Welcome to a series of talks about objective consciousness, an objective Universe, and an objective way to awaken, expanding upon the works of George I. Gurdjieff and Russell A. Smith.

In this podcast I will narrate a dialog between Russell and several of his students. Wherein Russell answers questions about genetics, about personality disorders, about planetary influences, about the Laws of Accident, Fate, Will, and Cause and Effect, as well as delineates two moments of Higher Insight that were shared with him by two of his students.  

Let’s begin.

Russell:  Welcome to class. Who has a question?

Student:  At birth, we can have genetic deformations, we can have physical abnormalities, or there can be deformations brought about through an abnormal birthing, or perhaps a doctor has made a mistake. We can have mental deformations where the baby did not develop correctly, or the cord was wrapped around the baby’s neck and the oxygen failed and thus has affected its mental capacities. There are several scenarios that might cause a baby to have physical and mental disabilities. But I could not find any that caused emotional ones. Yet, when I think about false personalities, artificial men, and mankind, and the labels that society has created, which define improper behavior, such as being bi-polar or having attention deficit disorder, I cannot help but wonder if that is a natural thing, something that was developed in the womb, or is a learned behavior.

Russell:  We certainly have all possibilities. Genes vary, which is why people are different, and certainly, some genes do not function as intended. That is why we discourage inbreeding, because flawed genetics can be passed on. I am sure there are many human beings born with every genetic incapacity you can imagine, and some of them will die because of that. But probably more devastating than genetic deformities, are the acquired ones. It is as simple as saying, we could take any dog and turn it into an attack dog. We could make it want to bite just about anybody. On the other hand, we could take a dog that was an attack dog, and put it in kind surroundings, give it food, talk nice to it, and over time, the dog would become kind and gentle, and would approach us wagging its tail. So there is much that can be altered in the personality.

Student:  Sort of along that same topic, there is a child at school that most of the teachers have ‘written off’ due to his behavior, they think he is beyond help. He lashes out under the slightest noise, he is difficult to talk with, has wild tantrums. He yells out don’t touch me, don’t bother me, I want to kill, I hate. He is full of rage and anger; he is very distorted. And yet, he is very gentle with his little sister, tender, caring, and kind. The complete opposite of his everyday actions; he definitely has a dual personality. Can a behavior like that be a genetic deformity, a chemical imbalance, or are the circumstances in his life so powerful that they have destroyed his natural emotional element and has allowed his false personality to completely encapsulate him?

Russell:  I do not know the answer to that, because I do not know the child. But there are definite conditions that would create things like that, either in his chemistry, or in his personality. Perhaps he is taking beatings from his father in order to protect his little sister. I cannot know the answer to such things because I am not a part of his home life. But certainly, home life can have an extreme bearing on the development of a child; both an advantageous one, as well as a detrimental one. And yes, there could be a chemical imbalance as well. But it is hard for me to give you a definitive answer on such things, without being privy to the entire lifespan of the child, even going back to before they were born.

Student:  In reference to the brain, and chemicals versus behavioral development. I was on hormones for 20 years, and as such, I had anxiety and depression. I was a wreck from the hormones. Then, I got off of them, and was just fine.

Russell:  That is a good example of a chemical change. Where, if you change the chemistry, you change the machine.

Student:  It seems like children are different even when they are born, some are louder than others, some are quieter, some smile all the time, some cry all the time. Is that of their essence? 

Russell:  Well, sometimes it is. We are born with capacities, we are born with strengths, and we are born with the ability to do certain things, which is of our essence. 

But yet, we also have to say, wait a minute, is that really a true statement about babies, or could there be other explanations? 

Perhaps while they were in the womb, arguments often took place between their father and their mother, and as such, the child felt the emotional distress of its mother. Or perhaps their mother took certain substances or ate certain foods that by being in the mother’s system were also in the baby’s system, which too could have influenced them.

