Defining Radhasoami, Ruhani, Sant Mat, Eckankar--a reply to Joseph P.
David Lane
Sant Mat, Radhasoami, Shabd Yoga, and Ruhani Satsang
I liked your review very much Joseph.
In the MAKING, I make those distinctions--between Ruhani Satsang and
Radhsoami Satsang Beas--quite clear.
Clarification is always helpful and I welcome it.
Below is what actually appears in the original text.
One can also review the R.S. Tradition for further distinctions.
Concerning the Theosophical Influence, you may want to ask Daniel
Caldwell for his input.
Chapter Six of MAKING (93 edition):
Chapter Six
LOST ANTECEDENTS
Retracing the Roots of Eckankar
To retrace the teachings of Eckankar to their origin is, in some
ways, to rediscover the actual religious influences upon Paul
Twitchell's own life.
For Eckankar, although it has its basis in many different
religious traditions, is, in the final analysis, a "Paul
Twitchell" creation.
In creating his new movement, Twitchell
drew extensively from his own personal
experiences.
He took grafts (each of varying degrees) from the
many mystical and occult groups he had encountered, finally
blending his knowledge of these traditions into what is
now known as Eckankar--the ancient science of soul travel.
While several movements have had a major impact on Twitchell's
development of Eckankar, three spiritual traditions were
of primary importance: 1) Theosophy, as founded by Madame
Blavatsky; 2) Self-Realization Fellowship, as presented
by Swami Premananda; and 3) Dianetics and its religious outcome,
Scientology.
But of all the religious movements to have an effect on Twitchell's
development of Eckankar, no tradition had as much influence as
the Sant mat tradition of North India.
Twitchell first encountered the tradition through the auspices
of Kirpal Singh, founder of Ruhani Satsang, a spiritual
movement entirely based upon Sant mat.
For more on the Sant tradition, see The Sants edited by
W.H. McLeod and Karine Schomer (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1987).
By knowing of the definite parallels between Paul Twitchell's
teachings and Kirpal Singh's, one can better understand
the context out of which Eckankar was formed.
A brief history of Ruhani Satsang and its antecedents
will better enable us to realize the vast influence
it and the Radha Soami Satsang Beas has had on the creation of
Eckankar.
Radha Soami Satsang Beas
I have only given a gist on the history of the Radha Soami faith.
For a more thorough study, at least genealogically, see my Master's
Thesis, Radhasoami Mat (Berkeley: Graduate Theological Union,
1981).
Shiv Dayal Singh (more popularly known as "Soami Ji") was the
first guru in the line of Radha Soami masters.
He was a follower of Sant mat and had a close association with
Tulsi Sahib of Hathras.
Soami Ji was born in 1818 and died in 1878.
After his death, several of his disciples worked as gurus.
The four main successors were Rai Saligram, who taught within
Agra; Seth Partap Singh, who was the younger brother of Shiv Dayal
Singh and was stationed at Soami Bagh; Gharib Das, a blind sadhu who
settled in Delhi; and Jaimal Singh, who founded the Radha Soami
Satsang at Beas in the Punjab.
One of the successors to Shiv Dayal Singh was Jaimal Singh.
Baba Ji, as he was affectionately called, was initiated by
Soami Ji in 1856 at the tender age of seventeen.
He was a celibate his whole life and was very much
respected for his holy ways.
After serving as a master for over nineteen years, he
passed on the mantleship to his most devoted disciple,
Sawan Singh.
Sawan Singh (known as the "Great Master") attracted
an exceedingly large following to his teachings.
He initiated over 125,000 people into
Sant mat.
He reigned as the master of the Radha Soami Satsang Beas
colony in India for over forty-four years.
A number of books were written during his tenure, the most
important Punjabi work being Gurmat Sidhant (otherwise
known as The Philosophy of the Masters ).
After Sawan Singh died, his mission was carried on by
Jagat Singh (and later Charan Singh) in the Beas colony.
Kirpal Singh, who also claimed succession, started his
ministry, Ruhani Satsang, in Gur Mandi, Delhi.
Ruhani Satsang
The teachings of Ruhani Satsang are almost exactly the
same as those taught by the Radha Soami Satsang Beas;
the differences are slight.
Ruhani Satsang requests the keeping of a spiritual
diary and does not advocate the practice of dhyan
(contemplation) on the physical form of the guru during
meditation.
Radha Soami Satsang Beas does not suggest writing
a spiritual diary, but does advocate the practice
of dhyan
Kirpal Singh explains the essence of Ruhani Satsang:
Ruhani Satsang is neither an intellectual nor scholastic
system of philosophy, nor is it merely an ethical
code of rigid moral virtues, though to a certain
extent it partakes of both. . .
Ruhani Satsang deals with the Science of the Soul or
contact with the Inner Self in man.
It teaches how the Self can be extricated from
the clutches of the outer self. . . .
Kirpal Singh, Ruhani Satsang: Science of Spirituality
(Delhi: Ruhani Satsang, 1970), page 1.
According to Kirpal Singh, Ruhani Satsang is the science of
connecting the individual soul with the "sound current"
(also known as the shabd, nad, or "audible life stream").
This is done by a perfect adept.
Vegetarianism plays a central role in the moral ethics
of the group.
All initiates of Kirpal Singh are pledged to a vow
of vegetarianism, which includes abstaining from meat,
fish and eggs.
In addition to the strict diet, initiates are asked to abstain
from alcohol and narcotics, and to give a minimum of two hours daily
in meditation.
Initiates are also asked to keep a regular diary in order to record
their efforts on the path.
Kirpal Singh died in 1974. He was succeeded by his son, Darshan
Singh, who has established his headquarters in Vijay Nagar, Delhi.
Others have also claimed succession, including Thakar Singh and
Ajaib Singh.
Three things are of elementary importance in the teachings of Kirpal
Singh, as well as in Sant mat and Radha Soami:
1. Satguru , both as the Absolute Lord (nirguna) and the
living human master (saguna).
2. Shabd , which encompasses both varnatmak (that
which is spoken or written) and dhunyatmak (inner spiritual
sound--beyond expression), the primal current of the Supreme
Lord (Sat Purush).
3. Satsang , externally the congregation of the earnest
devotees of the truth, and internally the communion of the
soul ( surat ) with the Satguru and Shabd .
Radhasoami Mat , op. cit.
Julian P. Johnson
The greatest influence the Radha Soami faith, the parent of Ruhani
Satsang, had on Paul Twitchell and Eckankar came in the form of a
book entitled The Path of the Masters .
The work was first published in France in 1939; its author was
Julian P. Johnson.
Johnson, a native Kentuckian and distinguished surgeon, was
initiated into Radha Soami on March 1, 1931.
Julian P. Johnson, With a Great Master in India (Beas:
Radha Soami Foundation, 1971).
The next year Johnson left his medical practice in California
and traveled to Beas, India, in order to serve his
guru,
Sawan Singh.
From 1933 to 1939, Johnson devoted much of his time to writing
about his master and his experiences in the Radha Soami path.
He first helped Sewa Singh in translating the Hindi book Sar
Bachan (prose) into English.
Later, he authored four of his own books on Radha Soami.
Johnson's first work, With a Great Master in India , was
a compilation of letters he had written to Americans about his
first eighteen months in India studying under the master.
His next two books, Call of the East and The Unquenchable
Flame were semi-autobiographical accounts of himself and his
future wife, Elizabeth Bruce.
Yet, it was not until 1939 that Johnson's most famous work, The
Path of the Masters , was published.
The English book was the first its kind; it described in detail the
history and practice of Santon-Ki-Shiska (Sant mat).
The work was Johnson's magnus opus and today is considered a
classic in oriental mysticism.
It should be noted that Johnson never saw the book in its final
published form, as he died in 1939 shortly before it came out.
A number of rumors have cropped up concerning Julian Johnson's
death, and this may be a good place to clarify what actually
happened. Apparently, Johnson got into a fairly heated debate
with a younger friend of his named Paul [not
Paul Twitchell] over health treatments.
During the heat of the debate Johnson either tripped or was
pushed and hit his head on a rock. He subsequently died from his
injuries on the way to the hospital. Since there was some confusion
over what actually transpired (Was it an accidental fall on
Johnson's part? Or, was it an accidental fall caused by
Paul who pushed Johnson to the ground?), there was naturally a lot
of speculation (which led to gossip) about Johnson's death.
Even today some uninformed observers claim Johnson was murdered.
According to witnesses who were in India at the time, though,
Johnson's death was a tragic accident and nothing more.
By 1955, the year Paul Twitchell received initiation from Kirpal
Singh, several books had been published in English about Sant mat
and Radha Soami.
However, it was Johnson's climatic text, The Path of the
Masters which remained the most popular explication.
The book served as a beacon for attracting seekers to either
Charan Singh of Radha Soami Satsang
Beas (who was Jagat Singh's successor) or Kirpal Singh of
Ruhani Satsang.
Twitchell, indubitably, first came into contact with the work in
the mid-1950's, if not earlier.
Although Twitchell does not cite The Path of the Masters by
name or refer to Julian P. Johnson in his writings, he has,
nevertheless, cited another key Radha Soami text-- Sar Bachan --which
was edited by Julian Johnson.
The overall influence that Johnson's books-- The Path of the
Masters and With a Great Master in India , in
particular--had on Twitchell's own spiritual writings is
truly remarkable.
To actually document the effect would itself take several volumes,
for Twitchell not only borrowed and learned from the book, he
also copied it. . . word for word.
Spiritual Shoplifting:
A Question of Plagiarism
The striking similarities between Twitchell's work and Julian
Johnson's earlier writings are astounding.
Three of Twitchell's books, The Tiger's Fang , Letters to
Gail (both volumes), and Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad , appear to
contain almost verbatim excerpts from Johnson's 1939 work, The
Path of the Masters .
Yet, it is Twitchell's 1966 book, The Far Country , which
raises the serious question of his originality.
The work, amazingly, contains well over four-hundred
paragraphs from Johnson's two books, The Path of the
Masters and With a Great Master in India , without so
much as a single reference note to them.
It is likely that almost one-half of The Far Country is
not of Twitchell's pen.
Realizing that it is incontrovertible that Twitchell
was intimately acquainted with Johnson's books (even Eckankar's
former President, Dr. Louis Bluth, admits that he loaned his
Radha Soami books to Paul Twitchell), the real question that
arises is, "Did Twitchell knowingly plagiarize from them?"
Although there are two contrasting viewpoints on this question,
the inevitable answer is: Yes, he did--unmistakenly so.
However, Eckankar strongly disclaims that their founder plagiarized
from anybody.
In a personal letter to the author, dated July 5, 1977, Eckankar's
attorney, Alan H. Nichols, elaborates:
With a wide background of study you will find many similarities
both approximate and exact in many religious statements, history
and mythology.
Whether one is a student of Zoroaster, Mohammed, Buddha, Jesus, or
Tao, many of the same things are said and (when translated) in the
same
way. . . How did you know Johnson didn't obtain his information
from Twitchell or Rebazar Tarzs (sic) or some other common source?
Don't be surprised that many people find the same truths and
even in the same words, commandments, etc., whether they are
concepts, stories of events, or levels of God Worlds or
consciousness.
I should mention here that the purpose of Nichols' letter was
to stop me from publishing my results on Paul Twitchell's
nefarious past. Although I was only twenty-one at the time,
I realized that Eckankar was hiding a devastating truth about
the origins of their group and its founder.
Naturally, I pursued my research with even my vigor after Nichols'
letter, despite the fact that I might be sued for uncovering the
hidden past of "Peddar Zasqk."
Nichols argues that when "truth" is given out from several
different religious traditions, it comes out inevitably "both
approximate and exact" to one another.
However, the criterion of "truth" (be it in concepts or stories) is
not the question involved here.
The charge of plagiarism has not been raised against Twitchell
for his use of similar ideas, teachings, or practices.
Rather, the accusation of plagiarism has been raised because of the
way Twitchell has chosen to describe that "truth."
Julian P. Johnson had his own unique style of writing, as can be
easily noticed by reading his books. Indeed, this very point has
caused some criticism of him.
Thus, when one notices the alarming coincidences between Johnson's
and Twitchell's writings, it is not a question of "truth" being
expressed but of style being copied.
Simply put, Twitchell was a plagiarist of the first degree. He had
a proclivity for literary piracy; he took whatever he wanted from
whatever books interested him. After long research in this area, it
is clear to me that all of the Eckankar books authored by Paul Twitchell
were lifted, to some degree or another, from other copyrighted
texts.
In fact, Twitchell stands out as one of the great religious
plagiarists of the 20th century.
To better understand Twitchell's literary indebtedness to Johnson,
consider the following facts:
1. Julian Johnson wrote all of his books on Radha Soami in
India during the 1930's .
Twitchell authored all of his works on Eckankar in America
during the 1960's and the early 1970's .
2. Twitchell has stated in at least two published pieces that
he considers Sar Bachan (Beas: Radha Soami Satsang, 1933)
to be his "Bible."
The book was edited by Julian P. Johnson in the early 1930's.
