Thought divides knowing into a knower and the known, loving into a lover and the beloved, and perceiving into a perceiver and the perceived. As such, it is thought alone that abstracts a subject and an object from the seamless, unnamable intimacy of pure Knowing or Experiencing.

The Resonance Of Love

Recently I have experienced frustration when trying to communicate this single thought, that it is only our perception which changes. Clearly there is some error in my thinking and I would appreciate how I may clarify this.

Hello Rupert,

I  have been thinking for many years about perceeption. As a psychologist I would often use the theme of “changing perception” about a situation in order to facilitate releif from stress/anxiety in clients.  Working with bereaved and traumatized  children it occurred that their perceived self (and perceptions of others) changed during the healing process.  They used art work and play to express feelings. Recently I have experienced frustration when trying to communicate (to others) this single thought;   it is only our perception which changes”.  Clearly there is some error in my thinking and I would appreciate how I may clarify this.

I have used the example of how we see ourselves in relative to others.  For example we may like someone a great deal but upon overhearing them making a cruel remark about us or finding them stealing from us, or perception  (of them) alters.  Yet they possibly have NOT changed and nor have we but our perception (it seems) irrevocably alters.  Or when we are “in love” with someone and then then fall out and meet them at a later date,  they seem to have changed but it is only our perception.  I would appreciate any feedback or clarification you can give.




Dear Elizabeth,

You give the example of when our perception of a person changes but their perception of us seems not to change. However, the observation that their perception has not changed is in fact simply our perception.

In fact we have no knowledge of anyone or anything outside perception.

It is precisely this idea that the other exists outside and independent of our self, Consciousness, that is responsible for the conflict that we are trying to resolve. The conflict cannot be resolved with the same separating tool (the dualising mind) that creates it in the first place.

Conflict between people is not resolved in the mind; it is resolved in the dissolution of the mind with all its fixed positions, opinions, attitudes, certainties etc. It is dissolved in listening, openness, sensitivity, love.

If we are frustrated because someone is not understanding us and then blame or judge them for not understanding, we simply add our own frustration into the mix and compound the conflict.

In such a case we may try again to meet them in understanding in a new way. Instead of imposing our own view of the situation we may take our stand in openness, welcoming and listening. If our words come from this place, chances are they will find their way to the heart of the other. And their words will find their way into our heart. If not, both parties have done their best and must wait.

Either way, conflict is not resolved in the mind. The mind is dissolved in that place where all resolution occurs.

Even in a professional situation such as the one you describe, it is in the deep listening rather than the speaking that the healing takes place.

It is the same in the situation with a teacher. The apparent teacher considers the apparent student to be his or her very own self, that is, to be the beautiful Presence that he or she knows him or herself to be.

That is the effective ingredient in the relationship. The words are simply the context, not the substance of the relationship. When we go out to play football with a child, is it because we love to play football? No, it is because we love the child. Football is just a way of being together, of allowing this resonance of love to shine.

It is in this resonance of love that all psychological conflict is healed.

With kind regards,