Eckankar and Sant Mat
Steve
Much has been written on this newsgroup about similarities between
aspects of Eckankar and Sant Mat. It is true that both teach about the
Light and Sound of God. That, in itself should be sufficient. I agree
with Charan Singh in that this is better in either case than secular
writing. Both paths bring people closer to God and this is, IMHO a very
good thing.
But there are differences and they sometimes lead to conflicting points
of view.
I recently met a man from northern India whose family follows Satsang
Beas. He, himself, is not particularly religious. The thing that most
impressed him about Satsang Beas is the organization, the buildings and
the way that visitors from the west are catered to when they arrive at
the airport. I have been looking at Julian Johnson's books recently.
Way back in the 1930s he too was impressed by the Sant Mat
organization. His books are replete with pictures of the buildings
supported by the religion and mention of the social services.
Eckankar, does not, at this time, have any similar such programs in
effect, nor any plans that I know of for anything similar. This is
neither a good nor bad thing, just a difference. It may be that someone
coming from a more traditional religious background may see this as a
failing on Eckankars part, while someone else may see it as a problem
with Sant Mat. I suspect that most of us will just see it as a
superficial difference.
One big difference between Eckankar and Sant Mat is the degree to which
one the chela is expected to adore the Master. Students of Eckankar
are actively discouraged from becoming too attached to the personality
of the Living ECK Master. For Julian Johnson, David Lane and Sant Mat,
adoration of the Master is essential. This can be seen today in Lane's
writing about his continuing affection for Charan Singh. Even when he
no longer follows the teachings of Charan Singh, the attachment to the
man endures. There is nothing *wrong* with this, but I think that it
may be part of the reason for Lane's confusion about the importance of
his writings on Paul Twitchell for most Eckists. Eckists are taught that
no one in the human state is perfect, not even the Living ECK Master.
If Paul copied from Julian Johnson or if he didn't is inconsequential.
It is how we can use what he copied or wrote himself that matters.
This may be why issues of succession and personality weigh so heavily in
Lane's writings, but are so inconsequential to most Eckists.
I also do not know of any Eckists who have dedicated their lives to
disproving Sant Mat.
Finally, it should be mentioned that Eckankar is not in any way an
offshoot of Sant Mat. It is a different religion with different
origins. Paul Twitchell studied Sant Mat for a time, but he also
studied many other faiths and used writings from them all to get his
point across.
Any thoughts?
Steve
Dean Cooper
Steve wrote:
> One big difference between Eckankar and Sant Mat is the degree to which
> one the chela is expected to adore the Master. Students of Eckankar
> are actively discouraged from becoming too attached to the personality
> of the Living ECK Master. For Julian Johnson, David Lane and Sant Mat,
> adoration of the Master is essential. This can be seen today in Lane's
> writing about his continuing affection for Charan Singh. Even when he
> no longer follows the teachings of Charan Singh, the attachment to the
> man endures. There is nothing *wrong* with this, but I think that it
> may be part of the reason for Lane's confusion about the importance of
> his writings on Paul Twitchell for most Eckists. Eckists are taught that
> no one in the human state is perfect, not even the Living ECK Master.
>
I obviously can't speak for Lane, in regards to his relationship to Charan
Singh. I can speak about my experience with Kirpal Singh.
Kirpal Singh never demanded that anyone worship him. In fact, he frequently
would say that he was just a man, like any other, and that the important
thing was to do simran and bhajan, open the third eye, and consciously rise
into the higher worlds.
On the other hand, one look from his eyes could nearly knock me over. The
spiritual force emanating from him had an intensity that felt physical.
Sweet currents of love would sweep over me, tears would flow, heart would
break from fullness, to be filled again from within. This brought about deep
devotion to him.
Sure, most anyone can sit and meditate, and experience light and sound. It
is a natural, God-given ability, I would say. But I firmly believe that it
requires a Shabd-guru, to be hoisted up and flung far from the shore of the
body, deep into the river of Naam.
If you find a guru who gives you this, you will have at least a deep and
abiding love for him, for that guru is the human pole through which the
Divine in yourself is revealed.
Dean
"From a hidden flower, sweet nectar drips,
with each honeyed drop, a torrent of bliss.
The lotus of the mind turns upward,
this ambrosia to receive,
Measure upon measure, to fill the heart's need.
A rare cup from my lord's tavern, indeed!'
Nathan Zafran
Dean Cooper <dgco...@ais.net> wrote:
>I obviously can't speak for Lane, in regards to his relationship to Charan
>Singh. I can speak about my experience with Kirpal Singh.
>Kirpal Singh never demanded that anyone worship him. In fact, he frequently
>would say that he was just a man, like any other, and that the important
>thing was to do simran and bhajan, open the third eye, and consciously rise
>into the higher worlds.
That may be so, but as a former disciple of Kirpal Singh, in the 2
years I was his chela, I found literally all his disciples worship him
exactly the way Christians worship Jesus. I was rather turned off from
this, because they made the whole path of Surat Shabda Yoga a path of
master worship.
>On the other hand, one look from his eyes could nearly knock me over. The
>spiritual force emanating from him had an intensity that felt physical.
>Sweet currents of love would sweep over me, tears would flow, heart would
>break from fullness, to be filled again from within. This brought about deep
>devotion to him.
Any master who reaches a high level even of the lower worlds can
emanate these kinds of vibrations. It is very common for yogis to do
this. These masters know full well the effect of opening up their
auras will have on their disciples, in the sense that it will
mesmerize them, and give the master complete power over them. In
certain cults, this has caused a lot of havoc amongst the disciples,
and led to unnatural acts between the master and certain disciples,
often with regards to sexual deviation with thee opposite or same sex,
or in the case of, for example Bagwhan Shree Rajneesh, has influenced
hundreds of people to donate all their worldly posessions to him,
making him extremely wealthy with dozens of fancy cars, etc.
