“I do not call art all that you call art, which is simply mechanical reproduction, imitation of nature or other people, or simply fantasy, or an attempt to be original. Real art is something quite different. Among works of art, especially works of ancient art, you meet with many things you cannot explain and which contain a certain something you do not feel in modern works of art. But as you do not realize what this difference is you very soon forget it and continue to take everything as one kind of art. And yet there is an enormous difference between your art and the art of which I speak. In your art everything is SUBJECTIVE — the artist’s perception of this or that sensation; the forms in which he tries to express his sensations and the perception of these forms by other people. In one and the same phenomenon one artist may feel one thing and another artist quite a different thing. One and the same sunset may evoke a feeling of joy in one artist and sadness in another. Two artists may strive to express exactly the same perceptions by entirely different methods, in different forms; or entirely different perceptions in the same forms — according to how they were taught, or contrary to it. And the spectators, listeners, or readers will perceive, not what the artist wished to convey or what he felt, but what the forms in which he expresses his sensations will make them feel by association. Everything is SUBJECTIVE and everything is accidental, that is to say, based on accidental associations — the impres-sion of the artist and his ‘creation’” (he emphasized the word “creation”), “the perceptions of the spectators, listeners, or readers. Fragments: One

I was very interested in what G. said about art. His principle of the division of art into SUBJECTIVE and objective told me a great deal. I still did not understand everything he put into these words. I had always felt in art certain divisions and gradations which I could neither define nor formulate, and which nobody else had formulated. Nevertheless I knew that these divisions and gradations existed. So that all discussions about art without the recognition of these divisions and gradations seemed to me empty and useless, simply arguments about words. In what G. had said, in his indications of the different levels which we fail to see and understand, I felt an approach to the very gradations that I had felt but could not define. Fragments: One

“On the way of the monk a man has a teacher, and a part of his duty, a part of his work, consists in having absolute faith in the teacher, in submitting to him absolutely, in obedience. But the chief thing on the way of the monk is faith in God, in the love of God, in constant efforts to obey and serve God, although, in his understanding of the idea of God and of serving God, there may be much that is SUBJECTIVE and contra-dictory. Fragments: Two

“The development of the line of knowledge without the line of being gives a weak yogi,” said G., “that is to say, a man who knows a great deal but can do nothing, a man who does not understand” (he emphasized these words) “what he knows, a man without appreciation, that is, a man for whom there is no difference between one kind of knowledge and another. And the development of the line of being without knowledge gives a stupid saint, that is, a man who can do a great deal but who does not know what to do or with what object; and if he does anything he acts in obedience to his SUBJECTIVE feelings which may lead him greatly astray and cause him to commit grave mistakes, that is, actually to do the opposite of what he wants. In either case both the weak yogi and the stupid saint are brought to a standstill. Neither the one nor the other can develop further. Fragments: Four

“One of the reasons for the divergence between the line of knowledge and the line of being in life, and the lack of understanding which is partly the cause and partly the effect of this divergence, is to be found in the language which people speak. This language is full of wrong concepts, wrong classifications, wrong associations. And the chief thing is that, owing to the essential characteristics of ordinary thinking, that is to say, to its vagueness and inaccuracy, every word can have thousands of different meanings according to the material the speaker has at his disposal and the complex of associations at work in him at the moment. People do not clearly realize to what a degree their language is SUBJECTIVE, that is, what different things each of them says while using the same words. They are not aware that each one of them speaks in a lan-guage of his own, understanding other people’s language either vaguely or not at all, and having no idea that each one of them speaks in a language unknown to him. People have a very firm conviction, or belief, that they speak the same language, that they understand one another. Fragments: Four

“The knowledge of man number four is a very different kind of knowledge. It is knowledge which comes from man number five, who in turn receives it from man number six, who has received it from man number seven. But, of course, man number four assimilates of this knowledge only what is possible according to his powers. But, in comparison with man number one, man number two, and man number three, man number four has begun to get free from the SUBJECTIVE elements in his knowledge and to move along the path towards objective knowledge. Fragments: Four

“In analyzing the various SUBJECTIVE meanings of the word ‘man’ we have seen how varied and contradictory, and, above all, how concealed and unnoticeable even to the speaker. himself are the meanings and the shades of meaning created by habitual associations that can be put into a word. Fragments: Four

“But at the beginning it is enough to understand the general principle: every phenomenon, of whatever magnitude it may be, is inevitably the manifestation of three forces; one or two forces cannot produce a phenomenon, and if we observe a stoppage in anything, or an endless hesitation at the same place, we can say that, at the given place, the third force is lacking. In trying to understand this it must be remembered at the same time that people cannot observe phenomena as manifestations of three forces because we cannot observe the objective world in our SUBJECTIVE states of consciousness. And in the SUBJECTIVEly observed phenomenal world we see in phenomena only the manifestation of one or two forces. If we could see the manifestation of three forces in every action, we should then see the world as it is (things in themselves). Only it must here be remembered that a phenomenon which appears to be simple may actually be very complicated, that is, it may be a very complex combination of trinities. But we know that we cannot observe the world as it is and this should help us to understand why we cannot see the third force. The third force is a property of the real world. The SUBJECTIVE or phenomenal world of our observation is only relatively real, at any rate it is not complete. Fragments: Four

“I do not know what you call ‘cosmic consciousness,’ ” said G., “it is a vague and indefinite term; anyone can call anything he likes by it. In most cases what is called ‘cosmic consciousness’ is simply fantasy, associative daydreaming connected with intensified work of the emotional center. Sometimes it comes near to ecstasy but most often it is merely a SUBJECTIVE emotional experience on the level of dreams. But even apart from all this before we can speak of ‘cosmic consciousness’ we must define in general what consciousness is. Fragments: Seven

“In order to understand what the difference between states of consciousness is, let us return to the first state of consciousness which is sleep. This is an entirely SUBJECTIVE state of consciousness. A man is immersed in dreams, whether he remembers them or not does not matter. Even if some real impressions reach him, such as sounds, voices, warmth, cold, the sensation of his own body, they arouse in him only fantastic SUBJECTIVE images. Then a man wakes up. At first glance this is a quite different state of consciousness. He can move, he can talk with other people, he can make calculations ahead, he can see danger and avoid it, and so on. It stands to reason that he is in a better position than when he was asleep. But if we go a little more deeply into things, if we take a look into his inner world, into his thoughts, into the causes of his actions, we shall see that he is in almost the same state as when he is asleep. And it is even worse, because in sleep he is passive, that is, he cannot do anything. In the waking state, however, he can do something all the time and the results of all his actions will be reflected upon him or upon those around him. And yet he does not remember himself. He is a machine, everything with him happens. He cannot stop the flow of his thoughts, he cannot control his imagination, his emotions, his attention. He lives in a SUBJECTIVE world of ‘I love,’ ‘I do not love,’ ‘I like,’ ‘I do not like,’ ‘I want,’ ‘I do not want,’ that is, of what he thinks he likes, of what he thinks he does not like, of what he thinks he wants, of what he thinks he does not want. He does not see the real world. The real world is hidden from him by the wall of imagination. He lives in sleep. He is asleep. What is called ‘clear consciousness’ is sleep and a far more dangerous sleep than sleep at night in bed. Fragments: Eight

“Both states of consciousness, sleep and the waking state, are equally SUBJECTIVE. Only by beginning to remember himself does a man really awaken. And then all surrounding life acquires for him a different aspect and a different meaning. He sees that it is the life of sleeping people, a life in sleep. All that men say, all that they do, they say and do in sleep. All this can have no value whatever. Only awakening and what leads to awakening has a value in reality. Fragments: Eight

G. began the next talk as follows: “Man’s possibilities are very great. You cannot conceive even a shadow of what man is capable of attaining. But nothing can be attained in sleep. In the consciousness of a sleeping man his illusions, his ‘dreams’ are mixed with reality. He lives in a SUBJECTIVE world and he can never escape from it. And this is the reason why he can never make use of all the powers he possesses and why he always lives in only a small part of himself. Fragments: Eight

“The idea of morality is connected with the idea of good and evil conduct. But the idea of good and evil is always different for different people, always SUBJECTIVE in man number one, number two, and number three, and is connected only with a given moment or a given situation. A SUBJECTIVE man can have no general concept of good and evil. For a SUBJECTIVE man evil is everything that is opposed to his desires or interests or to his conception of good. Fragments: Eight

“One may say that evil does not exist for SUBJECTIVE man at all, that there exist only different conceptions of good. Nobody ever does anything deliberately in the interests of evil, for the sake of evil. Everybody acts in the interests of good, as he understands it. But everybody understands it in a different way. Consequently men drown, slay, and kill one another in the interests of good. The reason is again just the same, men’s ignorance and the deep sleep in which they live. Fragments: Eight

“The results of the work of a man who takes on himself the role of teacher do not depend on whether or not he knows exactly the origin of what he teaches, but very much depends on whether or not his ideas come in actual fact from the esoteric center and whether he himself understands and can distinguish esoteric ideas, that is, ideas of objective knowledge, from SUBJECTIVE, scientific, and philosophical ideas. Fragments: Ten

