Η ψυχολογία της δυνατής εξέλιξης του ανθρώπου

by P.D. Ouspensky

(. . .) με τη σωστή μέθοδο και τις σωστές προσπάθειες ο άνθρωπος μπορεί να γίνει κύριος της συνειδητότητας και μπορεί ν' αποκτήσει συνείδηση του εαυτού του μ' όλα όσα συνεπάγεται αυτή η κατάσταση. Κι αυτά δεν μπορούμε καν να τα φανταστούμε στην τωρινή μας κατάσταση. (ΑΠΟ ΤΗΝ ΠΑΡΟΥΣΙΑΣΗ ΣΤΟ ΟΠΙΣΘΟΦΥΛΛΟ ΤΟΥ ΒΙΒΛΙΟΥ)

Genres: Psychology, Philosophy, Spirituality, Nonfiction, Religion, Self Help, Occult

112 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1951

About the author

Pyotr Demianovich Ouspenskii (known in English as Peter D. Ouspensky, Пётр Демья́нович Успе́нский; was a Russian mathematician and esotericist known for his expositions of the early work of the Greek-Armenian teacher of esoteric doctrine George Gurdjieff, whom he met in Moscow in 1915. He was associated with the ideas and practices originating with Gurdjieff from then on. He shared the (Gurdjieff) "system" for 25 years in England and the United States, having separated from Gurdjieff in 1924 personally, for reasons he explains in the last chapter of his book In Search of the Miraculous.

All in all, Ouspensky studied the Gurdjieff system directly under Gurdjieff's own supervision for a period of ten years, from 1915 to 1924. His book In Search of the Miraculous is a recounting of what he learned from Gurdjieff during those years. While lecturing in London in 1924, he announced that he would continue independently the way he had begun in 1921. Some, including his close pupil Rodney Collin, say that he finally gave up the system in 1947, just before his death, but his own recorded words on the subject ("A Record of Meetings", published posthumously) do not clearly endorse this judgement, nor does Ouspensky's emphasis on "you must make a new beginning" after confessing "I've left the system".

Reviews

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is something of a contradiction. It could be viewed as a “self help” book, but, unlike the majority of these, it does not reassure the reader or boost his or her confidence. It begins from the premise that most of our thoughts and actions are mechanical, and proceeds to suggest that it requires years of hard work to “remember one’s self” for more than a few seconds at a time. It does not claim that simply reading the book once is enough to change your life. Unlike some of the cults it has influenced, the book does not offer up a catalog of increasingly expensive courses, gadgets, or further books one must buy in order to achieve this, although it does recommend seeking out a “teacher” who works within a “school.”

Prior to the publication of this book, Ouspensky had worked with Gurdjieff within the “Fourth Way” school he founded. At some point, Ouspensky found that he could “no longer understand” his teacher, so he left the school and began to lecture on the techniques for self-remembering. After some years of this, he condensed his lectures into this book. It probably was easier for Ouspensky to show students what he meant in the context of a live lecture than it is on paper, but as he is dead now this is likely to be the first contact most people have with his ideas. A first reading is bound to be associated with a good deal of friction and internal resistance on the part of the reader. If not, it will be uncritically swallowed whole but not actually understood, which is probably much worse.

I believe that it is possible to get a great deal from reading this book, but only if one is honest with one’s self about the friction and resistance one experiences while reading it. Its purpose is to help you to take control over your own mind, and that begins with experiencing yourself in the here and now, and when you are reading it, the here and now is precisely what you experience as you take in each word, sentence, and idea. Therefore, it should not be read quickly, but rather in short bursts of self-awareness, which are stopped when the strain of remaining self-aware becomes too much. The reader will probably not agree with everything Ouspensky says, but the point is to work to Understand it before dismissing it. Never say “I already knew that,” because chances are that if you think so, you aren’t really hearing what he is saying, or at least are ignoring the context as it affects you.

In short, this book is not for everyone, and certainly not appropriate for all times in anyone’s life, but can be a powerful tool if you choose to use it.

