tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post116672329845030521..comments2023-10-09T22:44:56.500-07:00Comments on WHAT enlightenment??!: Andrew Cohen and Donations Under DuressUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-34869209783633001082010-07-12T18:03:36.852-07:002010-07-12T18:03:36.852-07:00" A lot of folks can ignore the blatant chara..." A lot of folks can ignore the blatant character flaws of a messenger and listen only to his message, but I for one can not do so."<br /><br />actually the message is very flawed, thats the give-away !<br /><br />check out kabir and ug krishnamurti!<br /><br />enlightenment is a fiction !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-77695270861276419982010-06-30T12:46:13.474-07:002010-06-30T12:46:13.474-07:00Hi Jane ,
I just read you story and it happens t...Hi Jane ,<br /><br />I just read you story and it happens that I know a very good lawyer specialized in busting cults, getting "spirituall leaders" like Andrew Cohen and defending people like you.<br />His name is Ford Greene and he is located in San Anselmo, California.Holly Goldnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-68573367664902416262010-06-29T14:24:29.744-07:002010-06-29T14:24:29.744-07:00I have watched Andrew Cohen in a workshop I partic...I have watched Andrew Cohen in a workshop I participated in the Dead Sea in Israel years ago.<br />I was with my two children already adults. In a brake I talked to him briefly to check him out. Something about his energy, his appearance,( his little moustache and the velvet vest) immediately just turn me off. I could see the big EGO behind. My son and daughter felt the same.<br />It was just a question of few hours watching him,to figure him out. I am amazed how people can be so blind and needy to a point of making someone like him a guru, spiritual teacher and on top give him family money to support his Big Ego. My heart and respect goes for the pure souls that searched for enlightment and higher consciouness in the wrong place.Melitta Greenenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-476680988003346912007-03-01T07:16:00.000-08:002007-03-01T07:16:00.000-08:00A large part of Andrew's appeal is that he is addr...A large part of Andrew's appeal is that he is addressing some of the deepest concerns and yearnings of people today. There's enormous potential here but Andrew has centered it so much on himself and has created an authoritarian organization that directly contradicts his call to autonomy and freedom. <BR/>Jeff Carreira (Andrew's assistant and Director of Education) is out there creating new ways to push Evolutionary Enlightenment and get new people involved with EN. He's already trained dozens of people to deliver the EE course and hundreds have taken it around the world. After the retreat Andrew's currently giving they will be training many more people at Foxhollow and by teleconference to deliver a 2 hour intro to Evolutionary Enlightenment. <BR/>For the first time Andrew's students are starting to agressively go out there to push his message and get more people involved. There is a deliberate strategy to downplay Andrew's role as guru and master so as not to scare people until they are really involved. Did somebody say cult?<BR/>I would hate to see some of the incredible ideas that have been generated by WIE be destroyed by Andrew's need to control. I'd invite anyone who wants to open the discussion of Evoltionary Enlightenment beyond Andrew to post to my blog.<BR/><BR/>http://freeevolutionary.blogspot.com/Georgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08342256287886485949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-27206224907371821182007-02-17T22:43:00.000-08:002007-02-17T22:43:00.000-08:00"This seems like an unreasonable assumption to mak..."This seems like an unreasonable assumption to make. I think we would have to ask them, including Alka what they think... <BR/>"<BR/>How would these women who have surrendered their own power to think independantly, really have an opinion? If we put ourselves in their position, and look in their eyes, we can feel the conflict. We do not have to ignore our feelings because we are free, while they are told that what they think and what they feel is not important...only what they do. Human beings divorced from their own thoughts and feelings are not free to tell anyone what they think....not even themselves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-39923970007257504222007-02-17T14:31:00.000-08:002007-02-17T14:31:00.000-08:00The pain reflected on the faces of the women, even...The pain reflected on the faces of the women, even his wife Alka at one point, clearly reveal the disrespect they are feeling as these simplistic pronouncements are being delivered upon them. <BR/><BR/>This seems like an unreasonable assumption to make. I think we would have to ask them, including Alka what they think...