What an amazing, amazing book! I read it straight through in one 8-hour sitting. I was totally blown away. It is helping me gain clarity on my cult experience like nothing else has so far.

Has anyone else read it? What did you think?

I have a lot to say about it but right now my head is reeling and I just need to let it a "percolate" a bit.

Yes, Luna's book is unique. Lots of parents have given accounts of how awful it is to lose your child to a guru.

But this is so far the only book written by a parent who lost her son because he became a guru.

The thing not mentioned in this book is how vulnerable we become when we desire enlightenment, become 'seekers' and are not aware that we have unconscious fantasies that enlightement will have a magical effect upon us--make us infallible, invulnerable, and (substitute personal hopes and dreams here) .

In John Horgan's book, Rational Mysticism there is a term 'The enlightenment industry.' I cannot recall whether Horgan coined the term or if he quoted someone else but it is perceptive.

It is easy to focus on Andrew Cohen, but after reading Tarlo's book I have wondered what Poonja may have done when young Andrew visited him.

Someone published an interview with Poonja. It makes strange reading.

**If anyone is familiar with these matters, let us know if this source is considered reliable or not.

[uarelove1.tripod.com]

One of the things that I found so interesting was the suffering that Luna went through because of the tension between her doubts (framed by Andrew, of course, as resistance) and the dazzling displays of "enlightenment" that kept her questioning her deepest instincts and turning it all back on herself as the one to blame for why she couldn't surrender. It was extremely sick and sad. It was very, very abusive and there was this weird sad-masochistic dynamic to the whole thing. And Luna Tarlo is an extremenly intelligent woman. It made me feel a lot better to see that getting suckered into a cult can happen to virtually anybody, and intelligence level has nothing at all do with it one way or another.

Many people, without realizing it, may be influenced by fantasies about enlightenment.

(Some great descriptions of issues and misperceptions can be found in Brad Warner's [i:140198fa1e]book 'Hardcore Zen[/i:140198fa1e].' Cheri Huber's [/i]'Perils and Pitfalls of Practice [/i]is also excellent.)

There are some misleading hopes and fantasies floating around concerning enlightenment. These fantasies may set seekers up to get trapped if they encounter a charismatic individual who has learned to trigger altered state of consciousness- in sensitive persons. A key component of this skill is the ability to clue in on a seeker's hopes and dreams and then utilize adroit flattery.

Special experiences apparently have nothing to do with enlightenment.

Another paradox mentioned by many teachers is the more you crave enlightenment, the further you get from it.

If you meet someone who fosters your craving for enlightenment, creates an atmosphere of mystique and glamor around enlightenment, [i:140198fa1e]rather than assisting you to investigate craving itself[/i:140198fa1e], you will land in trouble.

The context in which enlightenment is often discussed or talked may add to the craving. Much of the mythology that has condensed around enlightenment has glamorized it, turned it into a marketable commodity, turned it an object of craving.

This craving state of mind is incompatible with enlightenment.

Even the best intentioned teachers may find their efforts hampered by the social context caused by American-style mass marketing and outreach efforts. As an activity, marketing is based on triggering, then maintaining craving, with the implied promise that a particular product, person or 'xperience will assuage craving.

The fame/glamor factor also hampers genuine enlightenment teaching for it is nearly impossible for someone to sit on stage with a microphone, and not have many persons in the audience crave to become just like that teacher. For the teacher has become their focus of craving by becoming enlightened, talking about enlightenment, and - by having gained social status and prestige by doing all this.

A really conscientious teacher must constantly check and make sure that his or her efforts are not being subverted by social setting & publicity methods.

In New Age venues enlightenment is often presented as something to attain. This bias was in place well before Andrew Cohen came along. This bias is pervasive and very difficult to avoid, unless a teacher contantly safeguards his or her private life, gets intimacy from peers and does regular retreat work in private.

Its a dilemma: how to make liberating teachings available, do outreach and not fall into this trap.

And when people see some teacher onstage, with a crowd of admiring listeners, its easy to associate enlightenment with becoming powerful and desirable, just like that teacher.

But this 'gaining mind' caused by marketing enlightenment turns enlightenment into a commodity, an object of craving, making it impossible for people to experience it.

The lonesome life many teachers live doesnt help matters.

**Another common fantasy equates enlightenment with becoming infallible and perfect.

But any leader who claims to be a perfect person creates a potentially hazardous situation, no matter how kind he is. The teacher is human and will still be imperfect--but teacher and followers will refuse to acknowledge that imperfection. The group is forbidden to recognize the actual human imperfections in the leader [i:140198fa1e]no matter how badly he behaves[/i:140198fa1e].

So nearly always, these groups cope with imperfection by finding someone in the group to function as scapegoat. Over time, the group may deal with imperfection by projecting it outside, getting paranoid in relation to society at large, and have increasing impatience and even contempt for anyone who ignores their outreach.

So any time you see an allegedly enlightened, perfect guru, look for the scapegoat/s. If you are in such a group long enough, chances are, you will become the scapegoat--or someone you love will be selected. If you stand silently aside while others are scapegoated, you get traumatized witnessing their abuse. You may even be pressured to join in scapegoating someone. Thats one of the traumas of persons who emerge from these organizations.

Various illusions about enlightenment (and the benefits it supposedly confers) are often propagated by the enlightement industry. (The term appears somewhere in 'Rational Mysticism' by John Horgan)

Among these fantasies are:

* Assumption that enlightenment makes you infallible and all knowing.

*Enlightenment automatically liberates a person from anxiety, pre-existing neurosis, bigotry and makes them feel high all the time.

*That someone else can 'give' you enlightenment.

*That someone can be enlightened 24-7, no matter what they're saying and doing.

*That ordinary moral guidelines no longer apply to an enlightened person.

(Luna Tarlo wrote in her book that she felt perturbed that Poonja accredited Andrew to be a guru after just 6 weeks of training. But because such misgivings supposedly didnt apply to an enlightened person, Tarlo stifled her concerns. We demand more expertise from the guy who fixes our car than we do of the guru who demands our surrender.)

IMHO a lot of people who want enlightenment may actually want magic, or a perfect, ideal parent. It is much better to admit this at the start of your quest, no matter how embarrassed you feel admitting to this. Because if you carry these yearnings unconsciously, you'll be pulled into various traps.

Before you search for enlightenment, always ask, 'What do I wanna get out of it? What's in it for me?'

This self scrutiny is a better foundation for spiritual practice, than pretending you dont want goodies when in fact you want them. Take a kind, but searchingly honest look at your deepest hopes and your areas of spiritual horniness. Thats where your energy is. If you are conscious of it, you can work with it make that energy your ally, not have it used against you.

If you secretly hope that enlightenment will endow you with charisma and enable you to get rich, famous, compensate you for past humiliations, attract people to your side so you will never, ever be lonely again--admit that this is what you REALLY want from enlightenment.

Any unexamined fantasies you have about enlightenment can and will turn into potholes, blind alleys and pitfalls on the spiritual quest.

Agehananda Bharati did a survey of enlightened persons in India, and he experienced enlightenment himself. He found out that you cannot talk about enlightenment and preserve the experience, because ecstacy is incompatible with eloquence about ecstacy. [i:140198fa1e]You can read all his findings in The Light at the Center: Context and Pretext of Modern Mysticism[/i:140198fa1e]. It should be mandatory reading for anyone who thinks they need a guru, especially before they buy a plane ticket and go to India.

Even ordinary entrepreneurial activity is probably incompatible with what Bharati called 'The zero state.'

What Bharati discovered is that you must evict yourself from enlightenment in order to function in society and talk about enlightenment, just as you cannot describe orgasm while you're in the midst of orgasm.

The other thing Bharati discovered came from his expertise as a Sanskrit scholar, and his years as a wandering [i:140198fa1e]sadhu [/i:140198fa1e]in India. What he found was that over many centuries, Indian gurus evolved a professional coded language. They spoke as though they were enlightened 24-7, while in fact they had to exit their state of enlightenment in order to be articulate on the subject. So, while describing enlightenment, these gurus were not in it--they were only remembering it! (This also means that crooks who know nothing of enlightenment, can pretend to be enlightened if they master this coded language and then prattle it in front of audiences.)

This has made it nearly impossible to get a realistic take on what enlightenment really does and does not accomplish for those who experience it.

Finally, Bharati learned that there is no organization or authority in India which rules on an objective basis whether any guru is genuine or bogus. No one has to pass an examination or get a license to be a guru in India. Its not a protected title. Bharati found that in India, one becomes a guru by calling oneself a guru and by being called a guru. It is a process of ascription. All this is discussed in [i:140198fa1e]The Light at the Center[/i:140198fa1e]. Used copies are easily found on abebooks.com and alibris.com.

This means that it is entirely up to the seeker to discern whether a particular guru

1) is reliable or teaching doctrine/functioning in a social context that promotes craving and other states of mind incompatible with spiritual practice.

2) if a guru is honest, whether that person is the right teacher for the seeker. This means that a seeker looking for a guru must have a working knowledge of Sanskrit and various texts. And the seeker, in addition to knowing Sanskrit literature and its religious terminology, also has to know his or her own spiritual needs with a fair degree of precision.

Very few Westerners come to India with this kind of preparation. Many Western-oriented Indians are just as vulnerable.

For more insights, Dan Shaw MSW has a paper on traumatic abuses in cults.
His paper 'Traumatic Abuse in Cults-A Psychoanalytic Perspective' by Daniel Shaw MSW

[hometown.aol.com] Abuse in Cults

is lengthy but well worth reading. [/i]

There is one very telling scene in the book where Luna has her final conversation with her son. There is this overwhelming sense that he is trapped in his own myth. He KNOWS he's made mistakes but he can't admit to to any wrong doing because then the whole house of cards would collapse. He seems stressed and sad, but still rigidly clings to being "right" and "all-knowing." I ALMOST felt sorry for him. Almost, but not quite.

One of the most outrageous things to me about this whole situation was that Poonja simply sent him out into the world with virtually zero training and turned him loose on all of these poor, trusting people. It was disgusting and motivated purely by self-importance. It caused an enormormous amount of suffering and yet he still refuses to acknowledge that and take responsibilty. Instead, he poaches all of Andrew students who come to him to complain about Andrew's methods, then publicly reviles Andrew. What is up with that? I hold Poonja almost entirely responsible for creating this monster.

the perils of going to India are that you can meet someone who intuits your vanity and tells you what you want to hear, rather than what you need to hear.

Genuine gurus only tell us what we need to hear.

I heard someone quote a Sanskrit proverb:

'A greedy guru and an impatient disciple are both suspended over the pit of hell.'

That same person said, (my paraphrase from memory)

'When looking for a guru, pay attention to your own longings and what is triggered. If you're with a particular guru and you find yourself fantasizing how much fun it will be when you become a master, and have gorgeous women in yoga stretch pants sitting in the front row of your lectures, leaning forward, with their bosoms straining against their tank tops---that guru is not the person for you to study with, because something about him and his group is triggering your own lust and ambition. That same guru may be perfect for another student but not for you.

'Instead, keep looking until you find a teacher in whose presence you become lucid, insightful and aware of your fantasies, not trapped in your fantasies. A guru who triggers your greed, fear, hate and illusion is the wrong person for you, even if he has a fabuluous reputation and others genuinely benefit from working with him.'

But--this kind of self honesty and discernment requires a high level of maturity.

As for Poonja, Tarlo probably hit the nail when she suspected that he had become old, had few disciples and probably saw Andrew as someone who could fulfill his ambitions by becoming his publicist/recruiter.

In his biography [i:6b0c9f0d0c]The Ochre Robe[/i:6b0c9f0d0c] Agehandanda Bharati describes how he became a renunciate monk and the advice given by his preceptor.

One thing the mentor told Agehananda Bharati (and I must paraphrase) is that it can be relatively easy to keep vows of chastity when we are young or middle aged, but that when we grow old, lust can flare up and take us by surprise. 'Death is staring you in the face, and your body longs to assert its rights before you die.'

Perhaps a lust for fame may overpower an aging guru, too. After lonely lives as religious aspirants, some may want one last hug, a final kiss before they die.

But perhaps others may be seized with desperation to become famous at any costs, which can be another way to long for love and banish loneliness.

Some may long to acquire enough disciples to prove it was worth it, have a princely funeral in Benares, their bier covered with silks and garlands, attended by a huge retinue of mourners, instead of a lonely cluster of followers standing by a skimpy pyre, lit with a single flickering torch.

There's a blog with more discussion about Cohen, it's called [i:9b7dbbde1e]WHAT enlightenment?![/i:9b7dbbde1e] – sort of a take off on Cohen’s magazine (What is Enlightenment?) and its pretense to dispense the answers to what enlightenment really is all about.

[i:9b7dbbde1e]What Enlightenment!?[/i:9b7dbbde1e] is a good read, and seems to be doing its stated job of “exposing gross hypocrisy, not carping about past "mistakes." It is about revealing sadism and love of power disguised in the sheep's clothes of spirituality. It is about enabling people whose souls have been messed with and betrayed to sort things out and heal; and about warning potential future disciples off the road to spiritual slavery.”

Some of the topics include Cohen’s fundraising “techniques,” discussion of what a narcissist would do as a spiritual leader, Cohen’s persecution complex, David Deida’s satire of Cohen, a satire of a Cohen/Wilber dialogue, an angry letter from Don Beck accusing the blog of being nothing but “bottom dwellers!”

Here’s where you find it: [whatenlightenment.blogspot.com]

**If anyone is familiar with these matters, let us know if this source is considered reliable or not.

Hello,

My name is David. I was once in a position of being evaluated to be a formal student of Andrew Cohens. I lived close to his headquaters and interacted daily with his students. I want to be clear about all this up front.

I am also currently a member of his study groups after years of hiatus. I am not currently a Student of Andrews.

All that being said, after leaving the community to explore my own development (I was young, just 19 at the time I got involved) I came across a book by a former student of Andrew and then Luna's book, which I knew to exist.

I would not consider her a reliable source in this matter. From people who knew her over the years who are with Andrew, or not, she was know to be an overly neurotic women who truly shouldn't have been playing with the fire that is awakening. At least not with someone as serious about this process as Andrew, and he even expressed that he was wrong to take her on as a student, that he should've seen that she would be totally unwilling to relinquish her relationship as his mother, which would be necessary for him to take on the role of authority and teacher.

If you didn't notice, the book is a rocky ride where luna seems quite haywire, changing her mind and opinion every few pages. I truly, truly do not believe this is because of Andrews teaching or being, but rather due to her own neurosis, and unwillingness to face herself dead on, with deadly seriousness. It is very obvious for me to see through that book that she had little true desire to know the truth more than to uphold her own images of her seperate selfhood.

Honestly, the book by Andrew's former student Andre Van Der Braak is a better read if you are in need of a criticism of Andrew as a teacher.

That being said, I read the book as well, before Luna's, and it was an interesting read, much more coherent than Luna's book, and Andre is in a better position to make comments about Andrew as a teacher, because, for one, he's not the teachers mother, and two, because he was simply a guy who came to Andrew as a teacher, on his own accord out of interest, and accepted his position as a student.

Now, after reading both books (while I mention them collectively here and there past this point, I am mainly referring to Andre's book, as Luna's I consider the diary of an on the edge neurotic women who only took on a relationship with her son so that She could feel like "the mother of god") again, after reading the books I had a very liberating experience. I was liberated of the feelings of guilt and betrayal I had held onto after leaving the community. I was liberated of all kinds of dark areas of my soul. I truly felt that a huge boulder had been lifted off of my soul. I cried a little bit. I felt free. Free from the feelings of the past, from years of repression and spiritual angst. And while I didn't realize it at the exact moment of finishing the books, I was free from my historical relationship with the teachings of Andrew Cohen, and free to look at them clearly, without burden, and draw my own conclusions.

For the next two days there was a peace about me. A clarity of mind and soul. There was a contemplation going on deep with in me, in the subconscious areas. Something subtle but strong was growing. I lay on my couch on the third day, and all of a sudden it emerged, clear as daylight, clear as a bright light shining. Clear with a kind of distinct peacefulness that is so brilliantly still and yet so vibrantly alive.

Andrew was right.

The books were coming completey from the perspective of ego. From a strong unhealthy sense of self seperation that demanded that, no matter what, it remained in tact.

And I, like so many others, have had so many of the thoughts, so many of the feelings and psychological battles that were in those pages. In deed, another friend who is a happy, healthy, and strong person and a student of Andrews had the same experience. He said that in those pages it was like reading the thoughts that went through his own mind, that at the end of the day he saw them clearly as the ego itself.

Of course when you are battling for your spiritual liberation, whatever that might mean to you, if you are serious about challenging yourself, you will have to face the worst aspects of your soul, the most devided, viscious, petty, self serving elements that you posses, and that posses you. But we're talking about the highest heights of spiritual achievement here! This isn't supposed to be easy stuff. It's pretty much the exact opposite. And Andrew IS a deadly serious teacher who Doesn't play around. Of course your ego will make him out to be the worst enemy for as long as it can in order to not be defeated. He's not the type of teacher that lets people hang around him all there life, comfortable to be in the shadow and care of a great person, and allowing that comfort to take them to the grave without transformation. Andrew is NOT that kind of teacher!

And knowing first hand many of the rigorous tasks involved in this journey, I can tell you that much of what is in those pages is extremely exagerated, tainted, or sometimes a flat out lie. It is largely that I can percieve how tainted it is which led me to the clear realization of where this information was coming from.

So, while I know this may sound preachy, it is my experience reading these books. It actually opened me back up to Andrew and freed me from my ego's story of my historical relationship to his teachings.

So I share this BECAUSE I am someone who has been on the inside. And because, after having doubted a lot of things, reading these books freed me from that doubt and allowed me to see with a clarity of perspective that I was hiding from for years, and bending myself out of shape to deny.

BUT, you won't get that if you haven't known Andrew. You won't get that if you haven't known his teachings up close. You'll just see another "terrible guru". And while other teachers, big, famous, unchallenged ones, abuse their students sexually in infidelity and child abuse, condone orgies, substance abuse, money and power scandals, and even stockpiling arms, let's remember what Andrew is being challenged for here. For being harsh and unrelenting.

The ego doesn't like harsh and unrelenting, not when it comes to TRUE spiritual growth. So keep this in mind when approaching Andrew. After the scandals that came before our current time, it is very easy to want to pick up stones at the first cry of "imposter!" So it was in jesus time as well. How much have we really awakened with modernization? An open ended question I suppose. But take these books with a grain of salt, and never close down to possibility. It's like shutting a lid on the casket. I guess it's dry, dark, and comfortable.. and suffocating![/i]

This post by DavidChicago is either someone who is still under the grip of Cohen, or is an attempt at post-hoc damage control.

First, say his mother is crazy. Ad-Hominem.
Then, admit the criticisms, but then say "its all part of the process". Spin Control.
Then go into the warped psychobabble about the War of The Self. (which is an extremely dangerous concept).

Lastly, encourage the readers to go to Cohen themselves, as after all, he is being persecuted like JESUS CHRIST was!! (ever notice that a scoundrels last resort is to say he is being crucified like Jesus?)

Sadly, this type of attempt at a Mindf*ck probably does work on some people.
By the way, my healthy Ego can see that Cohen is a greedy SOB just out to enhance his own massive "Ego".

Stay away from Cohen at all costs.

Coz

As "yuse" Coz, you're right on-it!

I would guess that I'm not the only one that appreciates that!

Similarities with other groups abound between the line or just change the names....

PAX