tariki

Hi Rom, you always were the argumentative one! 😀

Thanks Paul Yes, it is always and ever US. Never "others" or "them" Or as one wag once said:- There are two types of people in the world - those that divide the world into two kinds of people and those who don't. Happy Christmas!

Just to say, I invited a Christian (Protestant Reform Fundamentalist) to comment on the above post - which I posted on another Forum - and his response was:- "Why would I as a Christian be inspired by the theology of a Buddhist Monk? That Catholic monk ought to be kicked out of his monastery." 😀

I feel a waffle coming on, so be warned. Those with the attention span of goldfish can safely move on to greener pastures......or is it wetter waters? Anyway, the meeting of religions. As I see it, the Religions meet when people of different Faiths meet. What can unite them then is not doctrine, nor belief as such, but that which I often call the Living Word, the spirit that blows where it will. One such meeting was between the Catholic Trappist monk Thomas Merton and the "zen man" (Buddhist) D.T.Suzuki. Here is Merton's testimony:- I saw Dr. Suzuki only in two brief visits and I did not feel I ought to waste time exploring abstract, doctrinal explanations of his tradition. But I did feel that I was speaking to someone who, in a tradition completely different from my own, had matured, had become complete and found his way. One cannot understand Buddhism until one meets it in this existential manner, in a person in whom it is alive. Then there is no longer a problem of understanding doctrines which cannot help being a bit exotic for a Westerner, but only a question of appreciating a value which is self-evident. Yes, self-evident, if we look for the fruits of the spirit and not simply look for a mirror image of ourselves or only recognise the words of our own belief system. As Merton said elsewhere, "The beginning of love is to let those we love be perfectly themselves, and not to twist them to fit our own image. Otherwise we love only the reflection of ourselves we find in them." Sadly, some have not even touched the beginning of Love. Thomas Merton and Suzuki only met on two occasions. Once was in New York when Merton had managed to escape from his monastery and was able to enjoy a bit of NY Jazz. When they parted Merton read to Suzuki the words of a South American theologian:- Praise be to God that I am not good! Suzuki, apparently deeply touched, said:- "That is so important" When some look at two religions they hear only themselves, their own creeds, beliefs, and thus decry those of another. Here, in the meeting of Merton and Suzuki we hear the spirit blowing. Suzuki, an "atheist", Merton a "theist" yet both able to dispense with labels and words. Suzuki could relate to the South American theologian's words from the heart of his own faith. Another example was when Merton quoted to Suzuki the words of the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart:- “In giving us His love God has given us the Holy Spirit so that we can love Him with the love wherewith He loves Himself.” Merton adds:- The Son Who, in us, loves the Father, in the Spirit, is translated thus by Suzuki into Zen terms: “one mirror reflecting another with no shadow between them.” (Suzuki, Mysticism: East and West, p. 41) Elsewhere, Eckharts words (which Merton says are perfectly orthodox and traditionally Christian) are continued:- We love God with His own love; awareness of it deifies us. Suzuki hears with approval, comparing it with the Prajna wisdom of Zen. As I see it, if we truly begin to touch the heart of our Faith we do not withdraw into a tight circle, seeking to protect its various creeds, but we begin to reach out, as spoken of here by another Buddhist:- The dharma, can be discovered through the Buddhist tradition, but Buddhism is by no means the only source of dharma. I would define dharma as anything that awakens the enlightened mind and brings on the direct experience of selflessness. The teachings of Christ are prefumed with dharma. There is dharma in jazz, in beautiful gardens, in literature, in Sufi dance, in Quaker silence, in shaman healing, in projects to care for the homeless and clean up the inner cities, in Catholic ritual, in meaningful and competent work. There is dharma in anything that causes us to respect the innate softness and intelligence of ourselves and others. When the Buddhist system is applied properly, it does not turn us inward toward our own organizations, practices, and ideas. The system has succeeded when the Buddhist can recognize the true dharma at the core of all other religions and disciplines that are based on respect for the human image, and has no need to reject them. And so, as I see it, there are Words and there are Living Words. If we are truly children of grace we look not for others to echo our own words, but are open instead to the fruits of the spirit. In any meeting of people there will always be truth and error on both sides - that is our finitude. What unites is not Creed, what unites is Love - a love which Reality shares freely, in which we "live and move and have our being". It is truly desperately sad that some will simply say that there can be no meeting between truth (theirs) and error (anything contrary) They will trust in being "of the truth", awaiting the "reward" of their God in the next life. If their trust was truly in God, in Love, in Grace, then they would have no such attitude. That's it. I doubt many - if any - will have got this far. But I find expressing myself therapeutic.

Thanks Thijs, I'll take a look. And the rananda site.

As pure self advertisement, the last post turned into a Blog in glorious technicolor HERE :- http://mydookiepops.blogspot.com

Hello again Thijs. You seem to be a friendly chap, which invites discussion and dialogue, unlike some who have drifted into this rather quiet and sedate forum - which suits a fine upstanding English Gentleman like myself who never voted for Brexi!) Well, nothing is eternal except eternity itself. Things are always moving on. The problems seem to begin when we want them to stop, to hold onto the moment William Blake:- He who binds to himself a joy Does the winged life destroy; But he who kisses the joy as it flies Lives in eternity's sun rise. There is a fine dialogue between "east" and "west" (to use the terms loosely) in "Wisdom in Emptiness", the second section of Thomas Merton's book of essays "Zen and the Birds of Appetite". It is between Merton himself, the Catholic Trappist monk, and the "zen man" D.T. Suzuki. They agree on many things (it is actually a dialogue concerning the "Fall" and of how we can regain Paradise) but part ways on the subject of eschatology. Suzuki speaks of the "eschatology of the present moment", the eternal NOW, while Merton speaks of some sort of "beyond", of some final consumation in God's Kingdom when all things are handed over to the Son. One never knows with Merton (the anti-monk) as to whether or not he is paying lip service to the Catholic censors. I've stopped trying to guess. Anyone who dallies with young nurses must become suspect.....😀 But whatever, in the past I have tended to side with Suzuki. But the 13th century zen master Dogen seems to offer some sort of reconciliation to the parting of the ways of Suzuki and Merton. Dogen agrees that the present moment is the "only" moment, yet there is movement toward Buddha. But as I see it, this must in a sense be a movement of no-calculation (Japanese "hakarai") Our definitions and conclusions, our beliefs, can forestall the movement, and hold us in the past. As is said in St Marks gospel, in one of the Parables of the Kingdom:- The earth brings forth fruits of herself We can set the sails but then we must wait for the wind to blow. Who is in control? The spirit blows where it will. I rest in Faith rather than belief. Faith "lets go" in pure trust, Grace. Belief clings. Faith unites. Beliefs divide us. We need to let go and trust the river of change, or as one joker once said:- "Stand upon the firm ground of emptiness". Or, again, as per the Christian mystic St John of the Cross:- If we wish to be sure of the road we walk on then we must close our eyes and walk in the dark Whatever, I still look to Dogen at the moment. He had his own questions, his own Life Koan. In concise form:- “If all sentient beings possess the buddha-nature and Tathagata exists without change - as enunciated in the Nirvana Sutra - then why must people develop the aspiration for awakening and vigorously engage in austerities in order to realize this truth?” Later on in life he wrote himself:- Fundamentally, the basis of the Way is thoroughly pervasive, so how could it be contingent on practice and realization? The vehicle of the ancestors is naturally unrestricted, then why should we expend sustained effort? Surely whole being is far beyond defilement, so who could believe in a method to cultivate it? Never is the Way apart from this very place, so what is the use of a journey to practice it? Yet, if there is a hair’s breadth of distinction between existence and training, this gap becomes as great as that between heaven and earth. Once the slightest sense of liking or disliking something arises, confusion reigns and one’s mind is hopelessly lost in delusion If I were a Christian I would be a Universalist. Which would change a few words, of Dogen's Life Koan. i.e. If all are saved, what must we do to be saved? Well, I have waffled enough. I find myself in MacDonald's with a coffee and just start tapping on my Kindle. I find it therapeutic. And as others have observed, I'm fundamentally harmless.

Oh, and just to add, I am not a Christian. However, as I was once considered totally harmless (😀) by the then Administrator of this Forum, I was given permission to post wherever I liked. Maybe you would like to pop across to the "Other Wisdom Traditions" and take a peep at some poetry of Dogen? Whatever, enjoy the Forum.

