6194Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar (Revisited)
- May 6, 2012What stood out to me most from the examples you listed was Doug
Marman's use of the word "facts".
In the examples I gave - especially when Doug addressed my questions
about Rebazar Tarzs on a.r.e. - it seemed to me that in some respects
"facts" were somehow "secondary" to spiritual experience.
I thoiught about the a.r.e. thread last night trying to fathom what
Doug was saying about Paul's stories and things said (some of them) not
based on facts. And frankly, it still didn't jive with me. Off hand I
can remember at least two places where Paul Twitchell illustrated that
Rebazar Tarzs "told him" what to write. In one place (I believe)
Rebazar Tarzs comes to Paul's room, wakes him up, tells him to take up
the pencil and write. (I'm referring to Dialogues With The Master and
The Far Country.) So how can Doug suggest those were Paul's words based
on a spiritual experience?
Paul wrote (in so many words) that Rebazar Tarzs came and materialized
in his room, and in one instance (I believe) the mattress sank from the
weight of R.T. sitting on it.
It would be nice if everybody didn't go away, all those Eckists on the
newsgroups, and if the string of dialogues could continue today. I say
this because there is a lot more information and examples available to
share where many of "Paul's words" read as plagiarized from various
books by other authors - none of them by the name of Rebazar Tarzs, or
other Eck masters.
"They" didn't succeed at booting me from a.r.e., and I didn't "move on"
as once suggested. To the contrary I continued to research the FACTS -
whether anybody likeed it or not - and have reams of examples (which
can be illustrated and verified by REAL evidence and FACTS) about many
of the things people were chewing on and debating over for years before
I arrived. Some of the examples I (and others) have since found are
those that not even David Lane was aware of (I'm talking about examples
of Paul's writings compared with other authors) and I think probably
that Doug Marman was unaware of.
So new information has come in since the D.L. / D.M. debates, etc. New
FACTS are now known. How facts can be important in one instance and
something else in another ... I am not sure what Doug was talking
I recall from the newspapers that sometimes when something happens that
embarrasses the government and people want to know who is responsible -
such as torture of prisoners, etc. - those higher up in the ladder
have responded with things like: The first time I heard about it was
from the news / newspaper. Iow, people claim ignorance and that they
didn't know about something until it became public via the news. Well,
to admit otherwise - and that they did know about it (and for a long
time) - would be damning to them and public opinion would have them on
Now I recall that (for some reason) Harold Klemp doesn't use the
Internet. I'm sure he reads the newspapers and watches the news, but
how much about the trove of FACTS regarding Paul's writings compared
with other authors - INCLUDING REBAZAR TARZS - is in the newspapers, or
on the evening news? (Maybe it should be?) Much of the new information
and research has been put on the Internet. That's where it is (also in
some books). And even there, we've probably all seen how apologists can
argue against certain information being true, try to marginalize people
and their research, even to the extent of suggesting (in so many words)
that facts don't matter. Or, it's not about facts.
Well, I've seen where it looks like people want to have it both ways.
Facts matter. Facts don't matter. As far as research goes, and besides
the stories of "spiritual experiences" that people send in, When was
the last time the Eckankar website posted something about people doing
real research into the stories told by Paul Twitchell? (Not to mention
"research" about the stories sent in by Eckists today?) It was 1984
when Harold came out with all that stuff about Paul Twitchell and when
Harold did research. I wonder if they continue to research, or if (for
some reason) it stopped a long time ago?
Oh yeah, I remember it now.
"[....] A few years after Harold became the Master [1984?], he began
researching and going through Paul's old files. That was after Darwin
turned Paul's library over to Harold. It certainly would be true to say
that Harold saw a side of Paul he had not seen before, as did I [Doug
Marman] when Harold gave me permission to look through the records.
Paul's files gave some interesting insights into Paul's past, which
Paul never spoke about. So Harold began to make a more thorough study.
"About this same time, Harold began hearing from a number of ECKists
about passages in other books that sounded similar to Paul's, and
further stories about how Paul had studied with Kirpal Singh and worked
for L. Ron Hubbard, which had circulated around since the early days.
So, with Paul's files handy, Harold started digging. [....] A few
months later, after researching Paul's files more thoroughly, Harold
began giving a series of talks and writing a series of articles to
share the information he found. Although Harold never tried to force
anyone to change their perceptions of Paul, he was clearly working to
unfreeze the ideas that had developed over time so that we could all
see Paul from a fresh viewpoint. [....]"
[Based on: Doug Marman: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 10]
"[...] Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in the foothills of the
Himalayas near Darjeeling. Before that on his first trip to India in
1935, he met Sudar Singh. We are still looking for information on Sudar
Singh. We have gotten a lot of reports about an individual named Sundar
Singh, who is not the same person at all.
"Somebody asked Paul why he didn't simply look into the ECK-Vidya
whenever he needed to know something. He said he didn't want to take
all the surprise and adventure out of life. I feel the same way. It's
more fun to find out yourself rather than be told. This is why the ECK
initiates go out and find material about Sudar Singh themselves.
"Some people wonder if Rebazar Tarzs really exists. They ask if Paul
just borrowed a name from the Far East and made him up. Yet people
report having met the ECK Masters even before they ever heard of
Eckankar. The ECK Masters are real."
[Based on: Article (Looking at the Past for Spiritual Lessons) by
Harold Klemp - see link]
They got reports? Hmm ... then maybe I should send in a report? :)
I could give other examples where it looks like Eckankar is interested
in stories from other people, including what people found by research.
Apparently though, the LEM. isn't going to simply look at the Eck-Vidya
and share answers to all of the questions people have. At the same time
though, it looks like people pick and choose from all the information
only what "THEY WANT" the facts to be and put the rest under the rug.
If one disregards the reported facts written by Paul Twitchell
concerning his meetings, encounters, and relationships with Eck Masters
then where does it leave you? In Never Never Land with Peter Pan and
Tinker Bell, etc.? (Hey look! He's playing a flute!)
Are "spiritual experiences", the "stories" (and the stories that people
send in) somehow more REAL than factual accounts which can be
researched and verified? Or, Are "spiritual experiences" sometimes used
as a label for anything a person wants to be true? Iow, does the land
of make believe trump the actual facts? This is what it comes down to,
From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
Sent: Sat, May 5, 2012 10:57 pm
Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: The Dark Side of ECKankar
BTW- Nacal and Usually Skeptical is (me) Prometheus:
A Calm And Peaceful Message For All
Please read this message in the calm and peaceful tone in which it is
I have really been for the most part enjoying the dialogue on this
I would like to encourage Doug Marman to continue posting here. I think
we can all learn something that will help us move toward a greater
We can do this together regardless of religious belief and possibly
a place with no fences. I have many friends from different beliefs and
I have noticed in the last 10 years or so is that our differences don't
us as much as they used to. There is a coming together of sorts and a
towards higher conciousness.
I have seen this come about through heartfelt sharing of ideas.
***A question for Doug. Is Patti Simpson still an Eckist?
I send all who read this my love
Thank you very much for the reply to the 5 questions that I asked of
you. Also thanks for
looking through Paul Twitchell's writings and finding the same thing
that I found out about
Paul not using the term MAHANTA until January 1969. It means a lot to
me that you answered that question I ask a while back. I join Eckankar
because the Mahanta was the highest state of consciousness in this
world and in the inner worlds so said Paul Twitchell the 971st MAHANTA
(the title he gave himself). I still wonder why Paul would say such a
thing. To me this is the biggest lie that any person could say. To make
up a line of Mahanta Masters, (highest state of consciousness and God
made flesh) what was Paul thinking of. O' well !!! I guess the next
time I see Paul in the astral library I will give him a kick in the
PS..... Doug, next time you see Harold, could you tell him that Joey
would like to see Him
start posting on The Truth Seeker Bulletin Board. It sure would be
grand of Harold to do so.
Thanks again for your help.
Seeker For The Last Time
Another X`Eckist Story
I joined Eckankar in the early 80's, attracted partly because of their
concept of Soul Travel
and left in the mid-90's. I had become a 3rd Initiate by that time.
Because of my outspoken
aggressive remarks and asking too many questions about concealed facts
about the organization, many wondered why the LEM had allowed me to
reach that level.
Initiations and secret words and the idea that we need a Master, mean
nothing to me
in this life because in my different existences I was connected to many
of these concepts.
There were times I needed these secret words and initiations and a
Master and for those
who need them now, it is OK. It is something many have to experience,
if not in this lifetime,
in a different one.
In the mid-80's, I posted a few remarks on ARE. This was a good lesson
for me, because
some of the die-hard ECKists attempted to attack me with their "sword
from the Sugmad"
and "weed me out of the garden of ECK." I had no grudge against them
because I knew
they would learn to open their minds. At the time, they believed in
what they did and
that it was the right thing for them to do. I accepted it.
I hadn't been on ARE for a long time but a few weeks ago I was impelled
to go on it
and out popped the information concerning Ford Johnson's book. In the
would say it was the ECK or LEM. I ordered the book, which I am
It brought back some memories of Eckankar.
I was very surprised to see some of the die-hard and long-standing
High Initiates, especially Nathan. This was a shock and it takes a lot
to shock me. I am
very happy for Nathan because we had communicated in the past. Nathan
a very high class lawyer in this life(have no idea what he does). Boy,
did he swing that
sword for Eckankar. He left nothing standing. But that was then and now
is now. I am
happy, Nathan that you allowed yourself to open and move beyond the
garden of ECK.
There is so much more to learn.
To some Eckankar is still a beautiful garden and I can respect that. I
would like to stress
that I have nothing against Eckankar and similar religions. They may be
needed for souls
I enjoyed reading the comments on this board..and I'll be back when I
I'll sign off with the name I used to use on ARE - Seeker, for the last
A Few Responses
I've received a number of comments to my last post.
I will respond to some of the questions and comments.
I agree with you that no church, book or religion can replace the part
that knows. We also both agree on the importance of fearlessness in
truth, and the importance of teachings with heart.
My lights are fine, as are yours.
To Joey Ward:
I don't do yes or no questions, but I will try to keep my answers
1. Did Paul Twitchell have the highest state of consciousness as the
as he told the world through his writings?
I don't know how anyone could say who was highest or who is even higher
So, I would never say such a thing, myself. I don't even think having
the highest state
of consciousness should be anyone's goal. A person can gain a high
state of consciousness
and be unable to make a living here in the physical. That's not very
2. Does Harold Klemp have the highest state of consciousness as the
as he is telling the world throught his writings?
Same as above, however, I will add this. I agree with the Sufis who say
that there is
what they call The Pole of The World. The Sufi teacher Ibn al' Arabi
points out that this
same principle applies at every level of human affairs. Another Sufi
put it this way:
"Just as there is someone who acts as the pole for the whole of
humanity, so there
are poles for every faith, community, occupation - even down to the
level of towns."
We sense when we are near such people since they seem to represent and
whole of the town or company or faith that they are a part of. Every
age has those
who carry the whole of things for the world at every level. We connect
to that whole
through their vision.
However, I don't believe in saying who the Pole of the World is, since
to find this out for themselves. In fact, in most times through history
the Pole of The
World was hidden. The Sufis say this as well.
3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works?
Yes. Well, I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes.
4. Did Paul Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters
names on them
as if the Eck Master were saying them?
5. Who do you Trust to tell the truth about Spiritual truths? Pick
one only. [Names omitted]
I see all teachings as mines. The good ones are gold mines, but they
all need to be sorted
through to find the pure gold. I have found no outer teachings that are
The only place to test the gold is within ourselves, when we try to use
it in our lives.
You might point to an outer person. I would rather point to our inner
to recognize truth. We often do pick it up from others, however.
You asked: "If you are not trying to undermine Ford and his book
"Confessions of a God Seeker," why did you give such a negative opinion
about the book in The Chanhassen Villager last November?"
If you read my comments to the Chanhassen Villager, just like in my
last post, it is focused
on the errors in what David Lane has reported and the unfortunate fact
that Ford repeated
these as if they were facts as David did. I am absolutely amazed at how
far the distortion
of truths from David Lane has spread. I was disappointed that the
newspaper had not done
better research, and that Ford had not as well, especially since David
Lane himself suggested
to Ford that he study my book more thoroughly to see what had been
discussed via the Internet.
I am just as amazed at how quickly and completely people assume that I
am some kind
of pawn in a battle or fighting some kind of war against Ford for
pointing out the errors.
I guess this goes to show how far off perceptions of someone else's
motivations can be.
People will imagine what my motivations are, but they are a million
miles from the mark.
I do agree that some people like to win their arguments no matter what,
and since I have
no interest in that, this is exactly why I have said I would say no
more about such things
unless folks here were interested. From the responses I've seen, there
doesn't seem to be
much interest in what I was writing about.
I think you are right that we should all look at our motivations. I
have certainly done so and
have tried only to offer help in clearing up some of the confusions
that have been going on
for a while by getting to the facts. I have tried to stay far from
criticizing anyone else's beliefs, although I do think some friendly
dialogue in this area is good.
I think it is just as important to look at the motivations for bringing
up my personal motivations. I have not questioned Ford's motivations,
nor would I. I think his intentions are sincere. Getting stuck over
another person's so-called intentions is often the way our Censor stops
us from seeing another person's point of view fairly.
When we get so attached to our cause, anyone who says anything that
appears to interfere
with our cause becomes or enemy. The motivations of our enemies are
in our minds. Ask them and they would say the same about their enemies.
It is a sad fact that public dialogue over religious matters is almost
impossible these days.
This was not true in America during its early days. Public dialogue was
often lively and contentious, but never came to people disowning their
neighbors or rejecting their families and friends like it does today.
As far as I am concerned, we are all friends here with a common
interest in Spiritual Truth.
That is how I see it. And we will each decide for ourselves what is
true, as we should.
You wrote: "You spend all of your time chipping away at the edges of
finding miniscule points of contention (a minor date discrepancy here,
a location there)
but not once do you address the underlying core truth that is being and
has been expressed
here from the very beginning."
Exactly right. So why is everyone getting so worked up about it? Why is
no one simply
acknowledging the minor points and letting it go? These are not core
truths, just a matter
of correcting errors in fact.
No, I don't agree that my "can't we all get along" message doesn't help
us get at the truth.
In fact, let me say it this way: If we can not listen to those who see
things differently than
we do, then we will never see Truth. This doesn't mean we should all
agree, but it certainly
does mean that we should be able to hold respectful and friendly
conversations with those
who have a different way of seeing things. We should be open to
learning from others.
You wrote: "Your method is to find a few unimportant discrepancies and
as an attempt to discredit the entire revelation of overall truth
This is incorrect. I am only trying to point out the errors. I am not
trying to discredit
the entire message. But clearly, after we have seen the facts for what
they are, the
overall picture does change somewhat. That's natural.
Since so many of David Lane's claims are in fact not based on facts at
all, but merely
on imagined intentions and speculations, I have also offered other
My point is not that David's guesses are wrong and mine are right, but
simply to show how
widely interpretations can vary when there are no facts.
You are the one who is painting a picture of black and white, not I. I
don't see David
or Ford as all wrong, nor as all right. I say let's find the gold
wherever we look.
Why blame anyone for the fact that everything they offer is not pure
Lastly, you suggest that I am defending a teaching and that I am an
Okay, perhaps I am. I don't feel that is what I am doing, but I can see
it would look
that way to you. But surely you see that your comments are the same.
You are also
defending your beliefs. In fact, everyone who has responded to my post
bulletin board has picked at what I would call minor, technical details
avoided my points. This doesn't mean you or anyone else here is any
You asked: "Where do you ever give a reference or a quote from your
They are in my book, and have been thoroughly discussed on
and can be found in the records there. I would be glad to present them
here as well,
if anyone was interested.
You asked: "Why have you returned without answering the questions posed
by site members in previous postings? When did Twitchell first write
about the mahanta?
Was it 1969 as one site member has stated?"
I answered last time that I had just moved to a new home and my files
were still packed
in boxes. They are still packed in boxes, but a few are handy so I
pulled out Paul's old
Wisdom Notes and Illuminated Way Letters.
You seem to be right. Paul didn't use the word, Mahanta, until the
January 1969 Illuminated
Way Letter and the February 1969 Wisdom Note. Before then he mainly
used, The Master, Spiritual Traveler, Teacher, etc. Not even the
mention of Living ECK Master very often, although Outer Master and
living Master were mentioned often.
This is interesting. Thanks for pointing it out.
You wrote: "You are also being untruthful when you say that you, "
desire to interfere with the beliefs of anyone."
And how would you know that? You seem to know my own desires and
better than I do. Clearly I will need to ask you next time what my
This is foolishness. Do you realize how hard it is to know the desires
of your own children?
How often do parents misunderstand what their children are trying to
do? Have you never had this happen to you when you were a child? Yet
you think you can actually guess my desires, when you don't even know
me? Have we even met?
Why do people spend so much time imagining they KNOW the intentions of
I see this with ECKists just as often as with David Lane and the group
here. So, I'm not picking on this group. I see it as a real trap and an
excuse to justify rejecting what another person has to say.
You wrote: "You also claim to "have enjoyed the conversations on this
bulletin board" and yet
you only respond to selective questions."
That's right. That was what I came here to share, after Ford claimed
that I was not after the kind of truth that could be discussed openly
and that my book was not about encouraging open dialogue. I came here
for just that kind of dialogue, but guess what? No one here wants to
discuss the facts or the errors openly.
If I were Ford, I would care enough to make sure the facts I was using
I thought, especially as a lawyer, he would want to know.
You wrote: "You attempt to confuse (like Paul and Harold) by twisting
and abusing truth
in order to blind the reader with your distortions and illusions of
If you really believe this, then why not point out a quote where you
feel this is what I am attempting to do, rather than making broad
accusations about my motivations? Why not just address directly what
what I am saying and point out how you see it differently? I have no
intention of twisting the truth in anyway at all.
You wrote: "Is what Harold's teaches (Eckankar) a myth?
"Since I brought the subject up can you tell me if the Holocaust was a
myth or not?
"Some things ARE black and white so just give a yes or no answer to the
previously mentioned two questions. Please, no long-winded explanation,
yes or no to each question."
Sorry, I don't do yes or no answers, but I'll be glad to discuss your
questions. 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. This doesn't mean that the Holocaust didn't
happen, or that many of the stories or facts are lies. It just means
that people often try to simplify things.
History is largely made up of myth. There are a million personal
individual stories about World War II, for example, yet the history
books treat it as one thing that happened. The people who go through it
don't see it the way the history books do. They were there, but the
myths are what we can deal with to understand. Otherwise it is too
You wrote: "Doug, instead of focusing on David Lane or Ford's book
let's now focus on the writings of Twitchell and Klemp and see where we
can find inaccuracies, or is the world still flat to you? Did you like
the posting from the May-June-July 1971 Mystic World about Twitchell?
"No one really knows for sure where he came from, when he was born, or
if his true name is even Paul Twitchell. How long he has been on this
Earth planet is not known." Or, how about this quote from the same
article, "Paul is known to the world as Peddar Zaskq, which is his real
name, is an occidental." Wasn't this also his name for his last
incarnation and his spiritual name?"
Obviously we now know where he came from and was born (Paducah,
Kentucky) and that his true name was not Paul Twitchell, but was John
Paul Twitchell. We also now know when he was born (1909). Paul
certainly didn't ever talk about these things, nor would he answer
questions about them directly, and I think he liked the idea that his
past was mysterious, and he helped to create this mysterious past. Yes,
Paul is only known to the world as Peddar Zaskq because he told the
world that was his spiritual name.
And yes, this is the kind of writing that is mythological. Did you
think I would say something else?
You went on: "Let's now go back up to the preceding paragraph since you
seem to claim to like "facts" (why don't you give your sources?). "But
it is a fact that his Master Rebazar Tarzs, an ancient Tibetan lama,
who appears to be in his early forties, was a young man when Columbus
discovered America." Now, was that really a "fact," or a delusional
belief, or a deliberate lie? Or, is it that, "There is a need of the
people to believe in the magic of a saviour, and Sri Paul Twitchell
knows this and acts out the part" (same article)."
It certainly is no fact, since there are no records nor anything else
to prove that Rebazar Tarzs even exists, never mind how old he really
is. However, there is no proof that it is a lie, either. It certainly
sounds far-fetched. But I don't think the belief in saints, saviors and
spiritual teachers comes from the desire to believe in magic. I think
it comes from the innate memory within Soul that there is a truth and
meaning to life that most of the world seems to have forgotten, but
As Rumi once said, the reason that false gold is so popular is because
there is such a thing
as real gold.
Of course, mixed with this is that many people want a father figure, or
want someone to take
care of them and tell them what is right and wrong.
You wrote: "The sad thing is that there is no freedom in religion
there is only control through the use of fear and surrender of the
common sense of having an open mind, and of course, the dangled carrot
of initiation and hope."
It certainly seems that way. To me, without freedom there is no point
to a spiritual teaching. It is simply a social group. There is more
peer pressure and more influence from the people who want everyone to
be harmonious rather than speaking honestly, than control from above,
but in general I agree with you.
You wrote: "Paul states, "Ramaji was one of the first initiates in the
ancient Order of the Vairagi." It seems Paul has a problem spelling his
name. "Ji" is a Hindu suffix used to denote respect and affection. But,
Paul is not speaking of Rama."
Why do you think that Paul is referring to someone different than Rama?
The Hindus often add the "ji" to the end of a name, and sometimes it is
written with only the "j". Take the name Shamus-i-Tabriz. Generally
this is spelled, Shams of Tabriz. Same person. Jalalludin Rumi is
spelled dozens of ways. Sometimes he is also called Mevlana. Same
person. Sometimes it is written Shabda Yoga, sometimes Shabd Yog.
Sometimes Yoga is spelled Joga. I interpret this quote from Paul to be
referring to the same person as Rama, but if you feel otherwise I would
find it interesting to hear why.
You asked: "By the way, why has Harold evaded giving his birth date and
I don't know. Probably because it is a personal fact that has nothing
to do with his role. But maybe it is just a hold-over from Paul. You
would have to ask him. My guess is that he doesn't want people holding
birthday parties because of his birthdate.
You wrote: "Also, why is it Doug that on page 282 that Harold, the
mahanta, doesn't even know today about an experience he had in1970. He
states, "Was he really an ECK Master? Who can say?" Shouldn't the
Master who is greater than the God of all religions know such things?"
I would have to read the whole quote in context. It sounds to me as if
Harold is asking a rhetorical question. In other words, who can say if
he was a Master then?
Actually the question I ask is how did Darwin know that he was the
Mahanta, or how does Harold know this? Isn't this like any initiate who
might think they have gained the next initiation? Isn't this the same
question? How do they really know?
You ask: "Are the initiations in Eckankar valid as a means to greater
spiritual growth over those who are non-eckists? Or, is this a myth
I think the initiations are a mixed bag. There is definitely reality to
them, from my personal experience. But they have become filled with
myths as well. I can tell you that real Self-Realization is rare, HI or
not. The initiation level doesn't prove anything. It is more meaningful
as a personal matter than a comparison to others. I don't think anyone
should be judging another person's worth or truth by what initiation
level they are at. Including the Master.
You asked: "Paul states on page 136 of Difficulties Of Becoming The
Living ECK Master, "Cause with all of that, see, I write books in
series. I have four books that are finished now; well, the Shariyat is
a continued writing, but I've got three books actually." So Doug,
where's book three? If it wasn't finished why didn't Harold go to the
Astral Library to finish it?"
Paul wrote a number of the first chapters to book three. I think he got
to chapter three or four. That's as far as it has gotten. I think that
Harold thought about completing book three but for some reason decided
it wasn't his place to do so. I would be surprised if Harold ever
finishes book three, or tries to. But you would have to ask him if you
wanted to know.
You wrote: "Was the "Moon Virus" that Twitchell warned of a myth or a
or did he make an erroneous assumption or was it just conjecture (page
234 of "Difficulties")? Show me where Kirpal Singh's name is used with
I have no idea where Paul got the idea of the Moon Virus from. He
certainly used it to gain some news. It is similar in some ways to the
HIV virus in the way it has stumped the scientists, but I have heard no
connection to the moon.
Here is the first quote of Paul's where he mentions Sudar Singh, from
the January 1964 Orion
"I began my study of bilocation under the tutelage of Satguru Sudar
Singh, in Allahabad, India. Later, I switched to Sri Kirpal Singh of
old Delhi. Both were teaching the Shabda Yoga, that which is called
the Yoga of Sound Current. I had to learn to leave my body at will and
return, without effort..."
Here is another quote from my book:
"I have since found two other early articles of Paul's, that show the
same thing: An article that ran in early 1966 called, Can You Be In Two
Places At The Same Time?, shows Sudar Singh, from Allahabad, India,
along with Bernard of England, a Self-Realization Swami who has a
retreat in Maryland, Kirpal Singh of Delhi, India, and Rebazar Tarzs, a
"The second article was called, The God Eaters, and ran in the November
1964 issue of The Psychic Observer. In the article Paul talks about
Rebazar Tarzu [sic], who he "made contact with...through bilocation,"
and Kirpal Singh as his teachers. These examples clearly show that both
Sudar Singh and Rebazar Tarzs were referred to, side by side with
Kirpal Singh. It was not until late 1966 before Paul suddenly stopped
referring to Kirpal Singh."
You wrote: "You mention that you talked to Patti Simpson and basically
she says it was "funny" how Paul would evade giving out information on
himself. You wrote that Paul tried to leave information blank "when it
came to filling out official forms," but found that, "they would gladly
accept whatever he wrote whether it was right or wrong." In truth,
Paul intentionally lied and mislead people. Ironically, this is one
"fact" that you have supplied to help prove the validity of David
Lane's claim! This is also proof that you don't even listen to your own
words! Perhaps, this is because your conscious subjective (self) is to
evade, and your unconscious objective Self (God-Soul) is to impart
If you want to imagine that, go ahead. I think there is a big
difference between someone who is intentionally trying to mislead
people about their age, and a person who refuses to give out their age.
But if you want to say that both are technically lies, that's fine with
me. It seems to me that you are just trying to make it look like
something it isn't.
Remember, the picture that David painted is that Paul lied to Gail
about his age, as he had lied about his age his whole life. In fact,
Gail knew perfectly well that Paul wasn't giving out his age, and so
did everyone else. Pretty different picture if you ask me.
Here's a similar example. David was accused of copyright infringment
many years ago (ironic, isn't it?). It was over a book written about J
R Hinkins group. Under oath he said one thing. In his deposition, also
under oath, he said the opposite. The judge politely said that his
testimony was untrustworthy. David claims that he was not trying to
lie, he just didn't remember it correctly. However, the testimony shows
that the first story he told seemed like the one that would best help
his case. Later it turned out to be exactly the wrong thing, so when
asked the same question in court, he answered the opposite way. He lost
his case over this.
Would you call that lying? David doesn't. I'll take David's word for it
that he just forgot, even though it looks otherwise. I guess that's
just how I am.
You wrote: "Doug you have imagined facts through your own distorted
belief system of myth being reality. You seem to be confused as you
spread confusion to others (somewhat like Typhoid Mary).You have no
idea of what fact or truth is because you are unable to hear truth."
Mighty big claims. Why not just show me the quotes where you think I'm
off base and share how you see it? Why imagine that I am unable to see
I'm sure I see it differently than you do. But I have few illusions
about Paul. My point was to show how many illusions that David had,
while claiming otherwise. Ford's book has got them now, too, since he
was taken in by David's story. The irony is that those who are most
concerned about pointing out the lies and illusions of others are often
just as unwilling to admit and correct their own.
However, if you feel that I've made any errors, please point them out.
David caught a few, and I immediately corrected them. I would like to
make my book as accurate as possible, and I'm in the process of making
another edit to include the latest information, since we are always
learning new things.
Thanks for asking specific questions. More of this would make a real
And I am glad to share the specific evidence behind my comments if
anyone is interested.
Be The Now!!
If you are a follower of the Clear Light and Silent Sound, then you
follow the natural order of who you really are as Beingness. The secret
between the truth and the lie, is intention. Intention is the prime
mover of awareness. How many really see themselves as the observer and
the observed, the now, the present. Look only to the temple within
yourself, no church, building or outer temple will ever point the way.
In fact remove or demolish all these objects of glory, pride and self
righteousness for in the heart of the now resides the gift. "Remind all
those that show you the way to the false temple of mortar and brick
that you have out grown their cage and See now with the Spiritual eye
NO RELIGION can hold GOD to a given doctrine! Even the doctrine of
Light and Sound ..
Freedom can not be bound and Freedom will destroy all that try to hold
Man is a funny creature, he seeks the company of the one and only
primal cause even until death. He is even willing to kill to be near to
it. He believes that distance exists between himself and his Maker and
he must make a journey back to the Godhead. Knock, knock, is anyone
home? Soul exists because it is GOD. God has never posed the question,
"I love Soul". Your Higher Self JUST IS, no more
- no less.
Dance, Sing and Be.
"All thing must pass away" George Harrison
Hold on to the social consciousness if you must but as Ford and Gram
are saying they only
opened the door you must walk through and see Freedom for yourself. Not
their truth, but yours.
After the Temple of Eck was built, I made a number of visits to it. On
one of my visits I noticed that the temples main entrance floor was
cracked right down the middle. Eckankar had it repaired, so no one had
any idea what had happened. If that had occurred in my life, I would
have asked what Spirit was saying to me? Well I did .. What it told me
was that the office(ORG) and the temple side(Spiritual) had a major
division between them. Another way of seeing it was that the true
teachings of Eck were no longer within the organization.
Fear is the last thing to go Pure awareness of consciousness can only
The events unfolding before us have the blessing of the Holy Order of
the World Adepts
or it would not be.
This is not an end to something, but more of a beginning.
Solipsist Reprieve: My Story -- Why I Left Eckankar
Soul, if It exists, could have entered into the agreement to share the
Eckankar dream. The purpose may have been for spiritual experience: to
advance spiritually and learn to be of service in a better and higher
way and to consciously learn a few other things, like the nature of
illusion and deception. But if I believe that soul exists, then I am
asking for another round of belief lessons. I had spiritual
experiences, but how do I know that they are real now? All I know is
that I am here now and even those two adverbs are suspect.
Now it is the age of Aquarius and the Piscean age is over. Some
astrologers say that the religions of the intercessor between man and
God were an aspect of the Piscean phase. It is a strong aspect of the
Aquarian age that the veils of the intercessors be lifted. And it
implies a dark night for the wizard who commands his followers to
"ignore that man behind the curtain." It is a bright day for expose'
writers. Since reading the book, I have seen other works that expose
Christianity and Judaism. All the political books are pointing out
lies told by the governments and the other party and the history books.
For the Christians out there: your version of "Confessions" may be the
works of Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy. Lies and damn lies. All
religions are of the cloth of deception, regardless of whose face is on
So it appears that Eckankar has decided to maintain its position as a
spiritual middle school. We all saw this coming, felt it in many ways
and Ford articulated it for our minds in a way that we could no longer
ignore. We knew about David Lane and some of the plagiarism years ago
and chose to forgive it. We wondered why Rebazar couldn't appear for a
TV spot, if he was so physical. We were uncomfortable about Darwin
being written out of history. The restrictive guidelines.
When I went to receive my fifth initiation, the internal phrase kept
repeating: "The bloom is off the rose. . . the bloom is off the rose."
I wondered what that meant, but the meaning is emerging. The days of
believing in Santa Clause are past. Time to take the next step in
becoming emancipated. Joseph Campbell said that his studies gave him
an overview of the myths and religions that precluded his having any
spiritual experiences himself. It is like the old saying that he who
carved the Buddha cannot worship it.
But I had just finished the book and was casting about and asked spirit
if it was true. The image of an animated Rebazar peered headfirst into
my inner vision and then started to mirror every movement I made. I
had never had an experience with him, but the message was that I was
doing it and so I might as well quit struggling against the curriculum.
"No more Mother Goose stories for you and you can pretty much forget
about the tooth fairy," it told me.
Now I suspect why Harold is always telling fairy tales. I see an image
now of Paul laughing, after telling his audience that only a handful of
them would understand what he was trying to say. What if he was trying
to say that only deception exists in the world of illusion? Is Harold
hinting that the teachings are a fairy tale used to teach a different
Masters and lying liars do not come clean. But there may be more to
this learning than is apparent. What if Harold had told us that he had
discovered the truth about the whole sham and just said,
"Well, you can call me Harold or you can call me Gerald, but you
doesn't have to call me Sri anymore." Would that have been masterful?
I do not know, but he didn't say that. He built a temple instead.
One of the wake-up calls for me was an Ask-the-Master session for RESAs
in one of the recent books. Those guys didn't know anything. They
were asking questions and Harold was describing worlds and temples and
I would like to think that RESAs should have been able to access that
information themselves, if the path was working.
But no mastership is happening here. With Eckankar producing only two
and a half masters in almost 38 years, I was starting to worry that I
wasn't on the short list, anyway. We're all better than we were and we
are better public speakers, but that is not what we came for.
We came onto the path because it promised mastership/enlightenment.
One of the unspoken truths is that we don't have a chance of reaching
it by way of Eckankar. It has been boiling us like frogs: slowly. By
the time we have been around long enough to know that no one is going
to go beyond the 8th initiation, except one guy, our minds are no
longer independent enough to get that this path to mastership is not
working and it not going to work.
Now we have talked ourselves out of a way of life. Harold would
probably say we have talked ourselves into a Dark Night of Soul. But
that's the kind of beating we would be in for if we stayed around.
I took a class with a lot of law enforcement types at one time. They
said that everyone, except the most committed sociopath, has a need to
tell the truth. The body language, tonal patterns and eye movements
combine with other unconscious clues to betray a lie or a concealed
truth. One way to conceal and deceive is to tell nothing but lies like
Kevin Spacey's character in "The Usual Suspects." This may be how Paul
Twitchell did it. There is a book about this subject called "Telling
Lies" by Paul Ekman. It has been staring at me from my bookshelf for
years and it has gradually dawned on me that the title and author may
contain a hint.
My inner voice says that there is only the one I Am that smears itself
across the living tapestry and reabsorbs itself after one lifetime or
many. So this baby is going out with the bath water.
Thanks for tipping the scales.
Reply to GPk: On Unloving Attitudes
As to your unloving and lack of understanding attitude, I based that on
what you said, especially in regards to your unkind words to Usually
You also seem to be putting down people who are posting here on this
message board. You continue to direct negative comments to others on
this site. You come across as a very angry person so I am not
surprised that my comments bothered you so much. You confused me
because you sound like you are still an Eckist in your attacks.
You are wrong in assuming I'm stuck/holding on to the teachings of
Eckankar. I was not a member that long, but I read all of Harold's
transcripts and several other books, attended Satsang classes, etc.
From the get-go, it seemed like a lot of double talk and
confusing--lots of contradictions. Your postings also attack Ford in
that you said he was going to become the leader of a new religion, that
would be no different from any other group. I think you are the one
hung up on Eckankar. I am glad you are reading Ford's book. Then, I
think your comments here would be made with a better perspective,
regardless of your take on Ford's writings.
It is obvious that the only self awareness that you have ever achieved
has been of the little self. You seem to be still experiencing the
brain washing of Eckankar. The comments that you have made indicate
that you are only aware of the little self, rather than the higher
self. Your initiation did not give you self-realization. This is the
flaw I see in your reasoning. But this is all understandable because of
the length of time you spent in the Eckankar organization--you have
more to dump than I do. There is a massive amount of flawed concepts
along with certain truths that have been mixed to such a degree that it
is almost impossible to decipher it all. In addition to anger, there is
fear that there is no truth out there--that you will not be able to
find it. This is, perhaps, the root of your negativity that you have
lashed out on this site. This is my understanding.
Also, I have not touted the degree of my spirituality as you have. I am
only a Truth Seeker.
Best regards and good reading,
FS Response To Ecki99 Plus 2 Laws
Thanks for the thorough response to the questions raised by Ecki99 and
others. As one other book (Christian Bible) often quoted notes "by
their fruits ye shall know them". Why do so many Eckists see the
activities of HCS and former members of Eckankar as a threat? There
are no lawsuits filed, there are no media exposes, there is just the
statement of spiritual truths as experienced by those who have taken
the next step. There is no massive attempt to force Eck chelas to
leave their path, if that is where they are comfortable. To each his
Harold has made much of Richard Maybury's two laws namely:
1. Do all you say you will do. (Your word is your bond, honor it.)
2. Do not encroach on others or their property. (Respect the integrity
I really like these two laws, since they contain so much of spiritual
truth in so few words. And this world would surely be a much better
place if they were practiced by more people as individuals, by nations,
and by spiritual paths. Perhaps the organization of Eckankar and its
leaders should consider how well they are honoring these two laws,
especially in regard to former members and also in regard to current
Response to Eckie_99: The Real Impact of Eckankar Mythology and The
Role of HCS
I may be starting to look predictable with the way I present my views
to this website, but, as many of the questions put to this site are in
defence of eckankar mythology, then one way of replying to these
questions is to use the very mythology that is being defended in order
to express the truer side of eckankar, the side the mahanta does not
want to be seen. This reply therefore will be no exception. I feel sure
that this will meet with your approval., seeing as I am using the
constructed, contrived, compilations of the master compiler, one Paul
I quote your own words:
b. A Person who builds a framework that can help people grow
spiritually, and shows it to the world, to be judged on its own merits.
There is one point that you have failed to address in your defence of
eckankar being a framework that can help people grow, and that is, `The
growth of people spiritually within the framework of eckankar is
dependant on Harold's acceptance as to what he sees as spiritual
growth, or more accurately stated, what he is prepared to accept as
`Truth`. I will therefore show to the world, and to you, another side
of how this framework of eckankar really operates in helping the
individual grow spiritually, and let the world judge it on its own
merits. Firstly, let the world see some of the teachings of eckankar
that will be relevant to this reply.
Shariyat book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
" Without the clear vision of the Vi-Guru- he who is the Master- and
the tests given by him, one cannot be assured of what he sees or hears.
Every Spiritual Traveller, or Vi-Guru will give the Word to the chela
to call upon the Master. If the vision fails to reply then it is
Shariyat, book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
"Be on guard, lest he who seeks without the Vi-Guru finds those who
only appear as the Holy One, claiming to be angels, or saints. Let
none deceive the chela. If he who seeks is a chela of a Vi-Guru, he
cannot be deceived by the kal Niranjan. If he has not the armour of
Spirit, he can be misled".
Shariyat, book 1, page 149. Third Printing 1972:
"The ECKist knows that the presence of the Living ECK Master is always
with him. He is never alone".
What is presented here to the world, and yourself , is the truth of my
own experience while within this framework of eckankar and its leader,
the mahanta. Here is part of my letter to Harold Klemp in regards to my
journal of recorded inner experiences that was sent to him while
following this framework of eckankar, that you say, " can help people
"All that is contained within the journal has withstood the tests of
the secret words that are
required to be used to prove their validity and all that you are about
to read, I stand by as true."
Now friend, let the world see what the teachings of eckankar say about
the inner experiences
of a chela and how they are viewed within this framework.
"The Shariyat book 2, pages 50-51: Second Edition 1988:
"No ECK Master will acknowledge his appearance to another person.
This is neither modesty nor is it a feeling of hiding something; in a
sense he is letting the individual decide for themselves whether it was
really him. He wants them to decide if it was reality. In this way he
is not telling, nor confirming his presence with them in the Atma
Sarup, but allowing them the independence of knowing and understanding
whether it was actually him.
If a person makes up his mind that the living ECK Master really
appeared to him, then he knows it and this cannot be taken away from
him, regardless. However, if he has to be told that it was the ECK
Master, then he is always in doubt, for it was an outside source which
gave him his information and not himself. It is superficial knowledge
and not from his own inner source.
He must always remember that the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master is not
the one to tell him of his inner experiences, nor whether the ECK
Master has appeared to him. But he must know this with a faith that is
beyond anything that he has experienced and, therefore, it will stay
with him. Otherwise it may fade in time, and the experiencer soon
forgets whether it was really the ECK Master".
Now let the world see the reply from the leader of this framework of
eckankar that helps
the individual to grow spiritually.
Reply from Harold Klemp in regards to my journal of inner experiences
while a chela under
his claimed protection as the mahanta.
"In response to your letter and journal of inner experiences which led
you to think you have
received the Rod of Eck Power. You have not.
Your instincts were right not to believe this. The Kal misled you."
Let it be explained to the world, and your own good self, that there
was never any claim made to me having had received the rod of eck
power, only that it was a possibility. Therefore, before we go any
further, Harold Klemp is wrong in his statement. Now we must look at
his other words, those of `The Kal Misled You`. Now friend, after
being told I was misled by the kal, even though I have Harold's
assurance that, `If he who seeks is a chela of a Vi-Guru, he cannot be
deceived by the KAL Niranjan.`. he then fails to explain how this could
have happened and failed to give any further guidance as to what I
could do to prevent it happening again, although as we can see by the
promise of this framework, I should never have been misled in the first
Having now told me I was mistaken, Harold then goes on to lay the
karmic responsibility upon me for being responsible for leading others
off the path of eck.
"This happens more often than one would care to believe. People who
fall for this trick and
mislead others off the path of eck become responsible for the karma."
Let the world and yourself take note of these words, for we are told
something very interesting here; "This happens more often than one
would care to believe." Are not these words very thought provoking? Is
Harold admitting that being misled by the kal while within this
framework of eckankar,and, having his protection of the Vi-Guru, being
misled by the kal is a common occurance? If this is so, then the
claimed protection of the vi-guru must be failing to work. Not only
that, the secret words must also be failing. Let the world see what
eckankar has to say about the protection of its secret words:
Shariyat book 1, page 14. Third Printing 1972:
"Without the clear vision of the Vi-Guru- he who is the Master- and
the tests given by him, one cannot be assured of what he sees or hears.
Every Spiritual Traveller, or Vi-Guru will give the Word to the chela
to call upon the Master. If the vision fails to reply then it is
Let it go on record that the visions within the journal's inner
experiences did reply and that I used the Word, and Words as is asked
of the chela. Some of these words being Sugmad, Wah Z, HU, Mahanta, or
any of the names of the masters of the vairagi.
Here I think we should let the world know just how important this
figure of the mahanta, the vi-guru really is, otherwise they may not
fully realise just how powerful the mahanta truly is?
Shariyat book 2 page 196. Second Edition 1988:
"The eck works are the most powerful in this world; and the mahanta,
the living eck master, who is the vehicle and channel for the eck, is
the most powerful being within the physical world, as well as the
planets and all the planes within the worlds of God."
Shariyat, book 1 says on page 81. Third Printing 1972:
"He is stronger than any man in intellect or spirit, for he has
unlimited power, and yet this strength is combined with the noble
virtues of the humble and gentle. All people find in him inspiration
for the development of noble character".
Shariyat, book 2 page 184 Second Edition 1988:
"The Mahanta, the Living ECK Master has other titles. He is the
Godman, the Vi-Guru, the Light Giver, protector of the poor, the king
of heaven, saviour of mankind, the scourge of evil, and the defender of
the faithful. He is the real and only power in all the universes of
God. No one can harm him without his consent, for all that is done to
him is given permission by the ECK, with his consent".
To help further my spiritual growth within this framework of eckankar,
the mahanta now goes on to say:
"As a spiritual discipline you are put back to the First Circle of
initiation and are to stand aside from all eck duties for the present."
We can show the world that this is also against what the framework of
Dialogues With The Master page 172:
First Printing 1990 "Remember this that those who demand respect and
love of others to themselves are only exercising the negative or
attracting power. The true teachings do not discipline in any way; do
not set up duties or difficulties or tasks for teaching their
This framework also tells the world, and its followers, that the
teacher will bring about any changes needed within a chela without any
pain or difficulties.
Illuminated Way Letters 1966-1971 page 54 Copyright 1975 by Gail
"It is doubtful that the teacher will sit with his chela and discuss
any character faults of the aspirant. Hardly ever will the teachers
tell anyone what is wrong with himself, but he will concentrate on the
error and bring about the change from the inner to the outer world,
without pain or difficulty to the chelas, very often without the chela
having any conscious awareness of it."
Dear friend, and the world. I am fully aware of what this framework of
eckankar has done to me, I am also fully aware of what this framework
has done to many others, and this is the reason why the framework of
the H.C.S. was brought about. It was brought about to help those who
have suffered the injustice of eckankar at the hands of its
mythological mahanta and to give them support and a free voice.
We can now look to another aspect of this frameworks teachings, if not
its practice, that of calling upon the master when the chela finds
themselves in any difficulty:
I was now left with no other recourse to attain further guidance other
than to write to the mahanta at the physical level. As yet, nothing has
been given. Now for the eckankar apologists they can say, "Get It On
The Inner", but, and this is very very very important, how can the
individual `Get It On The Inner` when the mahanta has just told the
individual that all they have received on the inner is the misleadings
of the kal? That the chela has the right to call upon the mahanta is
given in the frameworks teachings. Not only has the chela the right to
call upon the mahanta, but the mahanta is bound by his duty to answer
each and every call of this nature. Let the world see the following
Illuminated Way Letters, 1966-1971, PAGE 130 Copyright 1975 by Gail
Twitchell Gross: "Whenever the chela experiences any difficulty with
himself such as falling into the negative trap, or even with Soul
Travel, he should call upon the Master to assist him, or conduct him as
the soul traveller to the spiritual worlds. For the Living ECK Master
is bound by his mission to answer each and every call of this nature".
Let it go on record, that the mahanta has failed in his duty, both to
give the inner protection that his framework promises to give, and that
he has also failed to assist a chela when called upon to do so. Now
the world can see what the framework of eckankar says about a master
failing in his duty:
Shariyat, book 2, page 219. Second Edition 1988:
"If he falters or fails; it is possible that he may be taken out of
this position; and if he falters in his responsibility while serving as
the Mahanta, the Living ECK Master, it is possible that he must step
down for another to take his place".
Unlike the mahanta, I am prepared to let all see the contents of my
journal and come to their own understanding, and, unlike the mahanta,
I am prepared to answer any questions that others may wish to ask. The
framework of the H.C.S. has provided this facility for openness and
free speech, the framework of eckankar has provided only threats to
those who voice dissension and doubt.
Shariyat, book 1, page 91. Third Printing 1972:
"To ridicule, to scorn, to speak mockingly of the word of the Mahanta,
and not to have faith in him and the cause of ECK is to bring woes on
the advocator of doubt. It brings his karmic progress to a halt,
increases his incarnations in this world, and causes him to suffer
Even if a chela, or chela's tries to broach a question that is not
wanted by the framework of
eckankar and its leader, its teachings provide a guidance for the party
faithful of how to view
this dissesion within the ranks.
Shariyat, book 2, pages 25-26. Second Edition 1988:
" It must be remembered that all complaints and all arguments against
the ECK, which are directed at the Mahanta, are the works of the Kal.
Such assaults on the Mahanta are those which originate from the Kal
using the minds and consciousness of those persons within its power to
destroy the Mahanta and the ECK, if at all possible. These are the
works of the Kal, who uses religion, ministers, and lay persons to
bring about the downfall of the ECK, because it is the truth. There
will be those who call themselves ECK Masters and disguise themselves
under the robes of the ECK, but they are prophets with false faces who
are lying to the ECKist`s , but few if any who are true followers of
the ECK are ever deceived by these agents of the Kal".
What Harold Klemp and the eckankar organisation have chosen to ignore
is that truth, a truth that can be proven, is not an assault upon the
mahanta, it is an assault upon that which is untrue. If Harold Klemp as
the mahanta and the eckankar organisation see, and feel, that this as
an assault upon them, then it can only be because they have something
to hide. Truth knows no fear, so why does the framework of eckankar
hide behind a wall of silence, instead of making a stand upon its
proclaimed truth in order to defend the truth of the sugmad and its
Let those who have the eyes to see and the ears to ear reach their own
verdict from the `Facts` provided by the framework of eckankar itself ,
and its application of its teachings by the mahanta. `By Their Actions
Ye Shall Know Them`
Dear friend, and the world, I rest my case.
Response to eckie_99: I Took Your Test and Got An "A" !
Well, I looked at your test questions and have the answers... !.)
Q- What is more ethically incorrect?
A- "C" Liars such as Paul, Darwin, and Harold
Q- Who is less truthful?
A- "C" Liars such as Paul, Darwin, and Harold (that was just like #1!)
Q- Who is spiritually more developed?
A- "C" Those who are not afraid to see and hear truth
Q- What is a bigger spiritual crime?
A- "C" Not to give people the opportunity to know and choose truth over
That wasn't so hard after all... was it!
I graded it myself and got 100% correct!
--- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18"
>admitted that rebazar was imaginary? To whom did he tell this and why?"
> "Can you give more detail about the conditions that Doug Marman
>links/threads for complete context.)
> Some select trivia about Rebazar Tarzs. (See original
>still a long post though.
> To try and save space I chose to illustrate excerpts only. This is
> Reference to event from 1970s shared in Doug Marman's 2001 online
>self-assigned task and would ask me about it from time to time. One day
> [...] Anyway, back to the story: Darwin was very supportive of my
I [Doug Marman] told him that I'd discovered a tape like no others in
the box. It was a personal recording by Paul, apparently done in his
home. It sounded like Paul was experimenting again. This time he was
trying to create an audio version of something like Dialogues With The
>Rebazar Tarzs. Then we hear Paul's voice lower into a deep, gravely
> The tape started with Paul's voice describing a visit by
sound, saying something like, "Well, Paul, are you ready?" Paul was
mimicking the voice of Rebazar Tarzs! The tape went on to give a
discourse from Rebazar on a spiritual topic. This was so long ago I
can't remember much more than that, but the tape was amazing to me, and
I wish I could hear it again to see what I might think of it today.
>ever heard anything about it before. He immediately became interested,
> So, when I told Darwin about the tape, I asked him if he had
told me that it was news to him, and asked if I could get it for him. I
told Darwin that I had left it in my apartment with all the other tapes
I was sorting through, but I would run ho<br/><br/>(Message over 64 KB, truncated)
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>