Is there a concept of evil in the Work? What is evil and is it our nature or a force we are influenced by so to use our free will so to be under God's influence?
Yes, generally what we think of as good in the work is not what the general population thinks of as good. I would go on to say that it is "all good". What we see as bad is a judgment that we make as it is not what was wanted or intended. If we got everything that we wanted there would be no catalyst for the change to occur. Desire can be one of the biggest enemies on the path, and yet with out it we would not survive. Everything has a purpose and it could not be if it was not for the Good.
In a lot of Work writings, specifically Nicoll's commentaries, good is stated to be whatever helps your transformation/increase of consciousness and bad is whatever hinders it. Good and bad being relative to your personal Work.
Another question which is just as important is there a concept of Good in the work. Better yet what is the definition of concept; and where does a concept come from? Answer this and maybe the definition of good and evil could be one and the same... or at least relative.
"This idea that man does NOT have a soul is not foreign to me due to my previous work in Lurianic Kabbalah in the organization of Bnei Baruch. I was deep into this work and noticed something missing in it for me, thus leading me here. I was not actively searching for another path so to speak but just "landed" here out of the blue."I am learning as we communicate, The connection Minute. The synchronistic nature of this is that I also '"landed" here out of the blue'; nor was I 'actively searching for another path'. Instead I was searching for deeper understanding & greater satisfaction regarding the path I was following. Yet somehow - here we are.I had not encountered the concept that 'man does NOT have a soul' prior to this thread. Your question had intrigued me, & reflected questions of my own, so I went searching for answers. I'm certainly not well versed on The Work, & find that I'm slow to learn, as it's a complex teaching - though when integrated apparently leads to great simplicity & ease. (nb: This forum is for our interaction. If you prefer Ted to answer your question directly, I suggest you send him an email).I did discover Gurdjieff stated that although man is born without a soul, 'it is possible to make one'(1). I feel this is pertinent, as it leads back to the idea of becoming a 'real man'. Rather than being lead by the left, or the right hand, one develops balance via internal awareness; & strives towards an awakening of sorts, that in effect brings about the birth of the soul. I get the sense that this is related to Gurdjieff’s doctrine of the 'Sacred Impulse of Divine Conscience'(2a), & man's opportunity to participate in life with a conscience; rather than unwittingly be tossed about by the tides of this Sacred Impulse, via a lack thereof. The lack of conscience & its effects on the world is well expressed in your paragraph which addresses the devastation of man when blindly ruled by 'egoistic desires'.
"However, from my previous studies, evil is described as lack of equivalence with the Creator. We receive for our sake and He gives for our sake. When we realize this within ourselves, we feel that discrepancy between us the receiver, and Him the giver, as evil."Yet once we begin to contemplate this, light is immediately shed on the supposedly disparate gap between self & the Creator; & so too comes (I believe) the opportunity to dissolve this seemingly insurmountable obstacle. Once again we are brought back to the 'sacred impulse' that remains within each of us, though all too often left dormant among man. This hidden impulse seems to me to be the seed of conscience that if tended with care & diligence, may assist us to grow into 'real man', & in effect bridge the gap twixt man & God, thus easing the discrepancy. Perhaps to focus on the notion of good versus evil unwittingly perpetuates the rift. We are I believe, after all, (hidden under the crust & muck of ego / separation distortion) children of God, & thus, made in His image & like, existing within a Universe of infinite potential. I sense that to truly realise this is to become real man, with soul - aware of the Divine seed of creation within. There is no space for good nor evil in such a being, rather there is only the allowance of that which is natural & True & thus Godly (transcendenent from low level ego behaviour).'Gurdjieff teaches that there is one, and only one, sacred impulse remaining unspoiled, deep in the human psyche. This is the Sacred Impulse of Conscience, which cannot be destroyed. It is implanted by Divine Grace.'(2b)
"But my main yearning is to really grasp what evil is, if it exists, according to The Work. I am full of desires and they are so selfish and potentially destructive I feel, that I want to transform them into good if that makes sense. I want only "to do unto others...", "love thy neighbor", or just become like God or Christ.
So what is evil in The Work?"'Gurdjieff specifically rejects the myth of good and evil.'(2c)The article cited is worthy of reading to truly grok what is being said here. Firstly, there is reference to myth, as we are trying to name the unnameable, & discuss that which cannot be fully comprehended by man. Thus, myth & other means are employed to hint towards Truth.There is emphasis in the article that Gurdjieff focused not on dualism, but on triadic patterns such as man, the Universe & God. It would seem to me that dualism itself implies evil, & as dualism is limited, so too is that which we call evil. Perhaps evil is an egoistic concept which engenders unconscious behaviour & destructive patterns (life without conscience), & can in effect be transmuted by applying The Work.'With Gurdjieff, the drama of the Universe becomes a present living reality. Involution and evolution are neither good nor evil, neither in opposition nor even complimentary to one another. They are equally necessary for the Divine Purposes.To what does all this lead? Rejecting the dualism of good and evil, Gurdjieff has to put in its place some ultimate regulating principle of universal validity. This brings us to one recurrent theme of the book that defies verbal analysis. It is Gurdjieff’s doctrine of the “Sacred Impulse of Divine Conscience.”'(2d)1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhqWztusvpg2a, b, c, d. https://digitalseance.wordpress.com/all-posts/gurdjieff-conscience/
This idea that man does NOT have a soul is not foreign to me due to my previous work in Lurianic Kabbalah in the organization of Bnei Baruch. I was deep into this work and noticed something missing in it for me, thus leading me here. I was not actively searching for another path so to speak but just "landed" here out of the blue.
I have learned in this previous study and in my early studies here on this path, that man isn't good nor evil but driven by egoistic desires. In kabbalah, we learned these desires or "congenital passions"drive us to attain pleasures that keep the body alive (food, sex, family and shelter) and what drives our social atmosphere (wealth, power, honor and knowledge). Due to our egoistic nature, we use these desires selfishly at the expense of others, hence war, poor economy, divorce, disease, and all sorts of negativity we see.
However, from my previous studies, evil is described as lack of equivalence with the Creator. We receive for our sake and He gives for our sake. When we realize this within ourselves, we feel that discrepancy between us the receiver, and Him the giver, as evil.
But my main yearning is to really grasp what evil is, if it exists, according to The Work. I am full of desires and they are so selfish and potentially destructive I feel, that I want to transform them into good if that makes sense. I want only "to do unto others...", "love thy neighbor", or just become like God or Christ.
“In west – your world – is belief that man have soul given by God. Not so. Nothing given by God, only Nature give. … Man can become many things, not just fertilizer, not just real man: can become what you call ‘good’ or ‘evil’, not proper things for man. Real man not good or evil – real man only conscious, only wish acquire soul for proper development.”This is an excerpt (possibly adapted) from a conversation with Gurdjieff during a train trip, found in the book 'My Journey with a Mystic.', by Fritz Peters. It is suggested within the discourse that if we favour one hand (our left or our right) over the other, we are not balanced. Similarly, if we favour good or evil, we are neither conscious nor grown - ie; 'real man'.Thus, I garner that the concept of evil in the work is relative to ones level of conscious maturity. A fully grown (spiritually mature) man is neither good nor evil, but is in balance with nature's potential. There is no mention of external forces of evil that I have come across.http://www.josephazize.com/2018/10/29/29-october-2018-gurdjieff-on-good-and-evil/
Yes, generally what we think of as good in the work is not what the general population thinks of as good. I would go on to say that it is "all good". What we see as bad is a judgment that we make as it is not what was wanted or intended. If we got everything that we wanted there would be no catalyst for the change to occur. Desire can be one of the biggest enemies on the path, and yet with out it we would not survive. Everything has a purpose and it could not be if it was not for the Good.
In a lot of Work writings, specifically Nicoll's commentaries, good is stated to be whatever helps your transformation/increase of consciousness and bad is whatever hinders it. Good and bad being relative to your personal Work.
Another question which is just as important is there a concept of Good in the work. Better yet what is the definition of concept; and where does a concept come from? Answer this and maybe the definition of good and evil could be one and the same... or at least relative.
"This idea that man does NOT have a soul is not foreign to me due to my previous work in Lurianic Kabbalah in the organization of Bnei Baruch. I was deep into this work and noticed something missing in it for me, thus leading me here. I was not actively searching for another path so to speak but just "landed" here out of the blue." I am learning as we communicate, The connection Minute. The synchronistic nature of this is that I also '"landed" here out of the blue'; nor was I 'actively searching for another path'. Instead I was searching for deeper understanding & greater satisfaction regarding the path I was following. Yet somehow - here we are. I had not encountered the concept that 'man does NOT have a soul' prior to this thread. Your question had intrigued me, & reflected questions of my own, so I went searching for answers. I'm certainly not well versed on The Work, & find that I'm slow to learn, as it's a complex teaching - though when integrated apparently leads to great simplicity & ease. (nb: This forum is for our interaction. If you prefer Ted to answer your question directly, I suggest you send him an email). I did discover Gurdjieff stated that although man is born without a soul, 'it is possible to make one'(1). I feel this is pertinent, as it leads back to the idea of becoming a 'real man'. Rather than being lead by the left, or the right hand, one develops balance via internal awareness; & strives towards an awakening of sorts, that in effect brings about the birth of the soul. I get the sense that this is related to Gurdjieff’s doctrine of the 'Sacred Impulse of Divine Conscience'(2a), & man's opportunity to participate in life with a conscience; rather than unwittingly be tossed about by the tides of this Sacred Impulse, via a lack thereof. The lack of conscience & its effects on the world is well expressed in your paragraph which addresses the devastation of man when blindly ruled by 'egoistic desires'.
"However, from my previous studies, evil is described as lack of equivalence with the Creator. We receive for our sake and He gives for our sake. When we realize this within ourselves, we feel that discrepancy between us the receiver, and Him the giver, as evil." Yet once we begin to contemplate this, light is immediately shed on the supposedly disparate gap between self & the Creator; & so too comes (I believe) the opportunity to dissolve this seemingly insurmountable obstacle. Once again we are brought back to the 'sacred impulse' that remains within each of us, though all too often left dormant among man. This hidden impulse seems to me to be the seed of conscience that if tended with care & diligence, may assist us to grow into 'real man', & in effect bridge the gap twixt man & God, thus easing the discrepancy. Perhaps to focus on the notion of good versus evil unwittingly perpetuates the rift. We are I believe, after all, (hidden under the crust & muck of ego / separation distortion) children of God, & thus, made in His image & like, existing within a Universe of infinite potential. I sense that to truly realise this is to become real man, with soul - aware of the Divine seed of creation within. There is no space for good nor evil in such a being, rather there is only the allowance of that which is natural & True & thus Godly (transcendenent from low level ego behaviour). 'Gurdjieff teaches that there is one, and only one, sacred impulse remaining unspoiled, deep in the human psyche. This is the Sacred Impulse of Conscience, which cannot be destroyed. It is implanted by Divine Grace.'(2b)
"But my main yearning is to really grasp what evil is, if it exists, according to The Work. I am full of desires and they are so selfish and potentially destructive I feel, that I want to transform them into good if that makes sense. I want only "to do unto others...", "love thy neighbor", or just become like God or Christ.
So what is evil in The Work?" 'Gurdjieff specifically rejects the myth of good and evil.'(2c) The article cited is worthy of reading to truly grok what is being said here. Firstly, there is reference to myth, as we are trying to name the unnameable, & discuss that which cannot be fully comprehended by man. Thus, myth & other means are employed to hint towards Truth. There is emphasis in the article that Gurdjieff focused not on dualism, but on triadic patterns such as man, the Universe & God. It would seem to me that dualism itself implies evil, & as dualism is limited, so too is that which we call evil. Perhaps evil is an egoistic concept which engenders unconscious behaviour & destructive patterns (life without conscience), & can in effect be transmuted by applying The Work. 'With Gurdjieff, the drama of the Universe becomes a present living reality. Involution and evolution are neither good nor evil, neither in opposition nor even complimentary to one another. They are equally necessary for the Divine Purposes. To what does all this lead? Rejecting the dualism of good and evil, Gurdjieff has to put in its place some ultimate regulating principle of universal validity. This brings us to one recurrent theme of the book that defies verbal analysis. It is Gurdjieff’s doctrine of the “Sacred Impulse of Divine Conscience.”'(2d) 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhqWztusvpg 2a, b, c, d. https://digitalseance.wordpress.com/all-posts/gurdjieff-conscience/
This idea that man does NOT have a soul is not foreign to me due to my previous work in Lurianic Kabbalah in the organization of Bnei Baruch. I was deep into this work and noticed something missing in it for me, thus leading me here. I was not actively searching for another path so to speak but just "landed" here out of the blue.
I have learned in this previous study and in my early studies here on this path, that man isn't good nor evil but driven by egoistic desires. In kabbalah, we learned these desires or "congenital passions"drive us to attain pleasures that keep the body alive (food, sex, family and shelter) and what drives our social atmosphere (wealth, power, honor and knowledge). Due to our egoistic nature, we use these desires selfishly at the expense of others, hence war, poor economy, divorce, disease, and all sorts of negativity we see.
However, from my previous studies, evil is described as lack of equivalence with the Creator. We receive for our sake and He gives for our sake. When we realize this within ourselves, we feel that discrepancy between us the receiver, and Him the giver, as evil.
But my main yearning is to really grasp what evil is, if it exists, according to The Work. I am full of desires and they are so selfish and potentially destructive I feel, that I want to transform them into good if that makes sense. I want only "to do unto others...", "love thy neighbor", or just become like God or Christ.
So what is evil in The Work?
“In west – your world – is belief that man have soul given by God. Not so. Nothing given by God, only Nature give. … Man can become many things, not just fertilizer, not just real man: can become what you call ‘good’ or ‘evil’, not proper things for man. Real man not good or evil – real man only conscious, only wish acquire soul for proper development.” This is an excerpt (possibly adapted) from a conversation with Gurdjieff during a train trip, found in the book 'My Journey with a Mystic.', by Fritz Peters. It is suggested within the discourse that if we favour one hand (our left or our right) over the other, we are not balanced. Similarly, if we favour good or evil, we are neither conscious nor grown - ie; 'real man'. Thus, I garner that the concept of evil in the work is relative to ones level of conscious maturity. A fully grown (spiritually mature) man is neither good nor evil, but is in balance with nature's potential. There is no mention of external forces of evil that I have come across. http://www.josephazize.com/2018/10/29/29-october-2018-gurdjieff-on-good-and-evil/