David Lane's honest view of Sant Mat

There's a lot to like in a recent posting by David Lane on his Radhasoami Studies discussion group.

"What I Believe? -- a position paper of sorts by David Lane" describes how Lane feels about the Indian philosophy of Sant Mat, Radha Soami Satsang Beas version (Sant Mat comes in various guises, much as Christianity has many competing theologies).

One of the things I liked the most in this mini-essay was praise of me -- the person I'm closest to -- at the end. And I wasn't even expecting it!

Meaning, I didn't search out the posting because of the me-mention. I came across it in the course of perusing the Radhasoami Studies latest offerings, which I'm interested in because of the longstanding history I had with Sant Mat, just as David Lane did.

He wrote, in response to another person's posting:

P.S.

I think you mentioned Brian Hines and I wanted to throw in my two cents about how much I admire what Brian has done with his blog and about vocalizing his views.

Brian has been initiated even longer than I have and yet he had the courage to come out publicly and state very clearly where he disagrees with the teachings..... and even his own writings. This is a rare and admirable trait.

Now I realize that satsangis may view him as off the path or as ex-satsangi or Kal's next to kin or whatever...... but from my perspective I think he represents the best trait of a genuine satsangi...... he wants to associate with what he believes is the truth..... and if that takes him in a completely different direction than Path of the Masters, then good on him (as surfers in Australia might say).

Brian is still giving satsang, but just in a more radical way.

Nicely said, David. And not just because what you said expresses nice sentiments about me.

I completely agree that a true "satsangi," which means someone who associates with truth, isn't only a devotee of certain India-based religious groups who have appropriated that word to describe members of their organizations. 

A seeker of truth cares a lot more about truth than the path a particular group or person deems to be the best way of finding it. If truth isn't found in one direction, a genuine satsangi changes course. 

This makes the most sense when searching for spiritual truths, meaning of life truths, metaphysical truths, supernatural truths. External truths related to objective reality have evidence standing behind them, guideposts which tell someone whether he or she is approaching a certain realm of truth.

But religious, philosophical, and mystical truths can't be demonstrably proven. Only experienced personally. Which means they aren't true in the sense of being true for everyone. Just for oneself. 

So both David Lane and I are committed to distinguishing between these two sorts of truths: objective vs. subjective, general vs. personal, provable vs. unprovable, evident vs. hidden.

I've got no problem with someone who says, "The truth as I see it is..."

It's when someone claims "I see the truth as it is, and you should too..." that's problematic. Because as David notes in his posting:

I came to the path when I was 17 and now that I am 56 I don't think that much has changed in me, except that I have grown a bit more skeptical (and more vocal about it) over the years.

I still meditate (my kids just yelled that I meditate too much!), I am still a strict vegetarian, and I still have a deep and abiding love/affection for Charan Singh.

But do I agree with all of Sant Mat theology? NOPE. Indeed, I don't think I ever agreed with it in the absolutist sense.

...I disagree with notions of "perfect masters" and Kal powers and all this kind of stuff which seems to me to belong to our mythological past.

...I think Kirpal Singh had it right when he said that "Sant Mat should be treated like ANY OTHER SCIENCE." And what is that (at least for me)?

Critically, analytically, and skeptically. So, yes one can still meditate and still be skeptical of the theology surrounding it.

It's natural to meld the objective and subjective sides of a spiritual path/practice when someone first embraces it. That is, we like to think that out of the thousands of religions, theologies, mystical belief systems, and such in the world, we have found the One True Path.

In addition, we feel wonderful about what we've found. So intellect and emotion, objective truth and subjective feeling, outer and inner -- they go hand in hand for a while.

Eventually though, a sincere seeker after truth, a genuine "satsangi," may find that this conflating doesn't work for him or her any more. The seeker has seen through the spiritual path's attempts to push demonstrable evidence that it is the One True Path into another realm: life after death or a reincarnated life, for example.

I've come to understand that living a meaningful life can't be postponed.

At least, it shouldn't be.

There's no solid proof, none at all, that the life we're living now won't be our one and only chance to experience the cosmos. We need to make the most of this chance. Living inauthentically, mistaking illusion for truth, failing to feel the marvelous mystery of being -- so sad. 

Often we make life a lot more complicated than it needs to be.

I'm not saying that I am anywhere near answering the question, "What's it all about?" I just think that Julian Baggini has some good advice in his book with the same title (which I blogged about in Meaning of life is whatever you find meaningful.

Here's a quote from Baggni's concluding chapter.

The mere fact that life's meaning is available and potentially evident to all is a major challenge to those who see themselves as the guardians of life's significance: the priests, gurus and teachers who would have us think life's meaning is beyond ordinary mortals.

To challenge this view is to challenge the power others seek to exert over us by their claims to special knowledge. The main argument of this book is therefore democratic and egalitarian, in that it returns to each of us the power and responsibility to discover and in part determine meaning for ourselves. 

Comments

[Gaz]

Thanks for this post Brian, I agree with David's perspective, if I'm being honest, I think today's RS has evolved, for the better.

Over the last 2 years I've been analyzing the Satsangs in a critical manner, and I think even Gurinder is not integrating Lane's condemned notions such as Kal,perfect masters etc into satsangs/q&a.
But nonetheless Gurinder does not deny that Kal does exist. I just think Gurinder wants the sangat to move away from such notions, as today we live in a society where we're quick to point the finger at other people, and at many times I've heard satsangis always blame Kal etc.
I just think if Gurinder was to talk more about Kal etc like how Charan did, then satsangis WON'T do their meditation, with today's RS, the orientation is on frequent practice of meditation, nothing else.

[akdouglas]

"What if" seekers after truth were SUPPOSED to follow a guru for a while before realizing that THE REAL TRUTH is somewhere else? What if that is actually part of the "Path." But it's not part of the path that gets explained to you, because you have to figure it out yourself.

"What if" what you were SUPPOSED to get from your spiritual teacher is to realize that the knowledge they provide that is just one piece of the puzzle we were sent here to figure out?

"What if" something else we were supposed to realize is that there are other religions in the world, all of whom say they are the best or better or the only way to realize God. In all honesty, can we claim to believe that any real God would love one religion or mystic cult of her flock any more than another?

If we take the notion that all of us are equal and all roads lead to God (because God loves everything in the creation without ceasing for all eternity) then it seems silly to actually BELIEVE that any one religion or path is better than another.

"What if" we had to demonstrate to God that we had a willing to accept help in our search, but in the end we would have to realize this: that the only real relationship we can have with God is the one we have within ourselves, directly, and not through a third party.

Not to mention that if one were using a third party assistant, and waited 25 years for them to show up and do their job, then frankly, certainly one has waited long enough!

We expect bad customer service from the airlines and the cable company ...do we really think God would give us customer service that's way worse than the telephone company? Seriously?

It all comes back to this: why do we put more trust in someone else than we put in our own selves? Why are we so willing to believe in someone we have never met? Why are we so attached to things outside ourselves?

We all have the kingdom of heaven within us. We just have to look there.

We can take advice from someone on how to look, but that person can't look for us! They even tell us that. We have to do it ourselves.

[Roger]

"What if" seekers after truth were SUPPOSED to follow a guru for a while before realizing that THE REAL TRUTH is somewhere else?"

---But, what is this Real Truth, that is somewhere else? This supposed Real Truth is just another version of relative truth. True, one can go down a Path to find it. This is no big deal.....

[Blogger Brian]

akdouglas, I liked your comment. Have many of the same thoughts myself. Here's another "customer service" analogy.

The phone rings. Meaning, there's an indication that a conscious being is wanting to communicate with you. Great. You answer the call.

You say "hello." There's no response. Just silence. How many times do you say "hello"? How long do you wait for a reply? Pretty soon you'd hang up, figuring that either no one is there, or the person who called you is a jerk who is playing games with you.

But people keep saying "hello" to God for decades, like you said. Or even a lifetime. Without any response. So either God is a jerk who doesn't respond to earnest honest invitations to talk, or God doesn't exist, or God isn't the sort of being who communicates with humans in the way many people think God does.

Either way, it makes sense to go about your day and not waste a lot of time saying "hello" to an imaginary being.

[Tara]

akdouglas, thank you for sharing your thoughts, I liked them — very much.

[Dogribb]

Science and Sant Mat is a surety why just the other day I saw a commercial for Ekankar on during a marathon running of Ancient Aliens(I kid you not)

[ping]

Despite being provided with enourmous evidence by Charan's secretary Babani (who used to tour with Charan) and Babani's son in law and Canadian representative and others (some of which was provided to the archives of this site) David Lane still can't bring himself to acknowledge that Charan was a fraud profiteer, often trading on his status, cheating the vulnerable out of their lands and on the backs of the impovished workforce masquerading as seva.

Just like Gurinder although Gurinder, now a billionaire, took it to a whole new level.

Gurinder's quote regarding responsibility for managing his new found astronimical wealth is revealing 'don't confuse charity with spirituality'....

David was part of an initially small group of westerners who Charan showered attention on 'while courting the west' and David in turn wrote books in praise of Sant Mat for the Western audience.

While David has since provided a valueable critical view of Sant Mat, he still cannot admit he was played and the obvious advantage he provided to Charan with his books and that Charan was knowingly a fraud opportunist.

David has provided a more critical view

[William Turner in California]

Thank you all for a very enlightening discussion, both articles and comments. I am David Blaine's age and likewise was exposed early to Sant Mat (as I know it), in my case I was 17 and was loaned a three volume discussion from the 1930s. Back then, I thought I had discovered a potential path right up to the point where the imagery of past masters including Jesus and Mohammad appearing in a cave before Englishmen simply reinforced my atheism. That doesn't mean I have ever abandoned the search for a useful path, and Sant Mat has saved my sister and her family.

[Mike Williams]

Agree with ping totally.

I don't think honesty is one of the
traits David is known for.

I have known him long before any clubs
started when he contacted me long ago.

Think about it. Why has he never published
a Beas history (only short papers)? The other
RS groups he got mostly right with their history.

Lane knew he could never publish Beas history
lies without Maheswari coming
to the forefront some day and making him
look bad. He guessed right.

Yet, his idealogy of Beas history is so far from
reality it is astonishing. Charan
was a sensational liar and scammer. But, he
was much more clever than Kirpal.

Kirpal wrote his own name to his books and did not hide like Charan behind proxies.

Charan had his propogandists write lie after
lie about Beas history in their books. Sensational lies beyond belief.

Literally the worst religious group historical fraud I have ever seen perpetrated on society.

Beas people are so dumb they don't even know who founded their religion.

Lane should have come forward and debunked it and trashed it, but didn't.

And, harasses those who do now.

I am convinced he will never become honest
with the history of Beas.

It seems there is a deep psychological
reason he cannot face.

It could be he doesn't want to betray Charan.

But, David was very aware Charan lied about
the history.

He should have written Radhasoami Beas Secret History, not me.

I don't want anything to do with Radhasoami
and make no money from it.

http://radhasoamis.freeyellow.com/index.html

[Mike Williams]

Dear Mr. G

David Lane wrote Radhasoami Reality,
which was published under Juergensmeyer's
name. He has admitted if he was a ghost writer he would never admit it. He admitted to writting 80% of it.

[Mike Williams]

Hi Dogribb,
If you think RS advertising is funny listen
to this. First I noticed a large poster
walking by a laundromat (to my pizza place
next door in Cerritos, Ca.)

By chance I saw a Indian guru on the poster
and went in to look. It was Rajinder Singh of
SOS advertising his tour.

When I went in the pizza restaurant, I was
watching PGA golf on cable and one
of his adds came on to my shock during a golf game !!!

Later that night I was watching Criminal Minds
and another of his adds came on !!!

During his daughters wedding they passed
out boxes of corn flakes with Rajinder's
picture on them. No kidding. Like
Tony the Tiger.

If you think that is something you should have seen Summa Ching Hai's adds and weekly show. (The Material Girl) who donated much to Al Gore campaign and cost him the election from the news scandal. But, the news had her as a Buddhist. She was a Thakar
Singh initiate.

[David C. Lane]

I must admit that i have a perverse enjoyment of Mike Williams' latest rant about me and my motives. However, he says so many things that are factually incorrect that I think it is probably important that I point out a few things:

1. I did NOT ghost write Radhasoami Reality and I have never stated such a thing. Yes, I did help Juergensmeyer on his research for the project and he says so very clearly in his introductory materials. However, he wrote the book himself and he tried his very best to be fair.

