A Protest Made In Sorrow on the Revision

of Beelzebubs Tales to His Grandson

Subject: A Protest Part 1
Two Rivers Farm, Aurora, Oregon, February 1993
A Protest Made In Sorrow on the Revision of Beelzebubs Tales to His Grandson
The following is a response to the recent publication of a revised version of All and
Everything, First Series, or Beelzebubs Tales to His Grandson, by G.I.Gurdjieff. This is
made by a number of students of Gurdjieffs teaching, and is addressed to those believed to
be responsible for the revised publication, but who remain unidentified. While this response
presents many questions about the revision that arise in the minds of serious students of
Gurdjieffs teaching, it is in actuality a protest, reflecting the dissent and dismay of those
presented in the authentic text of his remarkable book. As such, this is written more in
sorrow than in anger. Appended hereto are the signatures of a few of the students who
support this response, and join in expressing their objection to the adulteration of
Gurdjieffs work.
For more than 20 years now, we have applied a considerable amount of time, attention, and
energy to the reading and study of Beelzebubs Tales To His Grandson (Beelzebubs Tales)
and listening to it being read aloud. Time and time again, we have drawn on Gurdjieffs
writings for answers to questions regarding the Work, our own Work, and how to live a life
in the Work. This Book, Beelzebubs Tales, especially has becomes for us a hearth of
understanding and inspiration, and no matter how many times we have read it, always
presents us with new insights.
I hope very much that you will be kind enough to answer this letter or cause it to be
answered.
A.L.Staveley
cc: Mr. William Caryl
Dr. Bernard Courtenay-Mayers
Mr. Thomas C. Daly
Mrs.Margaret Flinsch
Mrs. Norma Flynn
Dr. Jacob Needleman
Lady Pentland
Mr. Paul Reynard
Mrs. H.B.Ripman
Mr. William Siegel
Dr. William J. Welch
Sincerely, 7 February 1999. Please take the time to read this.-justin

Some corrections are made in blue

Subject: A Protest Part 1
Two Rivers Farm, Aurora, Oregon, February 1993
A Protest Made In Sorrow on the Revision of Beelzebubs Tales to His Grandson
The following is a response to the recent publication of a revised version of All and
Everything, First Series, or Beelzebubs Tales to His Grandson, by G.I.Gurdjieff. This is
made by a number of students of Gurdjieffs teaching, and is addressed to those believed to
be responsible for the revised publication, but who remain unidentified. While this response
presents many questions about the revision that arise in the minds of serious students of
Gurdjieffs teaching, it is in actuality a protest, reflecting the dissent and dismay of those
presented in the authentic text of his remarkable book. As such, this is written more in
sorrow than in anger. Appended hereto are the signatures of a few of the students who
support this response, and join in expressing their objection to the adulteration of
Gurdjieffs work.
For more than 20 years now, we have applied a considerable amount of time, attention, and
energy to the reading and study of Beelzebubs Tales To His Grandson (Beelzebubs Tales)
and listening to it being read aloud. Time and time again, we have drawn on Gurdjieffs
writings for answers to questions regarding the Work, our own Work, and how to live a life
in the Work. This Book, Beelzebubs Tales, especially has becomes for us a hearth of
understanding and inspiration, and no matter how many times we have read it, always
presents us with new insights.
I hope very much that you will be kind enough to answer this letter or cause it to be
answered.
A.L.Staveley
cc: Mr. William Caryl
Dr. Bernard Courtenay-Mayers
Mr. Thomas C. Daly
Mrs.Margaret Flinsch
Mrs. Norma Flynn
Dr. Jacob Needleman
Lady Pentland
Mr. Paul Reynard
Mrs. H.B.Ripman
Mr. William Siegel
Dr. William J. Welch

