It is in the personal encounter or confrontation with the ideas planted in the narrative of Beezelbub that our level of understanding or Being is revealed and, in that process, slowly develops. This much is clear to me after all these years.
I use Gurdjieff as an introduction to my work, his ideas regarding the psychology of man is truly profound. However, I found Spinoza has a method of awakening the mind from sleep. Learn how: WayofSpinoza.com
Mr. Gurdjieff died, and with him went his nervous system, wisdom, and secrets. Many events described in "Beelzebub's Tales to His Grandson" actually happened to the Work. It had to happen; it's according to the law. Thank you for this video. We need to ponder, not to find fault in the modern "Work" or to blame anyone. We are seekers, and seekers seek. Many new insights can now be found in modern science regarding the functions of the brain, the nervous system, and the vagus nerve. The Work, in my opinion, has become the way of the monk. Often sly, but foolish.
A very revealing discussion -- thank you. BTW, the anecdote about Mr. Gurdjieff's Paris apartment was from Ravi Ravindra's memoir Heart Without Measure. Instead of the books, the shelves had contained every sort of pantry staple and rarity ("real food", as she put it). Mme. deSalzmann's remark to Ravindra was quite possibly more about his state of mind than some straightforward factual accounting. With respect to the evaluation of the changing of methods and presentation described by the term "new work", an opportunity for orientation is published in Exchanges Within: Questions from Everyday Life; Selected from Gurdjieff Group Meetings with John Pentland in California 1955-1984. Those who revere the integrity of G's ideas and methods from a safe distance are likely to find this material almost unreadable -- in a similar but distinct way in which BT seems to affect many. Two features of the situation are of primary interest to an investigator -- just how developed and potent is G's science and subsequent sowing into life of that understanding; and what can my own attitude be to best participate?
Extremely interesting but I would also like to hear from people who stayed in the “new Work.” As a general spiritual principle, it seems that God provides the wind, while men raise the sails. The third force balances the two. Lastly, I’m quite curious about the domestic advice given by Gurdjieff that was edited out of the Paris Meeting 1943 book.
On the last bit, see meeting #7 in the Meetings 1941-1946 book, published by Book Studio. Pretty sure there are some more, but don't have my notes on hand.
The first part of this in particular is very unfortunate, or so it seems to me. With all of his apparent work, Joseph should know better. It isn't that questions of this kind shouldn't be raised, but this isn't the context in which to do so. This reduces real questioning to a much lower level - hearsay and gossip even. Gurdjieff was very practical and pragmatic - he frequently changed his methods and emphasis - why should that not have continued after his death? It's important that the Work remains alive and adaptable, or it becomes fixed and dead. In the end, it's down to each of us to exercise our common sense and intelligence - to experiment, and if something works, use it. Joseph is using the word 'passive' in a completely misunderstood way. To seek 'openness', is not an easy thing - it requires an active attention - in relation to which, that which is usually most active and dominant gives way and becomes passive. A new order is established. I was in a group in London led by pupils of Madame Lannes in the 80s - they were probably the most intelligent, open and humane individuals I've ever met - and were certainly faithful to their teacher. Yes I recognise the characteristics of this 'New Work' Joseph talks about, but it wasn't perceived as anything 'new' - but as a living evolution - something that made sense. It is unthinkable that those people were led by the nose. Joseph talks of the influence of Zen (or Krishnamurti) as if it was a bad thing - why? And who is to say that Madam de Salzmann wasn't in touch with Gurdjieff on some level we cannot understand? She was with him throughout his journey - he trusted her implicitly, and in her work after he died she was surrounded by intelligent people, not idiots. Joseph would gain much by exercising a little more humility. I hesitate before posting this comment as I suspect those who really know choose to remain silent - they are too busy focusing on what is important.
I agree with all you’ve said. I am amazed by how much apparently joseph did not understand or receive from Jim Wyckoff. He seems, like a whole group of other people who had formed attachments and gained much from working with another teacher , not to have been able to put his ideas of how things should be down long enough to really experience whst Wycjoff, Madame or Michele de Salzmann ( The Next Attention) , we’re bringing. And now that these selfless servants if G’s Work are not here anymore, they can be spoken of on a level similar to opinion or gossip. As you say it tahes a long time to develop an active receptivity - and it is developed by the exercises that were used by their original teachers. But there was a point to it - to take one to another level of seeing , if understanding , not to worship the exercises for themselves. It was at this new level where Wyckoff and others have tried to pick up the thread of what had been discovered about oneself. It is a shame Joseph missed the fact that Wyckoff patiently waited fir inner openings in students where he could meet them at another level much like the 2nd exercise here. The WirknGurdjieff gave outwardly was still very much there - but now, after all the years of doing exercises, something was also expected internally.not just given externally. Ultimately there is only One Work but there is also evolution.
@Amy Barker-Wilson Yes, it's really remarkable how these later day teachers have all surpassed Mr. Gurdjieff's level of understanding and developed better methods of work. (Who knew you could even work in your sleep?) But don't you think that in all honesty seekers should be informed that what the foundation now teaches is post-gurdjieffian instead of having to spending years trying to figure that out for themselves?
This "New Work" subject is fascinating, truly. When I read that part in Azize's book, I was really interested being that I have participated in Groups for years. I have been told not all groups are the same, what I can say about my experience is that Beelzebub is read, Gurdjieff wartime exercises are used, there is a preparation, but sittings are a stable. I dont see the advantage in discussing the technical side of the ideas, it does become too intellectual. I find that the practice of the work gives the needed experience to perceive the ideas in the proper context, perhaps there is a usefulness to those who have got to this point, but someone who hasnt had the necessary time to begin to have a feeling for work and feels its direction, talking about the ideas directly will not help them. They've already read material, so much material exists now that they can read from gurdjieff and students who will be able to explain it much better than anyone here now. What people need is the direct experience, the actual practice, as the knowledge is very high, but their being is quite low, and all the data extracted will only help to facilitate their sleep. The work has to move from the thought into the feeling, this will never be achieved by oneself nor will it ever be achieved by linear discussions about the ideas, unless it happens during the sharing of ones work with something, perhaps it can enter some place deeper after real seeing happens. The crust of our falsities is too thick, too solid, it has to loosen, to soften, become more transparent, for impressions to pass into a more essential element. One begins to feel the concepts, a different kind of knowing, like the body when it just enters a position.
I believe it is okay for me to mention the above given the subject manner of the video and the mention of foundation groups. Groups I have been a part of, which are foundation groups, we work on the movements in the same pattern given to Azize, 4 movements given for the year to work on. Those who are new to the work, did not do full movements, only movement exercises, to get a taste. Full movements were for people who had shown they were ready by the progress shown in the exercises which could take years or 1 year depending on the person and what the movements teacher felt they were ready for, how serious they were - what would be the reason to teach actual movements to a person who is going to leave in 3 months? One of the reasons certain exercises are protected is for the benefit and safety of people who wish to do them. The work is a very delicate work, the psyche is a very delicate thing, if you do not know what you are doing, you may create for yourself all matter of troubles. The peeling back of buffers is a very real thing, and it is a slow and quite deliberate process, if something is done too quickly or without the right guidance and help that comes from the atmosphere collected by a real group as support, could create psychosis.
@@ras9272 Thanks for your comment, it shows your experience. When you say psychosis, is it not the case that Gurdjieff would say humans are already crazy machines anyway? What is the 'normal', non-psychotic state? To find the balance between the theory and the actual practise is an interesting question. Too much on either side can't be good. Gurdjieff says it is Being and Knowledge that produce Understanding.
@@croissants1280 It's a slow process to tthe layers of seeing. The removal of buffers can not be immediate, if a person sees the reality of their contradictions, lies, and so forth too quickly, it can lead to all kinds of troubles. A while back I made connections with a saying in Thomas Gospel that beautifully describes the process... "When you seek, don't stop seeking until you find, when you find you will be disturbed/troubled, when you are disturbed/trouble you will marvel... it takes time to marvel at what is disturbing in oneself -- for soft rejection to turn into a joy of seeing and being seen... a real interest in all my functions and the price I must pay for it all.
Many of the work ideas in "In Search of the Miraculous" were dropped by Gurdjieff himself during the Beelzebub-post-car-crash-phase, so much so that some have suggested that there were at least two Gurdjieff systems during his lifetime. Maybe Madame de Salzmann had read "The Supreme Doctrine" by Hubert Benoit, published in French in 1951 & English in 1955, a book praised by Ken Wiber & Osho, that criticises the Gurdjieff Work without naming it specifically. "Better the illusions that exalt us than ten thousand truths!" Aleksander Pushkin Strewth, two version of Beelzebub, two versions of the index to Beelzebub, two versions of "Magick in Theory & Practice" by Crowley, two versions of "The Hierarchy of Heaven & Earth" by Douglas Harding, when will it end?
This is coming from a person who spent six years in a hardcore 'old Work' group. When you embark on the journey you first have to develop your ego. The goal is freedom from ego but nothing can be done without ego. Using the negative emotion tool, I diagrams, who said that, etc. develop spiritual selves. This is your spiritual ego and this has to precede finding the One True Self. It's confusing because you start to identify with this spiritual sense of self and many don't proceed past this point. It is way better than who you were but it's not the essence of who you are. This is a process of self improvement and foundational. I like what he is saying about doing nothing and that is similar to Buddhism. We can't do anything and an "I" agrees, the real you cannot yet your spiritual selves can. In G's carriage analogy how can the master direct the driver? The driver navigates the ruts and potholes but how does he know where he is going? What is the point of being on the journey if you don't have a destination? If your aim is leaving society and heading to a monastery or transcending all humanly ways then focus on presence. If you still want to interact and live in normal society then you need tools. I use the negative emotion tool daily, question myself regularly, AND try to stay in presence as much as I can. I was told early on that there are two wings if you want to fly, presence and impartiality. You can't fly with just one wing. My long leg is presence so many times I find myself walking in circles because I don't use the tools of impartiality enough. Great to see and hear people with the same aims. Thank you
The movements aren’t necessarily static the teaching has some a lesser degree of flexibility but also it is quite clear G experimenting and modifying various methods. a very clear example of this is seen in the absurd concept of suppression of negative emotions which become a toxin to the soul point is to develop to state where negative emotions are not experienced as a reaction to stimulus
Thank you very much for posting Joseph Azize's succinct evidence for the destructive charlatanry of Jeanne de Salzmann's self-constructed 'New Work'. One bit he leaves out is the tepidly made 1979 film MEETINGS WITH REMARKABLE MEN. I had read all of Gurdjieff's texts in the manner he requested by the time I viewed this film on its initial release. I remember huge disappointment in my overall response to it. Other than the fascinating opening musical sequence and the equally interesting closing Movements sequences the film lacks Gurdjieffian gravity with next to no real intensity undergirding the matters at hand. While repeated screenings has revealed initially missed subtle material, the most offensive part of its makeup (besides its tendency towards near-preciousness) is its rewriting of key statements which skew the Truth as Gurdjieff understood it and oh-so-carefully parlayed. (I'm ignoring the further gutting by the late Peter Brook in his recently re-edited 'restoration') As such, the film is not much more than a cleverly devised piece of propaganda, a blatant advertisement for a specific business and its approach. Why did Madame do all this? There's no real mystery to it for me. The inside facts are now all easily at hand for anyone's consideration. There is no reason to continue to politely tippy-toe around the shabbiness of the New Work's New Clothes and Official Corporate Procedures A completely ordinary if ultimately, inexcusable explanation suffices concerning these specific people and situations. And this, even as the aforementioned are often presented erroneously as above the pale: "Hell hath no fury, as an Intelligent and Talented woman -- a human PERSON -- used, abused, and scorned." And she was, whether with her personal agreement to it or not. And so it goes . . . I wish all the best to those like Joseph Azize who are attempting a quality-informed fuller and more authentic restoration. It's going to take a lot of work, a lot of work on interpersonal relationship in service of a higher aim AND there are no guarantees towards any of it. Although, I don't see its ever having been done in any appreciable way, it also has to be grieved fully and integrated that the key ingredient, George Gurdjieff, is gone from his physical manifestation on the earth. In other words, Big Daddy done left us. Period. Deal with it and deal with it RESPONSIBLY to lessen any further hurt. No one can claim elevation from that simple humane process. No one. In 1949, The Work changed irrevocably. Without Gurdjieff's active physical participation it could not and cannot be the same. It would be a good Idea for Gurdjieff population to accept that. And while they are important, Gurdjieff memorial services do not take care of that. Power struggles have had the unfortunate effect of obliterating that dyed in The Work Wool psychological and yes, ordinary emotional fact. But we're also talking about resurrecting one of the greatest creative works of the 20th century. That is an undeniable fact as well. Even if at Present The Gurdjieff Work is far from this level, it could be -- with due diligence, ever-checked egos and low tolerance for separatism -- among the finest of living honorariums. Thank you for your posting this and all the material on your site. It consistently constitutes for this viewer and I am sure for the viewed and the interviewed, time well spent.
Superb interview, expanding on the excellent previous one. The description of the "Web" and "Second Assisting" exercises was very interesting - there may be some overlap with concepts previously discussed in other shows such as Psi and "pneuma". Looking forward to further explorations of Gurdjieffian material in the MindMatters framework!
Started with reading Ouspensky way back when. Was a wonderful time. Met many people that mostly came up through the Bennett line and a few Foundation. All well intentioned and very intelligent. Sadly, I left for what I saw as any number of not excusable "flaws". Should be noted that many of these people wound up in the Sufi side of things which is where I went so it was like a "conflict of interest". Respect for all the ol school G types. They tried to move things a little. Still a methodology based on the past is futile and will fail as it is no longer applicable to humans today.. Humans are progressive. That being said I wish the best for all those involved in the "work". Least you are trying...lolz.
I use Gurdjieff as an introduction to my work, his ideas regarding the psychology of man is truly profound. However, I found Spinoza has a method of awakening the mind from sleep. Learn how: WayofSpinoza.com
In the decades following Gurdjieff’s death, didn’t Madame de Salzmann become quite influenced by Krishnamurti, reading his books and even attending his talks?
@@hkoehli I can apply, of course you need a good mike, but I can help if you need with guests that only use the laptop mike. Make it clearer, equalize a bit. Im a FOTCM member, but not active for a few years.
Kathryn Hulme and the women of the rope were given prayer beads. Mr G said that they would be able to move a mountain through the use of them 😄I believe that the method would involve some kind of sensing while using the beads. Does anyone know what was involved? Has anyone else written about this?
The beads are a tool to help you to remember yourself in the world. They are an aid to creating a separation between your I on the one hand and your animal and its functions on the other. The mountain you move is psychological.
Is this an expose? What is the purpose here? If this serves something i cant tell. Plenty of people are already arguing the Latin Mass vs the new Mass. we dont need any more of that. Especially not externally.
Don’t you see that the Gurdjieff work requires you to make an effort when your animal or personality doesn’t want to? You don’t like listening to him? Good! Decide to listen to him and to pay full attention, and then carry out the decision. What is easy, what you like, doesn’t count in Gurdjieff’s method.
As a 17-yr Foundation member, this clarifies my observations, doubts and frustrations, but in a way that moves my work forward.
A huge thanks to Mr Azize for this. Some of the best stuff I 've heard on the Gurdjieff tradition in years.
I find it strange that with such a rich system, there is so little qualitive documentaries about it.
Thank you so much MindMatters! This is exemplary work you are doing, I am grateful.
It is in the personal encounter or confrontation with the ideas planted in the narrative of Beezelbub that our level of understanding or Being is revealed and, in that process, slowly develops. This much is clear to me after all these years.
I've been starving for a channel like this. Haven't seen one since youtbe 2017 purge. I hope they don't take your channel down. Thanks
Purge,,?
@@edduardozamboga4082 yes my friend started in late 2016
I use Gurdjieff as an introduction to my work, his ideas regarding the psychology of man is truly profound. However, I found Spinoza has a method of awakening the mind from sleep. Learn how: WayofSpinoza.com
Love your WORK. Thanks for this....C you.
Mr. Gurdjieff died, and with him went his nervous system, wisdom, and secrets. Many events described in "Beelzebub's Tales to His Grandson" actually happened to the Work. It had to happen; it's according to the law.
