GURDJIEFF INTERNET GUIDE

Home | Articles | Books | Languages | Contact | About Us


Bookmark and Share


Reinstein, Robert A. (Bob)
Bob Reinstein interviewed by Jonimatti Joutsijšrvi

Back to Articles Home

Reinstein, Robert A. (Bob)


Robert A. (Bob) Reinstein is an international consultant whose offices are in Washington, Helsinki and Brussels. Among other things he has worked as Deputy Assistant Secretary at the State Department in 1990-1993 with responsibility over environment, health and natural resources and he also was the chief negotiator for the US in the agreement for climatic changes in the United Nations. Bob has experience nearly 50 years in science, economy, questions on energy, politics and diplomacy.
He has also published poems and his paintings have been in art exhibitions in the U.S. and Canada.
 

Loading
Share
Printer friendly format

Bob Reinstein interviewed by Jonimatti Joutsijšrvi

ďThe work begins with learning how to seeĒ


Jonimatti Joutsijšrvi: Maybe we could start from the basic question: How did you find this Work? Or why? What's the story?

Bob Reinstein: Why and how are two different questions. Why, which is the more important one, began when I was 17 years old.

I had an experience at a religious retreat, a Roman Catholic retreat. I was raised as a Catholic. It was a three-day closed retreat where no talking was allowed except for 15 minutes in the evening. The only other time one could speak was to pray or go to confession. And it was three days at a retreat house on a river in Maryland, looking out towards the East from the room where I stayed on the second floor.

I didn't find the retreat itself very meaningful and was in my room for a brief time on the morning of the second day. We were allowed to be in our rooms but only with the doors open. The priests were walking by to check that we were not sleeping.

I was wishing I could be in our family summer place in the north part of the US, and was looking out the window down toward the river where the morning sun was shining and reflecting on the water. As I was just looking and connecting back to my feelings, probably what the Work would call essence-feelings, in my very early years, the sunlight suddenly came, came into my head and exploded... and I lost consciousness for a very brief time, maybe less than a minute. When I woke on the floor, and got up, my whole life had changed. There was nothing specific, but I knew that everything would be all right, a feeling I have never lost.

During the 1960s, I had an interesting young life, with different careers, marriages, working in science professionally, but also as a writer and painter. I was a published poet by the age of 20 and had exhibitions of my paintings in both the US and Canada.

And in my searches, which also included the study of Zen Buddhism, I came to some very interesting, rather high places and understandings, but later fell down again. And then, afterwards, again came to even higher places, and again fell down, so by the mid-1970s I had been on a personal search on my own for nearly 20 years.

But during my period as a professional freelance writer and editor in science, I heard of someone. I was working as Senior Science Editor at Columbia University Press in New York City, but I lived three and a half hours to the East and only came there one week in the month, even though I had an office and a staff and a secretary. During one of my visits I met this little bit younger man, also very interested in Buddhism and Sufism and many things like that, and we had some long talks. Then on one of my visits he said, 'I'm leaving New York, I'm moving to Washington, I've found a real teacher.' And not because he said it, but something in my body told me this is true.

Two years later, as it happened, I needed to find a job outside of publishing. Jobs there were not enough to really take care of my financial responsibilities, and by then I had three children. I was offered a job in the Government and moved to Washington in 1975. After I had moved, I looked in the phone book and I found this person who had told me that there was a teacher in Washington.

I called him up and said, 'Remember me? I just moved to Washington and I want to study with this teacher.' He asked me what I knew about Gurdjieff, and I said I'd heard of him, and he asked me what I'd read, and I answered 'Nothing.' And he said, ĎYou have to read something, you can't just come like that.í I said, ĎI'll read whatever I have to, I already know.í I knew that I could not find what I was searching for alone, that I needed the help of someone who had been there, who was experienced, and he was that person.