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-16658124871845451362007-02-17T07:01:00.000-08:002007-02-17T07:01:00.000-08:00Stuart wrote:"It's a matter for reflection, but I ...Stuart wrote:<BR/><BR/>"It's a matter for reflection, but I do think that everything should be on the table. "<BR/><BR/>It is one thing to be told 'expect anything.' But the devil is always in the details. Intellectually, we can construct models, scenarios and think we are prepared, but the raw, gut level impact can hit us in ways that can never be anticipated, no matter how intelligent or imaginative one is. <BR/><BR/>What is interesting in Jane's account is her report that in her case it may be that not everything was on the table. <BR/><BR/>From what she wrote, it seems she reportedly was *not* told, up front, that persons she came to love and trust as friends in would act on orders to pressure her to do something that went against her gut instincts and that she has later regretted. <BR/><BR/>Nor was Jane told 'on the table' that others in the group would be told to stay away from her while she was under this kind of pressure, thus guaranteeing social isolation, disorientation <BR/>etc. <BR/><BR/>Nor does it appear that prospective members are told that there may be so much pressure not to leave that those who do, depart in secret, often at night, thus the name 'shadow sangha.'<BR/><BR/>(Note this article has some interseting material. Two items:<BR/><BR/>Manipulators do not immediately ask for agreement, they ask people to "try it" with an "open mind." Getting people to behave in a manner that is somewhat contrary to their current belief system will often result in changed attitudes (Deutsch & Krauss, 1965; Festinger & Carlsmith, 1968). That is, acting on requests to "try it before you reject it" and assurances that "you can disagree with what you are doing even as you do it" often leads to changes in belief systems, especially if the subject is not overtly rewarded (e.g., by being paid) for performing the new behavior. <BR/><BR/>§ Manipulators use group pressure. It is difficult, especially over long periods of time, to be the only one in a group to disagree (Jones & Gerard, 1967, pp. 331-386). It can be painful to feel rejected or different, and sometimes even more painful to think of oneself as someone who has trouble tolerating rejection. Hence, people conform but are not always willing to admit to themselves that they are conforming (i.e., responding to group pressure). People rationalize instead, and claim it was their "free choice" to change. <BR/><BR/>****Manipulators do not make things easy. People actually place more value on their actions if the task to be performed is somewhat unpleasant or difficult, even if it did not need to be unpleasant or difficult (Festinger, 1957). Corollary: making a task artificially "tough" typically makes it appear more meaningful and important than it may in fact be. <BR/><BR/><BR/>http://www.csj.org/infoserv_articles/eichel_steve_resistance_tactics.htm)<BR/><BR/>Another matter that may or may not be 'on the table' is that intimate letters people write when in states of great vulnerability are reportedly be kept on file, after they leave, a source of great embarrasment. When we begin a relationship with a therapist or health care provider, its customary to read, discuss and sign forms that govern patient confidentiality. These matters are also defined and regulated by state law, and thus are 'on the table.'<BR/><BR/>Finally, it would be interesting to know whether persons invited to join the inner circle will be told, up from and 'on the table' that they will end up functioning as parents and care providers in relation to thier leader, while all the while, being made to feel like shame ridden children who live in terror of a scolding.<BR/><BR/>Feeling shame ridden and childlike, while functioning in the parent/protector role for to someone who is supposed to be able to lead disciples to full adult potential, yet reportedly throws tantrums and requires constant new toys and praise...<BR/><BR/>Feeling like a scolded child while at the same time functioning as a careprovider, without any of the respect, autonomy or resources that make parenting both possible and enjoyable would be crazy making in the extreme. <BR/><BR/>So..it would be interesting to know if before getting involved, prospective students are clearly told, up front that this is also <BR/>'on the table.'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-15808695117665757912007-02-16T03:26:00.000-08:002007-02-16T03:26:00.000-08:00nhvgaegiDear Jane,I read some of AC's books a good...nhvgaegiDear Jane,<BR/>I read some of AC's books a good while ago. Luckily, I never felt inclined to become part of any group, being more of a loner, but I spent a massive amount on books; but at least books don't talk back to you!<BR/>If you really want pointers to truth, try some advaita or non-duality websites, such as Gilbert Schultz in Australia; Jeff Foster's in Oxford, UK; John Greven's book "Oneness" UK; these actually say very little, and the thinking mind tends to not like that! they point you back to You.