Beloved Bhagavan Avatar Adi Da Samraj,

Having studied and "considered" Your Word and Leela, I recognize that Your Divine Instruction, Demonstration, and Blessing-Transmission are an incomparable Gift. I therefore choose to make this vow of a free and direct devotional relationship to You as a fourth congregation member of the Transnational Society of Advocates of the Adidam Revelation. I accept Your Graceful Offering to live and serve as Your devotee. I understand that my responsive relationship to You is the sacred Means whereby I am Blessed by the Divine Freedom and Happiness that is Your own Love-Blissful Condition and Your Supreme Gift to Your devotees. I enter into this relationship with respect and love, knowing that it is not in any sense a conventional or worldly matter. Rather, I understand that my relationship to You is a profound and serious commitment that obliges me to resort to You consistently and to serve You steadfastly and energetically. I understand that by these means I become progressively more and more available to Your Transforming Grace.

As a fourth congregation member of the Society of Advocates, I understand that my primary obligation is to practice Ruchira Buddha Yoga (the Yoga, or practice, of devotional love of You, the Ruchira Buddha). I will do this by practicing the technically "simplest" practice of feeling-Contemplation of You, in which I simply Invoke You, feel You, breathe You, and serve You.

You have Said, "The technically 'simplest' practice is a profound practice. Although it does not include all the technical details of the more elaborate forms of practice, it is the same process and the same opportunity that I Offer to all My devotees. I can Awaken to Myself any being who really practices the technically 'simplest' practice. It is simply a matter of surrendering to Me, and becoming utterly combined with Me through that devotional surrender. You must simply do that, in direct relationship to Me, such that I am making My connection to You."

I also understand that my sadhana as a fourth congregation member of the Society of Advocates is to be principally expressed through my offering of consistent service to You, including (but not limited to) service to the publications missions (which is the particular responsibility of all members of the Society of Advocates), as well as a consistent monthly or regular pledge according to my means. I promise that through this direct, energetic, and always heartfelt service, I will do my utmost to advance Your Circumstance and Divine World-work, guided by Your Instructions, and in cooperation with my fellow devotees. I vow to consistently maintain and enlarge my service to You so that I may increasingly receive and be transformed by Your Blessing-Grace.

Beloved Bhagavan Adi Da, I thank You from my heart for the Gift of this free and most sacred relationship. I embrace You as Divine Guru, Giver of Truth and Heart-Blessing to all beings. I bow down to You with love and devotion.

One of the interesting aspects of the Adidam cult is the requirement that potential devotees make a binding vow of eternal devotion to Adi Da--before actually being allowed to be in the presence of the dude. Whoa! Now, such a vow is silly on its face to anyone who has experienced the timeless transpersonal realms, but even more ridiculous when taken blindly. Worse, the Adidamistas claim that breaking the vow will result in far more than 7 lifetimes of bad luck. Silly or not, here's what some have to say about the vow.

FROM Jaguar:

(Breaking my personal vow to post no more on Da -- and so soon, too!)

What I understand from your response, Pilgrim, is this: If people were allowed to see Adi Da "casually", as you say, i.e. without having recognized him as their own hearts, then Adi Da is disturbed in various ways. So he, and Adidam, must make sure as much as possible that people don't see him prior to having such recognition. Hence the vow.

This is so flawed in so many different ways/directions I'm hard pressed to find a starting point. Suffice it to say this is cultism, pure and simple.

Any genuine teacher would never ask a potential student to accept him without at least an interview. I mean, come on!

In Tibetan Buddhism, at least, there's a proverb that both the teacher and the student observe each other at least twelve years before committing to each other. Right on Ladida's homepage I see an exhortation to "become my devotee." This statement alone raises so many red flags I can't even say.

Something about the above does not quite feel right to me.

And of course, it shouldn't. Because it's complete and utter bullshit. The manipulations of a con-man -- the worst type of con-man, the spiritual kind.

