Osho - A psychopathic cult leader

[seek10]

But I always remeber this one "the devil is in the details".

Any clues about him?



Here is the documentary that criticize Osho and new-age movement
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6272335793596892362#

Thank you Daco writing this post. As others suggested , you need to question the emotional investment to the osho techiques.

Using the witty interpretation of the religious texts to the current day problems ( deadly in the form of stories) is VERY WIDELY used technique in all the hindu guru's. If Osho is used this technique, know that this is extremely prevalent in hindu religion. Hindu's are proud of their religion, because they are not non materialistic and their hindu religion is older than monotheistic religions and it is clearly mentioned in Veda's. blah blah blah

Thanks for the link of the video. It gave me quite lot of food for thought. In fact I was horrified to the fact that the entire yoga/meditation invasion to west as a conspiracy and how cunning and deceptively lied it as body and mind development tool, which infact is the New World Religion serving the NWO.

Though it is clearly made by concerned bible loving christians 25 years back, It have very valid points, though all the conclusions are correct. so I thought I will write the some interesting points.


1. systemic invasion of hindiusm into the west at the behest of Vishwa hindu parishad. -
I am still not sure that VHP is controls these popular spiritual guru's.

2. All the mantra's and yoga postures are not only physical and mental and they are deliberatly induced to create hypnosis of calm ness
- Yes
3. Repeating Mantra as a means of possessing the disciple's mind and surrendering once thinking faculties. - this is little scary

3. All yoga christian disciples are led to pray to hindu gods. calling it as a ritual, other way of religious conversion - I observed this, but never gave the religious invasion angle to it.

4. Mind blanking - part of mixing with the god. Yogic way is controlling/developing the mind, but blanking , this comes TM a perversion.

5. Movie Gandhi is a means to making hinduism acceptable to west - Probably right.

6.It even accuses Gandhi as a black magician and calls non-voilent movment is a trick and sextual predator - I have lot of reservations of this interpretation. I think this accusation is a BS.

7. Encouraging people to abandon the children for the sake of god and blaming it on karma - Yup!. this is there.

8. Lack of empathy to other human being or poverty ridden neighbours of this ashrams in the name of fate. - This is true and it is selective attention of these guru's
9. stealing the christian words and rebrand it as a hindu spiritual words. - I am not sure about this.

10. Rober Muller who is behind all these eastern yoga and meditation to come under UN as One world religion as a conditioning for ONE WORLD ORDER - Wow! What a grand deception.
This rightly falls under blanking the mind stuff and be happy all these guru's teaching right into the pockets of the NWO. I know this conceptually, but never linked it as a part of the
conspiracy. Psychopathic business leaders makes rules and their employees are subjected to TM for mental calmness. they have new effective new age robot whose mind is in the control of the Boss.


11. UN and brahmakumari's link for the world peace. Used for the software for the mind for surrender.



Video's of osho's programs



planetary initiative
fruit of religion and mystism in full blossom and whose end result is acceptance of new leader anti christ.
comparing the Hinduism to the paganism Hitler followed and claiming Hitler got all the ideas from Hinduism. It claims lot of guru's praised hitler for killing jews .
swasthika link .

Yoga/Meditation as a Spiritual deception and the movements from india as another tactics of the Nazi's is not only horrifying, but sounds like a plausible too.


The solution this video proposes is blind belief in Bible, the place where the problem started. This completes the cycle.

 

[realitybugll]

So this guy is definitely a fraud I think. That is the conclusion I came to when I read this thread in the past.

I just discovered today that Osho dictated this book "books I have loved" which covers his opinions thoughts on over 150 books. Many are by Ouspensky, and quite a few concerning Gurdjieff.

I just think its strange for a disinfo artist, and I forget a lot about him so maybe this isn't the right term, to be so well read. But I am thinking... he probably didn't read this books. The ones that I know of on the list, some of the classics, are long and tough reads (to me). not to mention the others by Ouspensky. So maybe he didn't read them.

here is the link. _http://www.osho.be/New-Osho-NL/EnglBooks/BooksIHave.htm

I think I might try and find this book. It would be at least interesting to examine his commentaries. I mean anyone claiming to have read all these books on his list, I would presume to be quite an interesting guy. So I would like to see what I make of him after reading his commentaries.

 

[dantem]

Thanks Endymion for the report!

I was reading Osho's books more than a decade ago, found it interesting at the time, but after going through the cass site and Gurdjieff this guy started looking more and more like a Cia program, sort of. Never picked up those books again, so far.

 

[seek10]

Thanks Endymion for the report!

I was reading Osho's books more than a decade ago, found it interesting at the time, but after going through the cass site and Gurdjieff this guy started looking more and more like a Cia program, sort of. Never picked up those books again, so far.

If one look at how escaped from india and silently got shelter in US heartland with all the security, it has complete hallmarks of the CIA operation. May be he started as a good guy and lost the control and STS took over. Like WikiLeaks.

 

[realitybugll]

Something has annoyed me this morning. I found this Osho guy again by doing a web search. I was searching 'gurdjieff on dreams' for the heck of it because I realized he says very little on actual dreaming from what I read.

I found an interesting talk between two people and it is on Gurdjieff and dreams and very interesting.

Also I found this Osho quote

"Osho – Gurdjieff, one of the buddhas of this century, used to give a certain meditation to his disciples which is very significant. He used to say to his disciples, “If you can remember in a dream that ‘This is a dream,’ then you are on the very threshold of transformation.”

But it is very difficult to remember in a dream that it is a dream. When you are in a dream you believe that it is the truth. And every night you are in a dream, and every morning you come back and you see and you know that it was all false. And again when you fall asleep the dream is there and you start believing in it again, as if you never learned anything.

But how to remember? He created a small device. He would give this device to a few advanced disciples: that in the daytime… because you cannot do anything while you are asleep and in a dream. The preparation has to be done in the daytime; then you have a little bit of awareness.

He used to tell them, “As many times as you can manage — brushing your teeth in the morning — just put your left hand on your head and say, ‘This is all dream.’ Walking on the street, put your left hand again on your head and say, ‘This is all dream.’ Let your left hand and the putting of it on your head become associated with the idea that ‘This is all dream.’

“Repeated many times, whenever you put your left hand on your head, immediately the idea will come: ‘This is all dream.’ Or whenever you say, ‘This is all dream,’ automatically your left hand will go on your head. This has to be practiced for at least three to nine months in the daytime.

“And then,” Gurdjieff used to say, “one day suddenly in a dream you will see it happen: the dream is there, and you put your hand on your head, your left hand, and suddenly you say, ‘This is all dream.’ And the moment you say it the dream disappears, you are fully awake. The dream cannot exist if you know that it is a dream.”

And that is a great experience when it happens — you can try it. When it really happens, that one night your hand goes to your head while you are asleep, while you are dreaming, and suddenly the idea comes that “This is all dream….” And you are immediately fully awake and you find your hand on your head. It has become so associated; it is like a conditioned reflex.

But one thing has become clear: if you can remember, “This is all dream,” the dream disappears. The dream can only disappear by your remembering that this is a dream; reality cannot disappear. You can go on remembering, “This is all dream,” but you know all the time this is not so. Philosophically you can go on repeating, “This is all dream,” and you can be very cunning philosophically."

I'm sure this is a lie and completely false. A quick search and I cannot find this quote from Gurdjieff at any other source. Also it just does not seem like something Gurdjieff would say. I mean the last phrase seems like an insult to the teaching. the Work has do with the understanding that we are "asleep" in a "dream" not vocalizing "I am dreaming" for the purpose to have a lucid dream! And so Osho says by saying "this is all dream... you can be very cunning philosophically'. so which is he talking about, the aforementioned technique or the basis of the Gurdjieff teaching? This is kind of ridiculous just to lie like this and say Gurdjieff said something he did not! I guess it could give Gurdjieff teaching more publicity but it just feels wrong to do... I'm not happy with this Osho guy...

 

[thevenusian]

Something has annoyed me this morning. I found this Osho guy again by doing a web search. I was searching 'gurdjieff on dreams' for the heck of it because I realized he says very little on actual dreaming from what I read.

You can find out more about Osho by searching on 'Rajneesh', which was his name previously. I wouldn't trust anything the guy ever said about anything.

 

[Renaissance]

Yeah I don't trust Osho's material at all either. The stuff Osho said about dreaming may have been his misinterpretation of how Gurdjieff was describing the observation of our mechanical behavior, or in other words noticing we are dreaming.

 

[Avi]

Something has annoyed me this morning. I found this Osho guy again by doing a web search. I was searching 'gurdjieff on dreams' for the heck of it because I realized he says very little on actual dreaming from what I read.

I found an interesting talk between two people and it is on Gurdjieff and dreams and very interesting.

Also I found this Osho quote

"Osho – Gurdjieff, one of the buddhas of this century, used to give a certain meditation to his disciples which is very significant. He used to say to his disciples, “If you can remember in a dream that ‘This is a dream,’ then you are on the very threshold of transformation.”

But it is very difficult to remember in a dream that it is a dream. When you are in a dream you believe that it is the truth. And every night you are in a dream, and every morning you come back and you see and you know that it was all false. And again when you fall asleep the dream is there and you start believing in it again, as if you never learned anything.

But how to remember? He created a small device. He would give this device to a few advanced disciples: that in the daytime… because you cannot do anything while you are asleep and in a dream. The preparation has to be done in the daytime; then you have a little bit of awareness.

He used to tell them, “As many times as you can manage — brushing your teeth in the morning — just put your left hand on your head and say, ‘This is all dream.’ Walking on the street, put your left hand again on your head and say, ‘This is all dream.’ Let your left hand and the putting of it on your head become associated with the idea that ‘This is all dream.’

“Repeated many times, whenever you put your left hand on your head, immediately the idea will come: ‘This is all dream.’ Or whenever you say, ‘This is all dream,’ automatically your left hand will go on your head. This has to be practiced for at least three to nine months in the daytime.

“And then,” Gurdjieff used to say, “one day suddenly in a dream you will see it happen: the dream is there, and you put your hand on your head, your left hand, and suddenly you say, ‘This is all dream.’ And the moment you say it the dream disappears, you are fully awake. The dream cannot exist if you know that it is a dream.”

And that is a great experience when it happens — you can try it. When it really happens, that one night your hand goes to your head while you are asleep, while you are dreaming, and suddenly the idea comes that “This is all dream….” And you are immediately fully awake and you find your hand on your head. It has become so associated; it is like a conditioned reflex.

But one thing has become clear: if you can remember, “This is all dream,” the dream disappears. The dream can only disappear by your remembering that this is a dream; reality cannot disappear. You can go on remembering, “This is all dream,” but you know all the time this is not so. Philosophically you can go on repeating, “This is all dream,” and you can be very cunning philosophically."

I'm sure this is a lie and completely false. A quick search and I cannot find this quote from Gurdjieff at any other source. Also it just does not seem like something Gurdjieff would say. I mean the last phrase seems like an insult to the teaching. the Work has do with the understanding that we are "asleep" in a "dream" not vocalizing "I am dreaming" for the purpose to have a lucid dream! And so Osho says by saying "this is all dream... you can be very cunning philosophically'. so which is he talking about, the aforementioned technique or the basis of the Gurdjieff teaching? This is kind of ridiculous just to lie like this and say Gurdjieff said something he did not! I guess it could give Gurdjieff teaching more publicity but it just feels wrong to do... I'm not happy with this Osho guy...

I suppose it all depends on how we perceive.

I do not know much at all about Osho, but when I read the part you put in bold above

Philosophically you can go on repeating, “This is all dream,” and you can be very cunning philosophically."

I understood him to mean that we can confuse and fool ourselves with words, the mind can be very cunning philosophically, and if we merely go on repeating "this is all dream" versus coming to awake, that is, have the experience and to know from action (the technique, or any technique in my view) that we are 'dreaming'.

I have never experimented with this technique, as I said I know little of Osho, but I recall that Castaneda describes a similar technique, with the intent of gaining control of our awareness regardless of the state of perception. That technique Castaneda describes involves finding one's hands in one's dreams and has something to do with being aware of the relative value of perception. "This" is "real" because our perception says it is real but once our perceptions change, what was once as 'real' as concrete, so real we would swear by it, tends to dissipate as there are many levels of awareness, each one involving a different level of reality.

When I was younger I made a short-film based upon the work of Castaneda and really liked the quote ascribed to Don Juan where he says "Reality is a feeling."

I am curious though if you don't like Osho why the desire to "run away with your horses."

You say "I am sure this is a complete lie and false" but then follow it up with "A quick search . . . "

So a quick search discerns what is true and false? I merely suggest that perhaps it is not possible to get
'the truth' without digging deep down.

Please realize and believe me when I say I have no desire whatsoever to 'defend' Osho, rather for YOU, my friend, what kind of affect is this truly having on your perception? It seems to bother you for some reason,
I am merely curious as to why?

With kind regards,

~Herakles

 

[seek10]

Something has annoyed me this morning. I found this Osho guy again by doing a web search. I was searching 'gurdjieff on dreams' for the heck of it because I realized he says very little on actual dreaming from what I read.

I found an interesting talk between two people and it is on Gurdjieff and dreams and very interesting.
..
Philosophically you can go on repeating, “This is all dream,” and you can be very cunning philosophically."[/b]

I'm sure this is a lie and completely false. A quick search and I cannot find this quote from Gurdjieff at any other source. Also it just does not seem like something Gurdjieff would say. I mean the last phrase seems like an insult to the teaching. the Work has do with the understanding that we are "asleep" in a "dream" not vocalizing "I am dreaming" for the purpose to have a lucid dream! And so Osho says by saying "this is all dream... you can be very cunning philosophically'. so which is he talking about, the aforementioned technique or the basis of the Gurdjieff teaching? This is kind of ridiculous just to lie like this and say Gurdjieff said something he did not! I guess it could give Gurdjieff teaching more publicity but it just feels wrong to do... I'm not happy with this Osho guy...
[/quote]

If you read any of the lucid dreaming books,you will see there are some techniques to remember the dream. One popular techniques is during waking time repeatedly look at ur palm and count fingers and ask your self whether you are dreaming or awake. This becomes ur second habit to identify whether u r in dream or awake. In the dream if you are awake they call it lucid dreaming and once you realise that there are some techniques on how to do some maneuvers like astral projections etc. robert bruce wrote on astral projections. But this has nothing to do the actual spiritual growth. this is all gimmicks. Castenada wrote widely about dreaming, stages in it and pitfalls in it.I think it is not pleasant to recklessly do it because u have the techniques and energy.

If osho says this is the technique ,that proves level of his knowledge. this is has nothing to self remembering or spiritual growth. another mental gymnastic. I have seen many of the more popular indian guru's has similar phenomenon promotions and make people hooked to the guru in anticipation of some thing.

linking this is to Gurdjieff is another sirty thing - muddying the Gurdjieff's reputation in the form of perceived association.
Just my 2 cents

 

[realitybugll]

If you read any of the lucid dreaming books,you will see there are some techniques to remember the dream. One popular techniques is during waking time repeatedly look at ur palm and count fingers and ask your self whether you are dreaming or awake. This becomes ur second habit to identify whether u r in dream or awake. In the dream if you are awake they call it lucid dreaming and once you realise that there are some techniques on how to do some maneuvers like astral projections etc. robert bruce wrote on astral projections. But this has nothing to do the actual spiritual growth. this is all gimmicks. Castenada wrote widely about dreaming, stages in it and pitfalls in it.I think it is not pleasant to recklessly do it because u have the techniques and energy.

If osho says this is the technique ,that proves level of his knowledge. this is has nothing to self remembering or spiritual growth. another mental gymnastic. I have seen many of the more popular indian guru's has similar phenomenon promotions and make people hooked to the guru in anticipation of some thing.

Right... Osho is essentially explaining a technique that is used to induce lucid dreams. Well, it is correct to say, Osho is misquoting Gurdjieff on this technique. What you wrote above on this habit of repeatedly saying "I am in a dream" is my understanding also. In the dream consciousness, lets call it that, for whatever reason a person will carry out normal everyday habits. On the off chance that this vocalization is carried out usually at least some degree of lucidity will be spurred even if it is lost quickly. Another technique (maybe better) Is to do reality checks such that when someone strange occurs in real life you make it a habbit to ask yourself at this moment "Wow! am I dreaming?" And this could be a small thing like misplacing the keys, someone not answering when you call them, and expected them too etc. Maybe this is more effective than the random "this is a dream" checks. but I have heard of both.

Thank you for explaining but I thought I would because I was not very clear in my original post. What I found interesting is how Osho "applied" this to the Gurdjieff teaching. It is true there is some commonality in the bare literal sense. For the Gurdjieff teaching recognizing you are "dreaming" is very important. In this Lucid dream technique you do the same thing and say "I am in a dream" but this has nothing to do with understanding... just a method or habit.

linking this is to Gurdjieff is another sirty thing - muddying the Gurdjieff's reputation in the form of perceived association.

Yes it is complete misrepresentation of the teaching. It is cunning perhaps the way he attributes this lucid dream technique to Gurdjieff. It would be one thing for him to try and teach or explain how becoming aware in a dream is a part of the Gurdjieff teaching (I don't think it can be, but at least this would be genuine. But no, he misquotes Gurdjieff too my knowledge so this is a deliberate lie and misrepresentation.

Philosophically you can go on repeating, “This is all dream,” and you can be very cunning philosophically."

I understood him to mean that we can confuse and fool ourselves with words, the mind can be very cunning philosophically, and if we merely go on repeating "this is all dream" versus coming to awake, that is, have the experience and to know from action (the technique, or any technique in my view) that we are 'dreaming'.

I think it is interesting indeed that by saying to oneself in waking consciousness that one is dreaming, can spur lucidity, becoming conscious in a dream. This does seem kind of cunning and fits well to a degree with the Castaneda teaching. So I think what you wrote above, if I understand correctly, is a more accurate understanding of Osho's meaning. That literally the method he described is cunning. The method is just a method though it is not philosophy. The "cunning" aspect is how and why it works...which Osho does not explain at all... so when he says "cunning philosophy" what is he really saying...not sure.

The way I interpreted it first was a condescending remark, veiled I guess, of the Gurdjieff teaching. Because in the abstract sense recognizing "this is all dream" is part of the work, and then he is saying it is cunning philosophy. calling the Work cunning philosophy doesn't sit well with me lol. Though I guess it could be interpreted as a compliment.

The truth about the matter IMO is that we know Osho held no respect for Gurdjieff teaching... maybe for his success or some other quality but not the teaching. Even though he "revered" the man in the public sense. So maybe I am reading in between the lines... and I am influenced by my already negative association with Osho. But I can tell you having to stumble upon this "gurdjieff quote" this morning annoyed me. I am also thinking that Osho did publicly criticize Gurdjieff and other students.

I really do not know much about Osho--other people in the thread provided interesting information though and have direct experiences. The best I can make of the situation is that Osho understood the effect that the teaching had on others. He could understand that people are searching for something, and so he provided some excitement. And it is all basically disinfo..complete lies I just came upon this morning. but he takes advantage of these people who are searching for something.

And There is many people who give not so positive accounts of Gurdjieff, Gurdjieff's son for instance,De Val, ..and the child under the custody of Margaret Anderson, Fritz Peters, who lived shortly at the Prieuré. But at least I think these are honest accounts. subjective, but honest, not deliberate lie.

Still can't understand the ideas that lead to association lucid dream technique with Gurdjieff.

Here's the link I found, the conversation on Gurdjieff concerning dreams which is interesting and more objective I think. Incase you want to read it Herakles, or anyone else.
_http://www.gurdjieff-internet.com/article_print.php?ID=231&W=14

 

[obyvatel]

Because in the abstract sense recognizing "this is all dream" is part of the work, and then he is saying it is cunning philosophy. calling the Work cunning philosophy doesn't sit well with me lol. Though I guess it could be interpreted as a compliment.

Gurdjieff referred to the 4th Way as the way of the sly man.

[quote author=ISOTM]
"The fourth way is sometimes called the way of the sly man. The 'sly man' knows some secret which the fakir, monk, and yogi do not know. How the 'sly man' learned this secret—it is not known. Perhaps he found it in some old books, perhaps he inherited it, perhaps he bought it, perhaps he stole it from someone. It makes no difference. The 'sly man' knows the secret and with its help outstrips the fakir, the monk, and the yogi.
[/quote]

 

[realitybugll]

Thanks for that quote obyvatel. In the back of my mind I think I agreed that the Fourth Way can be called cunning philosophy or at least cunning because I have encountered that description you provided. It's an interesting quote. It has me wondering who calls it "the way of the sly man". this name for the teaching automatically has some negative connotation for me. Then I start to think "I don't know THE secret" and so I don't like this label. but it's interesting...

 

[obyvatel]

Thanks for that quote obyvatel. In the back of my mind I think I agreed that the Fourth Way can be called cunning philosophy or at least cunning because I have encountered that description you provided. It's an interesting quote. It has me wondering who calls it "the way of the sly man". this name for the teaching automatically has some negative connotation for me. Then I start to think "I don't know THE secret" and so I don't like this label. but it's interesting...

I think the description "way of the sly man" is appropriate because 4th Way insists full participation in regular life - the life in the Matrix (as in the movie Matrix) - unlike other Ways which demand a separation from regular life. It is "sly" in the sense that a person following the 4th Way participates in life as an act - he/she is not (ideally) identified with the roles that life demands of him/her . It is related to the theme of "sincerity" - one has to learn to be consciously (and strategically) sincere. Mechanical sincerity (which is often a lack of control over one's self) to the ways of life and its roles are detrimental to personal development in the 4th Way.

But a man can easily lose his way unless he serves a higher ideal like the Work in this path. The following G quote regarding sincerity could be pertinent.

[quote author=ISOTM]
But there are different kinds of sincerity. There is clever sincerity and there is stupid sincerity, just as there is clever insincerity and stupid insincerity. Both stupid sincerity and stupid insincerity are equally mechanical. But if a man wishes to learn to be cleverly sincere, he must be sincere first of all with his teacher and with people who are senior to him in the work. This will be 'clever sincerity.' But here it is necessary to note that sincerity must not become 'lack of considering.' Lack of considering in relation to the teacher or in relation to those whom the teacher has appointed, as I have said already, destroys all possibility of any work. If he wishes to learn to be cleverly insincere he must be insincere about the work and he must learn to be silent when he ought to be silent with people outside it, who can neither understand nor appreciate it. But sincerity in the group is an absolute demand, because, if a man continues to lie in the group in the same way as he lies to himself and to others in life, he will never learn to distinguish the truth from a lie.
[/quote]

 

[Voyageur]

Thanks for that quote obyvatel. In the back of my mind I think I agreed that the Fourth Way can be called cunning philosophy or at least cunning because I have encountered that description you provided. It's an interesting quote. It has me wondering who calls it "the way of the sly man". this name for the teaching automatically has some negative connotation for me. Then I start to think "I don't know THE secret" and so I don't like this label. but it's interesting...

I think the description "way of the sly man" is appropriate because 4th Way insists full participation in regular life - the life in the Matrix (as in the movie Matrix) - unlike other Ways which demand a separation from regular life. It is "sly" in the sense that a person following the 4th Way participates in life as an act - he/she is not (ideally) identified with the roles that life demands of him/her . It is related to the theme of "sincerity" - one has to learn to be consciously (and strategically) sincere. Mechanical sincerity (which is often a lack of control over one's self) to the ways of life and its roles are detrimental to personal development in the 4th Way.

But a man can easily lose his way unless he serves a higher ideal like the Work in this path. The following G quote regarding sincerity could be pertinent.

Some important distinctions and quotes here obyvatel. This made me think of the Sufi path that G describes, if I’m remembering this correctly, about the people in one of the places he sought out - The community in everyday life; non separation, yet on their decided path/way.

[quote author=ISOTM]
But there are different kinds of sincerity. There is clever sincerity and there is stupid sincerity, just as there is clever insincerity and stupid insincerity. Both stupid sincerity and stupid insincerity are equally mechanical. But if a man wishes to learn to be cleverly sincere, he must be sincere first of all with his teacher and with people who are senior to him in the work. This will be 'clever sincerity.' But here it is necessary to note that sincerity must not become 'lack of considering.' Lack of considering in relation to the teacher or in relation to those whom the teacher has appointed, as I have said already, destroys all possibility of any work. If he wishes to learn to be cleverly insincere he must be insincere about the work and he must learn to be silent when he ought to be silent with people outside it, who can neither understand nor appreciate it. But sincerity in the group is an absolute demand, because, if a man continues to lie in the group in the same way as he lies to himself and to others in life, he will never learn to distinguish the truth from a lie.
[/quote]

 

[Cosmos]

I discovered this guy (OSHO) after a post on Facebook today where he talked about Gurdjieff.
My first reaction was that the way he presented himself and at the same time talked about Gurdjeff Stuff doesn't fit at all to a truly "enlightened" man. If any of his "teachings" were at all even a bit like fourth way teachings alla Gurdjieff the fact that he presented himself like he did and talked the way he did to people is proof that his "teachings" weren't fourth way at all.

another self proclaimed Guru in my opinion.