Why the secrecy?

[Oxajil]

They ask, with you as the perceptor of them asking.

And therein lies the rub.

How do you make sure that they are asking something that is close to what you think they are asking for, something that may be far away from your wholly made up desires, acquired experiences and limited understanding of the World, and crucially, dependent on your part, of understanding THEIR internal perception of the world?

Good point, if I'm understanding you correctly. As G. said, we all speak a different ''language'', we might not even talk about the same thing when having a conversation, of course we think we are talking about the same thing, but our words have different meanings. And if one asks something, you might misunderstand this question and thus give a whole lot of information that isn't asked for. Therefore "Do not give that which has not been requested. But when asked, give ALL." is a bit vague to me. How do you know how to answer and what they ask for?

To those who really wanted to know -- knew what to ask, and how to ask -- I did not hesitate to reveal myself, openly and honestly.

I also knew some people who ''knew what to ask, and how to ask'', basically were manipulators and used this info for their own goals. I've learned NOT to give information, at least, not revealing myself (to some extent). However revealing information about the Work I might, but even that has to be done I think carefully. Therefore ''But when asked, give ALL'' sounds ''dangerous'' to me. Of course one can practice etc. but it is important to know what to look at while practicing and not just give information. If someone asks a question that relates somehow to the Work, some I's might love to take this opportunity and proudly share all kind of information, perhaps some information that's not even related to the question and this person might not see this, because he proudly might think that he has done a ''good job'' because he thinks he has given ALL when asked..

I think it's a good motto, but one that has to be understood correctly. Not saying I understand it correctly though.. It's very hard to know when to give information and when there is sincere asking and what precisely is asked

 

[nicklebleu]

MrGullible: Just one little point maybe a bit off-topic, but I wonder if the dichotomy "attack" vs. "just bad luck" is really acceptable. Remember: ALL THERE IS IS LESSONS, so this - imho - definitively rules out "bad luck". It's either a "lesson" or an "attack" (which is a lesson too).

If this is an oversimplification (I have the tendency to try o break down things in "manageable" portions), please correct me.

As to the question whether the volume of knowledge decreases if it is spread, G. had the following to say:

"But first of all another thing must be understood, namely, that knowledge cannot
belong to all, cannot even belong to many. Such is the law. You do not understand this
because you do not understand that knowledge, like everything else in the world, is
material. It is material, and this means that it possesses all the characteristics of
materiality. One of the first characteristics of materiality is that matter is always
limited, that is to say, the quantity of matter in a given place and under given condi­tions
is limited. Even the sand of the desert and the water of the sea is a definite and
unchangeable quantity. So that, if knowledge is material, then it means that there is a
definite quantity of it in a given place at a given time. It may be said that, in the course
of a certain period of time, say a century, humanity has a definite amount of
knowledge at its disposal. But we know, even from an ordinary observation of life,
that the matter of knowledge possesses entirely different qualities according to
whether it is taken in small or large quantities. Taken in a large quantity in a given
place, that is by one man, let us say, or by a small group of men, it produces very good
results; taken in a small quantity (that is, by every one of a large number of people), it
gives no results at all; or it may give even negative results, contrary to those expected.
Thus if a certain definite quantity of knowledge is distributed among millions of
people, each individual will receive very little, and this small amount of knowledge
will change nothing either in his life or in his understanding of things. And however
large the number of people who receive this small amount of knowledge, it will
change nothing in their lives, except, perhaps, to make them still more difficult.

P.37 Ouspensky - ISOTM

I'm not sure this addresses the volume problem really, but from how I understand the above quote, knowledge seems to decrease in volume if spread over too many people and thus becoming useless - quite counterintuitive for me, my gut feeling was that true knowledge would increase in volume and lies would decrease ...

 

[Gimpy]

Mr Gullible says:

All the above seems to me at my stage to be "Secret". I can take the words and look them up in a dictionary and substitute the meanings and it still doesn't help. They seem to be all "coded up" in allegories, parables, myths, etc.

