E-mail David Christopher Lane
directly at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
Author: David Christopher Lane Publisher: The NEURAL SURFER Publication date: May 1998
E-mail David Christopher Lane
directly at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
I
want to go back to the home base now.
TESSLER writes:
The only problem here (besides a significant amount of evidence that
this is exactly what Baba Sawan Singh did), is that such a move by the
guru, from one center to another, occured in a majority of cases. If Soami
Ji was Tulsi Saheb's gurumukh successor, then we see the seat of the
guruship being moved from Hathras to Agra.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Oh, Neil, you are being silly here again. Have you ever been to
Hathras? If so, did you ask the followers there in the Tulsi
Sahibi camp about the "gurumukh" successor who left and went to Agra?
They disagree with you and there were a number of successors to
Tulsi Sahib--some even thriving today.
You have simply bought into Kirpal's version (without any
hesitation) and have not done sufficient research to know that
there are lots of claimants to Tulsi Sahib's gaddi.
How do you "know" Shiv Dayal was the gurumukh?
Answer?
Because you believe Kirpal Singh.
This view of yours is theology, Neil, not history.
-------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
We also see a gradual process
of deterioration and mythologization at Hathras, now inhabited by the
"Tulsi Sahebis".
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Have you been there?
Have you talked with Surswami's successors or Ramkrishna's
successors?
Moreover, this is "your" take via your lineage, not necessarily how
they view it.
One of Tulsi's present-day successors has a much different view.
They see Shiv Dayal Singh and his teachings as a BASTARDIZATION of
the truth.
Who is right in this fight, Neil?
You, simply because you happen to be a Kirpal follower?
No, Neil, what we have here once again is not history but a
theological dispute that you are unwittingly trying to pass off
as "objective."
------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Then if Baba Jaimal Singh were indeed the gurumukh
successor of Soami Ji, we see the seat of the guruship being moved from
Agra to the distant northern Punjab, leaving behind an uneasy situation at
Agra, with political fights, fragmentation, changing doctrines and
techniques of meditation.
--------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Sure, Neil, that is why Jaimal Singh builds an apartment at Soami
Bagh (to be "closer" to the politics?), that is why Jaimal Singh
pays allegiance to Radhaji (she is in Agra too), that is why Jaimal
Singh pays allegiance to Chachaji (he is in Agra too).
Sorry, but the historical facts betray your unilateral claims.
Jaimal Singh was not the exclusive successor to Shiv Dayal
Singh---far from it.
You may believe he was the only successor, but Sawan Singh didn't
think so.
Why else did he listen to "Chachaji" in Agra?
Or Gharib Das in Delhi?
Again, you have accepted a party line that has little recourse in
history, but lots of recourse in theological one upmanship.
-------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
In both cases, I am sure many fine and sincere
disciples of the root guru were never verbally or legally or even
spiritually directed to the gurumukh disciple.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
If you believe in Shiv Dayal's last statements, he was quite clear
about who is successors were.
Your claim here is not even close to being accurate historically.
It just happens to be your theological twist and one not grounded in
what transpired in Agra.
-------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Today the several Agra
satsang groups, Soamibagh and Dayalbagh seem to be micro-religious
caricatures of the teachings of Soami Ji and Tulsi Saheb.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
How do these groups view Kirpal Singh?
I know the answer and you know the answer.
They see him as a bogus guru from a bogus lineage.
You think they are wrong because you are a follower of Kirpal Singh.
Again, you have dressed up a theological argument as if it was an
objective history lesson.
Go read what the Agra groups think of Kirpal and Beas.
They have a much different twist than you.
Who is right, Neil?
You because you have a "true" guru?
And they are wrong because their lineage is false?
Sorry but your argument is sinking because you are not thinking.
------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Referring to the Sikh Gurus who preceded the modern lineage, Kirpal
Singh writes in his biography of Baba Jaimal Singh:
"This rich heritage goes from eye to eye and refuses to be bound to
traditional gaddis (so-called sanctified seats and sacred places)...Guru
Nanak, with his set at Kartarpur, passed on his spritual heritage to Bhai
Lehna, who, as Guru Angad, shifted to Khadur Sahib; while his successor
Guru Amar Das was obliged to transfer his seat to Goindwal. With Guru Ram
Das, Amritsar came into being, and later on became the headquarters of Guru
Arjan. Thus we see that there is nothing special about places as such.
They owe their sanctity to the sanctifying influence of the Saints who pass
their time at one place or another. 'All is holy where devotion kneels.'
It is not the places that grace men but men the places."
-----------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
I am not at all surprised that Kirpal would argue such a thing.
Why?
Because it supports his own lineage and his own succession.
Does Beas agree with this?
