No Self, Selflessness (Anatta/Anatman) & the Five Aggregates 

Love this way of perception...gives us more room to grow rather than labelling our selves.....

Thank you🙇 for this, it is really difficult to understand the 5 Aggregates at first. Even I as a long time Buddhist, I had to search videos after videos to fully understand it. So thank you for this. May you be well, may you be happy and may you be peaceful. May every sentient beings be well, may every sentient beings be happy and may every sentient beings be peaceful and rejoice in these merits. For us to search for this is us wanting to be on this path that Buddha had wanted us to be in. Namo amitofo 🙏.

This was the most cogent explanation of the aggregates I've found so far.

Eye consciousness. That realization that you’ve been staring off into the distance; realizing what your eyes were focused on while you’ were actually seeing with your mind’s eye.

I've tried reading about the no-self and the five aggregates and never fully grasped the concept. Thank you for this video, it made things a whole lot clearer!

We must think comfort, the end of suffering the closer we get to being comfortable with our selves & others. "He came to send US the🕊️Comforter"!

She has such a gift, explaining this all so well.

Many thanks Mindah-Lee. I enjoyed your calm and indepth analysis. Your presentation is simply beautiful. Thx.

Thank you for the clear teachings. With gratitude and appreciation, I am looking forward to part 2! :)

I swear. I've read so many pages and seen so many videos on this subject and specifically the 5 aggregates. This video is probably the only one that made perfect sense to my pea brain. Thanks!

One of the best Dharma talks ever made

Why I am here after 4 years , thanks for all these thoughts !! These thoughts make us calm and encourage us to see always forward in our life !!

Wow, that was something! I've read about the aggregates however the way you presented them and explained the whole idea surrounding Anatta is just simple and fabulous! Thank you for exemplifying- really a jewel!

Thank you for putting the link to part 2 in the description!

Every time I watch this video I want to relike it. This accerated my spiritual journey so much. I wish I knew this year's ago. Thank you so much for this life changing information.

This is the best talk on this subject that I know of - so clearly explained.

Best exposition of the five aggregates I have seen, very understandable, thank you.

This is the clearest explanation on this topic I've ever seen, thanks!

Thank you very much for this helpful and informative video. It makes this seemingly-abstract subject much more real.

Thank you so much for your awesome explanation of the 5 aggregates. Most unexpected and enlightening insight into how we believe in the me identification. Love and peace.

Beautifully taught -- perfectly clear. Thank you.

You're an awesome teacher. I list to this as a lead into my zazen pratice. Thank you, I love it!

Beautiful explanation 👌😃your passion for Buddhism shines through!

You are amazing! I have been having so much trouble grasping this idea and you have perfectly explained it. Thank you so much

I really like you eloquent way of explaining the aggregate part of the self. So enlightening.Thanks!

Wonderful video, thank you. Anatta seems like one of the most important teachings in Buddhism and this video is very well researched and clearly presented.

This is one of the clearest explanation of Anatta and the five aggregates I have heard! All in only an half hour. Thank You Mindah-Lee.

Had near death when I was 16 in a gray area fleet like I was myself but also not myself total calm and peace no thoughts

I have listened to Minjur Rinpoche's exlanation on no self in tibetan and your presentation compliments the concept clearly. Thank you very much.

Wonderfull clear and genuine. All the Buddhas from the 3 times and ten directions bless You. Karmapa Chenno. May we all become victorious!

Thank you for your diligence in mastering the teachings and your clarity in explaining the concepts.

Thank you Mindah, this is the best and most complete explanation of emptiness on the entire internet, I listen often, and you've helped me no end to deepened my own understanding of this very subtle topic of Sunyata.. Thank you and best wishes..

You are an amazing teacher and speaker. Blew my mind.

Thanks for this (and all) of your videos and posts. I am so glad to have found your RU-vid Channel. All so helpful and instructive to a newby like me. You are posting exactly what I am ready to hear and learn. I'm all caught up though.... so keep going! :)

Thank you so much Minda-Lee! This video helped me so much to understand all these different things about Buddhism. I never understood Buddha's definition of Form until now! Namaste Minda-Lee :) I give you all my blessings.

This is VERY good and I learned a great deal. You've wonderfully explained things I've listened to in the past.

Excellent video. This is the best explanation I have heard! Thanks for posting it.

very comprehensive and informative. really clarified a concept i've been having trouble understanding. thank you!

If only Buddhism had not been vanished from India, this sub-continent would have been so prosperous. I hope I gain the mental strength to help revive it to its full glory! And may peace & prosperity follow perpetually

i am just starting to learn about this and i certainly wish i had of received this information years ago. i am being persistent in meditating . i have no one to talk to about this but i am watching the monks learning every day and you also are very good in explaining it is very helpful. thank you. i needed this

This was very insightful. Thank you so much for this wonderful video.

Wow, I've been listening to lectures for years and yours was by far the best! Thank you so much.

I've been a Buddhist for about 50 years and I have to repeat what the great Buddhist monk, Ajahn Sumano said a while back. He had been meditating all his life as a Buddhist monk and said, when asked about 'him' he said, "there was never anybody there in the first place!"

I love your content so much. You really have a gift for explaining the Dharma in a way that makes it easier to understand. My experience with the Dharma is that it seems really simple on the surface but man, it gets deep really quick! 😊

🙏for explaining the five aggregates in such simple term. Finally I fully understand it and the importance of Anatta.

Great video. Although in my experience, along with a feeling of liberation is a sense of loss, depression, and confusion linked to the sense that if I'm "no self" than what am I other than a stream of experiences.

Loved this thank you so much for your incredible videos eloquently described and easy to understand this really helped out.

Dear daughter, your presentation is great! You deserve much merits!

Thank you so much! Namaste!

Thank-you so much for making these videos on the teachings of the Buddha. They are helping me immensely understand concepts that were hazy to me before. Also, I experience an increased measure of calm after watching your videos. I am very grateful for the time you put into making these.

wow, i never knew Buddhism was so interesting.

Thank you for this beautiful Dhamma...🙏

I do appreciate your teaching very much. You have a wonderfully calm and joyful way of presenting these teachings, and its always a pleasure to learn from you. Thank you for this interesting video and all the others too. Have a lovely day with Buddha Blessings :)

Beautifully explained!...Would love to see a complete series of videos on Buddhist teachings.

Very good Mindah-Lee.Clearly and articulately explained.Thank you

I never understood this concept, though I had read about it several times, until watching this video. Thank you.

I like that you quote directly from the suttas..thank you

This is a great video for anyone who is new to buddhism or the five aggregates. :)

I only grasped that sense of unrestricted identity at the end of this video - and this was the second time I watched it. Thanks 🙏

as someone trying to grasp these concepts I really like your videos

Hi Mindha, I realy needed this reflection this evening. Thank you for your very insightful presentation. Very very clear......

Thanks a million times Mindah... Buddha bless you!

Thank you, it is very beautiful, pleasant to listen and easy to understand such complicated concepts video.

We're not our names that only describe US to a certain extent but "a life of no questions needed" is the true goal in knowing "knowledge passes away"!

Hi Mindah, Thank you so much for this video. May you gain much merit. Jayantha

Mindah, thank you for changing my life....also, its so cute when you're laughing at your own jokes.

Brilliant teaching. Thank you.

Thanks Mindah, much easier to hear you teach on this than try to understand from the traditional texts.

So beautifully explained Thankyou Thankyou ❤️❤️🙏🏾🙏🏾

Thank you so much for your knowledge and dharma teachings...

One of the best explanations! Thank you so much!

Thanks so much for this video. It was very helpful.

Your voice is so sweet . And thank u for this video , i really got advantage of no self in my work :)♡♡♡♡♡♡♡♡♡♡

The Buddhist term Anatman (Sanskrit), or Anatta (Pali) is an adjective in sutra used to refer to the nature of phenomena as being devoid of the Soul, that being the ontological and uncompounded subjective Self (atman) which is the “light (dipam), and only refuge” [DN 2.100]. Of the 662 occurrences of the term Anatta in the Nikayas, its usage is restricted to referring to 22 nouns (forms, feelings, perception, experiences, consciousness, the eye, eye-consciousness, desires, mentation, mental formations, ear, nose, tongue, body, lusts, things unreal, etc.), all phenomenal, as being Selfless (anatta). Contrary to countless many popular (=profane, or = consensus, from which the truth can ‘never be gathered’) books (as Buddhologist C.A.F. Davids has deemed them ‘miserable little books’) written outside the scope of Buddhist doctrine, there is no “Doctrine of anatta/anatman” mentioned anywhere in the sutras, rather anatta is used only to refer to impermanent things/phenomena as other than the Soul, to be anatta, or Self-less (an-atta). Specifically in sutra, anatta is used to describe the temporal and unreal (metaphysically so) nature of any and all composite, consubstantial, phenomenal, and temporal things, from macrocosmic to microcosmic, be it matter as pertains the physical body, the cosmos at large, including any and all mental machinations which are of the nature of arising and passing. Anatta in sutra is synonymous and interchangeable with the terms dukkha (suffering) and anicca (impermanent); all three terms are often used in triplet in making a blanket statement as regards any and all phenomena. Such as: “All these aggregates are anicca, dukkha, and anatta.” It should be further noted that, in doctrine, that the only noun which is branded permanent (nicca), is obviously and logically so, the noun attan [Skt. Atman], such as passage (SN 1.169). Anatta refers specifically and only to the absence of the permanent soul as pertains any or all of the psycho-physical (namo-rupa) attributes, or khandhas (skandhas, aggregates). Anatta/Anatman in the earliest existing Buddhist texts, the Nikayas, is an adjective, (A is anatta, B is anatta, C is anatta). The commonly (=profane, consensus, herd-views) held belief to wit that: “Anatta means no-soul, therefore Buddhism taught that there was no soul” is an irrational absurdity which cannot be found or doctrinally substantiated by means of the Nikayas, the suttas (Skt. Sutras), of Buddhism. The Pali compound term and noun for “no soul” is natthatta (literally “there is not/no[nattha]+atta’[Soul]), not the term anatta, and is mentioned at Samyutta Nikaya 4.400, where Gotama was asked if there “was no- soul (natthatta)”, to which Gotama equated this position to be a Nihilistic heresy (ucchedavada). Common throughout Buddhist sutra (and Vedanta as well) is the denial of psycho-physical attributes of the mere empirical self to be the Soul, or confused with same. The Buddhist paradigm (and the most common repeating passage in sutta) as regards phenomena is “Na me so atta” (this/these are not my soul), this most common utterance of Gotama the Buddha in the Nikayas, where “na me so atta” = Anatta/Anatman. In sutta, to hold the view that there was “no-Soul” (natthatta) is = natthika (nihilist). Buddhism differs from the “nothing-morist” (Skt. Nastika, Pali natthika) in affirming a spiritual nature that is not in any wise, but immeasurable, inconnumerable, infinite, and inaccessible to observation; and of which, therefore, empirical science can neither affirm nor deny the reality thereof of him who has ‘Gone to That[Brahman]” (tathatta). It is to the Spirit (Skt. Atman, Pali attan) as distinguished from oneself (namo-rupa/ or khandhas, mere self as = anatta) i.e., whatever is phenomenal and formal (Skt. and Pali nama-rupa, and savinnana-kaya) “name and appearance”, and the “body with its consciousness”. [SN 2.17] ‘Nonbeing (asat, natthiti [views of either sabbamnatthi ‘the all is ultimately not’ (atomism), and sabbam puthuttan ‘the all is merely composite’ [SN 2.77] both of this positions are existential antinomies, and heresies of annihilationism])’”. In contrast it has been incorrectly asserted that affirmation of the atman is = sassatavada (conventionally deemed ‘eternalism’). However the Pali term sasastavada is never associated with the atman, but that the atman was an agent (karmin) in and of samsara which is subject to the whims of becoming (bhava), or which is meant kammavada (karma-ism, or merit agencyship); such as sassatavada in sutta = “atta ca so loka ca” (the atman and the world [are one]), or: ‘Being (sat, atthiti [views of either sabbamatthi ‘the all is entirety’, and sabbamekattan ‘the all is one’s Soul’ [SN 2.77] both are heresies of perpetualism]). Sasastavada is the wrong conception that one is perpetually (sassata) bound within samsara and that merit is the highest attainment for either this life or for the next. The heretical antinomy to nihilism (vibhava, or = ucchedavada) is not, nor in sutta, the atman, but bhava (becoming, agencyship). Forever, or eternal becoming is nowhere in sutta identified with the atman, which is “never an agent (karmin)”, and “has never become anything” (=bhava). These antinomies of bhava (sassatavada) and vibhava (ucchedavada) both entail illogical positions untenable to the Vedantic or Buddhist atman; however the concept of “eternalism” as = atman has been the fallacious secondary crutch for supporting the no-atman commentarialists position on anatta implying = there is no atman. Logically so, according to the philosophical premise of Gotama, the initiate to Buddhism who is to be “shown the way to Immortality (amata)” [MN 2.265, SN 5.9], wherein liberation of the spirit/mind [Greek = nous] (cittavimutta; Greek = epistrophe) is effectuated thru the expansion of wisdom and the meditative practices of sati and samadhi (assimilation, or synthesis, complete disobjectification with all objective [unreal] 'reality'), must first be educated away from his former ignorance-based (avijja) materialistic proclivities in that he (the common fool) “saw any of these forms, feelings, this body in whole or part, to be my Self/Atman, to be that which I am by nature”. Teaching the via negativa methodology of anatta in sutta pertains solely to things phenomenal, which were: “subject to perpetual change; therefore unfit to declare of such things ‘these are mine, these are what I am, that these are my Soul’” [MN 1.232]. The one scriptural passage where Gotama is asked by a layperson what the meaning of anatta is as follows: [Samyutta Nikaya 3.196] At one time in Savatthi, the venerable Radha seated himself and asked of the Blessed Lord Buddha: “Anatta, anatta I hear said venerable. What pray tell does Anatta mean?” “Just this Radha, form is not the Soul (anatta), sensations are not the Soul (anatta), perceptions are not the Soul (anatta), assemblages are not the Soul (anatta), consciousness is not the Soul (anatta). Seeing thusly, this is the end of birth, the Brahman life has been fulfilled, what must be done has been done.” Anatta as taught in the Nikayas has merely relative value as it is directly conducive to Subjective awakening, or illumination; it is not an absolute one. It does not say or imply simply that the Soul (atta, Atman) has no reality, but that certain things (5 aggregates), with which the unlearned man (fool = puthujjana, as is always implied in spiritual texts, a materialist) identifies himself, are not the Soul (anatta) and that is why one should grow disgusted with them, become detached from them and be liberated. This principle of the extremely abused and misunderstood term anatta does not negate the Soul as such, but denies Selfhood to those things that constitute the non-self (anatta), showing them thereby to be empty of any ultimate value and to be repudiated; instead of nullifying the Atman (Soul) doctrine, it in fact compliments and affirms it in the most logical method by which Subjective gnosis is initially gained; that by and thru objective negation. It has been said that: ‘No Indian school of thought has ever regarded the human soul (another error, since the soul is not a possession of, nor is of the nature of the persona, or 'human') or the carrier of human personal (persona [Bob, Larry, Sue] is never confused by the Metaphysician, with the Person/Atman/Purisha) identity as a permanent substance (literally meaning, absurdly "permanent impermanence [substance]")’, which is certainly true when referring to the empirical persona (mere self [aggregates/namorupa], as opposed to the Person, spirit, atman), that ‘ensouled’ being, as was common in old English to say: “late at night, not a soul (mere person) was to be seen walking about”. That the atman is not to be understood as a cartesian thinking substance, phenomena, or eternal soul, is certainly the case, and logically cannot be otherwise. It cannot be missed that in so discussing the commentarialist’s position of a ‘doctrine of anatta’ that anatta is merely a qualifier of something else and that anatta in and of itself in standalone is utterly meaningless and untenable to speak or make mention of an ‘anatta doctrine’ without qualification of what, and in what context, anatta is being qualified of X (the afore mentioned 22 things of which anatta is said to equal) i.e. that which is defacto equivalent to or with