I can't imagine a better life than one dedicated to working together with others to cultivate in the most serious and inspiring way our collective capacity for creating a world beyond ego.

I have absolutely no doubt that this is possible, a testament to my daily life in which I and others are immersed in a living experiment to map the contours of such a world. This is the promise and goal of the teaching of Evolutionary Enlightenment, and the vision and passion of teacher Andrew Cohen.

What we are discovering is that there is a leading edge to consciousness, a farthest point where we form our highest and deepest understanding of human purpose. That edge is where the future is forged, where we stand on a creative frontier and take this whole project of human life or, really, the entirety of the Life process, to the next level.

As my zaadz bio describes, 15 years ago I abandoned my post in tropical forest conservation to pursue a higher calling. The impetus to do so was, to no small degree, the result of my work with the conservation and international development institutions in DC. How power is wielded in a vacuum of authentic leadership...what a mess! It convinced me that a significant minority of human beings had to evolve beyond the only real obstacle, which is the ever-selfish and all-too-compelling belief that we have the right to live only for ourselves. When you step back and look objectively, the extent to which good intentions and good works are undermined by ego is nothing short of tragic.

As goes the saying, you don't know how bad it is until you see how good it can get.

So, years later, it was surprising to me to discover that one of the highest concentrations of What Is Enlightenment? magazine readers in the US is in the DC area. I had to ask myself why. Having led WIE Salons and Evolutionary Enlightenment Seminars in DC over the last several months, I'm formulating an answer to this question.

Every city possesses a unique collective set of agreements that create, in sum, its culture. In DC I've noticed:

1.  People care about the future. Granted, imperfections abound, but clearly idealism has brought many tens of thousands who seek to influence the institutions of power that are concentrated here like no other city on earth.

2.  Honest inquiry matters, consensus matters, intelligence and heart matter, and finding out what is true matters. It's a political culture: people articulate their positions clearly, and they listen to others. There are consequences to the use of power, and people know this.

3.  And because there are consequences, there is a very well-honed BS detector. This creates capacities for discernment that are essential if we're to build a future on the foundation of the best part of our humanity.

4.  DC is a culture of power, and there is a demand for leadership. Permeating the consciousness of the city is the awareness of a crying need for a new moral context - or philosophical premise - for human life in the 21^st century. The old myths have been discarded, and new ones that measure up to the unprecedented challenges of our time are needed. People know this, if only barely, but they know it, and they feel the responsibility to find an entirely new approach.

Yes, there are countless exceptions, but when you think about it, these qualities are clearly part of the beam-and-girder structures of the culture that frame, in part, how life unfolds in DC. And how life unfolds in DC is important - this city exerts an enormous influence over much of our planet. Strengthening these fundamentally positive and life-affirming characteristics strengthens the best part of our humanity, and we can't underestimate the positive ripples from doing this.

I think this is why people turn to the magazine for its substantive moral, philosophical, and spiritual inquiry. They know that what they do matters, in ways small or large, and they know that an intimate relationship exists between the transformation of the individual (you and me) and the future of life on earth.

Just a reminder: Andrew Cohen is coming to DC in May.



.

A new acquaintance in Washington, DC wrote me about her concern of promoting Andrew Cohen's upcoming talk and day seminar. She pointed out that most people are something less than comfortable with spiritual authority, especially if that authority takes the form of a spiritual teacher. And especially in DC, as she wrote, because "the waters have been so muddy for so long around this town that few feel at all clean anymore... Everything that is said is expected to be spin; everything is mistrusted."

She continued:

"...the Guru-bit is very hard to swallow.  We are longing for I-Thou relationships -- we do not want to have a middleman; we do not want to be followers of a guru.  This is the breakdown as I see it. The word "guru" has to be re-languaged and disarmed.  It must be clearly stated that the metaphoric white flag of surrender (of our ego-selves) will only be directly given to Source, not through an intermediary...  My sense is that this has to be addressed to truly reach the DC community.  How Andrew Cohen (and you) deal with this will make all the difference..."

I responded:

"Yes, for us post-moderns, authority in the realm of spiritual matters is a bitter pill to swallow. We are jaded, and for good reason, but more importantly, we are individualists, and seek for ourselves, to have our own independent relationship with the sacred. Boy do we! Andrew walks this line very well as he insists upon partners and not followers. Of course, unless the individual embraces freedom and the obligation to speak for, act for, care for the whole of the life process, there can be no liberation. And yet there is a real hierarchy - some of us have gone further than others. What I have found, imbued as I am with our narcissistic culture, is that bowing down to the fact of God (or whatever name you use...) - as oneself, as guru, as omnipresent consciousness - is all the same...This is a subtle point for if the teacher has absolute integrity, messenger and message are one - you bow down to the sacred principle and you also bow down to the teacher. If you don't, it's impossible to independently and courageously take responsibility for the highest as oneself. So surrender and independence, in the end, are the same thing."

This gets at something important: whether we need, and implicitly, whether we are willing to trust, in the authority of a spiritual teacher.

It might be possible that despite the fact that we live in an era where personal truths are sacrosanct, and despite the fact that countless spiritual authority figures have fallen on their faces, and despite the fact that past religious myths (and moral coda) struggle to find relevance -- there are spiritual visionaries with the courage and heart to walk their talk.

We need them. Especially in DC.