"Actual Freedom" within a larger context

@Craig: I loved your text about strolls in the park, etc, but do you realize that you have written it with an affective quality? Don't you see that this affective quality will disappear also? At least judging by the dry way that "actually free" people write (however, maybe they do this due to idiosyncratic choice)... You seem to be describing Naivete, which I have had some serious contact with (every person who ever took LSD will know what naivete is). Now I'm all for naivete, it's a wonderful way of looking at the world, it is a sublime and very nice way of being... but take that out and what's left? Pure, dry, perfection...

@Chris: this thing you describe, that you "just found out what you really are," but changed nothing, deserves being described in a different way. For sure that TONS of things changed in the way your brain works. In many scientifically measurable ways.

@August: have you ever considered that this idea of "absolute" which you have (which is emptiness or whatever), doesn't actually exist anywhere beyond your mental discourses about "not being your body" and so forth? Quite frankly to me this discourse seems like the ultimate reification.

The closest thing that I can point you might be talking about, that has come as a result of my practice, is the occasional (but more and more often recurring) sensation of "silence." I mean, things might be happening, even noisy things, but they are somehow "silent." Is this what you all mean when you talk about the absolute and whatnot?

@Chris That's exactly it. Knowing that Richard said it was possible to fundamentally change the things I was needing to accept (I came across AF in 1999 I think), made it impossible to fully accept imperfection. The great pinnacle of enlightenment is, when all is said and done, just enlightened imperfection. Until I 100% committed to AF recently, I was actually resentful of Richard and AF because it was like the devil on my shoulder keeping me from knowing peace.

Craig, I'm just speculating from what you were saying but it seems to me you said you were not sure you are enlightened, so why do you think enlightenment is some sort of enlightened imperfection? it seems as if you are judging enlightenment from the outside, by what other people report, but without any experience of it (full enlightenment).

What do you think?

"I'm so glad you asked - that set of instructions are a perfect example of the subtlety involved in this form of practice, because they can apply equally to invoke a PCE or a meditative state (AF would call an ASC). In your terminology I would say that is third gear practice, would you agree?"

Hi Craig,

I know you directed your question to Kenneth, but if I may...

Kenneth can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the descriptions of walking meditation that he posted relate to what he has been referring to as "vipassana consciousness". This is 1st gear (body level centered) timeless perspective, not a 3rd gear (pure awareness) timeless perspective. In-between, there are other timeless perspectives that correlate to varying degrees of 2nd gear (witnessing).

Your descriptions of what you're calling 3rd gear practice sound much more like 1st gear to me, so I wonder if we're not talking apples and oranges here.

~Jackson

Hi AugustLeo

Happy to be challenged, and happy to be wrong if that's the case. I understand that's the way it works around here.

Having said that, I'm not sure what you're saying here. What is the temporary perspective you see in my writing, and what is the Absolute?

It was not my intention to draw any such comparison. I speak from having known the Absolute, but I find it to be a vague and imprecise word that I can only assume others use in the same way as I do. Eg if you haven't known the Absolute then you would only conjecture about it. If you have known the Absolute as I have, you would not find any value chasing after it as it cannot be lived the way 3rd gear or the PCE can be lived. It can be seen/known - at least, this is the limit of my knowledge on the matter. Happy for you to 'enlighten' me

Craig

BrunoLof: "@August: have you ever considered that this idea of "absolute" which you have (which is emptiness or whatever), doesn't actually exist anywhere beyond your mental discourses about "not being your body" and so forth? Quite frankly to me this discourse seems like the ultimate reification."

Bruno - what i post here and elsewhere is based on experience and which I try to pass on with the best pointer I can come up with. The Absolute is not an idea. It's a word/concept that is a pointer to that which can't be described because it's beyond all concepts.

I find it interesting how you and others overuse and misuse the word "reify."

Best wishes. Practice.

Craig,

Thanks for your reply.

