Lane is Gay and Other Ek Myths

Author: David Christopher Lane
Publisher: The NEURAL SURFER
Publication date: November 1997

E-mail David Christopher Lane directly at

I want to go back to the home base now.

DICK writes?


Why do you keep harping on plagiarism? Name one religion that didn't
plagiarize earlier traditions and writings.


Hmm, is that your justification for it, Dick?

Personally, I think any religous founder who lied about his sources
should be called on the Mat for it....

I certainly didn't justify the booklet on meditation by Sawan Singh
which was really written by Rai Salig Ram.

I immediately notified the Dera about it and they immediaely
withdrew it from the satsang tables and stated publicly that the
book was wrongly attributed to Sawan Singh.

The reason plagiarism haunts Eckankar is because it is lamely

State the obvious, apologize for it, and withdraw the

DICK writes and quotes:

"Secondly, when Kirpal Singh found out about Paul doing these Soul Travel
workshops, he wrote a letter to the Parapsychology Foundation and
informed them that Paul's works were a lot like his own. But Kirpal Singh
never mentioned that he, too, had picked them up from someone before him.
In a way, he was trying to possess truth. But truth builds upon itself.
Kirpal Singh had gathered it from other groups, Paul had taken it and
built upon it from many different areas, and he then moved it more than a
step further. More than just identifying the mysterious force--which he
later called the ECK--that works through all the God worlds, Paul said,
'I also know how to begin working with It.'"

---Harold Klemp,


Hmm, Dick, dear Harji has got his information wrong here (again?).

Read Kirpal Singh for yourself.... He consistently says that he got
his information from Sawan Singh and from previous gurus. He quotes
them extensively, and anybody who knows Kirpal will attest to

Nice try, Harji, but your claim is untrue and inaccurate.....


JOEY writes:

David, you obviously did not read closely enough or you're beginning to take on
 massive quantities of Zuma brain stuff.

When an individual Soul gets into the pure spiritual worlds and receives
 information/wisdom directly it comes in an almost instant telepathic medium.

Later, when you sit down and begin to write it out, any cyrstalized thought
 form(previous readings) will intermingle with the 
"white light truth".  If you read Paul Twithchell's books you will see that the
 overall emphasis is distinctly differant from anything that Julian Johnson

Julian got sort of a box of picture puzzle pieces.....Paul got the entire
 picture intact.  That does not mean that Julian didn't see some things very
 clearly.....he just didn't understand the overall scheme as well as Paul did.


Nice to know that "white light truth" translates into funky syntax,
Aryan racism, distinctive 1930s transliterations, and the same
linear quotes (from Vivekananda, no less)--all coupled with a
Kentuckian and Baptist fervor......

Sure, Joey......................

By the way, I saw Gumby and he misses you on Pluto.


JOEY writes:

David I owned a copy of the Riverside WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.  Occasionally I use
 some alliteration in my writings.....does that mean I am plagiarising

So, tell me David.....Have you ever owned a copy of HUSTLER???......or anything
 by Jimmy Swaggert????


Sorry, Joey, but you should re-check Twitchell's plagiarism. It much
more extensive than the occasional use of alliteration. Your analogy
doesn't hold. Now if you copied 400+ paragraphs (almost verbatim)
from "one" of Shakespeare's plays then, naturally, you would indeed
accused of plagiarism...

The excuses that you and other Ekists use is exactly why this issue
will not go away.

By the way, where is the FAR country now? Can't seem to find it in
bookstores...... I wonder why?

As for Hustler, there is no need Joey to tell us of your bedtime


DICK writes:

Dear Dr. Dave,

As you know, one can't get to the bone without first removing the meat.
Basho will simply have to lower his vibratory rate to a point where he can
enjoy a nice slab of spare ribs.

As to the karma that Aaron inflicted upon you, I don't think that we can
attribute it to your morally irresponsible act of tempting a mystical dog
with junk food.  We are probably must more honest when we say to the
person who wants a moral explanation of why he was smacked upside the
head with a surfboard is that "we really don't know why Aaron reacted in
that way, ultimately." All we know in terms of moral ontology is that
certain phenomenal events occur which lead us to such and such a
conclusion. But instead of simply stating our ignorance, or our limited
point of view, or our basic statistical correlations, we instead say
something completely inane. We say something like, "I once gave Basho a
donut and suffered severe karma from Aaron," as if we have just revealed
our brilliance. We have, of course, revealed nothing of the sort. We have
revealed our ignorance.


I am actually quite impressed, Dick, that you read the section on
Karma in the enchanted land or in my postings....

As for the bad karma from Aaron, I should have spelled it CAR MA....

since he almost ran me off the road in his jag.....

Oh what I have suffered in the name of Basho the mystic dog......

As the saying goes:

sorry Ma, but my CAR MA ran over your DOG Ma.....

Basho dug the sugar rush.....


