How has your freedom held up over the years? [Not Tao] [MIGRATE] - Discussion
How has your freedom held up over the years? [Not Tao] [MIGRATE]
Migration 62 Daemon，修改在10 年前。 at 14-5-7 上午5:04
Created 10 年 ago at 14-5-7 上午5:04
How has your freedom held up over the years? [Not Tao] [MIGRATE]
帖子: 66 加入日期: 14-5-7 最近的帖子
How has your freedom held up over the years? [Not Tao]
Not Tao - 2014-04-25 22:23:24 - How has your freedom held up over the years?
Hello,
I've been practicing something very similar to AF for a while and I'm just wondering how the fruition has held up for people over the years? Those of you who have been "actually free" for a while, has it lasted? Does it take any maintenance? I've been fascinated to read all the success stories, since I've been playing with PCEs for years. I've always called myself a "Sensualist" haha. I'm ramping up practice to see if I can figure this out once and for all, so I'm just curious what I'm getting into. :3
-------------------
Felipe C. - 2014-04-26 05:49:50 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Hi, Not Tao,
I'm not actually free myself but I've been practicing actualism for about 3 years now. All I can say is that there is indeed some kind of baseline which one keeps changing over the years, one keeps raising the bar, and there are parts of your self that are no more after some realizations and then actualizations. It's been a fun ride and it has delivered incredible and apparently permanent results.
In reference to your original question, there are no actually free persons hanging in this forum in particular. Those who claimed AF, relinquished it later, so you may ask in the actualist forum at Yahoo, where Richard responds from time to time, or you can read his and other's testimonies at the AFT website. But basically, they haven't changed their claims or written about changes in their perceptions, they keep saying that actually is impossible to go back as their selves are extinct {Richard has been AF since 1992}, which also implies that it's completely effortless, as there is no self whatsoever to be vigilant about. Further, there are people who have met them in Australia at different times and they have reported basically the same.about them.
Lastly, if you want to give actualism a sincere try, I recommend that you do it following the instructions from the AFT website exclusively and not the ones posted in the DhO.
Cheers,
Felipe
-------------------
Not Tao - 2014-04-27 00:31:42 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
I was actually interested to see if anyone had claimed it outside of the AFT, since, to be perfectly honest, it just seems very culty and self-aggrandizing on their site. I've read a lot of Tarin's posts, but it looks like he's not posting around here anymore? I saw the post where he withdrew his claim, but it seemed more like he was saying "well, nothing has changed fro me, but I'm not interested in being part of these politics anymore," which makes sense.
Anyway, I'm mainly interested in Actualism because it mostly lines up with the practice I'm already doing, and seems to have delivered the results I suspected it would for other people. After 3 years how would you describe your day-to-day experience? What's your practice look like?
-------------------
Eric M W - 2014-04-27 17:14:32 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
I do not practice actualism, but I have done a good deal of research, considering the impact that AF has had on the DHO. I can say with certainty that actualist practice doesn't seem to have much going for it as far as any kind of permanent attainment goes.
Peter, one of the "original" AFers who wrote the majority of the AF site, is considered by Richard to be no longer actually free. This is probably a matter of politics on Richard's part, though.
Tarin renounced his claim a while ago. Daniel mentions two others in his essay on actualism that renounced their claims to AF.
Tommy M, once a major contributor here, renounced his claim to AF after a few days.
The shift in Daniel Ingram's perception after his experiments with actualism seem to have remained. However, he still experiences dreams, cycles, jhanas, etc, so the shift he experienced is in many ways very different than actual freedom as described by Richard et al.
Actualism aims at uprooting the affective faculty. Many here have argued that actualism is very Buddhist, but I tend to disagree. Mindfulness does not uproot things, it heals them. Perhaps this is why Daniel experienced a positive shift without losing access to jhanas, dreams, etc.
I realize that our emotions cause us a lot of trouble, but that's what we have practices such as the sublime abodes. I came to the DHO with no interest in getting rid of my emotions, and I find it strange that so many people are interested in actualism.
People who pursue actual freedom have my support, as I am all for anything that reduces suffering, but the likelihood of success seems to be very, very small.
Just my 2 cents
-------------------
An Eternal Now - 2014-04-27 17:42:40 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Peter, one of the "original" AFers who wrote the majority of the AF site, is considered by Richard to be no longer actually free. This is probably a matter of politics on Richard's part, though.Where can I read about this?
-------------------
James Yen - 2014-04-27 18:01:38 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Actual Freedom does not work, at all.
Edit:
The problem with AF is that is asserts a freedom that is independent of the mind, and solely dependent on an eternal body. This body is the universe.
I'll let you figure out the rest.
-------------------
Felipe C. - 2014-04-27 19:41:51 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Eric M W:
Not enough research, it seems.
Eric M W:
Not so. Peter became actually free from the human condition in 2010, has been and still is. There were never changes in this claim. There was only a clarification... Peter is 'newly free' from the human condition, which is still a state of an actual freedom, as you can see here...
You can see Peterís Report of Becoming Newly Actually Free here, which as valid as when it was first posted at the AFT website.
Also, it's funny how many people here have a knee-jerk reaction relating everything actualism to 'politics'. What are those 'politics' that are obsessively discussed in this forum?
In this case of Peter, adjusting and readjusting the actualist literature to be in accordance to clarity, reality, etc? Consider that this is a fairly new method and there is a very small sample of human beings who are practicing actualism and an even smaller sample of actually free ones. What Richard has been doing here is taking note, and comparing and contrasting, the experiences of those people and refining the understanding of all this. This way, he is determining what are the patterns, what is idiosyncratic, what is general, what are exactly the development stages, etc. Are these 'politics'?
In most cases in this forum, safeguarding the integrity of the actualist writings in order to not be confused with other methods {such as spirituality and common real-world solutions}? For instance, if someone invented tacos and then people started to say 'there is nothing new about tacos, they are the same as pizza', that someone becomes a politician at the moment of delineating the particular elements of tacos, the specific elements which make tacos different from pizza? All the controversies here and at the actualist forums are brought from pizza people who insist that pizza is tacos, and Richard has been only clarifying, again and again, that pizza is pizza and taco is taco {which has been clear to him since he became actually free}. Are these really politics or just a simple matter of clear classification between elements?
Eric M W:
Or --a very different thing-- they were never actually free in the first place. Here you can see how Richard proofs that Tarin and others from the DhO didn't fully understand the actualist method, and therefore how is very improbable that they really became AF.
Tommy did not renounce his claim. He clarified that he never was actually free, after a week or so.
Eric M W:
Daniel never claimed AF, and even never acknowledged that he was practicing actualism per se. He was experimenting with some things, mixing them with his own practices, but never went fully and exclusively into it.
Eric M W:
Well said. I fully agree that both approaches are very different. One works within the margins of the 'soul' {or affective being or self}, and the other eliminates it completely. The actualist approach is that this affective faculty is impossible to heal as it is rotten at the core.
Eric M W:
Well, if you consider that there has been no more than 100 or so known practicing actualists, and that there are 5 or so documented actually free persons, and that this method has been public for very little {less than a couple of decades}, and those who are not AF yet have been reporting benefits, I'd actually argue that the likelihood of success {when one is sincere and dedicated, of course} is pretty, pretty good.
-------------------
Eric M W - 2014-04-27 22:21:25 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Not so. Peter became actually free from the human condition in 2010, has been and still is. There were never changes in this claim. There was only a clarification... Peter is 'newly free' from the human condition, which is still a state of an actual freedom, as you can see here...
Good grief.
I find it hard to really understand this because anatta, translated as no-self or no-soul in, is the core of the Buddha's teaching. What "soul" exactly are we trying to eliminate here? If you sat down and tried to find a soul, you would be unsuccessful. Reality is just a fluxing, flickering field of sensations, none of them having a permanent essence or self to them.
I realize Richard talks about being enlightened before AF, but no one seems to know what he is talking about. He talks about Soul or Self with a capital S, so maybe a Hindu or Christian perspective? Bernadette Roberts talks about a similar line of development, developing the Self and then dissolving the Self. She also talks about losing things like altered states and powers, so maybe she is on the same boat. But I still don't understand the logic, since there is no "Soul" in the first place, just a field of sensations that imply a "self" if they are not seen clearly for what they are.
I'm glad that the AF community has had success with what they are doing. It is simply not something I am interested in pursuing.
-------------------
Change A. - 2014-04-28 00:49:30 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Justine supposedly became AF without ever meeting Richard and he wrote few books about it and then differences arose between them. Justine didn't write anything on the forums after that. He had a blog as well but that seems to be gone. AF is touted as a solution to the problems of the world.
If two AF people can't be on speaking terms what can you expect about world peace.
-------------------
Not Tao - 2014-04-28 14:42:01 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Hey guys, while I appreciate all of the replies, I'm really hoping to hear directly from people who have had success. I am not even practicing Actualism, but the aim of eliminating passions is in line whith my own aim, and this is the only place people seem to be discussing the subject. I'm looking for inspiration from actual practitioners, and possibly the methods they have found to work best. I don't care much about dogma or traditions - be they new or old - I am interested in freedom, and the quickest path there.
-------------------
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem - 2014-04-28 16:30:15 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
There is a somewhat-active forum set up specifically to discuss actualism. You will likely have more success there:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/actualfreedom/info.
Not Tao - 2014-04-25 22:23:24 - How has your freedom held up over the years?
Hello,
I've been practicing something very similar to AF for a while and I'm just wondering how the fruition has held up for people over the years? Those of you who have been "actually free" for a while, has it lasted? Does it take any maintenance? I've been fascinated to read all the success stories, since I've been playing with PCEs for years. I've always called myself a "Sensualist" haha. I'm ramping up practice to see if I can figure this out once and for all, so I'm just curious what I'm getting into. :3
-------------------
Felipe C. - 2014-04-26 05:49:50 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Hi, Not Tao,
I'm not actually free myself but I've been practicing actualism for about 3 years now. All I can say is that there is indeed some kind of baseline which one keeps changing over the years, one keeps raising the bar, and there are parts of your self that are no more after some realizations and then actualizations. It's been a fun ride and it has delivered incredible and apparently permanent results.
In reference to your original question, there are no actually free persons hanging in this forum in particular. Those who claimed AF, relinquished it later, so you may ask in the actualist forum at Yahoo, where Richard responds from time to time, or you can read his and other's testimonies at the AFT website. But basically, they haven't changed their claims or written about changes in their perceptions, they keep saying that actually is impossible to go back as their selves are extinct {Richard has been AF since 1992}, which also implies that it's completely effortless, as there is no self whatsoever to be vigilant about. Further, there are people who have met them in Australia at different times and they have reported basically the same.about them.
Lastly, if you want to give actualism a sincere try, I recommend that you do it following the instructions from the AFT website exclusively and not the ones posted in the DhO.
Cheers,
Felipe
-------------------
Not Tao - 2014-04-27 00:31:42 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
I was actually interested to see if anyone had claimed it outside of the AFT, since, to be perfectly honest, it just seems very culty and self-aggrandizing on their site. I've read a lot of Tarin's posts, but it looks like he's not posting around here anymore? I saw the post where he withdrew his claim, but it seemed more like he was saying "well, nothing has changed fro me, but I'm not interested in being part of these politics anymore," which makes sense.
Anyway, I'm mainly interested in Actualism because it mostly lines up with the practice I'm already doing, and seems to have delivered the results I suspected it would for other people. After 3 years how would you describe your day-to-day experience? What's your practice look like?
-------------------
Eric M W - 2014-04-27 17:14:32 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
I do not practice actualism, but I have done a good deal of research, considering the impact that AF has had on the DHO. I can say with certainty that actualist practice doesn't seem to have much going for it as far as any kind of permanent attainment goes.
Peter, one of the "original" AFers who wrote the majority of the AF site, is considered by Richard to be no longer actually free. This is probably a matter of politics on Richard's part, though.
Tarin renounced his claim a while ago. Daniel mentions two others in his essay on actualism that renounced their claims to AF.
Tommy M, once a major contributor here, renounced his claim to AF after a few days.
The shift in Daniel Ingram's perception after his experiments with actualism seem to have remained. However, he still experiences dreams, cycles, jhanas, etc, so the shift he experienced is in many ways very different than actual freedom as described by Richard et al.
Actualism aims at uprooting the affective faculty. Many here have argued that actualism is very Buddhist, but I tend to disagree. Mindfulness does not uproot things, it heals them. Perhaps this is why Daniel experienced a positive shift without losing access to jhanas, dreams, etc.
I realize that our emotions cause us a lot of trouble, but that's what we have practices such as the sublime abodes. I came to the DHO with no interest in getting rid of my emotions, and I find it strange that so many people are interested in actualism.
People who pursue actual freedom have my support, as I am all for anything that reduces suffering, but the likelihood of success seems to be very, very small.
Just my 2 cents
-------------------
An Eternal Now - 2014-04-27 17:42:40 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Eric M W:
Peter, one of the "original" AFers who wrote the majority of the AF site, is considered by Richard to be no longer actually free. This is probably a matter of politics on Richard's part, though.
-------------------
James Yen - 2014-04-27 18:01:38 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Actual Freedom does not work, at all.
Edit:
The problem with AF is that is asserts a freedom that is independent of the mind, and solely dependent on an eternal body. This body is the universe.
I'll let you figure out the rest.
-------------------
Felipe C. - 2014-04-27 19:41:51 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Eric M W:
I do not practice actualism, but I have done a good deal of research, considering the impact that AF has had on the DHO. I can say with certainty that actualist practice doesn't seem to have much going for it as far as any kind of permanent attainment goes.
Not enough research, it seems.
Eric M W:
Peter, one of the "original" AFers who wrote the majority of the AF site, is considered by Richard to be no longer actually free. This is probably a matter of politics on Richard's part, though.
Not so. Peter became actually free from the human condition in 2010, has been and still is. There were never changes in this claim. There was only a clarification... Peter is 'newly free' from the human condition, which is still a state of an actual freedom, as you can see here...
RICHARD: Gíday Initials &c., First of all, a minor technical point (purely for the sake of clarity in communication): I have been referring to peoples newly free as being actually free of the instinctual passions/ the feeling-being formed thereof ñ as compared to fully free (i.e., sans identity in toto/ the entire affective faculty) ñ so as to not only delineate the instinctual nature of what magically disappears during the definitive event/the pivotal moment an actual freedom takes place but to also emphasise the non-instinctual make-up of the social identity (a culturally-inculcated societal/ familial entity). Vis.:
ï [Co-Respondent]: ëSo, what exactly do you think he is experiencing then, if not an actual freedom? Are you suggesting there is some condition where the person has no emotions nor sense of identity/ self that is somehow not quite yet an actual freedom?í
ï : ë[...] First, obviously I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person sans identity in toto/the entire affective faculty is not actually free from the human condition (as that would simply be absurd). Second, I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person (newly) free of the instinctual passions/the feeling-being formed thereof is not actually free ... albeit not yet fully-free due, in part at least, to some shadowy remnants of a lingering social identity. (The social identity, being a culturally-inculcated societal/ familial entity, and not instinctually-based, is not necessarily rendered completely null and void at the definitive event/pivotal moment an actual freedom takes place; a period of accommodation and adjustment and acclimatisation, all throughout the normal day-to-day life, ensures the habituated patterns of a life-time cease). (Messages 11929).
Second, my response will make more sense by first delineating how there are, in essence, only two stages in the actualism proceedings ... namely:
1. a virtual freedom.
2. an actual freedom.
The first stage can have two aspects ... to wit:
1. a still-in-control/same-way-of-being virtual freedom (by virtue of the actualism method).
2. an out-from-control/different-way-of-being virtual freedom (per favour the actualism process).
The second stage also features two aspects (else it be ëtoo much, too fast, too sooní) ... vis.:
1. newly free (aka peace-on-earth freedom).
2. fully free (aka meaning-of-life freedom).
ï [Co-Respondent]: ëSo, what exactly do you think he is experiencing then, if not an actual freedom? Are you suggesting there is some condition where the person has no emotions nor sense of identity/ self that is somehow not quite yet an actual freedom?í
ï : ë[...] First, obviously I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person sans identity in toto/the entire affective faculty is not actually free from the human condition (as that would simply be absurd). Second, I am not suggesting there is some condition where a person (newly) free of the instinctual passions/the feeling-being formed thereof is not actually free ... albeit not yet fully-free due, in part at least, to some shadowy remnants of a lingering social identity. (The social identity, being a culturally-inculcated societal/ familial entity, and not instinctually-based, is not necessarily rendered completely null and void at the definitive event/pivotal moment an actual freedom takes place; a period of accommodation and adjustment and acclimatisation, all throughout the normal day-to-day life, ensures the habituated patterns of a life-time cease). (Messages 11929).
Second, my response will make more sense by first delineating how there are, in essence, only two stages in the actualism proceedings ... namely:
1. a virtual freedom.
2. an actual freedom.
The first stage can have two aspects ... to wit:
1. a still-in-control/same-way-of-being virtual freedom (by virtue of the actualism method).
2. an out-from-control/different-way-of-being virtual freedom (per favour the actualism process).
The second stage also features two aspects (else it be ëtoo much, too fast, too sooní) ... vis.:
1. newly free (aka peace-on-earth freedom).
2. fully free (aka meaning-of-life freedom).
You can see Peterís Report of Becoming Newly Actually Free here, which as valid as when it was first posted at the AFT website.
Also, it's funny how many people here have a knee-jerk reaction relating everything actualism to 'politics'. What are those 'politics' that are obsessively discussed in this forum?
In this case of Peter, adjusting and readjusting the actualist literature to be in accordance to clarity, reality, etc? Consider that this is a fairly new method and there is a very small sample of human beings who are practicing actualism and an even smaller sample of actually free ones. What Richard has been doing here is taking note, and comparing and contrasting, the experiences of those people and refining the understanding of all this. This way, he is determining what are the patterns, what is idiosyncratic, what is general, what are exactly the development stages, etc. Are these 'politics'?
In most cases in this forum, safeguarding the integrity of the actualist writings in order to not be confused with other methods {such as spirituality and common real-world solutions}? For instance, if someone invented tacos and then people started to say 'there is nothing new about tacos, they are the same as pizza', that someone becomes a politician at the moment of delineating the particular elements of tacos, the specific elements which make tacos different from pizza? All the controversies here and at the actualist forums are brought from pizza people who insist that pizza is tacos, and Richard has been only clarifying, again and again, that pizza is pizza and taco is taco {which has been clear to him since he became actually free}. Are these really politics or just a simple matter of clear classification between elements?
Eric M W:
Tarin renounced his claim a while ago. Daniel mentions two others in his essay on actualism that renounced their claims to AF.
Tommy M, once a major contributor here, renounced his claim to AF after a few days.
Tommy M, once a major contributor here, renounced his claim to AF after a few days.
Or --a very different thing-- they were never actually free in the first place. Here you can see how Richard proofs that Tarin and others from the DhO didn't fully understand the actualist method, and therefore how is very improbable that they really became AF.
Tommy did not renounce his claim. He clarified that he never was actually free, after a week or so.
Eric M W:
The shift in Daniel Ingram's perception after his experiments with actualism seem to have remained. However, he still experiences dreams, cycles, jhanas, etc, so the shift he experienced is in many ways very different than actual freedom as described by Richard et al.
Daniel never claimed AF, and even never acknowledged that he was practicing actualism per se. He was experimenting with some things, mixing them with his own practices, but never went fully and exclusively into it.
Eric M W:
Actualism aims at uprooting the affective faculty. Many here have argued that actualism is very Buddhist, but I tend to disagree. Mindfulness does not uproot things, it heals them.
Well said. I fully agree that both approaches are very different. One works within the margins of the 'soul' {or affective being or self}, and the other eliminates it completely. The actualist approach is that this affective faculty is impossible to heal as it is rotten at the core.
Eric M W:
People who pursue actual freedom have my support, as I am all for anything that reduces suffering, but the likelihood of success seems to be very, very small.
Well, if you consider that there has been no more than 100 or so known practicing actualists, and that there are 5 or so documented actually free persons, and that this method has been public for very little {less than a couple of decades}, and those who are not AF yet have been reporting benefits, I'd actually argue that the likelihood of success {when one is sincere and dedicated, of course} is pretty, pretty good.
-------------------
Eric M W - 2014-04-27 22:21:25 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Felipe C.:
Not so. Peter became actually free from the human condition in 2010, has been and still is. There were never changes in this claim. There was only a clarification... Peter is 'newly free' from the human condition, which is still a state of an actual freedom, as you can see here...
Good grief.
Well said. I fully agree that both approaches are very different. One works within the margins of the 'soul' {or affective being or self}, and the other eliminates it completely. The actualist approach is that this affective faculty is impossible to heal as it is rotten at the core.
I find it hard to really understand this because anatta, translated as no-self or no-soul in, is the core of the Buddha's teaching. What "soul" exactly are we trying to eliminate here? If you sat down and tried to find a soul, you would be unsuccessful. Reality is just a fluxing, flickering field of sensations, none of them having a permanent essence or self to them.
I realize Richard talks about being enlightened before AF, but no one seems to know what he is talking about. He talks about Soul or Self with a capital S, so maybe a Hindu or Christian perspective? Bernadette Roberts talks about a similar line of development, developing the Self and then dissolving the Self. She also talks about losing things like altered states and powers, so maybe she is on the same boat. But I still don't understand the logic, since there is no "Soul" in the first place, just a field of sensations that imply a "self" if they are not seen clearly for what they are.
Well, if you consider that there has been no more than 100 or so known practicing actualists, and that there are 5 or so documented actually free persons, and that this method has been public for very little {less than a couple of decades}, and those who are not AF yet have been reporting benefits, I'd actually argue that the likelihood of success {when one is sincere and dedicated, of course} is pretty, pretty good.
I'm glad that the AF community has had success with what they are doing. It is simply not something I am interested in pursuing.
-------------------
Change A. - 2014-04-28 00:49:30 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Justine supposedly became AF without ever meeting Richard and he wrote few books about it and then differences arose between them. Justine didn't write anything on the forums after that. He had a blog as well but that seems to be gone. AF is touted as a solution to the problems of the world.
If two AF people can't be on speaking terms what can you expect about world peace.
-------------------
Not Tao - 2014-04-28 14:42:01 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Hey guys, while I appreciate all of the replies, I'm really hoping to hear directly from people who have had success. I am not even practicing Actualism, but the aim of eliminating passions is in line whith my own aim, and this is the only place people seem to be discussing the subject. I'm looking for inspiration from actual practitioners, and possibly the methods they have found to work best. I don't care much about dogma or traditions - be they new or old - I am interested in freedom, and the quickest path there.
-------------------
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem - 2014-04-28 16:30:15 - RE: How has your freedom held up over the years?
Not Tao:
Hey guys, while I appreciate all of the replies, I'm really hoping to hear directly from people who have had success. I am not even practicing Actualism, but the aim of eliminating passions is in line whith my own aim, and this is the only place people seem to be discussing the subject.
There is a somewhat-active forum set up specifically to discuss actualism. You will likely have more success there:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/actualfreedom/info.
