“That is another question. In order to do it is necessary to be. And it is necessary first to understand what 10 be means. If we continue our talks you will see that we use a special LANGUAGE and that, in order to talk with us, it is necessary to learn this LANGUAGE. It is not worth while talking in ordinary LANGUAGE because, in that LANGUAGE, it is impossible to understand one another. This also, at the moment, seems strange to you. But it is true. In order to understand it is necessary to learn another LANGUAGE. In the LANGUAGE which people speak they cannot understand one another. You will see later on why this is so. Fragments: One

“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 lan­guage 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

Actually this conviction has no foundation whatever. The LANGUAGE in which they speak is adapted to practical life only. People can communicate to one another information of a practical character, but as soon as they pass to a slightly more complex sphere they are immediately lost, and they cease to understand one another, although they are unconscious of it. People imagine that they often, if not always, understand one another, or that they can, at any rate, understand one another if they try or want to; they imagine that they understand the authors of the books they read and that other people understand them. This also is one of the illusions which people create for themselves and in the midst of which they live. As a matter of fact, no one understands anyone else. Two men can say the same thing with profound conviction but call it by different names, or argue endlessly together without suspecting that they are thinking exactly the same. Or, vice versa, two men can say the same words and imagine that they agree with, and understand, one another, whereas they are actually saying absolutely different things and do not understand one another in the least. Fragments: Four

“People do not notice all these contradictions, do not notice that they never understand one another, that they always speak about different things. It is quite clear that, for proper study, for an exact exchange of thoughts, an exact LANGUAGE is necessary, which would make it possible to establish what a man actually means, would include an indication of the point of view from which a given concept is taken and determine the center of gravity of this concept. The idea is perfectly clear and every branch of science endeavors to elaborate and to establish an exact LANGUAGE for itself. But there is no universal LANGUAGE. People continually confuse the LANGUAGEs of different sciences and can never establish their exact correlation. And even in each separate branch of science new terminologies, new nomenclatures, are constantly appearing. And the further it goes the worse it becomes. Misunderstanding grows and increases instead of diminishing and there is every reason to think that it will continue to increase in the same way. And people will understand one another ever less and less. Fragments: Four

“For exact understanding exact LANGUAGE is necessary. And the study of systems of ancient knowledge begins with the study of a LANGUAGE which will make it possible to establish at once exactly what is being said, from what point of view, and in what connection. This new LANGUAGE contains hardly any new terms or new nomenclature, but it bases the construction of speech upon a new principle, namely, the principle of relativity; that is to say, it introduces relativity into all concepts and thus makes possible an accurate determination of the angle of thought — for what precisely ordinary LANGUAGE lacks are expressions of relativity. Fragments: Four

“When a man has mastered this LANGUAGE, then, with its help, there can be transmitted and communicated to him a great deal of knowledge and information which cannot be transmitted in ordinary LANGUAGE even by using all possible scientific and philosophical terms. Fragments: Four

“The fundamental property of the new LANGUAGE is that all ideas in it are concentrated round one idea, that is, they are taken in their mutual relationship from the point of view of one idea. This idea is the idea of evolution. Of course, not evolution in the sense of mechanical evolution, because such an evolution does not exist, but in the sense of a conscious and volitional evolution, which alone is possible. Fragments: Four

“The LANGUAGE in which understanding is possible is constructed upon the indication of the relation of the object under examination to the evolution possible for it; upon the indication of its place in the evolutionary ladder. “For this purpose many of our usual ideas are divided according to the steps of this evolution. Fragments: Four

“Once again let us take the idea man. In the LANGUAGE of which I speak, instead of the word ‘man,’ seven words are used, namely: man number one, man number two, man number three, man number four, man number five, man number six, and man number seven. With these seven ideas people are already able to understand one another when speaking of man. Fragments: Four

“Science, philosophy, and all manifestations of man’s life and activity can be divided in exactly the same way into seven categories. But the ordinary LANGUAGE in which people speak is very far from any such divisions, and this is why it is so difficult for people to understand one another. Fragments: Four

“In relation to the term ‘world’ it is necessary to understand from the very outset that there are many worlds, and that we live not in one world, but in several worlds. This is not readily understood because in ordinary LANGUAGE the term ‘world’ is generally used in the singular. And if the plural ‘worlds’ is used it is merely to emphasize, as it were, the same idea, or to express the idea of various worlds existing parallel to one another. Our LANGUAGE does not have the idea of worlds contained one within another. And yet the idea that we live in different worlds precisely implies worlds contained one within another to which we stand in different relations. Fragments: Four

“I shall try to answer this question,” said G., “but I warn you that this cannot be done fully enough with the material to be found in ordinary knowledge and in ordinary LANGUAGE. Fragments: Five

