Why Gurdjieff?
- Thread starter monkey
- Start date
monkey
The Force is Strong With This One
I have read most of it and found it very interesting but these ideas are by no means original to him, the foundations as far as I can see are in the Ashkenazi / khazarian Jews about 3000 years ago, I may have my facts wrong over the date, when you look for the origins of the Ashkenazi you get several different dates and the Khazarians were around 750 Ad but again there are conflicting statements.
Gurdjieff puts him bent on 'The Work' but is it the right one?
Gurdjieff puts him bent on 'The Work' but is it the right one?
monkey
The Force is Strong With This One
Well yes because the original ideas may well be skewed, newer doesn't necessarily mean an improvement. Gurdjieff makes some fundamental alterations of the work which changes its perspective from the external to the internal this is significant as it changes the whole focus and objective of 'The Work'
So the question - Why Gurdjieff? is a very important one
So the question - Why Gurdjieff? is a very important one
Psalehesost
The Living Force
In short, as can be seen by its fruits, the Work of Gurdjieff works for those who can apply it. From what she wrote if I recall correctly, Gurdjieff through Ouspensky was a big part of what, way back, got Laura really thinking, and a big component of what has lead to this community, and especially to the way it works, as well as to the material it is based on - so if (for you to try to determine for yourself) there is validity to the Cassiopaean experiment and to this community, it pretty much follows that there is to Gurdjieff's work, it having played such a large part in forming the former.
fwiw
fwiw
Mr. Premise
The Living Force
monkey said:
Why not Gurdjieff?
In other words, why do you think we shouldn't?
monkey
The Force is Strong With This One
Good question
One answer to that would be the focus on the internal and not the external this is, as far as I can see, hazardous to the delicate human mind and conjures up undesirable consequences upon the ego and the shadow self I'm obviously referring to Jung here. Following Gurdjieffs teachings have led many to personal destruction.
One answer to that would be the focus on the internal and not the external this is, as far as I can see, hazardous to the delicate human mind and conjures up undesirable consequences upon the ego and the shadow self I'm obviously referring to Jung here. Following Gurdjieffs teachings have led many to personal destruction.
Leo40
Jedi Master
This is a typical "idle" question. First of all The Work has nothing to do with Gurdjeff.
It stands on it's own. The only answer is: does it work; and to find out one has to do it.
In my younger years I was reading Gurdjeff as an intellectual excercise, like any other
philosopher or thinker. Naturally I did'nt get it.
It is absolutely essential to apply Gurdjeff's statements to yourself.
e.g. Man is a reaction machine. Did you ever realise that you are?
As to the sources of Gurdjeff's "teaching" they are irrelevant.
It stands on it's own. The only answer is: does it work; and to find out one has to do it.
In my younger years I was reading Gurdjeff as an intellectual excercise, like any other
philosopher or thinker. Naturally I did'nt get it.
It is absolutely essential to apply Gurdjeff's statements to yourself.
e.g. Man is a reaction machine. Did you ever realise that you are?
As to the sources of Gurdjeff's "teaching" they are irrelevant.
monkey
The Force is Strong With This One
Just because Gurdjieff says
'Man is a reaction machine" doesn't mean he is a total authority, its just his perspective. Have you looked at Ryle and his Ghost in the machine?
Again, this Man is a reaction machine isn't original to Gurdjieff its origins are in Descartes - mind body dualism
'Man is a reaction machine" doesn't mean he is a total authority, its just his perspective. Have you looked at Ryle and his Ghost in the machine?
Again, this Man is a reaction machine isn't original to Gurdjieff its origins are in Descartes - mind body dualism
Laura said:
monkey said:
monkey said:
Since you said that you have read it and since you said that you are trying to establish whether it is a good idea to put G work in practise, it does seem to me that the Work does not resonate very much with you.
So are you sure that you are at the right forum for you ?
Alada
The Living Force
monkey said:
Perhaps the question of having good reason to apply Gurdjieff’s ideas - or any of the sources quoted here - depends on whether one has an aim?
If a person has an aim, then perhaps there is sense then in trying to find ways to fulfill it. To find what is useful, helpful, otherwise why bother?
What is your aim?