DICK writes:

BTW, when will you get around to a textual analysis of Paul Brunton's
writings compared to Paul Twitchell's works? Or, do you only do writings
in your own Sant Mat tradition?


i have already given examples from Edward Schure and from L. Ron
Hubbard, but I would be most happy to include examples from Brunton
as well.

Why not post them Dick so we can see them?

That way, we can get rid of that awful Lane bias......

--------------------------- wrote:

>WHY do we care about this idiot David Lane? Does it matter whether Paul
>took liberties with certain facts and put them into his books, all of
>which dealt with experiences on the least significant plane of existence
>-- the physical? I could care less who Paul Twitchell hung out with or
>where he travelled to in this world. Have not the teachings of Paul and
>Harold, spiritual [not physical!] giants, brought us onto a path and
>given us experiences we might not have discovered on our own for the
>next millenium had those tomes not been written and lovingly
>disseminated to us? Don't we have a lot more serious impediments to our
>progress to concern ourselves with [e.g., anger, greed, lust,
>attachment, vanity?] than this disgruntled, agenda-laden sad-sack of a
>charlatan, David Lane?

Nathan Adds:

Dear Mohod,

I couldn't agree with you more about what you said about Lane.
However, most of the detractors here in this newsgroup are clones or
disciples of Lane, and although you and I can see through all this
crap without much effort, a fairly large number of newcomers are quite
vulnerable to his rantings and ravings, because they haven't had the
inner experiences  of the light and sound , the Mahanta and the Eck
Masters which would prove to them  without the shadow of a doubt that
Lane is a pure nimcompoop with an intelligence bordering on imbecilic.
That's why I will post my weekly messages til doomsday or until this
newsgroup is dissolved, so that these newcomers can be offered a
balance to Lanism, and then make their own choices. 

DAVID LANE (aka Bozo, aka Kal, aka charaltan, aka Hitler, aka "sad
sack"?) replies:

Oh the joys of such Eck love. I can just feel the Fubbi (Flubber?)
goo all over.

I find it ironic that pointing out Twitchell's plagiarism, deceit,
and cover-up can elicit such high compliments....

Makes one feel down right honored and loved.

Watch those kids Nathan the Kal boy has a few posts coming online.

(Double irony: When I was about 6 or so I appeared on the Bozo
T.V. show. I even won a contest on air. I was asked to pick out the
"real" bozo picture versus an imposter one. I picked the right one
and won all these neat prizes, including a huge box of Good and
Plenty...... Hmm, maybe a little bozo discrimination is in order for
EK history: did Twitchell graduate high school at 15/16 like "he"
claimed? (nope); did Twitchell lie about his war record (yep);
did Twitchell lie about his birthdate (yep); did Twitchell
plagiarize extensively without attribution (yep); did Darwin Gross
embezzle millions (yep)...........

Hmm.... but there Really IS a Vairgai order........



the Bozo's big top show


DOUG writes:

Now, as far as I can see, Paul Twitchell grew up in this same era, when many
 felt this was the way religion should evolve. Using the myths and teachings of
 other religions was common in those days, in the hopes of creating something
 relevant to today. And myths were not considered lies, but stories that
 expressed truths that cannot be expressed easily any other way.

Therefore, Paul's use of mythological stories, I don't find problematic, even
 though they don't seem as appropriate today. And the gathering of teachings
 from other religions, especially from Radhasoami, I don't have any problem
 with. The only area that I don't think looks good is Paul's lack of crediting
 his sources, to the point of making it look like he, or Rebazar Tarzs, was the
 original source. This looks especially bad these days, since copyright law has
 become much more controlled and publicized. However, it doesn't appear to have
 been much of a problem while Paul was alive.


I don't see how we can let Twitchell off the hook..... Not only did
he plagiarize extensively (and lie in the process--remember he tells
us that Rebazar, not Johnson, is talking in the FAR COUNTRY), he
straight out lied about his education, his travels, and his military

This sort of duplicity undercuts the truth claims he tries to make
about those things which we cannot see here in the empirical world.

Gathering myths, gathering stories is one thing (see the Chicken
Soup for the Soul series---by the way, Canfield used to be a
follower of John-Roger until he got a bomb threat from the dude---each
story is cited and appropriately referenced), but to then claim
neglect the "real" authorship and then substitute it with a Tibetan
monk is just plain duplicity...........

It is also called lying to one's audience and Twitchell did it
repeatedly.... as even Harji today admits.

As I have said before, why is Darwin's lying (which relates to
money) condemned when Twitchell's lying (which relates to the very
foundation of the religion) excused?

Twitchell wasn't exommunicated; Darwin was....................


DOUG writes:

In other words, I think that so much of this looks much worse today, not
 necessarily because of what Paul did, but more because of how it has all grown
 into something much bigger. Small transgretions and misunderstandings while
 Paul was alive, amongst a few thousand people, have snowballed into huge
 issues because, more than anything, there has been a lack of open dialog on
 these matters. I don't think there is a lot of value, some but not a lot, with
 looking back in time to blame the past. The matter stands as it does today,
 and must be faced and dealth with today. It is the problems that exist today
 that matter, not what or what did not occur in the past.


