DOCSLIB.ORG

18. Gurdjieff and Ouspensky (2)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
18. Gurdjieff and Ouspensky (2) 18. Gurdjieff and Ouspensky (2) 1. In this paper I examine another incident which reveals O’s awareness that G was of superior knowledge and being but also his own resistance to this fact. In the immediately previous paper, I examined the highly significant event in Finland which was the telepathic communication that G set off between O and himself thus giving to O proofs of his own [G’s] superior ability. We take it that O described accurately an actual event. Despite this, I pointed out, O assumed (p 263, In Search of the Miraculous) that G could react in a certain way deriding him, if he, O, told him of something he had found about himself: this shows very great presumption on O’s part. How could O, after G’s clear demonstrations of his own undoubted higher knowledge and power, assume that he knew G so well as to be sure of G’s ways and reactions? 2. A little later, after the events in Finland, two people of the group dropped off. They seemed suddenly, writes O (p 269), not to understand anything of the teaching, to see in everything G told them a misunderstanding on his part and to find in their fellow-students a lack of sympathy. The two thought all the other members conspired against them, failed to inform them of what G said when they were absent and, on the contrary, told tales to G in order to make him distrust them (= the two). The two became mistrustful, suspicious and openly hostile to the group. They accused them all of giving to G wrong information about themselves and presenting them in a false light. O was astonished by this change. 3. But the more significant aspect of this sad event is that O notes fully the two person’s change of attitude towards G himself! I quote O’s description of their new attitude: - “G. himself had completely changed, had become altogether different from what he used to be before, had become harsh, requiring, had lost all feeling and all interest for individual people, had ceased to demand the truth from people; that he preferred to have around him people such as were afraid to tell him the truth, who were hypocrites, who threw flowers at one another and at the same time spied on the others". Note: O writes that the two others thought G had changed, had become different; had ceased to demand the truth from people; preferred to have round him hypocrites. Yet some such notions appeared in O himself subsequently leading him to leave G! 4. At first O begins to "separate" G the man/teacher from the "system". In the circumstances this is an absurdity. Particularly as G does absolutely nothing that goes against the "system" as far as one can see at that stage by O’s own description. 1 Later he writes openly that there were many things (unspecified) he could not understand and that he had to go (p. 373) i.e. abandon G. He valued immensely the ideas of the system realising their significance. But he doubted that he, together with "the majority of our company", could continue under G's leadership. "I do not in the least," O explains, "mean that I found any of G's actions or methods wrong [here too he becomes judge of his teacher!] or that they failed to respond to what I expected". This explains nothing, of course; and the same holds for O's additional explanation that "a man has choice" and he is not obliged to follow something which “does not respond to what he is seeking" (p. 374). This seems to me to contradict the preceding statements about the two members who left and about O’s valuing the system. He does not say how exactly G’s methods failed to meet his own expectations! And when he wanders off into different types of school he is obviously covering up or evading something. How did G become different? No explanation! Nor is there the slightest improvement or clear explanation when he says that a leader (=G) should put off people for whom his methods or subjects will be "alien, incomprehensible and unattainable". O does not and will not give any real reasons as to his objections. He states then that he had been mistaken about many things that he had ascribed to G. But again we have seen no mention of these things. It all sounds like clumsy self-justification. Here I stop to return with another paper. 2 19. Gurdjieff and Ouspensky (3) 1. In my youth in England, I got acquainted with Krishnamurti’s and Ouspensky’s writings and, shortly after, Gurdjieff’s. Krishnamurti was very much alive then (late 1950’s) and I attended some of his talks. But he had no “school”, no practical, methodical system of teaching – only the practice of non-interfering “watching” or “self–awareness”. Therefore, I could not follow him in a practical way because no sooner did I remember to watch my condition and state of mind than I forgot again for a very long period. Fortunately, soon afterwards I joined an organisation descending from O, the School of Economic Science run by L. MacLaren. But I enthused immensely over the teaching of G & O as given in the dispassionate style of O’s books and the immense span they covered in human psychology and cosmic structure. I confess though, that, even then, I found rather artificial, some thing like the hydrogens and the food-octaves based on them. 2. Today, (Sept 2018), the G and O traditions are very fragmented even where groups continue in direct descent from one or the other man. In those days around 1960, we looked at the life and legacy of the two in great awe. I myself thought of G and O as Socrates and Plato, even though Socrates had not written any books and had died many years before Plato, whereas G outlived O by 2 years and had written his own books. Even in those days there were those who favoured O and those who favoured G. This initial split, which obviously had begun much earlier, gradually, with the passage of years, became a strong and rather “un-esoteric” partiality towards the one or the other line of descent. I suppose it was inevitable. Over the years appeared books promoting implicitly or explicitly the one or the other line, vindicating G over O and vice-versa, sometimes not without much acrimony. 3. Of the two lines, O’s would seem to be the more successful but only in so far as it changed very radically. At present I shall focus on one important aspect of O’s character which comes out strongly in his own writings. This is ascertained, searched out and sketched by W.P. Patterson in his Struggle of the Magicians (1996 Arete Commun. Publ. Fairfax, Cal). WPP writes (pp 36-37, n 22) that the point of O’s real break with G began in Finland, in August 1916. At that time, G had induced in O his telepathic ability of communication and O had discovered something about himself but decided (as he writes in his In Search of the Miraculous p 263) that he would not show this to G “because he would laugh at him”. Quite rightly WPP considers that here O betrays lack of trust in his teacher (one moreover who had just demonstrated to O powers unknown to him!) and assumes contrary to all esoteric principles, which O himself would later emphasise to his own students, that a student cannot know his teacher’s level of being! 3 4. In O’s A Further Record: Extracts from Meetings 1928-1945, in the section on the “Short History of the work”, O says that he went to the East to look for schools but, in India, he found only devotional ones which expected acceptance on the students’ part of all they were told and he was not interested; for such schools existed in Russia too. This to me sounds very odd for three important reasons. First, in his book In Search of the Miraculous O writes (p 5) of the devotional schools, indeed, but also that he heard of a different type that could have been what he was looking for; moreover, the people who were connected with and spoke to him about that type of school were, he adds, very different from others. Nonetheless, he rejected that, too, without further investigation because, as he says, such schools demanded too much – that he should give up his ideas and plans! But is not this what a school with a genuine esoteric teaching would ask? Second, O himself put similar conditions of obedience on his students also, sometimes quite severe, demanding and seemingly unreasonable, especially towards the end of his life. (In a later paper I shall examine the last months od his life in England which have been preserved in great detail.) Third, O enjoined his successor in London in 1947 to make contact with the Inner Circle and find the source of the system but he made no such effort himself throughout his life. Why not? He said at an interview in the 1930’s that Central Asia was closed and one could not travel there and in any case conditions, people and institutions like monasteries etc, would have changed beyond possible recognition. But John Bennet did travel there in the early 1950’s and discovered much. India was easily accessible being a British colony and one, moreover, which O had visited much earlier and found possibilities! Yet he did no further exploring for more than 20 years.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Research Article STALIN and OCCULT KNOWLEDGE Abstract. It