You said: Probably you have to have in fact caught the seventh stage buzz, and at best I can only cop to having had a "contact high". So for now I'll just presume its validity and move on.

Presuming any validity because one has caught a "contact high" is perhaps the worst of all possible reasons to follow a self-styled guru. There are many, many occultists who've mastered a few siddhis and use their powers to delude others for fun and profit. The recently late "Zen Master" Rama [Lama Ding-Dong], teacher of "Tantric Zen" (if you can cotton to such an absurd notion) is another case in point, though arguably sleazier and more ego-inflated that even Adi Da. This is why in both Hinduism and Buddhism, these siddhis are considered side-effects of a practice at most, and one repeatedly hears injunctions to avoid fiddling with them, since without the proper understanding or in the hands of a deluded egomaniac, they're direct routes to even greater delusion.

You said: My concern is that most of the people who stick around in Adidam believe that Adi Da is THE Heart.

Which is what makes Adidam a cult. This mentality is reflected in the domination of this forum by its cultists and apologists. One might wonder why they feel the need to consume at least half the Ken Wilber forum postings with their relentless proselytizing -- especially considering that I haven't read a single line about Adi Da in any of Ken's books. Perhaps I can convince a few Mormons to sign up here to parrot their garbage at us. At least that might balance things out more.

You said: But there also is something going on which you still wrestle with. You cannot just dismiss Him and turn away, done with the whole affair.

Sure one can! The most Da Free John has done is crib a lot of Hindu and Buddhist mysticism, peppered it with newage (rhyme with sewage) pap and added a lot of capitalizations to His Favorite Words. That he calls himself an "avatar" is revolting. No genuine avatar would need to proclaim his avatariciousness. This is the mark of a first-class borderline schizoid personality with a power-tripping agenda. Anytime you see someone claiming to hold the "keys to enlightenment" like Da does, run. Run like hell and don't look back.

Why not just bypass this charlatan and go straight to the sources of these ancient systems themselves? There are even really, really good teachers in various lineages Hindu, Buddhist, and other (Sufi, Christian, etc.). Who needs another Savior? God knows, we've got a distended pantheon to choose from as it is. And most have the advantage of being dead at least for centuries, so the human guru problem is minimized (though not the capacity in humans to idealize and mythologize about their Favorite Saints, I'm afraid).

FROM Philip:

I have heard from several people (two currently under vow) that "hellish karmas for lifetimes" are suffered when the vow is broken.

Yes, I have heard such things, if not that specific term. These were ominous warnings uttered in solemn tones about the frightful consequences of breaking this eternal vow.

Is this true? If so, Why?

-Philip

FROM Sri Bob:

The hellish karmas are true for those who believe them true. Just so, Philip my son.

Namaste, Sri Bob

FROM JCB:

Hi Philip,

Let's say you found out that Adi Da indeed did say that lifetimes of hellish karma would ensue from breaking the vow. How would this affect your actions, and your feelings about his credibility?

Now let's say that you found out that Adi Da said no karmas whatsoever would ensue from breaking the vow. How would this affect your actions, and your feelings about his credibility?

These words, from a reply to Natasha a couple weeks ago, still seem germane. Oh yeah, since Adi Da disclaimers all the stuff in his books, I'm doing the same from now on. Follow me over the cliff of conscience at your own risk.

"FUCK THE VOW"

A Carefully Reasoned Analysis Of Vow-Karma

To whom or what did you take that vow, what was the purpose of the vow, how informed were you when you took it, and what was the reciprocal side of the vow (i.e., Adi Da's supposed vow to you)? You, a person as a whole, whatever complex of ego and Divinity, desire to align yourself with and realize God. Who came first, God or a particular human manifestation? Who vowed what, and to whom?

