"In Search of the Miraculous: Fragments of an Unknown Teaching" by P. D. Ouspensky

I approached this book with skepticism, based on my previous knowledge and readings about Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, their lives and their (pitiful) deaths. However, after the first few dozen pages, I started to get more and more interested and involved in the material. It was something that you obviously deviates from the standard 'New Age' teaching, both in form and in function, and it actually sounded like something that could be true. Of course, there was plenty of borrowings from Theosophy, especially about the cosmology of the world and the organization of the 'higher planes' for which I couldn't care less. Things like 'The Ray of Creation' , the 'Law of Octaves', the angels and archangels that govern each plane did not interest me the least, since their practical value in modifying my life and everyday experience was next to none. Nowadays I judge the teachings by their fruits, not by how elegant and elaborate they are, but by how do the improve the quality of my life.

The teachings about 'self-remembering', self-observation, intentional suffering, about the fact that humans are machines, always under the Law of Accident, that they cannot do anything of their own free will, because they have none, they are asleep, constantly in a lucid dream where they only think they are free, but in fact all they do is caused by external influences and accident; these teachings resonate strongly, almost as if becoming aware of The Matrix. Also here we must mention the teachings about the complete mechanicalness of the human-machine, and the fact that no one is born with higher bodies, and they have to be earned by hard work, and the right kind of work, otherwise nothing outlast the death of the physical body, the dust returns to the dust from which it was created and the machine disappears, with no trace or any kind of entity outliving it. This discouraging view resonates much more truthfully than the fairytale teachings of most New Age groups, and is almost the same as the teachings found within Peter Carroll's Chaos Magick, i.e. humans are not born with a soul, they have to work hard all their lives to create a soul, which might have a fleeting chance of eternal life or even only outliving the death of the physical body for a certain period of time.

The teachings of Gurdjieff also bear close semblance to the teachings of Castaneda's Don Juan, especially in the parts about self-remembering, and the lack of self-consciousness or self-awareness in humans. Don Juan says that the human consciousness is eaten by creatures from other planes, which Gurdjieff is saying that it is being sucked by the Moon, which uses it to become a planet itself, while reducing the meaning of human existence to yet another parasite whose by-product is useful to the wider world in general, much like the oceanic fito-plancton which produces oxygen. While these claims might be classified as outrageous or bombastic by people who like to believe in their own special and privileged place in the universe the ladder of living beings (as all major religions teach), it does infuse a refreshing perspective that is not egocentric and megalomaniac, and while the exact metaphors used might not be extremely accurate, the significance might be.

Further similarities between Gurdjieff's system and Castanedas 'Tensegrity' can be found in both teacher's insistence on use of moves for achieving higher states of consciousness. Castaneda has his 'Magical Passes' while Gurdjieff has the 'Sacred Dances' both being used for raising one's awareness and focusing attention. Similarities to Osho's system have been pointed as well, though Osho places much more emphasis on traditional systems like Yoga, Tantra and Buddhism. However, while Osho had no problem revealing and describing his system in great detail and with minute explanations, so that the greatest number of people can understand and practice it, neither Castaneda, and even less Gurdjieff did this, but quite the opposite. Gurdjieff was especially cryptic, and always let the students know that he is not telling them everything, which some people have equated with insincerity, even sadism, to complement many methods that Gurdjieff recommended to his students, which would look like masochism to an outside observer. Gurdjieff even goes further by saying that it is neither possible nor desirable to initiate many people in his system and thus increase their awareness, since then the initial purpose of the human beings of being parasitic converters of energy for the moon would be damaged. This goes in stark contrast to all major religions which claim salvation is for everyone and that spiritual evolution is the ultimate goal for all human beings.

Critics point out that after the demise of the teachers, both Castaneda's and Gurdjieff's teachings have not produced new enlightened followers and teachers, but have mostly fallen into obscurity, which is true and disturbing, as no matter how truthful and powerful one teaching sounds , if it is being unable to enlighten the students and bring them to the level of the teacher eventually, then it is useless, and becomes just another exciting fairytale. It is questionable that even Gurdjieff's best student, Jean De Saltzman, who died in 1990 at an age of 101, has achieved the permanent 'objective consciousness' which Gurdjieff pointed out is the goal of his teaching on individual level. It is a pity that Gurdjieff never wrote a clear and complete explanation of his teachings, both theoretical and practical, but left it to the students to record and publish scraps, bits and pieces, and supplemented that with convoluted, unreadable books like 'The Tales of Belzebub to his Grandson'. He pointed many times that the teachings are 'out there' and people either have no interest or capability to understand them, but in the same time never published a single clearly written book of his own teachings that would be 'out there' for the people to try to understand, but fall back into the errors of the teachers and teachings of the time past, wrapping it with allegories and metaphors for the 'initiated'.

It is a pity that even in the modern day people still fall back to methods of secrecy and allegories, as did the Pythagoreans and alchemists, the latter having good reason, fearing the persecution of the Church, while the former doing it from pure egotism and vanity, thus retarding mathematics for hundreds of years, and even resorting to murder like in the case of Hippasus of Metapontum. This insistence on secrecy and 'veiled knowledge' serves only to increase the egos and sense of exclusivity for those who think they have it, and is just as ridiculous as the Theosophist's paralyzing fear of developing 'powers' that can be used for evil. Secrecy and allegories are, and should be things of the past. All knowledge should be exposed clearly and comprehensively for the evaluation, acceptance or rejection by all of the human community, and until all self-appointed teachers and self-righteous students accept this, we will all continue to live in our own squalid little matrices.

"In the Line of Fire: A Memoir" by Pervez Musharraf

This is a very interesting book to read right now (December 2007), although it was written more than a year ago, as Mr.Musharraf is all over the news again, having stepped down as a military dictator and holding the first democratic elections in Pakistan in years. Probably the single worst thing about the book is that most of it follows an apologetic tone, defending the actions of Musharraf and portraying them the best and only right ones to take at that moment, a statement with which many independent observers would thoroughly disagree. Another distracting thing is the style in which it is written. It is obvious that the book was dictated to a scribe, and not directly by Musharraf, as the sentences are simplistic and colloquial, with a very basic grammatical structure, and yet we find quite a few 'GRE' words scattered around, which stand out and distract the reader, being obviously placed there by the subsequent editors who wanted the book to sound more scholarly.

The book starts with Musharraf describing his family's escape from Delhi during the first Indo-Pakistani war, and reaching Karachi safely, which could not be said for many who were massacred right on the trains, both Indians and Muslims, going in both directions. He describes his early childhood in Karachi and after that in Turkey very vividly, and probably this is the best and least controversial part of the book. He describes himself as not particularly book-smart (an honor which was reserved for his brother), but street smart kid, who got into lots of fights, did lots of mischief, and was even a gang leader in Karachi.

After the return from Turkey Musharraf embarks on a military career, and progresses quickly through the ranks, mostly based on his physical strength, stamina, and comradeship with his soldiers. He is very emotional about the wars with India, and never misses a chance to point out how Pakistan beats India all the time, in all kinds of conflict, which gets kind of repetitive and boring after the first few time, regardless of if it is true or not. A very emotional and crucial formational moment for him is the separation of East Pakistan and it's independence as the state of Bangladesh, for which he rightfully blames the then Pakistani leader, but most of his rancor is directed towards India, and their role in the process. This very open hostility pervades the whole book, starting from cricket matches and ending with the Kashmir question, which Musharraf always refers to as the 'Kashmir's fight for freedom' and calls the Kashmir's mujahedeens, which the whole world sees as terrorists, "freedom fighters".

Musharraf had problems with authority and discipline and was expecting to retire as a Brigadier-General, if it wasn't for the last Pakistan's Prime Minister decision to make him Army Chief of Staff, in order to change and anger the previous Chief of Staff. However, the relations between the new chief of staff and prime minister did not develop well, and the Prime Minister tried to prevent the landing of Musharraf's plane, on a return from foreign visit, thus nearly killing him due to lack of fuel. This was used as a pretext for Musharraf and his supporters withing the army to execute a coup d'etait and take over power in Pakistan.

The further chapters of the book describe the self-proclaimed achievments that Mushrraf achieved since his coming to power, which include some less controversial ones like improving the economy and the corruption situation, but others that are highly disputed like another war with India that he lost according to all observers except himself, and shady dealings with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and its own religious extremists at home. This part of the book would probably be most burdensome to a western reader as it is written in openly bombastic and self-laudatory style that can hardly pass even for good Public Relations effort.

The War on Terror and Pakistan's role in it is another part which is very interesting to the western reader, and although there is much valuable information, lots of things are left unsaid or distorted, like the statement from the US saying that if Pakistan doesn't cooperate with the war they will 'bomb them back to the stone age' which some observers point out was formulated because of the Pakistani intelligence agency's involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Musharraf writes on in great detail about the hunt for suicide bombers networks in Pakistan, and attempts on his life, but glosses too lightly over the wider Muslim extremists elements in Pakistan which make the country such a fertile ground for wannabe martyrs.

The book concludes with an optimistic view of the future of Pakistan, of course, under Musharraf's leadership, and somewhat disparaging diatribe about democracy and why the western-style democracy is not applicable to Pakistan. Although an amusing read, this is not the best written book, or full of objective information, but it gives a curious window into the mindset and personal views of one of the last modern dictators.