Doug Marman once said, "Yes, I would say a lot of what is taught
about Eckankar is a myth. Yes, I think a lot of what people think
about the Holocaust is made up of myth as well." (2/8/2004,
A Few Responses) http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/
Klemp has also stated that Twitchell's Mahanta Consciousness
Would Not Be as High as his is Today, and that one former LEM/
Mahanta would only have the Consciousness of a Fifth Initiate
today. Is the Consciousness and comments of a non-LEM/Mahanta,
like Socrates, greater than Klemp's? Do Socrates' original thoughts
represent a higher truth than Klemp is able to parrot? Or, should
anyone's Mental Plane words and thoughts have more significance
over another's? Perhaps, we all need to place the thoughts and
words others convey into our own individual, private, and unique
perspective. Sharing these can be educational, fun, thought
provoking, and even good therapy! Some, like PT & HK, use the
words and thoughts of others to manipulate and control while
following a hidden personal agenda.
> etznab@ wrote:
> > tianyue@ writes:
> > <snip>
> > > So, as it appears from your statements, you have adopted Doug
> > > Marmon's strategy of attempting to minimize the impact of PT's
> > > plagiarism by pretending it is nothing of consequence.
> > <snip>
> > Tianyue,
> > The creatures of painting stand like living beings, but if
> > we ask them a question, they preserve a solemn silence.
> > And so it is with written words; you might think they spoke
> > as if they had intelligence, but if you question them, wishing
> > to know about their sayings, they always say one and the
> > same thing. (12) - Socrates
> > (12) Phaedrus 275d. See Protagoras 329a, Hippias Minor 365c-d
> > (and Republic 378d), Laws 12.968d-e, Letters 7.343a.
> > O.K., so this is my point. Until we can identify what
> > a person's necessarily unique use of any word(s) may
> > actually have meant, the meaning(s) that we attach to
> > them are of our own making.
> > It also helps to know the context. Is it a story handed
> > down? A legend? (modified or not)
> > Take Rebazar Tarzs for example. Is it legend that
> > he is "supposedly" or "said to be" over 500 years old?
> > (Glossary for Eckankar, The Key to Secret Worlds
> > says "supposedly". The Eckankar dictionaries say
> > "said to be".)
> > The latest book about Eck Masters contains the
> > word "legend" as well, when it relates a story about
> > Rebazar Tarzs (not about his age, but about some-
> > thing else).
> > I can empathize to some extent with most of your
> > observations and/or opinions. However, I still find a
> > lot of value in the words that Paul and others have
> > shared. What I see in any words, the meanings may
> > not absolutely match the meanings intended by any
> > particular author. However, that doesn't mean they
> > don't hold value for me. This is part of the freedom
> > of religion IMO. The freedom to believe in legends
> > and myths, etc. (and hopefully know the difference).
> > If I knew the context to all the stories, whether literal
> > or myth, fiction or non-fiction (etc.), I believe that for my
> > better understanding it could help.
> > Going back to Rebazar Tarzs. He has been called a
> > Tibetan Lama, etc. And due to the 500-year (plus) age
> > attached to his character, he does not qualify for the
> > description of so many other personages alleged to
> > stand for him.
> > There is only one other personage that I still "suspect"
> > might be connected. And that would be the legend of an
> > ancient Tibetan Master found within the teaching path of
> > Swami Yogananda, Swami Premananda (b. 1861), and
> > Swami Vivekananda (b. 1863), etc.
> > "A direct disciple of Swami Yogananda. Swami Premananda
> > established the Self Revelation Church of Absolute Monism in
> > Washington, D.C."
> > http://www.divinelifechurch.org/content/view/17/36/
> > O.K., so Paul Twitchell was familiar with both Swami
> > Premananda and Swami Vivekananda (at least). Paul
> > even at one time had belonged to a Church of Absolute
> > Monism in Washington, D.C. [1950-1955?]. And still,
> > this is speculation to identify Rebazar Tarzs with any
> > previous legends if I don't know exactly what was the
> > meaning of "supposedly" or "said to be" according to
> > Paul Twitchell when he described the age of Rebazar
> > Tarzs.
> > At any rate, I find history, legend, and myth to be
> > interesting conversation topics. There is probably no
> > greater material treasure still existing on the Earth
> > today than what has preserved (albeit veiled) behind
> > the worlds words, languages, and symbols. This can
> > appear like a huge treasure chest of priceless and
> > valuable artifacts or it can turn out to be like Pandora's
> > box containing all the evils of humanity (except for hope).
> > IMO, this is the way that I might put it. However, according
> > to the quote by Socrates, what good are words if when we
> > question them they all say the same thing? (Or, for that matter,
> > Missing Persons in the song Words: What are words for When
> > no one listens anymore)
> > Well I would guess that we each have to find what works
> > for us. What works for me (at this point in time) is to explore
> > the differences between historical fact, myth, legend, allegory,
> > and fable, etc.
> > It is not that we can order others to believe in the religion
> > (myths and all) subscribed to by ourselves, because in the
> > United States there is a separation between Church and State.
> > It is not something (to my understanding) that we could even
> > propose to become a law by Democratic vote or amendment.
> > So (IMO) perhaps there was/is good reason for this separation
> > and what stands to keep the U.S. unique among some of the
> > other nations who might inhibit "freedom of religion" (not that
> > it never could seem inhibited here too).
> > It seems to me, that what most people opposed to particular
> > elements of religion really fear, is the possibility that some day
> > the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom of Religion
> > might become extinct in every nation. That there might come,
> > one day, only one form of government and one form of religion.
> > That both would share in common but a single author and/or
> > leader. That this would not be to every single person's liking or
> > advantage. IMO this is the only really great fear, but at the same
> > time a necessary crisis for every single individual to solve.
> > Etznab