Since we are having this discussion here about splitting the mind, and the topic of Gurdjieff came up, as an example of practises *not* to do in TM theory/dogma, I think it's worth having a second look on it, what it actually means from a proponent of Gurdjeffs teaching. It is easy to misinterpret a teaching on the basis of half-knowledge and hear say. So I found the following video, explaining double attention, and, you know what, it actually makes sense. Our awareness is naturally able do perceive many things at a time, once we are in the witness mode. But once we concentrate on something, it tends to occupy are mind more or less exclusively, we get identified and are not in-the-flow. See the video and you will see that it is something we actually do all the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdk_JnZ4y0I In this context: Are there two minds? This is from a Castaneda book. Castaneda quite likely was also influenced by Gurdjieff, and many of his ideas he collected from him. Read this and compare: http://www.prismagems.com/castaneda/donjuan12.html "We are not naturally petty and contradictory. Our pettiness and contradictions are, rather, the result of a transcendental conflict that afflicts every one of us, but of which only sorcerers are painfully and hopelessly aware: the conflict of our two minds! One is our true mind, the product of all our life experiences, the one that rarely speaks because it has been defeated and relegated to obscurity. The other, the mind we use daily for everything we do, is a foreign installation." "To resolve the conflict of the two minds is a matter of intending it. Sorcerers beckon intent by voicing the word intent loud and clear. Intent is a force that exists in the universe. When sorcerers beckon intent, it comes to them and sets up the path for attainment, which means that sorcerers always accomplish what they set out to do."
