Dissing the Da Avatar, Part 2

EARLY ADI DA STATEMENTS (BEFORE HE CALLED HIMSELF ADI DA)

“My meditation is absolute. It is what is being reflected to you in these ridiculous conversations. Nor is my existence particular. I am manifested in particular but the confession I make to you is of a condition that is not particular. It is the Avatar in this moment. There could be Avatars all over the yard, you know! I do not know who they are. The Avatar is simply God present, God present and speaking through an ordinary manifestation. (Adi Da in “The Way That I Teach”). 

"There are some people walking around who claim to be the only incarnate God, the repetitive avatar of all the ages, the exclusive true guru, and such things. But they are the least among us" (Adi Da in “The Method of the Siddhas”). 

LATER ADI DA STATEMENTS (20 + YEARS AFTER HIS DIVINE SELF-REALIZATION)

“I Am Adi Da, the Adi-Guru, the Original and Eternal Teacher, here to Complete the Great Tradition of mankind. I Am the Da Avatar, the all-Completing Adept, the First, Last, and Only Adept-Revealer (or Siddha) of the seventh stage of life. I Am the seventh stage Realizer, Revealer, and Revelation of God, Truth, and Reality, Given in this late-time (or would-be Complete and potentially Consummate era) and in this now dark epoch (as it must be described from the Realized Divine and Spiritual "Point of View", and with regard to the tendencies of the times), and Given for the sake of Completion (of the progressive Ordeal of Man) and for the sake of Unity (or the cooperative re-Union of mankind).”

“I Am the First and the Last seventh stage Adept to Appear in the human domain (and in the Cosmic Domain of all and All). It is neither possible nor necessary for another seventh stage Adept to Appear anywhere.”

Note:  Before you proceed with this article, you may want to read the links provided by Adi Da devotee Chris Tong in his comments in response to my post “Dissing the Da Avatar, Part 1.” The links are a Daist attempt to reconcile the apparent contradictions between the early “pre-Avataric” Adi Da and the later “Avataric” Adi Da.

My contention is that there are no Avatars, because an acausal, or “real,” or  “Source,” God -- the Godhead -- is timeless and spaceless, and therefore is always outside of, and therefore uninvolved in, creation. Thus, this “real” God does not intervene in creation by periodically providing mankind with Great Agents. Great Agents manifest as a result of great karma, which enables them to transcend their karma and then point others to the Divine Domain that is prior to and beyond time and space.

The Bhagavad Gita has it differently than I do regarding Avatars, as evidenced  by the following quote from Wikipedia: “An oft-quoted passage from the Bhagavad Gita describes the typical role of an avatar of Vishnu—as bringing dharma or righteousness, back to the social and cosmic order”:
“Whenever righteousness wanes and unrighteousness increases I send myself forth.

For the protection of the good and for the destruction of evil,
and for the establishment of righteousness,
I come into being age after age.” (Gita:4.7–8)

According to the Gita, there will always be new Avatars, but if Adi Da is the First, Last, and Only 7th-stage Avatar, then that means mankind in the future has only lower-stage Avatars to look forward to.

Chris Tong writes, “In short, seventh stage Realization of the Divine is functionally impossible without the Divine Itself entering into conditional existence (via an Incarnation) and creating a ‘hole in the universe’ that bridges the insurmountable ‘barrier’ between conditional existence and Unconditional Existence.”

According to this “logic,” Divine Self-realization was impossible prior to the incarnation of Adi Da. But now that the “hole” has been created, mankind, finally, after a parade of less-than-seventh-stage Avatars for millennia, can fully Realize God.

And, according to Chris, this explains why the great Ramana Maharshi could not have been fully Enlightened. Chris writes:

“Another reason why Ramana Maharshi could not have been a seventh stage Realizer is a functional reason, based on Adi Da’s description of how such a Realization occurs; you can’t transition from the sixth stage of life (which Ramana’s early signs reflected) to the seventh stage of life without the help of a seventh stage guru. (incarnate or otherwise).”

In no way do I buy this Daist point of view, which contradicts what Da wrote in “The Paradox of Instruction,” published in 1977. According to Da in this text, rare yogis who pursued Truth, or the Goal, via the subtle path or causal path, could overcome the inherent limitations of their path and attain “the transcendent Goal of all Godmen.”

In my opinion, the claim that Divine (or seventh-stage) Self-Realization was impossible prior to Adi Da’s “Divine Emergence” is a preposterous attempt to “privatize the Divine,” and I have no regard for it. There is no way for Da to know the State of all past gurus. Virtually all of these gurus lacked Da’s education, access to the Great Traditions, and literary ability. Hence these gurus could not articulate their Realization on the ultra-sophisticated level that Da does his.

I have the utmost respect for Da’s great spiritual teachings (without which I could not have “put it all together”), but I have never been enamored with Da himself, because I never found him to be a transparent, straightforward individual. He could never openly, publicly admit his mistakes or limitations. He should have written a detailed essay explaining how and why his POVs evolved. But the problem he would have run into was: “Well, if he was wrong before, how do we know he’s right now, and won’t change his mind again?” For a regular philosopher this is problematic enough, but if you’re the Self-proclaimed exclusive seventh-stage Avatar, it’s downright daunting – and Da was not up for the challenge.

The sad truth is that Da’s “Avataric” Presence seemingly didn’t particularly Enlighten anyone. I knew, and know, a lot of people who spent a lot of time, over many years, in his company, and I doubt that they’re one iota more Enlightened than if they had never experienced all of their Satsangs with him. My ex-girlfriend, Claudia Bourbeau, married James Minkin, a deeply devoted Daist, and then Ty Koontz, another long-time devotee. And she and Ty ended up leaving Daism for David R. Hawkins. No one with real spiritual insight would opt for David R. Hawkins after Adi Da. In other words, all that time in Da’s company and studying his Teaching didn’t significantly transform and Enlighten them. If Claudia and Ty were the exception, that would be one thing; but they aren’t, and I could add plenty of other names to this list, since I lived in Marin County for a number of years and knew numerous people involved with Adidam (many of whom I did astrology readings for). The fact is, at least 95% of the people who joined the Daist community eventually left it.

I’ve read Adi Da’s writings on diet and politics – which don’t impress me – and I can’t recall his making it clear that his opinions on these subjects are his own as an individual and don’t reflect his unique Avataric status or insight. Or perhaps he believed that his opinions on these subjects did in fact stem from his unique Avataric Realization.

From an intellectual standpoint, I don’t see anyone other than myself (never a Daist) creatively applying Da’s Dharma to explicating and considering other spiritual Dharmas. In other words, Adi Da not only did not “produce” a great Realizer to carry on his Work; he did not produce any great scholars who could argue for his Dharma versus others. But even though I argue for Da’s essential Dharma versus others, I contend that 90% of Da’s Dharma is derivative (and that he made it a point not to explicitly point out wherefrom it derives) – and in Part 3 of this series I will elaborate my contention. I will also address Da’s controversial personal behavior, which, due to the advent of the Internet, effectively damaged his reputation for all time.