<BR/><BR/>Best wishes,<BR/>Stella, IrelandAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-90218728426111433352007-02-15T15:40:00.000-08:002007-02-15T15:40:00.000-08:00> I frankly think this whole > problem starts with...> I frankly think this whole <BR/>> problem starts with us, not in <BR/>> the wonderful things we were <BR/>> initially and still are striving <BR/>> for, but with what we are <BR/>> willing to blithely ignore to <BR/>> achieve them<BR/><BR/>What exactly are you referring to as things we were initially and still striving for, and what makes them "wonderful"?<BR/><BR/>Lots of us start out, for example, wanting to be spiritual, wanting to see or know God, wanting big special enlightenment experiences, etc. These lead us into a situation (like joining a spiritual group and following a teacher), and eventually we decide we don't like what happens in that situation.<BR/><BR/>For me, it's useful to question everything that got me there. If I started out with the desire to be spiritual, and ended up being part of a system I found destructive... then maybe that initial desire *isn't* as wonderful as I thought it was. Based on the results I got, maybe it *isn't* so wonderful to seek God, to focus my life on getting big elightenment experiences, etc.<BR/><BR/>It's a matter for reflection, but I do think that everything should be on the table. Sometimes people find themselves in a destructive group, and realize that something needs to change because they don't like what they've become or become a part of. Why not question *all* the things that went into the result? Just because it initally seemed so wonderful to be a godly, spiritual, enlightened being... doesn't mean that these desires themselves aren't bathwater.<BR/><BR/>Stuart<BR/>http://home.comcast.net/~sresnick2/socalled.htmstuartresnickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16879896068458013439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-84573593862314266332007-02-07T22:03:00.000-08:002007-02-07T22:03:00.000-08:00check out the video by pasting the following link ...check out the video by pasting the following link into your browser:<BR/><BR/>http://www.andrewcohen.org/media/video.asp?vm=menWomen<BR/><BR/>Listen carefully and watch the faces of the students, especially the women, as AC demeans and disrespects the female in his diatribe regarding the male/female relationship. I hear him saying that women hold a very strong conditioned belief that having a man means being "whole", while the men feel they will die if they do not "have" sex and are conditioned to feel diminished if they are not "getting it". He says of course in the past women did need men for protection because they are weaker. The pain reflected on the faces of the women, even his wife Alka at one point, clearly reveal the disrespect they are feeling as these simplistic pronouncements are being delivered upon them. I find this video very very disturbing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-66277271246207200542007-02-07T15:24:00.000-08:002007-02-07T15:24:00.000-08:00This story is from a former inner circle member of...This story is from a former inner circle member of a completely different group. Interested readers are invited to sit down with a notebook and count off the number of items that sound familiar. <br /><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/<br />group/<br />exsat/message/16748"> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/exsat/message/16748 </a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-50447961851904992142007-02-04T12:19:00.000-08:002007-02-04T12:19:00.000-08:00Speaking of big donors, or likely ones, does anyon...Speaking of big donors, or likely ones, does anyone know what's happened to Steve Brett, Chris Parish or Brad Roth?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-14420228055636647732007-02-02T17:43:00.000-08:002007-02-02T17:43:00.000-08:00I think the last two posts, the one referring to t...I think the last two posts, the one referring to the two personal viewpoints of self, (the one citing Joseph Campbell), and the following one, which analyses AC's actual phraseology, may be two of the most significant, though perhaps, not hugely dramatic, entries on this blog to date. <br /><br />I personally do not believe that AC is a charlatan, at least not in the conventional, con-man sense, mainly because I am convinced that he cannot see that he is (though this is by no means an excuse) imparting essentially personally ego-driven, finely honed, missives, wrapped up as ultimate truths; but rather, I think that he is a fairly smart (but by no means brilliant) and informed person who has managed, starting early on with great earnestness and sincerity, to gradually but ultimately hear and respond to the voice of his own ego, believing unshakably that it was (still?) the voice of a higher, inner, and certainly spiritual-evolutionary, driven self, whose clarity (to him,) was all the proof of