Student:  I am one of 4 kids, and I know before my brother was born my father lost his job, and we had to move far away from my mother’s family, in order for him to get work. And, as a result, my mother was really uptight and scared about what was going to happen; I was 5 years old at the time, but I do remember it very well. Then, when my brother was born, he cried a lot. And, while growing up, he seemed to be more anxious. I always believed that something was created in him because that happened.

Russell:  Well, perhaps you are correct. But many other things could have contributed to his crying and anxiousness as well.

Student:  How about twins? Twins are born at the same time, and yet when they are born, they might not be identical.

Russell:  Well, some twins have different genes. Fraternal twins result from the fertilization of two separate eggs, and as such, they share half of their genetics, just like all siblings do. Whereas identical twins result from the fertilization of a single egg that has split into two, and thus, identical twins have the same genetics.

Student:  The good news for me about all of this is that everybody has something to overcome; and, if we are lucky enough to find the Work, we have a better chance of overcoming it. Something that starts out as a weakness, may become a strength.

Russell:  Yes ma’am, that is so true. Thank you for sharing that.

Okay. Are there any other questions?

Student:  Yes, I have one. 

It turns out to be something along the lines of what we are talking about. I am going to read a sentence from The Fourth Way. “If man lived in his essence, he would be under planetary influences or, in other words, under the law of fate.” I would like a little clarification as to what he meant by that, and if you agree with him, or if you would change what he said.

Russell:  That is a good question. Much has been written about planetary influences, most of which is incorrect. 

The truth is, we certainly exist because of planetary influences. If we did not have a moon, we would not have life, if we did not have a sun, we would not have warmth, and if the large outer planets had not deflected or captured meteors, some of them could have hit us and destroyed us, and as such, their influence kept us safe. 

But the notion that somehow planets send emanations to us that have made us what we are, is poppycock. Carl Sagan once said, “The only influence that comes to us from Mars would be its gravity, but since Mars is very far away, its gravity would be very weak. Whereas the Obstetrician who delivered us was very close, and as such, he would have exerted much more gravity on us than Mars. So, if anything, we should be like our Obstetrician.” 

However, we do feel the planetary influences of the Earth. That is, if we lived in a desert, we would be hot, if we lived on a mountain, we would have less oxygen, and if we lived by a river, we would have water. All of which are planetary influences. 

Living in our essence means, we are in touch with the planetary influences that surround us, and therefore, are under the Law of Fate. That is, we would recognize the seasons, the dryness, the wetness, wear clothes to overcome the cold, and dig wells to get water. We would live according to the environment, which is of our essence. If it was of our personality, there would be bees that sting us, and since we don’t like being stung, we would have to kill those bees, and by doing so, we would inadvertently diminish our food source, as we would have destroyed the pollinators. But, if we were of our essence, we would be in alignment with the environment, and as such, we would be able to see things as they are, and thus be able to easily maneuver amongst them. 

Does that make sense?

Student:  Yes, it does. 

Okay. Regarding the Law of Fate and the Law of Accident, how do those two laws influence us before and after we awaken?

Russell:  To answer that, I must first provide some definition concerning the Law of Accident, the Law of Fate, the Law of Cause and Effect, and the Law of Will. 

The Law of Accident is when there is no connection between two things that meet, except for that meeting, or as Ouspensky says, if a man stands next to a building to get out of the rain, and a brick falls and hits him on the head, since there is nothing in the line of the life of the man that connects him to the line of the life of the brick except for that chance meeting, that would be a result of the Law of Accident. However, the Law of Fate says that if a man stands next to a building to get out of the rain, and a brick falls on him because he grows up in a city where all the buildings are dilapidated, and as such, bricks often fall from them, that would be the Law of Fate. Next, we have the Law of Cause and Effect, which says, if a man bumps-up against the building, and the impact causes a brick to fall; or if he makes an unkind gesture to someone on the building who in retaliation drops a brick on him, those occur by the Law of Cause and Effect. Finally, we have the Law of Will, which is predicated on the idea that whatever someone does intentionally is considered to be an act of their will. So then, if a man stands next to a building in order to get out of the rain, and someone thinks that it would be fun to drop a brick on him, or perhaps someone on the building is mad at the world, and hurls a brick at him, those would be done by the Law of Will.

That being said, we can now get back to your question, which was, how does the Law of Fate and the Law of Accident influence us before and after we awaken? 

Well, before we awaken, we are certainly under the Law of Accident, as our center of gravity is probably outside of ourselves, and therefore, is not on what we are doing. 

Speaking for myself, before I awoke, I often found myself driving across Cleveland, Ohio, in order to hang out with some friends that would make me feel good about myself; and as such, I had a much greater chance of being in a car accident. 

Or I would go to bars in order to meet women, where fights often happened since people were drunk. 

Or I would be off in a daydream and trip over the curb because I wasn’t watching where I was walking. 

I could go on-and-on about how before I awoke, I was under the Law of Accident. 

However, after I awoke, I stopped being pulled by such things. That is, there was no longer a need to drive across Cleveland, Ohio, in order to feel good about myself. There was no longer a need to go into bars where fights would break out. And, since I was now present when I walked, I no longer tripped over the curb. 

Does that somewhat answer the first part of your question?

Student:  Yes, it does. It most certainly does.

Russell:  Terrific. 

As to the Law of Fate, which is the influence of your environment, your family, and your friends, I must say that before I awoke, those things were very hard to change. That is, I was taught certain things, given certain views, and acquired certain beliefs. But, after I awoke, I developed a critical eye towards such things, and therefore was able to stand apart from them and say, wait a minute, is that really true? Thus, I began to separate the real from the false, and as a result, I started to free myself from the Law of Fate. Not surprisingly, the more consciously I saw things, the easier it was for me to free myself from them.  

Does that somewhat answer the second part of your question?

Student:  Yes, Russ, it does. Thank you very much.

Russell:  You are most welcome.

In addition, I would like to share with you two moments of Higher Insight that were shared with me by two of my students. 

The first moment of Higher Insight was shared with me last night when I was talking to a student in Puerto Vallarta, whose Higher Self told him to do the following exercise. It said, “Remember yourself, and at the same time try to consciously breathe, as well as hold an emotion and squeeze it like an orange; and when the juice was squeezed out, grab another emotion, and squeeze it as well, then grab another, etc.”

After listening to him describe that Higher Insight, I was reminded of early motorcycles, on which you had to jump on a pedal, in order to create a spark that would start the motorcycle. But once you started the motorcycle, you no longer needed to jump on the pedal, because a running motorcycle created its own sparks, sparks that kept the motorcycle running, that is, until it ran out of gas. 

Just like self-remembering, where, after remembering yourself, something reaches MI-12, and as such, it can be brought back to where Impressions enter, and once again, spark the next moment of self-remembering, which allows you to be in a perpetual state of self-remembering.

The second moment of Higher Insight was shared with me this morning, by a student who had just completed his Objective Dying Exercise, and had successfully separated himself from himself. After which, his Higher Self told him to get up and stay that way, so he did; he got up and stayed that way. Then he quickly called me to say, “Wow, Russ, I cannot think of anyone else I would rather share this with than you. Here I am, separated from myself, with no connection to my physical body. And as such, I am in this world but not of it; in so many ways, I really am not. It is hard for me to define; but, since you are the one who formulated the exercise, I knew that you would understand me not just lying there, but getting up, moving around, and staying in a place that has no connection to the physical body. And how, at present, I am outside my corporeal self, and how that is just marvelous.”

Student:  Wow, Russ, that sounds incredible.

Russell:  That is what “I” told him.

Student:  Okay. I have a question on another topic. As it says in Gurdjieff's Toast of the Idiots, “...no one can reach the Absolute Reason of God.” Does that mean that Angels, Arch-Angels, etc., up to God, get to a certain degree, and then have their own sense of subjectivity? Afterall, with God, all forces are in the same place, whereas for everyone else they are not. Does that figure into the equation of subjectivity?

Russell:  If I had God’s reason, I could give you an answer!

Student:  [Laughing]. Are you going to give me an answer?

Russell:  Yes, I am.   

Firstly, you asked a profound question, “If no one can reach the absolute reason of God, and only the sons of God like Jesus Christ can have the two gradations of reason that are 19th & 20th… are they therefore subjective?  To answer that, we must interpret the quote in a slightly different way. That is, it says that no one can reach the absolute reason of God, except God, but it does not say that we ourselves cannot become God! It only says that only God can have the reason of God. That is, if there are sons of God, then what do they become when they grow up? 

Secondly, is the model something as profound as saying that you cannot have thoughts of unity, unless you are unified? That is, you cannot have the reason of being in a unified place, unless you are in a unified place. 

If so, that would mean that only God, who is in a unified place, could have reason commensurate with being unified. But it does not say that one cannot become unified, before coming to that place. 

Christ said, “I and my Father are One,” so he must have been able to experience the place of God, without being in that place. 

Student:  Wow, Russ, that is just terrific!

The other part of my question was this: With God, all forces are in the same place, and with everything else they are not. Does that figure into the equation of subjectivity?

Russell:  Well, subjectivity is relative. 

If we deduce that the Universe is infinite, then all forces in the Universe are in the same place, that is, they are all in the Universe. So on that scale, we could say that in the Universe all forces are in the same place. 

However, if we are talking about another scale, a scale that has no size, and are saying that in that scale all forces are in the same place, well, that would be a different story. 

So, it depends on which scale we are talking about. 

Which scale is God in? 

Which scale is the separation of the three forces in? 

I happen to believe that all things are law-conformable. That is, whatever the possibilities are for God on His scale, are the same possibilities for us on our scale. That there is no line you reach which says, “Whoops, that is as far as you can go.” 

I cannot accept that. 

Because if there is a place beyond where we are created, then there must be a way of getting to that place. Besides, if somebody is already in that place, then, how did they get there? 

In all other fields of endeavor, records continuously get broken. People run faster and jump farther. That is, all things go beyond where they once were, and as such, all students are allowed to get better than their teacher. 

So why wouldn’t it also be that way for God? 

If so, then all we have to do is become as good as God, after which, we would not only experience what it is like to have all forces in the same place; but also experience what it means to go beyond God as well.

That being understood, Christ also said, when asked where the Kingdom of Heaven was, that the Kingdom of Heaven was inside of us. Therefore, God, who is in the Kingdom of Heaven, is also inside of us. Which means that we are God, and as such, when we become unified, we will possess the unified reason of God; and thus, my friends, it is not that hard for each of us to reach higher reason.

Student:  Oh my, Russ, your answers always amaze me. Probably because they always make such good sense.

Russell:  Well, thank you for that.

My answers probably make good sense to you, because they make good sense to me.

Student:  Hear, hear! 

Russell:  Well, I think that is enough for today. Thank you for being here. 

Student:  No. Thank you for being here; and, for freely sharing your knowledge with us. 

We all look forward to next week’s class.

Good night, Russ.

That completes today’s podcast.

Thank you for listening.

If you have any questions that you would like answered, please send them to [email protected], and we will endeavor to answer them, and perhaps ... even include them in a future podcast.  

In addition, you may now pose questions at our new Telegram group THEDOG Teachings, which is open to everyone to join and participate in.

You may also find us on Instagram at THEDOG Teachings, where we have posted all of Gurdjieff’s Aphorisms and THEDOG school’s DOGTales, as well as simple explanations of many diagrams and models.

Or if you would like to purchase Russell Smith’s book, The Blueprint of Consciousness, a 520-page hardback, which is also available for PDF download, or learn more about the subjects and exercises we have been exploring, you can do so by going to thedogteachings.com.

That’s T H E D O G teachings DOT COM.

There, you will be able to listen to other talks, obtain diagrams, animations, supporting videos, and much, much more.

But most importantly, you will have real time access to the materials we are discussing.

That’s thedogteachings.com

Goodbye, until next time.