Perhaps Twitchell's most revealing plagiarism, and one that cuts at
the very root of Eckankar's claim for legitimacy, occurs on pages
110 and 111 of his book The Far Country . For not only does
Twitchell appropriate the words of Julian Johnson, as found on
pages 32 and 33 of The Path of the Masters , but he also
plagiarizes Johnson's quotation of Swami Vivekananda (given on the
same pages)--forgetting
in the process that two different people are speaking.
The following is a comparison of Johnson's 1939 writing and
Twitchell's 1966 writing:
Julian P. Johnson, THE PATH OF THE MASTERS [1939]
[Johnson is quoting Swami Vivekananda in the following passage;
Johnson, by the way, properly references his quotation.]
Something behind this world of sense, world of eternal eating and
drinking and talking nonsense, this world of false shadows and
selfishness, there is that beyond all books, beyond all creeds,
beyond the vanities of this world--and that is the realization of
God within oneself.
A man may believe in all the churches in the world;
he may carry on his head all the sacred books ever written;
he may baptize himself in all the rivers of earth--still if he
has no perception of God, I would class him with the rankest
atheist.
And a man may have never entered a Church or a mosque, nor
performed any ceremony; but if he realizes God within himself,
and is thereby lifted above the vanities of the world, that man
is a holy man, a saint, call him what you."
[The following passage is directly from Julian Johnson]
First of all, it is not a feeling. Secondly it not a metaphysical
speculation nor a logical syllogism.
It is neither a conclusion based upon reasoning nor upon the
evidence of books or persons.
The basic idea is that God must become real to the individual,
not a mental concept, but a living reality.
And that can never be so until the individual sees Him.
Personal sight and hearing are necessary before anything or
anybody becomes real to us. . . .
Paul Twitchell, THE FAR COUNTRY [1966]
[The Sugmad] is beyond this world of senses, this world of eternal
eating and drinking and talking nonsense, this world of false
shadows
and selfishness.
It is beyond all books, beyond all creeds, beyond the vanities of
the world.
It is the realization of the Sugmad within oneself. . . A
man may believe in all the churches in the world;
he may carry in his head all the sacred books ever written; he may
baptize himself in all the rivers of the earth--still if he has not
perception of the
Sugmad, I would class him with the rankest atheist.
And a man may never enter a church or a mosque, nor perform any
ceremony; but if he realizes the Sugmad within himself, and is
thereby lifted above the vanities of the world, that man is a holy
man, saint; call him what you will.
First of all, it is not a feeling.
Secondly, it is not a metaphysical speculation, nor a logical
syllogism.
It is not a conclusion based upon reasoning, nor upon the evidence
of books or persons.
The basic idea is that the Sugmad must become real to the. . .
The preceding comparisons reveal two things: 1) Paul Twitchell
incorporated Julian Johnson's quotations (in this case, Swami
Vivekananda's elucidation) without giving any reference note
to him or the Swami.
Instead, Twitchell claims that the Eck Master, Rebazar Tarzs, was
speaking directly to him.
And 2) on pages 110 and 111 of The Far Country , Twitchell not
only exposes his outright plagiarism of The Path of the
Masters but reveals that almost all of Rebazar Tarzs' dialogue
is taken surreptitiously from Julian Johnson's writings.
Naturally, the authenticity of Twitchell's account of Rebazar
Tarzs is seriously damaged by such revelations.
Concerning the question of plagiarism, Woodrow Nichols sarcastically
remarks:
It doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes or even a Dr. Watson to see the
resemblance between. . . The Path of the Masters by Julian
P. Johnson and The Tiger's Fang by Paul Twitchell. . .
Nichols and Albrecht, op. cit.
In the case of Eckankar, one might add that it is not an issue of
a Sherlock Holmes undertaking the investigation, it is a problem
of perception, and finally a question of whether or not that
cognition is honest or deceptive.
--
----
dl...@weber.ucsd.edu
email for PGP Public Key
atmas...@aol.com
dLane wrote:
*B*
In creating his new movement, Twitchell
drew extensively from his own personal
experiences.
He took grafts (each of varying degrees) from the
many mystical and occult groups he had encountered, finally
blending his knowledge of these traditions into what is
now known as Eckankar--the ancient science of soul travel.
*E*
Isn't it also quite possible that this knowledge came from the Eck, the
Holy Spirit (in Christianity) or Universal Consciousness (to
metaphysicians) where all knowledge resides?
