VITVITSKAÏA, THE ONLY WOMAN DESCRIBED IN Meetings with Remarkable Men,
is indeed a remarkable and memorable character. She is not only
intrinsically interesting, but because Mr. Gurdjieff speaks of her as "an ideal for
every woman" Vitvitskaïa also seems a fit subject for pondering.
What we know of her life before she meets Gurdjieff is his retelling of Prince Yuri Lubovedsky's account. When Gurdjieff meets her, he describes her as being "on the brink of moral ruin." Although he agrees to accompany Vitvitskaïa back to Russia at the prince's request, he considers her "worthless" and feels a mixture of "hate" and "pity" toward her. By the time she was 14 both of Vitvitskaïa's parents were dead, and her financial circumstances were dire. Gurdjieff speaks of her as being "very beautiful" and "frivolous" and "subconsciously depressed all the time," a combination that can only engender mishap and suffering. When the prince encountered her, Vitvitskaïa had been seduced by a "commercial traveler" who later robbed and abandoned her. Then she had become the mistress of "an old senator" who turned her out because he was jealous of another man. Later she had used her beauty to attract men to the house of a doctor in need of more patients. Through the help and guidance of Prince Lubovedsky and his sister, Vitvitskaïa's life enters an ascending octave. Through her work on herself she changes so dramatically that Gurdjieff barely recognizes her when he encounters her again four years after their first meeting. Vitvitskaïa becomes a Seeker after Truth and joins Gurdjieff and others on their expeditions. She becomes, as Gurdjieff says, "a woman sacred for us all."
A woman who has much in common with Vitvitskaïa is Mary Magdalene, a significant
figure in the New Testament. Throughout history she has been seen as a
repentant prostitute, one who goes from moral ruin to becoming the cherished follower
to whom Christ first appears after his resurrection. Because of the influence of
Jesus on Mary Magdalene, and of the prince and Gurdjieff on Vitvitskaïa, both women,
each representing an archetype of the female seeker, realize a higher state of being.
One curious commonality between the women is their relationship to the masculine.
Gurdjieff describes Vitvitskaïa as "inimitable and fearless [and] who always
wore men's clothes." There are three possible reasons why she wore men's clothes. The
first two, that she is either a transvestite or a lesbian, must be rejected immediately, as
Gurdjieff would not have abided either. The third reason is more symbolic and
interior—her dress symbolizes the activation of
the masculine principle within herself. Also, no longer frivolous and depressed, she has
no need to attract men in terms of polarity, and so hides her great beauty behind men's clothing.
The connection between the archetype of the female seeker and the masculine
is spoken about in some interesting passages in the Gnostic Gospels, particularly
passages concerning Mary Magdalene.
Gnosticism, for those unfamiliar with
the subject, was a movement originating around the Mediterranean in the Hellenistic
world beginning in the second century c.e. Numerous Gnostic sects took their
views from disparate sources: Plato, Hermetic philosophy, Egyptian mythology,
Jewish mysticism, Christianity and others.
Simon Magnus, considered by some the founder of Gnosticism, is associated
with another female figure, that of Helen, the whore of Tyre. Simon must save Helen
because Thought (Epinoia or Ennoia) is imprisoned in female flesh. Simon takes
Helen as his consort and she is transformed through her relationship with a
male. The implication is that a defiled woman has within her something negative
that needs to be transformed through and by the masculine.
The Nag Hammadi texts, a collection of some 53 texts made 1,500 years ago and
discovered in 1945, are Coptic translations of ancient manuscripts originally written
in Greek. These texts give us, among other things, a new vision of the complexity of
early Christianity and the myriad influences of the Hellenistic world. The
differences between the New Testament and the Gnostic texts are striking. In the
Gnostic gospels God is not wholly other. Instead, the divine is seen as identical to
the Self; Jesus is pictured as a guide of enlightenment and once the disciple has
attained enlightenment he (or she) will become "as I [Jesus] am." Another difference
between the Gnostic and orthodox gospels is that the former often use sexual
symbolism to describe God, often speaking "of God as dyad who embraces both
masculine and feminine elements."
In one of the Gnostic texts, the Gospel of Thomas, the following exchange takes
place in the presence of Mary Magdalene.
Simon Peter said to the Lord, "Let Mary
leave us, women are not worthy of life." Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in
order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling
you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the Kingdom
of Heaven…. "
While both statements may seem misogynistic, Jesus' is to say the least, perplexing.
Viewed literally it makes no sense and has puzzled scholars who have tried to
explain it in historical and linguistic contexts.
The Valentinian teaching in the Gospel of Thomas is comparable to the
teachings of the Naassenes, a Gnostic sect, who believed that:
According to the Valentinians:
The "seed of light," so long as it was still unformed (i.e. uneducated, untrained),
is "a child of the female," but when it is formed (i.e. trained), it is changed into a
man and becomes a son of the (heavenly) bridegroom; no longer is it weak and
subjected to the cosmic powers, but having become a man, it becomes a male
fruit. As such it can enter the Pleroma [the fullness] and unite with the angels.
Therefore it is said that the woman is changed into a man and the community
here below (on earth) into angels. One must bear in mind that in Greek "angel"
(i.e. messenger) has the masculine gender. In Valentinianism…the "male" as it
was created in Adam is the "elect" of the angels, the "female" which corresponds
to Eve represents the "calling" of the pneumatics, who must be brought up to
the male "elect" in order to become part of the Pleroma and attain again to the
angelic status. These passages not only show a connection to Gnostic thinking but also suggest
its more esoteric view of Christianity. In ancient literature, the transformation of the
female into the male is discussed and often described as being from all that is earth,
perishable, passive and sense-perceptible into what is heavenly, imperishable, active,
and rational. How this transformation takes place is due to the female's being
guided or helped by the outer male. So, as in the case with Helen and Simon, it is Jesus
who will make Mary male.
The passages could also be viewed in the context of a school debate, where Jesus
corrects Peter's statement. Mary is not to leave the discipleship on account of her
being a woman. Gnostic texts also show a rivalry between Mary Magdalene and Peter
and the other male disciples for Jesus' affection. But Jesus considers Mary worthy of
transformation; He himself will "make a man of her," give her a special teaching.
And so two questions arise. If a female needs to be transformed into a
male (that is, activate and integrate the masculine within herself) before she can
enter the kingdom, why does Jesus Christ, an enlightened being, choose to favor
Mary, to appear to her after his crucifixion to give her a special teaching? And why
does Mary, a brave, strong, independent woman seem to accept without question
the idea that she must become male?
Many have assumed that this conversation reflects an historical situation and
have tried to explain the passage in terms of the radical nature of Jesus' acceptance of
women and Mary's position as leader.
Looked at from a purely historical context, it may be true that in the culture
of the place and time only a male could be taken seriously:
Spiritual beings will come to the "House of God," there they will cast their garments
and all of them will become bridegrooms, having been made male by the virginal Spirit.
The point is to recognize the importance of Mary of Magdala whom Jesus will
make male because she is to become part of the Kingdom of Heaven. It is to be
noted that the conflict with Peter is overt and at the center of the action. It probably
reflects something of the situation of the churches at the time of the writing of
the gospel. Peter was a leader in competition with Mary of Magdala or followers
of Peter were in competition with followers of Mary. The redactor of the "Gospel
of Peter" clearly places Mary in a position higher than that of Peter.
Only as a man could he [Jesus] have subverted the accepted definition of
masculinity, validated the so-called feminine virtue despised by men but
dear to God, redefined the relationship between women and men as one of
equality and mutuality, and destroyed patriarchy's claim to divine sanction.