P.D. Ouspensky’s legacy is usually tied to his work as a pupil of Gurdjieff. While Ouspensky was a thorough intellectual capable of articulating his own thoughts and ideas in a manner that reflected his own understanding of them, it was his experiences with Gurdjieff that gave him a glimpse of a far greater truth. Most of his life (along with that of his wife’s) was spent in propagating the Fourth Way. Yet, he had frequent (and infamous) episodes of falling out with the man who introduced him to the core of this teaching. Towards the end of his life, Ouspensky was said to have become gloomy, withdrawn and completely dismissive of the Fourth Way and the teachings of ‘G’ (as he refers to Gurdjieff throughout ‘In Search of the Miraculous’.

As I have begun to grow in an understanding of this teaching, I ask myself if Ouspensky had indeed achieved a greater state of ‘awakeness’. If he had, what made him (at least outwardly) abandon the system? And why was his relationship with his teacher so turbulent?



There are numerous possibilities. Let us consider four.

First – He achieved an initial glimpse of the state of being ‘awake’ through his early interactions with Gurdjieff.

There are several reasons for why this is likely. Ouspensky himself writes of interesting phenomena he experienced which convinced him he was asleep. The exact trigger for this burst of greater consciousness is not pinpointed – perhaps because it cannot easily be attributed to one perceptible moment or experience in time. What remains convincing that he received at least a glimpse of these possibilities are the accounts of his own experiences while studying with Gurdjieff.

This brings us to the possibility that he might have later lost that higher state or was unable to hold on to it. If he did experience it at all, it is possible it was initially induced through his interaction with Gurdjieff and Ouspensky was either unwilling or unable to sustain it. This is understandable because the ‘Work’ describes what is required of it from anyone interested in it – work.

Second – He understood that a higher state of being was possible but was unable to fully assimilate parts of himself into unity of consciousness.

This would also explain why Gudjieff tried his best to give Ouspensky ‘shocks’ to fully demonstrate the activity of those parts of him which Ouspensky was unable to fully grasp consciously. Could it be that this very aspect of his being which bothered him was the one area he was unable to clearly see? A man as ‘intellectual’ as Ouspensky likely developed very complex egos along the way which could have formed formidable barriers to his ability to self-observe.

Third – He was awake but unable to find any greater truth beyond this initial state.

This is an unlikely possibility, but the truth is I did not know Ouspensky and therefore can only use conjecture. If he had grasped and assimilated the truth to an extent that brought him into a state of higher consciousness similar or even greater than Gurdjieff, perhaps he found nothing beyond this state. Without knowledge of how to proceed (if such knowledge exists), he might have gotten disillusioned with the ‘Work’ and ceased to believe in its practical application.

Fourth – He was awake all along and had become who he was meant to be.

Finally, it is possible that Ouspensky was fully awake and understood his role and played his part in the greater scheme of things. Certainly, his writings and lectures on the system spread awareness of it in a big way in the Western world. Perhaps, Ouspensky grew to understand this was his role and he played it out fully. This is certainly an idea that would best explain the seemingly contradictory behaviour of both Ouspensky and Gurdjieff at various times during their interaction (or lack of it) with each other.