Skip to main content

18: The non-expression of negative emotions

Resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other fellow to die. —Anon.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. —Matthew 5:44

One of the first exercises we were given in the SES was not to criticise. This seems odd when criticism is so normal in everyday life, and indeed constructive criticism is often essential. We even sometimes ask for it, then summon up the courage to listen in silence and take it, if we are strong enough. It is one way (mercifully not the only way) to learn and grow.

What I think was meant by the exercise was rather to eschew criticism in the sense of mere negative commentary. There is a big difference, for example, between saying, “That child will never be a dancer because she’s too fat,” (a comment heard in relation to a girl rehearsing for an end of term performance) and what could reasonably have been said instead: “Look at her enthusiasm! She’ll make it some day if she carries on like that!” We often criticise out of ignorance, or we fail to see the positive for a perceived imperfection. We also tend to have internal negative commentary about ourselves, unless we’re so trapped and desperate that we buffer it with false pride. Internal criticism turns into depression; directed outwards it turns to anger or cynicism.

An exercise related to not criticising, in the Fourth Way as taught by Ouspensky, is the non-expression of negative emotions.

Not expressing negative emotions is not the same as repressing them, but it does mean observing them and resisting the temptation to express them, which because of ingrained habits is very hard. It is quite possible to hold one’s ground if necessary and state calmly but firmly what is and is not acceptable, and in most situations this is actually a successful strategy. Becoming angry usually results in a similar reaction from the other person, with both becoming entrenched in a particular position irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the case. Both compromise and understanding become impossible.

Sometimes we find ourselves in a situation in which we feel we have been wronged and we want it put right. We want the shopkeeper to give a refund for something that is not satisfactory, and we are indignant about it. The shopkeeper responds with intransigence on the ground that we don’t have the receipt. We get a little angry and raise our voice. The shopkeeper responds by folding her arms, or calls the manager who comes out with a stony face and a fixed attitude. Now let’s roll back the time to when we entered the shop. “I have a problem I hope you can help me with.” This is an entirely different dynamic, and puts the shopkeeper immediately in the mood to be helpful and to bend any rules that fall into a grey area.

Having control of my temper puts me in control of myself, and losing control of my temper often means losing control both of myself and of the situation. In practical terms this is not dissimilar to the technique of assertiveness training, in which one calmly asserts what is and is not acceptable. What is my aim? Do I want to express negativity or do I want things to turn out how I want them to?

In relation to someone I have had issues with in the past, I find it useful to approach a new encounter with that person as though the past were wiped clean. Of course I will be cautious: the principle of ‘once bitten, twice shy’ applies, and this is not an invitation to naivety. Nevertheless, starting afresh gives the other person the opportunity to behave differently, freed from my and their preconceptions from previous times. If they don’t take the opportunity, nothing much is lost.

There may be circumstances, particularly during a process of healing, in which it is necessary and useful to let feelings of anger out. This, I suggest, would usually be in the context of acknowledging the feelings, and much less often in expressing them to the person who occasioned them in the first place. However it is wise to avoid absolute statements—there are likely to be exceptions.

So far what I have written is no different from advice available from any number of non-esoteric sources. However according to Ouspensky the expression of negative emotions drains energy that could be used for creating consciousness, or in Gurdjieff’s term, creating a soul. This relates to the idea of higher hydrogens, the first and second conscious shocks and the food diagram (of which more later).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

3.2: Influence C in the Fellowship

When I joined the Fellowship I never questioned its authenticity as a fourth way school. I simply accepted the rules, did the exercises and enjoyed the sense of being on a meaningful journey. I felt I was able to verify the teacher through the people around me and the teaching itself. At no point did the question of lineage arise as a problem for me. Once I was asked about it in a prospective student meeting and replied that the System came to our teacher through Rodney Collin and Alex Horn, Robert Burton’s teacher. After the meeting another student quite rightly said to me that we shouldn’t claim a connection with Rodney Collin because we don’t know this for certain. Lineage was always claimed by Robert Burton through Alex Horn, but it is not at all clear what connection Horn had with the fourth way of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky. There is a suggestion that Horn visited Collin in Mexico, but there is scant evidence that he stayed for any length of time or learned anything from him. Howeve

3.7: Centres of gravity and body types

You’re nothing but a pack of cards! —Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland  I do not recall reading anywhere in Gurdjieff’s or Ouspensky’s works the idea of body types or centres of gravity. The idea of body types appears to derive from Rodney Collin’s Theory of Celestial Influence and that of centres of gravity is, as far as I can tell, an innovation by Robert Burton, although I do not know for certain.  In essence both sets of ideas are peripheral to the aim of the fourth way, but they have their uses. Both sets of ideas provide a framework in which one can identify the mechanics of one’s ‘machine.’ This enables one better to understand one’s mechanical or automatic reactions to people and situations and thus become more forgiving and accepting of oneself and others.  The idea of centres of gravity appears to be an embellishment on the division of the body into head, heart and guts, or intellectual centre, emotional centre and instinctive-moving centre, which is discussed in In Search

3.3: The Fourth Way to what?

  If I were to formulate from today’s understanding what my aim was when I first joined SES at the age of seventeen, it would be to acquire a sense of peace and that clear state of awareness that went with it, and also the delight of understanding the world from a set of ideas that made it make sense. It is hard to accept that sometimes it doesn’t. Stepping back, what is the aim of the fourth way from the point of view of its basic texts? The most fundamental texts are arguably Ouspensky’s The Psychology of Man’s Possible Evolution and his In Search of the Miraculous , also Gurdjieff’s All and Everything .  Life is only real then, when I am starts with a summary of the intended results of Gurdjieff’s All and Everything , of which Life is the third series. The summary is as follows: FIRST SERIES: To destroy, mercilessly, without any compromises whatsoever, in the mentation and feelings of the reader, the beliefs and views, by centuries rooted in him, about everything existing in the