Thank you for this video. We need to ponder, not to find fault in the modern "Work" or to blame anyone. We are seekers, and seekers seek. Many new insights can now be found in modern science regarding the functions of the brain, the nervous system, and the vagus nerve.
The Work, in my opinion, has become the way of the monk. Often sly, but foolish.
much appreciated,great work and a great channel
keep up the good work guys
looking forward to buy this book
really great content,
would be great if you could do a in dept discussion on "Meetings with Remarkable Men" sometime.
That's a great idea. We'll keep it in mind and plan to do it in the coming months.
@fynes leigh You're free to quit talking, and stop listening to all these useless words.
Extraordinary show
The part about giving, web exercises, and substance speaking are interesting and beautiful.
A very revealing discussion -- thank you. BTW, the anecdote about Mr. Gurdjieff's Paris apartment was from Ravi Ravindra's memoir Heart Without Measure. Instead of the books, the shelves had contained every sort of pantry staple and rarity ("real food", as she put it). Mme. deSalzmann's remark to Ravindra was quite possibly more about his state of mind than some straightforward factual accounting.
With respect to the evaluation of the changing of methods and presentation described by the term "new work", an opportunity for orientation is published in Exchanges Within: Questions from Everyday Life; Selected from Gurdjieff Group Meetings with John Pentland in California 1955-1984. Those who revere the integrity of G's ideas and methods from a safe distance are likely to find this material almost unreadable -- in a similar but distinct way in which BT seems to affect many.
Two features of the situation are of primary interest to an investigator -- just how developed and potent is G's science and subsequent sowing into life of that understanding; and what can my own attitude be to best participate?
You guys are making fantastic work! Just brilliant!
Great talk. Thanks ! Yes, Gurdjieff knowledge has origine in deep spiritual Traditions and humanity is the aim.
Really interesting talk - thanks for posting.
Extremely interesting but I would also like to hear from people who stayed in the “new Work.”
As a general spiritual principle, it seems that God provides the wind, while men raise the sails. The third force balances the two.
Lastly, I’m quite curious about the domestic advice given by Gurdjieff that was edited out of the Paris Meeting 1943 book.
On the last bit, see meeting #7 in the Meetings 1941-1946 book, published by Book Studio. Pretty sure there are some more, but don't have my notes on hand.
Markus Rose scroll to pages 19 and 20:
books.google.com/books/about/Transcripts_of_Gurdjieff_s_Meetings_1941.html?id=mrZ6DDP_pwYC
The first part of this in particular is very unfortunate, or so it seems to me. With all of his apparent work, Joseph should know better. It isn't that questions of this kind shouldn't be raised, but this isn't the context in which to do so. This reduces real questioning to a much lower level - hearsay and gossip even. Gurdjieff was very practical and pragmatic - he frequently changed his methods and emphasis - why should that not have continued after his death? It's important that the Work remains alive and adaptable, or it becomes fixed and dead. In the end, it's down to each of us to exercise our common sense and intelligence - to experiment, and if something works, use it. Joseph is using the word 'passive' in a completely misunderstood way. To seek 'openness', is not an easy thing - it requires an active attention - in relation to which, that which is usually most active and dominant gives way and becomes passive. A new order is established. I was in a group in London led by pupils of Madame Lannes in the 80s - they were probably the most intelligent, open and humane individuals I've ever met - and were certainly faithful to their teacher. Yes I recognise the characteristics of this 'New Work' Joseph talks about, but it wasn't perceived as anything 'new' - but as a living evolution - something that made sense. It is unthinkable that those people were led by the nose. Joseph talks of the influence of Zen (or Krishnamurti) as if it was a bad thing - why? And who is to say that Madam de Salzmann wasn't in touch with Gurdjieff on some level we cannot understand? She was with him throughout his journey - he trusted her implicitly, and in her work after he died she was surrounded by intelligent people, not idiots. Joseph would gain much by exercising a little more humility. I hesitate before posting this comment as I suspect those who really know choose to remain silent - they are too busy focusing on what is important.
You are exactly right in your comments.
