Indeed.

In all the contexts mentioned, listening to an other person is generally filtered through the ego of the listener. It is not easy to get rid of all of our ideological filters, our conditioning, our personal interests and beliefs that preclude really listening, as I define it.

As long as there is an ego, there is a separation between myself – other, making real listening impossible.
Really listening to the other is to: listen with his ears, his bones, with his deep being, with his divine being that is pure and innocent as a child, and does not judge.

Etymologically, listening comes from the Latin “auscultare”: listen carefully, and also “obey”. We know the times when a child is not listening, in the sense of not obeying.
A child who is always listening could not evolve, could not develop an ego, a social identity. To build up an identity one must be opposed, one must affirm oneself in the separation, and one way is through intentional non- listening.

As an adult, we have the opportunity to get rid of our identity mechanisms and find listening unfiltered by our ego. This is the purpose of all true teaching.

According to my observations, the freedom of being is there or it is not there.
I cannot imagine that there are “steps”.
However, there are exercises that can provide insights for this freedom of being, provided that such exercises are part of a teaching guided by an instructor (see below).
Listening in the sense of “obey” IS freedom of being. One who says obey says accept, welcome, by consciously separating filters of the ego, so beliefs, concepts, desires, fears, even as they arise.
Welcoming amenities at the same level as inconveniences keeps us in listening to non-duality.

Justified or not, the problem does not lie there. The fear of not being an individual remains as long as the belief that one is an independent person is active. I called this belief “the original belief. ” Stephen Wolinsky calls it “false core”. Deactivating it cannot be done overnight; the conditioning is too significant, and by getting rid of this belief, one must be physically prepared to undergo a true withdrawal treatment, with well-known symptoms just like those experienced by drug addicts because the nervous system is accustomed from infancy to live in the separation.
Learning to listen beyond the ego (which basically is just a belief and does not actually exist) cannot, as a rule, be done alone; we need a guide to learn, and who is himself in this listening continually.

I would phrase it like this: to rediscover the real listening in oneself, it is essential to recognize one’s own nothingness.

By listening from the heart one perceives the essence of the perceived. When I direct my attention on listening to the essential I allow the soul to feed and I connect with the meaning of life.

Any inner considering is an obstacle to listening from the heart. In the teaching of Gurdjieff, denouncing inner considering (manifested primarily through internal dialogue which in turn is fed by all kinds of fears) goes with “cultivating” the external considering, making oneself available to serve the context, to allow the free expression of one’s essential value, “the best of the best ” that reigns in us.
Listening from the heart is at the base of external considering.

Yes absolutely. Listening to oneself cannot be separated from listening to the other.

Here is an exercise that I recommend:
Listening to another is done simultaneously with listening to oneself. It’s a bit hard to describe this with words, but I’ll try. For those who are familiar with the teachings of Gurdjieff: this is about divided attention (hearing). 50% of this hearing attention is directed to “oneself”, i.e. to one’s body (biologically, there are two simultaneous tracks: listening ear and listening bones that vibrate by the perceived sound) and to one’s heart. The other 50 % are directed to the other, listening to his intention, not his words. In fact, it is essential to know how to dissociate from words because words have a different meaning for each of us.
Staying at the speech and words level produces confusion of languages and misunderstandings.

In listening from the heart, we are united.

Answer:
As long as we aren’t lastingly established in pre-sensory perception, the original belief continues to function permanently in an underlying way. It continues generating the mirage that I exist as an entity that was born one day and will die another. When I act and when I think, I do so with the idea in the back of my mind that I’m supplied with an identity that distinguishes itself from everything I perceive-me/identity perceiving the other and everything that surrounds me. As the principal structuring element of identity, original belief acts as a filter that places itself between pre-sensorial and sensorial perception. Let’s start with the presupposition that this way of sensorially perceiving the separation between the perceiver and the perceived isn’t the only way. If I commit myself to wanting to discover a way of perceiving that doesn’t engender separation anymore, I’ll have to become aware first of all of how my “mind” creates this separation. To do this, it’s indispensable for me to examine it as often as possible, and particularly in situations that are conflictual or emotionally difficult.

How do I react:

• when I realize someone’s pulled one over on me?
• when I realize someone else is being aggressive with me?
• when there’s more than one problem in the day?
• when I learn that someone I’m close to is gravely ill or has just died?
• when one day I find out that my companion has been cheating on me for the last three years?

What are the fears and apprehensions that I repress in order to avoid feeling them? This observation of my emotional reactions highlights little by little a perpetual, underlying unease, the great unease of all the unease we’ve ever felt, that comes from original belief. Becoming aware of original belief means going towards this unease whenever it appears and exposing it to the light of day, rather than wanting to avoid it, without feeling sorry for ourselves.

Response:
Effectively. This kind of personal work only has meaning when it’s integrated into the search for the absolute. The search for happiness isn’t at the same logical level as the search for the absolute. Looking for happiness is one of the characteristics of the identity in quest… of avoiding unpleasantness. Confronting ourselves with our original belief isn’t an encounter with temporary unhappiness, but with the unhappiness of separation. As long as we’re seeking happiness, we deprive ourselves of the wonders of life in each instant.

A:
It’s original belief that’s the source of all judgments. It’s the key constituent of our separating identity. Identity develops itself by distinguishing our opinions and judgments from those of others, and by affirming our own beliefs and convictions. The phrase “run up against” as it’s normally used actually describes inner states of mind, or events judged to be “against” us.

A:
Judgment attempts to validate, to ratify and to maintain; absence of judgment notices and observes, while remaining at a distance.

A:
We stop looking for them. As long as original belief functions, we’re restricted to looking for pleasures to compensate for and repress the inconveniences and the annoyances produced by our own judgment.

A:
The mental act of judgment and the mental act of evaluation aren’t on the same logical level. In functional life, we regularly evaluate the different aspects of a situation to then be able to make decisions that we “judge” to be the most adapted to the context–we “judge” through the use of the evaluation of/by criteria. It’s a question of good common sense. A judgment (in the sense that I gave to this word a moment ago) is a fixed opinion, unmoving, an affirmative verdict I pass on myself, on someone else, on a situation, or a combination thereof. It instigates the idea, “It’s true, therefore it follows that… ” (accompanied by the mental attitude: “I believe that my thoughts are real.”) An evaluation is more prudent, “If this is true, then it would follow that… ” (with the mental attitude: “I have thoughts, and I use them.”) A judgment is a confirmation by which I imprison myself, contrary to an evaluation which retains a hypothetical character, and which is necessary in the organization of everyday life.