Subject: A Protest Part II

Two Rivers Farm
28066 S. Meridian Road, Aurora, Oregon 97002
February 5, 1993
Dr. Michel de Salzmann
S.E.A.R.C.H.
5 rue de Commandant Mar
Paris 75016
France
Dear Dr. de Salzmann:
I am sending this letter to you as I understand you are the titular head of the teachings of
Gurdjieff in Europe and America possibly for the whole planet. If this is a
misunderstanding on my part, please forgive me. Copies of this letter will be sent to senior
persons I know by name in various centers such as London, New York and San Francisco.
This letter is a question and conveys a protest about the appearance in bookstores of a
revised version of Gurdjieffs Book, the legacy of his teaching, All and Everything, or,
Beelzebubs Tales to His Grandson. I am led to believe that this revision has been prepared
and published as it were, officially, and under the
auspices of responsible representatives of the way Gurdjieffs teaching goes into the world.
However, there is no name, or names of such responsible ones on the published edition,
with the exception of Madame de Salzmann who, being deceased, cannot, therefore, have
initiated the actual publication of this revision.
Enclosed with this letter is a protest compiled by some of the students of Gurdjieffs
teaching in Oregon who have been working with the authentic original, approved by
Gurdjieff himself. They have found it a scripture specially prepared for this time,
containing as claimed All and Everything. It is exact and precise. Nothing should be
changed, nothing omitted. I am quite certain that there are many others who are shocked
and outraged at the appearance of this book. In many places alterations are made which
even change the meaning of Gurdjieffs own writing.
If the faceless, nameless ones who published the revision really wish to give those new to
Gurdjieffs teaching a fair opportunity of comparing the revised with the authentic edition,
they should immediately authorize a reprint of the original authentic one perhaps
reducing the price somewhat to make up for the new students having to buy two books.
Naturally, many concerns and questions come to mind when we now see in the book stores,
for the first time since its original publication in 1950, a revised version of Gurdjieffs
written legacy of Work. We have read the dust jacket and enough of the text to realize that
changes have been made to virtually every sentence in the Book, and the text has been
shortened by more than a hundred pages. Frankly, this publication has left us baffled and
confused and even a bit floundering, as Mullah Nassr Eddin says, like-a-puppy-who-hasfallen-into-a-deep-pond (pg. 165), as we try to fathom its purpose. For these reasons, we
wish to share our questions and thoughts regarding this with you. We invite your response.

Subject: A Protest Part III

To begin with the comment on the dust jacket that the authentic edition was approached
with apprehension by readers, you should know that our experience in approaching
Beelzebubs Tales has not at all been one of apprehension or anxiety. It has been more like
awe, or perhaps a feeling akin to fear as in the fear of God, but certainly not
apprehension, in its meaning of suspicion, or fear of future evil. On the contrary, our
experience is a feeling of joy in knowing that Gurdjieffs teaching is alive in that Book. It is
really accurate to state that apprehension is what beginning readers have felt? Ofcourse,
they may well feel a reluctance to venture into new territory on their own, without a
competent guide who has the faith needed for the journey.
We (and there are a large number of us) have pondered the aim of this revision, which you
have formulated as: to clarify the verbal surface while respecting the authors thought and
style. What is meant by verbal surface? What could the verbal surface be but words
chosen by the author and arranged in the manner he selected, i.e. in his style? Is not
Gurdjieffs style inseparable from what you call the verbal surface?
You refer to a new experience of Gurdjieffs masterpiece for a generation of readers.
While we who have immersed ourselves in Gurdjieffs Beelzebubs Tales may now have
the option of choosing whether or not to invest in this new experience, people from now
on who are new to the Gurdjieff Work will not have this choice. The authentic edition has
not been published in hard bound copy for several years and even the paperback editions
have become increasingly difficult to obtain. Your revised publication will in time become
the only version of Beelzebubs Tales available and the new experience will become the
only experience (until such time as it may again be revised to conform to the assumed
inadequacies of future readers). What do you imagine this new experience could be? The
promise of a new experience implies that the old experience is somehow lacking. In
what way can you possibly see it as deficient?
Your jacket text refers to the Russian original of Beelzebubs Tales, and states that
readers have recognized the need for a revised translation. Isnt it true, however, that the
Russian original could only be the handwritten notes of Gurdjieff and of those who took
down his original dictation, which have never been published and made available to
readers? So, how is it that readers could question the translation without access to an
original Russian text? The original authentic text of Beelzebubs Tales, the one Gurdjieff
labored so long to create, is the English text first published in 1950. The publisher of the
revised version has informed us that the revised edition was prepared from a revision of the
original English text only. If this is true, then why does the copyright page state that the
revision was made by a group of translators? What was being translated?

