What are the Toltec Teachings?

You may have heard the word Toltec and vaguely associated it with Aztec and Mayan cultures, or, you may be able to connect it to the work of Carlos Castaneda, who is rightly considered the father of all new age movements, being the first to get wide recognition for bringing up self-development and self-empowerment issues. In actual fact, the word Toltec, as it is used by Theun Mares, the Nagal, and creator of the Toltec Teachings, (see www.toltec-foundation.org.com) refers to a covert tradition stretching back across millennia, whereby through methods and techniques known to members, and initiates, knowledge, true knowledge, could be gained that would lead to freedom. This knowledge and the tradition it stems from have been now made public by Theun Mares, by virtue of fact that since June 1995, mankind has come of age, and now must take responsibility for himself, and his world.

Now the first emergence of this knowledge was through Carlos Castaneda, specifically through the man he named Don Juan, who was indeed a fine Toltec warrior. Confusion has arisen though, because many see Castaneda as a Toltec teacher, when in truth, he was simply a very gifted messenger, of the existence of the teachings, and not a teacher as such. It’s also true that he did not always report the teachings exactly as Don Juan gave them to him. He was, economical with the truth. A product perhaps of him being a best-selling author? Whatever. He was one of the great writers of the twentieth century, who does present us with profound, awe inspiring, sublime, truths. Also, it is important to understand that before Castaneda, all esoteric writing had only a small coterie audience. Castaneda brought it into the mainstream, creating an interface between the academic and the shamanic world. In doing this he did us all a profound service. Don Carlos was my first teacher. Not personally, but through his work, and I, along with many others, owe him an immense debt of gratitude.

Since 1995 the true Toltec teachings have existed in book form. A complete set of Toltec manuals for self-transformation and empowerment, and a very brilliant, well presented and well conceived set they are! Perfectly structured to the lead the would-be apprentice from right side awareness, through to left side awareness, with apposite axioms and guidance, at every step of the way. If I may cite my own case. I had made good progress working with Castaneda, but was still far from any true understanding, or real self-awareness. The true teachings solved this problem for me, and I was eventually able to see the interrelationship of life, something which has empowered me enormously.

Now the point of this article is to show the teachings in relation to other systems, or things available at this point in time. The list would include Neil David Walsch, Osho, Eckhart Tolle, Suzuki, Watts, De Mello, A course in Miracles, and many more writers, teachers etc. Now, I want to make it clear that I think all this work is extremely useful, and it does, for the most part, contain absolute truth, and that this is a wonderful and comforting thing. So. How do the Toltec-Teachings differ? The answer is that if, if, you were really committed about self-transformation; were you one of those few dedicated beings who will settle for nothing less, than being a warrior on the path of freedom, then the above, is simply not enough. Why? Because it is not enough simply to be told ‘the truth’. We may know it, but we still do not own it. Like it or not, it is a verifiable fact of ‘depth psychology’, that due to our inner split, we can hold knowledge, without really acknowledging it. Or, put another way, being enlightened isn’t just having the right answers. Nowadays we can memorize the right answers from any number of published works, but will that guarantee that when we walk out the front door we will act in an enlightened manner? The answer must be a resounding NO!!!!!! Another analogy would be the math’s test. If we were to take one and simply write down the right answers would we pass? No. Without the relevant working out we will not get full marks. Similarly it is not enough to talk glibly about ‘process’ work. How people love to talk, but is this ‘process’ really going in the right direction. It it an effective ‘process’? Whichever way you turn the same fact confronts us.

INFORMATION IS NOT KNOWLEDGE

And just because we talk intelligently about things does not mean we have gained experience or true knowledge. And this is how the Toltec-Teachings differ, in that they do not just impart truths, but also provide us with tools whereby these truths can be corroborated for oneself. They provide practical techniques whereby truth, can be owned through experience, and then put to a meaningful use within your life. In short they don’t just tell you things. They give you guidance on how you can find things out for yourself. I make this point strongly for so often I see headstrong people, who have all the answers on anything you care to mention, and yet these people are still desperately unhappy and dissatisfied with their lives. They will sit there advising you on self-development, or inner work, whilst at the same time being incapable of being happy, or having a relationship, or knowing any kind of purpose themselves. Madness.

This is how the teachings differ. I hope this article might help to clear up some of the confusion which surrounds the word Toltec. I am not an official spokesperson for the teachings, just someone who has used them successfully. Obviously in the final analysis there is no substitute for the teachings themselves, and I urge everyone to familiarize themselves with them, for no matter what your motive, they are mankind’s most invaluable asset, at this moment in time.

www.toltec-foundation.org

the authentic you and theatre improvisation

Problems often stem from having internalised or introjected (clever depth psychology word), a very literal model of life, the universe, and everything! So that what always happens is this. Example. You feel stimulated and alive, say as a teenager. Then you get a bit older and through habit or whatever, you lose that feeling. To regain it you start drinking more stimulating drinks, like tea and coffee. Problem solved! Or is it? Well, in truth, as we all discover, stimulating yourself is fine, but there does come a point where the toxic nature of this forces you to stop. So there is big drawback with this method and, there is also the fact that stimulating yourself leaves you feeling empty and hollow. It like Chinese water torture. This is a stimulant which over time turns into a nightmare of pain. Problem being that it doesn’t spring from within you. It just a delusion, or what we could term delusional behavior. Somehow or other we have become conditioned into accepting it as the real deal. It is a dogma. Creed. Belief. We say, I will create or make the way I feel. I will not simply accept the way I feel. But to accept a feeling state you forced on yourself! as being real, the ’authentic’ you, is a delusion! We go on doing it though, for we have invested so much faith and trust in it, we really can’t imagine a world without it. It is our comfort, our balm, our pint of bitter and a packet of crisps! Try and remove it and the weeping and wailing begins. Or rather, THE ANXIETY! And people, even big strong men, do not want to feel their fear. Now I said at beginning, rather dogmatically, that all problems stem from being too literal. How does this apply here? Well stop. Think, Horatio!

1. We don’t feel stimulated.

2. Stimulating drinks stimulate us so we drink one.

3. We feel stimulated!

In other words, our way of solving the problem IS QUITE LITERAL! It is simple cause and effect. A + B = C! But as I have demonstrated, this literal model is not helping you. You’ll end up feeling hollow and empty and toxic, and is that what you want really want, really want?

Here is another way to look at it. Suppose you have a problem with John. You get an angry unfocussed feeling when you near to him. So literal model states you must go straight to the problem. So you must confront John about this. But fact is, John is gay. You are a straight bloke. This is real problem area. So you confront John and say, “I’ve got a problem with you. You must do something.” So john says, “Yes. I’ll stop being gay.” Problem solved! But truth is, he just humoring you, and even if he isn’t, what about when you meet other gay men?

Now. Here is yet another example. Suppose you don’t understand yourself. Your subjective world. So, Literal Model states, you go straight there. You take a drug. A mind altering substance. This forces the hidden part to emerge. It unlocks the door. Hey presto! Problem solved! But is it? And this the hard part to understand. There is big difference between experiencing something and working with it. It therapy terms it the difference between what is ‘acting out’ and what is ‘resolving’. This difference is not one though that the rational mind can easily grasp. Only thru experience can you begin to grasp the difference here. Bear in mind, experiencing is not experience. Experiencing is what is constantly happening, whereas experience is something looked back on which we have learnt from. I can corroborate this from my own experience. As a teenager I experimented with LSD. I remember vividly, on one trip, looking in a mirror and seeing a monster starring back at me, and at the time thinking, I will not deal with that now. Now is not the moment to try and deal with this monster inside me. And it wasn’t. I was experiencing. Years later, when I started therapy, I began to work with this monster. Which was not a monster at all, but simply my latent potential.

Moving on to Theatre Impro. You can see this same thing quite clearly. Scenes always tend to go in an unproductive, in the sense of not developing in a more psychological or interesting direction, i.e. not just comedy, because people approach things head on, or in too literal a manner. If scene starts with ‘A’ in a room. ‘B’ will enter and direct his focus and attention onto ‘A’.

(A in room painting a wall. B enters.)

B. What are you doing?

A. I’m painting the wall.

Now this is really a block, it impedes development, as we can see what A is doing and speech told us nothing about B. If on contrary, B enters and does not direct his focus onto A, i.e., is not literal or head on, and instead sits on a chair with his head drooped, we have..

(A in room painting a wall. B enters. Sits with head drooped.)

A. (Painting.) You’re not still depressed are you?

B. Yes I am.

Now this not a block. It tells us stuff about the characters and points the way forward; we must now learn why B is depressed, and what the relationship is, and all because it arose from a non-literal model. Think! Literally speaking a scene which begins with a man painting a wall is about wall painting, and the man’s relationship to it. Just as a play about injustice, has a man wrongly accused of crime and being sent to prison. THIS IS THE LITERAL MODEL!

HOWEVER. None of the above is a hard and fast rule. These are rather guidelines or areas to think in. Generally speaking, when entering a scene, it is more about feeling around something, rather than looking straight at it. It is like crossing your eyes. Shifting the focus. Ask yourself, how do I feel here? Literally, you may be in a shop buying trousers but non-literally you are feeling impatient because…????? You’re late? You’re tired of wearing trousers???? The shop assistant loves you but won’t admit it?????

To recap. You enter a scene in which it is not decided yet what scene is about, but in which some action is happening. Say a man reading the paper. So, Literal Model states, you go straight there. You approach man and say, “ Why are you reading the paper?” This version A. But in version B. The non-literal model. You enter scene where man reading paper and it not decided what scene about and you ignore the man, go over to window, draw curtain, look out, and say, “They’ll be here in ten minutes. Don’t you think we should get ready?”

Now. Which version will lead to a more interesting outcome. A or B?

Another impro issue is naturalness. How can I act natural in a scene? How is it done? Again, taking a literal model we say to ourselves, what is my memory of naturalness or other people’s behavior? I’ll imitate that! This means every shop assistant you play will be modeled on some behavioral model you’ve witnessed and remembered. This is natural. Real. You remember how shop assistants are so if you imitate that and it will, WILL, be natural. It stands to reason.

But think Horatio. This is yet another LITERAL model. It’s literal because there is a literal connection between observed behavior and your performance because it is an imitation. It is the same. However, the audience will not see it as natural for they know shop assistants are also people, regardless of behavior and people are all different. They all have agendas based on their own quirky and idiosyncratic feelings and ideas. So again, the literal approach will convince you, you ARE being ‘natural’, when in reality, you’re not, Horatio! NO YOU AINT!

If through lack of experience of doing impro you find all this hard to understand, don’t worry. Important thing to understand is that it is possible to work with issues of authenticity in a theatre or impro context. And this not psycho-drama. In psycho-drama, negative feeling states are enacted to identify with them. In our work we use the non-literal model in order to detach from these feelings states and see beyond them. So we can, see ourselves ‘acting out’. ‘Identifying.’

It is only normal though, that people have trouble accepting this. We do live in a very ‘literal,’ ‘more is more,’ ‘things go in straight lines,’ world. To move beyond that is a real leap of faith. Imagination. It is worth leaping though, for in impro terms, or theatre terms, or just in living your life terms, contacting the authentic you will put you in touch with where all the really juicy scenes are, HORATIO!