Raphael
26/04/1997
Doug.
You will never be the Living Eck Master
Raphael.
----
"Businesses come and go, but religion will last forever, for in no other
endeavor does the consumer blame himself for product failure."
--------
KMerrymoon
26/04/1997
Steve,
Thanks for the defense. Somehow I missed this posting from Dave.
There was something else here that Dave said that did grab my attention.
It was when he said:
>And I do think there is something amiss with Shiv Dayal's ministry
>if he could cause such immediate misinterpretations over who his
>guru was just a couple of years after his death. That's his problem
>and he should held accountable for causing his disciples to generate
>such contradictory views.
What is interesting about this is that it is very rare that the real
masters give a concrete message as to who their successor is. They may
often give hints, or sometimes nothing at all. The reason for this is that
the individual must always discover and prove to themselves who the true
master is. The process of sorting this through leaves the individual with
the realization that either they do not know, or they do. If they do, then
there is nothing that can shake them.
Those who think it should all be spelled out have a lot to learn. The
spiritual path is about 5% spelled out. The rest is to be discovered
through the inner teachings, especially when it comes to who the true
master is.
Thanks again for your comments
Doug.
---------------
Seeing a pattern here?
Steve Runfeldt
23/04/1997
Here is another example of hoiw David Lane completely misreads what
Doug says. It is as though Lane has read a completely different post.
dl...@weber.ucsd.edu (David Lane) wrote:
>DOUG WRITES:
>Now the point of this is not in any way to deride Sawan Singh, who indeed
>was a very special man and spiritual teacher. But we certainly have to ask
>the question; What is David Lane's problem? Doesn't he see that the
>spiritual teachings don't belong to anyone? That every founder of every
>religion has always been accused of being self appointed? That spiritual
>authority comes from a higher authority, not from a will and testament?
>And that every spiritual teacher who has brought forth anything original,
>or changed the spiritual teachings in any significant way, has always been
>accused of fabrication and imaginary creations?
>DAVID LANE REPLIES:
As usual David spends several paragraphs telling Doug to read his
previous articles. I suspect that this is simple advertising. It does
demonstrate a healthy ego though.
>Doug, I don't know how much you have read of my writings, but I
>would suggest that you re-read what I say in my Guru has NO Turban
>series, or what I say in the conclusion to THE RADHASOAMI TRADITION,
>or what I say in my many articles on Faqir Chand.
>I particularly wish to point out my section on Shiv Dayal Singh--the
>founder of Radhasoami--who I compare to Paul Twitchell (see R.S.
>Tradition).
>No, Doug, I think you entirely misread me if you think that I hold
>that R.S. (Beas or any other ism) is somehow supreme.....
Doug did not say that you said RS was supreme. That was not his point
at all.
>I don't. Please see my article, RS,INC., is not Sant Mat.
Doug didn't say this, but it seems awfully important for Dave to make
this point ad nauseum.
>However, having said that, I most definitely do think we should
>doubt and rip into "self-appointed" gurus--whether they are R.S. or
>in Eckankar.
Exactly the opposite of what Doug was saying. Doug said that every
founder of every religion is accused of being self appointed, not
because we should "rip" them all, but so that we will uinderstand that
the accusation is trivial, and that "spiritual authority comes from a
higher authority." Yet Dave seems to think that Doug is into
"ripping".
Anyone notice how much David Lane loves the word "rip". It's what he
does for a living.
>And if they do in fact "fabricate" things, let's call them on the
>mat for it.
Again, Doug says that "every spiritual teacher who has brought forth
anything original, or changed the spiritual teachings in any
significant way, has always been accused of fabrication and imaginary
creations? " He is saying that these teachers have been original and
falsely accused of fabrication. Yet Dr. Lane misses the point in
order to make his own dig..
>This kind of silly defense (that all gurus do the same bullshit) is
>no defense.
This again is absurd. This is the kind of statement that makes one
suspect that David Lane may just be so filled with anger that he
cannot read anyone's writing but his own.
Doug was not making a defensive statement "that all gurus do the same"
stuff. He was making the statement that all gurus have their own
David Lanes who come up with the same nonsense.
>Yes, if you think Shiv Dayal Singh is a fraud, you should rip him.
Doug did not say this. I would say that if you think that Shiv Dayal
Singh is a fraud, you should not follow him, but you should recognize
that all gurus have someone who thinks that they are a fraud.
[ snipped]
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.religion.eckankar/UO0M17Y42Yg/bAt60IlwQ9cJ
there is the STEVE Runfeldt pattern
"that all gurus have someone who thinks that they are a fraud."
accusations of fraud mean you're a "genuine guru"
AND
Doug says that "every spiritual teacher who has brought forth
anything original, or changed the spiritual teachings in any
significant way, has always been accused of fabrication and imaginary
creations? "
IPSO FACTO ... TWITCHELL IS A GENUINE SPIRITUAL TEACHER ...
Eckankar are genuine true spiritual teachings ....
even though DOUG goes onto say that only 5% of "spiritual teachings" can one find in an outer religion/spiritual path ....
THEREFORE anyone criticising the errors of an outer spiritual path ARE RIGHT FROM THE GET GO TO DO SO ....
OUTER teachings don't matter ... BUT LANE SHOULD NOT BE CRITIISiNG ECKANKA ...
OR IT'S HISTORY OR IT'S FAULTS ... FARK ME ...
RUNFELDT/MARMAN/APOLOGIST ....
-- TWITCHELL IS ACCUSED OF BEING A FRAUD - THEREFORE HE IS A GENUINE GURU TEACHING THE TRUE PATH .... Ipso Facto Fallacy
CIRCULAR LOGICAL BASED ON BELIEF AND ACCEPTING THE ECKANKAR TEACHINGS AS IS.
A default PROJECTION onto LANE .. Lane makes accusations, provides evidence of copying texts, the ACCUSER is at FAULT here ...
the accuser IS the problem, has the BIGGER the problem, not the "teaching" or the "doctrines" or the "organisation" or the "leadership".
Even if the "accuser" is simply reporting on his own historical research and sharing it. HE is THE Problem ... the mental case
FARK ME ...
STEVE RUNFELDT BACK TO 1996 ... but he used many anon nyms along the way.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!activity/alt.religion.eckankar/bAt60IlwQ9cJ
The old archives a somewhat screwy becasue they were taken over from Dejanews .... not all posts or threads remained imo.