Introduction to Beelzebub's Tales 'Deconstruction'/Study Group

I'd like to hear more about how you think the section about the pigeons relates to the two forms of mentation? I tried to point out a few sections i think require an ability to see two sides of a thing rather than one with the hypothesis that the book is supposed to have more than one intentional angle of meaning but im open to interpretations.
Do you see a connection between this section of the preface and the section about the barber surgeon (strange for a barber surgeon to be a dog catcher) who funnels dogs down into a furnace?
 
BotB said:
I'd like to hear more about how you think the section about the pigeons relates to the two forms of mentation? I tried to point out a few sections i think require an ability to see two sides of a thing rather than one with the hypothesis that the book is supposed to have more than one intentional angle of meaning but im open to interpretations.
Do you see a connection between this section of the preface and the section about the barber surgeon (strange for a barber surgeon to be a dog catcher) who funnels dogs down into a furnace?
Click to expand...
The two mentations section is a clue on HOW to penetrate the literal text, or outer version of the book. G said, according to Orage, that there are three versions of the tales - outer, inner, and inmost. Again according to Orage, G said that "Every complete statement in the book has three meanings and seven aspects". I would go further than two sides of a thing - "Every-Stick-Has-Two-Ends". I think you are correct that one must be able to see the duality, but, IMO, that is just the start. I think the connection between catching dogs, and catching pigeons, is centered on an aspect of the process of inner work. Really try to assimilate and understand EXACTLY what mentation by form means, and this will assist in 'peeling the layers of the onion'.

Does this make sense?

Kris
 
I agree that these sections have more than two sides. I guess I was really trying to point out that there is more than one way to look at these sections. What do you think are the three meanings and seven aspects to the sections you mentioned. Feel free to go into as much detail as you need.
 
BotB said:
I agree that these sections have more than two sides. I guess I was really trying to point out that there is more than one way to look at these sections. What do you think are the three meanings and seven aspects to the sections you mentioned. Feel free to go into as much detail as you need.
Click to expand...
I am not going to do the work for you. The deeper meanings in the book can't really be put into words, as it is more of a realization, or, an inner result from work that brings understanding of the deeper layers - which is why I mentioned Thought vs Form.

Kris
 
I am not going to do the work for you.
Click to expand...

I dont expect you to. However, you do need to present something if we are to have a productive conversation here. You highlighted the story of the pigeons for instance. I replied and pointed out a relationship between both that section and the section about the ship systems, namely, the aspect of 'twoness.' I also pointed out how this related to the dilemma of Hamolinadir. Why do you think he uses a stick with two ends rather than a branch with, say, 8? Why does he present us with two ship systems rather than more, for instance? Why does he present two diametrically opposite ways of approaching 'pigeon catching'? Why does he create a dualistic autoegocrat/trogoautoegocrat cosmology? These ship systems certainly bear similarities to the cosmology presented in the chapter 'Purgatory', which is subtly referenced in chapter 4, the Law of Falling. I feel justified in saying this is a clear thread to follow, and I think we have every reason, in this process of 'deconstruction', to take notice of this, if we are serious about doing the work required.

I am sorry I wasnt clear. I certainly do not feel there are only two sides to these things. I said that there were two sides, not that there weren't more sides. My mistake for not clarifying. However, if you are going to point out something you don't entirely agree with, you are accountable to presenting another point of view. I do not want you to work for me. I have a mass of material I've collated relating to these stories, and I have several thousand hours of continous study experience with this book. I am not interested in pushing all my ideas on you, as this would be quite boring to anyone but me. What I'm really interested in is a dialogue, starting from the beginning or any point you like. I want to hear what you think, and I'm quite willing to think along with you and to develop something. I have already, through my previous posts, shown the work I am willing to do. Did you read my earlier posts? Ill quote them at the end of this post.

I believe you were the one who quoted orage's claim that there are 3 meanings and seven aspects to each complete statement in the book. Well then, are we going to verify this for ourselves? If you put something like that out there that's fine, but just because a guy who died 60 or so years ago said this does in no way mean it is true, and if I'm not mistaken this is a Work of verification. If there literally are 3 meanings and 7 aspects, then there literally should be 3 meanings and 7 aspects we can talk about, no?

[...p.31]With a number of young rascals like myself, I was once laying snares for pigeons on the roof of a neighbor's house, when suddenly, one of the boys who was standing over me and watching me closely, said:
"I think the noose of the horsehair ought to be so arranged that the pigeon's big toe never gets caught in it, because, as our zoology teacher recently explained to us, during movment it is just in that toe that the pigeon's reserve strength is concentrated, and therefore if this big toe gets caught in the noose, the pigeon might of course easily break it."

...

I think the principle "Every-stick-has-two-ends" is all throughout the book. I want to draw your attention to the bolded above, as well as 'pigeons', in light of what Gurdjieff says about 'Mentation by Form' vs 'Mentation by Thought'.
Click to expand...

In this case, I am curious what significance the bolded section has for you. I am more than willing to put my 2 cents in, but you bolded it and im not sure how you saw it relating to what we had been talking about. How does it relate to the two forms of mentation (again, notice the two-fold aspect here)? Im curious and Id like to learn from you, but I need to know how you're seeing it. Apparently you had bolded it to try and point something out to us, but Im just not sure what you think is significant about it.

Also, what did you think of the inexactitudes I pointed out in this post:


Thank you for posting that list Approaching Infinity. There does seem to be a lot of new research.

Quote

I think AI is right in the suggetion that Venoma's 'ship' is the way of 'fakir/monk/yogi', in light of bolded in quoted section above. Elekilpomagtistzen is 'a totality composed of two independant parts of the Omnipresent Okidanokh.' The Okidanokh is a three fold 'thing'. These 'shutters' are blinding regarding two parts (Elekilpomagtistzen) of the threeness (body/heart/mind). In other words, ONLY body, or heart, or mind.

Does this make sense??


The shutters themselves are, as you say, on the one hand "blinding" in the sense that they block Elekilpomagtistzen, however, they also "freely slide in any direction", which allows control over Elekilpomagtistzen (electrogmagnatism?). In this sense the shutters almost seem like a third force in relation to the two represented by the substance elekilopmagtistzen. In any case, the shutters are definitely having a big impact on the flow of substance which apparently has a huge impact on the way a ship can fly through the universe.

what do you think about some of the apparent inexactitudes in the chapter:

-"saint" Venoma is "promoted" to purgatory; isnt one a saint AFTER purgatory?
-venoma apparently finds a way to overcome the law of falling or gravitational pull of planets:


Quote

"Saint venoma then evoted his whole attention to discovering some means of overcoming the said atmospheric resistance for ships constructed on the principle of Falling.
And after three 'Looniases' Saint Venoma did find such a possibility..."


then we find out that :

Quote

"It cannot be gainsaid that although the ships constructed on this system were ideal in atmosphereless spaces, and moved there almost with the speed of the rays 'Etzikolnianakhnian' issuing from planets, yet when nearing some sun or planet it became real torture for the beings directing them, as a great deal of complicated maneuvering was necessary."


my point here being that venoma's ship system is deficient exactly where it is supposed to be efficient!

I guess I've made three points in this post:

-the shutters as having two interpretations: unconscious buffers or intentional controls of some sort
-oddity that a saint is put in purgatory despite being a saint and that his name contains the word "venom", a word that occurs elsewhere
-oddity that the ship system is bad at what it is supposed to be good at, particularly in light of the fact that this saint was just promoted! maybe he should be demoted? :lol:

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

This I think has a number of highly important connections that, whether agreed with or not, deserve attention. G. would not have put them in the book otherwise! He says in the chapter Art that objective knowledge codified in legominisms communicate by means of inexactitudes. I think I am justified in pointing out then, that since there are clearly inexactitudes taking place on nearly every page that it behooves us to discuss them. Am I wrong in this?

What do you think?

Also, thank you for dialoguing! Please do not take anything personally. :)
 
Hi RflctnOfU,
You should know by now that PMs are not encouraged because of possible negative feedback and everything. You can address BotB's points here, not big deal. Hope you understand.
 
Hi, I am really getting stuck in to the first book but am looking for some place to throw out some ideas. I hope this thread is still active.

I have been trying to work out the story with the ships and here is what I have come up with:

The original ship was not affected by outside influences, but all its energy came from within. It did not have to fight the "law of falling" but it was extremely high maintenance and required its own energies to power itself.

The second ship was applied to the law of falling. The law of falling I think is the automatism we experience
What we do automatically. This is difficult because the automatic impulses are strong and need a watchful eye to avoid. This might be why Venoma went to purgatory - he turned us into an automaton. Influenced by the forces around us and we spend our time trying to fight and make sure we don't get too sucked in to some gravitational force or some automatic reactions. But it is unavoidable and apart of normal human development we become automatic and every part of us is.

The third ship takes control of the law of falling, it uses it not used by it. It is aware of the different forces around us and can manipulate the forces, deal with the external forces applied to us by using shutters, or being aware what these forces are and where they come from so that we don't go crashing into a planet we were automatically pulled toward. This ship is the work as I see it and we are trying to move from ship 2 to ship 3.

Is anyone interested in continuing this thread?
 
Dracount said:
Hi, I am really getting stuck in to the first book but am looking for some place to throw out some ideas. I hope this thread is still active.

I have been trying to work out the story with the ships and here is what I have come up with:

The original ship was not affected by outside influences, but all its energy came from within. It did not have to fight the "law of falling" but it was extremely high maintenance and required its own energies to power itself.

The second ship was applied to the law of falling. The law of falling I think is the automatism we experience
What we do automatically. This is difficult because the automatic impulses are strong and need a watchful eye to avoid. This might be why Venoma went to purgatory - he turned us into an automaton. Influenced by the forces around us and we spend our time trying to fight and make sure we don't get too sucked in to some gravitational force or some automatic reactions. But it is unavoidable and apart of normal human development we become automatic and every part of us is.

The third ship takes control of the law of falling, it uses it not used by it. It is aware of the different forces around us and can manipulate the forces, deal with the external forces applied to us by using shutters, or being aware what these forces are and where they come from so that we don't go crashing into a planet we were automatically pulled toward. This ship is the work as I see it and we are trying to move from ship 2 to ship 3.

Is anyone interested in continuing this thread?
Click to expand...
I think along those lines regarding ship systems as well, with one exception. The law of falling isn't habits or automatism per se, but rather the points of stability where forces from all sides converge are habits. Law of falling is the tendency towards those established habits, OSIT. Something just occurred to me regarding the three ship systems...1 is sleep, or man 1,2,3. 2 is man 4 who is learning his automatism, and its mechanism. 3 is man 5-7, who makes conscious use of his automatism, as you more or less said in taking control of law of falling. What do you think. BTW, welcome to the forum, and it is customary to write an intro post in the newbie section.

Kris
 
Thanks for the reply and welcome. I will head over to the intro section and make my mark. I am also happy to see this thread still going.

I think what's being said are that the sun and planets and any force of gravity are what we move towards. Eg a chocolate would be the planet or gravitational source, and the ship is us. The chocolate comes into our awareness, and its gravitational pull begins to affect our ship. And we without thinking will pick it up - the ship is pulled towards it.

I am not sure what the gasses and atmospheres are, maybe a fancy packaging or a good smell. And I need to go back and look at how the third ship is reacting, but I think it is being able to sense that you are being pulled in that direction and not let that control the direction of the ship. I haven't worked out how to do that which is what I think he is trying to tell us in how it works.

I don't have enough info on the different types of men, is that from in search of the miraculous?
 
Yep Dracount, descriptions of man 1-7 are found inside of ISOTM as well as G's fundamental ideas and principles. It may help to put aside beelzeebub's tales for the moment and read through ISOTM first because it's a nice intro and primer to G concepts / fourth way.
 
Thanks ajseph. I have gone through ISOTM but not in as much depth as I am going through bt.

I enjoyed it but there was a lot which seemed too cryptic to get anything out of. The different levels of worlds, hydrogen's, foods and the Enneagram with the numbers just to mention a few things was difficult to get anywhere with and I didn't see any way of gaining a better understanding. The descriptions I found were sometimes vague and I was annoyed at the lack of practical illustrations especially when it got to the numbers and world's.

But I did get a lot out of it and it gave me enough interest to find out more.
 
Dracount said:
Thanks for the reply and welcome. I will head over to the intro section and make my mark. I am also happy to see this thread still going.

I think what's being said are that the sun and planets and any force of gravity are what we move towards. Eg a chocolate would be the planet or gravitational source, and the ship is us. The chocolate comes into our awareness, and its gravitational pull begins to affect our ship. And we without thinking will pick it up - the ship is pulled towards it.
Click to expand...

Almost. I think a more precise correlation is that a 'ship' is attention 'piloted' by consciousness. There are differing degrees of consciousness. A 'ship' is a system for 'navigating/traveling' the 'universe', and three were described in the Tales. Remember that BTs is about the psyche. The 'ship' designed by Hariton is a conscious system...Man 5-7. If we are fortunate, we are beginning to form into man 4, or, beginning the 'understanding of the "Law of Falling"', the system of Venoma, which is the mechanics of our machine. Hariton's system would include being able to make conscious use of what is already there...lemonade from lemons. OSIT.

What is it that is in us that 'draws us towards the chocolate'? It is a 'center of gravity', or an 'I'/identification, determined by chance external conditions. Chocolate won't be responded to the same way by everybody.

Combine what you mentioned above with the chapter 'Hypnotism', in particular, the story of 'how-it-was-actually-discovered' in contemporary times. Part of this story ties in with 'centers-of-gravity'.


I am not sure what the gasses and atmospheres are, maybe a fancy packaging or a good smell. And I need to go back and look at how the third ship is reacting, but I think it is being able to sense that you are being pulled in that direction and not let that control the direction of the ship. I haven't worked out how to do that which is what I think he is trying to tell us in how it works.

I don't have enough info on the different types of men, is that from in search of the miraculous?
Click to expand...

Regarding the bolded above, atmosphere....gases...breathing. What does the second being food feed?

Dracount said:
Thanks ajseph. I have gone through ISOTM but not in as much depth as I am going through bt.

I enjoyed it but there was a lot which seemed too cryptic to get anything out of. The different levels of worlds, hydrogen's, foods and the Enneagram with the numbers just to mention a few things was difficult to get anywhere with and I didn't see any way of gaining a better understanding. The descriptions I found were sometimes vague and I was annoyed at the lack of practical illustrations especially when it got to the numbers and world's.

But I did get a lot out of it and it gave me enough interest to find out more.
Click to expand...

What is recorded in ISOTM was from the 'intellectual/scientific' phase of G's teaching on a relatively large scale. Basically he was giving an exposition of the laws of 3 and 7, in the language that his pupils of the time might have understood. I am glad for you that your interest was piqued. :)

FWIW, there is quite a bit of secondary literature worth getting acquainted with, as G pulled his so-called 'scatter-brained-trick' with what he told different pupils throughout his active-teaching-period.

I recommend:

--The Teachings of Gurdjieff - Stanley Nott
--Boyhood with Gurdjieff - Fritz Peters
--Gurdjieff and the Women of the Rope
--Our Life with Mr. Gurdjieff - Thomas de Hartmann
--Idiots in Paris - John G Bennett

This is a good bit to start with :)

Kris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom