Actual Freedom – The Actual Freedom Mailing List Correspondence

July 30 1998

VINEETO: Then came another temptation to divert – a journey into the psychic world, with all its deep and meaningful understandings, insights and ‘enlightenments’. But I had explored that enough, I wanted to see what there is without fear and psychic world. And what there is magic, stillness, unemotional, no excitement and strangely enough no form. The best description I could come up with is the definition for an idiot: All the stubbies are there for the six-pack, but the plastic is missing that would keep them together!

RICHARD: I cannot help but prick up my hears where you say ‘strangely enough no form’ . I am presuming that physical objects were still extant as you say that you were seeing without fear and the psychic world ... and thus by ‘no form’ you do not mean the metaphysical ‘formlessness’. Do you mean that there was no form to an ‘I’ as in an on-going identity ... like you write about in your next paragraph? Are the ‘stubbies’ the days gone by since birth – all events and occurrences – and the ‘plastic that would keep them together’ is this ‘me’ that is the ‘form’ that was missing in this experience?

VINEETO: Senses are operating but nobody is seeing or hearing and then there is no difference between me and the desk I am seeing, no distance, no ‘I’. Last night I experienced life beyond ‘being’, in a strange way hollow, but very alive and sensate. Now I slowly, slowly can examine the plastic between the stubbies, what it is made of, because recognised it disappears. Sometimes it is fear, sometimes a feeling, sometimes a sense of continuity, of having past and future and definition.

RICHARD: When there is no difference between ‘me and the desk I am seeing’ then this is the actual world ... as distinct from the real world that ‘I’ create by ‘being’ and wherein ‘I’ reside. Once again, I am interested in your description ‘in a strange way hollow’. Do you mean ‘hollow’ as in empty of ‘being’? (‘Hollow’ can imply a negative experience but I discount that as you say ‘very alive and sensate’.) Your examination of the ‘plastic between the stubbies’ (great descriptive prose that) reveals, you say, fear (which I delineate as an instinctive passion all sentient beings are born with); feeling (by which I am assuming you mean emotion as distinct from passion); continuity (which is a feeling of ‘being’ over time); past and future (also continuity as in ‘being’ but more from thought than feeling) ... and definition. Your use of the word ‘definition’ brings me back to your ‘strangely enough no form’ description above and I relate ‘definition’ with ‘outline’ ... as I wrote in Article 9 of ‘Richard’s Journal’: ‘What one discovers, time and again, is that the personal boundaries that one feels so safely protected by, are made up of ‘my’ accrued beliefs as to who ‘I’ am. This is ‘my’ outline ... yet the outline of this construct creates an enormous distance between ‘me’ and the world ‘outside’. At those times of peak experience, the distance disappears all of a sudden as ‘I’ vanish and this actual world is right here, so close that there is no distance any more. This is closer than any affective intimacy ‘I’ have ever longed for. This is a direct experience of actuality ... and I have always been here like this ... so safely here. The outline, the boundary that created the distance, was all in ‘my’ reality. ‘I’ created a substitute security for this original safety ... a safety which has never known any threat, nor ever will. This genuine safety has no need for precautions’.

It would appear that the experiential study of fear is germane to any examination of the ‘plastic between the stubbies’ so as to ensure a life beyond ‘being’.

August 05 1998

VINEETO: Then came another temptation to divert – a journey into the psychic world, with all its deep and meaningful understandings, insights and ‘enlightenments’. But I had explored that enough, I wanted to see what there is without fear and psychic world. And what there is magic, stillness, unemotional, no excitement and strangely enough no form. The best description I could come up with is the definition for an idiot: All the stubbies are there for the six-pack, but the plastic is missing that would keep them together!

RICHARD: I cannot help but prick up my hears where you say ‘strangely enough no form’ . I am presuming that physical objects were still extant as you say that you were seeing without fear and the psychic world ... and thus by ‘no form’ you do not mean the metaphysical ‘formlessness’. Do you mean that there was no form to an ‘I’ as in an on-going identity ... like you write about in your next paragraph? Are the ‘stubbies’ the days gone by since birth – all events and occurrences – and the ‘plastic that would keep them together’ is this ‘me’ that is the ‘form’ that was missing in this experience?

