Transmutation and recapitulation, ideas

T.C.

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Thanks to Art's post about "Depression as Stepping Stone", I feel I've been making good progress regarding concentration of negative energy in the emotional centre. I'll quote something by Mouravieff that I'm sure many others will have read that I think is so true once we have begun self observation.

"The inner content of man is analogous to a vase full of iron filings in a state of mixture as a result of mechanical action. Every shock received by the vase causes displacement of the particles of iron filings. Thus real life remains hidden from the human being due to the constant changes occurring in his inner life."

"Even so, as we shall see later, this senseless and dangerous situation can be modified in a beneficial way. But this requires work; conscientious and sustained effort. Introspection carried out relentlessly results in enhanced internal sensibility. This improved sensibility in its turn intensifies the amplitude and frequency of movement whenever the iron filings are disturbed. As a result, shocks that previously were not noticed will now provoke vivid reactions. These movements, because of their continuous amplification, can create friction between particles of iron so intense that we may one day feel the interior fire igniting within us."

I'm realising the above information for myself. It's quite amazing just how often, if we observe carefully, we get an inflow of negative energy and as Mouravieff states above, continued practice highlights more and more subtle "movements of the fillings"

And this brings me to recapitulation. I don't know if what I'm about to suggest is the same as what casteneda means by "reclaiming energy through recapitulation", and I know that the main idea of the fourth way with this group is to do the work in real time; I mean to wait until something happens to us to trigger negative emotions, then trace the programme. It being our programmes which cause us to misuse our centres.

But now my vase has become more sensitive, I'm noticing just how much negative energy can flow in through remembering difficult or embarrasing situations. For example, when I've made a mistake, or said something I shouldn't have that made me look a fool, in the past when I rememberd these things it would make me cringe I would try to blank it out of my mind. Is it possible, if you've reached a high enough level of dicipline in not allowing the other centres to steal its energy, to use these past experiences to bring in negative energy and concentrate it in the emotional centre?

I know that if we expect something to happen then it won't, and I believe I've begun to practice the right attitude; when negative emotions arise, I try to feel them and not think about them or get worked up physically by heavy breathing or pacing up and down for instance, at the same time not doing it for any reason other than to increase my will, saying to myself immediately "dont think, feel" and seeing if I can do it. I think this also relates to what has been said in the past, I can't remember who by, that we should try to become more sensitive. By learning to use the emotional centre on it's own, I think this cultivates sensitivity.

Then somthing I was thinking about today was that when we are not trying to transmute, we are encouraged to use the intellectual centre and the emotional centre together. To regulate a thought with emotions and regulate an emotion with thoughts. This to me is like saying if were ever going to get to the ultimate point of a sacred marriage of the higher emotional and intellectual centres, we need to have married the lower emotional and intellectual centres before hand.
 
Have you read In Search of the Miraculous and all three volumes of Gnosis in full? You seem to be laying too much emphasis on the concentration bit, and less on the constatation part. The former is necessary for the latter, but the latter is what would transmute the energy; both go hand in hand.

Then somthing I was thinking about today was that when we are not trying to transmute...
What are your reasons for attempting this? Consider this brief warning given by Mouravieff:

'A' influences offer a whole gamut of variations starting with seduction in its classical manifestations: money, women, ambition. If we resist these successfully, then prelest takes more and more refined forms, parallel to the 'B' influences, one might say. These forms vary infinitely, because they are related to personal cases. Among the most refined nuances on the emotional plane we can find considerations full of nobility, charity and compassion. On the intellectual plane, we find considerations relating to the 'well understood' benefit of esoteric work. These influences, which are parallel to the 'B' influences, but of an 'A' nature, must be uncovered by subtle attentiveness, and a firm, unambiguous attitude must be taken towards them. [Gnosis Vol. 1, pg. 158]
 
Hi Craig. Yes I've read In Search of the Miraculous, but I haven't had time to get the Gnosis series yet. There are so many books it seems we need to read that I've been prioritising.

I said, "Then somthing I was thinking about today was that when we are not trying to transmute..."

You ask, "What are your reasons for attempting this?"

Do you mean transmutation of negative energy or just esoteric studies in general?

In relation to the transmutation; because it sounds like a possible method of evolution. "The Work" in general, the same answer.

What I was trying to say here is, if we generate negative emotional energy then we shouldn't allow the intellectual or moving centre to steal it. But, at all other times, we need to find this balance between the Intellectual and Emotional centre, using them to regulate each other. Then you write:

"What are your reasons for attempting this? Consider this brief warning given by Mouravieff:

'A' influences offer a whole gamut of variations starting with seduction in its classical manifestations: money, women, ambition. If we resist these successfully, then prelest takes more and more refined forms, parallel to the 'B' influences, one might say. These forms vary infinitely, because they are related to personal cases. Among the most refined nuances on the emotional plane we can find considerations full of nobility, charity and compassion. On the intellectual plane, we find considerations relating to the 'well understood' benefit of esoteric work. These influences, which are parallel to the 'B' influences, but of an 'A' nature, must be uncovered by subtle attentiveness, and a firm, unambiguous attitude must be taken towards them. [Gnosis Vol. 1, pg. 158]

So are you saying that I STILL don't really know what I'm talking about? I honestly don't mind if you are. I've read and read and read about these processes on SOTT, glossary and QFS article and thought I'd got to a point where I was beggining to understand. Maybe I nead to study more, and maybe buy the Gnosis books..

Also, maybe I should look for this myself but, could you tell me the difference between concentration and constatation? I'll search myself anyway. If your saying I'm thinking too much in relation to processes, please note my part saying to myself "don't think, feel" and trying to increase sensitivity. I think I'm finding that I've never used my emotional centre before and am now learning to try to become familiar with it and listen to it.

Well, thanks always for your comments craig. It was actually your comments on this subject before, centres especially, that sent me off on a journey to try to understand these topics. Although I'm sure I haven't been studying in vain, there are obviously pieces missing from my knowledge that would bring better understanding.

(added)

Okay, constatation is the actual establishing of facts that come from the work you do, whatever it is. Is that pretty much right? So, I may be doing self observation and trying to learn about the different me's in general, but not actually coming to many solid conclusions which might, in a sense, rid me of some of these I's? Like just reading a book without taking in and learning what it is saying?
 
Thomas C said:
Hi Craig. Yes I've read In Search of the Miraculous, but I haven't had time to get the Gnosis series yet. There are so many books it seems we need to read that I've been prioritising. I said, "Then somthing I was thinking about today was that when we are not trying to transmute..." You ask, "What are your reasons for attempting this?" Do you mean transmutation of negative energy or just esoteric studies in general? In relation to the transmutation; because it sounds like a possible method of evolution. "The Work" in general, the same answer.
It's just one phase of a range of practices. Long preparation with self-observation (with the feedback of a group) and remembering is also part of the method, and a necessary one before transmutation even becomes possible; at least, that's what Gurdjieff and Mouravieff seem to agree on. Is it that you want to get a fast-track here and skip the boring lengthy part? You know, straight into the phenomena, the alchemy, to get that guarantee that you'll make it this time around and won't be a failure?... If so, it just doesn't work that way. The point is not to stop you from trying or to dampen your enthusiasm to learn, but to offer a little prod that we don't know ourselves and we're not a single individuality. Believe it or not, your false personality can take up the Work and you need to look out for it constantly.

So are you saying that I STILL don't really know what I'm talking about? I honestly don't mind if you are.
And if you did mind, all the better for you to observe the predator's mind.

I've read and read and read about these processes on SOTT, glossary and QFS article and thought I'd got to a point where I was beggining to understand. Maybe I nead to study more, and maybe buy the Gnosis books..
Sure you're beginning to understand, but has your inflated sense of self made that a bit more than it is in reality? Oh, and there's never a maybe for more study. ;)

If your saying I'm thinking too much in relation to processes, please note my part saying to myself "don't think, feel" and trying to increase sensitivity. I think I'm finding that I've never used my emotional centre before and am now learning to try to become familiar with it and listen to it.
No, just maybe thinking too much about a process that is probably just gonna be a dead end until you really start to feel organically your complete lack of being; and that only comes from a long struggle with self-remembering and observation. You know: putrefaction. You have to KNOW what your intentions are, and it also needs a group.

Okay, constatation is the actual establishing of facts that come from the work you do, whatever it is. Is that pretty much right? So, I may be doing self observation and trying to learn about the different me's in general, but not actually coming to many solid conclusions which might, in a sense, rid me of some of these I's? Like just reading a book without taking in and learning what it is saying?
You were talking about concentration of the energy, but that in itself won't get you anywhere. Not identifying with negative emotions, not letting them flood the system is necessary so the mind can be free to observe and understand it. In fact, you do have to "think" and reason and seek to understand it objectively; which is sorting the fine from the coarse. But that's an ability which the habitual misuse of energy destroys; it can be extremely subtle and needs a mirror of people.
 
Thomas C said:
But now my vase has become more sensitive, I'm noticing just how much negative energy can flow in through remembering difficult or embarrasing situations. For example, when I've made a mistake, or said something I shouldn't have that made me look a fool, in the past when I rememberd these things it would make me cringe I would try to blank it out of my mind. Is it possible, if you've reached a high enough level of dicipline in not allowing the other centres to steal its energy, to use these past experiences to bring in negative energy and concentrate it in the emotional centre?
I am curious... it seems to me that you speak of these negative emotions as being somewhere 'out there' and flowing back into you from somewhere else.

I would like to suggest that (especially) with recapitulation, these negative emotions are already there, and that by examining them (through recapitulation): gives a person a chance to re-evaluate and look at things , in a different light. This provides the opportunity to change the way we view things and thus 'transmute' that negative energy into something that ends up having less control over our lives. Recapitulation - to me - deals more with the past with a re-examination of emotions that have been forgotten, suppressed or, indeed, have a greater control over us than we would want them to have.

The situation you describe as 'looking like a fool' or 'cringing' is an interesting take on how much control a person's self importance has over.... quite a few things including behaviour and emotions. It is actually quite common. I've often wondered how interesting it would be if suddenly (by magic) everybody simply lost their sense of self importance. And I wonder at how 'freed up' our emotional centers would become. I would like to postulate that losing ones sense of self importance would be of great assistance to any 'work' a person is undertaking.... :D Perhaps this can and should be quite a cherished goal.

Thomas C said:
I know that if we expect something to happen then it won't,
Yes, the old anticipation thing.

Thomas C said:
and I believe I've begun to practice the right attitude; when negative emotions arise, I try to feel them and not think about them or get worked up physically by heavy breathing or pacing up and down for instance, at the same time not doing it for any reason other than to increase my will, saying to myself immediately "dont think, feel" and seeing if I can do it. I think this also relates to what has been said in the past, I can't remember who by, that we should try to become more sensitive. By learning to use the emotional centre on it's own, I think this cultivates sensitivity.
Here you speak about feeling negative emotions 'in the moment' (rather than in the past, as you would be examining under recapitulation). How much negative emotions effect a person, to me, depends on how much a person "sees". To do this a person has to observe, acknowledge a situation or emotion and use reason and thus increase their objectivity.

On the 'down' side, we humans have a lot of things that are going to interfere with this process. Some of these things include (but may not be limited to):

Anticipation; Sense of self importance; Programming and Impatience. Could these things all be part of our 'Predator's Mind'? Its funny how these four are all based on emotional reactions. Perhaps if we were to deal with these things first, we would have more objectivity every time a negative emotion pops up? Interestingly enough this is also the point where it seems many people institute a form of mechanical thinking as a way of 'dealing' with the above. And you can imagine what effect that has with 'dealing' with the above... pretty much none at all....

Thomas C said:
Then somthing I was thinking about today was that when we are not trying to transmute, we are encouraged to use the intellectual centre and the emotional centre together. To regulate a thought with emotions and regulate an emotion with thoughts. This to me is like saying if were ever going to get to the ultimate point of a sacred marriage of the higher emotional and intellectual centres, we need to have married the lower emotional and intellectual centres before hand.
Well, I'm not too sure how a person is going to 'regulate' anything without a good understanding of what the driving process is, or how it 'works'. And, I'm also not sure if 'regulation' is a good thing either... Sounds like a form of control to me. ;) Is that really what you want? One center controling another? And if so, why? This does raise the issue of control. Sometimes we drop 'clues' to ourself, by the words we use, on areas that we need explore in our own life (like I have just done) :D.... Many people (like me) have issues with emotional reactions towards the things they lack. Some people even think they can regain these things with mechanical thinking, but I tend to disagree. If a person does not acknowledge their emotions how are they ever going to 'appreciate' them and thus transmute any negative energy?

I think quite a few things are based on emotional reactions rather than logical thought and that a thought process isn't necessarily a 'cure' for an emotional reaction it can sometimes be a barrier.
 
Craig wrote:
Long preparation with self-observation (with the feedback of a group) and remembering is also part of the method, and a necessary one before transmutation even becomes possible; at least, that's what Gurdjieff and Mouravieff seem to agree on. Is it that you want to get a fast-track here and skip the boring lengthy part? You know, straight into the phenomena, the alchemy, to get that guarantee that you'll make it this time around and won't be a failure?... If so, it just doesn't work that way.

I guess that's what I've been doing, yes. You see, when "those who know" talk about the act of transmutation, they like to say that it is a very definite process, and that makes me almost picture someone in a room "doing something" in particular. The next thought process for me was probably "well, I just need to discover what this singular, particular action is and, hey presto, "GOLD"! "

The more I've read, the more I've begun to see the length of time the work on the self actually takes. But I still never seem to associate one thing with the other; cleaning the machine and the results it will have if done properly. I think another "problem" for me is like... There don't seem to be any markers for achievment, or thats the impression I have so far. For instance, fulcanelli talks about the ladder with nine rungs which are the sucessive steps of the work. On the one hand it could be totally metaphorical, but then why nine? I'm sorry if I'm always going on about the wrong things.

I wrote:
I've read and read and read about these processes on SOTT, glossary and QFS article and thought I'd got to a point where I was beggining to understand. Maybe I nead to study more, and maybe buy the Gnosis books..
Craig wrote:
Sure you're beginning to understand, but has your inflated sense of self made that a bit more than it is in reality? Oh, and there's never a maybe for more study.

Well, on the one hand, I know that compared to who I used to be and what I thought I used to know, that there hasn't really been any exageration on my part by feeling I was getting somewhere, and on the other hand I keep getting to stages of despair because.... I don't know how to put it. (and I'm really trying to be honest here and tell you what I'm really thinking and feeling)

I think it would sound too cliche'd to say I'm seeing how little I really know about myself and everything else. I don't like who I'm getting to know (me), I find I've got hardly any will power at all, I think things at times that I wouldn't want to share with other people, I don't know who I am, why I made certain decisions in my life, (well maybe not wanting to see that some things I thought I was doing for others are still always from selfishness). I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHO I AM ANYMORE! and if I didn't think this closeness to madness wasn't just a normal part of the work then I'd be worried, but I just try to carry on. Then, when I find things about "how to do this act, or that act," in particular Art's post about transmutaion/depression as a stepping stone, it gives me hope that I can achieve something. So, if my inflated sense of self/ego makes my understandiing seem a bit more than it is in reality, then it does so behind my back :)

I asked if I was thinking about processes too much, Craig wrote:
No, just maybe thinking too much about a process that is probably just gonna be a dead end until you really start to feel organically your complete lack of being; and that only comes from a long struggle with self-remembering and observation. You know: putrefaction. You have to KNOW what your intentions are, and it also needs a group.

You know, when I really think about it, I don't know what my intensions are. Something else that adds to my "madness" is trying to figure out whether reading all this stuff and comunicating on this site is a decision I've made or whether it's just an automatic reaction/domino effect (alla Gurdjieff) caused by finding Laura's work. Like I'm saying to myself, "what choice do I have? Continue in slumber or try to wake up?" Or maybe what will be will be, and everything happens for a reason.

Then I was talking about a possible method of transmutation and Craig wrote:
You were talking about concentration of the energy, but that in itself won't get you anywhere. Not identifying with negative emotions, not letting them flood the system is necessary so the mind can be free to observe and understand it. In fact, you do have to "think" and reason and seek to understand it objectively; which is sorting the fine from the coarse. But that's an ability which the habitual misuse of energy destroys; it can be extremely subtle and needs a mirror of people.

I have to say, when I do have negative emotions I ask myself why they're happening, trying to feel them whilst not getting angry thoughts. Most of the time, I have negative reactions to demands made on me by other people. I see straight away the only cause of this is self importance. After a while of this type of observation it gets easier to detach from the situation and see whats happening. That perspective makes it easier to not get angry about things.

Ruth wrote:
I am curious... it seems to me that you speak of these negative emotions as being somewhere 'out there' and flowing back into you from somewhere else.

Well, I had been thinking that nnegative emotions were negative energy that the motor centre drew in from the sexual centre. So whenever I got negative emotional reactions, I thought of them as energy that I was pulling in. Maybe I'd misunderstood the actions of the centre's. Again, I think it would probably help for me to get the gnosis series as Mouravieff seem to talk a heck of alot about the way the centres work.

What I meant about regulating the emotional centre with the intellectual and visa versa was making decisions with the head and the heart together. Not really trying to control one with the other which is how it came across. It's like, I have a friend who runs a business and he's contmplating firing someone for various reasons. His head wants to fire the guy and his heart is stopping him from doing it. Or it's like when your in a relationship with someone and your head is saying leave and your heart is saying stay.

Hmmm.... These are just Programmes aren't they. This is what I mean about not knowing my emotional centre well. I'm seeing cultural programmes and mistaking them for emotions. Oh well.... I think I'll stop for now.

Thanks everyone, anyway.
 
Thomas C said:
I guess that's what I've been doing, yes. You see, when "those who know" talk about the act of transmutation, they like to say that it is a very definite process, and that makes me almost picture someone in a room "doing something" in particular. The next thought process for me was probably "well, I just need to discover what this singular, particular action is and, hey presto, "GOLD"!
Because...? It seems in that sense you think you can remain the same and have that "gold" as a bit of a prize, a guarantee that will see to it you won't suffer. But notice it's all about aggrandizing the self, when in actuality, the "gold" is the complete antithesis of that; really and truly. Can you imagine living wholly for the service of others, and your only concern in regards to yourself would be so that you could fulfil this purpose more fully?

The more I've read, the more I've begun to see the length of time the work on the self actually takes.
More suggestion that you really want to skip right on ahead and get it all over with, maybe so you can bask in the glory of achievement and whatever that implies: impatience and false personality. There is no basking. In fact, it seems there is just more suffering but of a different kind and intensity.

But I still never seem to associate one thing with the other; cleaning the machine and the results it will have if done properly. I think another "problem" for me is like... There don't seem to be any markers for achievment, or thats the impression I have so far.
You said it yourself, there are markers, it's just that the first significant one is the "stench of the grave". But there's that part of you that wants immediate wondrous phenomena and that sureness of its immortality. Smells like the predator, and it's an illusion.

I think it would sound too cliche'd to say...
Inner considering here of what sound to be sincere realisations.

I'm seeing how little I really know about myself and everything else. I don't like who I'm getting to know (me), I find I've got hardly any will power at all, I think things at times that I wouldn't want to share with other people, I don't know who I am, why I made certain decisions in my life, (well maybe not wanting to see that some things I thought I was doing for others are still always from selfishness). I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHO I AM ANYMORE! and if I didn't think this closeness to madness wasn't just a normal part of the work then I'd be worried, but I just try to carry on. Then, when I find things about "how to do this act, or that act," in particular Art's post about transmutaion/depression as a stepping stone, it gives me hope that I can achieve something.
But is it just the program mentioned above that suddenly switches on? Remember: you're a legion of 'I's with the imagination of being a single whole, and from what you write, it seems there's still that expectation there of a reward that you can aggrandize to yourself.

Well, I had been thinking that nnegative emotions were negative energy that the motor centre drew in from the sexual centre. So whenever I got negative emotional reactions, I thought of them as energy that I was pulling in. Maybe I'd misunderstood the actions of the centre's. Again, I think it would probably help for me to get the gnosis series as Mouravieff seem to talk a heck of alot about the way the centres work.
On the specifics, I think that's the case, but it doesn't really matter.
 
Always a must read:

First Initiation
By Jeanne de Salzmann

You will see that in life you receive exactly what you give. Your life is the mirror of what you are. It is in your image. You are passive, blind, demanding. You take all, you accept all, without feeling any obligation. Your attitude toward the world and toward life is the attitude of one who has the right to make demands and to take, who has no need to pay or to earn. You believe that all things are your due, simply because it is you! All your blindness is there! None of this strikes your attention. And yet this is what keeps one world separate from another world.

You have no measure with which to measure yourselves. You live exclusively according to "I like" or "I don’t like," you have no appreciation except for yourself. You recognize nothing above you—theoretically, logically, perhaps, but actually no. That is why you are demanding and continue to believe that everything is cheap and that you have enough in your pocket to buy everything you like. You recognize nothing above you, either outside yourself or inside. That is why, I repeat, you have no measure and live passively according to your likes and dislikes.

Yes, your "appreciation of yourself" blinds you. It is the biggest obstacle to a new life. You must be able to get over this obstacle, this threshold, before going further. This test divides men into two kinds: the “wheat” and the "chaff." No matter how intelligent, how gifted, how brilliant a man may be, if he does not change his appreciation of himself, there will be no hope for an inner development, for a work toward self-knowledge, for a true becoming. He will remain such as he is all his life. The first requirement, the first condition, the first test for one who wishes to work on himself is to change his appreciation of himself. He must not imagine, not simply believe or think, but see things in himself which he has never seen before, see them actually. His appreciation will never be able to change as long as he sees nothing in himself. And in order to see, he must learn to see; this is the first initiation of man into self-knowledge.

First of all, he has to know what he must look at. When he knows, he must make efforts, keep his attention, look constantly with persistence. Only through maintaining his attention, and not forgetting to look, one day, perhaps, he will be able to see. If he sees one time he can see a second time, and if that continues he will no longer be able not to see. This is the state to be looked for, it is the aim of our observation; it is from there that the true wish will be born, the irresistible wish to become: from cold we shall become warm, vibrant; we shall be touched by our reality.

Today we have nothing but the illusion of what we are. We think too highly of ourselves. We do not respect ourselves. In order to respect myself, I have to recognize a part in myself which is above the other parts, and my attitude toward this part should bear witness to the respect that I have for it. In this way I shall respect myself. And my relations with others will be governed by the same respect.

You must understand that all the other measures—talent, education, culture, genius—are changing measures, measures of detail. The only exact measure, the only unchanging, objective real measure is the measure of inner vision. I see—I see myself—by this, you have measured. With one higher real part, you have measured another lower part, also real. And this measure, defining by itself the role of each part, will lead you to respect for yourself.

But you will see that it is not easy. And it is not cheap. You must pay dearly. For bad payers, lazy people, parasites, no hope. You must pay, pay a lot, and pay immediately, pay in advance. Pay with yourself. By sincere, conscientious, disinterested efforts. The more you are prepared to pay without economizing, without cheating, without any falsification, the more you will receive. And from that time on you will become acquainted with your nature. And you will see all the tricks, all the dishonesties that your nature resorts to in order to avoid paying hard cash. Because you have to pay with your ready-made theories, with your rooted convictions, with your prejudices, your conventions, your "I like" and "I don’t like." Without bargaining, honestly, without pretending. Trying "sincerely" to see as you offer your counterfeit money.

Try for a moment to accept the idea that you are not what you believe yourself to be, that you overestimate yourself, in fact that you lie to yourself. That you always lie to yourself every moment, all day, all your life. That this lying rules you to such an extent that you cannot control it any more. You are the prey of lying. You lie, everywhere. Your relations with others—lies. The upbringing you give, the conventions—lies. Your teaching—lies. Your theories, your art—lies. Your social life, your family life—lies. And what you think of yourself—lies also.

But you never stop yourself in what you are doing or in what you are saying because you believe in yourself. You must stop inwardly and observe. Observe without preconceptions, accepting for a time this idea of lying. And if you observe in this way, paying with yourself, without self-pity, giving up all your supposed riches for a moment of reality, perhaps you will suddenly see something you have never before seen in yourself until this day. You will see that you are different from what you think you are. You will see that you are two. One who is not, but takes the place and plays the role of the other. And one who is, yet so weak, so insubstantial, that he no sooner appears than he immediately disappears. He cannot endure lies. The least lie makes him faint away. He does not struggle, he does not resist, he is defeated in advance. Learn to look until you have seen the difference between your two natures, until you have seen the lies, the deception in yourself. When you have seen your two natures, that day, in yourself, the truth will be born.
 
craig said:
Always a must read: First Initiation By Jeanne de Salzmann
very true Craig, and always worth re-reading to remind ourselves how frequently and consistently we lie to ourselves and to others.
 
(Any self deprecation or talk about self in these recent posts is for other people to analyse and relate to..... I think.)

Hmmm....

Tricky, catch 22, much contemplation required. One by one, the veils of the work lift, I understand something new. Something thats been right infront of my face and that I've either just refused to absorb or just haven't been ready to take in.

For 23 years, my entire thought processes have revolved around myself. I've been thinking about recent comments from others and trying to understand why I doing what I'm doing, what's my motivation? THE PAY OFF. Always.

What is motivation if it isn't the manifestation of the want to do something for ourselves? Even the want to help others, to someone new to the work, is to please themselves.

I want, I want, I want. I hurt. I don't WANT to hurt so I WANT a way out for ME. Round and round we go.

So should I be trying to understand WHY I'm so selfish? I even, after looking at myself for a while, have begun to dislike my many selfs, but that goes no way at all in curing me of narcisism! Even if I dislike the "monster" I am, I still feed the beast whatever it likes.

Is there really a cure for this selfishness? From a sleeping 3rd density residents point of view it would feel totally unnatural to have complete lack of concern for the self.

I read craigs last posts last night and have been thinking about these things since then. I know its only been a few hours of contemplation, but self service, if looked at as a programme is like, the biggest CON, like a totally fake type of existance.

So, until, we know ourselves, we cannot possibly know what we want, or would want. So there's no point saying "I want to achieve this or I want to achieve that". Anything I want is just a programme of selfishness. It's not actually me wanting it, it's one of my little I's.

I don't mean to just write obvious things that everyone else already knows. But you see, I thought I already knew these things myself. *shakes head in disbelief* So, at the moment, I'll try to just notice as much as possible where my selfishness acts for me and takes over me, or is my motivation to do something.

I think what has happend is that, until now, I've been trying to learn the real difference between STO and STS with regards to interaction between others, but I've just been shown how it affects me, within myself.
 
Thomas C said:
What is motivation if it isn't the manifestation of the want to do something for ourselves? Even the want to help others, to someone new to the work, is to please themselves.
In the beginning - in the mixed inner world - it probably always is, but that may change.

So should I be trying to understand WHY I'm so selfish? I even, after looking at myself for a while, have begun to dislike my many selfs, but that goes no way at all in curing me of narcisism! Even if I dislike the "monster" I am, I still feed the beast whatever it likes.
Not sure we'll truly know why, but seeing it is the first step to "curing" it. But then it seems you have to do it without expectation of any reward, and the want to cure has to be a real burning wish resulting from the revulsion and hatred felt for it. That's a real bummer for the false personality.

Is there really a cure for this selfishness? From a sleeping 3rd density residents point of view it would feel totally unnatural to have complete lack of concern for the self.
Here's a quote from the Cassiopaea Glossary that may elucidate this. Perhaps complete lack of concern is a bit far fetched at this level, but it certainly seems as if it increasingly becomes like that; speaking about "self" in this context is really more what de Salzmann discusses in the essay above.

There exists a great confusion about what one should or should not feel about oneself. The confusion of the matter has to do with the lack of clarity concerning what the self actually is. As long as there exist all manner of fantastic conjectures that represent the self as being completely other than it in reality is, these questions cannot receive any satisfactory answer.

Castaneda writes that self-importance is a needless piece of baggage that the warrior needs to get rid of simply because maintaining it is a needless expenditure of energy. There is no ethical value judgement on self-importance per se, it simply is superfluous and inefficient and works against the values of correct use of energy the warrior should aspire to. Energy will allow seeing and seeing can bring one to knowledge and freedom. Self-importance is a hindrance on the way.

The self-importance as meant in the above paragraph is similar to Gurdjieff's notion of self-love and vanity. It is in fact identification with external circumstance, status, internal considering, worry over how other see the self. This self-importance or self-love has nothing to do with any real I but everything to do with obtaining support or corroboration or validation for various little I's.

Popular psychology speaks much about self-esteem, giving oneself credit and so forth. It is difficult to say anything about this because these statements are made as if the self were a single, known thing, which it is not. Esoteric discourse sometimes speaks of getting rid of ego. This suffers from the same vagueness.

The resolution of these issues begins with self-knowledge and discernment between the various impulses which make up the various little I's. We cannot say that all appreciation of self were bad: In the 4th Way discourse, a person who has an equal lack of appreciation for all things, one for whom all things are interchangeable, is called a tramp. A lunatic is one who appreciates things of no objective value and does not appreciate things of true value. Both conditions are harmful for the Work and exist to varying degrees within most people.

The crux of the matter is separating between diverse tendencies in self. Unqualified love or hate, appreciation or contempt of something simply because it originates with some part of self is absurd. Indifference is no better. Discernment between the mixed impulses which originate within the mixed self is key to having any reasonable attitude towards the question. The standard of how these impulses relate to esoteric work is one possible benchmark for ranking these impulses. Work towards truth cannot be based on lies to self, whether these were to glorify or vilify the latter. Both extremes represent a different flavor of self-importance and vanity. Yet, the self cannot be unimportant either. Some part must be recognized as higher and worthy of support for the Work to be anyhow motivated. Nothing can grow out of nothing, some rudimentary form must exist for anything to take root, says Gurdjieff.

Some teachings promulgate the dissolution of ego. This is in direct contradiction to the 4th Way. According to the 4th Way, the personality must on the contrary be brought to its highest possible development before it is ready for development past the human form. This development cannot however be based on illusory views on this personality nor can it be based on neglect of this same personality. The only kind of love of self that may hold esoteric benefit is telling the truth to the self. The subjective vanitous love of self is fundamentally opposed to this since it thrives on making the world support its preconceptions instead of seeking the truth concerning itself.
So, until, we know ourselves, we cannot possibly know what we want, or would want. So there's no point saying "I want to achieve this or I want to achieve that". Anything I want is just a programme of selfishness. It's not actually me wanting it, it's one of my little I's.
An aim is necessary obviously (i.e. to know yourself), but from my experience the more you strip away the layers, the more you may see how insincere that drive was, or how there was a lot of dross and filthy intentions attached to it, and it can awaken something real. It's all about seeing the maneuvers of the predator's mind and how it slides into the equation hoping for a pay off of a particular kind.
 
Thomas C said:
The more I've read, the more I've begun to see the length of time the work on the self actually takes.
The process of working on oneself is never easy and, in my opinion, it is really depends on the individual as regards to how long the process would take. The Work has a "step by step" process that one would likely to take, but there is no time limit for each single step. It may even take several lifetimes to achieve your aim(s).

I have found the following quote from Ark to be very helpful:

Ark said:
If you need five lives to accomplish what you WANT, let this be the first of those five. And then, without any "time obligation" or "should stressing" - start it. First step first. And ENJOY it. And LOVE yourself - take care of yourself. This is the only thing that the Universe wants from you, I think.
---

Thomas C said:
But I still never seem to associate one thing with the other; cleaning the machine and the results it will have if done properly. I think another "problem" for me is like... There don't seem to be any markers for achievment, or thats the impression I have so far.
The results usually come by itself but should not be anticipated in any way. If you found a wonderous phenomena being a marker of achievement as Craig mentioned, it may be part of self-calming as it is your predator's way to hinder you from absorbing the shocks, or so I think.

I get a sense that you seek or anticipate what the results would be like. Here's the session with C's on anticipation:

960811
Q: (L) OK, we've been talking earlier this evening about intent, and of course, our own experiences with intent have really been pretty phenomenal. We've come to some kind of an idea that intent, when confirmed repeatedly, actually builds force. Is this a correct concept, and is there anything that you can add to it?
A: Only until anticipation muddies the picture... tricky one, huh?
Q: (L) Is anticipation the act of assuming you know how something is going to happen?
A: Follows realization, generally, and unfortunately for you, on 3rd density.
Q: (L) Is this a correct assessment of this process?
A: Both examples given are correct. You see, once anticipation enters the picture, the intent can no longer be STO.
Q: (L) Anticipation is desire for something for self. Is that it?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) OK, so it's OK to intend something, or to think in an intentional way, or to hope in an intentional way, for something that is to serve another, but anticipation defines it as a more personal thing.
A: And that brings realization.
Q: (L) So, desire to serve others, and to do something because it will help others, brings realization...
A: But, realization creates anticipation.
Q: (L) Well, how do we navigate this razor? I mean, this is like walking on a razor's edge. To control your mind to not anticipate, and yet, deal with realization, and yet, still maintain hope... (J) They said it was tricky... (L) This is, this is, um...
A: Mental exercises of denial, balanced with pure faith of a non prejudicial kind.
Q: (L) OK, so, in other words, to just accept what is at the moment, appreciate it as it is at the moment, and have faith that the universe and things will happen the way they are supposed to happen, without placing any expectation on how that will be?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) This is, and I'm not asking about Ark, this is something that he has talked about in terms of shaping the future. He talks about shaping the future as an intentional act of shaping something good, but without defining the moment of measurement. In other words, adding energy to it by intent, but not deciding where, when or how the moment of measurement occurs. When the quantum jump occurs, it occurs on its own, and in its own way. Is this the concept he's dealing with here?
A: Anticipation.
Q: (L) In other words, is what he's talking about anticipation?
A: No.
Q: (L) Well, what do you mean -- anticipation in response to what I said?
A: That is the key to shaping the future... Avoiding it.
Q: (T) OK, because we're not anticipating in what we're doing...
A: Yes.
Q: (T) What we're doing is not anticipatory, it's just happening. We were talking about it on the way up, that with interactions with others, we are facilitating, we are creating reality. This is what they all say about reality.
A: When it hits you, it stops.
Q: (L) When what hits you? (J) The realization. (T) The fact that it's happening.
A: Yes unless you cancel out all anticipation.
Q: (L) Well, this is very tricky.
The process of the Work requires the INTENT, not anticipation or expectation of certain results. Anticipation is indeed very tricky to overcome or avoid.

You say you do not know what your intentions are, but I think you do in some way. Cleaning your machine, for one. Or to wake up and learn? Perhaps you would like to try to define your intentions or aims? But, you seem to be seeking to be a master of yourself, which is a powerful aim, and that is what you are working on now, I think.

Thomas C said:
I don't mean to just write obvious things that everyone else already knows. But you see, I thought I already knew these things myself. *shakes head in disbelief* So, at the moment, I'll try to just notice as much as possible where my selfishness acts for me and takes over me, or is my motivation to do something.
It is important to be conscious of yourself, to be aware of "what" you're feeling at the moment and "where" or "when" they came from (e.g., from the past) and discover the "why." It is never easy. For what it is worth.

My two cent.

[Edit:]

I posted just before seeing Craig's above post.

Craig said:
Not sure we'll truly know why, but seeing it is the first step to "curing" it. But then it seems you have to do it without expectation of any reward, and the want to cure has to be a real burning wish resulting from the revulsion and hatred felt for it. That's a real bummer for the false personality.
I agree with Craig here. The false personality is just that: false. It'll try to do anything to prevent its death.
 
Back
Top Bottom