A man is born as Essence (Instinctual/Emotional/Moving Centres) and this constitutes his real part, the part from which he can really grow and develop. But this part in him can only grow in a very small way. It has not the strength to grow by itself any further after, say, the age of three or four or five. Let us call this the first stage of a man. That is, the first stage of a man is pure Essence which by itself is capable of a certain amount of growth but reaches a point very soon in which it can grow no further.
Christianity teaches that the Essence in a man can only grow a very short way by itself. People naturally think that growth and development is something continuous or that it should be, but here is this extraordinarily interesting idea within Christian praxis that this is not the case. Man's Essence can only grow by itself unaided to a very small extent, and as such, a man is nothing but a little child. Now in order for it to grow further something must happen. Something must form itself round Essence and this is called Personality(Intellectual Centre) Essence must become surrounded by something that is really foreign to itself, acquired from life, which enters through the senses from family and culture.
A little child must cease to be itself and become something different from itself. A child's locus of awareness (self-awareness) passes from Essence into Personality. It learns all sorts of things, it imitates all sorts of things, and so on. This formation of the machinery of Personality around Essence is actually necessary for the further development of Essence. The formation of this machinery of Personality can be called the second stage of man. This is the end of psychological development for the overwhelming majority of these humans.
But let us clearly understand this notion, the future development of Essence depends on the formation of Personality around it.
If a very poor Personality, a very weak Personality, is formed round Essence, there is very little to help further growth of Essence. In the second stage, the formation of Personality is taking place, and, as was said, the richer the Personality the better. Most have neither the eyes to see, nor the ears to hear the extraordinary situation we are in—namely, that we cannot grow continuously from Essence because Essence is too weak to grow by itself. Most are not even aware of the distinction between Essence and Personality. Most know nothing whatsoever about the action of, and the specific qualities of, the Instinctual, the Emotional, the Moving, and the Intellectual Centres.
The further growth of Essence depends first of all on the formation of Personality and the richer the Personality the better eventually for the growth of Essence, but, ordinarily speaking, the formation of Personality is quite sufficient for the purposes of cultured human life. A man finds himself in a good position, able to deal with life through the formation of a rich Personality in him. And if he is satisfied, he is, for all life purposes, adequate.
Christianity is about a possible, but not necessary, further stage of human development. In the Christic scheme of possible development - Personality is sublimated into Essence as food for its possible further life and growth.
Everything else is merely conversation...,
18 comments:
"Christianity teaches that the Essence in a man can only grow a very short way by itself." Yep with you so far..Ephesians 2: " 8
For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
"Essence must become surrounded by something that is really foreign to itself, acquired from life, which enters through the senses from family and culture."
I think I can work with this, I might change "acquired from life" to say "acquired from the giver of life". And rather than through the senses, being adopted into a family spiritually, something like this, (if we are actually talking about Christianity):
Romans 8: 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 15 For you have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but you have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. 16 The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: 17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
"Most have neither the eyes to see, nor the ears to hear the extraordinary situation we are in—namely, that we cannot grow continuously from Essence because Essence is too weak to grow by itself."
Ok true, we should have this perspective: 2 Corinthians 12: 9 And he said to me, My grace is sufficient for you: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest on me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
"Most know nothing whatsoever about the action of, and the specific qualities of, the Instinctual, the Emotional, the Moving, and the Intellectual Centres."
True, and it's why we depend on God's word, (if we are talking about Christianity): Hebrews 4: 12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened to the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
"The further growth of Essence depends first of all on the formation of Personality and the richer the Personality the better eventually for the growth of Essence, but, ordinarily speaking, the formation of Personality is quite sufficient for the purposes of cultured human life. A man finds himself in a good position, able to deal with life through the formation of a rich Personality in him. And if he is satisfied, he is, for all life purposes, adequate."
I am having a tough time finding Christian truth here. Perhaps this truth would make all else merely conversation: Proverbs 3: 5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart; and lean not to your own understanding. 6 In all your ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct your paths. 7 Be not wise in your own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil. 8 It shall be health to your navel, and marrow to your bones.
I am having a tough time finding Christian truth here.
I am having a tough time in accepting your self-appointment as if you are a reliable or desirable gatekeeper for saying what is or is not Christian truth.
Not the point of this exercise.
Instead, observe how the automaton of Ken's "received wisdom" works in response to a perspective that Ken has never previously encountered.
Note the scholasticism and litigiousness of its operation on this new material, it must be dissected and it's elements discredited.
Note how utterly impervious Ken is to the gist of what is being set forth.
Perhaps this is a better line for Ken to internalize the message:
"I am destroying speculations, and every lofty thing raised up against
the knowledge of God, and I am taking every thought captive to the
obedience of Christ Jesus."
The bible regularly talks of submission to God, yet it also references the "destructive thoughts," of the Devil. So to surrender is to be godly, to think through and rationalize...
Carefully bear in mind that the ease with which you discern the splinter is inversely proportional to the difficulty with which you'll discern the beam.
Go on...
And if you mean it's the blind leading the blind, I agree! But at least we're holding hands, which is nice.
lol, the delusion of merit is indeed a terrible personality trap, but there is also something to be said for three decades of increasingly focused work. I don't know why folk get soft-headed about psycho-athletic development and insist on a self-calming democratization of mind. If you face me on the tennis court, and my capacity to play the ball exceeds your capacity to play the ball - there's no such equivocation.