Is this a form of the "languid east" syndrome? 😀 Yes, it is Dharma for the sake of Dharma. All else, including "works" are simply by-products. Which should be evident to any Christian who relies upon Grace for salvation. Thank you.

I don't really feel any special commission to do anything. In the Buddhist tradition it tends to be said that we should study Dharma for the sake of Dharma. The rest is left to the way of no-calculation. Maybe the greatest thing is genuine transformation. As you imply, this is not really our work. I think that when we seek explicitly to evangelise it can all take a nasty turn! Sadly, many DO put limits - if it is not in the name of Jesus it is not recognised, even denied. Anyway, welcome to the forum.

The context is for God to give. The spirit blows where it will. To simply presume, in a circular fashion (i.e. God reveals his true Word to the true believer, I am a true believer therefore he has revealed its true meaning to me) that one's own understanding is, in effect, infallible, is not a sign of either Faith or Grace, or of trust in God. It is more a sign of a trust in oneself. All the best.

Another poem by Dogen:- Another poem of Dogen:- In the heart of the night, Moonlight framing A small boat drifting, Tossed not by the waves Nor swayed by the breeze The meaning of this, at least for Dogen, can be illuminated by his words found in his "Genjokoan" (the actualisation of reality) He writes:- If one riding in a boat watches the coast, one mistakenly perceives the coast as moving. If one watches the boat in relation to the surface of the water, then one notices that the boat is moving. Similarly, when we perceive the body and mind in a confused way and grasp all things with a discriminating mind, we mistakenly think that the self-nature of the mind is permanent. When we intimately practice and return right here, it is clear that all things have no fixed self. Dogen, in his poem, gives voice to the vulnerability of enlightenment. We do not possess enlightenment. It possesses us. "A clearly enllghtened person falls into the well. How is this so?" (A zen koan) And Thomas Merton:- We stumble and fall constantly, even when we are most enlightened. As I see it, many fear vulnerability. We can cling to being right, of having "all truth" - but Faith is of another order. It is a letting go, trusting in becoming. Which is the "eastern" way of seeing things. Becoming, not Being. The eastern preoccupation with impermanence is well known to anyone who approaches its poetry, and impermanence can - and does - bring suffering when we cannot trust in the river of change. But impermanence, if we "let go", can transform the suffering. But Impermanence, it becomes clear, doesn’t mean that things last for a while then pass away: things arise and pass away at the same time. That is, things don’t exist as we imagine they do. Much of our experience of reality is illusory. And this is why we suffer. We attempt to hold onto happiness, as if it is a thing, a state of being, but as William Blake has written:- He who binds to himself a joy Does the winged life destroy He who kisses the joy as it flies Lives in eternity's sunrise Therefore Being IS becoming. "God" can become an idol. Faith for me is in letting go.

I see no reason for you to claim this. I do not wish to rewrite anything. I simply understand the words in a way different from your own. All the best

Hi, if I might enter this friendly discussion..... This is a Progressive Christianity website. It is NOT a Protestant Reform Tradition/Fundamentalist website. Please respect that. Sadly, your judgemental attitude says little in favour of your own views and opinions - which are just that....views and opinions. Thank you.

A cut and paste from my "missionary activity" 😀 on another Forum! In one or two posts I have referred to what I term "Jesusainity". This is not meant to have been disparaging in any essential way, although I must admit to being dismayed by those who insist upon "one way only" and who then cite the usual couple of verses from the New Testament that they consider closes the matter. If anyone is interested - and I guess that most are not, either being non-religious in any way, or being an ardent "one wayer" convinced of their infallibility - then I would simply seek to explain. There is Jesusainity and there is Christianity. Relevant here is a form of debate, argumentation, discussion, more prevalent in the East than the West i.e. argument by relegation. Here opposing positions are treated not by refuting them, but by accepting them as true, but only true as a part of the full picture. Logically, it broadens the scope of discussion. Even if I am persuaded that another’s view is incorrect in some respect, it is nevertheless a real point of view and my theory of reality must be able to account for its existence. In effect the discussion involves not refuting the position of another but will be competing over which position can relegate which. And so, which is relegated? Jesusainity or Christianity? Christianity simply says that the words (found in the most "spiritual" of the Gospels, St John) "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me" are the words of the Eternal Logos - as spoken of in the prelude to St John's Gospel. Again, the "no other name" verse should be seen in the context of its historical proclamation, this in line with the Catholic Church's understanding of how we should approach and understand inspired scripture:- To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (Dei Verbum, III, 12, 2) (Again, in this instance, as is said, "what is in a name"? "Jesus" is simply an anglicised form of the original Hebrew name) Accepting all this, what do we have? Christianity expands beyond the theology of the Protestant Reform Tradition, which is time-conditioned, insular and in fact shut off from the whole world of our various Faith Traditions, enclosed within itself, the "only truth". Expands instead to embrace all movements of the Spirit (that "blows where it will") - which explains just why the fruits of the spirit..... The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law. .....can be seen throughout history, in various individuals, of all Faiths, and sometimes of none. The Lord knows his own, as is said! Thomas Merton once said that we should never presume that Christ is in our own heart if we cannot also see Him and find Him in the hearts of others most remote from ourselves. I think this is true. I guess I am quite "remote" to some here being a non-theistic Buddhist of the Pure Land path. But we say:- My eyes being hindered by blind passions, I cannot perceive the light that grasps me; Yet the great compassion, without tiring, Illumines me always (Shinran, from "Hymns of the Pure Land Masters", verse 95) Which corresponds with the words of Julian of Norwich of the theistic Christian tradition:- If there be anywhere on earth a lover of God who is always kept safe, I know nothing of it, for it was not shown to me. But this was shown: that in falling and rising again we are always kept in that same precious love. I appreciate that there will be some who will continue to believe and insist that the God they worship turns His face away from those who - in their own time worn phrase - have not "accepted Jesus as their own personal Savior". Yet all I am saying here is that in Christianity, just how Christ is "accepted" can take infinite forms according to the almost infinite number of individual human beings. The spirit blows where it will. That is all. Make of it what you will.

For those who are interested, I find it therapeutic to transform my various posts here and elsewhere into Blogs, adding suitable pictures. You can catch it here... https://mydookiepops.blogspot.com/ Google statistics now tell me my blog had been viewed over 13000 times, from many different countries. I suspect some "views" are by Bots, robots sent out to glean useful info to transform and use in scams!

Yes, I know the feeling. I've been active on Similar Worlds and continue to cross swords with the self-proclaimed "true believers" (as in the circular argument "God reveals the truth of his Word to the true believer, I am a true believer and so he has revealed its truth to me"......😀) I guess the Lord knows his own. PS I tend to keep changing my screen name to keep ahead of the pack.......Telegram Sam, Pipedreams, and - as they say - many others.

Ha ha.......😋 Still fighting the good fight! All the best Paul.

To what shall I Liken the world? Moonlight, reflected In dewdrops, Shaken from a crane's bill. Many commentators, led astray by "the languid east" nonsense, and thoughts of maya (understood as "illusion") see such words, understand the poem, as being some some sort of diminution of the individual, and our world as being in a sense unreal. Sir Edwin Arnold wrote, in his epic poem of the Buddha's life, "The Light of Asia", ended that poem with the words (upon the death of the Buddha as he enters Nirvana):- "The dewdrop slips into the shining sea". More misunderstanding. In fact, it is more that the shining sea slips into the dewdrop - yet even that does not capture the Buddhist position, which in fact is a no-position that supecedes all positions. Getting back to Dogen's poem, here is a more perceptive understanding:- “According to this verse, the entire world is fully contained in each and every one of the innumerable dewdrops, each one symbolic of the inexhaustible contents of all impermanent moments. Here the dewdrops no longer suggest illusion in contrast to reality because they are liberated by their reflection of the moon’s glow. Conversely, the moon as a symbol of Buddha-nature is not an aloof realm since it is fully merged in the finite and individuated manifestations of the dew. Just as the moon is one with the dewdrops, the poem itself becomes one with the setting it depicts.” (Steven Heine) Thus the particular is seen to contain the universal. Each and every particular. Every moment. Every NOW. In this world, not some imagined "other" promised beyond the grave. Another astute commentator Hee-Jin Kim invites us to pay particular attention to the pivotal word “shaken.” Many examples could be given of static images of the moon in a dewdrop or the moon reflected in still water but, by virtue of being shaken, the metaphor becomes dynamic and interactive. So much for illusion, the diminution of the individual! The Way does not exist to be found. Each moment is the way.

