Anybody here read Whitnall Perry's "Gurdjieff in the Light of Tradition"? Anybody else dissapointed? I was hoping to read a good critical book attempting to demonstrate that Gurdjieff's ideas are not a "traditional" teaching (at least not from the Traditionalist perspective as taught by Rene Guenon or his cronies). Granted the book make some interesting points but Perry's argument is summed up by his final question:

"In order to situate Gurdjieff and his movement, the one and only question the seeker has to resolve is whether or not God is omnipotent. If the answer is in the affirmative, then Gurdjieff and his hosts are doomed."

The one and only question? God's omnipotence? This guy really needs to read Korzybski's "Science & Sanity" and realize that it is not correct to say that god "is" or that god "is not" omnipotent. My understanding, based on quite a few years of Sufism, is that "god" neither "is" NOR "is not".