Gurdjieff. An introduction to his life and ideas

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

In Herald of Coming Good, Gurdjieff says that only the first series of writings will be available to all. The second and third series will be made more difficult to get so that there is a better chance of them being read in order (these plans he made while he was still living, obviously). He also asked of his students and everyone who knew him to do everything they could to ensure his wishes were carried out. I cannot post the quote at this time, but will later.

I asked someone who worked with G in France in the 1940s about this , from my hazy memory on the subject (the conversation was over 25yrs ago) they said something along the lines that BT was written for everyone and the other books were for groups , those already familiar with the work and BTs.

 

[JEEP]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

FIRST SERIES Three books under the title of Beelzebub's Tales to His Grandson. An Objectively Impartial Criticism of the Life of Man.

SECOND SERIES Two books under the common title of Meetings with Remarkable Men.

THIRD SERIES Five books under the title of Life Is Real Only Then, When "I Am."

All written according to entirely new principles of logical reasoning and directed toward the accomplishment of the following three fundamental tasks:

FIRST SERIES To destroy, mercilessly and without any compromise whatever, in the mentation and feelings of the reader, the beliefs and views, by centuries rooted in him, about everything existing in the world.

SECOND SERIES To acquaint the reader with the material required for a new creation and to prove the soundness and good quality of it.

THIRD SERIES To assist the arising, in the mentation and in the feelings of the reader, of a veritable, nonfantastic representation not of that illusory world which he now perceives, but of the world existing in reality.

If I encountered the above before, it must not have dented my consciousness. This particular info is adding to my new perspective and understanding. But perhaps I'm coming to it at the correct time, so to speak, since earlier it just didn't compute. Cleaning one's slate of all the false "I"s and misconceptions is a challenging task indeed. How fortunate that there are those who have gone before and can show us the way - just have to get the "blinders" off.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

"This plan, newly formed by me, consists in taking all possible measures to prevent my writings, with the exception of the first series, from becoming at once property 'accessible-to-everybody.' ...I do not consider it vain to address a sincere appeal to all readers of my books to help me to the best of their ability in every way to carry out this decision, so that no one interested in my writings should ever attempt to read them in any other than the indicated order; in other words, he should never read anything written by me before he is already well acquainted with the earlier works, even if someone, with a particular motive, should attempt to persuade him to commence the reading other than from the beginning. Believe me, you must take my word for it, that the exact carrying out of this wish of mine can be of great importance to you and your interests, and I, therefore, particularly stress and insist on it..." - Gurdjieff's Herald of Coming Good, pgs 56-58

"...for certain people, a reading of my writings in any other than the indicated order (no matter if the reader has long been a follower of my ideas or has become one recently), can provoke undesirable phenomena in their genenral psyche, one of which in particular might paralyse forever the possibility of normal self-perfection." - Gurdjieff's Herald of Coming Good, pg 58. Now, I know that I have been a reader of this forum and Laura's material for about 5 years, but this kind of admonition still makes me nervous being that I read Meetings first and havent read either of the other two writings yet. As he also advises reading each book thrice, I will read Meetings twice more ONLY AFTER I have read Beelzebub 3 times.

I asked someone who worked with G in France in the 1940s about this , from my hazy memory on the subject (the conversation was over 25yrs ago) they said something along the lines that BT was written for everyone and the other books were for groups , those already familiar with the work and BTs.

Hm... well it does sound like it's important to read them in proper order, and G's reasoning for it makes sense. So I say better safe than sorry. But my original point was: if a Cass member happens to have read the "wrong" G book first, the Fourth Way knowledge and context gained from the forum, Laura's books, etc. can protect them from any negative side effects. So we should most definitely approach G's books with respect and read them as intended... But at the same time, if it's already "too late" and you didn't, I don't think you should be afraid that you've done irreparable damage to your being. I do agree, though, that it would be a serious danger if one has had no prior exposure to Fourth Way concepts. Which was the case for readers back when Gurdjieff's books were the only Fourth Way resource available.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

"This plan, newly formed by me, consists in taking all possible measures to prevent my writings, with the exception of the first series, from becoming at once property 'accessible-to-everybody.' ...I do not consider it vain to address a sincere appeal to all readers of my books to help me to the best of their ability in every way to carry out this decision, so that no one interested in my writings should ever attempt to read them in any other than the indicated order; in other words, he should never read anything written by me before he is already well acquainted with the earlier works, even if someone, with a particular motive, should attempt to persuade him to commence the reading other than from the beginning. Believe me, you must take my word for it, that the exact carrying out of this wish of mine can be of great importance to you and your interests, and I, therefore, particularly stress and insist on it..." - Gurdjieff's Herald of Coming Good, pgs 56-58

"...for certain people, a reading of my writings in any other than the indicated order (no matter if the reader has long been a follower of my ideas or has become one recently), can provoke undesirable phenomena in their genenral psyche, one of which in particular might paralyse forever the possibility of normal self-perfection." - Gurdjieff's Herald of Coming Good, pg 58. Now, I know that I have been a reader of this forum and Laura's material for about 5 years, but this kind of admonition still makes me nervous being that I read Meetings first and havent read either of the other two writings yet. As he also advises reading each book thrice, I will read Meetings twice more ONLY AFTER I have read Beelzebub 3 times.

I asked someone who worked with G in France in the 1940s about this , from my hazy memory on the subject (the conversation was over 25yrs ago) they said something along the lines that BT was written for everyone and the other books were for groups , those already familiar with the work and BTs.

Hm... well it does sound like it's important to read them in proper order, and G's reasoning for it makes sense. So I say better safe than sorry. But my original point was: if a Cass member happens to have read the "wrong" G book first, the Fourth Way knowledge and context gained from the forum, Laura's books, etc. can protect them from any negative side effects. So we should most definitely approach G's books with respect and read them as intended... But at the same time, if it's already "too late" and you didn't, I don't think you should be afraid that you've done irreparable damage to your being. I do agree, though, that it would be a serious danger if one has had no prior exposure to Fourth Way concepts. Which was the case for readers back when Gurdjieff's books were the only Fourth Way resource available.

I do agree, though, that it would be a serious danger if one has had no prior exposure to Fourth Way concepts. Which was the case for readers back when Gurdjieff's books were the only Fourth Way resource available.

I don't think that it's anything to do with prior exposure to 4th way concepts, after all G delivered lectures and encourage people unfamiliar with ideas to attend them. Its more to do with what he hoped to efficate through a serious study of his writings. He had Ouspenskys manuscript for ISOTM and hoped for it to be published so he never intended that exclusive exposure should come via his own efforts in fact quite the opposite, many were sent to start groups and return for guidance. BTs when read a number of times resides in subconscious and one day you might be sitting reading Meeting with miraculous Men and realise that a portion of a chapter is a continuation of a thread started in BTs, thats why you need all three and preferaby in order as the foundations a prepared before the roof goes on.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

I don't think that it's anything to do with prior exposure to 4th way concepts, after all G delivered lectures and encourage people unfamiliar with ideas to attend them. Its more to do with what he hoped to efficate through a serious study of his writings. He had Ouspenskys manuscript for ISOTM and hoped for it to be published so he never intended that exclusive exposure should come via his own efforts in fact quite the opposite, many were sent to start groups and return for guidance. BTs when read a number of times resides in subconscious and one day you might be sitting reading Meeting with miraculous Men and realise that a portion of a chapter is a continuation of a thread started in BTs, thats why you need all three and preferaby in order as the foundations a prepared before the roof goes on.

Makes sense. After reading all that's been said here, I agree that it's important to read G's books as he intended. And I personally have read BT first, and I do plan to read it twice more before moving on to MWRM. But if a long-time member of this forum happened to read the wrong book first - then later discovered what G said about the importance of reading them properly - should that person be concerned that they've done irreparable damage to their being? That's the question I've been trying to answer. And I don't think the person should worry. I do think, however, that they would benefit greatly from re-reading G's books in the way he intended them to be read.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

I don't think that it's anything to do with prior exposure to 4th way concepts, after all G delivered lectures and encourage people unfamiliar with ideas to attend them. Its more to do with what he hoped to efficate through a serious study of his writings. He had Ouspenskys manuscript for ISOTM and hoped for it to be published so he never intended that exclusive exposure should come via his own efforts in fact quite the opposite, many were sent to start groups and return for guidance. BTs when read a number of times resides in subconscious and one day you might be sitting reading Meeting with miraculous Men and realise that a portion of a chapter is a continuation of a thread started in BTs, thats why you need all three and preferaby in order as the foundations a prepared before the roof goes on.

Makes sense. After reading all that's been said here, I agree that it's important to read G's books as he intended. And I personally have read BT first, and I do plan to read it twice more before moving on to MWRM. But if a long-time member of this forum happened to read the wrong book first - then later discovered what G said about the importance of reading them properly - should that person be concerned that they've done irreparable damage to their being? That's the question I've been trying to answer. And I don't think the person should worry. I do think, however, that they would benefit greatly from re-reading G's books in the way he intended them to be read.

I think its more to to with what benefits you would get from reading. If someone has only superficially read books in wrong order then cant see a massive problem, if on the other hand they have started practicing ideas on the wrong foundation the certain habits of mind or emotion might take root, extra buffers if you like, that would need dis-assembled. Intentionally created habits can be more difficult to spot as they were assumed to be on the right direction and a certain atitude and emotions would have accompanied and been solidified with them. Would mean more work spotting and breaking down, habits intentionally formed can more difficult to break.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Makes sense. After reading all that's been said here, I agree that it's important to read G's books as he intended. And I personally have read BT first, and I do plan to read it twice more before moving on to MWRM. But if a long-time member of this forum happened to read the wrong book first - then later discovered what G said about the importance of reading them properly - should that person be concerned that they've done irreparable damage to their being? That's the question I've been trying to answer. And I don't think the person should worry. I do think, however, that they would benefit greatly from re-reading G's books in the way he intended them to be read.

I think its more to to with what benefits you would get from reading. If someone has only superficially read books in wrong order then cant see a massive problem, if on the other hand they have started practicing ideas on the wrong foundation the certain habits of mind or emotion might take root, extra buffers if you like, that would need dis-assembled. Intentionally created habits can be more difficult to spot as they were assumed to be on the right direction and a certain atitude and emotions would have accompanied and been solidified with them. Would mean more work spotting and breaking down, habits intentionally formed can more difficult to break.

I completely agree with this. That's why I think that experienced forum members would be safe. An inexperienced one, however... Well let's just say that my first solid exposure to the Fourth Way was Ouspensky's book by that name. And it took a few years for me to "unlearn" the erroneous approach I was taking after reading it. Interacting in this forum was a crucial part of rooting out the wrong habits and ideas I had formed.

 

[Bar Kochba]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Recollecting my reading of MWRM, I recognized the concepts introduced therein from my prior experience here with Laura's writings and ISOTM. I also recognized similar concepts from Castaneda's books. I connect more with the 4th way tho because it is so practical. Anyhow, I feel a little better about unwitting reading Meetings first.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Recollecting my reading of MWRM, I recognized the concepts introduced therein from my prior experience here with Laura's writings and ISOTM. I also recognized similar concepts from Castaneda's books. I connect more with the 4th way tho because it is so practical. Anyhow, I feel a little better about unwitting reading Meetings first.

Just to clarify - I'm not saying that Ouspensky's The Fourth Way is bad (athough his understanding has a few flaws). But at the time I read it I knew very little about Fourth Way concepts. I began treating that book like the "Fourth Way Bible," and practicing what I thought was "the work" based on my wrong understanding. So I was mostly to blame there, not Ouspensky. :)

 

[Renaissance]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Actually one of the things I've noticed with hard core 4th Way students, even if they have all their ducks in a row, so to speak, their behavior often doesn't match what is 'known' - Ouspenski being the most obvious example. I think the material on the cass website along with the psych books recommended here help round out a lot of those things, even to the point where reading BT probably isn't necessary. The Wave Series accomplishes the same basic goals as BT, and I think does so more effectively.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

The Wave Series accomplishes the same basic goals as BT, and I think does so more effectively.

Just to check that this statement is a result of long hard study and not simply a result of 'formatory thinking' could you elaborate in your understanding what are the goals of Beelzebubs Tales and in your opinion the key chapters which efficate those goals?

 

[Bar Kochba]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Argonaut, I wasnt referring to Ouspensky's book "The Fourth Way" - I was referring to the 4th way as a whole as compared to Castaneda's "system" which I read prior to reading any Gurdjieff.

 

[Argonaut]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

The Wave Series accomplishes the same basic goals as BT, and I think does so more effectively.

Just to check that this statement is a result of long hard study and not simply a result of 'formatory thinking' could you elaborate in your understanding what are the goals of Beelzebubs Tales and in your opinion the key chapters which efficate those goals?

I can't speak for Los, but I didn't read what he said as something that requires a full dissertation on BT. His thinking may have been formatory, because it's hard to say if there's point-by-point correspondence between The Wave's goals and those of BT. But on the other hand, maybe that's not what Los meant.

I feel I should explain a bit where we're coming from on this forum. From our perspective, Gurdjieff's writings - while important - are not the be-all-end-all of the Fourth Way. As G himself said, the Fourth Way is different from other ways. It is not permanent. It appears for a particular purpose, then disappears when that end is accomplished. It may later re-appear if the need arises, but will do so in a different form. It's our position that Gurdjieff's form of the Fourth Way accomplished its end and then left the stage. The Cassiopaean Experiment, the forum, and related writings are part of the current manifestation of the Fourth Way, appearing because a need for it has arisen. Gurdjieff and his teachings are still important to study, as they contain deep truths and insights on what the Fourth Way is all about. But we are not exclusively identified with his methods or his terminology. In a sense, those who continue to operate "Fourth Way" schools based solely on Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, etc. are in the wrong. They seem to view Gurdjieff's form of the Fourth Way as being permanent, contradicting the words of G himself. They also didn't learn enough to competently teach others. Many of G's students made this error, and it's been passed down to the present day.

This issue is dealt with very well in the thread Imitation Fourth Way Groups Started by Gurdjieff Rejects. I highly recommend reading it, as it explains things far better than I can.

