Archive for the 'Nondual Perspectives' Category

« Previous Entries
Next Page »

Stanley Sobottka on Quantum Theory and Nonduality

March 2, 2010

Stanley Sobottka summarizes his view on quantum theory and nonduality.

Dear Friends,

As my tenure on the OASG [Open Awareness Study Group] comes to a close, I would like to summarize, and perhaps correct, what I have said about quantum theory and nonduality.

Physics in general, and quantum theory in particular, began as the study of objective reality, i.e., a reality that exists whether or not it is being observed. Classical physics had no problem with this approach. When classical physics proved inadequate to the task of explaining the results of certain experiments, quantum theory arose. It was spectacularly successful in explaining these results and many more, too. Then a few physicists began to ask, is this all that quantum theory means–the explanation of experimental results? Does it have any ontological value, i.e., can it tell us what objective reality _is_, not just what it _does_? This is what an _interpretation _of quantum theory is supposed to do, to describe what objective reality is. So a few physicists worked very hard to come up with an interpretation in terms of an objective reality….and failed. But the failure was that there were too many contenders, not too few, and there was no way to determine which one, if any, was correct. Furthermore, most of them pretend that the quantum wavefunction, which is a probability wave rather than a physical wave, is an objectively real object rather than being simply the mathematical formula that it is. However, rather than this being cause for despair, it actually can liberate us from the prison of objective reality. As long as we believe that objects are real, we will find it difficult to escape the belief that we are objects, and consequently to feel separate from all other objects. The failure of physicists to find an objective interpretation of quantum theory has the potential to liberate us from this fatal belief in separation.

So now that we don’t have to believe in the existence of separation, what is left? We are free to believe in the absence of separation. Better still, we don’t have to leave it to mere belief, we can _see _that there is no separation. This is where the teaching of nonduality comes in. There are many statements of nonduality, e.g., consciousness is all there is, love is all there is, there are not two, there is only oneness, etc. These are useful to begin with but the statements themselves don’t take us very far. To believe the statements is to make nonduality into a religion rather than accepting it as a teaching. Instead of belief, what is necessary is a clear, direct seeing of truth. The essence of direct seeing is to see that there is no separate me. If there is no separate me, there is no separation.

How do we see that there is no me? Simply speaking, we just look for the me. If we don’t find it, then we look for what-it-is that sees that there is no me. We might think that then is the true me. In that case, we just take another step back and look for what-it-is that sees that. We might think that we will have to keep on stepping back forever but that proves not to be the case. Once we see that there is no me, the next step, the step of seeing the witness of no-me, is likely to be the last one because the seeing of the witness likely dissolves the witness, and then there is only pure awareness.

What if we find a me in the first step? The process is the same as above. We step back and see what-it-is that sees the me. If we find the witness of the me, we take another step back and see what-it-is that sees the witness of the me. That seeing will likely dissolve the witness, leaving pure awareness.

Even if we can find no me and no witness of no-me, we might still feel that our awareness is confined to the skull. In that case, we look for what-it-is that sees that awareness is confined to the skull. If we see an awareness that is confined to the skull, we immediately see that what seems to be confined awareness cannot be true awareness. Again, as we step back and look for what sees this, we might find a witness of no-confined- awareness. Once again, we step back to see what-it-is that sees the witness. In so doing, the witness again dissolves into pure awareness.

Once we see that there is no me, no witness of no-me, and no-confinement, all separation dissolves. This seeing might have to be repeated many times for it to be a continuing awareness of no separation. It is very helpful to realize that both the apparent me and apparent confinement are just arisings. Since all arisings rapidly come and go, the me and confinement are never permanent, even for a short time. There are many times when there is no me and no confinement but we are not aware of it because we are not at the moment suffering from separation. Consequently, we can save our practice times for the times that we are suffering.

Love,
Stanley
http://faculty.virginia.edu/consciousness/

Posted in Nondual Perspectives, physics | 2 Comments »
Tags: , ,

Paradoxica: Nondual Psychology – Psychotherapy Conference in Alberta, Canada

February 22, 2010

I have heard from Will Joel Friedman and Gary Nixon about what looks to be a great nonduality conference happening in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, June 17-18, 2010.

