Gurdjieff. An introduction to his life and ideas

[Renaissance]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

The basic goal to which I was referring is the process of seeing our reactions, programs, conditioning, etc. so we can begin to approach living in reality. Seeking explanations, parallels, proof, verification from another is in essence formatory thinking and so can't lead to anything but the same. We want to get out of that loop, right? Subjective verification wont do much but keep us satisfied (whether fighting for our righteousness or being spoon fed answers). Objective verification seems to stir something else and it starts with sincere work. Actually it seems to start with work towards being sincere - and then maybe some work can be done. Interesting thing about real verification is it eventually shows us what bums we've been, as well as how we've squandered our talents, and who can be satisfied with that?

 

[Argonaut]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

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?

Relative to the forum as a whole I'd guess myself at around 4 on a 1 to 10 scale of experience. :) Still, I'll give this a shot. If anyone else feels I erred or missed something, please correct me.

The entirety of the Cass material (the C's sessions, Laura's books, SotT, the forum, etc) has extended the Fourth Way by covering a few major concepts that Gurdjieff was rather vague on, such as the hyperdimensional nature of reality and the machinations of "evil," both human and hyperdimensional. There is also an emphasis on physical and psychological health, and recent developments like the Éiriú Eolas breathing & meditation program. Another large focus is Earth's history of catastrophic events, and what this means for the future. And, of course, there is the subject of the coming Wave itself - which is, incidentally, why the Fourth Way has resurfaced at this particular time. These things help us to gain knowledge, and thus protection from forces which exert a strong negative influence on us (and on the planet in general). They also help us become more objective about ourselves and the cosmos. And they help stop energy losses which are detrimental to the work.

But much of the Cass material doesn't extend or add to the Fourth Way per se... It's simply a different approach. And once you've familiarized yourself more with the Wave series, the forum, and other aspects of what we're doing here, you'll understand - nobody here is putting G down or saying that he didn't know his stuff. He most certainly did. Nobody's claiming that this manifestation of the Fourth Way is "superior" to what G was doing. It's just taken on a different form to fit the needs of this particular time, exactly as G's own manifestation did.

And it's being done in ways that many "Gurdjieffean fundamentalists" can't understand. At the end of Struggle of the Magicians, Patterson derided the idea of "Internet groups who think they can work in cyberspace." Some have also criticized the fact that the work here involves channeling. These appear to come from the natural "blind spot" of Gurdjieff imitators. G operated largely from his moving center. So his self-appointed successors, clumsily copying what they THOUGHT G was teaching - formed unbalanced, moving-center-based versions of the work. Which, as Laura pointed out, is not the Fourth Way at all, but rather the way of the fakir. It's also significant that a large number of today's "Fourth Way schools" are based on Ouspensky, who chose to become a teacher after failing under Gurdjieff and then rejecting him as crazy.

[quote author=Stevie Argyll]
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?
[/quote]

That's a good question. As far as I remember, Patterson doesn't address this in SOTM. So I don't know why he would've fallen for it. Wishful thinking leading to denial, maybe?

[quote author=Stevie Argyll]
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?

[/quote]

No it doesn't preclude asking questions. But reading the material will answer a lot of them - and may raise some new ones that you haven't considered. I second anart's advice to devote some time to reading before returning here to post.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Hi Anart

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.

Gurdjieff didn't stop teaching, this is mis-information. He closed the Priere but never stopped teaching, he was still teaching two days before he died.


Where do you get the idea that G was moving centre dominated? His sister Sophia says he was an higly intelligent young man, read voraciously in Kars library - trained for the priesthood - abandoned it and trained as a doctor.At the same time in his youth due to circumstance - no Wallmart in Alexandropol young men learnt a variety of practrical skills.

Its easy to say that I am identified with old forth way groups - If that were so I would probably be in one as I know of some who even up to a few years ago were run by people who worked with G in Paris in the 40's .

I am testing the water, so far no one has backlashed at me and people have been pleasant, the surest sign of identification is when people get emotional in their retorts because they are defending an emotional investment. So for instance Argonaut handled his response and his demeaner very well and was completely un-defenseive and never accused me of anything.
Someone else might have thrown accusations at me.

[moderator: fixed quote]

 

[vinny]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

I am testing the water, so far no one has backlashed at me and people have been pleasant, the surest sign of identification is when people get emotional in their retorts because they are defending an emotional investment. So for instance Argonaut handled his response and his demeaner very well and was completely un-defenseive and never accused me of anything.
Someone else might have thrown accusations at me.