Subject: A Protest IV
The revised edition states that the translators were under the direction of Jeanne de
Salzmann. Although Madame de Salzmann was a truly remarkable person, French was her

mother tongue, and she was not as expert as Orage in the use of the English language. It is
difficult for us to understand how one could expect the new team of revisers to be an
improvement over the team of Gurdjieff, Orage, and the others chosen by Gurdjieff for this
task. As stated in the Book itself, the authentic original text was prepared under the
personal direction of the author, by a group of translators chosen by (Gurdjieff) and
specially trained according to their defined individualities, in conformity with the text to be
translated and in relation to the philological particularities of each language. (copyright
page)
Orage, of course, had the primary responsibility for putting Beelzebubs Tales into the
English prose that corresponded to Gurdjieffs design. Orage held a special, if not uniquely
high position in Gurdjieffs regard, and is the only person known to be referred to as his
close friend. (Life Is Real Only Then, When I Am, pg. 154) As Orage labored to put
Gurdjieffs manuscript into English, he was asked why he did not do something about its
grammar and punctuation (perhaps clarify the verbal surface?). Orages answer has
always been helpful and illuminating to us as we struggle with our own understanding of
parts of the Book. He says:
Some of you still criticize the faulty grammar and punctuation and ask why I do not do
something about it.Gurdjieff is constantly re-writing and revising. (pg. 1)His
(Gurdjieffs) task is to write the book, ours to make the effort to understand. The style and
sense are Gurdjieffs. The surprising thing is that, in spite of the difficulties of translation
the sense and style come through so well. It can be said that in English, this being a more
flexible language than French, it is possible to play with words, so that the English
translation will have a quality of its own. (pg. 2)Gurdjieff will not use the language of the
intelligentsia ideas in the book will not be presented in our habitual thought patterns. Our
intellectual life is based on chance associations which have become more or less fixed.
Only when these are broken up can we begin to think freely. Our associations are
mechanical; a whole mood can be destroyed by the use of one word which has a different
group of associations. (pg. 3) (A.R.Orages Commentaries on All and Everything, Edited by
C.S.Nott, pp. 1-3).
It seems to us that many of the revisions do change the readers mood, and in many cases
the understanding as well. Even when we turn to Gurdjieffs first words in the Book, in
Friendly Advice, we find that his experimental elucidations concerning the productivity
of the perception by contemporary people of new impressions, have become in the revised
version, his research concerning the profit contemporary people can obtain from new
impressions. Perhaps the reader does struggle, a little, with the authentic text, but as he is
struggling, the reader might also be asking himself what is an experimental elucidation?
or wondering at the thought of perceptions being productive. The new renderings of
research and profit already have very well established groups of associations and are
easily passed along by the readers habitual thought process, not requiring any questioning
whatsoever. And so it seems to go throughout the text, from the chapter titles to the last
sentence of the book, substituting the familiar for the challenging.

Subject: A Protest V

While we may not be certain just what the language of the intelligentsia actually is, is it
not likely to be found in the nature of the revisions you have made? Isnt Orage saying that
the use of such language supports habitual thought patterns and gets in the way of the
readers ability to take in new ideas? Of course, Gurdjieff says this in Chapter I, in
explaining his refusal to employ the bon ton literary language used by patentedwriters.
(Pg. 6)
Here are just a very few examples of the alterations we have noticed in our encounter with
the new text, which we believe change the readers mood or alter the authors thought and
style, instead of clarifying the verbal surface:
Authentic Version (A.V):
any prayer may be heard by the Higher Powers and a corresponding answered obtained
(Friendly Advice)
Revised Version (R.V.):
any prayer may be heard and granted by the Higher Powers (Friendly Advice)
A.V.: the trouble with you is (pg.6)
R.V.: what will be troublesome for you (pg. 6)
A.V.: indispensably necessary that every day, at sunrise (pg. 78)
R.V.: indispensable when the sun rises (pg. 74)
A.V.: my dear Captain grandfather is wrong here (pg. 75)
R.V.: dear grandfather (pg. 72)
A.V.: convince (with regard to unconscious parts pg. 78)
R.V.: think and convince (pg. 74)
A.V.: fulfill the good (pg. 78)
R.V.: enjoy the good (pg. 74)
A.V.: sympathetic (pg. 594)
R.V.: amiable (pg. 545)
A.V.: constated (pg. 596)
R.V.: noticed (pg. 546)
A.V.: human mentation (pg. 1193)
R.V.: human thought (pg. 1093)
Throughout the text, nuances of meaning that have given Gurdjieffs writing a magical
quality have been spoiled by the revisions.

We have come to understand for ourselves that a very real aspect of Beelzebubs Tales is
not readily accessible to the formatory apparatus of the head-brain. Again and again, this
can be seen whenever people obstinately go on trying to figure it out upon encountering
the unfamiliar word or locution. On the other hand, when we simply listen to it being read
relaxed, attentive, and open like a child something real is definitely received. We have
experienced a broadening of our understanding, little by little, to encompass a knowing that
is found in feeling as well as in thought. This experience is reflected by Louise Welch in
Orage With Gurdjieff In America:
Beelzebubs Tales produced a powerful effect, but that is not to say it was readily grasped.
There were
layers of meaning that people were touched by, but could not in any way formulateCould
one listen, as
Orage advised, without giving way to constant verbal associations and unrelated imagery?
Much of the
narrative was addressed to different levels of perception in people (Gurdjieff had said
seven). The task
was to respond with the whole of ones mind, and not just with what Gurdjieff called the
formatory
apparatus, that part of the brain which was busy classifying ideas and objects, putting them
into pigeon
holes, and thereafter returning mechanically to them as statements of truth. This was all
before the days of
the computer, but his description of the conclusions of the formatory apparatus bears a
close resemblance
to computerized thought. (pg. 47)"

Subject: A Protest VI
Isnt it probable that Gurdjieff worked so diligently on the text, rewriting time and time
again, trying it out on all kinds of people, so as to find the exact words and mode of
expression that would direct his message to the deepest, most essential part of his readers,
rather than just to the head brain? Consider what Gurdjieff himself tells the reader in
Chapter I:
I wish to bring to the knowledge of what is called your pure waking consciousness the
fact that in
the writing following this chapter of warning I shall expound my thoughts intentionally in
such sequence and
with such logical confrontation, that the essence of certain real notions may of themselves
automatically,
so to say, go from this waking consciousness which most people in their ignorance
mistake for real
consciousness, but which I affirm and experimentally prove is the fictitious one into what
you call the

subconscious, which ought to be in my opinion the real human consciousness, and thereby
themselves
mechanically bring about that transformation which should in general proceed in the
entirety of a man and
give him, from his own conscious mentation, the results he ought to have, which are proper
to man and
not merely to single- or double-brained animals.
I decided to do this without fail so that this initial chapter of mine, predetermined as I have
already said to awaken your consciousness, should fully justify its purpose, and reaching
not only your, in my opinion, as yet only fictitious consciousness, but also your real
consciousness, that is to say, what you call your subconscious, might, for the first time,
compel you to reflect actively. (Pages 24-25)
Now, if one really wished to understand what is being said here, and allowed Gurdjieffs
words to penetrate to a deeper part of oneself, then perhaps one would see there is no need
to change a single word and ANY change could prevent the very result Gurdjieff intended.
This is especially so in light of Gurdjieffs statement that our fictitious consciousness is
formed from mechanical impressions, including the consonances of various words which
are indeed empty (pg. 25).
Certainly Gurdjieff and Orage and the others who stewarded the Book to publication could
have prepared a text much in the manner of this revision, had Gurdjieff so wished. How can
anyone not agree with J.G.Bennett in his Talks on Beelzebubs Tales that This is not the
work of an amateur first trying his hand at literary compositionIt is written as, after long
deliberation, he wished it to be written.? (pg. 10) Dont you think Gurdjieff had good
reason to present his ideas in just the manner of expression he chose?
The revisions appear to have been made for the purpose of creating a text that is more
grammatical, up to date, and presumably easier and more comfortable to read. Was it
your intention to facilitate the readers understanding of Gurdjieffs teaching? However,
isnt this contrary to Gurdjieffs way as expressed by Bennett, who says:
GURDJIEFFS METHODS ARE DIRECTLY OPPOSED to all our comfortable habits
he never made anything easyOn the contrary, he made the approach to his ideas difficult,
both intellectually and emotionally. (Talks on Beelzebubs Tales, pg. 9)
Or as Louise Welch states: Gurdjieff made a vital distinction between knowledge and
information. For knowledge to be rightly transmitted, and properly received, a special
effort was required to read and inwardly digest. Gurdjieff held that knowledge, like all else
on this planet, was material, was food and had to be properly ingested and absorbed. And,
since the way in which knowledge entered the psyche was of primary importance, it was
necessary for him to write so that the very structure of the material would refuse to allow
the reader easy possession of its substanceThe digging that the reader must undertake
to reach any understanding was essential. In fact, as Orage discovered, when an idea
appeared to be too easily grasped, Gurdjieffs instructions to him were to bury the bone
deeper. (Orage with Gurdjieff in America, Pages 44-45)

In Chapter I, Gurdjieff tells the reader that he chose not to write as others do because (for
one reason) the reader is not accustomed to making any individual effort whatsoever.
(pages 6-7)

Subject: A Protest VII

Consider also the observations of Bennett regarding changes Gurdjieff made in the
manuscript edition of Beelzebubs Tales. He says:
Why should Gurdjieff have made a chapter that was already difficult even harder, if indeed
the intention was that Beelzebubs Tales should be a means of bringing the ideas to the
notice of the general public? Only someone familiar with his ideas, and prepared to devote
a lot of time and hard study to the chapter could make anything of it. Gurdjieff has shown
in his Meetings with Remarkable Men that he could tell stories in simple language, without
confronting the reader with any linguistic problems. We also know that he spent no fewer
than seven years in the writing of Beelzebub as he himself says, sparing himself neither
day nor night, constantly writing and rewriting. Therefore, we must assume that the writing
of Beelzebub was in the form which he intended, and that the alterations were deliberate, in
spite of making the ideas less accessible to the unprepared reader. (Gurdjieff: Making a
New World, pages 176-177)
The Christian ideal, it is said, has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found
difficult and left untried. (G.K.Chesterton) Is it to be the same with Gurdjieffs teaching in
Beelzebubs Tales?
Gurdjieff has been quoted as saying that after he dies, people who follow his ideas will tend
to become organized in a kind of orthodox establishment, become conservative, publish
authorized editions of his words, and try to forget or at least ignore his outrageous side.
One of our favorite bits of Gurdjieffs masterful and unforgettable use of the unexpected is
his youthful dancing around his grandmothers grave and singing:
Let her with the saints repose,
Now thats shes turned up her toes,
Oi! Oi! Oi!
Let her with the saints repose,
Now that shes turned up her toes. (pg. 29)
The revision of the verse to,
Let her with the saints repose
She was a rare one, goodness knows! (pg. 27)
certainly presents a more orthodox and less outrageous picture of the young Gurdjieff. It
also produces a very different mood and emotional response in the reader, goodness knows!

Arent you worried, even a little, that Gurdjieffs grandmother, whose dying words to him
were never do as others do, might learn of her eldest grandsons revised verse and fulfill
his fears by turning in her grave like an Irish weathercock? (pg. 41)
This is one of the more shocking changes made in Chapter I, but many other revisions in
this chapter are just as bewildering. For example, why was it felt necessary to change ever
so slightly the opening prayer from In the name of the Father and of the Son and in the
name of the Holy Ghost. Amen. to, In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Ghost. Amen? (pg. 3) Why was the chant of so and so and so you must, do not eat
until you bust (pg. 30) changed to enough is enough, you dont need to stuff? (pg. 27), or
the famous Georgian song, little did we tipple (pg. 46) to Drink up again, boys? (pg. 42)
Even the authors exclamation near the end of the chapter, Stop! Misunderstanding
Formation! (pg. 50) has been altered; now, by the end of the first chapter of revised text,
the revisers have Gurdjieff exclaiming Stop! Misconceived formulation! (pg. 46) We
cannot help but wonder whether this new injunction may be addressed to the revisers
themselves as they attempt the reformulation of Gurdjieffs thoughts.

Subject: A Protest VIII

Throughout the whole of Chapter I, The Arousing of Thought, Gurdjieff, in the authentic
text, makes masterful use of his precise and unique style of expression to instill gradually
and subtly sympathetic feelings in the reader, feelings that serve to open the readers heart
and mind to all that follows in that magnificent Book. According to Bennett, Gurdjieff:
gave more time and care to the composition of The Arousing of Thought than to
anything else he
wrote. His translators assert that it was completely rewritten at least seven times, and read
in his presence
innumerable times to old and new pupils and friends, to chance acquaintances and even to
complete
strangers. Gurdjieff could be in no doubt about the hostility it would provoke; offending, as
it does, every
canon of literary and personal taste (Talks on Beelzebubs Tales, pages 9-10)
Have you fully considered that for every word or phrase that is changed or improved
upon, that there is also the risk of altering the subtle impact of this remarkable opening,
and its consequent results in the reader for the whole of the Book. As Bennett adds, The
Arousing of Thought is not an isolated phenomenon, but a characteristic specimen of
Gurdjieffs teaching. Does not the potential risk to the reader therefore extend beyond this
writing to the whole of Gurdjieffs Teaching and Work?
In The First Visit of Beelzebub to India, Gurdjieff describes how easily a teaching can be
lost. Through Saint Buddha, he says that owing to the maleficent particularity of our
psyche called Wiseacring, we gradually change the teaching of Sacred Individuals until
the whole of it is finally completely destroyed. (pg. 238) Saint Buddhas teaching itself

did not escape this fate. Gurdjieff may have been giving us a warning about his own
teaching when Beelzebub tells us, the first succeeding generation of the contemporaries
of this genuine Messenger from Abovealso began to wiseacre with all His indications
and counsels until nothing was left but Only-information-about-its-specific-smell.
(pages 239-240) He states further:
LITTLE BY LITTLE they so changed these indications and counsels of His that if their
Saintly Author Himself should chance to appear there and for some reason or other should
wish to make Himself acquainted with them, He would not be able to even suspect that
these indications and counsels were made by Him Himself This already long established
practice there consists in this, that a SMALL, SOMETIMES AN ALMOST TRIFLING,
CAUSE is enough to bring about a change for the worse or even the complete destruction
of[objective good]. (pg. 240) (Emphasis added.)
Not only did Gurdjieff predict that his followers would sanitize his writings, but he also, in
Life Is Real Only Then, When I Am (Third Series), refers to the fact that today,
enemies with an unusual inner attitude toward me are multiplying in great numbers He
explains this unusual inner attitude as follows: There is not, so to speak, a single one of
my sworn enemies who, in one or another of his ordinary states, would not be ready to sell
his soul for me. (pg. 174) While this appears to be absurd, he explains, it is nevertheless
an irrefutable fact that can be demonstrated at will. He says, The more someone has
direct relations with me, the more strength he shows later in the diametrically opposed
actions that he manifests towards me. (pg. 175) Is it not possible, therefore, that even
action taken by those who have felt closest and most intimately connected to Gurdjieff
could manifest in a way that is diametrically opposed to Gurdjieffs aim?

Subject: A Protest IX
Gurdjieff is not saying that these enemies act consciously against him, but according to
lawful scientific principles. How well one knows that actions can produce the opposite of
the results intended, even when carried out with the best of intentions. In this case, action
taken with the apparent intent to propagate the Teaching, perhaps is instead actually the
beginning of its deterioration. As Beelzebubs highly esteemed teacher, Mullah Nassr
Eddin, says: Isnt it all one to the poor flies how they are killed? By the kick of the hooves
of horned devils, or by a stroke of the beautiful wings of divine angels? (pg. 1086)
Gurdjieff literally put all and everything into this Book. As Gurdjieff himself said, he did
not have the slightest wish to write, but circumstances quite independent of him constrained
him to do so. He had already been not only through the mill but through all the
grindstones as well. (pg. 18) He began writing when he realized there no longer was time
to disseminate his teaching by way of direct contact alone. He was in his last stages of life,
had never before written for publication and was to receive neither fame nor riches for his
efforts. Yet he began writing only a few months after his near fatal automobile crash, which
he survived against all medical expectations. For a period of twenty-five years, Beelzebubs
Tales took on its form and content, until the printers proofs set for publication were at last

delivered to Gurdjieff. Having received confirmation that his lifes work was to endure in at
least this written form, Gurdjieff died eight days later.
His Book has been referred to as his Magnum Opus, the divine glorification of his lifes
work, a flying cathedral of a book, and an objective work of art. It is a book only in the
sense the Bible is a book a scripture. Gurdjieff perhaps saw the entire Book as one
magnificent prayer, for he advises that it be read thrice, because, any prayer may be heard
by Higher Powers and a corresponding answer obtained only if it is uttered thrice, first for
ones parents, then for ones neighbor, and lastly for oneself. Gurdjieffs writing of this
Book is a demonstration of the truth that real Work, like prayer, is to be invoked for the
benefit of others. Beelzebubs Tales is written to and for the Grandson, for the benefit of the
reader and those to come after. In this Book, Gurdjieff has sown the seeds of an authentic
teaching of immeasurable welfare for mankind. Whether or not Gurdjieffs labors will grow
to harvest now depends on us, the readers, and whether we make use of the teaching as he
presented it. Gurdjieff expressed a very strong hope and wish for the reader of Beelzebubs
Tales, in his words, a hope that according to your understanding you will obtain the
specific benefit for yourself which I anticipate, and which I wish for you with all my
being. Such a powerful wish from Gurdjieff, a wish made with all his being, can be
received only with complete humility and the recognition that the fulfillment of Gurdjieffs
wish must come through the understanding and efforts of the reader. In writing Beelzebubs
Tales as he did, Gurdjieff left us a living legacy of hope, the Hope of Consciousness, which
is strength. Our wish is that it continue to be a real source of strength to learners and
strivers everywhere.
(End)

BeelzebubsTales To His Grandson: original english version earlier transcript version

revised de Salzmann version