“But it must be remembered in this connection that a ‘black magician,’ whether good or evil, has at all events been at a school. He has learned something, has heard something, knows something. He is simply a ‘half-educated man’ who has either been turned out of a school or who has himself left a school having decided that he already knows enough, that he does not want to be in subordination any longer, and that he can work independently and even direct the work of others. All ‘work’ of this kind can produce only SUBJECTIVE results, that is to say, it can only increase deception and increase sleep instead of decreasing them. Nevertheless something can be learned from a ‘black magician’ although in the wrong way. He can sometimes by accident even tell the truth. That is why I say that there are many things worse than ‘black magic.’ Such are various ‘occult’ and theosophical societies and groups. Not only have their teachers never been at a school but they have never even met anyone who has been near a school. Their work simply consists in aping. But imitation work of this kind gives a great deal of self-satisfaction. One man feels himself to be a ‘teacher,’ others feel that they are ‘pupils,’ and everyone is satisfied. No realization of one’s nothingness can be got here and if people affirm that they have it, it is all illusion and self-deception, if not plain deceit. On the contrary, instead of realizing their own nothingness the members of such circles acquire a realization of their own importance and a growth of false personality. Fragments: Eleven

“This is the ‘abuse of sex.’ It is necessary, further, to remember that the sex center works with ‘hydrogen’ 12. This means that it is stronger and quicker than all other centers. Sex, in fact, governs all other centers. The only thing in ordinary circumstances, that is, when man has neither consciousness nor will, that holds the sex center in submission is ‘buffers.’ ‘Buffers’ can entirely bring it to nought, that is, they can stop its normal manifestation. But they cannot destroy its energy. The energy remains and passes over to other centers, finding expression for itself through them; in other words, the other centers rob the sex center of the energy which it does not use itself. The energy of the sex center in the work of the thinking, emotional, and moving centers can be recognized by a particular ‘taste,’ by a particular fervor, by a vehemence which the nature of the affair concerned does not call for. The thinking center writes books, but in making use of the energy of the sex center it does not simply occupy itself with philosophy, science, or politics — it is always fighting something, disputing, criticizing, creating new SUBJECTIVE theories. The emotional center preaches Christianity, abstinence, asceticism, or the fear and horror of sin, hell, the torment of sinners, eternal fire, all this with the energy of the sex center. … Or on the other hand it works up revolutions, robs, bums, kills, again with the same energy. The moving center occupies itself with sport, creates various records, climbs moun-tains, jumps, fences, wrestles, fights, and so on. In all these instances, that is, in the work of the thinking center as well as in the work of the emotional and the moving centers, when they work with the energy of the sex center, there is always one general characteristic and this is a certain particular vehemence and, together with it, the uselessness of the work in question. Neither the thinking nor the emotional nor the moving centers can ever create anything useful with the energy of the sex center. This is an example of the ‘abuse of sex.’ Fragments: Twelve

“And what is it that they most of all desire to preserve? First the right to have their own valuation of ideas and of people, that is, that which is more harmful for them than anything else. They are fools and they already know it, that is to say, they realized it at one time. For this reason they came to learn. But they forget all about this the next moment; they are already bringing into the work their own paltry and SUBJECTIVE attitude; they begin to pass judgment on me and on everyone else as though they were able to pass judgment on anything. And this is immediately reflected in their attitude towards the ideas and towards what I say. Already ‘they accept one thing’ and ‘they do not accept another thing’; with one thing they agree, with another they disagree; they trust me in one thing, in another thing they do not trust me. Fragments: Thirteen

As I have already mentioned before, G. used the expressions “objective” and “SUBJECTIVE” in a special sense, taking as a basis the divisions of “SUBJECTIVE” and “objective” states of consciousness. All our ordinary knowledge which is based on ordinary methods of observation and verification of observations, all scientific theories deduced from the observation of facts accessible to us in SUBJECTIVE states of consciousness, he called SUBJECTIVE. Knowledge based upon ancient methods and principles of observation, knowledge of things in themselves, knowledge accompany-ing “an objective state of consciousness,” knowledge of the All, was for him objective knowledge. Fragments: Fourteen

“But objective knowledge, the idea of unity included, belongs to objective consciousness. The forms which express this knowledge when perceived by SUBJECTIVE consciousness are inevitably distorted and, instead of truth, they create more and more delusions. With objective consciousness it is possible to see and feel the unity of everything. But for SUBJECTIVE consciousness the world is split up into millions of separate and unconnected phenomena. Attempts to connect these phenomena into some sort of system in a scientific or a philosophical way lead to nothing because man cannot reconstruct the idea of the whole starting from separate facts and they cannot divine the principles of the division of the whole without knowing the laws upon which this division is based. Fragments: Fourteen

“None the less the idea of the unity of everything exists also in intellectual thought but in its exact relation to diversity it can never be clearly expressed in words or in logical forms. There remains always the insurmountable difficulty of language. A language which has been constructed through expressing impressions of plurality and diversity in SUBJECTIVE states of consciousness can never transmit with sufficient completeness and clarity the idea of unity which is intelligible and obvious for the objective state of consciousness. Fragments: Fourteen

“You must first of all remember that there are two kinds of art, one quite different from the other — objective art and SUBJECTIVE art. All that you know, all that you call art, is SUBJECTIVE art, that is, something that I do not call art at all because it is only objective art that I call art. Fragments: Fourteen

“To define what I call objective art is difficult first of all because you ascribe to SUBJECTIVE art the characteristics of objective art, and secondly because when you happen upon objective works of art you take them as being on the same level as SUBJECTIVE works of art. Fragments: Fourteen

“I will try to make my idea clear. You say — an artist creates. I say this only in connection with objective art. In relation to SUBJECTIVE art I say that with him ‘it is created.’ You do not differentiate between these, but this is where the whole difference lies. Further you ascribe to SUBJECTIVE art an invariable action, that is, you expect works of SUBJECTIVE art to have the same reaction on everybody. You think, for instance, that a funeral march should provoke in everyone sad and solemn thoughts and that any dance music, a komarinsky for instance, will provoke happy thoughts. But in actual fact this is not so at all. Everything depends upon association. If on a day that a great misfortune happens to me I hear some lively tune for the first time this tune will evoke in me sad and oppressive thoughts for my whole life afterwards. And if on a day when I am particularly happy I hear a sad tune, this tune will always evoke happy thoughts. And so with everything else. Fragments: Fourteen

“The difference between objective art and SUBJECTIVE art is that in objective art the artist really does ‘create,’ that is, he makes what he intended, he puts into his work whatever ideas and feelings he wants to put into it. And the action of this work upon men is absolutely definite; they will, of course each according to his own level, receive the same ideas and the same feelings that the artist wanted to transmit to them. There can be nothing accidental either in the creation or in the impressions of objective art. Fragments: Fourteen

“In SUBJECTIVE art everything is accidental. The artist, as I have already said, does not create; with him ‘it creates itself.’ This means that he is in the power of ideas, thoughts, and moods which he himself does not understand and over which he has no control whatever. They rule him and they express themselves in one form or another. And when they have accidentally taken this or that form, this form just as accidentally produces on man this or that action according to his mood, tastes, habits, the nature of the hypnosis under which he lives, and so on. There is nothing invariable; nothing is definite here. In objective art there is nothing indefinite.” Fragments: Fourteen

“So you see that art is not merely a language but something much bigger. And if you connect what I have just said with what I said earlier about the different levels of man’s being, you will understand what is said about art. Mechanical humanity consists of men number one, number two, and number three and they, of course, can have SUBJECTIVE art only. Objective art requires at least flashes of objective consciousness; in order to understand these flashes properly and to make proper use of them a great inner unity is necessary and a great control of oneself.” Fragments: Fourteen

“It depends upon whose prayer,” said G. “The prayer of SUBJECTIVE man, that is, of man number one, number two, and number three, can give only SUBJECTIVE results, namely, self-consolation, self-suggestion, self-hypnosis. It cannot give objective results.” Fragments: Fifteen

G. many times pointed out the necessity of studying this forgotten “technique” as well as the impossibility of attaining results of any kind on the way of religion without it, excepting purely SUBJECTIVE results. Fragments: Fifteen

“Without this second part there can be no knowledge of religion or in any case such knowledge would be incomplete and very SUBJECTIVE. Fragments: Fifteen

“Whether general evolution is proceeding or not is again another question. It is enough for us to realize that it is possible, and therefore evolu’ on for people outside the ‘ways’ is possible. Speaking more correctly there are two ‘ways.’ One we will call the ‘SUBJECTIVE way.’ It includes all four ways of which we have spoken. The other we will call the ‘objective way.’ This is the way of people in life. You must not take the names ‘SUBJECTIVE’ and ‘objective’ too literally. They express only one aspect. I take them only because there are no other words.” Fragments: Seventeen

“No,” said G. “It would be more incorrect than ‘SUBJECTIVE’ and ‘objective’ because the SUBJECTIVE way is not individual in the general meaning of this word, because this way is a ‘school way.’ From this point of view the ‘objective way’ is much more individual because it admits of many more individual peculiarities. No, it is better to leave these names — ‘SUBJECTIVE’ and ‘objective.’ They are not altogether suitable but we will take them conditionally. Fragments: Seventeen

I had for a long time wanted to get G. to talk about repetition but he always avoided it. So it was on this occasion. Without answering my question about repetition he continued: “It often seems to people of the ‘way,’ that is, of the SUBJECTIVE way, especially those who are just beginning, that other people, that is, people of the objective way, are not moving. But this is a great mistake. A simple obyvatel may sometimes do such work within him that he will overtake another, a monk or even a yogi. Fragments: Seventeen