Nope.
Does Agra agree with this?
Nope.
Do scholars agree with this?
Nope.... they argue that there is NO connection between Guru Gobind
Singh and Tulsi Sahib.
You believe this sort of history because you are a follower of
Kirpal.
That's fine, but it is not history.
It is called "conversion" theology.
----------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Lane askes why these gurus would leave their disciples without clarity
in the succession. I discussed my own view in detail in my book, indeed it
is an important aspect of my thesis. Is it possible that the gurus of the
tradition have a point of view that is not easily grasped within the narrow
circle of Lane's literalism?
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Which can be translated as follows:
The guru likes to consciously CONFUSE the vast majority of his
followers, especially those who don't know better.
Except, of course, in the case of Darshan Singh to his own blood
son, Rajinder Singh, where he CONSCIOUSLY tried to MINIMIZE ALL SUCH
CONFUSION.
So who is confused here, Neil?
I have an answer:
The guru who can't be straight and the disciple who can't argue
straight.
In other words, we are back to the old guru as asshole theory (and I
do mean asshole--as in deceiver, as in backbiter, as in fuck with
the naive disciple, etc.).
You don't like that word, I gather, but at least I am willing to
call the guru's ploy for what it is.
You instead see some mystical reason for such duplicity, for such
conspiracy.
I don't.
I see human pettiness at work.
-------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
A) Lane insists that I believe the Beas will of 1948 is a fake. Why don't
I just come out and say it, he asks. Well, the fact is that I don't have a
belief on this point. I wasn't there in 1948 and it doesn't really matter
to me.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Oh, come on Neil.
This is amazingly dijointed of you.
Tell me what you think of the earlier Will wherein Sawan says he
will
eventually appoint his spiritual successor VIA will.
If you don't think it was a fake, why did you spend so much time on
discussing "forgery" and the like?
It does matter to many people.
It is clear that it does not matter enough to you; that is why you
lamely argue this way and that.
I understand why....
It is really quite simple.
You are a follower of Kirpal and tend to argue the party line to
support him.
Understandable, but certainly not historical.
------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
All I offered in Crisis and Renewal is the fact that there were
conflicting views, testimonies, evidences and a larger overlighting
context. I feel no need personally to make a judgement on the veracity of
the will, nor was my discussion a cover for a particular view, and in any
case, my opinions on Baba Sawan Singh's succession does not hinge on
whether or not a will existed.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Again, this is patently untrue.
Go re-read your paper again.
-----------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
B) In response to my statement that Charan Singh had no inner or outer
forewarning of his succession, Lane makes several mentions of a story that
Charan Singh had some sort of experience at the time of Jagat Singh's
passing. Charan Singh says, "While driving suddenly my heart began sinking
and I felt that Beloved Master (S.B. Jagat Singh) had left us." In another
version the editor of Treasure Beyond Measure states, "Maharaji told us
that it must have been some time past midnight when he suddenly saw a flash
of light and felt that Sardar Bahadurji was no more." In what way does this
experience, whether one or both versions, indicate a forewarning of his
succession? It does not.
----------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
But, my dear Neil, you have forgotten the most important point I was
trying to make.
I was merely telling you that Beas too (if it so desires) could
produce a whole lot of stories (including the one you just
mentioned) to buttress their lineage.
They don't usually.
Why?
They don't have to.
Why?
They have two notarized WILLS by the previous guru indicating quite
clearly who he wanted to succeed him.
Now do I think Charan's story indicates transpersonal knowledge?
Nope.
I take it as a human story, most likely with a human explanation.
Now do the same, Neil, to your Kirpal stories.
It would be a refreshing change of pace.
----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Experiences of knowing that someone close is dying or dead are fairly
common. Kirpal Singh had these experiences on a number of occasions as a
child, once excusing himself from elementary school due to just such an
experience regarding his grandmother (The Beloved Master. Bhadra Sena,
Ruhani Satsang, 1963, page 4).
An old friend told me that one night she was awakened by a knocking at
the bottom of her bed. There stood her brother-in-law with his knees
hitting the bed in a rocking motion peculiar to him. He then told her, "I
just died, go to your sister." He had indeed died suddenly of a heart
attack. A very dramatic experience, in some ways more dramatic then Charan
Singh's.
---------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
I quite agree.
But then you have missed my entire point.
Anyone can generate stories about anything.
They are just that though:
stories!
-------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
In my discussion with Giani Ji in 1986 at Sawan Ashram he told Arran
Stephens and I, that very late on the night of Sardar Bahadur Jagat Singh's
passing, he and Tai Ji were sitting with Kirpal Singh when suddenly he
exclaimed, "Sardar Bahadur is just leaving."
