1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist - Discussion
1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/13/15 4:06 AM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/13/15 4:06 AM
1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsThe experience was remarkably short, maybe ten seconds. Before it happened, there was a remarkable sense of expectation, and also of safety or certainty. After it happened, there was a sense of complete confidence that "that was it." There was no sense of the passage of time. It almost felt like a photograph or still frame, as if the entire world stood still (including the 'me' that is created through the passage of time), despite the fact that matter was obviously moving.
Daniel M Ingram, modified 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 5:21 AM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 5:21 AM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 3268 Join Date: 4/20/09 Recent PostsWhatever it was, sounds fun.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 12:03 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 12:03 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsThe A&P experiences I have had have always involved much more of a sense of transition to and from them, meaning, I could identify individual still-frames of mind when I was coming in and out of them. This lacked that. Also, they have involved the feeling of my consciousness as it did something, as if it were a separate material that could expand like a bubble or contract into nothing. There was no sense of feeling the energy of my mind like that. The A&P also seems to distinctly involve altered awareness of the body, even if it is only the subtlest, highest, euphoric vibration all over, there is still that link. During this period of time, there was not any special awareness of the body, and perhaps no awareness at all, for the 'pure' part.
I know that A&P's can happen spontaneously, but for me, they have always happened as a result of doing some meditation technique where I repeat a certain effort with my mind, over and over (whether vipassana or samatha). The way I have been doing actualism has been much more involving an every-day type of awareness and thinking, without much, or any, mechanistic repitition. This last bit is particularly important since the actualism method involves the inclusion of emotional content in completely normal, every day awareness (albeit without 'moral' filters), to be fully examined. My experience with meditation techniques is that they include emotional content through some special lens (such a positive-emotional slant, or the way they manifest in the body), and are then examined. So the methods used to get to each state were also different.
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 3:50 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 3:50 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent PostsI have never done heavy drugs but I wonder if this would be the feeling of a hardcore happy making drug like cocaine, except without the bad crash, addiction, screwed up body, and brain damage that often occurs with hard drugs. I wonder if trying to get there artificially with drugs before the mind and body are ready is partially why drugs jack people up so badly, it's like trying to force the body and mind further than it can tolerate, whereas a natural PCE occuring without too much forced effort only happens when the body/mind is ready, hence no or far less blowback. However, I do notice that my PCE type states tend to come in cycles with a bit of aftereffects or blowback in following days, like a bit of crabby and tired feeling later, as if some stuff is let and needs to be processed or something. I don't know if that is that way for everyone.
Anyway, when I came here and heard about PCEs, I didn't realize it was supposed to be an Actualist thing only. Since from the basic description of it, it sounds like a basic description of nondualism, when you feel intimate connection to environment, you feel you are still you but also you feel you are part of what is around you, neither separate but neither one. 'Not two' IMO carries a subtle but importantly diff meaning from 'one.' Although I also wonder if we really get to much into 'oneness' then that is cessation, too much oneness with the universe may I wonder perhaps preclude having human consciousness, which maybe requires a certain sense separateness to be maintained.
Anyway, sorry to yammer on about concepts instead of remembering to offer proper congratulations, I am very happy Noah for you to experience such a great thing and by all your hard work you certainly deserve it. I hope by listening to your clues I might have better knowledge about how the PCEs come to pass, it's been a while since I've had anything similar myself and I can certainly see why Actualism puts a premium on them! ;-P
-Eva
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 11:53 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/14/15 11:53 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsThanks for the congrats! It definitely feels good to reap the rewards of hard work. In my experience, the mind states that result from actualist practice are dissimilar to those that result from meditation in a variety of ways. For instance, at times when I have had experiences that I would describes as 'nondual', there has still been a huge amount of internal content (i.e. emotions) going on, but the perception of it was changed into a much more impermanent, centerless flow. I was completely at one with with the entire field, both in and out. Descriptions I have heard of advanced, nondual experience (such as those labelled 'rigpa'), usually occur in a deep, internal way which seems to clearly be different from the external emphasis of most PCE descriptions.
What seemed to be different about the experience from the other night (what I am claiming to be a PCE), was that there was no ego or deeper soul content at all. In other words, there was no affective energy in the mix. There also wasn't a separate sense of witness which would have been capable of housing a change in perception. I have noticed that as I have progressed through the nanas and jhanas, changes in perception have occurred, while basic personality or temperamental characteristics have stayed the same. In the the childhood PCE's I have rememorated, there was a distinct sense of relief from these things (or perhaps the relief came afterwards).
Anyway, the argument I'm making is pretty old on this forum. The tell-all will be what happens as a result of the practice, over time.
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/15/15 5:39 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/15/15 5:39 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent PostsFor instance, at times when I have had experiences that I would describes as 'nondual', there has still been a huge amount of internal content (i.e. emotions) going on, but the perception of it was changed into a much more impermanent, centerless flow.
I was completely at one with with the entire field, both in and out.
Descriptions I have heard of advanced, nondual experience (such as those labelled 'rigpa'), usually occur in a deep, internal way which seems to clearly be different from the external emphasis of most PCE descriptions.
What seemed to be different about the experience from the other night (what I am claiming to be a PCE), was that there was no ego or deeper soul content at all. In other words, there was no affective energy in the mix. There also wasn't a separate sense of witness which would have been capable of housing a change in perception. I have noticed that as I have progressed through the nanas and jhanas, changes in perception have occurred, while basic personality or temperamental characteristics have stayed the same. In the the childhood PCE's I have rememorated, there was a distinct sense of relief from these things (or perhaps the relief came afterwards).
From a wider issue of understanding, I am having trouble interpreting if one person's nondualist experience is similar to another's. It may be that any experience that feels amazing and mystical and fits the basic concept of 'not two' may tend to be interpreted by the experiencer as 'nondual.' But some that experience nondualism do not seem to understand the descriptions of others. Maybe the range of experiences is a bit wide under the umbrella of 'nondual'? I don't know myself but the more I stay here and read, the more the whole thing seems muddy and confusing.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/15/15 8:46 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/15/15 8:46 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsThe PCE doesn't have any affective energy to it, so that would exclude good as well as bad feelings. Words might be used to describe PCE's which are close proxies to the state itself, and yet are not entirely accurate. In some cases, these words might seem to suggest that there are good feelings in the PCE, but really there isn't any aspect of the experience that would accurately be labelled 'feelings.'
There are states labelled 'excellence experiences', which can mimic the PCE, but still have some affect to them. These states would include good feelings.
When I say things like 'centerless flow', I am referring to a literal feeling of there being no watcher sensations within the skull, and that awareness feels more diffuse and evenly spread throughout the sense field. On a more subtle level, there is a shift in the nonlocalized reference point which one previously used to structure and contextualize the field of inner and outer perception. So there is an intuitive sense to it as well as a very direct, tactile one.
So when I talk about nondual, meditation experiences, I would be referring to states where these intuitive and somatic shifts occur, which effect the background of the way things are perceived, without effecting the foreground content of what is perceived. The stuff that I have perceived during these experiences has included both good and bad emotion.
I have always understood my meditation experiences to be aspects of my personal, field of perception and sensation. Meaning, whether or not things have independent existence outside of my mind would not matter. The thing that was getting effected was the stream of my sensation itself, not the obejcts that are out there (or their streams of sensation, to the extent that they possess their own sentience). So I would not have been somehow psychically intersecting with objecs out there. It was all stuff that was taking place "in here" (in my brain, my stream of perception).
I would assume that there is a wide spectrum of 'field' experiences, and some would include more internal content than others. The one your remember most prominently included very little, but perhaps you have had others that you do not currently recall? Certainly, many meditators have these types of experiences which also include things like emotion in the body, mental imaging, etc. The thing that is conceptually important, in this discussion, to me, is that these experiences can be broadly grouped as 'altered states of consciousness' in which the mind creates, in one way or another, a connection with something greater (either a formed absolute [vedantic], which is the type we are discussing, or a formless absolute [vedic], which would include cessation and nirodha sammapatti). Following this line of conceptual thinking, what happens in a PCE is different in that the identity does not expand to connect to something greater than itself, instead it literally contracts all the way into nothing, it completely zeroes out. This is because the affective energy (and not the dualistic process of perception) is really what is behind the ego/soul as it continues to be in control. So the inner entity has falsified its own death in the form of nondual perception, while secretly remaining alive and well! Sneaky little bugger.
As a note, I will say that while I would hesitate to laud the main effect of altered states of consciousness (including the nanas and cessation) I have experienced tremendous positive side-effects as a result of these experiences!
In this case, I just meant that in most PCE's I have heard of, the focus is OUT, whereas in many of the deepest meditation experiences I have read about, the focus has been IN. This distinction may or may not also be linked to a specific posture or level of motion.
Certain aspects of your description do seem to be in line with the criteria for a PCE, while others don't. For instance, if 'everything was flowing' externally, as in the external world was seen in all its brilliance, that would probably be spot on. However, if there was any internal content that was 'flowing' beyond basic thoughts about the world, that would probably mark it as some other type of state. Its definitely a good sign that stress was gone, and that it felt 'just that good.'
It seem pertinent to note here that Richard is truly saying he has not experienced any emotions, in any way whatsoever (somatic, mental-imaging, energy field, inner talk, etc.) since actual freedom. He is not saying that the experience of them changed in some subtle way or that his internal psycho-emotional-dynamics became more harmonious. There specifically are no such dynamics at all.