“Work on oneself must begin with the driver. The driver is the mind. In order to be able to hear the master’s voice, the driver, first of all, must not be asleep, that is, he must wake up. Then it may prove that the master speaks a LANGUAGE that the driver does not understand. The driver must learn this LANGUAGE. When he has learned it, he will understand the master. But concurrently with this he must learn to drive the horse, to harness it to the carriage, to feed and groom it, and to keep the carriage in order — because what would be the use of his understanding the master if he is not in a position to do anything? The master tells him to go yonder. But he is unable to move, because the horse has not been fed, it is not harnessed, and he does not know where the reins are. The horse is our emotions. The carriage is the body. The mind must learn to control the emotions. The emotions always pull the body after them. This is the order in which work on oneself must proceed. But observe again that work on the ‘bodies,’ that is, on the driver, the horse, and the carriage, is one thing. And work on the ‘connections’ — that is, on the ‘driver’s understanding,’ which unites him to the master; on the ‘reins,’ which connect him with the horse; and on the ‘shafts’ and the ‘harness,’ which connect the horse with the carriage — is quite, another thing. Fragments: Five

I remember yet another talk that took place during the same period. Someone asked him about the possibility of a universal LANGUAGE — in what connection I do not remember. Fragments: Five

“A universal LANGUAGE is possible,” said G., “only people will never invent it.” Fragments: Five

“First because it was invented a long time ago,” answered G., “and second because to understand this LANGUAGE and to express ideas in it depends not only upon the knowledge of this LANGUAGE, but also on being. I will say even more. There exists not one, but three universal LANGUAGEs. The first of them can be spoken and written while remaining within the limits of one’s own LANGUAGE. The only difference is that when people speak in their ordinary LANGUAGE they do not understand one another, but in this other LANGUAGE they do understand. In the second LANGUAGE, written LANGUAGE is the same for all peoples, like, say, figures or mathematical formulae; but people still speak their own LANGUAGE, yet each of them understands the other even though the other speaks in an unknown LANGUAGE. The third LANGUAGE is the same for all, both the written and the spoken. The difference of LANGUAGE disappears altogether on this level.” Fragments: Five

“If we could connect the centers of our ordinary consciousness with the higher thinking center deliberately and at will, it would be of no use to us whatever in our present general state. In most cases where accidental contact with the higher thinking center takes place a man becomes unconscious. The mind refuses to take in the flood of thoughts, emotions, images, and ideas which suddenly burst into it. And instead of a vivid thought, or a vivid emotion, there results, on the contrary, a complete blank, a state of unconsciousness. The memory retains only the first moment when the flood rushed in on the mind and the last moment when the flood was receding and consciousness returned. But even these moments are so full of unusual shades and colors that there is nothing with which to compare them among the ordinary sensations of life. This is usually all that remains from so-called ‘mystical’ and ‘ecstatic’ experiences, which represent a temporary connection with a higher center. Only very seldom does it happen that a mind which has been better prepared succeeds in grasping and remembering something of what was felt and understood at the moment of ecstasy. But even in these cases the thinking, the moving, and the emotional centers remember and transmit everything in their own way, translate absolutely new and never previously experienced sensations into the LANGUAGE of usual everyday sensations, transmit in worldly three-dimensional forms things which pass completely beyond the limits of worldly measurements; in this way, of course, they entirely distort every trace of what remains in the memory of these unusual experiences. Our ordinary centers, in transmitting the impressions of the higher centers, may be compared to a blind man speaking of colors, or to a deaf man speaking of music. Fragments: Nine

“I was expecting this question,” said G. “There has never been an occasion when I have spoken of types when some clever person has not asked this question. How is it you do not understand that if it could be explained it would have been explained long ago. But the whole thing is that types and their differences cannot be defined in ordinary LANGUAGE, and the LANGUAGE in which they could be defined you do not as yet know and will not know for a long time. It is exactly the same as with the ‘forty-eight laws.’ Someone invariably asks whether he may not know these forty-eight laws. As if it were possible. Understand that you are being given everything that can be given. With the help of what is given to you, you must find the rest. But I know that I am wasting time now in saying this. You still do not understand me and will not understand for a long time yet. Think of the difference between knowledge and being. There are things for the understanding of which a different being is necessary.” Fragments: Twelve

THERE were certain points to which G. invariably used to return in all his talks with us after the formal lectures, to which outside people were admitted, were over. The first was the question of self-remembering and the necessity of constant work on oneself in order to attain this, and the second was the question of the imperfection of our LANGUAGE and of the difficulty of conveying “objective truths” in our words. 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

“Realizing the imperfection and weakness of ordinary LANGUAGE the people who have possessed objective knowledge have tried to express the idea of unity in ‘myths,’ in ‘symbols,’ and in particular ‘verbal formulas’ which, having been transmitted without alteration, have carried on the idea from one school to another, often from one epoch to another. Fragments: Fourteen

“Each one of these systems can serve as a means for transmitting the idea of unity. But in the hands of the incompetent and the ignorant, however full of good intentions, the same symbol becomes an ‘instrument of delusion.’ The reason for this consists in the fact that a symbol can never be taken in a final and definite meaning. In expressing the laws of the unity of endless diversity a symbol itself possesses an endless number of aspects from which it can be examined and it demands from a man approaching it the ability to see it simultaneously from different points of view. Symbols which are transposed into the words of ordinary LANGUAGE become rigid in them, they grow dim and very easily become ‘their own opposites,’ confining the meaning within narrow dogmatic frames, without giving it even the very relative freedom of a logical examination of a subject. The cause of this is in the literal understanding of symbols, in attributing to a symbol a single meaning. The truth is again veiled by an outer covering of lies and to discover it requires immense efforts of negation in which the idea of the symbol itself is lost. It is well known what delusions have arisen from the symbols of religion, of alchemy, and par­ticularly of magic, in those who have taken them literally and only in one meaning. Fragments: Fourteen

