Dasher Dancer Prancer Vixen Comet Cupid Donner Blitzen Rudolph Vanity Pride Suggestibility and Ouspensky

of course that last post was all tongue-in-cheek. we all know that st. nick is indeed our all-uni-common-cosmic-father who attained the degree of the sacred onclad through relentless being-parkdolg duty, having harmonized the functions and impulses in the khrh workshop crucible hrhaharhtzaha, and tamed and harnessed the many features and i’s that would otherwise fly off in all directions. and, as we all know, he is a very expensive saint indeed! so that last post was all tongue-in-cheek. or this post is. or maybe that’s just the nature of metaphor – a slippery something, they can go one way or another, or yet another.

but that’s sort of what i want to talk about. because i get hung up on what’s true and what’s false … the yes and no of it all, because i’m limited to that comparing function of the intellectual center.

in the past i’ve gone on about the many wines, and that carbon is the new black, and the differences between all the purported representatives of the higher. but lately, i wonder ... granted the following quote pertains to the mechanical and not people who are on a higher level, except to the extent my perceptions come from the lower level i occupy, i wonder ...

“Quite right,” said G., “people are very unlike one another, but the real difference between people you do not know and cannot see. The difference of which you speak simply does not exist. This must be understood. All the people you see, all the people you know, all the people you may get to know, are machines, actual machines working solely under the power of external influences, as you yourself said. Machines they are born and machines they die. How do savages and intellectuals come into this? Even now, at this very moment, while we are talking, several millions of machines are trying to annihilate one another. What is the difference between them? Where are the savages and where are the intellectuals? They are all alike.

i’ve been reading some martin benson, and some james opie and mme. de salzmann, and they all talk about a certain relationship between the lower and the higher, certain functions, and also service in some mannter which is on a vastly different scale. the most particularly striking correspondences involve the most esoteric parts of the teaching, and it makes me wonder if perhaps they are all talking about the same thing.

Someone asked him about the possibility of a universal language-in what connection I do not remember. “A universal language is possible,” said G., “only people will never invent it.” “Why not?”, asked one of us. “First because it was invented a long time ago,” answered G., “and second because to understand this language and to express ideas in it depends not only upon the knowledge of this language, but also on being. I will say even more. There exists not one, but three universal languages. The first of them can be spoken and written while remaining within the limits of one’s own language. The only difference is that when people speak in their ordinary language they do not understand one another, but in this other language they do understand. In the second language, written language is the same for all peoples, like, say, figures or mathematical formulae; but people still speak their own language, yet each of them understands the other even though the other speaks in an unknown language. The third language is the same for all, both the written and the spoken. The difference of language disappears altogether on this level!’ “Is not this the same thing which is described in the Acts as the descent of the Holy Ghost, upon the Apostles, when they began to understand divers languages?” asked someone. I noticed that such questions always irritated G. “I don’t know, I wasn’t there,” he said.

the point being, as Monty Ptyhon puts it, this is supposed to be a happy occassion, let’s not bicker and argue about who killed who!





happy merry!

there is no santa claus ...

in addition to suggesting that an evolutionary impulse cannot proceed mechanically, i also alluded to a potentially sinister aspect of the "christmas season" – consider, again:

First of all it must be realized that the sleep in which Man exists is not normal but hypnotic sleep. Man is hypnotized and this hypnotic state is continually maintained and strengthened in him. ONE WOULD THINK THAT THERE ARE FORCES FOR WHOM IT IS USEFUL AND PROFITABLE TO KEEP MAN IN A HYPNOTIC STATE AND PREVENT HIM FROM SEEING THE TRUTH AND UNDERSTANDING HIS POSITION.

There is an Eastern tale, which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep. BUT AT THE SAME TIME THIS MAGICIAN WAS VERY MEAN. He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing. The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and above all they ran away, for they knew that the magician wanted their flesh and skins and this they did not like.

At last the magician found a remedy. He hypnotized his sheep and suggested to them THAT THEY WERE IMMORTAL and that no harm was being done to them when they were skinned, that, on the contrary, it would be very good for them and even pleasant; secondly he suggested that the magician was a good master who loved his flock so much that he was ready to do anything in the world for them; and in the third place he suggested to them that if anything at all were going to happen to them it was not going to happen just then, at any rate not that day, and therefore they had no need to think about it. Further the magician suggested to his sheep that they were not sheep at all; to some of them he suggested that they were lions, to others that they were eagles, to others that they were men, and to others that they were magicians.

And after this all his cares and worries about the sheep came to an end. They never ran away again but quietly awaited the time when the magician would require their flesh and skins. (ISOTM)

* * *repeat: ONE WOULD THINK THAT THERE ARE FORCES FOR WHOM IT IS USEFUL AND PROFITABLE TO KEEP MAN IN A HYPNOTIC STATE AND PREVENT HIM FROM SEEING THE TRUTH AND UNDERSTANDING HIS POSITION.

of course in the telling of the tale the magician wants to eat the sheep, it’s not like he’s worried that the sheep will encroach on his riches or his dominion. so here’s where my paranoid notions enter. consider that gurdjieff said about IMMORTALITY:

Only the man who possesses four fully-develop bodies can be called a ‘man’ in the full sense of the word. This man possesses very many properties which ordinary man does not posses and one of these properties is immortality.

In this connection, certain teachings compare Man with a house of four rooms. MAN LIVES IN ONE ROOM, THE SMALLEST AND THE POOREST OF ALL, AND, UNTIL HE IS TOLD OF IT, HE DOES NOT SUSPECT THE EXISTENCE OF THE OTHER ROOMS WHICH ARE FULL OF TREASURES. When he does learn of this he begins to seek the keys of these rooms and especially of the fourth, the most important room of all. And when a man has found his way into this room he really becomes the master of his house, for only then does the house belong to him wholly and forever.

The fourth room gives man immortality and all religious teachings strive to show the way to it. There are a great many ways, some shorter and some longer, some harder and some easier, but all, without exception, lead or strive to lead in one direction, that is, to immortality."

... The monk ... is guided by religious feeling, by religious tradition, by a desire for achievement, for salvation; he trusts his teacher who tells him what to do, and he believes that his efforts and sacrifices are 'pleasing to God'. ...

It must be noted further that in addition to these proper and legitimate ways, there are artificial ways which give temporary results only, and wrong ways which may even give permanent results, only wrong results. On these ways a man seeks the key to the fourth room and sometimes finds it. But what he finds in the fourth room is not yet known. It also sometimes happens that the door to the fourth room is opened artificially with a skeleton key. In both these cases, the room may prove to be empty. (ISOTM)

as i said, an evolutionary christmas impulse cannot proceed mechanically, and instead becomes its opposite – such as gate crashing and pepper spray at walmart’s. but, as i alluded to, what if some jealous force wanted to hypnotize people to think that what is down is “up,” or that what is sideways is “up,” but in any case, “up” is not such a big deal after all? so i wondered if the FA LA LA LA LA song is an aberration.

i cannot say why some malevolent magician would want to turn everything supposedly “holy” into a freak show. but sometimes it does seem to this writer that counter evolutionary forces are as conscious as that magician. sophisticated. sinister.

having already drafted the following paragraphs i think it is worth inserting that i know that the christmas story did involve three wise men bearing gifts for the newly born and surely not all christmases are bereft of meaning. in a web search regarding my associations of santa and chimneys i came across this lovely dutch painting from the 1660s, The Feast of Saint Nicholas – replete with gifts and a jesus figure and familial warmth and depth and children looking up in wonderment towards a presumed chimney – lovely and neither scary nor sleazy. i do not doubt genuine meaning exists. i'm just wondering about the outer limits, who controls the vertical? because ...

when someone on twitter suggested that santa claus' knowing when you are sleeping and awake being was characteristic of a stalker, i instead recognized that they are characteristic of an imposter, a usurper. consider:

you better watch out,
you better not cry,
you better not pout,
i'm telling you why,
santa claus is coming to town
...
he knows when you are sleeping;
he knows when you're awake;
he knows if you've been bad or good,
so you better be good for goodness sake.

aren’t those functions of consciousness, or conscience even, or even of god? instead, one should refrain from expressing negative emotions because of the prophesized advent some jolly fat ho ho ho in a dunce cap, someone obviously in disguise as someone who impossibly works with a bunch of arguably mongrel elves and Mrs. Clause in the North Pole, rides a sleigh led by flying reindeer through the air and sneaks down chimneys, and gets seasonal work where he gets other people's children to sit in his lap – better watch out indeed! (just another word of caution, consider that at least in the 1700s and 1800s british chimney sweeps were naked young boys who wriggled through what was then a house's most filthy orifice (though, granted, that filth was rich in carbon) - perhaps they were told that if they were good that once a year “father christmas” would appear and wriggle through that filth in person?! perhaps “father christmas” is part of the trinity? maybe even the holy ghost part, as in the “christmas spirit”!). could it be SANTA?