Hi John, I saw your first posts here some time ago. I did think of responding with a quick word, but my coffee got cold in McDonalds and I was on my way.....😀 I'm taking a rest from my usual Forum so popped back here and saw your latest posting. I must admit to not reading much of you entire "Logos of Sophia" but the verse above which I have quoted caught my mind/heart. It fell into my current preoccupations and thinking (in between cracking further levels of Candy Crush Soda Saga) which revolves around relating Jung's so called "Individuation" process with the Buddhist "anatta" teaching (not self) Apparently, superficially, at loggerheads, yet as usual my own mind seeks for wholeness, unity, correspondences. I think that there must always be "mystery" beyond (and within) our being (or non-being) Without mystery, without the "something beyond, yet still to be" then it is easy to congeal into a finished product, a self-satisfied and "justified" self. New Age jargon speaks of living in the Now, and many seem to propose this. "Live in the Now, man!" goes the mantra. But if we get away from linear time frames into a multi-dimensional realisation of Time, any "Now" will always include before and after in ways that then add the "mystery". My own leanings are towards the synthesis of zen and Pure Land Buddhism, and the 13th century zen master Dogen has been (and is) a great guide and mentor to me. But I must go. Shopping to get, family chores. But I remember the story of Dogen, when in China, searching for his very own path, time and place. Searching for a "master" who would pass muster and do the job for him. In his travels he met an aged cook of a local monastery and had a short conversation, which ended with Dogen saying to the old fellow:- "Would you not rather be studying the Dharma than cooking for the novices at the monastery?" The old guy just laughed out loud! Dogen, when he eventually found his very own path, time and place, only then fully understood why. Anyway, all the best. It is quiet around here. I've simply indulged myself with my own musings. All the best. Derek

Yes, thanks, you make a good point. Words can be very powerful and suggestive. Maybe "healing" will fade from my mind!

Hi Paul, well I don't mind minor distractions, its full blown arguments that rub me up the wrong way......😀 Maybe I was unclear, but I was contrasting two ways of understanding Christianity, one that sees the end result as the final restoration of all things, and one where the end result is an eternal division between the lost and the saved. I was saying that those who look to the former would be more likely to begin to mirror and reflect back a life of healing. As I have said, I actually subscribe to neither one nor the other. On this subject, this was the one disagreement between Merton and Suzuki in their dialogue "Wisdom in Emptiness". Suzuki spoke of an "eschatology of the present moment" while Merton saw such as not final but needed the final handing over of "all things to Christ" in some sublime reality beyond us now to conceive. Basically I am with Suzuki. Absolute beginnings and final ends are not part of the Dharma, such things (speculation) being antithetical to the actual living of the "holy life". Again, it is avidya, ignorance, that is the problem, not "sin" (against a Supreme Being) Just to add, pure acceptance is, paradoxically, the catalyst of genuine transformation (healing) and therefore I see us as on the same page. ("Transformation" would be on-going) PS. Just as an edit, here is Merton in his own words where he speaks of some final reality:- This is the real dimension of Christianity, the eschatalogical dimension which is peculiar to it, and which has no parallel in Buddhism. The world was created without man, but the new creation which is the true Kingdom of God is to be the work of God in and through man. It is to be the great, mysterious, theandric work of the Mystical Christ, the New Adam, in whom all men as “one Person” or one “Son of God” will transfigure the cosmos and offer it resplendent to the Father. Here, in this transfiguration, will take place the apocalyptic marriage between God and His creation, the final and perfect consummation of which no mortal mysticism is able to dream and which is barely foreshadowed in the symbols and images of the last pages of the Apocalypse.

An eye catching thread title, perhaps particularly ideal for those suffering from insomnia. But for anyone interested, the word "apokatastasis" is used within the Christian Religion for Universalism, the hope for the restoration of ALL things, for all people, for all creation.This is not something that has arisen over the past few centuries, preached by those who have "fallen away" from "what the Church has always taught", an attempt to "corrupt the plain meaning of scripture." In fact it was a belief, a teaching, very prevalent in the Early Church, taught by several of the Early Church Fathers, taught throughout the Christian centuries, and now gathering pace among many whose fidelity to Christ is unquestionable. Names?Origen, Macrina, Gregory of Nyssa, Isaac of Nineveh, Maximos the Confessor, Silouan the Athonite, and later, George MacDonald and the boldest minds of our era, Sergius Bulgakov, Robert W. Jenson, Thomas Talbott, Ilaria Ramelli, David Bentley Hart, John Behr.Even the oft stated claim that the doctrine was declared heretical at one time is now called into question by reputable scholars of the Christian Church.Does any of this matter? Well, that depends upon each of us. I am a non-theist, and have little interest (or belief) in transcendent Beings, creators, any fall of humankind, and therefore of any restoration. The Dharma (Buddhism) avoids beginnings and conclusions, seeing allegiance to such things as being antithetical to the actual living of the "holy life", the path to the end of suffering.Yet I have great regard for what is called a fully "incarnational" Christanity, of "Christ in us". It really goes without saying that if, in our mind/hearts, we have faith in the eventual restoration of "all things", every last one of us, then our own lives will begin to mirror, to reflect, the Reality of Healing that we trust is in us and around us. This as opposed to believing that eventually creation will be solidified into a two tier system, of "sheep" and "goats", lost and saved, heaven and hell - does it take much imagination to recognise just how a mind/heart will develop that sees things in such a way? Being a non-theist I bring healing to my mind/heart in other ways. To be honest I find that belief in God is cloying and claustrophobic, and given in many ways a weak mind, easily led, the loud voices of the "believers" becomes discordant, a chorus of noise with little meaning, each voice convinced of its own pictures of Reality.I've asked before about the "dividing line" between theism and non-theism, and in truth I think there isn't one. That said, some images of God are fairly remote to me. It seems pretty obvious that there will be no time when I am "here" and God is "there" - God is more the ground of Reality in which we "live and move and have our being". Yet I have heard a very well known Christian evangelist say that when "we walk into heaven the only difference we shall see between God the Father and God the Son will be the nail-prints in the Son's hands." This is crass, ridiculous, and yet points to the very literalist way every word in the Bible is interpreted - the word as text, rather than the Living Word. (Obviously, such a literalist grasp of certain things does not necessarily preclude any mind/heart from bringing forth the fruits of the spirit)From my own perspective "Buddha nature" points to the immanence, the liberative potential, in the ground of the earth, as well as in the inner, psychological ground of being, "ever ready to spring forth and benefit beings. It speaks of and represents the fertility of the earth itself and the wondrous, healing, natural power of Reality, or the phenomenal world."The Dharma at best, combines soteriology, epistemology and ontology. As someone else has said:- Zen Buddhism developed and cannot be fully understood outside of a worldview that sees reality itself as a vital, ephemeral agent of awareness and healing.As I see it we all move forward with our mental maps of the world, and within this mental map there are things we think are good, useful, or valuable, such as flowers, and there are other things we think are bad, useless, or worthless, such as weeds. Usually we take it for granted that the fabricated picture of the world in our minds is the world itself. Nothing really wrong with this, and yet our "maps" can become solid, set in concrete, used to "justify" ourselves, projected onto God, who then is deemed to judge the whole earth according to our dictates. This is tragic.We are more a constant becoming - as Dogen says:-"Flowers fade even though we love them, weeds grow even though we hate them."As finite beings we simply can never really know, in a world of becoming, just which are flowers and which are weeds, and grasping at one and shunning the other, we can lock ourselves into a world that maybe can seem like heaven at times and yet is hell. Letting go of our conclusions and beliefs can be liberating, leaving the mind/heart to find ever greater intimacy with Reality - and to experience it (no matter how much "evidence" to the contrary) as truly healing, life-giving, and fulfilling.And hopefully we ourselves can mirror Reality, reflect it, be a source of healing to others.

Hi romansh, hope you enjoy your trip. Nothing quite like meeting old friends.

At my age there is only one thing on the horizon......😀 Then, of course, there is the question of copyright! But yes, I do have fun.