The links will take you to a fine website with clear, detailed descriptions of the proposed talks as well as the contents of Volume #1 of Paradoxica: Journal of Nondual Psychology.

Here is their announcement of the Conference:

2010 Paradoxica Nondual Psychology Conference

EXCITING NEWS: Announcing the first nondual psychology & psychotherapy conference in Canada.

The Paradoxica Institute is hosting the Nondual Psychology (and Beyond) Conference, June 17-18, 2010 at the University of Lethbridge in beautiful Lethbridge Alberta nestled in the coulees, and close to the Waterton Mountains.

We want this to be a dynamic and transformational conference including powerful and insightful clinical workshops in addition to ground breaking presentations and energizing workshops.

Join in June’s festivities as we celebrate and embrace the flowering of Nothingness together!

Full Program & Registration: paradoxica.ca/index.php/conference

Paradoxica: Journal of Nondual Psychology: paradoxica.ca/index.php/issue-1

Main Website: www.paradoxica.ca

Posted in Gatherings/meetings/conferences, Nondual Perspectives, Paradox of Nonduality, Psychoterapy-Psychology | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

What Did Lao Tzu Mean? Part 4

February 20, 2010

What did Lao Tzu mean when he wrote in the Tao Te Ching, “Those who say, do not know. Those who know, do not say”?

In this series entitled What Did Lao Tzu Mean? are entertained some responses. You are welcome to include yours as a comment. This part is by several contributors:

Hi dear Jerry:

Re: Lao Tzu’s efforts to express the in-expressible — I would tend
to go with the first….”Those who say do not know” BEcause, !! ..what any one of us “knows” – is only valid for that “one – me- belief”. It isn’t valid for any other.

All us seekers are looking for a universal remedy (primarily) because of our own “need to fix/help/save/enlighten>>>>) others.
Usually meant in great kindness and love; yet…still “our” goal, or
essence… OUR “smell” … OUR “taste” etc. When time to exit comes, we still have to in-breath “our smell, our taste, our belief(s) …so humility has the last word. How can these ideas be expressed – or “given”?? Thus.. saying is empty, even when with great love.
Jenny/Center For Awareness

Don’t know what Lao meant but maybe something like: Knowing is seeing 256 million colors and saying is having a vocabulary that consists of only these 5 words: red, green, blue, black, and white.
Tom Allen

“Those”, who know do not say. Those who say, do not know.
-geo-

Those who know do not say “those”; who say, do not know.
-geo-

Perhaps the koan points to there being ‘no separate knower’ to ‘know anything’ and ‘therefore ‘can say’ no thing. Or in other words there was never a split of ‘knower’/'known’ to utter anything just as there is no split of ’subject’/'object’, ‘dynamic’/’static’, ‘knowing’/'unknowing’, ‘dual’ / ‘nondual’ or any apparent ’set of correlates’.

And maybe although inseparable of ‘This inescapable completeness’ notionally any split may seemingly ‘arise’ yet no apparent ‘arising’ actually ‘utters a word’.
skeanea

Posted in Nondual Perspectives | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,

What Did Lao Tzu Mean? Part 3

February 20, 2010

What did Lao Tzu mean when he wrote in the Tao Te Ching, “Those who say, do not know. Those who know, do not say”?

In this series entitled What Did Lao Tzu Mean? are entertained some responses. You are welcome to include yours as a comment. This one is by several authors:

“Truth is a pathless land”. J. Krishnamurti
Vijayan Paliath

there are no words there is actually no there there is only…………..

its just on the subject of Reality[or what he called the Tao] not ordinary knowledge which is essentially just information
Kirk Crist

I think he meant that anyone who says they know, do not know. So that rules out Tolle, Foster, Parsons , Buddha, Christ himself etc. In other words he had no idea and just like most non dualists liked to play with words.!
Fun though!
Best wishes
alan murphy

If you read the whole book of Tao Te Ching, the message floats around this concept:
There are no boundaries.
There are no no’s.
There are no yes’s.
Bruce Lee put it rather appropriately – he said:
“Be like water, my friend.”
Seth Chong
http://www.hislatestwords.com

Posted in Nondual Perspectives | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,

What Did Lao Tzu Mean? Part 2

February 20, 2010

What did Lao Tzu mean when he wrote in the Tao Te Ching, “Those who say, do not know. Those who know, do not say”?

In this series entitled What Did Lao Tzu Mean? are entertained some responses. You are welcome to include yours as a comment. This one is by Gene Poole, with a brief comment by Yosy.

Gene Poole:

What was stated is simply this:

The speaker is not the knower.

- speaking is a process which
the knower cannot do

- the speaker cannot know

- thus, the knower is served by the speaker.

‘The speaker is not the one who knows’

‘The knower is not the one who speaks’

As we have seen (but not knowing what we see?)
this boggle can be very confusing. An ‘audience’
usually assumes that the moving mouth, belongs
to the knower.

But that is not the fact, in the case of genuine ‘masters’.

I would go so far as to say that the speaker does not
know ‘jack shit’ about anything, except perhaps an
impending mealtime.

The knower has no mouth, and if desires to communicate,
must utilize some faculty of a living body. Thus, we have
a knower and a speaker.

It is this situation, which has led to centuries of
incredible confusion, and need I say, bullshit.

The ‘knower’ is one, but speakers are many.

If further clue is needed; if you do not grasp what
I have said above; here is a quote and a link:

“THE VESTURES (Verses 72–107)

“Formed of the substances they call marrow, bone, fat,
flesh, blood, skin and over-skin; fitted with greater
and lesser limbs, feet, breast, trunk, arms, back, head;
this is called the physical vesture by the wise–
the vesture whose authority, as “I” and “my” is declared to be a delusion.”

(Thus is described, the moving mouth; the speaker.)

From here:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Crest_Jewel_of_Wisdom/Self,_Potencies,_Vestures

The root of the article:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Crest_Jewel_of_Wisdom

The article, a translation of an important text,
may seem complex, but it is not.

==GP==

:) speech does not come necessarily from the mouth… and the only knowing is being.
“actions speak louder then words”.
there is knowledge, and there is speech; but there is no knower nor speaker.
Yosy

Posted in Nondual Perspectives | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,

What Did Lao Tzu Mean? Part 1

February 20, 2010

What did Lao Tzu mean when he wrote in the Tao Te Ching, “Those who say, do not know. Those who know, do not say”?

In this series entitled What Did Lao Tzu Mean? are entertained some responses. You are welcome to include yours as a comment. This one is by Nathaniel:

Well, to start with, for a man who said that “those who say do not now”; he surely had plenty to say. Thus, he must not have known a whole lot…with that in mind, it seems as though he was attempting to explain the anti-knowledge knowledge for minds that eagerly gobble up candy-coated ideas.

In my own experience, it has been far easier to put into practice the principles he put forth than it is to relate them. Through his teaching I have learned the value that multiple views can have for the individual. I have made use of nothingness and I have cast off many burdensome intellectual possessions and I must admit, I have less of an idea what “truth” is today because of him, but far greater freedom to seek the truth if I choose to.

His words came to me mysteriously, at first, everything I read was so unique that I almost had no frame of reference to work with—it was so far out of the pale to me and so foreign. Initially he sounded like a genius. Yet, what I eventually began to recognize was that he wrote from a place that was not “advanced” at all. His words were so damn obvious that he could also be seen as the greatest idiot philosopher of all time as well without stretching the imagination one bit.

People, especially white, middle-class, vegetarian, yoga instructors who drive an Escalade like to make a big to-do about the “illusory” quality of this existence and they will quite often put Lao Tsu in the same category as Buddha and others—perhaps because he was Asian—I don’t know.

I don’t think that Lao Tsu saw this life as illusory though. I think his writings were merely those of a man who liked to shoot from the hip a lot; to my mind Lao tsu observed how Real this world was to him and he noticed how everything worked; teaching the illusion of intelligence rather than the illusion of existence.

~Nathaniel

Posted in Nondual Perspectives | 1 Comment »
Tags: , ,

Nonduality, by Colin Drake

February 18, 2010

Nonduality

by Colin Drake

Nonduality – not ‘the quality or opposition of being dual (two).’
— not ‘the opposition between two concepts or aspects.’ (Oxford English Dictionary)

Or to put it simply ‘not two’ (of anything). It is put this way, rather than saying ‘all is one’, for the very term ‘one’ implies (that there could be) two or more… In fact the term ‘nonmultiplicity’ would be more accurate for what is being suggested here is ‘not many’ rather than ‘not two’.

