In A Search in Secret India, Paul Brunton wants the
reader to believe that he is a journalist simply intent upon discovering the “real
facts” about the Yogis of India (1934: 16):
“I wanted gather the real facts about the Yogis of to-day by
the method of first-hand investigation. I prided myself that experience as a
journalist fitted me to draw out, with the least possible delay, much of the
information which I sought; that sitting at the editorial desk and curtly
wielding the blue pencil had trained me to become ruthlessly critical in
separating wheat from chaff; and that the contact with men and women in every
grade of life which the profession generally gives, with ragged mendicants as
well as well-fed millionaires, would help me move a little more smoothly though
the variegated masses of India, among whom I searched for those strange men,
the Yogis.”
Let us here briefly review some of the real facts Brunton
omitted to mention in Secret India:
- Probable contact with Meredith Starr, a follower of Meher Baba who at the time ran a retreat in Devonshire, England, dedicated to Baba.
- Reading an article about Meher Baba in the Occult Review.
- Correspondence with Khaikhushru J Dastur, who had written the above article along with a booklet in English about the subject, and also edited the Meher Message.
- “… became one of Baba’s ardent enthusiasts, and … filled several pages of the Meher Message with encomiums” (Ward Parks, ed., Meher Baba’s Early Messages to the West, 2009: 223).
- The intention to write a book about Meher Baba.
Then, having arrived in India:
- Was provided with an itinerary of places to visit by Meher Baba. (1)
- Accommodated for the large part of his brief tour by Meher Baba’s followers.
- Undertook two tasks of service (donations for the proposed Academy and new members for the Meher League) connected with Meher Baba.
- Was an honoured guest at a meeting of the Meher League; welcomed as the founder of the Meher League in England; and spoke of his personal ‘telepathic’ experiences in relation to Meher Baba.
- Spent just several weeks touring India after leaving the Saidapet Asramam in Madras.
- Complained about the heat, the food, and his inability to meditate in a letter to Meher Baba.
Brunton’s Secret India cannot be compared to, say, a
book that was published nearly thirty years earlier, The Mystics, Ascetics,
and Saints of India: A Study of Sadhuism, with an Account of the Yogis,
Sanyasis, Bairagris, and other strange Hindu Sectarians, by John Campbell
Oman. Unlike the academic author of that work, Brunton was merely a ‘freelance
journalist’ who not only exhibited a phantasy prone personality throughout his
life, but also had a background of interest in the occult and paranormal. He
even claimed to have possessed ‘psychic’ powers (see post Paul Brunton:
Early Years). He had travelled to India
engaged in a personal spiritual quest and not for academic research, despite
the later fictitious claim that he held a doctorate of philosophy. In his
posthumously published Notebooks he acknowledges (1997: 234, 6:214):
“the bulk of my writing is only journalism in book form.” But can Secret
India even be accepted credibly as journalism? In a new Preface to that
book in 1967, Brunton wrote “… I still fully affirm the fundamental truth of
this work.” Yet there are plainly fictional embellishments to be found in Secret
India along with the intent to deceive the reader. Certainly, the chapters
on Meher Baba now appear to be a hatchet job written by an affronted
ex-enthusiast. (2)
Secret India:
3
Not satisfied with his (real or imaginary) personal
‘telepathic’ encounters with Meher Baba, Brunton clearly wanted something far
more tangible. When he left the Meherabad ashram to embark on his brief tour,
he informs the reader (1934: 61): “I have imbibed sufficient pious wisdom and
prophetic forebodings to suffice me for the time. I have not wandered to
distant parts of the world merely to hear religious assertions or declarations
of grandeur. I want facts, even if they are to be facts of a strange, uncommon
kind. And I want reliable evidence; better still, something personal, something
to which I can testify for my own satisfaction”—in effect, Brunton wanted a
miracle, a demonstration of paranormal powers.
Brunton’s tour of India
had so far taken just eights weeks to accomplish, several of which were spent based
at the Saidapet Asramam in Madras,
home of the Meher League. Bemoaning the heat, the food, and the inability to
meditate in his letter to Meher Baba of 30 December, 1930, the representative of the Meher
League, who had talked publicly about his personal ‘telepathic’ experiences in
connection with Baba, arrived at Nasik
during the first week of February 1931. In his letter, Brunton had written: “I
am looking forward to the near future and to receiving spiritual enlightenment
at your hands …” But the retrospective narrative of Secret India presents
the reader with a quite different attitude (1934: 253):
“Once again I am to see Meher Baba, the Parsee holy man and
self-styled ‘new messiah’.
It is with no keen desire that I return to him. The cold
serpents of doubt have firmly coiled themselves around my mind, and a strong
inner feeling tells me that my proposed stay near him will be a waste of time,
and that Meher Baba, though a good man and one living an ascetic life, is
unfortunately suffering from colossal delusions about his own greatness.”
He states that on arrival Meher Baba had asked him: “What
are you thinking about?” To which the “tired and travel-worn” visitor replies
(1934: 254):
“I am thinking of the dozen or more messiahs whom I have
discovered in India
since I have been here.”
Brunton relates:
“Meher Baba does not seem surprised.
‘Yes,’ he rejoins with fingers moving slickly across his
alphabet board, ‘I also have heard of some of them.’
‘How do you explain it?’ I ask innocently.
His forehead contracts into wrinkles, but his mouth smiles
in a superior sort of way.
‘If they are honest, then they are mistaken. If they are
dishonest, then they are deceiving others. There are holy men who make good
progress and then develop spiritual swelled-head. Such a sad state of affairs
usually arrives when they have no proper master to advise and guide them. There
is a point which is midway along the mystical path which is most difficult to
cross; it often happens that the person whose devotions have brought him to
this point foolishly believes that he has reached the highest goal. It takes
little more for him to imagine himself a messiah!’”
Brunton then turns that explanation around in his narrative and
applies it critically to Meher Baba throughout the rest of the chapter derisively
titled ‘At the Parsee Messiah’s Headquarters’. The term ‘messiah’ would not
have been in use at either the Meherabad or Nasik
ashrams, and nor indeed recognized among the various yogis and sadhus that
Brunton had encountered on his tour. At the time in question Meher Baba was
viewed by his devotees as a sadguru or satguru, a Sanskrit term
which means literally: true teacher, a title given specifically to a spiritually
enlightened teacher. There is no sensationalism implied, but rather realism
based on the Hindu philosophical understanding of the importance of knowledge
and that the teacher, guru, is the sacred conduit to self-realization for the
disciple. This was apparently lost on Brunton, who would later in a mood of pique
introduce the element of sensationalism.
[In the record (see Secret India: 2) of
the meeting between Brunton and Prajnananda with Ramana Maharshi, published in
the September 1931 monthly magazine, Peace, the journal of the Swami
Omkar Shanti Ashrama in Andhra Pradesh, Prajnananda states in relation to Baba:
“He says he will become an Avatar in a few years.” If the transcript that talk can
be trusted as being a verbatim report then it may well be that on rare
occasions, either explicitly or implicitly, Meher Baba had used the term avatar
in reference to himself.
But during the brief time Paul Brunton stayed at the
Meherabad and Nasik ashrams in late
1930 and early 1931, the term avatar would certainly not have been in
general use; Meher Baba was accepted by devotees as a sadguru. Even among
Western enthusiasts in the 1930s Meher Baba was simply referred to as the ‘Perfect
Master’. The articles and publications of the period confirm this. In 1931,
Charles Purdom, then the literary editor of Everyman, wrote an article
titled “A Perfect Master.” He would later write a book, published in 1937: The
Perfect Master. In an interview with James Douglas, a leading writer and
religious editor for the Daily Express in London,
on April 9, 1932, Meher Baba
is addressed as “Shri Sadguru Meher Baba.” There were two booklets of sayings published
in 1933: Shri Meher Baba, the Perfect Master: Questions and Answers and The
Sayings of Shri Meher Baba. And even K J Dastur, known for his pompous
style of writing, used the heading “Sayings of His Divine Majesty Sadguru Meher
Baba” in the pages of the Meher Message.]
In his letter to Meher Baba of 30 December, 1930, Brunton had written: “It is difficult
to find time to meditate on this tour, so I trust to make up for this
omission.” But he does not use the opportunity to do so at the Nasik
ashram. Instead, he becomes increasingly affronted and resentful.
Bhau Kalchuri writes (Meher Prabhu, Vol. 4, 1973:
1358–59): “Brunton was invited to stay with the men at the ashram in Nasik.… however,
Baba usually kept aloof from him. Although Brunton questioned the Master every
day, Baba was cool in his reception and their meetings were deliberately kept
brief in contrast to the lengthy interviews Baba had granted him at Meherabad.” He was given the extensive diaries of two of Baba’s devotees to read,
comprising nearly two thousand pages of loosely written manuscript, mostly
composed in English. According to Louis Agostini, who for a three-year period
during the 1960s served as Brunton’s mail secretary “… when Paul Brunton first
met Meher Baba at Meherabad, he told Baba that he wanted to write a book about
him.” Baba is said to have replied “that it was not the time to write anything
about him” (Glow International, Feb. 1985). Were the diaries now produced
at Nasik because of that request, or
was it in order to gauge where his real interests lay?
Brunton was unimpressed and critical of the material that
had been presented to him (1934: 255–56):
“The diaries have clearly been compiled in a spirit of blind
faith … The two disciples who have kept these diaries are young men with only a
fragmentary experience of life beyond their extremely limited circle, but their
very naïveté and complete trust in their master have caused them to place on
record things which are really uncomplimentary to him.…
I find enough matter, therefore, to feed the doubts which
live repressed existences in my mind. I find also that Meher Baba is a fallible
authority, a man subject to constantly changing moods, and an egotist who
demands complete enslavement on the part of his brain-stupefied followers.”
In that critical frame of mind, he
then laments: “Meher Baba seems to be avoiding contacts with me … I wait for
the wonderful experiences he promised me, though I never expect them to arrive.…
Nothing unusual happens nor do I see anything unusual happening to the other
men” (1934: 257). Baba no longer appeared interested in him, was no longer
amenable to his questions. This amounted to a rebuff in the mind of Brunton. The
disciple of telepathic prowess who arrived at Nasik
with the expectation of receiving wonderful experiences was now dwarfed into a
mere tiresome and resentful visitor. Deflated, affronted, and minus the desired
experiences, Brunton states in his book, “with the passing of the month I
announce my impending departure.” In actual fact, contrary to the impression
given in Secret India, Paul Brunton had stayed at the Nasik
ashram for only a week. Despite his pledge to stay a month, he left Nasik
on 8 February, 1931, travelling
to Bombay, intending to return to England.
Kevin Shepherd notes (Meher
Baba, an Iranian Liberal, 1988: 154): “[Brunton] would have regarded the Nasik
ashram as the climax of his itinerary, not as the damp squib he later wished
his readers to think.” It is hardly surprising then, on reaching Bombay, Brunton describes his condition thus (1934: 269, 270):
“When I succeed in arriving there
and installing myself in a hotel, I succeed also in falling ill. Cooped up
between four walls, tired in mind and sick in body, I begin to develop, for the
first time, a pessimistic outlook.… My body is now a weary burden flung on a
bed of pain.… I wonder how much longer I can stave off a breakdown.… If my
physical and mental condition is bad, my spiritual state is little better. I am
disheartened by a sense of failure. True, I have met some men of remarkable
attainments and fine character, as well as others who can do amazing things, but
I have not settled down to any positive inward recognition that here is the
spiritual superman of my quest, the master who appeals to my rationalistic
make-up and to whom I can gladly attach myself.… it is a living, first-hand,
personal experience which I seek, a spiritual illumination entirely my own and
not someone else’s.”
Just before his ship sailed, he
received a letter from a follower of Ramana Maharshi, suggesting that he
revisit the latter’s ashram. Brunton did not want to return to England
bereft of consolation, and so he made the journey to Tiruvannamalai before
later returning to England.
It was not “spiritual illumination” but a demonstration by
Meher Baba of siddhis (paranormal powers) that Brunton required. He doubtless
also hoped to have such ‘powers’ bestowed upon him. According to Charles
Purdom, then editor of the Everyman magazine, a literary weekly for the
publisher J M Dent: “When the writer, then known as Raphael Hurst, came to see
me in London some time after his visit [to India] he said he had no doubt Baba
was false, as he, Raphael Hurst, had asked him to perform a miracle but Baba
could not” (The God-Man, 1969: 128).
Brunton had displayed typical Western misconceptions
about what constitutes spirituality in the East. And even in later life the
lesson he should have learnt from Nasik
had still not sunk in. On the subject of yogis and paranormal powers, in 1937 Meher
Baba is said to have communicated:
“The West differs from the East in its ideal of
spiritual perfection. The West believes perfection to signify the possession
and use of psychic powers.
A yogi can do all the jugglery by
using psychic powers. He can abstain from food, go without sleep, leave the
body at will, or stop his breathing, et cetera. Spiritually considered, a moral,
good man who works in the world selflessly for others is much better and stands
higher than many yogis with all their occult powers of performing miracles,
which are nothing but jugglery without any spiritual importance at all; because
whatever a yogi does is for his own individual self, and hence he is not
selfless. He overcomes one illusion by creating another, which differs
fundamentally from the teaching and work of a Sadguru …” (see Meher Prahbu,
1994, Vol. 6: 2232).
Shepherd observes: “[Brunton’s]
search after paranormal demonstrations had not brought him any fulfilment.
Though he does not give the due context, it is evident that the deflation he
had experienced at Nasik had made
its mark, and was not by any means as casual as the more superficial readers
might have thought.… The deflation caused Brunton to turn against his mentor
with distinctive venom.… To psychologists, it is quite evident that Brunton had
set much store on the possibility of miracles, and that he was acutely piqued
when these were not forthcoming. Two major features of his psychology after
that time were (a) to cover up the fact that he had been an admirer of Meher
Baba to a pronounced degree (b) to give a much lower rating to miraculous
elements and instead to assume a critical stance, though not invariably” (1988:
157, 156).
Brunton returned to England
in the spring of 1931, but due to “nearly two years which were needed to get
rid of the blackwater fever which India
dragged me down” he did not start work on A Search in Secret India until
early 1933. The events surrounding Meher Baba’s visits to the West in 1931 and
1932; the defection of Khaikhushru J Dastur in 1932, who became one of Baba’s
“fiercest public critics”; and the sensationalist Press headlines ‘Indian
Messiah’ were to play a decisive part in how Brunton would later express his
criticism of Meher Baba in Secret India. (3)
Notes:
- According to Bhau Kalchuri (Meher Prabhu, Vol. 5, 1990: 1610), Meher Baba “told [Paul Brunton] to go on pilgrimage to certain places in India. He did not do that …” The places suggested appear to have had a specific connection to events in Meher Baba’s life and travels. The intent was that Brunton remained mindful and focused on Meher Baba, and not go chasing after various yogis, sadhus and fakirs. It is doubtful that Tiruvannamalai, a small town near to which was the ashram of Ramana Maharshi, would have been part of that itinerary. In his letter to Meher Baba of 30 December, 1930, Brunton writes: “First the Bhikkhu Prajnananda become ill and irritable and had to have doctor’s attention. He is fairly well now again, but it was the travelling which does not suit him: he wants to rest since he came all the way from Burma. So at his request I wrote 2 letters to you to ask permission to leave out some of the places on our list, so he should have less journeys to make. You were away so Dastur said I should act as seemed best. So I omitted going to the extreme South … we did however visit Tiruvannamalai instead.” There is no mention in the letter of the meeting with Ramana Maharshi.
- Included in Paul Brunton’s posthumously published Notebooks is the following: “To become a disciple is to become an enthusiast, one who exaggerates, distorts, or overlooks the real facts. He will grossly misrepresent the true state of affairs because his guide is no longer reason but emotion.” (Notebooks, Vol. 11, 1987: 133, 6:13). Ironically, the above words of the ex-enthusiast can be used to provide a most fitting and truthful review of the chapters he wrote on Meher Baba in Secret India.
- Louis Agostini relates: in the “very last letter which [Paul Brunton] wrote to me from Auckland, New Zealand … he stated that he felt that his original statements about Meher Baba had been written by another person and that certainly if he had to do it over again, he would write differently ((Glow International, Feb. 1985). But Brunton never did publicly rectify his misrepresentation of Meher Baba in Secret India. His distorted portrait of Meher Baba remains influential to this day.
Copyright © 2013 Stephen J Castro