Author: David Christopher Lane Publisher: The Neural Surfer Publication date: 1996
E-mail David Christopher Lane directly at email@example.com
I want to go back to the home base now.
B.S., Trash, Biased Research, and Hey Where's Sudar Singh When You Need Him? Alright, now let me see if I get this one clear: 1. There is no documented information whatsoever on Sudar Singh, but when I point this out I am attacking the religion of Eckankar. 2. Whatever research I have uncovered (like name replacements from Kirpal Singh to Sudar Singh, from Swami Premananda to Rebazar Tarzs) is B.S., because I have a slant. Well, I got a suggestion, get the original ORION magazines yourself and read them. Why the name replacements? 3. When I uncover that Twitchell studied under Kirpal Singh, a fact which was denied by Twitchell since 1966 and denied by Darwin Gross (to the point of threatening me with a lawsuit over it), it is called "attacking the religion." Yet today Harold Klemp admits in both print and tape that Paul Twitchell did indeed follow Kirpal Singh. 4. I point out that Twitchell lied about his birthdate (he claims he was born in 1922), since he was born much earlier (1908-1912), but I am accused of "attacking the religion." Yet today Harold Klemp admits in both print and tape that Paul Twitchell was born in 1908 (contradicting the previous ECK Master, Darwin Gross, who sued Jim Peebles, a nineteen year-old Eckist, over this and other pieces of information). 5. I show that Twitchell's books are mostly copied from other pre-existing texts (Path of the Masters, etc.), but when I do such I am accused of "attacking the religion." Yet today Harold Klemp (again contradicting the previous ECK Master who threatened to sue me over this allegation as well) admits that Twitchell's writings are similar to Julian Johnson's. And the one book that I claim is almost entirely lifted from Johnson's books, THE FAR COUNTRY, is taken out of print..... Hmmm. 6. I discover that Twitchell was previously married (many people thought that Gail was his first wife) and when I reprint much of her observations, I am accused of "attacking the religion." Yet today Harold Klemp even mentions my findings on this in his own books! 7. I find out that Twitchell kept up an eleven year correspondence with Kirpal Singh. I read tens of letters by Twitchell to Kirpal calling him my "Beloved Master." However, when I mention this connection, I am accused of "attacking the religion." Yet today Harold Klemp (again contradicting the previous ECK Master, Darwin Gross) states that Twitchell did in fact study and receive initiation from Kirpal Singh. Ironically, Gross wants to sue me in 78 over this; and in 1996, Klemp uses my information and doesn't even cite me. 8. I could go on, but I think you are getting the point. I have said this so much I am starting to use this as my mantra: check the facts for yourself. Did Twitchell lie about his birthdate? Did Twitchell try to cover-up his association with Kirpal Singh? Did Twitchell plagiarize extensively? Yet, Steve, not appreciating my attempts to be civil and light about this, accuses me of "get a life," "wasted life" and "B.S." Well, for thousands of ex-Eckists (and perhaps a few practicing Eckists) they appreciate knowing more about their religion instead of less. To be sure, there may be healthy disagreements over my interpretation of these findings, but the findings themselves are valuable to sincere thinkers. Steve doesn't like it when I show the human failings of our gurus and our prophets. I just happen to think that we are better served by realizing these features instead of saying such research is "negative" (whatever that may mean). I like good debates and I don't mind Steve's counseling advice. What I would like more, of course, are some facts relating to Sudar Singh (going back to the original post). Now some have mentioned that I cannot prove that he does not exist. Following this line of reasoning, I could say that Elvis is eating a cheese sandwich on Venus in his astral body. Prove me wrong? Okay, it is not a cheese sandwich, but a hot dog on rye..... See, I can take criticism! Just give me some good leads on Sudar Singh. I don't mind being wrong. It would be cool to prove this guy exists. But I got to tell you that it don't look good when the very person who hung with him in India for a year can't get the facts straight (he can't even get the dates straight, nor the place, nor the directions, nor, by the way, is there any evidence that Twitchell went to India in the 1930s!). But then because I point these contradictions out, I am attacking the "religion." No, I just would like some facts about Sudar Singh. Steve, that's the post, that's the point. Do you have any facts about Sudar Singh? You may not like me, but you could really do me and everybody else a service by truly ripping me. You know how? Prove Sudar Singh really existed and that Twitchell really did visit this guy for a year in India. Then I would admit my error and be quite happy to do such. I could add Sudar Singh to Juergensmeyer's genealogical tree. I don't mind being wrong. Why? Because when you have no life (and even when you do you waste it) there's nothing to fear. signed: looking for Sudar Singh
E-mail The Neural Surfer directly at firstname.lastname@example.org
I want to go back to the home base now.