Over a period of about three years in the mid-seventies I personally
met six people in my region who had visions of Kirpal Singh on the day he
passed away, August 21st. 1974. Some of their experiences, as described to
me first hand, were very dramatic. None of them were initiated by Kirpal
Singh, though all knew initiates. None of them knew of the event of his
passing. None of this has to do with succession.
--------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Yes, more stories.....
That was my point, lest you forget.
You tend to tell stories to buttress your guru's narrative.
But they remain just that:
rhetorical devices to substantiate this or that lineage dispute.
-----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
C) Repeatedly, Lane draws comparison between Charan Singh's strong reaction
to his unexpected succession of Jagat Singh and Baba Sawan Singh's apparent
reluctance to begin initiation. It is always difficult to compare
historically distant events, especially as in Sawan Singh's case where we
have only this one anecdote, whereas in Charan Singh's case we have much
detailed information.
------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Hmm, the point in both was the same:
the succeeding guru claimed not to have sufficient power.
Sawan said it and now in the next few lines you are going to try to
see if you can legitimize an obvious discrepancy on your part.....
Let us continue reading:
------------
TESSLER writes:
So let us enlarge our view and see what we can see by comparing the
discipleship and succession circumstances of several of the Masters most
often discussed:
Soami Ji Maharaj was initiated at six years old and from a fairly
early age spent seventeen years of intensive meditation practice.
---------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice leap here, Neil.
How do you know he was initiated at six years old?
Where is the exact source?
Did Shiv Dayal say he was initiated?
By whom?
Or did Shiv Dayal say something a bit different, according to
Chachaji?
------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
His
parents were disciples of Tulsi at the time of his birth, so though he was
initiated at six, he would have spent 24 years under the influence of Tulsi
Saheb.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Again, another nice leap, since you have not informed your reader
that your claim is not substantiated by ANY Agra source, but only by
those related to Beas.
I may agree with you, but you have made a leap and clearly there are
many who don't think that Shiv Dayal was initiated by Tulsi at all.
----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Although, we have no written testimony from Soami Ji on the verbal
instructions given him by Tulsi Saheb, there is a story, printed in several
places, of something occuring that sounds suspiciously like the
transmission of spiritual authority described by Kirpal Singh.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Where was this "story" printed?
------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
We have
Baba Sawan Singh's own words from With The Three Masters by Rai Sahib
Munshi Ram (Page 179 - 180):
"20th June 1946 - During the morning walk Huzur said, "The grandmother
and the mother of Swami Ji Maharaj were both devotees of Tulsi Sahib. I
have seen a lady Satsangi of about ninety or a hundred years old who used
to say that Tulsi Sahib often came to Huzur Swami Ji Maharaj's house in
Panni Lane in Agra. When the last moments of Tulsi Sahib arrived He called
for Swami Ji Maharaj, whom He used to call Munshi Ji (a man of letters).
"When this message reached Swami Ji, he left immediately, barefooted.
such was His love for the Satguru! When he arrived at Hathras, which is
about fourteen miles from Agra, Tulsi Sahib, in great ecstasy and deep
meditation, had closed His eyes. People said to Him, 'Huzur, Munshi Ji
arrived.' At this, He opened His eyes, fixed them intently on Swami Ji
Maharaj, and then left this world."
---------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice story, but have you ever been to Hathras by foot from Agra?
Sounds a bit hagiographical and the Tulsi Sahibis don't buy it since
they claim that Surswami was Tulsi chief successor and that Shiv
Dayal was a wanna-be guru.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
We hear nothing about his attitude towards his succession, but we
certainly have indication from recorded comments of Tulsi Saheb, that he
must have been an extremely advanced soul from an early age.
---------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Where does Tulsi Sahib comment on Shiv Dayal?
Tell us the source, Neil.
YOu and I know where the source is and it is NOT from Hathras.
Again, more theology dressed up to look like history.
This is your theological twist, once again, Neil----not history.
-----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Baba Jaimal Singh came to Soami Ji already well advanced in
meditation, having attained mastery of the first two Names, given by a
previous guru.
--------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
How do you know he was "advanced."?
You read it somewhere and you happen to believe the writer.
But this again shows that you buy into stories (which could be
hagiographical renditions after the fact), but don't let onto the
reader that much of what you recounting is rhetorical, not
necessarily historical.
And you call this history?
Be clearer:
You "believe" this and that.
-----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
His initiation, at age seventeen, was characterized by a
powerful samadhi experience lasting two days, and he made very rapid inner
progress. Besides his intensive practice of meditation, Baba Jaimal Singh
had a series of remarkable experiences in which he was seen fulfulling his
military duties, while his physical body was, in fact, sitting in
meditation elsewhere or in the satsang of Soami Ji. One disciple of Soami
Ji apparently remarked, "Soami Ji gave us the water of spirituality in
measured doses in a tiny glass, but he gave to Baba Jaimal Singh in huge
mugfuls--like a millionaire giving away his wealth." (from Heaven On Earth)
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Once again, more hagiography that is lamely trying to act like
history.
Don't get me wrong.
Beautiful story and all, but you have no idea whether it is true or
not.
It is told by those with a vested interest in succession to buttress
their views.
It is not told by objective, third-person sources, huh?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Baba Jaimal Singh was given clear verbal orders to carry the work of
Naam initiation to the Punjab.
----------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Says whom?
And what orders did Shiv Dayal give to others?
----------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Previously he been ordered to give seekers
Naam whom he might meet on his military journeys, a number of years before
Soami Ji's passing. (See Heaven on Earth and Brief Life Sketch of Baba
Jaimal Singh). Whatever spiritual transmission occured is not recorded for
posterity. Baba Jaimal Singh's first initiations occured in 1887, before
the passing of Soami Ji. The period of his discipleship during the life of
his Master lasted twenty one years.
---------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Yet again, you use a story (unverified by outside sources) and use
it as cardinal facts.
Who tells us this stuff?
Beas and Ruhani related lineages.
NOT the Agra lineages.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Sant Kirpal Singh came to Baba Sawan Singh also highly advanced in
meditation, having had regular spiritual vision throughout his youth,
periods of heightened consciousness that would last for months at a time,
transcension of physical consciousness and visions of his guru on a daily
basis for seven years before he met him physically. His initiation was a
dramatic spiritual experience, after which he spent a minimum of six hours
daily in meditation. During the 1930's, on several occasions Baba Sawan
Singh mentioned to individuals, and in one case, to the entire Lahore
sangat that between He and Kirpal Singh there was no difference. In 1939,
nine years before his passing, Baba Sawan Singh wrote him and said.
"...complete your course of bhajan and simran. I am greatly pleased with
you. You are serving the Lord with all your resources--body, mind, and
money." Baba Sawan Singh also conferred on Kirpal Singh many physical
gifts, including a meditation shawl of Baba Jaimal Singh.
-------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Who says all this groovy stuff?
Yep, Kirpal Singh.
About whom?
Himself.
Yes, Neil, ego in the form of biographical hagiography.
---------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Like his Master before him, it was Kirpal Singh's habit to place before
Hazur all of his income, for Hazur to disperse as he wished. It is also a
fact that many of his family and friends had dramatic spiritual experiences
that gave direct indication of Kirpal Singh's great advancement and close
spiritual union with Baba Sawan Singh.
----------------------------------
LANE REPLIES:
Again, re-read what you write.
This is what you believe;
it is not necessarily a historical argument, but a believer's faith
in the stories of his chosen guru.
Every disciple tells more or less the same type of things,
even Ekists, even Thakar followers.
What makes you certain that your guru is the right one and the
others misguided (especially at Agra)?
I have an answer:
YOUR belief, your experience.
But that is the telling point:
It is "yours."
------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Baba Sawan Singh signed the first of the "TWO WILLS" (referred to
repeatedly by Lane, as if repetition makes something more true) for the
present and future management of the Dera, in September of 1947.
---------------------
LANE REPLIES:
This is cute, Neil, but why don't you be a bit more forthcoming. Why
don't you tell your readers that this earlier Will also states that
Sawan Singh will appoint his spiritual successor by a Will.
That's right.
The earlier Will says that there will be a future Will wherein Sawan
will write out who his spiritual successor will be.... not just the
manager.
Try reading it.
-----------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Nineteen
days later Kirpal Singh states that Hazur called him and gave him the task
of spiritual initiation with the following words: "Kirpal Singh! I have
allotted all other work but have not entrusted my task of Naam initiation
and spiritual work to anyone. That I confer to you today so that this holy
and sacred Science may flourish." Darshan Singh states that Kirpal Singh
informed him of this several days later, saying that he would need his help
in fulfilling Hazur's wishes. It is interesting to note the distinction
Baba Sawan Singh is making, between his temporal/administrative and
spiritual work, albeit in Kirpal Singh's words (I quite appreciate that
Lane believes this is all a fiction, as he discounts any and every account
that is specifically attributed to Kirpal Singh).
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Would have been a helluva lot easier if Sawan Singh would have
simply stated to his general audience that Kirpal was his spiritual
successor.
He didn't.
That's why 90% were "duped" (right, Neil?) into following Jagat
Singh.
Oh those sorry souls; they didn't know that only Kirpal was
appointed.
