Carlos Castaneda’s Don Juan’s Teachings

R: Done

M: Pleased.

M: Please allow yourself to imagine that everything personally related to you has significant expansions to what has been described, and that society simply loves (being facetious) to place many labels on these.

R: Yes, OK

M: Try to place yourself in the position of what all this might mean, and go a bit further, about what it can expand to be in a new reality.

R: A thought full of grand expectation.

M: Ah, but all abilities have commensurate responsibilities. At evolved levels, the responsibilities can be immense … and occasionally overwhelming … not just to ourselves but to what can be accomplished with others in altering their lives – forever.

M: Now the question: what would you do? How would you approach ‘normal’ society? Given that it is not acceptable that titles or labels may be used (because even the implication of self-importance or dependency causes negative effects, and this is being allowed because our discussion has become personal thanks to your openness) what would be your approach, considering that in agreement with your experiences, there don’t seem to be many individuals around … ?

M: Interesting, what?

R: That “what?” Is not something I would usually ask about, usually I would just let it pass as something I didn’t understand, but since it is right there, I can’t help asking, “what?”

M: The what is an invitation to expand … into the what (could be implied).

R: And you’ve asked me why I don’t want to stand out in public? It seems to me that don Juan’s teaching of being unnoticable works very well to support, in my case of doing the exercise you gave me — and I don’t see why not — yours as well of being “yourself.”

M: Yes, however in a form of stalking particularly in the sense of ‘the exercise’ we’ve discussed, no one would actually know what you were doing, although they might notice something different, so it becomes not important in itself and being self-consciousness is very different from being an observer in the shadows.

R: Don Juan: “The art of a sorcerer is to be inconspicuous even in the midst of people. Concentrate totally on trying not to be obvious. To learn to become unnoticeable in the middle of all this is to know the art of stalking.”

M: Wholly true. No question. To be ‘real’, the process must be subtle. It would be an immediate warning flag if someone approached you with a ‘come follow me’ advertisement … and you would immediately be suspicious, – to your credit!

R: Don Juan: “I have taught you to be dispassionate. The world of people goes up and down and people go up and down with their world; as sorcerers we have no business following them in their ups and downs. The art of sorcerers is to be outside everything and be unnoticeable. And more than anything else, the art of sorcerers is never to waste their power.”

M: Wholly true, in the most validated sense.

R: Don Juan: “Alignment has to be a very peaceful, unnoticeable act. The sobriety needed to let the assemblage point assemble other worlds is something that cannot be improvised. Sobriety has to mature and become a force in itself before warriors can break the barrier of perception with impunity.”

M: Yes. And add to that, the coherence that high self-esteem (which is the antithesis of high ego) brings the uniform cohesion required to fore. Without high self-esteem, which also means loosing the human form, the ‘way’ is rattled and shaky, bringing with the instability a new set of limitations and boundaries.

R: Don Juan: “Stalking is an art applicable to everything. There are four steps to learning it: ruthlessness, cunning, patience, and sweetness. Ruthlessness should not be harshness, cunning should not be cruelty, patience should not be negligence, and sweetness should not be foolishness. These four steps have to be practiced and perfected until they are so smooth they are unnoticeable.”

M: Good.

R: And I’m reminded as well of don Juan, in Journey to Ixtlan, saying of don Genaro that he is the only real one for him. I think your 10% is an amazingly optimistic number and that my one in ten million is probably even high. Not that I know anything. You at least, know of yourself and others, I know of none! But that I trust that you are only yourself and that you’ve reported parts of your life accurately to me.

M: Yes. At some point, you might have discussion with others within my circle. There will be time for that when you are more aligned. It is important that you understand and experience these processes through your own being, not with dependency on the others.

R: That presumed fact has given me a huge boost. I do find you totally credible and that is not something I’m use to doing. It is through what I pride myself with as a keen sense, not in any out of the ordinary way, unfortunately, but out of experience with many others in life through my almost 49 years and an ability to follow discussion logically. I’ve taken much heart in don Juan’s statement about such “reason”:

R: Don Juan: “Only a human being who is a paragon of reason can move his assemblage point easily and be a paragon of silent knowledge. Only those who are squarely in either position can see the other position clearly. That was the way the age of reason came to being. The position of reason was clearly seen from the position of silent knowledge.”

M: It amazes me still today, after many years, how dead-on-point this statement agrees with the concepts of Ayn rand, who was about an un-metaphysical of a philosopher as could be possible.

R: Don Juan: “The one-way bridge from silent knowledge to reason is called “concern.” That is, the concern that true men of silent knowledge have about the source of what they know. And the other one-way bridge, from reason to silent knowledge, is called “pure understanding.” That is, the recognition that tells the man of reason that reason is only one island in an endless sea of islands.”

M: Very good, and if you project this further, it implies the responsibility noted earlier herein.

R: Don Juan: “A human being who has both one-way bridges working is a sorcerer in direct contact with the spirit, the vital force that makes both positions possible.”

M: The bridges can be bidirectional. The apprentice initially, (and this is significant for you, especially now) builds the first bridge and that bridge(s) is (are) initially one-way. This, in a matter of knowledge, ‘signals’ into the attentions that there is an apprentice who is identifying him/her self as a candidate. Having established that ‘signal flare’, and after proving him/her self after a time, trial ‘return’ bridges will be established -as tests to learn the impeccability of the apprentice. Then things become interesting, since the prods, provocations to regress into false modes (some flatly scary) will test the coherence commit and self-esteem of the apprentice. This process causes the ‘ramps’ and plateaus noted several E-mails ago, to proceed. If the tests are met with commensurate ability and impeccability, then be bridges become increasingly bidirectional. After a point of evolution, the bridges are always available to gain further knowledge, on command.

R: So, I really do expect a lot from myself to come. And the fact that not the slightest feeling of anything has come so far in my day to day world somehow tells me, as I recall don Juan’s teachings, that when it does it will be all the better.

M: Yes, when you are prepared to accept without hesitation. This acceptance may not be gained by reading or study. It is gained through experience and personal knowledge gained through perception.

R: I’m wondering, were you really asking me: “what would be your approach, considering that in agreement with your experiences, there don’t seem to be many individuals around … ?” or was that question just for drawing forth the above on my own? I suspect the latter.

M: Yes.

R: And back to, “and that society simply loves (being facetious) to place many labels on these.” Yeah, and all the labels start with crazy, or charlatan! So much for showing up in public. At the same time, couldn’t you write your story under a fictitious name and remain anonymous? You’ve described Castaneda differently than I’d assumed. I surmised that he was presenting the pretense of “fool” for expedience sake.

M: There is always a catch-22 toward effectiveness. Something left out from the descriptions and admonishment – to hide – from ‘the priest’ revealed earlier today, was “they would worship you as a god or saviour, or condemn you as evil, both out of fear”. Try telling that to a ten year old boy, and you’ll begin to understand me and my history better.