Dissing the Da Avatar, Part 1

by L. Ron Gardner

Over the years, I’ve received numerous complaints about my “love affair” with Adi Da (a.k.a. Franklin Jones, Bubba Free John, Da Free John, Da Love-Ananda, et al). People cannot understand how I can unabashedly recommend the spiritual teachings of an “abusive,” “megalomaniacal” guru like Da.

First off, my “love affair” is not with Adi Da; it is with much, but hardly all, of his teachings. Secondly, I think his “abusive behavior” has been grossly exaggerated and that his “megalomania” is partially justified (which I’ll explain in Part 4 of this article).

Although I could not have “cracked the cosmic code” without Da’s teachings, and though I highly recommend most of them, in no way do I think Da is the final word on everything. In fact, if he was still trucking and I could meet with him, here are some of the things I would confront him with:

1) In the original “The Method of the Siddhas” (published in 1973),” Da writes: “the Process I describe as understanding is ultimately the same that Ramana Maharshi was describing. The same state or enjoyment is being communicated or served. It is the same Force or Truth. It is all absolutely the same.”

Then, in “The Paradox of Instruction,” (published in 1977) we find: “In the summer of 1973, Bubba approached the Presence of the late Sage, Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi, at his place of burial in Tiruvannamalai, South India. It was only there and then that the Revelation of Truth to which Bubba’s [Ada Da’s] whole life has been oriented was tested and confirmed as it is... The benign workings of this Grace culminated in the spiritual confrontation at the tomb and former places of residence of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi, where Bubba found the undeniable Realization of his life to be confirmed most directly, beyond all doubt.”

In 1988, I spent a week in the house William Tsiknas was sharing in Kauai Hawaii with my close friend Ritch McBride, also an Adi Da devotee. William was considered Adi Da’s closest male disciple, and I found him to be a nice guy with no pretenses whom I got on well with. William told me various stories about Adi Da, and I asked him about his 1977 trip to Sri Ramana Ashram with Adi Da. William said that Da told him, based on his his interaction with Ramana’s Presence at the ashram, that their Realizations were identical, that Ramana was like his twin. In other words, according to William, there was no difference between Da’s 7th-stage Realization and Ramana’s.

So Da went to Sri Ramana Ashram twice – in 1973 and 1977 –and both times he found no difference whatsoever between his Realization and Ramana’s. Moreover, Da claimed that his 7th-stage Realization was confirmed by Ramana’s Presence.

Now fast-forward to the mid 1990’s, when I, shockingly, learned that Da had changed his mind about Ramana Maharshi and Gautama Buddha. I can’t remember the Adi Da book I read it in, but Da “demoted” Ramana Maharshi and Gautama Buddha, formerly his 7th-stage peers, to 6th-stage realizers. When asked by a disciple why he originally had them as 7th-stage masters, Da’s terse three-word reply was: “I was naïve.”

Even if we accept Da’s audacious claim that Buddha and Ramana weren’t fully-enlightened spiritual masters, his statement raises a few questions. First and foremost, how could Da’s 7th-stage realization have been confirmed by Ramana Maharshi, a “6th-stage master?” If Da, the self-proclaimed 7th-stage Avatar, was wrong about the spiritual status of Ramana and Buddha, what else might he have been wrong about? Finally, exactly how and when, after a couple of decades, did Da overcome his naivete?  Da never answers these questions. As Rand would put it: Blank out.

In Part 2 (which will be posted within a couple of weeks), I will consider Da’s 180-degree shift regarding Avatars. When Da began his career as a spiritual guru, he mocked the concept of Avatars, but then, years later, he proclaimed himself as the First, Last and Only 7th-stage Avatar. This is another bizarre twist in what has been termed “ the strange case of Franklin Jones.”

{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }

Chris Tong August 10, 2014 at 1:03 pm

Ron, check out this article:
http://www.adidaupclose.org/FAQs/contextualization7.html
It explores some of the same issues.

Reply

morgan zo callahan October 19, 2018 at 7:44 pm

Hi, L Ron & Chris. Such a valuable conversation for me. I lived with William Tsiknas when we first bowed to our Spiritual Master. I lived with Bubba & the community from 1973-1979; I’ve recently hung out with William whose stories, art and reflections hold me spellbound. To have such a friend like William is such a Grace. When I’ve visited the MOA, I feel no separation & feel a welcome friend even though I am gladly & respectfully not a formal member

Of course the Master had serious human flaws as did we all as community members. All this spiritual force was pouring through a human vehicle which naturally had hang ups & maturing to do.We made a cult together.

Yet in our Hearts we can intuit the Presence of Conscious Light is always, already available. Somehow in Adi Da’s Company was a lasting initiation into this Light. It’s ongoing.

There are several people like William who communicate Adi Da in a real way, acknowledging the complexity with a feel for the “whole panrama,” including abuses that did occur (& lingering traumas that must be healed). I hope the community can grow & I wish the members well. Another long time devotee, Jim Steinberg ordered your book L Ron. I wrote him the following. Blessings Look forward to any comments.
So happy, James, u are buying L Ron Gardner’s book. For selfish reasons, Look forward to your comments. I find the little I’ve read of him showing Beloved’s influence & wonder what u will discern.

I do not agree with what he says about Ram Dass at the beginning of the discussion. Gardner says Ram Dass doesn’t really practice Be Here Now. Ram Dass was talking with Terrence McKenna on video & at the same time fingering his prayer beads, which Gardner interpreted as Ram Dass not “being here now.”

Teachers have such a strong tendency to compare themselves with other teachers (to announce their own superiority) that they over simplify to make easy target practice. I was a bit put off by this, but not surprised. & it didn’t stop me from seeing Gardner’s writing is valuable.

Gardner gives here an excellent account of Be Here Now (which I believe Ram Dass would resonate with & enrich.)

Reply

L. Ron Gardner October 21, 2018 at 5:53 am

Morgan, thank you for your comment. I met Jim Steinberg in Reno in the late 90s when he was present for a public spiritual consideration with some other spiritual teachers–and I remember him as a gracious, agreeable fellow. And, of course, I enjoyed the week I spent in the same house (Ritch Mc Bride’s) with William Tsiknas in Kahuai in the late ’80s.

Reply

morgan zo callahan October 22, 2018 at 7:43 pm

So great connecting L Ron. Wanted send u & Chris an e-mail exchanged between James & I. Best wishes for your work, writing & life. Chris sometimes it helps just to say concisely in your own words why you may disagree with L Ron. Of course, your scholarly work is also appreciated (even if not completely agreed with). Grateful for this conversation. Best wishes, abrazos

James Steinberg
Sat 9/29/2018, 9:08 PM
morgan zo-callahan writes:
Hi, James. Enough already but wanted to send this last excerpt which I think is important, even though I disagree as you do that Beloved ever mocked other Realizers & also in my heart I feel Beloved truly loved and appreciated the great Realizers. Much love. Thanks for your comments & friendship. Morgan

L. Ron Gardner:
In my estimation, there has been just one teaching-writing guru since Ramana Maharshi who was/is fully Enlightened—the nefarious and much-maligned Adi Da Samraj (1939-2008).

Yes, Da had some serious human flaws, but in spite of them, I fully believe he cut the Heart-knot and abided in perpetual Sahaj Samadhi. I concur with Alan Watts, who wrote of Da: “It is obvious, from all sorts of subtle details, that he knows what IT’s all about . . . a rare being.”

The fact is, being spiritually Enlightened does not necessarily transform one into a saint; and Da’s positive qualities and actions are ignored by those who, outside of full context, focus on his negative behavior, which in my opinion, has been grossly exaggerated. I know people who were insiders in the Daist cult, and the picture they paint of him is one of a gracious and radiant being bestowing Blessings on all.

Although there have been a number of fine spiritual teachings in the past 100 years, in my opinion, two stand out: Ramana Maharshi’s and Adi Da’s. And not coincidentally, I can’t identify any other teaching-writing gurus in the past century who I think were fully Enlightened.
Dear Morgan

this is an excellent little piece

I appreciate it a lot

thanks for sharing it

I have the Electrical Christianity book now

He has a nice bibliography with a great section on Bhagavan Adi Da very intelligent

I see he is in San Diego. Have you visited him? He says that he knows people who are insiders in the Daist cult. I wonder who that is?

Love
James

ps thank you for the birthday greetings

Reply

L. Ron Gardner August 10, 2014 at 2:38 pm

Chris, thanks for your response and the links. I will check out your articles and consider them in mine. This is an important consideration for me, because as I repeatedly make clear in my writings. I am indebted to Adi Da’s teachings, without which I would not have been able to put it all together spiritually to the extent that I have. My respect for Adi Da’s Dharma is made clear in my Amazon reviews (5 stars for The Knee of Listening, The Method of the Siddhas, The Paradox of Instruction, and Hridaya Rosary). I don’t embrace all of Da’s POVs — for example his ideas on cooperative politics (see my two-star review of Not Two is Peace) — but this does not detract from my immense appreciation of his spiritual Dharma.

Reply

Chris Tong August 11, 2014 at 1:50 am

Got it — thanks for the clarification, Ron! I’ll add a clarification of my own . . .

That link I sent:
http://www.adidaupclose.org/FAQs/contextualization7.html
is to an article that details the very systematic evolution of Adi Da’s view of Ramana Maharshi’s Realization, from 1973 through the 1993, and how what may seem a “bizarre” 180 degree shift was in fact the result of a ruthlessly honest consideration, based on a growing understanding of what the lifetime of a seventh stage Realizer must look like. (There were things that Adi Da would learn about the seventh stage of life, and the evidence for it in a Realizer — like the four-phase process of Divine Transformation, Transfiguration, Indifference, and Translation — that He simply didn’t know yet when He visited Ramana’s tomb in 1973, and made His assessment at that time.)

This article also explains why “the first, last, and only seventh stage Adept” is a functional characterization (not a self-promotional status). The work of the seventh-stage Adept is a one-time, history-changing affair: the creation of a “hole in the universe”, making the Unconditional Reality accessible to the conditional reality. Once that “hole” has been created (the “hole” is the Adept), no further seventh-stage Adept is needed or possible, because the “hole” already exists.

Another article on our site:
http://www.adidaupclose.org/FAQs/question10.html
specifically explores the issue you are intending to explore in your Part 2, and shows how Adi Da’s 1974 view of “Avatar” is completely consistent with his 2008 view.

Reply

M. K. Sha August 11, 2014 at 3:35 am

It figures you would find a way to justify “megalomania”…I await that blog post with excruciating anticipation.

Reply

M. K. Sha August 11, 2014 at 3:41 am

Perhaps you believe yourself to be an avatar…but that belief in itself would cancel out the entire possibility of being one!

Reply

L. Ron Gardner August 11, 2014 at 4:51 am

M.K. Sha, you will see that I don’t buy the concept of Avatars. Adi Da acknowledged other Avatars — such as Jesus and Buddha. But these guys weren’t fully Enlightened, according to Da. What kind of God would stick humanity with half-baked Avatars for millenia, and make mankind wait until Da appeared to finally get the whole spiritual “enchilada”?

How did Da determine he was an Avatar? Did God tell him? Da claimed to have created a “hole” between conditional existence and unconditional existence. Such a “hole” doesn’t exist; it has no ontological status. Moreover Da, to my knowledge, has not “produced” a single fully Enlightened being.

Da “cracked the cosmic code” because he figured out how to directly, radically, unite one’s soul (or consciousness) with Spirit/Shakti (or Energy), which “yields” Divine Being, or Siva-Shakti. He deserves kudos for this as well as for his brilliant exegesis of the Enlightenment process relative to one’s incarnational vehicle, meaning the gross, subtle and causal “structures” that comprise a human being.

Does this make him the Da Avatar? Not in my book. It just makes him a great guru for the ages.

Reply

Chris Tong August 11, 2014 at 3:33 pm

Re; “What kind of God would stick humanity with half-baked Avatars for millenia”:
A fundamental part of Adi Da’s communication is that there is no “God in charge”! God is the Source not the Creator. God is all-good but NOT omnipotent. When a Divine Incarnation appears in the history of the universe is not a matter of “God’s Plan” but a matter of the eons it takes for great Spiritual Realizers to finally have a Realization so close to God-Realization that the Divine is enabled at long last to incarnate through the vehicle of that Realizer. That takes however long it takes. . . In principle, it might not even ever happen — in which case, God-Realization would remain impossible for the entire history of the universe.

Re: “How did Da determine he was an Avatar? Did God tell him?”
Knowing that you are a Divine Incarnation (or Avatar) is pretty straightforward, and doesn’t need “God” to tell you: just check your State when you are born, and see if it is the “Bright”! The opening page of The Knee Of Listening communicates this point.

Re: “Da claimed to have created a ‘hole’ between conditional existence and unconditional existence.”
No He didn’t! That’s a misunderstanding of my (unpublished) comment. The “hole in the universe” is a metaphor, not a “thing” with ontological status. (It’s worth reading our articles, and not just reply to the gloss in my earlier unpublished comment, to really understand all the points in depth.) The “hole in the universe” is a metaphor for Adi Da Himself and for all of Adi Da’s Work in establishing the Divine in the conditional existence, and making the Divine eternally accessible to all beings — His human appearance, bringing down the Light, creating forms of Agency, etc.

re: “Da, to my knowledge, has not ‘produced’ a single fully Enlightened being”
We have addressed this issue as well (along with many other FAQs):
http://www.adidaupclose.org/FAQs/advancedpractitioners.html
http://www.adidaupclose.org/FAQs/question4.html

Reply

morgan zo callahan October 29, 2018 at 8:36 pm

Hi, Chris & L Ron, Really appreciate your interplay. As Chris alludes to there are many who have been initiated in a real way into tangible, felt Conscious Light in the Company of Master Da.

Finally read all of the links Chris provided.

Yes, L Ron is right that Da has not produced a single fully Enlightened being….but in relationship to him many are Stream Enterers, tuned into him, into the always, already Light, available in Divine Communion, the Eucharist L Ron says. Many seeds are planted; there’s no going back.

Abrazos from Los Angeles, Keep up your relevant writings & reflections. Morgan

Reply

Keyvan December 23, 2019 at 8:57 pm

Hi Morgan, can you tell me how you would possible know this? “Da has not produced a single fully Enlightened being”?

Reply

Yasu December 17, 2016 at 3:27 am

Hello
Thank yo for your post and amazon book review.
I’m trying to order the book:
The Paradox of Instruction
do you recommend the 2nd~revised or the original version.
Please advise
Thank you
Yasu

Reply

L. Ron Gardner December 21, 2016 at 6:48 pm

Hi Yasu, if the second, revised edition is published before 1980, I’m pretty sure it will be very similar to the original — but you can’t go wrong with the original.

Reply

Keyvan December 23, 2019 at 8:54 pm

I would not have called is a “love-affair” more like a “love-hate” relationship. So its both intellectual and emotional. As the case is with these kind of things, it happens on an unconscious level. In any case by speaking about Adi Da, it does help bring attention to his work and Presence—so its graceful.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: