Steven J. Sutcliffe and I have collaborated on an article: “Only this will bring results: Practising Gurdjieff’s Exercises in a Search Culture.” It is now published in Intentional Transformative Experiences: Theorizing Self-Cultivation in Religion and Esotericism, edited by Sarah Perez, Bastiaan van Rijn, and Jens Schlieter, pp. 97-120. (De Gruyter, Berlin, 2004)
The Volume
I have already reviewed, very favourably, Schlieter’s pioneering study of Near Death Experiences, What Is it like to Be Dead? He is joined here by two postdoctoral students. These papers seem to be based on an earlier conference in Bern, following up Schlieter’s work. To judge from these papers, it would have been a stimulating conference. The very first line of the chapter which this troika wrote sounds the note: their study if “the concept of religion and its dimensions of practices, beliefs, and experiences …” (1) Key terms such as “religion” and “religious experience” need to be looked at historically and in context, especially since something like “experience” is almost intangible (1). It would be straightforward to take transformative experiences as something “passively received,” but many such experiences are “deliberately sought out.” (2) How are they sought, and what is the harvest of this search? In particular, the editors suggest four areas of enquiry: foundational theories (“cognitive unerpinnings”), social and cultural context, the practitioners’ personal histories and interpretations, and particular individual matters which may aid analysis. (2)
The goal of this selection is exploratory: the formulation of fresh horizons, facilitating suggestive contrasts and improved methodologies. (2) The first concept which the editors broach is “experience.” At least six different nuances of the English term are historically known. These studies are of “immediate experience,” which they define as “a temporary, subjective change in awareness, knowledge and/or feeling.” (3-4). In particular, “religious experiences” are “those experiences that function centrally within the framework of … ‘a complex of practices that are based on the premise of the existence of superhuman powers, whether personal or impersonal, that are generally invisible’ …” (5, using Riesebrot’s definition of religion). They then further distinguish “esotericism” with its central “ineffable wisdom,” “spirituality” for individual practices, and “religious” for “communal and organised” forms. (5)
This volume is avowedly interdiscplinary, seeking to bring various sciences into “dialogue” (6). A certain philosophical or perhaps psychological line grounds their approach to “transformation”. (6-9) It nicely highlights the uncertainty inherent in undertaking any search for transformation, and the significance of decision-making and conversion experiences. This naturally leads to a consideration of “intentionality and self-cultivation,” and that leads us back to the critical nature of those practices in which intention is manifested, and the self cultivated. (9-11).
Transformative experiences have been studied by the disciplines of philosophy, psychology, anthropology, and neuroscience, as well as religious studies. These studies have noted that there is invariably reported an increase in knowledge, an expansion of feeling, and a permanent change in the orientation of one’s life. (11-12) However, a multidisciplinary approach may help to appreciate the variety of transformative experiences. A global approach, not limited to a discrete historical period, may provide more material for study.
The editors then turn to the essays in the book. It was interesting to me to read what they made of the piece by Dr Sutcliffe and myself. It is entirely accurate, yet, as one of the co-authors, it is strange to see one’s reflection in another person’s mirror, as it were. They wrote:
They show in great details the types of exercises Gurdjieff believed were necessary to awaken the self. More than any other chapter in this volume, the effort behind the attainment of a transformative experience is described, as Gurdjieff believed only thousands of exercises would result in success. The practices are shown to include many proprioceptive elements, and the objective of complete awareness of one’s actions and thoughts through painstaking repetition. Yet (we) go beyond showing just how Gurdjieff and his followers believed they could reach their goals. Additionally, they situate the movement in the twentieth century spiritual seekership culture, in which many participants sought out new methods to satisfy their religious needs. Gurdjieff’s approach is shown to fit within such a culture, but differ from some of its aspects as well. In doing so (we) demonstrate the importance of analysing the specifics of singular persons and movements within the wider context in which they were embedded. Their work sheds new light not just on the Gurdjieff movement, but on the religious landscape of the twentieth century as well. (16)
In sober truth, it was Steven who related our work to the “religious landscape of the twentieth century.” So, three quarters of the work was done by him.
There are ten other chapters in the book. The essay of a Hindu sage’s bodily flight has interesting details on early Theosophy. F.A. Geisshusler has an interesting article on “Direct Transference,” which he describes as “the most secretive meditation practice of one of the most esoteric traditions of Tibetan Buddhism …” (47) It seems to be a sky-gazing practice in which one waits for visions. (47-49) Not surprisingly, Geisshusler says: “it appears that the sky, during the visions, is unconsciously framed by the Tibetan practitioner’s own cognitive mechanisms.” (49) That is, “the visionary meditation practice cannot escape the fundamentally intentional nature of human thought.” (49-50) He concludes that thinking “always tends to make meaning, to create order, and to impose order in its thirst for understanding. … Perception … predicts the world around us according to our own priorities and needs …” (61-62)
Kraler’s article deals with pranayama and breath control. It has some information about this practice and how it has developed historically which I had not previously encountered. Surprisingly, it revealed that Swedenborg chanced upon “breath awareness practices.” (128) I was not so interested in what Foucault has to say on self-care, but to her credit, Kraler covers a very wide range of material.
Hanegraaff’s study of Atwood’s Suggestive Inquiry is sound, and covers some significant ground. At the Harvard conference I shall be speaking about Gurdjieff as an “esoteric alchemist.” This article came to my attention just in time. Thaler’s article on Gopi Krishna and kundalini is also worth reading, providing much of the modern history of this concept.
However, my favourite article is Bastiaan van Rijn’s study of Cahagnet and knowledge obtained by animal magnetism and by hashish. Suffice to say, it is a real contribution to scholarship. Animal magnetism was a major interest of Gurdjieff’s.
I have not had the chance to read the three final essays, but I do not wish to delay the appearance of this review – even time must have a stop.
Corrigendum
I take sole responsibility for the two reference errors pointed out to me by Michael Benham. In footnote 14, p.99, the reference to “Taylor 2012, 161ff” should be to “Taylor 2012, 167-169,” and in the bibliography on p.120, Taylor 2012 should be Real Worlds of G.I. Gurdjieff. The error is a double one because Gurdjieff: A New Life was published in 2008. So, wrong book, wrong pages, but the point is worth making. I am planning to return to this and the question of Gurdjieff’s date of birth in a future article. However, for me these are secondary issues: the most important thing is Gurdjieff’s system: his ideas and methods.
