What differentiates this from Adi Da’s pattern is the selflessness of Marpa’s actions. In other words, he does not direct Milarepa to create lavish homes and luxurious circumstances for Marpa, but to build stone temples in distant mountains. Yes, he is very harsh with Milarepa, but clearly not for his own enjoyment or satisfaction (unless, of course, Marpa is simply sadistic). Adi Da, on the other hand, makes the prime directive of his every devotee’s action to be “handling the Guru’s circumstance”, which up to this point in time means donating millions upon millions for everything from lavish homes around the world to extravagant art purchases to evangelizing with the express purpose of getting “people and pazoozas”. This pattern is not in the likeness of Marpa’s, but is far more closely in the likeness of the fraudulent cult leader with NPD. I’m not accusing Adi Da of being a mere fraud, but I am suggesting that it is nigh-impossible not to acknowledge what his pattern most resembles in the annals of spirituality and human psychology.

If you think that this is merely an example of whining and complaining, I would like to know what it is you are afraid of. Why is it that on the one hand you wish to debate these issues, but on the other hand you want anyone opposing your viewpoint to shut up? These are mixed messages which indicate mixed motives on your part.

Now, as for Adi Da openly admitting from the start that he intended to lie and ruin people, I think there is a good point there to be had about everyone taking responsibility for their involvement with someone like that. But does it actually excuse him for doing those things, simply because he warned others in advance? No. If someone warns you that they will kill you if you don’t give them all your money, and you refuse and then are shot, is the robber really not at fault? Perhaps in his own demented mind he will think to himself it’s the victim’s fault, but it isn’t. Sure, it might be stupid to resist an armed robber, just as it might be stupid to enter into a relationship with an NPD cult leader, but it doesn’t relieve either the robber or the cult leader of his responsibility for his actions. The point is that if we are all responsible for our actions, you are right that we have nothing to complain about. But then Adi Da has nothing to complain about either, and we both know that he spends most of his day complaining about one thing or another, often in “emotional trauma”.

The intelligent point is that anyone who has been lied to and ruined by an NPD cult leader needs to take responsibility for their own hurts and sufferings. I’m not an advocate of swishy lawsuits claiming emotional distress and damages, etc. But that is hardly the way for you to win anyone over to Adi Da’s side of the argument. In that case, the responsible thing to do is to admit that one has been willingly duped and extricate oneself from the situation. And of course educate oneself about all elements of the matter so as to learn from it and grow. But where does that leave Adi Da in this discussion? Not in a very pretty position.

One way of understanding Adi Da’s warning that he would ruin people’s lives and lie to them and abuse them and seem to exploit them is that it betrays a fundamental weakness and self-destructiveness that hides in many of us, that even in spite of such warnings we would have chosen to live out that pattern of dysfunctionality. It is potential in everyone, and can be exploited by a strong personality even when openly disclosed. It’s hardly rare, even. The desire to be destroyed and exploited and lied to is quite prominent in human beings, as you mention yourself. On the one hand you feel yourself to be too smart not to see the exploitations of our politicians, but then you turn around and reveal yourself not to be as smart as you wish you were when it comes to the exploitations of Adi Da. Why is it that you don’t excuse our politicians’ behavior as “crazy wisdom” as you do with Adi Da? Clearly, both have evident self-interest at stake in their actions rather than compassionate service to mankind.

The spiritual traditions do indeed tell dramatic stories about devotees going through crises of renunciation and ego-death. Yet those are generally metaphors for the spiritual process, not prescriptions for being exploited and abused by cult leaders. Not that exploitation and abuse hasn’t been a perennial problem in religious history, but that is hardly a point in its favor. The measure of spiritual growth is love, not abuse. It is about freedom, not authoritarian control. There are many, many examples of that kind of pattern in Adepts and their spiritual communities, and it is wholly justifiable to ask why this pattern is not terribly evident in Adi Da or his community.

You mention that enlightenment is very rare and difficult to achieve. I agree. But please explain then what good it does for the enlightened to abuse the unenlightened? Does this really further the process of their enlightenment, or does it diminish it. In rare cases, such as Milarepa, it does seem to have benefit, if the story has any validity beyond legend. But in most cases it does not seem to work that way at all. Certainly in Adidam, there is very little reason to praise Adi Da’s abusiveness. It seems not to have helped a bit, but rather in many obvious and direct ways has greatly hurt the process in most people’s cases, and even in those cases where it may have helped, it leaves a great many questions unanswered as to whether this was the most effective means that could have been used.

The basic line in Adidam that is promoted by Adi Da himself and his closest devotees is that every single action of his is perfect and perfectly compassionate, and that anyone daring to criticize even the slightest aspect of his action as anything less than Divine Help is guilty of the worst kind of egoity. Do you believe this to be the case? One has to ask oneself which is more likely true, Adi Da’s explanation for his behavior or the NPD explanation? It seems very unlikely that both could be the case, unless enlightenment is actually an extreme form of NPD. And perhaps that is the crux of the question: could the utter transcendence of Narcissism actually bear all the hallmarks of an extreme case of Narcissism, or would it not look very different indeed?

Thanks for your consideration, but please leave the personal attacks at home.

This is a good question (that you pose as an analogy that you believe is suggestive of Adi Da’s situation in relation to the “unenlightened” people in the world):

Q:  “If you found yourself in an asylum for the unbalanced where no one could hear anyone else because they were incapable of listening. How would you get anyone to listen?”

I’m not sure of the exact answer to the question, but I know that sexually exploiting such people, making them give me as much of their money as I could get my hands on, making them build me luxurious homes and supporting my every whim would not be the answer. That is a pattern of bondage, not one of liberation. Such people need to be treated with real compassion and loving care, not abused and mistreated. There are asylums where the patients are, indeed, abused and sexually exploited, treated poorly and made to suffer for the amusement of guards and others, but I don’t think that is an effective method of getting such people to “listen”.

Q: “By necessity, you would have to interfere with their habitual patterns that prevent them from even looking up!”“

Yes, you would have to interfere with their pattern, but this is not done by instigating a pattern of abuse and exploitation, authoritarian control and dominance. There was, indeed, a time when such approaches to the mentally unbalanced were once used, but they showed themselves to be fruitless and counterproductive. Authoritarianism has some limited and short-term advantages in restoring the illusion of order to damaged lives, but it cannot heal them or create a positive pattern that replaces the old one. Hence, such people are always falling short and must be scapegoated by those in charge for their failings. And that is the situation in Adidam.

Q: “And how do you think this would be perceived by the general population of inmates that would prefer to stay asleep?”

That would depend on what method was used and the results that were obtained. If the results were a failure, the doctors would probably be considered quacks. Which is of course an appropriate way to judge anyone. Of course, one of the methods of authoritarian leaders is to claim that anyone who judges them negatively is “not awake”, or “does not see the light”, or “is an enemy of the light and the truth.” It’s a shoddy but effective way of negating valid criticism and always redefining reality such that one remains on top and in control at all times.

I have no interest in crucifying Adi Da. That’s a common religious persecution fantasy of cult leaders with NPD, so as much as you are trying to counter that accusation against him, you are actually just digging a deeper hole. I wouldn’t say he’s the worst of us, but he’s not the best either. Another characteristic of NPD is the fantasy that one is either the greatest or the worst of beings, and such people commonly swing from the claim of being the best to the persecution fantasy that others think they are the worst. The fact is, one is neither. The thing to notice is the self-fascination and self-centeredness at the root of both.