“If two men who have been in different schools meet, they will draw the enneagram and with its help they will be able at once to establish which of them knows more and which, consequently, stands upon which step, that is to say, which is the elder, which is the teacher and which the pupil. The enneagram is the fundamental hieroglyph of a universal LANGUAGE which has as many different meanings as there are levels of men. Fragments: Fourteen

In connection with talks about the meaning of the enneagram as a universal symbol G. again spoke of the existence of a universal “philosophical” LANGUAGE. Fragments: Fourteen

“Men have tried for a long time to invent a universal LANGUAGE,” he said. “And in this instance, as in many others, they seek something which has long since been found and try to think of and invent something which has been known and in existence a long time. I said before that there exist not one but three universal LANGUAGEs, to speak more exactly, three degrees. The first degree of this LANGUAGE already makes it possible for people to express their own thoughts and to understand the thoughts of others in relation to things concerning which ordinary LANGUAGE is powerless.” Fragments: Fourteen

“In what relation do these LANGUAGEs stand to art?” someone asked. “And does not art itself represent that ‘philosophical LANGUAGE’ which others seek intellectually?” 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

” ‘The outer circle’ is the circle of mechanical humanity to which we belong and which alone we know. The first sign of this circle is that among people who belong to it there is not and there cannot be a common understanding. Everybody understands in his own way and all differently. This circle is sometimes called the circle of the ‘confusion of tongues,’ that is, the circle in which each one speaks in his own particular LANGUAGE, where no one understands another and takes no trouble to be understood. In this circle mutual understanding between people is impossible excepting in rare exceptional moments or in matters having no great significance, and which are confined to the limits of the given being. If people belonging to this circle become conscious of this general lack of understanding and acquire a desire to understand and to be understood, then it means they have an unconscious tendency towards the inner circle because mutual understanding begins only in the exoteric circle and is possible only there. But the consciousness of the lack of understanding usually comes to people in an altogether different form. Fragments: Fifteen

‘The square next below is — plants. The next — minerals, the next -metals, which constitute a separate cosmic group among minerals; and the following square has no name in our LANGUAGE because we never meet with matter in this state on the earth’s surface. This square comes into contact with the Absolute. You remember we spoke before about ‘Holy the Firm.’ This is ‘Holy the Firm.’” Fragments: Sixteen

“Obyvatel is a strange word in the Russian LANGUAGE. It is used in the sense of ‘inhabitant,’ without any particular shade. At the same time it is used to express contempt or derision — ‘obyvatel’ — as though there could be nothing worse. But those who speak in this way do not understand that the obyvatel is the healthy kernel of life. And from the point of view of the possibility of evolution, a good obyvatel has many more chances than a ‘lunatic’ or a ‘tramp.’ Afterwards I will perhaps explain what I mean by these two words. In the meantime we will talk about the obyvatel. I do not at all wish to say that all obyvatels are people of the objective way. Nothing of the kind. Among them are thieves, rascals, and fools; but there are others. I merely wish to say that being a good obyvatel by itself does not hinder the ‘way’ And finally there are different types of obyvatel. Imagine, for example, the type of obyvatel who lives all his life just as the other people round him, conspicuous in nothing, perhaps a good master, who makes money, and is perhaps even close-fisted. At the same time he dreams all his life of monasteries, for instance, and dreams that some time or other he will leave everything and go into a monastery. And such things happen in the East and in Russia. A man lives and works, then, when his children or his grandchildren are grown up, he gives everything to them and goes into a monastery. This is the obyvatel of which I speak. Perhaps he does not go into a monastery, perhaps he does not need this. His own life as an obyvatel can be his way. Fragments: Seventeen

Exercises on this occasion were much more difficult and varied than during the preceding summer. We began rhythmic exercises to music, dervish dances, different kinds of mental exercises, the study of different ways of breathing, and so on. Particularly intensive were the exercises for studying various imitations of psychic phenomena, thought-reading, clairvoyance, mediumistic displays, and so forth. Before these exercises began G. explained to us that the study of these “tricks,” as he called them, was an obligatory subject in all Eastern schools, because without having studied all possible counterfeits and imitations it was not possible to begin the study of phenomena of a supernormal character. A man is in a position to distinguish the real from the sham in this sphere only when he knows all the shams and is able to reproduce them himself. Besides this G. said that a practical study of these “psychic tricks” was in itself an exercise which could be replaced by nothing else, which was the best of all for developing certain special characteristics: keenness of observation, shrewdness, and more particularly for the enlargement of other characteristics for which there are no words in ordinary psychological LANGUAGE but which must certainly be developed. Fragments: Eighteen