anatta. That anatta in doctrine is aught but ever equivalent to what is evil, foul, disgusting, phenomenal and repulsive, to therefore make declaration that, as many fool "buddhists" (in name only) have done, “anatta is a core tenant of Buddhism” cannot be enjoined, since the principle upon which Buddhism was founded is the quest for the immortal (amatagamimagga SN 5.9), and the unceasing bliss as gained by and thru liberation in wisdom’s culmination. Anatta is, obviously so, a key principle in the doctrine of Buddhism (and other via negativa systems, of which Advaita also makes extensive use of the term anatman) and the metaphysics thereof quantify anatta and being meant all physical and mental consubstantial and temporal objectivity; all compounded things either in simplex (matter, hyle) or complex (mental). As an-atta is meant not-Subject (= object [phenomena]), those things, as Buddhism declares “the unlearned fool bemuses himself as being (those things)”. "What do you suppose, followers, if people were carrying off into the Jeta grove bunches of sticks, grasses, branches, and leaves and did with them as they wished or burned them up, would it occur to you: These people are carrying us off, are doing as they please with us, and are burning us? No, indeed not Lord. And how so? Because Lord, none of that is our Soul, nor what our Soul subsists upon! Just so followers, what is not who you are, do away with it, when you have made done with that, it will lead to your bliss and welfare for as long as time lasts. What is that you are not? Form, followers, is not who you are, neither are sensations, perceptions, experiences, consciousness" [MN 1.141]. Just as ‘disgusting (anatta) doctrine’ cannot make logical sense, neither does ‘anatta doctrine’ bring light to studiers of Buddhism what anatta is contextually or its philosophical importance as being merely a qualifier of that which is evil, foul, disgusting, phenomenal and repulsive (= anatta). Anatta is of course a doctrinal tenant within Buddhism used to earmark phenomena, however as conventionally and irrationally conceived, there is absolutely no such creature in Buddhism as a "no-Soul doctrine". What has Buddhism to say of the Self? "That's not my Self" (na me so atta); this, and the term "non Self-ishness" (anatta) predicated of the world and all "things" (sabbe dhamma anatta); Identical with the Brahmanical "of those who are mortal, there is no Self/Soul", (anatma hi martyah [SB., II. 2. 2. 3]). [KN J-1441] “The Soul is the refuge that I have gone unto”. For anatta is not said of the Self/Soul but what it is not. There is never and nowhere in sutra, a ‘doctrine of no-Soul’, but a doctrine of what the Soul is not (form is anatta, feelings are anatta, etc.). It is of course true that the Buddha denied the existence of the mere empirical “self” in the very meaning of “my-self” (this person so-and-so, namo-rupa, an-atta, i.e. Bob, Sue, Larry etc.), one might say in accordance with the command ‘denegat seipsum, [Mark VII.34]; but this is not what modern and highly unenlightened writers mean to say, or are understood by their readers to say; what they mean to say and do in fact say, is that the Buddha denied the immortal (amata), the unborn (ajata), Supreme-Self (mahatta’), uncaused (samskrta), undying (amara) and eternal (nicca) of the Upanishads. And that is palpably false, for he frequently speaks of this Self, or Spirit (mahapurisha), and nowhere more clearly than in the too often repeated formula 'na me so atta’, “This/these are not my Soul” (na me so atta’= anatta/anatman), excluding body (rupa) and the components of empirical consciousness (vinnana/ nama), a statement to which the words of Sankhara are peculiarly apposite, “Whenever we deny something unreal, is it in reference to something real” [Br. Sutra III.2.22]; since it was not for the Buddha, but for the nihilist (natthika), to deny the Soul. For, [SN 3.82] “yad anatta….na me so atta, “what is anatta…(means) that is not my Atman”; the extremely descriptive illumination of all thing which are Selfless (anattati) would be both meaningless and a waste of much time for Gotama were (as the foolish commentators espousing Buddhism’s denial of the atman) to clarify and simplify his sermons by outright declaring ‘followers, there is no atman!’, however no such passage exists. The Pali for said passage would be: ‘bhikkhave, natthattati!’; and most certainly such a passage would prove the holy grail and boon for the Theravadin nihilists (materialists) who have ‘protesteth too much’ that Buddhism is one in which the atman is rejected, but to no avail or help to their untenable views and position by the teachings themselves.

My aggregates are getting a warm fuzzy feeling ...please continue.

Wonderful explanation of the teaching of the Buddha. Anatta is quite a different doctrine in comparison to the teachings of most religions. Your accurate explanation without interpretation appears to be exactly what the Buddha taught. Sadhu sadhu!!

Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh writes: ....The ascetic Vacchagotta's gotta's visit to the Buddha. Vacchagotta asked, "Reverend Gautama, please tell me, is there a self?" The Buddha did not say anything. Vacchagotta asked again, "Then you do not think there is a self?" The Buddha remained silent. Eventually, Vacchagotta left. -Afterwards, Ananda asked the Buddha, "Venerable Sir, when you give us Dharma teachings you often speak about no-self. Why did you not reply to Vacchagotta's questions concerning the self?" The Buddha replied, "The teaching of no-self that I give the bhikshus is a means to guide you to look deeply in your meditation. It is not an ideology. If you make it into an ideology, you will be caught in it. I believe the ascetic Vacchagotta was looking for an ideology and not for a teaching to help him in the practice. So I remained silent. I did not want him to be caught by the teachings. If I had told him there is a self, that would not have been correct. If I told him there is no self, he would have clung to that dogmatically and made it into a theory, and that would not have been helpful either. That is why I kept silent." --In the Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra (Taisho 475), the silence of the layman Vimalakirti is praised by the Bodhisattva Manjushri as a "thundering silence" that echoes far and wide, having the power to break the bonds of attachment and bring about liberation. It is the same as the lion's roar that proclaims, "It is necessary to let go of all the true teachings, not to mention teachings that are not true." -This is the spirit we need if we want to understand the Sutra on Knowing in the Better Way to Catch a Snake. -The first precept of the Order of Interbeing represents the same spirit: "Do not be idolatrous about or bound to any doctrine, theory, or ideology, even Buddhist ones. Buddhist systems of thought are guiding means; they are not absolute truth." Teachings that are received as doctrines or theories are no longer teachings. They do not liberate, and the person receiving them is caught. In most precept texts, the first precept is not to take life. Not taking life, however, is not unique to Buddhism. In the Jainism of the naked ascetic Nirgantha, for example, restrictions concerning the taking of life were far more severe than in Buddhism. But in the spirit of breaking the bonds of attachment to ideology, the practice of the precept not to kill goes much further in Buddhism. - A person caught in a doctrine or a system of thought can sacrifice millions of lives in order to put into practice his theory, which he considers the absolute truth, the unique path that can lead humankind to happiness. -With a gun in hand, a person can kill one, five, or even ten people. But holding on to a doctrine or a system of thought, one can kill tens of thousands of people. Therefore, unless the precept not to take life is understood in terms of breaking the bonds of attachment to ideology, it is not truly the precept taught by the Buddha. Thich Nhat Hanh. Sutra on Knowing the Better Way to Catch a Snake.

Brilliant video; I am inspired now to sign up for an online Buddhism course to learn more about the teachings. (I already practice sitting meditation, but I see I need more knowledge to gain more insight into the sitting practice.)

Hello Mindah, thanks so much for helping of spreading the dhamma. You're doing a wonderful job. My Father from San Diego CA . forwarded me your video. Sadhu..............sadhu.............sadhu. May your mission spreads worldwide to all the beings.

This Vedic perspective is Just like cbt thoughts, core beliefs feelings and behaviour.

More insightful considerations for thought and reflection. I'll play this video a few more times, for a deeper understanding of the points and terminology raised. Then, I'll view your next instalment. Thank you.

I feel like this is so freeing in terms of not having a solid identity that is ours through letting go of who we thought we were and who we should be, we can just let ourselves be and be open to the changes. I've been an English teacher, and have decided to go back to school to study AI. When I think of my academic history and who I should be, this switch seems almost impossible, but when I let go of my past knowledge and work experience, I don't see why it's not possible for my mind to learn, given that I have the correct input. It's amazing how our identity is comprised of our surroundings, and can so drastically change if we let ourselves surrender to new surroundings.

wonderful, I have watched these videos many times.

Thank you, Mindah. There is so much information here, could you possibly create individual programs on these many pieces? What i mean is one for each aggregate, one for the senses, etc. I'm learning a lot from your work; thank you.

Very good teachings. Well done! :)

Greetings from Ireland again.thanks

Thank you. Well done. Insightful.

She inspires peace and joy

Great video! Helped me to understand a lot.

So much love , Thank you

Really beautifully explained. Thank you!

Excellent lesson, Mindah. Thank you for this great topic. :)

Thank you, you ex[plain with simplicity and eloquence

Very Well Said Dear Dhamma Sister 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻

Thank you. Great teaching. Sadhu🙏🏻

One of the best explanation.. Thank you. Keep it up

16 unlikee? Really ?! Wonderful work and educational!👍🏽👏🏽 thanks ! ☸️🕉

Loved this video. Thank you.

wow, that was mind-blowing!

I really appreciate this teaching,it make a lot of sense to average se e ker, it only take time to learn and practice .