E-mail David Christopher Lane
directly at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
Author: David Christopher Lane Publisher: MSAC Philosophy Group Publication date: 1996
E-mail David Christopher Lane
directly at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
I
want to go back to the home base now.
Hunkin: Thank you for your note. To answer your query as simply as possible: No, I don't jest when I say that Twitchell was associated with Kirpal Singh and L. Ron Hubbard. You mention that Kirpal Singh has no records of the "discourses" or the manuscripts of Paul. But this is factually incorrect. Below are a few sources that you may want to reference so that you can see where Kirpal talks about Paul Twitchell: 1. HEART TO HEART TALKS by Kirpal Singh (two volumes--in the first volume he talks about how Paul was initiated and how Paul had sent the manuscript THE TIGER'S FANG to him). 2. The 1955 SAT SANDESH mentions how Paul Twitchell was a new a initiate of Kirpal Singh. 3. Read Twitchell's early advertisements on Eckankar and how he mentions Kirpal. 4. Write to Sant Rajinder Singh at Sawan-Kirpal Ashram in Vijay Nager, in Old Delhi, India, and see if he will photocopy Twitchell's extensive correspondence with Kirpal Singh, dating from 1955 to 1966. I once spent over 5 straight hours with Darshan Singh, the son of Kirpal Singh, in Delhi at his office going over the Twitchell file. I read every one of Paul Twitchell's letters and some of Kirpal Singh's responses. In those numerous letters (over 10 in 1955 alone to Kirpal by Paul), Twitchell talks about his discourses via Kirpal Singh's nightly appearances and about dedicating the TIGER's fang TO Kirpal. 5. The Scientology connection is very well documented. I even have several articles penned by Paul Twitchell for the Scientology magazine ABILITY, where Paul's name is also mentioned as a counselor. 6. Twitch also plagiarized Scientology materials (see LETTERS TO 7. Even Harold Klemp admits that Paul had an association with Kirpal and Hubbard. 8. You ask me if I have ever seriously read Twitchell's books. Again, the answer is yes. How else could I have documented his plagiarisms so extensively? But on a lighter note, my favorite two books by Twitchell are: THE TIGER's FANG and THE TALONS OF TIME. 9. I have also read L. Ron Hubbard's books. The best expose' that I have read of the man and his work is the BARE FACED MESSIAH. A great read. 10. If you are interested in great cult exposes', the following are some of my favorites: NO MAN KNOWS MY HISTORY (on Joseph Smith's life and the founding of the Church of Latter Day Saints--Mormons) MONKEY ON A STICK (on the Hare Krsna succession crises--this book reads better than most novels) LIFE 102: WHAT TO DO WHEN YOUR GURU SUES YOU (the single best anti-cult book I have ever read and probably the funniest) Feel most free to question or doubt anything I say or write. It is good to hear from you; I think we may have briefly talked on the phone once. thanks, daveDear Hunkin: I just read your post about how certain Eck-critics are lucky that they are investigating Eckankar versus Scientology. Scientology, as you point out, respond to their critics quite severely. However, it is really Eckankar that should count themselves lucky (or perhaps Scientology has already contacted them? Letters to Gail Volume 3?) since they have been guilty of using copyrighted materials from Scientology publications without giving credit or due reference (see LETTERS TO GAIL for a good example) In any case, your post brought up a fond memory for me: I remember talking at a Conference on New Religions in Europe at the London School of Economics when I was told that the President of Scientology was in the audience. I don't think he liked my talk much (I said a few critical things of Hubbard and his educational credentials), but he came up to me and gave me a free book which was quite heavy (I mean literally as in terms of stones or pounds) entitled WHAT IS SCIENTOLOGY? I don't think too highly of the book, mind you (it is hagiography gone wild), but just carrying it around made me lose weight. I have seen my share of cult battles (especially via J.R. and crew) and I do agree with you that Eckankar is not even in the class of some others. But then again, maybe you should ask Jim Peebles or Ed Gruss about how "kindly" Eckankar treats its critics. ---------- Dear Hunkin: I just read your post about how certain Eck-critics are lucky that they are investigating Eckankar versus Scientology. Scientology, as you point out, respond to their critics quite severely. However, it is really Eckankar that should count themselves lucky (or perhaps Scientology has already contacted them? Letters to Gail Volume 3?) since they have been guilty of using copyrighted materials from Scientology publications without giving credit or due reference (see LETTERS TO GAIL for a good example) In any case, your post brought up a fond memory for me: I remember talking at a Conference on New Religions in Europe at the London School of Economics when I was told that the President of Scientology was in the audience. I don't think he liked my talk much (I said a few critical things of Hubbard and his educational credentials), but he came up to me and gave me a free book which was quite heavy (I mean literally as in terms of stones or pounds) entitled WHAT IS SCIENTOLOGY? I don't think too highly of the book, mind you (it is hagiography gone wild), but just carrying it around made me lose weight. I have seen my share of cult battles (especially via J.R. and crew) and I do agree with you that Eckankar is not even in the class of some others. But then again, maybe you should ask Jim Peebles or Ed Gruss about how "kindly" Eckankar treats its critics.