Argonaut, I wasnt referring to Ouspensky's book "The Fourth Way" - I was referring to the 4th way as a whole as compared to Castaneda's "system" which I read prior to reading any Gurdjieff.

Ah, my mistake. Thanks for the correction. :)

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Hi Argonaut

In a sense, those who continue to operate "Fourth Way" schools based solely on Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, etc. are in the wrong. They seem to view Gurdjieff's form of the Fourth Way as being permanent, contradicting the words of G himself. They also didn't learn enough to competently teach others. Many of G's students made this error, and it's been passed down to the present day.

I am working through the Wave and the Casseopian sessions as someone who is more experienced how do you think it extends the Fourth way, what has it added beyond the teaching Gurdjieff embodied in his writings?

As regards:

Ouspensky, etc. are in the wrong. They seem to view Gurdjieff's form of the Fourth Way as being permanent, contradicting the words of G himself. They also didn't learn enough to competently teach others. Many of G's students made this error, and it's been passed down to the present day.

I have read this type of thing many times in different forums over the years, have you personally met anyone charged with starting a group by Gurdjieff or is your opinion based on someone elses opinion? This may seem a provocative question, but if we are in the fourth way in spirit and not just by playing then isn't it the type of question we should be asking ourselves? How do we personally verify?

I read the Thread you posted and agree with some of it but their is no mention of for instance JH or HL who G asked to start groups in England in the 40s , why would he do this if there was no point? I am aware of the fake schools or pseudo schools - here is the rub - they catch so many, how is this so? is the answer in my sig?


As regards the Patterson material I have ordered Pattersons book so can't comment on his opinions yet but I will point something out: Have you ever read Eating The 'I'? In it Patterson tells the story of when he first went to meet Lord Pentland (who was mainly ouspensky trained) , that Pentland offered him his copy of Beelzebubs Tales which Pentland claimed was given to him by Gurdjieff himself. Now Bts wasnt published until after Gurdjieffs death, so how could Pentland have been given a copy? How could Patterson have fallen for this? But anyway I will be able to comment better on his conclusions when I have read the book so will say no more on his conclusions.

The biggest problem in all Fourth Way schools is the inability of students to move beyond the formatory mind. Thats why I questioned Los. Often people talk about things they have never thought about nor questioned deeply nor moved beyond a superficial analysis of the attitudes and assumptions beyond that which they accept as true.

So for example to reverse Los's statement which was 'The Wave Series accomplishes the same basic goals as BT, and I think does so more effectively. '
If I were to say 'BTs accomplishes the same basic goals as The Wave, and I think does so more effectively. Then I would fully expect someone here to ask me something of the order of the following

Have you exaustively studied Both.
Have you tested the directions of both (as an example there is a foundational exercise that G gives early on in Beelzebubs tales which so many people miss it because the read it as they are accustomed to read newspapers etc).
What time period did you give for evaluation, how did you decide on this.
etc etc etc

So far I am unable to comment on the wave as I haven't complleted it therefore would prefer to read it over a couple of times before jumping to conclusions, does that preclude from asking questions on others understandings?

 

[anart]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

I read the Thread you posted and agree with some of it but their is no mention of for instance JH or HL who G asked to start groups in England in the 40s , why would he do this if there was no point? I am aware of the fake schools or pseudo schools - here is the rub - they catch so many, how is this so? is the answer in my sig?

No, the answer is not in your sig. The answer is simply in the fact that those 'so many' who are caught are asleep - and in that sleep, they dream they are awakening. They are not. G asked several people to start schools, in an apparent attempt to See if it was worthwhile, he discovered it was not. He realized all of the students of these schools had the look of one ready for the mad house - he stopped teaching for this reason, and due to the realization that even those he had considered might be worthy of helping teach could not objectively awaken. Despite his best efforts, even those he chose to teach could not objectively grasp and carry on the line of force of his teachings, due to their own inability to master the self. You, Stevie, being identified with the idea of a Gurdjieffian student, should be able to see as much.

What do you agree with in that thread referenced? I ask because you write as if you can take some and leave some behind - as if your own personal identification with modern day Gurdjieffian schools is blocking your ability to understand that Gurdjieff stopped teaching for a reason. He found no students truly capable of carrying on his teaching in an objective manner, though he tried - which is why he committed his knowledge to writing in order to leave markers in place for this generation - for his 'grandson' - when the time is right.

I've read your posts here with some interest because, although you appear to be well-versed in Gurdjieff's work, there is also a certain flavor born of identification that is, ever so slowly, intensifying. I think it would be most beneficial for you to continue to read the Wave and Adventure Series - finish them - and then continue the conversation. I also think that Secret History of the World would be quite beneficial to you - it might broaden some horizons that will allow you to see things a bit differently.