Share Your Poems, Art and Creative Responses to the Reading

Hello Everyone,

Wanted to create a thread for people to share whatever creative works they may be creating in response to and in processing of Ever Present Origin.

These can be poems, sketches, doodles, short fiction, songs, essays, cake recipes (Ever Present Orange’n’Cream Cupcakes?) and whatever else you like.

You can upload files by clicking the “up arrow” button when you’re creating a post.

We really want this group to include and encourage all forms of expression, not just inter/intra-dialogue–so please consider sharing.

See you all between the lines,


We were speaking of “Pan Integral” and a few hours later I just happened to receive this poem (anonymously) in my inbox:

A Musical Instrument

What was he doing, the great god Pan,
Down in the reeds by the river?
Spreading ruin and scattering ban,
Splashing and paddling with hoofs of a goat,
And breaking the golden lilies afloat
With the dragon-fly on the river.

He tore out a reed, the great god Pan,
From the deep cool bed of the river:
The limpid water turbidly ran,
And the broken lilies a-dying lay,
And the dragon-fly had fled away,
Ere he brought it out of the river.

High on the shore sat the great god Pan,
While turbidly flow’d the river;
And hack’d and hew’d as a great god can,
With his hard bleak steel at the patient reed,
Till there was not a sign of a leaf indeed
To prove it fresh from the river.

He cut it short, did the great god Pan
(How tall it stood in the river!),
Then drew the pith, like the heart of a man,
Steadily from the outside ring,
And notched the poor dry empty thing
In holes, as he sat by the river.

“This is the way,” laugh’d the great god Pan
(Laugh’d while he sat by the river),
"The only way, since gods began
To make sweet music, they could succeed."
Then, dropping his mouth to a hole in the reed
He blew in power by the river.

Sweet, sweet, sweet, O Pan!
Piercing sweet by the river!
Blinding sweet, O great god Pan!
The sun on the hill forgot to die,
And the lilies reviv’d, and the dragon-fly
Came back to dream on the river.

Yet half a beast is the great god Pan,
To laugh as he sits by the river,
Making a poet out of a man:
The true gods sigh for the cost and pain,–
For the reed which grows nevermore again
As a reed with the reeds in the river.

– Elizabeth Barrett Browning


So, I have a question/game. It’s a creative playful thing. I figure this would be the proper spot to leave it.

Brief back story, I ordered this copy of Gebser through Amazon this Winter and I found this letter inside. The letter seems more than coincidental. In that, it addresses women’s solidarity within academia and philosophy.

I’m posting it: one, because it is awesome and I squealed like a child when I found it, and two because I’m curious as to whether or not anyone in this forum may be the person who wrote the note and/or may know the person who wrote the note.

This is the content of the note:


Gebser does not have the feminist view of the Origin of Creativity. Gebser sees matricide (Ore…) as crucial to the (something) mutation of consciousness to the patriarchal mutation.

-our own-

Gebser’s “plan” places both “matriarchy” and “patriarchy” in a “dislike creative principle.”

Exactly what I said when asked to give the invocation at the first dinner meeting of the women of the Park Forest/ S. Suburbs.

“Honoring mothers, grandmothers, hopes for our daughters, daughters: our prayer.”

From Jane

This is an image of the note:

1 Like

This is so cool and intriguing. I love a little mystery!

Of course, Gebser’s language carries some patriarchal undertones—“Man” doing this or that, we must “overcome” and “master,” etc.—though I think in many cases that’s more a convention of writing and speaking at the time, before the postmodern revolution, than a real sexism.

I wonder if that’s what Jane is reacting to here, or if she’s sensing something more deeply problematic.

It would be very interesting to get a feminist reading of the text. It would be very, very interesting, I think, to get a deeper sense of the “integral” from a more feminine sensibility or way of being.