its purity and lack of corruption that he needed. It is significant that AC has always stressed the hard work and dedication (which I believe IS a truth) - void of any societal or new age guru-esqe, “magic” - that is absolutely required for anyone to truly attempt to follow this path. Yet, there is still a fine line between the two – considering how close and in line the ego’s goals may happen to be with those of the spirit -IF one happens to be the one striving with all his might and power, to be the conduit and purveyor of higher, eternal truth! A very heady goal, for even perhaps, the most pious seeker/teacher. <br /><br />“MINE is the true and only voice who gives meaning to this monumental shift in collective consciousness.” As has long been said about absolute power…<br /><br />well you know.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-68451303869565701652007-01-22T10:37:00.000-08:002007-01-22T10:37:00.000-08:00Very interesting points about the "set-up" of AC's...Very interesting points about the "set-up" of AC's context. Watching the video clip of his latest lecture regarding "Happy Endings - Personal reflections on sex, romance, and evolutionary idealism" on his blog shows exactly what the prev anon poster points out. His statements are very black and white and in order to follow along with him the observer is constantly accepting his spoken and unspoken declarations of the way things are, without the time or conscious space to evaluate what is being lost in the process. His descriptions of what sex and marriage are all about certainly do not in any way reflect my experience. He has never experienced a normal family life, knows nothing about raising children and literally throws the baby out with the bathwater. When we spent several years being drawn into the teachings we became unavailable to our children and without any conscious decision on our parts we cut ourselves off from them with tragic consequences. Fortunately since being freed from the whole AC thought controlled context, our lives have been restored and deep healing has occurred for us and our children. Life is rich with opportunities to share love, joy, surrender and peace...without abandoning anyone. <br />The dynamics pointed out by the previous poster are well worth watching for when viewing the AC videos. I also find his description of his marriage to be very disrespectful to Alka and very disturbing. Just count how many "I's" are in that article. It's all "I" and "she", with not much "she", other than when he is criticizing her for not measuring up. Of course the context does not allow for any personal recognition, so there is never any appreciation for any personal contribution or sacrifice made to the cause. But what the heck is the cause? Who benefits? If the answer is THE WHOLE, how does any measure of pain & suffering benefit THE WHOLE? It is coming to the end of suffering that allows something new to express.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-63578404794091237122007-01-22T08:58:00.000-08:002007-01-22T08:58:00.000-08:00"I am sorry, but change has to start with us."
Th..."I am sorry, but change has to start with us."<br /><br />This is a very important point, but where it leads will depend on whether we buy into one of two viewpoints.<br /><br />It must be said that not one big name spiritual celebrity has said anything about the astounding situation that has been documented by Luna Tarlo, Andre van der Braak, and the WE? blog community.<br /><br />It has been the 'little people' and the democracy of cyberspace that has made the difference.<br /><br />IMO this calls the whole matter of spiritual elitism into question. <br /><br />Still, we have to be careful about 'it starts with us.' There are ugly arguments based on false empowerment which tweak tne 'it starts with us' then deviously twist it into a line of argument that lets the powerholders totally off the hook and leaves the abused underlings taking all the blame and being told they're wallowing in victim mentality, when by speaking up they are actually ceasing to be victims and have become agents of reform.<br /><br />There are two basic ways to see the human person.<br /><br />1) That each of us is a single unit, autonomous, and supposed to be able to function independently no matter what kind of peer pressure and subtle social influence is put on us.<br /><br />This 'I should be able to do it all by my self and be smart enough to out-think any situation'--is a kind of Superman/John Wayne view that slots right into American culture. <br /><br />This viewpoint is not accurate, though it is very appealing. Facing our essential influenciblity/vulnerability hurts like hell. Many abusive spiritual projects start by fostering this illusion of personal autonomy, then we end up feeling isolated and totally at fault for a situation far larger than us--and where we lacked important information when doing our first decision making.<br /><br />2) Viewpoint #2--that we are not autonomous, but are actually, by virtue of being human, social persons, susceptible to a wise range of influences, social, physical, and that empowerment comes not from denying our 'influencability' but by recognizing our 'influencability' and then by becoming very conscientious about our research, and become 'psychological gourmets'--taking as much care about mental and social influences as we do about the kind of food we put into our bodies.<br /><br />IF we hang around for too long in the presence of people who consistently sneer that kindness and concern for others is weak, and that real seekers are supposed to be 'tough enough to take it' then we risk having our own hearts de-sensitized.<br /><br />Part of the glory and danger of being human is that we are capable of adapting to anything, given enough time--whether that 'anything' is good or bad.<br /><br />False empowerment denies human interconnectedness and human influenciblity/vulerability. <br /><br />False empowerment makes us feel we can fly by persauding us to go into a state of denial about the existence of gravity and the law of physics. <br /><br />Another thing many of us are not aware of when embarking on spiritual quests is that bliss can be triggered by mere technique, and that someone who is good at triggering bliss may be merely regarding us as objects with buttons to be pushed.<br /><br />A very common error is to assume that someone who can send us into bliss sees us as persons. It can happen that a 'bliss technician' is merely diddling us as objects, elicting reactions that seem utterly profound and personal to us, but that are actually standardized--as is described in the Lifespring article.<br /><br />Joseph Cambbell famously said, <br /><br />'Follow your bliss'.<br /><br />Its now time to add 'Enjoy your bliss but always question your bliss.'<br /><br />1) Does the person who triggered that bliss actually see you as a person, and feel concerned for how you will function, or is the person seeing you as an object, interchangeable with others?<br /><br />2) Can you only care about your bliss and refuse to concern yourself with how well others are being treated by the person or organization who elicit the bliss? Any bliss state that leads to addiction and to indifference to the welfare of others, is no different from the bliss produced by happy powder purchased from your local street pharmacist. <br /><br />3) Bliss states should not cause the rest of one's life to feel meaningless and drained of vitality. If so, the bliss is being produced by some mechanism that is probably causing brief spikes in neurochemicals and causes states of depletion when the bliss state has passed.<br /><br />Finally, the Bodhisattva Precept of Mahayana Buddhism advises us to beware of darkening mnd and body of self and other with intoxicants.<br /><br />Crusades, ideas, diagrams and room set ups produced by social engineering (eg Lifespring and other such events), subtle energy, meditation, prostration, acupuncture, yoga can all be used to evade reality and suppress insights that threaten exploitative power structures.<br /><br />In these cases, such methods do become intoxicants. <br /><br />There is very little encouragement in the spiritual world to become wise and discerning consumers of bliss experience, and very little encouragement to question bliss experiences.<br /><br />In many parts of the Western seekers community, one seems to actually be taught NOT to apply discernment to bliss experiences and are taught that its cynical and negative to even imagine doing any sort of background check on a teacher or group--yet its considered quite desirable to <br />do this sort of consumer research when looking for a new car or laptop. <br /><br />So, its not just the seeker that's the source of the problem.<br /><br />Many of us are given the worst possible preparation when we become seekers. Most of the magazines and media presentations provoke states of greed and intoxication by subtly linking enlightenment with fame, power, desirability and celebrity.<br /><br />How often do we see interesting full length articles in major spiritual mags on 'Question Your Bliss' or 'Discernment is Empowerment' or 'Fact Checking for Pilgrims'??Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-59519669414790862082007-01-20T19:23:00.000-08:002007-01-20T19:23:00.000-08:00I agree wholeheartedly with the “This "agreed upon...I agree wholeheartedly with the “This "agreed upon context" Anonymous above. I was very tempted to just let this go – to not “beat a dead horse”, as it were – but I feel I really I have to respond to the other earlier “Anonymous” who took issue with my viewing Andrew’s lectures, “conclusion-first,” as being a “sick” or “weird” response, as opposed to a “healthy” one.<br /><br /> I frankly think this whole problem starts with us, not in the wonderful things we were initially and still are striving for, but with what we are willing to blithely ignore to achieve them; and what we overlooked about AC and his world right from the very start. Knowing what I know now, I DO see that the way he answers non, or at least very early, student’s questions in his video broadcast lectures, DOES hold a lot of information into the dialectic methodology of power and control he sets in motion, that lead to what comes later. I don’t think he even realizes this is a deliberate process on his part, though that is merely my own personal belief, and is probably irrelevant anyway. <br /><br />The bottom line is that once one understands where this all ends up for so many, it is very compelling to try and analyze, and then to discover, even the way he poses questions to his newbie audience questioners. I perceive that there is a constant framework of omission and subtle manipulation in the way he puts his counter questions that is very in keeping with the type of thing that an other 'anonymous' poster sites in the link http://rickross.com/reference/lifespring/lifespring4.html Take a look at the information to be found in the highly informative reference, and tell me that there is not significant bearing here on the arc of AC’s entire process of indoctrination and power assertion. <br /><br />I am sorry, but change has to start with us, and the way we look at this whole issue – even if it impinges on a great deal positive, and still probably very valid, personal memory of progress we have felt in the past, and may be loathe to part with. But that is really not significant when compared to the really almost horrific abuse of power that is obviously being exerted over so many unwilling participants to this whole process.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-50392743959731289152007-01-20T14:36:00.000-08:002007-01-20T14:36:00.000-08:00"the agreed upon context in which we were involved..."the agreed upon context in which we were involved with Andrew and the conscious expression of a willingness to do anything Andrew asked of us in order to be free"<br />This "agreed upon context" you refer to, are you here to tell us that when the students entered into this agreed upon context they were agreeing to such actions on Andrew's part such as slapping, compromising their health by freezing dips in the water, extortion to the tune of 2 million dollars etc etc? And what was Andrew going to deliver to the students who were agreeing to this crazy unspecified context? Where is the freedom promised? The only one who is free in this situation is Andrew Cohen. Everyone else is held captive in a very firm grip.<br />Beware anyone who offers freedom at the cost of everything! You'll get freedom alright, freedom from common sense, freedom from your money and freedom from your own autonomy. Reading all that is available on this blog will give a very clear description of what is at stake so anyone contemplating entering into any such crazy context take heed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-33390579042239864252007-01-19T20:57:00.000-08:002007-01-19T20:57:00.000-08:00It's a good play on my name; please be my guest. I...It's a good play on my name; please be my guest. I assure you I'd be amused even if it were my real name. I'm afraid it's just a hidey-hole though.<br /><br />It's a point well taken, and one I hadn't clearly seen before--that this blog could do with more soul-searching. I'd love to see accounts of someone's time with Andrew where the focus is consistently inward: what motivated me, what did I collude in, what ideals did Andrew embody for me, which of those ideals do I still hold and which of them did I blind myself by holding...<br /><br />This need NOT conflict with seeing Andrew objectively, critically. (Critically--but with total human understanding, no blame). An indiscriminate transparency is the only possible transparency. You simply won't see Andrew rightly until you see how your whole romance and trauma with him arose directly and entirely from your own inner formations. <br /><br />"Sociopathy" is really too strong a word from someone who doesn't know Andrew personally, and I apologize. I really meant it as a question: Andrew is an enigma to me. My interest in him is sympathetic. (Though also unambiguously horrified, I must say). You see, most of his writings strike me as baseless rhetoric, not very investigative, yet he's said a few very valuable and little-heard things. For instance? Well what we recited when I visited an IEF center, that was very nicely put, I'm sure you know it well--I approximately recall: "meditation is a metaphor for enlightenment, sitting still is a metaphor for wanting to be free more than anything else, paying attention is a metaphor for having no relationship to the arising of thought or the presence of feeling...". And also that point he drives home so tirelessly: that my divided aspirations can be starkly and lucidly assessed; which clarifies my intent; from which life energy flows marvellously in a single channel for the first time.