Actual Freedom discussion, please

[Brendan]

Hi to all the yogis at KFD. I've been meditating for about 4 years and in the past 6 months have been making what seems to be astoundingly fast progress in Buddhist meditation. I got Stream Entry in March and have since completed at least another 6 progress of insight cycles, along with very regular daily cycling. Nowadays there seems to be no discernible sense of self in my experience, though still the sense of presence/being that's described on the Actual Freedom Trust website. To keep this brief, it's been a truly profound transformation for the better.

But having experienced many PCEs in the past 3 weeks, I'm left thinking that this is clearly the way forward, that making this state permanent would be as much a quantum leap over this enlightenment as this enlightenment is over my previous, pre-Dark Night experience. And not just in terms of my own personal wellbeing, but the wellbeing of every person I will have meaningful contact with over the rest of my life, or affect in any way. Emotions strike me as clearly being distortions of reality that have evolved to increase the chances of the individual's survival over the collective good. A PCE clearly involves no unhealthy suppression of emotion as it arises out of heightened levels of positive feeling. It is the fulfillment that all emotion is pointing us towards, however imprecisely. Developing an ever greater appreciation of the present moment strikes me as clearly being a thoroughly sane way to live life. So when Kenneth Folk writes: "pull up your pants and be a human" in this thread (and I apologise in advance if your opinion, Kenneth, has since changed), I'm taken aback by how misguided that sounds to me.

Kenneth: Is not having a fully-fledged sense of self a fundamental part of being human? Surely to have none is making you "less than or more than human", just as you describe yourself as you resided in a PCE. I'm amazed that you would embrace your humanness in response to AF - I go to work every day and am regularly baffled by the (from my perspective) incredibly foolish, ego-motivated, selfish, and narrow-minded bickering, bullying and oneupmanship of my colleagues. How they suffer in all their humanness! And how better placed I would be as an Actually Free person to help them to live more harmoniously, being in a constant state of flow, unshackled by pity, compassion, love, sexual desire and most of the other aspects of being human that ultimately just make it harder for us to act rationally, responsibly and selflessly.

I get the impression that you've got a similar outlook to Daniel Ingram in that you believe there are multiple, and I assume you take them to be perfectly valid, axes of development post-4th path, but surely some allow the enlightened being to do more good in the world than others? And surely of those axes, living in permanent PCE mode is the most beneficial? I'm struggling to see what could possibly be more ethical than this, and especially how simply "being free in whatever arises" (as you write) could be. To use your metaphor from the post I linked to, if we take reducing the amount of suffering in the world to be our goal, and the analogy to that being getting from A to B in a city whilst minimizing financial and environmental cost, it could be worked out to a high degree of certainty which car is best at doing this.

Please explain to me why you're not advocating one particular car over another, and why Actual Freedom isn't the right car for the job. And especially, if you think this to be the case, why retaining emotion allows you to better connect with, and I'm assuming help, other human beings - the sheer strength of my engagement with the present moment in a PCE (just one of its many wonderful qualities) makes it seem a vastly superior means of doing so.

I respect your opinion and those of the other members of this forum, and I don't want to drastically alter my mental circuitry without thinking it through very carefully beforehand, so I'd love to kick off a bit of a discussion here and get as many opinions as possible, while adding my own responses, because, having read through the entire thread I linked to, I'm not convinced at all by these contentions of 'AFers are repressing their emotions', 'they're denying their humanity', 'they're deluding themselves', 'they're getting sucked into a cult', etc. Yet these are being made by very smart people (though I've met many smart people who seem to have very little 'sense', as in the ability to not cause themselves and others huge amounts of needless suffering, so that's probably not saying much).

[kennethfolk]

Hi Brendan,

It seems that the AF discussion has fizzled a bit in the last couple of years. I think that's because as time went by the hoped-for crop of happy, harmless, and helpful AF folks who had forever ceased to suffer did not materialize. People kept practicing in various ways, including AF practices, most of which can be found elsewhere, and people just kept on being people; to the extent that they practiced, they got better, kinder, wiser, and older. In other words, the same things happened whether people believed AF theory or whether they thought it was nonsense. The only thing that mattered was whether people actually practiced training their minds. I will not assert that all practices are the same or that they all lead to the same place. In fact, I think some practices are much more effective than others, and of course I practice and teach the ones I favor. I think some of the AF practices are useful, although the belief system that goes along with them does not appeal to me.

So, if I may, here is my suggestion; choose a practice make sense to you, commit to it, work your butt off, and see what happens. Any preconceptions you have about "permanent PCE states" are only speculation unless and until they happen. Just practice. Recognize your thoughts and hopes as thoughts and hopes. They will change over time. Understand that training your mind through hands-on exercises is not the same as believing what others say or write about a Utopian future. One is contemplative practice, the other religion. Know the difference and choose accordingly.

All best,

Kenneth

[Brother Pussycat]

Hey Brendan,

If you're interested in why AF is probably not The Answer, check out AF discussions on the Dharma Overground and especially posts by John Wilde and Omega Point.

[kennethfolk]

Thanks, Brother Pussycat. Following your tip, I just read this thread featuring John Wilde, and found it to be an excellent commentary on AF:

http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/gue ... ge/3694814

[Brother Pussycat]

Hey Kenneth,

That thread is John Wilde's bottom line on AF, but do take the time to read his other contributions, and not only those related to AF. Ditto for Omega Point.

[Russell]

Great response Kenneth.

What I would be really interested in hearing about are Tarin, Nikolai, et al's current views on AF. They have all seemed to quiet down about it, which may actually be a good thing. Usually people quiet down when their practice deepens significantly. Regardless, it would be an interesting discussion though.

