The Paradox of Instruction (Bubba Free John/Adi Da)
The Truth is Not Within
[My 5-star Amazon review (no date available) of “The Paradox of Instruction: An Introduction to the Esoteric Teaching of Bubba Free John” by Bubba Free John/Adi Da Samraj.]
"The Paradox of Instruction," first published in 1977, is an ultra-esoteric spiritual text for the ages. As I peruse my copy, which I recently received from storage, I marvel at the penetrating spiritual insights of Bubba Free John (a.k.a. Franklin Jones, Da Free John, and finally Adi Da Samraj). The other prominent spiritual gurus of this era - Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (Osho), Chogyam Trungpa, and Suzuki Roshi - dwarfed Bubba Free John in popularity, but he towered above them in profundity.
There are a number of brilliant arguments put forth by Free John in this text, and the most interesting one is found in the chapter The Great Path of Return Vs. the Radical Path of Understanding. In this chapter, Free John differentiates his path from those of the yogis, saints and sages. According to Free John, the paths of the yogis, saints, and sages [Jnanis] are characterized by a search for Truth rather than a radical understanding and direct penetration of the sense of dilemma that motivates the search. From Free John's perspective, even the Jnani's practice of Self-enquiry is exclusive and reductive because it involves the inversion of attention to seek the Self within. According to Free John, Truth is the Condition of all conditions; therefore Truth is no more within than it is without. Thus, radical spiritual life is not about an inward, or inward and upward, journey; rather, it is about directly and immediately standing forth as the Self, the Heart. But paradoxically, even if one's spiritual practice is to stand forth as the Self, the Great Path of Return must (spontaneously rather than strategically) be recapitulated because of the inherent spiritual-anatomical structure of the incarnate bodily-being.
The second argument that blew me away in this book was Free John's consideration of the ego and the `I.' In "The Method of the Siddhas," Free John defined the ego as not an entity, but as an activity of avoidance, the avoidance of relationship. In "The Paradox of Instruction," he elaborates further on the nature and function of the ego. Then he considers the `I' from a unique perspective. He writes:
"But in any case, the Way or practice that is true is not the way of salvation through the reflex of subjectivity, but it is the way of liberation from subjectivity. It is liberation from that very impulse to go within, to find an absolute inwardness that is separable from the outer world. That reflexive impulse of exclusive 'I' is completely false. `I' is the body, `I' is dependence, `I' is not separable from this whole process of arising. It is simply that `I,' since it is only the whole body itself, or the sense of separation native to birth in form, is not the Condition or Truth of the body, or of any of this arising. The true practice is not the way of reductive inwardness and the view `I am not the body,' but the way of relationship, or sacrifice, in which `I' is the body. In that path there arises perfect intuition of of the Condition or Truth of `I,' of all this arising, prior to all separative and subjective or egoic strategies. Thus our awakening in Truth is radical--not conventional. It is not founded in the ego-soul illusion, the illusion of the absoluteness and independence of the self, the subject-sense or subjectivity."
Another major Free John argument in this text is that of Divine Ignorance. Although the Christian mystics, most notably Nicholas of Cusa, originated the Divine Ignorance argument, in "The Paradox of Instruction," Free John elevates it to a more sophisticated level. For example, he writes:
"What is Truth? `I' may find out or know all kinds of facts or truths about any thing, or everything, or the whole world. But I may never discover or know that thing, or everything, or any thing is. No matter how much time passes, or how much knowledge is attained, this fundamental Ignorance can never be changed to any degree."
"The Paradox of Instruction" is not without its problems. First off, it is unconscionable that Free John, later dubbed "Derivative Da," never mentions that he did not originate the Divine Ignorance argument. Secondly, Free John errs when he conflates the Way Divine Ignorance and the Way of Radical Understanding, calling them the same practice. These two Ways are not the same practice.
In summary, if unique, ultra-esoteric spiritual texts float your boat, you'll doubtless find "The Paradox of Instruction" a fascinating and enlightening read.
[My 5-star Amazon review (no date available) of “The Paradox of Instruction: An Introduction to the Esoteric Teaching of Bubba Free John” by Bubba Free John/Adi Da Samraj.]
"The Paradox of Instruction," first published in 1977, is an ultra-esoteric spiritual text for the ages. As I peruse my copy, which I recently received from storage, I marvel at the penetrating spiritual insights of Bubba Free John (a.k.a. Franklin Jones, Da Free John, and finally Adi Da Samraj). The other prominent spiritual gurus of this era - Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh (Osho), Chogyam Trungpa, and Suzuki Roshi - dwarfed Bubba Free John in popularity, but he towered above them in profundity.
There are a number of brilliant arguments put forth by Free John in this text, and the most interesting one is found in the chapter The Great Path of Return Vs. the Radical Path of Understanding. In this chapter, Free John differentiates his path from those of the yogis, saints and sages. According to Free John, the paths of the yogis, saints, and sages [Jnanis] are characterized by a search for Truth rather than a radical understanding and direct penetration of the sense of dilemma that motivates the search. From Free John's perspective, even the Jnani's practice of Self-enquiry is exclusive and reductive because it involves the inversion of attention to seek the Self within. According to Free John, Truth is the Condition of all conditions; therefore Truth is no more within than it is without. Thus, radical spiritual life is not about an inward, or inward and upward, journey; rather, it is about directly and immediately standing forth as the Self, the Heart. But paradoxically, even if one's spiritual practice is to stand forth as the Self, the Great Path of Return must (spontaneously rather than strategically) be recapitulated because of the inherent spiritual-anatomical structure of the incarnate bodily-being.
The second argument that blew me away in this book was Free John's consideration of the ego and the `I.' In "The Method of the Siddhas," Free John defined the ego as not an entity, but as an activity of avoidance, the avoidance of relationship. In "The Paradox of Instruction," he elaborates further on the nature and function of the ego. Then he considers the `I' from a unique perspective. He writes:
"But in any case, the Way or practice that is true is not the way of salvation through the reflex of subjectivity, but it is the way of liberation from subjectivity. It is liberation from that very impulse to go within, to find an absolute inwardness that is separable from the outer world. That reflexive impulse of exclusive 'I' is completely false. `I' is the body, `I' is dependence, `I' is not separable from this whole process of arising. It is simply that `I,' since it is only the whole body itself, or the sense of separation native to birth in form, is not the Condition or Truth of the body, or of any of this arising. The true practice is not the way of reductive inwardness and the view `I am not the body,' but the way of relationship, or sacrifice, in which `I' is the body. In that path there arises perfect intuition of of the Condition or Truth of `I,' of all this arising, prior to all separative and subjective or egoic strategies. Thus our awakening in Truth is radical--not conventional. It is not founded in the ego-soul illusion, the illusion of the absoluteness and independence of the self, the subject-sense or subjectivity."
Another major Free John argument in this text is that of Divine Ignorance. Although the Christian mystics, most notably Nicholas of Cusa, originated the Divine Ignorance argument, in "The Paradox of Instruction," Free John elevates it to a more sophisticated level. For example, he writes:
"What is Truth? `I' may find out or know all kinds of facts or truths about any thing, or everything, or the whole world. But I may never discover or know that thing, or everything, or any thing is. No matter how much time passes, or how much knowledge is attained, this fundamental Ignorance can never be changed to any degree."
"The Paradox of Instruction" is not without its problems. First off, it is unconscionable that Free John, later dubbed "Derivative Da," never mentions that he did not originate the Divine Ignorance argument. Secondly, Free John errs when he conflates the Way Divine Ignorance and the Way of Radical Understanding, calling them the same practice. These two Ways are not the same practice.
In summary, if unique, ultra-esoteric spiritual texts float your boat, you'll doubtless find "The Paradox of Instruction" a fascinating and enlightening read.