To allow one's aura to dominate the chela in this manner might make
the chela swoon with ecstasy and experience some heightened levels of
consciousness temporarily, and even help the chela have some more
ecstatic experiences in meditation or contemplation, but, ultimately,
it leads to dependence on the master's personality in order to
continue making progress on the path. This is not an act of kindness,
but an act of control.
The Eck Masters have, at times, for example during major seminars, had
a momentary impact on certain chelas who may have been in their
presense or experenced the master's gaze, and may have had a beautiful
experience, but this effect usually lasts but a short time, then fades
away, leaving the chela better off for the experience, but totally
non-dependent from the master. This, to me, is an extreme act of
kindness of the Eck Masters who could easily let their auras expand to
the point where they will mesmerize anyone in the room who is in their
presence. They have learned how to control these emanations to the
point where they can walk into a crowd of strangers to Eckankar and be
totally invisible.
Having been such a yogi in my previous incarnation in India, I know
fully well how one can exert influence on another by opening up one's
aura to one's disciples. It got me into a lot of trouble which I am
not at liberty to talk about here. Suffice it to say that I will never
ever follow any guru who makes me swoon with ecstasy.
I have met disciples from other Sant Mat paths over the years, and,
without a single exception, all of them exhibited exactly the same
mannerisms as the chelas of Kirpal Singh. All they could talk about
was the master said this, the master did that, etc.. Like they were
all hopelessly in love with the master. His presence totally dominated
their lives. Their personalities were, in a sense, lost in the
personality of the master. I noticed a distinct loss of
individuality, self- expression and creativity outside of the general
teachings of the guru.
That very fact makes for a massive difference between all the Sant Mat
paths and Eckankar.
>Sure, most anyone can sit and meditate, and experience light and sound. It
>is a natural, God-given ability, I would say. But I firmly believe that it
>requires a Shabd-guru, to be hoisted up and flung far from the shore of the
>body, deep into the river of Naam.
The Mahanta helps Soul to leave the body, especially at night, to
study in the temples of Golden Wisdom at the various planes (there are
12 major temples, located in all the different planes, below and above
the soul plane), a well as assisting Soul to soul travel during
contemplation. However, Soul is hardly aware of this most of the time.
The master power of the Mahanta charges the mantras that are sung,
like the Hu, and make these words more effective than the normal
ability of these words to elevate the consciousness. It is all done in
such a way as not to distract the student, who might end up being out
of balance if his awareness of the power of the inner master were
fully known. This way, the student of Eckankar is able to function
perfectly well in the outer worlds, working a full day, raising a
family, not having to spend more than 20-30 minutes of contemplation
a day, and not having to give up sex or eat a vegetarian diet. In
other words, being a fully functional citizen of the world. Chelas of
Sant Mat paths, on the other hand, have to meditate a minimum of 2
hours a day, abstain from sex, be a strict vegetarian, and keep some
kind of record of all their thoughts, words, and actions, trying all
the time to live a perfect life. As a result of this lifestyle, many
Sant Mat practitioners choose to live a rather withdrawn lifestyle,
being more reclusive than the average Eckist.
>If you find a guru who gives you this, you will have at least a deep and
>abiding love for him, for that guru is the human pole through which the
>Divine in yourself is revealed.
In Eckankar, that function is also revealed, but not in the body of
the outer master, but the inner master, the Mahanta, which is not a
person, but a manifestation of the supreme creator taking on the form
of the outer master. This concept is not the same as in the Sant Mat
paths, where the inner master is understood to still be the
personality of the outer master, but in a radiant form. Big big
difference!
Some still find the Sant Mat paths more suited to their tastes. For
me, I'll take Eckankar anytime, having tried both. I also happen to
like good sex and good meat.
In Eck,
Nathan
Steve
Dean,
Thanks for this. I agree that one often cannot help but feel strong devotion to
one's spiritual guide. It is truly a wonderous and great thing that they do for
us. I cannot express how grateful I am to Harold Klemp for his service, and for
what he has done for me personally. I am merely going on what I have seen
written and heard said by the devotees of various groups. I am grateful that in
Eckankar we are discouraged from following the man, and encouraged to follow the
inner Master. This is not to say that there aren't Eckists who *worship* Sri
Harold or that there aren't followers of Shabd Yoga who know when to let go of
the personality of the Master. I just think that this difference may account
for some of the misunderstandings here. I think that this distinction may have
a lot to do with why David Lane feels that investigating the personal foibles of
individual masters is so important and why that sense of importance is lost on
most Eckists. It is just not such a big deal.
Steve
Dean Cooper wrote:
> Steve wrote:
>
> > One big difference between Eckankar and Sant Mat is the degree to which
> > one the chela is expected to adore the Master. Students of Eckankar
> > are actively discouraged from becoming too attached to the personality
> > of the Living ECK Master. For Julian Johnson, David Lane and Sant Mat,
> > adoration of the Master is essential. This can be seen today in Lane's
> > writing about his continuing affection for Charan Singh. Even when he
> > no longer follows the teachings of Charan Singh, the attachment to the
> > man endures. There is nothing *wrong* with this, but I think that it
> > may be part of the reason for Lane's confusion about the importance of
> > his writings on Paul Twitchell for most Eckists. Eckists are taught that
> > no one in the human state is perfect, not even the Living ECK Master.
> >
>
> I obviously can't speak for Lane, in regards to his relationship to Charan
> Singh. I can speak about my experience with Kirpal Singh.
>
> Kirpal Singh never demanded that anyone worship him. In fact, he frequently
> would say that he was just a man, like any other, and that the important
> thing was to do simran and bhajan, open the third eye, and consciously rise
> into the higher worlds.
>
> On the other hand, one look from his eyes could nearly knock me over. The
> spiritual force emanating from him had an intensity that felt physical.
> Sweet currents of love would sweep over me, tears would flow, heart would
> break from fullness, to be filled again from within. This brought about deep
> devotion to him.
>
> Sure, most anyone can sit and meditate, and experience light and sound. It
> is a natural, God-given ability, I would say. But I firmly believe that it
> requires a Shabd-guru, to be hoisted up and flung far from the shore of the
> body, deep into the river of Naam.
>
> If you find a guru who gives you this, you will have at least a deep and
> abiding love for him, for that guru is the human pole through which the
> Divine in yourself is revealed.
>
Dean Cooper
Nathan Zafran wrote:
> That may be so, but as a former disciple of Kirpal Singh, in the 2
> years I was his chela, I found literally all his disciples worship him
> exactly the way Christians worship Jesus. I was rather turned off from
> this, because they made the whole path of Surat Shabda Yoga a path of
> master worship.
I've been around Kirpal Singh initiates for 28 years and have found them a much
more varied group than you did in 2 years. Very definitely, we do not all worship
him exactly the way Christians worship Jesus. We are a very motley crew, about as
motley as you Eckists seem to be. <g> It is inevitable that two people looking at
the same thing will vary in the way they see it.
And I have seen people walk by Kirpal Singh, Darshan Singh, and Rajinder Singh,
without swooning about. Your explanation of my experiences with Kirpal are
influenced by the teachings of Eck, of course. I fully expect that this should be
so. The ecstatic bliss I experienced, and still experience, occurred when I
consciously tuned into Kirpal, and occurs when I consciously tune into the Shabd.
My ecstatic 'swooning' was a voluntary submission, as is the ability to tune out
of the experience, when worldly matters require greater focus. The fact that you,
and millions of others, less spiritually able than yourself, were not brought
under some kind of psychic dominance by any Sant Mat guru, shows that these gurus
are not necessarily spreading mesmerizing forces willy-nilly across the
landscape.
You _must_ view Sant Mat from the viewpoint of Eckankar. This is your chosen
path. Your objections to Sant Mat are reasonable, given your personal
preferences, and spiritual affiliations. I am not offering my comments as
criticism in any way.
On the other hand, deep devotion to one's guru does not automatically permanently
turn one into a zombie. Your experiences of Kirpal initiates occurred during the
late '60s or early '70s, I presume, and probably most of them were Americans. I
suspect the majority were initiated for only a few years, and were suffering from
the same new-convert syndrome that commonly occurs with newbies in any religious
path. At that stage, what you mainly get from newbies is quotes from their
respective scriptures, and a sort of ritualized behavior pattern based mainly on
whatever cultural context their path is based in. The inner side of their path is
barely beginning to manifest itself. I have seen this in Christian converts, Sant
Mat converts, Eck converts, Muslim converts, etc., etc.
The majority of Kirpal initiates that I have known since 1970, went through this
phase. So have the Darshan initiates. Thankfully, most of them pulled through it
eventually, some right away, some in a few months, some in a few years. Some,
like me, didn't go through it at all. If you look at my posts in this newsgroup,
I'm about as likely to refer to Plato as to Kirpal, or Leibniz as to Darshan.
This doesn't make me better, or worse. Each seeker will have his own approach to
the path.
> I have met disciples from other Sant Mat paths over the years, and,
> without a single exception, all of them exhibited exactly the same
> mannerisms as the chelas of Kirpal Singh. All they could talk about
> was the master said this, the master did that, etc.. Like they were
> all hopelessly in love with the master. His presence totally dominated
> their lives. Their personalities were, in a sense, lost in the
> personality of the master. I noticed a distinct loss of
> individuality, self- expression and creativity outside of the general
> teachings of the guru.
Hmmm... Maybe we're talking about two different Sant Mats. The one I see, and the
one you saw.
I live near the Science of Spirituality center in Naperville, IL. I am the head
cook in the free kitchen there. We serve a free lunch every Sunday. The crowd
varies from 100 to 300 people. Most of them are initiates of Kirpal, Darshan, or
Rajinder. A fair number just come for the free lunch. The initiates are an
extremely varied assortment of characters. Should you be in the neighborhood,
feel free to drop in. I think you will see that Sant Mat initiates are not
necessarily de-personalized zombies.
This reclusive lifestyle may be true of some Sant Mat practitioners, but
definitely nowhere near all, or even a large minority, at least among the
Kirpal/Darshan/Rajinder initiates. Pretty much every satsangi I know works a
normal job, gets married, has kids, goes to movies, all kinds of movies, goes on
vacations wherever they want. They visit relatives, go out to dinner, vote in
elections, whatever. They are Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, LaRouchies,
Greenies, pro-industrialists, you name it. Probably you won't find us in the KKK,
Militias, or as crypto-revolutionary communist anarchists, but such is the result
of leading a reclusive lifestyle.
> >If you find a guru who gives you this, you will have at least a deep and
> >abiding love for him, for that guru is the human pole through which the
> >Divine in yourself is revealed.
>
> In Eckankar, that function is also revealed, but not in the body of
> the outer master, but the inner master, the Mahanta, which is not a
> person, but a manifestation of the supreme creator taking on the form
> of the outer master. This concept is not the same as in the Sant Mat
> paths, where the inner master is understood to still be the
> personality of the outer master, but in a radiant form. Big big
> difference!
>
Uh, actually, in Sant Mat the inner master is not the personality of the outer
master. The Radiant Form may take the form of the outer master, and may exhibit
the personality traits of the outer master, or it may take the form of some other
master. It is not the personality of the living master as such. The Shabd takes
the form of the master, because the personality of the master has become
divinized, one with the Word, thereby allowing itself to be used by the Shabd as
a vehicle. The Shabd flows through the form of the master. The inner master, the
Radiant form, serves as a guide, only for the point of bringing the initiate to
the realization that the initiate himself (or herself, of course), is likewise a
manifestation of the Sound Current.
My personal experience has been, that being in the physical presence of the
master and directly experiencing the Shabd flowing from the physical form of the
master, has a tuning effect on the body. Withdrawal of the senses to the third
eye focus is easier. But, I don't think that this will make one dependant on the
physical presence of the master, simply because you can't always have your guru
physically near you. If anything, at least I have done my spirtual practices more
devoutly, after having experienced the boost that comes from being near a master.
A little taste of the Naam can rapidly produce a drunkard. A drunk can't depend
on a tavern that can go away. This drunk prefers the inner tavern.
> Some still find the Sant Mat paths more suited to their tastes. For
> me, I'll take Eckankar anytime, having tried both. I also happen to
> like good sex and good meat.
>
> In Eck,
>
> Nathan
And I, having examined Eckankar in the early 70s, and being exposed to the
current version, prefer to to do my drinking at a free tavern.
Ek-omkar, Satanaam,
Dean
Steve
Dean Cooper wrote:
> Nathan Zafran wrote:
>
> > That may be so, but as a former disciple of Kirpal Singh, in the 2
> > years I was his chela, I found literally all his disciples worship him
> > exactly the way Christians worship Jesus. I was rather turned off from
> > this, because they made the whole path of Surat Shabda Yoga a path of
> > master worship.
>
> I've been around Kirpal Singh initiates for 28 years and have found them a much
> more varied group than you did in 2 years. Very definitely, we do not all worship
> him exactly the way Christians worship Jesus. We are a very motley crew, about as
> motley as you Eckists seem to be. <g> It is inevitable that two people looking at
> the same thing will vary in the way they see it.
> snip
Dean,
Thanks for this. What you have said here underscores my belief that we are all on
the same highway, but some drive in one lane and some in another. Some drive Chevys,
some drive Fords - or BMWs and Mercedes, if you prefer. We seem to be headed in the
same direction. I would love to stop in for a free lunch some time. I will actually
be in Chicago next week. How far would I have to travel?
Personally I have always enjoyed meeting with followers of Sant Mat. We have much
more in common that we have differences.
My interest in starting this thread was not a side by side comparison of the
teachings of Sant Mat and Eckankar, so much as an examination of why one or a few
Sant Mat followers would take such exception to the teachings or the being of the
Living ECK Master
Do you share David Lane's views of Eckankar and Paul Twitchell? Do you think that
his views are common among Sant Mat initiates?
Respectfully,
Steve
P.S. and here's a non sequitor for you: I was reading in the paper that even some of
India's religious leaders have praised the nuclear testing that they have been
doing. Of course the papers did not cite any Sant Mat Masters. It made me wonder
what, if anything, Rajinder Singh or his initiates might have to say on the matter.
Dean Cooper
Steve wrote:
> Dean,
>
> Thanks for this. What you have said here underscores my belief that we are all on
> the same highway, but some drive in one lane and some in another. Some drive Chevys,
> some drive Fords - or BMWs and Mercedes, if you prefer. We seem to be headed in the
> same direction. I would love to stop in for a free lunch some time. I will actually
> be in Chicago next week. How far would I have to travel?
The Science of Spirituality center is at 4S175 Naperville Rd., Naperville, IL. The phone
number is 630-955-1200, in case you need to call there. How far you would have to travel
from Chicago depends on where in Chicago you will be. (I am well known for stating the
obvious.)
Naperville is about 30 miles from the center of Chicago. Public transportation, other
than rail, is almost non-existent in the outer suburbs. If you have a car, it's easy to
get to, though. The center is 2 1/2 blocks north of I-88 and I-88 has an exit on
Naperville Rd. We're on the east side of the road. There's a sign saying Science of
Spirituality out in front. It used to be a church, before we bought it, and still looks
like one. The receptionist can tell you how to get there from pretty much
anywhere in the Chicago area. I think she can also advise on public transportation.
Travel time would be maybe an hour, max, from the far north side of Chicago. If you're
staying near O'Hare airport, it could be 20-30 minutes, depending on traffic. Chicago has
a lot of toll roads, so be prepared.
We have small satsangs Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday nights, at 7:30 PM. Main satsangs
are on Sunday at 12 noon, with the free lunch at 1:00PM. We're having Indian food this
Sunday, 5/17, and I'll be cooking the following Sunday. I'll be there both Sundays, but
probably not at the weekday evening ones.
Sant Rajinder is in India, right now. He left two weeks ago, and will be back in early
July.
> Personally I have always enjoyed meeting with followers of Sant Mat. We have much
> more in common that we have differences.
I agree completely.
> My interest in starting this thread was not a side by side comparison of the
> teachings of Sant Mat and Eckankar, so much as an examination of why one or a few
> Sant Mat followers would take such exception to the teachings or the being of the
> Living ECK Master
>
> Do you share David Lane's views of Eckankar and Paul Twitchell? Do you think that
> his views are common among Sant Mat initiates?
