Intersubjective Fictions--Some Cohen Video Reviews
Here are some anonymous reviews of Andrew Cohen's latest web infomercial Creating the Future culled from some emails we've seen and reproduced (completely without authorization). Many thanks to our astute readers!
What do you think?
"it's like he's speaking another
language...they even transcibe every word, so we don't
miss these gems of wisdom...but I still don't know
exactly what the hell he's saying..."
"I just watched the video. Painful to see so many former dear friends. I just felt like it was blah blah blah, the same blah blah blah for years and years. Like they're inside a sphere of mirrors reflecting back on themselves the same catchphrases and ideas, over and over again. I didn't find it attractive at all. It really seems more like a mind state now. You can get a buzz from that mind state…I know I did for years, but it doesn’t seem authentic or compelling to me anymore."
"After watching this video, which made me want to puke, I think someone should stick their foot up this guy’s ass..... His rhetoric is so seductive, that’s the problem here; so you must continue to expose all his bullshit. What horseshit this guy is peddling. I feel sorry for the people who fall for it."
"Wow, just looking at his wardrobe, I got kinda hot. Do the words really matter?
Put another way, the presentation is so slick it supersedes the content - a perfect metaphor for our times."
"What a load of bollocks!"
"Don't take this the wrong way but it's obvious to me that you're not allowing the intersubjective friction of consciousness to create the ecstatic compulsion necessary to create the future in a way that allows a greater uber reality to emerge in you. It's about intersubjectivity, dude. Let it in!"
What do you think?
posted by the Editors at
12:02 PM
45 Comments:
...come on folks. These video testimonies come off like sound-bites from a Baptist meeting. Only difference is they're run through a post-modern evolutionary-techno-babble filter.
Andrew is laying out the land in which he lives and thrives. So did I for several years. It's nothing personal about it. An impersonal manifestation of Spirit, brough on by hard work and surrender by the people involved. In Christianity we call it Holy Spirit. Many of you have tasted this profound communion. Why knock it? Or are you just justifying your lives? And if you are, why?
Gods love,
Bjorn
With all the sci-fi-like talk of a new conscious being-presence surging through with its own agenda, one wonders if this new being has anything to say about Cohen's abusive antics with students. Or do the new emerging structures in consciousness still require an autocratic and slap-happy guru to hold everything in place around Foxhollow?
Whatever this new being's prime directive is, promotions like this one seem designed only to convince us that Cohen is ITs spokesperson. And I suppose that doesn't hurt magazine sales either.
Robert H - please, oh please, lose the goatee.
Consciousness itself does NOT evolve. Human awareness evolves.
Fun watching all of Andrew's lab rats.
How do you know this? Are you God?
"Are you God?"
yes, and so are you
Then I disagree with Myself, because I say that consciousness DOES evolve.
Oh, alright, you're both God!
Gett outta here, I love ya!
Seriously though - the beginning of the video features many short soundbites of students describing a shift in consciousness in which they were tapping into something greater than they were previously aware of on a personal level. I'm with them here.
But then Carter says, "We're actually trying to evolve consciousness" and loses me. If this isn't a confused statement on Carter's part, can someone please speak for what this actually means?
I agree with what you write. I was even experiencing the shift you (and they) were speaking about, as they were describing it. Carter lost me. what he said seemed abstract, divorced from what was being experienced. Why not write the Andrew Cohe website and submit your thoughts, ask the questions?
Hal Blacker said...
Oh, alright, you're both God!
Gett outta here, I love ya!
Thanks Hal, for the most lighthearted comment on this site, in a long time - comic relief even. I laughed with tears, upon reading what you wrote. it got even funnier, when I thought, "yes, and Hal's God, too...spreading His love!" It's great to be able to laugh, sometimes. Things get so heavy and serious at times.
Dancing with your jailer.
This phrase captures what it was like to be a student in Andrew’s world for those many years, and seeing this video clip, this infomercial, I can see a lot of dancing. To dance is to make the appearance of merry, and here almost everyone on camera, looks merry. But, quoting from Reading Lolita in Tehran, it only masks the reality of a far darker world:
“It is a sham world imposed by the jailer, where the prisoner moves within circles created by their oppressor. The worst crimes created by totalitarian mindsets is that they force their citizens including their victims to become complicit in their crimes. Dancing with your jailer, participating in your execution, that is an act of utmost brutality. My students enacted it every time they went out into the streets dressed as they were told to dress. They didn’t watch the executions but they didn’t protest them either. The only way to stop dancing with the jailer is to find a way to preserve ones individuality, that unique quality that evades description, but differentiates one human being from another.”
In Cohen’s future of intersubjective fictions, there would be no truly free individuals, only happy clones, dancing with him.
Dear "dancer", thank you for your very true description of the strained and hyped up happiness that is the world of the insider student of Andrew Cohen. I was in exactly that space for years as his student-clone. Creativity is allowed as long as it's expressed in a way that's all about him and his vision. Cohen tries to create the fear in those students that if they leave they will no lomger be "happy" and "free" because they are betraying him and their own heart. Truth is, there is real joy and real suffering outside of Andrew's evolutionary enlightenment camp. And when it dawns that the "jailer's" constructed reality is mainly designed to get everyone to work, work, work for his system and make him look fabulous, then a different more genuine joy of freedom starts to bubble up inside. You quietly smile as you realise that it is completely up to you to find out what your real gifts are and how they can unfold and serve ALL of us. It's the "unknown" for real!
At that moment, the real work begins.
SADDHU, SADDHU, SADDHU....
WELL SAID, WELL SAID, WELL SAID... TO THE LAST TWO ENTIRES!
MAY ALL OF ANDREW'S MARIONETTES CUT THE STRINGS AND DANCE THE TRUE DANCE OF THE UNKNOWN.
MAY ALL SENTIENT BEINGS BE FREE....ANDREW, TOO.
How things change.
This is an excerpt from an interview Andrew gave in 2000 posted on enlightenment.com.
In it, he seems to refute the idea of a global awakening of consciousness...
AC: Well, I have a lot of hope and am very inspired. I don't think in terms of any kind of miraculous global awakening of consciousness or anything like that that many people have been speaking about for quite a long time now. I believe that this kind of thinking tends to reflect a kind of superstition, where we imagine that miraculously some kind of dramatic shift of consciousness will sweep through the hearts and minds of millions of people.
E.com: Some kind of "Hundredth Monkey Phenomenon."
AC: Yes, right. And as a result the ] human reason will be dramatically changed for the better. This kind of thinking, I think, makes us feel better, and let's us off the hook at the same time. [Laughter.]
@gniz, to me what andrew seems to be saying is, that it needs our conscious, voluntary and committed participation to evolve consciousness and that it does not happen "100th monkey like" simultaneously in millions of people without their willingness to give themselves to this evolution.
Though i could imagine that the ideas about the evolution of consciousness might be true, i definitely reject andrew's methods to achieve his goal.
I just had to sit through a mindnumbing seminar by one of Andrew's guru's that was packaged under a Chinese Medicine heading. Basically it was exactly what was on the video shown. It was both scary and maddening to see others eat this up. When he started talking about Ken Wilber's spiral dynamics theory I knew we were in for it. All that was missing was a Tom Cruise jumping on the tables. What was even worse was that this was suppose to be a seminar on Consciousness and Chinese Medicine using a 5 element model. Obviously this disciple of Andrew's is so blind from the enlightenment he is trying to attain that he has forgotten his "authentic" medicine. Wish I could get my $250 back!!
oops...meant to say it was a seminar by one of Andrew's followers..not one of his guru's. Funny too because when I mentioned Chris Cowlan (sp?) one of the guys who debunked Ken Wilber's spiral dynamics, he countered with Don Beck and wouldn't talk about it..just told me to go to WIE.org to get some enlightenment I guess.
I find it interesting to recieve an email notification from Enlightenext advertising a WIE presentation by Carter Phipps on "death". The question in their message that really stood out to me is, "Is the experience of death itself changing and evolving over the centuries?" The experience of death evolving?????
I find this a sign that there is nowhere left to go for WIE. They have really come to the end of the road when they find themselves focusing on death.
Even the term "Enlightenext" says a lot. Anything but Enlighten Now! Where would they be without the "future" to entice and gather followers.? If you want to lead people, come up with a future promise to dangle just out of reach. You cannot gather them into groups, solicit their money and life-force for your own ends or control them without pulling their focus out of the present moment and diverting it to some other time, some other dimension, and the Piece d'Resistance is that old stand-by, fascination and fear of death. If you're going to promise them the jewel of Enlightenment and power over death, you definitely need to draw their gaze into the future. You certainly cannot deliver on those promises NOW.
Call me cynical, call me stubborn, call me deluded...but I find this stuff silly and anything but enlightening. I certainly would not be looking to a "think tank" for a genuine connection with Source. Its natural to want answers to the big questions in Life, but I have found the Mystery to be very friendly and downright loving. In fact, the more I surrender to the Mystery, the less I need to know and the more I experience peace, joy and innocence. Who would have ever imagined that coming to the end of oneself could be so lovely?
Depends on our 'definition' of the future. In a recent quote of the week, Andrew Cohen talked about the future emerging in the present...
When the Future Emerges in the Present
The evolutionary potential of enlightenment, which means consciousness beyond ego, only emerges in a collective or intersubjective context. That's when you see the value of it, the significance of it, the power of it. If we want to create a new level or stage of development, that egoless enlightened consciousness is a place we have to enter and engage with together. Stages of development are intersubjective structures that are created in consciousness. So if we can transcend ego, not only individually but collectively, what we will be creating is a new enlightened culture.
When two or more individuals come together who have awakened to the authentic self, the future is going to be created now. In the moment that they meet, heaven will come to earth, because heaven is a place in which the ego has been defeated. Then the future, at the level of consciousness, literally emerges in the present. The future is not some vague utopian fantasy world thousands of years away—at the deepest level, at the most interior dimension of the cosmos itself, it emerges in real time when one human being meets another in an engaged, creative, egoless context.
The last comment quotes Cohen as saying: "The future ... emerges in real time when one human being meets another in an engaged, creative, egoless context."
Sounds pretty. But what I want to know is how in the world that purportedly evolutionary "context" includes slapping, humiliation, overbearing control of students' sex lives, financial exploitation, and all the other kinds of abuses perpetrated by Cohen and amply documented on this blog and elsewhere?
May we all be free forever from that kind of "intersubjective friction." And may we be wise enough to question the purveyors of that kind of pseudo "evolution", no matter how lovely it sounds in theory.
"future emerging in the present", there is a game going on here. Its basic to every statement made by AC. Playing with words, playing with people's lives and performing intellectual hocus-pocus. None of this gobbledy-gook has any meaning. If x meets y under circumstances a + b then and only then will promised result ??!!?? occur...not now, not here. Accept the premise which is non-understandable, repeat non-sense in unison with others playing the game and the grand master will pull the strings, flash and dazzle and nothing, absolutely nothing will actually happen. No one will be enlightened, no one will measure up and after years and years of all this smoke and mirrors all there will be is more intellectual yadda yadda yadda.
I was going to submit a comment, but then I read the anonymous one just above which really nails the target. So all I can do is agree. AC is nothing more than an obvious new-age-consciousness snake-oil peddler who is romanticising the esoteric. Sadly, his followers are naive, gullible, and bereft of self-knowledge.
To someone who has not yet awakened, who is impressed, enchanted, and captivated by such superficial contrived nonsense which is merely re-cycled and re-shuffled over and over again by AC and a few of his human-parrots, it probably seems attractive and plausible...
...But when journeying upon the spiritual oddessey, BEWARE of the sirens babble. Or in other words, as the old saying goes: "There is nothing new under (or above) the Sun."
The entire video is a sham and fiction predicated upon the false notion that there is actually anyone existing as a separate individual who can evolve, and that there is such a thing as "future".
A. Cohen is nothing but a poisonous spider and a parasitical vampire, capturing and then sucking the life-blood of his gullible victims. If they had any sense and reason, they would all sue him for fraud, extortion, and abuse.
"Accept the premise which is non-understandable, repeat non-sense in unison with others playing the game and the grand master will pull the strings, flash and dazzle and nothing, absolutely nothing will actually happen. No one will be enlightened, no one will measure up and after years and years of all this smoke and mirrors all there will be is more intellectual yadda yadda yadda."
Holy shit, that perfectly describes my years in the "camp."
Current students - are you listening? Let it scare the bejesus out of you, and git the hell out of there!
Leaving's really under-rated.
Ordinary, everyday people living ordinary, everyday lives experience change all the time. People get born and die; situations and things come and go. And there's inevitable suffering when we cling to anything because it's all transient.
So, there are some teachings that point to something that doesn't change, that doesn't appear and disappear. There are lots of teachings where this unchanging thing is called "God." In the tradition that Andrew comes from, it's often called "Consciousness." The name doesn't matter, the point is to NOT get completely caught up in the changing show.
Now Andrew talks about the evolution of consciousness. He's using this word "consciousness," but he's putting it *within* the world of change (evolution by definition means change). The way Andrew is now using the word, "consciousness" no longer points to the non-changing.
Whatever games Andrew plays with ideas of "conscious evolution," what I'd ask is, isn't there something that *doesn't* evolve, doesn't change? What about that thing that was called "consciousness" in non-dual teaching? Has Andrew just forgotten about it?
Stuart
http://home.comcast.net/~sresnick2/mypage.htm
The Gafni story, as much as any, leads to the truth about Cohen:
http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/Gafni_Mordechai.html#Andrew%20Cohen
In Gafni there was also a leader hounded by allegations of abuse, who by the force of charism was able to avoid these allegations for years. Also in Gafni there were numerous top dogs in the spiritual scene (Wilber being one who champoined both) giving their endorsements in spite of all the painful stories of the abused.
Where is Cohen's tipping point...
"Even the term "Enlightenext" says a lot. Anything but Enlighten Now! Where would they be without the "future" to entice and gather followers.?"
It's clear that Andrew has moved on from the "Enlighten Now!" mindset from which he started out way back when he was with Poonja.
I'd agree that it his current philsophical investigations do not always make total sense, but daring to represent one view of truth is worth doing.
But is it the correct interpretation to say that Andrew invented the evolutionary slant simply to attract followers?
Isn't "Enlighten Now!" more in vogue (there even is a website with almost the same title www.enlightenment-now.com) and therefore easier to communicate than "EnlighteNext".
By choosing the harder route, Andrew's sincerity seems certain. While one might argue about his style, his general motives seem pure. Anyway, this isopen to debate and I am glad to see views from both "sides" being expressed here with more civility.
After all, we are all in this together, right?
Whatever Andrew's motives are, the sad fact is that he displays this video for the spiritual world to view his community's cutting edge. Andrew has never waivered in demanding that his students speak with clarity and depth when representing his teachings. But the sad fact is that the community has become so insular, that they don't even realize they appear to "outsiders" as speaking gibberish here. It's one thing to impress each other and impress Andrew in community meetings. But the content of their message comes off as confused at best in this over-produced video clip. There's a strange lack of perspective in thinking that this video stands on its own in any meaningful or profound way.
I would challenge andrewcohen.org to show us video of the actual collective experience of the intersubjective event of evolutionary enlightenment in action, rather than just clips of people talking about it.
The descriptions are not clear and so many are using the words "like", "almost" "as if" etc.
Why talk about it, why not talk from it? Let's see something factual, actual, present and real!
Good suggestion, let's see the proof.
Actually it was briefly displayed, in a video short posted at andrewcohen.org of Cohen and Gafni, the disgraced rabbi. This video portrayed the two "masters" smoozing, displaying their mutual infatuation and apparent facility with the intersubjective. But alas, Gafni was soon to admit to sexual violence and that led to the video being yanked.
Wouldn't it be great if someone had saved a copy of this video for posterity?
But what I want to know is how in the world that purportedly evolutionary "context" includes slapping, humiliation, overbearing control of students' sex lives, financial exploitation, and all the other kinds of abuses perpetrated by Cohen and amply documented on this blog and elsewhere?
Hal seems to have no problem with what Andrew is teaching. He just wants to know what all of these abuses have to do with it. My question is...are these things still going on? What Hal refers to happened some time ago. Is it relevant to refer to them anymore?
the previous poster wrote:
"Hal seems to have no problem with what Andrew is teaching. He just wants to know what all of these abuses have to do with it. My question is...are these things still going on? What Hal refers to happened some time ago. Is it relevant to refer to them anymore?"
Of course it's relevant, as Cohen has not publicly addressed the allegations against him -- neither has associate, Ken Wilber nor the EnlightenNext organization. And earlier this year, former WIE magazine managing editor, Craig Hamilton ran away from Cohen's Foxhollow ashram in the middle of the night for some reason.
There's still a shadow of secrecy that hangs over Andrew's whole enterprise despite the "Humanitarian of the Year" award he just got from fellow guru and student-abuser, Jaya Ma.
Here's Cohen's official promo about his "Humanitarian Award" received from Ma Jaya:
Cohen's award
and here's more information on the bestower of that award:
more on guru Ma Jaya
Anonymous said, "By choosing the harder route, Andrew's sincerity seems certain. While one might argue about his style, his general motives seem pure."
People often choose hard routes as a way of getting recognition and self-satisfaction.
Specifically: Andrew comes out of a non-dual tradition. A non-dual teaching can be a hindrance for someone who wants to claim the status of "higher being" for himself. Teaching that it's all One tends toward a view of *equality*, and runs the risk of making claims of superiority seem downright silly.
We see that Andrew has strongly and explicitly rejected the non-dual style in favor of the Wilburesque "developmental" teaching. This proposes that it's NOT all equal, that in fact we're *evolving* from something lower to something higher. Unlike the non-dual view, this "evolutionary" view DOES harmonize with anyone's desire to present himself as superior, more evolved, than the masses.
Consider the passion with which Andrew and Ken promote the developmental, evolutionary perspective. Why do that?! Particularly since they're both so well familiar with non-dual teaching?
One simple answer kind of screams out. Andrew and Ken promote this view because it feeds into their desire to consider themselves superior. I wouldn't call this a "pure" motive.
Anonymous wrote further, "But is it the correct interpretation to say that Andrew invented the evolutionary slant simply to attract followers? Isn't 'Enlighten Now!' more in vogue..."
Maybe Andrew's motive isn't to fatten his organization with the maximum number of followers. If he taught non-dualism, he might get bigger crowds, but it'd be less likely for those crowds to worship him as someone special. Instead, Andrew has crafted a message that may only attract a small community, but it's a teaching tailor-made to allow him to claim, "I'm more evolved than you!!"
At the end of the day, there's something more important than judging Andrew's motives, more important than whether or not anyone has a "problem" with Andrew's actions or teachings. The important thing is: is there anything in this style of teaching that I'd find useful in my everyday life? If y'all have found such a thing, God Bless You, and I'll listen carefully if you try to explain it. As for me, I'm still waiting to find any such thing. Andrew's teaching and two bucks will get you a tall latte at Starbucks.
Stuart
http://home.comcast.net/~sresnick2/mypage.htm
False Imprisonment -
Would commentors please include this on the list of crimes of the cohen regime.
Students have had their passports confiscated. Forced to forfeit car keys. Have had their drivers licenses confiscated, along with credit cards. There have been students who report "guards" sleeping at night outside the door to their bedrooms to prevent escape.
This is all serious, and is wrong. It should be included in any discussion of Cohen's abuses.
- Been there, done that
I find this so interesting. What we are looking for , we are, and yet we continue to seek the mirror...usually in human form. I am not a "Cohenist" or "ex-cohenist". I have read a bit about him, both positive and negative.
I watched his "info-mercial" with amusement. It seems some of those who have had a taste of the Real in themselves, but have yet to finish the meal, are abundant these days. Andrew Cohen may have some words of wisdom, but take what is useful and lose the rest. The ultimate trick of the ego is to think the truth lays outside of one's own experience...and can somehow be found or aquired. I especially would like to address the lady that left the group and returned after three months. It seems to me that you felt insecure outside of the cult and the desire for connection with human beings is strong. It is not that different from a woman who leaves an abusive relationship, only to return, because she feels an emptiness and loss at the absence of a painfully affirming experience of her identity. I hope that you come home to yourself.
May all beings know their own inherent joy, free of all trappings, gurus, and systems.
Alan Kazlev has some suggestions
about a state called 'intermediate
zone'.
http://www.kheper.net/topics//gurus/IZ_guru.html
The lesson here is that it isnt enough that a guru or leader 'is powerful'--we have to remember to test that power and always, always ask whether that power is tied to an ultimate source that is benevolent or serves only EGO in larger, grander form.
Handcuffs remain handcuffs whether forged from cold steel or beautifully crafted from platinum and studded with dazzling diamonds.
AMEN!
> The lesson here is that it isnt
> enough that a guru or leader 'is
> powerful'--we have to remember
> to test that power
It's a very complicated matter to test other people, and I question how worthwhile it is. How exactly do you test it, what exactly are you looking for?
I'd suggest instead questioning for yourself what type of life to lead. Then you can listen to other people, act with other people, but never follow anyone. If you're not following anyone, then there's no need to test anyone.
Reading between the lines, when someone talks about testing gurus, I think they're suggesting that there are some people out there who are true gurus, who you should follow, and others who are false gurus who you should avoid. I've got no use for that type of thinking. Everything is teaching us at every moment. All we need to attend to is how we keep our own mind.
If you're instead looking for a guru to follow, you're already screwed, and it doesn't matter whether the guru is good or bad. In fact, bad gurus like Andrew might be much better for you, since a bastard guru will make it easier for you to reject him and stand on your own feet.
> and always, always ask whether
> that power is tied to an
> ultimate source that is
> benevolent or serves only EGO
> in larger, grander form.
Who knows where power comes from, and what it's tied to? Who knows what EGO is? You can speculate about such things endlessly and never get anywhere.
If you stop looking for some outside power to help you, or some outside guru to follow, then you can just attend to keeping your own mind clear, and forget about the rest.
Stuart
http://home.comcast.net/~sresnick2/mypage.htm
Hmm. Some interesting points are made about Andrew Cohen. I sense that these points could be right, that Cohen needs to lighten up with HIS dogmatic form of enlightenment. It is disappointing to see that a magazine called What Is Enlightenment? has stopped asking the question, and quite possibly, has the gall to posit answers without asking anymore questions. Okay, so I'm not entirely convinced that Andrew Cohen is this bad, but he must be careful! I most certainly do feel a powerful pomposity in Cohen despite his good intentions. And that's where I am (at least for the moment) still in defense of him because I do not think he's as dangerous as some may fear. There are too many of us "out here" who have been through self-assigned gooroos before, and though we are sadder, we are most certainly wiser. So, yes, I am worried that Cohen will self-destruct if he loses sight of his responsibility to those who look to him for guidance. He must realize that as a teacher, he is less than his students, not more. Teaching--any kind of teaching--is a privilege. We must honor our students, not debase them--no matter what. Focus and discipline are not compatible with debasement and degradation. In terms of Ken Wilber, well, I'm not worried about Ken Wilber. I'm not worried about Ken Wilber at all. Ken is evolving. There is a wise undercurrent of humble surrender within Ken Wilber. Please, be patient with him. He may surprise you--he may surprise himself. He may surpise us all. He may surprise Andrew Cohen!
"Lee"
Hmm. Some interesting points are made about Andrew Cohen. I sense that these points could be right, that Cohen needs to lighten up with HIS dogmatic form of enlightenment. It is disappointing to see that a magazine called What Is Enlightenment? has stopped asking the question, and quite possibly, has the gall to posit answers without asking anymore questions. Okay, so I'm not entirely convinced that Andrew Cohen is this bad, but he must be careful! I most certainly do feel a powerful pomposity in Cohen despite his good intentions. And that's where I am (at least for the moment) still in defense of him because I do not think he's as dangerous as some may fear. There are too many of us "out here" who have been through self-assigned gooroos before, and though we are sadder, we are most certainly wiser. So, yes, I am worried that Cohen will self-destruct if he loses sight of his responsibility to those who look to him for guidance. He must realize that as a teacher, he is less than his students, not more. Teaching--any kind of teaching--is a privilege. We must honor our students, not debase them--no matter what. Focus and discipline are not compatible with debasement and degradation. In terms of Ken Wilber, well, I'm not worried about Ken Wilber. I'm not worried about Ken Wilber at all. Ken is evolving. There is a wise undercurrent of humble surrender within Ken Wilber. Please, be patient with him. He may surprise you--he may surprise himself. He may surpise us all. He may surprise Andrew Cohen!
"Lee"
Let me get this straight...
Ramana Maharshi is a lowly traditional green stage personal enlightenment loser, whereas people on this video such as Kirsty, Steve, & Co are Post-Traditional Indigo Stage Impersonal Radical Transformative Intersubjective Evolutionary Enlightened Winners? That’ll show Papaji! Are they swallowing galaxies whole yet, or is that only Ken Wilber’s specialty (see preface to Living Enlightenment)?
That’s it. I’m strapping my God Mk II rocket-powered backpack on and going vertical. Destination: Fox Hollow.
it is interesting to recognize that any 'urge' or 'must' to better something in my own reality is always fueled by some transgression. The more transgressions (ego full actions towards others) I have commited and not taken responsability for, the stronger my urge becomes to express my own goodness. I believe that development of conciousness really takes place only within a context of appreciation, simple understanding and care. Life is much sweeter and has infinitely more power than the forcefull endeavours of mr. Cohen.
I am not, and never have been a follower of this man... but are an outsider who had a friend who was once under his spell.
Judging from the video... the stage is set and the time is coming for his inevitable fall.
Serious people who are looking at themselves honestly will see this for what it is... collective deception. Others who are more vulnerable will be seduced by "the experiences" which are being promised, which is rather sad.
I heard that Andrew used to quote "The Great Krishnamurti" (I heard this from my friend) during his talks.
It's interesting that krishnamurti spent his whole life touring the world speaking to people yet never charged any admission.
The same is true for many Buddhist traditions in Asia.
I think what may appear to be an evolution of consciousness will prove to be what it is....
DECEPTION.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home