There is also another important aspect to consider, when working on oneself. That is, when one 'feels' attacked, is this an attack on the real I, or is it the predator's mind's perception of coming under attack? Often, an observation or mirror is indeed designed to focus and shine a light on the predator's mind (false personality)'s thinking, and when done so, it is perceived as attack, even though it is actually done in support of the real I. The predator's mind will go into a frenzy of emotional reaction (it does not like to have the light shone on it!), projecting all kinds of false nuances onto the questioner. This can cause a shutdown in critical thinking and trigger all kinds of compensatory subconscious filtering - substitution and selection of data, conversive thinking etc. This is a difficult sticking point for many, and is a really important thing to bear in mind, when observing one's own internal reactions - "where does this reaction come from?"

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

I am testing the water, so far no one has backlashed at me and people have been pleasant, the surest sign of identification is when people get emotional in their retorts because they are defending an emotional investment. So for instance Argonaut handled his response and his demeaner very well and was completely un-defenseive and never accused me of anything.
Someone else might have thrown accusations at me.

There is also another important aspect to consider, when working on oneself. That is, when one 'feels' attacked, is this an attack on the real I, or is it the predator's mind's perception of coming under attack? Often, an observation or mirror is indeed designed to focus and shine a light on the predator's mind (false personality)'s thinking, and when done so, it is perceived as attack, even though it is actually done in support of the real I. The predator's mind will go into a frenzy of emotional reaction (it does not like to have the light shone on it!), projecting all kinds of false nuances onto the questioner. This can cause a shutdown in critical thinking and trigger all kinds of compensatory subconscious filtering - substitution and selection of data, conversive thinking etc. This is a difficult sticking point for many, and is a really important thing to bear in mind, when observing one's own internal reactions - "where does this reaction come from?"

Well put Nomad. I completely agree. Defensiveness is either a buffer in operation or a 'nessecity of the moment' becaase the person under pressure does not have the necessary being developed to allow them to cope in a particular situation. Communication on forums is fraught with the danger of misinterpretation as the written word conveys no gesture and no voice tone and if a subject response shakes a partcipant up then they generally project the emotion onto the other when in reality it is a call to look closer at themselves. When a thread becomes an argument then the fourth way has taken a holiday !

Anyway, a bit of advice. I have started the wave but also received Secret History book in the last few days. Should one be read before the other ? Does the order matter?

 

[vinny]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Anyway, a bit of advice. I have started the wave but also received Secret History book in the last few days. Should one be read before the other ? Does the order matter?

Personally, I read the Wave first. I would recommend this approach (and this is the order generally recommended on the forum) because the Wave lays out some groundwork that really helps to clarify the context in which Secret History was written. It is a natural progression that lends itself to a more balanced understanding, in my opinion. Having said that, if you feel tempted to dip into SH to get an idea, go for it. The Wave is also a multilevel work that, I've found, uncovers deeper meaning when re-read after having studied other material.

 

[anart]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Gurdjieff didn't stop teaching, this is mis-information. He closed the Priere but never stopped teaching, he was still teaching two days before he died.

Apologies for not being clear enough, when I said he stopped teaching, I meant he closed his 'school' - which you acknowledge. Do you have issue with my interpretation of why he did so?

Where do you get the idea that G was moving centre dominated? His sister Sophia says he was an higly intelligent young man, read voraciously in Kars library - trained for the priesthood - abandoned it and trained as a doctor.At the same time in his youth due to circumstance - no Wallmart in Alexandropol young men learnt a variety of practrical skills.

I don't understand your point here or why you brought it up in this context? If you are referring to a statement in the other thread about Gurdjieff's moving center, then I do think there is copious evidence that his moving center was quite strong and, more importantly, that he tended to utilize the moving centers of his students to effect certain responses and reactions. Witness his Movements and the physical work at the school, and his driving for just a few indications. This is my personal take, however.

This does not mean, nor did I imply, that his other centers were not developed to a remarkable degree.

Its easy to say that I am identified with old forth way groups - If that were so I would probably be in one as I know of some who even up to a few years ago were run by people who worked with G in Paris in the 40's .

Good, then at least you recognize your identification.

I am testing the water, so far no one has backlashed at me and people have been pleasant, the surest sign of identification is when people get emotional in their retorts because they are defending an emotional investment.

Yep, and Nomad goes into quite accurate detail on that in his post.

So for instance Argonaut handled his response and his demeaner very well and was completely un-defenseive and never accused me of anything.
Someone else might have thrown accusations at me.

No need for accusations on this forum - there are merely observations and there is a difference.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Anart

Apologies for not being clear enough, when I said he stopped teaching, I meant he closed his 'school' - which you acknowledge. Do you have issue with my interpretation of why he did so?

So that question requires my opinion on the interpretation of the views presented in this statement:

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.

Personally I think that the decision to scale down the 'teaching' was a direct result of his accident. Near fatal and six weeks in a coma, his teaching could have been completley lost. His efforts up until this time has been to prepare a nucleus capable of starting preparatory groups and no-one at this point can carry on the teaching as no one has been given the full teaching. So to preserve a teaching that cost him 20 years of search he abandons his 'observatory' , postpones his 'grand plan' and he writes the teaching down.

He realized all of the students of these schools had the look of one ready for the mad house

I assume this is related to his observation of Orage's group in 'Life is Only Real Then When I Am'. If it is, then surely we can only apply it to Orage's groups and not 'all' groups, to do so would be taking liberties. And we can only apply it if indeed 'Life Is Only Real As I Am' is biographical and I don't think that we can take for granted that it is.

As for the success of Gurdjieffs teaching. My opinion is that only time will tell.

 

[anart]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

Personally I think that the decision to scale down the 'teaching' was a direct result of his accident. Near fatal and six weeks in a coma, his teaching could have been completley lost. His efforts up until this time has been to prepare a nucleus capable of starting preparatory groups and no-one at this point can carry on the teaching as no one has been given the full teaching. So to preserve a teaching that cost him 20 years of search he abandons his 'observatory' , postpones his 'grand plan' and he writes the teaching down.

That's interesting, though I disagree. In fact, I think his accident may have very well been a strong message from his higher self that he was taking the wrong route, so to speak.

I assume this is related to his observation of Orage's group in 'Life is Only Real Then When I Am'. If it is, then surely we can only apply it to Orage's groups and not 'all' groups, to do so would be taking liberties. And we can only apply it if indeed 'Life Is Only Real As I Am' is biographical and I don't think that we can take for granted that it is.

I think it's quite the assumption, actually, that this condition would not apply to all students in all groups. If one deeply, viscerally, understands the nature of sleep in Man, then it can really be no other way. In fact, understanding how information is twisted automatically and mechanically in Man, the outcome was quite predictable - no one twists information more completely than a person who believes he is awake, while he is still asleep. It could be no other way - likely Gurdjieff realized this and changed his tack to writing. One need look no further than Gurdjieff's actions to understand this, at least to my understanding.

As for the success of Gurdjieffs teaching. My opinion is that only time will tell.

This is a bit of a confusing statement since I'm not certain which 'teachings' you are referring to. If you mean his 'schools' - then time has told. If you mean the invaluable and voluminous written works that act as guide stones, then the success is apparent in many ways.

Did you actually read the entire thread on Imitation Fourth Way Groups?

 

[Juba]

Re: Biography on Gurdjieff

I picked up the book written by John Shirley on Gurdjieff "Gurdjieff: An Introduction to His Life and Ideas" . It was cheap at a used book store so I said what the hey it just might be a good over view of his work in addition to reading his actual writings. I just started reading it. Has anyone read it? If so, your input on validity of John Shirley's findings on Gurdjieff?

Hello,

I enjoyed more in: Meetings with Remarkable men, Gurdjieff's autobiography, covering his childhood and early adolescence and travels with basic inputs about people who strongly shaped his character, way of thinking and influenced on his visionary work. I remember when first time I finished with reading of this book, I almost felt like reading adventure novel, but after 2 decades I finally understand what Gurdjieff meant with: "This is the book about lives not the teaching!" Thanks to it; Gurdjieff become in my eyes, a regular human being, not some half-god from pantheon of ingenuity. Shirley's book is really nice book about Gurdjieff, but once you read about Gurdjieff, written by Gurdjieff himself, somehow seems like all other literal styles can't and couldn't express whole picture about this remarkable man.

 

[Maia]

I haven't posted for awhile because I've been busy reading The Wave Books and am now reading, "P. D. Ouspensky The Fourth Way A Record of Talks and Anwers To Questions Based on The Taching of G. I. Gurdjieff".

Found Laura's article on Scott Focus: Tunguska, Psychopathy and the Sixth Extinction fasinating and insightful..............excellent article Laura as always.

So, I'm busy readying and listening vs talking and posting.................have a lot to learn.

Still, I'm here - just lurking about and trying to learn more.

Safe journey.

 

[Maia]

Would have helped if I had used spell check..............change Teaching to Teachings.

 

[Jacques]

Would have helped if I had used spell check..............change Teaching to Teachings.

You could have edited your post and modified it. ;)