Four Steps to Freedom

Chances are, if you are reading this now, you have already taken a few courageous steps of discrimination. As Andrew used to teach, thoughts are not a problem. Neither is inquiring into the nature of what lies beyond the community or that you might come to know that there is a life, a real life, with real challenges, outside Andrew’s community!

If you have left you have to understand that we all go through very specific phases, or stages, upon coming out! This, too, is impersonal ….and it might seem horrible, but actually it is very refreshing!

So here are the four different phases:

Phase one: the isolation phase.
This phase can last from a few days to a long long time, even years and years. The problem is that the longer this phase lasts the more screwed up you are. Really. You are in what Tibetans call the Bardo realm and Catholics call Limbo: Neither here nor there. You know very clearly how the community and Andrew sees you: an egomaniac, full of anger, resentment, pride. Also you know, that the world outside is not only crawling with ignorant people that are wasting their lives away, but also (and that is way more dangerous), with us, the shadow sangha…and we are real bad news…and Andrew over the years has made sure you know how really bad we are!

So, there you are, in the isolation phase, confused about a lot of things, but very certain about one: you do not want to see anybody! Neither the community (if you are one of the lucky ones) nor anybody belonging to the ex community! You have heard we make phone calls trying to reach you disguised as friends….-and maybe are a bit surprised that nobody has called you yet - Well, we have a life….

But back to you. Fair enough, you need time to sort things out, and depending on how long you have been in there and the abuse (yes! abuse) you have gone through, you might really need some time. It would be good if you can find a friend in this phase, or if not a friend (there are no real friends in the community) someone that has left more or less at the same time you have. YOU NEED TO VENT! Really, it is your human right, and it is also very HEALING!

So, the best thing you can do is get out of phase one as fast as you can and start pouring your heart out to someone you trust! That will move you on to phase two.

Phase two: contact.
So now you are daring, you are starting to go beyond what you “knew” were the safe parameters. And maybe that is why you are even checking this site out. The internet is a safe bet. Nobody sees you, and only you know…but now you have to find out that actually other people have gone through the same things you have. Start to branch out, look for e-mail addresses, reach old friends that maybe have left a few years ago. The more you branch out the more you will see many others share your experience of doubt and disillusionment. The more daring you are the more you will contact people that are viewed as real perverse in the community, the hard core “negatives”. Because as much as phase two is the beginning of liberation, you will find out, you can get stuck there too.

You can get stuck in choosing who is good and who is bad, still according to what is Andrew’s view. Really, really bad is someone that says Andrew is an egomaniac, someone that does not take any responsibility at all for the fact that they have asked to be free in the first place. Someone less bad is someone that has left, but is admitting that it is their ego’s fault and they are sinners! So, these people are the ones that will admit they had to suffer in order to be redeemed and freed from their egos. They had to do prostrations in the cold freezing water, they had to be humiliated publicly on cartoons….because they are so narcissistic and self-centered that they deserved that! Really!

So here we go, the degree to which you will move on, is the degree to which you will inquire and dare, and so, to that degree you will be called bad! How ironic!

Phase three: discrimination
This is when you start to see that there are many different views out there of where Andrew is at. And it might be interesting to find out that people you understood to be so negative are not! Actually they might have had, at the time of leaving the community, some very valid points!
So in the big world out here, here we are all navigating and trying to understand!
Some of us have even been able to leave behind the whole Andrew thing, and view it as just part of our experience in life and the world, and move on…

Phase four: there are no safety nets out here!
The world and our spiritual explorations are wide open, there are no safety nets, if you blow it you pay. There are no guidelines and nobody is telling you what is right and what is wrong. You are the one that needs to learn to navigate both in the mundane world and the spiritual world. Some things are brought to you and some things you have to look for.

In A’s community you have learned to endure, now it is up to you to move forward!

(contributed by an anonymous reader)

Responses to Four Steps to Freedom

Happy New Year Everyone!

We're kicking the year off on the right note, which is to say lots of discussion and input! Thank you to all the commentors!

Four Steps to Freedom has ignited a flurry of replies and responses, which is a sure sign that this blog is being participated in - and that's good. We all don't agree - another sign of health.

For the record, WHAT enlightenment?! has as its theme "an uncensored look at self-styled "guru" Andrew Cohen" and we realize that by posting Four Steps, we were straying a bit from that and looking into the ex-student and how he/she navigates the world after AC.

We will be returning to our original theme in subsequent posts.

Here are the comments we've received on Four Steps:

Comment 1:
Even though it is a very interesting analysis, who ever posted this last post seems to be more upset by the people who have left Andrew and are not in touch with "the so called shadow sangha", then Andrew himself.... go figure!

I have left a long time ago and now peacefully living with my wife and kids, not thinking back a whole lot of my times with Andrew (still in Marin County). I dont know much of the more intense forms of abuse, but they sound NOT GOOD!

Still, I do feel that the confusing facts of the profound depth of Andrew's realization AND all his abusive stuff needs a lot more careful thought than just angry bitching... you know what i mean? there doesn't seem to be much of a balanced view here.

There was a post on your forum a while back beautifully refering to this as well, challenging to have a bigger heart about the whole situation. I found that very helpful.

Anyway, I doubt you will post this to the blog, but for what it's worth, here it is.... namaste!

Comment 2:
This is a comment on the commentator who believes that the author of Four Steps To Freedom is more interested in taking to task those not in touch with the "shadow sangha" than Andrew himself.I think this misses the point completely. It seems to me that, unfortunately, the commentator himself may be stuck in "phase one" and perhaps, therefore, the description of this phase struck too close to home for him.

The author of 4 Steps neither insists that contacting former members of the community who are critical of Andrew (the so-called "shadow sangha")is necessary, nor does the author find any fault in anyone who chooses not to contact these folks. (Although, to tell the truth, it seems to me that if you want to start investigating what happened, why you left and what that means, it would seem to make sense to speak with others similarly situated about it).

The author of "4 Steps" only recommends that you find someone you trust to "pour your heart out to." And if you do this honestly, you'll start to find a lot of anger and hurt that needs to be acknowledged before you can move on to the next step toward finding your wings and flying free.

One thing that's sure--sweeping it under the rug in the name of being "fair anad balanced" doesn't help.

On the other hand, dear commentator, if you do have something to say about Andrew that you think will make things here more balanced, I'm sure everyone would love to hear it.

Comment 3:
JEEEEEEEZ!!!!I read the first "comment on the commentator" earlier today and found it very refreshing. I left Andrew Cohen a few years ago and also feel that my life is on a pretty even keel. No massive amounts of unresolved anger but a willingness to sincerly question some core aspects of Andrew's teaching methods that were deeply suspect and possibly abusive.

I was sent the link to this blog anonomously and have found some of the information very helpful and it's given me a lot of food for thought and a real way to find my way through the confusion. This latest "four step" post I found, to be honest, patronizing, unpleasant, extremely polarizing and arrogant. It made me experience the feeling I often had in the community of being painted into a corner and not being the given the respect to find my own way. Most dangerously and oppressively of all being labelled in some self-invented step system I feel is particularly arrogant and lacking in any kind of grasp of the enormous complexity of the situation we all find ourselves in. I felt really angry that the person who responded (pretty openly I thought) to the "four step" manifesto was basically just put down. Reminded me of being in the community....very FASCISTIC!!!!

PLEASE let this blog be an open and fair place that people can meet to find out more about their experience. Not a place to be put down, patronized and subjected to a two dimensional and primitive pyschoanalysis!!

Comment 4:
Ramesh Balkaser says this. I may believe that the whole universe is a dream, but so long as one remains outside of the dream and sees it as something seen by him as something seen by him as a seperate entity he cannot be any nearer to liberation or self realisation.Liberation is nothing other than the liberation from the idea of a seperate entity doing the seeing.

Wilbur and Cohen are both very much seperate if not superior entities seeing others as still trapped in the dream. Poor fools instead of transending their ego's they have simply driven it under cover so that rather than being able to witness its workings they act so totally from it that they have become useless to themselves and a danger to others. Still its all part of the game. Goodies and baddies etc

Comment 5:
Some folks are very sensitive around here.I'm sure no offense or harm was intended by the post or the comment.May all beings be happy.

Om shanti shanti shanti.

Comment 6:
It looks like the Steps to Freedom post, and the "comment on the commentator" has set off a bit of a tiff.

Interesting.

I suppose some readers feel it criticizes them, and would prefer that criticism be kept to Andrew.

I think people are being a bit over-sensitive. It seems that 4 Steps was meant to help and was supposed to be provocative but fun.It does touch on a difference in strategy and approach among people who left AC. Apparently this is a hot button topic.

Maybe it's best thing is for WHAT enlightenment?! to keep the focus more on AC and back away from focusing on those who have left.

Comment 7:

Four Steps - But Only if the Shoe Fits!

In a way I can see why there is the difference in viewpoint between the "4 steps" article and some of the comments.

Basically, the people who were somewwhat less involved—like the one commenter who we know was able to avoid total immersion because otherwise he never would’ve left with his relationship and family intact-- are now probably feeling a subtle pressure from "4 Steps" to be part of a sort of a "sangha", albeit a “shadow” one, which they never wanted to get involved with in the first place.

I suppose that the 4 steps paradigm really only applies to those who were actually deep in the original and current sangha...really involved, to the point of completely giving up their independence for a number of years.

There are all shades, but people who weren’t longtime enough to really get hooked into the belief system and Andrew’s co-dependent guru-disciple bond might not necessarily have to go through the same lengthy and arduous steps of "de-compression" as those who were.

Rebuttals by Cohen's Defenders

Here are articles rebutting the main points and allegations of WHAT enlightenment??!:

WIE Editor Admits Slapping, Smeared "Blood" Incident by Craig Hamilton

"You're Bottom Dwellers!" by Don Beck

What Enlightenment??! - another view by Jeremy Lyell

Real Teachers Are Scarce as Hens Teach by Roberta Anderson


IN ADDITION to the above articles posted on WHAT enlightenment??! there are several comments to various articles which are also rebuttals to some of the main themes of this blog. Here are a few of those comments:


At Friday, 04 February, 2005, Craig Hamilton said...
AN EXPLOSION OF LIBERATION
Reflections of a current student
by Craig Hamilton

Dear Susan,

I’m glad to hear that you had a good sesshin, that you finally feel you have gotten your feet back on the path, and that you have regained your self-confidence. But after reading your diatribe against Andrew above, I have to ask you one question: Do you really believe the picture you laid out? Or perhaps more to the point, did writing all that out so eloquently and forcefully help you to believe it a little more?
Having worked closely with you on the What Is Enlightenment? issue “What Is Ego: Friend or Foe?,” I know you get why I’m asking, but for those who are peering into our little fishbowl here let me lay out a little context.
As Sigmund Freud saw clearly, and as Anna Freud explained in its details, the ego, or self-image, protects itself with an army of defense mechanisms which, in effect, endlessly reshuffle the details of reality in order to keep one’s picture of oneself intact. The “wisdom of the ego” as Harvard psychologist George Vaillant refers to it in his book by the same name, lies in its ingenious ability to distort reality to protect us from uncomfortable, even devastating truths. This is why authentic spiritual paths are so challenging. They attempt to disarm the ego, so we can see clearly, free of its distortions. And as any tradition worth its salt will tell you, except in the rarest of cases, human beings will not give up their defenses without a fight. And most of the time, we won’t give them up at all.
The problem this presents for the authentic spiritual teacher, then, is that it puts him or her in the difficult position of having to, in an often painfully literal sense, start a fight with the student. Granted, it’s a fight that the student has agreed to, perhaps even begged for. But, let’s face it, a fight is a fight. And once it has started, the outcome is never assured. This is probably why many of the great Zen masters would put their would-be disciples through such extreme trials before they would even consider accepting them as students. They wanted to gather some data: how likely is it that they are going to let me win the fight? When push comes to shove, as it inevitably will, are they going to side with the aspiration that brought them to me? Or are they going to side with the part of them that wants absolutely nothing to do with me and the freedom from delusion I represent? And as history tells us, no matter how much data they gathered, still there was no way to be sure.
Now, here we are in the postmodern world. A world in which, as Ken Wilber points out in Boomeritis, and Christopher Lasch makes clear in A Culture of Narcissism, the personal, egoic, narcissistic self-sense has become something of a god without peers. Let’s admit it together. We postmoderns answer to no one but ourselves. And if we have a God, it is a God (or Buddha) we have constructed to perfectly suit our spiritual self-image. A God that serves us well. Certainly not a God who challenges us. So, what happens when an authentic spiritual teacher—a teacher interested only in the real liberation of his or her disciples—walks into the middle of this narcissistic, postmodern world and gets to work? Any guesses?
Well, for starters, he ends up with a blog like this one and a couple of books written by angry former students who, surprise, surprise, got their egos bruised one too many times and decided to retreat to sunnier climes. But the problem is, once they got there, they realized they were still in the fight—only this time the fight was between two parts of themselves—the part of them that had been awakened by the teacher and the part that ran away. Of course, now the part of them that ran away is fully in control, but for all of its internal efforts, it can’t get that other part to shut up. Imagine the predicament. How to respond? You guessed it. Attack the one who started the fight in the first place in the desperate hope that tearing him down will stop the fight. It is truly a horrendous, and perhaps uniquely postmodern, predicament.
So, to return to my question at the beginning, the reason I’m asking Susan if she really believes what she said is that she and I both know that behind all of her confidence and feigned sincerity, she isn’t really quite as sure about this picture as she is making out to be. Although no doubt, she feels a bit emboldened, and at least temporarily more certain, for having said it so well and so publicly. This was, like most of the entries on this blog, an attempt to stop the internal fight, to untangle what she referred to as the “miles of black and white yarn entwined in a big ball at the pit of my stomach.”

But, of course, this isn’t really mainly about Susan. What I’m trying to shed light on here are the three areas that people reading this blog understandably tend to find confusing:

1) Why are some people so angry at Andrew Cohen when he seems to be such a powerful and inspiring teacher so wholeheartedly and selflessly committed to humanity’s highest ideals?

2) Why are people still angry enough to fight this fight so intensely even many years after they’ve left? Why haven’t they moved on?

3) Why are the sentiments so strong when there is no actual scandal to speak of?

I think that so far, I’ve pretty well covered the first two. But in light of how many truly self-serving, corrupt gurus have generated far less animosity, this third question is particularly intriguing. Take note: Andrew, for all of the respect he has garnered among today’s most prominent thought leaders and visionaries, does not have a particularly large following. And in contrast to many of the past few decades’ more prominent spiritual leaders, he has not been accused of any financial or sexual improprieties—nothing at all that would constitute any sort of scandal. And yet, he has already had two books (and one blog) written about him attempting to assassinate his character. Think about it. For all of their dramatic impact, somehow the cries of “he told me to jump in a cold lake,” or “he had my friend draw a cartoon caricature of me and post it on my office wall,” or “he threw me out until I was ready to be serious,” or even, “he had my best friend slap me in the face when I was being a jerk,” or even, “he told me to sleep with three prostitutes a day to try to get me to stop sleeping with prostitutes instead of my wife!” (which only happened once, just for the record) just aren’t the stuff of scandal. Even if they might offend our more conservative sensibilities.
Now, to return to your post, Susan, there are a few specifics I can’t help but respond to. First, I don’t know where you’re getting your data, but your characterization of what is happening around Andrew now is so far off the mark that I would suggest, in any future diatribes, you stick to the usual fare on this blog—rehashing the past. As for the “core group”, whatever that was (some special elite you saw yourself as part of?), it has not only gotten bigger and stronger, but more importantly, it has expanded to include everyone. Far from being the “monument to what might have been” you describe, Andrew’s global community is exploding—exploding with passion, exploding with creativity, and most remarkably, exploding with individual and collective liberation. The revolution in consciousness that Andrew and all of us have worked so hard to bring into being is now bursting out of every corner. It’s bursting out of the magazine (remember the magazine?), it’s bursting out of our new international speaker’s series, it’s bursting out of our new broadcast media website, it’s bursting out of the new documentary film we shot last summer at the Parliament of World’s Religions (incidentally, did you know Andrew spoke at the Parliament, and I hosted a panel on the Future of Religion?), and most importantly, it’s bursting out of every aspect of our collective life together, our meetings, our meditations, our Enlightened Communication groups. It’s by no means a finished product, and hopefully never will be, but some kind of critical mass has happened that is creating a momentum of awakening in the collective that anyone who visits here can feel in their cells. You wouldn’t believe what it’s like at Foxhollow now. Hardly a week goes by that some spiritual or cultural luminary doesn’t drop in for a visit to see what the buzz is all about. And the same could be said for our beautiful new five-storey evolutionary megacenter in London. And, of course to a lesser degree, our smaller but no less thriving centers in New York, Boston, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Paris, and Rishikesh.
Second, your characterization of Andrew as an ivory tower guru who thinks his is the only game in town has to be one of the most absurd distortions I’ve ever heard. I think any of us would be hard pressed to name one other spiritual teacher alive today who has made more effort to personally connect and maintain relationships with as many other teachers as Andrew has. Not to mention his efforts to actually promote the work of other teachers through his magazine, our speaker’s series, our broadcast media website, etc. This was really a low blow.
Third, your (and this blog’s) characterization of Andrew as someone who rejects and vilifies former students is another cheap shot. No doubt, splitting from such a close and involved relationship can evoke all kinds of feelings on both sides. But particularly in light of the fact that it was Andrew and I who reached out to you last year, simply to see how you were doing and try to reconnect, this emphasis in your letter was frankly painful. There are many former students who have maintained good connections with Andrew and the community, and we are always delighted to see anyone who drops in for a visit.
Finally, I have to point out the irony of your using the Lee Lozowick quote to try to build your case against Andrew, given that he’s one of the many people who knew you before you met Andrew who couldn’t believe how much you’d changed as a result of your time with Andrew. I hope some of that change has managed to stick, and that in your next sesshin, you come a bit closer to the truth that might really set you free.

