|
Post by Admin on Feb 27, 2022 17:39:53 GMT
Mentation By Form- A User’s Guide for Idiots
''.. This kind of people among us who have been turned into, so to say, ''moths'' destroying the good prepared and left for us by our ancestors and by time, have not the slightest notion and have probably never even heard of the screamingly obvious fact that, during the preparatory age, there is acquired in the brain functioning of every creature, and of man also, a particular and definite property, the automatic actualization and manifestation of which the ancient Korkolans called the ''law of association'', and that the process of the mentation of every creature, especially man, flows exclusively in accordance with this law.
In view of the fact that I have happened here accidentally to touch upon a question which has lately become one of my so to speak ''hobbies'', namely, the process of human mentation, I consider it possible, without waiting for the corresponding place predetermined by me for the elucidation of this question, to state already now in this first chapter, at least something concerning that axiom which has accidentally become known to me, that on Earth in the past it has been usual in every century that every man, in whom there arises the boldness to attain the right to be considered by others and to consider himself a ''conscious thinker'', should be informed while still in the early years of his responsible existence that man has in general two kinds of mentation: one kind, mentation by thought, in which words, always possessing a relative sense, are employed; and the other kind, which is proper to all animals as well as to man, which I would call ''mentation by form''.
--The second kind of mentation, that is, ''mentation by form'', by which, strictly speaking, the exact sense of all writing must also be perceived, and after conscious confrontation with material already possessed, be assimilated, is formed in people in dependence upon the conditions of geographical locality, climate, time, and, in general, upon the whole environment in which his existence has flowed up to manhood.--
Accordingly, in the brains of people of different races and conditions dwelling in different geographical localities, there are formed about one and the same thing or even idea, a number of quite independent forms, which during functioning, that is to say, association, evoke in their being some sensation or other which subjectively conditions a definite picturing, and which is expressed by this, that, or the other word, that serves only for its outer subjective expression.
That is why each word, for the same thing or idea, almost always acquires for people of different geographical locality and race a very definite and entirely different so to say ''inner content''. In other words , if in the entirety of any man who has arisen and been formed in any locality, from the results of the specific local influences and impressions a certain ''form'' has been composed, and this form evokes in him by association the sensation of a definite ''inner content'', and consequently of a definite picturing or notion for the expression of which he employs one or another word which has eventually become habitual, and as I have said, subjective to him, then the hearer of that word, in whose being, owing to different conditions of his arising and growth, there has been formed concerning the given word a form of a different ''inner content'', will always perceive and of course infallibly understand that same word in quite another sense..'' -From Beelzebub's Tales
The development of the kesdjan body involves a change in the experience of embodiment, and in the process there can be the literal sense of a development of an 'inner body' that is of a different 'materiality' to the physical body. The formation and coating of the kesdjan body is said to come through the digestion of the second food, being breath or air, though it also involves the other two foods as well. The process involves the interaction and relation between the breath/air, blood, and sexual substance, which can give a kind of fusion or 'fission'. This 'vivifies' the 'Hanbledzoin', or blood of the kesdjan body, and this vivification is a kind of 'coating' of the kesdjan body, 'energizing' it and giving it greater 'substantiality'.
In having the sense of another body, an 'inner' 'finer' body, there is the intensification of bodily awareness/presence, 'sensation' is developed, and it could be said that such an inner body is itself made of 'sensation/sensing', is a body of sensation/sensing. Along with the added bodily or physical dimension there is also an added 'mental' dimension to the development of the kesdjan body. This expresses that the kesdjan is formed not only from the blend of the first and second foods but also from the blend of the second and third, it has something that is both 'mental' and 'physical' in nature. Along with the 'cohering' of the stuff of sensation and physical embodiment, there is also a cohering of the stuff of 'mind'.
Gurdjieff says that the general mind, or mind stuff, is acted upon by sensation, is a reflection or product of sensation. He talks about this by saying that the general mind is like a kind of 'atmosphere' which inter-permeates the physical body and is controlled or directed by flux in physical sensation. Bodily/sensory flux tends to not only control the 'content' of mind or thought, but also controls the 'localization' of the atmosphere of such a mind, where it is 'concentrated' in relation to the physical body. It is said that the mental atmosphere is generally much smaller in size than the physical body, and it is constantly moving around due to physical stimulation. Part of the work then involves 'expanding' this atmosphere, so that it 'fills' the whole physical body or corresponds to it, and developing its stability in the face of physical/sensory flux.
With the added mental dimension in the kesdjan development there is a greater 'mental embodiment', there is not only a greater ability to not be identified with mental activity, and to be more able to direct the mind intentionally, but there is also the ability to experience a wider range of 'thought'. If thought or mind is like radio waves then there is the ability to receive or 'tune into' a greater number of channels or frequencies, rather than just our ordinary narrow bandwidth. This may be expressed by saying that what was previously 'unconscious', or only present to the 'subconscious', becomes available to the consciousness, or said another way, there is greater access to the subconscious and its mode of thought/mind, its 'language' etc.
Gurdjieff talks of the difference between mentation by 'word', or the general mode of mind, and mentation by form- which may be like the mentation of the 'subconscious'. The 'form' in mentation by form does not mean 'picture' or 'visual image', but more closely relates to the word 'pattern', again though, not pattern in the sense of a geometric image etc. Gurdjieff says that mentation by form is influenced by the landscape, it is connected with the natural cycles and patterns, it is based on the 'laws of nature'. Compared to the general kind of mentation, mentation by form has a different 'order' to its activity, it has a different 'form and sequence', a different 'logic'. Because of this nature of mentation by form it has been said to be more sympathetic to access or stimulation by symbols and visual art, because these may inhibit the automatic response and apprehension of the general mentation, the same is so for 'fairy tales' and fables etc. Mentation by form can respond to 'encoded' information or 'patterns/templates', such as is present in 'Legominism'. Verbal language itself is, or was, constructed using mentation by form, being based on its principles, but the language, or its use, has degenerated such that it only serves as material and stimulation for the habitual mode of mind/logic.
The development of mentation by form is connected with the development of the 'moving brain', in that higher mental activity, or the reception of higher/finer impressions, requires a stable physical presence, a balancing of the physical energies, and the assimilation of higher/finer impressions, such as certain ideas and laws etc, requires their 'enactment/performance' or translation into the physical body, a literal form of 'transubstantiation'. Gurdjieff mentions this by saying that access to the subconscious is generally hindered by the shocks, or flux, upon the physical organism. These shocks need to be compensated for in order to enable subconscious access and this compensation is achieved via the physical blood. In Beelzebub, in the Hypnotism chapters, he mentions how a change in blood flow is involved in accessing the subconscious, this relates to the interaction between the physical blood and the Hanbledzoin.
The development of the second body is both into greater physical and 'somatic' presence and also into greater mental presence, a greater light is cast into the world of 'mind' such that it 'expands' and becomes much more 'populated', we gain more of a presence and foothold in the mental realm. Thus we become greater participants in two worlds, the 'physical' and 'mental', and these two worlds become richer and more vibrant, and though they each become more 'distinct' they also become more inter-permeated and entwined in a more subtle way. Not only do we need to become more alive in our physicality but we also need to become more alive in the realm of 'ideas', our physical senses can be developed and become more keen and we can also develop our latent 'mental' senses. We can have greater perception of the 'Noosphere', the 'atmosphere' of ideas or information in which we dwell, and which could itself be called the kesdjan body of the Earth.
Gurdjieff talks of 'thought-tapes' that are stored in the atmosphere of the Earth and contain various information, information about the Earth and organic life itself, information about the history of man, and information about Cosmic laws and destiny. This information is literally in the air we breathe, it is our natural inheritance, but in general we do not 'digest' it, such higher influences pass right through us. We cannot digest such food unless we have the corresponding 'enzyme', and maybe we do have such an enzyme but the problem is that the food doesn't come into contact with it, something is required to enable the food and enzyme to come together. First and foremost there has to be the Wish, and not merely a fantasy wish with no real presence or substantiality, but a wish with a degree of integrity and persistence. There can be no coherent wish if there is a constant flux of conflicting emotions, a wish depends on a strength of feeling, a strength of feeling gives a 'center of gravity', a center of gravity is something which can respond, or be moved, 'according to law' rather than something which is moved 'chaotically'. A strength of feeling can be the needed catalyst, a means of 'propulsion' to our spaceship, a kind of polarization or magnetization that can enable us to fall, or be attracted, towards a desired destination, such as the cosmic concentration or second order sun known as planet purgatory.
As Gurdjieff said in the opening quote, the 'forms' can give rise to a definite sensation, through the flow of association, which can then give rise to a certain picturing. The form is then separate to the picturing, and really the form is of a 'higher world' and can be said to be more 'objective'. The particular resulting picturing and sensation may be of a lower world and hence more 'subjective' etc. Of course mentation by form may not guarantee an effective result in any particular instance, but the point is that it is only through the engagement of mentation by form that a being can come into contact with the 'realm of form', they can develop their 'sensitivity' and 'capacity' in relation to this realm. Mentation by form, just as by word, exists as a possibility which we can exercise and develop to varying degrees.
In coming into direct contact with the form there is no necessity of any picturing, the picturing etc is a mode of 'translation' which may or may not be involved in any given instance. This has been expressed in relation to understanding, by saying that in understanding, or in a 'moment' of understanding, there is no 'content' of consciousness involved. This is why understanding has been connected with will rather than with consciousness. The actual understanding itself is different to any particular content or mode of 'representation' that may be involved in a 'moment of understanding'. In mentation by form it can be said that the aim is to move through the 'image', or really the mode of representation, in order to come into contact with the form itself, which is 'beyond' any particular picturing etc.
So the act of mentation by form does not necessarily rely on, or have to involve, any picturing. Saying that there can be different, independent forms in relation to one and the same idea, is saying that one idea can be 'seen' from different 'angles' or 'expressed' in different ways. This is saying something other than the fact that one idea may give rise to different picturings in different people. So, as I said, the essence of mentation by form, or the 'form' in mentation by form, does not refer to an image or picturing in the usual sense of these words etc.
You could consider what it is that gives rise to picturings, that is, what is form itself? What is form without the connected 'content'?
I related mentation by form to the mentation of the subconscious, and talked of accessing the subconscious via the engagement of mentation by form. In this sense, there is a kind of connection between the words 'form' and 'logic'. There can be different kinds of 'logic', the only requirement of a 'logic' (in order to be such) is that it be 'self consistent', and hence there can be kinds of 'logic' which may appear to have no application in what is considered to be 'real life'. A 'logic' may be able to 'prove' an answer/premise, reach a conclusion, or make an valid/truthful statement etc, which may have no apparent 'meaning' outside of the given 'logic' itself. The 'logic' determines itself, it determines and defines what is 'consistent' and 'inconsistent' according to its own 'logic'. Of course, a 'logic' 'exists' independently of its particular mode of expression and the particular signs and pictures that may be used as designated terms etc. The 'same' 'logic' could be expressed by different systems of signs and pictures etc.
In asking what form is itself, aside from any particular content, we may also be asking what is a 'logic' apart from its related system of signs? We might say that any 'logic' is founded on some 'central', 'core', or 'base' 'notion', such as for example A=A. But aside from the symbols used to express this 'notion', and aside from any inner picturing that may also be used to represent this 'notion', what is the 'notion' itself? Such 'notion' may be described as a 'way of looking' at the 'world', and in a 'way of looking' itself there is no 'seen', no 'thing looked at'. A way of looking is a way of arriving at 'things looked at' or 'seen' etc. It may be taken as a kind of 'organization' or 'order', that is, 'something' which organizes and orders (itself or something else). It may also be taken as 'something' which creates or determines/defines 'meaning', or even that which determines the 'rules' involved in the making of meaning, the possible kinds of 'interpretation', the possible 'moves' in the 'game' of 'meaning' etc. In essence, both of these ( way of looking and way of meaning etc) refer to 'something' closer to an 'action' or 'act' rather than a 'content' or 'acted upon' etc. We might say that the Form, or forms, in mentation by form refer to the 'rules' or 'structure' of 'mind', or 'reason', itself. In coming into contact with form itself we come into contact with the essence of 'mind' or 'reason' itself, and it is through this that there is the development of Gurdjieff's 'gradations of reason' and access to the 'subconscious' (Gurdjieff's 'real' consciousness etc). The engagement of mentation by form, coming into operational contact with the realm of form, is the means of 'exercising' the I, the Individuality. It is in this sense that Gurdjieff said that ''Understanding is what a man can Do' and also '' A man IS his understanding''. Where Gurdjieff says ''...what a man can Do'' he is referring to something that is much more concerned with, or centered in, the 'inner world' rather than the outer world- as in 'practical' competence in some area etc. Gurdjieff touches on this when he talks about what is the work of a real man, in connection with the relation between his three brains etc.
Some may see a potential connection here between Gurdjieff and Plato in relation to form.The connection with Plato is not strictly relevant, though I would say that the two are really the same, talking about the same thing using different language, though Gurdjieff goes a bit further. I would say that the language used by Plato is generally mis-translated/misunderstood and it is this that brings up issues.
The particularities of the form are related to geographic conditions and climate etc, but the form itself, its operation, is objective to all, hence the ''laws of association'' that Gurdjieff mentions. The world of form, the 'laws' of form, are of a higher 'level' than those of the particularities of the picturing and its 'medium' and 'mechanism'' etc. The 'higher' form, or realm of forms, is not separated from the conditioned and particular, not 'somewhere else', but operates 'hand in hand' with it. The 'divine' and 'unchanging' words used by Plato in relation to form are simply an expression of the difference between the realm of form and the 'relative'; even in form there is a kind of 'change' and 'evolution' in connection with the nature of creativity. The fact that a different form can evoke a different sensation and picturing does not mean that form is 'subjective', really it means the opposite. For example, 'objective art' can give rise to different responses in different people, depending on the 'level of being' of the person, that is, each responds 'objectively' according to his being, by law etc. This example is not an exact analogy with the topic of form but you may get the picture.
Of course, we are in contact with form all the time, we can develop our 'consciousness' and understanding in this regard, in our relationship with form. This possibility is the difference between man and animals in regard to form, evidently a different number of brains enables a different relation. I have only said that form itself is of a higher world/nature than the particular picturing and its mechanism and medium and that the two are not the same thing, that form does not refer to the sensation or picture itself, it is involved in the evokation of such etc. As I said, I am not using Plato's theory or trying to match it with Gurdjieff, though as I have said, they do really correspond. We would have to look at the language of Plato, such as what is really meant by his use of the word 'image' etc. The 'image' of Plato's form is not a picture, it is what I have talked of as a 'way of looking' or kind of 'logic', it is in an act of 'comprehension' or 'understanding' in which there is no 'content' of consciousness, or in which such is a secondary after effect etc. Such an act is a 'act' of 'will', so that one 'conforms' to the form, or its 'image and 'logic', and thereby one is 'made one' with the form, or its 'image' and 'logic' - which is itself 'one with' the form.
What is 'taken back' from the realm of form by Plato's philosopher is the 'understanding', or the 'will', to act in accordance with such form, the person then acts in accordance with such form, in his understanding he IS the given form, and it is this that makes him 'wise'. Something like riding a bike, one never forgets how to do it, and it is not necessary to have visual image memories in order to get back on a bike and ride it, of course here we generally speak of such things as bodily and muscle memory, but again you may get the point.
Of course, the forms are not 'perceived' directly, they can be contacted directly, one can come into direct operational contact with them through the will and understanding, in which there is no 'content' of consciousness. Particular 'insights' and understandings appear periodically, the development of the gradations of reason progresses 'periodically', but one always acts according to his current level or gradation of reason, more than acting according to such, he IS such. One is always in relation with form, the nature of this relation can change, hence there can be development. I have said that mentation by form, its active use and development, involves going through, or getting 'beyond' or 'behind', the particular picturing or 'image' and its mode of representation, in order to contact the underlying form directly for 'assimilation' or understanding via the will and 'I' - or its 'seed' etc. The form itself, in corresponding to geographical conditions etc, 'expresses' or 'contains' the 'laws of nature', the laws involved in the fashioning and operation of such geographical conditions and their connection to the human mind or mentation etc. Hence via the operation of mentation by form we can connect with the forms which 'express' or are involved in the 'laws of world creation and world maintenance', thereby developing our understanding of such.
The 'conscious confrontation', mentioned by Gurdjieff, involves the 'confrontation with the 'forms', the forms are involved in shaping mentation, in the ''laws of association'' etc. To 'get to know' what form is, is then a practical endeavor, a necessary one in the process of the development of mentation and understanding. Evidently there is no other way of 'knowing' 'what' a form is, being told or listening by itself will not produce understanding. Allowing associations to flow whilst listening or reading may or may not provide insight, generally we take a new 'configuration' or formatting of the existing data to be a new insight or an 'interesting thought' and we remain satisfied with this. Obviously this relates to the nature of the formatory apparatus.
In passively observing association we may get a glimpse to the 'form' behind the content, but most often it is simply the content that is observed, watching one association after another and seeing, or reasoning, something of how, or why, one particular association has arisen or leads to another etc. In this passive observation we are generally 'on the outside', only observing the content that is being acted upon, rather than being aware of that which is acting upon the content, organizing it, in-forming it etc, and how this operates. I may be aware of what I am thinking but I am not generally aware of how I am thinking, aware of the thinking itself rather than what is thought about, that which brings the thoughts to mind and connects them and the 'logic' of its action in doing so.
You may be reading these words and observing your associations, but what about that which is making those associations appear 'relevant', or that which is making your thinking appear 'rational' or appear to 'make sense', rather than appearing as just a random nonsensical series of unconnected 'thoughts'? In what I have said, it is the form that is involved in 'formatting' thought or mentation, or experience in general, such that it appears to 'make sense' etc. Form then has a connection with 'logic', a 'lawful' operation that has some 'parameters' related to 'meaning'.
In the active engagement of mentation by form it is the understanding of the operating kind of 'logic' that is sought, rather than seeking any particular expression of this. The given logic is present 'behind' every expression that arises from it or in accordance with it. As the 'logic' or form is 'higher' or more active than that which it operates upon, or that which is organised by it, it is possible to connect with it or understand it without having to do this by going via that which it acts upon. Evidently the logic or form itself does not have any particular expression or 'picture' itself, it produces or evokes 'relevant' pictures or expressions according to its own logic. The particular pictures or expression may run in a linear sequence and order one after another, but the form, logic, or pattern is there 'all the time', in itself it is not 'linear' or 'sequential' in the same way as the expressions, relative to such it is 'timeless'.
Thus understanding by mentation by form is a kind of 'instantaneous' or 'timeless' affair, in which there is no linear progression in order to reach an conclusion. In reading I may have to go from one word to another and reach the end of a sentence in order to arrive at some understanding of what has been attempted to be conveyed, the equivalent via mentation by form would be like looking at a block of text as a whole and coming straight to the meaning. In the real exercise of mentation by form one is exercising different kinds of logic or different ways of 'making sense', one is exploring the 'rules' of 'mentation' itself. This may involve picture making, but this is secondary to the 'logic' or 'rules' which such pictures are fashioned in accordance with and are 'interpreted' through. Mentation by form is basically the mode of 'thinking' of the 'subconscious', or of the 'essence', as defined by Gurdjieff. It is a different mode of accessing the data or experiential information that is in a being, and a different mode of processing this. In Beelzebub's Tales, Gurdjieff talks of the different kinds of reason that a being can have.
General reasoning is based upon verbal associations, and as said the words come to replace direct experience, such that one may 'think' only in words or images that are not connected to direct experiences. Words and images come to replace the experiences that they refer to. Also, in general reasoning the associations can be led by chance and not involve any intentionality and can lead to misunderstandings, unrelated connections may be made and related connections may be missed. General reasoning is based upon 'linear' 'chains' of thought, and to get from particular thought to another requires a certain series of steps. The accessing of information or data in the being is by way of 'verbal' symbols.
Mentation by form is not dependent upon 'linear' ‘chains' of thought to get from one idea to another and information is gathered or grouped together according to a different 'form' of 'logic' or reasoning. The data or information of mentation by form is based upon direct living experience, the thoughts are 'living' thoughts, there is no difference between the 'object' of thought and the actual object to which the thought refers. In general reasoning or mentation an apple is simply a word or verbal sound or a vague image, in mentation by form the apple is a real apple.
Mentation by form has a connection with 'kinaesthesia' and a form of thinking or knowing by the body that largely operates 'unconsciously', that we are generally unaware of. In kinaesthesia the movements or actions of another person or object that are witnessed are repeated in us. A simulation is played out of their actions in us, giving us the experience of what it would be like if it were us who were performing those actions, or if our body were subject to the same kind of action. This has been related to 'mirror neurons' and is also part of why we can 'cringe' upon seeing an image of someone hurting themselves for example.
In connection with Gnosticism, thought or thinking itself is not a barrier to self knowledge or communion with the Divine, it has even been considered as one of the very testaments to the presence and reality of the Divine. The ability to 'make images', 'internal images' , may have some connection to the nature of man as being 'made in the image of God'. This ability for internal images, that enables the making of outer images, may be a double edged sword in that it can be used to make 'graven images' or 'idols' etc.
Man may become carried away by the ability to take something from one world, the inner, and bring it into another, the outer. The worshiping of the 'idol' can represent a bias towards the result rather than an appreciation of the means. Consequently the 'mind' may become conditioned and 'limited' to the 'senses' or the outer world, this world coming to be seen as the only 'true' or 'substantial' reality. The notion of the outer world being a reflection of the inner, and of the inner being a 'bridge' or 'medium/media' to the ultimate or 'Spiritual' reality, is lost. A 'divorce' occurs between 'heaven and earth' , the mind or nature of man becomes of the 'flesh' rather than of the 'Spirit'. 'Matter' or the 'senses' come to dominate the mind, the master and servant’s roles are inverted etc and the 'material values' are born.
The division in man’s nature is such that he cannot 'think outside the box' , or that he cannot think without stimulation of the senses, the initiative is handed over to the outer world such that the inner is limited to being a 'reflection' of it. He is in effect kicked out if his own garden, his own natural abode, his own inner world, and his creative functioning which should be expression of his freedom and Divine nature or inheritance becomes a means of slavery.
Man’s discernment between the inner world of 'image' and outer world of 'bodies/objects' is lost or becomes 'blurred' , a kind of 'superimposing' of one upon the other, such that he doesn't really live in one or the other, but dwells in a kind of 'limbo' between them. He cannot hold the two worlds together , be present and active in both and serve his role of uniting heaven and earth, of bringing and establishing proper 'order' or 'hierarchy' , such as the 'Rule of Christ' or 'Kingdom of Heaven' etc.
The 'imposition' or 'blurred' relation between the inner world and the outer world, requires their 'separation' or 'piercing' before they can be raised or made whole again. For this we have to take up our Cross which is the means of intersection, the axis, between worlds. The inner world, which is the light, has to be brought out of the darkness into which it has been cast by the favoring of the light of the outer world. Liberate the mind from the senses, destroy the false images that are the identification with objects, that attempt to reduce the mind to a physical body. Cast out the money lenders from the inner temple, who deal in worldly affairs. Feed the light of the inner place of worship so that it may become means of Holy Sacrament, the body and blood eaten and drank, resurrected anew, the world conquered. ’" Remember: by "forms" or "ideas", Plato was not describing a kind of jelly mold that turns out tables or trees. That's a metaphysically dead reading of him.
Rather, ιδέες to Plato were more like guardian angels and intelligences existing to secure all that's good, beautiful and true in the world.’’ - Mark Vernon.
'Angel' and 'angle' have obvious connections. An angle, in one sense, is a 'means of approach'. A means of approach may be a means of 'intelligibility'; a means, thereby, of meaning, of coming to meaning etc.
A form, rather than being a 'thing' or 'substance' from/through which 'things' are made, may be that which organises 'experience' such as to come to particular experience. The operative organisation of 'form' is then not so much upon 'things' as it is upon the 'stuff' of experience, perception and reason etc.
The 'form' or 'idea' of the tree is that which enables it to be experienced in perception and reason. It is an 'experiential structure', or 'that which structures experience'. The link between structuring and 'scaffolding' is what can give way to the general association of 'template' or 'mold' to 'form' or 'idea'.
The form or idea of the tree enables there to be the experience of 'class' and 'particularity', the experience of the recognition of 'trees' and an individual 'tree'. There is a certain reconciliation required in order to be able to recognise the sameness and difference between all trees.
The forms or ideas are involved in this reconciliation which enables a structured and organised experience. They uphold the 'good' in terms of the meaning of 'good' being 'in working order'; according to an aim, intention, purpose, or requirement etc. The forms or ideas go way beyond the notion of such as 'concept', which may not be considered as involved in the structuring of both 'mind' and 'perception' themselves.
The nature of the action of such forms or ideas would be put in terms of 'pattern' and 'holo-movement', a kind of action that is not strictly 'temporal'; in terms of one which is composed of parts or can be reduced to such. We may think here of the nature of 'waves' or 'fields' perhaps. The nature of their 'non temporal' action gives way to the association of a certain kind of 'eternity' to their nature and existence etc.
In being involved in the arising and maintenance of intelligibility, of Man's ability to 'know' and 'experience', the forms/ideas are then related to intelligence, the very essence of such, as well as 'beings'. In being involved in the making of Man, of what makes him Man, the forms or ideas are then related to 'beings', or 'super beings'. In their involvement in the being of Man, this kind of being is then partially attributed to the forms or ideas themselves. Though, in being involved in the creation of being or beings, they are then also associated as something more than 'beings', something more than 'living'. This may then get expressed in terms of certain abilities and qualities associated as 'super human' and 'supremely good' in terms of human abilities, values, and ethics etc. This is not at all to say that there aren't other 'beings' and 'spirits' of different kind and form.
As another mode of approach to a symbol or diagram, we could ask what is our feeling of the terms being pondered, perhaps ask a question and let the feelings answer, or perhaps even let the mind answer if you like, but do not allow the use of words or verbal terms, confine the representation to some abstract image that is not allowed to come from established repertoire of images etc.
The symbols and diagrams are dependent upon our level of being in order for them to operate, or for us to use them effectively. Without bringing our ableness of being into their use and contemplation, they can remain limited in their use and effect in us. Bringing one's being into the symbols can involve putting one's being into the symbol, so to speak, as involved in providing other means of representation and expression for contemplation, and bringing one's being can also refer to bringing the symbol into oneself in terms of mirroring the action of the symbol in one’s own being-mentation. Here we have to be able to engage with the form of the symbol so as to be able to apprehend its mode of action. Engaging with the form of the symbol or diagram does not refer to establishing a set of labels and terms for the aspects of a diagram/symbol and then pondering on the nature and relation of these terms. The true contemplation of a symbol, in terms of the bringing of one's own being into it, is a direct engagement with it such that there is no level of 'abstraction' going on in the general sense of the term, abstraction here referring to the process whereby terms or elements are used to refer to other things in order to come to some insight. In the true contemplation of the symbol, all the separate terms and labels are lost, and what is there is a direct engagement of a 'movement' that is apprehended directly in ones being through direct participation. Such participation can be a unitive blending, and yet participation still implies some individuality and relation etc.
It can be helpful to bring the body into one's engagement with symbols, and this is connected, in one sense, with the Gurdjieff Movements. We can also ponder images and symbols through the body and bodily movement. Exercises in mentation by form can also aid the development of the use of images and forms, and this exercise can develop the understanding of such things as geometric figures, where another level of their comprehension opens up. Such things as geometric shapes have a being or level of information that goes beyond images and rational conceptions of numeric relations and such. Developing the use of image and symbol inside myself, through my mind and body and feelings, enables a greater form of engagement and participation in regard to external symbols and images and their contemplation and use.
The use of language has been seen as a factor of conditioning. In this sense, our language use is important. The general inherited and acquired language, and its usage, fosters particular perceptions and conceptions. Language then conditions the given and possible experience. To engage with language more consciously is an important work.
Work to become conscious of one's own linguistic habits of expression is one form of the beginning of this work. Work to gain direct insight into the link between language and experience is a further endeavour. Linguistic structures condition sensory experience as well as mental experience.
Verbal mentation can be used as a means to explore and discover the deeper levels and structures at work in mentation itself. Mentation by word can be intentionally engaged and connected with mentation by form. The connection between picture and word can be developed and utilised more consciously. Words may be used as a starting point for inquiry into the deeper levels of mentation. Inherited notions connected with words may be brought to light and made conscious.
In this process, there can be the arising of one's own 'authentic' thought and language, or one's own individual mentation. This is a creative work that takes effort, and it is effectively the creation of one's own 'mind', from the materials and structures that have been acquired and serve as a raw material for this work of transformation. It has been said, and not for nothing, that the birth of the kesdjan body involves the 'fusion' of the 'mind substance.
What I am talking about though is not really something that is limited to the mind. It involves the feelings and sensation as well. In dreams, for example, there can be the experience of thought, feeling, and sensation, though we might consider such experience as a mental one. The material of dreams is related to the Kesdjan world, the material and capacity for dreams being developed into something more substantial. We could think of something like 'embodied thinking' where the experience of thought itself becomes much more real and tangible. This not being at the expense of the physical and sensory experience, but being a greater integration of mind and body.
Gurdjieff emphasises the need to sleep well, and the connection of this to the correct expenditure of energy during the waking state etc. In terms of what I have said, the material and capacity that is at work in dreaming is also at work in our general thought and mentation. It is just a case of degrees of activity and engagement. Most of our thinking has this same 'substantiality' as that of general 'dreams'. If we can make our thinking a more real experience, by connecting it with the other centers and engaging its capacity for action, then this can have the mentioned effect that Gurdjieff speaks of regarding sleep and dreams and the form of energy use in the waking state. This being along the lines of saying that most dreaming results from a misuse of energy in the waking state and from a lack of ability to disconnect the centers when going to sleep.
To be able to engage with the higher centers in an effective way requires that the substance of thought becomes more substantial and coherent in our experience. J.G. Bennett spoke of the 'sensitive energy', which was his term for the energy of the experience of thought, feeling, and sensation. The general experience of thought, feeling, and sensation, when actually attended, is present in/on/as a kind of 'screen'. The sensitive energy gives the general form of experience of the functions, and also gives the general form of relation between 'awareness/attention' and the functions. The material of experience, the material of the functions, can be transformed. Thought, feeling, and sensation can be blended and this can give a transformation in which the substance of these functions, the substance of the experience of these functions, can blend and 'fuse'. This not only changes the nature of the experience of such functions and how they are related to each other, but it also changes the form of relation between 'awareness/attention' and such functions, or their material/substance.
The substance of the functions becomes literally more tangible in experience and is thereby related to in a different way. This fission and fusion of the experiential substance of the functions provides the formation of the first 'inner body' as related to the kesdjan. In subjective experience, this could best be described as the formation of a new 'mind', in terms of being a new structure and system of being-mentation, and mentation here meaning a new relation and operation between the the three functions and brains/centers etc. Experience itself, and its substance, transforms into a new structure and system/operation. In this there is the establishment of a new principle of 'order' to experience, experience is processed and related to in a different way, and we could also relate this to the operation of a new 'logic' or 'reason' to experience.
The transformation also brings a new element to experience, outside of what was previously only the triadic experience of thought, feeling, and sensation, as related to each other in a certain form of experience and operation etc.
Most of the talk about the digestion of impressions has centred on their reception. The work of being more present and attentive to one's centers as impressions are received. Then there has also been talk of taking a more active role in one's mental reaction to the impression, becoming more actively involved in the direction and flow of association. This has been related to the beginning of intentional, active thought/mentation.
The digestion of impressions implies that there is a further 'informational' content present in the impressions, that is not commonly accessed and digested. Part of this added content and value is in the impression itself, and part of this extra content and value has to be made by our own action.
The added content to the impression can cover a vast field, and as Gurdjieff has said, there is no cosmic law governing the reception of impressions. The information present in the impression can be related to various levels and worlds.
Part of the reason for work on the digestion of impression is that our own understanding should develop, and along with this, there should also be the process of becoming conscious of 'another world'; and this being related to the development of the 'higher organs of perception' with which to perceive and engage with the higher worlds.
The impressions can serve as part of the fuel to the creation of the 'Real Inner World of Man'. A valid question to ask would be, what is the nature of such a 'real inner world of man'. What is the nature of 'a world'? What is the nature of the given 'inner' ? etc.
What was mentioned in terms of the exercise of intentionality towards the associations, is not itself active thought/mentation, but is a preliminary form of work to such. Gurdjieff gives a similar exercise in 'Views from the Real World' where he speaks of the use of becoming accustomed to think in a certain sequence. Part of the reason for this exercise, is to begin to develop the ability to direct and follow association, to make it conform to a certain intention/pattern. This ability has certain benefits and potential.
Along with this, the exercise is given to highlight something of the nature of true, real, active mentation. The form of the exercise is meant to mirror something of the true nature of the real mentation of a Real Man. In such a mentation, the Man himself is the source of order, and law, according to which the mentation operates. The elements involved in the mentation, their meaning, have been arrived at intentionally, 'self created'. This is the opposite to the general 'self created' meaning and subjectivity present in mentation. In general mentation, the meanings used and arrived at are acquired from external sources, and the form of mentation itself, or that according to which mentation can and does happen, has also been acquired habitually and proceeds without 'our' participation.
Work to be conscious at the moment of the reception of an impression, and work on the intentional direction of association, can help the process of becoming aware of how one's own subjective mentation works. There can be insight into the particular subjective patterns of one's own thoughts and associations. Along with this insight into the particular 'content' of one's own mentation, there can also be insight into the 'objective' process of mentation itself, the 'mechanism' according to which such mentation works and functions. This insight provides an indication of how one's own particular mentation can be changed, and can also provide insight into the way that mentation itself may be transformed, transformed into the action that is the property of the 'Real Inner World of Man'.
The work on the intentional direction of association can provide a degree of inner coherence that can potentially open up insight into a different possible form of mentation. The exercise attempts to mirror something of the nature of real mentation, by making the 'lower' correspond to the 'higher' so that there may be some real insight into the actual higher. The exercise may be thought of as an 'artificial' expression or representation of the 'real'. The performance of the artificial, if sufficiently competent, can yield insight into the real, such as a form of 'invokation' etc.
The digestion of impression, towards the creation of the real inner world, involves the establishment of Man's own Being and Authority in his mentation. Man can become a creative source to his own 'inner world', his own inner law of three, or triangle, from which 'meaning' and 'law' emanate into his 'surrounding inner space'. This 'inner world', which becomes 'law conformable' to the man himself, is won through creative action. A man must strive to create his own real meaning out of the stream of material and automatic processes that presently constitute his inner world; which is presently simply a material of potential akin to a womb.
The challenge and call is to create something 'of one's own' out of that which has been acquired and is present 'willy-nilly'. This begins by the work to transform the acquired inner data, which is present in a generalized form, into something individual to oneself. This requires a creative action on my part. Acquired meanings, whether simply acquired automatically from external sources or whether acquired as the result of direct personal experience, need to be further transformed. Meaning needs to evolve for there to be individual development of being and understanding. Without the development of the principle of meaning, all experience remains at the same level and is interpreted accordingly.
Gurdjieff says that the formatory apparatus was intended simply for the collection of impressions, but it has come to function in the role of the processing of these impressions. What was meant as something like a 'sensory receptor' has become a 'cognitive' processor. Our general thinking then works according to formatory apparatus, impressions are processed according to its nature and limitations. Limited, established modes of connection serve as the means of association, meaning that there can be no real new development, only new combinations of data that give the sense of actual mentation and new insight. In the dependence upon such formatory apparatus for mentation, there is the reliance upon a mechanical action to provide what should be a conscious and intentional principle of order and relevance/relation.
The creation of the real Inner World of Man involves the creation of a 'new mind', this mind is created according to 'new principles of logic and reasoning', and the man himself participates in this creation.
The general action of the intentional use of menation and association, is aimed at the discovery of something of another order. Engagement with the general level and material of 'mind' can open the way to the realization of the place and function/purpose of such 'mind'. In general, the content of 'mind' remains at the level of an 'image'. A man's 'mind' remains at the level of something 'virtual', his own experience and participation in his own mind or mentation is at the level of 'images' and is thereby 'abstract'. Man himself is 'abstract' in his own thinking, in the world of thought. To become embodied at the level of 'mind' means that the world of 'ideas' should become a real, tangible world akin to the physical world. The medium of ideas should come to be experienced as a real, tangible medium. This then enabling the equivalent of physical action in such a realm. The reflection of thought, in inner images and sounds, needs to become a direct engagement and perception. The general perception of thought is at the level of the physical body/world. This means that all thought is converted and translated into such images and sounds, which are themselves reflections of the physical world and senses. All thought is then translated into the language of the physical world and senses, and its attendant form of 'logic'. Thought needs to be realized as something beyond 'image', and needs to be engaged beyond its reflection in the 'lower centers'.
The question can be asked, what is thought/thinking aside from any imagery, sounds, feelings or sensations etc ?
The centers, as apparatus, can work with various energies. We have something which can distinguish between the various energies, though it requires development. Attention itself can serve as the means of such discernment, the means of the separation of energy and instrument. It is the form and sensitivity of attention that can enable there to be such a discernment, but that which discerns is a higher 'function'. The discernment may be thought of in terms of the action of a higher center, real 'seeing' may be connected with such as conscience and the higher emotional center. The 'impartial' attention is one which can register both the functional activity and the operative energy, however the two aren't 'perceived' in the same way. The energy does not appear as a 'something' in the same way as the functional activity, one is aware of them in different ways.
In general, what may be considered as the energy operating in/though a given center, is simply the experience of the other content that is present in the given center. Instead of simply following that which is actualized, or actualizing, in the given center, attention can come to recognize the potential as well as the actual. Out of all the possible content and data present in a center, there is something which is actualized in the present instance. All the rest of the data and content remains in its state of potential. A different form or kind of attention and 'perception' is required in order to become aware of the potential as a direct presence and reality, rather than simply some conceptual idea and memory etc. It is the development of the 'perception' of the potential, the currently un-actualized, that enables there to be a relationship established between the actual and the potential. It is this relationship that is involved in evolution.
The awareness of the unactualized, the potential, can be equated with the awareness of energy, in the sense that energy has no form itself and can hence be related to 'potential'. In terms of functional activity, the presence of a different energy can be recognised in its expression in the functional activity. A different energy or quality of energy can be expressed in different functional activity, functional activity may be refined by the presence of a higher energy etc. Perhaps there is struggle in some particular functional activity, such as getting one's head around some problem. When there is a change in the operating energy to a higher energy, the struggle ceases and the functional activity is performed with ease etc.
That which can recognise and discern the various energies is that which can appreciate 'quality', as different to that which can recognise 'quantity'. This is not attention or a kind of attention, but a certain form of attention may be required to enable this capacity to operate appropriately. Attention itself is seen as an expression of the creative energy. A higher energy may work upon a lower, and thus to a higher a lower may appear more 'material' and be manipulated as such.
To ask the question 'what' it is that can discern between energy and instrument, the energy of a center and its content, we may need to look into the question of what energy is itself; the difference between and energy and instrument. What is the difference in the nature of the reality of energy and the reality of instrument.
As I said, in order for there to be such discernment, attention needs to be in the form that corresponds to that which can 'perceive' the energy rather than the manifestation. The operative attention cannot simply then be the attention of one or other of the centers and functions, a partial and identified attention etc. Development of sensing can certainly aid this process, aid in the discernment between energy and instrument. Sensing operates according to the 'moving' aspect/nature, which is present in each center. Development of sensing, and its equivalent in the other centers, gives a certain sensitivity to the activity present in each center. This sensing capacity can be developed, opening up more of the content present in the centers, and making more of the activity of such available to awareness.
To the extent that activity is an expression of energy, then the development of sensing, and its equivalent in feeling and thought, can give a degree of sensitivity to the presence and manifestation of such energy, as functional activity. There can then be a discernment as to the kind or level of energy operating, and this discernment comes through sensitivity to the functional activity. This discernment of the energy operating works in reverse, judging the energy by its expression in functional activity. Though the operative energy may be discerned in this way, this is something different to the direct 'perception' of the given energy. Sensing may be involved in enabling the capacity for discernment to operate, but in itself, energy cannot be sensed, and so sensing/sensation cannot be considered as the means of the direct 'perception' and recognition of such energy.
Sensing can give a degree of coherence and integrity to the functioning that aids in the relative separation between energy and instrument, it provides a degree of stability such that the relative 'eye' of discernment can 'focus'.
I asked the question about energy in order to possibly clarify the ideas. Inquiry into the nature of energy, and thereby, inquiry into the difference between energy and instrument, can give insight into what it is that could make such a discernment. The question isn't to be answered so much as pondered. The question is as to the difference in nature between energy and instrument. I may say that energy is what makes or enables an instrument to work, but in itself, this does not directly address the nature of each, but only one aspect of their given relationship.
So far as an answer can be given in this medium, I would say that attention is the vehicle of creativity/creation. It is that which can be a means of Real I, or its seed etc, in its work of 'self creation'. Attention is the means for the I to exercise its Authority and creative potential. Attention gives a 'space' or 'field' through which a law or form of order can be expressed. Attention enables there to be a 'self governed' 'space', with a degree of independence. In being the means of individuality and independence, or 'self relation', it is also the means of relation with 'other'. Through attention there can be 'localised' 'centers' of individuality and being etc, and through attention these separate centers can be related and interact.
Attention is the 'whip and crook' of the Egyptian King, the means through which there can be relation, and 'lawful hierarchy'. Attention is the property of the Will, it is that through which a being may say 'I' or 'I am'. Attention connects Will and functions, it is thereby the means through which an aim or intent is judged in its manifestation, judged according to its degree of corresponding. It is then a means of both feed-back and organisation/hierarchy. The Holy Host comes to mind.
As we can see in our own experience, attention can be both a means of order and disorder. Through attention we may give or enable a higher order/organisation to our experience, thereby enabling the manifestation of a higher world. It is also through attention that we may be dis-organized and come under the action of a lower world. Attention is the representative of 'free will', the God given potential of Man for Soul and Real I.
|
|