>
Well, of course I can't speak for Jagat/Charan/Gurinder initiates, I have only casually
known a few of them. Among the Kirpal/Darshan/Rajinder initiates I know, the topic of
Eckankar doesn't come up too often. Neither does the topic of other Radahsoami groups.
Most satsangis that I have had Ek-related discussions with have been unaware of the David
Lane/plagiarism issue. Kirpal initiates seem to be generally aware of the Paul
Twitchell/Kirpal Singh relationship.
Kirpal Singh did not make a big public issue out of Paul and Eckankar, that I am aware
of. Paul claimed that Kirpal sent a letter against Paul to some parapsychology group that
Paul was going to give a talk to, but when I asked if anyone posting on a.r.e. had
actually seen a copy of the letter, or if they knew if Sri Harold had seen a copy, I got
no response. That's the only incident I've heard of, that could be construed to be a
public statement against Paul, and that isn't particularly public, if Kirpal actually
wrote such a letter.
Privately, Kirpal, when asked, would say that Paul was initiated, made significant inner
progress, but was deluded by Kal into thinking that he had reached Sach Khand, when in
fact he hadn't. Kirpal wrote this explanation to me, in response to me writing him,
wondering if he knew anything about Paul. I feel a bit foolish in telling you this,
because I no longer have that letter. It's the only correspondence I had with Kirpal that
I can't find. I keep all the letters I received from Kirpal in the same place, so I have
no idea where it went. Some short comments Kirpal made about Paul have been published as
parts of books. These books are transcripts of talks Kirpal would have with small groups
of western disciples, and the comments consist of a paragraph or two each, nothing
extensive. Since these particular books are available only from Science of Spirituality,
and the various other branches of Kirpal's Ruhani Satsang, they are really not widely
available to the general public. One can't really make a case that Kirpal went around
trying to prevent Paul from teaching, or even made a big thing out of Paul's denial of
having been associated with Kirpal.
>From discussions I've had with other Kirpal initiates, Kirpal did not allow Paul to
publish Tiger's Fang under the auspices of Ruhani Satsang because Paul received most of
it in dreams, and not during meditation. There are other Kirpal initiates who were
allowed to publish some of their inner experiences, so it wasn't because Kirpal didn't
want to allow such publishing, in general. Dreams are considered very unreliable, as
spiritual experiences, in Sant Mat, as well as in most of the other yogic schools that I
am aware of. It is not denied that spiritual influences may be experienced in the dream
state, but that, by the nature of the dreaming state, lucid or otherwise, those
experiences cannot be relied upon to be real.
Now, here's my personal opinion, re Paul. I think, along with Kirpal, that Paul
mistakenly believed that he'd reached the final goal. I admit I take my cue from Kirpal,
but not blindly. My reasoning is like this:
1) Paul taught an amazing variety of spiritual techniques. This is no reason to condemn
him, but when it includes things like staring intently at a low wattage light bulb, and
encouraging astral projection, as spiritual practices, it starts looking suspicious
to me. I also think that dream traveling is nowhere near as reliable as consciously
opening the third eye, and passing into the higher worlds that way. One is awake when one
does it, it is under complete personal control, once the ability is mastered, and it is a
method that has been considered effective for thousands of years.
2) Paul changed the number of initiations from 1 to 12. (It is 12 now, isn't it?) Before
Swami Shiv Dayal Singh, Sant Mat gurus commonly, but not always, initiated chelas in
several stages,usually two or three, with sometimes decades passing in between. Kirpal
said that this was changed for modern times. In the past disciples typically lived near
their guru, and could see the guru frequently for guidance and further instruction as
inner progress was made. The distances between gurus and disciples these days makes the
old practice much less workable, especially once Swami Ji started initiating large
numbers of people. What need did Paul have for re-introducing multi stage initiations at
all, let alone twelve? This is more like Masonic or Rosicrucian practices. It really
looks to me like a method for keeping the donations coming in, there always being another
level you haven't reached yet, and if you don't keep up your dues, the lessons may stop
coming to you.
3) Paul, in essence, charged for initiations, and lived off money from his initiates.
Yeah, I've seen the interminable arguments on a.r.e. about the membership dues not being
charges for initiations, and that these charges may be waved, in case of need. But the
Sant Mat gurus did, and do, just fine without requesting any donations, and they live on
their own incomes. I am not sure of all the other branches off Radhasoami, but I do know
that Kirpal and Darshan were self-supporting, and Rajinder Singh very definitely is. The
whole of the current Science of Spirituality organization is supported almost entirely
from non-solicited donations, with a small amount coming from sales of books and videos
we produce, and there really are somewhere around 200,000 of us, worldwide. We also only
accept donations from Sawan/Kirpal/Darshan/Rajinder initiates. To us, this makes Paul's
membership donations look like the proverbial money lenders in the temple. Each Sant Mat
guru received the gift of Naam from his guru for free, each guru passed it for free. They
will not request money for access to God, even as a voluntary donation. I think this
point is probably the biggest objection Kirpal initiates have to Eckankar.
I have a number of other reasons for questioning Paul's authenticity, including David
Lane's material, but these three are my main ones, with the money for spiritual guidance
being the most dominant. I do question a lot of other Eck teachings, but those are more
the sorts of things I question in any particular sect, my own included. I also think that
Eckankar is a modified form of Sant Mat, despite all the protestations to the contrary.
When I read Twitchell, or the numerous postings of Sri Harold's words on a.r.e., it
really sounds like it is based in Sant Mat, with a few changes. And I do think that Paul
made up the line of Vairagi masters. The Shabd will take the form of whatever the seeker
is most likely to respond to.
On the other hand, based on the testimony of Eckists like yourself, and that many of
Eckankar's techniques are widely used for spiritual development, outside of Eckankar, I
think Eckankar is as
good a method of spiritual development as most, especially since it encourages the path
of the Shabd.
> P.S. and here's a non sequitor for you: I was reading in the paper that even some of
> India's religious leaders have praised the nuclear testing that they have been
> doing. Of course the papers did not cite any Sant Mat Masters. It made me wonder
> what, if anything, Rajinder Singh or his initiates might have to say on the matter.
Kirpal, Darshan, and Rajinder have all made statements to the effect that we shouldn't
use nuclear energy to blow each other up. They have also said that using nuclear energy
for peaceful purposes is just fine, as long as it is done in as safe a manner as
possible. Of course, they are against people blowing each other up with anything, atomic
or otherwise, or not taking proper precautions with any technology.
There is a tendency for western satsangis to be environmentalists. I think this comes
from the vegetarian thing. Western vegetarians generally go in for Greenpeace, PETA, that
sort of stuff, so a lot of western initiates automatically tag heavy environmentalism
onto their conceptionof Sant Mat. This is definitely not the case for Indian satsangis,
nor for me.
I think India has a right to defend itself. So does Pakistan, China, whoever. War can't
be stopped by banning any particular weapon. If we did more to encourage third world
countries to develop their economies internally, with the building of infrastructure and
industry, and the transfer of advanced technologies, and encouraged regional trade
between countries like India and Pakistan, I think it would be of far greater service to
humanity, and the environment, than keeping them locked into burning forests for energy,
or dumping raw waste from low-tech industries into their rivers.
Please understand that I do not intend anything I have said here to be offensive,
although I know many Eckists would find it so. I do appreciate your having asked. Feel
completely free to respond however you want.
Actually, I think the interests of everyone posting on a.r.e would be better served, if
we all talked less about how Ekists/Sant Matists suck, and talked more about stuff like
how to serve humanity, within the context of spirituality. Sure, that's not name of the
newsgroup, but I think the essence of spirituality is loving self-less service to
humanity, and the universe, not whose guru has the biggest mojo.
With love,
Dean
Nathan Zafran
Dean Cooper <dgco...@ais.net> wrote:
And I do think that Paul
>made up the line of Vairagi masters. The Shabd will take the form of whatever the seeker
>is most likely to respond to.
ok, so Dean is willing to invalidate thousands of inner experiences
that Eckists have reported with the Eck Masters of the Vairagi through
lucid dreams. How about conscious soul/out of body travel experiences
with the Eck Masters? Does Dean also need to invalidate every single
one of them, and, by doing do, Does Dean therefore invalidate the
whole idea of leaving the body and experiencing a higher vibration
reality?
And, finally, Does Dean also invalidate the countless reports of
physical manifestations of Eck Masters? For example, following is a
true story told by Fran Blackwell of her first physical encounter with
Rebazar Tarz. I'd like to have an honest appraisal of that experience,
please, Dean. Here is the story as I personally heard from her lips a
year ago at Olympia, Washington at a seminar.....
Fran Blackwell told a story which happened around 1953, long before
she had ever heard about Eckankar. She had been searching endlessly
for truth for all her life and was really desperate. One morning,
after a particularly interesting visitation by some beings in her room
the night before, she awoke with a voice telling her to shower, eat,
and get on the bus. So she did. She was told which bus to get on, when
to get off, and when she did, she saw across the street a preacher
talking about hellfire and damnation. She said, “If this is the truth,
I’m outta here!” Nevertheless, she walked over to the small gathering
and listened. Standing beside her was a man dressed in a normal shirt
and pants who had dark curly hair, and a short black beard, and dark
complexion. He asked her what she thought of this preacher. she said
not much. Then, suddenly he asked her what is Soul? She stumbled
through this 3 times, as he kept repeating the question. Finally, she
said, “You tell me”. He then proceeded to give her the first discourse
in her life about Soul. After he finished, the meeting ended, and the
group dispersed. The preacher came over and asked her the same
question , “ What is Soul? She said she already went over this with
the other person. Anyway,she told him again. Then the dark-skinned
person took 3 steps back into the curb of the street and disappeared
right before her eyes. She realized then that this whole scenario was
a set up.
This was Fran’s first experience with meeting Rebazar Tarz in the
flesh.
-----------
OK, Dean, now assuming that you are willing to believe that Fran was
telling the truth (and anyone who knows her knows that she would never
lie about anything) and that the individual was none other than the
person who she says he is (his physical appearance is unmistakeable,
and his disappearing act right in front of her eyes was not a magic
act, so please don't try to squirm out of this with some dumb
explanation, then if, in fact, this experience was 100% real, how do
you account for the idea that the Eck Masters are non-existent and
made up, if even a single Eck Master actually exists? And if this is
true, are you willing to admit that everything else you opined about
Paul Twitchell might be headed for the revision room?
I eagerly await your unbiased and open-minded response.
In Eck,
Nathan
Bruce & Denise
Dean Cooper wrote:
<snip>
> Now, here's my personal opinion, re Paul.
> I think, along with Kirpal, that Paul
> mistakenly believed that he'd reached the final goal.
I see how you might think that, but I don't think so. Anyone who
writes a book like The Tiger's Fang does so with some authority,
but the narrator in the Tiger's Fang has an element of wonder in
his voice -- an absence of complacency -- that keeps it from seeming
like an ultimate statement of some kind. Also, I have to consider
that this book was written early on in Paul's career as a spiritual
teacher, and that in ECKANKAR, there is no "final goal".
> I admit I take my cue from Kirpal,
> but not blindly. My reasoning is like this:
>
> 1) Paul taught an amazing variety of spiritual techniques. This is no reason to condemn
> him, but when it includes things like staring intently at a low wattage light bulb, and
> encouraging astral projection, as spiritual practices, it starts looking suspicious
> to me.
Astral projection is barely mentioned at all any more in Eckankar, and
was
never taught as anything but a stepping stone; as one elementary facet
of
awareness on a relatively "low" plane.
> I also think that dream traveling is nowhere near as reliable as consciously
> opening the third eye, and passing into the higher worlds that way.
That may be true for you, but others may not find it so. ECKANKAR does
put a lot of emphasis on the third eye technique; about as much as for
the dream methods. I think the variety of spiritual exercises in
Eckankar
is a strength, though some might find it confusing.
> One is awake
> when one does it, it is under complete personal control, once the ability is
> mastered, and it is a method that has been considered effective for thousands
> of years.
Perhaps, but so has dream travel, and in many different cultures.
> 2) Paul changed the number of initiations from 1 to 12. (It is 12 now, isn't it?) Before
> Swami Shiv Dayal Singh, Sant Mat gurus commonly, but not always, initiated chelas in
> several stages,usually two or three, with sometimes decades passing in between. Kirpal
> said that this was changed for modern times. In the past disciples typically lived near
> their guru, and could see the guru frequently for guidance and further instruction as
> inner progress was made. The distances between gurus and disciples these days makes the
> old practice much less workable, especially once Swami Ji started initiating large
> numbers of people. What need did Paul have for re-introducing multi stage initiations at
> all, let alone twelve?
Why not, since there is no longer any reason to cut down the number of
initiations for logistic reasons; there are initiators in Eckankar in
most large communities all over the world.
I personally like the system of twelve initiations. It appeals to
my sense of order; twelve initiations, twelve planes. It also
encourages the student to take their time in assimilating the lessons
at each level which.
Sometimes Eckists have been given more than one initiation
at once if it is considered to be necessary or desirable.
> This is more like Masonic or Rosicrucian practices.
Possibly.
> It really
> looks to me like a method for keeping the donations coming in,
> there always being another level you haven't reached yet, and
> if you don't keep up your dues, the lessons may stop
> coming to you.
If money issues are what concerns you, that is what you will see. I am
a member of Eckankar and no spendthrift, and I feel comfortable with the
way they gather funds.
> 3) Paul, in essence, charged for initiations, and lived off money from
his initiates.
No, he did not charge for initiations. In essence, he charged for
lessons.
The initiations are free.
> Yeah, I've seen the interminable arguments on a.r.e. about the membership dues not being
> charges for initiations, and that these charges may be waved, in case of need. But the
> Sant Mat gurus did, and do, just fine without requesting any donations, and they live on
> their own incomes.
I'd like to know how anyone could do this in North America while running
an organization like ECKANKAR.
Personally, I don't think that amateur status confers any essential
virtrue.
>I am not sure of all the other branches off Radhasoami, but I do know
> that Kirpal and Darshan were self-supporting, and Rajinder Singh very definitely is.
They are very fortunate indeed.
>The whole of the current Science of Spirituality organization is supported almost entirely
> from non-solicited donations, with a small amount coming from sales of books and videos
> we produce, and there really are somewhere around 200,000 of us, worldwide. We also only
> accept donations from Sawan/Kirpal/Darshan/Rajinder initiates.
No social pressure to donate (honestly now)?
> To us, this makes Paul's
> membership donations look like the proverbial money lenders in the temple.
As a member of ECKANKAR, I think my opinion about Eckankar's policy
counts at least as much as yours, but you are entitled to yor opinion.
> Each Sant Mat
> guru received the gift of Naam from his guru for free, each guru passed it for free. > They will not request money for access to God, even as a voluntary donation. I think this
> point is probably the biggest objection Kirpal initiates have to Eckankar.
Objection? Wow, it must give you quite an ego boost, being so morally
superior
and all! <gg>
(just needling)
> I have a number of other reasons for questioning Paul's authenticity, including David
> Lane's material, but these three are my main ones, with the money for spiritual guidance
> being the most dominant. I do question a lot of other Eck teachings, but those are more
> the sorts of things I question in any particular sect, my own included. I also think that
> Eckankar is a modified form of Sant Mat, despite all the protestations to the contrary.
A rainbow is about more than red, no matter how red you might be.
<snip>
>The Shabd will take the form of whatever the seeker
> is most likely to respond to.
"When the student is ready, the master will appear".
Thanks for your thoughts; there were some good ideas there.
Bruce
Dean Cooper
Bruce & Denise wrote:
>
>
> No social pressure to donate (honestly now)?
There is no pressure, social or otherwise, to donate. It is generally not even discussed. I can recall only twice in 27 years that donations were even mentioned as being needed. Once
when Sant Darshan Singh was on a world tour, and extra money was needed for renting hall space, and later, under Sant Rajinder when Science of Spirituality purchased the building and
land in Naperville, IL., where our western center is located. On these two occasions the subject was simply mentioned.
>
>
> > To us, this makes Paul's
> > membership donations look like the proverbial money lenders in the temple.
>
> As a member of ECKANKAR, I think my opinion about Eckankar's policy
> counts at least as much as yours, but you are entitled to yor opinion.
My opinion of Eckankar should not count at all, as far as Eckists are concerned. I can only say, Steve asked and I answered.
