>>44906946Gurdijieff was the original gachikoi.
>The Work sometimes is criticized for lacking in love. What is meant is a lack of warmth, of good feeling, of affection, a spirit of friendship and encouragement. In a word, a lack of brotherhood. The point that is missed—and it is a vital point—is that the aim of the Work is to wake up from the sleep of the self-image, from self-love. And awakening is not to a glorious sunny morning but to all the explanations, "could haves," and rationalizations that obfuscate the primary fact of our existence: that we are mechanical and awash in the dreams. Gurdjieff promised not to awaken us but to create the conditions by which we could see ourselves as we really are, not as we imagine ourselves to be. That engenders suffering and so the criticism. (1)>Not surprisingly, just as we attribute to ourselves that we have a real I, free will, and the capacity to do, we also believe we can be sincere, that we can love. But how can a sleeping person love? Isn't the 'love' we experience a 'sleep love' a personal love? When Hindus meet they say Shanti, which means, "I honor the light within you." Not you as a person but the light, the truth, the being that is manifested. True love, (2) spiritual love, is impersonal. 