1) The answer to that part is: “Of course.”

2) I think it’s pretty clear when viewing Michael Jackson’s life that there are elements of both the non-clear masculine and the non-clear feminine woven all through the tapestry of that life, and you are probably seeing a considerable gender preference too. After all, there is usually more prominence given to the male than the female as is in this case. But you're probably also witnessing some age discrimination. Now this is what is interesting, because in truth they were not really that far apart in age, roughly ten years. But you wouldn’t know it from the radically different images the two people projected. Michael Jackson was the perpetual child, just looking at him none would guess his actual age, but if you also look at his issues. This is not to judge any of them, but if you honestly look at them you might also notice that his issues were more the issues of adolescence than those of mature adulthood, and I find that kind of curious, don’t you?

But further, Farrah Fawcett was not really a controversial figure, was she? Michael Jackson, on the other hand, was a highly controversial figure, and you know how the media works, the more controversial a person is, the more attention they are given in the media. Farrah Fawcett began her journey in the light goddess tradition and ended with a full measure of dark goddess maturity. Her life was one that matured over time. In other words, she didn’t get stuck as maybe Michael Jackson has. You can assess that yourself. But she was able to take her journey seriously enough to bear witness to it. She did this subjectively of course, as anyone would, but with some objectivity as well. I think you will probably see a completely different case with Michael Jackson. His whole journey has been quite subjective, I think, and not perhaps as objective as he might have hoped he could accomplish in this life.

What I find pretty interesting is how many people have sanctified Michael Jackson in their minds. Some are actually saying that now he’s an enlightened being, and while those projections are probably helpful to him as he negotiates the bardo, it is, let’s just say, interesting to note that none are holding Farrah Fawcett in this light. The death of these two entertainers on the same day does present some fodder for comparing mind, does it not? But the important question is, of course, what are each of you learning from all of this? I’m going to let each one of you fill in the blanks for that question, but I think this has been a pretty big event between these two people dying, and then all of the hullabaloo that’s sort of followed Michael Jackson in death is kind of similar to the hullabaloo that followed him in life, isn't it? So ask yourself what are you learning from observing these situations from bearing witness not only to the passing of these two people, both of whom were very well known, but also in bearing witness to how people have responded the world over.

Again, without restating that entire meditation, I’m going to try and answer these questions, because I think there’s merit for a number of you in focusing in this way. Personally to our questioner, I would not call the sense you are having an emotion. If anything, it should be a lack of emotion, which may be why it seems to you like depression. What you are trying to develop here is highly engaged neutrality. You thus become highly engaged in the meditation process but not the drama. In withholding your energy from the drama, you save yourself from getting lost in it. Now basically this is a good thing, and I would suggest that you simply observe what it is to be neutral to all of the drama that flies around you. Now, indeed, there is plenty of drama in the realm of humans, isn't there? But the sad part is that some people confuse who they are with the amount of drama in their lives, and this, of course, is a faulty notion of self. Thus, when one first begins to observe drama but holds oneself back from it, there clearly arises a different set of the mind. So while you are watching the drama, you can also simply watch your own mental state. You don’t need to do anything with the space that you are experiencing, just notice it and see what might be hidden within it for your learning.

One of the problems that the ego mind can get into is demanding to be entertained all the time, and often this entertainment comes by losing oneself in the drama that’s always manifesting in one’s life. However, it’s important here not to let the ego fool you. The drama is not who you are. In fact, it’s a false condition altogether. Now it may be fun, or at least high-spirited, high energy, but it’s not part of your core identity, nor that of anyone else for that matter, no matter how much they might identify with the drama that they either create or participate in. You see for some people drama seems to fill up the empty spaces in a person’s life. What it actually does, however, is simply to keep one from exploring a quiet mind, so pay attention not only to the drama you watch in your visualizations, but also to any part of your own mind that resists the observer role. Without judging it, see what you can learn from just observing. When you touch the quiet spaces that exist between you and what you’re watching, you're touching some kind of truth, so just observe it and see what you can learn about that particular space. In fact, don’t even try to name it as depression or indifference or anything, just watch it. Eventually that space will reveal its true nature to you, and I can tell you it’s luminous and—may I create a word here?—“splendorific.”

Keep using this visualization, and you will not only come to make friends with the visualization, you might see your way into enlightenment. So I would say, “You go, girl.”

In a perfect world or even in a perfect scenario, it would seem as if such states were not necessary at all. If they have any necessary meaning, it will lie in the fact that often it seems to take an experience of a negative mind state to demonstrate the areas in which one is not yet clear. Know this: episodes of anger, irritation, frustration, guilt, depression, hostility, blaming, etc. all come from the same root, and it’s the root that should always be in focus for dealing with them. These, and other negative or afflictive mind states, arise from a false notion of oneself. They can’t come from anything else. In the moment of their arising, the ego is simply carrying an emotional charge, and it is that charge that is felt in moments of eruption or even in lesser states of frustration.

Thus, when any of you have an episode, say, of becoming irritated with someone else, it is wise to examine first of all the emotional charge. How do you feel it? And how does it move through your body? Second, inquire within as to why, when the charge arises, you have a pattern of reacting in a specific way. Perhaps you snap at the other person or become critical, or maybe your ego uses ridicule in such situations. Become completely aware of your patterns so that when you next feel the charge arising you can intervene before the habitual pattern takes over. This is kind of the secret to ironing out the wrinkles here as we move along spiritually.

In reflecting on experiences that have triggered, let’s say, the eruptive pattern in the past, try to remove your focus from the other person and investigate deeply how it is that this false self got into the mix in the first place. How did it cause you to lose your grip on your beautiful nature, your true nature. This kind of investigating inwardly will lead you to experience probably a number of things, but mainly compassion for others who may have similar patterns. Eventually you will discover that the compassion also extends toward yourself. When you can hold a field of compassion, you will find it is a forgiving field that is very vast and also very healing. Believe it or not, this is your natural state.

You know, one of the things everyone has to learn is how to let the past be the past. When your mind drags up old events wherein you are not your best self, what good does it do? It may raise a critical nature or it may raise a tendency to demean yourself, but these, too, are reflections of a projecting non-clear ego. Of course it’s important to have remorse for those instances when or where and for whatever reason you slipped a bit. Remorse is a type of purification. I suppose there’s several ways to do remorse. You could just talk to the person and say you’re sorry, but if you really want the purification, you might visualize yourself doing some prostrations to the person at or on whom you erupted.

If you can, try to see the other as a Buddha who is in your life to help you learn to curb inappropriate reactions or perhaps just help you see where you are not yet clear. As you learn to clear these areas, you associate more with your true nature rather than the false self who was careless with an emotional charge and perhaps took aim at another person.

As you learn to internalize and ultimately identify more with your true nature, the false notion of yourself begins to dissolve. In this case, the false notion was seeing and believing in the part of your psyche that got careless in a stressful moment. I realize that when one first begins to wrestle with such concepts, the object of focus, that is your false self, becomes pretty slippery. You will find it’s difficult to get a firm grasp on the part of your psyche that you are trying to heal. However, with practice you will ultimately see through the false self and you will see into or into the greater self or your own true nature. It will take some practice of course and maybe some ruthless scrutiny as well, but I assure you it will be well worth your efforts in the end.