2. As for Maheshwari, unlike Mike Williams (a fake name for a real person who has threatened me on too many occasions not to have his name published), I have actually met him personally at Soami Bagh and I do think he is vitally important to the early history of Radhasoami. Indeed, I felt he was so vital that the very first time I met Juergensmeyer in Berkeley in 1978 I brought all the Maheshwari books I had and then encouraged Juergensmeyer to meet with him personally which we did.

I also encouraged Juergensmeyer to meet with Faqir Chand, since Faqir's philosophy is quite an interesting one.

3. While I can well appreciate that "Mike Williams" has a different slant on history than myself, the fact is that Beas has consistently asked me NOT to publish either my M.A thesis or my Ph.D, dissertation on the history of Radhasoami, since both of them bring up subjects that are contrarian to their viewpoint.

Indeed, as Mike well knows, I was asked NOT to publish the Unknowing Sage back in 1981, since Faqir's philosophy raises lots of doubts about Beas and other theologies.

i say all of this because despite what Mike may wish to believe, Charan never employed me as an apologist for anything. Indeed, I have taken lots of heat over the years from Beas.

But, I like "Mike" even if I disagree with some of his information. He seems to forget that I wrote THE GURU HAS NO TURBAN which is a severe critique of the Perfect Master concept and he seems to have forgotten that I pointed out that Charan was wrong to say that Shiv Dayal never smoked a huqqa.

Yet, such is the internet and such are the to and fro of such discussions.

To reiterate, it is wrong of him to say that I wrote 80 percent of Juergensmeyer's book.

I didn't write it. I simply helped in the research of it.

But Mike will believe what he will despite whatever I say anyways.

[David Lane]

I should add a bit more commentary as "Ping" (or is that "Mike Williams" in a different garb?) also has said some quite inaccurate things.

First, I never knew Mr. Babani and I have never met his son. Moreover, the rep in Canada that resigned was a "Khanna" and had no relationship with Babani.

How Ping creates such fictions is beyond me.

Moreover, Charan never lavished praise on me and he certainly didn't encourage me to write the book I did on Faqir Chand or do the history I did on Radhasoami.

Yes, I certainly do have a love and affection for Charan but that doesn't mean that one cannot question or doubt things. Indeed, my entire corpus on Faqir Chand is a testimony to doing just that.

But I realize people will believe whatever they wish.

Such is the internet.

[David C. Lane]

Again, to reiterate it is a complete fiction that Mike Williams keeps repeating that I somehow ghost wrote Radhasoami Reality.

The truth is that Juergensmeyer, to his great credit, wrote the entire book and all I did was help him on the research angle.

Unlike Mike Williams, Juergensmeyer has actually been to India many times and met personally with Maheshwari and others.

[Mike Williams]

I am not ping,
Note he, or she, writes too eloquently to be me. I am an accountant by trade.

Dave admitted on RS Studies a decade ago
he played a "tremendous role" in writing
Radhasoami Reality and Juergensmeyer
"wouldn't have a clue". When he was asked if he wrote 80% of the book. Dave gathered all the Maheswari books for J which were later donated to a San Diego University library afterwards.

Dave has known me long before these clubs started and has never pointed out one thing wrong with what I have published, but uses the high school debating trick of saying he has.

Secoundly, Dave let an extremely psychotic person print my real name on his club assuming my identity as his login name.
This psychotic person was well known to have very severe mental problems and was a registered Rajinder Rep published on Rajinder's site.

That same person is here now under a different name on this club.

When this person got my name and address years ago, ball bearing were put inside the brakes of both back tires of one of my cars.

It happenned to be the car my wife uses and
the brakes failed 100% when she was going 65 miles an hour on the freeway.

It was towed in where the mechanic asked me,
"is there someone who doesn't like you ?".

Regarding the identity theft of my name
by a person on Dave's site, I almost went to the police to
stop this stalker, who still stalks me to this day.

And, lastly I knew Maheswari and his son for many years and
talked to them and have
many letters.

I was actually initiated by Dr. Prof. Agam
Mathur, former vice chancellor at Agra University, listed 8th best historian in
India and great grandson of Salig Ram and master at Peepal Mandi now.

Dave could have stopped Juerensmeyer from publishing Radhasoami Reality and did not.

Dave your club is a stomping ground for
reps from Rajinder and proxie moles from Gurinder. The dignified people that
were on your club all left after you let them get harassed by moles.

If the moles come here they will get blasted and you cannot hide behind your moles here.

I could never figure out why you were always so petrified of me. I tried to present you in a good light.

The people on your club misquote and make terrible historical mistakes and you
do not correct them, when it would only take a few seconds.

The old propoganda version of beas history has been dead over a decade.

Everyone knows what happenned now.

[Mike Williams]

Further more Dave,
I didn't threaten to sue you. I threatened
to go to the district attorney and file
charges of complicity for allowing this
person to assume my identity for malicious
purposes on your club.

Identity theft is a crime. You not only
allowed this Rajinder rep to assume and use my real name, you actually egged him on.
He posted psychotic messages under my real name, as if it was me, and you did absolutely nothing.

This after I sent you the email he sent me threatening to kill me if I didn't stop saying negative things about Kirpal.

I informed you I believed this person could commit suicide, or kill someone else.

I believe you knowingly and willfully egged on an extremely sick man to to harass me and
I believe it led to an attempt on my life.

The same fellow sent threatening emails
to a sophisticated woman medical doctor
on your club and drove her off your club.

The psychotic messages which were constantly
posted both before and after for years by
this person were beyond belief.

Dave, your behaviour I believe is sociopathic.

You were acting illegally I believe,
not to mention unbelievably unethically.

Your reputation is quite remarkable. And,
I found out for myself why you have it.

Allowing identity theft is truly sick.

Egging on a severely mentally ill man whom
you know wanted to kill me, I consider unforgivable.

Thank God my wife is alive. Her brakes completely failed on a crowded freeway
going 65 and all she could do was coast to a stop.

Now are you going to tell the people here
you didn't allow this man to falsely assume
my identity with your full knowledge .. and cooperation ?

How far will you go to win a debate Dave ?

Take a good look at yourself.

You were not born smart enough to fool the world, therefore you resent it.

I consider your actions and behaviour scarry.

Your use of proxy morons to cover your ass
in debates is reprehensible.

[David C. Lane]

Dear "Mike":

Sorry to report but you are making things up as you go along--a trait I have noticed in you too many times to count.

1. I never donated Maheshwari's books or Juergensmeyer's books to a San Diego library. Do you make this stuff up?

2. Unlike you, I happen to use my real name and take the requisite heat. You have repeatedly claimed and said things that were wrong and yet anytime anyone uses your real name you then threaten me with a lawsuit, forgetting in the process that I don't use your name and yet you continue to say things that are untrue.

Again, I didn't "ghost" write Juergensmeyer's book and never said anything of the sort. Yes, I helped him in his research.... that is why I was called his "research assistant."

3. Mark Juergensmeyer was working on Radhasoami Reality way before I even met him. And I think he did a wonderful job, given that he tried to deal with each sangat fairly.

You must certainly know that the present living guru at Dayalbagh (in Agra, no less) loved Juergensmeyer's book and is actually seen in the latest brochure for Spircon holding on to it.

You may disagree with Juergensmeyer and that is fair game, but don't lie about things in the process.

4. Radhasoamistudies is an open forum and anyone (even you which have posted their repeatedly in the past) can post whatever they wish, even quite nasty things against me. I tend never to delete either posts or posters.

5. Not only were you initiated by Agam (via the phone? or was it mail? since you have never met the guru in person, right?), but according to your own claims you have been initiated by a whole slew of shabd yoga gurus.

Instead of creating fictions, why don't you simply state your views without resorting to making things up?

As I have said before, I think it is good that you show the underside in Radhasoami history, but the key is not make things up as you go along.

[Blogger Brian]

Guys, let's call it a day on the RS history/studies stuff. I respect both of you, but we've gotten both off-topic and excessively personal. No more comments on that issue, please.

[Moongoes]

Recent Williams - Lane fight caught on tape!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEEHZdxkOfo

[david r]

David, i just purchased your book on kindle about speaking in tongues. I know someone else who had a similar experience that you did when you were 15.

You called it a mystical experience. But even though it happened automatically and you witnessed it happen to you, in what way was this a mystical experience?

I tend to think that mystical experiences are mind-blowing experiences of God. It sounds more like to me you experienced a motor automatism, albeit one that has a mysterious source.

Have you experienced the spiritual eye that Paramahansa Yogananda talked about? Have you heard the AUm sounds?

It seems to me that you are a skeptic these days but you retain an open mind to a certain extent. Do you still meditate?

What is God to you?

[David C. Lane]

Hi David R,

Thanks for your note. The key thing for me when I spoke in tongues wasn't so much the act of glossolalia but rather the intensity of feeling or experiencing that something was much greater than I..... almost as if one was being enveloped into a higher dimension..... Now, this could simply be part and parcel of our neurological make-up. There is an interesting article in the new issue of SKEPTIC that goes into some detail about why people speak in tongues. As for other mystical experiences, I think we are actually predisposed to them since our consciousness is a virtual simulator and when we meditate we can access some pretty amazing stuff...... though the danger is that we might confuse our brain state for the ultimate state, forgetting in the process that we probably should be open to multiple interpretations.

Yes, I still meditate..... probably more than ever and, yes, still quite skeptical (at least sometimes!).

[Eric Robinson]

I was 'initiated' (? wonder what that means...) into Sant Mat in 1972, and gave it a good shot for at least 20 years - then concentrated on just the meditation (I'm still very much into meditation)

It is a breath of fresh air to read these blogs...
Of course words can only go so far...
but what else do we have... ?

Here's why I am commenting:
From even before I was initiated I remember reading what Soami Ji said (the original guru from whom the other strands developed)- He said

"Unless I see with my own eyes I do not believe in the words of the guru"

- that was my mainstay all the way through, and I used to avidly read "Spiritual Gems" - Sawan Singh's letters, which were all about this 'going within' and into these regions...Sawan Singh said that you must first accept some 'principles' in order to test whether what follows is true - as in the laboratory.

Wouldn't it have been wonderful if every satsang had started with a recital of Soami Ji's words ?

but for me I didn't see those inner regions, so I do not believe in what these gurus said... I gave it a good shot and now I know better....
Please don't write in and say my karma is not yet right ! Like the Hindus said the Universe is founded on the horn of a cow (or something as meaningless)- it's all meaningless until one has found the meaning..
In the meantime we just have to be happy and enjoy our little efforts... and as so many posts here say, to be open and appreciate somebody else's viewpoint (unless of course they are self opinionated blind indoctrinated bigots !)

Robo

[david r]

David, thanks for the reply. I haven't spoken in tongues but my body has moved into different positions by itself. You feel like you could stop it at any time but you kind of just let it happen.

I don't know why the speaking in tongues thing is primarily associated with the charismatic christianity. Nor what the source of the speech is.

I don't read Skeptic magazine or look at their website any more. It seems obvious to me that weird events happen in this world to such an extent that it would be crazy to dismiss all of them. I surrender in that ignorance because i am tired of analysing everything all the time.

In any case, was the spiritual eye real to you?

You know, i am a firm believer in belief being a catalyst for any kind of mystical or psychic experience. I assume you leave all analysis and doubt behind you when you go into a meditation.

[David C. Lane]

Good points you make and I especially liked your last line where you say "you leave all analysis and doubt behind you when you go into meditation."

Yes, one does try, but of course the same could be said when we make love, surf, skateboard, or bake a pie.....

thanks

dave

[david r]

Well Dave, (good name by the way!) of course it is probably nearly impossible not to analyze things when you relax into meditation since half of the brain itself performs this automatically almost for us!

This is what they call "letting go", dropping all doubt, speculation, and diving inside. Trouble is, it is nearly impossible to do this because it is the nature of the mind itself to act that way. At least, i have personally found that to be the case.

Once you have a routine of meditation going it becomes easier to relax into a nice hypnagogic state. It happens automatically despite the turbulence of the mind initially. It is that hypngagogic state of mind that interests me the most these days.

Why do some pray and get healings and others pray and die of cancer? Is God playing a trick on the human race? No, i don't believe so. However, this is such an enigma isn't it? Motor automatisms like speaking in tongues, and kundalini phenomena, as well as trance mediumship, are certainly mysterious events. I don't pretend to know any more.