To whom it may concern
The world is what our mind is, and it can be a hell or a heaven. Reached this point
I feel the need to express some considerations on my life. To whom it may
concernt and in the measure in which it can be interesting for other people.
We are our experiences, substance doesn't exist separated by its qualities (the experiences, note), therefore we change in continuation in the measure in which we belong to the
experiential process. It needs to notice: not in the measure in which we have experiences; in the measure in which we belong to the
experiential process. Reflects on this, on which I don't have space to dwell.
After so many years of meditative experience and various experiences in life, I can stay an instant and to make the point. There is not
really any stung by to do, it is not stopped by any part there, there is only the silent continuous
flow of living. But we adopt this conventional point of view.
Experiences that I have lately had pushed me to this reflection.
These experiences have made me touch again with hand how much the life, what we believes
to have built, is fragile and left to the wind. We create relationships and it is normal but these relationships are subject, as every thing, to
corrosion and to decay. You create suffering. Because we are attached, we don't succeed in flowing with the situations and the situations, unfortunately, with good peace of whom would like to delude
themselves (the persons in love, for instance ) are impermanenti. It is with pain that we see to develop
the end of a relationship, but in reality there is not any end and any principle, there is only change and it is correct that
it was so (neither correct neither unfair: it is so). These crises are healthy however because they push
us to see better what the components of these relationships were, their insufficiencies and their slaveries
I want not the selfish liberty to be free of whom rubs some others. It is something different, on which to measure all the experiences. There has been some experience of
freedom, of liberation, and that is the only meter on which I intend to measure my life. The whole rest is not of interest, it is ephemeral, it is vain, it is provisional. Same
freedom is empty therefore there is no anything to which to stick. But when I speak, in a context as that of the personal relationships, of
freedom, I would not like to be misunderstood. It is not the liberty of the lover that
takes leave and says: I " want to be free", thinking at the same time about a new person. No, the
freedom to which I allude, is empty, without content, it is a liberation. It is to be free, simply and, we hope, in the maximum possible
altruism. It is to try to live the life in the way simplest possible, as I am already living
I don't want others to make schemes on me neither I want me to make schemes on the others. I don't want that someone suffers because
he/she feels that I cannot give what this person wants, I don't even want to demand
that someone is in some particular way. I intend to go on along my road, placed side by side to other human beings that
go along the same road . The sensuality and the fun don't interest me, if not in occasional way entirely: in the sense that I don't live for these things.
The same is valid for the meditation. There is not here neither the need to be
in some particular sect or some particular affiliation. There are not "business",
neither Buddha-café. There are no expensive stages as others in New Age do . I also make other things in which
I am professional, as Kungfu and Taiji, but these are rigidly kept separate. The intersections between them are occasional and it
is correct that there are but I don't make meditation to attract people to Kungfu or Taiji, neither I make Kungfu or Taiji to attract people to the meditation. It sometimes happens and it is all right. We agree with all those that meditate in this
spirit. What is required it is to start to lose the attachments and the mental conceptions, not to develop of
new, even though "spiritual."
Equally I don't feel excited to the "spiritual tourism". It happens, in the life, but it is a thing to which
I am not interested anymore. Don't interest me to go to see this or that teacher. It is not
pride. It is to be free and detached. Which doesn't exclude that I can participate in something served as this or that teacher. I like the withdrawals of
Corrado Pensa or also others because they offer an environment in which you can
meditate in peace. But it is everything there. I am not fascinated by anybody. I know that what
it needs is here already. What needs is to let to go grasping. It is already here. Equally whoever can come to make meditation and to stop when he/she wants. Here, on
Saturday-afternoons, it is as on a sea harbour: one comes, one goes. What does it care? If you feel that it is
useful to come, come, otherwise you stop coming. Or you go and you come. You do as you believe, each
person has to live already the freedom. The goal has to be contained in the mean. The goal is to awaken to the life as it is,
to awaken ourselves to true freedom. The goal has to be here already present. I reflected yesterday as there is no liberty in
religions: you look at that poor men Witnesses of Jehovah. Or you look at the zeal of the missionaries. As
it smells of dirty theirs "interest for the others". The only one that
has preached true freedom has been the Buddha. I concern to his teaching, it is compared
to a raft. Once that you have crossed the river, will you attach yourself to the
raft and will you bring it on the shoulders? A new baggage? However it is clear whether to cross the river a
raft is needed . A strange fact now happens, since the raft of which the Buddha
spoke is an empty raft, deprived of substance. What substance can have the
liberation? What is needed is simply to let go the grasping. Therefore already from now theraft
doesn't have substance, it has the no-substance of letting go .
All people speak of concepts: God, spirit, soul... but they are only concepts in a world of concepts. Until we will have concepts to defend, to which to stay attached,
we won't be free. There is no true religion in being attached to a God, to a Church, to ideas. They are only dirty projections of the ego,
of our need to create ghosts, consolations or safeties. It told me my first Didactic manager, when
he saw that I didn't teach Religion: He told me: " The Religion is a great consolation".
It was right. Note, the religion is a great consolation, it prevents from seeing what is indeed. What
it is suffering for instance because we attach there to the things and even we create things where there are not
any. We attach there and when these no-things collapse, as it is in their nature, we suffer. The maximum one of the illusion is the concepts attachment. Therefore the Liberation is the end of
conceptualizations. We have to use the concepts, this is a necessity of the language, but we
don't have to be enslaved by the concepts. We need to have nothing to defend, neither god, neither the Buddha,
neither this neither that.
Therefore my only declaration of intents is: I don't want anything to defend, I don't want to create
anything. I want to simply live with people free as me.