The hell-karmas of breaking the vow to Adidam are solely within you. Having dealt with them extensively (I am an ex-devotee who has been to Fiji and thoroughly blasted by his darshan), I am pretty sure of this. This is not a "traditional" vow: "traditionally", the guru and disciple are supposed to get to know each other thoroughly. I would strongly suggest that whatever you do, don't act on the basis of the vow, but on the basis of whatever has motivated you to take vows, participate, laugh, cry, doubt, question and wonder in the first place. The only real "vow" is real and present understanding anyway...IMHO.

We all rationalize in ways that justify our actions. I could be wrong. So could the people who rationalize everything that Adi Da does as the actions of an enlightened master. And significantly, we could both be neither quite right nor wrong, but enacting what we sincerely believe to be the path our hearts and minds require of us. Karma is no more or less real for any of us.

JCB

FROM Elias:

Let me add a couple o' cents (or scents) to this session...

All too often religious vows are taken out of idealism, without a clue as to what's waiting out there, in the deep water...

Also, keep in mind that the person who initially takes the vow is, by definition, in a state of separation from "God" or "Guru" or the goal of his spiritual quest...

So, a part of him -- perhaps the most important part -- is already breaking the vow -- that is, holding itself apart from the Guru (etc.).

I took a monastic vow...and about a year and a half into the trip I had an intense dream one night where I felt how deep in my heart there was a "hatred" (as opposed to a "love") that separated me from God. That "hatred" was the core resistance of the ego, the hard nut of "Narcissus" that needed to be cracked...

So who took the vow? And did this one who took the vow know that a part of himself was swearing "you'll never get me dead or alive"??

Now...in the Adidam situation, it seems to me there is a unique opportunity that is squandered -- every person who is asked to take a vow could (and should) actually meet the Guru, sit in meditation with him, even talk to him one on one. Virtually no other guru that I have heard of has played as "hard to get" as Adi Da...

And yet somehow you have these neophytes of the street, with no experience of darshan of any kind, and you expect them to take a vow?

What the hell kind of deal is that?

E

FROM Sioux Marshman:

Pilgrim wrote: A vow is taken after a full "consideration" in which you take everything into account, so that no matter what possibility could arise in the future, you know that this is clearly the right course. That is the basis of making a vow."

Dear Pilgrim: If a 'consideration' takes everything in the future into account, it must by definition take into account the possibility that the vow is taken a) in a delusional context; b) based on a lack of full information; c) that the vow can be transcended in the future (while still being included as a lesser truth).

If, for example, I make a vow to someone who later turns out to be a fraud, then my vow need no longer be applicable. It seems crazy to believe otherwise, doesn't it? All vows are context based, and when the context changes, so must the vow (it seems).

Anyways, maybe you can say more about the vow process that addresses these issues. Thanks as always for your efforts on this forum.
-Sioux

FROM JCB:

Pilgrim,

The next two paragraphs are repetition of what I said before, but I feel strongly enough to have to repeat them. To have to repeat them.

Given all the factors that go into a vow, I strongly feel that it would be a lot better if people at least could see (if not interact verbally) with Adi Da before making the vow. It's really unfortunate that Adi Da feels damaged by people who have not taken a vow (with whatever degree of reality to it). Strange really, for one who by his own confession sees Only-God so profoundly. This one really bothers Carlitos, to put it mildly.

It's really unfortunate, from the POV of Adidam having a shot at being something good. Adidam could get fewer "false positives" (or idealistic vow-takers) and fewer "false negatives" (or people who are serious and would never take a vow without the strong, undeniable revelation of the guru, such as your life-changing experience of Darshan).

Of course, there is Divine justice here, because if Adi Da is misaligned here then he reaps the karma of a misaligned sangha. We have met the lions at the gate, and they are us.

You say "it takes a yes from both sides". This is where Carlitos starts to go crazy. Yes, in his apparent individual bodymindness, the person born as Franklin is not Da. But people are taking a vow not just to the Universal-Heart that they call Da, but to the human teacher. So beyond the level of simply Being the Heart, what are Adi Da's, the meat-body once known as Frank's, roles and responsibilities in this vow process?

