5

Gurdjieff to the Early 1930s

5.1  Introduction

There is no evidence that Gurdjieff used methods of Transformed-​contemplation

while at the Prieuré, but there is a significant account of his giving mental tasks
(for my definition of “tasks” see Section 0.2). Tchechovitch recalls that at the
Prieuré:

In the morning, after breakfast, we would head off to the work we had been
assigned. . . . One time we were asked to carry out mathematical operations
while using, in the place of numbers, sixteen feminine names. Instead of saying
16 minus 12 equals 4, for example, we had to say Nina minus Adèle gives Marie,
or that Marie multiplied by Nina gives Lily-​Marie, meaning 64. When we were
together at our tasks, one of us had to propose an arithmetical operation in time
with a certain rhythm. On the following measure, the others were to respond
according to the proposed rule. Then it was the next person’s turn and so on. . . .
The feminine names could just as well be replaced by colors, opera titles, var-
ious objects, gestures, or whatever.1

Students also memorized Tibetan words, Morse code, and Gurdjieff ’s new
script.2 These tasks were engaged in simultaneously with other activities, in the
social domain of life. The “Prospectus” had, after all, promised “Special exercises
for the development of the memory, will, attention, thinking, perception, etc.”3
This is reminiscent of the idea that Gurdjieff attributes to Yelov of studying lan-
guages while working, to occupy his mind with something useful and to prevent
his thought from interfering with other functions.4 Orage was to systematically
develop these techniques into what I have called “disciplines” (see Section 0.2),
and then sought to fashion exercises for the will. Thus, Gurdjieff ’s own pupil may
have nudged him toward the development of exercises.

5.2  Orage’s Psychological Exercises

In Section 1.5, we considered Orage’s career with Gurdjieff and how his publi-
cation of Psychological Exercises in 1930 had angered Gurdjieff. The book itself

Gurdjieff. Joseph Azize, Oxford University Press (2020). © Oxford University Press.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190064075.001.0001
116  Gurdjieff’s Contemplative Exercises

is in two parts: exercises and the fifteen essays. Both the exercises in the first
part of the book and the essays in the second exhibit clear continuity with the
tasks Gurdjieff employed at the Prieuré, and his teaching. Hence three of Orage’s
exercises read:

23. Recite the numbers 1–​100, a. ascending, b. descending.

For numbers divisible by three say Tom.
ʺ   ʺ   ʺ    ʺ four ʺ Dick.
ʺ   ʺ   ʺ    ʺ five  ʺ Harry.
24. Tom is 1, Dick is 2, Harry is 3.  Recite the numbers a. ascending,
b. descending,—​substituting these names where required.
Tom, Dick, Harry 4.5.6.7.8.9. Tom 0, Tom-​Tom, Tom-​Dick,
Tom-​Harry, Tom-​4  . . . 
25. The same where Tom is 2, Dick 5, and Harry 7.5

Webb correctly states that these exercises were based on Gurdjieff ’s principles
and were “designed to flex the unused muscles of the mind.”6 In his introduc-
tion, Orage stated that there are deficiencies in modern education, and that these
defects leave us unable to meet and solve the challenges raised by “a changing
civilization” and to advance science.7 Orage’s aspirations, then, were bold. He
avers that the exercises in the book have been tried over some time, with people
of varying ages, and the results vetted. The exercises have been found effective in
increasing problem-​solving abilities, and while acknowledging that the training
“is still in the pioneer stage,” he expresses significant confidence in these unique
methods.8 At the least, Orage was referring to his own groups, but he may have
been also alluding to the Prieuré. However, his psychological meetings ceased at
some unknown time due to poor attendance (see Section 1.5).
The exercises are subdivided into “simple,” “with numbers,” “with words,”
“with a verse,” “psychological,” and “miscellaneous.” The first of the simple
exercises is to count down from one hundred to zero, while the fourth demands
one answer as quickly as possible what day of the week and what day of the
month it is. The tenth and final exercise inquires as to the difference between
an odd and an even number.9 The exercises with numbers generally require the
rapid recitation of series of numbers, regularly ascending or descending in twos,
threes, fours, and so on, and then mixing the different series so that one might al-
ternately ascend or descend in different series (e.g., counting 2, 3, 98, 97, 4, 6, 96,
94, 6, 9, 94, 91, and so on).10
The exercises with words often require the conversion of words into numbers
(e.g., “an” becomes 1.14), reading mirror writing, recalling dictation, or reading
and spelling passages backwards.11 The verse exercises begin with something
simple, such as “Jack and Jill.” After counting first the number of words, then of
 Gurdjieff to the Early 1930s  117

