D. Justine J:
So it appears then that there is not 24/7 apperceptive awareness flowing, correct?
The apperceptive awareness is flowing 24x7 without obstruction.
Are you sure of that? Your memoirs paint a different picture. So you have reached the 'meaning of life' stage that Richard talks of? If you were truly 'apperceptive', I don't think you would be talking about the variety of 'reactive' patterns you describe in your behaviour (in your memoirs).
There is an 'object' of consciousness (pic of Richard and daughter) which is triggering something within, a subjective experience (now not forming as full blown 'affect' yet still establishing a fabricated relationship with the 'object').
They are not triggers. It is not subjective experience. 'Weeping' is a side effect of some main event. Pl. don't give prime place for it.
Yeh, can't see the weeping occurring without a trigger. It might not 'feel' or be sensed as subjective, but I would label it like so because it is some sort of reaction towards an 'object', and quite an extreme one at that. Sensation in the chest being triggered?
Dissolution of 'self? So there is still a residual felt sense of 'self' that needs to be dissolved via 'weeping'?
'Self' need not and cannot be dissolved 'only' by 'weeping'. There are other vital things connected to altruistic self immolation, where 'weeping' is a pleasant outlet, and an insignificant side-effect.
I'll ask again: So there is still a residual felt sense of 'self' that needs to be dissolved via 'weeping'? Do you still experience some sort of residual sense of tangibly felt sense of 'self' still that dissolves when you have wept?
"Invisible energy'? I do not see currently past the 6 sense doors (the all). How is this 'invisible energy' expericned? Via the 6 sense doors or beyond them? Is this just one's own 'conceptual idea' and 'belief' overlaying some sensation that is triggered at the sight or in the presence of the 'object' named 'Richard'? What is your destination? I thought AF was the destination? Is there another one?
Electricity is an invisible energy. But its impacts are known to us through the 6 sense doors and beyond them. Still no one has actually seen electricity and never will. Pristine Actuality is much more true than electricity. With the confidence born of Perfection, one can reach that realm without any effort of struggle, through altruistic self-immolation.
RICHARD IS NOT THE OBJECT TO REACH. THE PLACE WHERE RICHARD REACHED IS MY DESTINATION. One can call it 'Richard's Place'. AF is a word. How did you think AF is a destination, or another one to it?
How is this invisible energy experienced via the senses? Is the experiecne accompanied by a conceptual overlay of the idea of 'invisible energy'? So you are not 'AF'? Or your AF is not the same as Richard's current ongoing state?Can you clarify for the DhO?
These questions are to distinguish what Richard and yourself are calling 'actually free' Out of curiosity, I am asking you about details of your experience. I have had a baseline shift which does not have me 'weeping' nor experiencing affect nor 'being irked' by others like before. I notice aspects of the ongoing experience which are starting to drop away which i am seeing that you seem to still experience. I am asking you to clarify your experience so that we can simply stop fussing over what 'actually free' is supposed to look like, where we can simply drop the dogmatic conceptual overlays of "I am the first in the world" silliness and simply describe frankly what is occuring/has occured without the need to inject it all with mystic overtones.
By your descriptions, I found myself last year where you seem to currently be untill a month or so ago. Now there are some differences (which are improvements as I see it) between what you describe and where I find myself. i'm trying to suss out if this is the same thing that you describe or not and whether further investigation may be needed. Plus I think your version of 'apperception' is not the same as what I consider pure apperception. I don't think one would be 'weeping' or feeling 'irked' by other people's behaviour, as well as some of the other things you have expressed in your memoirs if you were truly 24/7 apperceptive, non-stop.
Perhaps we can talk about the differences in our 'versions'. What is apperception for you, and how would the experience of 'being irked' for example be seen apperceptively? If experience was apperceptive, then wouldn't the objects of 'being irked' not even be objects for the experience of 'being irked' and thus no experience of 'being irked' would arise?
And again if you will: Does your ongoing experience involve the mind habitually landing on 'objects' conceived and segregated from the whole field of experience (i.e. a photo of Richard, a thought of my daughter", the 'irksome' behaviour of other people, thought of 'bodiless peace') and then react in some way towards said 'object'? How is this still perceived as apperception? And if not, then would it be safe to say your ongoing experiecne is not 24/7 apperception? Also does it still do all of this just without a sense of 'affect' arising like before? No tangible felt sense of 'affect' yet an odd experience of 'sort of affect but not really affect' (like your weeping)?
Nick