I did not meet him for almost a year after I came into the Work, he was at the top of hundreds of people in Washington. I was in one of the very beginning groups of a dozen or so groups, but I did meet him more than a year later, and was fortunate to work very closely with him during the period of the four years until he died in 1980. So that is the why and the how.

JJ: So, during those years and the later years after your teacher died, what has changed in your life?

BR: In my outer life, many, many things. In my inner life, a gradual maturing. Sometimes, when we begin, we are like a raw cognac, and we need to age properly, in order to have the fineness. The alcohol is the same, but the finer quality is very different between a very new cognac and a very old one.

And one question is: what is this fineness? And what can bring it about? Is it simply years, age? No, it's something else, what Gurdjieff calls conscious labours and intentional suffering. It is not guaranteed, one can be in the Work, one can sit in a group, 20, 30, 40, years, and it may not happen. And it's not guaranteed, nothing is guaranteed in this Work. Nothing is automatic.

JJ: You have worked both alone and in groups. Whatís the difference, does it have anything to do with this, that nothing is automatic?

BR: Well, of course it has something to do with that, but... When we begin, we think of ourselves as a person all by themselves. We may be in a social situation with other people, or a marriage, or whatever. But there is still this feeling of being oneself alone. Gurdjieff says we need others, because one person working alone will not be able to escape from the prison of sleep that we find ourselves in. One needs the help of other prisoners, and also the help of someone who has escaped and knows how to escape. You can read that in Ouspensky's book 'Fragments [of an Unknown Teaching]í, and places like that.

Another perspective is: what does it mean to be an individual, does it mean distinctly separated from others or simply distinct? I hope you don't mind if I talk about other things besides the Gurdjieff system. For a period of nine years, between the early Eighties and early Nineties, I was actively involved in Tibetan Buddhism and was the Vice President of the Tibetan Meditation Centre in Washington. And among the events during those years was a visit to our centre by the Dalai Lama's personal doctor, who was both a traditional Tibetan doctor and a Western-trained medical doctor. He had an MD degree from a US University, and spoke very good English.

He gave a teaching on the Medicine Buddha, and after a meditation practice, he gave a talk and answered questions. And one thing he said, which has stayed with me ever since, was: 'In Buddhism we speak of suffering, that everything in ordinary life is ignorance and suffering.' He said, 'Most people think that suffering is physical suffering or emotional suffering, the loss of a loved one or someone close. But in fact, the root existential suffering is the feeling that we are all alone in our own body, separated from everyone and everything else.' And then he said: 'But it's an illusion.'

So, one question is: How is it possible to experience one's existence not as separate from everyone and everything else but as interdependent, as if we were all part of a single organism. So maybe that sheds a little additional perspective on the question of working alone or working with others. In the New Testament, Jesus says: 'Whatever you do to others, you do to me.' What could that mean?

JJ: I don't have an answer.

BR: An answer given in words may give an indication, but it cannot give the full meaning. The full meaning is beyond words.

JJ: So, as you give this interview, you are then maybe thinking that you can give some indications, but how do you feel that this will be in text form...

BR: In word text form, in a public place on the Internet. But my presence will not be there. So you sit here with me and you have a different experience than if you read these words. It is more three-dimensional, rather than one-dimensional. But words are what we have for ordinary communication, so we have to work with that.

Remember that every word divides the universe into two parts, that which it refers to, and everything else in the Universe. So if we have a long interview like this that is just full of words, we've chopped up the universe into thousands of pieces. How to put it back together again so that it is whole, one and everything connected together and interdependent as the reality is?

JJ: Maybe words are food for someone who is reading.

BR: They may resonate with something in a person, for example, what Gurdjieff calls magnetic centre. They may interest them, and finding more, finding where the words come from, not as words, but as pointers to something behind words. It is said in Zen that the finger points to the moon, but don't mistake the finger for the moon.

JJ: Maybe there is a connection between the magnetic centre and how you told about how your friend was speaking about a teacher, that you felt in your body that was somehow real.

BR: As if an influence had come from this teacher through this person, and the vibrations of that influence reached me indirectly through the person. What I responded to was not the person in between, but the source, although he himself wasn't the ultimate source either, he himself was only a transmitter of higher influences and vibrations.

The facts of my teachers life, I think, are public. He was a banker, an Englishman, who had studied in the 1930s and 40s with Ouspensky in London, and after the war, met Gurdjieff. He was told to go to Washington and gather people. Gather a group. That Gurdjieff would come to Washington and meet with the people. But he died before he could come to them, in 1949.

In the meantime, my teacher, Hugh Ripman, secured a job that enabled him to come to Washington at the World Bank, which was then a very new organisation, and he worked there in the late-1940s. He retired, I'm not sure exactly when, he had a very major stroke. I think he was then maybe in his late fifties, I don't know when. I don't know enough about the details of his life, but he was quite severely affected, he had to teach himself to walk and talk again, which he did, and one would hardly have known he had had a stroke.

I have heard, and since this is not personal knowledge, I say I have heard, that he was not only one of the high teachers of the Gurdjieff system, but also a certified Zen master, Sufi master and a Taoist master. Two of those I had a chance to see because he taught me using all those methods. Knowing that I had a background in Zen, he used Zen methods with me, knowing that I would understand. And he also taught me much about Sufism and Alchemy, so... I had studied that on my own as well, of course. So in that sense, elements of these other systems are also integrated into how I work with groups. I do not teach. I work with groups. I'm a student too, a senior student.

JJ: So, the Work in Finland. You have had the possibility of seeing how this kind of inner work begins in a new place, from in a way, nothing. How are the conditions created?

BR: First there has to be a desire. We are all called to this Work. So there is a calling and a responding, and my work with others here in Finland began, in a sense, by a call that came to me from people here who were searching for the Work. And I responded to that call. In one sense, they attracted me to find them and work with them. So that was good for the beginning.

Of course, in the beginning, there were many questions: Who is this guy? Some American, what does he know? We've read, some of us, all these books, some of us for 20, 30 or even almost 40 years. What value-added does he bring? Were you at the first meeting at Turku when I came to meet the group there? Someone in the group asked me: 'What do you bring us from Helsinki? What do you have to offer us?í Which was an expression of the same kind of attitude, that we already know a lot, what's the value-added? I said: 'Nothing. We have nothing to offer you.' So it began like that.

We are nothing. We have nothing. So what is this Work? We can't do. We have nothing to give. We cannot give another [person] understanding. We actually cannot give them knowledge. We can stimulate it in them, if they have the elements that are to be connected that result in increased knowledge, but if they don't have the basic elements that can be connected, it cannot get to them.

So I couldn't say what itís like to begin Work activities in a place where they didn't exist previously. Because each situation is different. There may be the same seed, and what grows from it will have certain characteristics from the seed. But the particular form, and aspect of that plant, depends very much on the conditions in which the seed matures. The climate, the soil, different properties, water, sunlight, all these many, many different elements, determine how that plant, tree or whatever grows from that seed. And certain things we know, like certain properties of the soil, and the sun and water. Without them there's no growth. But each, each will be unique, and so the Work in Finland is unique.

It has certain characteristics that are the result of it growing out of the Finnish soil, so it's very difficult to compare or to give any kind of model: 'This is the formula, you go to a place and you say the following things and do the following things.í We have to learn how to be open, in every situation. Not filtering what comes through our own expectations, but responding directly to what is. And then if we know how to do that, everything else follows lawfully.

JJ: This kind of opening and being influenced directly is often seen as impossible in ordinary life.

BR: Well, in ordinary life, we are in our own way. What we call ourselves, our personalitiesóbecause there's more than oneóstand in the way of us receiving the more direct higher influences, because we think we 'are'. We think we are one, and the one we call 'I' or in Finnish 'minš', is real I, or something close to it. And that prevents us from really being open. We have to get past that. But to do that we first have to see. So the work begins with learning how to see. We never do. We're not able to do. We have to begin by learning how to see.

JJ: And then come all these tensions, that I can't bear seeing myself, being like this, acting like that.

RR: And some people, when they begin to see things like that, don't want to continue. They say: 'This is too difficult, this is too unpleasant. I'm not ready. I was happier before, when I was sleeping peacefully, now something has disturbed my sleep, my psychological sleep.'

One has to choose whether to go back to the psychological sleep, which is comforting in some ways, although it has many elements of suffering, mechanical suffering, or to go deeper into this other kind of suffering, in order to become transformed, in order to become, ultimately, what we really are, not what we think we are.

So we have to try to see, we have to be willing to see. We have to bear, or suffer, from what we are seeing, and not turn away from it. And not try and analyse it, or judge it or control it, just allow, allow these contradictions to be what they are, to be seen and experienced, in all of our parts, in all of our centres, as Gurdjieff puts it.

Conscious labours and intentional suffering.

JJ: Gurdjieff speaks about the Fourth Way having a task in the world - not to say what the task is Ė and that there is a limited amount of time for this task. And when we look at the outside world, the news of what happens in different places, wars and ecological crises and many kinds of very large-scale suffering... then, do you have anything to say about this relationship between this task that the Work has and the situation of the world?

BR: There are parts of us that always want to know. Why? Not just what is my aim or purpose, which is a lifetime's work to discover. They want to know everythingóthe meaning of life, the role of the Work, how everything fits together. Ordinary people, really all of us, are not capable of seeing and understanding these things.

But if we were the ultimate measure of all things, as the earth-centred solar system advocates at the time of Galileo said, that the earth was the centre of the universe, or frankly as in recent times, that all of the weather is caused by humans, somebody would have figured all this out a long time ago, and we would all be okay. Humans are not the measure of all things. They are very small. Almost a mere speck, compared to the forces at play in the universe.

To be able to have any effect, we have to give up any thought that our personal self and effort is really important. It is necessary, and it is our duty, our responsibility, to make that effort, but the idea that by doing so we can control or prevent anything, is what the Greeks used to call hubris. Pride. Big pride. False pride.

So whatever our role and purpose is, we can only begin by putting ourselves under the will of something higher than ourselves, and simply be guided by that, if we can receive the direction that can come in that way. But we don't know what it is. Our ordinary little mind cannot anticipate what it will be, how it will come, or anything like that.

Does that mean we're just like a little leaf drifting in the raging river toward the sea? No, we are under higher laws and influences, but since they are not our laws and forces, our ability to understand them is limited. Only if we begin to experience them, can we begin to trust and understand that they are much higher than we are.

JJ: So, one part of the Work is to make these big theoretical questions into something practical. How we are here. And only then can we have any connection to the questions we are asking.

BR: First, we have to learn to see. Then we have to suffer the contradictions among the things we see, and after certain intense Work of this kind, we may be able to receive more directly guidance to indicate to us, not in words, what it is we are supposed to do. How we are supposed to be. We have to be before we can do. So to speak of what we should do before we understand what it means to be, is putting, as they say, the cart before the horse. Thereís nothing to pull the cart that way.

[LONG PAUSE]

BR: Itís difficult isnít it? The only questions Iíve really answered are factual questions like when and how did I find the work, and what were the historical elements of my teacherís life that I knew about or Iíd heard about, and I havenít really answered your questions have I?

JJ: Not much. You have, more or less, every time I have asked something, put me in the situation to try to experience myself something. Or thatís how I felt it. That in a way, thereís no time to be lost.

BR: Nothing is going to be given to you. But itís there. As Iíve said sometimes in meetings, it is as close as the breath, or the heartbeat. So this something, which is no thing, that we seek is not far, has never been far away. We are the ones who are not home. So when we remember ourselves, we donít remember someone or something from the past, we come home to ourselves after being away somewhere in a dream world.

[Interviewer laughs.]

JJ: You have worked as an artist and a writer, and Gurdjieff speaks of some quite high ideas about objective art. Have you had any practical insights into how this ideal could be approached?

BR: One canít approach objective art unless one has reached an objective state of awareness. So you want to know how to approach it? Become conscious. Not so easy. Gurdjieff says that objective art is precise. Subjective art produces one reaction, one effect in one person, and a different effect in another. Objective art produces exactly the same effect in everyone. Itís quite precise, almost mathematical, but it doesnít speak in words.

Even poetry, if there were objective poetry, it would not be about the words at all. It would be about the effect that is created by the combinations of words, sounds, appearance on the page, all the different elements that enter into a poem. And then, in a sense, the poem itself is empty, it is only a vehicle for these other things behind.

The true meaning of a poem is not in the words, but in the spaces between the words, the emptiness, the silence, out of which the words arise. The same with paintings, sculpture, dance or music. Like that. But how to do that? You have to see, you have to find it. You are a poet? Itís part of your search.

JJ: You have also had quite a lot to do with science, and I donít know how you feel, but my impressions of todayís scientists are many times thatÖ some of the loudest advocates of scientific world view are quite opposed to anything spiritual.

BR: Thereís no inconsistency. My scientific background is in mathematics and physics, Iíve taught chemistry and earth science, including meteorology and astronomy. I have never found any contradiction. I gave a talk here in Helsinki in 2006 at a conference and the theme of the talk, which was the first keynote presentation, was science, art, philosophy and religion. And what I said that all these have in common is that each is about a certain kind of open question, a search for truth, for meaning. And that each approach it in different ways. But ultimately, they are different ways of approaching the same thing.

And when we answer Ė and this is why I said I havenít answered your questions Ė if we answer the questions, it ends the search and things are closed. We need to look for open questions, where whatever we find, perhaps, doesnít close the question, but leads to an even bigger question, beyond the original question.

And one of the things they are finding in some of the modern scientific work is that the boundaries between what was thought of as science and what was philosophy, religion, art, are blurring. That all these things are beginning to have aspects of each other.

No inconsistency.

[PAUSE]

JJ: Many of your answers have led to this idea of receiving, in many ways. It seems to be quite essential to your approach, to your work.

BR: We donít deserve anything. But we are given many things, beginning with our own body, and its possibilities, its functions. Our mind, our emotions, our moving aspects, our instinctive aspects, our physical body. All these together, working together, when they can work together in a right way, open up to certain possibilities...

Most of us never realise the possibilities inherent in the design of this piece of equipment, this machine. They say Einstein used less than 10% of his brain. He gave it to science, after he died. They studied to see what parts had been used and what hadnít. Iíve heard that, anyway.

It is not surprising. When we go deeply into a search, we may find quite a number of things are possible through this body. Quite unexpected things, hard to imagine almost. I wonít give many examples, but among the more common ones are being able to see auras and things like that, what some people call thought transference. These are rather elementary examples.

JJ: Is there any practicality in those?

BR: Their purpose is not immediately apparent and sometimes for people who experience them, they become more of a distraction than a tool, something useful. Sort of like having a television programme going on all the time, and watching whatís happening on the screen. I had such experiences already in the 1970s and did not see how they really helped my inner work and development. So I took my attention away from them and stopped having them.

Occasionally things come to me like that, but itís not something I seek, or itís not the purpose of a path of inner development. Itís something that may help or may help in helping other people, but itís not what itís about.

And in particular one has to be very careful if these things come early in the process, when one is still struggling very much to become free of ego, because then they can feed on a sense that ĎIím special.í ĎIím different.í ĎIím important.í ĎI had this or that spiritual or psychic experience.í And itís not about these things. They can happen along the way, but thatís not what the process is about, ultimately.

We receive certain things, starting with our own body, because we are needed. Itís part of a much larger process. We donít understand how.

JJ: But we must have some glimpses of...

BR: We may. We must develop a capacity to serve. A wish to serve and a capacity to serve. To be able. So that we can be Ďresponse-able.í

[PAUSE]

JJ: What is the role of conscience in the Work?

BR: Itís central. We spoke at the beginning about magnetic centre. Magnetic centre is a small place in us that resonates in response to certain kinds of higher influences, and draws us to a path. To the Gurdjieff Work, or any other path. But further along, we need more than just this one thing that draws us. Because itís small, and there are all these other parts of us that are not interested in the direction that this inner compass points to.

So there is this work of bringing the rest of the organism into alignment with the direction of the inner compass, magnetic centre, which points to a kind of spiritual true north.

In physics, the way magnetism works is, a material that is capable of being magnetised has these small particles called dipoles, that is they have an north and a south pole. They align in every possible direction. But they tend not to line up totally individually, but in clusters, or groups, known as domains. So in a domain, more or less all of the dipoles or tiny magnets line up in the same direction, which is the direction of the domain. And domains are of different sizes and strengths, and they point also in all different directions.

Thereís this tiny little thing, magnetic centre, which points in the direction of the great external alignment. What we need to do is to work so that that influence affects the domains in us, which are different parts of us, different personalities, different elements of our make-up.

What happens when you impose an external magnetic field on a material that is capable of being magnetised is that those domains that are in alignment with the external field grow in size and strength, and those that are pointing in other directions away from that shrink and become weaker. They remain, sometimes they vanish in or are just absorbed, but ultimately, it spreads like that.

And so what we need to do, in that sense, is to magnetise or align our whole being, our whole body, so that every cell in our body is aligned with the direction of our aim and our magnetic centre. This takes very long work, and it can only be done with the help of a strong external field or force. We have to align ourselves with that external influence. We cannot do it from inside alone.

JJ: So thatís one of the reasons for working with others.

BR: Working with others but also working to submit, to open ourselves to the higher influences beyond ordinary life, in the sense of, as it says in the Bible, ĎThy will be done.í And we have to give up our little will, which in one part of us, points a different way and in another part another way, then begin to bring those little wills into alignment. Allow the ones that are pointing in other directions to shrink, to become weaker. Not kill them, no violence. No inner violence, but feed those parts that are aligned with our aim.

Our aim is not a word statement. It is organic. It is physical. The words are a manifestation that points to it. Those things which contribute to and strengthen our aim, are aligned with our aim, our aim being aligned with the higher influence outside, need to grow and become stronger. The things that oppose it need to become weaker, to come into alignment with the other. This is just physics, this is traditional physics from when I studied it more than half a century ago.

JJ: But applied to the inner life of a human being.

BR: There are analogies everywhere. Gurdjieff often refers to the saying: ĎAs above, so below.í And so you see these things in everything, at every level.

JJ: Then, what, in your experience, are the difficulties, or one could say traps, on this path of getting aligned with the aim?

BR: Ego. False personality. Personality per se is notÖitís like an externally acquired interface between our inner world and ordinary life around us with other people. We become socialized: we develop a personality to be able to be in that world. It's not our own. It's acquired from external influences, and itís necessary in ordinary life as a warm coat is on a day like today, when it is about -15 degrees Celsius outside. You wouldnít go out without a warm coat. In the same way, you donít go out into ordinary life to try to function effectively without personality.

So ordinary personality should be under our service in that way. It has a function. We need to understand what it is. It is not our self, our real self. It has to be brought under this higher influence so that it serves and is not like a spoiled child running around saying ĎI, Iím the real one.í The one we have to be really struggling with is false personality. Something in us that absolutely feels it is the real self. It is jealous and will not let anything else challenge it. Or take away from it what it feels is its rightful place.

And false personality may steal the results of our inner work, our spiritual work, if we are not careful. It will masquerade. This is a risk in any spiritual path. And it can happen to people who are very advanced, many decades on a path, and perhaps have even crystallised certain results. But they have crystallised them around flaws and imperfections in the material, in the clay which has been baked, and they cook ego into the result. And it steals the work. The efforts that are meant to serve something higher serve ego.

We have to be very careful about this. Youíve been on events, weekends, special things like that where we have felt a lot of very fine energy, and sometimes it lasts for several days, but sometimes it disappears quite quickly. Something steals it. We have to try to be more careful what is being fed in us.

So, in other words, youíre conducting this interview and Iím responding to your questions, but this should not feed anything in either of us to say either of us does anything other than do what is called for. Not determined by us personally, and not for us personally.

JJ: It is especially difficult, maybe, to submit in this kind of way in this situation, knowing that much of this will be public. It changes, somehow, my reactions, or openness. That kind of things happen.

BR: You are in one sense self-conscious. Not in the sense of Ďconscious consciousí, but the way you separate from yourself, you feel you are playing a role and thereís some part of you for whom this is even an important role, or something. Or you have an agenda, the questions you want to ask, for yourself.

How not to have an agenda, how be free? You have some preparations, some ideas, some basic things you want to ask, just to set a context for what we exchange. No script, no agenda, no form. We donít know. How to be able to be with that Ďnot knowing?í What is it that Iím not comfortable with?

JJ: There is the one who asks the question. There is this hurry to have some words to say aloud as a question. Maybe then no questions come.

BR: In the same way it can be in me, someone is in a hurry to answer, who has some message it feels should be expressed or communicated. So I have to struggle to be free from that as well. Try to be honest, sincere. Just without expectation, and knowing that no words can even begin to describe the other.

[PAUSE]

JJ: I felt this avoiding or not feeding the false personality to be quite an important idea. You said to be aware of where the energy disappears, or if it disappears. Thatís one of the things to be done. Is it the only way of... ?

BR: Question everything. Yourself. Me. Anything you read or see. Donít throw out anything you have learned from direct experience. Just try to see many things that come may not be what they seem to be. You have to be careful.

JJ: There is this question about what is necessary. What is just something that comes, that needs to be passed through, or is there something that Iím really needing.

BR: So how to tell? We have to come home, come down into the body. Leave the head. The head is very useful for many things, but about some of these things, particularly where emotions are involved, it can be not helpful and useful. Come into the body. The breath, awareness.

JJ: Then the other obstacle I found is where itís still doings of my head but something in me needs to have to answer quite quickly. ďDo I need to be this or not?Ē If I try to connect to my body and listen and I donít get the answer, then thereís confusion.

BR: Do you think the head is faster than the body? If you try to drive a car with the head, thinking about everything you do as opposed to letting the body, which is much faster and more intelligent in such things, take care of things, you can have big problems. But with important questions, it isnít just the body in general, itís particularly the centre of gravity of the body.

We have an expression in English: Ďto have a gut feeling about something.í Itís an instinct or sensation, where the centre of gravity of the physical body is, and thatís quick. If you can detect something there, that can tell you very quickly. It canít explain it in words, but it can tell you quickly yes or no. Go here, donít go there. But it canít tell you a formula that will apply in every situation.

You have to be home. That is how. It is not that the Work is simply about the body. But in my experience, all real work is grounded in the body. It includes the mind, it includes the emotions, but it is grounded, firmly grounded, in the body.

Also, all real work is in the moment. Thinking about it beforehand or afterwards, that is not the real work. It may be helpful or not, but the actual, real search is in the moment, every moment.

So we try to be present to each moment, so that we can be open to receive something of the possibilities in that moment.

Anything more to say?

JJ: No.

BR: OK.

JJ: Thank you.


Comments

Thank you for this, Bob, Jonimatti, and Reijo.

Vesa, Finland
added 2010-05-05


Add a Comment


Name:
Country:
e-mail:
Header:
Comment: