Zen Budo & Counter Strike


Zen Budo & Counter Strike are both presented by Ordo Octopia as a multi-level teaching, most specifically to introduce students to the concept of how our Attention-Energy can be described in terms of Tentacles.

It is a visionary concept drawn from the teachings of Don Carlos Casteneda regarding energy, psychology, and spiritual evolution, from which the writer and film maker George Lucas derived much inspiration.

“Luminous Beings are we, not this crude matter.” Master Yoda / Don Matus

The apparent focus of both essays is social politics. They are two parts of a sequence including other essays by the same author (‘A Bad Week and A Bottle Vodka’), containing further education less appropriate for our immediate purposes.


Zen Budo

This is the protocol.

They attack, thus putting me on the defensive.

I follow my training to use their own energy against them, instead of attacking them or defending.

I point out and highlight where they have flaws in their logic. If they took that on board they might improve the way their minds function. The basic principle being, if you irrationally attack another human for no reason, you are not thinking straight in the first place. If you rationally attacked another human for any reason, you are also not thinking straight in the first place. Most especially if your attack fails.

They cannot cope with the strategy. They wanted me to defend. They expected me to defend by attacking them back. They can exploit that system because the dynamic is open to exploitation. So, what they do instead, is to attack again in a different way. This repeated system of varied attacks is trying to find a flaw in his armour.

As a practitioner of budo philosophy, I recognise one very big thing here. They are attacking, but they do not know yet how to win. They have initiated a prolonged war, or they thought it would be much easier to defeat me than it is. In either case, they do not know what they are doing. Prolonged wars drain everybody. They also revealed that eventual goal is to defeat the target.

As that target, I value them as sparring partners. They are my teachers without whom I could not level up. They have alerted me that they are a threat to me and will continue to be so. Thus they are keeping my sword sharp. So far, I have not struck any blows. They are the aggressor.

Now, knowing that they are on a long-term agenda to defeat me, I attempted to pacify the situation. After they have come down from being defeated in initial attack, I offer them trade. I note that this will dirty me and put me at risk, but it is an attempt toward peace. It might even satisfy them that they made a mistake in the first place. Peace is infinitely more desirable than war.

Another option is to ignore them. To ignore somebody who has already attacked you, even though they were defeated, it’s not wise because they might come back and attack you again and win next time. So either I can improve my defences or rely on luck should they ever attack again. Only by trading with them can I; one, keep an eye on them; two, have an influence on them, albeit also to be influenced by them; three, seek lasting peace and integration.

A third option would be to defeat them utterly. Most of us live in a socio-economic community wherein outright murder is not going to improve my circumstances, nor theirs, nor anyone else involved.

Socially discrediting them for their own actions might warn the rest of the community what they are like and in the wider morality, benefits all. Because our existences cannot mutually ignore each other, given our fields of influence do overlap, segregation and apartheid is not a long-term answer.

That deep-seated resentment and generational indoctrination is historically known to permeate problems centuries after. We seek to end this.

Relying on third-party to adjudicate or use of a third party to adjudicate in any way, is a confession of both manipulation and disempowerment. A tiny person with a big army is still a tiny person.

Respectability from self responsibility and your personal spiritual development must face the challenges brought about by seeking long-term peace. This is the most honourable path of all.

I am expecting they will attack again. I’m expecting that even were we to ally, trade and work together for projects, they are still likely to attack again.

One of my trainers instructed: “keep your friends close and your enemies closer”. For many years I decided to ignore this advice because I wanted to surround myself with friends, not with animals. As I levelled up in experience, life circumstances become less clear cut.

To discern between genuine friends and those who once were a threat but became allies because of earning mutual respect; friends who simply never having crossed path before; and long-term, envious fake friends on a secret vendetta; all of which is a factor of life and always will be.

The discernment brings maturity. We learned to ignore and forgive because it is easier for everybody to improve. The greatest warriors never unsheathe their swords. Because it never comes to that. These are the ones we respect more than aggressors who’s glory in defeating enemies in battle set them apart, as warriors of the material world, not warriors of the spiritual world.

Budo philosophy encompasses both these things and instructs how to win.

The first lesson in how to win is how to learn. You cannot learn by being aggressive. Learning is yielding, not domineering assertion. The true masters are invisible, this is why you must seek them out. Were they visible, they would be an easy target and thus surrounded by their enemies, they would be in constant battle. Thus, a merit of a true master is one who having defeated opponents, no longer lives under constant threat.

I was instructed to seek out sociopaths and learn from them. The petty tyrants can teach us more Zen than the monk on the mountain. Fortunately, the community is full of pretty tyrants and they are easy to find! Simply follow the sound of battle.

Another essential lesson is in letting go. You only have so many tentacles. If these are gripping hold of yesterday’s rage, it is dragging you down like a dead weight. Satisfying it will pin you into a world which was on offer in the past, but which only your hate has brought into the future. By letting go, that tentacle is freed to reach towards a more optimistic tomorrow, to pull you up higher, to a more harmonious experience and way of being.

There are two powerful tools to help us let go, which are: acceptance and Forgiveness. Masters recognise those adept at these most respectable abilities.

©2018 Joe Russell


Counter Strike

And so, I have witnessed those who have declared themselves my enemy, changing their strategy in accord with the rebuff I presented them.

They change the context of their attack. They retreat from the battlefield, shouting: we won we won! They put the scenario into a different context, in which the hate for their chosen target is emphasised. One in which certain key factors are ignored and new factors are employed. To summarise this specific strategy, we label it as: changing the goalposts.

They have rephrased the situation, so that in the context in their minds, they have defeated their enemy.

That the enemy is still standing, disproves their claim and highlights that they are manipulatively delusional.

They may now draw on two factors. Which factor depends on which context is the dominant narration of the moment. They will switch between these whenever necessary to maximise their yield of attention energy. That is what this is ultimately all about, energy.

The first context is: having been defeated, they accuse their target of persecuting them, bullying them, belittling them, dividing them, deriding them, undermining them; this especially, undermining them. It’s pleasing to the poor-me victimhood syndrome which onlookers give them energy to placate.

The second context is that: they won! The battle was fun! They learned from it! But most especially, they have now established a situation which benefits them more greatly. The purpose of that first battle was not to win the battle. The purpose of that first battle was to create a new situation, in which they have two parallel contexts from which to operate. They believe this puts them in a better situation.

Having read this, you will see that I have remained true to my original intention of neither attacking nor defending against them. I am using their own energy against them, I am learning from them, and I am publicly analysing their system of operation.

Anybody else who can learn from this, most especially in the community immediately affected by it, will realise also how I am being used for their political gain. Will recognise also that I am remaining curiously impartial to their activities, and will recognise that they have come to me in an attempt to take from me, what I would have given freely had they come in peace, so as to empower themselves. I regard this last as a compliment and as a confession of my superiority. Had they so far defeated me, perhaps I would not.

I am confident that I can stand firm in my situation, having bent like a reed in the wind. I have to show this confidence because if I show any other face, they will see it as a sign of weakness and the flaw in my armour. They are now presented with a situation as it is.

The hate for their chosen target is emphasised. They are recruiting allies, “flying monkeys”, they are building an army because they require larger numbers for their next attack. I am anticipating it to be an attack by proxy. The agent will not publicly be affiliated with them.

©2018 Joe Russell