judgment and non-judgment
Judgment and non-judgment are often confused concepts. For there are spiritual teachings which say to always practice non-judgment, or to not judge anything. The confusion with this is in a lack of clarification about what is meant by judgment and non-judgment. The essential meaning of judgment is to discern what is true or right. This goes along with the meaning of having ‘good judgment’. Spiritual teachings would not want to say that all discernment and all good judgment should be abandoned. This would be a case of throwing out a baby because there is dirty bath water surrounding it. The dirty water is our negative connotation about the word judgment, so we need to understand what these connotations are, in order to understand why some spiritual teachings speak negatively about judgment.
What people are really upset about regarding judgment are prejudice judgments, unfair judgments, and cruel judgments. But these are really poor judgments, rather than good and fair judgments. Yet so many people have had bad experiences being wrongly judged that they now disdain the practice of judgment altogether and uphold a philosophy that all judgments are bad. Besides the contradiction in this very philosophy, (judging all judgments as bad), it is founded on shortsightedness. Some kinds of judgment are both good and necessarily practical. Yet what the anti-judgmental critics are really put off by are those kinds of judgment that are founded on either hatred, prejudice, rigid categorization, unsubstantiated generalization, or any act of making a ‘final judgment’ that closes the heart to another living being.
This topic is very important in life, yet difficult to simplify. Some people are very judgmental, while others are not judgmental. Some believe that non-judgment is a great necessity to spiritual life and that judgment is the root of all bad; others believe that judgment is necessary to bring justice to the world. Some believe that judgment can be eliminated in life; others believe that it cannot. Our teaching recommends a middle view, whereby much of judgment is sought to be eliminated, but some judgments are needed to further the divine purpose.
In general, judgments are a needed part of human life, because judgments make distinctions between good and bad, right and wrong, better and worse. Without these judgments, no one would take action to make life better, nor try to solve problems, nor bring about a better justice, nor even improve oneself. For there would be no reason nor motivation to attempt any of these changes, if one did not judge distinctions between good and bad, right and wrong, better or worse. If everything is equally good, or equally perfect, then this eliminates the value of social justice movements and self-improvement. Also, judging greater beauty from lesser beauty is sometimes a matter of common sense. Surely, a clean beach with nice water is aesthetically better, as well as ecologically better, than a trashed beach with polluted water.
Having said this, and hopefully having people see that complete non-judgment would be a ridiculous way of life; let us consider the virtues of non-judgment. The first virtue of non-judgment is acceptance. Non-judgment helps us accept and respect others for the way they are, and life the way it is. Accept first, before judgment. Then, after acceptance we might need to make a value-judgment. But first accept, for by accepting we do not immediately react, fight back or run away from a person or situation. By first accepting, we open the possibility to really see that person and situation, instead of immediately reacting with negative judgment. Then, by acceptingly seeing what is, we often see that this person or situation is not as bad as we first might have thought. However, we do need to be realistic about people and situations; for there are sometimes bad people and bad situations. So sometimes the situation calls for a realistic negative judgment; unless we want to follow the foolish idea that everything and everyone is really perfect or necessary to the divine plan. If everyone and everything that happens is really perfect or necessary for the greater good, then all negative judgment or negative discernments would be the stupidity (though according to this principle of everything’s perfect, the negative judgments would also be equally perfect as non-judgment, and so on until one is completely confused).
A second virtue of non-judgment is non-prejudice. Prejudice accompanying judgment is one of the main reasons why people feel that judgments are never good. Prejudice is a judgment about someone or a group that is not really true about the person or group. Also, prejudice is a pre-judgment, meaning that prejudice enters into a situation with an already fixed judgment about the person. It involves a presupposition or belief about the person before actually getting to know the person. As well, prejudice is often unfair; maybe an unfair generalization based on just a few negative examples. So judgment can involve prejudice. But judgment and value-distinction does not have to involve prejudice. We can eliminate unfair prejudice in our judgments; thus making unprejudiced judgments. Some have argued that psychological and cultural prejudice is very difficult to eliminate completely from our everyday value-judgments; but one could still counter-argue that immense purification of prejudice is certainly possible.
