Dialogue 2 Segment 1

Dialogue 2 Segment 1

Michael responds to an initial email forwarded by the author of the first set of dialogues. The initial email mentioned that perhaps the correspondent's partner would contact him later on her own. Therefore, his reference to 'both'. (Note: her email exchanges comprise the third set of email dialogues, Dialogue 3. Within these dialogues she is referred to as 'C', the original author as A: or 'A'.)

------------

M: In opening this exchange directly to you, and in so doing opening myself to you, it is requested (with emphasis) that you both consider my path address and identity, private between ourselves, meaning "not to be disclosed" to others.

Hello!

Michael

-------------

M: Greetings.

At 11:39 AM 9/14/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael - The communications link is private.

M: Understood. Anything in exchanges that are copied to X could well become exposed in "the dialogue". My processes have always been to "respond" only to the paths provided in the header of the ping to myself.

A: 'C' will communicate on her own when and if she feels like it. At the moment, she would prefer to 'hang loose' and see how things go here.

M: Understood. Actually, in "engaging" with others, this seems to be a normal function of the process when "a couple" is involved - one more active and initialized than the other.

A: Having made contact, I now find myself asking why - what is I want from you?

I believeI understand the things you have dialogued about (they jibe with my own findings about the 'truth' gleaned from the usual sources so therefore they must be right) - I have experienced some 'supernatural' phenomena, some 'seeing', some 'dreaming', been brushed by power on a few occasions, have abused power on a few occasions, can project my aura and sort of 'burn' others around me, have been able to invigorate groups, have been able to enervate the same, have done programmed astral battles, all so what? I'm not impressed with tricks, mine or anyone elses.

M: Humm: "tricks"; interesting term; implies some points for review, since the term itself suggests illusions, not realities. The deference to illusions suggests self-denial and containment of self into a protective boundary, which by definition, accomplishes nothing but self-protection. It is interesting that "protections" and denials tend to be bidirectional and the implied "containment" that "protection" demands, can be ultimately defined as "stasis". The turbulent period in your history, commitment but with conditions limiting them, with a hint of being obstinate, is perceived to be a systemic reflex/impulse that has as it's derivation, referenced events/impacts that are firmly lodged in your history. The broad result of this pattern is, by perception, suggested to be the establishment of "a comfort zone" for yourselves, although there is some dichotomies noted in the process. There is also a perception of recognition of the above, with a note of concern that "the comfort zone" may not be sufficient any longer.

A: I find myself gazing out the back door of my camper at the afternoon sunshine coming down through the trees in this Arkansas campground, cicadas cranking away, great piano jazz playing on the tape, A/C going with the door open, blah blah blah...real life. We have become 'full-timers', no fixed abode, no schedules, no 'work', no mortgage. A perfect time to pursue DJ's stuff - so I am.

M: It would be noted in concordance that you and ‘C’ have setup a real opportunity for yourselves, to facilitate exploration.

A: Why do I need you? You have enough apprentices and I don't want to be an apprentice.

M: Truly, one cannot be "apprenticed" to myself, although for the purposes of societal descriptions it's simple to say "I have xx apprentices", but it is not really fact. One can be apprenticed to self. One can be apprenticed to a concept and a philosophy, but not to another person since that would intone dependency. There are many who speak proudly of the "apprentices" that they have, and those descriptions carry a nuance that the "apprentices" are possessions, in some instances, societal descriptions(for convenience) not withstanding. Consider that "the mentor" who is linked to "proteges/apprentices" may only be surrounding him/herself into a protective and dependent cocoon, with "the apprentices" forming dependencies upon "the mentor". This projection is indicative of a trap that many fall into: co-dependency; without recognition.

A: I have had no extant mentors in all my searchings and expect to find none during this existence. Yet, I want something...perhaps a 'reading', perhaps your comments, perhaps your evaluation...what's the 'que paso'? I am not your equal, nor do I wish to be - I would not in any way wish to have the responsibility that goes with your achievement. I value your judgement.

M: The feign away from responsibility tends to be indicative of a feign away from evolution: the two are linked; commensurate; inseparable. If you choose to evolve, there will be commensurate responsibilities: no choice. The first and foremost responsibility is to yourself, with it's metric - impeccability.

A: A final comment in this opening communique - a book I found profound was 'Messages from Michael' by Chelsea Quinn Yarboro. The premise is hard to swallow, but the essence has that 'truth ring'. My curiousity was piqued when I found X's site and there was Michael - coincidence, I suppose.

M: Had not heard of that book. The truth is that there are many writings available. These only provide information. Information that is not actualized into being as experience, and hence into knowledge, is only "dead".

A: Since we are 'on the road', email communications are usually via cell phone, and they don't work in campgrounds. Therefore, responses from this end will be sporadic, meaning when we hit a rest area on an Interstate (where all the cell phone towers are), shall hook up and upload/download.

M: <smile> Lately, my "professional schedules" have been loose. When active, which occurs inconsistently, I might not login to a computer for a week or two at a time.

A: As a friend of mine said, 'This is going to be a hoot'. Thanks for the chance.

M: A friend of mine in Texas uses that expression! You're welcome.

Peace

----------

M: Hello!

At 08:36 AM 9/17/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

The depth of your perception is impressive. Thank you for your comments.

M: You are very welcome.

A: I have been in a 'comfort zone' for a long time and it is now time to move. I had actually despaired of ever leaving it.

M: Understood.

A: The events of the last week have been rather astounding, beginning with obtaining CC's books, ostensibly for my brother's son, re-reading 'Journey to Ixtlan' sort of 'for old time's sake', then on a 'whim', surfing the net and found X's site and the dialogues with you. Based upon the profundity of what is occurring, I find it hard to believe this was all coincidence.

M: True. There are "no" coincidences.

A: We camped in a place I suspected of being a 'power place' and had some startling dreams right on the edge of consciousness wherein I was presented with a Y, with two guys urging me to decided which way to go, and like X, became frightened and woke up, to then hear what I had thought were some kids driving by with their radio up loud. 'C' had awakened, so I thought she had heard them too. Talking to her in the morning, she said she had heard nothing, and recounting it, I realized I had not heard any tire noise, either from a car or from bicycles. Seemed like a close encounter - hopefully, next time I'll be ready, and will 'know' what to do and how to act (assuming there will be a next time).

M: Attempt to train yourself never to act/react in fear or disorientation. The 2nd attention perception that you had was the beginning of a sequence of tests. Consider your framework of impeccability as you understand it today. Consider the manner in which you react to step-function stimulus, and with that consider what (according to your impeccability understanding) you personally consider to be your weakest link as measured against impeccability. With that identification gained, then expect your 2nd attention test to hammer on that issue, and those processes that revolve around that issue, until full understanding is achieved. When it is achieved, there will also be sporadic additional tests that will approach you from different vectors, different dramas, just to be certain that the issues are fully resolved in a locked-down form of integration.

A: In 'Tales of Power' DJ said something about a warrior beginning with the awareness that his being was off center and spending his existence attempting to correct that (a bad paraphrase but sort of the gist of it). This statement has never left me. I defined correction as becoming 'right', something I know absolutely, as I know I am not right, and maintaining not right for me results in the 'comfort zone' you described so accurately. It is a state of deep mistrust of basic instincts wherein virtually ever act or potential act or potential reaction is examined before the fact. This causes hesitation, even if it is in the nano-second range, and 'He who hesitates is lost' could not be more true. It also leads to a lack of self-confidence, and to self-deprecation, blah blah blah. I have spent a long time and a lot of money analying the hell out of it and so what? Perhaps now, for some reason, I have a chance to change it. The prospect of changing it is exhilirating beyond words, to get out of virtually an entire lifetime of falsity.

M: Understood. True. Humans have a way during developments through life to try on various personality dramas, like characters in a play. They try this character, and that, then various interpretations of the character(s) for two purposes: to learn how these character-dramas fit themselves; and, to learn how others react in the form of feedback to these characters and dramas. Sometimes, quite probably often, a character-role becomes so comfortable, and the intrinsic person becomes vague, perhaps even dichotomous to self. Then, acting through the dichotomy, some "surprise" comes along that "the character" cannot adapt to, and poof! the frailties caused by the dichotomies cause the character to fall apart: disorientation is the result.

A: I would like to ask some questions re applicability of lessons learned at the various attention levels to this level of existence, but I want to get this sent.

Again, thank you for your assistance.

M: <smile> You are welcome.

Peace

----------

M: Greetings!

At 06:41 PM 9/19/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

We've been travelling, OK to CO, currently at my son's house in Boulder, had no chance to email, but we will be here at least 3 days, so I can inundate you :).

M: <smile> Ah, well, there is a major "flood" tolerence! <-:)

BTW, I have a husband/wife apprentice pair in (snip), next to Boulder. We've been connected for 19 years, and reports of them are in "the dialogue".

A: I was going to ask if 2nd attention level tests all took place during dreaming, but I know DJ set CC up several times during 'waking consciousness'. Perhaps the difference is that DJ was there to ensure CC didn't get his head bashed in. (I'm thinking particularly of the occasion with the mountain lion described in 'Journey to Ixtlan').

M: Second attention experience are initiated, simply, with perception. This subsequently migrates toward alternate states where the breadth of what is experienced through perception increases in intensity and significance. The state of waking or twilight, "the dream time" according to the Australian aborigines, or sleep itself are only phases that modify the presence in the 1st attention that might interfere with perceptions in the second attention. It is possible to enter these states from any reference.

A: I have to say I feel particularly fortunate at the moment. I have spent the majority of my existence (60 years in December) in some, as surfers would say, 'gnarly' situations, dissipating 'power', agonizing, seeing the way then cursing the knowledge, etc.

M: My age will be 59 in a couple of months. There is curiosity about your (former) professional/work history. Relative to the outline of my own background, there probably is a sufficient detail noted in "the dialogues" in both states of awareness as well as structural
schnarff.

A: Finally, I feel I was actually 'at work', now I have the opportunity to actualize what I have always known to be 'the truth', and it is a gas.

M: <smile>

A: I would like to tell you about a dream I had last night. I was on an errand to a liquor store to get stuff for a couple of parties, and I realized I was being followed closely by what had been a white kitten, but it had been severely beaten, to the point where one eye was bulging out and it looked nearly dead, but it followed me relentlessly. I felt I had beaten it, trying to make it stay away from me, or go somewhere else, but it was fiercely determined. It followed me through the liquor store, and other customers were aware of it. I finally picked it up, feeling a wave of compassion both for it and for what I had done - I wanted to console it, but it squirmed and wanted down - it did not want the consolation, but it was not going to leave off following me, either.

'C' and I discussed it...seemed obvious to her...kitten represented my spiritual self that I have been beating hell out of and its not about to quit. I can dig that.

M: Precisely agreed. The "spiritual self" are the attributes of you that you have neglected for a very long time. The "damage" is intended to highlight the abuse through stress that has resulted in self-denigration, and obvious deprivation. The bulging eye represents the damage to what you are capable of seeing, both within yourself and beyond. The characteristic you carry of being obstinate is displayed also, but this time rather that being a reflex of stubbornness as it has in the past, it implies perseverance. In impact, the abuse of the full quality of self has not departed from you, and is starving for attention.

A: I still have yet to get to question re 1st attention level, which I assume is physical awake existence. Given that we are stationary for a few days, with a phone line, seems an opportune time to harass you, and you have indicated you have, uh, a certain amount of free time, so...

M: So far, your files are not particularly large compared to those of others. My schedules can be quite volatile, and often the computer is not logged into for one or two days, to a week or more, at a time. One great advantage to e/mail is that it facilitates schedule flexibility. If a very long file is received, the response might require more than a day with the response effort being interspersed as time permits.

Peace

Michael

----------

M: Hello.

At 12:57 PM 9/20/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

re the couple in (snip)...the town is quite close to Boulder. Would it be inappropriate to make contact with them, perhaps 'do coffee' or some such? Once again, one of them 'coincidences'. :) In which dialogue do they appear? What are their initials? (I'm currently re-reading, finished III, starting on IV).

M: They are only a couple, indicated as "apprentices", and they'll be obvious when you find them. They are in their mid-40's in age. They have a lot to deal with right now, so I'll ask them by a blind e/mail copy to them. A note about them appears at the end of Part V of the dialogues.

A: My background - married and divorced early, 4 children, eldest 39 - mainframe computer programmer, 'C' and I and a partner had our own service bureau supporting direct mail advertising which we closed down a couple of years ago, made enough to cool it (not to live lavishly, but frugally and be free to travel). We sold our house in So Cal last year, bought truck and camper and hit the road. Technically we are Texans - we have mail forwarding service and truck license is Texas. (Texas has no state income tax...)

M: I reside (a ping to InterNIC "whois" would immediately show this) in Orange County California.

A: 'C' and I met in Hermosa Beach late 60's, place where I did most major thrashing, reading, etc., most importantly essential Zen, Castaneda on top of it - an interesting mix - also drank a lot and shot some pretty fine pool.

M: I spent the late 1940's through ~ 1980 in Santa Monica. When I was in high school, had a girl friend in Hermosa Beach...

A: I have a concern in communicating with you. I am, as you have perceived, obstinate, and, I feel, like the American Indian definition of a 'contrary'. My concern is, if I let fly, I might alienate you, and I would not like to do that.

M: No. Almost all dependencies of the human form have been lost. X discovered that, although he hasn't fully published all of that yet, though it will get your attention when you see it. You, simply said, do not have the ability to offend anyone. Offense is a reaction that someone has to another. No one "offends" or "angers" anyone - these are only human form reactions.

There IS a request, based on respect, that you make attempts to be "efficient" in our dialogue. This, measured against impeccability for both of us, conserves both your energy and my own.

A: All of my life I have been told to slow down, pipe down, lower my voice, etc. A programmer associate (who also raced Harley's) once used the phrase 'Go, blow, or hit the wall' referring to motorcycle flat track racing, but as a style of living - vigorous, but sometimes leaving a wake. It sums up my approach to nearly everything, the spiritual pursuit as well. Add impatience. 'C' just reminded me a work associate once called me a bulldog, in reference to going after computer problems. Enuff.

M: Impatience can squander energy. Vigorous can be efficient assuming that it is focused.

A: One of my favorite quotes from Zen is 'The answer lies in the question', which comes to mind in asking things of you, but what the hell?

M: There has been the experience that many simply rattle questions without really contemplating themselves in the process. This, naturally, wastes energy unnecessarily. You do have the focus for intensity. The concern is over the stubborn element because that can block understanding and only cause circular logic as an argument or discussion, resulting in stasis and more energy waste.

A: A primary question re 1st level is the role of sensuousness. 'C' and I both enjoy food (she eats, I cook), she is a superb 'hunter' being an accomplished birder, DJ frequently mentioned the beauty and magnificence of the desert, etc, and a lot of that seems to be ignored in what I have read, including the dialogues X has posted. Your take?

M: Sensuousness is a component of all perception, and an important component of myself. Experience of sensual perception is in impact an extension of all perception, and inseparable.

Peace

Michael

Hello. This is a blind copy being sent to 'Y'. 'Y', there is "another" who would like to meet both of you. They are currently visiting in Boulder. They are new in a relationship with myself, while we have been together for almost two decades. They are about aged 60, have a computer background, and it might be a good respite for you to visit with them. If you choose to decline, copy back to me. If you wish to make and extension, copy to 'A' in the address path above. 'Y', I truly believe that this would be a good meeting for you and lady to have: a good diversion. Please consider it carefully. The diversion and the interest this would bring to you would be beneficial. Love Michael

----------

M: Hi!

At 06:20 PM 9/20/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

Understood. I prefer succinctness and shall attempt to be 'to the point'.

Too bad about you residing in OC...common line in HB was 'There is no life east of Sepulveda'. :) Mayhap GF may have used the line...

M: Well, you ARE currently east of Sepulveda.

A: Thanks for the ping to the couple in (snip).

A: re the impatience and stubbornness - at the moment, I feel neither, and rather have a calm sense of just being in the moment, sort of a rarity. I do believe it to be part of what is going on as of the last few weeks.

M: Actually, it is hoped that this would continue within our exchanges and that you will find this exploration of yourself, expansive. Often for those seeking to move beyond their boundaries, my presence becomes a prototype for exploration.

A: 'C' tends to kick my ass frequently in these regards - I could not have asked for a better partner.

This is beyond cool. Thanks.

M: You are very welcome.

Peace

----------

M: Hello!

At 07:29 PM 9/21/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

For some stupid reason I feel compelled to share this...even tho geographically challenged (don't know up from down?) - today in Boulder was extraordinary - fine storm clouds, superb wind, and I managed to obtain a great CD by Brother Jack Mac Duff, a most fine blues organist...have listened to the album three times through so far, whilst the wind blew in the back door, rain came and went...all this goddamn vigor! Most superb. I realized the wind has been sort of an ally of mine for as long as I can remember, starting in San Fernando olive orchards in the 50's.

M: The wind and the clouds, as a matter of physics, setup electric fields. Usually, a sensitive "empath" can become disoriented or even nauseated IF the fields vary in amplitude near 1Hz or less. If the fields tend to be quiescent then "the sensitive" will feel invigorated, "closer my god to thee" sort of feeling. If you "feel good" under showers (as in bathroom or waterfalls), even being near the shower, and if you feel good even being near the shower stream - probably more so when it's passing by you and it's cold - and if this feeling intensifies with increased velocity of the stream - congratulations, you're showing empathic characteristics. If, though, clouds wafting by on moderately windy days, and fierce clouds building thunderheads have "nervous feelings", congratulations you're a sensitive empath.

For myself, there is sensitivities to fields, even from underground rivers. There are places in Switzerland, for example, where due to these effects, I cannot safely drive a car: RM (my spouse) has to drive, because I become disoriented. In these situations, the fields are quiescent, but I am in motion "through" the fields, so as being a point-receiver that is motional through various distributions of fields, it has the equivalent impact of a field variance, and it's very disorienting, even nauseating.

Peace

----------

M: Greetings!

At 10:53 AM 9/22/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

No reactions of the sort you describe, and certainly not at the level you mentioned in Switzerland, at least not that I can recall. Believe I'll try paying a bit more attention, however. Increased empathy, I would assume, comes with the territory as one 'learns' or 'expands'.

M: Yes, without question. From observations, the childhood "defense reflex" to promote various forms of distraction which would include "shields", mind noise/scattered confusion, defensive responses to others that could range from anger to withdrawal, could variously be established in individuals to "block out" the perceptions of being a "natural" empath. Contemplate your reflex to assertiveness, and stubbornness, and allow the thought that these attributes may have been reflexively put in place "against" something a very, very, long time ago. In your history, it is projected that you found that these mechanisms served you well in society and in professional endeavors. If you can recall when and why these tendencies became imbued, there is a possibility (even probability) that you will "find" a characteristic within yourself "prior" to the establishment of those reflexes.

A: Having opened 'Pandoras Box', I am being buried in stuff, primarily dreams, at least one a night that remains vivid enough for nearly a complete recall. So far, with the exception of the Y dream I mentioned, they have been of the review type, rather like status checks.

M: The suggestion is that this process is being facilitated by the need of recapitulation of the past. The tendency you have toward being meticulous would promote this, however the opposing tendency of moving into obsession would be regressive as a distraction. It is suggested that the perceptions be allowed to flow and in that mode, there will eventually be observed a pattern to provide a vision of self.

A: The one last night was extremely painful, and resulted in at least an hour's worth of thrashing about, considering its ramifications. The dream began with 'C' and me being involved in some sort of a political demonstration, and it seemed it was somewhere in Mexico. I was trying to read the pamphlets being handed out, realized we were being associated with this movement and that there could be repercussions. We were herded into some sort of a hall, and it became apparent we were being detained, we being a couple hundred people. I wandered about, then realized I did not know where 'C' was. That resulted in an increasingly frantic search. People were lying around sleeping, but I could not find her.

M: The "fear" was experienced of: a) being pushed into situations unwillingly; b} loosing the one reference you have beyond yourself ('C') that you wholly can trust and have "full" identification with; this, exacerbating the proclivity to fear.

A: (seems to lack the power it had when I awoke from it...)

M: The "safety" of the 1st attention "awakeness" removed you from the discomfort of the exploration. It is noted, though, that quite a piece of self-information was provoked.

A: Here's the upshot of the meaning. I have been in this 'comfort zone' for a long time.

M: Yes. Setup by defense attributes.

A: I have used 'C' (as I realized I used my ex-wife) as a cover, a shield from 'them'.

M: Yes. More than a cover, though, extended here to be "a reference" that you could always come back to.

A: In the dream I had lost the shield, and that caused the frantic feeling. Further analysis led to the sensation of not knowing who the hell I really was, certainly not the fake I have created.

M: Yes, with more extension. "The fake" is only the comfort-drama role that you setup for yourself, noted in the paragraphs above. As attributes, the drama-character that was established has served you well in that you found this necessary as a mechanism that was probably survival based a very long time ago. (Although it "feels" like this character sequence was initiated about aged 12 years as a prototype, it was probably "locked in" somewhere in the mid-20's.)

A: It brought to mind a movie called 'Billy Liar', a British flick that nailed me when I saw it, even having events in it that I did myself. (My lying has been going on since Jr High). It was not difficult to see all the lies about me, my children, my moment to moment existence, and eventually these dialogues with you. I feel confident you have 'seen through' me. In retrospect, in many relationships, my 'real' feelings were always covered up, or modified, and bottom line, I just lied.

M: Yes. (You might note, that when these responses/exchanges are offered, I do not read the whole piece first, simply working through the piece one sentence at a time.) Those in society who really might want to interchange with individuals with the attributes represented by myself, normally would experience fear because of the transparency of their character-roles, however the truth is that absent the agendas normally associated with the human form, "we" are actually "safe". By exchanges as these, the candidate is really only exchanging with him/herself. Myself, and those like, offer the attribute of being prototypes for the exchange.

A: This was some rather heavy stuff for 2 AM musings. I have achieved this same level of awareness perhaps two or three times before, and the net result in the past was always godawful agony. In one case, LSD assisted, I actually locked myself in my bathroom for several hours - horrible, ghastly way to think of oneself, that ones entire life has been a manufactured fake.

M: That is not as "true" at least with the emphasis that you are currently placing upon it. The recognitions that you are finding, are precisely what you "wanted" to find, which is another way of saying "needed" to locate, identify, and engage. The person that lies beneath in the broadest sense, is a wonderful, engaging individual who has the quality of being loyal, with making a high commit to self, and who only has a tendency to obfuscate self in regard to others for fear of being vulnerable. This fear was learned as a reflex that became integrated a long time ago and has been operative in recent years only as a matter of habit pattern.

A: There is a difference this time, perhaps. The things that came to mind last night were first that 'C' is a very aware person, and there must be something 'real' enough about me that makes her want to continue to hang around with me, although she has had more than ample cause to depart.

M: From my viewpoint, you are wholly real, and the emphasis on the character role is only temporary because the breadth of yourself is attempting to emerge. Please consider that the tendency toward self-depreciation is not impeccable because it squanders energy.

A: The most I suppose soothing thing was a comment from the dialogues, something I had heard before but had not been affected by, and that was that we are not presented with problems we cannot solve. i.e., I have the means necessary to get out of this goddamned 'comfort zone'. If I achieve nothing else by this contact with you, it has been eminently worth it.

M: <smile> The extension of yourself toward myself was made because within your being, there was recognition that the moment had come. Now it is appropriate to issue the caution that typically is advanced to all with whom there has been this contact: if you elect to continue on this "way" of knowledge (which has as it's focus, knowledge of yourself) the process will alter you life forever, and after crossing the transition that is immediately before you, you will never be able to return to"your comfort drama" again, without terrible consequences. This caution is issued in the sense of outreach, extension, as a concern simply because across the threshold of self-recognition the responsibilities build and they are commensurate with the abilities that are gained.

Peace

----------

M: Greetings.

At 09:25 AM 9/24/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

I believe I understand the consequences of continuing on this path, what DJ, I thought, appropriately, called a 'path with heart'. I truly feel I have no choice but to continue, and I suspect, it is just as well I do not really know what lies ahead. Time's a wastin, yet I realize impatience, like self-depreciation (as you said) are neither one impeccable states, rather they deplete power. and I agree again with DJ, that everything depends upon one's personal power.

M: There is an immense process in front of you should you choose to continue. One element of this is probably your relationship with 'C'. Early in your approach to me, there was indication that she was on the same path, but that may be an assumption on your part because the probability always is that she is operating from a different reality than yours. Alterations at this point in your processes could have a significant conflict, or at least turbulence, upon the references that thee and she have set up. It is suggested that a check of the premises upon which structures that have intensity as a focus for she and thee be investigated with respect to searching for dependencies.

A: X's last email to me said he felt like he was dealing with you as if you were Dear Abbey, and I begin to understand what he meant, however, I'll continue to 'use you' unashamedly for as long as I can.

M: <smile>

A: I would appreciate your 'read' on my eldest son, 38, living on a boat in So Cal, unmarried. My relationship with him has been primarily antagonistic for his entire life. He lived with me during his teen years in Hermosa, was one of the main dealers and surfers there, dropped a lot of acid, and I have always suspected 'saw' a great deal.

M: Obfuscations to avoid knowledge of self can take many forms and images. They often are initiated because one "simply gropes" in the search of something of merit for focus. Once the power struggle that has been established as a reflex between individuals has been locked in, the struggle itself may tend to form a dependency. Even a "struggle" of power is a reference to fall back upon, and since it does not convey energy in itself, it tends to become a dependency.

The basis of dependency can be fear, or the lack of self-esteem, in compensatory fashion for the lacking components of esteem. The problem for your offspring would occur if you were to die. He'd loose his reference with you. The problem is not IF he/thee have references, but the nature of the references.

If you have e/mail with him, it might work better to employ toward a dialogue, since in fact and in "the now" the reflex tendencies toward falling onto the emotions of dependence would automatically be instigated, and e/mail provides some detachment.

A: I have 'done battle' with him many times in dreams. I have struggled trying to understand what he wants from me, and what I want from him to no avail. I dreamed again of him last night, and of one of his ex-girlfriends - they both seemed to be challenging me, she to 'find' V, and when I discovered he was standing behind her sort of behind a fine curtain, he seemed to challenge me to 'fess up', or rather had caught me in some duplicity, and was rather arrogantly watching me squirm. I have suspected at times he has 'seen' who I really am and has been demanding I be that.

M: If you could learn to simply "observe" him without emotionally engaging, you'd learn the nature of his dependencies and those of yours that caused the play to become systemic within your relationship. For him, IF you were to become "transparent" to HIS emotions, particularly by not engaging yours (a suggestion of huge consequence), he would go into high turbulence and volatility, because he wouldn't have the reference of the power struggle to rely upon from that point forward. He has utilized that reference as a major component of his own self-definition for some time, and absent that, he'd have to really struggle within himself to find something else.

A: My youngest son, his wife, and 'C' and I, had a lengthy conversation last night about V, all of us trying to understand what he is about. Relations with P (youngest) and myself with V are essentially terminated, at least on the 1st attn level. He owes me a fairly substantial amount of money, and if it weren’t for that, I doubt I would have any more contact with him. I feel strongly that something needs to be resolved here before I can move on.

M: Sometimes it required to let go: one cannot fix what is not within self.

A: We leave tomorrow morning (Monday) for Texas. Contact with 'Y' did not happen. This is rather dumb, but I suspected perhaps the contact was supposed to be on a different level and I still have too much clutter going on. I did cruise through (snip) on Friday, thinking I might run into him, but did not.

M: Peace.

----------

M: Greetings.

At 03:30 PM 9/26/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

'C' and I hooked up with 'Y' on Sunday before we left Boulder. We were all rather stunned, I felt, mostly because without preliminaries we jumped right into talking (in public, no less) about 'stuff'.

M: Understood. Normally it happens that way when individuals are philosophically aligned.

A: We sort of acted like spies having a clandestine meeting, continually looking around expecting to get caught. Perhaps, more like guilty children. It was enjoyable. Thanks for the connect. 'Y' lamented the fact he had no one else in the area of similar intent that he could talk to. We told him we would stay in touch and that we came through the area at least once a year to see my son and would contact him again.

M: There is vague memory about "the spies" analogy, a long time ago.

A: So. I like to think I am aware of the immensity of the process and potential consequences. The descriptions of don Juan are of an accomplished man of knowledge, not at all unlike descriptions of the ancient Zen masters. I admire them, and you, for similar reasons - presentation of a prototype. I would appreciate, if possible, or reasonable at this point, more description of the immensity.

M: There is a tendency for most when fully engaging "to the way of knowledge" (really knowledge of self, initially) to desire knowledge and scope of the immensity of what "can be". The difficulty in providing this information is founded on the normalcy that early knowledge of "the immensity" (which said in normal societal terms could be "power" or "ability") and all of those attributes and characteristics can become a dependency to provide impetus to gain what is not yet achieved. Candidates "to the way" can utilize this information to develop obsessions and squander impatience simply because "they don't have it yet". What results is that "the won't have it" because the energy being wasted forms a block that has as it's roots, obsessions. Given that description, it is far too risky, and viewed by myself as not responsible, to provide more information that is perceived to be appropriate to anyone specifically. Through "the dialogue" in X's site there are some intriguing reports provided to the limit of my alacrity to provide those. As another expands, more is carefully provided as a moving reference. In providing this approach, the reference CAN move but NOT too far ahead of the vision and perception of the other.

A: I like to think also that my relationship with 'C' is out of the ordinary in its openness and will be able to survive (i.e. we will be able to establish new reference points). There is the matter of priorities and this 'quest' takes top billing - in fact, it always has. I believe the current process to be a continuation, not a new thing.

M: Understood, with acknowledgement.

A: I left my first wife partly because of the distraction, and primarily out of a need to be utterly on my own, to face myself, by myself, to learn. 'C' has not been a distraction. She has, to the contrary, been as you said, a superb point of reference, damnably reliable, ruthless, but fortunately with a sense of humor. There is no doubt she 'operates from a different reality', if for no other reason than that she is female. That is not a bad thing for me. We have frequently considered ourselves plebes, fortunate to be able to compare notes.

M: <smile> The term "candidates" comes to mind. The "reality", for a warrior, is continually subject to inspection as a metric of comparison to impeccability. As the understanding of impeccability expands, the personal version of reality is commensurately adjusted.

A: Thank you for the comments re V. It is a relief to step back from the struggle to realize the veracity of a 'reference point' being the definition of a relationship, and to realize the reference point can be changed. I have emailed him, and this time without heat, without bait, without resentment, etc. There is a real possibility that I have been using him to help convince myself of, as you say, a sense of low self-esteem - 'failure as a father, role-model', etc. It is conceivable I have more dependency on this relationship than he does.

M: You're welcome.

Certainly he "forced" himself away from that point, and it will take a great amount of peaceful - emphasis on peace - time in dialogue with you for his shell of arrogance to be removed. It is appropriate that this shell has served him and in more ways than within your personal relationship with him. Your "tests" will come as he attempts to provoke the reactions in you that he is accustomed to having. It it suggested to maintain in your presence toward him that he "only" knows of the past as being the process of interchange with you. Humans do not deal with change very well. The change that you will attempt to present will probably be greeted with suspicion, and perhaps even a sense of loss remembering that the base of your relationship does provide some form of reference and even identification of a drama that he has used with others. Changing that relationship could be very turbulent for him.

Peace

----------

M: Hi.

At 10:55 AM 9/28/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

My son has responded in a fashion that indicates we have an opportunity to establish some positive reference points. Deeply satisfying. He indicated he would appreciate your perceptions - I told him he had to contact you through X.

M: Thank you for protecting my direct path.

A: I'm back in Rockport - 'C' is in Veracruz - I have a good cell phone signal. (Makes me think of the bumper sticker - 'I'm out of estrogen, and I have a gun').

M: <smile>

A: I am getting the impression you are holding me off at arms length, or becoming somewhat remote. My temptation (obsession?) is to, as usual, toss the baby out with the bathwater and to misinterpret in a negative manner.

M: Certainly you are free to execute that action. It is always your choice because process can only be yours, not my own. It might be emphasized to note that if "your impeccability" indicates to you that it is appropriate to disconnect, then that would become an imperative for you as an action item. All you have to do at any point is say "good bye" and I will be gone.

What is provided is always commensurate as perceptions indicate, is appropriate to another specifically, and not more. How "the other" might perceive these restrictions would only be wasting energy.

Peace

----------

M: Hello. Have a little time prior to meeting a client.

At 12:36 PM 9/28/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael - (aka Dear Abby)

Thanks. The word is insufficient.

M: You're welcome.

A: I am not ready to 'hang up'.

M: Understood. The "reflex" that was reported to do so, though, provides an opportunity for self-inspection with intent to identify the early stimulus from which the emotion of self-protection, another form of ego, is derived.

A: I just wrote "How do I proceed?", and deleted it, because I know how to proceed. The immensity (and potential attachment to 'powers') is not something of concern to me. I referred to abilities as tricks - I have always felt the rightness of a Zen warning that one must not be dazzled by powers, that learning to deal with them was part of the gig, and learning not to become attached to them was crucial, in fact, rather like a DJ test.

M: Indeed. Being dazzled by "power" or "high ability" is only indicative of human form dependencies.

A: It is somewhat akin to learning to deal with con artists.

M: Individuals tend to fall into patterns that they find efficient as they grope through life. Efficient patterns, in turn, form dependency upon that pattern which operates as a comfort zone. The desire to expand becomes limited/inhibited by the dependent pattern, which then produces conflict. Conflict can be the derivative of self-esteem that sourced the need for the comfort zone.

A: A dream last night had me holding a ticket to some complex event including car park, etc. When I arrived, all the parking was gone, according to the attendants (not true) - there was a definite sense that I was not wanted there - more fragments, but I gave the tickets finally to my daughter and quit the whole thing.

M: The intent of the dream was a test. The test was motivated by attempting to provoke the frustration reflex, or anger with the attendants. The attendants were setup to pose as a block. They could have actually just dissolved had they been ignored in peace. Attempts to manipulate the attendants, attempts to "power" through the situation, would have failed. The other component of the test, having not provoked anger and obsessive use of force, was to evaluate withdrawal. That functioned because withdrawal was the reaction. In the second attention as in all of the universe, an individual cannot "be wanted" or "not wanted". One "just is". The emotions provoked are indicative of the "abilities" of the candidate usually in terms of human form reactions.

A: I'm thinking this might be the potential rejection I'm going to receive (one read), or it could be a rejection of attempts to go this way. I prefer the prior analysis.

M: It was only a test. Fear causes the symptom of rejection. Fear is based on the parasites of ego-form-dependencies.

Peace

M: Based upon the prior exchanges, the most probable approach that could yield a benefit to you would be to attempt probing into self to discover the facets related to reflexive emotions.

It's noticed that another e/mail was transmitted, so more will be included in response to the second file.

Peace

Michael

----------

At 07:09 PM 9/28/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

and now? I have two weeks plus completely to myself. Well, I DO have Greg Maddux pitching for Atlanta against the Mets...and a superb pot of lima beans simmering. I'm reminded of a koan response, question being 'what is enlightenment?' - and the answer being something like 'Carrying water and fetching firewood', or perhaps 'watching baseball and cooking beans'.

I want to get on with this process.

----------

M: Greetings.

At 10:31 AM 9/29/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

I'm deep in the bowels of dialogue IV. As mentioned, I have a large block of solo time, and I hope I don't bury you in BS - thoughts, dreams, etc, are coming full blast, and I'm inclined to let it rip.

M: Efficiency is appreciated as long as accuracy is not sacrificed in the attempts at efficiency. FYI, X only has published about 20% of the text of "the dialogue" to this point.

A: In IV, X quoted dJ thus: 'In the ups and downs of daily living, you win, and you lose, and you don't know when you win and when you lose. This is the price one pays for living under the rule of self-reflection'.

I fully understand this one. The question is, how does one 'strive to end the dominion of self-reflection'? How does one know action, thought, etc is impeccable sans evaluation of that action, thought, etc? Seems a Catch 22 of Zen-like proportions.

M: The cycle is broken at some point where there is sufficient achievement accomplished. While that statement may seem somehow insufferable due to it's vagueness, the flow of the process is attempted to be described for you in the following.

All humans carry proclivities that are based initially upon DNA. These initial attributes and characteristics at varying levels of intensity, in impact, form "the environment of self". The sense of direction, that is to emphasize the tendencies caused through this mechanism of proclivity, functions in a process that causes "reflex responses" in terms of decisions and emotions to be imbued. Science research has clearly exhibited that approximately 50% of personality is formed in this process.

From that base of self, actions of imprints are then executed around us. At least initially, the "reflex reactions" that result from these stimuli are influenced by the proclivities noted above. Operating in conjunction with this process, in effect actually expanding it, is the concatenation of memories that are retained as event-modules of recognitions and auto-reflexive responses.

In order to truly "become free", it is obviously noted that auto-reflexive dependencies, emotions, et al, can form limitations and boundaries. Due to their nature, initiated by the DNA-based proclivities that are expanded through imprints that have been integrated "reflexively", a reasonably daunting task becomes required. For purposes of these exchanges, we call this task "the way of knowledge" to evolve to a state of being that has "freedom" as it's derivative.

Whenever one has an "impulse" reflexive response, with emphasis on those responses that carry limitations and negative emotions, "self-limiting boundaries" are accordingly exhibited, and directly, it is necessary to work back through intent, into the previously noted concatenation of events in order to get into the root-core of self. Many adjustments are made along the way of this process, and if the commit can be thorough with impeccability, the result can indeed be "freedom".

Considered in this manner, it cannot be a limitless or circular process since the concatenation of the initiating sequence was progressive.

A: (I'm further strung up by another quote: 'The more talking and thinking, the farther from the truth', and I DO like to talk and think, although not both at the same time, not to mention gum chewing.)

M: The quote is directed toward useless rattle that conveys no new information. Noise. Rattle. Intended, focused, progressional impeccability is NOT described through those undirected and noisy processes.

A: I'm again wondering what I want from you, and as I write that I know - confirmation; evaluation; guidance.

M: There is an attempt at providing these components for you.

A: There have been occasions when out-of-the-ordinary things have happened, and your evaluation is sought.

The first coming to mind, was a clandestine invitation to meet, issued by a co-worker when I was an employee of (snip). (He and I were both systems programmers there.) I had been thrashing through CC/dJ. Turns out his wife was a friend of CC's wife, and the four of them occasionally dined together. Bill said casually at one point I could meet CC through him, if I wanted. (This was an open and different invite. At work, we just dealt with one another, although I always considered him superior - the company guru.) I felt the clandestine invite was loaded, and somehow a bit frightening. I never followed up on it. I have always suspected it was an invitation to 'come out'. It had no impact on our 'work' relations, but I have always wondered.

M: There have been many concepts already surfaced in these exchanges and they are formed by "why?" questions. When the statement was made that you had the reflex to withdraw in a prior e/mail, the "why" response of self was only the report of the emotion, and it did not probe into the "why there was the emotional reflex?" which is the core of recapitulation. In this case, the "why" of the fear, and other processes that inhibited your "coming out" (using your words) is not adequately reported only by the superficial note of the response. The knowledge of self comes from understanding in the more profound layer of the concatenated sequence "why?" is there integrated a reflex to "protect" which is defensive as ego, arrogance, and other properties may be.

A: Another 'occurance'. Part of chasing all sources I could find was the discovery of Alastair Crowley, ultimately finding a fine book of his in an obscure book store in Westwood, having a crazy photo of him in the front doing his best imitation of a 'black magician'. The book was something like 'The Law and Other Nonsense' - final line was 'Do what thou wilt shall be the sum of the law'. Impressive knowledge of Egyptian mysticism.

M: Certainly that "knowledge" was implied, at least.

A: However...there is the thing of controlling demons. I had been digging into the book when 'C' and another woman dropped by my apartment. I told them about Crowley (they were'nt interested) - so I read them part of the stuff, and it was anti-female. They both of them became nauseated and visibly distressed, so I knocked it off and put the book away. They did not stay long. 'C' later commented that Crowley was evil. I valued continuing with her over messing about, so I devised my own ritual for ridding myself of his influence, which required plunging a large dagger I had into the photo of him in the book, 'feeling' powerfully opposed to him, then tearing each page one at a time from the book. I don't recall if I burned the whole thing, but I beleive that followed.

M: From my observation, this was only a form of releasing negative energy that was stored within you. Since there had been at the least, "some" identification with Crowley, there must have been some components of his negativity, petty tyrant (parasitic) propensities that you learned needed to be expunged.

A: Another occurance. I learned the ritual of smudging from a medicine man in San Diego. I still practice it from time to time. When I was a systems programmer at a company in Torrance, I had the responsibility of all the operating systems software on a 360/65, one of the worlds most exquisite mainframes, but that's another story. I was being inundated with problems, both hardware and software and making no headway. The more effort expended, the more problems came up, pushing me farther and farther into the back. In exasperation, I decided to come in on a weekend and smudge the computer room, regardless who was there or what was going on, the idea being I was being hounded by imps, or whatever. I smudged the whole room and my office adjacent to it. (Sometimes smudge just smolders and won't stay lit...this time, it damn near erupted and produced voluminous smoke.) No surprise, ALL problems solved before week end.

M: These processes do not involve exorcism of negative forces of the environment. They invoke objectivity in self. The actions required alter the focus of self in that to execute the actions, another process of the emotional "partitions" within the luminous forms of humans become employed.

A: One more. Doing a contract at (snip) (had become a consultant some years later but stayed in touch with them), I was stymied by several obscure bugs in some complex software I had written. All efforts at finding the problems failed, including outside assistance. I had been experimenting with self-hypnosis, so as a last resort, decided to try it to find the bugs. Worked like a charm, but I have often wondered what got invoked there. The 'thing' of self-hypnosis seems able to tap deep resources.

M: Yes, because the process frees resources that are often otherwise tied up in self-important noise.

A: If nothing else, it yields a deep sense of relaxation and can result in some fine 'fantasies'. I'm tempted to say it seems a powerful tool for 'programming' one's self - very akin to programming a computer, however, I have as yet to use it that way.

M: Through this recognition, you are attempting to do so. It has already been initiated.

A: (from IV)

"M: This is another way of saying that when one truly recognized him/herself, the knowledge can "knock the daylights" out of you. The cognition of rapid awareness, knowledge, of self can be the most frightening. I've had these experiences, of course."

From Zen stuff: 'All things are thoroughly comprehended and all beings are clearly understood - when one who has Arrived senses this, he's startled in the darkness'.

and from IV - 'The body is the world's smallest prison'. No shit. I'm reminded of the guy holding prison window bars up in front of himself screaming 'Let me out!'.

The end of that dialogue is uplifting, a warning about obsession (me?), and passionate (my word) longing, getting a 'too soon' taste of what has to be the exquisiteness of living with 'it' all the time, easily between attns 1 and 2.

M: Well said. Yes. If you directly encountered what is possible, you would be shaken and the resonant oscillations that would occur would not be (to put it mildly) "efficient". The process and the progression along the sequence must function in a manner that would be similar to untangling lines-of-code. The process of recapitulation reminds me of sequences written in "C" code, being not particularly cryptic as source code. The analogy for you is that through the micro-code (the "proclivities" noted above) of DNA, impacted by the programming of events that are concatenated through life's experiences in an unrecognized way, all of these influences form a analogy to a "source code" of self.

The problem is that the "source code" has been "compiled" INADVERTENTLY through the sequence of inadvertent living, YACC, yet another compiler-controller. The challenge of the warrior for freedom, the warrior for knowledge, is to de-compile this inadvertence so that the source code may be recognized and altered.

A: At the moment, I can't get enough. I have three more dialogues to muse through and potential responses from you, X, and my eldest, meantime fine sun in my back door, jazz on the stereo, I know no one in this RV park so they won't interrupt by 'visiting', I realize I'm indulging, but what the hell?

M: This indulgence could yield benefit for you. A body scan of self is indicated.

a. Place yourself, preferably in the early night, in a resting environment. Be naked in order that the pressures of fabrics not distract from your perceptions. Attempt to be comfortable in a very dimly lit room, lying upon your back, face up.

b. Close your eyes, and attempt to place yourself into a form of quiet mind.

c. Mentally, upon your focus of intent, imagine that there is an extraordinarily intense beam of light. The beam of light is flooding the soles of your feet. Feel that intensity. Perceive how the feet feel. Ask if they are experiencing emotions. Hold the perception of the light as the feet become warm. Hold the light in that position.

d. When the feet warm, move the light with mental focus, to the tips of the toes. Ask the same questions ("the questions"): How they feel, are there emotions, are there perceptions?.

e. When these body surfaces are thoroughly explored and understood to the limit of their efficiency at this "first" exercise, move the light intensity, progressively, through the body, the next position being the ankles. Ask "the questions".

f. Continue this slow and delicate process carefully, through the lower and upper legs, pelvis, genitalia, being examining with "the questions" at each step. Move through the torso.

g. The features of the face can be as provocative as the other segments of the study.

What results could very well be quite altering for you. To get to "the source code" that is the subject of the seeker, this process will be required to be repeated about every other night until much is learned. On the second scan, the responses will be very different - very - as another layer of self will then be investigated upon that occasion.

Peace

Michael

----------

M: Greetings.

At 05:30 PM 9/29/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

I suspect it is a rule that just when one 'thinks' one is progressing, something happens to prove otherwise. I may be reading too much into this little incident, but somehow it seemed significant.

M: Listening.

A: Besides emailing you, reading, etc, I spent the morning taking the camper off my truck and stowing stuff. I was about to leave for a run to my storage thing, was sitting sort of half in, half out of my truck, intent on my 'to do list', when another tenant stopped in passing in his truck and said 'Have you found what you're looking for?'. My attention was elsewhere. My response was some mumbled bullshit meaning to put him off and away from me, to create in him the impression of that 'comfort zone' blah self. He looked at me and smiled. I tried a recovery...it failed. He moved on and parked his truck. Dammit.

M: Hummm. Lost opportunity. Blocked by reflex yet again.

A: The profundity of his question nailed me. How did he know? What does he know? blah blah blah. In the past, an encounter like this always occurred whenever I began to 'move out', and always the consequences were to run back and hide - not this time. What occurs to me is how to be aware, to be impeccably aware so that responses are appropriate. Inevitably these things happen when I am least aware, caught up in some damned mundanity. Fine. Bring 'em on.

M: The "learning" continues! <smile> (with affection).

Michael

----------

M: Hello.

At 07:17 PM 9/29/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

Thank you again. I got the message. I'll give the exercise a go - it is very similar to the self-hypnosis I mentioned, except for the requests for information from the various parts.

M: It's perhaps a little better than self-hypnosis because though it carries those elements of meditation, it tends to call up stored responses in the body.

A: I have chewed on one statement you made and I cannot understand its meaning. You said '...attempt probing into self to discover facets related to reflexive emotions'. I'm aware you have said this before. I cannot grasp its meaning, perhaps hung up on 'reflexive'. What is it that I project that you are responding to, that obviously I must become aware of and deal with somehow?

M: Humans learn how to be protective, in a blindingly quick and impulse reflexive manner. If someone were to throw a baseball at your face so that you could see the threat, you WOULD "reflexively" defend yourself. If a small flying insect flew toward your eyes, you would reflexively "blink" or jerk your head in defense.

Human emotions, derived usually from experiences while very young in the early formative period, learn "reflexive" emotions that way. A parent slaps the buns, and there is an automatic reflex. If the emotion was anger, then the anger is intensified on this provocation. If the emotion was fear, then the fear initially becomes a reflex on the "slap" which can be quickly followed by "protective anger". Humans tend to use "reflexive emotion" that becomes ingrained through these stimuli in a blind and unthinking way (hence, "the reflex") throughout life. The early "learning" imprints noted by the "spank" example noted above is converted (more or less) automatically into reflexive responses later in life that might have as their stimuli, not a "spank" but some words. It can be so subtle that perhaps the tone of the other providing the stimuli, the inflection, or the words themselves or even the phonic sound of the voice, might be a sufficient "match" to the allegorical experience of "the spank" when it was encountered.

Humans can go through all of their lives with these dependencies, and not know the sources. Blind (to deliberate thought) auto-reflexes.

A: We cross-communicated - I sent another email before I downloaded your responses. I'll attempt to eliminate the useless chatter.

M: Peace

Michael

----------

M: Hello!

At 09:15 AM 10/1/2000 -0500, you wrote:

A: Michael -

The body scan exercise yielded some unexpected results. I had presumed I might uncover some painful 'scars' - instead, nothing but pleasant recollections, like re the feet, the remembered sting of kicking a football barefoot, but watching a fine kick take off, then playing ball in the grass on a crisp day, blah blah. The scan further up continued to yield pleasant things. I suspect I'm being lulled into a sense of peace and I'm going to get hammered on subsequent scans.

M: It is suggested that the process noted be approached with objectivity, which by itself is an important attribute-ally of the seeker. To implement this concept, consider that you, in yourself, are something like a highly fascinating and interesting "book". In reading through your own personal "book" of self, not only history is explored but how history interacted with "the now" in various moments and impacts, to eventually "discovery" the mystery of who/what you are today. If this process can be approached with the same sort of "discovery" of energetic thrill, then although there can be excitement, "getting hammered" would not be included.

A: I have re-read my dialogues with you. I am tempted to become deeply discouraged because the more I examine (recapitulate?), the more I find responses that are reflexive and I realize the un-realness of the majority of my existence. However, I know being discouraged is; a) an indulgence; b) not impeccable; c) accomplishes nothing but self-pity which is an utter waste of time. (I suspect the discouragement itself of being a reflex.)

M: Yes. True, in it's entirety.

A: I realize the opportunity to 'be right' exists at every moment, that if a reflex occurs it is an opportunity to identify it, sort of defuse it, or somehow upset its automatic nature. The more I examine, the more I find, however, I do not consider this jousting at windmills.

M: The discovery is what the imperative to self really is, not being judgmental about the "right or wrong" of what is found. Quite probably, if something that is found is reflexively judged to be anything other than "information" that can be a tool of good use, then the reflex becomes a block since snap-judgments can block by themselves.

A: My editor is 'on' as I write and as a result I'm trying to determine what I'm revealing in my writing and trying to anticipate your reaction and response. This is not productive.

M: It is not productive. If you could move to the point that my reactions are not based in the human form, then it would be of assistance to you.

A: It is as if I am stark fucking naked, with the spotlight on me, center stage, nowhere to go, and the desire to cover up is huge. I cannot see the audience/judges, but I know they are there, that every action and non-action is being noted, not criticized, just noted. The attention is without caring - it is just attention, and I'm vibrating, blabbing, emoting, anything but quiet - and real.

M: The only member of the audience that is important, is you.

A: A cool line from an Alanis Morissette song '...but enough about me, let's talk about you for a while: enough about you, lets talk about life for a while'.

Thanks for the peace, and for the affection. Someday I'll be able to wish you the same.

M: <smile> You're welcome.

Peace

----------