I love mystery, too, and playing detective. Here’s my thoughts:

  • I think the first missing word is Orestes (Gebser references this Greek myth on pg. 149-150, 315)
    I’m curious to know what page the note was found on? (picture here is pg. 41)
  • “crucial to the next mutation”
  • not dislike, but “divine creative principle”
    -“Honoring mothers, grandmothers, hopes for our daughters, g.daughters: our prayer” g short for grand-
  • I don’t see “From Jane”. On the back?

Park Forest is a suburb of Chicago. A google search of “women of park forest” yielded two possibilities (and a number of potential ladies to date):
United Protestant Women of Park Forest (church group)
Women@Park (Park Community Church) This appears to be a modernized version of what I imagine to be a women’s religious group, and may in fact be the same organization with a new face (assuming the note is somewhat dated). If I were really trying to track down the note-maker, I’d contact these groups.

I agree, Marco, if Gebser does not have the feminist view, I’d be curious to know what that would be/how would it “whole” the picture. I have a hard time imagining Gebser would regard matricide as crucial to the mutation, as that strikes me as causal, “developmental” thinking (Mental) which he takes great pains to deconstruct in the first pages of ch. 3 (and which he’ll reiterate often). However, its certainly possible he didn’t “cross every t” so to speak.

That is the great difficulty in speaking about such things as evolution of consciousness and history, whilst not succumbing to Mental trappings, and Gebser is the veritable role model of awaring one’s “mentality” as one is doing so. Sure, one might find a place where he stumbled, but for the most part, I think he navigates the edge beautifully, all things considered (which is not to excuse him, either…damn, so many caveats…)

1 Like

Just to connect related discussions…

Some of the relevant German from another topic:

I don’t really understand how mythical culture is matriarchal, though. I’ll have to learn about this as I get to that point in the text.

This is something that I would work on and would take at least 5 years to integrate all of the literature, art and action required to treat the text properly while keeping it in tact. If that makes sense. Allowing the feminine into the text as an archetype-mythology-religion that isn’t consistently misconstrued as something that needs to be harmed in order for the “other” to succeed.
I’m sure Gebser is going somewhere a lot more complex with the art-myth-religion deal, and I won’t even know how to talk about it until I read more.
The other thought that I am having atm is that there are already integral women, so they are bringing that to integral as we speak and I don’t know about it because I am on the ground floor with the radicals and nihilist punks :slight_smile:

Whoa, this is rad. This is annotated and everything :slight_smile: Thanks so much. Hm, maybe it isn’t too important who wrote it. It was initially exciting though.

I don’t remember what page I found it on because I was micro-dosing on LSD when I found it.
And yeah, “from jane” is on the back.

Yeah, thank you for reading and offering insight, and most of all playing :slight_smile:

I’ll continue reading and see the note as a friendly invitation to be more curious about Gebser’s view.

Re: English word for “rule by the integral”, we do have holarchy. Rule by the whole (holon).

1 Like

Θέατρο τον Διονύσου
(Theatro ton Dionysou)

Just recently I had some time to sit.
The wanting-warming sun at times obscured
by shadowed clouds pushed by a south-bound breeze.
And here it was that we became a me.
I felt a chill – of weather or of thought –
for it was here that drama once was played:
the actors here and lo, the chorus there.

The actions here contrived and yet too real;
the actions there took place still undisclosed
behind spectating eyes, self-seen, self-heard.
Imagination’s sacred rite thus staged
and set before the god’s ecstatic rush,
the proper pace, stately space overcome
by wine-induced abandon’s blessed chaos.

Ever-returning chaos, the circle
rent asunder, the cave, the womb, transformed
by light banishing here, now the shadows.
In here the drama, out there all the world
where each of us alone must find a way.
In here we are together, out there we are
alone, each of us, together, alone.

There is no return, just regathering
the bits and pieces, glimpses and soundings,
moments once past but awakened to now.
The fragments will not fit, they stir and shift
and strain and resist my will to order.
Quite so, for they’re mere parts of what is more.

Just recently I had some time to sit.
The wanting-warming sun at times obscured
by shadowed clouds pulled by a south-bound breeze,
for here it was that we became a me.
I felt a chill – of weather or of thought –
for it is now that drama overcomes
the actors here and lo, the chorus there.

  • ED Mahood (2016-01-24)

Beautiful play, @achronon, alluding to Gebser’s observations describing the way Greek drama differentiated the individual from the group, p. 81.

I imagine the poet sitting in the empty conch-shell theater, listening to echoes of time, letting the presence of the past sound through…

He’s alone (-with) there. It’s a moment of reflection, resonance. There’s a sense of loss, no longer being one with the chorus, being so distant from the wine god’s ecstasy that once cleansed the place. So intimate with this distance…

There is no longer even a whole to be the comprehended or recovered, only scraps of memory. As the actor is set apart from the chorus, now here the poet is set apart from the action that once encircled and protected us as spectators, where the tragedy could be there, on stage, performed for us, but not yet us, each alone, outside the sacred circle.

I really enjoy the correspondences in this poem, such as between the chill of thought and the pushed/pulled clouds of impending weather. It’s nice how this makes thought itself feel neither of earth nor sky, but of a layer in between, illuminated by the sun, yet shadowed and shadowing.

The “wanting-warming sun” also beautifully captures that feeling of the flesh drinking in the sun when the thirst can’t quite be quenched. The sun wanting…what? Time?

1 Like

Vanessa was a bull dyke. Afro American, corn row hair style, baggy blue shirt, and black pants, her body was heavy with the earth. She was a security guard and I worked at the front desk.

" I had a dream last night," she leaned towards me, at the front desk, where I was stationed, reading a book. I looked up from my book and focused my attention on her. She knew that I loved dreams." I dreamed that I was a giant, naked, black man, standing on a mountain top, looking down at a village in the valley. My dick got bigger and bigger and then I shot a load of semen onto the valley. All of the people were jumping up and down, covered in semen, jumping for joy. What do you think it means?"

I cleared my throat and asked," How do you feel about the dream?"

" Great!" she said, " I loved it."

Pausing for a moment, tuning into the field of infinite possibilities, I responded,
" I think you are getting in touch with your masculine side."

Her radio contacted her about a fight that broke out on the sixth floor." Later-" she said as she ran towards the elevator. That incident happened twenty years ago. Vanessa was a good woman.

Last night I had a dream that I was a naked woman with big breasts, nursing an infant. I was standing with the entrance of a cave behind me and before me a broad river, a mountain and a gray sky, with a flock of birds, circling on extended wings, pivot and drop, rise and fall, taking turns playing the leader, forming and reforming a stable V shape, just for the fun of it.

And I turned to the infant, felt its pull on my teat, and did not pluck my nipple from his boneless gums, and dash his brains out. I found the power to become what his little body needed me to be. He was my first child.

And Jesus saw infants being suckled. He said to his disciples,
" These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom. When you make the two one, and when you make the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male be not male and the female not female; and when you fashion eyes in place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, and a likeness in place of a likeness; then will you enter the kingdom of heaven."

1 Like

Page 615 of the text notes that Gebser associated with Paul Eluard.

A couple years ago, I came across this quote by Eluard: “There is another world, and it is this one”.

This thought has been very powerful in my life the more I’m able to grasp that another world(s) is co-existing with my ‘normal’ daily unique experience and can be accepted as one world, one reality, albeit from different perspectives/layers. In waking, daily life, I ask myself, 'what does this interaction with this person/circumstance tell me about myself/everything? Also, this other world(s), is very much experienced in my dreams. Putting it all together puts a practical and buoyant reality to the fact that life is an adventurous journey of discovery.

I’ve been listening a lot to David Bowie’s last album, Blackstar.

The song Lazarus has this line: “I’ve got drama, can’t be stolen”.

We each have our own unique/experience/contribution. More and more I am learning not to compare against other people…that would be such a shame!

@Jeremy, It took me a while to get why he preferred ‘mutation’ as opposed to ‘development,’ evolution,’ and ‘progress.’ He spent so much time (Ch 3) emphasizing that these processes definitely didn’t apply to the emergence of new structures of consciousness, but, then the nuanced ‘movements’ from one structure to the next he elucidates in pain-staking detail throughout the next few chapters seemed (to me) to be the very characteristics of a evolution/development of consciousness. Then, when he wrote the below about the ‘exhaustion’ of consciousness structures, I had a epiphany (mutation?) that potentially gave insight into his meaning.

"[I]t must be evident on the other hand that our present state is one of exhaustion; that is, what was at the beginning of our structure its constituting strength or energy has become exhausted in the course of the exfoliation of consciousness.

Exhaustion, however, does not bear within itself the possibility of continuation or evolution, unless perhaps in the sense of progress. This will perhaps emphasize again why we have disavowed the concept of evolution and prefer instead to speak of mutations. The sequential aspects or character are limited to the individual structures, whereas the integrality is embodied in the mutations. No new structure proceeds from an exhausted one, but a mutation can readily spring forth from the originary presence of the whole." (emphasis my own)

While the seeds (germs) of one consciousness structure can be present in another, a new structure isn’t a continuation of an old one. A continuation would lead to further exhaustion of an already exhausted structure. Instead, what can happen is a (re)structuration of consciousness out of origin into a new (non-exhausted) structure. This doesn’t mean there can’t be dependency relationships between consciousness structures, only that a new one isn’t a continuation of a old one: it is a discontinuous emergence (mutation). A phoenix rising. (I have more to say on his resistance to ‘progress’ oriented wording, and how, I think, it can be misinterpreted, but I don’t want to continue on that digression here, as I think it would distract from the next point.)

In this case, however, I don’t think the matricide is a seed ushering in the emergence of a new age. Particularly, not of a integral age. Instead, it is the sound of the mental tearing itself asunder and slamming the door on a deficient mythic. As shown in the passage(pg 149-150) I think the note is referring to:

"We wish…to make some additional supplementary remarks concerning patriarchy. We noted earlier the connection between the patriarchal and emphasis on the “right,” directed thought, and “rights” and law-giving in our discussion of Lycurgus and Solon (who, incidentally, was the first to have coins minted). It is the mental structure which first places emphasis on the principle of masculinity, and there is a causal connection between Solon’s legislation and the matricide documented in the Oresteia which even touched the realm of the gods: Zeus devoured a mother, Metis, who was pregnant with Athena.

Or, stating another way, both legislation and matricide proceed from the same-newly-forming consciousness structure. The tremors and shock unleashed by this murder must have been overwhelming; they can be felt in Greek tragedy, in Aeschylus’ trilogy of the Oresteia as well as in the aftershocks that appear even today. Indeed, the consequences are today more distinct than ever before.

Matricide is synonymous with the elimination and collapse of matriarchy. Yet we must not forget that matriarchy had by then become deficient. Bachofen, for instance, has written, “Mankind has not forgotten that the time of feminine dominance visited experiences of the bloodiest kind over the earth.” The matricide extensively reduced, although not quite destroyed, what was once the sanctity that had turned into atrocity within the once-valid mythical structure, along with the remaining foundations of that structure itself. Orestes’ actions bring on the collapse of one world and the dawn of another with the full force and attendant circumstances of such cataclysms."


Edgar Mitchell, an astronaut who walked on the moon, died on February 4, 2016. He had a transcendent experience during his return voyage from the moon. Because of that experience, he left NASA right after, mere technology having taken him as far as he felt possible. He wanted to work with mystics and other ancient religious traditions in addition to what technology offered. He recounts this in his book The Way of the Explorer: An Apollo Astronaut’s Journey Through the Material and Mystical Worlds (1996) which had an impact on me a number of years ago. I follow his organization Institute of Noetic Sciences to this day.

In 1968, an earlier Apollo 8 mission took some important pictures of the earth from the moon orbit. When this new perspective was experienced by those astronauts, and then later by others (us) in photograph form, a new kind of self-awareness entered in. Many have said that perhaps the most important reason for going to the moon, was to be able to look back at the earth - experienced as hanging in space - as a planet - that is alive. And also seeing the sun, not in a blue sky, but a black ‘sky’ - as a star - in a galaxy. Here is a beautiful short video of the subsequent and similar experiences of later astronauts as to the profound effect being in space has.

New experiences like this do the good work of overwhelming the mental rational, dividing mind (in its deficient mode) and provide course correcting openings (mutations?) of new ways of seeing/thinking/experiencing.

I wonder if technological heights must come first, which then make a powerful, game-changing, qualitative (magical/mythical/mental/integral) experience possible - mutations in other words. I wouldn’t say it always happens this way, but it often does. Petrarch walks up the mountain and is confronted with a new experience.

We rely on technology as our default until we come up to the limits. And rely on technology we do! For example, in the mental rational structure, there is an Elon Musk who says that the planet Mars is a ‘fixer-upper planet’ and a few nukes might have to be used to kickstart a more human friendly atmosphere. Then he wants to take a million people there. This is all in play now.

I sense a conundrum (might this be an aspect of ‘intensity’ - the difficult sorting out process between interfaces of the structures because of the force of perceptual lock-in?). Do we run with certain technology, focus on Mars, while failing to adequately address the qualitative side of our life here on earth? If we fail to make headway in the practical, day to day experience of actually getting along better with each other, will we take our debilitating baggage with us to other planets? Would this be Gebsers ‘hyperobjectification’ (everything as an object to be conquered)?

I guess my concern is that it’s too easy to rely on technology provided solutions and have that eclipse other initiatives on the quality, subjective, interpersonal side of things - which is really hard, and precisely why we prefer mental rational divided up solutions. And speaking of limits, and the sheer inappropriateness of certain technologies today, consider the Wall that Donald Trump and many others want to build. A Wall! As a solution to current challenges! In a world of single information space sharing, walls are not the answer. What is, I don’t know - but that certainly isn’t.

Finally, imagine this. You are Buzz Aldrin, following Neil Armstrong to walk the moon’s surface, joking about locking themselves out from the Lunar Module. What if that happened, and the technology of the day couldn’t remotely open it. Neil and Buzz locking themselves out. Technology failing us. This was the thought that came to me as I listened to a song by Porcupine Tree - a called Moonloop capturing Apollo 11’s journey, approach, landing and moonwalk. It’s interesting to note how most of the initial descriptions Armstrong gives of walking on the moon(!!!) is so very mental rational! I wondered at the feat of technology and at the same time, the limits. If you must succumb to the constraints of time, and can’t listen to the entire song, then at 9.50 you will hear Neil descend the ladder…but I don’t recommend this.


Brad – Thanks for this post, and especially the connection between Petrarch’s discovery of 3D landscape and the Apollo 8 images of the Earth—I hadn’t thought of that before, and it’s a beautiful correspondence.

Whereas Petrarch’s experience marks the beginning of mental perspectivity, the Earth images mark the beginning of planetary or integral aperspectivity. That’s very cool!

Of course, there is not necessarily a causal relationship between the images or experiences and the structures. But I think the perception crystallizes what was previously inchoate in consciousness. Concretizes it, so to speak.

Zaq – I appreciate you highlighting this passage:

I hadn’t quite picked up on the nuance of sequentiality or progress occurring within a structure—which I think we could easily characterize as “development,” whereas mutuations occur in a discontinuous manner, which might be closer to the more contemporary idea in evolutionary theory of “punctuated equilibrium.”

This challenges the notion of evolutionary “gradualism” to which Gebser may have been responding. So, I wonder if we can still speak of mutation as an evolutionary phenomenon, so long as we don’t presume that evolution happens linearly and gradually.

One point that confused me in this part of the text was Gebser’s assumption about the violence of the matriarchy.

Is that empirical in any way? What is he referring to here? Does it reflect a modernist bias regard the the violence of tribal societies?

@madrush Lol. We could only wish; it seems he rarely relies on empirical evidence to back up his claims. This is fine, but, to me, it means much needs to be substantiated in order to be taken out of the realm of conjecture and speculation. Lucky for us, In this case, when speaking of the bloodiness of the matriarchy of the Mythical structure, he is quoting another source, J.J Bachofen’s “Das Mutterrecht.” In footnote 42 p 160, Gebser claims that Bachofen “adduces several examples from antiquity to support his statement.” So, if one was inclined to search down the empirical evidence, this would be one possible lead.

However, this may not be necessary to determine if his has a modern bias regarding the violence of tribal (does he equate mythic with tribal…I forget?). If you read closer, he is only speaking of the deficient version of the matriarchy He writes the following before quoting Bachofen: “Yet we must not forget that matriarchy had by then become deficient.” Plus, If he has any bias, I don’t think it is leveled solely at the matriarchy. He has maybe more harsh and less substantiated accusations of of the patriarchy. Instead, I think he is trying to illustrate the deficiency of both structures and why he thinks we need a new, integral, structure to overcome these deficiencies.

I think quoting the rest of the passage continued on p 150-151 will illustrate my meaning:

"Matricide is synonymous with the elimination and collapse of matriarchy. Yet we must not forget that matriarchy had by then become deficient. Bachofen, for instance, has written, “Mankind has not forgotten that the time of feminine dominance visited experiences of the bloodiest kind over the earth.” The matricide extensively reduced, although not quite destroyed, what was once the sanctity that had turned into atrocity within the once-valid mythical structure, along with the remaining foundations of that structure itself. Orestes’ actions bring on the collapse of one world and the dawn of another with the full force and attendant circumstances of such cataclysms.

A downfall of the soul such as man then experienced must have been horrendous, particularly as the new structure could not fully unfold before this collapse. The demands and the pains placed upon man by this emergent structure are reflected in the exertions and struggles of the ancient heroes to assert themselves in the world. The demeanor of Odysseus - or of any other Greek hero - which manifests his boastfulness and self-adulation, is symptomatic of his compulsion to bridge the gap rent by matricide, as well as to assert himself.

Those vainglorious monologues of the Greeks, which have always seemed embarrassing because of their boastfulness and exaggeration, are accordingly an expression of the mania and compulsion of these heroes to regard themselves as seriously as the already emerging mutation demanded. Only a man still unsure of himself is given to boasting as the only way of establishing his status; this is why the ancient Greek had to assure himself by swaggering: he had destroyed the security of his maternal world and stepped out into the diurnal brightness of the columnar solar temple.

What was then taking place in moderation, counterbalanced by the cults of Demeter and Artemis (and later by the worship of the Virgin Mary), became increasingly and perilously one-sided with the onset of rationality. It is almost as though the _mater_ial-crazed man of today were the ultimate victim of the avenging mother - that mater whose chaotic immoderation is the driving force behind matter and _mater_ialistic supremacy. Besides, a world in which only the man or the father (or his representative, the son) has status and worth is ultimately inhuman.

Here lies the root of the most dangerous phenomenon of the so-called humanistic age: militarism. Patriarchal inhumanity exists particularly because the father is viewed only as, and nothing but, father; the emphasis is on his paternity and not on his humanity. The woman of this age, to the extent that she has any status at all, is seen correspondingly as only a woman and not as a human being. The “humane” age, notably the era beginning with perspectivity, is most likely the least human, and the most inhumane ever.

Yet despite this assertion we do not which to join Mereschkowski or Bergmann in proclaiming a return to a new matriarchal world. This would be tantamount to turning back the wheel of time. What must happen is rather a change in attitude by the male, who will have to forego many of his presumptions such as the arrogance that everything, including wife and child, belongs to him. He will have to give up this presumption in order that a world can come to be without maternal or paternal dominance, that is a non-masculinized world where man and woman together honor the human, and think not merely in terms of the human but of humankind in its entirety. This would mean that as matriarchy was once succeeded by patriarchy, patriarchy should be succeeded by an “integrum,” as we have designated it. In this integral world neither man nor woman, but rather both in complement as human beings, should exercise sovereignty."


