Thorbiorn said:
When Laura writes “that everything isn't exactly for everybody”, this goes, in my honest opinion, for other books on the reading list as well. Having most of them, I know some of them are and will be read much less intensively than Beelzebub’s Tales, while there will be books I shall need for further understanding and clarification, which are not on the list.
Nemo said:
I absolutely agree! The same could probably be applied to the suggested sequence in which said books should be read. If I knew I would suffer from amnesia soon, I`d suggest to myself to read
the recommended books in a different order more approbriate to my mentality and "pre-existing knowledge"( or better stated, lack of).
Like Anart sez, that's a slippery slope.
Actually, the reading list I created is based on long observation of people in our groups and on the forum as well as from the emails people write to me. Those books are the ones best suited to convey many of the concepts Gurdjieff talks about in more modern terms and often with reference to physiology so that you really understand how things are in your machine, and why.
I also put the MOST ESSENTIAL FOR EVERYONE volumes at the top of the list. If you don't grok the concepts in those first half dozen or so books, NOTHING ELSE WILL MAKE SENSE!
Sorry for shouting there, but I really want to emphasize this to everyone.
Beelzebub's Tales is on the reading list, but it's not at the top.