[Mary Clark · Rating 3 out of 5]

In this book, the psyche is “the soul or spirit” and psychology the means of human evolution to a higher level of awareness and being. This is not what is being taught in schools, as Ouspensky points out. He postulates that there is a “true self” one must get to know. However, we will not advance until we acknowledge that we are machines. We must undo our machine-like ways before we can become free. This freeing from the hard-wiring of our natures is possible through inherent abilities to not only comprehend and envision, but to turn these into action.

This is a powerful idea, but not a new one: others have written about the need to get away from fixed ideas and preconceptions before we can attain a higher spiritual state. The methods vary. Ouspensky unfortunately appears to be promoting a "psychological cult," and as happens in all cults, he exalts the method over the goal.

[Adriana Scarpin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Um desses casos peculiares quando lemos um livro onde quase todas as considerações propostas são teorizadas e praticadas há anos pelo leitor que não tinha conhecimento profundo do autor. Presumo que, ao final, todos que baseiam suas vidas na evolução da consciência e a total compreensão do ser cheguem nesse ponto comum e se reconheçam mutualmente no olhar da alma em gozo.

[محمدعلی کرمی · Rating 1 out of 5]

عنوان فارسی: تکامل آگاهانه انسان، ترجمه محمود پورآزاد
.
یکی از بی‌معنی‌ترین و پوچ‌ترین کتاب‌هایی بود که این اواخر خوندم. زمانی‌که از دور به کتب اوسپنسکی نگاه می‌کردم، تصور می‌کردم حرفی برا گفتن داشته باشه، اما این کتاب انگار صرفا فقط برای تبلیغ مکتب اوسپنسکی بود و به‌شکلی در طول کتاب صحبت می‌کرد که انگار مخاطب یه ابلهه و هرچی که اوسپنسکی (علامه دهر) میگه رو باید قبول کنه.
.
آسپنسکی انتخاب طبیعی رو بدون آوردن هیچ دلیل و استدلالی رد می‌کنه و تنها به تکامل آگاهانه باور داره، حتی فسیل‌های ماقبل تاریخ هم مربوط به موجوداتی غیر از انسان هوشمند می‌دونه و براین باوره که انسان هوشمند همیشه وجود داشته و ما نمی‌دونیم از کجا اومده. هرچند یه‌جا اشاره میکنه که طبیعت تاجایی انسان رو تکامل میده، اما انسان بعد از اون انسان خودش باید باعث تکامل خودش بشه.
.
واژه "روانشناسی" تو عنوان کتاب وجود داره، اما آسپنسکی روانشناسی رو به دو دسته تقسیم می‌کنه: اولین نوع، نوعی که انسان رو طوری که هست مطالعه می‌کنه، یعنی روانشناسی مدرن علمی، و میگه که این نوع روانشناسی اصیل و حقیقی نیست -__-. اما نوع دوم روانشناسی که مربوط به موضوع این کتاب هم میشه و آسپنسکی اون رو اصیل و حقیقی می‌دونه، انسان رو می‌خواد از دید تکامل آگاهانه نگاه کنه، یعنی چیزی که میتونه باشه.
.
آسپنسکی انسان رو یک ماشین/دستگاه مکانیکی می‌دونه که توسط تاثیرت خارج به حرکت در میاد و دقیقا مثل یه دستگاهه؛ دیدگاه جبرگرایانه داره، میگه انسان با خواست خود هیچ‌کاری نمی‌کنه و یه‌جورایی همه‌چی خودشون اتفاق می‌افتن و انسان مثل عروسک خیمه شب‌بازیه- نویسنده کتاب میگه‌که اولین قدم تو تکامل آگاهانه و تغییر انسان اینه‌که انسان قبول کنه که یک دستگاهه و هیچ‌کاری نمی‌ونه انجام بده و ناتوانه. پس از این حرفا، آسپنسکی میگه که انسان می‌تونه به ماشین بودن خودش پایان بده. نویسنده کتاب بر این باوره که "درحقیقت هیچ وحدتی در انسان، هیچ مرکز کنترلی، هیچ من یا نفس ماندگاری وجود ندارد" و مجددا میگه که انسان از من‌های بسیار تشکیل شده که هرلحظه این "من" می‌تونه من‌های قبلی رو نفی کنه.
.
آسپنسکی براین‌باوره که انسان آگاهی نداره، بلکه توهم آگاهی داره و این توهم رو حافظه به وجود میاره، یا یادآوری لحظات و دقایقی از زندگی که آگاهی داشته و انسان نمی‌دونه که داشتن آگاهی چه معنایی داره.
.
همچنین رویابینی رو برخلاف باور رایج زمین خودش (باور فرویدی) بی‌معنی می‌دونه و میگه که رویاها اراجیف و چرت‌و‌پرت‌های ذهن هستن. جالبه که وجود ناخوداگاه‌رو هم برخلاف باور رایج زمان خودش نفی میکنه و ذهن رو یکپارچه میدونه. و یکی دیگه از ادعاهای عجیبش اینه که حواس، رویاها (که میگه تو بیداری‌هم تو ذهنمون هستن و از بین نمیرن) و حالات ذهنی اجازه نمیدن که دنیای واقعی رو ببینیم :/ حتی توجایی از کتاب ابراز احساسات منفی و این‌چیزا هم مضر میدونه. و نهایتا در آخر کتاب حرف‌ای بی‌پایه‌ای که میگه رو حتی جمع‌بندی خوبی نمیکنه.

[Dias · Rating 1 out of 5]

After reading 60 pages into this book it feels like I have wasted my time. I strongly dislike authors that proclaim that they have the best understanding of human nature, universe or anything. Yet, when it comes to explain why, they need 10 pages to bring you the message that could be communicated in two sentences. I found some of the arguments contradicting each other and some that I think are simply wrong. And may be I wouldn't point at those, but I feel that I have to when the author tells you that all other theories are incomplete and inferior. Here is my list of arguments, which I came over so far:
1. "Memories are only from moments when we are conscious (or glimpses of those moments, because we are not able to be conscious for longer time)." I am not a psychologist and far from this field of study, but I have heard that it is possible to bring forth memories that your consciousness has forgotten under hypnosis therapy, ie bringing forth the subconscious memory.
2. "Serious irregularity or abnormality in the sex function makes self-development and even self-study impossible." Based on what? Did you make a research on the topic? I would agree with the author if he added "in the moments of sexual arousal".
3. "There are four states of consciousness and we don't possess self-consciousness (third level), only glimpses of it." Yet we have to be conscious in order to be able to realise that we are unconscious. How can we achieve that in "sleep" or "wake sleep" states (first and second)?

My general conclusion: If you want to learn happiness, read ideas and teachings of people that themselves have achieved (or touched) happiness in life, or whatever you are looking for. What you search for, you will find. But remember that if you are looking for an apple, and you are convinced that it looks like a strawberry, you will reject all the apples that come along in your life.

[Amy · Rating 5 out of 5]

This bopok is all about the levels of wakefullness and sleeping that we live within in our daily waking lives. When I read this book I was relieved that it had been expressed. I had been thinking about these things since I was a little kid and could never express them in an understandable way. I didn't neccessarily agree entirely with Ouspenky but it was a relief to get some feedback in a way. He was a student of Gurdjieff who I believe was a mystic and a creator of music and very specific dances which coincide with them. If you look in the back of the Village Voice you can often find a picture of a crazy looking lady over the ad for a Gurdjieff/Ouspensky study group. Creepy. Intriguing.

[Erica · Rating 2 out of 5]

I give it 2 stars because it is short. But the book says nothing new or profound, these ideas have been passed around like all beloved mêmes, just rewritten in a slightly different way. But if you must read Ouspensky then start here because you'll feel better that you didn't waste your time on the thicker books.