    International Conference. August 20, 2020. San Francisco, California, USA SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY IN THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD: THEORETICAL BASIСS AND INNOVATIVE APPROACH 15th edition DOI: http://doi.org/10.15350/L_26/15 Research Article STALIN AND OCCULT KNOWLEDGE Tengiz Simashvili1 1Professor, Iakob Gogebashvili Telavi State University, Georgia tengizsimashvili@yahoo.com DOI: http://doi.org/10.15350/L_26/15.2 Abstract. It is impossible to publicize previously unknown documents about Ioseb Jugashvili that I have discovered in various archives in Georgia, without the analysis of the already- known materials. To some extent, the content of these new materials is different from examined in this article, are to some extent contradictory, the analysis of them makes it the “true” facts that are already known to us. notAlthough sufficiently the information studied. and documents, evident that Ioseb Jughashvili’s Biography is “In the mind of Georgian people St. George hasAcad. a place Ivane of Javakhishvilithe old main pagan deity of the Georgians, the moon…” The content of unpublished memoirs of Aleksandre (Sandro) Tsikhitatrishvili a son of Ioseb Jughashvili was my– breast brotherIoseb Jughashvili’s and my father Godfather Mikhaka Mikhail* was a Tsikhitatrishvili,groomsman of Besodated* togetherby 1936 with is Jacobquite Egnatashvili.1interesting. According1 to his words, “Comrade Stalin – Keke’s mother Melania was a Godchild of my grandmother. Soso was myselfborn in responsible December 1878, to say my all father’s that I know, mother or I Mariam think it helpedwill be usefulKeke during to fill out the a childbirth”. biography ofHe ourwrote, leader. “All Also,these I circumstancesconsider myself make obliged me dareto say to allbecome that I prudenthave hear andd fromconsider my 2 I stress this fact, because the memoirs are largely subjective, but defamation of any non-objective information about Stalin at that time was punished at least by forcedparents”.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gurdjieff Folk Instruments Ensemble
    Hoofdbegunstiger / Patron The Gurdjieff Folk Mede mogelijk gemaakt door Embassy of the Republic of Armenia Instruments Ensemble to the Kingdom of the Netherlands © Alber Babelon Omslagen programma's deel 1.indd 13 22-5-2015 11:55:22 INHOUD CONTENT THE MUSIC OF GURDJIEFF & KOMITAS ARMENIA: ORIENT & OCCIDENT Podium Mozaïek Muziekgebouw aan ’t IJ CREDITS 02 CREDITS 08 PROGRAMMA PROGRAMMA PROGRAMME 03 PROGRAMME 09 TOELICHTING TOELICHTING PROGRAMME NOTES 04 PROGRAMME NOTES 10 DE MUZIEK VAN JE INNERLIJKE ZELF THE MUSIC OF YOUR INNER SELF 12 OVER DE ARTIESTEN ABOUT THE ARTISTS 18 HOLLAND FESTIVAL 2015 23 WORD VRIEND BECOME A FRIEND 26 COLOFON COLOPHON 28 1 THE MUSIC OF CREDITS GURDJIEFF & KOMITAS muziek music George Gurdjieff, Komitas piano piano INFO Lusine Grigoryan ZO 7. 6 arrangeur, artistiek directeur SUN 7.6 arranger, artistic director Levon Eskenian aanvang starting time 14:30 2:30 pm musici musicians The Gurdjieff Folk Instruments Ensemble: locatie venue Emmanuel Hovhannisyan, duduk Podium Mozaïek Norayr Gapoyan, duduk, bass duduk Avag Margaryan, pogh duur running time Armen Ayvazyan, kamancha, cymbal 75 minuten, geen pauze Aram Nikoghosyan, oud 75 minutes, no interval Meri Vardanyan, kanon Vladimir Papikyan, santur Davit Avagyan, tar Mesrop Khalatyan, dap Eduard Harutyunyan, tmbuk, cymbal 2 PROGRAMMA Podium Mozaïek G.I. Gurdjieff (ca. 1866-1949) Komitas arr. Levon Eskenian gearrangeerd door Levon Eskenian voor Chant from a holy book traditionele Armeense instrumenten arranged for traditional Armenian G.I.Gurdjieff, T. De Hartmann instruments by Levon Eskenian Armenian Song Manushaki Bayaty Yerangui No 40 uit from: Asian Songs and Shoror Rhythms uitvoering performed by uitvoering performed by The Gurdjieff Ensemble Lusine Grigoryan, piano Komitas G.I.
