Gurdjieff and slavery….
I accept the challenge to the statement that Gurdjieff approved of slavery. I will try to find the Bennett book on that. If Gurdjieff had any liberal sentiments let’s hear them.
But I think that what I am saying is true in the same way it is true of Nietzsche, sort of. Anyone proceeding down the exile path of the Whites to escape the revolution is a dead ringer. Gurdjieff was among the reactionaries. In general these people use the thematic of the ‘masters’ without the slaves after it. Disciples is far more comforting. The overall verdict is not doubt murky, but it is clear that he was content for the Russian peasant to be as he was. C’mon. That’s just grotesque. But you are right: he could do a dialectic and was actually critical of Ouspensky’s support of Indian cast law. The latter is one of the gross evils of the G movement. How could Ouspensky have fallen for such putrid horrors.
All these new age gurus are having a hard time with modernity, but it is a strategic error that will bring down the new age movement.
Students of Gurdjieff should be exceedingly wary they don’t become slaves of the master, to use the correct ugly phrase. One you have agreed to surrender he will find you in your next life, and attempt control without your awareness. A dreadful plight. Never surrender to such people.
Enlightened buddhas are different: they must finally help you to reach enlightenment (maybe). Figures like Gurdjieff can wish to control a whole flock of slaves over many lifetimes. They have no enlightenment to offer, and must hoarde the energy of ‘consciousness’ they extract from their ‘slaves in the work’.
Osho was very cagy here: he saw that spiritual movements had to drop the past and he tried to cast his gaze on modernity at many points.