Excerpt (with permission) from THE UNKNOWING SAGE: THE LIFE AND WORK OF BABA FAQIR CHAND |
This incident is very characteristic of Sri Bhagavan. It is
characteristic that the distress or devotion of one of his people
should call forth an involuntary response and intervention in a form
that can only be called miraculous. [Arthur Osborne, RAMANA Maharshi And The Path of Self-Knowledge (Bombay: Jaico Publishing House, 1982), pages 93-94.] Ramana's experience of bilocation indicates that Faqir Chand's categorical statement about all gurus not knowing about their visionary manifestations may need qualifications. Simply put, some saints appear to know about their miraculous appearances. The number of these "fully aware" mystics, however, is so incredibly small that it is not an exaggeration to say that Faqir Chand's "unknowing" hypothesis explains 99% of all the so-called guru visions in the world. The overwhelming majority of inner visions are projections of one's own mind which have no substantial "reality check" with either the outer world or the higher inner regions. Furthermore, the object of devotion in these transpersonal encounters are, for the most part, not aware of their role. Thus, the Chandian Effect is a general explanation which [The Chandian Effect, so named because Faqir Chand was the first Sant Mat guru to speak at length about the "unknowing" aspects of visionary manifestations, designates two major factors in transpersonal encounters: 1) the overwhelming experience of certainty (ganz andere/mysterium tremendum) which accompanies religious ecstasies; and 2) the subjective projection of sacred forms/figures/scenes by a meditator/devotee without the conscious knowledge of the object/person who is beheld as the center of the experience. I first coined the term in my article, The Himalayan Connection: U.F.O.'s and The Chandian Effect, The Journal Of Humanistic Psychology (Fall 1984).]covers almost all transpersonal visions. Ramana's experience and others like his represents a very small, bracketed, "special" case scenario. As such, it warrants further inspection, but should not be misconstrued as a general reference point with which to adjudicate transmundane happenings.
Concerning these "special cases," Sawan Singh, a deeply admired master
in the surat shabd yoga tradition (1858-1948), for whom both Faqir
Chand and his teacher Shiv Brat Lal had tremendous regard, wrote that
the outward guru can and does know about the inner condition of his
disciples. This knowledge, Sawan Singh pointed out, is conveyed to
the physical master via the inner Shabd (Divine Sound), though only in
extreme cases where the outer master's attention is needed. "Now regarding your question about the Inner Master and that Inner Master guiding the disciple, first of all, what is the Inner Master?Hence, according to this perspective, the outward master does not know most of the time. Similar to Ramana Maharshi's experience, the Beas master learns of his visionary manifestations on only special occasions. The modus operandi behind how certain masters could possibly know about their disciple's spiritual experiences is explained in a remarkable passage by Da Kalki (alias Da Love Ananda; Da Free John; Bubba Free John; Franklin Jones):
I am fairly certain that by the time this book is published, Franklin
Jones (his real birth name) will have assumed a new name. "After that time, [when Da Free John achieved Enlightenment]when I would sit for meditation in any formal way, instead of contemplating what was arising in myself, I would contemplate other beings as my own forms. Instead of my own psychic forms arising, the psychic forms, minds, and limitations of others would arise. I was aware, visually and otherwise, of great numbers of people, and I would work with them very directly on a subtle level. In some cases, these people would soon contact me and become involved with me in a personal relationship. Others were people I already knew. I would work for them in the subtle way, and then watch for signs and demonstrations in their outward lives of the reality of that manifestation. I tested everything in this manner."My citation of Da Kalki should not be construed as an endorsement of his mastership; it is not. Although I am sincerely a great "fan" of Da Love Ananda's writings, I am a very harsh critic of his personal lifestyle. I have written an extensive article on this very point--how to distinguish the message from the medium--because it is vitally important to remember that a superb writer/thinker does not mean that by extension that the person is "God-Realized" or a "Perfect Master." Moreover, I am not all that sure that Da Kalki has any psychic experiences. I just happen to think that his explanation of possible psychic experiences is clear and rational. [See "The Paradox Of Da Free John: Distinguishing The Message From The Medium." UCSM (Volume One, Number Two).] Charan Singh, the late head of the Radhasoami Satsang at Beas, for instance, chose disciples for initiation by simply looking at them. I have personally seen thousands of people file directly in front of Charan Singh and in a matter of a few seconds he turns his head to the left or to the right, indicating whether the seeker was accepted or rejected for Nam-Dan. [Nam-Dan is a ceremony where the living Satguru gives the "Gift of Nam" or Initiation to chosen disciples. It includes precise details about how to meditate and withdraw one's consciousness from the physical body by means of a three-fold method: simran (repetition of holy name(s)), dhyan (contemplation of the inner light or the guru's form within); and bhajan (listening to the divine sound current). There are several movies which have filmed this unusual selection process for Nam-Dan, including Satguru (London 1976), The Dera Documentary (Dera Baba Jaimal Singh, Beas, India, 1970's), and Guiding Light (Dera Baba Jaimal Singh, Beas, India 1983). I personally witnessed the event inside the famous Satsang Ghar at Dera in the Winter of 1981.] Needless to say, it is an awe-inspiring sight, and one which I confess is beyond my limited comprehension.]During his second world tour in 1970, Maharaj Charan Singh was asked the following question: "Is the physical Master aware of all the initiates' inner experiences?" Charan Singh's answer demonstrates that the outer master does know about his visionary manifestations. Responded Charan Singh: "Our real Master, as I just told you, is the Shabd and Nam. And when we are connected with that Shabd and Nam, that Shabd and Nam takes care of us. The physical Master, of course, is aware of all that. [My emphasis.] But, you see, it is Shabd and Nam which is our real Master, that takes care of everything." [Thus Saith The Master (Beas: R.S. Foundation, 1974), page 150.] Another example of extraordinary manifestations which go beyond Faqir Chand's hypothesis of unknowingness comes from Baba Jaimal Singh, the first guru of the Beas satsang and a personal disciple of the founder of Radhasoami, Shiv Dayal Singh. In the following excerpts, Jaimal Singh details a most remarkable physical bilocation of his guru. Recollects Baba Ji: "Once, during Christmas, the army units were allowed four holidays. As I had no official duty assigned to me during that period, I felt that I could best spend it in meditation in my room. Accordingly, I told the cook that I should not be disturbed, that if I needed food I would personally ask for it. Also, if anybody asked for me, he should be told that I was out.Although Jaimal Singh's experience was extraordinary, there have been other reports by mystics of similar physical bilocation excursions. The important point to remember, though, is that [See D. Scott Rogo's Miracles: A Parascientific Inquiry Into Wondrous Phenomena (New York: The Dial Press, 1982), Chapter IV, which deals specifically with bilocation experiences around the world.] such experiences are the exception, not the rule in mysticism. The value of Faqir Chand's revelations of ignorance is that most gurus (I am tempted to say all) in India and elsewhere are in the same lot, but falsely parade their attainments to sincere, if gullible, disciples. Faqir's startling insights show that most religious visions are, in fact, products of one's own mind. When I use the term "mind" here it should be equated with "imagination." Naturally, all visions are of the mind in the strict sense of the term, but those manifestations which cannot be correlated by others either in this world or the higher worlds are, for the most part, merely vivid extensions of one's imagination. However, we should not take Faqir's confessions as precluding the possibility that certain rare saints do have access to knowledge far beyond our comprehension, and that being residents of those higher regions have the ability to directly transmit such information to their respective followers. -----[If I may interject a personal note here, I must confess that I find myself more and more agreeing with Faqir Chand and his claims of unknowingness.]As a seasoned observer of the guru scene, most of what I discover is petty human motivations. To be sure, there are gurus who have deeply impressed me with their compassion and humility (Charan Singh being, at least for me, the most impressive), but I have yet to unearth an airtight, empirical case for genuine psychic powers. There are always some uninspected loopholes which reveal that natural (versus supernatural) processes were involved. I realize that my skepticism will turn off a number of parapsychology buffs, but in light of Occam's Razor I see no overwhelming evidence to suggest that Faqir Chand's autobiographical admissions are not right on the mark.
Moreover, we should keep in mind that Faqir Chand's use of the term
"ignorance" has two meanings. First, Faqir uses the term in an absolute sense equating "Ignorance" (with a capital "I") with God, thereby agreeing with many saints and mystics that the Lord is an unqualified Mystery (as Shiv Dayal Singh put it: "Wonder, Wonder, Wonder; Wonder hath assumed a form"). In this reference, there will most likely be little debate with Faqir
Chand. However, Faqir also uses the term "ignorance" to describe his
realization that gurus do not know about their visionary
manifestations. As we have noted, there may be exceptions to this general rule,
though they have yet to be empirically verified. |