[A.M. · Rating 3 out of 5]

My goal in reading this was to get a clearer sense of the 4th Way system, as I'm planning on studying Gurdjieff in more depth over the next year (or more). I've previously read another book that seemed like a more basic overview of the system Ouspensky covers in more detail here, so little was entirely new to me. Even with all that fore-knowledge and detailed outlining of concepts, one feels like there is even more that could have been covered. To be fair, the text here is actually written for a set of lectures Ouspensky gave in the 1930s and as such as designed simply to explain particular ideas in the 4th Way system. The approach is more conversational, less focused on the details.

I'm a bit on the fence about the content overall and would agree with criticisms lodged by other GR reviewers. Ouspensky often likes to make unfounded assertions phrased as self-evident truths, which are too numerous to list. Did you know that you can only remember something when you are truly conscious? That the human machine has 7 different functions? That there are 7 different levels of humanity? How do we know this? Ouspensky doesn't say. So on and so forth. This kinda of thing is not all that uncommon in the realm of mystical literature, really, but if you can't stand this sort of thing you'll probably find this more irritating than it's worth. Personally, I like a little more dialectic in my spirituality. I don't just want to know what to do or how to do it, I want to know why I'm doing it. And that relates to Mary Clark's rather salient point that this "exalts the method over the goal." A typical problem with any systematic approach. The basic goal, of course, is consistent with many traditions, or what the Sufis and guys like Evola would call Tradition.

Overall, I pretty much got out of this what I expected to get out of this, and I think it would be a good brief overview for those unfamiliar with the 4th Way and Gurdjieff. I am, however, looking forward to reading something a bit meatier.

[Dan Cooper · Rating 1 out of 5]

Presented in five chapters termed "lectures," The Psychology of Man's Evolution, by P. D. Ouspensky, is a strange little book intended to whet the reader's appetite for diving into the full blown G. I. Gurdjieff system. I say, "No thank you."

I found it to be a jumbled mixture of genuine kernels of wisdom blended in an unfortunate montage of "centers" with overlapping labels and too many I's. But as confused and confusing as the system is (to me) it is apparent that Ouspensky clearly had a full grasp of the Gurdjieff system. That someone of Ouspensky's intellectual stature would spend the time to learn and adhere to this system is really the only reason I can recommend this book and this system.

He spends a notable number of words discussing human will, and the irony that I enjoyed most was the amount of will it took for me to finish this book. It truly is unintentionally comical at times, and for those in the scientific community, I doubt you will get past the first lecture. But that is unfortunate, in a way, because your most hearty laughter would come while reading the fifth one.

What really sticks with me, though, are not the laughs or my derision, but those interesting kernels of wisdom that populate so many passages in this book. It is fascinating how such a system can be composed of such brilliant observations about our innermost workings, but expressed in such strangely foreign terminology and strained categorical organization. I am glad I read it, but I can honestly say it is one of the few books I will very likely never pick up again.

Perhaps the most enlightening note in the book is on the final page, in a biographical note by Ouspensky. He says, "At the end of 1923, I found that I could not remain connected with G[urdjieff] because I completely ceased to understand him and broke with him finally in January of 1924." That pretty much says it all, for me. But it is also strange that Ouspensky invariably referred to Gurdjieff as G, almost as if he, himself, would for some reason prefer to be called "P."

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is difficult book to rate for a variety of reasons. I do find it interesting that many people downgrade this book because it discusses "old ideas" when Ouspensky himself states quite early that the ideas are as old as man, but have been largely forgotten. Others downgrade it because it is not exhaustive, which fails to take into consideration the intent of the book and the more exhaustive works that Ouspensky has available on this subject. I digress.

As for the book itself, it seems to be a great introduction into Ouspensky's approach to life and inner-development, emphasizing the need to "self-remember" and draw our attention to the various workings of our own machine. It is a call to rise from our "waking sleep" (where most of us live) in order to obtain a higher state of consciousness and take the next step in our evolution of being.

While I agree with him on the fundamental principles he lays out, I do not know if I agree with him on all accounts; of course, he would maintain that I simply do not understand and cannot understand all at once. This may well be true. However, there is plenty within the lectures that give me pause and I will be revisiting the ideas several times over, either directly, or through similar follow up works.

