|
Claudiu / Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem Report on Discuss Actualism Forum about
KUBA: So what I am contemplating is whether all of ‘my’ planning and scheming can be safely dispensed with. VINEETO: However, despite knowing that ‘you’ will never know with certainty what the destination is like, because ‘you’ will have to become extinct in order to reach the ultimate destination, ‘you’ still play the game of finding out the impossible, even when you “dispensed with” “all of ‘my’ planning and scheming”. At some point your unequivocal agreement to ‘your’ demise is imperative to reach your destiny. KUBA: So linking it back to ‘my’ habit of planning and scheming, this investigation of the ‘planner and schemer’ would be part of the “in the meantime” business of cleaning ‘myself’ up where possible. Because honestly ‘I’ cannot see what else ‘I’ can do in order to allow ‘my’ self-immolation currently. CLAUDIU: Hummmmmm I do wonder if this thorough reasoning is really more a justification of inaction rather than prudence in action? I say it from experience I visited Geoffrey for a few days recently which I’ll write more about later. Part of the point of the trip was of course to get me further towards self-immolating (if not self-immolate right on the trip itself). One evening I saw my next obstacle so clearly. I had pinned it down – I really did want to self-immolate of course! But I felt like I couldn’t, I was too much of a fraud, too rotten to do it, I couldn’t allow myself to do it. So, I wanted to do it, but alas I wasn’t good enough. And I had planned out how to resolve this all too, like sticking with that feeling, allowing myself to do proceed even though I felt I couldn’t, allow myself to have this thing I want even if I am rotten, the rotten-ness is the whole point (the reason to self-immolate) etc. When I met back with Geoffrey I started telling him all this, and he’s like oh you feel like a fraud? To who? “The universe, like cosmically so.” And he was like Ahhhh I see! You got dealt a bad hand. The old wise men up in the sky took a look around one day when they were deciding everyone’s fate, and they saw Claudiu and said “Nah he’s not gonna make it, we’ve decided, he’s not good enough”. Nothing you can do about it, it is out of your hands! And I just burst out laughing haha. It was easy to see the silliness of that when he put it that way. And that was the end of it. But then he said you know, this sounds more like ehh… a hurdle, not a real obstacle. I don’t think it was a real reason, it’s really something else. It was interesting because I really did feel like it was a real reason. But I saw he was right, it was a made-up reason. It was just a way to justify putting it out of my hands. The real reason was, in fact, what Vineeto wrote here to you, which is that I hadn’t unequivocally agreed to my demise. It was just a way to distract from that fact, basically. Two other key pieces: the major one was we figured out that I had been trying to put myself into actuality, as in I as identity, as a feeling-being, will continue somewhat beyond self-immolation. There were many ways I had justified it, like “Oh but Peter said there was a continuity of consciousness…” and he’s like “Consciousness! You’re translating that into ‘identity’! It’s not identity that continues!” or “But I remember disappearing in a PCE” and he’s like “No you don’t! You are putting yourself into the PCE and spoiling the memory. This is why you are supposed to rememorate it not remember it.” etc. Basically the way he put it is, what will happen in the universe if I physically die? Essentially nothing except this body is dead (most of it will continue as-is). And the point is that the only difference with self-immolating rather than dying, is that there is a body that will continue being conscious (and not fall into a coma or whatever). But for me it will be exactly the same as if the body physically died, no difference whatsoever for me – total extinction. That put the notion to rest that I would continue in any way after self-immolating. He also really impressed upon me just how significant this is. It’s not kid stuff. It’s not a playground ride or a roller coaster where you get on it then come back and get off and you’re back to where you were. It is a one-way ride with no return ticket. So long as the enormity of it is not grasped – to which fear and dread are a normal response – then it’s still just being on the playground ride. Only once this is grasped then can the decision be made to take the leap and continue anyway (otherwise you’re just imagining yourself to be on a cliff but you’re really on a flat ground, and you don’t see the edge to jump off of but only think you do). So you have to actually get to the edge of the cliff (seeing the enormity of the extinction) and only then you can decide to jump. And that decision to jump, self-immolation doesn’t happen right then – it takes a little longer, which is the final, constantly-accelerating, out-from-control process which Geoffrey experienced for about a week. But he said the experience after jumping is one of constantly accelerating, and also no dread afterwards, the dread part (“wall of fear”) only happens before. Whether there are different flavors of out-from-control that we have been experiencing or they are different things entirely, and/or figuring out what to call all this, could be an interesting exercise, and maybe of value later, but for now whatever it is, it’s clear we hadn’t done that jump Geoffrey talked about here off the cliff. In any case the main take-aways for me from the trip was A) see that I really will disappear entirely, B) see the enormity and significance of this (the stakes are indeed high), C) stop kidding myself with fake hurdles that feel real, it really (for me at this point) is all avoidance tactics to avoid facing the real thing, which is the total extinction of it. In short, go up to the edge of the cliff, see if I really want it, then joyfully/gaily/cheerfully (not seriously) jump/traverse the wall of dread/whatever the metaphor, do whatever you can to do it, and then extinction will be nigh. I write it here to you so you can see if you recognize any of it in your own experience and to help you proceed as well. Cheers,
CLAUDIU: The main change since visiting Geoffrey has been that everything’s a lot more straightforward now, I have managed to disabuse myself that I will continue on (it took many repeated times running into that wall again and realizing I’m doing it haha). This really brought into sharp focus just the enormity of it all, with repeated “… fuck!!”s going on in my head as I re-realized it each time haha. I could also see how it was like there’s a funnel that keeps sloping more downwards, and if I really jumped into it fully it would be like a free-fall, which I felt the potency of it. And the fear and dread of it I was feeling fully, but excitedly proceeding anyway. Then on May 24th at 6:48pm there was an intriguing experience where I was experiencing incredible potency of pure intent, and something certainly happened to me, I even saw it in my visual field shifting, it’s like everything came to a point, then started to separate out down and to the right before coming back, but it didn’t come back to exactly where it was before. I don’t quite know what to make of it yet, the main thing is that things are even more straightforward after that, which I experience as being again there being less in the way of actuality, and also I haven’t felt the fear or dread at the face of extinction anymore, but also I don’t feel a constant acceleration towards actuality, so I don’t really know yet lol. I would say it like I am now in the position where it’s clear which direction to go, and have no doubt that I can do it and that it will work, and it’s just a matter of ehm … actually doing it lol. It feels like the last pieces of “do I really want this forever?” getting myself on board, but that I do still need to answer that question in the affirmative. The other interesting thing is before I experienced it like there was no brakes anymore, yet I could still put on the gas more or less… now I experience it like not only are there no brakes, but there’s no gas pedal either. There’s nothing I can do to make the process happen faster or slower, it happens at the pace it happens. However I am still able to sort of squirm away from it, it’s not like the process can pull me forward against my will, if that makes sense. But when my will is aligned then off it goes. Even though this makes it sound like I have some control over it, I wouldn’t really put it that way. When I am aligned there’s nothing I can do to accelerate or pause it. But I am able to still ‘misalign’ myself. I say this not as advice but just description of what is happening lol, and if Vineeto and/or Geoffrey have any advice they can read it and see… but the way forward is clear enough, continue appreciating the enormity of the stakes of total extinction, and see if it really is what I really want, as it is for keepsies. Cheers,
CLAUDIU: Basically the way he put it is, what will happen in the universe if I physically die? Essentially nothing except this body is dead (most of it will continue as-is). And the point is that the only difference with self-immolating rather than dying, is that there is a body that will continue being conscious (and not fall into a coma or whatever). But for me it will be exactly the same as if the body physically died, no difference whatsoever for me – total extinction. That put the notion to rest that I would continue in any way after self-immolating. GEOFFREY: I’ll just comment on this for the benefit of readers. Be very clear that all this ^^ is from the point of view of the identity, who goes willingly
into oblivion, both because it has seen without the shadow of a doubt that it would be to the benefit of this body,
that body, and everybody to do so; and because it secretly desires it. The second point is the ‘blessed’
dimension of oblivion, that is accessible experientially – which I tried to impart to you the next day – and that
you seem to be missing here. The main point, that you also make no mention of, is of course caring, and further
altruism, which requires for its activation the total grasp and absolute certainty, derived from the experience of
the PCE and lived by the identity through near-actual-caring in particular, that if there is “no difference
whatsoever for me”… there is all the difference for the world whether a body without identity “will
continue being conscious”. And by “for the world” I mean no abstract thing, I mean: for this body,
that body, everybody.
GEOFFREY: The second point is the ‘blessed’ dimension of oblivion, that is accessible experientially – which I tried to impart to you the next day -, and that you seem to be missing here. CLAUDIU: Oh yes you did succeed in imparting that. I just didn’t add it in here But to flesh it out here, the blessed part of it I can see by reflecting on the burden aspect of being me. It is exhausting being me, having to maintain myself, to do this and that, to be responsible, to be these malicious and sorrowful emotions that still continually get triggered, etc. The blessed aspect is that I no longer have to do this, to maintain myself, and what a relief this is felt to be… I relate it particularly to the ‘safe’ aspect of it, like it’s safe to do so, and this envelopment of safety allows me to let go (or at least aligns in that direction) I think it was on the first evening you were talking about how much of a burden it was even compared between basically free and fully free – and you were wondering why you were saying it as in maybe it was something I had to hear. Although it’s a different burden, it was actually super appealing to hear as I was able to relate it to the burden of being a feeling-being, and how nice (or rather blessed!) indeed it would be to not have to be that anymore … GEOFFREY: The main point, that you also make no mention of, is of course caring, and further altruism, which requires for its activation the total grasp and absolute certainty, derived from the experience of the PCE and lived by the identity through near-actual-caring in particular, that if there is “no difference whatsoever for me”… there is all the difference for the world whether a body without identity “will continue being conscious”. And by “for the world” I mean no abstract thing, I mean: for this body, that body, everybody. CLAUDIU: I had actually been neglecting this, ty for bringing it up. It makes sense. It’s
not all the same in every way if I physically die or self-immolate (what would be the difference then?). Yea it
makes sense, it is a sacrifice, a sacrifice has to have some benefit or it’s not a sacrifice, so yea the benefit
part of it is really like the whole point lol, great stuff.
CLAUDIU: Hi Felix, FELIX: Hey Claudiu, awesome to hear about your trip - would be cool to read a report if you want to CLAUDIU: I’m not sure I will write A Report™, as in “Claudiu’s Report™ of Visiting Geoffrey” I was prompted to write #1592 Maybe what would be beneficial is to highlight just how appealing actual freedom is, how clearly and obviously appealing it is to be that way, which interacting with an actually free person demonstrates readily. There’s an effortless and remarkable ease of existence that I witnessed with Geoffrey. For me I was able to be completely un-self-conscious and I had a wonderful time conversing with him about whatever it is. It was delightful because no matter where the conversation turned, there was never any ‘friction’, no seriousness came up… I knew that we could go into any topic to any depth and it would be the same, regardless whether I disagreed or not. Whereas already soon after I got back home I saw how different it was with other feeling-beings, at a certain point something ‘turns’, there’s some rubbing or friction (even little stuff, not even anywhere near to the point of becoming annoyed let alone angry), it’s not… clean. I was able to be clean with Geoffrey as there was nothing from his side. At one point I realized that he must be like that with everyone, that effortless way of interacting, and he confirmed this is the case. It was evident anyways: the people we met out and about like waiters and waitresses always interacted favorably with him, with many smiles and laughter. My visit prompted a conversation between him and his wife where his wife shared what it was like for her living with him. Two things stood out: one is that she came to see their home as a refuge, a safe space that she could basically come back to from the chaos of the ‘real world’ (my words). The second was that she knew that no matter what, when she got home to Geoffrey, he would be good. As in, there would not be an issue or something he was having. This is distinct with normal people where no matter how generally happy someone is, they will have bad days or emotional issues or whatnot, and they will not be ‘good’ when you get home to them, and it’ll be something to deal with. But coming home to Geoffrey, he is always good. I thought this was remarkable and shows that there is no conflict with an actually free person living with feeling-beings, even with those closest to them, even when they have nothing to do with actualism. This was after some years of living with him. Geoffrey also said something along the lines of, when you become actually free, to other people you will be basically the same, like they won’t even necessarily notice you being any different from one day to the next, even though for you the experience will be totally different. As more of an anecdote, I found his eyes remarkably striking. There was a certain… clarity to them, an intensity whilst simultaneously an ease of existing. I didn’t quite know how to put my finger on it or how to describe it, but there was something special about it. When I got back home to my partner, and looked into her eyes, I immediately saw why: with my partner, there is something “in the way” – her identity (this is on top of my identity which is already in the way). With Geoffrey there was nothing “in the way” at all from his side. I am not sure this is something other feeling-beings would notice per se but it was something I noticed. With regards to how he was as compared to Richard and Vineeto, I experienced him to be essentially the same way of being conscious as them. Sitting on a bench in a nearby forest-park, there was no difference at all between Geoffrey and the trees themselves. The trees are the universe and he is the universe experiencing itself as a flesh and blood body. The palpable stillness of the universe is the same as the stillness that he experiences himself as, I experienced both as inviting me in just the same way. Another interesting thing he imparted to me was just how much social identity can remain even for the basically free people. In other words, the ‘bar’ to basic actual freedom is really not that high. You don’t have to clean up all or even nearly all of your social identity issues… that being said, simultaneously it is still absolutely everything for me to self-immolate, as I (the feeling-being) am indeed fully going extinct, make no mistake about it. But you don’t have to clean up every last thing. It’s more a matter of seeing the way to oblivion and going there, full-on. Essentially the take-away I want to impart is that it is clearly a beneficial and better way to be alive, and there’s no downsides at all to it, nothing of ultimate value that one has to give up such that it would affect one’s association with other feeling-beings, even those that have nothing to do with actualism. I only have to give up myself, in my entirety, to allow this body to be free and for everyone around to palpably and tangibly benefit (immensely so) as a result of this worthy sacrifice which is fully and completely the end of me. I want to emphasize that last part: from how I understand it now (as not having done it yet this is not a report): it is not that I become free… it is that I go extinct, and allow this body to continue being conscious without me, which body being conscious is what will benefit those other bodies being conscious, but for me the feeling-being it is the same as if the body were to physically die, i.e. the end of everything, in totality. Cheers,
KUBA: So this whole out from control / not out from control saga that has been going on What I can say is that there was a qualitative shift last year and this qualitative shift has remained throughout. What changed then, has not unchanged […] being out from control is not a leisurely club to hang out in […] what it means to be out from control is the very antithesis of having such a static plateau to hang out on […] The experience of being out from control is more to do with the lack of anything stable or static rather than chilling out on some rung on an imaginary ladder. Essentially it is to say that being out from control is not a feather in ‘my’ cap, it’s more like ‘I’ am speedily loosing all ‘my’ feathers and ‘my’ cap […] CLAUDIU: I think we both experienced something like this and what it is like being alive has not changed for me either. And the experiential portions of the reports we have made of it are accurate reports of what it is like, at least I haven’t made anything up . However, does it attain to that which is called “out-from-control virtual freedom” in actualist lingo? There are, I think, two ways to tackle this question. The first is the mapping approach which is trying to determine whether it really is this. What happened with me is: after talking about my experience of being alive with Geoffrey, he described a bit what it was like being out-from-control for ‘him’ in ‘his’ last week, and to me it sounded like a different thing than I was experiencing, and we were in concordance on that. Part of that convo is where he asked me something like, do I think that how I am now will inevitably result in self-immolation, or do I think there is something more I have to do to have it happen? I said it was the latter, and he said something along the lines of that that’s good and he was wondering whether I have been “chilling” / waiting around (or something like this) as a possible reason for why I haven’t self-immolated yet. Another way to take the mapping approach is to compare experience with already-available descriptions. Is something really
described as being “nigh-on unstoppable” KUBA: I banished myself from remaining where it is so magical for no good reason at all, and hence I entered a “parenthesis period” that lasted months! CLAUDIU: (Note that even if once it starts again the experience is that of it never having stopped, it does not mean that it didn’t stop in the mean-time…) And is a state that is described as a “different way of being” and “where the beer is the operant” And is a state depicted as one where “Being naiveté is intrinsically part of that
state (out-from-control/different-way-of-being)” And lastly as far as this first approach is concerned, what is it that really sets apart an excellence experience (which is temporary) from an ongoing excellence experience (which is another way an out-from-control virtual freedom is depicted)? Vineeto may have some firm words for me here but… it is not even being out-from-control! As Richard wrote (emphasis added): “Is it possible for someone who is in an EE and not out-from-control to experience near actual caring during the duration of the EE?” • [Richard]: “As to be having an EE (or an IE) is to be out-from-control then
the critical criterion, which you have evidentially been looking for throughout this email exchange, is the
ascendant beer being in full allowance of the benignity and benevolence inherent to pure intent being dynamically
operative (whereby the actualism method segues into the actualism process) and pulling one evermore unto one’s destiny”. In other words an EE (according to Richard in 2016) is a (temporary) experience of being out-from-control, while an out-from-control virtual freedom is set apart from this by the “critical criterion” of the ascendant beer (which is also ascendant in temporary EEs) being “in full allowance of the benignity and benevolence inherent to pure intent being dynamically operative” (my emphasis added). Ehm sooo what does it mean to be in full allowance as opposed to a partial allowance? How would you know, experientially, the difference? Maybe you just think it is a full allowance but then later you allow it more and then you realize it was only a partial one? And especially, if you have come to associate a certain experience of being at least somewhat allowing of pure intent, as being the experience of an out-from-control virtual freedom… and you have come to consider that any gaps in the experiencing of this do not disqualify one from being virtually free… and whenever you reflect on the question of whether you are virtually free, that contemplation necessarily brings that (partial) allowance of pure intent into the picture… then wouldn’t you always conclude that you are virtually free even if you aren’t? You don’t have to answer these questions, it is merely food for thought. The second way to tackle this issue is I think a much more pragmatic and experiential approach, which is to say… … does it really matter, at this moment, in particular, specifically for the purpose of self-immolating sooner rather than later, what the way of being alive you are experiencing is called? With this in mind I can only see it hindering, and not helping, to consider it to already be that “out-from-control virtual freedom” as depicted on the AFT site. Because this virtual freedom is one where it’s described as essentially inevitable, that pure intent is pulling one forward with impunity. And the only purpose this can serve, in my opinion, is to diminish my intent, to conclude it is not fully in my hands anymore (now it’s in the universe’s hands you see). If one is correct about it then it doesn’t change anything, but if one is incorrect about it, then this becomes another cunning and clever excuse to put off my inevitable demise (whether it be when the body dies or sooner). And, to be abstaining from the question or not thinking about where one is on the map, if one is indeed virtually free then again it changes nothing, and if one isn’t then one wouldn’t be selling oneself short. So the winning approach, and indeed the obvious approach to me at this point, is this one, just not to really conceive of it in this way, and rather just naively go forth regardless. At this point it sorta seems like the best approach is to go ahead and self-immolate, and then later the flesh-and-blood-body which continues being conscious (and is NOT me ) can see if what was experienced may have qualified for out-from-control virtual freedom or not. But that’s just how I’m thinking about it currently. Cheers,
Freedom from the Human Condition – Happy and Harmless Richard’s Text ©The Actual Freedom Trust:
1997-. All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer |
