Session 09 June 2009

[Divide by Zero]

Thanks E. I value the work. So I know what to do now.

In this case, I would rather save the money, maybe to donate to SOTT than do the class, especially with what Laura said how she isn't sure about the class.

 

[anart]

Time & money often comes up on the forum, and it always makes me think of Gurdjieff's words:

In Search of the Miraculous, p. 19

I'm not sure it's wise to directly compare G's work and its value to the Art of Living course. I don't think they are objectively equal in any way.

Thanks E. I value the work. So I know what to do now.

Again, I'm not sure what valuing the work has to do - directly - with the AoL course. I think this might be a case where discernment is necessary.

 

[Peam]

Gurdjieff also didn't tell pupils when meetings will be held in advance, but rather on the 'spur of the moment', like in the afternoon before the evening meeting. Some might say he purposefully inconvenienced people so that effort played a part in their attendance. This might be so, but as a 'spur of the moment' person myself, I didn't necessarily consider that to be the case.

From my subjective impression of what I’ve learnt about Gurdjieff, I can’t honestly place him as a 'spur of the moment' person’. He likely knew exactly what he was doing. What better way to test which pupils valued the work and which pupils still preferred ‘A’ influences than whether or not they were prepared to drop their ‘A’ influence pursuits at short notice, in order to pursue ‘B’ influences at the meetings.

At the same time, he did not desire and ought not—he emphasized this—to spend his own money on the organization of the work. His work was not, and could not be, of a charitable nature and his pupils themselves ought to find the means for the hire of apartments where they could meet; for carrying out experiments; and so on.

I’m sure I read somewhere where, although G emphasized this, he did in fact help some of his pupils financially who couldn’t meet the costs. I’m sorry but I can’t remember where I read it and I could be mistaken.

 

[Gaby]

I had a chance to review more articles about the breathing exercises.

Pranayama breathing and Sudarshan Kriya studies show that there is increased melatonin production, there is vagus nerve stimulation and the benefit of stimulating the parasympathetic system and acetylcholine through the vagus nerve is also well documented. There are more theta and delta waves in the electrical activity of the brain, the "parasympathetic state". Anti-oxidative stress benefits and other benefits as well. And even though is not as good as electro convulsive therapy (!) for treating depression, it is good enough, almost as good as taking the drug imipramine...
So even though it can bring calmness into your life and bring other improvements, it doesn't necessarily mean it "enlightens" you. Actually, anti-depressive treatments puts people out of touch with the reality. The Corruption of Reality...

"Complacent robots" its actually another way of putting it too.

The Cs said: "Overcoming emotions so that one is not affected by what is out there and inside is little more than becoming an automaton."

Those who suffer are those who are more in touch with the reality. It is like shattering all your positive illusions about yourself and the world into million pieces. Positive illusions, which makes us cope, are themselves susceptible to the impact of reality, which sometimes shatters them, leaving a bleak world in its wake. That is why people tend to defend their sacred cows. And that is also why knowledge protects.

Among the studies it was said that with the breathing exercises the brain has also more plasticity.

plasticity 1: the quality or state of being plastic ; especially : capacity for being molded or altered2: the ability to retain a shape attained by pressure deformation3: the capacity of organisms with the same genotype to vary in developmental pattern, in phenotype, or in behavior according to varying environmental conditions4: the capacity for continuous alteration of the neural pathways and synapses of the living brain and nervous system in response to experience.

I personally find the word fascinating. Its like having a helping tool to rewire your brain which can be a great thing depending on who does it... Without knowledge of the self and the world, people in general will be more suggestible and programmable by the Control System. And people are programmed by the Control System within and without and re-act accordingly...

Very few beings really seek knowledge in this world - few really ask. On the contrary, they try to wring from the unknown the answers they have already shaped in their own minds - justifications, confirmations, forms of consolation without which they can't go on. To really ask is to open the door to a whirlwind. The answer may annihilate the question and the questioner.

 

[Psalehesost]

I’m sure I read somewhere where, although G emphasized this, he did in fact help some of his pupils financially who couldn’t meet the costs. I’m sorry but I can’t remember where I read it and I could be mistaken.

The very same book:

Those who could not pay or who could pay very little always understood that they could not count upon getting something for nothing, and that G.'s work, his journeys to Petersburg, and the time that he and others gave to the work cost money. Only those who had money did not understand and did not want to understand this.
"Does this mean that we must pay to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?" they said. "People do not pay nor is money asked for such things. Christ said to his disciples: 'Take neither purse nor scrip,' and you want a thousand roubles. A very good business could be made of it. Suppose that you had a hundred members. This would already make a hundred thousand, and if there were two hundred, three hundred? Three hundred thousand a year is very good money."
G. always smiled when I told him about talks like this.
"Take neither purse nor scrip! And need not a railway ticket be taken either? The hotel paid? You see how much falsehood and hypocrisy there is here. No, even if we needed no money at all it would still be necessary to keep this payment. It rids us at once of many useless people. Nothing shows up people so much as their attitude towards money. They are ready to waste as much as you like on their own personal fantasies but they have no valuation whatever of another person's labor. I must work for them and give them gratis everything that they vouchsafe to take from me. 'How is it possible to trade in knowledge? This ought to be free.' It is precisely for this reason that the demand for this payment is necessary. Some people will never pass this barrier. And if they do not pass this one, it means that they will never pass another. Besides, there are other considerations. Afterwards you will see."
The other considerations were very simple ones. Many people indeed could not pay. And although in principle G. put the question very strictly, in practice he never refused anybody on the grounds that they had no money. And it was found out later that he even supported many of his pupils. The people who paid a thousand roubles paid not only for themselves but for others.

 

[Peam]

The very same book:

Yep. Thanks Csayeursost, thats it. :)

 

[Niall]

I'm not sure it's wise to directly compare G's work and its value to the Art of Living course. I don't think they are objectively equal in any way.

I initally thought the same thing: that E had made a mistake equating the question of value in G's work with my mentioning that money was an issue for me as I weighed up whether or not to do the AoL course. But then I wondered if E was making a general point that money shouldn't be the primary issue when evaluating something work-related or potentially useful towards the work.

I think this might be a case where discernment is necessary.

I decided not to undertake the course in the end for a blend of reasons; money was the least of them.

 

[anart]

I initally thought the same thing: that E had made a mistake equating the question of value in G's work with my mentioning that money was an issue for me as I weighed up whether or not to do the AoL course. But then I wondered if E was making a general point that money shouldn't be the primary issue when evaluating something work-related or potentially useful towards the work.

I agree. I just think in this particular case, at this particular 'time', it is quite important to make the distinction.

 

[lara4unow]

Thanks for the feedback jacksun,

I thought of Stonehenge too, however, I am not as familiar with the specifics of the type and placement of the stones. Stonehenge has always been an intriguing mystery to me. The C’s used ingredients or recipe as a choices of words in their response. I am a chef by hobby and the proper balance of ingredients is the key to the success of the final product. In the case of creating a transceiver to our higher self through our chakra system, the ingredients are important but, as in cooking, the recipe depends on the proper amounts, the sequence of blending and the time it takes for all of the ingredients to become one, during cooking, cooling or just sitting together. For me, the C’s using a cooking metaphor is a significant clue.

I suspect we will discover that other PaleoChristian groups also had recipes for receiving coded communication from higher sources. My question would be to discover what content similarities they all share. I suspect that our modern version will be our own recipe yet to be discovered. As the C’s said:

A: The knowledge of realms that all men comprehended before the "fall". Paleochristianity
Bogomils and the Cathars

Let’s imagine that for us to “sing to the Gods”, we will need: several in our group gathering with knowledge from an objective thought process, the correct tonal rill source to sing with us, at a specific location on the earth for us to gather, in a specific arrangement, performing a sequence of movements or a choreographed dance, while at the same time we are all visualizing a specific sacred geometric figure or shape and we are all breathing together rhythmically using the proper technique. And as you reminded us, the C’s said

Resonating to tonal rill, the otherwise unteachable could obtain wisdoms entered psychically through their crown charka tranceiving system.

Wow! This could accelerate the growth of many other people but in what direction?

The recipe above is like a Greatful Dead concert or a gathering of people at a Guru event like AOL or others I have attended where music is played while everyone is sounding a specific mantra. I also flash on references to Gurdieff gatherings where there is dancing to the music he composed. The whirling dervishes, I could go on and on but the mystery remains, which of these gatherings actually became a conduit (portal) to communicate with higher sources and was the communication to higher light or STO or to dark or STS sources?

Like a recipe one bad ingredient can spoil the soup. I bet the presence of a hallucinogenic drug in the bodies of the people was the culprit at the Dead concerts. It might also be helpful to discover the one or more bad ingredients in similar situations. Maybe the guru was a STS reaction machine or the musicians were not playing the correct tone. Anyway, it is fun to come up with modern renditions of Stonehenge and why they do or don’t work to receive network status and to which network they connect to.

More to come on this thought process

 

[Erna]

[quote author=Peam]
From my subjective impression of what I’ve learnt about Gurdjieff, I can’t honestly place him as a 'spur of the moment' person’. He likely knew exactly what he was doing. What better way to test which pupils valued the work and which pupils still preferred ‘A’ influences than whether or not they were prepared to drop their ‘A’ influence pursuits at short notice, in order to pursue ‘B’ influences at the meetings.
[/quote]

In Search of the Miraculous, p. 37-38

I did not understand everything about the way these meetings were arranged. It seemed to me that G. was making much of it unnecessarily difficult. For instance, he seldom allowed me to fix a meeting beforehand. A former meeting usually ended with the announcement that G. was returning to Moscow the following day. On the following morning he
would say that he had decided to stay till the evening. The whole day was passed in cafés where people came who wanted to see G. It was only in the evening, an hour or an hour and a half before we usually began our meetings, that he would say to me:
"Why not have a meeting tonight? Ring up those who wanted to come and tell them we shall be at such and such a place."

I used to rush to the telephone but, of course, at seven or half-past seven in the evening, everybody was already engaged and I could only collect a few people. And some who lived outside Petersburg, in Tsarskoye, etc., never succeeded in coming to our meetings.

A great deal I afterwards understood differently from the way I did then. And G.'s chief motives became clearer to me. He by no means wanted to make it easy for people to become acquainted with his ideas. On the contrary he considered that only by overcoming difficulties, however irrelevant and accidental, could people value his ideas.

"People do not value what is easily come by," he said. "And if a man has already felt something, believe me, he will sit waiting all day at the telephone in case he should be invited. Or he will himself ring up and ask and inquire. And whoever expects, to be asked, and asked beforehand so that he can arrange his own affairs, let him go on expecting, . Of course, for those who are not in Petersburg this is certainly difficult. But we cannot help it. Later on, perhaps, we shall have definite meetings on fixed days. At present it is impossible to do this. People must show themselves and their valuation of what they have heard."

All this and much else besides still remained for me at that time half-open to question.

I think in addition to what’s already been said, and the value Gurdjieff placed on someone’s commitment, I think something can also be said about our chance universe / accidental universe, and Gurdjieff’s understanding of it. Going with ‘spur of the moment’ impulses, one self’s or someone else’s suggestion, often lands one in company or situations one wouldn’t ordinarily end up in, with some interesting consequences and experiences. Not sure if it’s just my possibly subjective impression and if the value I place on it has merit or not.

I get the impression that going with the universe and the current spirit was intentional, and the people outside Petersburg who were unable to attend was just unfortunate. Again, it might just be me. You know how the best get togethers are always those accidental unplanned ones. I don't know, for me there is just something in going with the moment, the current spirit. Maybe Gurdjieff felt like harnessing the current vibe in the air, like a dance with universal energy.

[quote author=Anart]
I just think in this particular case, at this particular 'time', it is quite important to make the distinction.
[/quote]

I’m with you.

 

[Peam]

I get the impression that going with the universe and the current spirit was intentional, and the people outside Petersburg who were unable to attend was just unfortunate. Again, it might just be me. You know how the best get togethers are always those accidental unplanned ones. I don't know, for me there is just something in going with the moment, the current spirit. Maybe Gurdjieff felt like harnessing the current vibe in the air, like a dance with universal energy.

We can all suddenly decide to do something, even Gurdjieff. Making spur of the moment decisions which disrupt the plans of others by harnessing the current vibe in the air and dancing with universal energy, doesn’t sound like a conscious aim or intent to me for some reason. It sounds more like floating in the wind like a leaf, and it doesn't seem very externally considerate to me.

I think the devil is in the details. There’s a big difference between Gurdjieff’s intent, than if we were to suddenly phone a few friends on a vibe, to come round for a chin-wag to see what may become of it. But that’s just my current impression, and I could be totally misreading it.

 

[Laurentien2]

Hello Lara4unow, you have brought an idea that I had for some time and the last session just gave it more volume. And now you come with this:

Let’s imagine that for us to “sing to the Gods”, we will need: several in our group gathering with knowledge from an objective thought process, the correct tonal rill source to sing with us, at a specific location on the earth for us to gather, in a specific arrangement, performing a sequence of movements or a choreographed dance, while at the same time we are all visualizing a specific sacred geometric figure or shape and we are all breathing together rhythmically using the proper technique. And as you reminded us, the C’s said

here is my thought, Laura as connected whit the "C", her in the future, through the use of the board after year of session showing amazing perseverance and dedication. She as grooved a channel a "connection" enabling her to become a "receiver" for 6 density though form the "C", an then became a "transmitter" through the web. In turn, we connecting to the web,we become receiver, connecting our self by acquiring Knowledge (light) we begin to "groove" our connection an in turn transmit back energy (light, knowledge) back through the forum. This is the STO 's way, "a natural way" to quote the "C". STS use a mechanical way i.e. they use technology to communicate whit other density by binding the energy of this world to there will. We suspect that they want to influence the out come of the passage from 3 to 4 density whit there technology (haarp project for one) by affecting EM field, by building a world grid.

My though is so far, are we not here in this forum building our home world grid the STO ways, the natural way and that connecting to our higher self will permit us to produce en ever larger amount of energy by grooving a broader channel . So our though are parallel except for the gathering part, to quote the "C" "it doesn't matter where you are but who you are and what you see."

Am I going somewhere whit this.

 

[PepperFritz]

Q: (T) Is that what this whole plan is about, then, if I may be
so bold as to include all of us here in this. We, of the beings of
light who have come here into human form, to anchor the
frequency, is this what we are anchoring it for, for this wave,
so that when it comes enough of us will be ready, the
frequency will be set, so that the change in the planet can take
place as it has been planned?
A: Yes.
[...]
Q: (T) Okay, what you are saying, then, is that we are
anchoring the frequency, so that when the wave comes, we
move to 4th level density as many people as possible, in order
to break the hold the "Dark T-shirts" have got on this planet,
those who remain behind will not have enough energy left for
the "Dark T-shirts" to bother with the planet any longer. There
will be less of them so the planet will be able to refresh and
they will be able to move on in their lessons without
interference?
A: Close.
Q: (L) At this point of dimensional transition, is what we are
doing, anchoring a frequency, are we creating a sort of "super
string" network that will literally create another earth in 4th
density, which will then exist in 4th density, and the old 3rd
density earth -- almost like the splitting of a one celled
organism, only in this splitting one half of it moves into another
dimension and is energized and quite literally created by the
anchoring frequency, while the old one remains and
experiences 3rd density reality?
A: Step by step.
Q: (L) Are we anchoring frequency to create a split?
A: One developing conduit.
Q: (L) We are developing a conduit?
A: Yes. One.
Q: (J) How many conduits do we need?
A: Open.
Q: (T) Is this conduit going to allow those who remain behind
to be able to move to 4th density easier when they are ready?
A: No.
Q: (T) What is the conduit for?
A: You and those who will follow you.
Q: (T) Oh, this is for those of us who will move to 4th density.
We will move through and they will follow us through the
conduit. (J) Oh, others who are ready?
A: Your group here tonight.
Q: (L) Does this mean we will have followers or just us here
now?
A: Open. Up to you.
Q: (L) This conduit. Is this a conduit through which an entire
planet will transition?
A: You are one. There are others.
Q: (L) There are other planets...
A: No. Conduit.
Q: We are one conduit and there are conduits...
A: No. Developing at this point.
Q: (J) So, at this point we are developing a conduit?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) There are other groups on this planet developing their
own conduits?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) These are conduits for us to move to 4th density in?
A: Knowledge is the key to developing a conduit.

Q: (L) ...Okay, what is it about Stonehenge?
A: Location attracted those spirit types on the proper
frequency, who in turn, placed stones in proper location to
receive the coded communications in code telepathically, in
order not to have to chase around the countryside reading
encoded pictographs.
Q: (L) What was the technique used within the circle to
receive the information telepathically? [Planchette spiraled in,
and spiraled out.]
A: Transcendent focused thought wave separation.
Q: (L) OK, so that you're saying that moving in a spiral...
A: The spiral serves to translate message by slowing down the
wave and focusing thought wave transference energy. Utilizes
/transduces electromagnetic waves, the conduit, by breaking
down signal from universal language of intent into language of
phonetic profile. This is for multiple user necessity.
Q: (L) Multiple user necessity implies that a number of people
must do the spiral. Is that correct?
A: No. Must hear and feel and understand precisely the same
thing.

 

[Erna]

[quote author=Peam]
There’s a big difference between Gurdjieff’s intent, than if we were to suddenly phone a few friends on a vibe, to come round for a chin-wag to see what may become of it.
[/quote]

Sure, maybe not a good comparison. What made an impression on me though, was that it made an impression on Ouspensky (enough to analyze in his book). But as long as I'm a reactionary machine to accidental influences, it's maybe wise to refrain from voicing my take on G's intent.

 

[Laurentien2]

Thank Papperfritz I missed the first part or forgot.