2941Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: KLEMP Rewrites & Distorts History in TWEM!
- Oct 12, 2007Mish,
Forgive me for rambling. I was basically trying to sort
legend, from fact, from myth. I know that David, Doug and
others have spent way more time doing research, but what
I haven't seen much of in their illustrations is a timeline
context where all of the dates and the corresponding events
are spelled out more or less in chronological order. This is
probably the only thing unique about the way I personaly
choose to evaluate history. Besides that, the information I
use is basically the same as what the others have.
It's not an easy task, I'll say that. Thanks for the findings
and comments from David Lane, BTW. I agree about much
of what people have to look at are not "their" writings. They
are not the ones who wrote it in the first place, however, the
writings are mostly what they have to work with.
In my recent posts I was trying to trace back to the begin-
ing and looking for any connection between what Paul gave
out as history or legend, with what other paths he knew
about were familiar with.
I traced back to 1963 because that is the year when the
word Eckankar appeared in public and the year when I
suspect the relationship between Paul Twitchell and Kirpal
Singh "started" to change. There was a reason I focussed
on that year - not because I was born near the time when
those things were happening ( : ) - but because it wasn't
long afterward (1963) when the names Rebazar Tarzs and
Sudar Singh started to appear. It has to do with tracing of
things back to the beginning.
Paul Twitchell seemed to indicate he first heard about
Rebazar Tarzs from Sudar Singh. So I tried to trace back
to when they first met - according to the writings. Let me
put it another way: I tried to trace the story about when
they (Paul Twitchell & Sudar Singh) first met. Their are a
number of different dates and versions recorded.
1935 appeared to be significant because it was a year
when Paul & Sudar met and because of the reference to
Eckankar - the teachings - reappearing then. I gave the
quote in an earlier post.
It was confusing, I know, because I was trying to trace
the beginnings of several different things at once. Initially
though, it was a search for legends that inspired me to
start writing those posts in the beginning. I was curious
whether Kirpal Singh and his group shared any legends
similar to what are found in Eckankar. The Christopher
Columbus stuff and others.
Frankly, the trail seems to begin and end with Sudar
Singh, as far as the story about Rebazar Tarzs goes.
The beginning of it, that is (not about Columbus). Here
is the thing though, it was Sudar Singh that replaced
the name Kirpal Singh in a lot of the writings that I have
looked at. And it was Rebazar Tarzs that appeared to
replace Kirpal Singh in the first letter to Gail in December
1962 and also in The Tiger's Fang (manuscript of which
was sent to Kirpal Singh around 1963). So what I saw
was that the name Kirpal Singh kept popping up in the
begining (according to what I saw, and what others
said they saw). In other words, before Sudar Singh
and Rebazar Tarzs there was Kirpal Singh. That is,
if you trace the published material back to the beginning
when Eckankar was first mentioned publicly (1963),
it was Kirpal Singh that Paul was mentioning, not
Sudar Singh or Rebazar Tarzs. They appear to come
mostly afterwards (far as the published record of events).
What did Kirpal Singh know? That was my initial
question. Did Kirpal share any stories with Paul?
I don't know what all he picked up from the Hindu
teachings, whether Paul only included teachings
or some of the history, legend and myths too.
I'm probably gonna go and read the Tiger's Fang
next (it's been a long time) because it talks about
planes, and the gods of different planes, which I be-
lieve is a part of the teachings in other Hindu paths.
Afterall, Paul Twitchell was sending his Tiger's Fang
manuscript to Kirpal Singh - and I doubt that Paul
would have done such a thing if ithese were such
foreign ideas to Kirpal Singh. Also, I want to look
at if there is a place in the beginning of that book
where the physical characteristics of Rebazar
Tarzs are described. If they are and they do not
match the features of Kirpal Singh then I have to
go and determine if these amount to additions, or
if they were in the original manuscript.
Basically, I'm trying to follow the information
back in time to when it started. It's not easy
and it takes a lot of time and research because
all I have is the published materials - most of
which are later editions - and the originals have
changed over time. All I'm looking at is history
and are not trying to negate any of the really
beneficial spiritual/universal principles shared,
no matter who said it. But the actual history
is important, IMO, for other reasons and I
imagine most people would have to agree.
(To some extent, at least, it does matter to
sort legend, from myth, from fact as far as
religions go. It's not all the same - or else
there wouldn't be three different words and
ideas describing them, IMO.)
It's hard to trace back to the beginning when
one doesn't have the earlier books and manu-
scripts. That is part of the reason why it's taking
me so long and why I become disgruntled at times
too. However, each time I find an original it adds
something new to the history. IMO.
Thanks for all of your help :)
were happening ( : ) -
See what's new at http://www.aol.com
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>