>
>
> > Each Sant Mat
> > guru received the gift of Naam from his guru for free, each guru passed it for free. > They will not request money for access to God, even as a voluntary donation. I think this
> > point is probably the biggest objection Kirpal initiates have to Eckankar.
>
> Objection? Wow, it must give you quite an ego boost, being so morally
> superior and all! <gg>
>
> (just needling)
>
About as much an ego boost as Nathan must get from Eck teachings having no objections to him eating dead animals and having hot sex, the last of which I had no desire to know.
(The hot needle of jest returns, in a witty reposte.) <gg, also>
> "When the student is ready, the master will appear".
>
> Thanks for your thoughts; there were some good ideas there.
>
> Bruce
And as both Eckists and Sant Matists seem to agree, the master does indeed appear!
Dean
Bruce & Denise
Dean Cooper wrote:
> About as much an ego boost as Nathan must get from Eck teachings having no objections >to him eating dead animals
Actually, Eckists sometimes also enjoy eating live animals
(mostly in the form of yogurt) <gg>
>and having hot sex, the last of which I had no desire to know.
Me neither (at least, not with Nathan) <gg>
Somebody stop me! :-}
Bruce
Michael Turner
Bruce & Denise <w...@achilles.net> wrote:
>Dean Cooper wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Now, here's my personal opinion, re Paul.
>> I think, along with Kirpal, that Paul
>> mistakenly believed that he'd reached the final goal.
>
>I see how you might think that, but I don't think so. Anyone who
>writes a book like The Tiger's Fang does so with some authority,
>but the narrator in the Tiger's Fang has an element of wonder in
>his voice -- an absence of complacency -- that keeps it from seeming
>like an ultimate statement of some kind. Also, I have to consider
>that this book was written early on in Paul's career as a spiritual
>teacher,
Hi,
I don't mean to take issue with you, but I do think it's necessary to
clarify a point. According to his own accounts, Paulji wrote The Tiger's
Fang in 1957 or 58, during which time he was still a student of Sant
Kirpal Singh. According to Kirpalji, and others who were there at the
time, The Tiger's Fang - and many of the experiences recorded in Dialogues
With The Master - was drawn from journals Paul kept of his inner
experiences with Kirpal Singh. Indeed, from what I understand, Kirpal's
name is used throughout Tiger's Fang as the identity of Paul's inner
guide. It was only in the 1960's, when Paul released the book for popular
consumption, that he changed the name from Kirpal Singh to Rebazar Tarzs.
Now why he did this, I don't know. Except that Paul submitted Tiger's
Fang to Kirpal for publication by Ruhani Satsang in the late 50's - early
60's - and Kirpal declined, apparently saying that there were innacuracies
in Paul's depictions of the inner regions (possibly due to the fact that
many of them were drawn from dream experiences, something Sant Mat doesn't
exactly favor).
"I tell you one American was initiated by me - I've got the
initiation report in his own handwriting. The he wrote to me, "The
Master's form appears to me inside.' That Form used to speak to him,
dictate to him, inside. And all that dictation was put into a book and
the manuscript was sent to me in 1963. Then later on he started a new
movement....Later he sent me another letter, 'Return my book, The Tiger's
Fang.' That is what such-like people will do. They had some little
thing, and got stuck fast there. Now he's carrying on propaganda. He
says he was neer initated by me. He was initiated in 1955. Some people
get stuck fast on the way. this little ego is very difficult to get rid
of unless there's some kind of protection. This is a living example. He
has written other books. I need not mention his name.
Question: "I dont think he mentions Your name either."
Master: "I don't think he would. Why say things about anyone? If any
man does well, alright. I returned his book. That was dictated by me on
inner planes, and that's alright. He changed that book before printing;
where he mentioned my name, he changed it to another guru's name. So that
is the fate of these people. People are fed up with these masters, gurus
and sadhus. Why? Only for this reason."
- Kirpal Singh, "Heart to Heart Talks, vol 1." pg 53-4
"In the beginning, you'll feel as if somebody is hovering around you,
with you. You'll feel His presence like that. Then that will manifest -
that Form can materialize like the physical body to guide you. Paul
Twitchell used to write to me every week, 'Master came and sat down on hte
chair and dictated His teachings to me.' He pulbished them in 'Tiger's
Fang.' You see, He comes and talks; he can dicatate to you. But when a
man thinks himself self-sufficient, he's cut off."
- Kirpal Singh, "Heart to Heart Talks, vol 2." pg 205
One other point. Regarding single initation vs multiple initiations, I
vastly prefer the former for a couple of reasons. For one thing, it
enfranchises the individual with access to all the inner regions at
whatever pace s/he is comfortable with unfolding at. Secondly, it avoids
the aristocratic and hierarchical attitudes inherent with a grade level of
spirituality, and their concommittant abuses of power. In traditional
Sant Mat, there are no "High Initiates" (vs the implied "low" initiates).
There are simply initiates, who see each other as brothers and sisters in
Naam. A much healthier perspective I believe.
Peace and truth,
Michael Turner
Spiritual Freedom Satsang
zep...@connectexpress.com
In article <355DC8...@achilles.net>,
objections >to him eating dead animals
>
> Actually, Eckists sometimes also enjoy eating live animals
> (mostly in the form of yogurt) <gg>
Yogurt cultures are plants, not animals.
> >and having hot sex, the last of which I had no desire to know.
>
> Me neither (at least, not with Nathan) <gg>
>
> Somebody stop me! :-}
Ah, those of you who know only Nathan's outer persona are missing
SO MUCH!
(;p)
Kate
May breezes blowing, hormones rising
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading