Thursday, October 19, 2006

Cohen Suddenly Gets "Integrity"

File under: The Siddhi of PR

Seemingly in response to the Jaxon-Bear brouhaha – or at least timed suspiciously close to it – "bad boy" and fellow Papaji-ite (and rival) Andrew Cohen has released "A Declaration of Integrity" on his blog. Apparently, it's getting hot in the kitchen and the boy does not want to leave:
I’ve always been the kind of teacher who evokes reverence and respect from some, and suspicion and hatred from others. In recent years, however, this polarization has become more extreme, due in large part to the dedicated efforts of a small group of former students who seem to have made it their life mission to create and spread a negative picture of who I am, in a couple of books and in online forums.
One of those "former students" being his own mother! We read her book The Mother of God last year on the plane, but we couldn't finish it as it was just endless stories of Andrew being a grandiose asshole. Too close to home, we guess.

It doesn't appear that they've caught this yet, but since it's more in the purview of the What Enlightenment? blog, we'll let them take it from here. It's been a while since our last visit and it looks like there's a couple of new articles about abusive gurus up, so check it out.

Update: It looks like they've caught it now.


At 10/19/2006 11:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, Jody. You are not a grandiose asshole.

A truly grandiose asshole doesn't know and will not admit he's an asshole.

You are only a self-proclaimed asshole. And as with those whom you debunk, who are prone to making claims to be that which they are not, methinks perhaps you are not one also.


At 10/20/2006 10:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

hey, Cohen basically doesn't deny anything said about him. He only says that his critics are failures=losers! What a humble guy!

At 10/21/2006 6:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dude, Cohen's post is actually pretty impressive (did you read the whole thing?). If you look at that WhatEnlightenment? blog, and read his blog, it's obvious who has the more rational perspective and who is simply licking their wounded egos... But our society loves victims, doesn't it? That's why we award $2 million to people who spill coffee on their laps. Or bow in reverence to whiny ex-students of a modern Zen master who got themselves into deeper spiritual waters than they were prepared to swim in (i.e., the intentional pursuit of ego death) and can't get over it because, despite their best intentions, their raging egos won't let them. Isn't this an old, predictable story? I bet Judas Iscariot would have started a blog, if the technology had existed back then...and what would the world's biggest religion be today? The Church of the Wounded Spiritual Victim, perchance?

At 10/21/2006 11:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I'll admit to not knowing enough to be able to pass judgement. There are a lot of things said about Andrew that are wholly taken out of context for sure. And I think we're so self-absorbed the idea of a person pushing someone outside their comfort zone we call abuse. So before calling any guru an asshole I'd meet them first to my best ability, to find out for myself what's actually true. The postmodern perspective flattens everything and hates anyone who stands for some higher order in human relationship. Which is why the "life coach", the "buddy" guru, flourishes in a world that distrusts any sense of hierarchy.

At 10/27/2006 2:07 PM, Blogger Stuart said...

Here's a quote from Andrew's "Declaration" which gets to the core of the matter:

> As far as I’m concerned, the spiritual life is
> just like any other endeavor—you can succeed or fail.

(The context is that the people who criticize Andrew’s actions do so because they've failed at the spiritual life.)

We all already understand the world of success and failure. If you want to make money, then success means getting rich. If you want sex, then success means making a sexual conquest. And so on.

The spiritual life that Andrew offers is also like this. The particular thing he tells us to want is different. Instead of trying to get money or sex, he advocates trying to get "enlightenment" or "higher consciousness" or "evolution.” But he pointedly is NOT changing the underlying mind, the mind that wants something, that makes goals, that creates distinctions like "success and failure."

Andrew's path is therefore appropriate for those who want to change the content of their desires, without letting go of desire itself. To question the very idea of success and failure, we need to go elsewhere. There are other teachers and paths that question more deeply.


At 10/29/2006 2:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i went to one of his lectures long ago
it was so bad i walked out
others eat it up
i read his book
autobiography of an EGO
he talked about the amazing things that happened round him

LIKE WHAT ????????????????????????

At 10/31/2006 10:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was there and the shit DID happen. I'm just amazed at the drivel being posted by his admirers, subtly and not-so-subtly seeking his affirmation. Isn't the whole spectacle a bit nauseating?

At 1/17/2007 5:11 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Q. What is Enlightenment......?

A. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


Post a Comment

<< Home