“Spiritual” Food For Thought
Updated: 21 hours ago
Do you understand the distinct and unique differences between the process the Dalai Lama describes for choosing a successor and Adi Da's Demonstrated Instructions about how "He" and his function as "Guru" will continue after his "death"?
The Dalai Lama is engaged in a "battle" with China whose leaders have already chosen the Dalai Lama's successor. The Dalai Lama argues that China's leader and governmental institution cannot confirm his successor; only he can. If his successor is not spiritually revealed before his death, he passes this mantle of responsibility on to a group of the most advanced practitioners that were around him, while he was alive, those who are in his own trust.
Present time "Adidam" is involved in its own necessary "debate" among those who were acknowledged throughout all the years as being most advanced and senior.
However, the process Adi Da indicated as to how the role of "Guru" would function after his death is being prevented by institutionalized insiderism in a battle with those whom they consider to be "outsiders".
Regardless of where any "devotee" finds himself or herself, on this spectrum (insider or outsider), all groups are refusing to be accountable. The entire Sangha (recognition responsive collective) of qualified devotees who could and should form a large quorum of maturity are refusing to come together.
This coming together was written in Adi Da's Will. In order to authenticate a True Order of seniority this coming together beyond all boundaries is non-negotiable. A trusted order of seniority has to manifest.
Until there is a True community (large in numbers) of "non-institutionalized" devotees cooperatively agreeing upon who the most matured and trusted senior authorities are, there will be no MEANS that can authenticate (for any devotee or of a collective Order) the SIGNS of growth, maturity, advancement or Perfect Practice and certainly not Full "Bright" Awakening 7th Stage Yoga.
Yet the CHOICE of cultic ego politics are still blocking the "right action" that Adi Da clearly expressed in his Will and throughout his written and spoken instructions. "He" has not died.
Nor are "His" instructions unclear. ALIVE by "His" Presence and Person. Many devotees are ALIVE in the knowledge and embodiment of "His" WILL. Yet the formal institutionalisation that took hold after "his" death is not taking on the responsibility for enabling his WILL to manifest.
