My definition of wealth: "financial assets sufficient to allow one to spend their time as they see fit, without concern for survival". Notice that my definition is about time, not about the acquisition of objects (houses, boats, etc.).
I "retired" at 50 years of age. I put that word, "retired" in quotes because what I really did was quit my job and become self employed. I am now 52. I work about 25 hours per week, from home, and earn about the same as I did when I was in that job, working about 50 hours per week.
I have virtually no stress now, and no long commute on traffic-congested highways. I have plenty of time to do what I want to do, when I want to do it, and I enjoy the work that I am doing. I have achieved wealth (according to my "time-centered" definition of wealth). But I have not acquired expensive objects. My house is not the house of a rich person, neither is my car. I don't have any expensive hobbies. Rather, I have achieved my freedom from the rat race in large part by avoiding the purchase of expensive things.
My work now consists of me working on a laptop computer. My desk is the wooden TV tray that my laptop sits on. My office is wherever in the house I decide to put the TV tray on any given day. I do "signal processing" research and development in the field of wireless communications. I guess you could say that it is applied mathematics, or engineering, but it is not like "normal" engineering because it involves no hardware. Anyway, it has trained my mind to be more rigorous and logical than the average citizen.
My retirement from the rat race has freed up time for study of stock market investing. There are a very large number of systems for making money in the stock market. Various stock screens filter all the stocks in the U.S.A. markets, winnowing them down to the few that you should invest in. These systems are described in various books and articles.
Remember that my R&D experience involves rigorous analysis. So in the last couple of years, I read many of these investing schemes, but felt uneasy that the authors' analyses of their performance was unconvincing. You see, when one develops an investing strategy, a method of evaluating it involves "back testing". Back testing applies the strategy retrospectively to prior years to measure the returns that would have been gained if one had used that strategy. The problem is, there are a large number of ways to wittingly or unwittingly screw up the back testing. Some of those mistakes can be quite subtle.
As a skeptical engineer, I did not trust these authors' results. I needed to do the back testing myself, so that I could evaluate all the strategies on an equal footing and avoid biasing the results. A friend of mine turned me on to a suitable back testing program, which came with 12 years of historical data and a subscription for daily updating of the database as well. This was about 2 months ago. I purchased the program and did back testing of about a dozen of the most promising strategies, and about 3 of the 12 gave excellent results.
I tested the strategies over 1 year time periods. The first trial started January 1, 1997 and ended December 31, 1997. The second trial was also 1 year long, but started one month later. There were 115 trials altogether, with the last one-year period ending yesterday. These strategies did not involve the use of margin (investing with borrowed money). They did involve shorting stocks (a strategy that benefits when a stock's price declines) during bear market periods, as well as buying stocks long (the normal method of investing that benefits when a stock's price increases) during bull market periods.
The program I use is pretty sophisticated. It has numerous features that allow one to avoid most of the simplifying assumptions that typically lead to back testing errors. For instance, it simulates buying a stock at the average price of the stock during the next trading day after the buy decision is made, and it accounts for commissions. If you are interested, you can find out more at www.vectorvest.com. Of course, I have no financial interest in the company.
I just discovered today another subtle way in which one can fool oneself with back testing. I found out that my back-testing program uses a database that omits the history of any stocks that are no longer in existence. That makes the back-testing results look better than they should, since in the simulation, only the survivors are purchased. I found out that this is called the "survivor bias".
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Violence
It seems to me that most people who feel themselves to be "spiritual" reject violence. But in my opinion, this rejection of violence is not well thought out.
Does their rejection of violence mean that they would, if they had their way, take the guns away from their policemen and soldiers? Do they propose to shower violent criminals with love and flowers?
Most people who consider themselves to be "spiritual" people are omnivores. How do they rationalize that? Do they not consider killing and eating a pig to be violent (I do!)? One way to avoid acknowledgement of our violent eating habits is to call various types of meat by names other than the animal names. We don't call the meat "baby cow", we call it "veal".
Some people are vegetarians, but they wear leather belts and shoes (but would NEVER consider wearing a mink coat). Peoples' ideas on the issue of violence seem filled with inconsistencies.