<br /><br />And such an energetic community life as he developed, based on this principle, seems unique to me, and abidingly fascinating. (In its ideal form--there's no doubt in my mind that it's largely dysfunctional in practice). <br /><br />If he knows whereof he speaks when he says an enlightened person never moves again--how can he possibly have developed such raging blind spots? Does anyone who agrees with me that he has raging blind spots, also feel that he has (or had) access to a passion to speak truth with zero concern for ingratiation? I've seen a video where his impersonal response to each questioner--pretty or ugly, silver-tongued or nervous--was frightening. But then he'll have those dialogues with Wilber, or with teachers who (I gather) he privately denigrates, and it's all buddy-buddy and back-slapping, not one challenging question. And he's boastful-- actually he was boastful in the video too, he's invariably boastful and hyperbolic. <br /><br />I mean, he really believes his myth, doesn't he...? How can he buy it so wholesale if he's ever known deep inward questioning? Certain of his powerful pronouncements seem to suggest he must have known it. <br /><br />I'd love to hear a realistic and thoughtful reckoning of where his gifts (-or "gifts?"-) come from--from enlightenment? From a rare concentration of narcissistic ambition? I think a realistic appraisal can only come from someone who sees the whole sad saga, their own part and Andrew's part, without agenda. Without defense or blame of self or other.<br /><br />Jane O'Neil's post does this nicely, actually.<br /><br />"Without agenda" does NOT mean that Andrew's true ways shouldn't be aggressively publicized. What valuables he's contributed to the spiritual conversation must be freed from all his obfuscation before they'll have any power to energize that conversation--meanwhile they'll be disregarded, or taken along with his very bad medicine. This blog, at its best, has served that new movement: people taking what they've learned with Andrew and with the community around Andrew and moving forward with it in freedom, while rejecting the toxic. Any ideas of Andrew's perfection and apartness, for instance, are toxic, and not at all integral to a true human understanding of "clarity of intention." A community that asks its members to be their very best and truest is a rare gem. But it requires the most sensitive attention to one another, discrimination, and nothing but love and understanding. Stumbling, dark and terrified mortals won't do their best just because scary people yell at them to do their best. They don't know they have a best. <br /><br />I mean, I don't know, did the high demands in Andrew's community reveal a best that people didn't know they had...? Like throwing you in the deep end to learn to swim? The students in his promotional videos don't have the look of people moving from their own strength. Their evolutionary excitement looks fevered, not like the wholesome enthusiasm of moving WITH our green world, WITH basic awareness. What is there to be so excited about if it's life's own nature, your own nature? When the good news really takes up residence in a life, doesn't it rather give that Buddha-statue, infinitely-even smile? Hecticness is a sign to me of non-resident inspiration. -Such as you'd get from looking fixedly to a capricious source for reassurance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-49427943005871466902007-01-19T18:44:00.000-08:002007-01-19T18:44:00.000-08:00In response to "it has been frustrating to read th...In response to "it has been frustrating to read the amount of denial, finger-pointing at Andrew (often without first hand experience and information), and lack of looking at oneself and one's relationship to what we said we wanted and understood."<br /><br />Without first hand experience? Have you been reading what I've been reading? Is there any chance at all that the denial here might be on your part, perhaps?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-17760447811427159252007-01-17T21:43:00.000-08:002007-01-17T21:43:00.000-08:00Dear Po Po...
Those who have tried to present a d...Dear Po Po...<br /><br />Those who have tried to present a different perspective on the 'abuses', that included the agreed upon context in which we were involved with Andrew and the conscious expression of a willingness to do anything Andrew asked of us in order to be free...have been 'poo-poo'ed'. <br /><br />I don't mean to be disrespectful by playing with your name like this...hopefully, the 'cosmic clown' has a place in this discussion, but it has been frustrating to read the amount of denial, finger-pointing at Andrew (often without first hand experience and information), and lack of looking at oneself and one's relationship to what we said we wanted and understood. Doing so would put a whole different spin on the matter...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-28724684457459483942007-01-17T18:32:00.000-08:002007-01-17T18:32:00.000-08:00One or two recent comments seem to shade slightly ...One or two recent comments seem to shade slightly into mocking Andrew--just slightly, in a fairly innocent or just over-exuberant way; my interest is not to take issue with them--but what they make me realize, gratefully, is what a serious and humane tone this blog has sustained. I feel the invitation to Andrew has thereby remained open, however slim the chances currently seem that he'll ever humbly engage his critics. There's been lots of deep hurt registered here, to be sure, but quite often accompanied by that humane tone. --Even LOVE for Andrew, not at all infrequently. Sadly, actually, this might be further evidence of sociopathy in Andrew, mightn't it...?: The fact that he can shrilly caricature such by-and-large humane and occasionally affectionate critics, label them as too irrational or vengeful to engage.<br /><br />(FWIW I have no personal experience with Andrew or his community. Heard him speak once).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-7887577040979767432007-01-16T18:19:00.000-08:002007-01-16T18:19:00.000-08:00This gives a description of techniques used in a g...This gives a description of techniques used in a group training that triggered intense emotion and fostered obedience to the trainer. <br /><br />http://rickross.com/reference/lifespring/lifespring4.html<br /><br />One problem is that entering the spiritual seeker's community often means becoming part of a large social scene in which a capacity for objectivity is aggessively devalued. <br /><br />One can slip into this state of mind long before crossing paths with a guru or group.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-84978485283038919592007-01-16T16:44:00.000-08:002007-01-16T16:44:00.000-08:00It would be one thing if, as a result of watching ...It would be one thing if, as a result of watching Andrew you concluded that there were 'holes' and 'flaws' and you speak from that and about that. Quite another thing to be watching with the specific intent to find flaws and support what you have already concluded. That's 'sick' to me, not to mention kind of weird.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-68192008609900515172007-01-16T16:29:00.000-08:002007-01-16T16:29:00.000-08:00Got all kinds of thoughts buzzin around in my head...Got all kinds of thoughts buzzin around in my head...perhaps the students dedication to scrubbing and serving was a good way to divest themselves of self-concern. Could be AC was providing a vehicle for such selfless service for the benefit of the students. When I visited I was impressed with and experienced to some degree the passion of expressing a divine love in such circumstances. <br />This does not however explain the incidents described on this blog which I can in no way accept as being helpful to anyone.<br />I'm also intrigued with the fact that I sense there would be tremendous fear and hesitation in coming forth with the truth of these experiences on the part of the student and somehow it appears that it is harder to reveal being victimized than it was for the abuser to actually deliver the abuse. I am trying to understand why the shame is experienced by the victim rather than the perpetrator. It is strange, no? There have been several slaps to the contributors who have overcome great resistance to share their experiences here and those who scold them have nothing to say about the perpetrator. I wonder why this would be? That the mind would choose to focus on the ones who were hurt or robbed etc and completely ignore the one who so clearly abused a position of power is an interesting phenomenon. I just don't get it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8775078.post-79321041919646548322007-01-16T12:47:00.000-08:002007-01-16T12:47:00.000-08:00I don’t think that there is anything sick about tr...I don’t think that there is anything sick about trying to observe threads or caveats in AC’s lectures that might eventually be part of contributing to the formation of a basis of almost totally un-self-examined corruption. (And obviously there are many other things I do with my life aside from this, thank you). At one time I thought AC was the very model of integrity, in a world populated largely by new age charlatan gurus. Clearly this is not the case. I think he is so deluded by power that he does not realize or accept his fundamental dishonesty in any meaningful, or truthful way. So what have we got left, but to look to his lectures, to see if there are perhaps clues about his self-enabling personality, that may already be apparent in his talks? It seems to me that if all (myself included), had been a bit more skeptical at an early stage, it is at least possible that many of the conditions for the abuse we have read about here might not have had a chance to take such firm root. Perhaps there would have been no way to detect, and such observation would have made no difference at all. But I don’t think it is out of place to re visit some of his lectures on occasion, with all of this in mind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com