A:
It takes an awful lot of personal work to become aware of all the ramifications of original belief, because most judgments take place at the unconscious level.

A:
What is annoyed? Think of an annoyance you’ve recently experienced.

R:
Dennis takes the subway every morning to get to work. Most of the time he has to remain standing because there aren’t any empty seats left. One morning, Dennis is thinking about a dream he had the night before, when some guy violently shoves him from behind. Dennis can feel his adrenaline go shooting up. Thinking, “This guy is out of his mind!” he turns around, and sees it was a blind man who had lost his balance.

A:
Each of us has to find our own representations. When we slow down our thoughts, they become visual, auditory and kinesthetic representations. At the visual level, original belief can appear as nightmarish images; at the auditory level, it appears most often as reproaches in inner dialogues; at the kinesthetic level it takes the form of a disagreeable feeling that resembles what we call a “guilty conscience”. We mustn’t confuse this with the feeling of guilt, which is characterized by a refusal to assume responsibility in ourselves for the repercussions we experience from an event or the person who instigates the event. Among the principal representations of original belief we find the judgments we pass on the things that happen to us. Deep down inside we represent this through a particularly distressing kinesthetic feeling expressed as, “I’m a zero,” or “I’m worthless,” or “Nobody loves me,” or “I’m completely abandoned.” These expressions bring us back to a dimension which is beyond painful inner states; they reflect the hidden psychical reality which is present in everybody’s life, and independent of the level of a person’s social success.

A:
All the old traditions recommend retreats and meditation exercises. When we isolate ourselves, we are confronted with ourselves. The ultimate objective of this withdrawal is to experiment with a dimension that puts an end to automatic, mockingly defiant thoughts. Meditating will expose the nature of what’s not quite right in us, what I call original belief. For me, practicing meditation only makes sense when I conceive of it as a discipline that prepares my nervous system to confront the apparent reality of separation, instead of running away from it. It’s impossible to live the dimension of pre-sensory perception without being able to remain upright in the almost unbearable feeling of extreme solitude. As long as I’m not yet capable of this, the feeling of solitude will be experienced as real. When I become capable, this same feeling will mutate into a perception which recognizes itself in everything-the torment will cease. The feeling of solitude doesn’t disappear, but it’s no longer felt as isolation or separation.

A:
Yes. The idea that existing phenomenon have a beginning and an end comes from perceiving them as distinct from one another. Perceiving them as distinct is not at all wrong, they are of course also distinct, but being distinct isn’t what characterizes them at the essential level. By placing my attention on the common denominator of everything that exists, nature, human inventions, the differences between people, as well as the apparent beginning and end of all these phenomena, I perceive that the beginning and the end of something or someone, myself included, are epiphenomena of my own perception and my own conception of existence. From the point of view of pre-sensory perception, the importance of a beginning and an end fades.

A:
Except for the instinctive fears that we also find in animals, most of the fears that humans experience hide a humility that a person has not known how to take on. We can distinguish two kinds of fear:
(1) First of all, the fear (for the identity) of questioning and reevaluating ourselves. This fear originates from the same source as the fear of physically dying. Intellectually, we know we can die at any moment. As long as we continue to forget this reality, we produce all kinds of sub-fears. Not repressing them becomes possible only after personal work on ourselves has rendered the nervous system capable of facing the reality of our own physical death at each instant. Even though original belief can’t do anything about death, it manages to convince its owner (without his or her knowing it) of the opposite. In addition to that, every time we’re confronted with the ramifications of original belief, we run the risk of encountering a fear. This fear isn’t just a mental invention based on representations. It acts as a buffer against the shock of confronting original belief. It’s very enriching to study the mechanisms of fear (as NLP proposes to do), to dis-associate ourselves from the fear at the very moment it arises (especially when a fear seems particularly justified to me), and to learn not to believe in it anymore.
(2) A completely different kind of fear is that which comes from our intimate values, and which is called in German “Ehrfurcht”. “Ehr” can be translated to reverence/awe and “Furcht” means to apprehend the reevaluation of our identity because there is a premonition of being submerged by something (de) vast (ating). Ehrfurcht’s “fear” knows that I overvalue the role that my identity plays. It’s a real “fear” that isn’t based on representations and that is accompanied by an unforced, natural humility. It’s accompanied by a profound emotion of reverence for all creation around me and to which I belong.

A:
The nightmares of childhood can be seen as being directly linked to the establishment of original belief in the nervous system. Without them, the human organism wouldn’t be able to assimilate the incoming restrictions from the surrounding world, and a child wouldn’t be able to develop his/her identity. When identity is well established, nightmares occur to reestablish the psychical balance after the unexpected coming of a dramatic event for which a person hasn’t yet been able to find an adequate reaction. As a general rule, personal work to become detached from original belief also triggers nightmares, of which the principal characteristic is the absence of distressing emotions.

A:
The question about problems, bad luck, illness, and so on, is one of the main questions that we ask ourselves in order to understand the enigma of life. All religions offer models that try to explain these phenomena. We can penetrate these mysteries neither with the intellect nor with the heart. Work on original belief requires us to affirm, to assume responsibility for, to live the entirety of a life.

A:
Original belief is a dead end street.

Réponse:
First, we have to look for the way out with an overlapping impossibility of turning back, just until we are utterly exhausted. At some point, with a little bit of luck, an atomic bomb will fall and blow up the guy who created the dead end street.

A:
A telescoping with self.

A:
The existential destiny of an individual is located outside of the standards that society offers us. When we are in contact with essential value, we express this destiny. In this sense, it is the only “sure value” which is immutable because it’s disconnected from the values and rules that are necessary for social life. All societies offer us an ethical code that, at the very least, is based on the rules of good and bad. Empirically, we can observe that everywhere there are people who express the two extremes, most of them being somewhere in between the two, depending on the circumstances. What is defined as good or bad varies from one culture to another. Let’s start from the presupposition that throughout all cultures, in each human being, there’s an innate code which is independent of cultural values, and which acts sometimes more, sometimes less, as a reference concerning our behavior towards others, ourselves, and our environment. I call this innate code “intimate values”. Intimate values come directly from the pre-sensory perception with which we were born. They carry the memory of all the phenomena originating from the same source and they are all linked to one another. However, contrary to pre-sensory perception, they are very rarely completely forgotten. We have to forget pre-sensory perception during the construction of original belief in order to acquire an identity that will help us to forge the necessary tools for life in society. Original belief is manifested in functional life through self-interest–my interest versus the interest of the other or of nature. This conflict is lessened by intimate values. Furthermore, among most human beings, they function as a “call-to-order” that prevents people from directing their entire identity into self-interest. We could establish a “scale of corruption”–the more I pursue self-interest as an adult, the more I’m forced to repress intimate values. (Capitalism is the economic system that corresponds the most to the often conflicting encounter between self-interests, where everyone is trying to accumulate power and money at the expense of the other. Economists call this “competition”. At the functional level, we have to play the game of self-interest as long as we live in this kind of society.) The more I repress intimate values, the further I get from my true nature that in a natural way respects all other creatures and all creation. In other words, the more I decide to let myself be corrupt, (the more I follow my self-interest), the more I reinforce my separation with existence. At the same time, each time I act like this, I validate of going counter to my intimates values. Sometimes this can go all the way to committing crimes. I can also try to make the decision to follow the ethical rules that my intimate values indicate to me. Just the same, no one has ever lived a life without breaking the rules of intimate values, or a life without conflicts with ourselves or with others. Why? Because as long as original belief acts, we’re obliged to express our self-interest, whether we want to or not. At the same time, if we want to rediscover our origins, we can’t disregard our intimate values. It’s even thanks to their presence that we can sense the possibility of liberation. Taking intimate values into consideration in our actions should be experienced as a conscious and voluntary act that comes from no ideology and looks for no profit or gain. Only this way of proceeding within ourselves is the guarantee that it’s not self-interest acting on its own account. At the same time we become capable of considering the self-interest of the other as being just as legitimate as our own. So it isn’t a question of going against self-interest, neither in myself, nor in the other, but rather of taking into consideration our intimate values in our actions, to feel the common nature of everything that exists. Some people call that “loving”.

A:
At some point in our lives, we’re all confronted with the way we’ve been living up until now. People who have been through dramatic experiences and have foreseen physical death frequently bear witness to a sudden awareness of the relativity of their ethical values as they had experienced them up until that point, to such a degree they say they feel they never really lived until then. Some make peace with those around them when they know they’re going to die. Why? Physical death is also the end of identity. When identity is confronted with physical death, it knows that its personal ambitions are going to cease. Personal ambitions are generally influenced by self-interest. The more I base things on the values of self-interest, the more I automatically have to go against the self-interest of someone else or nature. Essential value isn’t influenced by all that. It only reveals itself to the person who has learned not to give in to the temptation to hang on to his/her self-interest. This is, however, only a preparatory condition. To incarnate our essential value, it’s absolutely necessary to leave dualistic, good/bad thought behind, to change logical levels. The good/bad dichotomy is situated at the functional logical level, while essential value is at the existential logical level. By confronting ourselves with our original belief we authorize ourselves to feel humility in the sense of feeling our weakness, our vulnerability. All our thoughts that the misfortunes of life were someone else’s fault or due to circumstances no longer hold water. In the deepest part of our being comes humility, due to an elating humiliation that consumes our self-interest. This attitude is manifested by a kind of modesty, a natural and unforced simplicity which no longer judges in terms of good/bad, and which just is. Essential value can only express itself in a lasting way when original belief has ceased to act.

A:
Hermits who have chosen total solitude as a way of life are rare. Either they are looking for their original belief, or they’ve found it and savoring solitude is a voluntary choice. The simplicity that I’m talking about is an attitude which we live peacefully within the intimacy of our being, and is entirely independent of outer circumstances. It isn’t in contradiction with the external behavior that I adopt when I’m negotiating a rebate on my new car. Most of our social activities take on a playful aspect. A few of the conditions for accessing this tranquility of mind include the voluntary renunciation of conviction-thoughts such as: society owes me… , so-and-so owes me… , and so on.

A:
“Doing” refers to the functional logical level, “being” refers to the existential logical level. We have to distinguish between “being” conscientious and “doing” conscientiously. A person who is conscientious makes use of a particular kind of attention that allows him/her to do things conscientiously. This attention is directed to the action itself, before aiming at the result of the action or the result of the result of the action. This attention carries within it the foresight that all phenomena are interconnected. When we’re conscientious about what we do, we also know that we’re collaborating with the unnamable in us–we are parts of a whole. All throughout the history of humanity being conscientious has been considered an honorable value. This doesn’t come primarily from the fact that we appreciate quality. Being conscientious in our creations as well as in our relationships is a requirement in the quest for the essential.

A:
I don’t recommend self-observation because generally it’s the “I” who observes itself. In addition to that, it’s easier to be attentive when we pay attention to the suggestions of our intimate values. When we compel ourselves to be linked with the purity and innocence that is our state of being and which we find among all children, intimate values express themselves naturally, above and beyond all ethical codes. Ingenuity surpasses intellect, which prefers complexity. We only have to remember it in our hearts.

A:
In these kinds of situations, if we forget that our self-interest is just as present and legitimate as that of the other, then we become hypocrites in spite of ourselves. Intimate values emerge from the unnamable and when attention is focused on them, my self-interest as well as the self-interest of the other are side issues. It isn’t a question of considering intimate values as being more admissible than self-interest, but of revealing the ingenuity of self-interest.

A:
When there are no expectations, we’re forced to confront ourselves with our self.