Somehow, being generically insulated at the end of a number of "notecycles" does not strike me as sufficient here. Not when as long as he's still into other stuff at a fine level of granularity. That's a bad call, selectively eating owl sandwiches like that.

It is this sort of thing that will tend to make a lot of people say, "okay, Divine Avatar or not, the processitself is so screwy that I haven't a chance. No one else is making it that I can verify, and why is the Divine Avatar so weird-headed about the vow and so much more?" Come to think of it, I could have said those exact words. ;-)

It is good to hear your report of greater receptivity on the part of cultural leadership to the possibility of false vows. Have you observed an actual instances of such a thing happening recently, or are you making your best call based on how things are now to you?

And again, what does Adi Da have to say about this? He's supposedly quite tuned into peoples' practices. It can't escape him that this is an issue. Why doesn't he give some teaching to address the point of possibly having made a false vow? And how about clarifying this hell-karma stuff once and for all? Or has this been done?

hare hari hare heal hara

JCB

FROM Elias:

Dear Pilgrim,

As usual you construe my statements/questions as meaning I have some kind of "problem"...

In fact, my statements/questions are meant to point out that Adidam has a severe "problem" in the area of expecting aspirants to take vows without laying eyes on the Teacher.

Your point about "protecting" Adi Da just doesn't wash, at least not in my Maytag.

Why would one who is "All in all" be afraid of anyone? In fact, as numerous leelas have shown, he is not afraid of much, and will, at times, freely mix with the public, stand up in movie theaters and give speeches, take on Mexican bandits in bars, wear funny hats and hassle stewardesses on airplanes, etc. etc.

His wonderful ability to give public talks, as seen on videotapes, also belies your point.

Taking your "problem" a step further, why do you need to have a written contract before you think you know someone sufficiently to trust them in the vicinity of your guru?

Generally, people who approach your community have read the books, and approach full of sympathy and even longing to meet the Guru. You want them to come already Enlightened -- i.e. fully understanding the 7th stage adept!

Christ, man, even devotees who have been with him for thirty years don't grok that bit yet!

Go back in time a couple of decades...a man named Franklin Jones sat with people off the street, and some of those people responded to him, and he spent a great deal of time with them, befriended them, entertained them, permitted their karmas to merge with his life...

Many of those people are still with him today...in fact, they form the core of his missionary community!

OK...fast forward to the nineties...according to people who have been there, nobody gets to sit with the Man until they have made "full financial disclosures" (handed over tax returns, etc.).

Is that about filtering out "the unprepared"...?

Sorry, Pilgrim, you are a nice guy and I am sure I would like you... But your response to my points about the need for openness and relationship, between the guru and those who respond to him, is just more of the usual sickening Daist apologetics...

If he was to turn around tomorrow and decide to do personal interviews himself, I'll bet a million you'd be right there with "wow...isn't this great! What a revelation of the divine!"

Fact is, anything he says or wants to do is ok with you...and your job is to get your mind to dance to the tune, and justify it to yourself...am I right?

(Sorry for sounding so crotchety... You caught me on a bad day...I'm in a foul mood because the Bulls threw away the opportunity to close out the Jazz in Chicago last night...)

PS: Please don't misinterpret my statements/questions as implying I am dog-hungry to sit with Adi Da and just wish it were easier... that would be a false assumption on your part, again part of the assumption that all your critics are secretly nursing a "problem" or secretly wish they could hang with you homeboys. I think I've made it pretty clear in my posts (as you noted elsewhere) that God is located as close as your own heart...and therefore not to be sought by taking expensive trips to Fiji... No, my "problem" is I have a tendency to notice when the Naked Emperor is avoiding relationship and claiming to be the most relational being who ever existed...indeed the very Essence of Relationship Itself!

Sorry, Frank...you can run...but you cannot hide. ;-)

love, Elias