Based on this quote from you: " I speak from having known the Absolute, but I find it to be a vague and imprecise word that I can only assume others use in the same way as I do. Eg if you haven't known the Absolute then you would only conjecture about it. If you have known the Absolute as I have, you would not find any value chasing after it as it cannot be lived the way 3rd gear or the PCE can be lived. It can be seen/known - at least, this is the limit of my knowledge on the matter. Happy for you to 'enlighten' me "

I question whether you truly remember having known the Absolute, certainly not as I have, based on your words. I'm merely basing my responses on your posts relative to my own understanding. I question whether you have even reached Awakening.

I cannot Enlighten you, but Enlightenment is waiting for you. Practice.

Such are the pitfalls of depending on concepts - they are all so imprecise.

AugustLeo

"Craig, I'm just speculating from what you were saying but it seems to me you said you were not sure you are enlightened, so why do you think enlightenment is some sort of enlightened imperfection? it seems as if you are judging enlightenment from the outside, by what other people report, but without any experience of it (full enlightenment).

What do you think?"

Hi yadidb

Good on you for calling me out on this - trying to sidestep around the issue probably causes more problems than it solves. I did not practice in a tradition, I did not have a formal teacher, so I do not have any formal confirmation of enlightenment. I have done much research on what it means to others, eg the work of Jack Kornfield, Adyashanti, Mariana Caplan.

Thanks to forums such as this and DhO I've had the opportunity to engage in various fashions with some people who are out about being enlightened, and I have found that my experience lines up with Kenneth, Gozen and Chuck's but not Daniel, Trent or Tarin's... is it individual differences or right and wrong, 3rd and 4th, arahat vs something else? I just don't know. I figured time would tell. If in 7 years I got a new path, great. I'd explain to others what the big difference was if it happened. Now that I've chosen to pursue AF my "attainments" are only relevant to compare notes with others.

Craig

Public Service Announcement:

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reify

Hi Craig,

Thank you for your openness and clarity. I agree with Jackson on this point:

"[T]he descriptions of walking meditation that [Kenneth] posted relate to what he has been referring to as 'vipassana consciousness'. This is 1st gear (body level centered) timeless perspective, not a 3rd gear (pure awareness) timeless perspective. In-between, there are other timeless perspectives that correlate to varying degrees of 2nd gear (witnessing)."

I still haven't heard anyone who is drawn to AF convincingly point to the 3rd Gear perspective. As you know, my hunch is that AF would necessarily have very little appeal for someone who really "gets" primordial awareness.

I want to be open-minded in this discussion without falling prey to what I think of as the quintessential post-modern fallacy, namely that any view is as good as any other. I think some views are much better than others and in this case I think the tried and true approach toward opening to and becoming free in all of your experience is better than any plan to cultivate one perspective to the exclusion of all others. One man's humble opinion, of course, but I want to be clear about this. I like and admire you as a person and found you to be sane, intelligent, rational, and reasonable when we spoke at length last year on Skype. But I think that while the experience being cultivated by Actualists (by whatever name) is lovely and valuable, the view attached to AF is nutty and counterproductive. I think it will be seen by history as one of those odd cul-de-sacs that branch off from the main body of contemplative practice, dead-end a bunch of well-intentioned yogis and then fade away within a couple of generations of the founder's death.

If it were up to me, I would prefer that you not be one of the yogis who is dead-ended in this way, but I recognize that it isn't up to me and I will learn to let it go.

"@Craig: I loved your text about strolls in the park, etc, but do you realize that you have written it with an affective quality? Don't you see that this affective quality will disappear also? At least judging by the dry way that "actually free" people write (however, maybe they do this due to idiosyncratic choice)... You seem to be describing Naivete, which I have had some serious contact with (every person who ever took LSD will know what naivete is). Now I'm all for naivete, it's a wonderful way of looking at the world, it is a sublime and very nice way of being... but take that out and what's left? Pure, dry, perfection..."

Hi Bruno

Yes I will tend to write with an affective quality as I am not actually free yet. I am looking forward to the affective quality disappearing, as it gets in the way of true intimacy - instead of taking what is written at face value only and responding to the message, I react to it with a long string of emotional representations and imaginations culminating in a reply that is as much to myself as it is to my correspondent.

