G.I.Gurdjieff

Distinguishing degrees of materiality allows us to examine the relation between man’s functions and the planes of the universe. The principal difference between the centers is that they work with substances of different materiality. The thinking center is the slowest of the three lower centers, operating with a substance on the level of world 48. The moving center works faster with a substance of world 24 that is many times lighter and more mobile. The feeling center can work with a substance of world 12, an even lighter material, although in practice it very rarely does so. The higher feeling center works with a substance of world 12, and the higher thinking center with a substance of world 6. As discussed above, the different degrees of materiality explain why the
higher centers cannot be connected with the lower. In order to obtain a correct and invariable connection between the lower and the higher centers, it is necessary to regulate and quicken the work of the lower centers.

On an individual basis man serves as an apparatus for development pursuant to the Law of Octaves. Nature made us for a certain purpose—to evolve. We eat not just for ourselves but for an outside purpose, because food cannot evolve by itself without our help. We eat bread, and also take in air and impressions, each of which then develops according to the Law of Octaves. Bread enters as do, which contains the possibility and momentum to rise to re and mi without help. But it cannot become fa unless it is mixed with air, which brings energy needed to pass a difficult interval. After that, it needs no help until it reaches si, but it then can go no further by itself. Our aim is to help this octave to completion. Si is the highest point in ordinary animal life, and is the matter from which a new body can be formed.

Our evolution is the evolution of our consciousness. And “consciousness” cannot evolve unconsciously. It is the evolution of our will, and “will” cannot evolve unwillingly. It is the evolution of our power of doing, and “doing” cannot be the result of things that are simply “done.”

THERE ARE, SO TO SPEAK, two lines along which our development proceeds: the line of knowledge and the line of being.

The most characteristic feature of modern man is the absence of inner unity, along with a complete lack of those traits we most like to ascribe to ourselves, that is, “lucid consciousness,” “free will,” an “invariable ‘I,’ ” and the “ability to ‘do.’

Developing only the line of knowledge creates someone who knows quite a lot but is unable to do anything, a person who does not understand what he knows, who is without appreciation and does not distinguish between one kind of knowledge and another. On the other hand, someone who develops only along the line of being and disregards knowledge has the
capacity to do a great deal but has no idea what to do or why. This person would do whatever his subjective feelings happen to dictate, which may lead him greatly astray and cause him to commit grave mistakes. In either case, both knowledge and being are brought to a standstill, and neither can develop any further.

Understanding depends upon the relation of knowledge to being. It is the mean or resultant of knowledge and being. Knowledge and being should always remain about equal because if one gets too far ahead of the other, then understanding will turn out to be further removed from both. At the same time, the relation of knowledge to being does not change merely with the growth of knowledge. It changes only when being grows simultaneously in tandem. In other words, understanding grows only if being also develops.

The difference between knowledge and understanding becomes clear when we realize that knowledge may be the function of one center, whereas understanding is the function of three centers.

It is possible for the thinking part alone to know something about a given phenomenon, but understanding appears only when we feel the emotional aspect of it and the sensations connected with it.

Only the idea of cosmoses can provide a firm basis for the laws of relativity, on which real science and philosophy should be based. Indeed, it is possible to say that science and philosophy, in the true meaning of these terms, begin with the idea of cosmoses.