Violence exists throughout the natural world and throughout human civilization. In an effort to minimize violence and create civil societies, governments evolved. Here is my definition: "a government is an organization which has a monopoly on violence within a region". To the degree that an organization actually demonstrates a monopoly on violence, that is the degree to which it is recognized as the government of a region. When other actors do violence within that region, we call those people criminals and expect the government to make them cease, employing violence as a means to that end, if necessary. We shield our consciousness from the violence of the world by sub-contracting the violent jobs out to cattle, pig and poultry ranchers, butchers, fishermen, policemen, prison officers and soldiers. This allows us to pretend that we are non-violent.
Here is a quote from Mahatma Gandhi's autobiography.
"I felt that Indians residing in England ought to do their bit in the war... As soon as the news reached South Africa that I ... had offered my services in the war, I received two cables. One of these was from Mr. Polak who questioned the consistency of my action with my profession of ahimsa [non-violence]....
We are helpless mortals caught in the conflagration of himsa [violence].... Man cannot for a moment live without consciously or unconsciously committing outward himsa. The very fact of his living - eating, drinking and moving about - necessarily involves some himsa, destruction of life, be it ever so minute. A votary of ahimsa therefore remains true to his faith if the spring of all his actions is compassion... but he can never become entirely free from outward himsa...
Whilst in England I was enjoying the protection of the British Fleet, and taking shelter as I did under its armed might, I was directly participating in its potential violence. Therefore, If I desired to retain my connection with the Empire and to live under its banner, ... I thought there was nothing for it but to serve in the war."
In my opinion, spiritual practitioners should not spend their time trying to bring "peace on earth". Violence and peace are merely the two ends of the same stick. To try to bring peace on earth is to get caught in the duality trap. These dualities are not the fundamental fabric of life. The fundamental fabric of life transcends duality. A spiritual practitioner should constantly be letting go of the illusion that the fundamental essence of life is duality.
Does their rejection of violence mean that they would, if they had their way, take the guns away from their policemen and soldiers? Do they propose to shower violent criminals with love and flowers?
Most people who consider themselves to be "spiritual" people are omnivores. How do they rationalize that? Do they not consider killing and eating a pig to be violent (I do!)? One way to avoid acknowledgement of our violent eating habits is to call various types of meat by names other than the animal names. We don't call the meat "baby cow", we call it "veal".
Some people are vegetarians, but they wear leather belts and shoes (but would NEVER consider wearing a mink coat). Peoples' ideas on the issue of violence seem filled with inconsistencies.
Violence exists throughout the natural world and throughout human civilization. In an effort to minimize violence and create civil societies, governments evolved. Here is my definition: "a government is an organization which has a monopoly on violence within a region". To the degree that an organization actually demonstrates a monopoly on violence, that is the degree to which it is recognized as the government of a region. When other actors do violence within that region, we call those people criminals and expect the government to make them cease, employing violence as a means to that end, if necessary. We shield our consciousness from the violence of the world by sub-contracting the violent jobs out to cattle, pig and poultry ranchers, butchers, fishermen, policemen, prison officers and soldiers. This allows us to pretend that we are non-violent.
Here is a quote from Mahatma Gandhi's autobiography.
"I felt that Indians residing in England ought to do their bit in the war... As soon as the news reached South Africa that I ... had offered my services in the war, I received two cables. One of these was from Mr. Polak who questioned the consistency of my action with my profession of ahimsa [non-violence]....
We are helpless mortals caught in the conflagration of himsa [violence].... Man cannot for a moment live without consciously or unconsciously committing outward himsa. The very fact of his living - eating, drinking and moving about - necessarily involves some himsa, destruction of life, be it ever so minute. A votary of ahimsa therefore remains true to his faith if the spring of all his actions is compassion... but he can never become entirely free from outward himsa...
Whilst in England I was enjoying the protection of the British Fleet, and taking shelter as I did under its armed might, I was directly participating in its potential violence. Therefore, If I desired to retain my connection with the Empire and to live under its banner, ... I thought there was nothing for it but to serve in the war."
In my opinion, spiritual practitioners should not spend their time trying to bring "peace on earth". Violence and peace are merely the two ends of the same stick. To try to bring peace on earth is to get caught in the duality trap. These dualities are not the fundamental fabric of life. The fundamental fabric of life transcends duality. A spiritual practitioner should constantly be letting go of the illusion that the fundamental essence of life is duality.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Avoid the Duality Trap!
It seems to me that most people think spirituality is about being good, moral, pure, kind, gentle and helpful. I don't believe that at all, because all of those qualities exist as one pole of a duality, and I don't believe that spirit lives in the world of duality. Rather, I believe that if there is spirit, then spirit has to be transcendent.
It is obvious that nothing in the world of duality can be infinite, omnipotent or omniscient, so a belief in spirit (or God) who has all of these qualities is inconsistent with a belief that "God is good". I don't believe that God is good. God must transcend the good-bad duality.
If God is transcendental, then any conception of God's nature will be a wrong conception. So the first line of the Tao Teh Ching says, "That Tao which can be spoken of is not the true Tao". And the Muslims forbid images of God and the Jews forbid speaking God's name and Moses got pretty pissed off about that golden calf, if I remember correctly.
A false belief that my essential nature is "in the world" of duality is the core essential mistake from which all of my suffering springs. The belief in the primacy of duality is the original sin. Remember that Adam and Eve "ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" (they fell into the duality trap), and that right there was the end of the good times.
Therefore, the job of a spiritual practitioner is to negate the false belief that duality is the fundamental fabric of existence. And that negation is the spiritual practitioner's only job. Forget about saving the world... that's a mission dreamed up by a mind caught in the duality trap.
It is obvious that nothing in the world of duality can be infinite, omnipotent or omniscient, so a belief in spirit (or God) who has all of these qualities is inconsistent with a belief that "God is good". I don't believe that God is good. God must transcend the good-bad duality.
If God is transcendental, then any conception of God's nature will be a wrong conception. So the first line of the Tao Teh Ching says, "That Tao which can be spoken of is not the true Tao". And the Muslims forbid images of God and the Jews forbid speaking God's name and Moses got pretty pissed off about that golden calf, if I remember correctly.
A false belief that my essential nature is "in the world" of duality is the core essential mistake from which all of my suffering springs. The belief in the primacy of duality is the original sin. Remember that Adam and Eve "ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" (they fell into the duality trap), and that right there was the end of the good times.
Therefore, the job of a spiritual practitioner is to negate the false belief that duality is the fundamental fabric of existence. And that negation is the spiritual practitioner's only job. Forget about saving the world... that's a mission dreamed up by a mind caught in the duality trap.
Suffering, the Way out of Suffering and Compassion
I think my suffering is caused by my resistance to what is. If that is true, then there are two ways out of suffering. One is to change what is. The other is to let go of my resistance.
The problem with the first approach is that "what is" has many aspects, and all of them keep changing. Therefore, to try to keep all the aspects of my world arranged in such a way as to not cause me suffering is like trying to juggle dozens of balls continuously. It is a hugely multi-dimensional task. There is the job, the family relationships, the social relationships, the financial situation, the political situation, physical health, mental health, the health of those we love, etc. It ain't gonna work... many of those balls are going to fall to the ground. In fact, I am going to die one day, and that's like dropping all the balls. Death makes the failure of this approach inevitable.
I think the second approach, letting go of resistance to what is, is the only viable solution to suffering. Whereas the first approach involved a continuous, multi-dimensional problem, this letting go involves a continuous, single-dimensional problem. I have to let go continuously, but letting go is only one action, a very simple action, that I am capable of in this moment.
So how do I let go of resistance to what is? I believe that any resistance is accompanied by physical tensioning of the muscles. Sometimes it is very subtle, perhaps just a slight tensioning in the muscles of the jaw, or around the eyes. Sometimes it is more obvious, such as hunching the shoulders or tightening the fists. So letting go can simply be relaxing those muscles. When you relax the muscles, simultaneously you (automatically) let go of the emotional resistance to what is. I think it is literally that simple. Perhaps there are also instances where resistance is not accompanied by muscular tension, but if that type exists, I am not concerned with it now.
When I was about 10 years old I was sitting in the back seat of my parents' car with my little sister. It was very cold, and I was shivering and suffering. For some reason I decided to try an experiment. I relaxed all my muscles and accepted the cold. This immediately transformed my suffering into a delicious experience. I still felt the cold, but I was no longer suffering. I was enjoying the same cold that had made me suffer a moment before. I think perhaps that all of our suffering can be transformed like this, in the moment that we give up our resistance.
I am not saying that you can give up your resistance once and then you'll be liberated from suffering forever. It can only be done in this moment, and the moments keep coming, so it is a continuous practice. For me, it is a continuous practice that I forget to do most of the time. But it does work when I remember to do it.
When other people are suffering, how can you help them? Well, you COULD try to help them keep all those balls in the air, but we already figured out that that is an approach that is destined to fail. You could make sympathetic noises while stroking their hair. If you adopt this approach, you will become popular, but you will not help anybody. Or you could try to convince them to give up their resistance to what is.
This will not make you popular, but it might work sometimes. It seems to me that this is the truly compassionate approach, although it will seem cold and unsympathetic to say, "All you have to do is let go!". People want to believe that their problem is important and unique. People are attached to the gravitas of their suffering.
The problem with the first approach is that "what is" has many aspects, and all of them keep changing. Therefore, to try to keep all the aspects of my world arranged in such a way as to not cause me suffering is like trying to juggle dozens of balls continuously. It is a hugely multi-dimensional task. There is the job, the family relationships, the social relationships, the financial situation, the political situation, physical health, mental health, the health of those we love, etc. It ain't gonna work... many of those balls are going to fall to the ground. In fact, I am going to die one day, and that's like dropping all the balls. Death makes the failure of this approach inevitable.
I think the second approach, letting go of resistance to what is, is the only viable solution to suffering. Whereas the first approach involved a continuous, multi-dimensional problem, this letting go involves a continuous, single-dimensional problem. I have to let go continuously, but letting go is only one action, a very simple action, that I am capable of in this moment.
So how do I let go of resistance to what is? I believe that any resistance is accompanied by physical tensioning of the muscles. Sometimes it is very subtle, perhaps just a slight tensioning in the muscles of the jaw, or around the eyes. Sometimes it is more obvious, such as hunching the shoulders or tightening the fists. So letting go can simply be relaxing those muscles. When you relax the muscles, simultaneously you (automatically) let go of the emotional resistance to what is. I think it is literally that simple. Perhaps there are also instances where resistance is not accompanied by muscular tension, but if that type exists, I am not concerned with it now.
When I was about 10 years old I was sitting in the back seat of my parents' car with my little sister. It was very cold, and I was shivering and suffering. For some reason I decided to try an experiment. I relaxed all my muscles and accepted the cold. This immediately transformed my suffering into a delicious experience. I still felt the cold, but I was no longer suffering. I was enjoying the same cold that had made me suffer a moment before. I think perhaps that all of our suffering can be transformed like this, in the moment that we give up our resistance.
I am not saying that you can give up your resistance once and then you'll be liberated from suffering forever. It can only be done in this moment, and the moments keep coming, so it is a continuous practice. For me, it is a continuous practice that I forget to do most of the time. But it does work when I remember to do it.
When other people are suffering, how can you help them? Well, you COULD try to help them keep all those balls in the air, but we already figured out that that is an approach that is destined to fail. You could make sympathetic noises while stroking their hair. If you adopt this approach, you will become popular, but you will not help anybody. Or you could try to convince them to give up their resistance to what is.
This will not make you popular, but it might work sometimes. It seems to me that this is the truly compassionate approach, although it will seem cold and unsympathetic to say, "All you have to do is let go!". People want to believe that their problem is important and unique. People are attached to the gravitas of their suffering.
How to Meditate
When I go walking with my dog, oftentimes my mind gets caught up in my problem of the moment, whirling around and around like a hamster on one of those little hamster Ferris wheels. While this is going on, I don't see the beautiful trees, smell the clean air, or notice the joy my dog is experiencing. My mind is involved in ths nasty little mental whirlwind. In Sanskrit, the word "vritti" means whirlwind, and it is used to refer to this mental agitation. Patanjali's Yoga Sutras, one of the primary texts of yoga philosophy, says "Yoga chitta vritti narodha", which means something like, "Yoga is the process of letting go of the mental whirlwinds".
When I'm wrapped up in a vritti, some part of my body is holding muscular tension.... oftentimes the small muscles in my face, or around my eyes. After wrestling with the vritti awhile, I realize that I'm caught, and then I let it go. The letting go involves relaxing my muscles while I let go of the thought. Once I've let go of the vritti, I start seeing the trees and enjoying the walk (and life) again. This practice is the real yoga. It is absolutely simple and absolutely effortless. The instructions could be completely expressed in only one sentence, "When you realize that you're wrapped up in a vritti, let it go".
