In Defense of the Guru Principle

Rating:
Summary: Legacies of guruism
Review: I do not know anything about A. Cohen and, although I do not approve of the guru principle, will leave judgement in neutral, since I read the book, and do in fact find a book with this title provocative and interesting. Instead of the usual cavil of the alarmist deprogrammer circuit, I would simply point to the recent of history of gurus, and the remarkable wreckage, from Gurdjieff, to Rajneesh, Muktananda, Da Free John, and more. A unique series of failures. What's going on? Something is wrong. The Upanishads clearly warn of what can go wrong. Don't be on the wrong end of that.
I notice in all defenses of the principles of yoga, gurus and the New Age India phenomenon (which I don't reject out of hand)nothing is said about the history. Not surprising, but disingenuous. That history should be there. It is a truly frightening history for anyone about to surrender their will to a stranger. To excise that history is prima facie evidence the guru phenomenon is for the sake of the guru, not the disciple.

A 'guru' in this vein tends to be in the line of post-Buddhist neo_Brahmanistical line, after the savagery of internecine 'guru wars', the extermination of Buddhists, the restoration of Vedic and caste, etc... A work such as Prem Nath Bazaz _The Role of the Bhagavad Gita in Indian History_ gives one type of chilling account of the forever suppressed history, which includes the confusions built even into the Gita.
So what is what here?
Study the history. And keep in mind that the West was the last place on this planet, as of 1500, that had no guru domination principle. Sooner or later they will find you. Be prepared. Be informed, and not by those promoting these subjects. Study the history. Know the dangers, which in some cases are considerable. Whatever the guru principle is, it has no sancrosanct character whatever and threatens to complicate the realization of one's autonomy.
To try revive the tradition of the 'godmen' of this reactionary tradition in the modern age is the useless confusion. It is not sufficient to claim ignorance of this history.
Perhaps Mr. Cohen would care to comment on the 'spiritual alavery' theme of Mr. Lee Lozowick,or the dangerous tactics of Mr. E.J. Gold before he recommends gurus for us.