Often connected with acceptance and non-prejudice is love, and rightly so. There is an experience of love when one is accepted unconditionally without any prejudice. And non-judgment is part of this unconditional acceptance. Related to this is an openness of the heart and mind to others, rather than a closed heart or closed mind. And through this openness, or opening, the other is received without judgment and without reservation. The other is accepted and respected for who they are in their uniqueness.
A third virtue of non-judgment is non-reaction, which of course goes along with acceptance and non-prejudice. Our thesis here is that value-judgment, and even negative judgment, can be an important response in some situations. Yet we do not need to react with strong negative emotions. This reaction of negative emotion is often why a lot of people feel that judgment is a bad thing. But judgment does not have to be filled with negative emotion. If someone clumsily runs into you because they were not paying attention to their surroundings, then there is nothing wrong with having a judgment that this person lacked attention and was clumsy; but there is no need to react with negative emotion. Instead, one can accept the situation as it is, while also making a reasonable judgment that this was clumsy rather than graceful, and that the person could have been more cautious and considerate of their surroundings.
This is making a factual recognition, such as this person just ran into me, and also making a value-judgment such as this person was clumsy and lacked considerate attention; but a negative emotional reaction can be avoided. The factual recognition and the value-judgment are useful and reasonable; but a negative emotional reaction is not useful. One does not need to react with anger or hatred. One does not need to yell at the person, nor punch them, nor plan out a retribution for their offence. Instead, one could forgive the person, while also advising them to please be more careful. This is just a silly example, but hopefully it can serve to show the meaning intended.
We can also note that positive loving emotions can go along with judgments. For example, when the kids run into the kitchen with muddy feet, mom can inform the kids that this is not a good way to come in. The kids need to learn how not to do this again. So there is judgment in this, between what is good and not-good. A spiritual mother does not need to think this was a perfect situation, though it might be thought of as a perfect opportunity to teach the kids about being more careful and respectful of a clean house. The mother can have and apply some judgments discriminating between good and bad, but she can do this with love, forgiveness, and the wisdom of a teacher. She might be direct and blunt about what the kids should learn, but she need not be angry or hateful or mean.
So judgment does not necessarily come with negative emotion; instead, it can come with love and wisdom. If you are confronted with a disagreement, or if someone is harshly and unfairly judging you, you can confront them and even have an argument over values, or what is right and wrong. But you do not need to fight them with anger, or try to blow them up with hatred; instead, you could visit them with love and a desire to resolve misunderstandings or disagreements. Make a movement towards conversation with respect; not attack with despise. And through this way of love, we can still work with value-judgments, as long as these do not turn into rigid prejudices or spiteful scorn. Make distinctions and judgments, but without reactive negative emotion. Then respond with value-discerning wisdom, but without vengeance or intentional hurt. At times one must disagree and even argue, but this can be done with respect and open-mindedness.
Non-judgment is certainly a love-based attitude. It includes the love qualities of acceptance, openness, respect, non-prejudice, and non-negative reaction. If we study world history, as well as simply studying our own experiences of social relationships, we can see how negative judgment can eat away at potential harmony and love, and how fights are often caused by negative judgments. Yet we should be clear in our understanding about the factors of judgment that cause these many problems of the world and in relationships. The negative factors of judgment, or that which causes more negativity in the world, are prejudice, disrespect, closed-heartedness, despise, and various other negative emotional reactions. These factors are what many people associate with critical judgment; probably because they accompany judgment so very often. But if we can make reasonable value-judgments without indulging in these negative factors, then it is possible for judgment to be spiritually useful and recommended in certain situations. This goes along with the thesis here, that we should not completely abandon all critical judgment or all value-judgments; because they can be useful, as long as the negative factors already described are not included in such judgments.
It is suggested here that a pure, reasonable judgment is possible. This would be a pure judgment of spiritual reason, or spiritual discernment, or it could be a moral judgment. But along with this, there is no need for any negative emotional reaction. Neither does this have to imply prejudice, disrespect, or closed-heartedness. For example, a teacher makes a critical judgment about a particular reading or work of writing, distinguishing between good and poor writing, or between better or worse. Or there might be some critical judgment of a particular reasoning involved with a writing or discourse; for not all reasoning is sound and consistent.
We might also make distinctions and judgments about moral behavior; for example, one might critically and negatively judge an act of pollution to the environment. Some acts simply are not good, and the discernment of this is part of the function of critical judgment. So it would be silly to absolutely abandon judgment altogether. We can make these judgments without adding in various negative emotional factors and reactions that will then cause more problems. Another example: one can point out untruths in politics, based on discernment and judgment between truth and false, and also one can criticize political actions if they are discerned as being harmful to higher purposes. But this does not have to also involve harsh negative emotions. If we want the world to be more loving, then an expressed hatred for those we believe are not loving enough would be counter-active to the larger purpose of building love.
Instead, we can make critical judgments with an unemotional clarity of a teacher, or with the sincere caring of a mother. So if the children run into the room with muddy feet, we can judge this as being not-good for the greater purpose of cleanliness, and we can teach the children to be more careful and respectful of cleanliness. This would be a critical judgment, a value discernment, and a teaching about good and bad. But one does not have to include a harsh or mean judgment about the children; for the judgment is only directed at the action, not the person. And one does not have to include negative reaction, such as screaming at or beating up the children for their mistake.
Judgment might sometimes be a ‘Final judgment’. A final judgment is actually a
pre-judgment; that is, it is a prejudice based on stereotyping or unjustified generalizations about others. So sometimes, people judge others or circumstances based on unfair stereotyping or prejudice. I judge you; I am making a final conclusion about you. A final judgment about another or about something is when one mentally puts another into a particular box and closes the lid. I judge you; I put you in that box and close the lid. For instance, imagine a teacher making a final judgment about a poorly achieving student – that this student is definitely and forever pegged as being a poor achiever. And they get no more chances to be seen differently. Imagine a parent doing basically the same, making a final judgment about their child or teen; like that is who they are, and they could never be different, while the parent thinks they could never be wrong about who their child is or what they can achieve. This final kind of judgment should obviously be watched out for and avoided.
Final judgments close the door to further inquiry about a person or group. The attitude is that one has seen enough and knows enough about this person that they can make a final conclusion, which is often limiting and negative. The most common kinds of final judgments are that a person is stupid, or that a person is bad, or that a person is incapable in some way. These are the more common kinds of negative conclusions about others. And this conclusion, this judgment, carries on with an expectation. One expects them to be this way, so everytime there is an example to support this conclusion, the person judging thinks how right they are about that person, while the judger neglects everytime that person shows the opposite. This is due to the power of a final conclusion and the expectations that proceed from it. It is possible to make positive final judgments and expectations as well, but the bigger concern is with negative ones.
Final judgments are often unfair or unsupported generalizations. Sometimes people judge others far too quickly and easily, and often based on quite trivial evidence. For example, you drop a dish so I judge you to be clumsy. You drop another dish, and I become absolutely certain you are clumsy. This is an example of a generalized conclusion based on just a few supporting evidences. We often make such generalizations, without sufficient amounts of evidences. This is a quickness to judge. Other times, it is common to make final conclusions based on a faulty logic. For example, you see someone drinking wine on a park bench, and you immediately conclude that they are unintelligent bums. Again, this is a hasty judgment. We make all sorts of hasty, generalized judgments, based on little evidence, which then become stereotypes and expectations.
Sometimes, judgment is accompanied by unfair blame put upon others. I judge you; I blame you. Sometimes, judgment is accompanied by anger. I judge you; I am angry with you. And this anger could have an added hurtfulness to it. I judge you; I hurt you. Sometimes, judgment is accompanied by a personal disliking. I judge you; I dislike you. Yet it is possible to make some honest judgments about behaviors, without also meaning that one dislikes or hates that person. We could, in fact, have a negative judgment about people who harm others, whereby we mean that their behavior is bad; and yet we could refrain from hating the person.
So these are some of the negative manifestations of judgment: the tendency to blame and resent as part of the judgment, and the tendency to generalize a final conclusion about others or stereotype them. Thus, we should always be careful about judgments.
Judgment and perceiving others
Judgment is when you think you know someone. This is judgment. People think that judgment, in a negative sense, is only when you think bad about someone. But most often it is much more subtle. You say he is this way, or they are that way. They do this, so they must be like that. Listen to how people speak about others, or how you speak about others. And you’ll see this pattern. Whenever you think you know about anyone, like how they are, this is judgment. The only way to get beyond this is to realize that you don’t really know them. Each person is a mystery. You might discover aspects of this person. But aspects are like facets of a diamond; and there are many facets. So you might perceive a facet about another person, and that is alright. But it is different when we get into a thinking pattern or conversational pattern about someone that goes like this: they are this way. You might discover a facet about this person, but you don’t know much about who they really are.
Can you drop, let go of, your beliefs about who I am? You think you know who I am, or you think I am like this or like that. But those are merely your judgments about me, and these soon become prejudices, for prejudices are pre-judgments – that is, judgments already decided, already believed. So you will not really see who I am in the moment, because you will be seeing me with pre-conceptions and prejudgments. You will have already made up in your mind who I am or what kind of person I am. Can you realize how insulting this is? Yet it is a human tendency to do just this. We see someone we know and think “I know that person.” We might have a history with that person, a memory of them. But even those previous experiences or those memories are questionable interpretations about what is truly real.
The solution, the way around this, is to treat each person as a divine mystery and realize that we do not yet know much about that person at all. All we know are a bunch of cheap fixed beliefs about them, beliefs most likely based on generalizations that are supported by just a few particular instances. Someone does something wrong or different than we think is best, so we immediately make a fixed belief about them and forever label them as such. We generalize about people based on just one or two instances. But instead realize humility – that you don’t really know much about this person, and you do think you know is probably a hasty generalization, or hasty judgment – which soon becomes a fixed prejudice. So the next part of the solution is to see each person in complete freshness of perception, without any held beliefs about them – that is, without any pre-judgment about them.
Thus, realize humility about what you actually know about me. You know very little; probably because you never took much time to really see and know me. So, see me and listen to me without your judgments about me. Then, it is possible to understand something real about me. Then, you might even see who I really am in my very essence. Perhaps, you might see the divine reality in me. Perhaps, you might even see the Divine Itself looking through me at you. Perhaps, you will see the Divine Light through me. Perhaps I am the Divine meeting with you. But you can never possibly see this if you continue having fixed ideas about me, fixed beliefs about me, fixed judgments and prejudices about me. Remember, everyone is the Divine in hiding. And what is mostly making it hidden is our own myopic perceptions and judgmental mind.
Nonetheless, we cannot just dismiss all judgment as bad or unnecessary. We have all felt the injustice of being judged unfairly at times. And yet, if we were in a singing contest, for example, or any artistic or sport contest, we would be acting childish if we demanded everyone to never judge us; because judgment (meaning discernment of good and right) is inherent in any contest, and it is really inherent in human life. It would be silly or childish to say that no one should judge one performance in comparison to another. Should we neglect the difference in excellence, and thus not judge, between a master musician and a novice beginner?
We should not be denying or throwing out the good and useful meaning of judgment, just because the connotations surrounding it have become tainted. What are these connotative meanings? It has to do with a few added on emotions and thought patterns, which sometimes accompany an act of judgment.
So, in spite of the many possible problems and misuses of judgment, we should not throw all judgment out the window, or demonize all judgment. For some forms of judgment are healthy and good, even negative judgments, as long as they are pure discernments about truth and falsity, or about right and wrong; without resentments, prejudices or unwarranted conclusions. For example, business corporations and governmental policies are often in need of judgment concerning their honesty and social benefit. We should be judging the worth and truthfulness of businesses and governments. In education we need to make judgments about which students have done well in subject and can move on to higher studies; although we must avoid prejudicial judgments, final conclusions, and blaming connotations. In art and sports we need to make judgments about higher or lesser pieces and performances. If we want to buy something, we need to judge the real worth of what a seller says something is worth. We need our own good judgment and discernment, rather that rely on businesses, governments or others to tell us what is good and what is not. And we need to make some judgments about people as well; as for instance, in deciding who we can trust and who we decide to make a relationship with. These are all very practical judgments, and they cannot be thrown out of our spiritual handbook with cliché injunctions such as ‘no judgment’. Basically, good judgment is needed to discern between true or false, right or wrong, and between better or worse.
Some degree of judgment, if it be good judgment or right judgment, is often appropriate and necessary. An example would be having a well-supported judgment about the quality and honesty of a particular government agency. Another example would be having a sound judgment about the degree of excellence of a particular commodity or performer. On a more personal level, we need to have sound judgments about what our friends and acquaintances say, regarding what is true or false, and regarding what is good or bad. We shouldn’t be simply believing everything anyone says, as if everyone knows and speaks of the truth all the time. Our friends or acquaintances might be wrong, which might simply be because they were misinformed by someone else. Good judgment is deciphering what is true or false. And we should not simply be following our friends on every path, without judging or discerning for ourselves what is good or bad. Sometimes one needs to just say no, rather than having a simplistic attitude of never judging anything or believing that every path is just as good as any other.
We should be judging the truth or falsity of what people say. We should be judging the usefulness or stupidity of actions. We should be critical, if there is a need for it, and criticism is often useful. Especially in academic studies, in politics and in philosophy, criticism and critical thinking are necessary and essential. Criticism and argument are seen as essential tools for an evolution of right understanding. Critical thinking and critical judgment are cornerstones of an intellectual or academic life. This means that one is capable and willing to recognize and point out problems with what is given by a text or by a proposed theory. Criticism is important because without it, the problems, the contradictions, and the unsupported generalizations will go unnoticed and thus will never be changed. The whole evolution of science would never have occurred, if not for critical thinking and criticism. It’s part of the whole process of inquiry into truth. As well, on a personal level with ourselves, self-criticism and critical thinking are essential. Otherwise, the narcissic ego would easily take over completely.
However, we need to be wary and careful about judgments, because many people have a tendency to over-judge or over-criticize. Just as some people are timid about judgment and criticism, there are others who are somewhat oppressive about it. I am one of these. The problem with over-criticism is with its excessiveness and its tendency to dwell on all details, even the most trivial ones. Another tendency is to justify such criticism as being important to either the person or to some higher purpose. Notice my need to justify criticism in general and make note of its positive attributes, before embarking on a negative critique of criticism. So besides being tediously over emphasizing a criticism of details, the overly critical person tends to sadistically enjoy hurting others with their critical words, though justifying this as a necessary act of dispelling falsity and demanding justice. Thus, it might well be important to sometimes make a criticism, but we should be careful how we do this and be concerned about the possible hurtful effects of such criticism or sarcasm.
There is a good reason for having judgments, which is a practical reason. The judgment is useful for some purpose, such as discerning what is better. But this does not mean that we should always be judging. There is a time to judge and a time not to judge. Those against judgment altogether have failed to recognize the practical importance of judgment, yet they have reminded us that many cases of judgment are both unnecessary and harmful. If we want to improve on some aspect of our life or work or music, we might need to judge what is better from what is worse. If we hope to improve on something, we must first make judgment. Though this should not be automatically confused with beating oneself over the head or hating oneself. And we might at times need to judge the work or music of others, with a greater purpose in mind of improvement. But again this does not have to be automatically associated with meanness or lack of love. It is simply a practical function. Even with judgments, there may be better or worse, good and bad judgments.
But there are many times when judgment should be forfeited in favor of simple acceptance. Like if you go to a nudist resort, you will see all sorts of bodies. The judgment mind will start to classify the different body shapes into a range from excellent to poor. This active judgment may be useful in a contest or in deciding who to choose as a fitness teacher, but otherwise it tends to be a dysfunctional activity of the mind – if there really isn’t any useful need for the judgment. In other words, if there isn’t any immediate practical use for judging, then there isn’t any reason to make judgments about the shapes of people’s bodies. So this is just one example of no need to judge. Instead, this is a time to practice non-judgmental acceptance. In fact, when one changes from judgment mode to acceptance mode, the many diverse body shapes begin to look beautiful in their unique ways. This is a positive consequence of the unconditional acceptance mode.
The goal is good judgment, vs. lousy judgment, not the complete annihilation of judgment, because good judgment can serve us in practical life. Afterall, we should want to know and distinguish quality vs. crap, honesty vs. cheating, truth vs. falsity, good vs. bad. To distinguish these, we want right judgment, not wrong judgment. We want to be wise in judgment, not stupid. It seems that the faculty of judgment has become the new evil in the eyes of new age spiritualism and postmodernism. But what they ought to be down on is bad judgment; for it is bad judgment that has given judgment a bad name.
Still the caution we must sustain is to not make judgments that will simply cause further negative reactions in the world. No sense in making negative judgments that will simply create more negativity. For the only positive and practical value of critical judgment is to successfully transform lower quality into higher quality, falseness into truth, deception into honesty, prejudice into fairness, hatred into love. If judgment does not help in such transformations, then it is not worthy to exercise.
So instead of absolutely eliminating judgment and criticism, we could hold a middle position, whereby we hold a wide range of non-judgment, but still reserve an importance in negatively judging extreme acts of violence, greed, hatred, and inhuman manipulation of others. We eliminate petty judgments and truly unnecessary judgments from our way of being, which also means that we have a wide degree of acceptance in our encounters. And we learn to appreciate as much of our reality as we can. Yet we also acknowledge some boundaries in what we will accept. Somewhere there has to be lines that we draw between good and bad, and past this line we cannot merely accept what is. For example, we should not merely accept killing and harm to others.
Some people say that criticism and judgment are bad qualities and are not spiritual. They hope for a world where there is none of this. Well in a perfect world, maybe criticism and judgment would not exist. But our world is not perfect, or we could say it is in process towards a perfection; and thus, on the way or along this process there may be need for occasional criticism and judgment, in order to point out what is not right or not true or not good. I see nothing wrong in this, because it is usefully necessary for progressing from bad to good, from falsity to truth. It is necessary in the process of social and spiritual evolution.
I accept criticism and judgment as significantly useful responses to circumstances, and I engage in this. I also accept death and life, destruction and creative building. Like death and pain, criticism and judgment are not the nicest aspects of our way, yet nonetheless they are part of it. Criticism and judgment should not be intended to hurt people, but it may be needed to break down and dismantle old buildings of wrong thinking and unethical patterns.
Some teachings and people negatively criticize and judge those who apply criticism and judgment in life. But I accept criticism and judgment, and I intentionally engage in it. I accept others being critical, and I engage in criticism. So, I am not negatively critical of criticism and judgment, as are others who criticize my acts of criticism. Thus, on a meta-level I accept the inherent value of criticism, and I am not critical about criticism. While at a practical level, I am critical of certain patterns and agendas in society, and I am critical of certain environmentally harmful activities made by certain people or businesses. And I feel no need to be apologetic about such criticisms and judgments. Yet some people are negatively critical about criticism. On a practical level, they refrain from criticism and judgment, but on a meta-level they are definitely critical and judgmental about those who engage in criticism and judgment on the practical level.
Yet I don’t value and I don’t accept unnecessary harmfulness or spitefulness in such criticism. Criticism should come from the intellect, and thus it should be purely intellectual. It should not have added baggage of emotional hatred, meanness, or spitefulness. This emotional baggage is why criticism and judgment get a bad name. Too many times, this emotional baggage comes along with criticism and judgment, which causes unnecessary hurt and also tends to create emotionally charged reactions.
Argument (did this connect to what is just above here about how to deal with negatives?)
It is sometimes appropriate to argue – or to make one’s point of view clear to the other. There is nothing inherently wrong with argument, with making one’s opinion clear and giving some reasons for this opinion. If everyone gave up all argument, then the status quo would mostly likely keep continuing. This would be ideal for authorities and traditionalists, who would love if no one ever argued with them about anything. Authorities and status quo are always against argument, as well as against any kind of confrontation. But confrontation is not inherently wrong; in fact, we should engage in confrontation when false statements are being made or when injustice is being done. Yet people who engage in false ideas or in injustices never want any confrontation, so they will tell you how bad confrontation is.
However, it is extremely difficult to achieve success with argument and confrontation, because those who one is arguing against or confronting will usually prop up all sorts of defenses and barriers and also react like a cornered cat. Truly successful argument and confrontation, whereby the other side actually listens or changes, requires a learned mastery of the art. Yet again, we should not have too high of expectations, because any confrontation will be dealing with other egos and their reactions. Also, the one making argument or confrontation must look very honestly inside their own motivations, because sometimes the biggest problem is with oneself, however difficult this might be to recognize.
Further advice on this topic is also to honor one’s own highest intuition. This is one’s final guide. One should consider many things, but the final guide has to be one’s highest intuition or heart knowing. One should consider what others say, think and feel. One should consider what teachers and great books say. One should be a ready observant of one’s own emotional motivations and automatic reactions. Yet finally, one has to trust one’s highest intuition or heart knowing.
The Way is
love, mixed with discernment.
Maybe the best kind of judgments are to do with how well man-made activities and products fit harmoniously and sustainably with the natural world.
judgment has no place in pure heart consciousness. Times to be just in the heart , in heart consciousness – without judgment about self or others. Just love and we see just beauty.