VINEETO: With the stubbies I meant in this incident my actual senses including the brain, fully functioning, better than with the ‘plastic’, but they had no definition or identifiable form, hence the description ‘formlessness’. It is more an idea of a form that was missing. I seemed to be made out of the pieces of information that the senses gave me, the seeing, hearing, thinking, but it had no continuity, no person as such, no identity.

RICHARD: Ah ... now I am with you. I remember the first time I experienced being the senses only during a peak experience. 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. And further to this: I was the senses and the senses were me. With this comes an awareness of being conscious ... apperception.

Is it not staggering to realise that the identity is felt to be so very real that when it goes into abeyance one initially experiences oneself as having no form ... ‘formless’?

VINEETO: Your term ‘outline’ is a very good description of this fictitious entity. It seem to come on so silently, that if I not turn my attention to it I hardly notice it has slipped in yet again, pretending to be someone, while only the experience of the particular bit of the universe is happening. Right now it takes a lot of remembering and awareness to discrete it or better to focus on the actual experiencing of coffee, food, sound, or whatever I am doing.

RICHARD: I would say to myself: ‘This is my only moment of being alive ... I am actually here doing this reading of these words now’. The past – although it was actual whilst it was happening – is not happening now ... and never will again. A past peak experience can never be repeated ... it is useful inasmuch as it bestows the requisite confidence that it is possible to experience the purity of the perfection of life here and now ... but that is it, finish. One slips into this moment in time and this place in space by being aware that all this that is happening is happening for the very first time and that I have never been here before doing this. In fact: I have never been here before. In everyday terminology this moment in time is the ‘cutting-edge of reality’. Who knows what will happen next as ‘the future’ does not exist until this moment happens.

If this realisation is not thrilling I would like to know what is!

*

RICHARD: It would appear that the experiential study of fear is germane to any examination of the ‘plastic between the stubbies’ so as to ensure a life beyond ‘being’.

VINEETO: Yes, I agree, although often it does not appear as fear, rather a certain hesitancy to fully enjoy the moment, to lash into the sparkles and to become yet more alive – a safe place of ‘this is already enough happiness and pleasure, let’s not rock the boat!’ But since I have nothing else important to do, I might as well rock the boat and become entirely mad!

RICHARD: It may not appear as fear but ‘a certain hesitancy’ and ‘a safe place’ and ‘let’s not rock the boat’ all go to indicate fear ... in this paragraph the fear of going mad. Now, some people say: ‘Richard is mad’. From the real world point of view, this observation is entirely correct. The ‘Richard’ that was so very real back in 1981 was deathly afraid of experiencing where I am now ... yet he opened the door marked ‘madness’ and walked through. Then he panicked at his daring and sought to go back ... but the door had vanished. He had no choice but to proceed.

There is a thrilling aspect to fear ... and it is the source of courage.

December 01 1998

RICHARD: Vineeto, firstly, further to our conversation on the balcony – and just to reiterate in writing – to get out of the ‘ditch’ one gets off one’s backside and does whatever one knows best to activate delight. (Delight is what is humanly possible given sufficient pure intent obtained from the felicity/ innocuity born of the peak experience). From the position of delight, one can vitalise one’s joie de vivre by the amazement at the fun of it all ... and then one can – with sufficient abandon – become over-joyed and move into marvelling at being here and doing this business called being alive. Then one is no longer ‘making sense’ of life ... the wonder of it all drives all intellectual questions away. Such delicious wonder fosters the innate condition of naiveté‚ (which is the closest one can get to innocence) the nourishing of which is essential if the charm of it all is to occur. Then, as one gazes intently at the world about by glancing lightly with caressing eyes, out of the corner of one’s eye comes – sweetly – the magical fairy-tale-like paradise that this verdant earth actually is.

But try not to possess it and make it your own ... or else ‘twill vanish as softly as it appeared.

