Jim, of course you are correct that there is no intellectualism in any of this besides the pseudo-intellectualism of their speech.
But another question is: is there any reality to what they are saying. I find that there is not, it is entirely fake. And another question is whether their philosophy is helpful or harmful. I find that it is harmful.
The main idea is expressed in their discussion - the transcendence of ego into the higher consciousness though an inner surrender.
Some people claim to have experienced this transformation and attempt to capitalize on it, and some people are seeking to experience it. Cohen is one of those people who claim to have transcended ego into the higher state and is capitalizing on it. His interviewer seems to be one of those people who are sincerely deluded into thinking there is some actuality to the philosophy.
No one has transcended ego into higher consciousness and the attempt to do so is anti-human, unnatural, futile, and harmful. "Ego" is a false concept in the first place. What we experience as separate mental beings is all we have and there should be no struggle of any kind, not even the struggle for improvement or some ideal of enlightenment. We each have a separate self and a personality which will remain with us until we die. The attempt to "die" to ourselves while still in the body is, again, anti-human, unnatural, futile, and harmful.
The harm is relative and dependent on the methods a person adopts in the search for the holy grail, or as I like to put it, engaging in a silly goose chase. Some Buddhist monks put their arms in the air for hours each day until their arms wither away into useless appendages. The harm is obvious. Some people are more moderate and meditate for 20 minutes each morning. They experience a combination of boredom and stress relief. The harm is very minor, a simple waste of time. There is also the harm of cults, when people seek enlightenment, not within themselves, but within the rules and regulations of some sort of group or by adhering to the teachings of some idiot guru. These harms are well-known.
People still fall into the trap of enlightenment. It seems obvious to me that if there is a higher light and if I may become one with it, then it is the higher light that will have to do most of the work. The most I can do is be open and honest with myself. The trouble with people is that they are not open and honest with themselves or with each other. Far from being superior and enlightened, they are fools who hurt themselves and other people.
Gurus such as Cohen and students such as his interviewer all talk about world peace along with personal enlightenment. They are correct when they say that we all need to act as if we are sitting on the same branch because we all are sitting on the same branch. But their solution of ego-transcendence will never work. These gurus don't really care one wit about world peace. In fact, one of the main problems in regard to world peace is religion itself and all the really religious people. The more religious they are, the worst things get.
The objections to Rawat's cult are not passe, 1970's stuff. The objections are current. His present philosophy, espoused in the Keys, is a fake and harmful philosophy.