At the very worst, the lectures do provide a template for organizing my own thoughts, actions, reactions, words, movements, ideas, and so forth, and self-reflection is an important aspect of all of our lives.

[Rahul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quite disheartening to see all the missing support which this book deserves more than all those sci-fi novels. This book, is a pioneer according to me after the Darwin's evolutionary theory which though is very subjective and lacks empirical understanding in many fields where as this book on psychology of evolution by Ouspensky deals with practical applicability of evolution and states how it's in one's hands to evolve.
Book consists of subsequent five lectures on Evolution and it's key role involving consciousness and explaining how we don't know at all about ourselves and believe in the contrary. It states, and I believe rightly so, that reason for our impulses, desires, motivation governed by so incoherent vibes is that it's a state of delusion and dream. Everybody believes he's consciousness of his existence where as he is not.

[Robert Duberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps, the single most influential book I've ever read. Proved to me through my own investigation that its entire foundation was true, leading me to embrace The Fourth Way as my spiritual path in life, and I continue to do so today. Ouspensky was brilliant, the argument simple and breathtaking, for those who have the courage to consider the ramifications.

[Bruce · Rating 5 out of 5]

The only book by Ouspensky that I've read, so far. 5-Star for me.

[Alienne Laval · Rating 3 out of 5]

Man cannot move, think or speak of his own accord. He is a
marionette pulled here and there by invisible strings. If he
understands this, he can learn more about himself, and possibly
then things may begin to change for him. But if he cannot realise
and understand his utter mechanicalness or if he does not wish to
accept it as a fact, he can learn nothing more, and things cannot
change for him,
Man is a machine, but a very peculiar machine. He is a machine
which, in right circumstances, and with right treatment, can know
that he is a machine, and having fully realised this, he may find the
ways to cease to be a machine.
First of all, what man must know is that he is not one;
he is many. He has not one permanent and unchangeable 'I' or
Ego. He is always different. One moment he is one, another
moment he is another, the third moment he is a third, and so on,
almost without an end.
The illusion of unity or oneness is created in man first, by the
sensation of one physical body, by his name, which in normal
cases always remains the same, and third, by a number of
mechanical habits which are implanted in him by education or
acquired by imitation. Having always the same physical sensations,
hearing always the same name and noticing in himself the same
habits and inclinations he had before, he believes himself to be
always the same.
In reality there is no oneness in man and there is no controlling
centre, no permanent 'I' or Ego.
- P.D. OUSPENSKY
(aka Everyman)
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MAN'S POSSIBLE
EVOLUTION

Substanceless fellahs in the name of the LORD-demiurge!

[Temo Tchanukvadze · Rating 3 out of 5]

No work can be done in sleep - P.D. Ouspensky

It's a short self-help book about wakefulness. I was researching Gurdjieff and his Fourth Way when I discovered this book. Ouspensky was his student and then they separate because Gurdjieff wasn't following even his own rules(as author emphasized several times) and he was unpredictable. Long story short it's a mystery what really happened. The book itself is very short and full of controversial ideas.

[Berend Vendel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Paar fraaie inzichtelijkheden verwikkeld in een hoop arrogant esoterisch gelul in de letterlijke zin

[Tavo · Rating 3 out of 5]

5 ⭐ to the first 2 lectures + 2⭐ stars to the rest = 3⭐ total.

He clearly articulates his ideas, knowing it's a difficult topic to put into words. The third lecture suddenly starts introducing unnecessary definitions and new concepts that makes the reading boring. Because the book is divided in 'lectures' it makes the flow of the reading feel confusing as a lot of new information is delivered without proper connection or structure.

The book isn't long and even with all the negative aspects, reading the whole work was worth it just because of the first two lectures and makes me feel glad to have done so.

[Ümit Sevgi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ouspensky bu kitapta Gurdjieff'in 4. Yol öğretisinden bazı temel kavramları alıp anlatmış. Zihin, duygu ve hareket merkezleri. İnsanın mekanikliği, uyuyor olduğu, uyanmanın zorlukları vs.
Bunlardan çıkışın nasıl olduğunun detayına pek girmiyor, sadece gözlem yapmaktan bahsediyor.

[nurseli ciraci · Rating 1 out of 5]

this horrible book is the brilliant example of mansplaining

[Jonathan Hockey · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good basic outline of some of the ideas that would be developed much more later in the new age spiritual movement. Refined by thinkers such as Grof on transpersonal psychology for instance. It looks quite dated now, because these kinds of ideas have been gone into much more detail since. Also, in many places Ouspensky is just giving the ideas of Gurdjieff, rather than his own, and as such, I think the more original work of Ouspenky's own comes primarily in his book new model of the universe. An idea of his still important I think to this day is the conflict between modern democracies and knowledge. For knowledge tends to flourish best in esoteric areas among limited groups of people. A democracy of knowledge tends to resort to affirming mundane and mindless ideas that do not help us improve our knowledge and our self knowledge, but they tend to hinder it. Separating our knowledge from our true state of being.

[Amir · Rating 5 out of 5]

A hundred pages of Fourth Way arguments to convince you that almost all human beings live in a state of waking sleep, and how difficult it is to break this cycle of unconscious sleep and ascend into higher realms of consciousness. Ouspensky, being an old fellow of Gurdjieff, summarised the most important ideas and concepts of The Fourth Way in the simplest possible way, allowing the reader to grasp esoteric wisdom obscurely stated in Beelzebub's Tales to His Grandson. I started reading In Search of the Miraculous right after I finished reading this book.

[Andreas · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was once told that the best book to start reading Ouspensky would be his "In Search of the Miraculous" After reading that one and this book, I think this book is the better one to start with. All major ideas are covered here, the different centers, different man, different kind of consciousness, difference between knowledge and being, personality and essence, self-remembering and so on. If one likes what is presented here, one can move on to the other book for more detail on the individual ideas.
Both books definitely have piqued my interest on the subject of consciousness.

[Z · Rating 5 out of 5]

It seemed to me this book said a lot of genuinely new things - not facsimiles of old ideas wrapped a little differently - but truly pioneering and brave thinking, thinking that can only be arrived at by actually having a wide breadth of life-experience and consciously observing oneself and one's reactions through all of it. I will be reading this one again and again.

[Claus Brinker · Rating 3 out of 5]

The edition I read included six lectures. I found the first three to be very interesting and thought provoking, but the book grew increasingly disappointing toward the end; too vague with far-fetched and unsubstantiated assertions.

[Holly · Rating 5 out of 5]

A quick read, deep philosophy in a tight presentation.

[Kirtida Gautam · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was expecting much more from this book. I have studied Indian Psychology and School of Ashtanga Yog, therefore I am familiar with most of the concepts.

[Lyubina Litsova · Rating 5 out of 5]

Човекът има множество разнообразни погрешни идеи за самия себе си. Той не осъзнава факта, че в действителност той самият е една машина. Какво означава изразът „човекът е машина“? Това означава, че той не извършва независими движения нито вътре в себе си, нито извън себе си. Той е машина привеждана в движение от външните явления и външните тласъци. Всички движения, действия, думи, идеи, емоции, настроения и мисли се пораждат от външни въздействия. Самият човек е просто автомат с определен запас спомени от миналия си опит и определен запас от енергия. Необходимо е да разберем, че човек не може да направи собствено нищо. Но той не разбира това и си приписва способността, че може нещо собствено да направи. Това е първото нещо, което човек погрешно си приписва. Това трябва да бъде разбрано много ясно: Човек не е способен собствено да прави нищо. Всичко, което според него той прави, всъщност му се случва, така, както падат валежите или се затопля времето. Ние говорим, че човек мисли, чете, работи, обича, ненавижда, започва битки, войни и т.н. В действителност всичко това става с човека. Той не е способен да се движи, да мисли или да говори собствено от своя собствена позиция. Човек представлява в този смисъл марионетка, задвижвана от невидими нишки.
Ако човек разбере това, то той може да узнае повече за самия себе си, а тогава са възможни и определени изменения. Но ако за човека е недостъпна тази абсолютна механичност, или ако той не желае да я приеме като факт, то той на нищо не може да се научи и нищо тогава няма да се измени.

Познай самия себе си! Такъв е бил първият принцип и първото изискване на древните психологически школи. Ние сме запомнили тези думи, но сме загубили техния смисъл. Ние считаме, че да познаем себе си означава да знаем своите особености, желания, вкусове, способности, а в действителност това означава да опознаем себе си като машини, тоест да знаем структурата на своята собствена машина, нейните части, функциите на различните части и условията за тяхната работа. Ние в най-общ вид признаваме, че не знаем тази машина, докато не я изучим. Ние трябва да изучаваме своята машина, като машина. Това означава, че изучаването е самонаблюдение. Друг път няма и никой няма да свърши тази работа вместо нас. Ние трябва да я свършим сами. Преди това, трябва да се научим как да наблюдаваме. Необходимо е да разберем техническата страна на наблюдението. Трябва да се знае за необходимостта от наблюдение на различните функции и да се прави разлика между тях, помнейки за различните състояния на съзнанието, за нашия сън и за множеството "азове" в самите нас.

Трудностите, които възникват по време на наблюдението на тези четири прояви - лъжа, въображение, изразяване на отрицателни емоции и ненужна реч, показват на човека цялата му механичност и даже невъзможност за борба против нея без външна помощ, т. е. без нови знания и действително съдействие. Дори в случаите, в които човек получава някакъв ценен материал, той пропуска да го използва, забравя за необходимостта да наблюдава и „заспива“ отново, и е необходимо през цялото време да бъде събуждан.

Необходимо е човек да се опита да запомни себе си.
За да направи това, е нужно да води борба с механичните мисли и въображението. Ако тази работа се води добросъвестно и упорито, то резултатите ще бъдат налице за сравнително кратко време. Не трябва, обаче, да се мисли, че това е лесно и, че е възможно веднага да бъде овладяна тази практика.
Самонаблюдението е много трудно да се усвои на практика. То трябва да се основава не на очакваните резултати, тъй като би се получила идентификация със собствените усилия. То трябва да се базира на факта, че ние не помним себе си, но в същото време имаме сили да си спомним себе си, ако положим достатъчно усилия.

Относно изучаването на възможната еволюция на човека, трябва да се отбележи една много важна точка. В човека има две страни, изискващи развитие, т. е. има две линии за възможно развитие, по които е необходимо да се движим едновременно. Тези две страни на човека или две линии за възможното му развитие, са познанието и битието (съществуването).

„Психология на човешките еволюционни възможности“- П. Успенски
Превод от руски: Росица Николова

[Y · Rating 5 out of 5]

A summary of the psychological teachings written in In Search of the Miraculous (ISM). This book mirrors very closely to that book, excluding the metaphysics, cosmogony and most of the chronological narrative. Gurdjieff is mentioned at times, but the focus is on the teachings. However, ISM stops rather abruptly in 1921 when Ouspensky broke with Gurdjieff. This book includes a sort of epilogue, describing a little what Ouspensky did after 1921.

Reading this right after reading ISM, I feel like I was able to grasp the concepts better but there was very little in the way of information that was not written in ISM. It was more of an introductory text than ISM, so I probably should have read them in reverse order.

One part I found especially interesting was Ouspensky’s attacks on Psychoanalysis. He attacked two aspects: the concept of the unconscious and of complexes. Both felt like squabbling about semantics however.

