WHEN ONE IS STARTING WITH NOTHING, HOW DO YOU BEGIN?
THE THREE ELEMENTS FOR BEGINNING
Ancient philosophers devised various approaches and systems for determining what was true knowledge, through the use of logic, scripture, the words of a teacher, and so on. These different approaches related to religious, philosophical, and metaphysical knowledge or “belief.”
Gurdjieff’s system requires the student above all understand; that he accept nothing (except provisionally) on faith, but finally come to a true knowledge or objective grasp of an idea or concept.
The whole procedure behind gaining a bit of truly objective knowledge is prevented or obstructed simply by the disorganization of the human machine, as Gurdjieff indicates. How can a human know, when his internal mentation and feeling has no center, no essence, no right or correct functioning? There is not even, as Gurdjieff says, a central “I” to act from, as a center of gravity, to know about anything at all.
The answer, is that one needs to start with the limited resources that one has in order to know what is truly real. And that requires the combined effort of three things:
1). Clear, Rational, Logical Thinking.
A lot of people these days don’t believe in clear thinking. There is an assumption that “experts” are government stooges; that science is a corrupt tool of the corporations and billionaires; that even what one “researches” on obscure corners of the internet is the “real truth.”
On the other hand, there are many people who proclaim that they are atheists because science can’t detect or measure spirit; that what current science books say is the only truth one should believe in; people who even slavishly copy the social, moral, and political stances of left-leaning media rags to a “T” without any individual investigation at all.
Neither one of these approaches demonstrates clear thinking.
Clear thinking entails using the intellect to think for oneself, clearly, independently, and in a progressively logical manner. It can be thinking about conventional scientific facts, so-called; or it can be thinking about metaphysical and religious things, such as whether or not there is a God.
There is a strong current in the Gurdjieff Foundation which rejects clear, logical thinking; which accuses the head of “being a bowling ball.” The overlying idea behind that, I assume, is to not get caught up in “discursive thinking” of the mind; but to “be here, now,” and experience reality instead. It is also supposedly to learn to “feel,” although for the most part, “feeling” in the Work really ends up being more, “what was my physical reaction to such-and-such?”
This is not a bad motivation, to not get caught up in the “formatory apparatus” and to notice the emotions. But there is a difference between simply being awake and conscious of reality, and being rudderless at sea.
The Fourth Way is above all a system. It is, as Nicoll says, a system of ideas which needs to be absorbed and internalized, in order to understand the system. Without the Fourth Way system, teachers and group members in the “Work” are simply “psychoanalyzing” one another — without a license! — and getting one another in a heap of psychological trouble, emotionally and mentally.
In the Tales, Gurdjieff is constantly talking about rationality and clear thinking. This entails the use of the Intellectual Center, such as one has it, in its undeveloped state. The intellect can be sharpened and honed through correct usage.
And the intellect is how we approach, think about, and move closer to “Objective Knowledge.” It cannot be a reactive type of thinking; where we simply come up with whatever superficial thought happens to occur to us. But it must be a directed, sustained, deep, and honest inner research of a concept.
2). “Friction” Within the Thinking, Emotional, and Moving Centers Is Crucial!
Friction means going against the grain; it means doing “the right thing” in daily life; it means working to make sense of yourself and your life and your world full-time. When we go about our business in life, we don’t need to assume that what we automatically think, feel, and do is just simply “us being ourselves,” no questions asked. Yes, certainly we need to be honest about ourselves throughout life, and not be a “phony.”
But our automatic reactions in life are simply the law of entropy; just acquiescing to a stimulus that hits us. It is going downhill, rather than struggling hard to go upwards, to climb the mountain. Choosing to simply not work, and to “be real,” is us simply being a slab of meat, under the butcher’s cleaver, for a sale. Friction entails not reacting; but choosing our action.
At first, for a very long time, friction or the struggle to choose between right and wrong (in one’s own view) seems like a lot of unnecessary suffering. But it is better by far than the inner confusion that goes with giving up or not trying to improve oneself; the superior way is to struggle to make sense of one’s Life.
It is through friction that we work to also make progress in beginning to see a dim outline of Objective Reality. Slowly, this hard work begins to form small structures within our centers of intellect, emotion, and movement. Structures which are the first formations of the permanent centers, rather than the splintered and chaotic mix of thoughts and feelings (reactions) which initially filled our life.
These nascent centers, and the knowledge and being (or rather impressions of intellect and feeling and experience) they contain are the first crucial organs of perception which can make sense of Reality, and which can perceive Objective Knowledge.
Gurdjieff in general called this friction “putting up with the manifestations of others around us,” or “not complaining when others step on our corns.” This idea being that we outwardly not react when confronted with other people’s annoying or irritating words and deeds. But rather, to inwardly process the behavior of others; to process or work through other’s manifestations in an intellectual and emotional way. We then teach others through the inner transmutation of ourselves.
3). Finally, Along with the Preceding Two, There Is the Collecting of Experience
Then third, there is experience. The Fourth Way Work is right, in that it is important to “verify everything.” It is necessary that, whatever we think we know or whatever we read or hear, that we check it out in the real world for ourselves.
And we can verify everything; from the structure of our mind, to the “level of being” of our teacher, to the existence of God. These are not things that we can “prove” to anther person or to a scientific panel. An inner mental/emotional thing can be verified in an inner way, just as a spiritual thing can be verified in a higher and inner way. There are repeatable and even external and sensory methods that can verify inner and spiritual things.
And it is important that we implement the knowledge and being we have attained in our external lives. Perhaps a better way of expressing it would be, after we have gained some knowledge and being within ourselves, our outer life starts to manifest that higher level of knowledge and being, externally. It is not necessarily a lower magic, but rather a true “high magic;” where an inner elevation and change is reflected with an outer bestowal of gifts of transcendent quality.
In fact, the noticing of external synchronous events around oneself is a superior way of verifying inner structures and processes. Gurdjieff noted this when he stated, “Knowledge begins with the teaching of the Cosmoses.” The true “microcosm” of the ancients, by the way, is not the human body; the physical body is just another part of the outer world, or macrocosm. The true microcosm is the mind and feelings — the consciousness and will — of a human being. Unfortunately this crucial knowledge has been lost; and most especially absent these days with the Gurdjieffians. This is also the original teaching of the Buddha.
In the end, just as one wants the most substantive intellect, and one wants the most substantive motivation and choice in Life (friction), so also one wants the most substantive fixtures in the external world to inform oneself. When looking outward for confirmation and for knowledge, it is imperative to look to the most reliable and most authoritative things, people, places, and events one can find. This requires discernment. Or as the Buddhists call it “discriminating wisdom.” Life contains a whole spectrum of phenomena; Objective Knowledge can be found only at the top of the spectrum. (Unfortunately, there isn’t the option to misread the Buddhist’s “emptiness,” and simply accept everything around oneself indiscriminately, as emptiness.)
IN CONCLUSION
So, Objective Knowledge isn’t “facts.” Objective Knowledge can be defined as possessing an unvarnished view of the world, of Reality. The cosmos is a system (as in systems theory), a wholistic organism that cannot be assembled with a collection of facts. But in order to acquire this objective view, mankind needs to have an inner structure that can apprehend that outer reality. If there is nothing on the inside of a person, then the outer truth cannot make an impression.
Objective Knowledge is alternatively not simply opinions or beliefs. As is commonly said, beliefs are “held.” One can lose them or change them. Whereas a person “possesses” knowledge. This knowledge has become a part of the possessor. Through the exercise of the three above elements, true knowledge is at first dimly perceived, then apprehended, and finally verified and tested, over and over again. Then in the end it becomes a part of one’s outer daily life.
If one wanted to apply the Law of Three to the above, or perhaps the gunas of Indian Philosophy, Intellect would have a sattvic nature, Friction would have a rajasic nature, and Experience in the World might have a tamasic nature.
But these three are necessary, and all we have to begin with, to perceive the Real World.
What this process entails is the proverbial “pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps.” We start with nothing at all; and end up being a complete cosmos.
