By Rivka Attal
Is Andrew Cohen an abusive teacher whose main purpose to gain power through using his position and authority and abuse his students trust in him, as is expressed by a few ex-students who have gone public with their conclusions whether through book or blog? Or is there something else going on and, if so, what is it?
For me there were no questions as to what the answer is. This is my way of saying THANK YOU Andrew! This is an opportunity to stand up for what I know to be true and I am very grateful for this.
Is Andrew Cohen Abusive? Is he Corrupt?
Some ex-students who are very critical of Andrew do not question his positive vision: the evolution of consciousness through and as the evolution of culture in a collective body. Nor do they question his high spiritual attainment. What seems to be the main debate here are his methods when trying to achieve this goal.
Not long ago when a man beat his wife not only was he not regarded as being abusive, but it was his birth right. Historically women were treated as an object in man’s possession. I’m not saying such a man’s behaviour wasn’t in fact abusive, but I’m pointing to the fact that even the use of power, be it physical or mental, at different time in history, can be seen differently, depending on the cultural evolution of the time. My point is that when we attempt to decide if Andrew is corrupt and abusive, we need to consider the time we are living in and the cultural status quo of which we are a part. In that respect what seems reasonable exertion of power in one epoch may be viewed as “abusive” in another. But is there an ultimate truth defining when an action is not reasonable anymore and therefore abusive? Is there a universal moral code true to all times?
Another aspect I would like to explore here, (before attempting to give my own view on this debate) is the notion of “quantity”. Many of his ex-student critics don’t seem so much to be having an issue with Andrew “needing” to exert “some” pressure on individuals in order to assist them in seeing their egoic behaviour and transcending it. It is more a question of how much. At what point does exerting pressure become abusive and therefore can be seen as taking advantage of someone?
To illustrate my point I would like to look at a situation we are all so familiar with: the education of children. The first time a child behaves in ways that are “anti-social” it is the job of the parent to teach and show another way of being. Should this misbehaviour repeat itself, how does parent respond? Well, there are a variety of possible responses. Some may chose to ignore it as it is not easy ‘to take your child on’, some may be kinder than others and some may even revert to a more aggressive response. Usually the child will end up learning what an acceptable social behaviour is and change his way of being. Most of us will view this course of action as being reasonable and not necessarily abusive. It becomes abusive if:
a) the forceful action expressed towards the child is not in proportion to his misconduct
b) if the aim of the forceful action wasn’t to educate the child
c) if the forceful action repeats itself over long period of time for no apparent reason.
We all know how difficult it is for a parent to know what is “the best” way to respond. What action should I take to ensure my child will learn from his mistakes and change his behaviour? Should I be softer or tougher with the child? How “strong” should my response be? A sensitive parent will also take into consideration the particular child in question, the number of times this ‘undesirable’ conduct has repeated itself and what their previous responses to having it pointed out have been, ideally before making up his mind as to what the appropriate way to respond actually is. In any case the situation is not easy to manage and involves a complex set of circumstances, characters (child and parent alike), history and, most importantly, the purpose of what the parent is trying to achieve.
Why am I bringing ‘educating children’ to our discussion here? When an individual enters a relationship with a spiritual teacher, from a certain point of view, or at least for the first period, in many ways it is similar to a parent/child relationship as described above. The individual recognises that the teacher expresses something they would like to learn and at the same time they give the teacher the right to teach them. It is only natural that at this point both parties involved can’t know how things will evolve. Note that one of the big differences when comparing a student/teacher relationship to a parent/child relationship is that in the former the individual not only chooses to enter the relationship they also choose with whom they want this relationship – the Teacher, Guru or Master.
So is Andrew Cohen an abusive Teacher, Guru, Master? I guess, in the end, we each have to make up our own mind as to what is reasonable. We are living in a time in which self concern and narcissism has never been so emphasised. Most of us Westerners have never really suffered; I mean existential suffering like starvation, poverty, physical abuse etc. In comparison to most human beings on the planet most of us have grown up like spoiled brats believing we are the centre of the world, that the universe owes us or that we deserve to have whatever our hearts wish for! Discomfort, and in particular emotional discomfort, is not something we are familiar with. It is reasonable to expect we won’t like it, to say the least, and probably we will resist, when our chosen spiritual teacher challenges this cultural status quo in ourselves. How much pressure can the teacher exert before he is seen as being unreasonable and even abusive? As long as we also consider how much resistance was enforced upon the teacher, we will be better positioned to make up our mind.
I know that Andrew never responds light-heartedly to what is occurring around him. He always gives a lot of thought and consideration before deciding what an appropriate response is. When he tries to measure an appropriate response he considers the “misconduct” (its gravity and its impact) which will among other things depend on how long a student had been with him, what kind of behaviour he has previously expressed and for what length of time, how committed the individual says he is to the process, their cultural conditioning, and, most importantly, the “contract” he has with the student when they chose him to liberate them from the grip of their ego.
Choosing a Spiritual Teacher or Guru
It is not everyone’s cup of tea to even consider this possibility. Many who can’t even relate to it may never understand it. However if you are reading these words you are probably not one of these individuals. Be it as it may there is an element of mystery or a particular chemistry.
In my own case several months after meeting Andrew I asked to be his student. At this point Andrew was still unconvinced about me. Before “taking me on board” he wanted to make sure that
a) I was fully aware of what I was asking him, and of what the nature of this relationship was
b) that I had some understanding of what his teachings are about.
When someone becomes a student of Andrew it is because they want to and Andrew has been convinced enough that they know what they were getting involved in. He never takes someone on if he feels that they don’t understand what they are asking, or what is it that he’s trying to teach/achieve.
And so in entering this relationship we agree and trust that the only ‘job’ the teacher had to fulfil was to guide us and help us become an expression of a ‘free’ human being. More often than not, when we say that this is what we want, we cannot imagine what it will entail, as we have almost nothing from our past experience we can relate this to. It is the teacher’s job to prepare us as much as possible and lay the ground so that under pressure we won’t crumble.
Most of the years I was in Andrew’s circle, I wasn’t part of the ‘core’ formal student body, but never the less one cannot be close to him without experiencing his fierce demand that we express our highest potential. I would have been disappointed had he not pushed me to do that. It is true that his at times fierce demand could be expressed in whatever way and with whatever means necessary to “make” us, the students, live up to what we ourselves had committed our lives to—the “contract” that each one of us signed for.
This is an absolutely crucial point because when reading some of the allegations of abuse made by former students it often seems as though people were innocent. I know this is wrong and not what actually happened. Each one of us ‘signed up’ fully aware that we are entering a relationship that would challenge anything known and familiar to us. We knew, and claimed, that this is what we wanted the most.
Rivka Attal can be contacted at free.bird@live.co.uk
