There are massively interesting parallels between Gurdjieff’s hokey, though nevertheless meaningful, metaphysics and the pseudo-religious Discordianism of Greg Hill and Kerry Wendell Thornley.
Ill give a brief description. for those not aware of the Discordian religion, of its wild and wooly history. Originally spawned from a bowling alley conversation of Hill and Thornley, their conversations eventually resulted in the Principia Discordia, itself often referencing an earlier work called the “Honest Book of Truth”. This was written by Greg Hill under the pseudonym of Malaclypse the Younger. Later, the religion was popularized through Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s Illuminatis! Trilogy. This was an adventurous, sci-fi conspiracy story published in 1975 that became very well regarded in the literary field, receiving accolades from Rolling Stone and Playboy, among others. Its references to Disordianism brought Hill and Thornley’s brain child to a wider audience and had a widespread effect on a number of other scenes on until the present day.
Eric Davis, show host of the expanding mind podcast, himself a bonified Pope in the Discordian fold and bearing the name Pope Jude the extremely obscure, describes the paradox Discordianism traverses: “A Joke masquerading as a religion, or, perhaps, a religion masquerading as a joke.” Put otherwise, it is a “religion that is not a religion, a joke that is not a joke.” Referring to the Principia Discordia, one of the primary texts of this absurdist religion, he says it is “One of the greatest books of the twentieth century, with a peculiar influence, at once marginal and mysterious, vaguely rumored, barely appearing in libraries and card catalogs, but also incredibly pervasive and prophetic.”
Discordianism contains, not surprisingly, a varied field of philosophical speculation, largely circulating around the basic concept of Order versus Disorder. As might be imagined, the emphasis is on Chaos, pure Order or Truth existing beyond artificial and cultural concepts. Little ‘t’ truths are referred to as subjective and provisional ‘grids’, not necessarily bad, but not to be adhered to with any kind of sanctity. An extreme relativistic, anything-goes kind of philosophy ensues that plays out in the anti-hierarchical, or, more exactly, pseudo-hierarchical structure of the religion. Sectarianism is encouraged, anyone can be the Pope, and members (anyone can of course become a member) feel free to take on all sorts or ridiculous honorifics and pseudonyms that mock traditional human religious figures (for instance, malaclypse the younger pokes fun at a figure like pliny the younger, etc.).
The number 5, oddly enough, was chosen, perhaps arbitrarily, or perhaps in relation to the satanic pentadic principle relating to disorder, as a ‘sacred number’. It shows up in the pentabarf, sort of the Five Oblogonian Strivings or Five Buddhist precepts of Discordianism, whose fourth rule, in contradiction to its 3rd rule, forbids the consumption of hot dog buns. (Its fifth rule forbids the belief in things read, contradicting the fourth rule!) 5 also shows up in the “Law of Fives”, which is described in the Principia Discordia:
The Law of Fives states simply that: All things happen in fives, or are divisible by or are multiples of five, or are somehow directly or indirectly appropriate to 5. The Law of Fives is never wrong.
—Malaclypse the Younger, Principia Discordia, Page 00016
This is a riff on confirmation bias, and plays into the overall scepticism of Discordianism.
Hopefully this clears up some of the essentials of this “religion that is not a religion, this joke that is not a joke”.
Now we’ll take a look at some of gurdjieff’s metaphysical system, drawing parallels along the way.
One of the first correspondences that stand out is the implicit mockery of traditional celestial and terrestrial hierarchies, both through the silly honorific titles given to characters as well as the domains over which they rule. Throughout the book they travel up and down bewildering hierarchies, being promoted for what would be appear to be despicable actions and demoted for meritorious labors. For instance, “His Conformity, the angel looisos”, is promoted to archangel after many dubious actions relating to his actions taken in response to the First Cosmic Catastrophe. (see page 179 of the 2nd Descent). Another example is “Saint Venoma”, whose very title and name contradict each other, and who is “promoted” to Purgatory for his meritorious labors. Even Ashiata Shiemash, the cosmic redeemer of God and Devil, and saint who almost reforms the entire human population of their attachment to the consequences of the organ kundabuffer, receives strings of highly entertaining, sarcastic honorifics such as “Most Saintly”, “Most Most Saintly”, “Very Saintly”, etc. So in this way, we have a construction of characters with silly titles and the mockery of an arbitrary celestial hierarchy just as the Discordians did.
The Law of 5 is an interesting correlation to Gurdjieff’s Laws of 7 and 3. In Gurdjieff’s case, his Laws were not arbitrary, and this is where a distinction has to be drawn between the basic intention of Discordianism and Gurdjieff’s Method.
The very structure and nature of the Tales can appear baffling and chaotic. Gurdjieff introduces hundreds of extremely complicated topics, never resolving them in any one given place. He frequently hands the reader a stack of dense information and immediately flies off into a tangent itself no less obfuscating and seldom appearing related to the main topic of discussion. This emphasis on ambiguity and apparent disorder is a marked similarity between Discordianism and Gurdjieff’s systems, and speaks to a very clever method or reaction against rarified traditional religious structures.
The basic method is a theatrical discourse against those dogmatic structures through satire and charicature rather than a verbally reasoned polemical attack in an organized, academic mode. This is highly interesting and useful for a number of reasons. Firstly, highly rigid institutions have generally acquired such a firm base, both organizationally, but, more importantly for the creation of new ideas and ways of acting, theologically. That is, the institution itself, in response to other belief systems, has fleshed out a counterargument for any possible outside attack. It has developed a formal system of logic that shifts and morphs to counter any challenges to its ideas. This can obviously become highly problematic when many of its tenets, invented in a given time or place, persists into the new environment of a different epoch or age where they no longer belong. Nonetheless, no reasoned attack can win against these traditional theologies. Many of them, as a final recourse, simply refer to the “mystery” or the “need to have faith”. There is, of course, absolutely nothing wrong in the mystery or the unknown. Ultimately all systems of thinking, when questioned fully, come back around to the fact of the unknown. The sinister thing here is that rather than this being of a point of intellectual opening to other ways of seeing the world, it justifies a whole mentality with which it isnt even fundamentally associated or supporting. Nonetheless, the point Im making is that appeals to the Reason no longer work. (For any students of the Tales this is a very interesting point as it forms a major step in Gurdjieff’s own development as a teacher and social revolutionary. (See the Tales of Abdil, and Buddha, for instance, particularly in the context of the overarching story of the “has-been” Gornahoor Harhakh.))
So these satirical methods, while in its implications being quite reasonable, points to the emotional stagnation of the institution through aburdity. It brings the self-importance into view in a starkly contrasted way and appeals to the heart rather than the head. This is striking the institution right at its weak point. Surely such rigid structures form only on the basis of fear of the new, fear of the unknown, and fear of chaos. Clearly this is a highly generalized statement which I dont have the space to open up, but we can say that Discordianism and Gurdjieff’s satirical account appeal to the emotions and circumvent pointless intellectual polemics for a direct attack on degenerated traditional structures at their weakest point.
The All and Everything Review 