The 80/20 Rule as a Goal
for a Good Framework

No general framework covers everything. For this reason, if the framework we have presented here conforms to the "80/20 rule" — the framework provides 80% of the necessary context for understanding Adi Da's Word, while the remaining 20% must be supplied by special-purpose (e.g., line-by-line) commentary for each specific talk or essay — it will be extremely useful, obviating the need to supply what would essentially be the same general commentary over and over again for each of Adi Da's talks, essays, books, Note sets, etc.

So for example, relative to Adi Da's use of terminology, a generic approach goes a long way: if it's 1978, this is what He meant by the word "God"; if it's 2006, this is what He meant (and in 2008, He typically would use the phrase, "Real God" instead of just "God").

That approach covers a lot of ground, but it doesn't capture everything, because of the immense scope of what Adi Da was covering in His Teaching. While He developed His Own special uses of terminology, and applied terminology with great consistency (indeed, this was one of the primary jobs of His editorial staff: to edit His Writings so that they used terminology throughout in a fashion consistent with His most current use of terminology), nonetheless one can find examples where, in writings from roughly the same period, the same term — for example, the word, "religion" — is used in different senses. (See our article, Is Adidam a religion?, for examples.) A special purpose commentary would be required in a case like this.

So looking at this from an "80/20 rule" perspective, we could hope that a glossary that mapped out Adi Da's use of words and phrases (and what He meant by them) during different periods might provide 80% of the commentary needed to understand the terminology in a particular passage He wrote (from a specific time); the remaining 20% would require special-purpose commentary (as in the "religion" example).