Nope, what Twitchell did was lie and that is why it bothers people
today as it did back then..........

I guess we just wish our spiritual masters would be more truthful
than our plagiarizing 7th graders.....


David Lane wrote:

> As much as I like Spark's posts, I must admit that I find it truly
> ironic that Michael Turner's "credentials" cause him so much
> trouble.

SPARK writes:

    David is amazing.  What a chess player.  Tennis was fun but this is more
like chess here.  Introduce Michael Turner to a.r.e.  by posting *for* Turner
and then stepping back and watching.

    I knew when I recently posted my disgust with Turner that *someone* was sure
to tie it into Paul Twitchell, etc. However, it doesn't have anything to do with
anything but my perception and knowledge of Turner.  Paul's behavior good, bad,
and indifferent doesn't help Turner look any better than the wannabe that he is.

    If I dropped out of Eckankar tomorrow I'd still see Turner as spiritually
delusional and to misrepresent his ability to give initiation in any authentic


I quite agree that a guru should stand on his own merits (or
lack thereof).

I just noticed that Turner raises up the heat and volume in this
group, while the justification meter for Twitchell raises even

You are right: one doesn't necessarily justify the other, but it
seems quite obvious to me that Turner has been much more forthcoming
than Twitchell about his past.

That, of course, doesn't constitute enlightenment, but it does
suggest something absent in Peddar Zaskq......

SPARK writes:

    We've got apples and oranges here, David.  But  playing the Turner card in
this fashion may get a few people to 'bite' on your hook.  And I think it is
somewhat brilliant (sorry Mohod...who thinks David is an imbecile)


Thanks for the compliment (Bozo needs some support from time to
time), but I don't really think they are apples and oranges....

I think, rather, that Twitchell and Turner represent the same
principle: self-generated masterships, with the former being coy
about his past and the latter being relatively forthcoming.....

SPARK writes:

    I'm happy that you feel so good about Turner and can use him to such good
advantage in repeating the information that you want to communicate in an *ever*
so slightly new way.  But it isn't debate material.  No round two.  Turner isn't
even in the ring.


That's exactly my point, though: why do you "think" Turner is NOT in
same ring or league? (you know, i am baiting you here, of course).

SPARK writes:

    This has nothing to do with Eckankar or Twitchell.  They stand or fall on
their own strengths and weaknesses.  As does Turner.


YES, most certainly.

SPARK writes:

    It may not be an attempt but that is one result, David. It is a pretty wild
coincidence that you use the Turner vehicle to both further roast your favorite
old chestnuts as well as provide unintentional support for a highly questionable
self-proclaimed sat guru.   I think if Turner's flock of sheep grew you would be
happy to debunk him as you are happy to use him now to make other 'points.'


Anyone who knows me or who reads my website will know (without any
doubt) that I think the only guru to trust is the one who doesn't
want to be one. Moreover, I don't believe in ANY self-proclaimed
gurus. If a guru proclaims himself, in my opinion, he is precisely
NOT somebody to follow.

But I have been saying that for years......

Yet, there is really nothing to "debunk" about Turner. His position
is obvious, his past is obvious, his lineage is obvious. Indeed it
is precisely his "obviousness" (rightly or wrongly) which is why
nobody is really "exposing" him.

We expose the Nixons, the Twitchells, the Thakar Singhs of the

Precisely because they are NOT so obvious.

As to the enlightenment of these guru types my position has already
been spelled out with my Doug debate:

The guru's status is IN the Eye of the Beholder, even if that Eye is
Apparently REally REally blind...........


P.S. It is really good to have you online..... You have a wonderful
way of understanding my chess moves.....

Am I checkmated so early?


JOEY writes:

Your interpretation only David.  Virtually all documentaries of this so-called
 plagiarism have been written or inspired by you.  You yourself have admitted
 to bias on this issue.

Where does that leave us????

Trust in your "scientific methods"????


Joey, do yourself a favor and get a copy of THE PATH OF THE MASTERS
and compare it with THE FAR COUNTRY. Do liner notes.

Add WITH A GREAT MASTER IN INDIA to the mix to round off your

Print each pertinent paragraph side by side.

Forget about "Lane".....

What will you find, Joey?

Plagiarism--hundreds of very similar (at times verbatim sections).

That's the method, bro.....

Try it.

JOEY writes:

Your participation in anything around the Eck teachings have been nothing but
 self serving.

Your agenda may have been inspired by the envy of Kirpal Singh towards Paul
 Twithchell, but the expansion and tone of your accusations have gone way
 beyond anything that he would have even thought about.


Kirpal Singh's "envy"?

Have you ever read what I have written about Kirpal Singh or R.S.

I am harsher on him and on it than Eckankar.....

