Comments on: Adi Da is Dead

By: “I ask that you not make cultic nonsense out of my life” Adi Da Samraj | Cesspool of Madness

Tue, 02 Aug 2011 03:28:33 +0000

[...] January 2, 2009 at 5:10 am [...]

By: kozad

kozad — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 02:11:10 +0000

Da was a good writer. For ten or fifteen years, anyway.

By: Dan Joy

Dan Joy — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 02:16:39 +0000

Dave, you can get in touch with the DC area Adidam community if you like. www[dot]adidamdc[dot]org.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 22:26:06 +0000

I encountered Adi Da in the old Yes Bookstore in Washington, DC. I was looking for nothing in particular and flashed on one book in the entire place, “the Knee of Listening”. Just as I had previously gotten thoroughly into Parahamsa Yogananda’s, “Autobiography of a Yogi” purely by “accident” this book seemed very authentic and interesting. I believe in the divinity of us all so cannot either accept or deny the special powers of Adi Da, but it still seems odd how I found this book. -Dave in DC

By: dziga vertov

dziga vertov — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 08:50:15 +0000

Good riddance to the lousy, pompous, gauche, thoroughly Mafioso spiritual con artist. He abused his gifts, abused his disciples and he abused the great tradition.

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:42:43 +0000

In the summer of 1974 I happened to listen to the tape Garbage and the Goddess while driving in my car to a conference where I were one of the talkers.

I had a realization of being the ME to which all should come. Since then this has been my life. I have let others come to ME. No content is involved, just open eternal space.

It feels funny, so long afterwards to see this long page concerning the death of Jones. But I have absolutely no opinion one way or the other.

Just a feeling: stop cognizing and come to ME.

Tom in Sweden

By: petranandaji

petranandaji — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 22:00:04 +0000

my first thought was ‘so what?’ the Divine Place is not dependent on anything

By: tom

tom — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:34:33 +0000

http://www.strippingthegurus.com/index.html

chapter 20

By: petranandaji

petranandaji — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:07:03 +0000

thanks so much for your reply. has helped me alot already today. please where does this passage come from?

By: Omax

Omax — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:03:00 +0000

MASTER DA: The self must be transcended not because it is some sort of unjustified and unreal entity, a separate actual something that must be obliterated or somehow dissolved. The self must be transcended because the conventional presumption about consciousness has taken the form of the activity of dissociative contraction and is manufacturing otherness and separation, performing, in other words, the habit of dissociation or separativeness.

Therefore, it is not the self as an entity that must be transcended, because even in Enlightenment the apparent self, present as a body-mind in relationship, continues. It is the self as contraction, the self as this knot, this disease, that must be transcended. Yet its transcendence is not a gradual process that ultimately results in Enlightenment, but truly it is a process that must be successfully or fully completed it every moment. The apparent progress of the Way depends on the complete prior success of the process of self-transcendence, which must occur in every moment.

….so, its ok everybody. What is so threatening about this?