Craig Hamilton
Managing Editor
What Is Enlightenment?
www.wie.org



At Sunday, 13 March, 2005, Jeff Feldman said...
I was quite surprised to hear from Richard Pitt, after all these years. With regards to what he wrote about those who leave the community, it wasn't my experience, even early on (in 1989), when I decided to leave the community, then newly set up in California. I have written about it as part of a longer contribution submitted under Ed McDougal's 'Emperor's New Clothes'. Knowing that I was struggling, Andrew actually called me, at the time, and said that although he was disappointed, I was free to go and encouraged me to do it with dignity. Actually, I found that I was given more of a hard time by Andrew's male student body, which included Richard and others who have contributed to this site and spoken of as having being abused, terrorized, etc. during their time in the community. Andrew was a prince, which was more than I could say about a few of the male students.

At the time I am referring to, I did go away and ended up keeping in touch with Andrew, on a regular basis. Every now and then, I received messages from him and had a couple of very sweet and supprotive phone conversations with him, during that period. Eventually I returned, for a few years.

During the past ten years, I have not been part of the formal community, but continue to have a healthy relationship with Andrew and his students, as well as a few ex-students.

Perhaps Richard and others have not yet discovered what it was, in them, that evoked such a strong response from Andrew.

Jeff Feldman


At Friday, 25 March, 2005, Mo Riddiford said...
Hello Hal,

Six days ago I saw a reference to a blog on a discussion list I'm on. Immediately I clicked on the link and, feeling responsible to keep my eyes open concerning everything around Andrew Cohen, I took two hours that day to read the entire blog. What an unpleasant but strengthening experience that has been. I now understand why Andrew wrote a book called "In defence of the Guru Principle" and not just a book called "The Guru Principle".

Sometimes we each have to stand up and defend what's right.

Do you remember me, Hal? Do you remember you were the first one to show me how to use a computer mouse in an office in Mill Valley in California well over a decade ago? I remember and also know well almost all the people you mentioned in your letters.

Having read the entire blog, I feel compelled to stand up in defence of Andrew and in defence of the guru principle. For the record, I live in a country where there is no centre devoted to Andrew's teachings and I am married to someone who, at the time of our wedding, had no connection whatsoever to Andrew or his organisation. No one could describe me now as part of Andrew's "inner circle", whatever that might possibly mean. For the record, no one has asked me to write this letter, nor have I discussed it with anyone.

As you might well remember, Hal, I met Andrew during his first year of teaching over eighteen years ago. Within weeks, it became irrevocably clear to me that Andrew is a genuine teacher and he is also my teacher. This recognition has endured over the ensuing years, whether physically close to Andrew living in a house with him and other students, or far away on the other side of the planet.

You're a lawyer by profession, Hal, so I'll present some legal facts, of the type where a person can stand up in court and declare to the whole world,
"These things I have seen with my own eyes!"
"These things I know from my own direct experience!"

In my eighteen years of relationship and communication with Andrew, we have had very many interactions and communications. When necessary, he has used every creative means possible to keep me true to my own deepest intention to be free.

Over all these years he has NEVER made one mistake, not even one time, in his many communications with me. His advice to me, for my own evolution, has always been PERFECT, and I do mean perfect. Perfect means impeccable. Perfect means also that, try as I might, I could not attribute personal motivation to his advice. Very often I've looked back to what he told me and only later, sometimes many years later, have I understood how perfect his advice has been.

Those reading this testimony might well believe that no human being could possibly live with such integrity. My own mind still finds it hard to comprehend but these are the facts.
But facts are facts and I present them to the court of world opinion.

Every one has to decide for themselves about who Andrew is, and what he teaches.
Everyone has to find their own way from their own experience.
No one should ever just believe someone else's words.
But I will say to anyone at anytime; this is my own *tested* experience over many years.

But there's more, Hal.
It's all about how any of us interpret these reported possible events.

Cast your mind back to a moment in your life in which, perhaps when making your very first steps on the spiritual path and perhaps bursting with transcendent inspiration, you felt willing to face the hottest fires of Hell, just to see one time the screaming fact of non-separation.
Weren't you ready to do whatever it takes, to face whatever, just to discover this glory?

After reading your litany of puny accusations, and in my opinion they are very puny, I came to realise how thrilled I would be if ALL of it is true and accurate!
I have no direct evidence that *any* of it is true but, if it was, isn't this truly the GOOD NEWS? *If* all that you say is true, we would then have evidence of a teacher willing to do whatever it takes to develop his students. Those, endeavouring to be true to our noblest motivations but also grappling with all in ourselves that wants to wallow in the swamp, can then have confidence in a teacher who is so committed to our evolution that he is willing to go that far.

Your puny accusations are such very good news, Hal !
DON'T YOU GET IT, Hal ?????

So I've now given you some facts, personal testimony that could be accepted in any court.
I've also told you how I interpret your puny accusations.
Finally I'll give you my own opinion.
And, yes, it is my own judgement (God forbid!) on what you and others (some without even having the courage of using their name!!) are doing here with this blog.
I find what you are doing here only destructive ― there is so much to be done globally at this critical time in human history and you are wasting your life with this miserable thing?

I concur with Don Beck in what he called you.

I simply have neither the time nor any interest to read this blog further.
I am not anonymous, I do have a name, I use it when I criticise, and I can be reached - so here's my email address riddiford_mo@yahoo.com
Sincerely
Mo Riddiford

At Saturday, 09 April, 2005, Tabitha Cooper said...
I was lucky enough to be a formal student of Andrew’s for 4 years. In the five years I was involved with him and his teaching, I learnt more of value about myself, Life and what’s important than from anything in my life up until that point, it was 4 years ago that I left, and it remains an un-erasable and precious reference point in my heart now. Nothing bar death itself can cause this knowing to be not known in me, and for this I am so profoundly grateful.

In a world so full of doubt and cyncism, it is not difficult to find support for suspicion, in authority, integrity of action and wholeness, and very rare to find people willing to have the courage and faith to find out and live what that might mean at this very confusing time in the story of the world.

Andrew always warned us of the difficulty of the path to Enlightenment, he has always said it is not for everyone, he never forced anyone to be involved in his teachings and making the choice to be his student was never taken lightly. But all of us did make that choice, and this is key.

I know for myself that the joy in awakening to another context, and feelings associated with realising that something else really is possible caused an almost drunken relationship to everything whereby I filtered what I wanted to hear – things Andrew said that acknowledged my interest in Enlightenment, filtering out any other more grounding elements that might conflict, so that I could stay intoxicated. I wasn’t the only one.

It is very easy to do this, even now, to hear what you want to hear, to remember what you want to remember, and forget what is convenient, to affirm the way that we want to live our lives now. The Context for the life we lived in the Community cannot be compared to a more regular life lived by most of us in the world, and it is misleading to reference events out of this context. The media - as an example – often do this, not to give a fair representation, but to meet their own ends.

I have found peace in facing the fact that I am not the warrior for freedom that I wanted to believe, that as much as I may have recognised the perfection of the goal of Enlightenment, I am not up for the kind of surrender that it takes. I am responsible for what I do and the choices I make, - I always have been.

This forum has been set apparently to warn people against Andrew, but isn’t it a bit patronising to assume that people are not capable of discriminating for themselves? The context being built through the teachings is precious, throwing mud at it so it doesn’t shine for others is as destructive to ourselves as it is to the possibility of Freedom. Should people not be allowed the freedom – without the fear you are generating - to make up their own minds? It is an ugly battle being fought here, and in your hearts you must know that this is not an even playing field.

I agree that the truth matters, which is why I feel compelled to respond. I don’t expect anything I’ve said here to make any difference to the initiators of this blog, but to anyone else reading – if you do draw conclusions, let it at least be free from fear.

Thank you Andrew, and deepest respect to his students.

Tabitha Cooper


At Thursday, 14 April, 2005, Dave Reid said...
Tabitha you're post was a welcome diamond in the rough. You astutely point out the profound calamity that those behind this blog are seeking to wreak.

The calamity is that WHAT they are actually out to destroy is the greater evolutionary context of enlightened communion and knowledge that is being revealed and explored by Andrew, his community and others participating in that with them. They are making this about soiling Andrew's reputation, but really its about tearing apart something even more precious which is the context I quote here in Tabitha's post: "The context being built through the teachings is precious, throwing mud at it so it doesn’t shine for others is as destructive to ourselves as it is to the possibility of Freedom."

These people's ego's got hurt seeking enlightenment from a real teacher, and rather than be man or woman enough to accept that, they instead seek to destroy the profound context that is undeniably being revealed around Andrew. EVEN if you think he's a farce, or a mean guru who hurts people, its still hard to deny the miraculous discoveries he, his community, his retreat participants, fellow teachers and pundits are touching upon as seen in andrewcohen.org and wie.org.

