You say, “It is very subtle and easily disappears when I again identify with what is experienced.” Being is never experienced. Experienced means a memory: it is already past. Being is always a process of experiencing.

Perhaps the word experiencing does not exist in the dictionaries, but that’s exactly the existential situation. It is always a process that goes on deepening. You can never come to a moment when you can say, “I have experienced.” That moment will be that you have fallen out of the flow of experiencing.

“Is this my mind,” you are asking, “entering by a back door, or am I going in the right direction?” Both are true. When you are centered within yourself and feeling ecstatic you are going in the right direction. And the moment you start thinking about it – what this experience is, how to see it – the mind is coming from the back door.

You have to avoid the mind completely. Except mind, there is no enemy in the whole world as far as one is concerned. Mind is your enemy for the simple reason that your whole experience of past is accumulated there. And you have always experienced identification. You say, “I am thirsty, I am hungry,” without ever thinking what you are saying. Just look at the process: are you really hungry, or are you aware that there is hunger in your body? Are you really thirsty, or can you experience the thirst in your throat, in your body? But because of language, which has been made up by people who are not enlightened….

There exists no enlightened language in the world yet, and perhaps there never will exist – for the simple reason that language is needed for communication.

There are only three possibilities of communication.

Two ignorant persons can communicate very easily: they are in the same boat, they are surrounded by the same darkness, their identifications are same.

The second communication is a little difficult but can happen: it is between an enlightened person and one who is ignorant. The difficulty is created by the ignorant person, because he knows the language of ignorance but he does not know the language of enlightenment…so constant misunderstanding. But the enlightened people of the world have tried their hardest somehow to reach you. They have succeeded in reaching only a few people. The task seems to be immensely difficult.

And there is a third possibility – two enlightened people – but they will sit in silence. That is their communication.

So I don’t see any possibility that there will ever be an enlightened language. And the language that we have created is basically faulty. For example, when you say “the tree,” you make a noun of a process. The tree is not static; it is treeing, it is growing. Even when you see with your own eyes a river flowing, you don’t use the word rivering, you use the word river. River makes it something static. It never is – not even for a single moment. It is constantly flowing. That is its intrinsic nature.