What we are trying to get a handle on here is that there is actually no (permanently existing) thing in existence, and that all apparent ‘things’ are manifestations of the same essence.

This can be shown by investigating the nature of our own subjective experiences, which is actually all that any of us have to investigate. For each of us any external object or thing is experienced as a combination of thought (including mental images) and sensation, i.e. you may see it, touch it, know what it is called, and so on … Thus everything in the external world is experienced as a mixture of thoughts and sensations, and when we attempt to investigate any ‘thing’ it is these that we are investigating.

In any given moment of direct experience there are only three elements: thoughts (including all mental images), sensations (everything detected by the senses) and awareness of these thoughts and sensations. All thoughts and sensations are ephemeral objects (the perceived) which appear in this awareness (the perceiver) which is the constant subject. So at a deeper level than the ever-changing objects (thoughts and sensations) we are this constant subject, awareness itself.

To put this in a slightly different way, we can easily notice that every thought and sensation occurs in awareness, exists in awareness and dissolves back into awareness. Before any particular thought or sensation there is effortless awareness of ‘what is’: the sum of all thoughts and sensations occurring at any given instant. During the thought or sensation in question there is effortless awareness of it within ‘what is’. Then when it has gone there is still effortless awareness of ‘what is’.

Reiterating, for each of us any external object (or thing) is experienced as a combination of thought and sensation, i.e. you see it, touch (feel) it, know what it is called, etc. Therefore in our direct experience everything arises in, exists in and subsides back into awareness itself.

Awareness can also be defined as universal consciousness when it is totally at rest, completely still; aware of every movement that is occurring within it. In our direct experience we can see that awareness is still, as there is awareness of the slightest movement of mind or body. In fact this is the ‘stillness’ relative to which any movement can be known. Every ‘thing’ that is occurring in consciousness is a manifestation of cosmic energy, for the string theory and the earlier theory of relativity show that matter is in fact energy, which is consciousness in motion (or motion in consciousness). For energy is synonymous with motion and consciousness is the substratum, or deepest level, of all existence.

Now all motion arises in stillness, exists in stillness, is known by its comparison with stillness, and eventually subsides back into stillness. For example, if you walk across a room, before you start there is stillness, as you walk the room is still and you know you are moving relative to this stillness, and when you stop once again there is stillness. In the same way every ‘thing’ (consciousness in motion) arises in awareness (consciousness at rest), exists in awareness, is known in awareness and subsides back into awareness. Awareness is still, but is the container of all potential energy which is continually bubbling up into manifestation (physical energy) and then subsiding back into stillness.

Thus there is no dichotomy or duality between the physical world and ‘awareness’ for they are both manifestations of the same essence. The physical universe is just cosmic energy (consciousness in motion) when it is manifest into physical form, and awareness (consciousness at rest) contains this same energy in latent form as potential energy. Therefore there is in reality no multiplicity (nonduality) as there is only consciousness existing in two modes, in motion and at rest.

~ ~ ~

Colin Drake is the author of

Beyond the ‘Separate Self’
The End of Anxiety and Mental Suffering

A Simple Guide to Awakening

Based on the Meditations, Contemplations, and Experiences
of Forty Years of Spiritual Search and Practice

Learn more and order here.

Posted in Gurus/Teachers/Sages, Nondual Perspectives | 3 Comments »
Tags:

hmm … yeah … wow … ok … A nondual fly on the wall

January 5, 2010

I love how nondualism sneaks into the middle of this post, this life. This is a peek at a nondual perspective, a small bubbling up, a seed of nondualism planted in the legal profession. Reading this, I feel like a nondual fly on a wall.

from http://janeejgarcia.blogspot.com/2010/01/and-so-it-begins.html

Monday, January 4, 2010

And so it begins…

Day One:

BarBri: Temple Mason’s Lodge #6 at 8:30am. Check in. Give hugs to familiar faces. Pick up my stack of outlines. These outlines are to facilitate note-taking while listening to lectures – very cool. These outlines and notes will supplement the ten, very dense, books stacked in my house. All of that will supplement Barry’s Bar cards, purchased and installed last night. Today, I was made more familiar with the various parts of the bar exam. 2/23, day one will comprise of three hours allotted for six essay questions (30 min per question) from twelve state-specific subject areas, plus the six MBE subject areas (18 total subjects for the exam writers to choose from), then the final three hours are given to two Multistate Performance questions, 90 minutes each. 2/24, day two will comprise of two three hour sessions to complete 100 questions per session. That’s 1:48 per question. Connect with my fellow Bar exam-takers and establish community. Community is vital and a group of us decide to have lunch once a week. Calendar all classes, subjects, proctored practice exams, and various must-haves in my life. I just happen to be at one of two dropping off places in working a program and I won’t allow myself to fall apart now, not after ALL the work I’ve done and continue to do. i.e., I Skype weekly with a helpful person and that time slot is definitely calendared. It has to be or I die. Oh! I shared with her my thoughts on non-dualism and how I thought she would have been upset with me for dedicating time and neurons to a more spiritually advanced topic when I should be sitting with my written work, but she just laughed and remembered that tomorrow is my 90 days in another program. Okay, bar exam, then accepted help where it was offered, from a member of the Inn of Court who is also on the Board. She is sending their recommended study outline, but you have to ask for it because it’s not online and no one ever alludes to it. I just happened to jokingly ask her at the last Inn if she would give me a hint about where to focus and she said, ‘I’ve actually just picked all the questions for February.’ Oh my God. I was looking at a woman who knows the questions for 1/3 of my exam grade. Anyway, she told me about the outline. Then, drop a hundred at Trader Joe’s to stock up in the hopes that I won’t have to fret so much about healthy food & vitamins. Burn some CDs for happiness, cook up a shrimp lo mein (straight out of a bag!), and tape up the few simple rules I need to always remember throughout: Let Go, Let God; Easy Does It; First Things First; Stick to the course outline; Read less/ Practice more; Use the tools you’ve been given; Move & groove your body; You matter and You are doing it!

Posted in Law, Nondual Perspectives | Leave a Comment »

Introduction to Nondual Perspectives

November 28, 2009

a parade of nondual perspectives
from
www.theawakenedeye.com/nonduality.htm
nonduality

Most of the excerpts are taken from One: Essential Writings on Nonduality.

Nonduality means ‘not two’, nonseparateness.

When we speak, we speak from a disposition.
There are two basic dispositions: one from the place of oneness or “I Am” or Truth, Consciousness, God, Reality, whatever you want to call.
The second is the disposition from the Absolute, which is where the direct experience people come from. People like Tony Parsons or U.G. Krishnamurti. They say there is no God, consciousness or whatever you claim to be. They’re coming from nothingness, the Absolute. From that point of view there isn’t even nonseparateness. There’s nothing and no one. That’s the ‘real’ nonduality. That’s true Advaita. But no one can get it. You can’t do anything to get it. There’s no getting and no one to do the getting.

But we can get the nonduality that pertains to God, consciousness, truth, reality. We can get it through intention, inquiry, surrender, and different means. We can taste it and know it as our true nature, as the truth of who we are.

nonduality and art:
A mature creative life, which has discovered its source, finds it is linked to everything. When we are able to tap this source and link the illumined threads, we no longer want to live our creative lives separate from it. A creation that does not have the residual glow of its source can, at best, only sound a deathly rattle – however impressive that rattle may be.
Jerry Wennstrom

nonduality and education:
Awareness doesn’t need more information. It needs only enough information. This intelligence, the quality that mediates information into wisdom, is seldom referenced in school. If we do not include awareness in what we convey to our children, then aren’t we teaching them to be unconscious and to be consumers of an endless stream of pointless information and products?
Steven Harrison

nonduality and aikido:
The Art of Peace, begins with you. Work on yourself and your appointed task in the Art of Peace. Everyone has a spirit that can be refined, a body that can be trained in some manner, a suitable path to follow. You are here for no other purpose than to realize your inner divinity and manifest your innate enlightenment. Foster peace in your own life and then apply the Art to all that you encounter.
Morihei Ueshiba

nonduality and cinema:
“Who were you that I lived with, walked with? The brother, the friend? Strife and love, darkness and light – are they the workings of one mind, features of the same face? Oh my soul. Let me be in you now. Look out through my eyes. Look out at the things you made. All things shining.”
The Thin Red Line

nonduality and haiku:
These intimate haiku-pauses ground us in the mystery of being as we open ourselves, time and time again, to new vistas and to keener insights into the living, changing universe we inhabit. They allow us to be attuned to the rhythm, colour, sound, scent, movement and stillness of life, from season to season, whoever, whatever or wherever we are.
Gabriel Rosenstock

nonduality and western philosophy:
Proving the nondual nature of reality is not an overall goal for Western philosophy. A few philosophers have created nondual metaphysical theories; and others have argued against metaphysics altogether. But most philosophers who dissolve or dismiss dualities are not nondualists. The dualities left in the dust by these writers are merely casualties of their other work. In fact, the cleverest and most persuasive arguments tend to come from the works focused on narrower issues. These arguments can be very helpful in the course of one’s nondual inquiry. As the old-time news editors used to say, “We can use it!”
Greg Goode

nonduality and psychotherapy:
Are awakening psychotherapists in the same lineage as the Buddha or India’s other illustrious sages? It seems obvious that any awakening or awakened beings will transmit their understanding according to their capacities and limitations in any moment. This holds true for psychotherapists and nonpsychotherapists alike. In some ways being a psychotherapist may make awakening more difficult, especially if there are strong attachments to theories about the mind. On the other hand, psychotherapists are in a unique position in modern society to offer a sanctuary for individuals to sort out their lives and more intimately explore their direct experience.
John J. Prendergast

nonduality and religion:
With the perspectives of religion, particularly Advaita Vedanta, Buddhism, Judaism, Sufism, and Christianity, you’ll see expression from the disposition of the Absolute. It’s important to recognize the difference between the two dispositions.

advaita vedanta:
“The essence and the whole of Vedanta is this Knowledge, this supreme Knowledge: that I am by nature the formless, all-pervasive Self.”

buddhism:
“If anyone listens to this discourse and is neither filled with alarm nor awe nor dread, be it known that such a one is of remarkable achievement.”

sufism:
“… if you know yourself without being, not trying to become nothing, you will know your Lord. If you think that to know Allah depends on your ridding yourself of yourself, then you are guilty of attributing partners to Him – the only unforgivable sin – because you are claiming that there is another existence besides Him, the All-Existent: that there is a you and a He.”

judaism:
“Do not attribute duality to God. Let God be solely God. If you suppose that Ein Sof emanates until a certain point, and that from that point on is outside of it, you have dualized. God forbid! Realize, rather, that Ein Sof exists in each existent. Do not say, ‘This is a stone and not God.’ God forbid! Rather, all existence is God, and the stone is a thing pervaded by divinity.”

christianity:
“The truth of the body, then, is the revelation that Christ is all that is manifest of God or all that is manifest of the unmanifest Father. Self or consciousness does not reveal this and cannot know it. In the ‘smile’ there was no knower or one who smiles, nor was there anyone or anything to smile at or to know; there was just the smile, the ‘knowing’ that is beyond knower and known.”

native american tradition:
“We believe profoundly in silence – the sign of a perfect equilibrium. Silence is the absolute poise or balance of body, mind, and spirit. Those who can preserve their selfhood ever calm and unshaken by the storms of existence – not a leaf, as it were, astir on the tree; not a ripple upon the shining pool – those, in the mind of the person of nature, possess the ideal attitude and conduct of life.”

taoism:
Evince the plainness of undyed silk,
Embrace the simplicity of the unhewn log;
Lessen selfishness,
Diminish desires;
Abolish learning

Posted in Nondual Perspectives | 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Nonduality Business as Stale Bread

September 19, 2009

Let’s not forget that we’re in business. Nonduality is a business. Your business is to find out your true nature. It’s not to get involved in the nonduality business. The nonduality business has been established to help you find out your true nature, or to see things as they are. You don’t need to be involved in the nonduality business unless you are driven to do so.

The nonduality business is always bringing you stale bread. That’s the best we can do. But in delivering that stale bread we deliver sustenance. It is up to you to break down the sustenance to substance and, further, to particles of reality.

Don’t get too invested in stale bread: all the books, websites, videos, satsangs, all of it. But take the sustenance that is least stale to you, least refined, and let it fall apart in your hands into the fresh and great display of existence, stale bread and all.

Posted in Nondual Perspectives | 3 Comments »
Tags: ,

« Previous Entries
Next Page »