There is a certain amount of truth in all religions. Yet some religions
or spiritual paths may have answers to certain questions that others do
not. But regardless of this, the truth in religions all come from the
same place. And all religious paths share much of the same truths. It is
very short sighted to say that the truth that any spiritual leader
presents to his followers comes from another path rather than from the
spirit itself. Most don't say that the Pope gets his spiritual
understanding from any other path unless they are Atheists or Agnostics.
People must be connected to the Eck, Holy Spirit or Universal
Consciousness for humanity to have survived all these thousands of years
(or is it millions, I forget which).
Here's a thought which I pondered upon lately. In thinking about humans
in prehistory, I came to the conclusion that they truly must have been
connected to the Eck, possibly even with some sort of open dialog. For
them to have known how to survive the rugged environment, illness and
other aspects mother nature bestowed upon them, they must have had many
inner experiences which taught them which plants to use for food and which
to use for medicine. Without that knowledge, eating the wrong plants
could have completely wiped out the human race, for many plants are lethal
if eaten, and some are good to eat during certain seasons, while deadly
during others.
How would the first women have know what was happening to them when they
first became pregnant, and what to do with the baby after it was born?
Surely the spirit was guiding them, or again the human race would not have
survived.
People must be connected with the Holy Spirit, Universal Consciousness,
the Eck, or whatever you choose to call it. But because of the
complications of life today, it is easy for most people to overlook this
aspect of who we are. Humans have become extremely empirical. Many do
not acknowledge that which can not be experienced through the five senses.
There are just so many distractions that we can see, feel, hear and taste
that titilate the imagination, that many find little time to concern
themselves with that which is not so easily visible.
In ancient times, when life was less complicated, it was easier to
recognize spirit living and moving through all things. Once humanity
achieved that hurdle in their spiritual development, life became more
complicated. This happened to challenge souls to stay connected to their
true selves and the Spirit (or to unfold more of their true selves). When
soul is strengthened enough to remain spiritual amidst all this chaos,
then it is ready for the next step in its unfoldment, on its path home to
God.
To sum it all up, soul is definitly connected to spirit, all souls. And
Paul Twitchell was no acception. However, some recognize this connection
more than many others and can work within this connection to help
themselves and others. In my opinion, Paul was one of those souls despite
the things he may or may not have done that some people disagree with.
Did everyone agree with Jesus?
AtmaSharir
ste...@aol.com
In article <19961201083...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
atmas...@aol.com writes:
>Did everyone agree with Jesus?
Well, it was no fun arguing with him. He had this way of turning
everything back on the inquisitor, you know, like putting a mirror in
front of them.
But to answer your question straight on, no . . . not because they didn't
agree with what he said, either. Most folks just couldn't fathom what he
was saying.
They still can't.
Of course, today it's a moot point, since 99% of his original message has
been processed beyond recognition.
Go figure . . .
Love,
Jay
my5k...@aol.com
You have tried very hard to drive the word/sound "eck" into peoples
consciousness for the purpose of getting them to accept eckankar as a real
religion, especially in comparison to Sant Mat and its various names. I
didn't count how mant times you referenced it in this post but it was
several times. Many of us understood what you were saying when you said
Holy Spirit, and because that is a word that is not too diufficult to say,
what purpose was it that you needed to say the word "eck" so many times?
atmas...@aol.com
My5koshas wrote:
*B*
*E*
Your message stated that you were replying to Joseph P., but I get the
impression that you were referring to my post.
When I speak of what you call the Holy Spirit, I use a different word. I
use what is meaningful to me, and I believe there are those on this forum
that find the word Eck to be meaningful to them. I included the words
Holy Spirit and Universal Consciousness for those who find these words to
be meaninful to them. I wanted to include as many people in on the
message as would like to be. It is in no way my intention to try to sway
anyone to my beliefs or to compare Eckankar to any other path. You
mentioned that I may have been comparing it to Sant Mat. Well to be
perfectly honest with you, I have no idea what that is. I never heard of
it until a week or so ago when I started posting here. If that is your
path, and you find answers there then I am happy for you. I did not mean
to offend anyone here, and I apologize if I did. I enjoy having
discussions about matters of Spirit with people of all religious paths.
Regards...AtmaSharir
\
tuzat...@aol.com
atmas...@aol.com wrote:
>For them to have known how to survive the rugged environment, illness
and
>other aspects mother nature bestowed upon them, they must have had many
>inner experiences which taught them which plants to use for food and
which
>to use for medicine.
Yes A, "better" inner connections. But 'mom' nature does not bestow what
is not created :o)