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.
Sudar and "Sudarshan"? There has been a bit of speculation recently that Sudarshan Singh, the nephew of Shiv Dayal Singh, may actually have been the "Sudar Singh" mentioned by Paul Twitchell. While I am convinced that Paul Twitchell "coined" the name "Sudar" from the name "Sudarshan" (cutting off the "shan" part), I see no evidence to suggest that he ever met Sudarshan Singh. When Paul says he met Sudar Singh in Allahabad, it should be remembered that at that time "Sudarshan" Singh was staying in Soami Bagh, Agra, not in Allahabad. Besides the lack of any evidence for Twitchell traveling to India in the 1930s or before, his description of Sudar more closely matches Kirpal Singh than Sudarshan Singh. It should also be kept in mind that Sudarshan Singh did not run an ashram, like Paul claims Sudar Singh did. Moreover, Sudarshan Singh never formally acted as a guru, but instead showed allegiance to the Soami Bagh line of gurus, particularly Madhav Prasad Sinha, who was alive in the 1930s and 1940s. Sudarshan Singh also had an intimate friendship with Sawan Singh of Radhasoami Satsang Beas, as his letters in SPIRITUAL LETTERS indicates. Though it is most likely true that Paul learned of the name Sudarshan from Julian Johnson's book WITH A GREAT MASTER IN INDIA and used the term "Sudar" as a cover for both Kirpal and Swami Premananda, there is no indication that Paul ever met Sudarshan. Sudarshan, moreover, did not act as a guru and never considered himself the leader of any group or path. I am sure there will be more on this subject to come.