Sorry, Joey, but Twitchell did indeed lie, deceive, and plagiarize.

And even if you think I am a KKK Hitler Bozo Nazi it will not change
the simple fact that when you compare Twitchell with Johnson you
will discover plagiarism.

JOEY writes:

oYou know full well what  facts you leave out in your never ending diatribe
 against the Eck teachings and their spiritual leaders.

Probably some of the worst "yellow journalism" methods from someone who wishes
 to be recognized as an academic expert that I've ever seen.


Hmm, the yellow aspect of it is simply that Twitchell pissed in
public and we can see the stains of his deceptions.

He claimed that the FAR COUNTRY was dictated by Rebazar; it was
lifted, in many places, from Johnson.

The "yellowness" of it is that we condone such plagiarisms with
sophomoric justifications....


Your "students" will find out David.....maybe next month, maybe next year,


My students?

If you are talking about MSAC, they were already taught to find out
the "worst" thing about me (not the best).

I think our gurus deserve the same.

And from that platform we can better understand their ultimatie

sorry, but Twitchell lied Joey and that's not a matter of semantics,
but of a clear public history.

Even Harji admits it.


JOEY writes:

Now I can say that David Lanes comments are "libelous


It is not libel Joey when it is the truth.

That's the greatest defense of all.


IN a post it was written:

you expect David Lane to care which books you have read, but he doesn't
even return your emails.


I do my very best to respond to almost every email I get.

By all means, send your list again.....

I would be quite interested in what books you have read....

I happen to like reading.


DICK writes and then quotes Lane:


Since I stirred up this mess, let's take a look at at some of Dr. Dave's
remarks on the subject of homosexuals:

" Sathya Sai Baba (South India). I hesitated putting this Gumby blessing
Avatar on my list for over a year because his followers can be (at times)
so downright sweet. However, when one realizes how many young boys Sai
Baba has molested in his private quarters over the past two or so
decades, the cotton candy devotion melts away showing how genuinely
rotten at the core the Indian guru system can be when left critically

And to top it off, Sai Baba has a preference for young male cocks. Why
God would want to rub oil (Sai has called it his "bachelor oil
treatment") on kids' dicks is a "Divine" Mystery to me. But if I take out
the God equation, the answer to Sai's devotion to erections seems pretty
obvious. The only catch, however, is that Sai wants this "secret"
ceremony kept, well..... you guessed it..... secret.

I wonder why?

Hey, Sai boy, try rubbing your own dick and let the kids go out and play

Better yet, though I dig your afro and that long orange robe you wear
(nothing up the sleave, right?), why don't you give up the God game and
come down to earth. Here's a start: try doing your magic tricks under
controlled circumstances and in front of known skeptics like Randi and
Penn & Teller.

Furthermore, why don't you give Michael Jackson a call. Maybe both of you
could hang out together and share bachelor oil stories.

In any case, it's ironic to know that when God does come to earth he
produces more shit (burnt and dried at that) and likes to fondle lots of
young erect cocks.

John-Roger Hinkins (Yea, I know, he robbed my house, but I would rather
be stuck with J.R. than Thakar.... John-Roger Hinkins has also been known
infamously as the "Divine Rump Ranger" [You want to achieve God
consciousness? You need a rectal reem rod session with the Mystical
Traveler.] Check out McWilliams book, LIFE 102--the best anti-cult book
written in the last decade.)

J.R. (alias "Baba Butt Rogers")


Is Dave homophobic or merely enraged at the guru's abuse of trust in
their spiritual office? I haven't got a clue. I'd guess that he can count
the number of his non-heterosexual acquaintances on one hand. I can count
mine on two fingers.


Dick, do ask questions merely to answer them for me?

As for how many non-heterosexual acquaintances I have, the number is
quite large.

Sorry, but it is much larger than two hands, two feet, and two

Remember, you said "acquaintances."

The two quotes you used were not against homosexuality but rather
against the abuse of spiritual seekers by so-called gurus under the
"pretext" of divine instruction.

Personally, i think we have made some significant strides in the
last three decades in developing a more humane understanding of
human sexuality.

One of my favorite books (and one that I used in intro to Sociology)
in the past few years was the SEXUAL BRAIN by Simon LeVay. I once
met Simon, who is openly gay, in Del Mar. A delightful man and a
fine scholar as well.

I have many gay friends, dick. 

DICK writes:

You'll notice that ECKANKAR will not officially sanction a homosexual
organization within ECKANKAR. There is an unoffical group that holds
informal meetings at major seminars. They style themselves, "Souls Like

That doesn't mean that ECKANKAR disapproves of the sort of lifestyle
espoused by the non-heterosexual community. Harold has knowingly
appointed folks of unconventional sexual persuasion to positions of
responsibility within the organization, including the office of RESA.

I don't care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.
I don't want to know about it. As long as they leave me out of it, I'm
happy. But, there seems to be a concerted effort afoot to mainstream
non-procreative sexual behavior as a minority rights issue. (And, these
folks will always be in the minority; they don't reproduce.) It is one
thing to shell out tax dollars to help starving children, provide
opportunity for the handicapped, or education for the poor. It is another
thing to provide tax breaks to double-income households that do not bear
the expense of raising the next generation.

If everyone adopted the Gay/Lesbian lifestyle, the overpopulation problem
would be solved in one generation. Fortunately for the human race, it
doesn't seem to be a matter of choice. Procreation is a strong biological
imperative. Perhaps, future genetic research will be able to correct the
procreation wiring in the folks that simply can't help the way that they
are, and would rather enjoy a conventional sex life.


Hmm, even though I am not gay, I happen to disagree with your last

Why would gays want to "correct" (your term) their genetic heritage?

I think their sexuality is perfectly fine as it is, since many
heterosexuals choose not to have children as well (indeed, I would
venture, to guess, a much higher total number in point of fact).

Human evolution has given a wide array of sexual possibilities....
Being gay is one of them.....

I like being heterosexual........ just as I would imagine that Simon
likes being homosexual.....

What is the need to "correct"?



> Richard, you asked.....
> <<<<<Why would Dr. Dave have a copy of "Hustler" when he has Jacquie?
> What has Jimmy Swaggert got to do with some surfer dude that shows up
> whenever the Kal is called?      >>>>>
> Can't say I know the answer to either question.......
> Sometimes people just seem to project an image that begs for a
>  comparison......even if there is no logical connection at all.
> For instance David Lane labels anyone who has claimed to have had a spiritual
>  experience as "delusional."  He does so despite the fact that tens of
>  thousands of people from different religious backgrounds describe essentially
>  the same thing.  As far as Eckists are concerned he ties the "delusional"
>  description to "blind sheep" followers willing to believe what he has
>  described as "lies".
> The ironic thing is that there is no logical connection between these things
>  and at the same time he purports himself to be some kind of academic scholar
>  who dissects and "logically concludes" his "findings".


Sorry, Joey, but you have made a fundamental mistake. I didn't say
that "anyone who has claimed to have had a spiritual experience as

I have had many such experiences and so have a large number of
people throughout history.

What I have repeatedly stated is that the "interpretation" we have
given to these experiences is oftentimes (I never said "always",
Joey) questionable and subject to debate....

I have always felt it was good to meditate, to explore within
(just see my Preface to the Enchanted Land, for one example).

But I think we should "doubt" the ultimate interpretations that
we give those inner phenomena....

Be accurate, Joey; it will strengthen your future critiques.

DICK writes:

The ironic thing is that Dr. Dave's late guru, Maharaj Charan Singh,
described some spiritual experiences as equivalent to some of the
experiences of the mentally ill. Apparently, one often goes insane before
reaching God Realization according to Maharaj Charan Singh's analysis.
(Don't even think about it, zerO maS. I'm way ahead of you here.) Even
more ironic, Dr. Dave was once quite delighted to go along with his
guru's thoughts on the matter (as well as his commentary on the Gnostic
books in the Bible), and enthusiastically enjoined others to implement
the methodology of Sant Mat meditative practice. Surf's up! "Ride the
current," he said.

Trouble is, Dr. Dave was wiped out by a vision of Gumby on Pluto, and
hasn't been able to paddle back out through the foam of his insanity to
catch a wave to God Realization. (All of this is covered in more detail
in another post.)

That, my friend, is irony. God! I just want to get down and waller' in it.

Pass the tenderloin, biscuits, and gravy. Brother Jimmy, would you say


Lest you forget, oh "uncorrected" heterosexual friend who has two
gay acquaintances, I still advocate meditation, interior
exploration, and inner journeys.....

What has transpired in the past ten years is not so much a doubting
of the methodology (i still meditate each day), but rather (and do
underline this Dick since you seem to forget it) an increased
skepticism of the "ontological" interpretations that we give to
inner phenomena which is encountered during such internal

I am all for meditation and interior exploration. Where you have
seen me shift in perspective is on how to ultimately "interpret"
what we see and hear and feel within.

That simple, Dick.

I have become more skeptical, to be sure, but I strongly feel that
it is important to "go within"..... just as it good to "go without."

In both instances (mysticism and science), I think a little doubt is
quite a good thing.....

Experiment, but question the interpretations..............


Clear enough yet?


RICH writes:

Hi David,

Glad you got a good laugh.  I thought Richard Pickett's original spin
was very funny.  So, in your style of changing the Subject title to
something more outrageous, I took the joke a step further.
DAVID LANE writes:

> I am sorry to disappoint you, however, but I have never had a
> homosexual experience and have no inclination to switch teams.


David, it _was_ a joke.  Richard's was an obvious joke(wasn't it?) and I
just pushed it a bit.  No need to defend your masculinity.<G> 
Apparently by yours and the reactions of others, this is *too* sensitive
of a topic even for this NG.  Sorry everyone.

Too sensitive? No, Rich, I merely stated that that I have never had
a homosexual experience, since many of your readers tend not to know
when you are joking and when you are being serious.

This is obvious, of course, by how many posts took your claim

DAVID LANE writes:

> I am sure Aaron will be pleased to see his name broadcast in such an
> illuminating way.
> I even told my classes today about your latest post. We enjoyed a
> good laugh and so I must thank you.

RICH writes:

That was exactly my intention, although you spoiled it by telling them.
My hope was that the thread would go on and on as many do, and that they
would discover this thread in their Deja News searches, sans the
explanations.<GG>  A perfect example of disinformation. Oh, well.


Spoiled it? No, many of your readers took your joke seriously (and
responded to it as such).

Although I found your joke funny, my friend Aaron (who is a lawyer,
by the way) did not.

He is contemplating whether or not to take a defamation suit against

Good luck......

He graduated from Harvard Law School, by the way.


*******  18 December 1986 DAVE replies to DICK:

"Maharaj Charan Singh in all of his published writings (and in his
personal letters to me) states over and over again, not to get detained
by _any_ vision, but to follow the light and the sound to their terminal
apex in Sach Kand. And what happens there? Does it stop? no, Shiv Dayal


Thus, Maharaji's point in your letter is really quite apt. Go beyond
visions (earthly or otherwise, and ride the Current.

The question of hallucination is an old bugaboo, and one that is really a
non-question. How do you know that _this_ waking state is not a
hallucination? It only lasts about 18 hours and then you go to sleep.
What makes you certain that this is real? Well, the same thing that makes
you certain that this is real, can also arise in the higher state of
awareness (only more so.) So, nough of armchair specualtion. The point is
this: withdraw your consciousness from this body and rise upwards and see
the light and the sound, transcend this plane. THEN WORRY ABOUT
INTERPRETATION. Then we can have a good debate. . . and we can do it on
that very plane."

.. . .

So now we stand at an impasse. My only strong contention in all of this
is: meditate and find out. Whether or not the interpretation of such
events differs on this plane or they do not, depends upon people actually
having those experiences. We can debate or talk about mysticism until we
are blue in the face. And it matters little to me whether one believes in
God, doesn't believe in god, doesn't know there is a God, or cares less.
What matters is that if one is interested in the mystical dimension, then
one should engage in the methodology. What the ultimate interpretation of
meditation turns out to be is an _open_ question, but it is a question
that can only be truly appraised by critically minded _mystics_."


So, am I correct in asserting that you made a radical change in your mystical outlook between 1986 and 1992? Is it true that you no longer
desire to gloss over underlying social tensions by references to
spiritual realities? Are you willing to come to grips with the
sociolgical motivations driving your investigations of ECKANKAR?


I still strongly advocate meditating..... What I questioned then
(look at the quote again) and what I question now (even more so) is
the ultimate interpretations that we give to "inner" phenomena....

It is quite clear to me that in certain instances we use "inner"
phenomena to "fuel" our earthly disputes, juxtaposing our enemies
with Kal and our friends with the "court of Sat Purush."

Yes, i do think interior exploration is an altogether important and
vital venture....

What I "doubt" is the ultimate interpretations we give to what we
see and hear within.....

I still meditate and I still doubt......

Both can go hand and hand.......

Faqir Chand meditated to his dying day, he still saw visions to his
dying day, and he still doubted the ultimate interpretations of
those visions to his dying day.....

There is another word for it, of course.....

It's called "science."

DICK writes:


I can't win. First, you steal my vegetarian dog search. Second, Rich
steals my witticism on your usage of "intimately" and turns it into a
federal case.


Sorry, Dick, but nobody "stole" your vegetarian dog search.
Dejanews, lest you forget, can do the search for anybody and,
contrary to your doubts, did EXACTLY that for me as well.

Pretty sad that you wish to "own" a vegetarian dog search....

What, slow days in the astral library?

"Witticism" on intimately?

Hmm, given your recent thoughts on "correcting" homosexuality, I
think your witticism is more than a revelation.....

DICK writes:

What's wrong with gay FBI agents anyway? J. Edgar Hoover would have been
proud to know you during your service with the bureau on the John-Roger
case. Too bad about your trouble at Waco. That was a terible end to a
promising career in cult smashing.


Nothing wrong, Dick, with gay FBI agents (do you want to "correct"
them as well?).

I merely mentioned that I was neither.... that is, I am neither gay
nor an FBI agent....

J.R. was merely making shit up.......

kinda like you, but without the "wit?"


Dear Glen:

thanks for your note... Yes, I wash shown a copy when I met with
Bill Popham and Steve Gazda (and others) at the Eckankar
International Headquarters in Menlo Park back in the late 1970s.

I had actually forgotten about the episode where Popham showed me
Paul Twitchell's personal copy of THE PATH OF THE MASTERS.
Apparently, when Darwin found out (that they had shown me Paul's
copy) he was a tad upset (this was reported to me by one of the
Eckankar official who was there).

Eckankar had set up the meeting in wake of the SCP journals....

Popham was hired by Eckankar to review my manuscript and its

It was a relatively pleasant meeting, but clearly Eckankar did not
heed my one good piece of advice to them (they asked me what to do
about SCP).

I said come clean on Twitchell's plagiarism and lying.......

They didn't (just read what Darji says).

Steve Gazda resigned a few years later from Eckankar, I am told.


LION writes:

    Michael Turner shall win the Ultimate Chess game for Godhood!

    You see, there just had to be a 1st one. [Don't tell me that the
  1st one lives in some timeless time or something insane like
  that!] We just have to figure out who it is. (Michael Turner,
  Please Stand Up). You know? Now, personally, my vote goes
  out to MICHAEL TURNER, and I hope that's where all your votes
  go to to! Because HE IS the most Wonderful God that I have
  ever known. And because even *David Lane* thinks so! The
  Beloved Lane itself! The KAL! (Oh wait, Michael told me that
  the KAL is NOT David Lane, that the Kal is actually some guy
  that Michael knew in LA (of all places), and who he had a poker
  game with one night, and they were arguing about whether or
  not Michael would be able to save all the souls in the world.
  The Lord has told me that the Kal was relying on human nature
  to make sure that we all burned in Hell, but the Good Lord has
  told me that he said, "I'll save them all anyways!" Now when
  it's God versus Satan, I think I have a pretty good idea who will
  win. {:)}= )

Thank you,
  With Love,
    Lion {:)}=


I realize I have a head cold and I may be a bit foggy, but I don't
really understand this post.....

Quite frankly, I have NEVER thought Michael Turner was enlightened,
a Sat Guru, or a Divine Master.

I have found him, rather, to be just a nice guy with good writing
ability and fun to talk with.

But, you know Lion, in today's guru world that may be a much better
compliment than one might at first suspect.

The only gurus I am impressed with are those who DON'T want to be
gurus (and MEAN it).


Bozo with a cold


JOEY writes:

David, let me be the first to remind you about the following story.

An infant was once read a children's story.  Decades later that individual
 "wrote" and copyrited a childrens story.  The story was identical, sometimes
 word for word renditions.  Did the individual know that she had "plagiarized"
 a story she had heard as an infant????   NO, David she didn't.  

For those of you who don't know "the rest of the story" the actor in the above
 is the famous Helen Keller, a woman who was blind and deaf by age one.

A process occurs whereby an individual can log, subconciously, large volumes of
 information and repeat it years...even decades later.  

Paul Twithchell was such a person.  A genius of a man who read cover to cover
 over a thousand books a year for decades upon decades.


Hmm, but Joey I think you forget the moral of the story: Paul
Twitchell said REBAZAR TARZS DICTATED and TALKED with him.

Given your line of reasoning, we either have Twitchell lying or
Rebazar reading Johnson.....

Silly either way.


Paul recognized truth when he saw it.  When, years later, he would sit down and
 construct his books he would draw upon all the information that he had stored
 in his subconcious.  He also had a particularly detailed photographic memory. 
 It would only follow that the sixty or so book length manuscripts that he
 authored would have some pretty detailed renditions of what he had "read"
 years and decades before.


Then why have Twitchell lie to his audience and say Rebazar DICTATED

Moreover, you better re-read your Twitchell.

Photographic memory?

Nope. Plagiaristic tendencies? yep.

Don't forget Joey, Paul owned a copy of THE PATH OF THE MASTERS.

He also called the R.S. book, SAR BACHAN (edited by Johnson as
well), his "BIBLE."

No need to invent explanations when the obvious one is already at


DAVID LANE writes:

> Dear Dick:
> Sorry to disappoint, but I did a dejanews profile on myself and so
> was aware of Talsky's dog questions.
> Nope, you weren't the inspiration or the source.
> I merely replied to what you had to say when you wrote in ARE....
> As for collecting money for your posts, maybe you should talk to
> Twitch first........
> Basho says sorry about biting you so hard.....
> --
> ----
> email for PGP Public Key

Dear Bodhi,

I've consulted with Peddar Zasq, and he said that if Johnson was his
inspiration, then surely I was your inspiration for the vegetarian dog
article quest.

I know that the evidence is circumstantial, but I'm sure that a jury
would see it my way.


Nice try, but you should think through your analogy first.

In order to "believe" that you were the inspiration for my post we
would have to forget two obvious things: AARON is MY best friend
and He was USING my ACCOUNT.

Both of these things I am "intimately" related with.

Moreover, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to do a dejanews search
profile on one's self.


P.S. Twitchell owned a copy of Johnson's THE PATH OF THE MASTERS.


Oh, but maybe Rebazar posted under Twitchell's name.... having
memorized THE PATH OF THE MASTERS in that astral version.....

Go check the plates, Dick.


What beautiful contortions of astral logic.


BENJI writes:

> If I was forced to live on a desert island for the remainder of my years and
> had to choose between Bozo & The Myth Killer, guess who'd I pick??? Bozo!
> Why? Because life "would not" be neurotic and boring.
> This may come as a big surprise to everyone but this is one "former Eckist"
> who does NOT worship at the feet of the great god Dr. David Lane. I have
> "some respect" for Lane in alot of his work on RS & ECK. I think the whole
> plagarism thing was a briiliant stroke by Lane and I welcome more research
> in finding more of this, (because I myself have found a few over the years.)
> It is my humble opinion that Lane has not looked at RS with the same
> "critical intensity" that he looked at Paul and Eckankar. I have suspicions
> about ANY scholar who does a "critical study" of a religion he himself
> belongs to. Reader beware! Now if you want a real "objective" study on RS &
> ECK let a humanist do it.
> Sorry, Dr. Dave. But I am known for my "struggling fairness." Ask Glen
> Stevens. (:D)


No neded to apologize. I quite agree that it is best to read a
number of different accounts on R.S. Mark Juergensmeyer has never
been a follower of R.S. and that provides his book, RADHASOAMI
REALITY, with a bit of distance.

However, it can also be the case that those closer to the movement
can, in point of fact, be even harsher.

Read the conclusion to my book, THE RADHASOAMI TRADITION.

It is actually much harher and more critical in tone than
Juergensmeyer's--indeed, it has generated a lot of heat for me from
the very circles closest to me (see point2.html under shabd yoga).

Also look closely at my Guru has no Turban series and assorted

R.S. history, however, is still in its infancy and I would imagine
in the future that it will come under the humanist scholarship you

DICK P. writes and quotes:

Benji seems to have forgotten Dr. Dave's immortal words:


I don't have a religion, as such, but I came to A.R.E. only after
I was discussed at length. Aaron Talsky told me about this fine
newsgroup and said that there was a heated discussion about "Lane
and his research." I joined into an already pre-existing discussion
and I have been having a fun time ever since."


Dave said that he doesn't have a religion, as such. So, what is happening
here. How did this thought get into Benji's head? How did Dr. Dave arrive
at the epidemic site? According to the above statement, the old rule of
invocation applies, "Speak of the Devil and he shall appear."


Oh, yes, as the saying goes, "Just CALL KAL", and a surfer guy shows

DICK quotes:

"Meme propagation drives memetic innovation by helping generate and
recombine ideas. The beliefs spreading most vigorously prevail in the
natural selection of memes, giving them the best odds of spawning new
variants and combinations. Such innovation, in turn, drives propagation
by supplying both new and strengthened thought contagions. Meme
propagation and innovation thus accomplish the great feedback system of
Darwinian evolution in the ideosphere. Much as biological evolution keeps
viruses renewed and infectious, so too does memetic evolution keep
certain beliefs current and contagious. It all happens without plan, and
it gives evolving thought contagions a profound influence on society."

DICK then writes:

Wow! What if we had a plan? Simple repetition is often enough to
propagate a meme.


Yep, like Gakko came from Venus, or Twitchell graduated high school
at 16, or like Sudar Singh exists..... you get the drift.


DICK writes:

However, access to the same public internet use area doesn't prove that
Benji framed up the whole scenario anymore than Paul Twitchell's access
to Julian Johnson's writings proves plaigerism.


Sorry, Dick, but you left something out here. It was not merely
Twitchell's "access" to Johnson that caused the plagiarism

It was the 400+ plagiarized paragraphs from THE PATH OF THE MASTERS
AND WITH A GREAT MASTER in INDIA as found in Twitchell's much later
book, the FAR COUNTRY.......

The verbatim similarities are the key.

It is merely icing on the cake to know that Twitchell owned a
copy of THE PATH OF THE MASTERS (it even had notes in it).

I was shown the copy at the ECkankar International Headquarters in
Menlo Park back in the late 1970s.....

Twitchell's access is obvious;
his plagiarism of that source is even more so.


DICK writes:

Dear Dr. Dave,

As a co-worker with the SUGMAD, it is my delight to add a little fun to
your life.

If laceration is your criterion for admiration, then several of the
denizens sof a.r.e. should be near to gods in your estimation.

I only wish that Aaron would allow Basho to attend a true Southern
pig-pickin' and experience the fun of his true carniverous nature.

Good luck with your lawsuit over Life 102.


Yes, you are quite correct: Nathan, Joey, Steve, Dick, and others
are in my pantheon of EK gods.....

I am in all seriousness quite grateful to them and to you and to
others for inspiring me to write.....

Otherwise, I would simply be checking the surf alerts.....

Basho is a mystic dog and has no need of "flesh" food........

But I am quite sure he would give up his turban for a good bone/////


I once gave Basho a donut and suffered severe karma from Aaron


E-mail The Neural Surfer directly at

I want to go back to the home base now.