In the past decade or so, a slew of authors have published books wholly or in part about the Work. A new book about the Work should be something to rejoice about, if it's accurately and honestly written. The trouble is, so many of them aren't.
One writer, for instance, urges his readers to set up their own Gurdjieff groups, even if they know very little about the Work. Another advises the regular, unsupervised practice of some fairly difficult Work exercises, which could cause problems for the psychologically vulnerable. A third writes of his decision to leave the Work and start up an "independent" group, in a chapter that's clearly one long piece of self-justifying.
What has got into them, I wondered. Why set yourself up as a Work teacher or adviser, when you're advising something very unwise? And then I clocked it. All of these writers, without exception, have left the Work after a period of 10-13 years. All of them gloss over their reasons for leaving. One states that after 12 years in the Work, he "found himself" running an unauthorized group in America! Found himself? How? Obviously, he took a decision to do so, but why? Another simply says she left the Work, but gives no reason why. And so on. The break occurs, but the reader is given no details.
In such cases, we can assume the parting was not amicable. No Work teacher in an authorized line, whether from the Gurdjieff Foundations, the Ouspensky school or the Nicoll groups, would consent to an unauthorized student's setting up a new group, let alone to writing about the Work as though they really understood it. If a student insisted on doing so, he or she would be asked to leave.
As we might expect, these books are full of errors, but unfortunately these errors are mixed in with some sound teaching, so it's really hard for the beginner to sift through what's of value and what isn't. I fear that many would-be students are being taken in by these deceptive writers and given very bad advice.
But why this approximately 10-year period? What's so special about that?
And then another penny dropped. It's after about 10 years that the Work student, if really working on themselves, will begin to be brought face to face with the deepest, darkest I's in their psyche: their Chief Feature.
And it's then that many flinch, turn away, and leave. At some level, they know that they can progress no further, but at the same they can't face the necessary suffering that continuing with the Work would bring. They may leave the group voluntarily, or the teacher may request that they leave, because they're distorting the Work teaching, arguing, distracting the other students, and simply failing to work on themselves at all.
Every Work teacher has had such a student, or students, in a group, and while we all want to further the progress of as many people as possible, we can't let one rebellious, defiant person spoil the Work for the others, especially as such students are harming themselves in the process.
What might the Chief Feature of such writers be? Obviously, it varies with each student. But one characteristic that recurs through many of these writings is that of Lying. Lying destroys Essence, and is extremely serious. Lying includes claiming knowledge you don't have, or denying the inner reality with which you're faced. Liars have to leave the Work.
As the dervish sheikh says in "Meetings With Remarkable Men", may God curse those who do not know and yet claim to show others the way. Or, as Jesus put it, if the blind lead the blind, they will both fall into a pit.
Another Chief Feature detectable in some of these books is that of vanity. The author wants to be seen as a teacher, an expert. He or she is out to make a name for themselves, and see no reason why they should not use the Work to further their aims.
For others, it may be codependence that prompts them to leave a group. They can see that the most prominent relationships in their lives are actually codependent, that they are addicted to this person or people, and can't face the thought of having to give up the relationships or change themselves.
So they leave, and they write in order to create a new type of relationship, one in which they can be the authority, the teacher, the wise one. This satisfies their ambitions and perpetuates the addictive I's, closing off all possibilities of personal growth.
At the end of roughly 10 years in the Work, if the student meets the Chief Feature successfully, struggles with it, and begins to overcome its influence, he or she may then go on to be a trusted and valued group member and eventually may be authorized to teach the Work.
So my advice is, when a new book on the Work appears, scrutinize carefully the writer's credentials. Is he or she in the Work? If not, why not? What seems to be the author's aim - their Third Force - in writing? Are they offering sound advice, or do they seem somewhat "off"? If you're in a Work group and you aren't sure, ask your teacher to evaluate the book.
And if you come across anyone - writer or simply acquaintance - who's left the Work after about 10 years, ask yourself why? You may glimpse that person's Chief Feature in the way he or she replies; and it may prompt you to speculate about your own.
No comments:
Post a Comment