First, the Fourth Way teaches men are rarely, if ever, conscious so by definition there is not other unconsciousness. However, that just means that the Fourth Way would view the ego as part of the unconscious. The different centers (moving, emotional, and intellectual) act autonomously in the average person. The goal is for a man to become fully conscious and therefore expert some/total (unsure which, as would a man number 6 take every breath consciously?) control over these. Psychoanalysis’ goal is similarly to bring what is unconscious into the conscious, which from its viewpoint the three centers would found in the unconscious, except for that part of the intellectual center composing the ego. They both desire for a man to gain more conscious control over parts they typically do not.

Second, Ouspensky says complexes do not exist, period. However, complexes sound like the term “personality” as used in the Fourth Way. The myriads of “I”s a one has seems like the myriads of complexes one has. Both are present within a person and typically dormant until triggered where they then may exert considerable influence on one’s behavior.

I do believe there are incompatible aspects of both frameworks, such as the Fourth Way’s view of positive and negative emotions, but the two aspects discussed in the book felt more like an attack on a rival than a true difference.

[Мрми · Rating 3 out of 5]

A short collection of 5 lectures which talk about the 4 states of consciousness, 4 centers of man's mind (intellectual, instinctive, emotional, mechanical) and their "positive" and "negative" sides.

I dislike how the author writes about 7 types of man to be able to compare 7 states of development of consciousness yet provides no arguments and definitions of type 6 and 7 apart from one sentence since they are "unprovable and hardly understandable". He preaches the idea of understanding being a combination of knowing + being and claims that it is not possible to understand someone and disagree with them since that would be a contradiction.

I also dislike how the author writes about numbers and theories without proving them or referencing them later, even if he says that they will be talked about later. I expected those topics to be revisited in later lectures in this same book.

For example, he explains how the intellectual center of a man is 30000 times slower than the instinctive center by saying that when drinking a drop of brandy or water one experiences sensations one second after digesting the water, while intellectually understanding and describing all of the processes that happen while digesting water would take around 8 hours.

If you can ignore the unproved and unnecessary claims the author makes, you can extract value from ideas about self-remembering and surpassing negative emotions which Ouspensky also states in multiple lectures.
Here are some useful quotes from the book:
* It is impossible to know oneself without knowing one's defects and wrong features.
* In reality negative emotions contain nothing but weakness and very often the beginning of hysteria, insanity or crime. The only good thing about them is that, being quite useless and artificially created by imagination and identification, they can be destroyed without any loss. And this is the only chance of escape that man has.

If these ideas don't sound new or interesting to you, I'd give this book a hard pass.

[Leonardo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Um livrinho brilhante sobre como você está inconsciente no momento e que deve trabalhar muito para aumentar sua consciência. Este livro o deixará ciente do conceito muito importante de que você está dormindo. Sem esse conhecimento, você não consegue acordar.

Este é um livro da velha escola - tem mais de cem anos e eu achava que era sobre psicologia até entender que era um livro sobre iluminação, embora o autor não use o termo iluminação nele. É um livro de importância fundamental sobre consciência e todos deveriam lê-lo porque ele ensina como você é inconsciente nessa vida. Você pode pensar agora que está muito consciente lendo isso aqui, mas na verdade não está consciente de forma alguma - está vivendo sua vida como uma máquina automatizada e mecânica - e ainda assim, se engana ao dizer para si mesmo que está consciente.

Pelo fato de você estar iludido sobre isso, você nunca sai por aí tentando encontrar a verdadeira consciência, afinal você pensa que já a tem. Peter Ouspensky vai demolir essa ilusão muito rapidamente com este pequeno livro que você pode ler em apenas algumas horas.

Eu recomendo lê-lo várias vezes conforme você fizer mais trabalhos de consciência em si mesmo. Ao elevar sua consciência, você voltará a este livro e ficará surpreso com quanta sabedoria existe aqui e como você não entendeu quase nada na primeira ou segunda vez que o leu. Mesmo que você possa entendê-lo logicamente, você pode deixar de notar seu significado profundo simplesmente porque sua consciência ainda está muito baixa e você não consegue acreditar no que Peter nos ensinou - e é por isso que este livro é realmente crítico se você quiser fazer um trabalho sério de ampliação da própria consciência.