Becoming a good 'obyvatel' as a foundation for the work?

[lainey]

An obyvatel is really like a good householder -- inside and out. "Simple, honorable." It's the foundation you build everything else upon.

Funny story ... I use to work as an artisan bread baker when I first met the Work ideas, and I worked with a Russian woman. Since all the loaves of bread were hand-formed, we would stand at the bench for hours at a time. One day I asked her about this word and she laughed. She said it was the kind of person who would sell you something at the market, but when you got home the box would instead have bricks, and they'd be long gone.

But G was pretty clear what kind of obyvatel he meant (italics mine):

"Ability to orientate oneself in life is a very useful quality from the point of view of the work. A good obyvatel should be able to support at least twenty persons by his own labor. What is a man worth who is unable to do this?""

Martfotai,

Your story about the Russian woman and her definition of an obyvatel was very interesting. It makes me think of the term "street wise". People who know the score so to speak when it comes to everyday human behavior and sometimes how to take advantage of the knowledge. ;)

Thanks

Perhaps the meaning of the word has transformed over time to have a different connotation to when Gurdjieff used it.
But yes I agree, someone who is clever enough to know how to"play the game" of life in an honorable manner would be my interpretation.

 

[goyacobol]

An obyvatel is really like a good householder -- inside and out. "Simple, honorable." It's the foundation you build everything else upon.

Funny story ... I use to work as an artisan bread baker when I first met the Work ideas, and I worked with a Russian woman. Since all the loaves of bread were hand-formed, we would stand at the bench for hours at a time. One day I asked her about this word and she laughed. She said it was the kind of person who would sell you something at the market, but when you got home the box would instead have bricks, and they'd be long gone.

But G was pretty clear what kind of obyvatel he meant (italics mine):

"Ability to orientate oneself in life is a very useful quality from the point of view of the work. A good obyvatel should be able to support at least twenty persons by his own labor. What is a man worth who is unable to do this?""

Martfotai,

Your story about the Russian woman and her definition of an obyvatel was very interesting. It makes me think of the term "street wise". People who know the score so to speak when it comes to everyday human behavior and sometimes how to take advantage of the knowledge. ;)

Thanks

Perhaps the meaning of the word has transformed over time to have a different connotation to when Gurdjieff used it.
But yes I agree, someone who is clever enough to know how to"play the game" of life in an honorable manner would be my interpretation.

lainey,

I know "take advantage" doesn't sound very STO. I like "honorable manner" better. But I guess if we don't use the knowledge at all, we are not "taking advantage" of it either. Maybe like knowledge is a terrible thing to waste idea.

Thanks :)

 

[David]

But G was pretty clear what kind of obyvatel he meant (italics mine):

"Ability to orientate oneself in life is a very useful quality from the point of view of the work. A good obyvatel should be able to support at least twenty persons by his own labor. What is a man worth who is unable to do this?""

Being a good obyvatel, would seem to me as almost impossible, if I take it as meaning a person who stands alone, separate, and supporting everybody else, an ‘almighty idiot.’ and a bit STS

In another way I look at it in terms of just being a member of twenty people... the twenty or more, being the obyvatel, each one supporting the other, when needs be... maybe one becoming a little less of an ‘idiot.’


Maybe :/

 

[HowToBe]

Thanks for sharing this. I just turned 23, the advice you give of 'breathing' is exactly what I am doing at the moment. I sense a lot of people our age are feeling rushed and unsure as how to approach things. But there is difference between taking the time to make clear decisions and avoiding responsibility.

Interesting discussion, it seems that this subject is very relevant for those of us who are younger, probably especially in the west. I'm 23 also, in the US, and can relate to being trapped in the snares of "imagination"I grew up on video games and television, especially cartoons and sci-fi/fantasy, and also chose those as much of my school-age reading material. As I'm sure some know, this can make it difficult to face reality, as the attitudes and habits (or "muscles"/) of dealing practically and effectively with the world are underdeveloped, plus there is an addictive element to fantasy and "overthinking"/obsessing about things, at least in my case.

When I think of an "obyvatel", I tend to think of a hands-on, responsible working class person, like an average plumber, carpenter, or really any "get it done" worker in any average profession. He has to "pay the bills", so he works (leaving aside whether the "work" might involve stealing or whatever). He does not hesitate to put out the effort to do what needs to be done to maintain a basic standard of living, or maybe support a family if he has one. He may not necessarily be virtuous, but has a practical and active relationship with reality, (which may suggest a certain amount of balance among the centers, even if it is "noisy"?) If he has to think, he thinks, if he needs to feel or empathize or relate, he makes the effort, if he needs to exert himself physically, he does so, and he takes care of himself in a common sense way. He maintains a practical efficiency and stays active.

I think some of the ideas of what an obyvatel is are too idealized, and represent something beyond the basic foundation that an obyvatel seems to represent in Gurdjieff's terms. Gurdjieff seems to make clear that an obyvatel is not necessarily a "special" person in appearance, maybe quite the opposite, and may not be virtuous. But the obyvatel has something the tramp and lunatic don't, that opens the path of work to him. And maybe that comes down to everyday practical know-how and adaptability. I think "street smarts" is a great term.

I notice that I've only used the word "he", but of course this may apply to men or women equally, whether they are living a "traditional" social role or not.

Maybe think of Laura, and her many comments about being more or less "just a housewife looking for truth and trying to raise her kids (and care for her roses ;) )", especially her descriptions of how she started out when she knew a lot less, before "waking up".

All of that said, I'm not sure I understand it, so discussions like this are helpful. A lot of us have some work to do to get there, I think.

 

[Thaigrr]

Thanks for sharing this. I just turned 23, the advice you give of 'breathing' is exactly what I am doing at the moment. I sense a lot of people our age are feeling rushed and unsure as how to approach things. But there is difference between taking the time to make clear decisions and avoiding responsibility.

Interesting discussion, it seems that this subject is very relevant for those of us who are younger, probably especially in the west. I'm 23 also, in the US, and can relate to being trapped in the snares of "imagination"I grew up on video games and television, especially cartoons and sci-fi/fantasy, and also chose those as much of my school-age reading material. As I'm sure some know, this can make it difficult to face reality, as the attitudes and habits (or "muscles"/) of dealing practically and effectively with the world are underdeveloped, plus there is an addictive element to fantasy and "overthinking"/obsessing about things, at least in my case.

When I think of an "obyvatel", I tend to think of a hands-on, responsible working class person, like an average plumber, carpenter, or really any "get it done" worker in any average profession. He has to "pay the bills", so he works (leaving aside whether the "work" might involve stealing or whatever). He does not hesitate to put out the effort to do what needs to be done to maintain a basic standard of living, or maybe support a family if he has one. He may not necessarily be virtuous, but has a practical and active relationship with reality, (which may suggest a certain amount of balance among the centers, even if it is "noisy"?) If he has to think, he thinks, if he needs to feel or empathize or relate, he makes the effort, if he needs to exert himself physically, he does so, and he takes care of himself in a common sense way. He maintains a practical efficiency and stays active.

I think some of the ideas of what an obyvatel is are too idealized, and represent something beyond the basic foundation that an obyvatel seems to represent in Gurdjieff's terms. Gurdjieff seems to make clear that an obyvatel is not necessarily a "special" person in appearance, maybe quite the opposite, and may not be virtuous. But the obyvatel has something the tramp and lunatic don't, that opens the path of work to him. And maybe that comes down to everyday practical know-how and adaptability. I think "street smarts" is a great term.

I notice that I've only used the word "he", but of course this may apply to men or women equally, whether they are living a "traditional" social role or not.

Maybe think of Laura, and her many comments about being more or less "just a housewife looking for truth and trying to raise her kids (and care for her roses ;) )", especially her descriptions of how she started out when she knew a lot less, before "waking up".

All of that said, I'm not sure I understand it, so discussions like this are helpful. A lot of us have some work to do to get there, I think.

This well describes most of my life (especially the virtuous comment ).

When I was your age I had a fair sense of right from wrong and a healthy craving for esoterica. Life seemed to get in the way of pursuing "Truth" raising a

family with continuing narcisisstic generational programs driving it all. "If" I was a good obyvatel through that it was with a lot of luck. I hadn't heard the

word until very recently. I am therefore very grateful for this thread.

I am assuming you, HowToBe, to be relatively young with my "when I was your age" comment. I tend to assume most folks are younger than me

 

[obyvatel]

But G was pretty clear what kind of obyvatel he meant (italics mine):

"Ability to orientate oneself in life is a very useful quality from the point of view of the work. A good obyvatel should be able to support at least twenty persons by his own labor. What is a man worth who is unable to do this?""

Being a good obyvatel, would seem to me as almost impossible, if I take it as meaning a person who stands alone, separate, and supporting everybody else, an ‘almighty idiot.’ and a bit STS

You have to take the comment about supporting 20 people in the social context of Gurdjieff's time and place. It was common to have large extended families, with members being added in due to displacements caused by war, strife or natural causes. When such calamities caused people to leave their place of origin, they often sought out people whom they were related to by kinship or place of origin and who were now settled in more hospitable places away from the strife. If the host agreed to take in the displaced kinsmen, he would have to support their entire families until the guests were able to generate income on their own after settling down in the new place. If the men were dead or otherwise incapacitated due to the calamity that caused the immigration of the family, the host would take up the responsibility to take care of the dependents.

So G's good obyvatel is someone who is able to support in a practical money-making way many others who were not able to support themselves. He himself supported many people while moving across multiple countries during the Bolshevik "revolution" and the world wars.

 

[David]

But G was pretty clear what kind of obyvatel he meant (italics mine):

"Ability to orientate oneself in life is a very useful quality from the point of view of the work. A good obyvatel should be able to support at least twenty persons by his own labor. What is a man worth who is unable to do this?""

Being a good obyvatel, would seem to me as almost impossible, if I take it as meaning a person who stands alone, separate, and supporting everybody else, an ‘almighty idiot.’ and a bit STS

You have to take the comment about supporting 20 people in the social context of Gurdjieff's time and place. It was common to have large extended families, with members being added in due to displacements caused by war, strife or natural causes. When such calamities caused people to leave their place of origin, they often sought out people whom they were related to by kinship or place of origin and who were now settled in more hospitable places away from the strife. If the host agreed to take in the displaced kinsmen, he would have to support their entire families until the guests were able to generate income on their own after settling down in the new place. If the men were dead or otherwise incapacitated due to the calamity that caused the immigration of the family, the host would take up the responsibility to take care of the dependents.

So G's good obyvatel is someone who is able to support in a practical money-making way many others who were not able to support themselves. He himself supported many people while moving across multiple countries during the Bolshevik "revolution" and the world wars.

A case of Imagining, on my part...

The world hasn’t changed that much... so maybe indeed, it still holds true, in some respects...

It seems I’m going backwards... in ending an old cycle, and maybe beginning a new one.

 

[Martina]

I just wanted to share something that troubles me and it's connected with the idea of what really good obyvatel is. I don't think that being obyvatel is connected with being a plumber, or some other low payed job or being nice to your neighbours or anything associated with la petite bourgeoisie. I'm from small town full of such people who are really small minded and hypocritical and for the love of Cosmos I don't hate or judge them, they are what they are. None of them has the need to support at least twenty other people, only their family, especially manual workers who barely with what they earn can pay their bills. Then on the other hand as described you have people who do not support this system like so called bumps- dreamers who don't want to work. I recently met an old friend of mine and it turned out she is homeless because - well many things but one of the reasons was that she didn't want to be a manual worker as it was offered to her at unemployed office which got her in fight with her family. Where we live they don't give you much choices. She wants to do something else like being a bioenergetic healer and doesn't have the money for the classes.
So we can see that both examples represent a formative apparatus- black - white which is not the solution of how to be a good obyvatel. What should actually be the task of good obyvatel- to help yourself and others to have essential needs to do the work. That would be doing something that you're good at and you love to do and you can make a good money to at least support one extra thing besides your family. Could be a friend or some organization, you name it.
I went trough both paths, I worked recently as a warehouse worker which I didn't like because I was so exhausted, I was bullied at work, I haven't earn enough to have money for whole month until next paycheck. I'm honestly not convinced I'm gonna find an add for my dream job in local newspapers, but I'm gonna find some way to cash my abilities and help others.
Sorry for angry tone.

 

[T.C.]

I just wanted to share something that troubles me and it's connected with the idea of what really good obyvatel is. I don't think that being obyvatel is connected with being a plumber, or some other low payed job or being nice to your neighbours or anything associated with la petite bourgeoisie. I'm from small town full of such people who are really small minded and hypocritical and for the love of Cosmos I don't hate or judge them, they are what they are. None of them has the need to support at least twenty other people, only their family, especially manual workers who barely with what they earn can pay their bills. Then on the other hand as described you have people who do not support this system like so called bumps- dreamers who don't want to work. I recently met an old friend of mine and it turned out she is homeless because - well many things but one of the reasons was that she didn't want to be a manual worker as it was offered to her at unemployed office which got her in fight with her family. Where we live they don't give you much choices. She wants to do something else like being a bioenergetic healer and doesn't have the money for the classes.
So we can see that both examples represent a formative apparatus- black - white which is not the solution of how to be a good obyvatel. What should actually be the task of good obyvatel- to help yourself and others to have essential needs to do the work. That would be doing something that you're good at and you love to do and you can make a good money to at least support one extra thing besides your family. Could be a friend or some organization, you name it.
I went trough both paths, I worked recently as a warehouse worker which I didn't like because I was so exhausted, I was bullied at work, I haven't earn enough to have money for whole month until next paycheck. I'm honestly not convinced I'm gonna find an add for my dream job in local newspapers, but I'm gonna find some way to cash my abilities and help others.
Sorry for angry tone.

For me, the obyvatel issue is about practical efficacy and practical mindedness. That people who have their head in the clouds - people who would rather be homeless and dream of being bioenergetic healers than work for a living - have no hope of coming close to being able to do The Work. That The Work is for the most part a practical matter, a hard science, not mumbo jumbo-voodoo-wishful thinking; it's not an escape. That the attributes required to do the Work are acquired through just successfully navigating reality as a decent, normal, useful member of society. It's about being able to accept the way the world works and to accept the way things are and learning the rules of the game of life and living in concord with them.

So really it's about becoming a good game player. It's about becoming good at learning the rules of any game and figuring out how to win at it.

 

[Martina]

Agree, I couldn't sleep at night bothered with that among other things, so I started to think what else could it mean to support 20 others people and ability to go to monastery when time comes- it has an extra impact on psyche. Gurdjieff was brilliant, he wanted to invoke specific impressions in others. It provokes specific mind state of wholeness as if you already have such conditions. As he says in Life is only real when I am we sometimes have to pretend that we already are that what we want to be. I am, I can , I will. Or in Caesars words: veni, vidi, vici. I hope that's more reasonable. :)
I'm gonna call my friend today and see how she is.

 

[Laura]

But G was pretty clear what kind of obyvatel he meant (italics mine):

"Ability to orientate oneself in life is a very useful quality from the point of view of the work. A good obyvatel should be able to support at least twenty persons by his own labor. What is a man worth who is unable to do this?""

Being a good obyvatel, would seem to me as almost impossible, if I take it as meaning a person who stands alone, separate, and supporting everybody else, an ‘almighty idiot.’ and a bit STS

You have to take the comment about supporting 20 people in the social context of Gurdjieff's time and place. It was common to have large extended families, with members being added in due to displacements caused by war, strife or natural causes. When such calamities caused people to leave their place of origin, they often sought out people whom they were related to by kinship or place of origin and who were now settled in more hospitable places away from the strife. If the host agreed to take in the displaced kinsmen, he would have to support their entire families until the guests were able to generate income on their own after settling down in the new place. If the men were dead or otherwise incapacitated due to the calamity that caused the immigration of the family, the host would take up the responsibility to take care of the dependents.

So G's good obyvatel is someone who is able to support in a practical money-making way many others who were not able to support themselves. He himself supported many people while moving across multiple countries during the Bolshevik "revolution" and the world wars.

Yes, this is G's context. If you examine it, what you see is a person who is ready, willing and able to be responsible toward others, to care for others. And right along with that must come External Considering. It would be almost impossible to perform such a feat as Gurdjieff had in mind without being able to manage that many people in such a context, and keep the peace, and keep everyone together as a functional unit.

External Considering is pretty much the foundation of The Work and, as Gurdjieff described it, it includes a great knowledge of the self and other people so as to be able to make life easier for all. This is one of the reasons we stress psychology and human relations as foundational knowledge.

 

[Andrey]

Thanks for the thread. I personally am struggling with the concept... not necessarily in the sense that I don't understand it, but more in the sense of how someone like me could even become such a person. Someone mentioned in this thread that it is tough for people in recent generations to mold themselves into an obyvatel considering everything we've been bombarded with since childhood and all the programs and traumas etc etc.. me personally i have a history of substance abuse, but it's not just the drugs but the whole selfish lifestyle that revolves around it and it's made me inherently selfish... and every now and then when I try to "act out" being an obyvatel it just kills me.. it's really the boredom that kills me most of all.. or maybe thats just a personal problem i have.. reading isotm when g. described the "tramps" or "lunatics" or whatever... thats me! I always looked down on people who never "followed their passions" and were stuck in a dead end job even though you could tell they hated it... but after reading 4th way material it was really eye opening to realize that it isn't a bad thing and the c's also mentioned that following your "passions" isn't exactly a ticket to freedom (paraphrasing).. anyways this thread has been enlightening and I wish you all the best.. thanks for reading!

 

[KristinLynne]

Thanks for the thread. I personally am struggling with the concept... not necessarily in the sense that I don't understand it, but more in the sense of how someone like me could even become such a person. Someone mentioned in this thread that it is tough for people in recent generations to mold themselves into an obyvatel considering everything we've been bombarded with since childhood and all the programs and traumas etc etc.. me personally i have a history of substance abuse, but it's not just the drugs but the whole selfish lifestyle that revolves around it and it's made me inherently selfish... and every now and then when I try to "act out" being an obyvatel it just kills me.. it's really the boredom that kills me most of all.. or maybe thats just a personal problem i have.. reading isotm when g. described the "tramps" or "lunatics" or whatever... thats me! I always looked down on people who never "followed their passions" and were stuck in a dead end job even though you could tell they hated it... but after reading 4th way material it was really eye opening to realize that it isn't a bad thing and the c's also mentioned that following your "passions" isn't exactly a ticket to freedom (paraphrasing).. anyways this thread has been enlightening and I wish you all the best.. thanks for reading!

It is understandable the struggles that you and others in similar situations have with putting into practice concepts such as these. Rereading the thread after many years has given me a few more insights combined with all the other reading here on the forum and many of the recommended books, so I would advise to continue your reading as well. Several concepts that Laura presented is the nature of the system we live under that promotes the ideas that we should not grow up and continue to be dependent on the system for our whole life.

The system discourages thinking and have gone to great lengths to stop personal growth by the massive programming through many avenues as we can see the effects of it more clearly today than ever. Since the leaders of this world are supremely selfish which is the very definition of STS, they have given us their morals (or lack thereof) to emulate. They don't take responsibility for there actions and do very little real work. In turn they learn very little and their hubris will probably come back to bite them sooner rather than later.

Not doing jobs that we feel are beneath us for some reason while dreaming of starting out in a cushy position with high salaries is becoming more of an issue I see everyday even though it has become increasing more difficult to even entertain that illusion. But from my perspective starting at the bottom and working your way up (not just in a job but in personal areas of life), builds the muscles needed to lay the foundations to learn and see things as they are, not as we wish them to be. There are many lessons to be learned along the way and the most important one that Laura has mentioned repeatedly, is there is no free lunch.

For me in today's world being a good obyvatel means balancing work, family, personal and spiritual lives by continuing to learn new things and applying the knowledge when applicable. It's a balancing act of the greatest order and it takes years of working at many things to be able to even understand the concepts. The trial and error method was my way of learning hard lessons and it can be a great teacher if viewed in that respect. Adding new skills is a way of increasing our independence from a system that seeks to enable the very dependence on it. I'm talking about basic life skills such as cooking, cleaning, health matters, home and car maintenance, and money management and the inherent traps that come with it. If we haven't learned these things from our parents then it is up to us to learn them on our own because we live in a world that requires these things to survive.

Having taken responsibility for oneself is one thing but taking responsibility for others who cannot care for themselves for whatever reason also teaches us many things such as empathy, internal and external considering, compromising, what's healthy and what's not healthy, if we haven't yet learned some of those basic principles. When you have a young child or a frail parent to care for it can also be a way of nurturing the things in oneself that may have needed it and a way to look how far we have come when caring for a child or a preview of what may come as we get older. So for me it's not about being a cog in the systems but being a strong link in a chain of human connections that we could aspire to be.

We have to start somewhere and start with what we have to be able to learn and grow. With practice things become easier which allows us to take on more of the advanced lessons if that is our choice to do so. FWIW.

 

[LongCloud]

What a fantastic post this is.

You have encapsulated a LOT about being an "obyvatel".

The thing is, is that it's not a goal, it's something that you do that's within you when you know you should.

When you can, and every time you can. No matter how hard it is.

 

[ephemerality]

Hi,

As a 23 year old male growing up in a western country, I have grown up with a lot of fantasy, imagination, idealization of what it means to be a well functioning human being and a man without quotation marks. One of the most striking concepts in my readings related to the work is the concept of an obyvatel. From my understanding this is a person who fulfils all their immediate responsibilities in life and doesn't according to their imagination of themselves. I consider imagination to be one of my main weaknesses, maybe even my chief feature so I am looking for some further understanding here on the forum as to the relationship between the work and being a responsible individual who functions well in society.

Do I have to focus on growing up and being efficient and completely self sufficient before I can make real developments in the work? Does this also mean consciously accepting my STS nature and doing what I need to do to be a man before I devote myself to focusing on STO?

I have a deferred place to study post graduate artificial intelligence starting in September. So I guess that's my immediate big responsibility/next step that I have to prepare for. However you never know what's around the corner, one of the few results I have had is how less tense you are and how more fluid the flow of events seem to be when you don't anticipate as much, just a thought.

Thanks

Imagination and logographic emotional language are intrinsically correlated. Perhaps studying your own emotions might provide you with the assistance you want in order to cover up the weak points you suggested to have.