5. Disaffection and the Scapegoating Ritual

This is Part 5 of Michael Costabile's seven-part article, The Call To Be Love: (And To Live As Love In All Relations).

This brings us to a critical point in our discussion: For some time, a small group of former members of Adidam have been working to discredit Adi Da on several Internet sites. Much of what is said or alleged by this group is simply not true and does not, in its sheer spite and malice, warrant serious consideration or response. Indeed, most of what passes on the Internet for responsible “accounts” and cautionary “warnings” about Adi Da is part of a calculated effort by this group to discredit Him.

However, my own firm conclusion, based on all that I have seen in Adi Da’s company over more than thirty years, is that the underlying reason for such reactivity and disaffection is not some wrongdoing or misstep on Adi Da’s part, but the simple fact that some people were dissatisfied with their experience in His Company. Or, to put it more precisely, on the one hand, they did not get what they wanted or expected from Adi Da, and on the other, they received far more than they bargained for!

When ego-bound (and self-protective) individuals become mired in reactivity, they cannot vulnerably feel the damaging impact of their reactivity on others. The nature of Adi Da’s Self-Submission was (for Him) difficult in the extreme — not only because He suffered the abuse of devotees’ reactivity, but because he made a total and unguarded Submission to them in the very face of it. He once remarked in the midst of this ordeal:

Moreover, by reaction, devotees resorted to scapegoating Adi Da, targeting Him as the “man-in-the-middle” and blaming Him for their unhappiness and disappointment. Indeed, all His devotees have done this to one or another degree. And all are called by Adi Da to observe how egoic reactions inevitably become the scapegoating game. This is a principal lesson for humankind as a whole about how the ego actually works.

There are countless scenarios attached to this dynamic. But whenever Adi Da worked with emotion and sexuality in specific, the pattern took on a predictable form: women tended to approach Adi Da (and, indeed, all men) as “daddy” or “lover”, competing with other women, especially for a (presumed dominant) male’s attention. In relation to Adi Da, women often rejected and betrayed others, including their intimates, for access to Him. Meanwhile, men tended to approach Adi Da (and all male “others”) — not only as “daddy”, but as “rival” and “opponent” — competing (in the case of Adi Da) for victory over Him in the games of life, including the “conquest” of the female. As Adi Da describes this dynamic:

In the history of Adi Da’s Submission Work, this was a constant theme (with variations, based on the unique emotional patterning and sexual orientation of each individual). In the end, it is the “man-in-the-middle” who is targeted by this ego-dynamic — at first adored, then rejected, punished, and persecuted — simply because one’s desires are not satisfied and one’s egoic aims unfulfilled.

Adi Da endured a great deal of abuse from those who projected onto Him the very negativity and darkness of heart they could not confront in themselves. None of this is pretty to observe, but in the history of Adi Da’s Self-Submission Work, such dynamics emerged with clockwork regularity, revealing universal archetypes of egoity hidden beneath each person’s outward persona.

In the distracting theatre of such interactions, devotees tended to forget that Adi Da was always only working to serve their ultimate Freedom and Happiness, prior to the ego’s loveless patterns and tendencies. The testimonies of Frank, Katsu, and Eileen speak for themselves of the integrity and impact of this Work. And I myself have witnessed countless exchanges between Adi Da and His devotees — always with Adi Da’s purity of motive clearly discernible to others present.

Therefore, I am certain from my own experience that in every “controversial” exchange between Adi Da and any one at all, He was working to reveal something painfully ugly, yet unmistakably true, about an individual’s faults and falsehood. And this was never done merely for the sake of exposing such things. Rather, it was a labor of immense generosity — done to unburden individuals of their suffering, their patterns of unlove and unhappiness. More fundamentally, it was to enable them to realize the nature and condition of Reality Itself, beyond all illusions and limitations.

One must be clear about the reactive dynamics of scapegoating to appreciate such an undertaking. To attack Adi Da with accusations or distortions of incidents (that are subject to entirely benign and profoundly illuminating understanding) is a subterfuge. I know from dealing with my own reactions to Adi Da that the ego would exact a consolation prize for failing the lessons and tests (and for resisting the help) inherent in such direct exchanges with Him. To candidly confront one’s own limitations is painful and difficult no doubt, but it is absolutely necessary for human growth and true spiritual awakening. In Adi Da’s words,

To summarize here: It is far easier to react and retaliate than to endure the stark revelation of egoity reflected to individuals in Adi Da’s Company. This is so even when that revelation and the changes indicated thereby are the very means for overcoming a false (and profoundly suffered) life-pattern. Therefore, it is clear to me that the real reasons for attempting to discredit Adi Da are not in the Work He undertook with devotees, but in the reactivity and retaliation of those who refused the very help they were asking for in approaching Him to begin with.

The Culture of Anti-Gurism

In their outspoken hostility toward Adi Da, detractors intentionally capitalize on the prejudice against all Spiritual Masters within the broader culture. There is also the now-ipso facto presumption that any Master who associates intimately with devotees (or works harshly with them) is inherently false. But such prejudices run precisely counter to the stream of authentic Guru-traditions and the reports of disciples throughout history. To provide a modern example, here are the comments of Pema Chodron (a well-known Western-born Buddhist monk) on her trying discipleship with the late Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche (given during an interview for “Tricycle Magazine”):

There is a tacit authenticity to such a confession, just as there is to the accounts given earlier by Adi Da’s devotees. Nevertheless, by playing to the popular bias against Spiritual Masters and by employing other “spin” tactics that exploit the media-driven attitudes toward sex and Gurus in popular culture, some former members continue their efforts to discredit Adi Da. I would offer that their “methodology” hinges on several factors:

• the double-minded and problematic disposition toward sex in the common world
• the moralistic taboo against any free and open consideration of emotion and sexuality
• the prejudice against any Spiritual Teacher who engages in sexual play with his or her students, regardless of the circumstance, context, or expressed purpose in doing so
• the antagonistic reactions toward Adi Da Himself for taking a no-holds-barred approach to examining the full range of emotional-sexual patterning with His devotees, irrespective of conventional rules and expectations about sex, intimate relationships, or anything else related to the common order of everyday life

By these “standards”, Adi Da’s emotional-sexual consideration with devotees is vulnerable to tabloid-like distortions that obscure the underlying integrity and virtue of such an undertaking. In actual fact, a number of those actively posting negative internet comments were once among the most enthusiastic “insiders” among Adi Da’s devotees — actively competing for His attention and for the presumed “glamour” of being intimately associated with this “wild” and “free” being. (Many of them have acknowledged as much in their private exchanges with other devotees.)

In the course of His Submission Work, Adi Da indulged all to a point, in order to Teach them. Invariably, however, He would deliver the hard and challenging lessons — often with the devastating impact of a “direct hit”. He would, for example, skillfully expose the “hidden script” of petty selfishness and negativity behind an individual’s outwardly positive social persona. In doing so, Adi Da exhorted devotees to accept His criticism and the inevitable loss of face that attends such humbling self-knowledge. But He would also indicate the responsible changes in life and practice that served the transcendence of such patterns. About this He writes:

The process that leads to real spiritual liberation cannot be approached frivolously, with expectations that have as their underlying motive (however cleverly masked) one’s own self-promoting ends. Spiritual life in the Company of Adi Da requires (and in fact is) the actual undoing of egoic tendencies — directly and unequivocally. There is simply no way around this or the humble, face-losing process that attends it. And so Adi Da has given clear warnings to this effect from the very outset of His Teaching-Work. As early as 1974, he openly cautioned one and all: “Do not approach Me if you are not willing to be undone. The Guru is only interested in the ‘radical’, utter dissolution of that whole limitation that appears as His disciple.”

He expresses this warning forcibly for good reason. Spiritual practice in His Company is full of tests and ordeals of every conceivable kind. But while Adi Da fully accepts responsibility for establishing the requirements for true spiritual awakening in the case of every one who resorts to Him, all are free to decide for themselves what of His Teaching and Person they will avail themselves of at any given time. This has been a great and humbling lesson in my own practice with Adi Da. Therefore, I do not take issue with any one who has suffered difficulty and disappointment in their own experience with Him. I simply speak to the other side of the picture, knowing full well that there have been no “innocents” or “victims” among those who approached Him.

Adi Da has consistently upheld the God-Realizing purpose of His association with devotees, and all have been free to participate or not in the various forms of consideration and theatre He has introduced to serve this realization. Therefore, His Teaching-Work and Self-Submission to devotees must be viewed in the total context of His Divine Revelation to all. Then its necessity and rightness are made plain and unequivocal.

6. The Paradoxical Conclusion Of Adi Da's "Self-Submission" Work

FOOTNOTES

[1]	An Open Letter To All Who Would Find Heart-Breaking Freedom (available on this site) is a slightly older version of this essay