On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
Thassa,
Good morning. The trigger is not happening. It doesn't seem to matter that I cant find the source of thought (the projector or the receiver). I go back to the "I am" feeling and "Who am I" question and the "headless" experiments of Ramanamaharshi, Nisagardatta and Harding. The first ends in a feeling of "self" that I am to stay in touch with and it moves from head to chest, sometimes light and sometimes very heavy feeling (but these are just feelings). The second results in a decidedly intellectual (I don't know!), if I can't find the source of thought or the receiver of thought than I could say "nothing", but that doesn't seem to matter as this nothing is then "looked for" with the same results....but the emotional drive and pattern of looking continue, and the WANT for them to stop also presents...another thought-feeling.
My thoughts regarding the matter of unacceptance. - I am in love with the idea of Dan as I prefer the feeling of pride and spin the positive aspects of a Dan story to "milk" it like a pride drug. I am afraid of dropping the idea of Dan. I fear the loss of control...the unknown next moment and prefer the lie of the history of an "I" which is essential in the provision of a pattern which will allow a prediction of the next moment. I know how full of shit I am and as soon as I stop spinning the story I pay the price of its history...its inertia.
Thank you for your time.
Dan
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail>
To: Dan <email@emailaddress>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: Trigger
Hi Dan,
I can certainly help you.
A couple of ground rules and questions if you'd like to try...
I help people see the reality of no self only, and do so in a very practical manner. Sometimes that doesn't suit the seeker as I don't reference any of the teachings, and instead work with you to check your own experience in reality. The method is very simple, so simple in fact, that it's often overlooked at first. But it's effective.
What I ask is that you put aside all spiritual teachings while we do this. Everything we do will be based in physical reality and verifiable fact. You can go back to them afterward, but for now they may cloud this part of the realization. With focus and honesty, we can be done with this within a week, possibly a bit more depending on how quickly we exchange emails and how focused the looking is.
If this sounds good for you, we can begin! :)
The question I have for you is,
What are your expectations for seeing no self? What do you suppose the shift might look like?
Thassa
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
Thassa,
That absolutely works for me. Thank you very much I so appreciate your willingness to do this.
What are your expectations for seeing no self?
A. Openess to everything as it comes (even the selection of one thing over another without spinning a story of "Well I guess this makes me "that sort of guy".), untouched by the ups and downs (emotions resulting from the story of who I am , history, and wanted future...if sadness is felt I want to experience sadness, if anger is felt I want to experience anger, but I don't want them to be filtered or created by a self image that MUST be this or that) Oneness (no separation and really immortality of being "nothing in particular" regardless of what that which does not die looks like). Oneness that opens me to seeing myself in everything but threatened by nothing. A release from the fear of death or insult. Surrender. I want to surrender and not feel as if I'm running the isolated show of Dan., building a Dan to worship. I don't know what it would visually look like other than what I see now without the individual personalization. I'm also thinking that I would like to be hollowed out...nothing unecessary needs to be here.
What do you suppose the shift might look like?
A. I suppose it would look like what I see now (half the world in front of me and where I feel myself to be in the unseen). I suspect the shift might feel like an openess that comes from the release of a limiting / containing idea. I suspect it would look different insofar as the importance placed on thoughts of identity are concerned. I suspect these would expand or be removed.
I can try and be more "to the point" and objective if I've missed the mark.
Thank you so much again.
Dan
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail> To: Dan <email@emailaddress>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 7:45 PM
Subject: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
Perfect. All of it. You've seriously given this a lot of consideration.
You should know that sometimes this realization results in a quick and hard "shift", and sometimes it's subtle. The reason for the subtle shift is simple. The fact of no self is already the case, and it's evident everywhere you look. It's already true. So, it's a matter of just recognizing that.
Another helpful thing to know is that this is the simplest truth you can imagine. When I say simple, I'm talking about how a child knows this, and how no intellect is required to see it. As a matter of fact, sometimes intellect can delay the seeing, because you can fall into thinking it through, reasoning, or trying to believe.
It's not a belief. It's verification.
Ok!
Let's get started.
Part 1
Take a look in front of you right now. Choose an object in the field of view and describe it in your mind. Note color, size, shape, texture. Try to describe everything about what you see.
Write out the description for me here, please.
Part 2
While still looking at that object, think about the last movie you really enjoyed watching. See a scene in your mind, and describe it. But keep looking at the object.
Write out a very brief description here.
Part 3
Try describing the object and the movie at the same time, and watch the thoughts. Do they happen simultaneously, or one at a time? Are you able to think about both at once or is there a sequence?
Try to think two thoughts at the same time.
Write out a very brief description of what happened when you did this exercise.
Thanks!
-t
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
TY!
Part 1.
"Take a look in front of you right now. Choose an object in the field of view and describe it in your mind. Note color, size, shape, texture. Try to describe everything about what you see.
Write out the description for me here, please."
White, approximately 6 or 7 inches, smooth in texture but there is a grainy surface if inspected closely, the top has a approx ¼ inch “lip” that juts out, and the entire piece is cylindrical with an empty center, somewhat discolored brown, and shadows fall onto its outer and inner aspects. The bottom is also “lipped” but it’s a recess approx .5 cm. There is a coffee inside a brownish white colored fluid and its room temperature to the touch. Its light weighing maybe a couple of oz’s. Its color is white and there appears to be a piece of tiny tape on the afore-described lip.
Part 2
"While still looking at that object, think about the last movie you really enjoyed watching. See a scene in your mind, and describe it. But keep looking at the object.
Write out a very brief description here."
There was a woman in a wedding dress running across the road of a somewhat busy street and her friends were in a dress shop as they just tried on dresses for her upcoming wedding. Earlier in the day they had eaten food from a Brazilian restaurant and now they were food poisoned. The woman makes it ¾ of the way across the street and she squats down and poops in her dress. LOL!! She states its coming, its coming and she poops in the dress while the women watch on the other side and one of the women says…”you’re really doing it, you’re really shitting in the street.” The movie was Bridesmaids and it was HILARIOUS!
Part 3
"Try describing the object and the movie at the same time, and watch the thoughts. Do they happen simultaneously, or one at a time? Are you able to think about both at once or is there a sequence?"
I can only alternate between the two and cannot think about both at once.
"Try to think two thoughts at the same time.
Write out a very brief description of what happened when you did this exercise."
It became apparent as I was trying to describe the movie while looking at the cup that I could not really focus on the cup if I was describing the movie. I couldn’t really focus on the movie if I was focused on the cup. It was quite pronounced. I also found “cup” thoughts slipping into the stream of recollection of the movie as I recalled the movie but my attention switched to the cup.
Dan
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail Dan <email@emailaddress>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
Terrific work and description, Dan. Thank you for doing the exercise with care. And! Bridesmaids was absolutely hysterical! :)
What the exercise shows is two things:
Mind does not exist except as a concept or label. There is no storage of thought, only presently arising thought, one at a time. "Mind" is often thought of as a collection, but that collection doesn't exist anywhere.
It also shows that thought is separate from reality. Completely. This isn't news, but it's a truth nearly completely ignored. We take the content of thought to be very real, or relate it to the world around us. This was a loose example, but in paying attention to the process of thought, we can see how it works.
So, a few things to consider:
1. Thought happens one at a time. There isn't a collection of thought or "mind". There is only singular thought.
2. Memory is thought that does not relate to presently existing reality.
3. Even presently arising thoughts do not necessarily refer to the present physical reality.
Watch how thoughts and memories can "disconnect" from an object, and yet the view of the object remains unimpeded.
Do the exercise with the body. Look at the hands without the thought, "my hands". For a second or two, let the "my" thoughts fall away. Then, look at the legs without the thought, "my legs". Just gaze at them. See how they exist even without the "me" or "my" thoughts, and how nothing about reality changes one bit without those thoughts.
Bring yourself back to thoughts of "my hands", then repeat the exercise a few times. Look at them without thought, then bring the thought back in.
What happens to the body without the thoughts? Can you say what the object even is? Does it "belong" to anything? Does it continue to exist in physical reality?
Please write down your findings.
Then, find a memory of "yourself" from childhood but continue to look at the body. A memory that's self-referent brings up the "I" thought. Notice how the memory replaces current thought and does not co-exist.
Let me know what you find.
Thassa
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
Thassa,
I have a couple of weeks off and obsess over this work so I'm rolling with it. I hope you don't mind. :-)
What happens to the body without the thoughts? Can you say what the object even is? Does it "belong" to anything? Does it continue to exist in physical reality?
Without thought the hand is just there as it appears to be of its own accord as are the legs. I do find that thoughts still enter...pink, goofy-looking, primative, small, but with as close to no thought as possible the hand seems to lose itself in the background as the attention becomes diffuse. The parts of the body do not seem to belong to me without the thought of "hand, leg, or mine, my". The ownership feeling is absent. You can't say what it is. It's not as if the thoughts stopped entirely as the goal came up on occassion and when this happened it seemed to have the aforementioned descriptives attached to it. Ex. No thought (thought)...look how it looks different, so primitive (thought), and then when this stopped it just blended into the background unless my eyes adjusted to see it. The hand does continue to exist in physical reality.
Then, find a memory of "yourself" from childhood but continue to look at the body. A memory that's self-referent brings up the "I" thought. Notice how the memory replaces current thought and does not co-exist.
Let me know what you find.
I noticed that my memory was of learning to ride a bike, but the memory picture was of a little boy (me) on a red bike being pushed by an old woman (my grandmother). I was watching the memory but from the third person view. (which isn't the point of the exercise, but what I saw). It was more of a recalled picture and then the thought "that's me over there and that's my grandmother over there", but then the thought was "I'm learning to ride a bike in this memory." It does replace current thought and they do not coexist. The memory drew attention away from the hand even. As the picture of the memory was constructed the details of the hand became less apparent., but the hand was still there
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail: Dan <email@emailaddress>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
Good. Two things I'll point out from this exercise.
Self is a thought that arises and is not inherent. Even when looking directly at what is thought of as a self, without thought, self is simply not there at all. It's a complete construct and overlay. See whether this holds true in experience. Test it out with the exercises given.
Secondly... Isn't it interesting how memory is in third person? Odd isn't it? That's because we are literally constructing a self upon the prompt to pull up a memory. And still, memory is simply thought. Thought is real... a real event. But the contents are not. They only *refer* to something. Sometimes those things are imaginary, and sometimes have a counterpart to what is contained in the environment.
Think of a unicorn.
Think of your self.
See how both thoughts occurred equally? Within the same conceptual space and had the same quality? The reason you know the unicorn isn't real is because you were taught that it doesn't exist, and you've never seen one.
Here's the kicker. You've never seen a self either. The difference is that you (the brain) was repeatedly taught that it does exist. This started as a baby and has been reinforced throughout "you", as a human's, entire life cycle. It has never been questioned until now.
Putting that together, you can see how self does not exist outside of thought, and that thought happens just one at a time. So what is happening to construct a self is a series of thoughts that pop up. It's literally a habitual thought pattern only and has no counterpart in reality. Self is twice removed! First it occurs only in thought and secondly it *appears* to be a continuous entity but simply is not. It's broken up by utter non existence of a self, probably for a good part of the time. When prompted by the environment, however, another thought pops, and there is an appearance of continuity, an impression of it always having "been there". But where?! It can't be found!
Does all of this hold true in "your" experience? Where are you, where is the self, outside of thought?
Please let me know what you find, and any objections/fear/hesitation that comes up.
Thanks!
thassa
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
Does all of this hold true in "your" experience? Where are you, where is the self, outside of thought?
Bear with me here please....
There is no "I" or "my" outside of thoughts. I believe its the reason people say "I'd like to die in my sleep.". This statement recognizes that without identity or posession there is no fear of loss. There is also no pain when one is unconscious such as in deep sleep or while under sedation. So this could also be responsible for the above statement .
My first fear is that each pain would impose an undeniable "my" or "I" unspoken. I.e. ..."if you dont think you exist go step in front of a bus."
It does strike me that "I" is always a redundancy to what is happening (but it points to prioritization...a prioritization that exists based on the quality of events...I would feel this hand hurt, but I dont feel your hand hurting if it were hit with a hammer. Doesn't this imply a reasonable priority for this hand...a sense of "my" as prioritization? But wouldn't this prioritization exist without "my"? What breaks the priority that seems to follow "my body"? It seems to follow it based on actual events where the depth of experience is greater both positive and negative when they happen to "my" body.
If the "I" and "my" are thoughts not created by "me" how do they get uncreated? I say this as there is a belief that a significant event needs to be present where the "self" is wiped out entirely and thereby the impulse to create it or look for it leaves.
Wow - Thats everything. Absolutely everything. Thank you so much for prompting me to write it out and I look forward to your reply. I apologize for the messiness of it, but I've looked at this inside and out at various times and may need an "outside lever to move the world".
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail> To: Dan <email@emailaddress>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
It's not possible to stop the "I" thoughts as they are ingrained patterns of thinking which occur in the brain. And we are indeed humans with a biological need to survive, as all life has. So, jumping in front of a bus isn't recommended for the human! The body would feel pain, but no self or I would be involved. It would be just pain occurring. That sounds odd, but check experience to see whether it's true. Pinch "your" leg. Why is an "I" thought necessary for the sensation?
Is an "I" needed for pain or joy? Or does it just arise? :)
But... the prioritization is in thought and force of habit too. There are other humans in the world. If you were to hit me with a hammer, this body and brain would experience a sensation based on a biological response to injury. The "I" would come in to claim it, as it comes in to claim everything. But it's completely unnecessary to the experience.
It's important to know that the thoughts and sense of "I" exists and is necessary for functioning in the world as it has evolved. There is no need to be rid of it or uncreate it, simply to see it for what it is... yep, just thought.
The body and brain takes care of all functioning perfectly as does all life.
Trees don't need an I to grow. Life doesn't need an I to exist.
Do you have pets? Observe how every response is automatic. There are patterns of behavior, and characteristics or tendencies, but is there a self or I?
Go for a walk to another room. Is there an I necessary for the legs to move and coordinate, for breathing or for beating the heart?
How about thought? Do You think thoughts, or do they just appear, then upon reflection the "I" attributed?
Can seeing be stopped or started?
What do you find?
thassa
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
"But... the prioritization is in thought and force of habit too. There are other humans in the world. If you were to hit me with a hammer, this body and brain would experience a sensation based on a biological response to injury. The "I" would come in to claim it, as it comes in to claim everything. But it's completely unnecessary to the experience.”
- Oh sh*t. You're not wrong. Without the "I" there is still experience, but "who experiences it"? Nobody as such...there may be a point of experience though...a point of increasing intensity as space is transversed. The establishment of a proximal relationship may be necessary in order for things to be experienced in a specific way, but there is no "I" there just potential to experience in a specific way, but its always doing this with or without an "I". I mean if I were strapped to a tree in the desert and only had the experience of being strapped to a tree I would be no less or more existent then if I had all kinds of experiences. I was insisting on subject-object, but its all as much "subject" as it is anything. The experience varies, but experiences vary with or without an "I" thought. The variation doesn't create identity via intensity or lack thereof. I'm no more "me" on a roller coaster than I am walking down the street (even though the experience of movement is that much more intense on the roller coaster.) So, the intensity of experience even in the "I" paradigm never implied identity....merely the "I" did.
“It's important to know that the thoughts and sense of "I" exists and is necessary for functioning in the world as it has evolved. There is no need to be rid of it or uncreate it, simply to see it for what it is... yep, just thought.”
...and thoughts aren't real, but reference objects in reality and fantasy...scissors or unicorn neither is made real by the thought, but scissors exist in physical reality and not as a function of thought, unicorns also exist in the experience of thought, but not in physical reality. The "I" exists much the same way as the unicorn. Holy sh*t!
“The body and brain takes care of all functioning perfectly as does all life. “
- I have no argument with this. I've had an inkling that this was true as I can't imagine being responsible for all of the biological functions of my body. It's that damn "executive functioning" I felt responsible for, but even the "options" of this function appear without my seeing their source or understanding the depth of the interaction with the environment, past, and all the other variables that result in their presentation.
“Trees don't need an I to grow. Life doesn't need an I to exist.”
- No argument here.
“Do you have pets? Observe how every response is automatic. There are patterns of behavior, and characteristics or tendencies, but is there a self or I?"
- They think they own everything but only as interpreted by my tendency to animapamorphise the patterns seen. There is no evidence that an "I" exists.
“Go for a walk to another room. Is there an I necessary for the legs to move and coordinate, for breathing or for beating the heart?”
- No!
“How about thought? Do You think thoughts, or do they just appear, then upon reflection the "I" attributed?”
- I've watched this for quite sometime...they just appear and disappear into an unknown "blackness".
“Can seeing be stopped or started?”
- I've also reflected on this...and "I" does nothing for seeing to take place. There is no need for the thought of "I" to see.
“What do you find?”
- Holy sh*t. This has been something I haven't been able to do and I've been working on seeing it via all types of exercises. It is almost undeniable. Who is the point of my life? What is the sense of "I am" or "I exist"?
Dan
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail> To: Dan <email@emailaddress>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
Amazing, isn't it? Deceptively simple, as if some cosmic joke has suddenly delivered the punchline!
Terrific!
The point of existence is in and of itself, the entire point. There is no you who has to make a point of it and life continues perfectly as it always has. It exists because it Is. Take a moment to let that soak in. There is no need for grasping, seeking, struggling through "my life". Freedom is what this is.
Who is the point of my life? What is the sense of "I am" or "I exist"?
The sense of "I am" is because life moves through all observed, and it exists within the human "being". It's just that there is no collective entity steering what is simply happening in all of its amazingness! Relax into it and see what happens.
What does life look like without the "I"? Is there anything missing?
thassa
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
Holy cow. I need to sit with this for a bit. I can't believe how effective this is. Can I get back with you if something presents? Thank you so much.
Dan
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail>;
To: Dan <email@emailaddress>;
Subject: Re: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
Sent: Tue, Sep 27, 2011 11:55:15 PM
Sure thing.
Whenever you come back, I have three questions I generally ask to ensure those I help aren't left in an "unfinished" or incomplete state.. between worlds, so to speak. If you could answer, I'd really appreciate it as it would mean peace of mind that the pointers given were helpful and complete.
1. What is the self or I? How is it constructed?
2. Is there a you anywhere at all?
3. What is different "now" from "before"?
Thanks, Dan. There's more information, but I will let you sit with this a bit. Feel free to ask anything in the meantime.
Thassa
p.s. I can give you more to read on my blog. There are accounts of two others I've been able to help. The names have been changed to protect their identity, but they've allowed me to post the exchanges in the hope that it might help others. Please don't mind the disjointed nature of the posts.... I had to reconstruct them from email and omit any personal information.
http://www.thassa.blogspot.com/
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 5:01 AM, Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
1. The self is merely a thought. It places an unecessary subject into a world of subjects thereby creating an object that experiences which is merely implied and never existed. It may be a function of simple acceptance via belief or mental organization. Things do exist in a physical sense its just there's nobody to experience them.
2. if there is it would need to be everything and if this is the case then no "I" is needed to distinguish one aspect from another, so-no.
3. I don't see anything differently. I just don't feel like there is an "I" doing anything. It's transient in intensity.
The anxiety feeling has passed. :-). There is still a thought present regarding a satirical of such magnitude that the mental pattern of a habitual I creation would cease to be. I just can't say it would be anything other than a brain reprogramming. No subject would be changed.
Dan
From: Thassa Amzwar <thassaamzwar@mail>
To: email@emailaddress
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 8:51 AM
Subject: Re: No Self Inquiry [Dan M]
Thank you very much, Dan.
Are there any questions? I do have some resources/reading options.
This is a continuous process, especially after the initial seeing, and it can be helpful to continue reading or discussing with others.
The no-self.com website has more reading material in "chapter 2". But this is where the site administrator and I differ in teachings. His material points to consciousness/awareness, but there are other teachings which point to that which is beyond consciousness/awareness - the void or emptiness.
From here, the journey will happen as it may. Some teachings will resonate more than others, and the "path" taken may meander. No worries. It will all happen as it does, and no teaching is absolute, merely pointing to truth which has to be discovered by "you".
some of the resources I can point you to include Facebook groups. There are several people I work with there and on other sites. What we do is help anyone who asks by working with them on Facebook itself, in a forum, or via email. In addition, we've also set up a couple of groups where we work out all of the questions which can come up after this seeing. It's an interesting mix and there are sometimes lively debates on teachings or how to "deepen" this. At the very least, it's interesting. :)
Ok, the groups....
Clearing House - this group has a "western" slant and does not discuss Eastern philosophies or thought.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/263531620334613/
Liberation Unleashed - members of this group come from a more Eastern view of enlightenment. It's popular and the administrators are very good at assisting folks through a transition period.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/200033776715393/
If Facebook isn't for you, you can also email the no-self site admin, Scott. His email is info@no-self.com. He has more information also on consciousness/awareness, and would be glad to know that the site was instrumental in helping you.
The resources I'm pointing you to are free, by the way. None of these folks have formal teaching or accept fees. It's entirely volunteer.
Please stay in touch for a bit as I'd like to be sure you're getting along ok. :)
And finally, may I use post exchange (with your name and personal info removed of course) on my blog? It can be really helpful in assist others who may have some trepidation about the process.
Take care, Dan. I'm so glad for "you". There's lots more to come.
thassa
Dan <email@emailaddress> wrote:
Definitely interested in the "void" or "emptyness" paradigm. Probably has to do with the materials I've read and meditations I've practiced up to this point. Consciousness and Awareness just confuse me :-)
You can absolutely post this exchange on your site. It feels as if the ramifications of what you have shown me have yet to be seen in their entirety. My sense of "doership" is dead, and my sense of "self" is wide open, but there is still a thought that it will go deeper in its manifestation and I believe its in response to what feels like a full head about to burst.
I will visit those resources and thank you so much. I will DEFINATELY be in touch :-)
Dan
photo credit: we need space by davespertine
this is absolutely mind blowing!!!!
ReplyDeletemay i ask what does the picture signify?
ReplyDeleteHi Tarun. I have no idea what happened to my response to you way back in 2011, but I'll post it again. :)
ReplyDeleteThe picture doesn't signify a thing.
Hope you are well. Write any time.
This is a great discourse. when you say that "this is a continuous process" I can't help but think 'struggle or battle'. Like one has to be on guard all the time. Is this the experience?
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, you might call it 'on guard'. I know that awakening has occupied all of my free time for two years now, including when I've 'guided' others. That's how it seems to work for many. But then again, 'on guard' supposes a self who will do that and can actually reinforce the sense of a self. So being 'aware' is more like it.
ReplyDeleteThe simplest thing to do is to just keep noticing, as much as possible. The rest takes care of itself. :)
Hi Thassa,
ReplyDeleteI'm Niall from Dublin. That piece was awesome, definitely felt a subtle shift as I read, things just got centered and felt more whole.
Been seeking along time, just discovered your blog and love it.
Cheers,
Niall.
Hey Niall,
ReplyDeleteGlad you stopped by. Take a look at the resources linked at the top of the blog. They're all free and really very useful. Liberation Unleashed, No-self.com, and Truthstrike will walk you through to seeing no self if you like. Take a look if you're feeling up to it.
All the best,
Thassa (delma)