I'm sure the efforts of this blog will fail overall, but its still sad and pathetic to see how willing so many are to jump on the bandwagon of assuming that Andrew is as much of a monster as he's made out to be in this blog. Too all those people - prove you are not weak minded and at least look deeply into all this before accepting that this is "just another cult."

Dave Reid

At Sunday, 17 April, 2005, Jeremy Lyell said...
Here we go again…. someone, in this case Dave Reid (but the same applies to Roberta, Tabitha, Mo and others’ posts), dares to speak out in support of Andrew… and surprise, surprise, immediately there’s another bout of angry, anonymous mud slinging. Interesting how most of these mud slingers post anonymously, whereas those on the pro side post almost invariably with their own names. This anonymous posting is cowardly, invulnerable and oh so safe.

There have been calls to hear from those either still in the community or at least willing to write in Andrew’s support. When some current students wrote, they were fairly viciously put down, so don’t expect any of them to show their faces here. But at least they identified themselves. After I posted several weeks back, I received several positive emails from other former students, none of whom wanted to be involved with a blog in which so much negativity is being expressed.

I wonder how an impartial reader, someone new to Andrew’s teachings without an agenda to jump into the feeding frenzy, would really view the various posts ? Who sounds like they are seething with rage – those that express enormous, lasting gratitude for the time they spent with Andrew, or those who are still furious all these years on ?

What I find so sad is that so many former dharma brothers and sisters, many of whom left before me nearly TEN YEARS AGO, are still stuck in the past, trying to justify their actions on this blog in the name of serving the spiritual community….. well I know too many of you to believe that is your true motive and in my opinion, Dave has really hit the spot where he writes “Tell your readers how you could not bear to realise that you don’t want to be free more than anything else…… and that you are quite angry about that revelation and the loss of your spiritual identity”. I understand that this is a very hard thing for any individual to face, but until it is faced, I’d say it will be almost impossible to move on. I’m left wondering if some of you guys truly want to move on ? There is so much more to life than being a student of Andrew’s, however valuable that may be at the time – so why stay hung up about it for so long ?

It’s also interesting to note that although we have heard stories about face slapping, paint throwing etc etc, we have heard these stories primarily from people who weren’t even in the community when these events took place. Roberta for example was there, prostrating herself in the freezing lake etc – she doesn’t sound so very bitter, does she ?

I remember hearing Krishnamurti responding many years ago to a question about what could one do for society. K replied that society does not actually exist, individual people exist and that the best thing one can do for the Whole is to find true freedom for oneself. So I ask those former students who are giving so much energy to the Andrew bashing – can you honestly say this is constructive to your own spiritual development ?

If you feel like you were misled and wasted years of your life with Andrew, I urge you to take responsibility both for putting yourself at his feet and then for choosing to leave. But victimhood can be a tragically attractive place in which to dwell, especially as a group, and that’s what I see happening here.

I’d like to add that I have nothing whatsoever to do with Andrew’s community, nor have I had since shortly after I left. I nevertheless remain eternally grateful to Andrew for the invaluable time I spent there, which was truly transformational.

Jeremy Lyell.





Back to Navigation Page

Tale of Two Teachers

by Karl B.

[Note: The following article is a fascinating account from a person who was among the first to spend time with Andrew Cohen after Andrew's enlightenment experience with H.W.L. Poonja (known as Papa-ji or Poonja-ji), the guru who Andrew later disavowed. Soon after spending time with Andrew in Rishikesh, the author met Poonja-ji himself, and, like Andrew, was also declared enlightened and given permission to teach by Poonja. The story gives a valuable historical perspective on Andrew Cohen and raises interesting questions about his claims to uniqueness, as well as the very nature of enlightenment itself.]


I am sharing my story in hopes that my perspective could serve as a tool for seekers questioning their path and themselves. In the Summer of 1986, I was staying in Hardwar, India, awaiting the opportunity to meet H.W.L. Poonja Ji, whom I had learned about from Murray, a fellow traveler, at a high Himalayan shrine. There was a knock on my hotel room door. It was Murray and Andrew Cohen. They had news to share with me and wanted me to walk to the Ganga to talk. At the banks of the holy river, Andrew explained that he had just become enlightened by the grace of Poonja Ji, and that he was now beginning his teaching career. They planned to have satsangs in Rishikesh while they waited for Poonja to join them. Would I like to come along?

I was determined to meet Poonja (who was not commonly available in those days) so I went with them. About a dozen of us rented the rear compound of a temple in Laskman Jhula, and plunged into an orgy of Satsang, tea drinking, and Ganga dipping.

How can I capture the rare and fascinating dynamics of a man suddenly plunged into the role of spiritual teacher? He was trying to process and understand the sudden change he had undergone and he was attempting to enlighten others at the same time. It would be easy to focus on the negatives, it would be easy to focus on the positives, but it would be impossible to convey the totality of the situation without bias. With that disclaimer, I will simply attempt to share my perspectives that might benefit those who are concerned with the enigma of Andrew and the mysteries of "Enlightenment."

We stayed up regularly into the wee hours of the night, engaged in one-on-one dialogs and group discussions. (Eating kilos of mangos in the process) I thought Andrew was an unparalleled genius in using Socratic questioning to guide a person to a state where they would no longer have "a place to stand." He could force a person's mind into a self-canceling contradiction where thought was suspended and transcendent reality might have a moment to shine through. For me personally, I was very much benefited by Andrew's explanation of the simple fact that the highest Self was not "an experience" by virtue of the fact that our highest Self was the experiencing consciousness, the subject, not object, of all experience.

I spoke with Andrew a great deal about his developing perspectives on his sudden enlightenment. He freely admitted to being a miserable neurotic seeker prior to his breakthrough with Poonja Ji. Andrew was certain that through Poonja, he had reached full and final enlightenment, beyond which no further progress was relevant. He claimed to be a radically changed man.

Later I found it ironic that a "fully enlightened" man would write a gushy love book about his guru, and then manage to have an ugly falling out with him, over petty issues. In a vast universe with untold planets and beings, underpinned by a timeless reality, maybe we shouldn't use that word "final" so easily.

Andrew was also convinced that his students were becoming enlightened, or coming to the brink of enlightenment, at unprecedented speed. Folks were becoming "enlightened" and then falling from enlightenment at record pace. All this judged as true by a man claiming final and full enlightenment.

On one hand, Andrew's approach was refreshing. He was a Western teacher unburdened by "Indian Guru Conditioning" Satsang was free of the ritualistic culture of respect, reverence, even worship, commonly found around Gurus. You could treat Andrew as a friend. On the other hand, there was a feedback loop of praise and discovery that was plainly leading Andrew to suspect that he was such an exceptional teacher, that he just might be the greatest of all, perhaps the fountainhead of what could be a revolution of human consciousness in the planet.

The biggest turn-offs were his monumental arrogance and narcissism. I was no stranger to great teachers with flaws, so I reserved judgment. Still, one of the great questions seekers face is "What is the relationship between the personality of the teacher, their ability to impart wisdom, the perfection of the Absolute, and it's application to the relativities of human life in this world?" Let's get back to that later.

The pressure to submit to Andrew grew and grew, as Andrew's enlightening process seemed to depend on surrender to both "the Truth" and to Andrew. As students surrendered to Andrew, they looked to influence others to do the same.

While I clearly hadn't surrendered, I was open to satsang and deepening my spirituality, so I submitted to Andrew's questions and challenges. I had knowledge of Hindi, Sanskrit and various Indian philosophies. Andrew believed that I was attached to that knowledge and insisted that I throw my spiritual books in the Ganga. I felt that I had already come to terms with the limitations of paper knowledge, but eventually complied in order to prove my ambivalence. I felt neither freedom nor attachment in doing so, just a sense of waste. Does he ever force students to throw Andrew's books into that icy lake?

I had met many teachers over many years. I felt Andrew was not exceptional on any transcendental level, although he certainly had rare skill in dialectics. His heart seemed almost limited to marveling at his own greatness. Looking back at Andrew's teaching career, it seems to me that he's been determined to "stand out" and "be special" among all teachers. At first, when students appeared to become suddenly enlightened, Andrew had a claim to fame as a vehicle for instant transformation. When it turned out that those transformations were short-lived, I believe Andrew had to develop "cutting edge" enlightenment concepts so that he wouldn't just be "another guru." Certainly as a budding musician he would have fantasized about success with it's attendant fame and adulation. Now it would come through his very inner superiority. The neutral Light of the Spirit can lend a fake authenticity to an overblown ego with its power and radiance.

I hadn't been immune from this fault myself, as a tantric guru in Badrinath had earlier faulted me for wanting to be special. He said there was a danger of my inflicting "Karl-ism" on the world. He said that great men like Gandhi were simple, and accepted their mission with humility. I had to look within and admit that he was right.

Back to my story, I'd waited long enough to meet Poonja. A former Muktananda Swami and I somehow got permission to visit Poonja in Delhi. We left Andrew and crew in Rishikesh.

Within a few weeks of meeting him in Delhi, Poonja Ji had declared me enlightened as well, and given me permission to teach as he had given Andrew permission to teach. I believe I was the second appointed teacher of Poonja's. At this point, I don't believe Poonja had an idea of what exactly he expected from his emissaries. It was certainly not the case, as some have suggested, that Andrew's role was to attract followers to Poonja Ji in Lucknow. Poonja's health was in serious question in 1986. He had no ashram, no attendant disciples, no history of collecting followers, and there was no talk of changing that. He didn't even have a "teaching" in a conventional sense.

On the other hand, I don't think he expected Andrew to make up his own teachings and declare himself Lord. I had no discussions with Poonja regarding how teaching should proceed. I think Poonja Ji assumed that anyone grounded in Truth would be guided from within. Poonja always let his followers be free. He never demanded any money from me, nor gave me any orders. Rather he'd buy me a mango lassi and sit in communing silence with me if I didn't have any questions.

I had experienced a radical transformation 8 years earlier, where I clearly perceived the unity and perfection of all things as consciousness. You could say that I was reborn, but not without my own share of delusions and confusions. The "enlightenment" that I later experienced with Poonja Ji was no such "big bang." It was an ineffable shift that opened a clear sense of my own eternal nature as consciousness. I had always been a happy and peaceful person; my immersion in my own presence had been continuous in my mental background since my initial awakening. I'd be tempted to say that Poonja simply gave me proper understanding of my Self, but I'm afraid this would miss a transcendental aspect of his transmission that defies words and understanding.

This "enlightenment" transmission of Poonja Ji has been controversial since other paths have views of enlightenment that are much more extreme in terms of mystical knowledge and power. I consider "enlightenment" to be a term that is not only misunderstood, but misleading, and somewhat counter-productive. Our consciousness is continually being refined through experience and yet it expands in quantum leaps throughout our evolution. Every one of those quantum leaps seems like "enlightenment." Humans are pretty blind and contracted. A glimmer of divine light seems like a thousand suns.

The reason I relate the story above is for the sake of those who would make the "enlightened" man's behavior and pronouncements infallible and sacrosanct. I was, and am, more than capable of mistakes of all sorts, of being swayed by lust and greed, and plenty of other weaknesses and vices. I am totally confident that Andrew is in the same boat, only with his own individual set of faults and vices. Apologists will claim that I'm merely projecting my own imperfection on Andrew. Maybe so. Yes, our innermost essence is totally transcendent of these human foibles, but it isn't the one cashing the checks either.

Here is an unfortunate nexus of spiritual law and human weakness: The spiritual law is "Ask and it shall be given, seek and you will find." If somebody comes to a teacher, and asks from sincerity of her heart, the teacher may act as a conduit for universal consciousness to guide that person. The more faith that the questioner has in the teacher, the more likely they are to draw out an inspired answer, and the more likely they will be to accept and enact the teacher's advice. Call it evolutionary tension if you like.

The result of this phenomena is that Andrew's greatest faults are some of his greatest strengths. He went from Dog to God, so his realization seems supreme to him. He's supremely confident and arrogant so it's easy for him to demand total agreement and submission. By putting himself up on the highest pedestal, he has the power to effect maximum change in a student who believes in him.

Unfortunately, we are all silly humans with faults. Our ego is scum floating on the ocean of truth and it gets slimy over anything that emerges from that ocean. It's easy to see how a man, observing "miracles" happening in his presence, being showered with love, respect, and obedience from everyone around him, could believe that his scum was as pure as the ocean below.

When I returned to the United States, I determined that if I were to serve the Truth with integrity, I wouldn't depend on the "Andrew method" of proclaiming myself be the Most High and expecting folks to fall in line. I would let the Spirit guide my destiny. It turned out that I quickly fell in love, fell into drama, and fell into more attachment than I had suffered in my "pre-enlightenment" phase. I moved through those challenges but am not fooled that my human side is obliterated or beyond influence. I'm happy to suspect that I've had a positive influence on my friends and community nonetheless, without placing myself in an unnatural position of power and authority in relation to them.

After exchanging numerous letters with Poonja Ji and meeting him in New York, I continued to have questions regarding the guru's personality versus his enlightenment. While Poonja preached non-judgment and non-comparison, he seemed to indulge in his share. I wrote him a letter asking for an explanation but didn't hear from him. Poonja was always setting his students free, not creating a dependency, so I left our connection on the inner level rather than external, and went on with life.

In 1996, it struck me that Poonja Ji had been very generous with his time and love with me. He had actually cried when he believed I was enlightened. He would also die someday. I wanted to be sure that there was no gulf between us. I had also heard about the feud between Poonja and Andrew and hoped that perhaps I could help mend fences. I was sure that Andrew, despite his faults, meant well, and I knew the same about Poonja. Why should high beings so intimately connected be so estranged? If the Gurus were at war, what hope do nations have?

I wanted to clear waters and test his reaction to Andrew. I wrote Poonja Ji a letter. Here is an important except:

"I believe it has been at least seven years since I have seen or written you. Even though I have not felt separate from you during all that time, I hope you still remember this wayward Son of yours and forgive me for not fulfilling my potential as a teacher. I understand that Andrew, who did accept the teaching role with both hands, has become such a demigod that he can no longer love his good Father the way he used to. When I see that, I feel glad that I judged myself as not yet fit for that work, as I would never want to fall short in such a critical role. I am not in a position to judge, so I wish love and wisdom for all, and hope Peace and Understanding ultimately prevail."

Poonja Ji replied on 7-18-96. 99 percent of its essence can be gleaned from the following excerpt:

"..the student who abuses his teacher goes to the 7th Hell, where one is thrown into fire, and again revives, and again is thrown into the fire, this will continue for a million years in this Hell. Later he will be born into the pigs family." [And on and on! ] "You are a most lucky person to have saved from living with such rascals. If you don't have enough money, stay where you are Divine will Bless you."

I'm afraid my friends, that we live in a dark world where the Spirit doesn't fully rectify the personality of the fortunate ones who realize transcendent truth. Seek the truth, and follow a path with a heart, but don't expect idealized perfection where it can't exist. Attempts to force "Heaven on Earth" through moralism and ideology fail to recognize that it is the very nature of life on this planet to grow by struggling though our ignorance. If this planet were to evolve beyond it's darkness, it would be a beautiful thing, but another planet would have to come into being to fulfill that niche. It's a greater mystery than anyone can explain in human terms, but everything at each moment has a perfect place in the totality. Change yourself, and your world automatically changes. If Andrew sees the world as deficient, it is his own deficiency that he witnesses.

Isn't it perfect that Andrew, having rejected and abused his teacher, (who, even though imperfect, gave him so much) is now accusing his own students of betraying him? Perfect that the king of narcissism finds it everywhere around him?

Poonja was a great teacher. He has my eternal love and respect. Andrew is a powerful man who has had direct knowledge and potent inspiration. However, this world is a like a big drunk party. You might learn to see through your state of intoxication and call it enlightenment, but you're still in danger of crashing your car if you drive too fast.

Andrew's treatment of his students is counter-evolutionary. A student with inculcated self-hatred is more egoic than one who loves himself. Every bit of coercion, psychic violence and inner loathing adds to the pot of darkness reflected in our worldly situation. Love is the healing balm for our society. In the face of love, we can afford to "drop our egos."

I certainly hope Andrew can taste some of his own medicine because he has much potential as a leader. I think every spiritual teacher should take a month out of every year to travel alone and incognito. He should interact with many people in many situations where a guru has no standing, no identity and no authority. That would be an excellent reality check and retreat.

It's important to note that realization of the Self does not necessarily convey realization of the complete spectrum of relative truth and manifest reality. Andrew hasn't saved the world. The world will be saved or lost as a reflection of the totality and either result will be a perfect outcome in the face of Eternal Consciousness.

Still, I'm confident that our journey in refining and awakening consciousness is something beautiful and sacred. Experience the poetry of life in love and beauty. Learn from teachers, but know that the only realization you can have is from within. Take a path with a heart, and open to eternity.

With great love
Karl B (peacebaba@excite.com)

The Truth Will Set You Free

Introduction

In June of last year, the editors of this blog were contacted by Yonatan Levy, a contributor to the Israeli online journal NRG-Ma’ariv, for an article he intended to produce on Andrew Cohen and Cohen’s organization, EnlightenNext. Levy had sought an interview with Cohen himself, specifically in order to seek a balanced perspective on the allegations against Cohen previously published on this blog. While the interview he’d requested was never granted, Levy did receive from EnlightenNext’s “Communications Director,” Amy Edelstein, a series of official written responses to questions he had submitted in advance of the proposed interview. He also received an intimidating letter from Cohen’s lawyer, dated the same day, advising him of NRG-Ma’ariv’s potential legal liability in the event of the article’s publication. These documents are available here:

EnlightenNext's responses to Mr. Levy Letter from EN's attorney

Under the circumstances, NRG-Ma’ariv’s legal department encouraged Levy to seek firsthand confirmation of any allegations against Cohen or EnlightenNext that he intended to outline in his article. It was for this reason that Levy contacted us with the answers he’d received from Edelstein—in which she declared that most of the information published by former students of Cohen on this site is simply false.

Almost a year later, Levy’s article has still not seen the light of day, and it now appears that it may never be published. However, EnlightenNext’s responses to Levy’s questions represent an historic event of sorts, as they constitute its first official denial of the events described on this blog. Although previously Cohen and his defenders had publicly taken refuge in the notion that the incidents reported here have been taken “out of context” by “a few disgruntled former students,” they have never—until now—gone on the record with official declarations that the reported incidents never actually took place.

Although it seems clear from the correspondence reproduced above that EnlightenNext’s representatives believed coordinated legal intimidation would be sufficient to keep their denials below the public radar, What Enlightenment??! has decided—in the interests of a free, transparent and open exchange—to publish them here. Doing so will accomplish two objectives. First, it will give EnlightenNext a platform from which to “go public” with its reportedly common response to the queries it receives from current and potential students about the contents of this blog, i.e., that they are mere fabrications. Secondly, it will give former students who have direct experience of the reported incidents an opportunity to respond specifically to EnlightenNext’s denials.

It is worth reiterating that the publication of these documents represents an historic moment in the public dialog that this blog was created to facilitate but could never fully accomplish without the full participation of both sides. This is why we have decided, at least for a limited period, to re-open it. It is our sincere hope that potential responses, from current and former students alike, can now begin to focus specifically on the truth and accuracy of our recollections, as it is only by these means that we can arrive at any meaningful reconciliation—or, in Andrew Cohen’s well-chosen words, “come together in the truth.”

Searching for the truth about Andrew Cohen:

A journalist's odyssey

My name is Yonatan Levy. For the last few years I’ve been a writer and editor for the spirituality section of NRG-Ma’ariv, a major Israeli media site. Nine years ago I attended a weekend intensive led by Andrew Cohen in Israel. It was my first encounter with a living spiritual teacher and my impression was positive. I was impressed by Cohen’s simple and clear meditation instructions and by his powerful personality. Soon afterward, I attended a meeting of a group of his followers, but found the atmosphere awkward and unnatural. Yet I still found the rhetoric of Cohen’s writings moving and inspiring. I was thus surprised and bewildered to discover dozens of accounts in the What Enlightenment??! blog depicting Cohen as a capricious, dishonest tyrant—especially in light of his emphasis on ethics and integrity as a crucial aspect of true spiritual evolution.

Before Cohen’s next visit to Israel, I asked to interview him, with the intention of asking about the allegations. In response, I was told that the interview would be granted on the condition that I would not ask about anything in the WE??! blog, because Cohen had not yet responded publicly to the issue as a whole, and was planning to do so on his own blog; after this, I was assured, I could ask about anything I wanted to. I was willing to wait, but all of my interview requests following Cohen’s post (“A Declaration of Integrity”) were declined. Finally, I decided to write the article without an interview. Yet I did send Cohen a list of questions concerning the issues and accounts that had been presented by the What Enlightenment??! blog, adding that if the allegations proved untrue I would call the article off.

The answers to my questions, formulated by Amy Edelstein, perhaps with the aid of Attorney Barry Fischer, are the first detailed public response by Andrew Cohen’s organization, EnlightenNext, to the accounts of Cohen’s ex-followers. Some of the answers use juridical language, taking advantage of inaccuracies in the phrasing of the questions to evade the matter. Others seem to be blatantly counterfactual, or are so easily refuted that there is little doubt they were primarily given in order to convince me not to write the article—which ultimately did not appear on NRG-Ma’ariv for fear of a long and costly lawsuit.

As part of my research, I sought reactions and statements of verification from former contributors to the WE??! blog, whose accounts of abuse on Cohen’s part had raised the issue in the first place. Some of these appear below. In several cases, I was able to speak with individuals directly involved in incidents described on the blog, who also confirmed the accuracy of accounts that have been denied or disputed by EnlightenNext.

Here then (above), for the benefit and judgment of those who are interested in Andrew Cohen’s standards of integrity, openness, honesty and “soul strength,” are the questions I asked and the answers I received from his organization, EnlightenNext.

Yonatan Levy ~ Tel Aviv, Israel

*******************************************************************

Selected responses to EnlightenNext's statements

from former students of Andrew Cohen:

Student #1 Student #2 Student #3 Student #4

To view readers' comments or to post one, click on the "comments" link below:

WIE Editor Admits Slapping, Smeared "Blood" Incident

I nearly laughed out loud when I read Hal’s preamble to his “Breaking the Code of Silence” entry on this blog. How noble of you, Hal. You’re finally going to enlighten us all to what’s really going on around Andrew? What “code of silence” exactly are you referring to? As far as I can tell, so far the only code on this blog seems to be a code of kvetching. Let me try a new approach. I’ll call this entry “Breaking the Code of Victimization.”

My name is Craig Hamilton. I’m the managing editor of What Is Enlightenment? magazine, where I’ve worked full time since 1997. I’ve been a student of Andrew’s for nearly thirteen years, and have been a close friend and colleague for the past eight of those years. I’ve been watching this latest incarnation of the anti-Cohen cult with mild curiosity since its small handful of founders started repeatedly emailing announcements about it to all of the magazine’s advertisers and contributors. I never planned to respond, but at a certain point, the rhetoric of mischaracterization got to be too much to listen to.

So, for anyone who, upon reading the entries on this blog, finds themselves scratching their head at the bizarre, two-dimensional, and often surreal picture it paints; for anyone who finds it nearly impossible to reconcile the diabolical PowerLord depicted here with their own experience of Andrew Cohen (either through his writings, his magazine, his video dialogues on the web, or his public talks and retreats), I thought it would be worth offering a few words of explanation to help set the record straight.

First, a couple of questions:

(1) if the community around Cohen even remotely resembled the sort of life-destroying police-state this blog depicts, why would most of those writing on this blog have stayed with Cohen of their own free will for ten or more years? And why would so many others report it to be the most enriching, life-affirming, and genuinely evolutionary environment they have ever experienced?

(2) if Andrew Cohen really were the menace to society this blog describes, why would so many of today’s wisest and most respected spiritual and cultural authorities have expressed such strong support for his work? (A small sample of these can be found at: http://www.andrewcohen.org/pressroom/comments.asp).

For starters, just to be clear, yes Andrew Cohen is a demanding teacher. And if he accepts you as a student and you get close enough to him, he’ll likely challenge you in ways you have never been challenged. Sometimes warmly. Sometimes affectionately. Sometimes fiercely. But if you’ve been even a few steps down the path of transformation, and have begun to glimpse the usually obscured face of that dubious cluster of self-serving motivations traditionally known as ego, you’ve probably realized that, frankly, sometimes you need to be challenged. I know I had. In fact, a big part of the reason I came to Andrew for help was that, after years of meditation and therapy, I had managed to see myself just clearly enough that I was starting to become faintly disgusted by the self-aggrandizement, narcissism, and deep-rooted selfishness that was playing itself out in all my relationships. And it was clear that, despite my growing concern about it, I wasn’t in a hurry to give it up on my own. Andrew made it clear from the word go that he was in a hurry for me to give it up, and that it wouldn’t be easy, that I would at times resent him or worse for forcing me to confront and leave behind the self-image I had grown so fond of. But I was pretty convinced that without the kind of “evolutionary tension” a relationship with a teacher like Andrew promised, I would likely spend the better part of a lifetime in spiritual self-delusion, in love with my own image as a seeker.

In case there was any doubt, Andrew delivered. And then some. And he was right. There have been many times when I have resented him and worse for the sometimes stark or even severe reflection he has unfailingly provided. (I was the one mentioned in Hal’s letter who got slapped in the face and also had fake blood smeared on his wall—which, incidentally, we already wrote about in the magazine three years ago—so much for the “code of silence”). And if I had, at any one of those times, followed my bruised ego out the door, as a number of others have, I might well be joining the feeding frenzy along with them. The spiritual path has always been a high-stakes game. The mystical literature isn’t filled with metaphors like “Razor’s Edge” and “Chasm of Fire” simply for poetic effect. Indeed, before I met Andrew, I always wondered why the traditional stories were so replete with images of demons trying, and often succeeding, at tempting people from their own highest aspirations. For all of my meditation and therapy, I had encountered nothing in my own experience that could help explain their existence—metaphorical or otherwise. But in my thirteen years with Andrew, where the fires of transformation burn bright, I have seen in often painful living color just why the traditions made such a strong, if metaphorical, point of this. The sad and at times devastating truth is, not everybody makes it. And some barely make it to the starting line.

But for those who have remained steadfast through the struggles that come with the territory, something miraculous is unfolding. On an individual level, it manifests as a deep authenticity and vulnerability, a profound freedom of being, whose human face is care for others and for all of life. But the greater fruits of this sacred labor are revealing themselves on a collective level. Coming together beyond the fears and desires of ego, we are discovering a new way of being together, in which the autonomy of each individual is fueled and animated by the power and love of communion beyond difference. If you want to get a glimpse of what heaven on earth might look like, I strongly encourage you to pay us a visit. Our doors are always open, and many who have come through have commented that they’ve never experienced anything like what they tasted here.

Just to be clear, I’m not saying that Hal or any of the other writers on this blog shouldn’t have left. Nor am I suggesting that everyone who leaves this path does so because they have an ego tantrum. No path is for everyone, and least of all this one. But having known Hal for many years, I have no doubt that the reasons for his departure were as I described above. And that in light of that, we would do well to question his motives for writing what he has, and the accuracy of the picture he paints. (For the record, Hal served very briefly as the lead editor of What is Enlightenment? while it was making the transition from a two-color in-house newsletter to its first issue or two as a small, four-color magazine. Those of us who worked with him remember him as an emotionally unstable and often aggressive colleague. Indeed, it was his unwillingness to make any effort to control his fitful aggression that eventually compelled Andrew to give him the nickname “Raging Bull,” and which also ultimately led to his departure).

Finally, I think it needs to be said that this blog’s portrayal of Andrew as a self-proclaimed infallible authority who answers to no one is little more than a cheap shot. It ignores the fact that since he began teaching, Andrew has gone out of his way to seek out meetings with other teachers, traditional and non-traditional, with whom he shares not only his insights but his struggles and questions. It also leaves out the fact that Andrew regularly speaks about his own continued evolution as a teacher.

I was hesitant to write this letter. I recognize that, given the level of aggression we are confronting here, this small effort at explanation may well backfire, generating a yet greater wave of animosity, even if again only from that small minority whose axe will not be sufficiently ground until it is but a stub of a handle. But at some point, silence on such matters starts to look like consent. And if nothing else, perhaps this small statement will at least raise a question for anyone who might have been fooled by Hal and his gang. I guarantee that if you dig deep enough to find out for yourself, you’ll discover that the picture of Andrew Cohen portrayed on this blog is nothing more than a small-hearted rendition of loosely assembled half-truths, a coward’s caricature. Yes, there is another side to the story. It’s a side whose glory cannot be contained in the space of this letter. But one well worth investigating for anyone in whom the heart’s cry for freedom cannot be drowned in the clamor of cynicism.
Sincerely,
Craig Hamilton

Healing From Abuse: A Framework

(From 'Relating to a Spiritual Teacher' by Alexander Berzin, Snow Lion Publications, 2000. Berzin traces many complex psychological issues and pitfalls that have come up for Western practitioners of Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhism. If you're in early stage recovery, his book may be confusing and seem invalidating, but after you've reclaimed your boundaries and are curious to analyse the situation, his book is likely to provide food for thought, even if you disagree with some of it.)

'In (his book) 'Invisible Loyalties' Boszormenyi-Nagy, the Hungarian founder of contextual therapy, suggested sensitive ways to heal the psychological injuries of victims of physical or sexual abuse. The methods he outlined parallel in many ways the approach taken in sutra level guru meditation. His analysis may augment our understanding of how the meditation may help to heal the wounds of students deeply hurt by abusive spiritual teachers.

'Boszormenyi-Nagy explained that the first step in the healing process is for abuse victims to acknowledge their pain and that they are entitled to feel bad. They have in fact been violated and for them to deny the truth will only add fuel to suppressed anger or feelings of guilt. Similarly, if we have been personally abused by our spiritual mentors or have learned from reliable sources that our teachers have maligned other students, we too need to acknowledge our pain and our "entitlement" to feel bad. We were in fact wronged or let down...'Contextual therapy calls next for trying to understand the context in which the abuse arose from both the perpetrators' and the victims' sides. This does not mean one should rationalize the faulty behavior or mistakes in judgment on the perpetrator's parts, nor that the victims should take the entire blame and feel guilty...

'Victims of abuse also need to acknowledge that they are entitled to a better deal in life. In Buddhist terms entitlement to happiness comes by virtue of having an innate network of positive potentials as part of (one's) Buddha nature. Nevertheless abuse victims need to earn that happiness by acting decently. For example, war refugees are entitled simply as human beings to homes and a livelihood in host countries. Yet they need to earn good treatment by following the law and leading upright lives...'Many victims of abuse have negative self-images. Either consciously or unconsciously, they blame themselves for what happened and may feel they do not deserve better treatment. Even if they feel entitled to better treatment they may resign themselves to further abuse.

'A similar pattern often emerges with victims who are told and feel that they are special. (eg when an unethical guru tells you that you're enlightened and must now start a revolution amongst the young, or if an abusive teacher singles you out to be his or her favorite and you find yourself following orders to tyrannize over others--my note, not Berzin's) During the abusive relationship, an inflated sense of self worth may make them unaware of being victims of abuse. They often deny the abuse or defend their perpetrators, even if confronted with the facts. Then, when their abusers find other "chosen ones" they feel humiliated, experience sudden deflation of their self images and become deeply hurt or completely outraged.

'In all such cases, the victims need to dispel their identification with their negative self images in order to regain emotional stability...so long as they identify with being unworthy, they continue to open themselves to possible manipulation and abuse.'The next step in the healing process in contextual therapy is determining clearheadedly the legacy that the abuse victims may take from their relationship with their perpetrators. Is it just outrage, bitterness, and an inability to trust anyone in the future, or can the victims take something positive with them? (At this stage, only after legitimate pain and anger have been thoroughly acknowledged--see previous steps--my note, not Berzins)

'The therapy encourages focusing on the positive factors gained from the relationship and enables the victims to be loyal to the positive aspects and to incorporate them into their lives. 'This process also helps the victims to avoid acting with misplaced unconscious loyalty to the abuser's negative aspects. Such loyalties may result in victims being inconsiderate of themselves, and due to feelings of guilt, denying their rights to have healthy relationships--conforming to the subtle message conveyed by the abuse. Consequently, victims of abuse frequently experience mental blocks about emotional and physical intimacy and may not feel entitled to get married or become parents...Dharma students traumatized by abusive teachers often become so disillusioned that they are unable to continue on the spiritual path.'

(From 'Relating to a Spiritual Teacher' by Alexander Berzin, pp 143-146)

Note: In the Dharma and New Age worlds, there appears to be a taboo against legitimate, appropriate anger even when one has been horrendously abused. It is sad to see tormented students trying to bear witness and anxiously declaring 'But I am not angry!'

It doesn’t help that abusive teachers and their minions are quick to pounce if someone show signs of anger and use that to invalidate them and shame them.

But this recovery framework makes clear that legitimate anger is an essential ingredient in the early stages of recovery from any kind of abuse.

Its useful to see recovery from abuse as analogous to a multi-stage rocket, the kind used to propel the Apollo moon expedition.

When the rocket blasted off from Cape Canaveral, the initial power thrust was supplied by the first stage of the rocket. (eg the vital anger stage of early recovery).

After the fuel burned out from Stage One, that portion would un-couple from the rocket and fall away. The engines from the second stage then fired up. After the rocket was free from the earth's gravity and the second stage fell away, a smaller set of engines, guided by precision instruments fired up and the expedition continued its trajectory to the moon.

What assists in early recovery can become disabling in later recovery. Compassion toward one's perpetrator, something vitally important in advanced recovery, can hamper early recovery.

Unskillful use of non dual analysis (aka 'Advaita Shuffle') can also be used by the victim or well-intentioned but unskillful helpers in such a way as to derail recovery. Of course the perpetrator can also use this trick to stop recovery, preventing the victim from gaining independence from the dictates of the perpetrator.

- Much appreciation to the reader who send After Hours this article. This is a very clear statement of the recovery and healing process...further discussion is welcome.

Reflections Of An Early Student

A Letter From Brook Stone

Dear What Enlightenment Blog,

I’d like to begin by saying how grateful and appreciative I am that this blog has come into being. My story is an old one so I will keep this relatively brief. So much has been said so well and my experience and thoughts match most of what has been written here.

I was a very involved student of Andrew's for 5 years from 1988-1993. Many people have understandably asked in their comments why people didn’t speak up, or why it has taken so long for people to be able to get over their experience. I’ve asked myself that question as well. Reading this blog in detail has revived many memories and thoughts about my experience. Though I feel that Andrew is a tainted teacher and I feel highly motivated to speak up in this forum, I nonetheless had one of the most profound experiences of my life during my time with him. It took me, and I think many people, quite a lot of time and courage to sort out the depths of love and idealism that Andrew inspires from the very twisted and dysfunctional use he makes of them.

Giving oneself so fully and feeling the power of that kind of surrender and commitment makes it very hard to untwist. If one hasn’t been involved, I think it’s difficult to imagine the depths of the pull that this kind of spiritual opening and connection exerts. One then feels a powerful need to protect the beauty of one’s experience and deny the trouble. And the experience gets so deeply entwined with the teacher who helps make this possible. This too makes it harder to untangle. This is a central part of the seduction. Though I have remained deeply involved in spiritual life, sit regular retreats and work with different non-dual teachers, I am still clarifying where my authentic spiritual yearning and direction lies.

I finally left when I felt I could no longer support what seemed to me the very personal needs of the leader in the name of the Truth. In my case, it was deciding to listen to my doubts rather than rationalize them away, that was the turning point. For a long while, I believed that my doubts were my ego speaking. And certainly to some extent they were. But by the end, the doubts I had overwhelmed the benefits and insight that had been worth the journey up until that point. Leaving was terribly difficult. It meant giving up everything I had devoted my life to. Perhaps what’s hardest for those not involved to understand is how one feels one has given oneself to the highest purpose possible. To see that purpose contaminated and then crumble is a profound disillusionment. Hopefully, for many of us, this marks the beginning of a more mature and honest spirituality.

Andrew is living example of how a mind no doubt transformed by profound experience can nonetheless carry a personality that is deeply flawed. Andrew is not able or willing to apply his deep insights to himself. It was one of the things that kept his community so compellingly confusing. He seemed to name the dynamics in other groups and teachers that were going on in his own. How could he be doing the very thing he named as dysfunctional in other groups? He'd joke and tell us to call the group a cult “and be done with it.” It was a truly clever diversion that served to hide some very twisted motives.

Now that Andrew has made it into communities of repute, I feel especially compelled to speak out. One needs a very critical eye to understand that what you see is not what you get. He's a master of sorts, no doubt. But he is not benign nor is his community.

Andrew’s community is shame-based. When I left, it was small potatoes compared to what’s happening now, though the seeds were all there. I was shunned when I left, shamed and told to my face that though I may think that leaving was took courage, I was weak and a coward. End of five years of commitment. But I was not physically attacked and pursuit ended quickly when I returned hostile letters to the sender unopened. Now he hits people, or has them hit, and condones other practices that by any measure constitute abuse. His need for power and recognition trump all else.

I want to say to those of you in the academic community, to Ken Wilber and the others, please, do not be fooled or seduced. In the current cultural context, where truth is constructed to suit the image desired, it seems especially important that in progressive communities, we have open dialogue, the ability to think critically and the freedom to question leaders. Idealism should not lead to blindness. We humans are a very mixed bunch, capable of the highest ideals yet all carrying some kind of shadow. Andrew is no exception to that. If he could own his shadow as others in these pages have suggested, maybe a true transformation could take place. Then we’d have not a perfect person, but a complex and compelling human being with something to offer for those who are drawn. But for now, to sanction abuse, to rationalize it away or trivialize what is happening, is inexcusable. It perpetuates a stance of denial. This does not, nor can it ever, set us free.

Sincerely,
Brook M. Stone, MSW, LCSW

Through a Mirror Darkly—continuing to try to see clearly!

Further Reflections from Roberta Anderson

Dear Friends,

Trying to get clear about my time as a member of Andrew’s community has been and continues to be a challenging and extremely emotional process. In talking with an old friend from the community recently it occurred to me that it’s actually quite a bit like the grief process I went through when my mother died a number of years ago. I kept thinking it was “over” and that I had reached some kind of “resolution”, and then, lo and behold, yet another “wave” would hit me often when I least expected it. I want to say that I really appreciate this blog a lot, as it has provided a great forum for me and many of us to sift and resift through these incredibly intense years many of us shared together. Finally getting the courage to participage and throw in my two cents has been far more helpful than I’d expected. In beginning to shake up and examine and re-examine so much that I hadn’t seen clearly and probably still am not. I actually think that this, like the grief process, may well go on for a long time! Many experiences and incidents from this time with Andrew are continuing to burble up to the surface which I’d forgotten about or filed away “safely” because I really didn’t know what to make of them at the time.

For me the really hard part about all of this is to hold and acknowledge it ALL, in all of its craziness, ecstatic revelations, agonizing humiliation, intense joy, incredible fear, unbelievable ongoing pressure, etc. The mind continually insists on something very white or very black, and to try somehow to stay in that really uncomfortable middle place of discomfort and confusion where nothing is denied or left out and the whole actually wildly confusing thing is attempted to be seen all at once—well, I continue to find that this is really difficult!

I think that as Brook pointed out in her post, part of why it’s so challenging to see this all clearly is that undeniably so many of us had enormously powerful and ecstatic realizations of Self when we met Andrew that literally blew our minds. His charisma, confidence, brilliant grasp of the dharma, and willingness to be “on the edge” enchanted us all. Also, the fact that he was an “independent teacher” actually living and teaching from nothing but his OWN understanding instead of some “stodgy tradition” –the incredible aliveness and freshness of all of this really appealed to so many of us “dharma renegades”. Our teacher was a handsome New York Jew who wore Italian clothes and knew everything about jazz. He was hip! He had a great sense of humor, was an incredible mimic, had great timing, and everything he did and said seemed to delight us. He seemed to have an amazing gift for cutting through obscuration and making the dharma simple and accessible and clear. Everyone and everything seemed to “glow” when we were with him. The fact that everything really did seem terrifically new and “unknown” was incredibly exciting. We were explorers out there on the edge, investigating new and uncharted lands with our brave and beautiful teacher at the helm. We were definitely a special and chosen lot!

As things slowly began to change and become not only not very ecstatic, but actually quite scary, many of us including myself felt that finally we were really entering the “true spiritual life”. Although it became often painful and really uncomfortable more and more of the time, everything we’d read and studied from the traditions told us that this was The Way. Slowly and progressively things got harder and weirder. NOW we were definitely “doing it”! Throughout this time lots of new innovations came into play, many of which were in fact skillful and very useful for all of us. We had freqent “discussion groups” where we would go into and explicate subtle points of the teachings with each other, and all of us learned a great deal about how to actually listen to others, articulate our thoughts and ideas much more clearly, and try follow each other’s train of thought with some intelligence. I’ve already written a lot (some would say ad nauseum!) about how all of these years with Andrew really did have a powerfully transformative effect on me and on many of my friends.

But now slowly, because I continue to stare into all of this and reflect and re-reflect from as many angles as I can find, I have to say that I am starting to fall off my high horse and to see that there was indeed a great deal that was just plain old weird, cruel, and abusive, and way over the top. It’s helped me to think about what “went wrong” in terms of looking at the fact that Andrew didn’t really have a real model of “how to teach”. He hadn’t really worked closely with a deeply realized teacher who was steeped in a time-tested tradition where many of the kinks had a chance to get ironed out through centuries of learning from lots of mistakes. He was actually making it all up as he went along, and while we first thought that this was great because he was only teaching purely from his own understanding (which was undeniably profound)--and this was indeed probably why the teachings had a truly "alive" quality, his main and really only strategy became to simply continue to “up the ante”, no matter what. The force and domination and control indeed became quite nazi like. No situation was tailored for individual students at particular times (although I still believe that “intensity” at the proper time and with a great deal of sensitivity and finesse can actually be helpful on occasion). Every month and every year the intensity and “abuses” (already fully documented here on this blog) appeared to escalate to a degree that was beyond extreme. I never really participated myself in being aggressive with others (I was in fact considered rather weak and “wimpy” in that I was always pretty bad at giving “strong feedback” –this seemed to be a sign that I really didn’t care about the freedom of others!)

Truly weird as it was, I think that Andrew thought and probably still thinks that this extreme force was necessary for the “liberation” of his students. I really don’t think he knows any other way to teach, and will probably justify his “methods” to the end. A big part of the underlying setup, as many have described, was that once you accepted Andrew as your teacher that was it. He knew best (as he often said, “why would you come to a teacher if you already know better?”) and because of his rather incredible confidence, managed to set himself up as the unquestioned Authority on Everything! Because of this I think there must be some kind of underlying fear that the whole thing would fall apart if Andrew ever admitted to having made a mistake. This in itself is symptomatic perhaps of how and why it all got so crazy.

So I am finding it really helpful to just keep looking at all of this, trying to keep seeing the holes and blockages in my own understanding, my areas of denial, where I may be still protecting anything for whatever reasons, etc. As I’ve said before I am not bitter about all of the quite long time I spent in this situation, crazy as a lot of it was. For whatever reasons, mostly because I really wanted so much to believe in Andrew’s “vision”, I chose to stay and tough it out through a great deal of wild and crazy and quite painful stuff. I definitely learned a lot and changed deeply in ways I needed to. It was an unbelievably wild ride, and I must say that I both don’t regret it and I am also really glad I’m no longer in that situation! I know that there is still probably a great deal more for me to see about all of this, really appreciate the posts from everyone, and want to thank Hal for providing this much-needed forum.

With love and thanks to all,
Roberta

P.S. Something I’m finding kind of interesting to think about is that early on with Andrew he had all us us ex-Da Free John students (there were six or seven of us) get together to get “de-programmed” and see and face clearly what a mad teacher he actually was. We all sat together for a number of hours going over and over our experiences. I remember actually feeling a bit “seasick” from just being forced to see and tell the truth. It’s just rather ironic and weird that now I am going through this again with Andrew! Wow.