The point is that in this fashionable language the word for "soul" and the word for the bottom of the foot, also "sole," are pronounced and even written almost alike.

I do not know how it is for you, who are already half a candidate for a buyer of my writings, but as for me, no matter how great my mental desire, my peculiar nature cannot avoid being indignant at this manifestation of people of contemporary civilization, whereby the very highest in man, particularly beloved by our Common Father Creator, can be named and often understood as that which is lowest and dirtiest in man. (B'sTs, Arousing of Thought)

or SAINT nick, as opposed to “old nick”?

contrast what I presented above as possibly the "lower" with a proper fool:

The Mullah Nassr Eddin overheard some visiting mendicant that his doctrine could answer anything – there was nothing to which it could not be perfectly addressed. “Wonderful,” interrupted the Mullah, “just last night someone asked me a question I was at a loss how to respond!” “Tell me the question, I can answer it,” replied the visitor. “He asked, 'what are you doing climbing into my window in the middle of the night?!'”

compare:

lower is not higher. higher is not lower.

These indubitable facts, which I had seen with my own eyes, as well as many others I had heard about during my searchings—all of them pointing to the presence of something supernatural—could not in any way be reconciled with what common sense told me or with what was clearly proved by my already extensive knowledge of the exact sciences, which excluded the very idea of supernatural phenomena. The contradiction in my consciousness gave me no peace and was all the more irreconcilable because the facts and proofs on both sides were equally convincing. (Meetings, p. 83)

stop a moment and consider whether the whole santa notion indeed represents something higher, or whether quite possibly it usurps that which might be a holy impulse before ultimately laying the myth to rest, letting a child down as gently as possible with the “truth” there is no SANTA claus – because only children believe in SANTA.

It is not a question of to whom a man prays, but a question of his faith. Faith is conscience, the foundation of which is laid in childhood. If a man changes his religion, he loses his conscience, and conscience is the most valuable thing in a man. I respect his conscience, and since his conscience is sustained by his faith and his faith by his religion, therefore I respect his religion; and for me it would be a great sin if I should begin to judge his religion or to disillusion him about it, AND THUS DESTROY HIS CONSCIENCE WHICH CAN ONLY BE ACQUIRED IN CHILDHOOD. (Meetings, p. 115)

i’m reminded of someone suggesting that the wizard of oz was similarly some allegedly anti-christian masonic or illuminati allegory of denuding an all-powerful god-like figure to expose a pathetic feeble ineptitutde.

anyway, society is certainly hypnotized, and i don’t know where to draw the line – is it just the fluoridated water? or is it also the Christmas jingles? does it extend to saying god bless you when someone sneezes?

in any case, it is especially important to be vigilant, a reminding factor even, considering that some creepy guy is watching. and perhaps one tantalizing aspect of christmas is that this “slippery something,” avails me the opportunity to transform what arguably presents as lower to the higher, for being.

rabbit season, christmas season

the day after thanksgiving, known as black friday, marks the onset where consumers everywhere are hell-bent on consuming everything they didn’t consume on thanksgiving, and on being consumed in the process. that’s the beginning of a season of no-holds-barred jingles and pretense in support of dollar business. it’s not just that day, it’s the whole season, the holiday season, fraught with jingles and pretense and razzle-dazzle and overstimulation and consumerism. even gurdjieff celebrated christmas with dazzlement, gifts, and certainly a good measure of materiality – but obviously there was also something meaningful, purposeful, and special in the atmosphere. that’s certainly not what i experience. i remember from last year’s christmas eve a muzak version of 'hallelujah' as i was buying toilet paper at the local fine fare supermarket. it is such a fake, i hate it – what’s redeeming about the holidays?

hmmm … redeeming about holidays …

maybe that’s it! there are holydays, of course, and there’s the winter season. but “holiday season” is as much as a merchandising contrivance as a “holiday sale.” like the lesbian activists say, "a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." (the apt juxtaposition even leads me to wonder if perhaps nassr eddin had two mommies??)

any evolutionary christmas impulse cannot proceed mechanically, and instead becomes its opposite – such as gate crashing and pepper spray at walmart’s. or worse, perhaps some insidious force wants to prevent evolution, consider fa la-la la-la, la-la la la and how lamely fa (a note to follow the mi-fa first conscious shock) forfeits its advance, settling back to the do it started from, while maintaining the charade it is la – am i making that up?

in any case, an evolutionary octave must proceed against that!

doesn’t the christmas-jesus-being-born story have something to do with “redemption”? i’m in no position to address ramifications of jesus supposedly being born at all, let alone whether or not it was during this season. but, although fools rush in where angels fear to tread, i am interested in how this potential clash between an evolutionary octave and the ray of creation gets reconciled. et, alors, wiseacring.

from fritz peters:

it was my day on kitchen duty. … the kitchen boy’s first duties were to build the fires in the coke stoves, fill the coal scuttles, … on this particular day, the cook had not appeared by nine- thirty and i began to worry. i looked at the menu, and the recipe for the soup of the day, and since i had often seen the various cooks prepare the meal that was scheduled for that day, i made the necessary preliminary preparations. … when the cook had still not appeared by about ten o’clock 
i sent some child to find out what had happened to her and was told that she was sick and would not be able to come to the kitchen. i took my dilemma to gurdjieff, and he said that since i had already started the meal i might as well return to the kitchen and finish it. “you be cook today,” he said grandly.

i was very nervous about the responsibility, as well as rather proud of being entrusted with it. my greatest difficulty was in having to move the enormous soup kettles around the top of the large coal stove when i had to add coal to the fire, which was frequently necessary in order to keep the soup cooking. i worked hard all the morning and was reasonably proud of myself when i managed to finish the meal and 
deliver it, intact, to the serving table. the cook being absent, it was also necessary for me to serve it.

habitually, the students formed a line, each person with his soup plate, silver, etc., in his hands, and as they passed by the serving table the cook would serve them one piece of meat and a ladleful of soup. everything went well for a time. it was not until rachmilevitch appeared -- among the last to be served -- that my difficulties began. the soup pot was almost empty by the time he reached me and i had to tilt it in order to fill the ladle. when i served him -- it seemed to me that it was decreed by our mutual fates -- the ladle also brought up a fair-sized lump of coke. it was a thick soup and i did not see the coke until it was deposited, with a hard, clanking sound, in his soup plate.

judging by rachmilevitch’s reaction, his world came to an end at that instant. he started in on a tirade against me that i thought would never end. everything that all of the children had done to him during the past winter was brought up, hashed over in detail; and as he cursed and raged i stood helplessly behind the soup kettle, silent. the tirade came to an end with gurdjieff’s appearance. he did not usually appear at lunch -- he did not eat lunch -- and he explained his appearance by saying that we were making so much noise that he was unable to work.

… without saying anything 
to him, gurdjieff picked the lump of coke out of rachmilevitch’s soup plate, threw it on the ground, and asked for a plate of soup himself. he said that since there was a new cook today, he felt that it was his responsibility to taste his cooking. someone went for a soup plate for him, i served him what remained in the soup pot and he ate it, silently. when he had finished, he came over to me, congratulated me loudly, and said that the soup -- this particular soup -- was a favourite of his and was better than he had ever tasted.

he then turned to the assembled students and said that he had great experience and training in many things, and that in the course of his life he had learned a great deal about food, chemistry, and proper cooking, which included, of course, the taste of things. he said that while this particular soup was one that he had, personally, invented and which he liked very much, he now realized that it had always lacked one element to make it perfect. with a sort of obeisance in my direction, he praised me saying that i, by a fortunate accident, had found the perfect thing -- the one thing that this soup needed. carbon. he ended this speech by saying that he would instruct his secretary to change the recipe to include one piece of coke -- not to be eaten, but to be added for flavour only. he then invited rachmilevitch to have after-dinner coffee with him, and they left the dining area together.

coke adds life, indeed. carbon. what if carbon is added to the mix? immediately i associate to recognize that all that décor and cheap music and shopping and holiday motifs everywhere are not only decoration and flavors, to shop or not to shop, to indulge or resist, to approve or disapprove, but what if a reminding factor is introduced into the mix? all that spent trash and contrived sentiment to which i am conditioned to react one way or the other, though generally negatively, could instead remind me to try to remember myself – perhaps i'll find something nutritious in myself and/or in all those manifestations? suddenly suddenly i recall gurdjieff’s instruction to martin benson (and i think kathryn hulme and others but i don’t recall) that during they season they can go to the churches and “steal the prayers” of multitudes who’s prayers are otherwise spent, unable to reach “god,” but, thus, presumably, available as a food for people able to collect and assimilate it (i have no doubt such an indication to steal prayers is more esoteric than just a reminding factor).

isn’t the “christmas season” the clash of these octaves? how might they be reconciled?