The true path of the warrior wizard

[Starjumper]

This is something written by Castaneda and I see it as also an excellent description of long path that one takes along the Way of real nei kung, (not to be confused with fake nei kung, which abounds), of Taoist wizards, and immortals.  I recognize it as accurate because I have been through these stages, except maybe for the last enemy mentioned.

Edited March 3, 2018 by Starjumper

[Starjumper]

Every bit of knowledge that becomes power has death as its central force. Death lends the ultimate touch and whatever is touched by death indeed becomes power.

 

A man who follows the paths of sorcery is confronted with imminent annihilation every turn of the way, and unavoidably he becomes keenly aware of his death. Without the awareness of death he would be only an ordinary man involved in ordinary acts. He would lack the necessary potency, the necessary concentration that transforms one's ordinary time on earth into magical power.

 

 

Thus to be a warrior a man has to be, first of all, and rightfully so, keenly aware of his own death. But to be concerned with death would force any one of us to focus on the self and that would be debilitating. So the next thing one needs to be a warrior is detachment. The idea of imminent death, instead of becoming an obsession, becomes an indifference.

 

Now you must detach yourself; detach yourself from everything. Only the idea of death makes a man sufficiently detached so he is incapable of abandoning himself to anything. Only the idea of death makes a man sufficiently detached so he can't deny himself anything. A man of that sort, however, does not crave, for he has acquired a silent lust for life and for all things of life. He knows his death is stalking him and won't give him time to cling to anything, so he tries, without craving, all of everything.

 

 

A detached man, who knows he has no possibility of fencing off his death, has only one thing to back himself with: the power of his decisions. He has to be, so to speak, the master of his choices. He must fully understand that his choice is his responsibility and once he makes it there is no longer time for regrets or recriminations. His decisions are final, simply because his death does not permit him time to cling to anything.

 

And thus with an awareness of his death, with his detachment, and with the power of his decisions a warrior sets his life in a strategical manner. The knowledge of his death guides him and makes him detached and silently lusty; the power of his final decisions makes him able to choose without regrets and what he chooses is always strategically the best; and so he performs everything he has to with gusto and lusty efficiency.

 

When a man behaves in such a manner one may rightfully say that he is a warrior and has acquired patience. When a warrior has acquired patience he is on his way to will. He knows how to wait. His death sits with him on his mat, they are friends. His death advises him, in mysterious ways, how to choose, how to live strategically. And the warrior waits! I would say that the warrior learns without any hurry because he knows he is waiting for his will; and one day he succeeds in performing something ordinarily quite impossible to accomplish. He may not even notice his extraordinary deed. But as he keeps on performing impossible acts, or as impossible things keep on happening to him, he becomes aware that a sort of power is emerging. A power that comes out of his body as he progresses on the path of knowledge. He notices that he can actually touch anything he wants with a feeling that comes out of his body from a spot right below or right above his navel. That feeling is the will, and when he is capable of grabbing with it, one can rightfully say that the warrior is a sorcerer, and that he has acquired will.

 

A man can go still further than that; a man can learn to see. Upon learning to see he no longer needs to live like a warrior, nor be a sorcerer. Upon learning to see a man becomes everything by becoming nothing. He, so to speak, vanishes and yet he's there. I would say that this is the time when a man can be or can get anything he desires. But he desires nothing, and instead of playing with his fellow men like they were toys, he meets them in the midst of their folly. The only difference between them is that a man who sees controls his folly, while his fellow men can't. A man who sees has no longer an active interest in his fellow men. Seeing has already detached him from absolutely everything he knew before.

[Starjumper]

A man of knowledge is one who has followed truthfully the hardships of learning, a man who has, without rushing or without faltering, gone as far as he can in unraveling the secrets of power and knowledge. To become a man of knowledge one must challenge and defeat the four natural enemies inside him.

 

When a man starts to learn, he is never clear about his objectives. His purpose is faulty; his intent is vague. He hopes for rewards that will never materialize for he knows nothing of the hardships of learning. He slowly begins to learn--bit by bit at first, then in big chunks. And his thoughts soon clash. What he learns is never what he pictured, or imagined, and so he begins to be afraid. Learning is never what one expects. Every step of learning is a new task, and the fear the man is experiencing begins to mount mercilessly, unyieldingly. His purpose becomes a battlefield.

 

And thus he has stumbled upon the first of his natural enemies: Fear! A terrible enemy--treacherous, and difficult to overcome. It remains concealed at every turn of the way, prowling, waiting. And if the man, terrified in its presence, runs away, his enemy will have put an end to his quest and he will never learn. He will never become a man of knowledge. He will perhaps be a bully, or a harmless, scared man; at any rate, he will be a defeated man. His first enemy will have put an end to his cravings. It is not possible for a man to abandon himself to fear for years, then finally conquer it. If he gives in to fear he will never conquer it, because he will shy away from learning and never try again. But if he tries to learn for years in the midst of his fear, he will eventually conquer it because he will never have really abandoned himself to it.

 

Therefore he must not run away. He must defy his fear, and in spite of it he must take the next step in learning, and the next, and the next. He must be fully afraid, and yet he must not stop. That is the rule! And a moment will come when his first enemy retreats. The man begins to feel sure of himself. His intent becomes stronger. Learning is no longer a terrifying task.

 

When this joyful moment comes, the man can say without hesitation that he has defeated his first natural enemy. It happens little by little, and yet the fear is vanquished suddenly and fast. Once a man has vanquished this kind of fear, he is free from it for the rest of his life because, instead of fear, he has acquired clarity--a clarity of mind which erases fear. By then a man knows his desires; he knows how to satisfy those desires. He can anticipate the new steps of learning and a sharp clarity surrounds everything. The man feels that nothing is concealed.

 

And thus he has encountered his second enemy: Clarity! That clarity of mind, which is so hard to obtain, dispels fear, but also blinds. It forces the man never to doubt himself. It gives him the assurance he can do anything he pleases, for he sees clearly into everything. And he is courageous because he is clear, and he stops at nothing because he is clear. But all that is a mistake; it is like something incomplete. If the man yields to this make-believe power, he has succumbed to his second enemy and will be patient when he should rush. And he will fumble with learning until he winds up incapable of learning anything more. His second enemy has just stopped him cold from trying to become a man of knowledge. Instead, the man may turn into a buoyant warrior, or a clown. Yet the clarity for which he has paid so dearly will never change to darkness and fear again. He will be clear as long as he lives, but he will no longer learn, or yearn for, anything.

 

He must do what he did with fear: he must defy his clarity and use it only to see, and wait patiently and measure carefully before taking new steps; he must think, above all, that his clarity is almost a mistake. And a moment will come when he will understand that his clarity was only a point before his eyes. And thus he will have overcome his second enemy, and will arrive at a position where nothing can harm him anymore. This will not be a mistake. It will not be only a point before his eyes. It will be true power.

 

He will know at this point that the power he has been pursuing for so long is finally his. He can do with it whatever he pleases. His ally is at his command. His wish is the rule. He sees all that is around him. But he has also come across his third enemy: Power! Power is the strongest of all enemies. And naturally the easiest thing to do is to give in; after all, the man is truly invincible. He commands; he begins by taking calculated risks, and ends in making rules, because he is a master.

 

A man at this stage hardly notices his third enemy closing in on him. And suddenly, without knowing, he will certainly have lost the battle. His enemy will have turned him into a cruel, capricious man, but he will never lose his clarity or his power.

 

A man who is defeated by power dies without really knowing how to handle it. Power is only a burden upon his fate. Such a man has no command over himself, and cannot tell when or how to use his power. Once one of these enemies overpowers a man there is nothing he can do. It is not possible, for instance, that a man who is defeated by power may see his error and mend his ways. Once a man gives in he is through. If, however, he is temporarily blinded by power, and then refuses it, his battle is still on. That means he is still trying to become a man of knowledge. A man is defeated only when he no longer tries, and abandons himself.

 

He has to come to realize that the power he has seemingly conquered is in reality never his. He must keep himself in line at all times, handling carefully and faithfully all that he has learned. If he can see that clarity and power, without his control over himself, are worse than mistakes, he will reach a point where everything is held in check. He will know then when and how to use his power. And thus he will have defeated his third enemy.

 

The man will be, by then, at the end of his journey of learning, and almost without warning he will come upon the last of his enemies: Old age! This enemy is the cruelest of all, the one he won't be able to defeat completely, but only fight away. This is the time when a man has no more fears, no more impatient clarity of mind--a time when all his power is in check, but also the time when he has an unyielding desire to rest. If he gives in totally to his desire to lie down and forget, if he soothes himself in tiredness, he will have lost his last round, and his enemy will cut him down into a feeble old creature. His desire to retreat will overrule all his clarity, his power, and his knowledge.

 

But if the man sloughs off his tiredness, and lives his fate though, he can then be called a man of knowledge, if only for the brief moment when he succeeds in fighting off his last, invincible enemy. That moment of clarity, power, and knowledge is enough.

 

[LAOLONG]

 

[Wu Ming Jen]

To defeat self  is definitely wizard level.  Wood has fire inside it. If wood catches on fire the wood soon becomes dead ash, the flame extinguished.

 

The unconquered self will burn up the body like fire on wood.

 

True light does not depend on the body ( or wood) to burn because the source has no form or substance it does not run out or die. This light was before the body began to begin. This light does not burn up things like a body, unlike the fire of self.

 

Self does not want the light to take back its proper position. Self needs a body to burn or it is not a self. Self has to remain seperate, have its own identity that is different and not related to all things or again it is just not itself any more. This is a sad story for self at the end of this story no one gets out alive. The other story is that there is nothing to die. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 4, 2018 by Wu Ming Jen

[silent thunder]

Powerful stuff Wu Ming Jen!  The manner in which you arranged those word/forms really resonated.  Thank you!

 

I recall a powerful realization, where I imagined myself inside the Sun and wondered, if I were a source of light... would I be able to perceive that light?  Or is it only through the light bouncing off of 'others' that it would rebound back to me.  what is the nature of light and non-light?  It was a potent ride that abides still from time to time.

 

 

Light does not illumine itself... fire doesn't burn itself... teeth don't bite themselves, nor do knives cut themselves.  Relational actions in the realm of form is magnificent and paradoxical. 

 

How lovely to ponder such!~

 

relational perceptuality...  form dependent, co-arising phemonema?

 

Last night my wife called Connor and I out to see the sun setting.  It blazed through the high cumulous clouds that had been raining on us blessedly all day, turning them to magenta dragons and was then arching off the underside of the palm fronds in the trees that line our street, causing them to burst in flashes of oscillating orange/green. 

 

I said to Connor... "imagine the path those photons of light have traversed, from their cacophonic rattling about inside the ovoid of the sun, to their line across 'space', toward our ovoid earth as it spins and hurtles through space... then arches through our atmosphere, rebounding off the underside of those palm fronds as they dance in the wind, to settle perfectly on the back of our eyes where we see them flash and glint."  Where is the separation of one thing and another in that process?  Forms appear separate, yet it all coalesced into one fluid, flowing process for me again in beingness... not understandingness. 

 

really lovely... thanks again WMJ.  Your words (and all of manifest and unmanifest reality again reveal themselves as my teacher) are calalysts for my continued realization.

 

*deep bow*

 

Edited March 4, 2018 by silent thunder
expand and hopefully clarify my experience

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Power is tricky. Clarity is decietful. Fear ever more so.

 

Reminds me of the stages of conscious vs conscious in/competence, but that model seems to be cyclic, which is the core thing about learning right?

 

I have issues with the idea of the warrior in my mind, warrior-stuff has been ruminated and reproposed to me by a lot of different and dubious sources. What is a warrior? Is being one desirable?

 

Funnily enough i’ve been pondering that more and more while reading this neverending moder sci-fi epos (/social commentary/ridicule and grotesque interpretation of Plato, fascism, heroism etc) that is the Horus Heresy, based off a strategy figurines wargame called Warhammer 40 000 set in a grimdark future, the epic details a set of crossroads 18 different superhuman generals and their soldiers etc etc etc

 

one of the books regarding one of these generals returns often to the point and vision that these incredible warriors will one day see war end, thus becoming obsolete if not outright undesirable because of their intrinsic warrior-ness and so the general encourages his warriors to cultivate their talents and superhuman abilities to non-warring, causing all sorts of hubbub in the ranks but the thought sticks. A warriors philosophy is the awareness of both war and not-war, that each has their context and both present issues and opportunities to deal with while they are and aren’t a reality.

 

Plus theres all that jazz about warriors in contemporary martial arts culture that most often is, well at least to me, a pretty worn gimmick in both marketing and establishing a kind of cult-cultureor elitism.

 

Not saying thats whats going on here Starjumper and i really appreciate this thread, i’m just curious in what this warrior means to you or others.

Is the warrior desirable? What am i missing?

[silent thunder]

Interesting stuff.  Your Warhammer example reminds me of something I learned from a Lakota woman.  She said that among the First Nations living in North America it was common to have two chiefs.   One who took the lead in times of war and another in peace, as those with skills suited to one arena, didn't necessarily translate well to the other.

 

 

 

 

[Starjumper]

On 3/7/2018 at 11:03 PM, Rocky Lionmouth said:

Not saying thats whats going on here Starjumper and i really appreciate this thread, i’m just curious in what this warrior means to you or others.

 

Is the warrior desirable? What am i missing?

 

My concept of warrior is not so much one who is a fighter but rather one who will fight for what they believe in and for the protection of their family/clan.  I heard a good saying about that, can't recall the source:  "It is better to be a warrior in a garden rather than a gardener in a war."

 

To me a warrior is a person who applies ruthless self honesty to himself above all others, no hiding behind excuses.  A warrior is someone with an intrinsic sense of what is right and ethical and automatically follows this Way simply because they will not do something that isn't right.  Of course, what is right or wrong, or good or bad, is primarily in the eye of the beholder.  He does what is right for its own sake, for his own sake, and what is right for his clan.

Edited March 12, 2018 by Starjumper

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Starman, thanks, i hear you and can appreciate what you point towards.

 

Sounds like your Warrior is close to my idea of a True Person. I believe right and wrong to be not so much in the eye of the beholder but dependent on the agent and what their purpose and sets of specifics require with respect to their environment and it’s inhabitants.

 

However i do not believe a warrior in a garden is preferrable to a gardener in a war. Their merit is equal and their virtue and honesty is the true divider, but i think we’re basically saying the same thing anyway, now i’m just enjoying the look of my own letters

 

Thanks for elucidating, my hunger is sated.

[Rocky Lionmouth]

On 2018-03-08 at 1:26 PM, silent thunder said:

Interesting stuff.  Your Warhammer example reminds me of something I learned from a Lakota woman.  She said that among the First Nations living in North America it was common to have two chiefs.   One who took the lead in times of war and another in peace, as those with skills suited to one arena, didn't necessarily translate well to the other.

 

 

 

 

 

That, is very cool. You’ve mentioned this before on here? It’s familiar somehow, had forgotten! 

War Chief and Peace Chief, their jobs incredibly complex as the current state of things and their ongoing succession and recurrence intrinsical to life i guess? Lucky to learn from an inheritor, feel my benign envy

[Limahong]

1 hour ago, Starjumper said:

My concept of warrior is not so much one who is a fighter but rather one who will fight for what they believe in and for the protection of their family/clan.

 

Hi Steve,

 

Concepts of a warrior:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Anand

[Limahong]

On 3/4/2018 at 2:50 AM, Starjumper said:

I see it as also an excellent description of long path that one takes along the Way...

 

Hi Steve,

 

Is the path of a warrior - chosen or predestined?

 

- Anand

[thelerner]

I think one has to be careful with the term warrior.  I think its a word oft repeated by the ego and whispered into the ears of the bad as often as the good. 

[Starjumper]

31 minutes ago, Limahong said:

Is the path of a warrior - chosen or predestined?

 

For me those words don't apply so well.   I think that a person doesn't choose the path so much as their upbringing by their parents or guardians trains them to look at things a certain way, however a person does choose to follow the path of ethics once they learn about it and the path of ethics is the same as or very similar to the path of the warrior.  As far as predestiny is concerned you could say it plays a part because of the parental training, but that isn't the kind of predestined you are referring to I think.