A:
The answer depends on the point of view I take. In the reality of the person who lives pre-sensory perception this difference doesn’t exist, because pre-sensory perception is by definition non-discriminating perception–it doesn’t discern phenomena. Sensorial perception doesn’t stop functioning when we access pre-sensory perception. The two always coexist. However, once I have rediscovered pre-sensory perception I know (and this isn’t intellectual knowing) that at each moment, everything that I perceive sensorially is only an extension of pre-sensory perception. I can also answer your question starting from sensorial perception. I see, I hear, I feel, I taste, and I smell. If I trace back through the logical levels, becoming less and less specific, and taking my senses less and less into consideration, I will necessarily come to the origins of perception. As if I were playing a little brain game, I can ask myself the question, “what makes me perceive with the senses?” Of course, I won’t stop at the typical kinds of responses, which are only models, such as: “it’s the auditory nerve which is stimulated,” and so on. To obtain an answer that will satisfy me, I have to drop all the explanations given by science, and refer resolutely to myself, with the attitude of a scientist seeking his/her own origins, excluding everything I’ve heard or read about this subject, and excluding everything I repeat in inner dialogue as well as everything that I’ve memorized. As if my past had never existed. After that, I will succeed in being present in what I call immediate-sensorial perception–me perceiving. I continue to abstract: “what is this immediate-sensorial perception?” After a while, I’ll manage to conclude–the “me perceiving” becomes “perceiving”. The “I” has provisionally disappeared. All that remains is pure and nonseparating perception (between me and all that surrounds me). So, at the furthest level of abstraction, the “I” that perceives disappears temporarily. All that’s left is pre-sensory perception. While remaining in this pre-sensory perception, I go back, becoming more concrete, more specific. I reappear, I perceive with my senses. If I manage to remain in pre-sensory perception, I’ve “won”–what reappears is no longer the “I” that thinks it’s the center of the universe, it’s a transformed “I” that likes playing its executive role without pretension. Furthermore, it now participates in an active and creative way in the development of personal destiny. Here’s a schema that describes this process:

 

Pre-sensory perception less specific
————|————————————————————————-|—————————
Immediate-sensorial perception |
| |
Sensorial perception more specific

 

To sum things up, we can say the difference between pre-sensory perception and sensorial perception only exists when I place myself from the beginning in sensorial perception that, although it emanates from pre-sensory perception, acts as a filter that veils the access to it. This question can also be answered with a Zen story:
Disciple: What is the way of truth?
Master: Can you hear the flowing of the river?
Disciple: Yes.
Master: If so, that is the way.

A:
First of all, it isn’t a phenomenon and it isn’t representable. On the other hand, it’s everywhere. If we take the presupposition that everything that exists is energy, it’s this energy. However, this energy doesn’t exist in a “pure state”, it always manifests itself through existing and perceivable phenomena.

A:
They’re miracles today. Tomorrow they’ll be normal. And tomorrow there will be other miracles that don’t yet exist today. From the point of view of pre-sensory perception, there’s no real question concerning unexplainable phenomena. As long as the “I” takes itself for something it’s not, it needs explanations. To this end, it creates models and beliefs while forgetting at the same time that no explanation can be definitively satisfying. Miracles lose their attraction when we become the miracle of all miracles that is creation, that is life.

A:
Most of the time when we talk about clairvoyance, we presume that it involves Madame X who’s going to predict what’s going to happen in the future of Mr. Y. The faculty of anticipation that I’m talking about goes hand-in-hand with pre-sensory perception; it’s a sub-phenomena of the abolition of original belief. We can in no way acquire it through any kind of apprenticeship or learning, and it is neither innate nor a gift. When we no longer live under the influence of original belief, we perceive much more clearly with our senses, and the evaluations we have of situations encountered are obscured neither by preconceived notions nor our self-interest. We’re therefore capable of observing and considering even more parameters. The more information I have about a given situation, the more I can anticipate its development. This occurs in an inner state of permanent expectation, without clinging (clinging/holding on = belief) to a particular development.

A:
These phenomena are there as long as original belief acts. Each appearance of these tormenting inner states brings us back to original belief, to separating identity, and becomes the occasion for personal work. A person who lives in pre-sensory perception can’t be afraid in the way with which we’re typically familiar. S/he’s conscious that at every moment illness, accidents, financial ruin, death, and mourning are a part of life and anything can happen. On the other hand, identity needs to repress these “negative” thoughts, it finds the confrontation with these subjects threatening and dangerous. Nevertheless, even in the most outrageous and humiliating situations, the “solution” can only take place at the pre-sensorial level, which doesn’t judge events.

A:
There isn’t any. Time also acts as a filter. It’s a model that allows us to structure our functional life. From Einstein we know that our model of time isn’t universal. But even Einstein’s discoveries concerning the relativity of time are only models themselves that have enlarged the understanding of time for some. Pre-sensory perception is located outside of time, in the absolute, it doesn’t even refer to the infinite, or eternity. At the same time, it’s present in all we perceive, and also in the models of time.

A:
Yes. The faculty of memorization and time belong to “I’s” references at the functional level. The correct functioning of what I call “internal memory” is based to a large degree on the correct functioning of personal motivation. In psychotherapy, it’s a well-known fact that a good memory depends on the satisfaction we find in our activities, among other things. Failure, bankruptcy, illness, and so on, can thwart motivation and might impair the faculty of memorization. Going to the extreme, in observing people who have Alzheimer’s disease, we can, in fact, notice from the exterior that something comparable to a dissolution in identity has taken place. Apparently, memory is directly linked with identity. To access pre-sensory perception we have to be ready to temporarily lose the faculty of memorization.

A:
Obviously. The greater part of memory is supported by the personal motivation of identity. When the identity crumbles, the faculty of memorization crumbles at the same time. It becomes a bit of a miracle to be able to continue functional life during a certain time. Little by little we get used to it; a new way of remembering events and people settles in, that I call “external memory”. It no longer depends on personal motivation, which has ceased to exist. In pre-sensory perception I know I’m connected to everything around me–I perceive the development of events as a process in perpetual motion to which I belong. I’m aware that I permanently perceive in an underlying way the entirety of different contexts as well as the links that are between them. External memory is the memory of the interconnection of these contexts down to their slightest detail.
The needs of the current context automatically bring out what I need to know to be able to respond.

A:
Yes-no-yes-no.

A:
Yes-no-yes-no.

A:
Cohabitation between the existential logical level of pre-sensory perception and the functional logical level of sensorial perception occurs harmoniously. We can’t aspire to pre-sensory perception as long as we believe it’s dichotomous to functional life. Since we’re no longer subjected to inner states, everyday life is enriched at all levels.

A:
They don’t disappear, but the importance I attribute to them diminishes. Depending on the projects I have in mind, I produce stimulating or demotivating inner states, and it’s the “I” that judges them as such. A person living in pre-sensory perception pays hardly any more attention to his/her inner states. S/he notices them without according a particular importance to them.

A:
As long as “I” believes itself to be the bellybutton of existence, it’s better for it to find itself in pleasant, inner states. A person who has accessed pre-sensory perception establishes him/herself in his/her being in temporarily losing all motivation to act. Little by little s/he learns to respond to the demands of the surrounding social life without there being any personal motivation. S/he falls into agreement and often in love with the diverse contexts in which s/he circulates. The different inner states (feeling good, feeling bad, etc.) are reduced to the inner state from whence they came – “being”. “Being” is the common denominator of all inner states. Here, personal motivation no longer acts, but rather natural motivation, which is at the origin of all that evolves and takes into consideration the interconnection of all that exists.

A:
The social strategies that are ingrained within us and necessary to functional life such as personal motivation, the faculty of memorization, as well as beliefs and judgments, have produced in our nervous system an effect of dependence comparable to drug addiction, right from the very beginning of our arrival on this planet. We frequently feel pre-sensory perception brushing by lightly, mostly without realizing it. If we want to consciously live it, in a permanent way, we will become aware of nervous manifestations similar to the withdrawal symptoms of an addict without drugs. Since our early childhood, we’ve become used to living with social strategies to be able to participate in social life, but if we go beyond necessity by maintaining an attachment to these strategies, we will deprive ourselves of contact with our origins. The process of liberation is a continual struggle against the intoxicating effect of social strategies that are the constituent elements of our separating identity (and not a struggle against these strategies themselves). Generally, physical discomfort is a part of this process.

A:
Pre-sensory perception may only be recognized within ourselves.

A:
The way daily life goes on is never the same from one instant to the next. Each day is different, each moment is a new moment, never lived before.

A:
We have to distinguish between “doing” and “being”. What I do in my life isn’t what my life is. In my actions, I can succeed or fail and I can observe a linearity in time. At the level of being, I am before all else, and this “I am” is outside of time and outside of linearity. When I act knowing that I am, my acts leave no traces in me. It’s identity that produces the illusion of a linearity in life. The model of linearity is surely a very practical model for managing the succession of activities in everyday life, but it’s completely inept if we want to experience within ourselves the nature of our existence. Only immersion in all that’s unknown and unknowable can take us behind the scenes of life, which emerge from the undefined and the indefinable, of a creation not yet born. Pre-sensory perception is perfectly synchronized with non-linearity, while at the same time it brings to light the correlation between phenomena. The linearity with which we construct our defined and knowable models is a specificity born from pre-sensory perception.

A:
Normally we recognize ourselves by what we do, by our actions (notably those that put us in a good light), and especially by our emotional reactions in relation to events and people. This recognition isn’t a permanent “state of being”, it pops up more or less often to then disappear once again. It’s subject to the fluctuations of life which are about as predictable as the weather. The recognition of self in pre-sensory perception is a recognition that’s present all the time in all circumstances, and depends on nothing. Not only do I know who I am and what I am, I know that I am at one with my me in an ultimate intimacy.

A:
Nothing.
An immeasurable perceptive richness.
A normality that couldn’t be more insignificant. A simplicity of heart.
A gratitude towards existence. A freshness in each instant. Innocence.
Nothing.

Reply:
We’re all in the same boat.

Reply:
You can begin to mentally represent (but not in everyday life!) the possibility to act without purpose, outside of the conditioning to do everything with a purpose; imagine a dimension inside yourself that does what needs to be done as an obligation before setting a goal.

Reply:
Remove the fear by convincing yourself that the progress of your social life remains unchanged.

Reply:
The “I-from-my-personal-interest” becomes the “I-am-the-ultimate-value-that-expresses-itself” as Steve Jourdain would say. A ripe and mature “I” knows that the quest of the ultimate does not make life easier or more difficult; a new way of being emerges, in anticipation of a modified subjective “reality”: the events encountered in one’s life take place regardless of how one treats them in the nervous system.

Reply:
He who says thought, says model and language. Everything that is said or is written is a descriptive or interpretative model, we will not find the slightest trace of the event: the word soap is not the soap (soap = the event of perception). When we think, we are in a meta position relative to the event or in relation to the idea that we have of it. In this sense, we can say that the thought creates time: there is a time lag between thought and what this thought refers to. Thought is also creating memory: I can find no memory of a time that I spent without thinking. The pre-sensory perception refers primarily outside of time, that is to say outside of thought and outside of the model. Generally I feel that I think my ideas, I model my creativity. When I think “pre-sensorially” I have the impression that “it” thinks my ideas, “it” models my creativity. Thinking is a special way of expressing the pre-sensory perception.

Reply:
And that’s not at all. It is even the opposite. For the one who lives it, it’s almost commonness. An extraordinary simplification of the unfolding of life. You cannot imagine what it is to be free of the expectations we have of life. It’s like being sick, weakened and poisoned for years and then regaining one’s strength.

Reply:
No. Generalizations find all their usefulness in the functional life. In the pre-sensory perception there is neither generalization nor selection, or distortion. These are functions that my mind puts into action as the context demands.

Reply:
It all depends on what you mean by active attitude. The different steps each time actually require an active attitude. It is also impossible not to be active, because our nervous system is active 24 hours a day. We know that the explorers and some major sports stars prepare their performance in every detail, sometimes for years. The quest for the essential, demands more effort, more vigilance, more directed work than these feats, because it involves our whole being. What we can do, must be done actively; by getting enough rest when one feels the need.

Reply:
The energy invested and the meticulous preparations of these performances are comparable to those that we must engage in the quest for the essential, but the objective and certain conditions necessary to achieve this are not the same. Thrill seeking through intellectual, emotional, sexual or physical feats or through spiritual exercises, are products of efforts produced by the identity in search of happiness. There are sometimes, during and often after these feats, a temporary increase in the hormones of happiness, which is known nowadays as endorphins and serotonin. What is referred to, is above all an extreme modification of internal states that goes along with a self-confirmation and/or a hetero-confirmation. To get involved with the whole being in the ultimate quest prepares us to be able one day, to give up (at the existential level) any result, any confirmation.

Reply:
I think there is none.

Reply:
I think there are as many reasons as there are men and women on planet earth.

Reply:
This is a question that concerns the private life. It can be asked only to yourself. A response from the heart is the only (response) permissible.

Reply:
There are moments in life when thoughts stop because we are deeply touched by the presence of someone or by an extraordinary event. When I fall in love, I think it is the other who is the cause. In reality, it is me who is the cause and effect simultaneously. From the perspective of the pre-sensory perception, all that I see every moment is sacred. The sacred is embodied by the profane in me through the essential value while preserving all its qualities.

