Gary Lachman. In Search of P.D. Ouspensky: The Genius in the Shadow of Gurdjieff (Wheaton, IL: Quest Books, 2004, 329pp.) We must never forget that we are passing into the new age. To play the part that we are prepared for, we have to belong to the future, and free ourselves from the past in every way… More and more it seems to me that a tremendous effort is being made by some force behind the scenes to unite in understanding –(not externally) – all people everywhere who have reached a certain level, and who can take part –(even without knowing it) – in the unfolding of some new possibilities on a very large scale indeed. Perhaps this tremendous effort of growth is exactly proportionate to the equally tremendous dangers that face mankind. But I feel it more and more, because so many interesting things happen, so many connections are made, and so many possibilities open up, that not only are far beyond anything we could calculate or hope for, but also in some way beyond the circle of influence that one would expect of any single teacher, however great. As though there were some deep inner co-operation on a very high level between what for centuries have been separate lines of growth.” Rodney Collin The Theory of Conscious Harmony For this change to a new age to be accomplished in relative peace and conscious harmony we need to bring forth from within ourselves the wisdom, the stability, the vision which such a period of transition requires. An age is a cycle of time which is characterized by a dominant quality. The dominant quality of this “New Age” is a change of consciousness from one of isolation and separation to one of communion, attunement and wholeness. This higher consciousness is an indication of humanity’s next leap of evolution into a level of awareness filled with the power and creativity of the wholeness of life. A permanent and steady state of higher consciousness was the aim of the efforts and the teaching of P.D. Ouspensky, a Russian writer who in the decade before the Russian Revolution was well known as a writer on esoteric themes. He knew English well and so introduced into Russian circles the thinking of writers such as Edward Carpenter who had travelled to the East in search of enlightenment and especially R.M. Bucke, the author of Cosmic Consciousness. Bucke was a friend and follower of the American poet Walt Whitman whom Bucke considered to be the prototype of the person with cosmic consciousness. With his presentation of Bucke, Ouspensky also drew attention to the philosophical depth of Walt Whitman, who became an influence on many modern Russian poets. Sensing that the Russian Revolution would lead to a restriction of thought and in particular spiritual thought, Ouspensky left Russia and settled in England. From 1924 to 1940 he imparted orally his ideas to a number of people whom he met privately in London. The core of his teaching was that a person without cosmic consciousness was basically a machine set in motion by external forces in whom everything happens by accident rather than by design. Yet by continuous effort at self-awareness and especially by working in groups, a person can gain control over the machinery and become the “true self”. His followers were required to recognize the various states of mind with which he dealt, not from external descriptions, but from their own inner experience of them. It was for this reason that his teaching was imparted only by word of mouth, for only by his pupils account of what they actually observed in their own person could Ouspensky be sure that his

ideas were really understood. The pupils’ tasks were to gain self-knowledge through observation. Ouspensky spent the years of the Second World War in the USA, living near New York City, where he continued his teaching to small groups. In 1947, he returned to England and died shortly afterwards. Thus, his later writings were published only after his death. His ideas are also reflected in the writings of some of his students such as Kenneth Walker, Maurice Nicoll and Rodney Collin. Given the oral nature of Ouspensky’s teaching, it is not clear how much was original and what was the repetition of what Ouspensky .learned in Russia from G.I. Gurdjieff. Neither men were given to footnotes and references for their ideas. Gurdjieff had also left Russia after the Revolution and lived most of his life in the West in Paris with a few trips to the USA. From 1924 on, Ouspensky and Gurdjieff did not see each other though they shared much of a common system. In some ways Ouspensky remained psychologically dependent on Gurdjieff who had a strong and colourful personality. Unfortunately both Ouspensky and Gurdjieff took the role of the teacher who knew; the role of the student was to learn. There was no cooperation of teacher and students as among equals. Thus, in reading Gary Lachman’s fine study, as well as other writing on the Gurdjieff circle, one has the impression of a static system which was never enriched by the insights and experiences of others. This is somewhat ironic for a philosophy which stressed growth and development. As Gurdjieff said in presenting his center near Fontainebleau “Here there are neither Russians nor English, neither Jews nor Christians. There are only persons following the same aim, to become capable of being.” As is true in many cases, one must draw from a system what is useful for the present and leave the personality of the teacher aside. Gary Lachman has a good balance between an emphasis on “the Work” as the Gurdjieff/Ouspensky system is often called and the personality and biography of the two. Ouspensky’s efforts merit being known, and Gary Lachman has drawn a fine portrait. Rene Wadlow