One of the most remarkable parallel developments accompanying the rise of modernity has been the emergence of the so-called New Age movement and its immense proliferation of groups and gurus, speaking from a variety of religious traditions. In that context one of the most confusing movements has been that associated with the figure of Gurdjieff and his expositor Ouspensky. The immense influence of the writings of Ouspensky has served uniquely as a promotional literature for a figure whose enigmatic, controversial, and finally shadowy legacy has ended in a kind of limbo, leaving behind a long trail of 'read the book' converts, to say nothing of actual victims of that spurious sufistic 'school', unable to extricate themselves from the combination of sales pitch and authoritarianism that characterizes the question of the so-called 'fourth way'. It is notable that, despite a considerable activity, this movement has proven singularly barren in its results, as if the intent behind the public literature had been something else, leaving those attempting to make use of the materials provided paralyzed, and suspicious of a game of disinformation is at work. Followers of this movement demonstrate a frozen character, as if stuck in place, and unable to get beyond the obsessive rereading of the writings of Ouspensky by actually doing something productive. There is another side to this, the increasing realization of the dark side of Gurdjieffian activities, a factor suspected very early on by Ouspensky, who ended, we should recall, by renouncing the 'work'. Ouspensky in private on several occasions denounced Gurdjieff as a criminal, and the whole initiative has endured as an anomalous puzzle that never quite became a scandal. Few teachers have had the stroke of good fortune to snare a celebrity as good at (unwitting) propaganda for a cause as Ouspensky and the Gurdjieff movement has, strangely, been an overwhelming success at the startup phase and a complete failure in every other respect. Behind that the ominous, almost malevolent character of Gurdjieff himself has significantly poisoned the naive enthusiasm of many of its devoted converts, who cannot seem to snap out of the depiction of purportedly 'esoteric' knowledge made public by 'G', knowledge that upon examination shows far less substance than is apparent at first encounter. Hopefully this series can help those who begin something amiss to stand up to the pretense of the Gurdjieff work. Many who realize the trap into which they have fallen are too intimidated to deal with the situation. 

In fact, there is another dimension to the Gurdjieff escapade, one very difficult to unravel, but leaving those who come across it with a severe case of mixed feelings, even outrage, at the deception perpetrated by this cleverly publicized 'teaching'. It is important to assist those who become entangled in this already quite old spiritual quagmire so they can move on, and come into the presence of mind to stop saying 'yes' to their own exploitation. It can be difficult to penetrate the disguises of Gurdjieff, but in fact enough clues are readily available to do this, by looking at the chronicle of events as given in plain sight, without the confusing deferral to the 'unknown' esoteric 'mumbo jumbo' said to justify the public action. Movements citing the legacy of ancient wisdom are not exempt from public judgments, nor is the authority of those who proclaim themselves spiritual teachers with self-issued credentials beyond question. One has but to screw up the courage to indulge a healthy skepticism, to demand some answers, or else be finished with a pseudo-school left on automatic pilot to the great profit who those who wish to exploit the suggestibility of the spiritually bewildered. And that temporal remainder is destined to attract many claimants to its succession, shrewd enough to see the windfall in the formulation of spiritual authority concocted by Gurdjieff. 

The purpose of this series of essays, and an associated blog, is to air public information of this subject, in the process setting an example of skepticism and free enquiry for those mesmerized by the formulation of the Gurdjieff 'teaching', perhaps enabling those caught in this legacy to 'snap out of it', and start reading the fine print. Experience shows that the stance, or necessity, of skepticism evokes fear and reluctance in many who wish to imagine they have stumbled on the path to esoteric wisdom by reading Ouspensky and embarking on the true wild goose chase of public 'schools' in this field. Still others snap out of it right away once they sense they are in the presence of clear predestigation. As such this communication is a warning, but runs against the grain of 'guru kowtow' that pervades the field of Indian religion spreading globally, a phenomenon that Gurdjieff exploited without ever explaining his place in any of the outstanding traditions. He laid claim to a new and different tradition, but if his public statements upon examination don't add up, then the claims for such plummet at once. Although we can touch on issues of what 'constitutes a spiritual path', it is not our aim to pursue that subject, or to add anything more to the hopeless confusion of such questions, as current in the proliferation of New Age movements. In fact, the realm of the 'work' tends to be a monopoly or cabal of insiders, and inside information, the various public groups and documents being cynically exploited 'fish bait' for the 'exoteric' support, financial or otherwise, of a select few. Exclusion from such information is fatal to any practical use of the spurious 'Ouspenskiana' which has come into existence as a kind of dog's bone of obsessive preoccupation. 

One irony of the whole question is that Gurdjieff produced a distorted depiction of the so-called fourth way, and an effort to correct the record here might help bemused seekers to find all the elements of such a path embedded in ordinary culture, and especially in modern civilization, that entity against which we see a very reactionary 'G' posing an almost fascistic conservatism, spiritual or otherwise. Irony of ironies, then, that modern culture, almost by default, is the real 'fourth way', a statement of relatively little content, as if true by definition. In general no evidentiary instance of a 'fourth way school' has been documented for the times prior to the appearance of Gurdjieff, and the hype factor here is grossly misleading. After a while those pursuing all this should suspect it is all 'come on', with little content. 

Gurdjieff had a knack for snaring intelligent intellectuals, three times at least, with Ouspensky, Orage, and Bennett, two of them we should note, celebrities, and two, mathematicians, highly exploitable figures induced to serve a cause whose real aims and intentions were quite other than what appeared in public. The lonely and vulnerable followers who are turned on by this manufactured literature remain at risk in the vast success, underserving, of this species of propaganda. Many questions remain here that it is not the job of these essays to answer, perhaps they have no answers. In the final analysis, modern culture has moved in a different direction from the spiritual legacies of antiquity, and any attempt to force modernity into that mould is going to backfire. It was the guru Rajneesh who, puzzling over Gurdjieff, noted his total failure, and tried to get some of his followers to break camp and move on. I find a host of similar difficulties in the ashram world he created, but at least he stood in the great legacy of the bodhissatwic tradition, that is, he granted the humanity of his followers and wished to point to the possibilities of realizing their potential. 

Please note that the Gurdjieffs and their gangs of nihilists, so reminiscent of Nietzschean loudmouth thuggery, grant no such potential to their mass of followers, and aim at nothing but to treat them as cattle, 'food' for some obscure ritual of their own. It belongs to an ancient world before the onset of democracy, and its much to be hoped for 'spiritual democracy', whose first requirement is acknowledgment of the humanity of seekers, with rights against exploitation as dead slot robots in the schemes of black magicians perpetrated over successive lives. The danger for a mass of followers is small, they are soon discarded to the public sphere,  but for many the dangers of association with such people are immense, horrific, and we must rush into the fray with blunt instruments of exposure, and a hope to track down and liberate the victims of that dark world of spiritual slavery. 

Wake up to the danger, and study the overall context, fine print, and the tactics of 'hypnosis' designed to achieve the release of any such sense of autonomy to the schemes of occult adventurers about their own obscure business, who have only contempt for the achievements of modern freedom. 

 Pages with content in red

Introduction

Conclusion