Reply:
The identity fears suffering because it knows, without wanting to admit it, that every pain may bring out the unacceptable (for it): I am alone, I am separate from existence. The more suffering there is, the more awareness of loneliness there is. A disaster risks to reveal that we are alone and without recourse, the dilemma becomes obvious. Not fearing the suffering is only possible when we are liberated from our separating identity. There, we understand that we are linked as much with suffering as we are with the joy of life.
There are two kinds of calamities that can change the course of the life of a human being. In the first case (A) we suffer the consequences of our own personal interest/our own negligence or we suffer the consequences of the personal interest/negligence of a person or a group of individuals (wars, some famines, the destruction of the ecological balance with all its consequences, etc.) The second class of calamities (B) can strike at any moment as a fatality coming out of nowhere, without apparent human cause, such as the premature death of our child, genetic diseases, earthquakes etc. Now we have to make a second distinction, are you currently directly confronted with such calamities or do you fear them? And if so which ones?

Reply:
Case A: It should be noted that currently, the inner values of communities are not sufficiently taken into account to give back to the world even a little bit of what it gives to us. The personal interest of the collective identity takes precedence over the inner values. This creates a real threat to the survival of the planet. Generally, neither the leaders nor those who elect them, do not put their focus sufficiently on inner values. To elect someone without ensuring his intentions, makes us as much responsible as he is for the continuation of the decline. The fear that one day, (we will) suffer the consequences of the acts of our own personal interest/our own negligence or others personal interest/negligence is in a certain sense justified. It reminds us of our powerlessness and our loneliness. Thus it can serve to affirm us in our efforts to seek existential issue. Case B: We cannot avoid automatically incidents “marked by destiny.” The fact that we are lacking foresight should not lead us to repress them. On the contrary. Be aware that the course of my life can suddenly take a turn previously inconceivable, transform my fears into vigilance, into self-remembering, into “Ehrfurcht” (?). Anything can happen at any time. The identity has good reason not to care too much about that. Being forced to make judgments to ensure its survival, it considers the inner confrontation with the possibility of being part of a collective or individual drama as threatening. The identity cannot grasp the whole of existence. Only when we put ourselves in the off-identity dimension, can we understand the law of evolution (according to Hindu tradition) concerning all that is taking shape and which comprises three elements: create–maintain–destroy. Everything that exists is subject to this law. It acts permanently, we do not need to believe it. It is clearly observable in all phenomena. Furthermore, we must consider the actuation of one of the three components as random. We can go with or fight against. But we can never escape it.

(?) “Ehrfurcht” is a German word that knows no English-language equivalent. “Ehr” can mean reverence/respect and “Furcht” means: understanding the questioning of his identity, because there is a feeling of being overwhelmed by something devastating. The “fear” of Ehrfurcht knows I overvalue the role that my identity plays. It is a real “fear” which is not based on representations and which is accompanied by a naturally non-forced humility. It is accompanied by deep emotion of reverence vis-a-vis of creation around me and including me.

Reply:
When we no longer fear them, we are able to find the right answers when the time comes.

Reply:
Keeping the identity in good condition consumes huge amounts of vital energy. Moral fatigue comes regularly to give a rest to the nervous system experiencing a weariness to cling to the internal memory, the representation of time, personal motivation etc., and the fight against manifestations of the original belief. This kind of tiredness consumes vital energy. Another kind of fatigue, consuming under certain conditions the mechanisms that maintain the conflict of separation can occur during the work on the original belief. Whenever it manifests in us, we find an inner resistance which can also take the form of fatigue or boredom until exhaustion. This is one way of the original belief to oppose violently to be highlighted. When we learn not to fall asleep during these times, as advocated by some traditions including Zen, we can consciously participate in the process of its disintegration.

Reply:
Yes. The so-called psychic life is maintained by our beliefs, responsible for our moral suffering. At the same time, the psychological mechanisms, of which essentially the beliefs, act as a buffer to absorb shocks we experience in life. The ups and downs, then the work on oneself, when one sets out to the quest for the essential, can give the impression that there is an evolution. But there is evolution only when we believe in it. The pre-sensory perception does not change. It’s not stagnation either. It is born for the first time in every moment.

Reply:
Ideologies are multiple. These are cultural collective beliefs that permeate all of society. We find many expressions of them such as patriotism, political parties, associations and religions. They have in common to help support the separating identity. Adhere to a collective ideology can be a sign of an immature “I”: his identity needs others to assert itself. An identity accessing to maturity intuitively knows it’s alone, it denounces as a decoy that any solidarity based on a belief would provide a solution for itself or could change something for affairs in the society. Detecting an ideology (that is to say membership of beliefs supported by a group) in others is relatively easy and useful in functional communication. We should be cautious when we observe emerging in ourselves, an assent on convictions issued by someone (else).

Reply:
There are in the literature a multitude of interpretations of this very ancient expression. The law of karma is also called the law of cause and effect; understanding it, is part of the very first learning of human beings and animals beings. We had indeed to realize very early in our childhood that things in life are changing according to the schema cause/effect. Integrating it into ones mental organization is essential to the functional life. My stomach causes a hungry feeling and I cry to call my mother. Later I cause the starting of the chainsaw and I get the fact that the chain starts to rotate. I cause the purchase of flowers and I get the effect of a pleasant smile from my wife. We link in permanence the phenomena we encounter in life by giving them the cause on the one hand and the effect on the other hand. At the same time, we are not aware that it is we, who stipulate this law by a presupposition-belief, certainly useful, and very functional. But we forget in general, that this presupposition-belief is among the main obstacles to understanding the meaning of life. It is said that an “awakened one” is no longer subject to the law of karma. He simply realized that the cause-effect rightfully belong to the functional world, the scientific community etc.; he ceased to believe that this is a universal law. Another condition for “escape” to the law of karma is to stop to maintain (mentally), predilections on the course of events. We can never penetrate the mysteries of life as long as we believe in the existence of causes. From the perspective of the existential, there is no cause: there are only effects.

Reply:
The idea behind the word “karma” refers to a tool of spiritual work on myself. When we deal with our inner values, we corrode the roots of our consciousness. What is the intention behind all self-corruption? When I follow the suggestions of my personal interest in a particular project, I am convinced that at the same time I get effects favorable and beneficial for me, causing causes that are in violation of my intimate values. If I intentionally yield to this temptation, I have to repress the fact that in doing so I maintain and I feed my own separation syndrome. I produce, as one says, karma for myself, because I strengthened my belief in my separation. Moreover, this expression is not suitable in any case, to have explanations of phenomena external to us, and especially not to interpret or judge the actions or attitudes of someone else. When we want to escape, as one says, the law of karma, we have to (among other things) compel ourselves to reflect on the personal intention behind our actions. Making the right choice is not always the easiest choice.

Reply:
I think you’re referring to what I call “karmic scenarios”. These are scenarios that involve a take of preconsciousness of karmic law and taking place in the way you describe them, workable for our purposes, provided that we have made the decision that we did not want to ignore our innermost values. Throughout our childhood to adolescence, we have to learn the laws of self-interest to be able to integrate into society. Among the major conflicts of a youngster during puberty is that of personal interest in opposition to his inner values. The teenager is forced to leave one day the last remaining illusions and dreams of his childhood in order to assert his identity/personal interest. Taking sides fully for personal interest is almost impossible, the conflict continues to braise under the surface. This is so for a while to navigate between inner values and personal interest. Karmic scenarios are triggered by a sudden self-assertion of inner values in a given action (good choice). This liberating awareness is often resented by the different personal interests of the environment, which risk to strive. The relational pandemonium takes shape. In the end, often there is a break and a new stage begins.

Reply:
I cannot accede to this expression. It is very difficult to assess this situation, even after the fact. In each karmic scenario there is a multitude of different aspects and a multitude of opportunities for work on oneself. In the best case–and this we will know only much later–we will have solved a part of the conflict between values and inner personal interest.

Reply:
You’ll know when you’ll know. I cannot say more.

Reply:
First, these subjects are models, presuppositions, interpretations invented by man in order to give himself explanations. Everyone chooses among these models according to his culture more or less voluntarily what suits him. As for luck/bad luck, it’s always an arbitrary judgment. There is no objective place that allows us to place ourselves, to attribute to an event, the qualifier of lucky or unlucky. According to the view I take, every situation can be considered lucky or unlucky. Two Sufi stories may indicate that direction:

WE WILL SEE

A horse breeder had a magnificent herd, who lived most of the year freely on its extensive grasslands. The man was considered rich, he had a healthy son, and more than one of his neighbors had already said, “How lucky you are!” The man had always merely replied: “We’ll see.”
One morning the man had seen that the most beautiful stallion, the prince of the herd, left the usual meadows, and was believed lost forever. The neighbors said: “What a pity, it was on him that was based primarily the life of this beautiful flock! ” The man said: “We’ll see.”
A few weeks later, one evening appeared the beautiful black stallion head over the fence of the paddock: he was not alone, but accompanied by a large group of wild horses, who remained on the land with the herd. The neighbors were admiring: “Gosh! This is your herd expanded considerably congratulations!” The man said, “We’ll see.”
Among the new wild arrived, was a young colt, wonderful but very wild and seemingly indomitable, who was not letting anyone approach him. When it came time to prepare him to be mounted, everybody was trying to control him and abandoned after a severe dust bath. Only the son of the man had, after a long and patient work, succeeded to make a friend of him, and only he rode that horse now. Until, after an unexpected kick, he fell to the ground with such violence that his leg was broken and left no hope of a full recovery. The neighbors lamented: “Here is your son crippled, perhaps for life If only he had never met this foal…” The man said only: “We’ll see.”
Months passed, and there was a war: a very hostile neighboring tribe, attacked, and all the young men were automatically integrated into the army. The son of man, with his bad leg, was the only young person to stay at home; and he would be the only survivor of his generation at the end of the war…

CHANCE OF THE ONE CAN BE THE BAD LUCK OF THE OTHER

A woman had two daughters; the eldest was married to a horticulturist, the youngest with a potter, each participating in the work, joys and cares of the husband. This woman loved her daughters, and she thought for a long time how to make them really happy, how to find a gift that can be really useful and help them. “I will pray for them”, she said. And as the birthday of the eldest approached, she prayed for a long good rain, fresh, benevolent, so that her vegetables and her fruits will be the tastiest, best developed. And her prayer was answered: just on the anniversary day, a fresh and tepid rain began to fall, which lasted two weeks. After five days, the woman was surprised to see her youngest daughter who was coming to visit her early in the morning. You could see she had been crying. “Mom, it’s over. My husband will go bankrupt. Help us if you can and welcome your grandchildren under your roof, while we two go find work elsewhere.”–“But what happened to you?”– “My husband had received a large order from the court, for making fine pottery for the Princess who is getting married. He pledged to finish this delicate work by a specific date. When all was shaped, he prepared the oven, it has everything cooked with great care-and at the moment to pull the pieces out of the oven to dry them, it started raining. Usually it never rains here at this time of year, and this time it does not stop even at night. All of his work was ruined because he could not dry the parts.”

When I cease to interpret events that I meet, I am lucky: I do not fear the bad luck anymore and I don’t hope for luck anymore. Instead of assigning a judgment to the situations encountered, a comprehensive assessment settles on one of these, characterized by the absence of a priori and interpretations. Furthermore, the absence of judgments allows us, always in the present moment, to understand the non-mental and non-emotional meaning of events, and respond appropriately.

Reply:
We are once again in the realm of beliefs and models developed by different cultures concerning existential questions. Life is. And we are free to speculate on the either-called truths hidden. As humans we are very able to convince us of something in order to no longer be able to discern between facts and beliefs. It is proved that reincarnation exists, that foresight is, that UFOs exist. And it is proved that all this does not exist. When we believe in something, there is a good chance that with enough perseverance, we fall on subjective evidence than what or what we believe really exists. Moreover, when–for example–the belief in reincarnation has a sufficient support, it risks becoming reality. It is the same with ideas like “chance that does not exist”; it is still the same with speculation about the recurrence and on predestination. When I believe in something, I try to find the confirmation. Everyone disposes of personal strategies that allow him to be convinced of something. But it is relatively easy to come across someone who is convinced of the contrary: the war of beliefs is imminent. The Buddha said, one who awakens to his true nature will have lived its last incarnation. He’s right: when God is falling on us, we no longer believe in anything. And since we no longer believe in anything, we no longer believe also, in reincarnation. It follows that we are living our last incarnation. Reincarnation or not, to awaken in the sense of the Buddha, we must give up all beliefs, both those of reincarnation and there is only one lifetime. The life lives. In the present instant. Point. Everything else is futile mental speculation that leads to something (too).

Reply:
In life there are very few self-taught people. Usually most people who excel in their field have had one or more masters who have passed on their know-how. The transmission is a universal phenomenon in humans and that starts when we are children. Our parents, our relatives and our teachers are the first to try to transfer us their skills. Everywhere there are real experts, incompetents and charlatans.

