp of approval, taught in schools, printed in books and online sources, etc.).

VINEETO: It’s good to be fully aware that these theoretical constructs may well turn out to be an incorrect interpretation of what is actually happening, and because they are now ubiquitously in use, they can spawn a great deal of more theory, conjectures and imaginary conclusions merely based on mathematical equations and models thereof. While it describes the present models of reality, by their very nature of being theoretical constructs they can never be actual.

Richard: ‘History shows that a model can be found to be useful without it necessarily being correct ... and such a model is later discarded when another model can be found to correspond more accurately to the facts. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 30, 27 February 2002).

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Henry 2, 3 July 2025).

July 4 2025

VINEETO: Hi Henry,

HENRY: I know that what we call an ‘atom’ is a theoretical structure, but is the vibrating also only a model? (…) But this cannot replace the fact that these eyes are actually seeing, these mechanoreceptors are actually touching, and so on.

“A mechanoreceptor, also called mechanoceptor, is a sensory receptor that responds to mechanical pressure or distortion. Mechanoreceptors are located on sensory neurons that convert mechanical pressure into electrical signals that, in animals, are sent to the central nervous system.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanoreceptor)

VINEETO: Regarding mechanoreceptors actually touching – the word “touching” here describes a mechanical device making contact, and not the sense of touch experienced by a sensate human being. Hence, I don’t know what you refer to when you say “mechanoreceptors are actually touching”.

HENRY: Here I was referring to those neurons (the mechanoreceptors) being manipulated by the finger etc. touching, rather than any mechanical device.

VINEETO: Ok, I was mislead by the (rather inappropriate ‘scientific’) naming of human/ animal receptor nerves when sending electrical signals to the central nervous system. I prefer to keep it simple, and thus make a semantic distinction between biological (including bio-electrical) functioning and mechanical operations involving man-made mechanical devices.

*

HENRY: Any further explanation to this potentially apperceptive sensing remains interpretation, and frequently if not always leads away from what is actually happening as fact.

VINEETO: (…) Apperception is a function of an identity-free consciousness, i.e. when you are being apperceptively aware, regardless of receiving mechanical pressure, or not. A mechanical device is neither sentient nor conscious let alone apperceptive.

HENRY: The reference to ‘potentially apperceptive sensing’ was because with an actually free person, that signal is not being interpreted according to beliefs. Though I am realizing that that would perhaps require a fully free person.

VINEETO: Indeed, or a person contemplating “that signal” in a PCE. Then one can experience that those signals are actually happening in the actual flesh-and-blood body – such as a full bladder for instance – (no matter what they are called in real-world ‘science’). Personally, I find it much easier to observe, delight, marvel in and appreciate the fact that it is all wonderfully operating of its own accord.

*

VINEETO: Now, you cannot focus “light down to the size of an atom” nor produce images of molecules because atoms and molecules are not actual but mathematical postulates. As such the images they speak of are interpretations (quantum mathematics in quantum-language). When they say “a molecule’s normal modes of vibration” they refer to a postulate’s (molecule’s) mode of conjectured operation, in this case labelled “vibration”.

HENRY: Yes, this is the conclusion I came to as well.

VINEETO: I am pleased you can appreciate that.

I have always found Richard’s modus operandi very useful and effective, to look for the capstone of the upside-down pyramid when researching the facts or falsehoods of any topic – and it can be rather alarming that facts are far and few between the theories, hypothesis, models and outright lies and inventions –

• [Respondent № 110]: “Reading over some of your previous correspondence (regarding UV Light, quantum physics and subjective realities), I seem to have no reason to believe in private representative realities or a noumenon objective reality anymore. Stunning stuff. Thanks again Richard”.

• [Richard]: “You are very welcome ... it is indeed stunning to discover that more than a little of the wisdom of the real world is not worth the parchment/ papyrus/ palm leaves/ rice paper/ clay panels/ stone tablets it is inscribed upon.

What I have found, more often than not, in any area of research I have ever looked into is that not only are facts rather few and far between but it is mainly the proposition which gets most of the attention ... so much so that I have oft-times figuratively likened such theses to an inverted pyramid (one standing on its apex) where a judicious pulling-out of its intuited/ imagined capstone results in the teetering edifice painstakingly constructed thereupon ignominiously tumbling down.

It is all so glaringly obvious when one twigs to what to look for – the factual basis of the hypothesis or theory/ the basic premise of the argument or proposition – and it saves wading through a lot of quite often well-written but fatally-flawed articles trying to make sense of something which can never make sense”. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 110, 14 April 2006).

As such when you know for a fact that atoms and molecules are hypothetical postulates and the question “whether electrons and nuclei have *an objective existence in reality is a metaphysical question to which no definite answer can be given*” (Prof. A. Brian Pippard) then you also know that everything built upon this premise is not actual, even when a large number of ‘scientists’ consider them as real as everyday objects.

Then it’s really simple, for you personally, to distinguish a belief or interpretation from fact and actuality in this topic.

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Henry 2, 4 July 2025).

September 17 2025

SONYA: Another cool experience to log in!

With all this kind of happening automatically now I think it opened up a new level for me. Last Thursday, I was walking to dance class from my car. It had just rained so the air was cool and had that fresh wet rain smell. I was just enjoying walking, smelling, seeing, feeling the air etc. but not in a forced way if that makes sense. It was a simple direct experiencing of my surroundings. I was simply just happy to be walking.

VINEETO: Hi Sonya,

This is a great report – with less energy wasted in negative mood changes – because you learnt how to nip them in the bud or simply find them unnecessary – you are now free to enjoy, and appreciate, the whole smorgasbord of sensate experiencing which being alive has to offer. It is certainly another kind of enjoyment – the unconditional enjoyment of simply being alive.

SONYA: I remember I was almost at my destination and walking under some trees and all of a sudden it was like everything came into focus with the most clarity I’ve ever experienced. Colours were so vivid and it was like looking through binoculars that were previously “blurry and unfocused” and the settings had adjusted to a clear and crisp image. It was so intense I was definitely taken aback and almost stumbled a little bit. It was quite exhilarating. It lasted a few seconds then faded back to “normal”. After I was definitely feeling a bit shaken but not in a scared way, more like my definition on what was a “direct” way of experiencing the world was turned on its head and amplified really suddenly, really quickly and it has shaken something. There was a raw directness to it that I had never experienced before that I’d like to experience again.

VINEETO: It seems you had your first taste of “a “direct” way of experiencing the world”, i.e. direct because the feelings/identity which was blurring your sensate experiencing was temporarily in abeyance. It is wonderful and amazing when that happens and confirms that exactly this is what you want more of.

You might like this one –

RICHARD: In short: this ambrosial paradise I refer to as ‘this actual world’ has been no further away, all the while, than coming to your senses.

JAMES: Just what I needed to hear Richard. ‘In short’ is right. This pretty much says it all.

RICHARD: Aye ... this is my favoured way of saying it all:

• [Richard]: ‘Step Out Of The Real World Into This Actual World And Leave ‘Yourself’ Behind Where ‘You’ Belong.

JAMES: The key part of the first sentence to me is ‘coming to your senses’. That seems like the gateway into the actual world.

RICHARD: It is indeed – just as it is also the gateway out of the real world – and ‘tis only the price of admission/the cost of exit that hinders ingress/ egress.

JAMES: The ‘price of admission/the cost of exit’ must be ‘me’ which hinders exiting the real world and also hinders the direct contact of the senses to the actual world. Seeing exactly how the ‘me’ hinders this ‘ingress/egress’ diminishes the ‘me’. Can I leave ‘me’ at the gate?

RICHARD: This is what I would suggest:

• [Richard]: ‘The other aspect of the actualism method – other than felicity/ innocuity – is sensuosity: feeling felicitous/ innocuous, each moment again, brings one closer to one’s senses and the resultant wonder at the brilliance of the sensate world can enable apperception ... the direct experience of the world as-it-is. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, James, 27 March 2004).

Such a felicitous/ sensuous state of wonder can do wonders (pun intended). (Richard, Actual Freedom List, James, 2 April 2004).

Here is one of my favourite descriptions –

• [Richard]: I remember the first time I experienced being the senses only during a PCE. There was no identity as ‘I’ thinking or ‘me’ feeling ... simply this body ambling across a grassy field in the early-morning light. A million dew-drenched spider-webs danced a sparkling delight over the verdant vista and a question that had been running for some weeks became experientially answered: without the senses I would not know that I exist as this flesh and blood body. And further to this: I was the senses and the senses were me. With this came an awareness of being conscious – apperception – rather than ‘I’ being aware of ‘me’ being conscious. (Richard, General Correspondence, Alan2, 1 Aug 1998a).

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Sonya, 17 September 2025).

October 13 2025

CHRONO: On another separate day, I was reading something Richard writes in regards infinitude where he says that ‘I’ create a center in consciousness and block the experience of infinitude. I started thinking ‘what really is this infinitude?’. ‘It’s a physical infinitude’. ‘Oh it’s this infinite space and eternal time’. Then this thought occurred to me that perhaps that this physical universe is all that there is. There’s nothing other than this physical universe that actually exists. The experience of being ‘me’ is an experience of an ‘otherness’ which is blocking this immensity (which I experience as there on the periphery). I understood for a moment this:

Richard: The human eye is, rather, looking into infinity (when gazing deeply into that velvety darkness betwixt the stars) in the sense that there is no limit to its seeing ability other than its own physical capacity due to having evolved on a planet a short distance away, in astronomical terms, from its central star (aka the sun) (when gazing deeply into that velvety darkness betwixt the stars) in the sense that there is no limit to its seeing ability other than its own physical capacity due to having evolved on a planet a short distance away, in astronomical terms, from its central star (aka the sun). [Emphasis by Chrono]. (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Infinitude).

VINEETO: This is marvellous. What happened in that moment was apperception –

Richard: In that brief scintillating instant of bare awareness, that twinkling sensorium-moment of consciousness being conscious of being consciousness, one apperceives a thing as a nothing-in-particular that is being naught but what-it-is coming from nowhen and going nowhere at all.

Apperception is very much like what one sees with one’s peripheral vision as opposed to the intent focus of normal or central vision. This moment of soft, ungathered sensuosity – apperception – contains a vast understanding, an utter cognisance, that is lost as soon as one adjusts one’s mind to accommodate the feeling-tone and subverts the crystal-clear objectivity into an ontological ‘being’ ... a connotative ‘thing-in-itself’.

In the process of ordinary perception, the apperception step is so fleeting as to be usually unobservable. One has developed the habit of squandering one’s attention on all the remaining steps: feeling the percept; emotionally recognising the qualia; zealously adopting the perception and getting involved in a long string of representative feeling-notions about it. When the original moment of apperception is rapidly passed over it is the purpose of ‘how am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’ to accustom one to prolong that moment of apperception – a sensuous awareness bereft of feeling content – so that uninterrupted apperception can eventuate.
Apperception is the clear and direct experiencing of being just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time – sans identity and its feeling-fed realities – and it is a wordless appreciation of being alive and awake on this verdant and azure planet.

Apperception is where one is living in the already always existing peace-on-earth and is where one is blithe and carefree, even if one is doing nothing: doing something – and that includes thinking – is a bonus on top of the never-ending perfection of the infinitude which this material universe is.
Apperception is where one is the universe being stunningly aware of its own infinitude. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 25, 31 August 2001)

All the best.

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Chrono 2, 13 October 2025).

October 24 2025

ANDREW: So, ‘I’ have had all the aspects of what later were “codified” in religious fear and guilt, love, compassion, sin, etc… long before anyone had imagined the first “handing down” of commandments or any such thing. Even before my favourite “bicameral” people theory, all the passionate energy of ‘who’ I am “really”; blind nature’s rough and ready survival and reproduction “programs”, was there! Fully intact and in full flight!

VINEETO: I’ll butt in here before you go on and insert a feeling, and a fresh identity, into this remarkable insight. I suggest to linger a bit longer in this pre-identifying gap, if you can, and allow some further fascinated reflective contemplation regarding the ramifications and consequences of having been able to shed the wrath and grace of god, and ponder how you can enjoy and appreciate this freedom, and if it is worth to do whatever necessary to maintain such enjoyment of freedom.

Richard: One starts to feel ‘alive’. Being ‘alive’ is to be paying attention – exclusive attention – to this moment in time and this place in space. This attention becomes fascination ... and fascination leads to reflective contemplation. Then – and only then – apperception can occur. An apperceptive awareness can be evoked by paying exclusive attention to being fully alive right now. This moment is your only moment of being alive ... one is never alive at any other time than now. And, wherever you are, one is always here ... even if you start walking over to ‘there’, along the way to ‘there’ you are always here ... and when you arrive ‘there’, it too is here. Thus attention becomes a fascination with the fact that one is always here ... and it is already now. Fascination leads to reflective contemplation. As one is already here, and it is always now ... then one has arrived before one starts.

The potent combination of attention, fascination, reflection and contemplation produces apperception, which happens when the mind becomes aware of itself. (Richard, Articles, This Moment of Being Alive).

ANDREW: It’s a remarkably freeing fresh feeling to know this is a fact. I feel it! I feel it in a very direct down-to-earth-way. It’s the same “flavour” as my previous “one with god” illumination years, but without anything between the freshness and the knowing of it. When I have felt this before, it was in the context of new age, “I am god” imaginations et. al. There was that colouring of supernatural power is “around the corner”, and walking on water was inevitable.

Simple.

VINEETO: Have you noticed, once you condensed the insight into a feeling and as such into a belief, and then collate it with those feelings of a familiar flavour, similar to previous affective experiences, that the original insight instantly loses its freshness and poignancy? You even conclude (erroneously) “just feeling the fact of ‘being’ ‘myself’. ‘I’ know what I am!’”

Now, a feeling can never be a fact as a feeling cannot experience, let alone know, “what I am”. What you are is the flesh-and-blood body only, as experienced when the ‘self’ is temporarily in abeyance. Whereas the feeling “of ‘being’ ‘myself’” is a passionate feeling born of the instinctual passions – and it not only changes according to your fluctuating moods but, as you already discovered, can also be changed by choice for your benefit and the benefit of those around you.

Now that you determined (believe) that you are “a dude, playing a dude, disguised as another dude” – what are you going to do with this feeling? Do you want to live like those ‘dudes’ in the video you attached (Yuri Wong “I am a Dude”), driven by passion, or perhaps be inspired by a more happy and friendly way of life? Such as –

Richard: It is all so simple, in the actual world; no effort is needed to meet the requisite morality of society. I have no ‘dark nature’, no unconscious impulses to curb, to control, to restrain. It is all so easy, in the actual world; I can take no credit for my apparently virtuous behaviour because actual freedom automatically provides beneficial thoughts and deeds. It is all so spontaneous, in the actual world; I do not do it ... it does itself. Vanity, egoism, selfishness ... all self-centred activity has ceased to operate when ‘I’ and ‘me’ as ‘being’ ceased to ‘be’. And it is all so peaceful, in the actual world; it is only in actualism that human beings can have peace-on-earth without toiling fruitlessly to be ‘good’. The answer to everything that has puzzled humankind for all of human history is readily elucidated when one is actually free. The ‘Mystery of Life’ has been penetrated and laid open for all those with the eyes to see. Life was meant to be easy. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Mark, #peaceful)

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Andrew 2, 24 October 2025).

October 25 2025

VINEETO: I’ll butt in here before you go on and insert a feeling, and a fresh identity, into this remarkable insight. I suggest to linger a bit longer in this pre-identifying gap, if you can, and allow some further fascinated reflective contemplation regarding the ramifications and consequences of having been able to shed the wrath and grace of god, and ponder how you can enjoy and appreciate this freedom, and if it is worth to do whatever necessary to maintain such enjoyment of freedom.

ANDREW: Indeed, I can heed these words quite willingly. I am very much enjoying some of the ramifications. For one, driven the freeway each morning and night is usually a huge annoyance. However, being as you say, a feeling and not a fact, (I will remember this, very useful and easy to remember). I see other drivers just doing what any person driven by the exact same blind program will do, variations on a theme, and actually amazing that we all get where we are going, the vast majority of time.

It was so much easier to see my own anger, and it all be pre-morality. All happening before morality was even a thing, in the modern sense. I felt it is a lightweight manner, as the feeling and the knowledge were immediate. I wasn’t trying to “not be angry”, I was angry, but was not exploding because I was not repressed. It was definitely the beginning of fascination. It was interesting. Feeling myself, watching others.

VINEETO: Hi Andrew,

Yes, it is generally “morality” incorporated into one’s own identity and the accompanying self-image which stands in the way of acknowledging the feeling which is happening. But once “the feeling and the knowledge were immediate” and you know that this is ‘me’ in action, then it is easy to choose to be in a more pleasant and harmonious manner – voilŕ, you are instantly more happy and harmless. And thus there is room for fascination and contemplation. Life is amazingly fascinating when ‘I’ don’t insist of having an emotional opinion/ reaction to everything that is happening.

That’s why I ‘butted in’ before you proceeded (in the last message) to make “a fresh identity” which would consolidate whatever you feel into a substantial (seriously important) event demanding protection and defence of this freshly created identity.

Here it is explained more fully –

Richard: The actualism method – enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive – that was first put into action in 1981 is a potent method specifically aimed at experiencing a condition of uninterrupted apperception ... which means that the peace-on-earth that is already always here – now – will become apparent.

When one first becomes aware of something there is a fleeting instant of pure perception of sensum, just before one affectively identifies with all the feeling memories associated with its qualia (the qualities pertaining to the properties of the form) and also before one cognitively recognises the percept (the mental product or result of perception), and this ‘raw sense-datum’ stage of sensational perception is a direct experience of the actual. Pure perception is at that instant where one converges one’s eyes or ears or nose or tongue or skin on the thing. It is that moment just before one focuses one’s feeling-memory on the object. It is the split-second just as one hedonically subjectifies it ... which is just prior to clamping down on it viscerally and segregating it from pure, conscious existence. Pure perception takes place sensitively just before one starts feeling the percept – and thus thinking about it affectively – which takes place just before one’s feeling-fed mind says: ‘It’s a man’ or: ‘It’s a woman’ or: ‘It’s a steak-burger’ or: ‘It’s a tofu-burger’ ... with all that is implied in this identification and the ramifications that stem from that. This fluid, soft-focused moment of bare awareness, which is not learned, has never been learned, and never will be learned, could be called an aesthetically sensual regardfulness or a consummate sensorial discernibleness or an exquisitely sensuous distinguishment ... in a word: apperceptiveness.

In that brief scintillating instant of bare awareness, that twinkling sensorium-moment of consciousness being conscious of being consciousness, one apperceives a thing as a nothing-in-particular that is being naught but what-it-is coming from nowhen and going nowhere at all. Apperceptiveness is very much like what one sees with one’s peripheral vision as opposed to the intent focus of normal or central vision. One experiences a smoothly flowing moment of clear experiencing where one is interlocked with the rest of actuality, not separate from it. This moment of soft, ungathered sensuosity – apperceptiveness – contains a vast understanding, an utter cognisance, that is lost as soon as one adjusts one’s mind to accommodate the feeling-tone ... and subverts the crystal-clear objectivity into an ontological ‘being’ ... a connotative ‘thing-in-itself’. (Richard, Articles, Attentiveness, Sensuousness, Apperceptiveness)

Feeling being ‘Vineeto’ never paid much attention to this article, ‘she’ found it too dense, but now I can see how much information it contains for understanding and achieving apperceptiveness right from the beginning. I am reminded of Peter talking about looking from the front of one’s eyeballs.

Peter: Something Richard said that I found useful was to practice bringing my visual awareness to the very front of the eyeballs. I found this is the best ‘I’ can do to mimic ‘self’-less seeing – there is less of the feeling of ‘me’ looking through the eyes and more of the feeling of the eyes seeing. In this way you also avoid the risk of becoming ‘the observer’ watching ‘the observed’, but more closely mimic what you actually are – the universe sensately experiencing itself as a thinking and reflective corporeal human being. (Actualism, Peter, Actual Freedom List, No. 52, 22.9.2003).

ANDREW: It seems all so much easier.

VINEETO: It is indeed “much easier” and a marvellous way of living naďvely. This is wonderful.

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Andrew 2, 25 October 2025).

November 2 2025

KUBA: I think the crux of what I am getting at is – is apperception only possible when ‘I’ am in abeyance, no matter how briefly? And ‘I’ only have a memory of the flavour, yet ‘I’ never taste it ‘myself’? In fact ‘I’ have never tasted the “mirificent flavour of pure intent” at all.

VINEETO: There are excellence experiences where ‘I’ am still present –

Richard: ... the term ‘Excellence Experience’ comes from my third wife’s experience (who is meticulous in grading her experiences so as to not befool herself into thinking something is happening which is not actually the case) on Australia’s most easterly headland one bright and sunny morning where she initially described it to me, while it was happening, as being “not quite a PCE”.

Then, while gazing intently at a group of tourists on a lookout platform further below, she observed how it was such an excellent experience anyway, despite not quite being a PCE, it would henceforth be slotted into her then-scale of ‘good’, ‘very good’, ‘great’ and ‘perfect’. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List D, No. 7, 16 November 2009, tool-tip)

And to distinguish the difference of excellence experiences to a PCE –

Richard: The most outstanding distinction in the excellence experience is the marked absence of what I call the ‘magical’ element ... in a PCE one is fully immersed in the infinitude of this fairy-tale-like actual world with its sensuous quality of magical perfection and purity where everything and everyone has a lustre, a brilliance, a vividness, an intensity and a marvellous, wondrous, scintillating vitality that makes everything alive and sparkling ... even the very earth beneath one’s feet. The rocks, the concrete buildings, a piece of paper ... literally everything is as if it were alive (a rock is not, of course, alive as humans are, or as animals are, or as trees are). This ‘aliveness’ is the very actuality of all existence – the actualness of everything and everyone – for one is not living in an inert universe.

Gary: In hindsight, the description of the PCE fits the bill, with the magical, fairy-tale like quality. The excellence experience may be more common to me lately that I hitherto thought. In the excellence experience, there is a commonness to it not found in the PCE.

Richard: Ahh ... good, I am pleased to have feedback that shows this to be a facet of experiencing that more than just a few people have so far reported. It all helps to clarify and aided communication.

Gary: In the PCE, there is a clear sense that something of momentous importance is happening, at least it seemed that way for me.

Richard: Excellent ... words conveying what ‘momentous importance’ conveys are words such as what I look for in a description, for it is no little thing what one does/ what we are doing. What is conveyed is what impelled ‘me’, all those years ago, into proceeding with the utmost dispatch so as to enable peace-on-earth sooner rather than later ... so much so that when the going got rocky, from time to time, when ‘I’ put ‘my’ foot on the brake pedal in order to slow the process down the pedal went straight to the floor.

‘I’ was on the ride of a life-time.

Gary: The excellence experience, if not labelled such, might seem to be an experience of exceptional clarity and lucidity. With the PCE, words like bounteousness, bursting, pouring forth, vibrant, clear, alive, animate, come to mind.

Richard: The words ‘exceptional clarity and lucidity’ strikes me as being a very good description of the distinction when compared with ‘bounteousness, bursting, pouring forth’ and so on as I am swimming in largesse.

Gary: One of the things that was most striking about it was how uncommon everything appeared, how rich and variegated everything was.

Richard: Yes, I took particular note of your depiction of the stone in the gravel pit: sometimes peoples have looked at me in shock when I wax eloquent about actual intimacy with a stone, a brick, a glass ashtray, a polystyrene cup and so on, but I just tell them that I am officially mad and/or that I am a war veteran and they, presumably, go away content that all has been thus satisfactorily explained.

It is great that you are here for your input from all your posts is invaluable. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, Gary, 15 August 2000).

Or this description from a correspondent, who had explicit PCEs, describing here what was happening for him at the time –

Respondent: I’ll try to give an accurate description of this, but it’s very difficult to convey the quality of it. If you have experienced this, you will probably recognise it at once; if not, I don’t think there is any way of conveying it.

There is an increase in sensory clarity, especially visual acuity. Along with this increase in clarity there is a ‘purity’ in everything one perceives. The words ‘immaculate’, ‘perfect’, ‘pure’ capture it quite well; everything is wonderful. Strangely, though, the word ‘beautiful’ does not apply. There is no (felt) affect whatsoever. The purity of perception (and the marvellousness of what is perceived) goes beyond affect, leaving only pure, calm wonder. It’s sensory delight without any emotional resonance at all. The sensory delight I’m talking about is not the usual kind of sensuousness/ sensuality that one enjoys in an ordinary state. Rather than being ‘pleasurable’, it is appreciation of the perfection that seems to be inherent in what one is perceiving, which leads to enjoyment of a very different kind.

This is quite extraordinary. There is a sensation of softness in the air, which has a pellucid, jelly-like quality (metaphorically speaking). I’m reminded of something you once wrote about the eyes ‘lightly caressing’, as if one is seeing from the front of the eyeball. I also remember you saying ‘nothing dirty can get in’, and that’s exactly the way it is. Objects that would seem drab, dirty, sullied, soiled in ‘reality’ are immaculate in themselves; any ‘dirtiness’ is overlaid by ‘me’. (This is not an intellectual realisation but a direct perception of the fact).

In many ways this is like a PCE. The mode of perception is strikingly similar to a PCE. But when I turn my attention to the writer of this message, something is different but I can’t put my finger on it. I’m not really sure whether ‘I’ am here at all, or whether ‘I’ am only a thought/ feeling that briefly intercedes between perceptions and assumes itself to be the agent of this body’s actions. This sounds awkward in words, but there is nothing at all awkward or confusing about what I’m experiencing.

I am not sure that I would call this a ‘self’-less experience because, although there is no affect (none that I recognise, none whatsoever), there is still a sense of agency that could be given the name ‘me’ for convenience. (Am I making any sense? Do you know what I’m talking about?).

Richard: Yes ... you may find the following link useful in this regard: (Library, Topics, Excellence). [Emphasis added].  
(Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 60c, 22 May 2004).

Maybe you described something similar here –

Kuba: Right now I experience myself to be here where this moment is happening but there is certainly affect still happening, but it’s like there is only pure affect and then there is actuality all around. (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba 11, 10 Jul 2025)

KUBA: This does appear to be so, that moment when apperceptiveness is taking place it is not ‘me’ tasting the actual, there is the experience of actuality itself, when ‘I’ shortly return ‘I’ have a recent memory that the actual world exists. In the near-PCE state of naiveté this happens at a frequent rate, the actual world seems to be not far at all and yet for ‘me’ it is actually inaccessible, as it always is.

VINEETO: Of course, the actual world is not far away, it is right under your nose.

It also could be that it is not quite apperceptiveness, or apperception, taking place but something similar in quality but missing the magical out-of-this-world element of the PCE. I am not suggesting you never experienced PCEs but perhaps not paying meticulous attention to the difference in quality between a PCE and experiences that were akin to a PCE but not quite. This lack of scrupulousness may have made it easier for ‘me’ to step in and claim them all as ‘my’ experiences, even as something ‘I’ created not something that ‘I’ have to step out of the way in order to experience it.

Richard: Apperception, as I said, is the mind’s perception of itself – it is a bare awareness. Normally the mind perceives through the senses and sorts the data received according to its predilection; but the mind itself remains unperceived ... it is taken to be unknowable. Apperception happens when the ‘who’ inside abdicates its throne and a pure awareness occurs. The PCE is as if one has eyes in the back of one’s head; there is a three hundred and sixty degree awareness and all is self-evidently clear. This is knowing by direct experience, unmediated by any ‘who’ whatsoever. One is able to see that the ‘who’ of one has been standing in the way of the perfection and purity that is the essential nature of this moment of being here becoming apparent. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, List A, No. 15, No. 07).

*

Richard: Apperception is the clear and direct experiencing of being just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time – sans identity and its feeling-fed realities – and it is a wordless appreciation of being alive and awake on this verdant and azure planet. Apperception is where one is living in the already always existing peace-on-earth and is where one is blithe and carefree, even if one is doing nothing: doing something – and that includes thinking – is a bonus on top of the never-ending perfection of the infinitude which this material universe is. Apperception is where one is the universe being stunningly aware of its own infinitude. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 19a, 1 September 2001).

Only you can figure this out.

KUBA: However via ‘being’ naiveté ‘I’ am inviting apperceptiveness to happen over and over, and each time ‘I’ am bleeping out for the duration of the apperceptive seeing, even if it is just a flash, and another flash etc.

This last paragraph explains quite well how it plays out experientially for me.

Remember, you have some experience now with trying to do ‘shortcuts’ which revealed to be rather diversions, avoidance and delays –

Respondent: I have (big) issues to sort out first before I will be able to make the leap.

Richard: As there is no ‘leap’ – an actual freedom is not a spiritual freedom – it would indeed appear so.

Respondent: I guess there are no shortcuts.

Richard: What I find telling – and this is a general observation – is just how much peoples object to being happy and harmless ... the vast majority of the correspondence in the archives is, in fact, a cutting indictment on the human condition itself.

Do you realise – and this is a personal observation – you have just said, in effect, that you guess you will have to become a happy ‘being’ before you can become actually free from the human condition (as if were there a way to be thus free without having to do so you would not)?

Whereas it is actually such a delight to finally be able to be happy (and harmless) ... and a relief. [Emphasis added]. (Richard, Actual Freedom List, No. 54, 27 November 2003).

Cheers Vineeto (Actualism, Actualvineeto, Kuba 11, 2 November 2025).