The three Great Siddhas have represented to mankind the three principal dharmas as they have been understood to this time. Jesus represented the dharma of the sacrifice of self, Krishna the dharma of the sacrifice of mind, and Gautama the dharma of the sacrifice of desire. Separated self (or ego), limited mind, and limiting desire are the three principal conditions of suffering or contraction in man. Thus, the three principal dharmas that have been known among men have been attempts to undo these forms of contraction through the deliberate or motivated sacrifice of these three: ego, mind, and desire.

Gautama was the Great Siddha of the navel. He taught and demonstrated the dharma of the sacrifice of desire. His whole teaching essentially consisted of methods for achieving the condition of nirvana, or the great quenching of the principle of desire. And the center of the principle of desire is the great region of the navel, the great life center.

Just so, Krishna was the Great Siddha of the sahasrar or the subtle epitome, the subtle region above the head. He taught and demonstrated the dharma of the sacrifice of mind, the merging of mind in God.

Jesus was the Great Siddha of the region of the heart. Just as the mind has its seat in the upper regions of the head, and desire has its seat in the great vital region of the navel, the ego or separate self and its dissolution are seated in the heart. Jesus taught and demonstrated the dharma of self-sacrifice, the dharma of the surrender of the ego in life terms, in functional and human terms. And so the dharma of the sacrifice of the self is the dharma of the heart.

But the three principal dharmas are themselves forms of seeking, reactions to the fundamental dilemma which motivates the usual man. The three Great Siddhas, along with all the other Siddhas, and all the yogis, saints, sages, and prophets, and all the men of experience, including the whole range of human individuals, themselves represent a limitation, a form of seeking founded in dilemma. The principle of the search remains intact in the great work of all the Siddhas to now.

In response to every communicator of the Great Process, a cult has always grown. There was a cult around Jesus as Christ, a cult around Gautama as Buddha, a cult around Krishna as the Divine Avatar. ...Every limited communication has tended to have been taken in some tradition or other to be absolute, to be perfect. The world is full of cults, great cults and lesser cults, all of which have the same fundamental structure as the limited life of Narcissus, the egoic life of obsessive mentality and peculiar desires.

My own work is not separate from the great work of the Siddhas and Great Siddhas. But my work is a new performance of the dharma of the Maha-Siddha, and represents a new teaching from a new point of view. ...The Way of Understanding is utterly free of the whole principle of seeking. At the same time, the Way of Understanding effectively undermines the three principles of suffering, not by deliberately acting upon those three principles or conditions themselves, but by undermining, in the process of understanding, the fundamental and principle activity which is suffering, the principle of contraction or dilemma, the avoidance of relationship. ...The process involves simple, motiveless understanding of one's own activity, not the effort to suppress or transcend the ego-sense, the force of the mind, or the force of desire.

All there has been up to now is the tradition of the dharmas that arose within the great search. The Way of Understanding is entirely apart from that whole traditional activity. ...It does not exploit the individual's motivation to be free of the ego, the mind, and desires. It simply enforces the condition of Truth, which is Satsang itself, the relationship to the Guru in God.

There is only one Siddhi or transforming Spiritual Power active in this work, and that Siddhi is God, the Power of the Divine Person. It is not a secondary siddhi, not magic, not a mere influence. Only the Divine is active in this work. The Lord is the fundamental condition communicated in Satsang with the Man of Understanding.

...Whereas the ancient dharmas involved specific attention, strategic attention to desire, mind, and ego, the dharma of understanding does not involve such strategic attention. ...The Man of Understanding only offers this Satsang, and he demands that those who come to him come in the form of the devotee, not in the form of the seeker. ...The Man of Understanding regards only those who come in the form of the devotee. He is continually mindful of the state of his devotee, and through various means continually returns him to the principle of his sadhana, which is Satsang, rather than to those things toward which the devotee himself is always tending: his desires, his mind, and his ego.

...The Man of Understanding's point of view is That which is prior to the three great dharmas (of Buddha, Krishna, and Jesus the Christ)... His point of view is the Divine itself.

~Franklin Jones aka Bubba Free John, 1975

When folks like Adi Da claim to be the One Divine Being offering the One True Path, they're bound to step on a few toes. Perhaps more importantly, Frank can be seen to act less compassionately, less loving and less open than other Masters. Herein are posts in which Frank's talk and walk are compared to other traditions.

FROM Elias:

Dear Pilgrim,

God, the Divine, the Holy Spirit, Buddha, the Christ, Krishna, the Divine Self, the Sacred Reality (to give but a few of its Names) is completely active in the world and in communion with all beings, apart from and without any necessary connection to Adi Da.

Believe it or not, a great many people have a living relationship to the Divine -- a very real and heartfelt love relationship -- a relationship of spiritual responsibility, sacrifice, service -- without in any sense finding a connection between their spiritual life and Adi Da -- even though they know about him, have read the teachings, and even have been in the community, etc.

How can this be? Well, it's quite simple, really. If you really experience the Sacred Dimension (or God), you will find that It is a Reality that is beyond all duality and form, and which draws you towards that same condition, by simply liberating you directly in your heart and mind -- it is an awakening, a lighting up, an enlivening, an empowerment -- not at all like the terrible "husbanding" (or domination) practiced by Frank. Rest in It, flow in It, allow yourself to metamorphose in it...and then realize It is your true nature, that there is no real life apart from the ever-transcending awakening as Spirit. True responsibility and love and service to God flow out of this gift, for what other response can one give when one is given everything?

This great liberation is given free -- a great wealth of creative power and energy -- out of the inexhaustible Reality of which we are all a part and in which we all awaken to our sacred and immortal Self. It is your own Nature for Godsakes! Why should you want to be anything less than what you Are?

Ego doesn't have a damn thing to do with it, Pilgrim -- ego is your problem, not mine. Ego is your bugaboo, the Daist Satan, your shadow, your "self-contraction" which is strangely reinforced by your religion, such that you are forever undergoing the fires of "purification" and never realizing the native freedom of your Divine Self! ...And such that you are always able to dismiss your critics as merely "egoic", or to relativize their statements within your artificial system of "seven stages".

Fortunately the Divine Self (or Oneness) is full, natural, happy, freely communicating with everybody, and bubbling along without any concern for Frank's silly attempts to codify the Divine Reality and turn the whole world into his "Truman Show", in which he is the main attraction and every other living creature, man, woman, child, or dog exists only as a walk-on on his island stage set, to be belittled and stripped of self-regard and finally cremated at death and heaped in great piles around his grandiose mausoleum where his mummified body sits comically posed before a statue of the goddess of blood-sacrifice, Durga...

Frankly, Pilgrim, if you (and your teacher) want to convince the world of his spiritual importance, there is going to have to be a demonstration of Adi Da's love, compassion, sacrifice, and unconditioned spiritual transmission... A thousand "talking school" books and audio tapes are not going to do it.

So far no genuine demonstration has yet occurred. Just the opposite, what has been demonstrated, quite clearly, is megalomania, misunderstanding of and disrespect for the traditions, sorcery, and perhaps even spiritual psychosis...

Oh...I forgot...if I see megalomania, it must be me, because lil old Frank has never done anything the slightest bit megalomaniacal in his whole fershlugginer life, except when he was "reflecting" the shameful habits of his followers in order to teach them what assholes they are... ;-)

stay easy, brother

Elias

From Sri Jageswar:

I said: I have nowhere seen this [Frank's style and behavior] in all my meetings with [spiritual teachers], in the sutras, or anything.

Pilgrim said: In my readings of the lives of the Mahasiddhas, Arhats, etc., there are tons of stories of very bizarre behavior, breaking of social taboos, abuse, etc., by high masters and gurus, all presented as means of communicating Divine Enlightenment.

Yes, they're illustrative of certain concepts in tantra. Unfortunately, as soon as con-men like Frank get a hold of "crazy wisdom" concepts all hell breaks loose, because he's too lacking in wisdom, too greedy, or too selfish to use them properly. This is why the tantras are traditionally kept secret: to keep leeches and frauds like Frank from them, as pouring the tantras in such tainted vessels is will turn the teachings from amrit into a deadly poison. Frank's teaching certainly reflects this.

I said: Nothing from his writings suggest to me that he's awakened, though technically it's impossible to tell who is and isn't -- but this is mainly for non-trivial cases.

Pilgrim said: Again, I just laugh at this. What have you even read of his writings? Hell, His writings are definitely His strongest suit for most people out there, at least those who actually read them.

Pilgrim, I've met a lot of people who swear by Ayn Rand and her writings, and consider them the Zenith of taste, intelligence, and prajna-wisdom. And then some people who read Rand snicker at her naive assumptions and totally unsophisticated understanding of human nature. Same with Frank, Pilgrim. And, just like the zealous True Believer Randroids, you can't see just how silly Frank's inflated, egoic hollering sounds to some people. In fact, the comparison is apt; Rand represents the ultimate naiveté of pure intellectual sorts; Frank, the ultimate naiveté (with a generous helping of greed and delusion tossed in) in matters spiritual.

Pilgrim said: The Buddha's advice is what I have always followed, and it has led me to Adi Da, and confirmed His Realization beyond any doubt or mind. So where does that leave us? Are you going to claim that I'm fooling myself?

Frank won't lead you to liberation, because he doesn't have fully developed access to wisdom-mind, as evidenced by his behavior and misunderstanding of such basic elements of tantra, namely stuff like upaya (skillful means). Of course you are free to have raptures from reading his stuff, but this doesn't make it genuine dharma.

Pilgrim said: Is it considered good form to trash a spiritual teacher, and then hide behind a the facade of respectability when it comes your turn to answer up?

It's considered imperative, according to the Dalai Lama, to expose corrupt teachers within Tibetan Buddhism. Frank's (even though he's not TB) "dharma" deserves trashing, just like Freddy Lenz and Jim Jones. He's pissing in our collective dharma pond and has perverted the tantras to suit his egoic ends. It's important that his distortions and misunderstanding of the tantras are corrected, where possible.

Pilgrim said: Your take on Buddhism is very suspect. The fact is, Buddhism is mostly built on lineages of transmission of the Buddha-Dharma. That means submission to a teacher and or teachers in a school of instruction. I would gather in your case that is the Vajrayana tradition, which is heavily reliant on Gurus and lineages.

Bingo, which makes my comments on the guru thing that much more relevant, as the teachings on gurus is explicit there. You should heed this stuff, Pilgrim, as this wisdom is the result of centuries of experience on the matter, and all you're getting from me is a direct parroting of this handed to me by my gurus (note the plural).

The problem with Frank is that his claim to beyondananda "realization" makes impossible for you to be "polygurous" (unable to accept there are many realizers out there you can learn from) and thus therefore all your understanding will suffer the same distortions as Frank's. You get only one view of reality this way. Hardly healthy or conducive to realization -- to limit oneself so profoundly.

Pilgrim said: That's good to acknowledge your sources. But your motives are not exactly pure. You quote your tradition very selectively, to back up your own particular point of view, even when it is at odds with the bulk of the tradition itself, as in your views on the place of devotion to the Guru in Vajrayana.

What??? I'm stating very clearly stuff you'll find if you do even a superficial study of Vajrayana!!! Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick, Pilgrim, you try to twist and distort everything you come across to fit a narrow, rigid template of the Universe According to Frank!!! Your continued attempts to impugn my character here really underscores where you're coming from. In my opinion, you have done more damage to Frank and his "teachings" than anything he could have ever done, just by incessantly posting your distortions and apologetic nonsense here in the Wilber forum.

Pilgrim said: In fact, I suspect that most of your objection to Adi Da is a case of rivalry with an ego that you fear is even larger than your own.

This is standard cult-type logic. If I don't agree with Frank and grovel at his gouty feet, I'm either "egoic" or somehow not entering into "proper relationship" and resisting his Ati-ness thanks to the force of my accumulated delusion. This is right, isn't it Pilgrim?

Pilgrim said: You are basing this view entirely on the mere fact of Ken's endorsing Adi Da as a Realizer, as if that ipso-facto makes his views on Realization wrong. That's a fundamentalist's reaction.

No, I'm saying it's as if I've discovered that a well-known author in biology is a closet Creationist. And again, I've never confused Ken with spiritual guru, so nothing's changed there. This makes not one whit of difference to me in terms of my understanding of enlightenment yanas (which Ken's stuff clearly isn't as he's repeated often).

Pilgrim said: You have not for a moment considered the possibility your own views on Realization are fucked up, or even in need of a little tweaking.

That's because my views are restatements of classic views on the matter. And I've confirmed the validity of those teaching to my personal satisfaction, and had them re-validated in turn by those teachers I respect.

Pilgrim said: The ridiculing, categorical denunciations you offer do get me a little personally pissed, however, for the obvious reason that it also insults my own ability to discriminate between a false teacher and a true one. And of course that's not your intention, but it's also an unavoidable aspect of this debate. So I'm human. It doesn't mean I don't have every right to ask you the questions I have here.

You have a right to ask such questions, and I have a right to ignore them. I also have a right to comment on what I see as perversion and confusing "dharma" with navel-gazing self-obsession and self-gratification.

Pilgrim said: Exactly, and your lack of understanding of the guru issue, not just in Adi Da, but in Buddhism itself, it affects every part of your appreciation of spirituality.

If the only way your belief in Frank can survive is to denigrate my understanding of the guru issue (which is really, really straightforward and glaringly obvious to anyone who's had a teaching on this topic in TB), then it really is sad. But hey, it's your life. You are certainly free to deeply misunderstand this issue and ignore the extant wisdom on it, and ignore the effects of Frank's teachings and behavior in the world-at-large.

Pilgrim said: Tell me about your Satori "experience", and maybe I'll know what ordinary mind is really all about.

This is after having gone through all the kriya convulsions, nadi openings, states of the profound, unbelievable ecstatic bliss states of samadhi, and penetrated deeply in the states of rupa and arupa jhana, the highest categories of consciousness according to Buddhist texts. I'm sure Hindu sources have similar states, but I'll defer to experts in that tradition for their take on the matter. The point is that folks who're awake don't make the kind of hyperinflated fuss about it that Da does!

Pilgrim said: So you claim for yourself.

No, I don't claim for myself; I'd never be so foolish or arrogant as to make any claim of being enlightened, although you're doing your damndest to make it appear as though I am, using your typical techniques of distortion. Shame on you Pilgrim.

Pilgrim said: I'll agree with that any night or day of the week. Sitting with Adi Da is like sitting inside a nuclear furnace. The ego just burns up. Like Wilber says, I would NOT recommend it to you. You aren't anywhere near ready for it. Stay with your practice as it is.

What is the sound of two eyes rolling?

Pilgrim said: About the only purpose my testimony might serve is to inspire or infuriate them enough to actually read Adi Da and find out for themselves what He's about.

Actually, your posts here serve to reinforce the idea that Adidam is a cult and that all Frank's ideas are rotten to the core, as they're lacking a foundation of genuine realization. Your posts, particularly your recent replies to me, do more harm to Frank and your cause than anything else I've seen here (well, besides the damaging reports by the countless ex-devotees who've weighed in here on the matter).

FROM Elias:

Andy,

I'm not anti-guru and not exactly "anti-Da". He has taught me lots and certainly tested me (as he tests everyone) to the point of taking spiritual responsibility for myself.

I am definitely opposed to what I perceive as his deceptiveness, his willingness to exploit people's projections, and his rather obvious self-indulgence of the appetite side of his nature.

I don't think he is what he says he is. In fact that information is out there, on the "Cosmic Telegraph", for anyone to access. What he is is simply one personality that realized its Eternal Form and then got the mistaken idea that it was the supreme manifestation of God.

But that's a very complex matter...there are levels and levels to it, and you really need to be careful around a guy like him. He's got most people "surrounded" and he uses that ruthlessly to devour their lives.

Fortunately there are other Teachers who have a more pristine Realization, and who function at a more sophisticated level of the Divine. Among them I include Meher Baba, Ramana Maharshi, and (curiously enough) Carl Jung. I was reading some Jung recently, his book called Aion. There's stuff in there that will take the top of your head off. Jung is the great hidden Spiritual Master of Western culture. He is far beyond anything Adi Da has achieved.

Other Teachers who have meant a lot to me include Ramakrishna, Yogananda, Namkhai Norbu, Lama Tharchin Rinpoche, the 16th Gyalwa Karmapa...and yes, even old Krishnamurti (who is far from the "adolescent" that Frank called him). I had the honor of spending an hour or so alone with Trungpa Rinpoche...my perception of him was that he was advanced spiritually, but not in the same league with Karmapa or others in the Tibetan tradition.

There was another Teacher, a monk I knew when I was a Benedictine during the 1960s. He was quite extraordinary, a classic visionary who had his eyes wide open to the Divine. He taught me a lot and gave me a lot of confidence about my own inner life.

As for Rudi, Nitya, and Mukta... I've read Rudi's book, and don't have much respect for him. Similarly for Muktananda, whom I consider a charlatan. Nityananda, on the other hand, was very special. He is a man to love, and was probably the main instrument of Frank's early awakenings. (Frank says it was Rang Avadhoot, but that's Frank for ya.)

It is interesting that Frank claims a connection to Meher Baba's guru, Sri Upasni Maharaj. Whether Frank likes it or not, this makes a connection to Meher Baba. I once had a little dream that Meher Baba released a little red sun from under his robes and it rolled across the floor and under a chair. It was Frank.

;-)

E