more stuff from octave archive
Date:
Mar 04 2000 06:04:20 EST
From:
Karl Starkweather
Subject:
the Six Triads in the Intellectual Function
This is the result of some observations of my own, and might help to show
how the different triads work together.
Forces:
1 - Awareness (active)
2 - The Unknown or Contradictory (passive)
3 - Current level of Knowledge (neutralizing)
Activities:
213 - New information(2) is met by awareness(1) and assimilated as
knowledge(3). [Learning]
132 - Awareness(1) examines current knowledge(3) to reveal contradictions(2).
[Criticism]
312 - Current knowledge(3) overwhelms awareness of contradictions(1),
perpetuating ignorance(2). [Lying]
231 - A fallacy(2) is confronted by contradictory knowledge(3) to restore
awareness(1). [Disillusion]
321 - Knowledge(3) is brought to bear on a contradiction(2), resulting in a new
awareness(1). [Hypothesis]
123 - New awareness(1) is applied to a problem(2) to expand knowledge(3).
[Deduction]
Comments:
In Learning, new information is digested and organized into knowledge, but
when that knowledge is faulty it must be eliminated through Criticism.
The paradox revealed by Criticism can be handled in three different ways:
i) the idea underlying the contradiction can be rejected (eliminated)
ii) the contradiction itself can be suppressed (Lying)
iii) the contradiction can be resolved through a higher Hypothesis.
The process of Hypothesis warrants a little explanation, because the
meaning of this word has largely been lost to us. "Thesis" literally means a
position taken, and rests on the scale of knowledge. Hypothesis is that which
underlies a position, meaning that it lies on a different scale. Collin
describes this process (aka regeneration) as "the creature emulating the
creator" and goes on to explain that something is first created naturally, and
is now to be re-created a second time by will. An Hypothesis is a flash of
realization; it is a re-creation of direct awareness, and that is the scale it
occupies.
Once the hypothesis has appeared, it infects a full gamut of knowledge,
transforming it as the implications of the idea are worked out. This is
deduction, the growth of an idea, and it means that ideas are living things.
Like all living things ideas eventually succumb to the process of destruction
(132) as their implications eventually begin to contradict one another. This is
inevitable because truth is not on the scale of ideas.
Date:
Mar 04 2000 05:38:58 EST
From:
Karl Starkweather
Subject:
Re: Legal Advice Octave
jeremy dixon wrote:
>
> Do The Problem (Passive)
> Re Facts given to advisor
> Mi Facts reduced to legally salient points (see below on this)
> =>Mi-Fa Application of the Relevant Law (Neutralizing)
> Fa Legal consequences of salient facts drawn out
> Sol Overall legal position, and legal options, clarified. (see below)
> => Advice Transmitted to The Client (Active)
> La Client understands and considers advice, chooses options.
> Ti Client Acts.
>
This looks quite sound to me Jeremy. A very minor adjustment I would
consider would be to move the transmission of advice up to La and include the
selection of options under point 8. My reason for this would be that I have
come to see the points 3 and 6 as Forces entering with their own identity and
direction, rather than actual steps in the process (after all, they are not
notes in the octave). I suppose the way to test the correctness of the
positioning would be to look at the inner line 7-1. Somehow either the advice
transmitted, or the client's understanding of that advice has an impact "from
the future" upon the facts that are presented at point 1 (i.e. the client's
presentation is colored by the nature of the advice he wants to receive at the
end of the process, and likewise the advice is given "in light of these facts").
The basic triad looks to me like Problem-Law-Counsel, and illustrates very
well I think Collin's "re-discovery of original principle" in that the body of
Law is the result of history, and similar legal situations which have
established certain principles and precedents. The person of the Counsel (I
know the US and Australian legal systems have much in common, but I don't know
if you use that word the same way we do) is of course present throughout the
octave, but "steps in" to play an active role at point 6. The informing triad
seems to be "outside time" to a certain extent in the enneagram, but still with
one foot (or perhaps three feet) in the temporal world.
It is also not without amusement that I notice point 8, the Client's action,
leading often to new legal problems, thus beginning the next octave.
Nicely done overall.
> Would yoghurt making, I wonder, be an example of a 312 octave in action?
>
I would have assumed so, although your distillation octave has left me a little
uncertain. I'd have to be more familiar with the process to be sure
Date:
Mar 02 2000 20:17:43 EST
From:
"jeremy dixon"
Subject:
Rainbow Octave
The Rainbow Octave is what I'm calling the octave of refraction of light.
This is discussed in a very detailed paper by someone called Pledge on the
relation of the octave to using a spectrometer. I don't follow it all as
yet.
However the basics of it seem simple, the Rainbow Octave is a 123 octave
like Ray of Creation discussed in ISOTM. The light source is poistive, the
prism is negative and the wall or whatever catching the rainbow image is
neutralizing.
This was important for me because it is the first small sclae example I've
seen worked out of an "involutionary" octave. I find I need these paractical
small-scale examples.
The article, which is quite detailed and looks at the significance of the
inner lines ,can be found as an appendix to Bennett's book on the enneagram
(as edited posthumously by Blake....um...I mean Bennett was dead not
Blake...anyway!)
There is also a worked out example by Bennett of a 231 octave, parallel to
what I called the "Legal Advice Octave". This deals with the training of a
singer and looks in moderate detaila t the inner lines.
Luv, J
Date:
Feb 25 2000 22:30:07 EST
From:
"jeremy dixon"
Subject:
Bread from Beelzebub.
Found another refinement octavement, courtesy of Mr G.
In the chapter "Beelzebub in America" in Book 3 of _Beelzebub's Tales_ the
triad of making (unleavened) bread is discussed, in such a way as to make
the octave easily sketched in. Its page 156 of the Dover paper back edition.
Flour, according to Beelzebub is Passive, Water Active, and Fire
Neutralizing. (He discusses this in the context of ways of preserving foods,
here he is talking of the preservation of water!)
Do is the flour. (Passive)
Re and Mi refer to the sifting and other preparation of the flour.
At =>Mi-Fa the water enters (Active)
At Fa the flour has been saturated with water, the flour and water are
"mixed".
At Sol the flour has been turned into bread dough, kneaded and shaped.
At =>Sol-Fa fire enters, the oven. (Neutralizing).
At Fa the bread is baked.
At Ti or "Si" it is cooled and ready for eating.
Its interesting to compare this octave to the Food Octave as given in detail
by Ouspensky (and in less overt detail by Gurdjieff in _Beelzebub_).....and
to the attempt to define a Distilling Octave. By the theory of triads we
have lately been assuming these are all of the
"Refining" triad, 213.
The point which really strikes me immediately is the relationship beteen the
Active and Neutralizing points. The Active point involves introducing water
and the Neutralizing point involves a partial loss of water in the baking
process. This strikes me because it is similar to one of the most puzzling
points of my proposed Distilling octave. That is the Active point involves
applying heat and the Neutralizing point involves removing heat(ie the
condensing chamber.) I'd have expected Active & Passive, not Active &
Neutralizing, to have this +/-
realtionship. But it does yield one interesting prediction, as in the Food
Diagram "Air" is the Active element. Could it be that the process of
self-remembering in its biochemical aspect involves a reduction reaction of
some sort? Bring on the biochemists!
Another thing, water is "hydrogen 384", right? Properly speaking the octave
should be at 384 at Mi to enable water to fuse with it. In what sense is
this so? It occurs to me that at Mi the sifted flour is properly speaking a
mixture of flour and air, I think, which may help explain it is arounf
"hydrogen 384" and thus able to mix with water. But that is just a first
pass at an answer to that one.
For leavened bread activated yeast would be added at =>Mi-Fa with the water.
The octave of the yeast would have already begun, and would unite with the
bread octave. The activated yeast might have been used for some other
purpose (such as brewing!)...so this is an area where forking octaves can be
looked at.
The Fa-Sol "phase change" is the transformation of flour into dough, not as
might have been expected the baking itself. I think this may be important in
understanding the nature of the "phase change".
I'm running out computer time so must go. But there is a lot more in this.
I hope we can spend some time looking at this stuff indetail1
Luv,
Jeremy
Date:
Feb 28 2000 06:26:05 EST
From:
Karl Starkweather
Subject:
Re: Bread from Beelzebub.
jeremy dixon wrote:
> Enneagram & Octave Discussion List - http://www.listbot.com/archive/octave
>
> Found another refinement octavement, courtesy of Mr G.
>
> In the chapter "Beelzebub in America" in Book 3 of _Beelzebub's Tales_ the
> triad of making (unleavened) bread is discussed, in such a way as to make
> the octave easily sketched in. Its page 156 of the Dover paper back edition.
>
> Flour, according to Beelzebub is Passive, Water Active, and Fire
> Neutralizing. (He discusses this in the context of ways of preserving foods,
> here he is talking of the preservation of water!)
>
> Do is the flour. (Passive)
>
> Re and Mi refer to the sifting and other preparation of the flour.
>
> At =>Mi-Fa the water enters (Active)
>
> At Fa the flour has been saturated with water, the flour and water are
> "mixed".
>
> At Sol the flour has been turned into bread dough, kneaded and shaped.
>
> At =>Sol-Fa fire enters, the oven. (Neutralizing).
>
> At Fa the bread is baked.
>
> At Ti or "Si" it is cooled and ready for eating.
>
Yes, I'd say you're right on target, although I'm not sure this octave actually
goes past Fa..
>
> Its interesting to compare this octave to the Food Octave as given in detail
> by Ouspensky (and in less overt detail by Gurdjieff in _Beelzebub_).....and
> to the attempt to define a Distilling Octave. By the theory of triads we
> have lately been assuming these are all of the
> "Refining" triad, 213.
>
Yes, it has been given that cooking of food is a process of refinement (some
have mistakenly jumped to the conclusion that the kitchen octave must also be
refinement)
>
> The point which really strikes me immediately is the relationship beteen the
> Active and Neutralizing points. The Active point involves introducing water
> and the Neutralizing point involves a partial loss of water in the baking
> process. This strikes me because it is similar to one of the most puzzling
> points of my proposed Distilling octave. That is the Active point involves
> applying heat and the Neutralizing point involves removing heat(ie the
> condensing chamber.) I'd have expected Active & Passive, not Active &
> Neutralizing, to have this +/-
> realtionship. But it does yield one interesting prediction, as in the Food
> Diagram "Air" is the Active element. Could it be that the process of
> self-remembering in its biochemical aspect involves a reduction reaction of
> some sort? Bring on the biochemists!
>
I think the point here is that the active force entering at point 3 brings
with it an element which does not continue with the octave, but has an immediate
effect and then returns to the environment. In the food diagram this simply
means that Oxygen does not continue up the scale, but releases energy which does
continue. Likewise with bread the water does not remain, but simply assists the
fusion of certain elements, then MUST be eliminated for the process to continue.
By the way, I don't know what Bennett has to say about this passage, but I
can tell you it contains many layers of meaning. Gurdjieff uses the word
"prosphora" to refer to bread. This is a Greek word used by the Orthodox church
to refer to the communion bread served in the liturgy (any churchgoing Russian
or Armenian would recognize the word as readily as a Greek). But the word
doesn't mean "bread", it means "sacrifice" or "offering" and signifies the Body
of Christ.
You could say that in this triad the active force (water in this case) is
sacrificed in order to continue the transformation of the passive force:
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for
if I go not away, the Helper will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will
send him unto you." (John 16:7).
This also relates to what is known as "Deputy Steward" in the creation of
"Real I", but this is taking me far afield of the topic at hand... basically
Beelzebub's claim is that by subjecting wheat to this refinement process, it is
changed into a substance that can better withstand the test of time. In my
experience raw wheat withstands the test of time better than cooked bread, which
suggests to me that this must be taken metaphorically, relating to the question
of immortality.
>
> Another thing, water is "hydrogen 384", right? Properly speaking the octave
> should be at 384 at Mi to enable water to fuse with it. In what sense is
> this so? It occurs to me that at Mi the sifted flour is properly speaking a
> mixture of flour and air, I think, which may help explain it is arounf
> "hydrogen 384" and thus able to mix with water. But that is just a first
> pass at an answer to that one.
>
I would let that one go if I were you. The scales of Hydrogens in the Food
Diagram are for the Food Diagram. This octave progresses from dry wheat, which
is H1536, to Bread, which is H768.
>
> The Fa-Sol "phase change" is the transformation of flour into dough, not as
> might have been expected the baking itself. I think this may be important in
> understanding the nature of the "phase change".
>
Another way to look at the "phase change" (which Beelzebub calls the
harnel-aoot) is that it is a unique "point of no return" for the octave. Before
it has been mixed with water, the flour can still be set on a shelf and the
octave resumed later, but once the dough is mixed (and even moreso once the
yeast has risen), the octave must continue without interruption to completion
Date:
Feb 28 2000 06:30:32 EST
From:
Karl Starkweather
Subject:
Taking it Literally
jeremy dixon wrote:
> Karl wrote:
>
> This process of organic life "feeding" the Moon is critical to the
> growth of the solar system because (it is thought) in time the influx of
> magnetic energy with allow the Moon to generate its own rotation (as it
> is, the Moon always shows the same side to the Sun, and thus has no
> rotation relative to it), and from there to possess it's own atmosphere,
> etc. In other words, allow the Moon to evolve into a planet."
>
> Hum. "Truth can reach the earth only in the form of lie". How literally this
> cosmology was meant to be taken is itself a question; certainly it is very
> clever and striking...and from all accounts Gurdjieff is unlikely to have
> himself invented it. In a number of areas the ideas Gurdjieff transmitted
> can be shown to be ahead of the mainstream science of his time, and I
> wouldn't rule out the possibility that his astronomy may also turn out to be
> ahead of its time.
>
>
> And I suspect that Nott was right in saying that Ouspensky "took it all too
> literally".
>
Hogwash.
But I think I see the problem.
I was in a bookstore recently and was HORRIFIED to see a notice
recommending Beelzebub's Tales as "a good place to start learning about
the ideas of Gurdjieff". Gurdjieff once said about that book that he
had buried the dog deeper, after which he was asked "you mean buried the
bone deeper?" and replied "No, the whole dog." Beelzebub's Tales is
advanced material and should only be read imo only AFTER one has
assimilated the ideas of the 4th Way the same way his students did; from
his lectures. And those lectures are recorded nowhere more faithfully
than by Ouspensky's In Search of The Miraculous. Gurdjieff himself
stated that Ouspensky's book captured "what I teach, exactly" (I'm not
sure where these quotes are, but their pretty close). Keep in mind
that Beelzebub's Tales was written for a specific purpose, namely to
"destroy, mercilessly...the beliefs and views...about everything
existing in the world." In other words it was written to put us off
balance, and is about as reliable a source for accurate cosmological
knowledge as the Holy Bible.
In his lectures however, Gurdjieff was constantly stressing the literal
materiality of his teaching, and I know of no quicker way to completely
castrate these ideas than taking them symbolically. They were meant to
show the role of organic life in the creation of the universe, in order
to explain why humanity is trapped in it's collective role, and the
forces we are bucking when we try to awaken. There is no symbolism
WHATSOEVER in the 4th Way material outside Beelzebub that I know of, and
that is precisely why the teaching is so unique. We are asleep - that's
not a metaphor... we are machines - that's not a metaphor... mankind is
food - that's not a metaphor!
Date:
Feb 28 2000 18:26:58 EST
From:
"jeremy dixon"
Subject:
Re: Taking it Literally
karl wrote in part (which is my formula for noting that I'm not marking
SNIPs) :
>Hogwash.
Hey, who wants dirty hogs?
Gurdjieff once said about that book that he
>had buried the dog deeper, after which he was asked "you mean buried the
>bone deeper?" and replied "No, the whole dog."
According to Bennett. And Bennett recommended engaging with with
_Beelzebub's Tales_. You should be aware that while the Collin lineage is
very respectful of Ouspensky, this assessment is by no means
uncontroversial. By other accounts Ouspensky is regarded as something of a
channel, transmitting the water but not drinking himself. For one
plainspoken expression of this attitude see the writings of CS Nott. For
more courteous expression see the writings of Bennett.
> Beelzebub's Tales is
>advanced material and should only be read imo only AFTER one has
>assimilated the ideas of the 4th Way the same way his students did; from
>his lectures. And those lectures are recorded nowhere more faithfully
>than by Ouspensky's In Search of The Miraculous. Gurdjieff himself
>stated that Ouspensky's book captured "what I teach, exactly" (I'm not
>sure where these quotes are, but their pretty close).
Not quite. On being read part of ISOTM Gurdjieff remarked that his words
were accurately reported. Not the same thing. Again, my memory is that this
is in Nott; and perhaps the rest of Nott should be read to provide context
for this.
There is a lot of Ouspensky in ISOTM, close reading will show that its
limpidity is something of an illusion. Though we do have Gurdjieff's
reported agreement that the sense of his lectures was well rendered, which
is useful; and the accounts of his lectures from other hands in "Views from
the Real World" to on the whole verify this.
While you may recommend that _Beelzebub_ be kept for the initiates;
Gurdjieff's recommendation to the contrary also deserves some weight.
The stuff on preserving foods in "Beelzebub in America" also refers, I
think, to the preservation of knowledge. If steps are not taken to preserve
it, its nutritional qualities decay. This may involve changing its form,
cooking it and covering it with a protective layer of fat, so to speak, as
descibed in "Beelzebub in America".
Keep in mind
>that Beelzebub's Tales was written for a specific purpose, namely to
>"destroy, mercilessly...the beliefs and views...about everything
>existing in the world." In other words it was written to put us off
>balance, and is about as reliable a source for accurate cosmological
>knowledge as the Holy Bible.
No doubt. And then again the Bible may be more reliable than we usually give
it credit for, if read properly. Look again at the first chapter of Genesis
for example.
> There is no symbolism
>WHATSOEVER in the 4th Way material outside Beelzebub that I know of, and
>that is precisely why the teaching is so unique. We are asleep - that's
>not a metaphor... we are machines - that's not a metaphor... mankind is
>food - that's not a metaphor!
As a matter of tedious fact, these are all metaphors (except for the last,
we are certainly food for worms!) 'Sleep' and 'machine' have ordinary
meanings and Gurdjieff was giving them new meanings which refer to the
normal ones without being the same. Actually, as Gurdjieff with his
linguistic interests knew, metaphor is inescapable in applying language.
As to the literal nature of the cosmology...."He who has not a critical mind
is wasting his time here". It is allowable, said Gurdjieff, for a teacher to
lie to his pupils. Beware.
Luv, Jeremy