Being Cool 
 

Being cool is a strange paradox. 

Everyone wants to be cool, because we are afraid. We want to get rid of the fear, gain control. We want to be the hunter, instead of the hunted, right? Cool-ness may be what initially attracts us (use whatever words you like if cool sounds crude for the path of the warrior) but in the end we have to drop this aspiration, because to be "cool" is not to know it. 

It´s like karate and being able to kick! You may fancy those Bruce Lee kicks, but by the time you reach the level of mastery, you´ll have automatically dropped the desire to harass your neighborhood. 

Dropping the ego is cool, but if you do, you stop caring anyway. So what the heck! 

I say words are not things, and you say they are! 

I assure you that if you understood my words the way I do, you would agree  (and the other way around!). What does that tell us? 

I juggle the words up and get some sort of workable solution for myself, and you do too! Neither of us is wrong (which is why we apprecieate diversity of opinion), which goes to show that words are not things. Right?! If they were, only one solution would persist. 

In our case, the exact same words are referring to different things (or concepts) to give us two different solutions. Neither of us is right or wrong....using the same words, which shows that I am right!... or am I? Now that I´ve proven you right!??...... : ) 

I saw and I loved Star Wars, and who would have known it was seeped with age old wisdom? Remember the scene when Luke was supposed to raise his X-plane from the swamp by using his mind only? After Luke´s unsuccessful attempt Yoda does it for him. Luke watches in bewilderment I-I don´t believe it? he stammers. That...Yoda says quietly, but firmly...is why you failed. 

The mind (full of words and descriptions) can all too easily limit our possibilities, as well as giving us a line to follow (in a world that would otherwise be too confusing). This is a dilemma. Do words help us perceive, or do they obstruct perception? 

I have a personal example that might fit this context. I know very little about cars and I used to know much less than I do today. I just saw them as cars. I knew a truck, from a bicycle, from a motorcycle, you know, the general categories. I saw them as red cars, yellow cars, shining cars, dirty cars, regular cars and funny looking cars. I didn´t know their names (apart from a couple of types I had had special experience of). Basically I couldn´t tell a Japanese car from a Russian car from an American or a French one. 

A whole new world of perception opened up as soon as a friend of mine pointed this out to me (and we made a game out of it. Every time a car passed by he would ask "What about this one?" and I´d scratch my head while trying to fine-tune my perception in these matters. It was fun, and it was pretty much successful. ; ) Now I´m not ashamed of my ignorance in this field anymore, but still I keep on wondering...since labeling those "things" into subcategories helped me to tell them apart, does it not limit my perception also? In other words, if I did away with all those car-categories and perceived more directly intuitively, would I be able to pick up a whole new range of differences between any cars, especially between those that belong to the same general category. Maybe I would start to categorize all cars in a completely different way (by, say, the size, shape and heighth of the wind-shield - since I would be more accustomed to focusing on the "eyes" of all moving "things"). 
 

The main difference between a warrior and the normal bloke is that the warrior accepts that the descriptions are bollocks, and he transcends them and uses them! He swings along with this realization. He can switch between descriptions. He knows it is just a *tool* to use. It is like the finger that points at the stars. As the fool looks at the finger, so clings the normal bloke to his description. It *is* his life. He can´t see beyond it. But the warrior *chooses his own battleground*, he chooses his own beliefs, he finds the role appropriate for the moment and plays along. That´s what we call Controlled folly. Life is a big joke. First it was serious, then (at the collapse of the description) it became a disaster. Finally he comes out at the other side of living without guidelines, and life becomes almost unbearably light.... 

Stopping the world 

When I listen to music on the radio I usually enjoy it more than when I put the same on in my stereo. Why? My expectations of the music build up a perception block. I sense more of the nuances when I´m not responsible for the music I´m listening to. If I´m aware of having put something on I start to try to get something out of the music instead of just passively *doing* the listening without expecting any rewards.... 

that´s what stopping the world means to me in my daily life... 

If we define every situation before encountering it we probably won´t discover much by ourselves (through our whole body of perception). When introduced to someone, make sure your assessment of the person is not unduly influenced by the perception of the one doing the introduction. This tends to breed prejudice. If told that the person is so and so, you tend to look for those qualities and find confirmations. What you see is what you´ve learned! Even such basic perception as sense of perspective is something we pick up during our lifetime. A wonderful example comes from the anthropologist Turnbull who was doing fieldwork with the BaMbutis in Africa. Another fine example comes from Claudia Strauss and Naomi Quinn who attempt to explain the nature of social prejudice. 
 

Work is definitely one of the major testing grounds for Warriors. 

Being a warrior is not escapism. It is the real thing. It helps us to go through life with people, not disappear into the wilderness, searching for coyotes or eagles (that would be too easy). It is about seeing the miracle within the routine. It is also about breaking the routine in order to see beyond it, to see the mysterious in the mundane. That is a gateway to freedom, but having done that, seeing beyond the routine liberates you from it - even if you act within it (this is what I understand by "controlled folly") and it gives you the power to choose your routines (which is what I understand by "having to believe"). 

Why should we do that when it should be so much easier just to head off into the wilderness? 

I personally think that our purpose in life (if there is one) is to help others to see the magic that lies beyond a narrow-minded description of the world. To do that you have to meet people on their home ground, on their understanding, and work your way towards the indescribable from there. It is risky. It demands that you participate in the empty show all around,  and in the meantime not get alienated from your deeper understanding. 

CC: What was there in that scene, don Juan? What was so important? 
DJ: I don´t know. It wasn´t happening to me. 
CC: What do you mean? 
DJ: It was your experience, not mine. 
CC: But you were with me, weren´t you? 
DJ: No I wasn´t. You were alone. I repeatedly told you to watch everything, because that scene was only for you. 

(Carlos Castaneda, Tales of Power, p.157) 

And so is life. We are used to being spoonfed with "truths" about the world, but the "whole truth" can only experienced with your whole being. That experience is only for you.