101

i was imagining someone wanting to read plato or the new testament in greek, or the five books of moses in hebrew, or goethe in german. i was imagining their listing alphabetic runes and trying to approximate the corresponding phonemes, while studying various linguistic rules and exceptions. i was imagining their nuanced understanding of the vast scope of the enterprise they were embarking upon, fully cognizant of what they may have to pay and of the easier alternatives. i imagined someone consulting history and experts, and admiringly nodding to forerunners who had mastered those amazing works.

but learning the alphabet, and the language ... isn't that all Classics 101? what about the 200 level courses? not even talking about advanced degrees!

what led me to such imaginings was hearing people discussing gurdjieff's talk to ouspensky & co.. beginning with "know thyself" gurdjieff stated that such knowledge must be obtained and it must be obtained starting with self observation with regard to a division of centers/functions, and further with regard to the divisions of those centers, and that one must first identify what is obvious and soon one will have lots of material, etc..

one inconspicuous word i just used to summarize this is "soon." gurdjeiff nowhere indicated that identifying centers and functions is a lifetime pursuit. rather, it is a prerequisite, but not the subject itself. 101. or perhaps if the outline itself is 101 maybe this subject might be 102 or 110, but 100 level nonetheless.

yet from the tone of the discussion one would think that people were pursuing a masters in the alphabet; despite years of attempts some seemed despairing, or discussed who it is that sees, or resigned to start again, or discussed sincerity, daring not state anything definitively - all manner of things. overall, the gravity of the discussion of an unattainable 101 seemed odd in that familiar way and echoes my various misgivings:

• does the fourth way work? perhaps it did but no longer does, perhaps it has changed, or perhaps it was dependent upon something else (i.e., gurdjieff's presence).
• are we going about it wrong? are we overlooking something? did i register and pay tuition?
• is ouspensky's account correct, was gurdjieff pulling our legs?
• has anyone ever "mastered" identifying centers?

if the intellectual center compares and if the emotion center likes, how can we isolate comparing and liking? why doesn't comparing fahrenheit to celsius and taking a cold shower put us well on the way towards the 200 level strata? isn't rick-rolling by definition an emotional "ugh"?

there's something to be said for contemplating the intricacies of the process, consulting history and experts, admiringly nodding to legends. but perhaps certain work starts at a lower level.