Secondly, you said you had run out of reasons for talking or writing to others of the magic of the actual world as evidenced by your peak experiences. In particular, I would remind you of what you related to me during your ‘Mad Scientist’ exploratory phase: ‘I stood on the verge and looked at what I would call ‘Actual Freedom’. It was a perfection of such enormity that it was a ‘1500 Number’ and that all of my improving and perfecting of myself could never match that. That I would willingly die for’. Well, here is an E-mail exchange that caught my attention a little while ago. Person One is definitely male and it seems that Person Two is female (going by the names). If the dismal quality of their pathetic ‘exploration’ does not stir you into bouncing around the Internet with your vivacious E-Mails, then nothing will.

• [Person One]: ‘You are totally right. Sorrow becomes abstraction only when we try to deal with it AS sorrow, that is, as something we have or something which has us, rather than something we are. When we see that we are sorrow, we can’t act on it. Sorrow is ME, and as ME there is nothing divided or separate as observer and observed. There is only what is happening, and what is happening is ME-sorrow. That is perception without division, or the beginning of the end of sorrow, of ME’.
• [Person Two]: ‘Is the comprehension by thought of its nature the comprehension of sorrow? Or is sorrow deeper?’
• [Person One]: ‘I would say that that sorrow is much deeper. Sorrow is vast and exists without the human form as well as within it. It exists beyond human birth and death. The whole of human consciousness is just one aspect of total sorrow’.
• [Person Two]: ‘Interestingly enough, life sometimes lets us visit this realm of sorrow. Usually in NDE (near death experiences). While some come upon a tunnel of light/love, others feel they have visited hell and are often reluctant to talk about it. The experience is often called terrifying. Here is what one 33 year old woman said ‘It was a feeling of ... of ... nothingness. It was absolutely shattering. I had enormous despair’. Actually, she is talking about the void, the emptiness that touches seemingly quite a few people. Other NDE’s describe being in a ‘Dantesque’ environment, feeling ‘murky, cold, slimy’. Some have seen a lake of fire. Feelings of being trapped in a dark cave-like place full of depression, anger and despair, going in circles with people trapped just as they are. I was also a visitor there, but without a NDE, maybe a gift. So, I am amazed at your insight. I thought what I experienced was the human consciousness, but the cave held not only my past dishonesty and deceit, but that of every human ever born. I was only a pinpoint of total awareness in the cave, but I was overwhelmed by an unbearable nauseousness. I read that many NDE people did profoundly change their lives; what was once thought meaningful was seen not to be so. One person who had a NDE relived her life and afterwards said: ‘No wonder you are the way you are. I felt all the slate is being wiped clean. I understood the reason behind everything that had ever happened to me. It was the most healing therapy there could be’. You mentioned going through shock, when you saw the truth of what mind has become. I have resisted going too deeply into sorrow, after the episode I had, which was many years ago. In fact I was ignorant enough to overlay it with my interpretations of my readings of Krishnamurti books; but maybe there is no other way but to be of sorrow fully? We resist seeing that ‘what is happening’ is ME-sorrow’. I have a feeling it has tremendous importance, especially when one considers or realised what can end it.
• [Person One]: ‘I’ve spoken about seriousness lots of times because I feel it is necessary for self knowledge. This is going to be one of those occasions when seriousness is absolutely necessary. All of that – the realm of sorrow with its various depths, dimensions and ‘degrees of consciousness’ – is totally useless to one who is concerned with self-comprehension. NDE’s, clairvoyance, telepathy, experiences of the tunnel and the thumbs, the modification of one’s life based on one’s encounters in the expanded realms of thought. All of that is inhibiting to self-perception. Every bit of it is illusion and does nothing but move one farther and farther away from one’s seriousness about oneself. When awareness occurs, the brain often perceives the immensity of human consciousness, but since the local manifestation of that consciousness – ME – still considers itself as a solidly existing individual rather than comprehending its nature as a fragment of that total consciousness, it will only strengthen itself through identification with what it feels is not only separate, but greater than itself. That whole realm is nothing but thought, images, impermanent manifestations of sorrow – self delusion. And since the self is always looking for a way out of its sorrow, it will attach itself to those manifestations which reflect its own conditioning and self-invented needs. At that point, self becomes more lost than it already is. Though awareness may (or may not) have precipitated the encounter of self with its larger nature as total human consciousness, that awareness is not maintained once self has become involved with its greater, more deluded reactions. Further, once the doorway closes and one has to face ones same daily life, whether it has changed either positively or negatively, it will be tremendously more difficult for one to encounter oneself because one will be busy trying to implement the beauty of what one thinks one has seen, or to avoid its horrors. Simplicity is farther away than ever before. Some even get completely lost in those areas of illusion and cannot recover from those altered states they have experienced. They move through life totally deluded, thinking they are bringing something wonderful to humanity, some great revelation or teaching, when, in reality, they have reached only the height of illusion and are influencing others to move in that same direction. It is the ordinary, featureless observation of oneself which is useful. Nothing else. When the brain has seen its entrapment in thought in daily life, it has seen its entrapment in thought every place else. The fragment is the whole, so it is not necessary to become involved with the depths and dimensions of sorrow. To see oneself as one is in one’s encounters with the world – with one’s family, with nature and oneself – is the same function of awareness which perceives the totality of collective human illusion. Awareness is the absence or transformation of aberrant energy, not attachment to or involvement with such energy however spiritual one has told oneself that energy is. It is quite simple actually. Either there is awareness operating or there is not. When it is operating, the totality of illusion is comprehended either as a fragment or as a whole. There are no wonderful sensory or psychological feelings involved. A tree is just a tree, but it is seen without the projection of thought. That is all. Whether that intelligence is bliss or whether it is happiness cannot be known since there are no labels which are being used by a labeller. Most people are looking for bliss, happiness, a way out of present confusion. That desire will prevent any chance of self knowledge. It will only lead to either an exacerbation of horror or to the confusion of altered states with some sort of arrival. For many it ends with disillusionment and depression when, after the usual confusions of daily life return eventually, they realise the futility of all they have believed to be of spiritual value.
• [Person Two]: ‘Well, as an experiment, I opened myself fully to the sorrow that seems to be just under the surface of the conditioned mind. It lead to silent agonising screams and fathomless anguish. And it stopped within the space of about two minutes and there was calm. I had thought that the episode, once over, is gone. Yet, I now sense that a doorway is open and anyone can touch human suffering. Which in itself means nothing, but can I learn from it? So I was hoping to look at ‘what is happening is ME-sorrow’ very closely. I can do this alone, but if you are interested, can be both look at it? I mostly agree with you, for all of the NDE’s who saw the pillar of light, recognised it as God and became very religious. It may have encouraged some to improve their lives, superficially, but not to seriously question how come they have so little love in themselves. I question whether what is experienced by the brain at death is an illusion or what is experienced near death. How can we know or intuit? The thoughts about it afterwards are certainly illusion. But that moment may not have been. But you are talking about the very roots of sorrow – deceiving ourselves out of ignorance. Has sorrow anything to teach? If we don’t come into contact with sorrow, what basis is there to change radically? And I don’t mean wallow-in or indulge sorrow. If it is a fact, it can be lived and explored. Is the essence of sorrow self-pity? helplessness? depression? feeling unjustly hurt? I appreciate you expressing it fully, for then there is less room for misunderstanding. I see now that I did not express myself fully and have come across as a possible believer in ‘altered states’. I do know that life can do some very strange things – as long as the thinking mind leaves it alone. I do not mean that sorrow needs to be looked at as a separate entity, but AS our daily life. I see that it is what is needed. But there is a subtle inner resistance. Maybe it is not sorrow that needs closer scrutiny, but the inner resistance. The seeing of oneself as one is, IS of course the problem. One is resistance and fearfulness. Fear of being nobody and being of nothingness. What you say above is so very, very true – but is not actuality here. And I am not making a problem out of that. Just noticing. However, you hit the nail on the head: looking for a way out of anything prevents any chance of self knowledge. Thought will usually look for a way out. So, seeing that – then ok, no way out. Be in every way possible all the little or big inner urges and resistances, every wayward fleeting reaction ... every pain and every attempt at escape. Just be and see ... is that what you are also saying? For I see now that the mind understands this some of the time and escapes most of the time. Yet, effort is not helpful. Funny situation’.

And on and on it went for another six or seven E-Mails until finally petering out. And, thirdly, your E-Mail correspondence with the Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti Web Page ... okay ... this is just for fun:

• ‘Hi ... goodness me ... nothing needs to be purchased unless one wants to. Over 250,000 words are being given away for free on the ‘Actual Freedom Web Page’. What is being offered is what the 521,697 words at the U.G. Krishnamurti Web-Site cannot ever offer: A clear and unambiguous explanation of where a human being is coming from; where a human being is currently at ... and where a human being can get to and how. Richard has read all that is on offer at the U.G. Krishnamurti Web-Site and wrote the following in response to a question from a correspondent late last year:
‘No one else, as far as I have been able to ascertain in eighteen years of scouring the books and travelling overseas, is able to see things clearly. The only person who comes close is Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti. But he does not know what happened to him and has no solutions to offer. He is simply a curiosity to those who go to see him. He states that he is a ‘never to be repeated sport of nature’. Whereas I know where I came from and where I am at and how I got here.
‘From what I have read his condition is the same as what I experience in that he has no psyche at all. But there the similarity ends. I first heard of him when I bought a computer and gained access to the Internet in February 1997. I located the Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti web page via another article and read all the information with rapidly diminishing interest. Something fundamental happened to him that I can relate to – the total annihilation of any psychological entity whatsoever – but he clearly states that he himself does not know what it was that happened, unfortunately. He makes it clear that he has nothing to offer to advance humankind’s knowledge about itself, which makes his a hapless condition. He makes no bones about considering himself as being a ‘sport of nature’, which is not about to be repeated, so therefore he concludes that no good will be obtained by talking with him.
‘To paraphrase what someone else has written, ‘Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti does not regard his state as a new way of living for any other person. He has no basic survival or reproductive objectives for himself or others. He says that as all desires have disappeared in him, any psychological and spiritual wants are without any foundation. He states that there is no message he can give or help he can offer. He says has no disciples, no teachings, and no practices. His ‘message’ is that he has no message for humankind. He cannot save humans from their basic dilemma or from their self-deception. Yet, being typically paradoxical, he says: ‘If I cannot help you, no one can’.
‘Of course, I am in accord with his oft-repeated statements about Spiritual Enlightenment being a waste of time, but it is one thing to speak out against something – whilst offering nothing in its place – and another thing entirely to propose a viable, liveable and delightful alternative to what one is knocking down. I did not read him saying anything about how deliciously enjoyable it is to be finally free of the Human Condition; what a pleasure it is to be alive at this moment in time; how life is an adventure in itself by the simple fact of being here; what a felicitous experience it is to be the universe’s experience of itself as a human being; to be able to fully appreciate the infinitude of this physical universe by being alive ... and so on. In short, what I read sounded existentialist and nihilistic and negative.
‘I asked around for any videos of him and I was able to watch three of them. I stopped watching half-way through the third one as I had had enough. He acknowledges that there are still emotions ... but that it is the body that is having them ... fear was one that I heard him talk about on the video. The writings about him talk of him getting angry at people who come to see him ... he tells them to go away in no uncertain terms. I can not relate to this at all as I experience no feelings – emotions and passions – whatsoever. Also, on one video, he says that he looks at a clock and wonders what it is; someone asks him what the time is and he answers ‘A quarter past three’ – or whatever – and then falls back into wondering what it is that he is looking at. I know perfectly well what a clock is. Apparently he has to knock his head against a wall to know that he is here; he slams kitchen doors shut for the same reason; he goes to a doctor who examines him and says that he is indeed alive ... whereas I know that I am alive and well and thoroughly enjoying myself ... and will continue to do so for the term of my natural life. It is a strange situation he is in and he seems to be very much alone in it.
‘In a way it is all a bit of a dismal story’.

Well, that was good fun ... over to you, Vineeto!

December 05 1998

VINEETO: As for ‘chief-disciples’ – there will be a draw from the hat for the chief of all chief-disciples and other disciples on January 1, 1999. Applications can be placed on this mailing list, deadline: December 31, 11.59 PM. Necessary qualifications: none. The elected chief disciple will then be sitting in the front row of the discourses that never happen.

RICHARD: What are simply marvellous idea! May I suggest? Could the draw be held at some particularly delightful restaurant ... like the ‘Pockets’, perhaps? First there could be a sumptuous feast on the balcony overlooking the tropical gardens ... followed by a post-prandial draw over coffee? Any suggestions?

Secondly ... why a draw? Maybe it could be done by vote like the cardinals in the Sistine Chapel? You know, get a bit of ritual going ... smoke up the chimney and all that? And would it be an annual thing? Biannual? How often could we get to dine out on this pretext?

Thirdly ... what badge of office should the chief disciple wear? Not a cloth badge like the Brownies or the Scouts ... maybe a hat? Or – now here’s a thought – why not a baton! The Field Marshals get a baton ... and a real fancy one at that. There may even be a baton lying around here some-place ... it was dropped in a hurry by the previous tenant and never passed on properly. I’ll have a look around and see what I can find, eh? And fourthly ... what are the duties of the chief disciple ... and what are the perks of office? Have you put much thought into all this? Perhaps a director’s meeting is called for?

We have been rather slack about this matter, have we not? Better get our act together ... and PDQ.

December 07 1998

RICHARD: Vineeto, this post came onto the Listening-l Mailing List this morning ... you may find it interesting.

• [Person 1]: A logical deduction from a set of facts, has the same validity as the facts themselves. A logical deduction from the presentation or thesis (involving premises or suppositions) makes clear what that thesis is implying or maintaining. Logical reasoning is then an invaluable tool in the process of communication and of understanding.
• [Person 2]: This fragment of your post struck me and prompts the following quote of the definition given to logic by Ambrose Bierce in his wonderful dictionary:

• ‘Logic, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding. The basic of logic is the syllogism, consisting of a major and minor premise and a conclusion ... thus:
Major Premise: Sixty men can do a piece of work sixty times as quickly as one man.
Minor Premise: One man can dig a post hole in sixty seconds ... therefore:
Conclusion: Sixty men can dig a post hole in one second.
This may be called the syllogism arithmetical, in which, by combining logic and mathematics, we obtain a double certainty and are twice blessed.

[Konrad]: You have given me a tremendous good time with that above joke! Thank you very much to have shared this with us. I am going to use this joke in my logic lectures.

September 30 1999

VINEETO: Richard, reading through your correspondence on the Krishnamurti list I have come across something that I cannot grasp. [Correspondent No. 12]: ‘If the many are reduced to one, what is the one reduced to?’ [Richard]: ‘When it is understood that the one is the epitome of the many and that ‘I’ am the ‘many’ and the ‘many’ is ‘me’ ... ‘I’ self-immolate at the core of ‘being’. Then I am this material universe’s infinitude experiencing itself as a sensate and reflective human being. A desirable side-effect is peace-on-earth’. What does it mean, when you say ‘I’ am the ‘many’ and the ‘many’ is ‘me’?

RICHARD: In the context that the quote was written, I was adapting my oft-repeated phrase ‘I’ am ‘humanity’ and ‘humanity’ is ‘me’ to fit in with the subject matter and focus the discussion away from its predictable and self-serving end-point (‘we are all one’). It was also apt as Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti was well known for his ‘you are the world’ saying ... which is probably where, years ago, I plagiarised the phrase from anyway.

VINEETO: There was another quote in your correspondence with Alan, where you said: ‘Being born of the biologically inherited instincts genetically encoded in the germ cells of the spermatozoa and the ova, ‘I’ am – genetically – umpteen hundreds of thousands of years old ... ‘my’ origins are lost in the mists of pre-history. ‘I’ am so anciently old that ‘I’ may well have always existed ... carried along on the reproductive cell-line, over countless millennia, from generation to generation. And ‘I’ am thus passed on into an inconceivably open-ended and hereditably transmissible future’. I have taken it simply that ‘me’, my instinctual programming, is as much part of my DNA as it has been the case in every human being on the planet since ‘the beginning of time’.

RICHARD: Yes ... biologically all sentient beings are – very fundamentally only – identical. The survival instincts (fear and aggression and nurture and desire in some form or another) are more or less common to all creatures ... and have been essential to get sentient life to this point in the earth’s history.

VINEETO: Yet I cannot identify with being ‘so anciently old that ‘I’ may well have always existed ...’ Do I need to in order to understand something vital? Does this instinctual ancient ‘me’ have something to do with the ‘many’? I do have a hunch that understanding this could be essential.

RICHARD: As I understand it, in the on-going study of genetics the germ cells (the spermatozoa and the ova) have been classified as being of a somewhat different nature to body cells. This has led to speculation that each and every body is nothing but a carrier for the genetic lineage ... that the species, therefore, is more important than you and me or any other body. Now, whilst that theory is just a typically ‘humble’ way of interpreting the data, it did strike me, some years ago, that this genetic memory could very well be the origin of the immortal ‘me’ at the core of ‘being’ (as contrasted to ‘I’ as ego who will undergo physical death). Hence it occurred to me that the source of ‘who ‘I’ really am’ could very well be nothing more mysterious than blind nature’s survival software.

I have always had a bent for the practical explanation ... and solution.

VINEETO: Last night serendipity provided the answer to my question to you, which had been going on in my head since I wrote. The experiential answer to ‘I am many and many is me’ presented itself in the form a TV program on International Humanitarian Aid Organizations and their role and accountability. For one and a half hours there was ample footage presented on human suffering and devastation in war, famine, genocide and racial ‘cleansing’ on one side and the helpless, well-intentioned, yet almost useless effort of people in the aid organizations on the other side.

RICHARD: Basically, most people mean well ... it is just that, for all their best intentions, they are hog-tied. No one is to blame.

VINEETO: The presentation was enough to make it utterly and unquestionably clear to me that there is no difference between me and the hundreds of thousands who have suffered and died and those who have, without success or effective change, tried to help – for ‘umpteen hundreds of thousands of years’. On an overwhelming instinctual level ‘I’ am ‘them’ and ‘I’ have had no solution and never will have a solution.

RICHARD: There is no cure to be found in the ‘real world’ ... only never-ending ‘band-aid’ solutions.

VINEETO: The devastation is enormous and the only way ‘out’ is ‘self’-sacrifice.

RICHARD: Yet it is the instinct for survival that got you and me and every other body here in the first place. We peoples living today are the end-point of myriads of survivors passing on their genes ... we are the product of the ‘success story’ of fear and aggression and nurture and desire. Is one really going to abandon that which produced one ... that which (apparently) keeps one alive?

Do you recall those conversations we had about loyalty (familial and group loyalty) back when you and I first met ... and what was required to crack that code?

That was chicken-feed compared with this one.

July 14 2001

RESPONDENT No. 18: ... and certainly if No. 23 deliberately is being vague about his cult fear claiming to have good reasons for not disclosing anymore information as to his previous memberships of organisations labelled by him as being cults methinks that there is fair risk that this list is moving into the bullshit zone ...

RICHARD: I can assure you, for whatever that is worth, that I am entirely sincere in wanting clarification so that it will become clear to me just what it is that certain peoples are trying to tell me. Look, are we not fellow human beings who found ourselves (when we first noticed what was going on) having been born into the human world as it was ... a mess? And do we not all seek to find a way through this mess ... and share our findings with one another? And if I have made a mistake by going public to share my discovery and understanding is it not beneficial that someone else will point that out to me? I can benefit from such interaction as much as the other ... we all benefit.

VINEETO: Richard, if you had ‘made a mistake by going public to share [your] discovery and understanding’ then it is too late now.

RICHARD: True ... but others can benefit, nevertheless. That is, if somebody else ever discovers the already always existing peace-on-earth they will now know, because of my mistake, that if they share this discovery with their fellow human beings then any discussion about it will not be cultic unless their fellow human beings become interested enough to want to live in that already existing peace-on-earth themselves.

I would guess, therefore, that this next discoverer will phrase the sharing of their discovery in a similar fashion to the way Mr. Uppaluri Krishnamurti has shared what he is experiencing.

‘Tis only a guess, though.