Reply:
By observing. Imagine that I want to learn the mechanic profession and I wish to find a competent teacher; I do what? I talk to him and I observe the way he works and collects information, his didactic skills, his way of behaving vis-à-vis the other, his reputation, etc. If his approach suits me I ask him if he agrees that I become his apprentice. Then he will tell me what he expects of me.

Reply:
There is never any certainty. This is because we cannot perceive the other as he is, objectively. Do not forget that our own senses, our values and our beliefs filter what we see, the map (which allows us to orient ourselves on the planet) is not the territory (life on the planet); these are limitations with which we must live. Someone else remains forever elusive.

Reply:
Yes.

Reply:
Some charlatans in the field of spirituality found an organization based on personal interest. The capitalist system openly proclaims its adherence to personal interest. In these organizations it is disguised as a pseudo-religious missionary-redemptive ideology which furthermore, hides the true intentions (power, money, perpetual affirmation of his vanity/pride) of the founder and his cronies. Most of these groups are structured hierarchically, which allows the big chief to legislate and impose his superiority. It disseminates promises of salvation for ever reported in a future that is never realized. When he announces to one of his followers that he has reached the highest level, the “master” will have already miraculously gained an even more supreme level. The flock, of course are elected and are part of the elite of humanity. Woe to him who leaves the organization, “If you adhered, all is promised to you, if you go away, all will be lost forever!”. On the adepts side, the scenario is not much more flattering: the secret dream that the grace of the chief and the “service” towards the organization, will one day liberate them from their misery, propels them, straight in the maze of corruption, that is to say, the abandonment of inner values, as the only way to climb the ladder to heaven.

Reply:
Let’s talk about the side of those or those who engage with him. Here are some clues that fall within my own “assault course”. I quickly realized that I had to commit myself with someone who “knows”. It was always very important for me to have this direct contact. I had several guides, and after a period of observation, I decided to act as if they were competent experts, that is to say, I tried to follow their proposals and their methodology. I know now that I never came across a charlatan. During this evolution I was forced to develop various internal attitudes in me that I still judge today as suitable for he who wishes to go to the end of his evolution. These attitudes are all equally important:

• Sincerity to oneself.
• Learn to ignore one’s own mental projections (representations) = to know to not believe one’s own reading of thoughts.
• Take one’s responsibility to society, work and family life; continue to patronize the “normal” people; refrain from behaving like someone special. “I’m not better; I’m not worth more than my neighbor or my co-worker.” Do not voluntarily give up his hobbies; giving them a playful nature.
• Reliability, know how to end an action, know how to go to complete a project.
• Commitment, that is to dare the relationship. Try to grasp the intent of the guide. Ask questions whose answer may be uncomfortable or inconvenient. Become active in research of this relationship. Especially not obey, but seriously consider proposals, suggestions, tips; listen them to the 3rd degree (often these indications are very discreet, sometimes voluntarily hidden). Be prepared to experience periods of confusion or embarrassment, without making the affairs of daily life suffer. Be prepared to receive shocks. Always refer to yourself: take responsibility regarding all that is going on in the relationship. When we learn to take our responsibilities, we are never in need of (blaming anything on anyone).
• Be careful: to have the project to want to understand on what criteria it determines what it does. “What does he understand that I do not yet understand – What does he live that I do not live?”
• Discriminate well between the functional life of the guide and his qualities as an instructor; do not believe that he is perfect or that he does not commit errors of judgement. The way he manages his life, concern only him. Start with the presupposition that he probably takes more responsibility than you do, for what he does and what he does not.
• Discretion, secrecy: anticipate the non-nameable by becoming “invisible” = live a normal life, without apparent presumption; be well grounded in the everyday.
• Develop “the listening of the heart” which is characterized among other things by controlling the internal dialogue and gives rise to a presentiment that all is one.
• Take care of yourself, of your own mental health; stop waiting for some kind of wellness or wellbeing from him; be clear about the futility of hoping for advantages from the relationship with him (especially concerning, the functional life).

Reply:
Behind what we call “feelings (emotional)” there is always the personal interest of the identity that legitimately likes to tie itself to the joys of present and who also legitimately hate the present pains. The past joys and sorrows, become representations, and personal interest makes them nostalgias, while it awaits the future joys. The future pains, it fears them. Although the pre-sensory perception is outside time, it manifests itself in the human being through the essential value, and this only in the present moment (which has always already passed by when we think of it). These present moments are collectible by what I call the “perceptual feelings” (not representable). Perceptual feelings are from another logical level and thus, clearly differentiated from emotional feelings (expressed all-out by the identity that looks for the labyrinthine complexity) due to their simplicity and their maneuverability. They emerge–always in the here and now–from a space (of absolute serenity and of eternal peace) infinite and timeless, generating a perceptual printing (non-representable) to be connected to all phenomena. An emotional feeling occupies the “front stage” and feeds itself with our identification with the object or about the subject of our feelings. An example: Giselle wanders quietly in nature, suddenly she thinks about her boss who the day before had unjustly suspected that she had a private phone call abroad. All her attention is immediately removed from the environmental perception and focuses on the incident. The perception of context retracts and gives way to a sentimental representation. This one is fed by identifying with it, the rest of the situation is occulted and the incident at work becomes more important to her than the blade of grass beside the road. Another example: think of two people who have by their behavior aroused in us strong reactions, one of anger and the other enthusiasm. We can see that, having focused our attention on anger or enthusiasm, not only have we temporarily lost contact with the whole context which we were in, but we were no longer aware of the relativity of these incidents over the whole of our life. The pre-sensory perception perceives simultaneously and without emotion, in a holistic optic, a phenomenon and the links that all phenomena weave in them. The universe is perceived as impersonal. The essence of existence is resolutely impersonal, and we cannot grasp it with our emotional feelings. It is through the essential value that we can awaken our perceptual feelings, to our personalized-sacred imprint, allowing us to perceive the soul of existence, in all its manifestations. Contrary to what might be or what we would like to believe, the true nature of phenomena (ourselves included) is not likely to be perceived by our emotional feelings. It is the essential value and the abolition of the original belief that allows us to born (again) to our souls, we leave behind our emotional feelings to welcome and recognize our perceptual feelings that put us again in touch with our spontaneity of yesteryear, when we were children–like the caterpillar who leaves herself, by welcoming the butterfly and recognizing herself in him.