    [Show full text]
  • My First Introduction to Azerbaijan Was in a Book I Read in 1971 When I Was 19 Years Old and Searching for Larger Meaning in Life
    AZERBAIJANI CARPETS My first introduction to Azerbaijan was in a book I read in 1971 when I was 19 years old and searching for larger meaning in life. I had grown up in the sleepy suburbs of Philadelphia and had become convinced while still a teenager that I needed to travel, see the world and learn a lot about how the rest of the world lives and thinks. The book I read, Meetings With Remarkable Men, was written by an early 20th century mystic philosopher and world traveler, George Gurdjieff. He was born and raised in the Caucasus, and on the first pages of his first chapter, he mentioned the name of a country I had never heard of, but was about to hear a lot about: Azerbaijan. I remember like yesterday feeling as if the name, so odd to my ears, just jumped off the page. In other writings this same author mentioned his abiding interest in and expertise on the oriental carpets of the regions, from the Caucasus, Turkey, Persian and Central Asia, where he claimed to have spent years in search of specialized esoteric wisdom. My first encounter with the carpets from Azerbaijan was filled with astonishment. I had not experienced such a wealth of feeling from a physical object. I didn't know it was possible to feel transported, merely by gazing at a woven pattern of design and color. Mr. Gurdjieff claimed that there existed in the world art that was of another level than the one we are accustomed to, art that was able to transport us to another way of feeling in this world, and the old carpets from the orient were sometimes able to do that.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shock of Presence.’ Brook Articulated This Very Clearly in His Essay on Gurdjieff, ‘The Secret Dimension,’
    ABSTRACT This thesis investigates the social, political, and cultural climate which facilitated the emergence of Peter Brook and Jerzy Grotowski as the most influential theatre directors in the Fig. 1. Unknown. Last photograph taken of George Gurdjieff. 1948. second half of the Twentieth Century. Jeremy Johnson This thesis is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts THE SHOCK OF (Research) Department of Theatre and Performance Studies. Faculty of Arts and Science, University of Sydney November 2017 PRESENCE Peter Brook & Jerzy Grotowski - The Reinvention of Australian Theatre I certify that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work and that all the assistance received in preparing this thesis and sources have been acknowledged. 1 Table of Contents Prologue 2 Introduction 4 Part 1 1.1 Stanislavski and the Russian Soul 13 1.2 A Challenge to Prevailing Ideologies: 20 How the Cultural Landscape was shaped to receive the Ideas of Gurdjieff in the 1920s and Brook and Grotowski in the 1960s 1.3 Jerzy Grotowski: hic et nunc. The Sacred Aim. 31 1.4 Peter Brook: An Orthodoxy within the Mysticism 37 Part 2 2.1 1960: The Time is Not Yet Ripe 51 2.2 1970: Australia and the Shock of Identity in an Overdue Cultural Revolution 56 2.3 Larrikins, Ockers and the Empty Space 62 2.4 Freestyle Upstream to Jerzy Shore 73 Part 3 3.1 Poor Theatre, Women’s Theatre, and Take No Prisoners 79 3.2 Conclusion: The Socio-Political and Spiritual Legacy 86 Endnotes 96 Bibliography 100 2 Prologue Even at a superficial level, looking at Peter Brook and Jerzy Grotowski, one cannot help but see two sides of the same coin: Brook re-evaluating theatre as an empty space for ritual practice, Grotowski re-evaluating the empty soul of ritual practice and making it theatre.
    [Show full text]
  • SELF-REMEMBERING Georges Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (1870-1949) & His Legacy
    SELF-REMEMBERING Georges Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (1870-1949) & His Legacy By Joanna Nicholls–Parker A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in RELIGIOUS STUDIES 591 Victoria University of Wellington 2014 1 SELF-REMEMBERING Georges Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (1870–1949) & His Legacy Contents: 1) ABSTRACT 2) INTRODUCTION 3) HISTORICAL CONTENT . Georges Ivanovitch Gurdjieff 1870–1949 . Pyotr Demianovich Ouspensky 1878–1947 . Ouspensky with Dr. Francis Crosbie Roles 1901–1982 – Master/pupil 4) THE MANIFEST SPIRITUAL PRACTICES AND TECHNIQUES 5) THE LONDON STUDY GROUP SPIRITUAL PRACTICES & TECHNIQUES: An Account Of * A Reflection On * Contemporary Academic Literature . Dr. Francis Crosbie Roles 1901–1982 . Dr. Peter Fenwick 1935–present 6) CONCLUSION 7) BIBLIOGRAPHY 2 SELF-REMEMBERING Georges Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (1870–1949) & His Legacy ABSTRACT The subject of this thesis is the spiritual practices taught by Gurdjieff (1870- 1949) and the legacy of these teachings in the major spiritual groups that have aspired to follow his path. I argue that at the core of these spiritual techniques are the practices that Gurdjieff referred to as “self-remembering” and “transition” and that by an analysis of these it is possible to articulate Gurdjieff’s spiritual system in a novel fashion. This articulation is then utilized to explore the different ways in which his system was developed by his disciples. The more recent studies of spirituality and spiritual techniques allow us to critically reconsider Gurdjieff and his legacy in a systemic and academic fashion. The thesis concludes that while Gurdjieff was a man and teacher of his time many of the themes of his teachings continue to resonate in contemporary spiritual movements and that his influence has been wider than is often acknowledged, and that at the centre of this legacy are his spiritual techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • George Gurdjieff
    Subject: Spiritual Human Article: 15 George Gurdjieff Doç. Dr. Haluk Berkmen George Gurdjieff (1866 – 1949) was a spiritual teacher who transmitted his wisdom not only through words, but also through music and spiritual dance. His teachings are found in the books of P. D. Ouspensky (1) and Thomas, Olga de Hartmann (2). Gurdjieff’s father was a bard who travelled in eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus telling stories and singing mystic songs, in accordance with the Ashik tradition (3). Being influenced by his father, Gurdjieff developed a method for awakening one's consciousness. He called his method The Work or The Forth Way , where he addresses the question of people's place in the world and how to focus attention and increase self-energy. Gurdjieff claimed that people ordinarily live in states of waking sleep and react with mechanistic reactions. He claimed that: “Humans are machines and machines can only react mechanistically.” He therefore, found out that all humans can be categorized within nine character types. These types are organized symbolically around a circle divided into 9 equal segments. The symbolic figure is called Enneagram , from the Greek word ennea , meaning "nine". Below we see the enneagram and the nine essential character types. 2 Out of these nine types, three of them are the most prevalent and widespread among people. These are the types 3, 6 and 9 (Achiever, Loyalist and Peacemaker) which occupy the corners of an equilateral triangle. Type 9, the Peacemaker, is accepted to be the most valuable type and therefore is located at the top of the Enneagram symbol.
    [Show full text]
  • Stalin) and Murder of Ilia Chavchavadze
    Electronic Research Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Vol 2: Issue III ISSN: 2706 – 8242 www.eresearchjournal.com Jul - Sep 2020 Joseph Jughashvili (Stalin) and Murder of Ilia Chavchavadze by Professor Tengiz Simashvili Iakob Gogebashvili Telavi State University, Georgia Email: tengizsimashvili@yahoo.com Abstract The archives of Georgia contain many interesting documents about Joseph Stalin. One of the most significant documents among them is a letter on September 5, 1907. It is mention, that somebody with last name Nizharadze was the suspect in Ilia Chavchavadze’s assassination. It is quite possible that this surname contains extremely important information to the study of Joseph Jughashvili (Stalin)’s biography. The point is that in 1908, Joseph Jughashvili (Stalin) was arrested in Baku with a false passport under the name of Gaioz Nizharadze. According to the archival materials which I have discovered so far, it becomes evident that the false passport under the name of Nizharadze was issued on April 7, 1906. On the one hand, such a coincidence of surnames directly indicates Joseph Jughashvili (Stalin)’s involvement in Ilia Chavchavadze’s assassination. However, on the other hand, while working on the archival documents in Georgia regarding Ilia Chavchavadze’s assassins: Iliko Imerlishvili, Ivane Inashvili, Pavle Fshavlishvili, and Gigila Berbichashvili, I could not find any information about Joseph Jughashvili’s or “Nizharadze’s” involvement in Chavchavadze’s murder. Although the information and documents, examined in this article, are to some extent contradictory, the analysis of them makes it evident that Joseph Jughashvili’s Biography is not sufficiently studied. Keywords: The Georgian achieves, Murder of Ilia Chavchavadze, Joseph Stalin, Biography, Terrorists, Historiography Introduction: There are quite interesting materials about Joseph Jughashvili (Stalin) in archival materials of the murder of Ilia Chavchavadze.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anatomy of a Myth: a Biography
    1 Gurdjieff The Secondary Literature: A Selective Bibliography J. Walter Driscoll On January 13, 1949, George Gurdjieff was in New York City and announced his decision to publish Beelzebub’s Tales to His Grandson. This was a complete departure from the practice he had followed for almost four decades, of expounding his ideas orally and circulating his writings privately. He died on October 29 of that year, barely a week after receiving the publisher’s proofs for Beelzebub’s Tales. Biographers date his birth between 1866 and 1877 in Alexandropol, which is now Gyumri (Gumry), in the Republic of Georgia. Few historical facts about Gurdjieff’s life are certain until he was probably in his forties and emerged in Moscow about 1912. His father was Greek, his mother Armenian. He grew up in this war-torn frontier area of the Caucasus, which for millennia has seen a parade of conquerors; Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Byzantines, the Arabs, the Mongols, the Turks, and latest the Russians. The Caucasus has long been a melting pot of cultures, religions and races from the East and West. Gurdjieff: the 2ndary Literature—Copyright ã2004 J. Walter Driscoll—www.Gurdjieff-Bibliography.com 2 In his autobiographical Meetings with Remarkable Men, Gurdjieff describes how he was deeply influenced by his father’s fund of songs, poems and legends from ancient wisdom-traditions. Gurdjieff’s father preserved this oral tradition as an ashokh or storyteller and troubadour. Privately educated for both medicine and the Eastern Orthodox priesthood, but equally interested in science and technical specialisation, Gurdjieff found that neither conventional religion nor orthodox scientific knowledge answered his ‘irresistible urge’ to understand the meaning and purpose of life and satisfy his questions about the world, the human psyche, and death.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TEACHINGS of GEORGE GURDJIEFF Week Three 1 DAY 1
    Quotes From THE TEACHINGS OF GEORGE GURDJIEFF Week Three 1 DAY 1 HE HAS NO TIME TO FEEL REALITY “These terrors on account of which you will not hang your- self are admitted by Nature as offensive for your existence, to the extent in which they are necessary to give you the experiences of joy and sorrow, pleasure and pain. Without them, there could not exist the experiences of which our life is made up. This is the source of the many troubles, griefs, efforts, self-loves, vanities which force man to act, to attain, and have illusions and disillusions. That is what supports life. These same things give us dreams, imaginations, and illusions, and awake the most various wishes in man. And he is always full of them. They give him the necessary impulse and fill his life, and he has no time to feel reality. Often those alms are inaccessible, but man does not see this and keeps on trying and trying. When one kind of trouble passes-anoth- 2 er appears. Man’s machine has to work all the time. “And now imagine that you know, that you remember, if only with your head, that you have in one month to die. Exactly in one month. What will remain then of all that has filled our day? Everything that you have will lose its meaning and will count as nothing. And the newspaper with your morning cof- fee, and the polite greeting from your neighbors on the stairs, your professional work and belongings, and theater in the evening, and rest and sleep-to what purpose is all this? “But if death will come only in a year or two? Even then, everything will no longer have the same meaning that it had for us before.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TEACHINGS of GEORGE GURDJIEFF Week One 1 DAY 1
    Quotes From THE TEACHINGS OF GEORGE GURDJIEFF Week One 1 DAY 1 MANY MEN BORN, BUT ONLY FEW GROW He [George Gurdjieff speaking to 12-year-old Fritz Peters] went on to say that his work was not only very difficult, but could also be very dangerous for some people. “This work not for everyone,” he said. “FOR example, if I wish to learn to become millionaire, necessary to devote all early life to this aim and no other. If wish to become priest, philosopher, teacher, or businessman, should not come here. Here only teach possibility how become man such as not known in modern times, particularly in western world.” He then asked me to look out of the window and to tell him what I saw. I said that, from that window, all I could see was an oak tree. 2 And what, he asked, was on the oak tree? I told him: acorns. “How many acorns?” When I replied, rather uncertainly, that I did not know, he said impatiently: “Not exactly, not ask that. Guess how many!” I said that I supposed there were several thousand of them. He agreed and then asked me how many of the acorns would become oak trees. I answered that I supposed only five or six of them would actually develop into trees, if that many. He nodded. “Perhaps only one, perhaps not even one. Must learn from Nature. Man is also organism. Nature make many acorns, but possibility to become tree exist for only few acorns. Same with man—many men born, but only few grow.
    [Show full text]
  • An Enlightened Life in Text and Image: GI Gurdjieff‟S Meetings With
    An Enlightened Life in Text and Image: G. I. Gurdjieff‟s Meetings With Remarkable Men (1963) and Peter Brook‟s Meetings With Remarkable Men (1979) Carole M. Cusack Introduction This article considers the „autobiographical‟ memoir by George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff (1866[?] – 29 October 1949), Meetings With Remarkable Men (hereafter Meetings), which was published posthumously in 1963 under the aegis of Jeanne de Salzmann, Gurdjieff‟s designated successor. Almost all known about the Greek-Armenian Gurdjieff is open to question, from his birth date (variously given as 1866, 1872 and 1877), to the „Work‟, as his teaching is called. The Work has been jealously guarded as a modern initiatory tradition by first – and second – generation disciples, and is controversial in terms of its sources, meaning and interpretation.1 The 1979 film, Meetings With Remarkable Men, with a script co-authored by Madame de Salzmann, directed by Gurdjieffian theatre and film auteur, Peter Brook (b. 1925), depicts the young Gurdjieff‟s spiritual quest reverentially. This article investigates a number of issues including: what models underlie the self-understanding expressed in Gurdjieff‟s memoir; what role Jeanne de Salzmann and other prominent disciples in the Work played in the dissemination of Gurdjieff‟s model of the „enlightened life‟; the ways that Peter Brook has modelled his own life on that of Gurdjieff; what the constituent elements of an „enlightened life‟ in the contemporary, deregulated spiritual marketplace might be; and the aesthetics of the film‟s presentation of the quest for enlightenment. It is speculated that the film adaptation of Meetings With Remarkable Men potentially won for Gurdjieff a new audience of spiritual seekers who did not wish to join the secretive and authoritarian Work, but admired the portrayal of Gurdjieff as a spiritual seeker who achieved enlightened status.
    [Show full text]
  • SOURCES of GURDJIEFF's TEACHINGS1 from the Beginning of Gurdjieff's Teaching Mission in the West, a Number of Questions Have F
    SOURCES OF GURDJIEFF'S TEACHINGS1 From the beginning of Gurdjieff’s teaching mission in the West, a number of questions have fuelled an ongoing debate about the source of his teachings and practices. Where did he learn his powerful system of psychological and cosmological ideas? What particular spiritual teachings form the foundation of his work? Which teachers inspired and influenced his development? When asked these questions directly, Gurdjieff seemed reluctant to provide any information of substance, typically answering evasively or in generalities. On one occasion when esotericist Boris Mouravieff asked him about the source of his teaching, he replied: “Maybe I stole it.” (1) Gurdjieff sometimes spoke to his students of his search for esoteric knowledge and teachings and his eventual discovery of “elements of a forgotten knowledge of being that reconciled the great traditional beliefs. He called it ‘ancient science’ but did not identify its origin, those who discovered and preserved it.” (2) In an interview with scholar Denis Saurat in 1923 he provided some general indications of this search: Thirty years ago, twelve of us spent many years in Central Asia, and we reconstructed the Doctrine; by oral traditions, the study of ancient costumes, popular songs and even certain books. The Doctrine has always existed, but the tradition has often been interrupted. In antiquity some groups and castes knew it, but it was incomplete. (3) According to Gurdjieff, a comprehensive teaching of human spiritual development existed in ancient times but was later divided into specializations: “In India there was ‘philosophy,’ in Egypt ‘theory,’ and in present-day Persia, Mesopotamia, and Turkestan – ‘practice’.” (4) He also spoke of four principal lines of esoteric teaching – Egyptian, Hebraic, Persian and Hindu, and two Western mixtures of these lines, theosophy and occultism.
    [Show full text]