Gurdjieff Teachings Disciples Gurdjieff Books, Osho on Gurdjieff

Meetings with remarkable men : Gurdjieff sacred dances

2009-08-19T23:40:00.001-07:00

Crucial extract of the movie with Gurdjieff sacred dances

"Meetings With Remarkable Men" Gurdjieff Dance scene

2009-08-19T23:39:00.001-07:00

Gurdjieff Sacred Dance video by Osho Sannyasins

2009-08-19T23:38:00.001-07:00

A version of Gurdjieff sacred movements performed by Osho's sanyassins, courtesy of Osho.com.

Gurdjieff dances are practiced by many Osho sannyasins and is popular among them. Osho has spoken very highly o Gurdjieff and has used many of the techniques of Gurdjieff. Stop dance, Gurdjieff sacred dances and movements are some of the techniques used in Osho work.

Ouspensky on Gurdjieff Teachings on Self Observation

2009-06-02T02:27:00.000-07:00

Ouspensky On one occasion at the beginning of a meeting G. put a question to which all those present had to answer in turn. The question was; "What is the most important thing that we notice during self-observation?"

Some of those present said that during attempts at self-observation, what they had felt particularly strongly was an incessant flow of thoughts which they had found impossible to stop. Others spoke of the difficulty of distinguishing the work of one center from the work of another. I had evidently not altogether understood the question, or I answered my own thoughts, because I said that what struck me most was the connectedness of one thing with another in the system, the wholeness of the system, as if it were an "organism," and the entirely new significance of the word to know which included not only the idea of knowing this thing or that, but the connection between this thing and everything else.

Gurdjieff was obviously dissatisfied with our replies. I had already begun to understand him in such circumstances and I saw that he expected from us indications of something definite that we had either missed or failed to understand.

"Not one of you has noticed the most important thing that I have pointed out to you," he said. "That is to say, not one of you has noticed that you do not remember yourselves." (He gave particular emphasis to these words.) "You do not feel yourselves; you are not conscious of yourselves. With you, 'it observes' just as 'it speaks' 'it thinks,' 'it laughs.' You do not feel: I observe, I notice, I see. Everything still 'is noticed,' 'is seen.' ... In order really to observe oneself one must first of all remember oneself" (He again emphasized these words.) "

Try to remember yourselves when you observe yourselves and later on tell me the results. Only those results will have any value that are accompanied by self-remembering. Otherwise you yourselves do not exist in your observations. In which case what are all your observations worth?"

These words of G.'s made me think a great deal. It seemed to me at once that they were the key to what he had said before about consciousness. But I decided to draw no conclusions whatever, but to try to remember myself while observing myself.

The very first attempts showed me how difficult it was. Attempts at selfremembering failed to give any results except to show me that in actual fact we never remember ourselves.

"What else do you want?" said G. "This is a very important realization. People who know this" (he emphasized these words) "already know a great deal. The whole trouble is that nobody knows it. If you ask a man whether he can remember himself, he will of course answer that he can. If you tell him that he cannot remember himself, he will either be angry with you, or he will think you an utter fool. The whole of life is based on this, the whole of human existence, the whole of human blindness. If a man really knows that he cannot remember himself, he is already near to the understanding of his being."

Source: from Ouspensky Book "In Search of Miraculous"

Ouspensky on Gurdjieff Teachings - different bodies of man

2009-06-02T02:22:00.000-07:00

Ouspensky - During one of the talks G. again returned to the idea of the different bodies of man.

"That man can have several bodies," he said, "must be understood as an idea, as a principle. But it does not apply to us. We know we have the one physical body and we know nothing else. It is the physical body that we must study. Only, we must remember that the question is not limited to the physical body and that there are people who may have two, three, or more bodies. But it makes no difference to us personally either one way or another. Someone like Rockefeller in America may have a great many millions, but his millions do not help me if I have nothing to eat. It is the same thing in this connection. Everyone must think of himself; it is useless and senseless to rely on others or to console oneself with thoughts of what others possess."

"How is one to know if a man has an 'astral body'?" I asked.

Gurdjieff - "There are definite ways of knowing that," answered G. "Under certain conditions the 'astral body' can be seen; it can be separated from the physical body and even photographed at the side of the physical body. The existence of the 'astral body' can be still more easily and simply established by its functions. The 'astral body' has definite functions which the physical body cannot have. The presence of these functions indicates the presence of the 'astral body.'

The absence of these functions shows the absence of the 'astral body.' But it is too early to speak of this now. All our attention must be concentrated on the study of the physical body. It is necessary to understand the structure of the human machine. Our principal error is that we think we have one mind. We call the functions of this mind 'conscious'; everything that does not enter this mind we call 'unconscious' or 'subconscious.' This is our chief error. Of the conscious and the unconscious we will speak later. At this moment I want to explain to you that the activity of the human machine, that is, of the physical body, is controlled, not by one, but by several minds, entirely independent of each other, having separate functions and separate spheres in which they manifest themselves. This must be understood first of all, because unless this is understood nothing else can be understood."

Source: from Ouspensky Book "In Search of Miraculous"

2009-06-02T02:14:00.000-07:00

Ouspensky - By the Y THE beginning of November, 1915, I already had a grasp of some of the fundamental points of G.'s system in relation to man. The first point, on which he laid stress, was the absence of unity in man.

"It is the greatest mistake," he said, "to think that man is always one and the same. A man is never the same for long. He is continually changing. He seldom remains the same even for half an hour. We think that if a man is called Ivan he is always Ivan. Nothing of the kind. Now he is Ivan, in another minute he is Peter, and a minute later he is Nicholas, Sergius, Matthew, Simon. And all of you think he is Ivan. You know that Ivan cannot do a certain thing. He cannot tell a lie for instance. Then you find he has told a lie and you are surprised he could have done so. And, indeed, Ivan cannot lie; it is Nicholas who lied. And when the opportunity presents itself Nicholas cannot help lying. You will be astonished when you realize what a multitude of these Ivans and Nicholases live in one man. If you learn to observe them there is no need to go to a cinema."

"Has this anything to do with the consciousnesses of separate parts and organs of the body?" I asked him on this occasion. "I understand this idea and have often felt the reality of these consciousnesses. I know that not only separate organs, but every part of the body having a separate function has a separate consciousness. The right hand has one consciousness and the left hand another. Is that what you mean?"

"Not altogether," said G. "These consciousnesses also exist but they are comparatively harmless. Each of them knows its own place and its own business. The hands know they must work; the feet know they must walk. But these Ivans, Peters, and Nicholases are different. They all call themselves 'I.' That is, they consider themselves masters and none wants to recognize another. Each of them is caliph for an hour, does what he likes regardless of everything, and, later on, the others have to pay for it. And there is no order among them whatever. Whoever gets the upper hand is master. He whips everyone on all sides and takes heed of nothing. But the next moment another seizes the whip and beats him. And so it goes on all one's life. Imagine a country where everyone can be king for five minutes and do during these five minutes just what he likes with the whole kingdom. That is our life."

Source: from Ouspensky Book "In Search of Miraculous"

Gurdjieff Sacred Dances workshop by Komal Mathur (India)

2009-05-28T23:54:00.001-07:00

Komal Mathur is conducting workshop on Gurdjieff Sacred Dances New Delhi - India.

Gurdjieff Sacred Dances Workshop is for interested people aged 18 years and above. Participants will be taught Dervish and Sufi prayer dances, dances of the Enneagram, whirling, inner exercises and meditations.

WorkShop Classes will be on alternate days.

Date of Classes is - Monday 25 May - Friday 05 June 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM

Registration fee: Rs 2,000/-

Address - India Habitat Centre, Max Mueller Marg ,
Lodhi Colony, Delhi NCR India

2009-05-28T23:54:00.000-07:00

Gurdjieff Book "Meetings with Remarkable Men" Excerpt

2009-05-19T23:28:00.000-07:00

Gurdjieff Neither the delays in the steamer's progress nor its crowdedness disturbed anyone; on the contrary, they all accommodated themselves so well that the whole journey was like a series of picnics.

As soon as it became clear that this time the steamer was thoroughly grounded, almost all the passengers gradually went ashore. By the end of the day there appeared on both banks clusters of tents, made from whatever came to hand. Smoke arose from many fires, and, after an evening gaily spent with music and song, most of the passengers stayed on shore overnight.

In the morning the life of the passengers resumes its rhythm of the day before. Some build fires and make coffee, others boil water for green tea, still others go in search of saksaul poles, get ready to go fishing, go out to the steamer and back in small boats, call back and forth between the steamer and shore or from one bank to the other; and all is done calmly and unhurriedly, as everyone knows that, as soon as it is possible to move on, the big bell.

Neither the delays in the steamer's progress nor its crowdedness disturbed anyone; on the contrary, they all accommodated themselves so well that the whole journey was like a series of picnics.

As soon as it became clear that this time the steamer was thoroughly grounded, almost all the passengers gradually went ashore. By the end of the day there appeared on both banks clusters of tents, made from whatever came to hand. Smoke arose from many fires, and, after an evening gaily spent with music and song, most of the passengers stayed on shore overnight.

In the morning the life of the passengers resumes its rhythm of the day before. Some build fires and make coffee, others boil water for green tea, still others go in search of saksaul poles, get ready to go fishing, go out to the steamer and back in small boats, call back and forth between the steamer and shore or from one bank to the other; and all is done calmly and unhurriedly, as everyone knows that, as soon as it is possible to move on, the big bell of the steamer will ring an hour before departure and there will be plenty of time to return on board.

In that part of the boat where we had settled ourselves an old Sart made his place beside us. It was evident that he was a rich man because among his things were many bags of money.I do not know how it is now, but at that time, in Bukhara and the neighbouring countries, there were no coins of high value.

In Bukhara, for instance, the only coin worth anything was called a tianga—an irregularly cut piece of silver equivalent to approximately half a French franc. Any sum larger than fifty francs had therefore to be carried in special bags, which was very inconvenient, especially for travellers.If one had thousands in this coinage and had to travel with this money, it was necessary to have literally a score of camels or horses to carry it from place to place.

On very rare occasions the following method was used: the quantity of tiangi one wished to transport was given to some Bukharian Jew who gave in exchange a note to some acquaintance of his, also a Jew, who lived at the place to which one was going, and there the latter, deducting something for his trouble, returned the same amount of tiangi.

And so, on arriving at the town of Kerki, which was as far as the boat went, we left our steamer, changed to a hired kobzir1 and continued further. When we were already quite a long way from Kerki and were making a stop at Termez, where Professor Skridlov had gone ashore with some Sart workmen to get provisions in a near-by village, our kobzir was approached by another one carrying five Sarts, who without saying a word began to unload from their kobzir on to ours, twenty-five large sacks filled with tiangi.

At first I did not understand what it was all about; only after the unloading was finished did I gather from the oldest Sart that they had been passengers on our steamer, and that when we had disembarked these sacks of tiangi were found in the place which we had occupied. Certain that we had forgotten them and having learned where we were going, they decided to make haste to catch up with us and give us back the tiangi we had obviously forgotten in the confusion.

And he added: 'I decided to catch up with you without fail because the same thing happened to me once in my life and so I understand very well how disagreeable it is to arrive in a strange place without the necessary tiangi. And as for me, it makes no difference if I arrive in my village a week later; I shall regard it as if our steamer had run aground an extra time.'

I did not know how to reply or what to say to this queer fellow; it was just too unexpected for me and all I could do was pretend that I understood very little Sart and wait for the return of the professor. Meanwhile I offered him and his companions some vodka.

When I saw Skridlov returning, I quickly went ashore to meet him as if to help him carry the provisions, and told him all about it. We decided not to refuse the money, but to find out the address of this still unspoiled man, in order to send him a pesh kesh in gratitude for his trouble, and then to hand over the tiangi to the nearest Russian frontier post, giving the name of the boat and the date of its last trip and explaining in as much detail as possible all the facts which could serve to identify our fellow-traveller, the Sart, who had forgotten these sacks of money on the boat. And so we did.

Source: Gurdjieff Book "Meetings with Remarkable Men"

Gurdjieff Sacred Dance Video from movie Meetings With Remarkable Men

2009-05-10T00:33:00.001-07:00

A scene of the movie "Meetings With Remarkable Men" of Peter Brook [G.I.Gurdjieff] 1979

Gurdjieff Writingss - Adventures During the journey - Ferocious Dogs

2009-05-08T22:44:00.000-07:00

Gurdjieff - During our journey, we had thousands of adventures which I will not describe, but there is one that I cannot pass by in silence. Although it happened so many years ago, I still cannot recall this incident without laughing, and without at the same time re-experiencing the sensation I had then—of instinctive fear combined with a presentiment of imminent catastrophe.
Many times after this incident I found myself in very critical situations. For example, more than once I was surrounded by scores of dangerous enemies; I have had to cross the path of a Turkestan tiger; and several times I was taken literally at the point of a gun; but never did I have such a feeling as I experienced on this occasion, however comical it may seem now, after the event.

Pogossian and I were calmly walking along. He was humming some march and swinging his stick. Suddenly, as if from nowhere, a dog appeared, then another, and another, and still another—in all about fifteen sheep-dogs, who began barking at us. Pogossian imprudently flung a stone at them and they immediately sprang at us.

They were Kurd sheep-dogs, very vicious, and in another moment they would have torn us to pieces if I had not instinctively pulled Pogossian down and made him sit beside me on the road. Just because we sat down the dogs stopped barking and springing at us; surrounding us, they also sat down.

Some time passed before we came to ourselves; and when we were able to take stock of the situation we burst out laughing. As long as we remained sitting the dogs also sat, peaceably and still, and when we threw them bread from our knapsacks, they ate it with great pleasure, some of them even wagging their tails in gratitude. But when, reassured by their friendliness, we tried to stand up, then, 'Oh no, you don't!'—for they instantly jumped up and, baring their teeth, made ready to spring at us; so we were compelled to sit down once more. When we again tried to get up, the dogs showed themselves so viciously hostile that we did not risk trying a third time.

In this situation we remained sitting for about three hours. I do not know how much longer we would have had to sit there if a young Kurd girl had not chanced to appear in the distance with an ass, gathering keesiak in the fields.

Making various signs to her, we finally managed to attract her attention, and when she came closer and saw what the trouble was, she went off to fetch the shepherds to whom the dogs belonged, who were not far away behind a hill. The shepherds came and called off the dogs, but only when they were at some distance did we risk standing up; and all the time they were moving away the rascals kept an eye on us.

Gurdjieff Pictures

2009-04-30T02:25:00.000-07:00

George Gurdjieff Pictures

2009-04-30T02:22:00.000-07:00

Photo of Gurdjieff Funeral

2009-04-30T02:20:00.001-07:00

Gurdjieff Pictures

2009-04-30T02:20:00.000-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:19:00.003-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:19:00.001-07:00

2009-04-30T02:17:00.003-07:00

2009-04-30T02:17:00.001-07:00

2009-04-30T02:16:00.002-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:16:00.001-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:15:00.003-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:15:00.001-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:14:00.000-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:13:00.002-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:13:00.001-07:00

George Gurdjieff Sacred Dances Photo

2009-04-30T02:12:00.003-07:00

George Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:12:00.001-07:00

Gurdjieff Photos

2009-04-30T02:11:00.001-07:00

Gurdjieff on Kundalini - 'fire of Kundalini,' or 'serpent of Kundalini

2009-04-30T01:36:00.000-07:00

In so-called 'occult' literature you have probably met with the expression 'Kundalini,' 'the fire of Kundalini,' or the 'serpent of Kundalini.' This expression is often used to designate some kind of strange force which is present in man and which can be awakened. But none of the known theories gives the right explanation of the force of Kundalini. Sometimes it is connected with sex, with sex energy, that is with the idea of the possibility of using sex energy for other purposes.

This latter is entirely wrong because Kundalini can be in anything. And above all, Kundalini is not anything desirable or useful for man's development. It is very curious how these occultists have got hold of the word from somewhere but have completely altered its meaning and from a very dangerous and terrible thing have made something to be hoped for and to be awaited as some blessing.In reality Kundalini is the power of imagination, the power of fantasy, which takes the place of a real function.

When a man dreams instead of acting, when his dreams take the place of reality, when a man imagines himself to be an eagle, a lion, or a magician, it is the force of Kundalini acting in him. Kundalini can act in all centers and with its help all the centers can be satisfied with the imaginary instead of the real. A sheep which considers itself a lion or a magician lives under the power of Kundalini.Kundalini is a force put into men in order to keep them in their present state.

If men could really see their true position and could understand all the horror of it, they would be unable to remain where they are even for one second. They would begin to seek a way out and they would quickly find it, because there is a way out; but men fail to see it simply because they are hypnotized. Kundalini is the force that keeps them in a hypnotic state. 'To awaken' for man means to be 'dehypnotized.' In this lies the chief difficulty and in this also lies the guarantee of its possibility, for there is no organic reason for sleep and man can awaken.

Theoretically he can, but practically it is almost impossible because as soon as a man awakens for a moment and opens his eyes, all the forces that caused him to fall asleep begin to act upon him with tenfold energy and he immediately falls asleep again, very often dreaming that he is awake or is awakening.There are certain states in ordinary sleep in which a man wants to awaken but cannot. He tells himself that he is awake but, in reality, he continues to sleep – and this can happen several times before he finally awakes.

But in ordinary sleep, once he is awake, he is in a different state; in hypnotic sleep the case is otherwise; there are no objective characteristics, at any rate not at the beginning of awakening; a man cannot pinch himself in order to make sure that he is not asleep. And if, which God forbid, a man has heard anything about objective characteristics, Kundalini at once transforms it all into imagination and dreams.

Source: from Ouspensky Book "In serach of Miraclous"

Gurdjieff Quotes from Beelzebub's Tales on Kundabuffer

2009-04-30T01:31:00.000-07:00

One day while instructing some of his closest initiates, Saint Buddha spoke in very precise terms about a means for the possible destruction in their nature of the consequences of the properties of the organ kundabuffer, transmitted to them by heredity. Among the things he said to them was this:'One of the best means of rendering ineffective the predisposition in your nature to crystallize the consequences of the properties of the organ kundabuffer is "intentional suffering"; and the greatest "intentional suffering" can be obtained in our presences by compelling ourselves to endure the displeasing manifestations of others toward ourselves.'

Ouspensky on Gurdjieff Views on Astrology

2009-04-30T01:29:00.000-07:00

Ouspensky - As we left the park G. stopped talking and was going a few steps ahead of us. We five walked behind him talking together. In going round a tree G. dropped the stick - ebony with a Caucasian silver handle - he was carrying and one of us bent down, picked it up, and gave it to him. G. walked on for a few steps, then turned to us and said:"That was astrology. Do you understand? You all saw me drop the stick. Why did one of you pick it up?

Let each of you speak for himself."One said he had not seen G. drop the stick as he was looking another way. The second said he had noticed that G. had not dropped the stick accidentally as happens when a stick gets caught in something, but that he had intentionally loosened his hand and let the stick fall. This had excited his curiosity and he had waited to see what would happen next. The third said he saw G. drop the stick, but was very absorbed in thinking of astrology, particularly trying to remember what G. said once before, and did not pay sufficient attention to the stick. The fourth saw the stick fall and thought of picking it up, but at that moment the other picked up the stick and gave it to G. The fifth said he saw the stick fall and then he saw himself picking it up and giving it to G.

G. smiled as he listened to us."This is astrology," he said. "In the same situation one man sees and does one thing, another - another thing, a third - a third thing, and so on. And each one acted according to his type. Observe people and yourselves in this way and then perhaps we will afterwards talk of a different astrology."

Source: from Ouspensky Book "In Search of the Miraculous"

Gurdjieff on His Father individuality and Honesty

2009-04-26T08:52:00.000-07:00

Gurdjieff - To give a fuller picture of my father's individuality, I must say something about a tendency of his nature rarely observed in contemporary people, and striking to all who knew him well. It was chiefly on account of this tendency that from the very beginning, when he became poor and had to go into business, his affairs went so badly that his friends and those who had business dealings with him considered him unpractical and even not clever in this domain.

And indeed, every business that my father carried on for the purpose of making money always went wrong and brought none of the results obtained by others. However, this was not because he was unpractical or lacked mental ability in this field, but only because of this tendency.

This tendency of his nature, apparently acquired by him when still a child, I would define thus: 'an instinctive aversion to deriving personal advantage for himself from the naivete and bad luck of others'.

In other words, being highly honourable and honest, my father could never consciously build his own welfare on the misfortune of his neighbour. But most of those round him, being typical contemporary people, took advantage of his honesty and deliberately tried to cheat him, thus unconsciously belittling the significance of that trait in his psyche which conditions the whole of Our Common Father's commandments for man.

Indeed, there could be ideally applied to my father the following paraphrase of a sentence from sacred writings, which is quoted at the present time by the followers of all religions everywhere, for describing the abnormalities of our daily life and for giving practical advice:

Strike—and you will not be struck.
But if you do not strike—they will beat you to death, like Sidor's goat.

In spite of the fact that he often happened to find himself in the midst of events beyond the control of man and resulting in all sorts of human calamities, and in spite of almost always encountering dirty manifestations from the people round him—manifestations recalling those of jackals—he did not lose heart, never identified himself with anything, and remained inwardly free and always himself.

The absence in his external life of everything that those round him regarded as advantages did not disturb him inwardly in the least; he was ready to reconcile himself to anything, provided there were only bread and quiet during his established hours for meditation.

What most displeased him was to be disturbed in the evening when he would sit in the open looking at the stars.

I, for my part, can only say now that with my whole being I would desire to be able to be such as I knew him to be in his old age.

Owing to circumstances of my life not dependent on me, I have not personally seen the grave where the body of my dear father lies, and it is unlikely that I will ever be able, in the future, to visit his grave. I therefore, in concluding this chapter devoted to my father, bid any of my sons, whether by blood or in spirit, to seek out, when he has the possibility, this solitary grave, abandoned by force of circumstances ensuing chiefly from that human scourge called the herd instinct, and there to set up a stone with the inscription:

I AM THOU, THOU ART I,
HE IS OURS, WE BOTH ARE HIS.
SO MAY ALL BE FOR OUR NEIGHBOUR.

Source: from Gurdjieff Book "Meetings with Remarkable Men"

Gurdjieff on His Father Subjective Sayings

2009-04-26T08:44:00.000-07:00

Gurdjieff - Some of these subjective sayings of his(Gurdjieff referring to his Father) were as follows:

Without salt, no sugar.

Ashes come from burning.

The cassock is to hide a fool.

He is deep down, because you are high up.

If the priest goes to the right, then the teacher must without fail turn to the left.

If a man is a coward, it proves he has will.

A man is satisfied not by the quantity of food, but by the absence of greed.

Truth is that from which conscience can be at peace.

No elephant and no horse—even the donkey is mighty. In the dark a louse is worse than a tiger.

If there is '/' in ones presence, then God and Devil are of no account. Once you can shoulder it, it's the lightest thing in the world. A representation of Hell—a stylish shoe.

Unhappiness on earth is from the wiseacring of women.

He is stupid who is 'clever'.

Happy is he who sees not his unhappiness.

The teacher is the enlightener, who then is the ass?

Fire heats water, but water puts out fire.

Genghis Khan was great, but our policeman, so please you, is still greater.

If you are first, your wife is second; if your wife is first, you had better be zero: only then will your hens be safe.

If you wish to be rich, make friends with the police.

If you wish to be famous, make friends with the reporters.

If you wish to be full—with your mother-in-law.

If you wish to have peace—with your neighbour.

If you wish to sleep—with your wife.

If you wish to lose your faith—with the priest.

Source: from Gurdjieff Book "Meetings with Remarkable People"

Gurdjieff on Mullah Nasr Eddin (Hodja Nassr Eddin)

2009-03-20T04:15:00.000-07:00

Gurdjieff - Although I have began to write in Russian, nevertheless as the wisest of the wise, Mullah Nassr Eddin would say, in that language "you-cannot-go-far".Mullah Nassr Eddin, or as he is also called, Hodja Nassr Eddin, is, it seems, little known in Europe and America, but he is very well known in all the countries of the continent of Asia. This legendary personage corresponds somewhat to the German Till Eulenspiegel. Numerous tales popular in the East, akin to wise sayings, are ascribed to this Nassr Eddin; and various witticisms, some of long standing and others newly arisen, still continue to be ascribed to him also.

Source: from Gurdjieff Book "Beelzebub's Tales 1931 manuscript"

Gurdjieff Sacred Dances, Gurdjieff on Mystery of Scared Dance Movements

2009-03-20T04:06:00.000-07:00

George Gurdjieff :"My ballet is not a mystery. The purpose of it is to present an interesting and beautiful spectacle. Of course, under the visible forms a certain sense is hidden, but I did not aim at demonstrating or emphasizing it. The chief position in this ballet is occupied by certain dances. I will explain this to you briefly.

Imagine that in studying the laws of movement of the celestial bodies, let us say the planets of the solar system, you have constructed a special mechanism for the representation and recording of these laws. In this mechanism every planet is represented by a sphere of appropriate size and is placed at a strictly determined distance from the central sphere, which stands for the sun. You set the mechanism in motion, and all the spheres begin to turn and move in definite paths, reproducing in a lifelike way the laws which govern their movements. This mechanism reminds you of your knowledge.

"In the same way, in the rhythm of certain dances, in the precise movements and combinations of the dancers, certain laws are vividly recalled. Such dances are called sacred. During my journeys in the East, I often saw dances of this kind executed during the performance of sacred rites in some of the ancient temples. These ceremonies are inaccessible, and unknown to Europeans. Some of these dances are reproduced in The Struggle of the Magicians. Further, I may tell you that at the basis of The Struggle of the Magicians lie three thoughts; but, as I have no hope that they will be understood by the public if I present the ballet alone, I call it simply a spectacle."

Gurdjieff Youtube Video - Tribute to GI Gurdjieff

2009-03-02T03:42:00.001-08:00

Some actual footage of the mystic and the great teacher of the Fourth Way, George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff

Osho on Hartmann Book "Our Life with Gurdjieff"

2009-02-28T02:25:00.001-08:00

Books loved by Osho - Osho on Hartmann Book "Our Life with Gurdjieff"

Osho - Again a book by another disciple of Gurdjieff, Hartmann. The book is OUR LIFE WITH GURDJIEFF. Hartmann -- I don't know the exact pronunciation... because I can hear a little giggle somewhere. But don't be bothered about the pronunciation. Hartmann and his wife were both disciples of Gurdjieff. Hartmann was a musician and played for Gurdjieff's dances. Gurdjieff used dances as meditations, not only for the disciples but even for the people who saw the disciples dancing.

In New York, when he performed for the first time, Hartmann was playing the piano, the disciples were dancing, and the moment when Gurdjieff shouted "Stop!" -- it was a stop exercise. Not you Devageet, you go on writing. When Gurdjieff shouted "Stop!" the dancers really stopped, in the middle of a dance! They were just on the edge of the stage.

They all fell on top of one another on the floor, but still nobody moved! The audience was awestruck. They could not believe that people could be so obedient. Hartmann wrote the book OUR LIFE WITH GURDJIEFF and it is a beautiful description by a disciple. It will be helpful to anyone who is on the way.

Osho on Gurdjieff Disciple De Hartmann & De Hartmann Music

2009-02-28T02:23:00.000-08:00

Question - Beloved Osho, in a book I read about Gurdjieff, it was said that two of his disciples, who had been with him for a long time and in a very intimate way -- for example, De Hartmann, who played his music -- suddenly left him. Can you explain why this seems to happen again and again in the Master-Disciple relationship?

Osho - Turiya, the question is something of deep significance and with profound implications. It is something in the very nature of things that this kind of thing happens again and again, and will continue to happen again and again; it cannot be stopped. De Hartmann lived with George Gurdjieff for perhaps the longest period of any of his other disciples, perhaps forty years or more. He was a great genius as far as music is concerned, and he was playing music for special meditations which Gurdjieff had devised.

The music was also devised by Gurdjieff; de Hartmann had to bring the device into reality. Gurdjieff was a strange master, everything about him had the quality of strangeness. He himself was not a musician, but he understood what kind of vibrations could create certain states in man. His understanding was about man, his meditation, his mind, the possibility of his receiving certain vibrations and being affected by them.

He would explain his whole program to de Hartmann, and de Hartmann had become such an expert that he would make it a reality. But de Hartmann was not a disciple -- this was where the trouble arose. He had come to George Gurdjieff to be a disciple, but his genius about music took him on a different route: rather than being a disciple, he became an associate. He started working for Gurdjieff insofar as he needed music for his special dances, and he forgot completely why he had come.

Gurdjieff reminded him many times: "de Hartmann, you are a perfect master as far as music is concerned, but you had not come here to play music. And now your ego is feeling so fulfilled and contented that you don't want to sit among the disciples. You have forgotten that your basic motive was not to play music here."

The separation was bound to happen one day, because finally Gurdjieff became very hard. And he said to de Hartmann, "You have to stop music completely, because music has become a barrier. Your music has helped others tremendously, but for yourself it has become a barrier.
You stop music completely! Burn all your musical instruments." This was too much for de Hartmann. He was not an ordinary musician. He left Gurdjieff rather than leave music.

And because he had lived for forty years with George Gurdjieff, and had remained in a very intimate relationship... but not as a disciple, remember -- that was forgotten; that was why the problem arose. The intimacy was because of the music; Gurdjieff needed a musician. He was taking his disciples around the world, showing people the immense effect of vibrations.

In New York, in one of his shows, the disciples were dancing... They have to dance intensely and totally; they have to forget the whole world. But if the music stops, then they have to stop in whatever position they are in -- if the hand is up, it remains up; if their eyes are open, they remain open, they don't blink -- a total stop. If one leg is up in dancing, it remains where it is.

And when the dance came to its climax, he gave the indication to de Hartmann to stop. As the music stopped, every dancer had to stop -- just like statues, as if suddenly they had become marble statues, no movement. It is a tremendous experience. In that gap, when all movement has stopped, you simply feel your existence, your isness.

But when he said to de Hartmann to stop... the dancers were moving in a certain round and they were so close to the edge of the stage that with the sudden stop, one dancer fell from the stage. Because there was no way, you could not do anything -- whatever happened, happened, you had to stop. On top of him, another dancer fell. A whole line of dancers went on falling from the stage, as if they were dead bodies.

The people who had seen that show could not believe... the silence of the disciples, their becoming centered, created a new vibration. Even the people in the audience who had no idea of any meditation certainly felt a new breeze, a silence surrounding them, and a peacefulness. For years, the intelligentsia of New York talked about the dance. They could not believe what had happened; it was simply sheer magic.

But nothing happened to de Hartmann. He was just a technician: he played the music -- he was an expert -- and when the indication was given he stopped it. But he remained in close proximity to Gurdjieff for forty years, and people naturally thought that he was a disciple, and a very close disciple. And when he left Gurdjieff, he maintained the illusion -- perhaps he himself was in the illusion -- that he was a disciple, that he had learned everything that Gurdjieff knows... forty years is enough. That's why he went to America to open his own school.

A desire to become a master is a simple ego number. His statement, Turiya, when he said to people, "You are more important to me than Mr. Gurdjieff," is simply shameful -- but this is the category of the Judas.

In every master's life there are bound to be Judases. It seems to be the law of nature that the people who come to a master don't come with the same motivation. A few come to seek the truth, a few come to learn how to be a master.

In the life of Basho, one of the great mystics of Japan, there is a beautiful incident. He was sitting with his disciples and a man came and he said, "I also want to join."
Basho said, "There is no barrier; the doors are open, you can join. But let me tell you: disciplehood is an arduous thing. Are you ready for it, or is it just curiosity? If it is just curiosity then don't waste your time, because soon you will have to leave. If it is a sincere search that you are ready to stake everything -- life included -- only then can you be a disciple."

The man said, "I am not prepared. I never thought that to be a disciple costs so much." And then he said, "Then what about the master? -- I can become the master. If it is easier, then I can drop the idea of being a disciple; I can become the master."

Basho said, "We will not prevent you from being a master, but unless one has passed through the arduous path of disciplehood, one cannot be a master -- although it is very easy. If there was some back door, I would have allowed you in. But there is no back door; you will have to come through the right channel of being a disciple."
The man said, "Then I will think it over, and I will come again," and he never came again.

A few people simply come to the masters because they see a certain dimension of fulfillment for their ego, their ambition. To them, it is the same: to have power, prestige, respectability, richness, or to be a great master with thousands of disciples. They have no desire to know the truth, no search for knowing oneself. To them, to be a master is just like any other ambitious project of the world -- to be a rich man, to be a politician, to be a prime minister, to be a governor. And you cannot prevent them, because sometimes when they come and they try to understand, they change.

They see that when they came they had come with a wrong motive, but now that motive has been dropped. So they cannot be prevented from the very beginning... and one never knows when they will change; it may take years. The master has to be patient. But these people are in a hurry, because life is slipping out of their hands.

Judas betrayed Jesus not for any other reason. It was not for thirty silver coins that he betrayed Jesus; he betrayed Jesus because he was the only educated disciple. He was more educated and cultured than Jesus himself. Moving with Jesus, seeing his teachings, he could easily visualize himself as a great master, greater than Jesus: "Because this man is simply a carpenter's son, knows nothing much; still he has created a great stir in the country."

It was a very simple arithmetic: Judas could see that if this man is removed, he can prove himself to be a great master; but if this man is alive he will always remain a disciple. Either he had to revolt against him and create a totally different following, which is more arduous... This was far better, if Jesus could be removed in some way. And Judas was bound to be the leader, with an established following.

It is just like a shop with a credibility of hundreds of years -- rather than opening a new shop... You may be offering better things to the world, but still, the old name has a credibility, an established credibility. The competition is going to be tough and very difficult. The best way is somehow get the name of the old shop -- just old bottles filled with new wine. Nobody bothers about the wine, everybody looks at the bottle -- but the bottle has to be old. The old bottle is the proof of old wine. Simple logic...

And to remove Jesus was easy, because the Jews were after him and things could be done in such a way that nobody would ever know that Judas had done it. But he forgot one thing: nobody would ever know that Judas had done it, but how can Judas forget it? That realization came only later on. That realization came only when Jesus was crucified. Judas was in the crowd. He could not believe that he had done this -- just to become a master, he had betrayed a friend, a master who loved him, trusted him. And now he forgot all about the old ego trip.

Something new that he had never thought about, a great repentance, a guilt... within twenty-four hours he committed suicide. De Hartmann was not a disciple at all, but he knew certain techniques that Gurdjieff was practicing with disciples. He had become a technician. Because he had to supply the music to every technique, he knew the techniques in every detail -- but he had never practiced them; his work was to supply the music.

But this is how the mind deceives you. Your own mind leads you astray. De Hartmann could not prove himself to be a master -- without Gurdjieff, the music fell flat. He knew the technique, he knew the music, but he was not aware that the technique, the music, all were alive because of the living presence of a master. He was only a technician. That is the difference between a technician and a master.

Now if something goes wrong with the electricity any technician can come and fix it, but that does not mean that he is Edison who discovered electricity. Although he knows everything, he is not Edison. That master touch will be missing. It took three years for Edison to discover electricity. He started with many colleagues and students -- he was a professor. And by and by, because every experiment went on failing, people started deserting him: "He seems to be mad, he is trying to do something impossible.

Hundreds of experiments have failed, but that man seems to be strange... every day, early in the morning, he comes back to the lab with the same enthusiasm, the same zest." All his colleagues were feeling that it would be better to do something else -- "We are wasting our time." They were all frustrated. Except for Edison, nobody had any enthusiasm, and within three years all his colleagues and students had left.

But Edison continued, and one night at three o'clock... the whole night he had been working, because he was coming so close. And that was his logic -- he was saying to his colleagues, "Don't desert me; you are deserting at the wrong time. We have tried hundreds of experiments and they have all failed. That means that the one experiment which is going to succeed is coming closer. Finally we will sort it out. We are dropping those which are going to fail, they are not on our list anymore. The list is becoming shorter -- soon we will be able to find the right method."
They said, "Three years have been wasted, and we cannot imagine how long this `soon' is going to take."

And that night he started to feel from the very beginning of the evening that he was coming closer: "Things are fitting; the puzzle is to be settled tonight." He went on and on and on, and by three o'clock he saw the first electric bulb. It was so much light! No human eye had ever seen it before; people had seen only candles. His wife was sleeping in the other room. She had been calling him again and again -- "It is time to go to sleep."

He said, "Not tonight; you just go to sleep and don't disturb me. I am so close, and I don't want to miss. Tomorrow things may be different, I may have forgotten something. Today I cannot leave it." At three o'clock, suddenly the light... It was almost like lightning in the house.
The wife said, "You idiot, put that light out! Neither are you going to sleep nor will you allow me to sleep. And from where did you get this light?"

And he was sitting with unblinking eyes in a state of awe... unbelievable! It has happened! And the poor woman was saying, "Turn the light off."

He said, "This light is never going to be turned off. Now it is going to be on forever and ever." Now every electrician knows -- but he is only a technician, he is not an Edison. He can fall into the illusion that he is also as knowledgeable as Edison himself, but the charisma is not there, the genius is not there. Those miracle-making hands are not there.

De Hartmann tried hard in America, because in America Gurdjieff had been such a success. He went through the same cities giving the same shows, but everything fell flat. He could not figure out what was wrong -- because the songs were the same, the dances were the same, the music was the same, the musician was the same... "And that man Gurdjieff was not doing anything, he was simply standing there.

All that he used to do was to tell me, `Stop!' Just that much, anybody can do. And I myself know at what point he used to say stop, so I stop myself at those points, exactly at those points -- but the magic is not there."

He forgot that he had never been a disciple -- and he had become a master! He forgot that he had been only a musician. If he had remembered that he was only a musician -- and in that too, he was brought to such refinement by Gurdjieff, not by himself -- things would have been different.

Turiya, the same thing happened with Ouspensky, who was really a disciple. De Hartmann can be simply cancelled; he was never a disciple. But Ouspensky was a disciple, and one of the foremost disciples. But again, something took him away, and that something was similar to de Hartmann's music -- that was Ouspensky's intelligence. He was a world-famous mathematician, a great writer. Even before meeting Gurdjieff he was known all over the world. Nobody knew Gurdjieff.

In fact, it was Ouspensky who made Gurdjieff's name known to the world; the whole credit goes to Ouspensky. In this whole century there has not been another writer of the same caliber. He writes with such authority, with such beauty -- and that became his fall, because Gurdjieff became famous through his books. Gurdjieff was not a writer; he had no special talent which is recognized by the world. He was purely a master. He could transform human beings, their consciousness, but that is not an art recognized by the world.

And when Ouspensky saw that he had made Gurdjieff world-famous, why should he bother? He knew everything about what Gurdjieff was teaching, he had written everything; through him the whole world knew about the teaching of Gurdjieff... "I myself can teach." He started a school in London. And such ungratefulness... he would not use Gurdjieff's full name; he would simply call him "G". Just to avoid the full name, Gurdjieff, he would use only the first letter, G.

And he made it clear to his students, that "Gurdjieff was right as long as I was with him. I left him because he started going wrong. So his teaching is valid till I left him -- beyond that, it has no significance."

But he was just a school teacher, a professor, with no aura of a master. It was really ridiculous to see him pretending to be a master, because even in teaching higher principles of consciousness he was using a blackboard. Just the old habit of being a mathematician... So he would write on the blackboard, as if the people who had gathered were students. He would not look into anybody's eyes. He was not an impressive personality. He would have been perfectly good as a professor in a university, but to be a master, to belong to the category of Gautam Buddha, Gurdjieff and Krishnamurti, is a totally different matter. He tried hard, but he could not manage anything; nothing happened.

And you will be surprised to know that the whole world condemned Gurdjieff, nobody condemned Ouspensky, nobody condemned de Hartmann. In fact, they had nothing worth condemning either. Gurdjieff had a teaching, a methodology to transform humanity.

But these persons wanted to be masters. Seeing the power of Gurdjieff, they became power hungry. Seeing his influence, they started feeling inferior; they wanted to move away and create their own sphere of influence. They all failed.

So it seems to be in the very nature of things that this will go on happening. Wherever there will be a master, there will be Judases, Ouspenskys, de Hartmanns. With Mahavira there was Goshalak. With each great teacher, these people have followed like shadows -- hungry for power.
But to be a master is not an ego game. The power of the master is not of the power of the ego; it is the power of his humbleness, it is the power of his nothingness. So these people will continue to happen, but they don't make even a dent in human evolution. They simply spoil their own life and a great opportunity that was given to them.

Source: from Osho Book "The Osho Upanishad"

Osho - When P.D.Ouspensky came to Gurdjieff he was a great scholar

2009-02-21T07:12:00.000-08:00

Osho - When P.D.Ouspensky came to Gurdjieff he was a great scholar, already world famous -- more known in the world than Gurdjieff himself. Gurdjieff was an unknown fakir in those days; he became known through Ouspensky. Ouspensky had written a great book before he met Gurdjieff. The book is really rare because he talks as if he knows, and he is such an articulate man that he can deceive.

The book is Tertium Organum -- third canon of thought, and really one of the rarest books in the world. Even ignorance can sometimes do things; if you are skillful you can do things, even in your ignorance.

Ouspensky claims in that book -- and his claim is right -- that there exist only three real books in the world: one is Aristotle's Organum, the first canon of thought; second is Bacon's Novum Organum, new canon of thought, that is the second canon of thought; and the third is his Tertium Organum, third canon of thought. And really these three books are rare.

All the three authors are ignorant, none of them knows anything about truth, but they are very articulate men. They really have done miracles: without knowing about truth they have written beautiful books. They have almost come around, approximately they have reached.

Ouspensky was a name; when he came to Gurdjieff, Gurdjieff was nobody. Of course he came with the knowledge that Gurdjieff was a man of being -- a man of no knowledge really, but of very substantial being. What did he do? He did something beautiful: he remained silent.

Ouspensky waited and waited and waited, became fidgety, started perspiring before this man because he simply remained silent, looking at him, and it was so awkward, and his eyes were very very penetrating -- if he wanted to he could BURN you with his eyes; and his face was such that, if he wanted to, he could simply shake you out of your being with his face.

If he looked in you, you would feel very uneasy. He remained like a statue, and Ouspensky started trembling, a fever came over him. Then he asked, 'But why are you silent? Why don't you say something?'

Gurdjieff said, 'First one thing has to be decided, decided absolutely; only then will I say even a single word. Go into the other room, you will find a piece of paper there; write on it whatsoever you know, and also that which you don't know. Make two columns: one of your knowledge, one of your ignorance, because whatsoever you know I need not talk about. We are finished with it; you know it, there's no need to talk of it. Whatsoever you don't know, I will talk about.'

Ouspensky has reported that he went into that room, sat on a chair, took the paper and the pencil -- and for the first time in his life realized that he didn't know anything. This man destroyed his whole knowledge because, for the first time with awareness, he was going to write: I know God. How to write that? -- because he didn't know. How to write: I know truth?

Ouspensky was authentic. He came back after half an hour, gave a blank sheet to Gurdjieff and said, 'Now you start work. I don't know anything.'
Gurdjieff said, 'How could you write Tertium Organum? You don't know anything -- and you have written the third canon of thought!'

It's as if people go on writing in their sleep, go on writing in their dreams; as if they don't know what they are doing, they don't know what is happening through them.

Osho on George Gurdjieff Saying - Respect your Parents

2009-02-16T06:38:00.000-08:00

Osho - Once somebody asked George Gurdjieff, "Why do all the religions teach: Respect your parents?"

Gurdjieff said, "For a simple reason: if you respect your parents you will respect God, because God is nothing but the ultimate parent. If you don't respect your parents you will not be bothered with God either. "

A great insight: God is the great father; you are just small children searching for a lost father, searching for a lost childhood, searching for the security of childhood. Your behavior is childish.

Osho - Gurdjieff will become more important than Freud in the coming century

2009-02-16T06:37:00.001-08:00

Osho - Sooner or later, you will be surprised, a few other names will become more important which are already there but known only to a few people. For example, Gurdjieff will become more important than Freud in the coming century -- because he has tried to give a few keys for a real, objective psychology. Ouspensky's name will become more important than Jung's. And a few completely unknown names will bubble up into prominence.

Osho on Gurdjieff Saying - if you start getting disidentified from things

2009-02-16T06:35:00.000-08:00

Osho - Gurdjieff used to say that if you start getting disidentified from things, sooner or later you will fall upon your essential being. That is the basic meaning of renunciation. Renunciation does not mean, sannyas does not mean, renouncing the world and escaping to the Himalayas or to a monastery -- because if you escape from the world and go to a monastery, nothing is going to change. You carry the same mind. here in the world, the house was yours, and the wife was yours; there the monastery will be yours, the religion will be yours. It will not make much difference. The 'mine' will persist. It is a mind-attitude -- it has nothing to do with any outside space. It is an inner illusion, an inner dream, an inner sleep.

Renunciation means: wherever you are, there is no need to renounce the things because in the first place you never possessed them. It is foolish to talk about renunciation. It means as if you were the possessor and now you are renouncing. How can you renounce something which you never possessed? Renunciation means coming to know that you cannot possess anything.

You can use, at the most, but you cannot possess. You are not going to be here forever -- how can you possess? It is impossible to possess anything. You can use and you can be grateful to things that they allow themselves to be used. You should be thankful to things that they allow themselves to be used. They become means, but you cannot possess them.

Dropping the idea of ownership is renunciation. Renunciation is not dropping the possessions but possessiveness. And this is what Gurdjieff calls getting unidentified. This is what Bauls call realizing 'Ardhar Manush' -- the essential man. This is what Zen people call the original face.

Osho on Gurdjieff Teaching of Respecting Your Parents

2008-12-30T04:29:00.001-08:00

Osho on Gurdjieff Teaching of Respecting Your Parents

Osho : Your God is nothing but a projected father; it is a father fixation. You cannot live without the idea of a father. Maybe your actual father is dead and you cannot conceive of yourself without a father. You need an imaginary father in heaven who takes care of you, who looks after you. And, certainly, the ordinary father is bound to die one day or other so you need a heavenly father who is eternal, who will never die, so he will become your safety and security.

Once somebody asked George Gurdjieff, "Why do all the religions teach: Respect your parents?"Gurdjieff said, "For a simple reason: if you respect your parents you will respect God, because God is nothing but the ultimate parent. If you don't respect your parents you will not be bothered with God either. "A great insight: God is the great father; you are just small children searching for a lost father, searching for a lost childhood, searching for the security of childhood. Your behavior is childish.

Osho on Gurdjieff idea of Disidentification, Renunciation

2008-12-30T04:24:00.000-08:00

Osho on Gurdjieff idea of Disidentification, Renunciation

Osho : This game of 'my' and 'mine' is the most absurd game -- but this is the whole game of life. This earth was there before you ever came here, and this will be here when you are gone. The diamonds that you possess were there before you ever came here, and when you are gone those diamonds will remain here -- and they will not even remember you.

They are completely oblivious that you possess them.This game of possessiveness is the most foolish game there is -- but this is the whole game. Gurdjieff used to say that if you start getting disidentified from things, sooner or later you will fall upon your essential being. That is the basic meaning of renunciation.

Renunciation does not mean, sannyas does not mean, renouncing the world and escaping to the Himalayas or to a monastery -- because if you escape from the world and go to a monastery, nothing is going to change. You carry the same mind. here in the world, the house was yours, and the wife was yours; there the monastery will be yours, the religion will be yours.

It will not make much difference. The 'mine' will persist. It is a mind-attitude -- it has nothing to do with any outside space. It is an inner illusion, an inner dream, an inner sleep. Renunciation means: wherever you are, there is no need to renounce the things because in the first place you never possessed them. It is foolish to talk about renunciation.

It means as if you were the possessor and now you are renouncing. How can you renounce something which you never possessed? Renunciation means coming to know that you cannot possess anything. You can use, at the most, but you cannot possess. You are not going to be here forever -- how can you possess? It is impossible to possess anything. You can use and you can be grateful to things that they allow themselves to be used.

You should be thankful to things that they allow themselves to be used. They become means, but you cannot possess them.Dropping the idea of ownership is renunciation. Renunciation is not dropping the possessions but possessiveness. And this is what Gurdjieff calls getting unidentified. This is what Bauls call realizing 'Ardhar Manush' -- the essential man. This is what Zen people call the original face.