I am indeed attempting to describe naivete and that is central to AF. The PCE is anything but dry btw. The dryness indicates some investigation left to be done - eg subtle resentment of being here. Eliminate the resentment and find that its enjoyable to be here in and of itself.

Craig

The term "post-modern" is such a meaningless, philosophical, academic phrase. Plain language please.

Michael, the term "postmodern" actually has a pretty specific meaning, that being the rejection of the absolute in favor of the relative. Kinda like what you said here a little bit earlier

I know Chris.

I'm suggesting that rather than use those overworn academic terms that suggest one is writing a thesis paper for a degree, just spell it out in plain language, as you did.

Thanks.

Hi Kenneth

Regarding vipassana consciousness I had another look at that page and perhaps it's my own predilection for (what I think to be) 3rd gear that makes me take it to be useful for that. I never really did a lot of vipassana, certainly no retreats, and while I have completed many insight cycles I never attained any wisdom during any recognisable fruition, which led me to believe the significant work was done through my interest in Jnana Yoga, Dzogchen, Mahamudra, both UG and Jiddu Krishnamurti and Nisargadatta Maharaj in particular I am THAT. I can see a lot of instructions at the bottom that I just skipped on right by because I've never done that type of meditation, and I probably never will. Perhaps I will attempt to describe third gear in detail in a separate thread.

I liked your comment about the view attached to AF being nutty - many people who know me can attest I have no problem being nutty. On a serious note though, I believe the PCE to be absent of any views, so the View-that-lines-up-with-the-PCE, that is available at any time to me, is not the same as the PCE itself. So when I write emails like this about AF, usually I am writing from the PCE-like-view based on my memories and conclusions about the PCE. From that perspective, I totally see why it seems nutty and counterproductive.

Thanks for being open-minded about this. Also thanks for your kind words, I certainly felt the same way about you when we spoke on Skype. And yes - I am not being a good actualist for saying so

Craig

"Yes I will tend to write with an affective quality as I am not actually free yet. I am looking forward to the affective quality disappearing, as it gets in the way of true intimacy - instead of taking what is written at face value only and responding to the message, I react to it with a long string of emotional representations and imaginations culminating in a reply that is as much to myself as it is to my correspondent. "

So can I infer from the quoted statement that you honestly believe that writing "in the best interest of your correspondent" means writing "without affective quality"?! What on earth gave you that impression?

Behind what you are writing lies what is, in my opinion, one of the greatest fallacies of Actual Freedom, the idea that getting rid of one's emotions works "for the greater good." AF folks often repeat that the "war and misery in the world" is somehow a good reason to get rid of one's affections, that the "global affliction" made them decide to "set the example." To me this looks like trippy conceit...

Let me give you an example where I don't think that is the case: if you are -> feeling <- well and happy, you emanate a vibe which naturally spreads to others, making them feel it too. When I read your description of the ("we should do that more often") good-times, I felt something nice tingle inside, and I thought something along the lines of "oh, life is beautiful." But if you decided to write like a "good actualist," you would instead have made a very mechanical, dry, unpoetic description focused on the "sensual pleasures" associated with walking around in the park (richard goes on and on with these). (contd.)

"I am indeed attempting to describe naivete and that is central to AF. The PCE is anything but dry btw. The dryness indicates some investigation left to be done - eg subtle resentment of being here. Eliminate the resentment and find that its enjoyable to be here in and of itself.
"

Then I would have had the sensation: Oh yeah, this guy's brain is really processing the signal from his sensory apparatus without any noise at all, and that's it.

You describe that during PCE's, when you "have no affections," that makes you feel more intimate with others. But have you really thoroughly investigated whether others feel more intimate with you? --- I am asking this because when I read what the AF people write, in that dry, constant-sensory-orgasm kind of way, it evokes no sensation of intimacy from my part, quite on the contrary...

You talk about being Actually Free as if it was the most selfless thing to do in the world, but quite frankly, nothing seems more selfish to me than being permanently blissed out to the point of "perfection." I think that this is the basic critique made to "small vehicle buddhism" (the world burns while monks get blissed out)

Also, quite frankly, if I could choose, I would opt for being able to be in PCE whenever I want, and out of PCE whenever I want... That way you could have the cookie and eat it too

Thoughts?

Bruno - please attribute the author to your quotes ... best wishes, AugustLeo

Bruno - you have no creditibility with me. It may be mutual.

Hi Bruno

I think dryness is just what it looks like from the outside. I have certainly never found a PCE to be dry - quite the opposite. I find Richard's writing rich with meaning when I am approaching a PCE. It is only dry when you're habitually looking for the affective words that are obviously missing.

Re the fallacy, yes emanating good vibes feels good. But what goes up must come down. We also emanate bad vibes that causes harm to others through the same mechanism. Have you ever gotten vibes from another that you later discovered to have been a misinterpretation? I have. Between miscommunicated vibes and intended vibes I have seen families split apart, and living in Australia and that being the worst I have seen I consider myself one of the lucky ones. But having taken 100% responsibility for my actions I do not pretend that my dark side doesn't exist, I do not project it onto others... well, I try not to Old habits die hard.

I can't tell you if other's feel more intimate with me but I can tell you that meeting Tarin and Vineeto in person when I wasn't close to a PCE at all, they were intimate beyond my previous understanding of intimacy. That helped me kick my commitment up a notch.

The selfless aspect is because to cease being sorrowful - spreading misery instead of happiness, and to cease being malicious - causing harm to others directly, I must make the ultimate sacrifice by giving up everything I hold dear, everything I cherish, all those tender feelings, warm feelings... indeed, my very soul. And it's not about chasing bliss, there is no bliss in the PCE. We all want perfection, but most go about unconsciously seeking it from outside ourselves (other people, God, etc) where it can never be found. So instead, I demand perfection from myself alone, for the benefit of everyone involved with me (myself included).

Craig

"Bruno - you have no creditibility with me. It may be mutual."-AugustLeo

I, on the other hand, find you credible, Bruno. Not because you know, but because you don't claim to know and because you are eager to find out.

And AugustLeo, I want to tell you how much I love the fact that you have been contributing more to the forum lately. I like your depth, your experience, your authenticity, and the "lucha libre" pugnacity you bring to your onscreen persona. It's a great addition to the dynamic here, keeps things lively, and keeps everybody on their toes:

theexperiencegalleryblog.files.wordpress...-libre-in-london.jpg

"
And AugustLeo, I want to tell you how much I love the fact that you have been contributing more to the forum lately. I like your depth, your experience, your authenticity, and the "lucha libre" pugnacity you bring to your onscreen persona. It's a great addition to the dynamic here, keeps things lively, and keeps everybody on their toes:
"

I love this fact too

My own hypothesis so far is that, past the early rounds of the discussion, it is coming down to a matter of taste-- like a Spam aficionado out to convince an avocado enthusiast that Spam is the food of the gods, clearly superior to any and every other food in every way.

On my own behalf, I'd have to say that, if that is your conviction-- you're more than welcome to my share!

"My own hypothesis so far is that, past the early rounds of the discussion, it is coming down to a matter of taste-- like a Spam aficionado out to convince an avocado enthusiast that Spam is the food of the gods, clearly superior to any and every other food in every way.

On my own behalf, I'd have to say that, if that is your conviction-- you're more than welcome to my share! -Roomy"

Avocados, please!

"My own hypothesis so far is that, past the early rounds of the discussion, it is coming down to a matter of taste-- like a Spam aficionado out to convince an avocado enthusiast that Spam is the food of the gods, clearly superior to any and every other food in every way.
"

Spam vs Avocado......hmm, roomy, could I please choose a mango instead? Mango is definitely the fruit of the gods in my ideal world. Mango lassis make me blush. Hehe!