I agree with all you’ve said. I am amazed by how much apparently joseph did not understand or receive from Jim Wyckoff. He seems, like a whole group of other people who had formed attachments and gained much from working with another teacher , not to have been able to put his ideas of how things should be down long enough to really experience whst Wycjoff, Madame or Michele de Salzmann ( The Next Attention) , we’re bringing. And now that these selfless servants if G’s Work are not here anymore, they can be spoken of on a level similar to opinion or gossip. As you say it tahes a long time to develop an active receptivity - and it is developed by the exercises that were used by their original teachers. But there was a point to it - to take one to another level of seeing , if understanding , not to worship the exercises for themselves. It was at this new level where Wyckoff and others have tried to pick up the thread of what had been discovered about oneself. It is a shame Joseph missed the fact that Wyckoff patiently waited fir inner openings in students where he could meet them at another level much like the 2nd exercise here. The WirknGurdjieff gave outwardly was still very much there - but now, after all the years of doing exercises, something was also expected internally.not just given externally. Ultimately there is only One Work but there is also evolution.
@Amy Barker-Wilson
Yes, it's really remarkable how these later day teachers have all surpassed Mr. Gurdjieff's level of understanding and developed better methods of work.
(Who knew you could even work in your sleep?)
But don't you think that in all honesty seekers should be informed that what the foundation now teaches is post-gurdjieffian instead of having to spending years trying to figure that out for themselves?
This "New Work" subject is fascinating, truly. When I read that part in Azize's book, I was really interested being that I have participated in Groups for years. I have been told not all groups are the same, what I can say about my experience is that Beelzebub is read, Gurdjieff wartime exercises are used, there is a preparation, but sittings are a stable.
I dont see the advantage in discussing the technical side of the ideas, it does become too intellectual. I find that the practice of the work gives the needed experience to perceive the ideas in the proper context, perhaps there is a usefulness to those who have got to this point, but someone who hasnt had the necessary time to begin to have a feeling for work and feels its direction, talking about the ideas directly will not help them. They've already read material, so much material exists now that they can read from gurdjieff and students who will be able to explain it much better than anyone here now.
What people need is the direct experience, the actual practice, as the knowledge is very high, but their being is quite low, and all the data extracted will only help to facilitate their sleep. The work has to move from the thought into the feeling, this will never be achieved by oneself nor will it ever be achieved by linear discussions about the ideas, unless it happens during the sharing of ones work with something, perhaps it can enter some place deeper after real seeing happens. The crust of our falsities is too thick, too solid, it has to loosen, to soften, become more transparent, for impressions to pass into a more essential element. One begins to feel the concepts, a different kind of knowing, like the body when it just enters a position.
I believe it is okay for me to mention the above given the subject manner of the video and the mention of foundation groups. Groups I have been a part of, which are foundation groups, we work on the movements in the same pattern given to Azize, 4 movements given for the year to work on. Those who are new to the work, did not do full movements, only movement exercises, to get a taste. Full movements were for people who had shown they were ready by the progress shown in the exercises which could take years or 1 year depending on the person and what the movements teacher felt they were ready for, how serious they were - what would be the reason to teach actual movements to a person who is going to leave in 3 months?
One of the reasons certain exercises are protected is for the benefit and safety of people who wish to do them. The work is a very delicate work, the psyche is a very delicate thing, if you do not know what you are doing, you may create for yourself all matter of troubles. The peeling back of buffers is a very real thing, and it is a slow and quite deliberate process, if something is done too quickly or without the right guidance and help that comes from the atmosphere collected by a real group as support, could create psychosis.
@@ras9272 Thanks for your comment, it shows your experience.
When you say psychosis, is it not the case that Gurdjieff would say humans are already crazy machines anyway? What is the 'normal', non-psychotic state?
To find the balance between the theory and the actual practise is an interesting question. Too much on either side can't be good. Gurdjieff says it is Being and Knowledge that produce Understanding.
@@croissants1280 It's a slow process to tthe layers of seeing. The removal of buffers can not be immediate, if a person sees the reality of their contradictions, lies, and so forth too quickly, it can lead to all kinds of troubles. A while back I made connections with a saying in Thomas Gospel that beautifully describes the process... "When you seek, don't stop seeking until you find, when you find you will be disturbed/troubled, when you are disturbed/trouble you will marvel... it takes time to marvel at what is disturbing in oneself -- for soft rejection to turn into a joy of seeing and being seen... a real interest in all my functions and the price I must pay for it all.
This is wonderful. Thank you!
Many of the work ideas in "In Search of the Miraculous" were dropped by Gurdjieff himself during the Beelzebub-post-car-crash-phase, so much so that some have suggested that there were at least two Gurdjieff systems during his lifetime.
Maybe Madame de Salzmann had read "The Supreme Doctrine" by Hubert Benoit, published in French in 1951 & English in 1955, a book praised by Ken Wiber & Osho, that criticises the Gurdjieff Work without naming it specifically.
"Better the illusions that exalt us than ten thousand truths!" Aleksander Pushkin
Strewth, two version of Beelzebub, two versions of the index to Beelzebub, two versions of "Magick in Theory & Practice" by Crowley, two versions of "The Hierarchy of Heaven & Earth" by Douglas Harding, when will it end?
Good talk. Thanks
This is coming from a person who spent six years in a hardcore 'old Work' group. When you embark on the journey you first have to develop your ego. The goal is freedom from ego but nothing can be done without ego. Using the negative emotion tool, I diagrams, who said that, etc. develop spiritual selves. This is your spiritual ego and this has to precede finding the One True Self. It's confusing because you start to identify with this spiritual sense of self and many don't proceed past this point. It is way better than who you were but it's not the essence of who you are. This is a process of self improvement and foundational. I like what he is saying about doing nothing and that is similar to Buddhism. We can't do anything and an "I" agrees, the real you cannot yet your spiritual selves can. In G's carriage analogy how can the master direct the driver? The driver navigates the ruts and potholes but how does he know where he is going? What is the point of being on the journey if you don't have a destination? If your aim is leaving society and heading to a monastery or transcending all humanly ways then focus on presence. If you still want to interact and live in normal society then you need tools. I use the negative emotion tool daily, question myself regularly, AND try to stay in presence as much as I can. I was told early on that there are two wings if you want to fly, presence and impartiality. You can't fly with just one wing. My long leg is presence so many times I find myself walking in circles because I don't use the tools of impartiality enough. Great to see and hear people with the same aims. Thank you
The movements aren’t necessarily static the teaching has some a lesser degree of flexibility but also it is quite clear G experimenting and modifying various methods. a very clear example of this is seen in the absurd concept of suppression of negative emotions which become a toxin to the soul point is to develop to state where negative emotions are not experienced as a reaction to stimulus
Thank you very much for posting Joseph Azize's succinct evidence for the destructive charlatanry of Jeanne de Salzmann's self-constructed 'New Work'.
One bit he leaves out is the tepidly made 1979 film MEETINGS WITH REMARKABLE MEN. I had read all of Gurdjieff's texts in the manner he requested by the time I viewed this film on its initial release. I remember huge disappointment in my overall response to it. Other than the fascinating opening musical sequence and the equally interesting closing Movements sequences the film lacks Gurdjieffian gravity with next to no real intensity undergirding the matters at hand. While repeated screenings has revealed initially missed subtle material, the most offensive part of its makeup (besides its tendency towards near-preciousness) is its rewriting of key statements which skew the Truth as Gurdjieff understood it and oh-so-carefully parlayed. (I'm ignoring the further gutting by the late Peter Brook in his recently re-edited 'restoration')
As such, the film is not much more than a cleverly devised piece of propaganda, a blatant advertisement for a specific business and its approach.
Why did Madame do all this?
There's no real mystery to it for me. The inside facts are now all easily at hand for anyone's consideration.
There is no reason to continue to politely tippy-toe around the shabbiness of the New Work's New Clothes and Official Corporate Procedures
A completely ordinary if ultimately, inexcusable explanation suffices concerning these specific people and situations.
And this, even as the aforementioned are often presented erroneously as above the pale:
"Hell hath no fury, as an Intelligent and Talented woman -- a human PERSON -- used, abused, and scorned."
And she was, whether with her personal agreement to it or not. And so it goes . . .
I wish all the best to those like Joseph Azize who are attempting a quality-informed fuller and more authentic restoration.
It's going to take a lot of work, a lot of work on interpersonal relationship in service of a higher aim AND there are no guarantees towards any of it.
Although, I don't see its ever having been done in any appreciable way, it also has to be grieved fully and integrated
that the key ingredient, George Gurdjieff, is gone from his physical manifestation on the earth. In other words, Big Daddy done left us. Period.
Deal with it and deal with it RESPONSIBLY to lessen any further hurt. No one can claim elevation from that simple humane process. No one.
In 1949, The Work changed irrevocably. Without Gurdjieff's active physical participation it could not and cannot be the same.
It would be a good Idea for Gurdjieff population to accept that. And while they are important, Gurdjieff memorial services do not take care of that.
Power struggles have had the unfortunate effect of obliterating that dyed in The Work Wool psychological and yes, ordinary emotional fact.
But we're also talking about resurrecting one of the greatest creative works of the 20th century. That is an undeniable fact as well.
Even if at Present The Gurdjieff Work is far from this level, it could be -- with due diligence, ever-checked egos and low tolerance for separatism -- among the finest of living honorariums.
Thank you for your posting this and all the material on your site. It consistently constitutes for this viewer and I am sure for the viewed and the interviewed, time well spent.
Superb interview, expanding on the excellent previous one. The description of the "Web" and "Second Assisting" exercises was very interesting - there may be some overlap with concepts previously discussed in other shows such as Psi and "pneuma". Looking forward to further explorations of Gurdjieffian material in the MindMatters framework!
Started with reading Ouspensky way back when. Was a wonderful time. Met many people that mostly came up through the Bennett line and a few Foundation. All well intentioned and very intelligent. Sadly, I left for what I saw as any number of not excusable "flaws". Should be noted that many of these people wound up in the Sufi side of things which is where I went so it was like a "conflict of interest". Respect for all the ol school G types. They tried to move things a little. Still a methodology based on the past is futile and will fail as it is no longer applicable to humans today.. Humans are progressive. That being said I wish the best for all those involved in the "work". Least you are trying...lolz.
humans are anything but 'progressive'...
This guy is too important not to be heard. Needs better mic
I use Gurdjieff as an introduction to my work, his ideas regarding the psychology of man is truly profound. However, I found Spinoza has a method of awakening the mind from sleep. Learn how: WayofSpinoza.com
In the decades following Gurdjieff’s death, didn’t Madame de Salzmann become quite influenced by Krishnamurti, reading his books and even attending his talks?
Don't know about the influence of Krishnamurti, but apparently they veered towards Zen meditation.
Does anybody know how to contact Fr. Joseph Azize regarding the missing controversial transcripts??
You can reach him on his blog via comments: www.josephazize.com/
This guy is trying to sell books. Not a real teacher. Just copying , printing, selling.
Hard to be more wrong, so you get the prize.
Decent sound engineer required; apply upstairs;
Are you offering?
@@hkoehli sound is perfectly fine.
@@hkoehli I can apply, of course you need a good mike, but I can help if you need with guests that only use the laptop mike. Make it clearer, equalize a bit. Im a FOTCM member, but not active for a few years.
What a waste! Spending time discussing who is more 'pure' in the Work.
Disagree. It shows the different strands of development of the Work.
1:00:00
💙🌸🌱😀
Kathryn Hulme and the women of the rope were given prayer beads. Mr G said that they would be able to move a mountain through the use of them 😄I believe that the method would involve some kind of sensing while using the beads. Does anyone know what was involved? Has anyone else written about this?
The beads are a tool to help you to remember yourself in the world. They are an aid to creating a separation between your I on the one hand and your animal and its functions on the other. The mountain you move is psychological.
@@CrazyLinguiniLegs Haha good one
Is this an expose? What is the purpose here? If this serves something i cant tell. Plenty of people are already arguing the Latin Mass vs the new Mass. we dont need any more of that. Especially not externally.
Do you have IG ?
Instagram? Nope.
it is not gurdjieff and she was told this by him to her face.
The first video about Gurdjieff was really good. But this guy sounds so laborious I had to switch it off. This is boring guys.
Don’t you see that the Gurdjieff work requires you to make an effort when your animal or personality doesn’t want to? You don’t like listening to him? Good! Decide to listen to him and to pay full attention, and then carry out the decision. What is easy, what you like, doesn’t count in Gurdjieff’s method.