letters, one progresses to numbering each word (e.g., 1 Jack, 2 and, 3 Jill), reciting
only the first and last letters of each word and so on, until a second rhyme is
selected (e.g., “Mary had a little lamb”) and one line from each rhyme is alter-
nately recited.12
Then follows a Gurdjieff-​based diagram, charting “thought” above “emotion”
and “sensation,” and showing the distinction between pleasant and unpleasant
emotions. This is used to explain certain fundamental concepts—​for example,
“Thinking pre-​ supposes Imagination; Imagination pre-​ supposes Memory;
Memory pre-​supposes Sensation; and Sensation pre-​supposes and external
world as the original source of sense-​impressions.”13 There then follow tests for
sense-​impressions (e.g., to scan a surface, close one’s eyes, and recall in detail what
was seen). Sensory impressions are cultivated by various means (e.g., preparing
a range of scents and having the students distinguish and classify them).14 That
sort of idea is repeated with all the senses, being—​in this schema—​sight, hearing,
smell, taste, touch, bodily states, and bodily movements.15 The miscellaneous
exercises, what I would call “tasks,” offer a variation on Ouspensky’s exercise of
watching a watch hand move while being conscious of oneself: The exercitant is
to be aware of the moving hand only, while reciting a familiar verse such as “Jack
and Jill.”16
The fifteen essays had earlier been published, in 1925, by Munson when he
was editor of the popular magazine Psychology.17 Munson was quite taken by the
essays, as were Orage’s friends and students, finding that they harmonized with
the contents of his Gurdjieff group meetings. For example, Carol Robinson said
that many of the group members had wanted to attend the classes based on them
but could not afford them; she copied sections of them and posted them to Jane
Heap, then residing on the Continent.18 But they aroused little other interest until
they were republished in 1953 and marketed as The Active Mind.19 The first essay,
“How to Think,” repeats the hand-​watching exercise, with some elaborations.20
The second, “The Control of Temper,” recommends having the correct attitude—​
that is, that negative emotions are an illness—​and then neither to think about
nor feel the supposed grievance, but rather to sense one’s physical state only (the
skin, the tension of the muscles, and so on).21 These ideas are all pure Gurdjieff. It
is doubtful that Orage could have conceived and then formulated them so clearly
but for Ouspensky and Gurdjieff, and yet perhaps Orage alone could have put
them so concisely and almost sweetly. The essays, then, show something of what a
first-​class writer could make of Gurdjieff ’s system. Why was Gurdjieff unhappy?
The book did not meet expectations when it was published in New York.22
Perhaps without an ongoing commitment to such exercises (for example, in
one of Orage’s groups), they would just be curiosities, and abstruse curiosities at
that. Yet, it makes interesting reading today, for the ideas and outlooks are good,
sometimes very good, and Orage’s prose is always clear, precise, and pleasant.
118  Gurdjieff’s Contemplative Exercises

Unlike the exercises Gurdjieff was later to teach, there was nothing in them
about attempting to remember oneself during them. However, it is difficult to im-
agine that Gurdjieff had not known of Orage’s experiments, since the essays had
been printed in 1925 and were known to his Gurdjieff students, and the psycho-
logical exercises began in 1927. There is positive reason to think that Gurdjieff
did know, hence, on May 13, 1930, that Orage said to his group, concerning the
Third Obligolnian Striving (see Section 2.1):

This is not necessarily a visible activity, or concrete work, but it is effort.

Obligation of this kind is to keep one’s self exercising—​effort-​making. Perhaps
before January I can make you a scale of exercises of will, from the scale of the
mouse to the elephant. These would not be exercises of mind but of developing
will, which is the ability to carry out whims. I have received a suggestion from
Gurdjieff which makes this possible.23

So, while the evidence is less than conclusive, it does seem that Orage was
working in tandem with Gurdjieff on this line of research, and publication. He
had spoken with him about furthering it by devising a series of exercises for the
will—​that is, for the ability to “do,” in Gurdjieff ’s terms. Some light is shed on
this by consideration of one particular essay, “On Dying Daily,” which I term a
“discipline,” being more sustained than a “task” but not so complex as an exer-
cise, as it does not use the feeling and body, and is not aimed at digesting higher
substances (see Section 0.2).

5.3  Orage’s “On Dying Daily”

This essay is based on the premise that “If the moment for a pictorial review of
life is death, the moment for a pictorial review of the day is sleep.”24 Orage refers
first to the reports of drowning people whose lives are “unrolled before [them]
in pictures,” impersonally and impartially, without commentary. These show, he
says, that the impressions of life are not lost, and suggest that we can learn from
the change of consciousness associated with the approach of death to take advan-
tage of the change of consciousness associated with sleep. The critical point is to
make an impartial, pictorial, daily review consciously.25
The knowledge that we would be making such a nightly review, says
Orage, leads us to be more attentive during the day. Then, the more imper-
sonal it is, the more it provides us with self-​knowledge, for we see ourselves
as others do, and, better perceiving our own faults, we acquire tolerance of
others. The final promised benefit is an increase in strength of mind, will,
and concentration.26
 Gurdjieff to the Early 1930s  119

Orage suggests a method: First, establish a rhythmic count (e.g., 2, 4, 6, 8, 10,

and then descending) and start to see yourself as you were that day, “exactly as
if you were unwinding a film,” commencing from when you awoke. Orage’s ra-
tionale is that “counting occupies the thinking brain and thus naturally allows
the pictorial memory to work more easily. . . . Thinking not only impedes the pic-
torial representation but it subtly but surely falsifies the pictures.”27 This is redo-
lent of Yelov’s advice (see Section 5.1). Orage avers that many have worked at this
discipline and found that it starts to proceed almost of itself; further, it will help
us sleep better since both “brain-​thinking” and “emotional thinking” (i.e., wor-
rying) keep us awake.28
This method was used by Jane Heap, who taught it to Kathryn Hulme in 1928.
Heap’s explanation referred to “the cinema of one’s life,” wherein drowning
people had found all their memories were recorded; this could be used “con-
sciously” for an impersonal and pictorial review.29 The discipline made a massive
difference to the success of Hulme’s writing. Overjoyed, she reflected: “I have al-
ways believed that if an unknown man named Gurdjieff had not told someone,
who told someone else, who finally told me, how to unroll the reels and look at
the shadows of forgotten selves buried in the unconscious memory, there would
never have been that [success].”30
There is no direct evidence that the person who learned from Gurdjieff and told
Heap must have been Orage, but given Heap’s friendship with Orage, it is much
the likeliest hypothesis. As it happens, a similar discipline is twice mentioned
by Iamblichus as being a Pythagorean technique.31 In the first instance, the
Pythagorean task is given as performed on waking up and then reviewing the
previous day, but in the second it is presented as an evening’s review of the day.
Given the evidence of Gurdjieff ’s knowledge of Neoplatonism (see Section 3.3),
coincidental devising of an almost identical method is not plausible.
Gurdjieff did not appear in Russia in 1911 with an entire panoply of methods
and exercises. But he did have principles, and these allowed him to fashion
instruments as he saw a need. It seems likely that Orage’s experiments showed
Gurdjieff a need and indicated the direction of the solution. He was continuing
a trajectory Gurdjieff had initiated and did it so well that it gained a new mo-
mentum. Heap continued to teach the “dying daily” exercise, as did Annie-​Lou
Staveley, her pupil.32

5.4  The Herald of Coming Good

I shall delay consideration of the 1931 edition of Beelzebub until Chapter  6,

as it benefits from comparison with the 1950 publication. The earlier edition
preceded Gurdjieff ’s booklet The Herald of Coming Good, which was meant to
120  Gurdjieff’s Contemplative Exercises

prepare a path in the wilderness for that book. Herald does not enjoy an envi-
able reputation as literature, an opinion Gurdjieff perhaps shared, for within
a year of its release he “repudiated [it] and [had it] withdrawn from circula-
tion.”33 Webb wrote that, in some respects at least, it was “confusing,” showed
“symptoms of paranoia,” and at times was “deliberately boastful,” and although
it purported to provide a “skeleton chronology,” it was too ambiguous to be of
value.34 Webb avers:

The style and the presentation were intimidating. The prose was, if anything,
more rambling and less consequential than that of Beelzebub’s Tales. Gurdjieff
now had no Orage to structure his sentences for him, and an uninitiated
reader . . . might well be forgiven for thinking that at best he had stumbled on
the folly of a peculiar monomaniac.35

To an extent, the difficulty of Gurdjieff ’s prose, both here and elsewhere, is a

function of his basic principle that one had to struggle to hear his ideas and to
understand them (see Section 1.1). This, however, fails to explain the tone, which
is often simply off-​putting, for example referring to his pupils as “trained and
freely moving ‘Guinea Pigs’, allotted to me by Destiny for my experiments.”36 To
some extent, Gurdjieff will have erred in judgment, and to an extent, Ouspensky
may have been correct to say: “All great men have their weaknesses. G.’s weak-
ness was his conviction that he could write if he wished—​the very thing he could
not do.”37
The booklet was intended to achieve two related goals: to raise money for his
projects, not the least the revival of the Institute, and to arouse interest in the
publication of Gurdjieff ’s All and Everything, comprising three series of writings
in ten books:  Beelzebub, Meetings, and Life Is Real.38 Despite later assertions
that it was intended to promote Beelzebub alone, the contents show that that
was clearly not the case.39 To this end, the book included seven “registration
blanks.” The first page of blanks was headed “for a preliminary subscription
to the books of the first series” and included questions such as how registrants
knew of Gurdjieff ’s ideas, and whether they were in one of the groups.40 This is a
fairly clear indication that not only did Gurdjieff hope to obtain a significant sub-
scription in advance of publication, but that he hoped to be able to follow it up
through organized groups.
Gurdjieff therefore had great hopes for his Herald: He had expended a sig-
nificant sum of money on it, at a time when he was so short of funds that he
had endangered his base at the Prieuré.41 He asked his pupil C. S. Nott to send
it to everyone interested in his ideas. When Nott asked whether this included
Ouspensky’s pupils, Gurdjieff said yes; however, “the silence of its reception was
almost deafening,” and Ouspensky had his pupils’ copies destroyed.42
 Gurdjieff to the Early 1930s  121

According to Webb, Gurdjieff ’s American pupils, then his main body, were
shocked by the revelations that Gurdjieff had been a professional hypnotist, and
his candid avowal of having used them (his pupils) for his own ends, with the re-
sult that “its appearance in the spring of 1933 coincided with the biggest exodus
of his American pupils.”43 Ouspensky conjectured from it that Gurdjieff had ac-
quired syphilis and gone mad.44 Not only did the reaction to this booklet so un-
nerve Gurdjieff that he had it withdrawn, it seems to have also been the cause of
his decision to delay the publication of Beelzebub.45
I would conjecture that Gurdjieff needed, at this point, to persuade people to
assist him, and for this he needed both an element of continuity (as his target
audience was those who were interested in his ideas) and also one of disconti-
nuity (as his closing of the Institute and unpredictability had disillusioned many
people). There is a tension between these two desiderata, which required good
judgment to resolve. Just when Gurdjieff needed to be clearer, he opted to be
even more opaque and eccentric. The only conclusion is the one he himself came
to: With this booklet, he had miscalculated.
If Gurdjieff ’s state of mind was, indeed, disturbed when he wrote Herald, this
might explain why, together with the meanderings and obscurities, there are
sections that seem candid and unguarded, or at least make assertions to which
he consistently held—​for example, the oath made in 1912, which was probably
not to use hypnotism to achieve his ends, and his plans for the revived Institute.46
Lipsey is of the view that some of its contents are not only valuable but essential
for understanding Gurdjieff ’s program.47 Nott conceded that “The long, almost
interminable sentences make it difficult to read, let alone understand”; however,
he adds that “even in its rough, uncut form truth glows through.”48 Significantly,
in his eight-​page summary of Herald, Nott omits any reference to Transformed-​
contemplation, which is further reason to believe that Gurdjieff had not, at this
point of his life, been teaching it; otherwise Nott would probably have noticed it.

5.5  Transformed-​Contemplation

As indicated, some of Herald is lucid—​for example, this passage, which we can

take as our starting point:

The modern man does not think, but something thinks for him; he does not act,
but something acts through him; he does not create, but something is created
through him; he does not achieve, but something is achieved through him.49

Each phrase here has clear meaning. He continues: We receive impressions in our
thinking, feeling, and moving brains, and these give rise to associations that elicit
122  Gurdjieff’s Contemplative Exercises

our imagined conscious thought, behavior, and planning.50 The language, so

far merely prolix, now becomes rather cloudier. As I understand him, Gurdjieff
states that there are three types of impression possible for us: The first two are
impressions caused by the external world, and impressions in which previously
received associations mix with impressions of the external or internal world. For
example, Ouspensky noted that impressions of smell cannot be directly received
by the intellectual center, only by the instinctive.51 However, once the instinctive
center has received the impression, then other centers (e.g., the intellectual and
emotional) can respond to it, providing, I suggest, an example of mixed external
and internal impressions.
But the most significant category of impressions for our purposes is the
final category, that which “originates exclusively from the process of so-​called
‘transformed-​contemplation’ ” [my italics].52 As we saw in Section 2.7, Gurdjieff
placed some weight on the idea of three foods (ordinary eatables and drink, air,
and impressions) and the concept that their conscious ingestion and metabolism
would lead to the formation of what he called “higher-​being-​bodies.”
Gurdjieff returned to impressions when he offered what seems to be a def-
inition of Transformed-​contemplation as “the confrontation of homogeneous
impressions of all origins, which were already fixed, while continuous contact is
maintained between their inner and separate centers.”53
The essential element of this equation is placed at the end: There is a sus-
tained attention given simultaneously to mind, feeling, and body. This, I sug-
gest, is one of two possible grounds of criticism of Orage’s exercises; first, that
they did not exercise three centers at once, and second, that they do not call one
to sense their presence. In my terms, they were “tasks” or, at most, “disciplines.”
Of course, this charge could also be leveled at the exercises given at the Prieuré.
It seems that experience had shown Gurdjieff the value of expanding his pre-
vious methods.
In Herald, Transformed-​contemplation also requires a certain knowledge
and system—​which is what I understand by the reference to fixed “homog-
enous impressions.” That is, Gurdjieff grandiloquently refers to something
that has been learned and now guides or informs the attention: This is, I sug-
gest, the “confrontation” in question. The homogeneity of the impressions
may also mean that the impressions in question are from the higher range
of possible impressions, for there is an entire range of impressions from H48
through H3.54
Gurdjieff does not explain much of the theoretical background in Herald, but
he had told Ouspensky that while we cannot feed on higher nourishment and air
than what the body now feeds on, we can receive higher impressions, and so it is
these that will facilitate the better work of the alchemical factory that the human
organism is:
 Gurdjieff to the Early 1930s  123

[One] can improve his impressions to a very high degree and in this way in-
troduce fine “hydrogens” into the organism. It is precisely on this that the
possibility of evolution is based. A man is not at all obliged to feed on the full
impressions of H48, he can have both H24, H12, and H6, and even H3.55

Thus far, what Gurdjieff has written in Herald about Transformed-​

contemplation is consistent with what he had earlier taught. The Russian
teaching also elucidates what is meant by “confrontation” here:  It is “con-
frontation  .  .  .  while continuous contact is maintained between their inner
and separate centers.”56 To Ouspensky, Gurdjieff had said that we live as a du-
ality, full of inner conflicts—​for example, “Thoughts oppose feelings. Moving
impulses oppose instinctive craving for quiet.”57 This can be changed if we
first destroy our self-​deceit and conviction that our mechanical actions are
conscious, and we ourselves are now “single and whole.”58 This undeceiving of
ourselves will be productive if we oppose to our automatic nature: “a definite
decision, coming from conscious motives, against mechanical processes.”59 He
goes on to say:

The development of the human machine and the enrichment of being begins
with a new and unaccustomed functioning of this machine. We know that a
man has five centers: the thinking, the emotional, the moving, the instinctive,
and the sex. The predominant development of any one center at the expense of
the others produces an extremely one-​sided type of man, incapable of further
development. But if a man brings the work of the five centers within him into
harmonious accord, he then “locks the pentagram within him” and becomes a
finished type of the physically perfect man. The full and proper functioning of
five centers brings them into union with the higher centers which introduce the
missing principle and put man into direct and permanent connection with ob-
jective consciousness and objective knowledge.60

Here Gurdjieff speaks of five centers. Later, he will tend to speak of three,
leaving the instinctive and sex centers aside, for the sake of clearer exposition.
The point is that Transformed-​contemplation requires the three centers to come
into a harmonious engagement: I would also suggest that it is precisely in this en-
gagement or confrontation that Transformed-​contemplation acquires the char-
acter of an exercise, something requiring the sustained inner effort of intention
and attention.
But why Transformed-​contemplation? I  suggest that the first point is that
Gurdjieff wished to distinguish it from contemplation simpliciter. Thus, later in
Herald, he criticizes the techniques for “self-​training and self-​development” that
have appeared and that “recommend definite methods and processes, such as
124  Gurdjieff’s Contemplative Exercises

various physical exercises, exercises in meditation and concentration, breathing

exercises, various systems of diet.”61
Then there is the issue of the word “transformed.” What is actually
transformed: the person undertaking it, the contemplation, or both, or some-
thing else? I suggest it is something of both, for the concern is the state of con-
sciousness. Gurdjieff states:

One of the three states of consciousness, which, in the objective sense, is

considered the highest and most desirable for man, reposes exclusively on
associations of previously perceived impressions of the third category only.62

As this third category of impressions is the fruit of Transformed-​contemplation,

it would seem to follow that the exercitants are themselves transformed in that a
higher state of consciousness becomes available to them. Gurdjieff then speaks
about how poor a life it is to have only the lower states of consciousness. However,
it may yet be that one could think of the contemplation as “transformed” in that
it is not contemplation as we know it. In Herald, using the identical terms em-
ployed in the Institute Prospectus (see Section 4.5), Gurdjieff was quite critical
of known meditative and contemplative methods.63 It may not be too bold to say
that, by the time he came to write Herald, Gurdjieff had decided that some con-
templative technique was necessary, and that it would need to be adapted to the
needs and condition of each individual.

Notes

1. Tchekhovitch (2006) 118–​119 corrected by reference to Tchechovitch (2003) 254–​

255. The English “translation” is once more simply mendacious.
2. Webb (1980) 239.
3. Gurdjieff (unpublished) 9; see Section 4.5.
4. Gurdjieff (1963) 117.
5. Orage (1998) 15.
6. Webb (1980) 309.
7. Orage (1998) 7.
8. Orage (1998) 8.
9. Orage (1998) 9–​10.
10. Orage (1998) 11–​18.
11. Orage (1998) 19–​30.
12. Orage (1998) 31–​36.
13. Orage (1998) 37–​38.
14. Orage (1998) 39–​51.
15. Orage (1998) 37.
 Gurdjieff to the Early 1930s  125

16. Orage (1998) 52, cf. Ouspensky (1950) 19.

17. Munson (1985) 259. Munson does not name the magazine, but Taylor (2001) 98 does.
18. Copies of unpublished letters kindly made available to me by Barbara Todd Smyth.
19. Munson (1985) 259.
20. Orage (1998) 61–​64.
21. Orage (1998) 65–​68.
22. Webb (1980) 365.
23. Orage (2016) 375.
24. Orage (1998) 105.
25. Orage (1998) 105–​106.
26. Orage (1998) 106–​107.
27. Orage (1998) 107.
28. Orage (1998) 108.
29. Hulme (1997) 39.
30. Hulme (1997) 43.
31. Iamblichus (1991) 179 and 249.
32. Heap (1994) 20 and 36 and personal knowledge of Mrs. Staveley and her teaching.
33. Bennett (1973) 1.
34. Webb (1980) 27, 45, 76–​77, and 420. Moore (1991) 247–​248 writes to like effect.
35. Webb (1980) 427.
36. Gurdjieff (1933) 22.
37. Patterson (2014) 518.
38. The most incisive and insightful analysis is still that of Bennett (1973) 90 and
180–​181.
39. Gurdjieff (1933) 33–​53. Characteristically, Webb (1980) 426–​427 does not misstate a
single fact, but Moore (1991) 247 does.
40. Gurdjieff (1933) unnumbered pages at the end.
41. Nott (1969) 59; Webb (1980) 422–​427; Taylor (2008) 276–​277.
42. Nott (1969) 59.
43. Webb (1980) 427.
44. Moore (1991) 249.
45. Webb (1980) 428–​429. That the shock caused by Herald led Gurdjieff to postpone
the appearance of Beelzebub is my own inference from the fact that Herald had been
intended to whet appetites for Beelzebub’s imminent release. No other conclusion
seems available.
46. Webb (1980) 91, plus Gurdjieff (1975) 25, and Bennett (1973) 148 and 180.
47. Lipsey (2019) 27.
48. Nott (1969) 60.
49. Gurdjieff (1933) 31.
50. Gurdjieff (1933) 31–​32.
51. Ouspensky (1949) 227.
52. Gurdjieff (1933) 32.
53. Gurdjieff (1933) 32.
54. Ouspensky (1949) 321.
126  Gurdjieff’s Contemplative Exercises

55. Ouspensky (1949) 321.

56. Gurdjieff (1933) 32.
57. Ouspensky (1949) 281.
58. Ouspensky (1949) 282.
59. Ouspensky (1949) 282.
60. Ouspensky (1949) 282.
61. Gurdjieff (1933) 35–​36.
62. Gurdjieff (1933) 32.
63. Gurdjieff (1933) 35–​36.