Very Nice

[jenjulian]

I read this on Ampers &nd last night. It is a good description of ZooFence and its members.

But those who really desire to understand, who are looking to find that which is eternal, without beginning and without an end, will walk together with a greater intensity, will be a danger to everything that is unessential, to unrealities, to shadows. And they will concentrate, they will become the flame, because they understand. Such a body we must create, and that is my purpose. Because of that real understanding there will be true friendship. Because of that true friendship ... there will be real cooperation on the part of each one. And this not because of authority, not because of salvation, not because of immolation for a cause, but because you really understand, and hence are capable of living in the eternal. This is a greater thing than all pleasure, than all sacrifice. ... .---J. Krishnamurti

[zoofence]

jenjulian, That's a nice piece from the talk by J. Krishnamurti at TZF's Ampers&nd.

Then neither you, with your "sez who?" attitude or me, clothed in my skepticism suit, would last very long as his students … As an idea, his theory is real, but as a reality ...?

As I have said, I am no expert on Gurdjieff’s teaching, so what I am about to write are my own words alone. But as I understand his “shock” idea, it makes sense.

I think it is true that it is in the nature of the human condition that we easily, too easily, slip into ruts, and just stay there for no other reason than that we are there. And it takes a powerful force, sometimes generated by us, sometimes generated by others, sometimes (well, okay, always) generated by the Grace of God, to lift us out of it. Even when we begin an undertaking with the greatest of intentions and energy, we seem to reach a point where we just level off, and then eventually settle in. I think what keeps us aloft along the spiritual path is enthusiasm, which is why I mention it so often. The word is from the Greek for "having a God within" or "in the possession of God", and it is one of my favorite words.

Along my own travel of the spiritual path I have seen this phenomenon play out repeatedly. I mention a couple of points in the stories at A Continuing Fiction where a book or a meeting with a Teacher or some other event literally “changed everything”. I think that what Gurdjieff is talking about in those two paragraphs (and of course, those were not his words, but a consideration of his teaching by one of his students) is some of what is meant by the Sanskrit terms darshan and satsang. Being in the Presence of a Self-Realized Teacher (and it does not have to be the physical Presence) can itself be a “shock” to the system, a shock that quite literally changes everything. The Tanakh and the Gospels and Christian mysticism and Sufism and on and on are replete with examples of that.

Now, is it the seeker? Is it the Teacher? Who knows, but probably it is necessary that the seeker be open and receptive (with enthusiasm). In one of my favorite Ramana stories (see here), a disciple prostrates himself before the Teacher, and says, “I have had darshan” (been blessed by the sight of the Guru). Ramana replies, “Whose darshan? Why don't you say that you gave darshan to me?” (I love that! No one but a True Teacher could respond that way!)

As spiritual seekers, it seems to me that we go out of our way sometimes to generate just such shocks, to find or initiate circumstances that will create them, because on the inner, we know how necessary they are.

Again, I don’t know if any of that is what Gurdjieff means, but it is as I see it.

[zoofence]

A technical note --

I notice that in this new version of phpBB, internet links -- like this -- open in the same window as the forum itself, thus replacing the forum in the browser. In the previous version, links opened in a new window.

The folks who design this software offer a way to revert to the former system, and I have tried to make the change, but then links simply went dead, did nothing. Evidently, I followed their instructions incorrectly (it happens!), and so, until I can figure out what I did wrong, we will stay with links the way they are.

In the meantime, if you are using a current version of Microsoft Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox, you can defeat the new default by right-clicking on the link itself in the text, and choosing "Open in New Tab".

[Ihavesayso]

...where a book or a meeting with a Teacher or some other event literally “changed everything”.

"Things" remain the same. Our perspective of them changes!"

BTW, Art, I like your quotation!

[Neo]

This thread gone from new digs to gurdjeff. That is a stretch.

The only thing I can think is that, Neo, you must have been using the Firefox browser

Correct. I switched to Firefox about a month ago. Merry Xmas to all.

[anna]

Well, after wading around here, and grumbling about having to learn to navigate all over again, I thought I'd add a little to the Gurdjieff issue, since I once upon a time studied him fairly extensively. I discovered that with Gurdjieff, his theories, however elaborate and complex they may have appeared, were simply basic physics and his theories, however apparently deep and complex, were based on solid ancient truths, re-addressed in terminology that appealed to his own particular audience. (Isn't it interesting how teachers claim to have "the only real system", when in fact, they are all the same, only spun a certain way, or draped with cosmologies and babble to make it appear to be new and original? ) And the one to which Stefan referred originally in this thread was the law of entropy, or at the very least, inertia, however well draped with ornamentation G may have costumed it. In G's case, of course, he was applying that law to consciousness, but with physics what it is today, there is all the proof anyone would need right there in front of us that consciousness is also subject to the same laws as physics applies to the material universe, however diaphanous those laws may now need to be or are becoming.

If one personally wants to experience this, just watch the mind as it focuses or meditates on something, and how easily it slides into sleep, or day-dreaming, or something other than its original intention. It was this tendency of the mind to slip into idle to which Gurdjieff applied his shocks, sometimes so bizarre that he almost killed one of his students in those efforts. And yet those shocks WILL keep the mind attentive, and in particular, if applied by someone or something other than oneself, it is doubly shocking and stimulating, the latter possibly causing an evolution of some kind within consciousness, who knows. Certainly it would agitate it and energize it. Not unlike bombarding molecules with electrons, which transforms molecules thereby. And thus, G's efforts to break his students somnambulism up by means of this method was a legitimate and useful one, although the fruits of his labors still aren't clear to me. (How many of G's students are actually liberated? Or "evolved" as he might prefer to call them. Does any one know? -- Maybe there are millions, and if they are that evolved, they probably don't talk much about it, perhaps?) There is no doubt in my mind at least that inertia is a powerful force, in all aspects and all levels of the universe, and there is no reason to assume that consciousness is somehow exempt from this force.

Anyway, if you read his theory of shocks with this in mind, all his theorizing comes down to basic common sense, as most of physics is, after all. Someone asked Gurdjieff what he thought he was doing, and his response was "I am an alarm clock". That is a good response for his system, I think, once you wade through his fantastic imagery and cosmology. All of the latter, I believe, was probably for the glamor and entertainment value of his system. But at base, it was a system designed to rattle the consciousness of his students, presumably in an effort to change that consciousness into something grreater than it originally was, or at least, different. Who knows what is greater than what?