E-mail David Christopher Lane
directly at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
Author: David Christopher Lane Publisher: The NEURAL SURFER Publication date: April 1998
E-mail David Christopher Lane
directly at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
I
want to go back to the home base now.
TESSLER WRITES:
Taken as a whole, the emphasis on inner experience at initiation, his
abandonment of the ritualized use of the term Radhasoami, his broad
humanitarian activity, and the self-introspection diary, suggest that
Kirpal Singh came out early with clear direction for his ministry. It is
important to note that had he inherited the mantle at Beas, probably none
of these innovations would have been possible. His freedom from the
traditions and alliances established at Beas gave him the opportunity to
develop his ministry along new lines.
-----------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
I see no reason why Kirpal Singh (if he was appointed at Beas--he
wasn't since Jagat was) could not have implemented such changes.
It would have been easy to do. Beas has established a number of
things, like hospitals, like eye camps, like age limits, like cheese
restrictions, and so on.
You have given me no compelling reason why Kirpal's estrangement
from the Dera was necessary at all.
Indeed, it seems quite the opposite, since if he was appointed at
Beas he could have easily utilized such a comprehensive base of
operations, just as Charan did and just as Gurinder is now doing.
Given your logic, then Darshan should NOT have appointed Rajinder
since such continuity (as in Beas) works AGAINST not FOR innovations
and unity.
Sorry but your logical schema for Kirpal's departure doesn't hold
water, especially in light of Darshan's own iron-clad WILLED
transmission to his son, Rajinder....
No wonder the Ajaib camp and others see Darshan/Rajinder as a contradiction
of Kirpal's intended ministry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
The kind of inquiry and historical review we have undertaken deepens
our awareness of the richness and complexity of the processes that underlie
succession in the Sant tradition. I have offered this as a complement as
well as a counterpoint to Lane's categories of succession rhetoric. I have
argued that his categories tend to reduce complex and varied processes into
narrowly defined common patterns that confine rather then develop our
understanding.
---------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
While I quite agree that any study is limited, I think the
differences between our two approaches is much simpler than you
suspect:
You are looking for an inflationary (read: mystical) interpretation,
even when the "facts" are mostly hearsay and one-sided and lack
documentation. You tend, in other words, to accept whatever Kirpal
says and discount whatever anyone who opposes Kirpal may say.
Whereas I tend to look for a deflationary (read: empirical)
interpretation, positing that there is a HUMAN (versus a Divine)
impulse that is underlining the politics surrounding guru
succession. In this regard, I think all the gurus (including my
own--thus contradicting my OWN tradition) ARE HUMAN.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Lane's concluding assertion that succession controversies are basically about mundane factors such as property rights, bank accounts,
etc., highlights the contradiction of edifying a social science approach to
spiritual succession.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nope. I simply point out the obvious: that gurus seem very concerned
with ordinary, mundane matters. This ranges from the Dayal
Bagh/Soami Bagh lawsuit over "worship" rights at Soamiji's samadh;
to Kirpal's repeated snipes at Sawan's family and gossiping about
anyone who is anti his mission; to the eventual control of
copyrights and trademarks as now illustrated by Gurinder's reign.
Seems very human.
The social science aspect is merely stating what our common sense
tells us:
Geez, these God-Man seem really really uptight about some silly
things, like "hey, I really authored the book," to "see, I meditate
more than the next guy," to "if you step in this temple again, I am
going to sue your butt."
Divinity?
Nope.
Human pettiness?
Yep.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Lane's categories may describe Radhasoami succession
in a general way, yet they circumscribe and suffocate the spirit of Sant
Mat.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
No, it is the other way around, Neil.
I don't suffocate the "spirit" of Sant Mat,
its GURUS do exactly that.
How?
By suing, by backbiting, by gossiping, by defamation, by property
confiscation, by lying, by bragging.....
I have merely pointed such "humanness" out.
You, instead, argue that their is a Divine Purpose to Kirpal's
conceit, or Darshan's 3 hour ego ramblings, or Rajinder's book
signings at Borders.