 

It seems to me that past lives can determine a life path, which is what I think happened to me, in that case you could say it is predestined, I think.  Predestined is hardly in my vocabulary, and then there is a possibility that a person can choose to live contrary to their previous lives, ie: choose to not follow their predestined path.

 

All of which is saying hell.if.i.know the long way.  What do you think Anand?

 

Steve.

 

ps. the pictures/saying you posted are very good.  I see Castaneda's name their often.

Edited March 13, 2018 by Starjumper

[Limahong]

9 hours ago, Starjumper said:

All of which is saying hell.if.i.know the long way.  What do you think Anand?

 

Hi Steve, 

 

I had not thought much about warriors before till today. As for warrior wizard - never crossed my mind. Will go through your thread before I respond.

 

My response will be more visual than with words, if possible.

 

Why?

 

 

 

 

- Anand

[Boundlesscostfairy]

So can a warrior be at peace..? Or does he have to develop peace via personal training and accomplishment?

 

During his practice does he have to be at war with something?

[Limahong]

23 minutes ago, Boundlesscostfairy said:

So can a warrior be at peace..?

 

Hi Boundlesscostfairy,

 

 

 

On 3/13/2018 at 4:32 AM, Starjumper said:

My concept of warrior is not so much one who is a fighter but rather one who will fight for what they believe in and for the protection of their family/clan.  I heard a good saying about that, can't recall the source:  "It is better to be a warrior in a garden rather than a gardener in a war."

 

 

- LimA

[Boundlesscostfairy]

Hmmm, The course in miracles would imply that its a dichotomy and paradox at the same time..

 

Truly a peaceful warrior is a miracle.. and so is everything else that is beautifully penchant but makes no logical sense..

 

Like the concept of nihilism and everythingism..

[Limahong]

On 3/13/2018 at 4:32 AM, Starjumper said:

My concept of warrior is not so much one who is a fighter but rather one who will fight for what they believe in and for the protection of their family/clan.  I heard a good saying about that, can't recall the source:  "It is better to be a warrior in a garden rather than a gardener in a war."

 

Hi Steve,

 

On 3/13/2018 at 7:15 PM, Limahong said:

My response will be more visual than with words, if possible.

 

Warrior <=> gardener.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Anand

Edited March 14, 2018 by Limahong
Enhance ...

[Starjumper]

1 hour ago, Limahong said:

Warrior <=> gardener.

 

Thanks for those, a lot of really good ones in there.  I'm going to copy them for future use in other places.  Oh, and by the way, I'm both warrior and gardener, or warrior and farmer, but more like orchardist.  Permaculture food forest kind of stuff.

 

Edited March 14, 2018 by Starjumper

[Starjumper]

So next, anyone have any comments about the warrior to wizard path as described above by Castaneda?  I really like that because it's in plain English, one of my favorite things.  After all, a wizard is the official Chinese designation for an advanced chi kung master.

[Lost in Translation]

41 minutes ago, Starjumper said:

So next, anyone have any comments about the warrior to wizard path as described above by Castaneda?  I really like that because it's in plain English, one of my favorite things.  After all, a wizard is the official Chinese designation for an advanced chi kung master.

 

The Castaneda text was a bit long, and since I was reading it on my phone I got a bit lost. Re-reading it now from my PC I can say that it is very insightful. I enjoyed the progression of enemies from Fear to Clarity, then Power and ultimately Old Age and Death. I would imagine that any serious seeker can see where they are on that progression. If, for example, you have achieved Power and think you are done then this might give the necessary bump to drop that illusion and move forward. Or not.

 

Which of his books did this passage come from?

[Limahong]

On 3/13/2018 at 4:32 AM, Starjumper said:

I heard a good saying about that, can't recall the source:  "It is better to be a warrior in a garden rather than a gardener in a war."

 

Hi Steve,

 

 

Seems to be linked to Sun Tzu (The Art of War) - but I cannot confirm thus far.

 

- Anand

Edited March 14, 2018 by Limahong
Enhance ...

[Limahong]

3 hours ago, Starjumper said:

Permaculture...

 

Hi Steve,

 

Re permaculture - a warrior ~ a good son of the Earth? A Nature child?

 

 

- Anand