The following quote from a book review quotes Eliot's reaction to Gurdjieff. It seems like the reviewer has categorized Eliot's attitude well.
the publisher's reports - relaxed, unbuttoned, but (on the basis of the samples Schuchard gives) carefully thought out none the less - give insight into what Eliot thought about the barren shores of mysticism. "The addiction to Asiatic mysticism, separated from Asiatic religion, produced... something which to me is very much ... repellent in Gurdjieff and Ouspensky."
"Eliot's suspicions were aroused by any form of mysticism which had not evolved out of, and was not supported by, a religion."
Ah yes, mysticism not supported by a religion. What could this mean -- what could a mysticism be which was not supported by --- words. And yet what mysticism COULD be supported in any healthy way by ---words???
It is a barren place we seek, barren of the past, barren of words, ...