[beoman.claudiu]

Hey Brendan,

I'm always glad to see somebody being genuinely interested in actualism! Although it is up to you to decide which way to go forward, I'd like to say that I agree with all your points. After visiting Richard in April 2012 and verifying for myself that he is what he says he is (and that actual freedom is what he says it is) I've turned away from the meditative path I was going down and began "practicing Actualism" - which is to say, making enjoying my life my number one priority. The results have been great - it's certainly put a spring back in my step!

I just wanted to say that, if you continue to be interested in actualism and would like to discuss it, then I would recommend you join the actualfreedom yahoo group ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfreedom ) as there is much in the way of misinformation and false impressions that go around on forums such as KFD and the DhO (the thread you linked to being one example of that).

Regardless, keep in mind that the goal of actualism is the perpetual enjoyment of being alive, and the means to that goal is to enjoy being alive as much as possible. Thus the means and the goal are the same, except that the means are an affective enjoyment (as you can't stop feeling, then the best thing to do is to feel felicitous, as that most closely approximates the PCE) and the goal is an apperceptive enjoyment (without 'being' entirely, as glimpsed in the PCE). To put it succinctly: if you're not enjoying yourself then you're not practicing actualism.

Cheers,
Claudiu

P.S. Regarding John Wilde, you guys might be interested to know that he has recently (~January 2013) changed his mind about actualism and is indeed pursuing it again. Some relevant messages from the yahoo group (free registration required):

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfre ... sage/12673
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfre ... sage/12841
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/actualfre ... sage/12899

And basically any message he's written after those.

[Brendan]

Okay, just finished reading Omega Point's posts on AF...
Mother of God!! He's completely demolished it to my eyes. Tbh, I'd been so enamored with the practice that I'd completely overlooked what I now realize are very suspect claims and other details about Richard's behaviour - such as the fact that he smokes, or that he's even prepared to claim anything like 'no-one in human history has ever done this before'. What a careless, foolish thing to claim! And as Omega Point makes blindingly obvious with his 'obnoxiously bright light', this is only one of many, many other examples of willful ignorance, complete disregard for the facts and generally careless, unethical behaviour.

The only major chink in his argument I believe is that he asserts "the [AF] postures themselves are identical in principle with the category of 1000s of Buddhist/Hindu/Jain/etc called dharma practice" then neglects to go into detail about what those identical postures are/where they can be found. Regardless, he's convinced me to take the time to locate the original/earlier sources of these teachings and not give any more exposure to AF. Anyone have any ideas on what he's referring to??

Even for those of you with no interest in Actualism, I'd still highly recommend reading these posts - they're filled with all sorts of fascinating/useful/inspiring information. His amazing account of his experience with Dream Yoga has definitely inspired me to investigate that and try to induce a lucid dreams. When 1/3 of your life is spent sleeping, why waste the significant portion of that which is spent dreaming on dreams left forgotten and ignored?

In conclusion, it's left me feeling like he's made something of a mockery of large chunks of the Pragmatic Dharma movement. This whole business of proclaiming yourself an arahat while still experiencing craving and aversion, or indeed, as he makes clear, unpleasantness of any kind, is... a joke. When numerous traditions supported by "tens of thousands" of contemplatives spending the "bulk of their lives" in practice and study assert that arahats do not suffer, how arrogant and absurd it is to claim it's all lies! I just hope someday the real 4th path can be made just as demystified and accelerated as 1st/2nd has been for me.

Thank you Brother Pussycat for the suggestions!

[Brother Pussycat]

"The only major chink in his argument I believe is that he asserts "the [AF] postures themselves are identical in principle with the category of 1000s of Buddhist/Hindu/Jain/etc called dharma practice" then neglects to go into detail about what those identical postures are/where they can be found. Regardless, he's convinced me to take the time to locate the original/earlier sources of these teachings and not give any more exposure to AF. Anyone have any ideas on what he's referring to??"

FWIW it seems that the enjoyment of every moment of being alive plays a major role in at least some Zen approaches (this is based on a German Zen book I own, which places great emphasis on sensory enjoyment of all things and gives quotations from old masters in support of this approach). Quite a change from the 'all is dukkha' Mahasi approach.

Also, while Omega Point's posts are fascinating, do take the time to read John Wilde's stuff, at least the thread Kenneth linked to. All the more so because he insists on a thorough, ruthless analysis of the consequences and implications (especially moral ones) of one's practice at every step, regardless of any wonderful states and experiences this practice brings us. According to him this is something many practicioners of many different traditions (including Buddhist ones) fail at, not only AF folk.

[beoman.claudiu]

Also, while Omega Point's posts are fascinating, do take the time to read John Wilde's stuff, at least the thread Kenneth linked to. All the more so because he insists on a thorough, ruthless analysis of the consequences and implications (especially moral ones) of one's practice at every step, regardless of any wonderful states and experiences this practice brings us. According to him this is something many practicioners of many different traditions (including Buddhist ones) fail at, not only AF folk.

Sound advice! For example, the fact that Richard smokes definitely tells you something about what an actual freedom is. If that bothers you then of course you wouldn't want to pursue that. It's a question of how important morality is to you. If you want to be moral then you will have to look elsewhere. Which is not to say an actually free person is immoral - rather, they're amoral, though that can seem immoral to those who are moral.

Something is a bit off about morality though, isn't it? Morality as in, right vs. wrong, good vs. evil. Hence the amorality. Maybe in the process of analyzing the moral consequences of one's practice one could also analyze the practical consequences of one's morality?