Hatha Yoga is the most wonderful thing for becoming aware of, and releasing physical tension. People who have been habitually and unconsciously holding certain muscles tight for years become aware of that tension through Hatha Yoga and learn to release it.
This physical awareness eventually helps them in their daily life by helping them recognize the physical tension associated with vrittis. If the vrittis were completely mental, they would be difficult to recognize, as they are subtle. But the physical manifestation of the vritti is grosser, and therefore easier to recognize.
This practice of releasing vrittis should eventually become a continuous practice during our waking hours. But as a starting point you might consider practicing sitting meditation 10 minutes per day. Sit in a chair with eyes closed. Watch your mind with great attention. When you realize that you're wrapped up in a train of thought, let it go. Do not "try to stop it", just let it go. If you try to stop thoughts, it will never work, and you will become frustrated and stop meditating. But you can relax and let thoughts go without any effort whatsoever. It's actually a process of abstaining from effort. The following flow chart that describes the process.
What is the value of this practice?
· When I'm caught in a vritti, I'm not enjoying life.
· When I'm caught in a vritti, I'm not paying attention to what I am doing, and so I will perform below my full potential and also am more likely to have an accident or thoughtlessly hurt someone.
What is the difference between a vritti and a normal thought?
When I am experiencing an egoistic attachment or aversion to some situation or thought, I would call that a vritti. It seems to me that an inappropriate tension in the muscles due to a thought signals that that thought is a vritti. Clear, dispassionate thoughts are not vrittis.
So are you saying that I should walk around empty-headed, like a zombie all day?
No, but try being empty headed for 10 minutes per day and see how it feels. Don't worry, you won't get possessed by a dis-embodied spirit, or become a flaky, new-age peace & love flower bimbo. But you will feel a little calmer, more centered and more capable. And it will grow with regular practice.
The longer you do this practice, the more you will live in a way that does not wrap you up in a whirlwind of agitation.
What is the true nature of the Self?
I am that which remains the same, while my circumstances, body and mind change.
What is the difference between stopping thoughts and letting go of thoughts?
You can't stop a thought, but you can let a thought go after you realize that you are having one. Another one will come sooner or later, but that's okay. When you realize that you're involved in a train of thought again, you can let it go again. Over and over, perhaps hundreds of times in just a 10 minute meditation. Or perhaps you realize your involvement only once during the whole meditation, and the rest of the time you were daydreaming, without realizing it. That's okay, that one time when you realize that you've been trapped, let go of the vritti.
How do I know when I've had a successful meditation?
There is no such thing as a successful or unsuccessful meditation. Don't judge it. When you realize that you're judging it, let go of the judgment. Over and over again. And don't judge the fact that you're judging it, either. Let it all go, every time it happens.
I have trouble keeping my mind blank.
That's normal. Don't judge your success or failure by how quiet your mind is. In fact, don't judge your meditation at all. Just follow this one simple instruction, over and over again, "Every time you realize that you are thinking, let go of the thought." With regular practice, your mind will become quieter, and not just in meditation, but most of the time.
How do I make my thoughts go away?
Try this simple experiment, right now. Put your right hand on your knee. Now, for the next 30 seconds, let it be still......
Okay, 30 seconds are up. Did you have to force your hand to be still, or could you just let it be still? In the same manner, you don't push your thoughts go away, you just let go of the thoughts. Pushing your thoughts away will just create more thoughts.
It's too noisy in my house for me to meditate
It doesn't have to be quiet to meditate, although it would be good if nobody is trying to talk to you or talk about you. Juicy gossip does tend to grab the mind. But normal noises won't bother you if you treat them in the same way we treat other thoughts. When you realize that your mind is on the noise, just let it go, without effort.... over and over again. With the right attitude, noise won't bother you at all.... it will just pass right through you with hardly a ripple.
I keep falling asleep
When you meditate, sit up straight and don't have your back touching anything. You'll be less likely to fall asleep if your back and head are not leaning against anything.
When I'm wrapped up in a vritti, some part of my body is holding muscular tension.... oftentimes the small muscles in my face, or around my eyes. After wrestling with the vritti awhile, I realize that I'm caught, and then I let it go. The letting go involves relaxing my muscles while I let go of the thought. Once I've let go of the vritti, I start seeing the trees and enjoying the walk (and life) again. This practice is the real yoga. It is absolutely simple and absolutely effortless. The instructions could be completely expressed in only one sentence, "When you realize that you're wrapped up in a vritti, let it go".
Hatha Yoga is the most wonderful thing for becoming aware of, and releasing physical tension. People who have been habitually and unconsciously holding certain muscles tight for years become aware of that tension through Hatha Yoga and learn to release it.
This physical awareness eventually helps them in their daily life by helping them recognize the physical tension associated with vrittis. If the vrittis were completely mental, they would be difficult to recognize, as they are subtle. But the physical manifestation of the vritti is grosser, and therefore easier to recognize.
This practice of releasing vrittis should eventually become a continuous practice during our waking hours. But as a starting point you might consider practicing sitting meditation 10 minutes per day. Sit in a chair with eyes closed. Watch your mind with great attention. When you realize that you're wrapped up in a train of thought, let it go. Do not "try to stop it", just let it go. If you try to stop thoughts, it will never work, and you will become frustrated and stop meditating. But you can relax and let thoughts go without any effort whatsoever. It's actually a process of abstaining from effort. The following flow chart that describes the process.
What is the value of this practice?
· When I'm caught in a vritti, I'm not enjoying life.
· When I'm caught in a vritti, I'm not paying attention to what I am doing, and so I will perform below my full potential and also am more likely to have an accident or thoughtlessly hurt someone.
What is the difference between a vritti and a normal thought?
When I am experiencing an egoistic attachment or aversion to some situation or thought, I would call that a vritti. It seems to me that an inappropriate tension in the muscles due to a thought signals that that thought is a vritti. Clear, dispassionate thoughts are not vrittis.
So are you saying that I should walk around empty-headed, like a zombie all day?
No, but try being empty headed for 10 minutes per day and see how it feels. Don't worry, you won't get possessed by a dis-embodied spirit, or become a flaky, new-age peace & love flower bimbo. But you will feel a little calmer, more centered and more capable. And it will grow with regular practice.
The longer you do this practice, the more you will live in a way that does not wrap you up in a whirlwind of agitation.
What is the true nature of the Self?
I am that which remains the same, while my circumstances, body and mind change.
What is the difference between stopping thoughts and letting go of thoughts?
You can't stop a thought, but you can let a thought go after you realize that you are having one. Another one will come sooner or later, but that's okay. When you realize that you're involved in a train of thought again, you can let it go again. Over and over, perhaps hundreds of times in just a 10 minute meditation. Or perhaps you realize your involvement only once during the whole meditation, and the rest of the time you were daydreaming, without realizing it. That's okay, that one time when you realize that you've been trapped, let go of the vritti.
How do I know when I've had a successful meditation?
There is no such thing as a successful or unsuccessful meditation. Don't judge it. When you realize that you're judging it, let go of the judgment. Over and over again. And don't judge the fact that you're judging it, either. Let it all go, every time it happens.
I have trouble keeping my mind blank.
That's normal. Don't judge your success or failure by how quiet your mind is. In fact, don't judge your meditation at all. Just follow this one simple instruction, over and over again, "Every time you realize that you are thinking, let go of the thought." With regular practice, your mind will become quieter, and not just in meditation, but most of the time.
How do I make my thoughts go away?
Try this simple experiment, right now. Put your right hand on your knee. Now, for the next 30 seconds, let it be still......
Okay, 30 seconds are up. Did you have to force your hand to be still, or could you just let it be still? In the same manner, you don't push your thoughts go away, you just let go of the thoughts. Pushing your thoughts away will just create more thoughts.
It's too noisy in my house for me to meditate
It doesn't have to be quiet to meditate, although it would be good if nobody is trying to talk to you or talk about you. Juicy gossip does tend to grab the mind. But normal noises won't bother you if you treat them in the same way we treat other thoughts. When you realize that your mind is on the noise, just let it go, without effort.... over and over again. With the right attitude, noise won't bother you at all.... it will just pass right through you with hardly a ripple.
I keep falling asleep
When you meditate, sit up straight and don't have your back touching anything. You'll be less likely to fall asleep if your back and head are not leaning against anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)