David Lane article discussing Ken Wilber's hyperbole in relation to Adi Da Samraj
KEN WILBER'S ACHILLES' HEEL: The Art of Spiritual Hyperbole
Author: David Christopher Lane
Publication date: 1996
PART ONE:
Ken Wilber says the following statement about the spiritual teacher
Adi Da (aka Franklin Jones, Bubba Free John, Da Free John, Da Love
Ananda, Da Avabhasa, Satguru Da, and just plain Da):
"This is not merely my personal opinion; this is a perfectly
obvious fact, available to anyone of intelligence, sensitivity, and
integrity: THE DAWN HORSE TESTAMENT is the most ecstatic, most
profound, most complete, most radical, and most comprehensive single
spiritual text ever to be penned and confessed by the Human
Transcendental Spirit. That seems an objective fact; here is my own
personal and humbler opinion. I am honored (even awed) to be allowed
in its Presence, to listen to and Hear the Potent Message of the
Heart-Master Da. How can the soul not bow down to such a Message?
What other is the appropriate response? How can I not say what I am
saying? How, in the face of such a Testament, can we possible
justify neglect?
"At the very least, it is perfectly obvious that there is now no
excuse whatsoever for any intelligent and spiritually-minded person,
of whatever persuasion, not to be at least a student (or one who
simply studies the Written Teachings) of Master Da Free John. The
days of denial are over; this nonsense of neglect cannot continue,
with any rational reason. I ask my friends, my students, my readers,
even my casual acquaintances, to see and recognize and--above
all--confess the Realization that Master Da is.
"I do not understand why so many thousands of people--who have
heartily expressed to me the opinion that my own written works
express great clarity, judgment, and understanding--balk and look in
disbelief when I speak ecstatically of the Heart Master Da. It is as
if my friends believe everything I say except that Master Da is a
genuine Adept, Free at the Heart, Confessed in Radiance,
Transcendent to it all. How has my judgment suddenly lapsed in
regard to this Man? I am as certain of this Man as I am of anything
I have written--in fact, as certain as I am of my own hand (which
apparently claps by itself in solitude when it comes to this Great
Issue). So I make only one request: if you do only one thing to test
my judgment in this matter, please read this DAWN HORSE TESTAMENT
cover to cover (and I mean cover to cover), and then I will be glad
to argue with you if you still wish--but not before. And, I think,
we will then see who the Master of the Heart really is. Is that not
fair? Read this Man, Listen to this Man, Hear this Man, then See
Him. And then, I think, you will stand Smiling.
"What else do you really want? What else can I say?"
[KEN WILBER, WAXING ABOUT THE GREATNESS OF DA AND HIS BOOK THE DAWN
HORSE TESTAMENT]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Yea, right, Ken.... By what yardstick? Herpes transmitter? Fat boy
chronicles? Amyl Nitrate addiction? Wife Beating? Dildo
Predilection? Capitalization Freak? Purveyor of Other People's Wives
and Girlfriends? Muktananda's Letter Successor? Crazy Wisdom and
Let's Smoke, Drink, and Party While My Disciples Fast? Porno
Production Coordinator? Urine Drinker? Get Pissed When My New
Girlfriend Leaves? Perpetually Out of Money, but Hey Donate To My
Name? Biography Evolution--Only the Facts will be Changed? Settle
Lawsuits Out of Court Guru? Mentally and Physically and Sexually
Humiliate Female Disciples? The Pouting Master--Geez, Why Doesn't
Anybody Listen to Me? Why Don't They Believe I am God?
Oops, I got carried away there (by the way, every one of the
previous statements I just slandered Da with have a documented
source: see Scott Lowe's "The Strange Case of Franklin Jones" or the
numerous exposes' of Da in the San Francisco Chronicle [1985 was not
a good year for Franklin/Da]).
Okay, I think you can see why Wilber has been accused of gross
exaggerations, especially in light of his praise of Da Free John. But
let's be systematic and let's see why Wilber's commentary is mostly silly
puffery.
1. Wilber says that THE DAWN HORSE TESTAMENT is, in essence, the
greatest spiritual book of all time. Well, he does not know this.
What he does know is that of all the thousands of books "he" has
read in his lifetime (sorry previous reading in previous lives
doesn't count here), he is most impressed with this text by Da.
That's an important difference, and not just some trivial pettiness
on my part. Indeed, I have been guilty of the same indulgent
hyperbole in my book reviews in FATE in the mid-1980s (see the New
Age in Review), but such stupid leaps of praise should be pointed
out. Thus, Wilber would be more honest, more precise, and more
believable if he simply stated, "Hey, this is the best book 'I' have
read."
2. Just by way of contrast, having read THE DAWN HORSE TESTAMENT
myself (cover to cover, as Wilber implores), I was just not that
impressed. I like Da's books as well and for my money I think the
PARADOX OF INSTRUCTION is a much better book: tighter, more focused,
and a lot fewer irritating capital letters to distract the reader
(sorry Da, but your postmodern attempt at revamping English doesn't
work for me; try the internet and hyperlinks.)