Only if he (and you) understand that comparatively speaking, Instinct (word of God) is light speed, emotion the speed of an electron through a conductive medium, movement the speed of sound, and thought, the speed of thick molasses over a frozen pane. If we're going to talk about time, http://squeezingthehourglass.blogspot.com/2012/12/lets-talk-about-time.html we should be sure to talk about that aspect of time which truly matters.
We're on the same page, I'm just trying to talk the man's language.
You think any amount of rhetoric, however masterful, has the remotest prayer of provoking a glimpse underneath decades worth of ________________________?
Do you think Nicoll considered the Gurdjieff's system equal in meaning to Christianity? I guess I am curious why you decided to change "system" to Christianity. You didn't really believe Nicoll considered his beliefs Christian did you?
That's not my language of course, that's 2 Corinthians 10, and it would be a correct application here. For Christianity, whether it's Eastern Orthodox, or Catholic, or Lutheran, or Protestant, the Bible is considered the main text to go to check the doctrine or message being presented especially when the message is coming to you in the name of Christianity. I think if you are going to bring a message saying it is from Christianity, it is acceptable to test the message against the known doctrines of Christianity. Your scripture was fine, and I understand you don't really call it yours like you said here. But if you wanted to get more to the heart of the matter I would probably have used this:
1 John 4: 1 Dear friends, stop believing every spirit. Instead, test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
2 This is how you can recognize God’s Spirit: Every spirit who acknowledges that Jesus the Messiah has become human—and remains so—is from God. 3 But every spirit who does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist.
I suspect the scripture below coupled with the scripture above should help define who is adhering to Christian truths and it's teaching.
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. 2 The Word was with God in the beginning. 3 All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. 4 In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. 5 And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it. .... 11 He came to what was his own, but his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who have received him – those who believe in his name – he has given the right to become God’s children 13 – children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God. 14 Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.
lol, read Nicoll's The Mark and answer that question for yourself. The vastly more important question for you is why do you suppose Gurdjieff and Ouspensky went to such great lengths to distance their terminology from what you refer to as "Christianity"?
The dogma of the text is the opposite of the message. The idea of the Trinity was developed as a kind of koan: how can three be one and one be three? It's meant to force you out of rationality and past thinking into feeling it's ineffable rightness. The portions of the text that are supposed to be the important bits are consciously confusing--they're supposed to confuse your consciousness as an upwelling of Truth overwhelms your system.
Religion isn't supposed to be a road map to God, it's supposed to be a doorway. You don't follow the instructions, you suddenly open up into a whole new world beyond comprehension.
I don't know what I think, but that's what I feel. :)
kinda, sorta, almost...., nah....,
http://www.gurdjieffsburieddog.com/uploads/1ST_3__shortened_PDF.pdf
http://youtu.be/12vEN0MBMBk
observe how the automaton of Ken's "received wisdom" works in response to a perspective that Ken has never previously encountered.
This has been Ken's issue from day one -- easily recognized in almost all of his comments due to his oppositional stance to your comments. One does not need be oppositional nor confrontational if they disagree. In fact, the most direct route to understanding is for one or the other party to demonstrate through doing rather than lip-flapping. The other party either gets it or not.
Note the scholasticism and litigiousness of its operation on this new material, it must be dissected and it's elements discredited.
The whole point of which is to distract the weak-minded so that they see Ken's "authority" (and why I made the comment I did) and follow his lead for proper in-group behavior (shut down their own discernment).
Note how utterly impervious Ken is to the gist of what is being set forth.
...all of this participates in a feedback loop to reinforce the role that religion has in dopamine hegemony. Ken participates primarily so he can selfishly continue to benefit from his share of the resources as they are funneled from the bottom to the top. This is easily achieved because he only has to flap his lips as his superiors flap theirs (his own mirroring of in-group behavior). He would be utterly lost in a culture of competency so therefore has to defend his denial to the death.
Ken participates primarily so he can selfishly continue to benefit from his share of the resources as they are funneled from the bottom to the top.
lol, nah magne, I don't think it's that deep.
(his own mirroring of in-group behavior). He would be utterly lost in a culture of competency
au contraire mon frere, he's IN a culture of competency, just not competent at anything that either you or I would deem particularly useful. He is, however, quite adept at slinging chapter and verse in an odd, ad hoc juke box sort of way that may be very impressive to the easily impressed and highly suggestible.
Based on lengthy and direct personal experience with bible-buddies, going back to the middle-school years, something deep inside these folks has been marshaled in defense of their special dispensation in the world. I'm thinking that the collective-security-club (CSC) instinct and emotion has been triggered to an extent that either you or I could scarcely imagine.
I had a friend named Brent in middle-school. Tall, lanky, good-looking, intelligent kid, who came from a single parent family, had a younger brother who was a weed-head and an outsider. Brent, however, was a bible-toting, bible-quoting wargamer, persistently trying to kick it with the smart boys, but constantly having to defend his magical-thinking tribe and his allegiance to the same against the scrutiny and scorn of his peers.
I'm not quite sure what accounted for his early conversion and unshakeable devotion to bible-verses as cognitive and interpersonal security blanket, but I know that he was a dead-earnest gamer, and loved to "litigate" the nuances of rules, etc.., frankly, I'm inclined to think it came down to something as simple as that he'd found a lingua franca of sorts in which he could in fact be highly competent within a designated in-group, and, he had acquired a tool for recruiting others into that in-group.
Post a Comment