So, I'm staring down the road at committing towards something (The Work - 4th Way), that has a tremendous amount of confusion, secrecy, and overly subtle language to it that doesn't seem to fully fit the reasons we have fleshed out in this thread.

It sounds like you're freaking yourself out before you even start. ;) It also sounds like you're trying to cram everything into your head at once. Why not slow down and give yourself some time to understand what you're reading?

We don't learn by osmosis MrG. :)

 

[Erna]

[quote author=Gimpy]
It sounds like you're freaking yourself out before you even start. ;)[/quote]

People have an aversion to secrecy. I'm one of them. Only bad things need to be hidden. We live in a society where transparency is continuously promulgated as good, and secrecy as bad. Secret = dark. Secret societies are bad. Secret intelligence only conjures up images of war in everyone's minds.

We have all encountered people incapable of relaying information properly due to a lack of understanding themselves (I'm talking information belonging to a more "complex sphere") and then try to act all mysteriously to avoid being exposed for not having the answers.

Those of us who grew up in Christian homes will have a natural aversion to secrecy, because the Bible has much to say about secrecy, fraternities, secret societies, agents of darkness etc. Upon deeper inspection though, there is a line throughout the Bible disclosing the idea of a sacred secret that cannot be had by all, in fact, it can only be had by a few.

 

[go2]

All the above seems to me at my stage to be "Secret". I can take the words and look them up in a dictionary and substitute the meanings and it still doesn't help. They seem to be all "coded up" in allegories, parables, myths, etc.

For when for the time ye ought to be teachers,
ye have need that one teach you again
which be the first principles of the oracles of God;
and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

The esoteric schools are arranged in circles with the truth within the living being of the women and men of the inner circle. The truth is always a secret of those who know, as literal women and men cannot hear, no matter how loud one shouts. Each man and women must find this truth in their own “invisible struggle” using the methods known to the inner circle.

One comes to a school knowing nothing, but with a burning desire to know what is the purpose of all this suffering called life. This is sufficient to enter the outer circle, which is perhaps what this forum is. We are fed “milk” that is sufficient for babes, as that is what I am. This revealing thread has a potential of solid food for the hungry.

With respect to the sincerity of the asking, time will reveal this by one's actions doing the Work, which is why it is called work, which is the purpose of the outer ring in the esoteric school structure, so I think.

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs,
neither cast ye your pearls before swine,
lest they trample them under their feet,
and turn again and rend you.

The early Christians leave this clue to the efficacy of secrecy in the inner and outer world. Mouravieff has much to say about silence as we proceed on the Way. It is found in Gnosis I, Chapter XVI. I have read this material many times, and through the fog I think it is says we are silent to ourselves as well as to the outer world while building a “cage”. Does this describe an inner attitude of “secrecy” or “silence” so as not to arouse the “predators mind”? Practically speaking, I think we observe and examine the inner and outer world without comment from the mind or tongue, until…here I am at a loss for words!

…this hostile attitude of the ‘World’ towards someone who carries on esoteric work is not only a normal phenomenon but is so to speak, a necessary one. If he who lives in the wilderness—and is satisfied to be there, were to approve of the attitude of one who walks on the track, it would be equivalent to recognizing his own bankruptcy. That is why the ‘World’ considers the latter as a failure. The more he progresses with his work, the more he becomes an object of hate.

…Anyone who wants to benefit from the Law of Exception must first achieve a victory over himself, over his own interior world, before he will achieve a victory over himself, over his own interior world, before he will be able to overcome the ‘World’ and –by doing so—escape from the General Law.

….The principle of this method is simple. One must remember Plato’s proposition by which like can only be perceived and understood by like. Extending this, we say that exterior influences cannot act on the individual, except by the mediation of similar elements which form part of his interior world: the interior world of the individual is also subject to ‘A’ and ‘B’ influences.

...The man who decides today to enter the track in search of the Way has, in principle, become another man; but in fact he remains as he was yesterday: weak, drowsy and pitiful. In this state, how can he overcome the resistance of the General Law and so finally reach the Way? It is impossible. To attain this aim, he must first accumulate strength. That is why we insist on the necessity of silent progress in esoteric work, so as not to provoke greater pressure from the General Law. This would quickly drain the new reserves of strength, which had been accumulated at the price of sustained efforts in the fight against this same law. One must therefore gain time and as much as possible delay the reaction of the General Law.

 

[Gimpy]

[quote author=Gimpy]
It sounds like you're freaking yourself out before you even start. ;)

People have an aversion to secrecy. I'm one of them. Only bad things need to be hidden. We live in a society where transparency is continuously promulgated as good, and secrecy as bad. Secret = dark. Secret societies are bad. Secret intelligence only conjures up images of war in everyone's minds.

We have all encountered people incapable of relaying information properly due to a lack of understanding themselves (I'm talking information belonging to a more "complex sphere") and then try to act all mysteriously to avoid being exposed for not having the answers.

Those of us who grew up in Christian homes will have a natural aversion to secrecy, because the Bible has much to say about secrecy, fraternities, secret societies, agents of darkness etc. Upon deeper inspection though, there is a line throughout the Bible disclosing the idea of a sacred secret that cannot be had by all, in fact, it can only be had by a few.
[/quote]



I don't think the truth of our reality is a secret, but a lot of energy's been put into making us think it is, which is why, on diving into all the reading, that it can all
appear too overwhelming to sort out.

Do you see what I mean?


Secrecy = 'the bogey man'. The truth isn't a secret, but it sure looks like something wants you to THINK it is.

 

[MrGullible]

MrGullible: Just one little point maybe a bit off-topic, but I wonder if the dichotomy "attack" vs. "just bad luck" is really acceptable. Remember: ALL THERE IS IS LESSONS, so this - imho - definitively rules out "bad luck". It's either a "lesson" or an "attack" (which is a lesson too).

Thank you nickebleu, that is a great point! One I had forgotten in my confusion / frustration of last night :)

 

[MrGullible]

Mr Gullible says:

All the above seems to me at my stage to be "Secret". I can take the words and look them up in a dictionary and substitute the meanings and it still doesn't help. They seem to be all "coded up" in allegories, parables, myths, etc.

So, I'm staring down the road at committing towards something (The Work - 4th Way), that has a tremendous amount of confusion, secrecy, and overly subtle language to it that doesn't seem to fully fit the reasons we have fleshed out in this thread.

It sounds like you're freaking yourself out before you even start. ;) It also sounds like you're trying to cram everything into your head at once. Why not slow down and give yourself some time to understand what you're reading?

We don't learn by osmosis MrG. :)

:) Thanks, Gimpy. I had definitely reached a point of frustration and "freaking" last night after having done a lot of reading over Christmas :) You are right that I do need to take a deep breath. I have been trying to cram in as much reading time as possible, and have been trying to stay more self-aware / self-remembering. But, I am starting to see alot about how things are so bad and so badly stacked against us so I feel the need to put a lot of energy into getting my head more clear.

 

[MrGullible]

[quote author=Gimpy]
It sounds like you're freaking yourself out before you even start. ;)

People have an aversion to secrecy. I'm one of them. Only bad things need to be hidden. We live in a society where transparency is continuously promulgated as good, and secrecy as bad. Secret = dark. Secret societies are bad. Secret intelligence only conjures up images of war in everyone's minds.

We have all encountered people incapable of relaying information properly due to a lack of understanding themselves (I'm talking information belonging to a more "complex sphere") and then try to act all mysteriously to avoid being exposed for not having the answers.

Those of us who grew up in Christian homes will have a natural aversion to secrecy, because the Bible has much to say about secrecy, fraternities, secret societies, agents of darkness etc. Upon deeper inspection though, there is a line throughout the Bible disclosing the idea of a sacred secret that cannot be had by all, in fact, it can only be had by a few.
[/quote]

Hey Erna, we are in the same boat in some ways. I definitely have an aversion to secrecy and have the Southern and Christian upbringing where there didn't seem to be any secrets and people were very suspicious of those who kept secrets or those who were very quiet.

 

[anart]

Even in the descriptions in Cathedrals, it is mentioned that certain things are the "Green Language" or maybe the "Language of the Birds".  For a fetus like me, that just seems to be more secrecy.  And at the end of the book it says to keep silent.  Wierd!

I always thought it was kind of funny that he ended a book with such wide distribution with the words 'KEEP SILENT'.   It could be said that he did not 'keep silent' since he wrote this book.  However, he did 'keep silent' because he wrote it in such a way that 'puffers' would only see and understand what they wanted to see and understand and the deeper meaning would be lost on those without 'the eyes to See' - as it were.

I think, from a practical standpoint, the 'keep silent' aspect might all come down to one very simple fact that was brought up by 'go2':

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs,
neither cast ye your pearls before swine,
lest they trample them under their feet,
and turn again and rend you.

The practical point is that people will fight to stay asleep.  People will not only fight to stay asleep, they will attack (and even destroy) the person who tries to awaken them from their relatively 'comfortable' sleep.  The vast, vast majority of people do not want to know the truth -  and they will do things one would have previously thought them incapable of, when faced with it.

I suppose the simplest way to find out, viscerally, why it is so important to 'keep silent' is to not keep silent and see what happens.  I would NOT suggest this, simply because every example of this I have ever personally seen has resulted in enormous damage that was not possible to reverse.

I don't think it's about 'keeping things from others' - 'keeping secrets to deprive' - I think it simply comes down to protecting one's ability to move forward in this learning - a strategic enclosure and external consideration - making life easier for yourself and others.

Once one realizes how REAL the fact is that people will fight to stay asleep and that it can get quite nasty - then, it becomes perfectly logical to not make others uncomfortable (and dangerous to you) by exposing them to a truth they would find so horrible as to 'turn again and rend you'.   That's my current understanding at least - and, in case it helps, every time I read Fulcanelli, I see something I completely missed before - and I'm sure this will continue for a long time to come.  Even Gurdjieff mentioned that one does not 'awaken' all at once - it is a process, a ladder, a journey; upon which more is revealed as you move along with effort.  fwiw.

 

[MrGullible]

The esoteric schools are arranged in circles with the truth within the living being of the women and men of the inner circle. The truth is always a secret of those who know, as literal women and men cannot hear, no matter how loud one shouts. Each man and women must find this truth in their own “invisible struggle” using the methods known to the inner circle.

go2, that is a good aspect of the issue to my thinking. Basically, maybe it is the nature of the thing.

One comes to a school knowing nothing, but with a burning desire to know what is the purpose of all this suffering called life. This is sufficient to enter the outer circle, which is perhaps what this forum is. We are fed “milk” that is sufficient for babes, as that is what I am. This revealing thread has a potential of solid food for the hungry.

This thread is definitely feeding me on many levels. I'm beginning to wonder if I'm just chafing very hard at the necessity / natural requirement for so-called "secrecy". I *want* my head clear, to understand the reality of the world, and to be able to think and act with purity. But holding a lot inside oneself and "keeping secrets" is mostly against my "nature".

Thank you for the detailed post.

 

[Craig]

[quote author=anart]I think, from a practical standpoint, the 'keep silent' aspect might all come down to one very simple fact that was brought up by 'go2':

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs,
neither cast ye your pearls before swine,
lest they trample them under their feet,
and turn again and rend you.

The practical point is that people will fight to stay asleep. People will not only fight to stay asleep, they will attack (and even destroy) the person who tries to awaken them from their relatively 'comfortable' sleep. The vast, vast majority of people do not want to know the truth - and they will do things one would have previously thought them incapable of, when faced with it.[/quote]

Maybe it's no coincidence that the Greek word for silence, σῐωπή siope, sounds like psyop! In French, "keep silent" is se taire... switch them round and you have something like tares.

 

[PepperFritz]

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm just chafing very hard at the necessity / natural requirement for so-called "secrecy"....

Dot you truly not understand WHY it is necessary, or are you simply experiencing an emotional resistance to the idea? If it's the latter, you might want to explore where that is coming from, what experiences and emotions from your past are being triggered by the idea of "secrecy".

But holding a lot inside oneself and "keeping secrets" is mostly against my "nature".

Are you having difficulty with it on a conceptual level or on an actual experiential level? That is, are there people in your life that you have a desire to share the Work with, and are you having difficulty restraining yourself from doing so? If so, what kind of emotions does that trigger? Guilt? Frustration? Loneliness?

 

[Pierre]

…this hostile attitude of the ‘World’ towards someone who carries on esoteric work is not only a normal phenomenon but is so to speak, a necessary one. If he who lives in the wilderness—and is satisfied to be there, were to approve of the attitude of one who walks on the track, it would be equivalent to recognizing his own bankruptcy. That is why the ‘World’ considers the latter as a failure. The more he progresses with his work, the more he becomes an object of hate.

…Anyone who wants to benefit from the Law of Exception must first achieve a victory over himself, over his own interior world, before he will achieve a victory over himself, over his own interior world, before he will be able to overcome the ‘World’ and –by doing so—escape from the General Law.

….The principle of this method is simple. One must remember Plato’s proposition by which like can only be perceived and understood by like. Extending this, we say that exterior influences cannot act on the individual, except by the mediation of similar elements which form part of his interior world: the interior world of the individual is also subject to ‘A’ and ‘B’ influences.

...The man who decides today to enter the track in search of the Way has, in principle, become another man; but in fact he remains as he was yesterday: weak, drowsy and pitiful. In this state, how can he overcome the resistance of the General Law and so finally reach the Way? It is impossible. To attain this aim, he must first accumulate strength. That is why we insist on the necessity of silent progress in esoteric work, so as not to provoke greater pressure from the General Law. This would quickly drain the new reserves of strength, which had been accumulated at the price of sustained efforts in the fight against this same law. One must therefore gain time and as much as possible delay the reaction of the General Law.

In addition to this Mouravieff excerpt maybe a simple analogy can illustrate this "secrecy" thing.

Imagine you are an inmate. After lots of suffering you realize that your only aim now is to escape.

However in this jail there are plenty of guards. There are also happy inmates who hate escapists, inmates who have some garding responsibilities (like this one-eye blind guy in Midnight Express), talkative inmates who repeat everything they hear, submissive inmates who do what the gards tell them to do...

After months of enquiries and thinking, you finally discover that some past inmates have managed to take the Midnight Express and in addition they seemingly left some instructions and tools for the ones who want to follow them. You also discover that there are other inmates around you that plan to escape.

But past and current escapists know that the jail is full of guards, spies, happy inmates, naïve inmates,... so anything obvious (open tunnels, broken walls, pickaxes, detailed maps, escaping meetings..) would be immediately detected. It would lead to sanctions, bodysearches, isolation,... and break the current escaping efforts.

So they secretely prepare to take the Midnight Express.

 

[MrGullible]

Dot you truly not understand WHY it is necessary, or are you simply experiencing an emotional resistance to the idea? If it's the latter, you might want to explore where that is coming from, what experiences and emotions from your past are being triggered by the idea of "secrecy".

Well, I think, especially after learning so much in this discussion, that I understand why. But, I believe it is emotional resistance. I will look at that more.

Are you having difficulty with it on a conceptual level or on an actual experiential level? That is, are there people in your life that you have a desire to share the Work with, and are you having difficulty restraining yourself from doing so? If so, what kind of emotions does that trigger? Guilt? Frustration? Loneliness?

Definitely the experiential level. I would like to share more with my wife and brother especially, but I'm not sharing with them at all because I'm trusting in the guidance of those here even though it is emotionally hard. The biggest two emotions are Guilt and Frustration.

The Guilt and Frustration are sort of tied together now that I think about it. I'm Frustrated because I care very deeply about them and the rest of the family and I want them to understand and open their eyes some. I feel "future-guilty" that I might make some progress but leave them behind "in the masses".

I guess you actually pinned three prime emotions I'm feeling. The loneliness is related to not having close ones that I can share in person with as I'm going through inner difficulties.