I wrote a long posts regarding AF's claims to uniqueness. I then left to walk the dog and realized that AF is, in fact, very different from Buddhism. However, I still think the AF technique is identical to mindfulness. Here is most of that previous post re-formatted to fit the new subject line.
Most of these quotes come from the Commonly Raised Objections index which can be found at the very bottom of the page of the Library and Glossary section . They are all within the category "Actualism in not new."
RESPONDENT: There is nothing new in the idea of using mindfulness as a methodical approach to awakening.
RICHARD: ...‘mindfulness’ is a Buddhist term that I never use and involves a total withdrawal of self from the sensate world so as to realise the ‘timeless’ which is another term I never use...I speak of ‘self-immolation’...
Is his "total withdrawal of self from the sensate-world" a reference to the samatha jhannas? Is this not taking those ASC out of context? Or am I ignorant?
In the following, he disparages the term 'surrender' which I believe is used by the Mahayanists to describe living within the sensate-world either with identity transcended or without it altogether.
RICHARD:...(and, further, that the word ‘refuge’ is but a code-word for ‘surrender’) but Buddhists will shake their heads knowingly and tell me that I just do not understand.
I see little between surrendering to the world as it is and self-immolation since it is the self that always wants to change the world to it's own liking. Here Peter further shows that self-immolation is desirable.
The path to an Actual Freedom is to devote one’s life to being the universe experiencing itself as a flesh and blood human being, and if undertaken with scrupulous integrity, will inevitably and inexorably lead to one’s self-immolation.
The only thing left to do is demonstrate that Buddhist believe in surrender and show that surrender and self-immolation are the same. But in order to do that, I'd have to research some Zen websites and/or Kenneth Folks dharma page. I've spent too much time on this post already. And, personally, I think it's self-evident, if you'll excuse the pun.
Here is more on mindfulness verses HAIETMOBA.
RESPONDENT: To ask and stay aware of what I am experiencing now is mindfulness.
RICHARD: The Buddhist connotations (of the english word mindfulness) come from the Pali ‘Bhavana’...‘Vipassana’ is derived from two roots:...Put it all together and ‘Vipassana Bhavana’ means the cultivation of the mind, aimed at seeing in a special way that leads to intuitive discernment and to full understanding
I am arguing that "full understanding" is surrendering to the here and now which includes the sensate-world but may also include the world of the self and dependent co-arising as it happens without judgement and with total awareness. If there is a state where dependent co-arising does not occur and that state is identical to a PCE then so be it. But that doesn't mean that mindfulness can't also occur without the process of dependent co-arising.
In the following, the respondent is making my argument. He is saying that the state of AF has been reached and identified by called by different names e.g. Non-dualism, Timelessness, Vipassana Consciousness.
RESPONDENT: ‘There is nothing but x’; substitute for ‘x’ any term ...
RICHARD: Okay ... as you say ‘any term’ here is what I report looks like under your schemata:
• [example only]: ‘There is nothing but this actual world. You are this actual world’.
Now, as this actual world is the world of this body...the world of the mountains and the streams...and so on and so on...what you are saying is that you are everything... whereas I say I am this flesh and blood body only (sans identity in toto).
There is no such self-aggrandisement...(there is no identity in actuality).
And this is truly wonderful.
Richard is fundamentally adamant that no self-aggrandizement be allowed to enter the mind. And the zen teachers say stuff like, "I am tree." I don't see the difference.
Furthermore, Peter writes in the AF glossary,
The path to an Actual Freedom is to devote one’s life to being the universe experiencing itself as a flesh and blood human being
If the path to enlightenment can lead to self-aggrandizement (which it surely can) than so can AF (as demonstrated by Peter's semantic inconsistency). Given all this, I really don't understand why Richard insists that perfect mindfulness and a PCE are completely different.