(19.) Maurice Nicoll 1 - WRONG WORK OF CENTRES - Part II - pp.71-74
This is number (19.) of our sequential postings from Volume 1 of Maurice Nicoll’s Psychological Commentaries on the Teaching of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky.
(If you are a subscriber to The Journal of Gurdjieff Studies, you can opt in or out of receiving emails from the Fragments Reading Club category.)
Links to each commentary will be put on the following Contents page, as we progress through the book:
Birdlip, October 23, 1941
Part II.—Last time we spoke of wrong work of centres from the point of view of using wrong divisions of centres and from the principle of Attention.
As was said, people inhabit or live in small divisions of centres—that is, in mechanical divisions. You must understand that all the different 'I's in us live in smaller or larger divisions of centres. That is to say, we have more mechanical or less mechanical 'I's. In the small divisions, in the mechanical or even automatic parts of centres dwell most of the 'I's that control our ordinary life. In this sense, people inhabit or live in small mechanical divisions of centres. That is, our ordinary life is largely controlled by very little mechanical 'I's, that inhabit these small subdivisions of centres. These should be servants and not our masters, for we have 'I's of different power or quality or capacity. For example, the 'I's that live in small subdivisions of centres are incapable of understanding this Work. They are very limited. They cannot change. They are like peasants who suspect anything new. The little 'I's that you use in ordinary life—the 'I's that quarrel and feel dis-
72
contented, that are occupied with little plans, little suspicions, little things, little interests, and so on—are in mechanical parts of centres. They are quite useful for little things. But they cannot understand the Work. They belong to little parts of centres. And sometimes you find people who are so much in these small daily 'I's that they are incapable of understanding anything save what belongs to their immediate small interests and to the outlook of these little 'I's that occupy themselves only with the small things of daily life, which are very important on that scale—namely, on the scale of small things. That is to say, these little small 'I's have their right place and if they deal with what belongs to them, they do their work as they should ; and everyone must possess trained 'I's of this sort. As you know, a person must be developed to some extent in all parts of centres in order to become No. 4 man or balanced man. But, as was said, these small 'I's cannot grasp this Work, they cannot adapt themselves to the ideas of this Work, and if the Work-ideas fall only on these little small daily-life 'I's the Work cannot be received and rightly placed in a person's being. In short, this Work, if taken in only by these small self-interested daily 'I's, will only be understood at their own small level of understanding—at the "level of being" of these little 'I's. This Work must fall on bigger 'I's and never be allowed to sink to small 'I's. This is a very real and important side of work on oneself—that is, it is very important not to let small 'I's living in small parts of centres think and decide about the ideas of this Work. Since this is so important and from a practical point of view constitutes so direct an example of the wrong work of centres, which is the subject we are now studying, we must try to understand better what is meant. For, as was said, the study of wrong work of centres is not merely a matter referring to the wrong use of a centre, such as using the thinking centre for running quickly downstairs—in which case one will fall—but also a question of using the right part of a centre in relation to what has to be done at any particular time. For there are quite different kinds of things that we are called upon to deal with at different times and we possess not only different centres or minds—the intellectual for complex comparisons and thoughts, the moving for complex movements far quicker than thought, the emotional for seeing the quality of things and relations and meanings hidden from the intellectual, and so on—but each centre is divided and subdivided into parts, each having its right place in the scheme of things and its proper function.
To return to the intellectual centre. The mechanical part includes in itself all the work of registration of memories, associations and impressions, and this is all the work it should do normally—that is, when the other centres and parts of centres are doing their proper work. It should only do the work of registration or recording, like a secretary taking down what is said and arranging it, etc. And, as was said, it should never reply to questions addressed to the whole centre and should never decide anything important: but unfortunately it is always deciding and always replying in its narrow limited way, with ready-made phrases, and it continues to
73
say the same things and work in the same mechanical ways under all conditions. This is the fixed part of a man and when a man dwells intellectually in the mechanical divisions of intellectual centre, he will not change, and nothing can be new in him, but he will see life always in a certain way and say the same things, like a gramophone. But if he has another part of him developed in a larger division, the case will be quite different. He will then have a very mechanical dead side and a different side, that is more conscious and living—namely, that lies in either the emotional or intellectual divisions. Actually, a balanced man in the Work-sense is developed to some extent in all parts—mechanical, emotional and intellectual—of all centres. That is, he is represented in them by some 'I's and they are not like empty rooms. This distributes his energy, and brings the psychic life into harmony, but it is only through ideas similar to those of this Work—namely, ideas coming from "C" influences, from the conscious circle of humanity, from those who have reached full internal stature—that the harmonious development of centres is possible. Life-interests alone are bound to lead to one-sided development; and no man can develop only through self-interest for then he will only develop certain parts of emotional centre.
Now if the Work falls on the mechanical side of the intellectual centre it will fall among 'I's that deal with the ordinary daily affairs of life. These 'I's are fed by "A" influences and are for use in life, and they cannot understand what the Work is about or why the Work is necessary. They are turned to outer visible life which is the sum total of reality for them. For them only what they can see and touch is real. There is therefore no soil for the Work-ideas to grow from, for the Work is not about the things of sense that can be seen or handled, but begins with self-observation—that is, with what cannot be seen or handled. So you will understand how dangerous it is for those who have been given the opportunity of receiving the Work in larger parts of centres, in bigger 'I's, to allow its ideas to fall down in themselves into little mechanical 'I's where they will be divided or even torn to bits, as it were. This is really the basic idea in sacrilege or profanation—that is, it belongs to wrong work of centres. The Work must always be thought about with attention, for this puts a man into intellectual parts of centres.
As regards the hearing of the ideas of the Work with little narrow 'I's, you all know the parable about the Sower and the Seed. The person who lives only in very small parts of centres, in little personal things, on hearing this Work will only understand it in a very little small way. This situation is mentioned in the parable. The seed means the ideas of esotericism, the ideas of this Work. If the ideas of this Work fall, as living seeds, on very small 'I's, on very little parts of centres inhabited by very small, very little 'I's, it is as if the seed—that is, the ideas of this Work—fall "by the wayside". Let us remind ourselves of this parable:
"The sower went forth to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the wayside; and it was trodden under foot, and the birds of the heaven devoured it. And other fell on the rock; and as soon
74
as it grew, it withered away, because it had no moisture. And other fell among thorns; and the thorns grew with it and choked it. And other fell into the good ground, and grew, and brought forth fruit a hundredfold." (Luke: VIII v-viii)
In interpreting this parable to his disciples, Christ says: "The seed is the word of God. And those by the wayside are they who have heard; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word from their heart, that they may not believe and be saved." Do you understand why it is called the wayside ? It means that the ideas of the Work fall amid the traffic of one's mind, among the ordinary thoughts of one's life, and are taken in the mechanical side of the mind which Christ calls the devil—for mechanicalness is the devil.
Now you all know that, in the Work-sense, a person can only under- stand at his level of being. This means that if you meet a man on a higher level of being than your own you will not understand him. And if you live in very little, very small, very limited, mechanical 'I's, then that represents your level of being. You will then only understand what is very small, very little, very personal, and, as was said, if you centre your- self in these little 'I's, these small 'I's that relate to the small business of your daily life and to your little jealousies, little hatreds and desires and meannesses, you will be unable to adapt yourself to anything new, so the ideas of the Work will "fall by the wayside" and either be quite meaningless to you or even ridiculous, silly, unnecessary and fantastic. This means that you will understand the Work at this level of your being. But everyone has a scale of being. That is, a man has, provided he has magnetic centre, a better level and better 'I's in him, if he tries to find them, through which to understand the Work. And one sign of this is the possession of "magnetic centre" which can distinguish between "A" influences and "B" influences.