This is a dream
In case you forgot
The thing generating the dream is real
what’s that?
in these black times
all the fountains are reversed
so that when we come upon a wall
a world opens
and we enter


A dream yoga report working with some of the themes that are arising in our group’s study of Gebser. After watching the last hang out I went to sleep and had the following dream. I present this because I believe there is a resonance between this dream report and my study of this Gebser material with this particular group. I am experiencing difficulty in translating between different kinds of communications between different kinds of human and perhaps non human characters. Who ever reads this I thank you for your patience.

The method is simple. I awake after four hours of sleep. I put on an eye mask and tape my mouth shut and practice Yoga Nidra. I focus on each body part and relax. Then I settle into the heart center and visualize ‘A’ in white and with the ahhhhhh sound. I note the tone of the bedroom and the sounds outside and the random thoughts and then the physical fades out and the interior starts to open up. I see very briefly a giant explosion of bright light in the shape of an orb shape coming from an interior space.

I am in a place like my mother’s shop. There are lots of people there and my mother is meeting and greeting people. I am greeted by a woman who asks is I remember her. She gives me her name and though I like her and sense a connection I don’t recall much. We are moving through different levels of this store and I am aware of the visuals and the other senses are out of synch. Sometimes the visual is vague and the auditory and the sense of movement are primary and I am trying to put the event together. The woman I met I am trying to perform a healing ritual of some kind.

I am in an office space doing some tasks when I notice some photos of some homoerotic images and there are men there who are trying to use the images in a case against someone. I do not like this. I notice that the room is full of books, records, on shelves, and I feel the people are nefarious and with my mind I start to tear up the room. Books and shelves and huge chunks of the room I destroy. I sense this destruction is necessary. I am getting rid of the whole messed up structure.

I am walking through a maze of offices and watching people go about their business. I am I realized from another dimension and they can’t see me. I reach out my hand and say,” Touch me, touch me.” I am ignored until a woman does notice me and touches my hand. We then are out of the office space into a vast auditorium, we are on the stage and it is mostly empty. I ask her where she is from. She tells me she is from earth. I tell her that we are both from earth. I try to get her earth location and wonder how we can make further contact in earth or non-earth conditions.

Then I am wandering through a run down version of the East Village, before gentrification, the streets are dirty and dark. I want to see Ed again ( a friend I have lost touch with who had a bad drug problem). I reach out to touch a door in a back alley. I call out his first and last name three times. Rocks and stones bar the entrance, and I am surrounded by debris from a building collapse. I reach towards my face and feel my eye mask, the one I wear to bed is covering my eyes. So I am in a dreamscape with my eye mask on and yet I see images but not of an outside generated reality. I decide to close my dream eyes and meditate on the emptiness.

I feel hands on my head. I open my eyes and there is a man stitching up a cut on my head, on the left side of my head. I feel the stitch has followed some kind of swift operation inside my skull. I am unafraid and trust him. I ask,” Who are you.” He says,’ I come from-“and says something I can’t understand. He is pointing upwards to a clear blue sky and I sense that he is from a vaster intelligence than my own.

I ask,” Do you love me?” There is no affect shared. He lets me know in a way that I can understand that his version of what love is, is very different from his, however he can say that in my terms that he holds me in esteem and considers me very valuable. I sense that the surgical procedure was necessary rather than nefarious however I am not in a condition to know for sure. I could not resist him.

I am then out on the streets of a transformed city, with a clear blue sky in what feels like a perpetual morning and I in a big street wrestling playfully with a man but then I realize with a mild surprise that I am interacting with a goat man, a man with a human torso and furry legs and hooves.

’ Oh," I exclaim, with a confused delight," it is the God Pan!"