I see ALL of it (including Beas, lest we forget) as reflecting
HUMANNESS.
I rarely, if ever, see anything Divine about it at all.
Geez, if these gurus can't stop backbiting each other HERE, i
don't see why we should trust them THERE!
--------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Though the Beas succession controversy is the center of Lane's thesis,
his attempt to squeeze Charan Singh and Kirpal Singh into categories based
on their succession rhetoric has failed to convince in either instance.
---------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
No need to squeeze, I can sum it even simpler:
Kirpal didn't get appointed at the Dera and thus had to talk about
himself a lot (bragging about his meditation, his inner contact, his
"charging," his "miraculous" powers, his love, etc.).
You call such talk "divine."
I call such talk "human."
Moreover, much of Kirpal's talking about himself was, I argue,
strategic.
How?
He wanted to "rhetorically" persuade his listeners that he was the
"real" Master and the "real" successor to Sawan Singh.
Your ample quotes of Kirpal substantiate my thesis quite succinctly
on this point.
-------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
This is largely due to an interpretation that emphasised their social
position in relation to the sangat; Jagat Singh/Charan Singh as majority
successors and Kirpal Singh as a minority successor. I have shown that a
broader historical analysis tends to displace this limiting view.
-----------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
No, you have not shown us a "broader" view, but have, in effect,
shown us that you believe whatever Kirpal Singh says and discount
whatever anybody else (who opposes Kirpal) says.
As such, your thesis could also be summarized thusly:
"I, Neil, believe whatever my guru, Kirpal, says. Even when my guru
doesn't make logical or empirical sense, I will try to explain it
away (or justify it) by an appeal to hidden, mystic secrets.
In any case, Kirpal is right and all other competing gurus are
wrong. Why? Because Kirpal MUST be right....."
You haven't provided a wider historical analysis, but rather a
MYSTICAL interpretation of some historical events.
You seem to think that a mystical interpretation somehow counts as
"history" (it doesn't).
Each guru and each satsang tends to legitimize itself by appeals to
"mystical" (read: "hidden") variables.
Your defense of Kirpal Singh is no different.
The only problem is that your "facts" are weak, whereas your
"belief" in Kirpal is strong.
I would be more impressed if it were the reverse.
----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Specifically, our discussion of Charan Singh's succession revealed a rather
more basic reason than "office authority" for his lack of reference to his
spiritual authenticity in the early period of his succession.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
No, we have instead seen how "you" (not the Dera, and certainly not
Beas satsangis) tend to view Charan's "humility."
You seem to be under the impression that if a guru claims insight he
or she must have it; and if a guru does not claim such he or she
must not have it.....
In other words, you tend to put Lao Tzu on his head:
Those who SAY, DO KNOW.
Those who don't SAy, obviously don't know.
I call this line of reasoning the LOCKER ROOM OF JUNIOR HIGH
MYSTICS.
I also call it extraordinarily naive and gullible.
Given your line of reasoning, not only are there millions of Elvis'
worldwide, but Paul Twitchell was a truly enlightened Vairagi
Master.
Geez, does that mean that J.R. is the Mystical Traveler too?
--------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Also we have
seen how Kirpal Singh's focus on the guru's spiritual authenticity and
inner experience at initiation existed within a much larger context than
Lane allows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Or, more succinctly: Where I see humanness, you see divinity.
Where I see hype, you see "Revelation."
Where you see authenticity, I see ego.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
There is ample evidence that the full story of politics at Beas in the
last decade of Baba Sawan Singh's life remains untold, probably forever.
------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
I quite agree, but that applies to each and EVERY guru succession
episode, including Kirpal's as well.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Kirpal Singh speaks in detail of the jealousy of others and severe
controversy following his 1938 initiation of 250 persons at Beas on Hazur's
behalf. This is a very strong signal that all was not well at Dera, even
ten years before the passing of Baba Sawan Singh.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Kirpal Singh says people were jealous of whom?
Himself.
Oh, I get it, Kirpal once again talking about himself (and putting
others down in the process) as a beloved object.
Quite frankly, I think Kirpal's revelations speak volumes about his
own ego trials and tribulations.
I quite agree that there were politics at the Dera.
And guess who contributed to it in a significant way?
Kirpal Singh.
And guess who consistently talks ill of Sawan's inner circle and
family (in other words: gossips)?
Kirpal Singh.
That alone tells us something.
Tessler sees it as Divine.
I see it as a petty trait of a human being.
---------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Following the brief tenure at Beas of S.B. Jagat Singh, he is
succeeded by a most surprised and reluctant Charan Singh. This succession
was achieved in a unique manner, strictly on the basis of legal
documentation, no verbal authorization, and not even a hint of spiritual
forewarning on the part of the recipient of the mantle.
------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Again, this is not entirely accurate. See TREASURE BEYOND MEASURE
for Charan's last drive to the Dera where he is forced to pull the
car to the side of the road.
In any case, there is no denying Charan's shock.
There is also no denying that Charan, unlike Kirpal, never talked
at length about his own inner attainments or his own meditation.
Or, in other words, Charan followed exactly what Johnson states as
an objective indice of a master:
The guru never praises himself or his spiritual attainments.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
This raises many
difficult questions. Furthermore, a critical review of Charan Singh's
succession suggested that beneath the mass of organizational hyperbole and
the faithful presumption of followers, his own clear statements give ample
cause to question the spiritual authenticity of his guruship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Sorry, Neil, but you are again be quite inconsistent.
Sawan Singh AFTER he is appointed as a guru (and after his own
guru's
death) goes to AGRA and states univocally that he lacks sufficient
power to initiate and then asks Chachaji to send a sadhu to conduct
initiation.
Given your line of reasoning (and you should be consistent, since
Sawan was Kirpal's own guru), then Sawan provides us with "ample"
cause to question the spiritual authenticity of his guruship.
But you never question Sawan on this score.
Why?
Because it systematically undermines your whole thesis.
What you fail to realize is that talk is cheap.
Anyone can talk about their inner attainment (Jerry Mulvin et al.).
The rare thing is to shut up about it.
But, unlike you, I think ALL these gurus are HUMAN.
Some are humble, some are egotistical.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
What then was Baba Sawan Singh's plan for Dera at the time of his
passing? If we accept both of the major versions of his succession as
more or less valid, we see in the last months of Baba Sawan Singh's life,
apparently contradictory, even potentially conflicting processes being set
in motion by him, for the future development of different aspects of his
life work.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Hmm, The Sawan Singh as ASSHOLE theory.
Help 10%, and FUCK the other 90% by giving them false hopes under
the
guise of a false guru.
No, Neil, I disagree.
I have a different theory:
it is called, "Yep, I did appoint Jagat as my Spiritual Successor,
and wanted to clarify the matter by doing it in two public and
notarized Wills."
I call it the "less confusion theory".
It is also a much simpler explanation.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Earlier we reviewed Soami Ji's succession at Agra as well as his
tolerance of Rai Saligram's heterodox interpretation of his teachings.
This indicates the tolerance that a Sant Mat guru has for those who go
astray or deviate from their teachings.
--------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
No, it just shows how people AFTER a guru dies try their best to
explain why the guru left such a mess and why so many followers
are confused.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Baba Sawan Singh may have been in
a position at Dera that required a similar gesture of magnamity, such as
tolerating a Beas succession for the continued stable functioning of the
Dera.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Magnamity?
To consciously deceive 90% of your following by appointing a false
guru who "lacks" the charging?
Geez, Neil, can't you think through your ideas first.
Why not just say like it is:
Sawan Singh wanted to fuck with his disciples and leave them
confused and caught in a property net.
You call such an act magnamity?
I call it being an asshole.
Now, naturally, I think your theory is wrong on many fronts.
I have a much simpler solution:
Sawan appointed Jagat and Kirpal got bummed and started his own
group.
Sawan was a human being and did his best to minimize the confusion.
Given your theory, we have the opposite:
Sawan was "divine" and wanted to MAXIMIZE THE CONFUSION.
Geez, so much for mystical interpretations.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Knowing that members of his family and managing committee would not
accept Kirpal Singh, Hazur had Kirpal Singh do his work as successor from
another place and tolerated a situation in which those who wished to do so
could continue at the Dera under management led by Jagat Singh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
is Sawan Singh that much of a fudging wimp?
Geez, the picture you paint of Sawan makes him look like a complete
idiot, who is willing to placate his family/friends so as not to
lose his "property" interests.
If this is called being a "guru", then who needs them?
Nope, I opt for the human theory of lessening confusion:
Sawan appoints Jagat (we have his two wills) and Kirpal starts his
own ministry and starts to backbite anyone who opposes his
candidacy.
90% follow Sawan's wills;
10% or less follow Kirpal's claims.
The Will clarifies,
whereas your hypothesis confuses.
you call the latter a divine plan;
I call it a petty mess.
Unlike you, I think Sawan simply wanted to minimize the confusion by
using the Wills.
You tend to think that he wanted to MAXIMIZE it.
Thus, you must by your reading look for a conspiracy AGAINST
Kirpal.
Whereas, I can simply look at the events in a human and predictable
way.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes
Whether or
not there was an actual will, we know that Hazur was made aware of the
politics of the Dera's managing committee before he left the body.
-----------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Again, the Will was probated.
Why don't you ask for a copy?
Pretty simple, huh?
Moreover, just go the earlier Will (which has R.K. Khanna's
signature on it) that says univocally that Sawan will appoint his
successor via a will.
----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Hazur,
knowing this, could have chosen to intervene one way or the other, by
publically naming Jagat Singh or Kirpal Singh, but he did not do so. This
is a most notable fact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
But he did intervene, Neil.
He signed TWO wills to that effect.
Thus he minimized (instead of maximized) the confusion.
Given your scenario, he would have actually ADDED to the fudging
mess.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Baba Jaimal Singh's succession of Soami Ji has several important
similarities to Kirpal Singh's succession of Baba Sawan Singh. Lane has
commented on the benefits to Baba Jaimal Singh's ministry that resulted
from his distance from Soami Ji's Agra sangat. This is very reminiscent of
the progressive innovations Kirpal Singh brought to his ministry in Delhi,
where he was away from the traditions of the Dera. In both cases the
spiritual work was started from scratch, with much smaller numbers, but
with much greater freedom. In both cases religious and institutional
accretions were stripped away, so that the spiritual kernel of the guruship
could flourish. As we discussed much earlier, this spiritual kernel seems
to set lightly on material soil. History indicates that Sant Mat gurus
have no attachment to place as such, often choosing to cast their tent in
more congenial environs when the world and its forms have begun to cling to
tightly. It would also appear that in every generation the crisis of
succession is the moment of opportunity for any major changes in form and
locale. In some cases major changes are made, while in other cases there
is no need for major changes and continuity is desirable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
"Set lightly on material soil"?
This is not true, neither in Kirpal's case nor Darshan's.
Kirpal gathered tremendous amounts of property and Darshan even sued
over Sawan Ashram.
Sorry, but your rhetoric is contradicted by that most ugly of
empirical features:
HISTORICAL FACTS.
These gurus are much more human than you portray, even Kirpal.
I saw Darshan for upwards to ten hours over two days and I can
tell you that he was quite concerned with name, fame, and ego.
You naturally will see a mystical bent in all of it.
I see something much more extraordinary:
a human guru trying to impress a researcher.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
The analogy to Baba Jaimal Singh's succession of Soami Ji was
certainly not lost on Baba Sawan Singh. When ordering Kirpal Singh to
leave Dera he commented:
"When Baba Ji came from Agra, he brought with him neither money nor
followers. He fetched within him only his Guru and through his blessings
the present Dera came into existence."109 [Brief Life Sketch of Hazur Baba
Sawan Singh Ji Maharaj. Ibid.]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Another quote from Kirpal wherein Sawan praises or instructs him.
And this is called "objective"?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Despite the alleged Beas will, the controversial succession of Baba
Sawan Singh could well be regarded as another example of deliberate
ambiguity, a device employed by the departing leader to ensure the
preservation of the spiritual character of the guruship.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Sorry, but TWO wills is not the height of ambiguity.
Quite the opposite: it is quite clear what Sawan wanted to
accomplish.
And guess what?
He did minimize confusion:
90% went to Jagat and Charan;
only 10% or less went to Kirpal and others.
Very clear in light of Sant Mat history, huh?
What is unclear is Kirpal's succession allegations.
Kirpal has to brag about himself to convince us that he is the
successor..... not very modest, huh?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
The view of
Kirpal Singh's succession promulgated by Dera Beas suggests the deviation
of a self-interested disciple.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Yep. And your various quotes directly from Kirpal supports such a
contention quite well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
However, the evidence upon which this view
is based seems deliberately contrived.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nope. It is primarily based on Kirpal's own words.... and there are
lots of them wherein he talks about himself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER WRITES:
On the other hand there is a large body of testimony that suggests that Kirpal Singh's succession was a
planned and cultivated process in which his grooming by Hazur spanned many
years. This can be evidenced from statements made by Hazur at their
earliest meetings, as well as through numerous incidents and comments made
publically and privately by Hazur throughout Kirpal Singh's discipleship.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Testimony by whom?
Mostly Kirpal Singh and those who later aligned with him.
Those who aligned with Jagat and Charan (90% of the sangat) have
quite a different "testimony", huh?
They also have something unique:
Two Wills by Sawan himself (probated).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
It is notable that there were disciples of Hazur who actively anticipated,
even prepared for Kirpal Singh's succession, as early as fifteen years
before the fact (see Appendix A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
And, there were disciples who anticipated other disciples as
would-be gurus as well (from Somanath to a slew of others that
Tessler fails to mention).
There are also a slew of disciples who felt that Jagat and Charan
were being groomed (geez, even R.K.Khanna felt that Charan was being
groomed--he told me so back in 1978).
In any case, more testimony but not more evidence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Just as Soami Ji had done at Agra, it
appears that Baba Sawan Singh at his end arranged for the future needs of
the Dera, even while preparing his spiritual successor for his intended
departure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Future needs of the Dera?
According to your theory, these needs were deception, illusion, and
bullshit.
Are these new needs?
Sorry, but you have failed to really think through your theory.
You end up with Sawan as asshole.
My hunch is much kinder:
Sawan as human who did his best to MINIMIZE the confusion.
And guess what?
He did that.
Kirpal maximizes it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
As with any death or birth, succession in Sant Mat is a cascade of
intense and distressing images. Yet the one that sustains is that of a
single man stretched between an absolute experience of spiritual ecstasy
and human anguish. In this, the apotheosis, the summit of human purpose,
all that it means to be divine and all that it means to be human, touch
each other, and then fuse. When such a man emerges he is something other
than what he was before, for in essence, he no longer exists. Who then is
the Sat Guru?
As Kirpal Singh has written:
"In him shines the very Sun of Spirituality. He is the fountainhead of
Life. He is an epitome of the entire creation, visible and invisible,
right from Sat Lok down to the physical plane.... He is Truth personified,
possessing the very essence of God and fit to be worshiped by all."
(Godman. Kirpal Singh, Sawan Kirpal Publications, pp. 75-76. Originally
published by Ruhani Satsang, Delhi, 1967).
---------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice rhetorical gibberish.
Given your theory, the guru is the one who CONFUSES us.
And you call it divine.
Given my theory, the guru tried to minimize it.
And I call it human.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail The Neural Surfer directly
at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
I want to go back to the home base now.
E-mail The Neural Surfer directly
at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
I want to go back to the home base now.