Thus on even this score, since I have read almost every available Da
book since 1973, Wilber's "ontological" statement about THE DAWN
HORSE TESTAMENT being the greatest is suspect. And I am reasonably
certain that I am not alone in this regard (Why else would Wilber
vent?).
3. Wilber continues in his praise and says that the book's greatness
is a perfectly obvious fact." No, actually, it seems like a subjective
opinion and one which Wilber is naturally entitled to, but to then
hype his opinion and skirt the issue of objectivity is arbitrary and
sophomoric. If Da's writings are indeed so "amazingly true" then
Wilber's endorsement adds zip to the argument. In surfing parlance,
a thirty foot wave at Pipeline (i know such beasts are rare....
let's say twenty foot) doesn't need a testimonial. When it arrives,
you get worked. It has an objectivity to it that is empirically
verifiable. Wilber, on the other hand, has simply been impressed by
a book, which if his analogy were correct, should be similar to the
wave at Pipeline. But it is not. Why? Because the claims that Wilber
makes about Da have yet to be verified (I wonder if they can be
verified at all?). Instead of limiting his praise to the realm of
opinion, Wilber argues that he has somehow tapped into the spiritual
attainments of this man.....
As I mentioned to Wilber in print and in person (I first wrote the
Paradox of Da Free John back in 1985 as a direct response to
Wilber's hype) just because one writes well does not mean by
extension that he is an embodiment of the highest truth or
realization. He could be quite the opposite. Wilber repeatedly
confuses the message with the medium, believing that if someone
writes well or beautifully or transcendentally that he/she is a
Master by virtue of it. Well, given that modus operandi, then Alan
Watts was an enlightened being (just tell that to his ex-wives and
his drinking buddies in Marin County). No, Alan was a good
writer.... Just like Wilber is a good writer. But that does not make
Wilber enlightened.
Simple mistake, no doubt, but a devastating one as well.
4. Wilber expresses wonder at how his numerous fans balk at his
praises of Da Free John. I am not surprised. I don't even think
Wilber is surprised. If Wilber really believes that Da is the
greatest spiritual master of all time, then why did he refuse to do
Da's official biography? A job which would have allowed Wilber
direct access to Da for a long period of time. In private
correspondence with me (and in person), Wilber has admitted that
"Da is a fuck-up" (his words, not mine).
Do I see any indication of that in Wilber's overly-enthusiastic
gushes? Yea, there it is, Da is the Supreme Avatar of all time,
but he is also a major fuck-up...... Talk about Paradox!
In more simple terms, if Wilber really believed what he was saying,
then I would venture that he would want to "hang" with the Supreme
one. But guess what? He has only occasionally seen the Big Boy.
I mean if you are going to read this guy's books, you are going to
express your absolute awe at his being, then take the next logical
step and become his disciple (Wilber told me he was a "friend" of
the group--a non-committed involvement).
Now I am sure Wilber has lots of reasons, but I would suggest that
those reasons should be broadcast load and clear. Could it be, as
Wilber has told me in conversation, that Da surrounds himself with a
bunch of sycophants? Could it be that Wilber does not condone Da's
continual sexual interplay with numerous female disciples (The great
Da is reported to have had a least 100 sexual encounters since the
1970s with his female devotees; my source on this, lest I be accused
of inflating figures is from a soon to be published essay by a
former follower of Da. I have cut his figures in half, just to be
conservative.) Could it, in fact, be that Wilber sees in Da the
egotistical just as much as the transcendental? Wilber has confessed
that Da has a proclivity for pouting, for trying to legitimize, for
trying to justify, and for trying to place blame on others when in
truth much of the blame should be placed directly on his shoulders
(i am tempted to say penis, but ah well)......
It is strange for me to say this, but Wilber is quite naive.
Naive in interpreting a guru's status; naive in thinking that
writing is somehow reflective of one's inner attainment; naive in
thinking that just because he knows lots of maps, has meditated, and
has a good reputation, that he somehow "knows" and is "certain" of
Da's ontological status in the known and unknown universe.
It is just plain silly. I don't know, in truth, any body's ultimate
spiritual status. I don't even know how to give directions to El
Cajon, much less to the fabulous inner region of Sahans-dal-Kanwal.
To be sure, I have read lots of books and talked to lots of gurus,
but I "don't" know.
And, Wilber doesn't either, and if you push him on it (I did when we
met), he admits that there are many things about Da that are
"funky."
So why not just say, "hey, I really get a lot out of his books." Who
knows about the guy, but his books are cool. Or, if you
really do like Da and the impression he gives you in public
audiences, then say, "yea, I liked his vibe." (whatever that means).
Yet, instead we get this disguised reprimand, as if we were the
Pharisees who didn't recognize Christ when he was alive.
Well, I know very little about who Jesus may or may not have been,
but I can tell you this: I don't think he took amyl nitrates when he
had sex with his female disciples; i don't think he forced his
disciples to make a "porno" movie; I don't think he had his
disciples sell his dildo collection in Berkeley; I don't think he
beat his wife; I don't think he got sued for transmitting herpes to
one of his female devotees; I don't think he lived on Raymond Burr's
old island? (hey, Ironside was a good show.... watch what your
criticizing, Lane)