thx....from the Horgon website: John Horgon's interview with Andrew Cohen.  
(Horgon is a former chief editor of Scientific American).
"
I suspect that Cohen sees LaLanne as a kindred spirit. For all his talk about 
our need for submission, Cohen has forged his own guruhood out of sheer 
willpower and faith in himself. If Cohen believes, unwaveringly, that he is the 
equivalent of Christ and Buddha and other Bodhisattvas, then his belief will 
be—must be!—fulfilled.

Cohen describes enlightenment as a form of not-knowing. And yet his guruhood, 
his entire life, revolves around his belief in—his knowledge of--his own 
unsurpassed perfection. To borrow a phrase, Cohen is a super-egomanic. His 
casual contempt for us ordinary, egotistical humans is frightening, as is his 
belief that, as an enlightened being who has transcended good and evil, he can 
do no harm. Cohen may not be a monster, as his mother claims, but he has the 
capacity to become one. If Cohen settled for being human instead of perfect, 
he'd probably be a better teacher, and a better man.

After Cohen and I had spoken for several hours, we ate a vegetarian lunch with 
two of his male students. Both had an interest in science; they had helped put 
together an issue of What Is Enlightenment? devoted to science. Aware that I 
write about science, the two disciples asked my opinion of various fields, 
theories, theorists. Delighted by their deference, I pontificated about 
superstring theory, artificial intelligence, and other scientific arcana. 
Meanwhile, part of me was aware of Cohen at my side, quietly watching me. I had 
a sudden vision of how I must have appeared through his eyes: vain, 
self-absorbed, smug in my paltry knowledge. I silently gave thanks that I was 
not in thrall to this guru. As soon as this lunch was over I would walk away 
from him, free to be my flawed, foolish self.



--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote:
> >
> > Quote that just came in that seems to relate to a point
> > Barry often brings up:
> >  
> > For the Sake of the Whole
> > Most seekers are interested in enlightenment only for their
> > own sake, only for their own personal liberation. Indeed,
> > when we begin the spiritual life, the most important thing
> > to us is our own happiness, our own personal experience of
> > expanded states of consciousness, our own enlightenment.
> 
> I'd say Cohen should speak for himself. This sure isn't
> why *I* began TM.
>


Reply via email to