Wishful thinking/strategic enclosure

Buddy

The Living Force
PepperFritz said:
OPINMYND81 said:
...most people aren't that way at all, but are rather easily impressionable by such tricks.

If this is true, then he should know. He is using 'such tricks' to create false impressions in the minds of unsuspecting readers.

anart said:
We've found out over time that more people are brought to sott and the related sites by this sort of nonsense than are turned away - they come out of curiousity or to see if 'it's true' - they read a little and realize that what they read from 'chrisc' or whatever persona vinnie is currently using, is a huge lie and they stick around for the information.

It's one of the reasons sott and the related sites are so stringent on research, backup and data - when people read the facts (and back up documentation) it becomes really obvious who the liar is - so - as a wise young lady once said, "as long as they spell your name right, who cares what they say?"

I like this quote. This indicates to me how fully invested in 'wishful thinking' people like 'chrisc' are. If they fully realized the extent to which they are eventually damaging themselves by putting there errors on public display, they would think twice or more. After all, anything posted on the internet is forever available as evidence as long as it is saved somewhere.

mada85 said:
Pepperfritz said:
Opinmynd81 said:
While there may be a few who are genuinely inquisitive enough to read for themselves most people aren't that way at all, but are rather easily impressionable by such tricks. So some people who are genuinely interested in seeking truth will sadly get vectored away by guys like chrisc who can't get beyond his own social programming.
I would suggest that "people who are genuinely interested in seeking truth" are also "genuinely inquisitive enough to read for themselves".
From my own experience, I agree with Pepperfritz on this. Before I came across Laura's work I was interested in all sorts of channelled material, and was a regular reader of Sheldan Nidle's Yahoo forum. The more that I read there, and on other similar sites (Kryon, Hosts of Heaven, etc), the more the 'splinter in my mind' became more like a huge stake and my degree of frustration with the material I was reading rose. Without having experienced all that frustration and boredom, and felt the concerted effort of such material to send me to sleep, I would not have been ready for the Cassiopaeans and Laura's writings, and I would not have appreciated the truth, clarity and external consideration of this forum.

So I would say that people like chrisc, Bridges, Nidle, and all the others, are actually performing a very valuable work providing the first steps in awakening for those who are ready.

I wholeheartedly agree that they are performing a very valuable work, although from a 180 degree perspective than what they think. After all, without the ability to compare and contrast (and other abilities), how would anyone be able to distinguish the liar from the honest person?
 
Buddy said:
PepperFritz said:
OPINMYND81 said:
...most people aren't that way at all, but are rather easily impressionable by such tricks.

If this is true, then he should know. He is using 'such tricks' to create false impressions in the minds of unsuspecting readers.

Excuse me, but what exactly do you mean by this remark? Are you somehow implying that I'm trying to "trick" people in order "to create false impressions in the minds of unsuspecting readers"? Who exactly is the "he" in your statement and furthermore what exactly is the point of your statement? It sounds more like a hit-and-run smear than something substantive that contributes to the discussion.
 
Matt said:
Excuse me, but what exactly do you mean by this remark? Are you somehow implying that I'm trying to "trick" people in order "to create false impressions in the minds of unsuspecting readers"? Who exactly is the "he" in your statement and furthermore what exactly is the point of your statement? It sounds more like a hit-and-run smear than something substantive that contributes to the discussion.

My apologies for the misunderstanding. The 'he' referred to was 'chrisc' and I was simply conveying understanding and agreement with your position. In retrospect, I don't see anything of real substance in my post, and as a result of your challenge, I think me learning some more about 'external consideration' should be my immediate priority..
Thanks for the 'wake up'.
 
Buddy said:
My apologies for the misunderstanding. The 'he' referred to was 'chrisc' and I was simply conveying understanding and agreement with your position. In retrospect, I don't see anything of real substance in my post, and as a result of your challenge, I think me learning some more about 'external consideration' should be my immediate priority..
Thanks for the 'wake up'.

No worries, I have to admit I am a little jumpy as of late. It seems that I'm getting attacked from all sides at my jobs and at school (particularly ever since I read Ponerology). At best I'm called a "tin foil hat" conspiracy theorist, at worst, well, it's worse. It's a bit like this chrisc implying that I'm some sort of cult member but on a lot more personal and day to day level. Either way it's not at all fun since it you're getting your identity, your ideas, and more, attacked, denied, ridiculed and dismissed. The last place I thought I'd get it is here, so I hope I wasn't too aggressive in my tone.

From my experience in 'online interactions' it is always far more likely that written text will be misinterpreted in a countless number of ways, far more than regular social interaction. I always re-read what I write before posting, e-mailing, etc. and make sure that there is no ambiguities that other people might 'misinterpret'. Sure you can never be in the clear 100% but I find by making a small, quick effort you can avoid a lot of unpleasentness. Believe me I learned this the hard way many times over.

At any rate I'm glad it was cleared up.
 
Matt: It sounds as though you need to be practicing more "Strategic Enclosure" in your work and school environments, in order to avoid being "targeted":


STRATEGIC ENCLOSURE

Extracted from Jupiter, Nostradamus, Edgar Cayce, and the Return of the Mongols, by Laura Knight-Jadczyk

Those who are familiar with the Parable of the Prodigal Son can understand that the realization alone that one is "in the pigsty of the foreign country" would serve to produce the state of alert, the condition for the "journey home." This is crucial since, in the story of the Prodigal son, we also see that when the son went to the "resident of the foreign land" to ask for help, he was sent to live and feed with the pigs. This exemplifies that principle that the Radiant being must understand at all times that the Lords of Entropy - the Powers That Be in this reality - will always try to reclaim them as servants. Additionally, belief in the ownership of the land, belief in "being at home" in this world, or being "in charge" of this world, can give a false sense of security to the Radiant being leading them to lower their guard and succumb to the Power of Illusion.

With this in mind, the Radiant being should then create an "Enclosure" around their "being."

The forces of entropy which govern this reality at present, are much stronger than the powers of resistance of the individual Radiant being. This fact leads us to consider the principle of the enclosure as a psychological policy, in relation to ourselves and to the exterior world, which will allow us to compensate for our lack of strength and available reserves by an appropriate strategy.

Because of millennia of cultural and religious conditioning, everything about us is limited, beginning with our nervous resistance. The rule which can be deduced from this is that we must - as much as possible - work silently so as not to draw increased attention and pressure upon ourselves while working on the process of awakening and assimilating knowledge and interior force that can restore us to the Edenic condition. This is true for the average Radiant being, because if he attracts the attention of what Mouravieff calls the General Law that mechanically rules this reality, he will be lost, as the reaction of the 'World' against him will be extreme.

What the Radiant being must do is to consciously master the material that is part of his interior world - his Belief Centers - by gaining sufficient knowledge to be able to exercise perspicacity and SEEing. This enables him to divide that which he perceives and to choose that which is assimilated, or "enters within" his "strategic enclosure." This allows him to accumulate force and put it in reserve. When the false beliefs, the illusions of this world, no longer have any part within the Radiant Being, then he will be able to step out of the flow of Linear Time.

The principle of the strategic enclosure is, then, that the individual or group must initially work silently to create this enclosure, without drawing the attention of the forces of life of this world to himself. These forces are systematically hostile to anyone who persistently searches for the Truth.

There are two parts to the Strategic Enclosure: The first is to shelter oneself physically from the harmful influence of the 'World' as much as possible. Gurdjieff referred to this as the activity of the "sly man." Unfortunately, this has often been twisted to mean the "monastic life" or "withdrawal from the world" which is an essentially useless approach when the thing that needs most to be learned is the objective truth of the reality in which we live.

The second part of the Strategic Enclosure is that the shelter must be built in his inner world. Mouravieff writes that "The picturesque language of the Tradition says that man must build a cage in himself. This must be provided with all means of connection with and direction of the centres. It must also be solid enough to effectively resist all rebellions of the little 'I's', singly or 'federated'. This construction takes time. To play its role as an organ of direction, it must be continually enlarged, improved and perfected."

In other words, the Strategic Enclosure is an allegory that refers to an ontological state where the individual basically declares his independence from the Law of Entropy that seems to govern the Material Universe. Using the concepts explained by Mouravieff, this state could also be described as a manifestation of a resolution to shut oneself up to the influences of illusion and instead open only to those influences that lead one to objectivity.

The Creative Hyperdimensional Wisdom claimed that once having "enclosed the land occupied," the people then could cultivate it and make it produce fruits. This, again, must be understood allegorically - even if the end result may be quite material. This is also reflected in alchemical metaphors as well as in one of the most famous examples given by Jesus: the miracle of the loaves and fishes which is merely an example of the fact that Jesus was a master of the Creative Hyperdimensional Wisdom which had expressed this principle in many other allegories including that of the Head of Bran and the Cauldron of Regeneration.

The principle of the Strategic Wall is, in its more immediate meaning, the practical application of the principle of Enclosure, however the fact that there are different manifestations of this strategic wall depending on the realm to which it is applied is made clear by the fact that there are many worlds where the Spirit remains captive and in each one of them the principle of the Strategic Wall supposes a different manifestation.

It could be said that, in the physical world the correct application might lead to construction of a Stone Wall, but one must understand that the definition of a "Stone Wall", as manifested in the physical realm, should not be constricted to the idea of a spatially closed wall. There are obviously many principles that belong to "Lithic Wisdom", which suggest that that a "stone wall" is related to the emplacement of megaliths in very specific layouts for the purpose of creating a grid that may have served, as one of its purposes, to protect the enclosed space from the influence of the Entropic Principle.

The Strategic Enclosure, then, aims at the innermost part of each man, creating a space in which awakening can take place. This awakening calls to them, and through their blood connections it calls to all others who are of the Radiant lineage, to cease their march along the "evolutionary" or "progressive" path of History and to rebel against the Laws of Entropy that reduce all to primal matter. Awakening induces the Radiant ones to take a leap in the opposite direction and transmute man's "animal tendencies" [the reactive machine programs of Gurdjieff, the Predator of Don Juan, the confluence with the General Law of Mouravieff ] and claim back their divine Hyperdimensional nature.

To achieve this latter Racial purpose, as opposed to the individual one, do have the help of an "external element".

What, specifically, is this "external element"?

It's the one thing whose sole description would fill entire volumes and which is often referred to as the Grail.
 
PepperFritz, thanks for this post. I had read this article before somewhere and had a difficult time comprehending the second half of it, so I sat it aside intending to go back to it later.
Now seems to be a good opportunity to ask something about it.
My difficulty seems to start at the 8th paragraph with the line:


PepperFritz said:
This must be provided with all means of connection with and direction of the centres.

I can't say why, but the more I read this, the more confused I seem to get. Everything before this sentence seems very clear, so the problem seems to start here.
Can you help me understand it? I want to be able to apply as much of this knowledge as soon as I can.
Thanks!
 
Hi Buddy,

The concept of strategic enclosure can be summarized in way more simple terms than that quote from Jupiter...

Basically, you want to act towards other people in your world strategically in such a way that you create space behind a wall, so to speak, to do the Work. If you let everyone know what you are thinking and what you are working on, you will be wide open for attacks of various kinds.

Examples of this would be acting normally, being able to discuss normal, everyday things with co-workers, family members, etc. It also helps to act with external consideration by not daying and doing things that will disturb other people in your life in ways they never asked for.

Hope this helps.

Buddy said:
PepperFritz, thanks for this post. I had read this article before somewhere and had a difficult time comprehending the second half of it, so I sat it aside intending to go back to it later.
Now seems to be a good opportunity to ask something about it.
My difficulty seems to start at the 8th paragraph with the line:


PepperFritz said:
This must be provided with all means of connection with and direction of the centres.

I can't say why, but the more I read this, the more confused I seem to get. Everything before this sentence seems very clear, so the problem seems to start here.
Can you help me understand it? I want to be able to apply as much of this knowledge as soon as I can.
Thanks!
 
Mouravieff said:
This must be provided with all means of connection with and direction of the centres.

Buddy said:
I can't say why, but the more I read this, the more confused I seem to get. Everything before this sentence seems very clear, so the problem seems to start here.Can you help me understand it?

I agree with DonaldJHunt that the above Cassiopaea description of Strategic Enclosure is more complex than required for what I wanted to communicate to Matt; however it was the only one available at the time. I cannot improve on Donald's excellent "simplification" of the concept, and thank him for his clear communication skills. I have bookmarked it and will quote it in future when I need a good, concise description.

As to explaining the full meaning of the Mouravieff quote, well, I am hardly an expert and hesitate to do so. Hopefully someone with more knowledge of Mouravieff's work can step in to answer your query in full. I can, however, direct you to the Cassiopaea entry Description of the Centres, which should provide you with the proper context.
 
DonaldJHunt said:
Examples of this would be acting normally, being able to discuss normal, everyday things with co-workers, family members, etc. It also helps to act with external consideration by not daying and doing things that will disturb other people in your life in ways they never asked for.

Hope this helps.

It does indeed. I didn't realize what the 'space' and 'cage' were referrences for.
The point about external consideration was also helpful.
Thanks
 
PepperFritz said:
As to explaining the full meaning of the Mouravieff quote, well, I am hardly an expert and hesitate to do so. Hopefully someone with more knowledge of Mouravieff's work can step in to answer your query in full. I can, however, direct you to the Cassiopaea entry Description of the Centres, which should provide you with the proper context.

Between what you and DonaldJHunt posted, I believe I can develop my understanding more fully.
Thank you very much!
 
DJHunt:

Excellent clarification of esoteric concepts for practical application!

Might Occam shave some redundant terminology? Seems to me that External Considering itself would mitigate value-clashes & interpersonal turbulence.

Strategic Enclosure connotes either constriction (applied to self) or aggression (applied to others.)

Strategic connotes manipulation, whilst Considering connotes empathy.

Framing ways of doing The Work in the world, seems SE might be infected by STS terminology, whilst EC is more STO.

Just my speculation, since I don't know ultimate source of term 'Strategic Enclosure' in this context.

Anyone knows?

Thanks, ayamaya
 
ayamaya said:
Strategic connotes manipulation, whilst Considering connotes empathy.

If you were being pursued by someone who intended to do you harm, you would use "strategy" to escape his clutches, not "empathy". The same applies when you are trying to pursue the Work while avoiding attack.

The dictionary defines "strategy" as "a careful plan or method; a clever stratagem; the art of devising or employing plans or stratagems toward a goal." It would only be "manipulative" if the goal were STS in nature. There's nothing wrong with using one's "smarts" to protect oneself from attack.
 
Hi Aya, External Consideration and Strategic Enclosure are two different concepts that apply broadly to the Work. The first is a fundamental re-evaluation and re-understanding of our interactions with people and basing our behavior and communication towards them from their perspective and understanding as opposed our own.

Gurdjieff in ISOTM said:
There are several different kinds of 'considering.' On the most prevalent occasions a man [note that in the Russian original, this is "human being"] is identified with what others think about him, how they treat him, what attitude they show towards him. He always thinks that people do not value him enough, are not sufficiently polite and courteous. All this torments him, makes him think and suspect and lose an immense amount of energy on guesswork, on suppositions, develops in him a distrustful and hostile attitude towards people. How somebody looked at him, what somebody thought of him, what somebody said of him - all this acquires for him an immense significance.
And he 'considers' not only separate persons but society and historically constituted conditions. Everything that displeases such a man seems to him to be unjust, illegal, wrong, and illogical. And the point of departure for his judgment is always that these things can and should be changed. 'Injustice' is one of the words in which very often considering hides itself. When a man has convinced himself that he is indignant with some injustice, then for him to stop considering would mean 'reconciling himself to injustice.'
There are people who are able to consider not only injustice or the failure of others to value them enough but who are able to consider for example the weather. This seems ridiculous but it is a fact. People are able to consider climate, heat, cold, snow, rain; they can be irritated by the weather, be indignant and angry with it. A man can take everything in such a personal way as though everything in the world had been specially arranged in order to give him pleasure or on the contrary to cause him inconvenience or unpleasantness.
All this and much else besides is merely a form of identification. Such considering is wholly based upon 'requirements.' A man inwardly 'requires' that everyone should see what a remarkable man he is and that they should constantly give expression to their respect, esteem, and admiration for him, for his intellect, his beauty, his cleverness, his wit, his presence of mind, his originality, and all his other qualities. Requirements in their turn are based on a completely fantastic notion about themselves such as very often occurs with people of very modest appearance. Various writers, actors, musicians, artists, and politicians, for instance, are almost without exception sick people. And what are they suffering from? First of all from an extraordinary opinion of themselves, then from requirements, and then from considering, that is, being ready and prepared beforehand to take offense at lack of understanding and lack of appreciation.
There is still another form of considering which can take a great deal of energy from a man. This form starts with a man beginning to think that he is not considering another person enough, that this other person is offended with him for not considering him sufficiently. And he begins to think himself that perhaps he does not think enough about this other, does not pay him enough attention, does not give way to him enough. All this is simply weakness. People are afraid of one another. But this can lead very far. I have seen many such cases. In this way a man can finally lose his balance, if at any time he had any, and begin to perform entirely senseless actions. He gets angry with himself and feels that it is stupid, and he cannot stop, whereas in such cases the whole point is precisely 'not to consider.'
It is the same case, only perhaps worse, when a man considers that in his opinion he 'ought' to do something when as a matter of fact he ought not to do so at all. 'Ought' and 'ought not' is also a difficult subject, that is, difficult to understand when a man really 'ought' and when he 'ought not.' This can be approached only from the point of view of 'aim.' When a man has an aim he 'ought' to do only what leads towards his aim and he 'ought not' to do anything that hinders him from going towards his aim.
As I have already said, people very often think that if they begin to struggle with considering within themselves it will make them 'insincere' and they are afraid of this because they think that in this event they will be losing something, losing a part of themselves. In this case the same thing takes place as in attempts to struggle against the outward expression of unpleasant emotions. The sole difference is that in one case a man struggles with the outward expression of emotions and in the other case with an inner manifestation of perhaps the same emotions.
This fear of losing sincerity is of course self-deception, one of those formulas of lying upon which human weaknesses are based. Man cannot help identifying and considering inwardly and he cannot help expressing his unpleasant emotions, simply because he is weak. Identifying, considering, the expressing of unpleasant emotions, are manifestations of his weakness, his impotence, his inability to control himself. But not wishing to acknowledge this weakness to himself, he calls it 'sincerity' or 'honesty' and he tells himself that he does not want to struggle against sincerity, whereas in fact he is unable to struggle against his weaknesses.
Sincerity and honesty are in reality something quite different. What a man calls 'sincerity' in this case is in reality simply being unwilling to restrain himself. And deep down inside him a man is aware of this. But he lies to himself when he says that he does not want to lose sincerity.
So far I have spoken of internal considering. It would be possible to bring forward many more examples. But you must do this yourselves, that is, you must seek these examples in your observations of yourselves and of others.
The opposite of internal considering and what is in part a means of fighting against it is external considering. External considering is based upon an entirely different relationship towards people than internal considering. It is adaptation towards people, to their understanding, to their requirements. By considering externally a man does that which makes life easy for other people and for himself. External considering requires a knowledge of men, an understanding of their tastes, habits, and prejudices. At the same time external considering requires a great power over oneself, a great control over oneself. Very often a man desires sincerely to express or somehow or other show to another man what he really thinks of him or feels about him. And if he is a weak man he will of course give way to this desire and afterwards justify himself and say that he did not want to lie, did not want to pretend, he wanted to be sincere. Then he convinces himself that it was the other man's fault. He really wanted to consider him, even to give way to him, not to quarrel, and so on. But the other man did not at all want to consider him so that nothing could be done with him. It very often happens that a man begins with a blessing and ends with a curse. He begins by deciding not to consider and afterwards blames other people for not considering him. This is an example of how external considering passes into internal considering. But if a man really remembers himself he understands that another man is a machine just as he is himself. And then he will enter into his position, he will put himself in his place, and he will be really able to understand and feel what another man thinks and feels. If he can do this his work becomes easier for him. But if he approaches a man with his own requirements nothing except new internal considering can ever be obtained from it.
Right external considering is very important in the work. It often happens that people who understand very well the necessity of external considering in life do not understand the necessity of external considering in the work; they decide that just because they are in the work they have the right not to consider. Whereas in reality, in the work, that is, for a man's own successful work, ten times more external considering is necessary than in life, because only external considering on his part shows his valuation of the work and his understanding of the work; and success in the work is always proportional to the valuation and understanding of it.

The second has more to do with implementation of the above in your life. I kind of think of it as keeping a part of your Being separate from your general personality. The part of you that does the Work should be kept private, hidden, tucked away from those in your External life in order to protect it as it grows. The key point is to not draw the attention of the General Law.

All in all In Search of the Miraculous by PD Ouspensky does a great job at giving you a great deal of info on external considering and Gnosis I by Mouravieff has a lot more discussion of the Strategic Enclosure. If you haven't read these yet I suggest ya hop to it, otherwise much of the discussion here will go misunderstood or not at all.

I think trying to tie in STS and STO into these concepts is a little like putting the cart before the horse. You need to have a solid understanding of all of them individually before trying to rectify them.
 
Yes, well put. Now it's my turn to thank YOU for your clear communication skills. :)

PepperFritz said:
ayamaya said:
Strategic connotes manipulation, whilst Considering connotes empathy.

If you were being pursued by someone who intended to do you harm, you would use "strategy" to escape his clutches, not "empathy". The same applies when you are trying to pursue the Work while avoiding attack.

The dictionary defines "strategy" as "a careful plan or method; a clever stratagem; the art of devising or employing plans or stratagems toward a goal." It would only be "manipulative" if the goal were STS in nature. There's nothing wrong with using one's "smarts" to protect oneself from attack.
 
I have a question.

Does General Law manifest itself mostly/only when you are NOT practicing external consideration and doing the Work in a Strategic Enclosure? If you are successful at doing this all the time, you escape General Law? or am I oversimplifying?

:shock:EDIT disregard & apologies, I had something else on my mind and allowed that to effect my post, I wasn't thinking clearly.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom