A Tale of Suggestibility
Gurdjieff, as well as many other spiritual teachers, note that an underlying characteristic that is at the base of the “abnormally established conditions of ordinary being-existence” on the planet Earth is man’s egotism, we see this manifested often as self-love and vanity. And it is very difficult to argue with this. However, it seems only Gurdjieff notes that suggestibility, of all man’s abnormal being-particularities is, “…the particularity of their psyche the most terrible for them personally…”1 In his First Series, All and Everything: Beelzebub’s Tales to his Grandson, Gurdjieff notes that suggestibility is one of many undesirable characteristics of man, a vestigial characteristic of the no longer functional “organ” kundabuffer. Verification of this characteristic’s presence in others and oneself is not difficult to observe; human beings all have it. Certainly, it is easier to see in others, but in the rear view of our lives we can, with little effort, see it in ourselves. The manipulation and exploitation of this characteristic is a driver of both the economic and political structure of society. Current and older societies have been dominated and controlled by certain power possessing beings exploiting man’s suggestibility, and this continues. However, with the advent of the internet most of humanity has entered a new more intensive phase in a widespread exploitation of this flaw. There now have appeared on the World Wide Web, along with the nation state actors of old, the rise of many thousands of individuals of very dubious intelligence, character and understanding exploiting the trait of suggestibility for their personal and political agendas. In the world of today it is social media platforms that often provide the medium of delivery. The internet is an active cesspool, frequented by assorted lunatics, tramps2, and con men as well multitudes of the simply ignorant masses that are now all connected. There is all too often a mechanical repeating/parroting of “something” heard or seen from some web site, a something that is taken-as-a-truth, that has tickled a fancy or stepped on a corn of righteous indignation and captured the fragmented attention of the masses particularly “unstable reason”. Quite often what is being offered is not just any old, so-called truth but a truth that has long been deeply hidden by the “other”, conspired to be kept from us and has now been miraculously revealed as a real truth to all those simply willing to click and watch. Invariably, the “revealed truth”’ presents a dualistic view of the world and is often accepted without question; presenting an us versus them, good versus evil, my tribe versus the other tribe and so forth, as non-nuanced, absolutist facts. Of course there is no viewer context outside of the abject materiality, self-love and vanity that is the motivating impulse of ordinary life. There is now a simple, no cost process by which the masses are enabled to communicate with each other, and that the powerful people of the world use to directly influence and manipulate the multitudes. Simply watch a video requiring little more from its intended audience than a human’s most valuable, least understood and most squandered possession—attention. The current AI infiltration of our already abnormal being existence, will only magnify all these issues. The masses without any self-awareness and motivated by some random, often unconscious desire or identification have, as Gurdjieff predicted, gone irretrievably mad.
Of course, there are degrees of suggestibility, but all people of the outer circle of humanity have this characteristic and are susceptible to these kinds of influences. And perhaps even more discouraging, not only the outer circle of humanity. Gurdjieff speaks to the dissemination of such suggestibility within even “normal” humans in chapter 14 of the First Series. The chapter is set in Babylon during the construction of the Tower of Babel. A man named Hamolinadir, a “sympathetic Assyrian” who lived in Egypt and was one of many “learned beings” who were brought, against their will, to Babylon. This group of learned beings having been brought to Babylon at the direction of the Persian King who currently ruled this area; historically this would likely be Cyrus who captured Babylon in 539 BCE or possibly his son and successor Cambyses 11. Hamolinadir was an initiate of the then highest esoteric school existing on Earth, the ‘School of Materializing-thought’. As a product of this school, he was a man who already had his real “I” and those characteristics which flow from this individuality such as, “‘self-consciousness,’ ‘impartiality, ’sincerity,’ ‘sensibility of perception,’ ‘alertness,’ and so forth.”3 In other words he had traits that Gurdjieff would ascribe to a normal human being. However, a normal human being on Earth was then very unusual and likely today is more remarkable. We are told the leaned beings were then engaged in a discussion as to whether or not man has a soul. This issue of the soul had become the so-called, burning question of the day. At one of the learned being’s “general-learned-conferences” Hamolinidir was to speak on the question of the “Instability-of-Human-Reason.” During the talk he demonstrated, “…how easy it is to prove and convince this Reason of anything you like.” Hamolinidir also realized and stated his own reason, “…which received the highest development given…”4 does not have, after thorough study and even writing on the question of the soul, the ability to discern the correctness of his or any other theory. At the conference, it should be noted that Hamolinidir spoke 5th and that during the talk he gave he became very agitated, simultaneously shouting and sobbing, but finally calmed after drinking a bowl of water. Hamolinider’s 5th position in speaking likely relates to the 5th stopinder of the sacred Heptaparaparshinokh or law of seven. A position which Gurdjieff calls the Harnel-Aoot and which can create disharmony. And while his speech made a deep impact on his audience, it was temporary, only lasting about a month. As to Hamolinidir, after the speech he decides to immediately leave Babylon before the “tower of babel,” which he foresees collapsing, perhaps metaphorically, bringing death and destruction upon the residents. And being done with the learned being business, we are told that he moves to Nineveh and spends his time planting ‘choongary’ (maize), existing to a ripe old age. So, is Gurdjieff saying that this tendency toward suggestibility is so profound that even a reason of a “normal” human being cannot be relied upon to come to truth? That the greatest ability such reason can utilize is the determination that normal reason(it) cannot be relied upon, as to answering questions on subjects and questions that lay beyond the physical. That even though Hamolinidir’s impartial reason was and is remarkable among human beings, such reason can only be used to determine his and others attributes, at or below his level, to see one’s limitations, and this is no small thing. Therefore, while his reason was suited to come to conclusions reached through a type of “impartial observation & self-observation” he found it not possible for a “normal” human being to simply use one’s reason to reach understanding of metaphysical questions in this case, does man have a soul. For this, something else is required. Something that supersedes man’s inherent suggestibility.
Hamolinidir was said to be an Assyrian, a product of an Egyptian esoteric school named the, “School of Materializing-Thought’’. The name and the location of the school, points toward a teaching which Gurdjieff called (and disparaged as half-truth) Western Occultism. Many of the various so-called occult schools that proliferated in the late 19th and early 20th century traced their origin to or through Egypt. These teachings such as Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, Anthroposophy, various spiritualists, healers and so forth also accepted some version of the phenomenon of materialization. It’s important when reading The First Series to be aware of the context of the time in which Gurdjieff lived and wrote. Western Occult teachings, ideas and phenomena were very much of interest in certain groups and classes of people, similar types as might be attracted to his teaching. Gurdjieff himself observed many supernatural phenomena, and sought an explanation for these phenomena; this was the initial motivation in his search. Neither the conventional religions nor science of his day could explain what he had witnessed and therefore after exhausting such conventional sources he sought answers elsewhere. He began with a study of ancient artifacts and manuscripts, the past records of civilizations that had long since vanished and by connecting certain information he and his co-seekers gathered he came to believe in the existence of past esoteric schools. And that such schools still existed in his day with lineage reaching back thousands of years.
The Assyrian Hamolinidir, after giving his speech, having come to see the limitations of the school he came from and his own limitations, immediately leaves Babylon fearing its destruction. A destruction which did come. He moved to Nineveh which was located in the locale of present-day Mosul. He spends the rest of his time on earth “planting choongary”. Not growing choongary, but planting it. This choice of words very well could represent Hamolinader planting the seed of a new type of school working toward rectifying the “instability of human reason” expanding upon what knowledge his “Occult” school had given him. The meaning of Choongary beyond what Gurdjieff’s states as “maize”, has by some, Orage included, thought to represent “being”, and this makes much sense. Hamolinadir sought to start a school of being, to balance the knowledge he had received through his Occult school of materialization of thought. Gurdjieff’s definition of understanding makes this idea in the context of Hamilinodir’s talk and his vivisection of ordinary human reason resonate. The knowledge the learned beings of Babylon had acquired is not enough, one must have a balance between knowledge and being to come to real understanding, this level of understanding is beyond the reach of normal human reason. And with an understanding that comes with the growth of being, one may perhaps be enabled to withstand the suggestibility inherent in all men. It is also to be noted that Nineveh/Mosul was quite near the area where Gurdjieff and his fellow seeker Pogossian were initially looking for an esoteric school, the Sarmoung Brotherhood which they concluded had been founded by Aïsors, who are descended from the Assyrians which, as we are told, was Hamolinider’s ethnicity. Is Gurdjieff pointing an arrow toward the Aïsors? While earlier in the First Series he traces Egyptian esotericism evolving from the remnants of the Akhaldans who survived the destruction of Atlantis. Is it Atlantis, to Egypt, to Babylon, to Nineveh to the valley of Izrumin to…?
In the Fourth Way teaching Gurdjieff brought to the West, there were attempts made to put in place barriers to suggestibility. Barriers of reason and verification, to not use infatuation and to work against identification so as to at least temper the suggestibility of students. A main tenet of Gurdjieff’s teaching is that nothing is to be accepted on faith and as such no faith is required. Further, as part of one’s work one must verify what is being given by the teacher(s) and books through one’s own work. This sounds very scientific and anti-religious but in practice it is neither and it doesn’t work very well within the milieu of a Gurdjieff group. The theory is that this works against the conditioning of the Western educational system, which Gurdjieff railed against. Western education with its hierarchical teacher/student relationship generally takes as truth that which the teacher gives, without much discussion or question. One of Gurdjieff’s aphorisms Inscribed in the study house of his Institute at the Prieuré, was as follows: “If you have not by nature a critical mind your staying here is useless.” But unfortunately, most work groups essentially use the same teacher/student structure, thus promoting a degree of faith in what the teachers give. Is there a way around this? Perhaps. The Gurdjieff Work while taking place in a group setting ultimately is individual. And thus, it really falls to the individual to not give up their questioning, to not simply believe what they are told but to only conditionally accept. And as Hamolinider foresaw, stabilize their reason by working to raise their level of being to balance what knowledge is given and come to real understanding. To verify the ideas through their own work to make what they have been given their own, first-hand information. As was noted above, Individuals are different in their susceptibility to suggestion and infatuation but it’s a given that students have all the unfortunate traits that others not in a spiritual work have. Here it also falls to a teacher to step out of their cloak of infallibility, and not act as an authority in their own right. But rather as a facilitator in the journey undertaken by all who have put themselves under the teachers influence. A facilitator of what? A facilitator of the students’ self-exploration, self-discovery and ultimately a student’s self-transformation.
Richard Myers
Notes
1 G.I. Gurdjieff, First Series; All and Everything; Beelzebub’s Tales to his Grandson, pp 107, E.P. Dutton, 1950 addition.
2 P.D. Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, pp 363-364.
3 G.I. Gurdjieff, First Series; All and Everything; Beelzebub’s Tales to his Grandson, pp 333.
4 G.I. Gurdjieff, First Series; All and Everything; Beelzebub’s Tales to his Grandson, pp 336.
Open to Openness 