I sort of object to the usage of a 'phenomenological' lens (as we know it in pragmatic dharma circles) to describe PCE's. To me, such a mode of communication inherently involves a certain type of self reflective awareness that simply isn't possible in the PCE. In a PCE, there is no witness that is capable of looking within, and no 'in' to look at. Richard and others have written some interesting descriptions of them, but they do not involve the rigorous and detailed focus on the process of perception itself, that we have gotten used to using on the forums. I don't think such levels of rigor can be attained from within a PCE, or in the reflection back onto it. Here is an example of a description from the AFT:
http://actualfreedom.com.au/sundry/frequentquestions/FAQ64a.htm
The limpid and lucid purity and perfection of actually being just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time is akin to the crystalline perfection and purity seen in a dew-drop hanging from the tip of a leaf in the early-morning sunshine; the sunrise strikes the transparent bead of moisture with its warming rays, highlighting the flawless correctness of the tear-drop shape with its bellied form. One is left almost breathless with wonder at the immaculate simplicity so exemplified ... and everyone I have spoken with at length has experienced this impeccable integrity and excellence in some way or another at varying stages in their life.
Moreso just content focused. Focused on the wondor of what is out there, because there is no 'in here' to be include anway.
I would say that the criteria for a PCE is much stricter and clearer than the criteria for a nondual experience. Was there affective energy or any sense of the identity or self? No PCE. The nondual, on the other hand, definitely falls on a spectrum with the highest level of perceptual fusion on one end, to a more sutble or wimpy manifestation on the other.
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 3:37 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 3:37 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent PostsThe PCE doesn't have any affective energy to it, so that would exclude good as well as bad feelings.
Words might be used to describe PCE's which are close proxies to the state itself, and yet are not entirely accurate. In some cases, these words might seem to suggest that there are good feelings in the PCE, but really there isn't any aspect of the experience that would accurately be labelled 'feelings.'
There are states labelled 'excellence experiences', which can mimic the PCE, but still have some affect to them. These states would include good feelings.
So when I talk about nondual, meditation experiences, I would be referring to states where these intuitive and somatic shifts occur, which effect the background of the way things are perceived, without effecting the foreground content of what is perceived. The stuff that I have perceived during these experiences has included both good and bad emotion.
Some here seem to say that 4th path is collapsing of the witness, but that website seems to say that enlightenment is developing of the witness. I think I am confused on what is meant by the sense of witness. I can see two ideas for it, one is that at first I was just sort of sucked into the character of me and acting it out without much thought. Then later I learned to step back and observe self as if it was a thing, a kind of scientific observation of the thing in the petri dish and all it's strangeness. I thought that was 'witness.' But this website seems to imply it's more like when you are just so separated from the character of 'you' that you can just kind of sit back and enjoy the show called life much more safe from getting pulled into the drama, so it's more like watching a movie, seems like the website calls that 'witness.' (maybe that person is not speaking from experience and is a tad confused though?) When I feel the intense nondual, the first kind of witness is gone (which feels very weird), but the second kind from that website definition is still there I think (will have to take some notes next time). Hard for me to follow conversations well when I have not been able to tack down the terminology yet though.
I have always understood my meditation experiences to be aspects of my personal, field of perception and sensation. Meaning, whether or not things have independent existence outside of my mind would not matter. The thing that was getting effected was the stream of my sensation itself, not the obejcts that are out there (or their streams of sensation, to the extent that they possess their own sentience). So I would not have been somehow psychically intersecting with objecs out there. It was all stuff that was taking place "in here" (in my brain, my stream of perception).
The thing that is conceptually important, in this discussion, to me, is that these experiences can be broadly grouped as 'altered states of consciousness' in which the mind creates, in one way or another, a connection with something greater (either a formed absolute , which is the type we are discussing, or a formless absolute , which would include cessation and nirodha sammapatti).
Following this line of conceptual thinking, what happens in a PCE is different in that the identity does not expand to connect to something greater than itself, instead it literally contracts all the way into nothing, it completely zeroes out. This is because the affective energy (and not the dualistic process of perception) is really what is behind the ego/soul as it continues to be in control. So the inner entity has falsified its own death in the form of nondual perception, while secretly remaining alive and well! Sneaky little bugger.
In this case, I just meant that in most PCE's I have heard of, the focus is OUT, whereas in many of the deepest meditation experiences I have read about, the focus has been IN. This distinction may or may not also be linked to a specific posture or level of motion.
Certain aspects of your description do seem to be in line with the criteria for a PCE, while others don't. For instance, if 'everything was flowing' externally, as in the external world was seen in all its brilliance, that would probably be spot on. However, if there was any internal content that was 'flowing' beyond basic thoughts about the world, that would probably mark it as some other type of state. Its definitely a good sign that stress was gone, and that it felt 'just that good.'
It seem pertinent to note here that Richard is truly saying he has not experienced any emotions, in any way whatsoever (somatic, mental-imaging, energy field, inner talk, etc.) since actual freedom. He is not saying that the experience of them changed in some subtle way or that his internal psycho-emotional-dynamics became more harmonious. There specifically are no such dynamics at all.
I sort of object to the usage of a 'phenomenological' lens (as we know it in pragmatic dharma circles) to describe PCE's. To me, such a mode of communication inherently involves a certain type of self reflective awareness that simply isn't possible in the PCE.
In a PCE, there is no witness that is capable of looking within, and no 'in' to look at.
Richard and others have written some interesting descriptions of them, but they do not involve the rigorous and detailed focus on the process of perception itself, that we have gotten used to using on the forums.
I don't think such levels of rigor can be attained from within a PCE, or in the reflection back onto it. Here is an example of a description from the AFT:
http://actualfreedom.com.au/sundry/frequentquestions/FAQ64a.htm
The limpid and lucid purity and perfection of actually being just here at this place in infinite space right now at this moment in eternal time is akin to the crystalline perfection and purity seen in a dew-drop hanging from the tip of a leaf in the early-morning sunshine; the sunrise strikes the transparent bead of moisture with its warming rays, highlighting the flawless correctness of the tear-drop shape with its bellied form. One is left almost breathless with wonder at the immaculate simplicity so exemplified ... and everyone I have spoken with at length has experienced this impeccable integrity and excellence in some way or another at varying stages in their life.
I would say that the criteria for a PCE is much stricter and clearer than the criteria for a nondual experience. Was there affective energy or any sense of the identity or self? No PCE. The nondual, on the other hand, definitely falls on a spectrum with the highest level of perceptual fusion on one end, to a more sutble or wimpy manifestation on the other.
T DC, modified 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 4:48 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 4:48 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 516 Join Date: 9/29/11 Recent PostsWas there affective energy or any sense of the identity or self? No PCE. The nondual, on the other hand, definittely falls on a spectrum with the highest level of perceptual fusion on one end, to a more sutble or wimpy manifestation on the other.
Hi Noah! Congradulations on the PCE! I have generally interpreted the PCE as a glimpse of enlightenment (or non-dual) experience, beacuse I had such an experience in high school and it formed the basis and inspiration for my journeys on the spiritual path. I was going to say that there is a range of such experiences, from a genuine glimpse of enlightenment itself (aka a peak experience) to a lesser non-dual experience in which the self of self is not quite so absent. However given your strict criteria for the PCE, which I found in your discussion with Eva (and quoted above), it seems you probably had a strong experience. Your description definately sounded like a pure experience of awareness.
After learning about actualism about 5 years ago when some other actualists posted here, I immediately tried to pursue it because the expreince of the PCE sounded so much like the satori experience I once had. However I soon came back to Buddhist meditation because I wanted to pursue a more reliable and well worn path. During the time I pursued actualism, I contacted a woman on here who had enacted a shift in here consiousness by willing herself into the PCE and spending as much time as possible in this state. I guess eventually a shift occured, and the PCE state of consiousness became her baseline, or something of this sort.
Given that you seem to have dedicated yourself to this practice, it is exciting that you are seeing results, and I hope it continues to manifest well going foreward! It's always exciting to hear about someone getting it done, especially through a different method of progession.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 5:39 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 5:39 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsThat is a very interesting counter-point. It makes total sense that the experience of the nanas change through time. As to how it relates to my particular experience, I can not be completely sure (nor can anyone, for that matter), since I have not been attempting to track my experience of the cycles over the past 3 months.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 5:43 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 5:43 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsThanks for the encouragement. I will definitely continue to pursue the actualist path, in earnest. If that woman you encountered on here experienced a true virtual freedom, then the most sensible course of action would have been for her to make her experience known to others. I am of the opinion that the most effective way to spread actual freedom would be for the few actually free people to make themselves available to others in as many ways as possible.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 6:07 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/16/15 6:07 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent Posts]Hi Eva,
Some disjointed thoughts, not necessarily addressing your own comments in an exact fashion. We will, at some point, come upon the sensible time to 'agree to disagree' on certain topics within this discussion.
-In terms of identifying and describing the PCE, and distinguishing it from other experiences, and how this all relates to concepts/worldviews:
I think human brains need concepts to get about in the world and communicate with one another. In my opinion, the presence or absence of concepts within Richard's way of talking about things does not necessarily have a direct correlation with the degree to which his experience was entirely new. I have found the actualism method highly workable for my own needs, at this point in my self-exploration. I also feel puzzled when I see how some people (not necessarily you!!) tend to steer discussions of actualism in the direction of "is it new?", repeatedly.
I have found enough evidence in 1st and 2nd-hand experiences with spiritual teachers. I had my first A&P with Amma, the hugging saint. I KNOW that Amma has shakti. She has since been revealed to financially, emotionally and sexually abuse her students. My dad studied under Rama Murti Mishra in the 70's. My dad watched helplessly as the guru seduced and bedded his girlfriend at the time. My mom lived in the zen monastery of Omori Sogen in the same era. Despite being clearly, highly enlightened, and repeatedly expressing compassion to my mom, Omori was known for his ultra-nationalist support of Japan before and during WWII. In the pragmatic dharma movement we have a generous handful of examples of highly realized teachers who have vowed to peel back the veil on romantic fantasies surrounding enlightenment. And while I am in awe of the courage it takes to do this, as well as the level of training that has been required to get to where they are at, they have simply confirmed what I have grown up suspecting, as a 2nd generation, Western yogi: that spirituality is not the answer for the human condition.
I hear people describe incredible perceptual shifts, and I want to know: Are you still horny? Are you still mad at your parents or siblings (commanded by childhood psychodynamics)? Are you still 'you'?
I don't believe in the 'limited emotional range' or 'perfection action' or 'perfection' models of contemplative training. That is not what actual freedom is. Actual freedom does not make you perfect, because perfect doesn't exist. It does exactly what it does, and that includes the elimination of the affective faculty. Its just different than enlightenmnet, not actually "better" or "worse." I think I am saying this because people will read me and think, here we go with the 'perfection' stuff, again.
Now, how does this relate to what we were talking about? To me, the core topic is that describing and distinguishing the PCE from other states is not a matter of semantics or world view. Richard describes a state that is clearly different from the spiritual masters that I have had first or second hand contact with (particularly those who still describe the experience of negative emotions). Richard's actions are clearly different from the actions of those spiritual teachers who are not free from scandal. He has been exacting in his communication, on the AFT, regarding accusations surrounding adultry, financial abuse, and other violations. He is willing to provide specific dates, names and locations to help prove his whereabouts and actions. Why does this matter? Because it appears that he may both a) actually not experience negative emotions, and b) be completely scandal-free, as in, there are no "behind-the-scenes", fucked-up, hidden subconscious drives being acted out.
And how did he get to this point? By distinguishing the PCE from various ASC's. By being very specific about when the instinctual passions are actually gone, and when they are simply sublimated. Excellence experiences matter because they are more consistently liable to lead into PCE's than ASC's are. Also, excellence experiences contain a very specific subset of positive emotions and feeling-tonalities, called 'felicitious feelings.'
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:04 AM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:00 AM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent Posts]
Some disjointed thoughts, not necessarily addressing your own comments in an exact fashion. We will, at some point, come upon the sensible time to 'agree to disagree' on certain topics within this discussion.
-In terms of identifying and describing the PCE, and distinguishing it from other experiences, and how this all relates to concepts/worldviews:
I think human brains need concepts to get about in the world and communicate with one another. In my opinion, the presence or absence of concepts within Richard's way of talking about things does not necessarily have a direct correlation with the degree to which his experience was entirely new. I have found the actualism method highly workable for my own needs, at this point in my self-exploration. I also feel puzzled when I see how some people (not necessarily you!!) tend to steer discussions of actualism in the direction of "is it new?", repeatedly.
***I suspect strongly that this has to do with how Richard chose to come out with his ideas. If he had come forth with an attitude that he had worked on some stuff that got good results, it probably would not have been as controversial as what he did which was to strongly assert his stuff was totally new and unique and not at all like the other stuff. Steps on a lot of egos with that kind of angle. So you have an audience of people who can't know if Actualism works probably unless they practice it a lot and they are trying to decide if that would be the best commitment of their time. So what do they do? They look for clues about accuracy in things they CAN see, like is this really new? They will look at any of his claims that they can potentially assess with the knowledge they already have and then figure the rest is likely to be equally accurate. So if they don't believe his claims about is it new, then why should they believe the rest of it? Of course this is not a perfect systme of decision, certainly many brilliant things have come from some very screwed up people in the past, but it does tend to be more accurate than spin the bottle and if something asks for a large time commitment, many people will try to make a judgement call before starting it. If Richard comes and seems to make claims that seem likely not true and if he seems to act like a paranoid nut at times, well that also does not go well for promoting his case. Since I have already experienced a thing like PCE and since I already practice some of the things he suggests and they seem to work for me, those two things are probably why I have more than average interest in it but it's not enough for me to adopt his whole belief system (to be fair I have not adopted anyone else's whole belief system either so it's not just him)
I have found enough evidence in 1st and 2nd-hand experiences with spiritual teachers. I had my first A&P with Amma, the hugging saint. I KNOW that Amma has shakti. She has since been revealed to financially, emotionally and sexually abuse her students. My dad studied under Rama Murti Mishra in the 70's. My dad watched helplessly as the guru seduced and bedded his girlfriend at the time. My mom lived in the zen monastery of Omori Sogen in the same era. Despite being clearly, highly enlightened, and repeatedly expressing compassion to my mom, Omori was known for his ultra-nationalist support of Japan before and during WWII. In the pragmatic dharma movement we have a generous handful of examples of highly realized teachers who have vowed to peel back the veil on romantic fantasies surrounding enlightenment. And while I am in awe of the courage it takes to do this, as well as the level of training that has been required to get to where they are at, they have simply confirmed what I have grown up suspecting, as a 2nd generation, Western yogi: that spirituality is not the answer for the human condition.
***Good info, thank you. I have often wondered if those that are said to be enlightened but do fairly bad things were really enlightened or just acting like it but were not really enlightened. Again the definition of enlightenment does not seem well pinned down and as you said, seems filled with much legend that may or may not be true. On my path, I have definitely found myself becoming more moral than I used to be and not because I 'should' or that someone said other ways are bad, it's only because I want to do it more myself for myself because it feels better for me and more right for me now. So I do tend to equate moral improvement with the path because I have seen it in myself.
***But on the flip side, I have not become some all perfect Saint Eva who is always immaculate in all behavior, nope definitely not that! And there were also some stages along the path, one in particular when I had an incredibly strong sex drive all of sudden, it was extremely distracting and lasted for like a year or so, some kind of kundalini thing I guess. But it's easy for me to imagine someone experiencing that kind of drive and also being in a situation of great power with many obedient followers all around that would be easy to seduce, that there would often be those that fell to temptation.
***But what I don't know is if those people, even having great charisma and some powers, probably having spent a lot of time and effort developing those powers too, what I don't know is if those people were really far enough down the path to be all the way to say 4th path or beyond. I do wonder if maybe there were more around the earlier paths. It seems like it's not really until 4th when you are more sure where you are and have T$% more sorted out. One thing we do see repeatedly with humans is that many if given a huge amount of power and influence such that it becomes easy to do bad things without repercussions, many humans will do some very bad things. Buddhism is not exempt from the problem but if there is more or less of it in Buddhism I couldn't say.
***Conversely, I also wonder if maybe the technical paths are not enough to lead to moral development or that they are slow to do so compared to say a path that has more emphasis on fixing your bs and balancing your psyche. This might be more along the lines of what you are thinking if I get your drift correctly. I don't have any strong feelings on the answer myself but am interested to gather more data on it, perhaps another reason why I am interested in your experiment with Actualism and what you find out about it.
***From my angle Ive come to have more a feeling that I can get all that I need and even much that I don't need but still want without screwing other people over or doing unsavory things, so it just makes sense for more to choose the less jerky route. I don't know if it's even a matter of huge moral gains on my part. It's like whereas previously it was unsavory but now I realize it's not only unsavory but also unnecessary so those two things together tend to lead to natural avoidance.
I hear people describe incredible perceptual shifts, and I want to know: Are you still horny? Are you still mad at your parents or siblings (commanded by childhood psychodynamics)? Are you still 'you'?
***When I am experiencing Eva's PCElike experience, then no, I do not experience any of that. It was one of the things i really noticed, a person that is super irritating to many including me, doing her usual irritating stuff, yielded zero feelings of irritation in me. She was kind of like the ultimate litmus test! (that could be found in ordinary life at least) Plus other things like the car broke down, spent 3 hours trying to fix the computer, whatever, just everything was fine even things that normally would have really been a hassle. But the experience did not stay, it was there for a while, came and went, but I would fall back to baseline in which I carried some of that with me at least, my baseline now has more of that than previously, but it was no longer the full Monty.
I don't believe in the 'limited emotional range' or 'perfection action' or 'perfection' models of contemplative training. That is not what actual freedom is. Actual freedom does not make you perfect, because perfect doesn't exist. It does exactly what it does, and that includes the elimination of the affective faculty. Its just different than enlightenmnet, not actually "better" or "worse." I think I am saying this because people will read me and think, here we go with the 'perfection' stuff, again.
***I wonder about that a lot, not that I expect one to become perfect, seems unlikely, but are there any moral attainments that can be expected then and if so, what are they? There is certainly a lot of stuff in legend but not sure how idealized that is.
Now, how does this relate to what we were talking about? To me, the core topic is that describing and distinguishing the PCE from other states is not a matter of semantics or world view. Richard describes a state that is clearly different from the spiritual masters that I have had first or second hand contact with (particularly those who still describe the experience of negative emotions). Richard's actions are clearly different from the actions of those spiritual teachers who are not free from scandal. He has been exacting in his communication, on the AFT, regarding accusations surrounding adultry, financial abuse, and other violations. He is willing to provide specific dates, names and locations to help prove his whereabouts and actions. Why does this matter? Because it appears that he may both a) actually not experience negative emotions, and b) be completely scandal-free, as in, there are no "behind-the-scenes", fucked-up, hidden subconscious drives being acted out.
***Well that is kind of a diff area to delve into. First of all, I would guess that not all 'enlightened' folk are morally bankrupt sex abusers just because soem of them were. They probably run the gamut would be my guess. In Richard's case, I think I would have to know him well to know the truth of what he says he experiences (same thing would be true with any guru). As many on here have attested, it's very possible for many to exhibit a certain persona on social media that is very different from real life persona at times when they let their hair down in private.
***The more a guru makes grandious claims the more people will be scrutinizing if that person lives up to his/her claims. Richard has said in the past that people like Daniel that tried a version of actualism that was not exactly as Richard promoted were part of a secret scheme to ruin actualism and prevent its global spread. Since i don't believe Daniel or I are part of any such schemes, then consequently I am already starting off on a foot of not believing something that Richard said and am thus not likely to blindly believe any others of his claims either. That's not to say that I won't believe any of them but just becuase Richard says he has a certain experience, I don't assume it is true (nor do I assume it's not true). In such a case, I am sitting on the fence watching the show to see how it unfolds. Also in order to suspect more validity in it, I would like to see some substantial number of reasonable sounding people over time come foreward to say they too have accomplished full time Actual Freedom. So far I only know of Richard, are there any others? If others say they have managed to replicate the outcome, obviously the story is going to sound more believable than if it's just Richard saying it. I think a big problem that Richard has is that people naturally look to the messenger to judge the message, if Richard comes off as egomaniacal and paranoid, then any story of his is going to be dismissed quickly by most with prejudice.
-Eva (edited to fix formatting issues)
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:33 AM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:33 AM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent PostsWas there affective energy or any sense of the identity or self? No PCE. The nondual, on the other hand, definittely falls on a spectrum with the highest level of perceptual fusion on one end, to a more sutble or wimpy manifestation on the other.
Hi Noah! Congradulations on the PCE! I have generally interpreted the PCE as a glimpse of enlightenment (or non-dual) experience, beacuse I had such an experience in high school and it formed the basis and inspiration for my journeys on the spiritual path. I was going to say that there is a range of such experiences, from a genuine glimpse of enlightenment itself (aka a peak experience) to a lesser non-dual experience in which the self of self is not quite so absent. However given your strict criteria for the PCE, which I found in your discussion with Eva (and quoted above), it seems you probably had a strong experience. Your description definately sounded like a pure experience of awareness.
The kensholike experience was different than the PCE like experience which did not have any evangelical butt kicking feeling, it was a way more calm and relaxed state and has been the only one that I feel that loss of tension where the emotions and thoughts no longer clash inside me. It was an amazing feeling of internal peace and loss of tension. It's the one I really think of as 'enlightened' even if it's just because of the amazing amount of mental weight that was lifted off. I truly felt way 'lighter.' I would just operate on whatever needed to be done efficiently minus the fist pumping type feeling that the Kensho type experience had. The Kensholike experience was one where I thought those ideas and insights were right and true and was thrilled by the freedom that I realized I had from it. But the PCE type experience was one where it was not just some wonderful ideas of mine that were right but that the whole of me and my current state and the world were right.
It strikes me now writing about it that when I had my kensholike experience, I thought truly this was 'it.' But then later when I had the PCE type experiences, then I was feeling this is so profoundly more obviously 'it.' Makes me wonder if the can be an even greater 'it' that I will experiene in the future, LOL now that would be even more interesting!
Anyway, I don't really know if I am using the correct terminology for these experiences, the words are just a guess from what I've read on the terms, it could be quite wrong for all I know.
-Eva
However I soon came back to Buddhist meditation because I wanted to pursue a more reliable and well worn path. During the time I pursued actualism, I contacted a woman on here who had enacted a shift in here consiousness by willing herself into the PCE and spending as much time as possible in this state. I guess eventually a shift occured, and the PCE state of consiousness became her baseline, or something of this sort.
Given that you seem to have dedicated yourself to this practice, it is exciting that you are seeing results, and I hope it continues to manifest well going foreward! It's always exciting to hear about someone getting it done, especially through a different method of progession.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 1:17 AM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 1:17 AM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsLots more interesting thoughts here, thank you. I especially like hearing more details about your PCE, and about your overall attitudes and goals in contemplative development.
Here are links to some descriptions of practicing actualists who have met Richard, Peter and Vineeto (all actually free), in person:
http://actualfreedom.com.au/actualism/others/claudiu'sreport.htm
http://actualfreedom.com.au/actualism/others/srid'sreport.htm
http://actualfreedom.com.au/richard/listdcorrespondence/jonathan.htm
Here is a list of people who have been confirmed to be actually free.
http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/announcement.htm
The tough thing about compiling such a list is that there is no foolproof criteria for telling, from the outside, whether or not someone is actually free. The AFT folks have been very explicit in not wanting to be seen as, or act as, the final judgement committee on anyone's actual freedom, or lack thereof. More importantly, in becoming actually free, one loses the capabillity to intuitively or psychically feel another person out. So there is no emotional vibing capability in an actually free person that could help them determine a person's psychic status. If anything, a person within the human condition would be more equipped in this regard. Also, the list does include people like Tarin annd Justine, who seem to have expressed certain thoughts, through text, that would be contradictory to living in actual freedom. Long story short, its not perfectly cut and dry, but they are out there!
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:00 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:00 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent PostsThe tough thing about compiling such a list is that there is no foolproof criteria for telling, from the outside, whether or not someone is actually free. The AFT folks have been very explicit in not wanting to be seen as, or act as, the final judgement committee on anyone's actual freedom, or lack thereof.
More importantly, in becoming actually free, one loses the capabillity to intuitively or psychically feel another person out. So there is no emotional vibing capability in an actually free person that could help them determine a person's psychic status. If anything, a person within the human condition would be more equipped in this regard.
Also, the list does include people like Tarin annd Justine, who seem to have expressed certain thoughts, through text, that would be contradictory to living in actual freedom. Long story short, its not perfectly cut and dry, but they are out there!
-Eva
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:22 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/17/15 12:22 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsHaha, nope, you can't psych out others. You won't be connected to them at all! PCE's are very slippery, so if you try to psych someone out, you might fall out of it into normal consciousness or an ASC. But yeah, that might be a good litmus test. The minute you can sense your own vibes, or your own emotional content at all (or, to paraphrase what you say, the minute your emotions are detectable as clashing our out of harmony) or you can sense the vibes of others, you are, by definition, having some other type of experience.
Without knowing all the details, but speaking on it anyway (since its important), it seems that Tarin did have some sort of favorable outcome as a result of his efforts inspired by Richard's words. It can be hard to say what inspired what (and what led to what), since he did seem to continue to be influenced by Buddhist paradigms and techniques, when I read back into the DhO archives. Also, there was the issue of his misusing the phrase 'pure intent', which is an important aspect of both the path and the end point, in actualism. The question then becomes, did he simply misunderstand the definition but did experience pure intent, or did he not experience pure intent at all, and therefore spoke about it incorrectly?
Part of my point is that we can't say with certainty who 'counts' and who does not. The integrity of the AFT is not most prominently displayed (in my opinion) through the list of addendums. Rather, it is to be found in the consistency in the words of Richard, Peter and Vineeto, over the course of fifteen years or so.
Noah, modified 8 Years ago at 11/18/15 3:54 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/18/15 3:54 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 1467 Join Date: 7/6/13 Recent PostsI just had another flashback to the childhood PCE on the beach in Acadia, and remembered something about the full, 3-dimensionality of being present there, at that time. The body and consciousness were really complete, and the identity was totally absent. While my more recent experience did not have any detectable aspects of identity, there was a certain 2-dimensionality to it, displayed by my focus on the visual field, for one. Also, there was something 'soft' or 'gentle' about my time on the beach (although these words do not do honor to the thing I am trying to express, as they are inherently affective in both denotation and connotation).
For my actualist practice, the takeaway from this flashback will be to remember some of these remarkable qualities and seek to magnetize towards their closest, affective proxies, while still 'in identity.' Something about the niceness of it, the okay-ness, the sense of being friends with the universe, that sort of thing.
@ Other discussion participants:
And for the sake of this discussion, particularly the comments of Pawel and Daniel, it does seem possible that this experience was not a full PCE, but rather an EE. I still hold to the fact that it lacked many characteristics of ASC's (in general, that I have experienced), but am open to the idea that a given nana or jhana can be experienced in fundamentally different ways, over time (especially with the after-effects of a new path settling in). Point being, dharma diagnosis is difficult and confusing, especially when being performed oneself.
@ Eva:
(emphasis mine)
This is a long shot, but if this was a PCE that you experienced, the baseline-changing, after-effects would be what is known as 'pure intent' in the language of the actualism method. Pure intent is a really big deal, and is a common prerequisite for attaining VF. It isn't that the PCE/PCE rememoration causes some stable, continuous shift in consciousness, but rather that it slowly and subtly begins to effect the way you think and feel about things... how to act... what is sensible... etc. I thought of this yesterday at work and wanted to add it in. Keep in mind that this isn't some conceptual mismash or grey area (in terms of the whole 'Richard's belief system' thing)... something either is, or is not, a PCE. After-effects of that something either are, or are not, pure intent. This doesn't make them better or worse, I'm just trying to highlight the value of clear distinctions.
Eva Nie, modified 8 Years ago at 11/21/15 8:35 PM
Created 8 Years ago at 11/21/15 8:35 PM
RE: 1st PCE As A Practicing Actualist
Posts: 831 Join Date: 3/23/14 Recent Posts@ Eva:
(emphasis mine)
This is a long shot, but if this was a PCE that you experienced, the baseline-changing, after-effects would be what is known as 'pure intent' in the language of the actualism method. Pure intent is a really big deal, and is a common prerequisite for attaining VF. It isn't that the PCE/PCE rememoration causes some stable, continuous shift in consciousness, but rather that it slowly and subtly begins to effect the way you think and feel about things... how to act... what is sensible... etc.
I thought of this yesterday at work and wanted to add it in. Keep in mind that this isn't some conceptual mismash or grey area (in terms of the whole 'Richard's belief system' thing)... something either is, or is not, a PCE. After-effects of that something either are, or are not, pure intent. This doesn't make them better or worse, I'm just trying to highlight the value of clear distinctions.
-Eva