------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
This occured six months prior to his guru's death. Kirpal Singh also
describes spiritual transference from Baba Sawan Singh through the eyes,
several days before Baba Sawan Singh's passing. Those who witnessed Kirpal
Singh's first satsang in Delhi, several weeks after the passing of Hazur,
say he shed copious tears, characterizing his position as that of a message
boy, conveying orders from the general who sat in his tent. After this he
retired to the Himalayas for six months of intensive meditation before
being ordered from within to begin the work of Naam initiation. The period
of his discipleship lasted twenty-four years.
------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
More hagiography......
And once again, Kirpal talking about Kirpal and his grief.
Humility 101.
----------------------
TESSLER writes:
Hazur Baba Sawan Singh was initiated in 1894 and the period of his
discipleship was nine years. He came to his guru with no indication of
prior inner spiritual awakening. Hazur is once reported to have said in
conversation, "If you talk of deserving candidates, I can tell you in
confidence that even I was not deserving when Babaji bestowed on me the
riches of Naam." (The Beloved Master page 31) There is plenty of evidence
from the large body of letters of Baba Jaimal Singh that his favorite
disciple required some forming. Nevertheless, he engaged his spiritual
practices devotedly, sometimes meditating for many hours at a stretch.
----------------------------------
LANE REPLIES:
Once again, Neil writes the infamous "is once reported to have
said"........
Geez, can we at least put a name to these sources?
Or should we substitute "They said" to indicate that impartial
third person observer to all events historical?
------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
There are indications in Baba Jaimal Singh's letters and Baba Sawan
Singh's own testimony, of his strong spiritual progress during his
discipleship (See Spiritual Letters and Spiritual Gems, Beas publications).
-------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
There are also indications that Sawan Singh still suffered from lust
and anger.
Go read the letter dates.
----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
In a letter of August 1903, Baba Jaimal Singh says, "In this very life
you will reach Sach Khand...", indicating that he had not finished his
journey up to that point, six months before his guru's passing. On the
other hand, several months later, Baba Jaimal Singh is reported to have
said that, "Sant Mat had not been understood by any of them with the
exception of one (his successor), and only He would be able to follow it
with the Daya Mehr (grace) of a Saint. A spiritually poor soul cannot know
anything about it." (Spiritual Letters page 131) This could be regarded
as a clear statement of Baba Sawan Singh's strong spiritual attainments.
Furthermore, Baba Jaimal Singh clearly expressed his wishes regarding his
succession to his sangat as well as to Baba Sawan Singh, who says:
"'Although Baba Ji Maharaj ordered me to initiate people,' continued
Huzur, 'I did not initiate anyone until a year after His death. At last,
when Chacha Ji Maharaj (the brother of Huzur Swami Ji Maharaj) compelled me
to do so, I had to do this work.'" (With The Three Great Masters Page 175
Volume 2).
Baba Sawan Singh did begin initiation about a year after Baba Jaimal
Singh's passing, but did not retire until 1909. There is certainly ample
indication of Baba Sawan Singh's spiritual competence during the time of
his guruship.
So, Baba Sawan Singh's succession story may indicate that it is
possible to be a gurumukh disciple, highly spiritually advanced, perhaps
having attained Sach Khand, yet not be fully established in perfect
spiritual realization at that time. Baba Sawan Singh would say openly that
he went to Chacha Pratap Singh and Baba Gharib Das after the passing of
Baba Jaimal Singh, and it was only with their assurance that those he
initiated would gain spiritual liberation, that he took up the work of
initiation.
----------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
This is a long winded attempt by you to somehow legitimize Sawan's
"lack" of power as being different than Charan's.
Sorry, but Sawan stated the obvious and so did Charan.
I said it a couple of posts back and your legitimation adds really
nothing to the obviousness.
And what is that obviousness?
Humanness.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
When Baba Sawan Singh "passed on his spiritual mantle to Kirpal Singh,
the latter said, 'Sir, as you say you met Chacha Pratap Singh Ji and Baba
Gharib Das Ji in a situation like this, may I know to whom I should turn?'
Hazur replied, 'What you say is correct, but you know all and need not turn
to anyone else.'" (The Beloved Master, Page 50). Like Baba Jaimal Singh,
Kirpal Singh's long discipleship and advanced spiritual position at the
time of his initiation, ripened him to full spiritual maturity during the
lifetime of his Master.
-------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Once again, another story where Kirpal talks about himself and in not
so subtle terms has Sawan Singh "legitimizing" his mastership.
Of course, we don't have Sawan on record.
We have Kirpal's recollection.
Geez, the more I read this stuff the more I realize WHY a Will was
so necessary.
Anybody can claim anything given this "story as truth" modus
operandi.
-------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Clearly, each Master burned with the passion for the inner life, yet
each had his own course and journey to the perfection of that passion.
Some of the Master's were highly realized already by the time of their
initiation, others walked a steeper course to the summit of spiritual
attainment.
Maharaj Charan Singh: Charan Singh's position at the time of Jagat
Singh's death and even up to at least the ninteen seventies is discussed in
great detail in my book and need not be reviewed again here. I would
simply say that the analogy between Baba Sawan Singh's reluctance to begin
initiation and Charan Singh's dramatic reaction to his designated guruship
(based on the fact that he had no warning on any level, verbal, internal,
or spiritual transmission through the eyes, no real interest in satsang, no
developed practice of meditation, no familiarity with Sant Mat literature,
no comprehensive understanding of Sant Mat philosophy, and denied "any
claims whatsoever to spiritual attainments"), are hardly compatible.
--------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Yes, you are right.
He comes off MUCH MORE humble than even Sawan Singh or his
predecessors.
Or as Lao Tzu might say,
Those who know, DON'T SAY.
Those who say, don't know.
Or as Johnson might say,
ANY CLAIMS, no attainment.
NO CLAIMS, GREAT ATTAINMENT.
Kirpal, of course, might disagree.....
---------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Lane has said that he once heard Charan Singh refer to his succession
as the saddest day of his life. I must point out that it was not a sad day
because of the loss of Sardar Bahadur Jagat Singh, but because of the total
sacrifice of Charan Singh's autonomous existence, the loss of his life as
might have been determined by his own nature.
--------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Sorry, Neil, but you have the story wrong once again.
Charan point blank stated that it was the saddest day because he
knew that he was not what people took him to be.
He was sad, in other words, because he saw himself only as a human
being, but millions were going to see him as God.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Charan Singh characterized
himself in a letter written in the first few days after he was notified of
his designation as "dead minus existence." Lane finds humility in Charan
Singh's anguished desperation, though I think it was so much more human
than that. Charan Singh's own testimony clearly reveals that his grief and
reluctance to step in to the guruship were due to self-based reasons,
having only the most superficial similarity to the mystic anguish of
separation described by the gurumukhs.
---------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Neil, you should go do some more research because you clearly don't
know what you are talking about.
First, Charan stated point blank that he was bummed because he knew
that he was going to be taken as a God-man, even though he regarded
himself as nothing but a human being.
And as for Charan's sadness concerning Sawan, I can tell you that I
have seen Charan cry only once in my life.
When was that?
I asked him in 1989, what he missed most about the Dera.
His reply (with clearly a choke in his voice), was only one thing:
Sawan Singh.
Sorry, but your interpretation is incorrect......
Again, don't get me wrong.
I see this as a very human thing....
But that's what I loved about it:
a beautiful human thing.
-------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
The grief and reluctance of the
gurumukh disciple is due to the outward loss of their guru and the clear
inner knowledge of the onerous task of guruship.
-----------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Go read some more, Neil.
Charan clearly stated he was bummed because he had to be taken for
what he felt he wasn't.
Or, does Kirpal feel that he WAS what people took HIM to be?
-------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
I would like to take a pause here to say that in pointing out these
facts about Charan Singh, drawn from his own vivid and consistent
testimony, I mean no offence to his memory whatsoever. My purpose in
writing on his ascension to the Beas gaddi was never to malign, but to
apply Lane's beloved razor, towards understanding the larger issues of Sant
Mat succession beyond Lane's categories of succession rhetoric. The story
of Charan Singh is is a very poignant story, but it is not a story of
gurumukh discipleship.
--------------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Amazing how you think egotistical statements by Kirpal are somehow
reflective of gurumukh glory, whereas a guy who claims nothing and
is bummed because he knows he is just a human being is somehow
"less" due to that.....
Again, Neil, it is so obvious to me what is going on after I read
you.
All gurus are human.
Some are just more egotistical than others, like Kirpal.
You see, Neil, I accept that Charan was just human.
But you cannot accept that from Kirpal.
You should try shaving, you may see that what needs trimming is
Kirpal's egotistical rhetoric.
And what do we get in the end?
Humanity.
----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
With Charan Singh's successor, Gurinder Singh, we see a new tone
again. I would say that the edicts now emanating from Dera were
predictable if it is understood that the further a lineage travels away
from its spiritual roots in a fully realized adept of the path, the more
will it subtley alter Sant Mat. With each generation of the spirit-vacated
guruship, such a lineage will move increasingly toward dogmatism, rules and
regulations peripheral to the spiritual process, and other trapping of
social religion.
Copyrighting Sant Mat terminology, demanding that Beas followers make
no reference to their guru or path through electronic communication, recall
of a published volume, disallowing tape and video recording, recalling
notes of the Beas guru's satsangs, and other recent edicts, are all
indications of deterioration at the center. They have nothing whatsoever
to do with spiritual awakening. These contemporary events offer strong
support for the ideas advanced in Crisis and Renewal.
-----------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Oh, Neil, this is silly even for you.
While I might quite agree that the Dera needs a good critique (go
read my website for that, since much of what you just stated appears
to have come directly from me as a source), you seem to forget
Ruhani's own weirdness.
Or is Border's booksigning what Shiv Dayal predicted?
Or advertisements for A Sat Guru in FATE magazine?
Or a guru trying to get as many awards as possible from city
officials (yea, here is the key to the city Guruji) and then
ADVERTISING IT as part of his resume?
You get the drift.
All satsangs look funky from outside the square.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
D) Kirpal Singh's "ego" is the largest subject of David's criticism, so it
shall be among the shorter objects of my reply, since it is the least
deserving of comment. Many of the Sant Mat gurus, if not all of them,
expressed themselves directly in one circumstance or another. One can find
quotes of Soami Ji, Baba Jaimal Singh, and Baba Sawan Singh where they are
clearly speaking from their empowerment as guru. Does it have a ring of
egoism? No. Any incarnate being is going to be in a position requiring
directness on one occasion or another. Each Master manifested the divine
through their unique personality.
David Lane sees "ego, ego, and more ego" in both Kirpal Singh and
Darshan Singh. I saw with my own eyes two men who served and served and
served with both hands extended, almost all hours of the day and night,
while living very simply, taking very minimal food and rest, giving to
their disciples and all of humanity even in the face of great physical
suffering, which they pushed through at all times until the end.
-----------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Sure, they worked hard, so do bus boys at Soup Plantation.
So do lots of people.
But you forgot the point:
Darshan Singh talked about himself and his accomplishments for OVER
THREE HOURS STRAIGHT.
Even his wife had to tell him to wrap it up since people were
waiting for him.
Look, I think Darshan was a really nice guy and he was quite fun to
be with, but if I did what he did to my friends what would they say?
"Hey, Lane, cool the ego fest. We get the drift."
But if a guru does it, then we have to look for some higher
explanation.
I have a very simple one:
Darshan wanted to impress me.
That's cool, but geez it is ego no matter how you dress it.
And I don't blame him for it.
It is a very human thing to do.
I am sure all gurus, to greater or lesser degrees, do the same.
What is silly is to rationalize it away.
Let us just state the obvious:
The guru had an ego.
-------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Baba Sawan Singh saw complete surrender in Kirpal Singh, and felt
perfectly fine to say so via letter. He also saw fit to give him very
precious gifts as well as having Kirpal Singh initiate on his behalf,
during illness or absence. Would Baba Sawan Singh have conferred these and
other blessings on Kirpal Singh if he felt they would be received through
the ego?
---------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Taking your line of reasoning, we could just as easily postulate the
following:
Would Sawan have written a WILL saying Jagat Singh was his spiritual
successor if he wasn't?
Don't you get it by now Neil?
You believe your guru and argue in such a way as to legitimize him.
That's cool, but it has nothing to do with objectivity, larger
contexts, or history (try as you might).
Why?
Because you are unwilling to do the one thing that would reveal some
objectivity.
What's that?
Disagree or rip your own guru.
-----------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
I once had the privelege of listening to a prominent Sawan Singh
initiate recount a remarkable series of incidents spanning several days in
the early forties. To make a long story short, her and her husband were
present when Baba Sawan Singh gave Kirpal Singh a number of gifts at once,
including one of his own sweaters and a shawl of Baba Jaimal Singh, finally
taking his hands and saying, "I give my own self to you." She recounts the
deep humility and tears of ecstacy with which he received and handled these
gifts upon bearing them back to Lahore, where her and her husband, stayed
with his family on their way home.
-----------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Again, more stories..... Geez, each guru has tons of this stuff.
Do you really think Beas is not filled with like stories about their
gurus?
Neil, every guru has tons of these kinds of narratives.
It is the guru thing to do.
------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Ego is a concept, like various other concepts that Lane uses to tear
down or build up as suits his position.
---------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
It doesn't take me or my slant to see Kirpal's ego.
Let the interested reader just go and read Kirpal for himself or
herself.
It is obvious enough.
---------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
F) Lane alleges that Darshan Singh filed a suit against Sawan Ashram.
I discussed this issue with Darshan Singh very specifically and he was
clear that it never happened. He had no interest in such things.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
This is easy enough to prove or disprove.
Let us go get the court documents.
Your beloved Gyaniji was my first informant on this point, by the
way.
--------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
G) Lane goes on and on and on about the fact that Kirpal Singh apologized
for the letter he allegedly wrote, exposing Charan Singh's planned
abdication. Again, had Kirpal Singh not apologized, the whole thing would
have ended up in court, something Kirpal Singh would never have allowed to
happen. For Lane it is damned if you do, damned if you don't. My view of
this is discussed quite adequately in my book. Here again, a literalist
interpretation by Lane, offered in sensationalist style, serves his
interests.
-------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Of course, you have forgotten the most obvious explanation:
Kirpal Singh screwed-up and got his information wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
H) "Baba Sawan Singh replied that it was fine for Sardar Bahadur to serve
at Dera, but that 'Kirpal Singh will serve the world much more than Beas.
Kirpal Singh is the only one who can serve the world after me, and his name
will be found written on every leaf of every tree.'"
Lane, with his literalism, finds this one a big laugh. Yet, a very
similar metaphor used by Baba Sawan Singh can be found on page 105 of
Heaven On Earth. While discussing a family land purchase soon after his
retirement, Baba Sawan Singh's son protests the location. Baba Sawan Singh
reportedly replies, "Don't worry son. Every thorny shrub here will one day
resound with the greeting, 'Radha Soami.'"
The recountings of Bibi Lajo's experiences were meticulously conveyed
to me by her assistant of over two decades, and as I said in the text,
re-confirmed after I had committed them to paper.
-------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Glad to know that you can recognize a metaphor when it hits you.
---------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
I) Lane attacks Kirpal Singh for his assertion of authorship of the 1938
edition of Gurmat Sidhant. He also attacks Baba Sawan Singh for putting
his name to a book he did not write. Is this an instance of projecting his
values onto an entirely different cultural setting?
He might recall that the first four successors of Guru Nanak also used
the name Nanak in their very extensive poetic compositions as found in the
Guru Granth Sahib, never once differentiating themselves by name. It is
only by a marking system in the Granth that one can differentiate the
actual writer.
One of the largest books of Rumi is called, The Work of Shams of
Tabriz, (Divani Shams Tabriz). Does Lane consider it immoral for Rumi to
claim that his work is that of his Guru? Or is this an indication of the
Fana fil Sheikh of the Sufis, ie; mergence in the Master?
----------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice try, Neil, but your analogy doesn't hold water.
First, Rumi praises Shams throughout the book so it is obvious that
Shams is not the writer. Second, we don't have a dispute wherein
Shams and Rumi and some other party are trying to get authorship
credit.
And yes, Neil, if Kirpal did write that book then Sawan should have
had the balls to say so.
Sorry, but it is not my cultural imposition, since the confusion has
already misled people in both directions.
Or is this another case of Sawan's gift of prophecy?
In any case, Kirpal's sense of humility is a sham.
------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
In asking his Master to put his own name to the book written under
Baba Sawan Singh's direction, Kirpal Singh indicated that he regarded
himself as a vessel through which the physical writing was done. In
allowing his name on the book, Baba Sawan Singh was expressing his unity
with his disciples work, perhaps with the disciple himself.
Kirpal Singh's later assertion of physical authorship, during the time
of his ministry, may have been related to the fact that Beas would not
allow him to publish the volume.
-------------------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
But didn't the all-knowing one know that this would happen?
Or did Sawan consciously know this would happen and then Kirpal
would be allowed to say he wrote something that doesn't have his
name on it?
Don't you see how confusing this mystical mumbo jumbo is?
Why can't the gurus (in either case) simply be straightforward?
Didn't they "know" the consequences?
Or are they "unknowing" when it comes to book publishing?
----------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
In any event, such instances where he
made mention of his authorship were almost invariabley in the context of
one story or another about that time. Also, they were generally to small
groups of disciples, and later published in Sat Sandesh magazine, in almost
all instances after his passing, or in the posthumous volume. Heart to
Heart Talks.
-------------------------------
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
Nice try to justify Kirpal's ego, but sorry it doesn't cut the
mustard.
Next time a disciple wants his guru's name to be on the book, then
the disciple should do what he intended:
shut up about it and not brag later.
Kirpal did neither.
-----------------------------------------------------------
TESSLER writes:
Here I end the reply to Lane criticism of Crisis and Renewal.
Interested readers may contact me personally at ntessler@portal.ca or the
addresses given in the beginning of Crisis and Renewal. Hard copies will
be available very shortly.
DAVID LANE REPLIES:
I deeply enjoy Tessler's attempts to argue on behalf of his guru,
Kirpal Singh.
Although I am not at all persuaded by his arguments, I think it is
important to think through these issues.
E-mail The Neural Surfer directly
at dlane@weber.ucsd.edu
I want to go back to the home base now.
