The Problem with Words
- Hi, All! (Etznab and Everyone)
Etznab, you might have explained this somewhere else, but I'm
interested in knowing how you became interested in etymology and how
long you have devoted your time to the study. I'm just curious.
Having just now read your recent posts this morning and the ones
last night, I have a few thoughts. First, most of us have already
looked behind the veil of eckankar and what we found is the reason
we left. But it seems you are still delving there.
Regarding the shariyat and reading it word by word in order to
understand its meaning, the difficulty comes from Twitchell's
plagiarizing and altering other people's thoughts and adapting these
to his own private philosophy, while taking them out of context to
do so. I believe that is why many eckists prefer the one particular
exercise of randomly opening the shariyat to a page in order to find
a directed meaning for them. It is more easy to do this then to plow
through all the disjointed and contradictory writings contained
within. Personally, I think reading such a tome seriously is bound
to have negative effects on one's mind--maybe create some disorders
that weren't there before or increase those that were there
initially! : )
Regarding the Ocean of Love and Mercy as the highest heaven vs the
Living Echo (the Sound), in eckankar dogma the Sound is projected
from the Ocean of Love and Mercy (the highest Heaven) where Sugmad
resides. The Sound Wave then returns to the Ocean of Love and Mercy
(this returning Sound Wave is what eckists are suppose to grab onto
while doing a spiritual exercise in order to Soul Travel to the
higher planes and return home to God), and then this can be said to
be the Divine Echo. Therefore, IMO, this Echo or Sound Current is
not the same as Heaven (or the Ocean of Love and Mercy). This is the
accurate eckankar dogma, while your explanation of this is of your
own creation and not that of eckankar. I point this out because
while you claim to be still be an eckist, it seems that you are re-
creating it to your liking and thus, perhaps, there is no need for
you to use eckankar dogma and the shariyat as your platform--just
say what is of your own creation and not confuse it with a bit of
this or that inaccurately from eckankar? I don't think you need to
give credit to someone else, say like the mahanta or the eck
teachings--it is what you believe and thus, it is okay to say it!
Going back to your statement in message 1795 "Personal Study of God
and Its Way," you wrote, "The word vs. (versus) is a past particle
form of the word vertere ["turn"]. Just what happens when things
move in circles, or back and forth. This is my understanding at
least. The title Living Echo vs. Living God was to illustrate the
dynamic relationship between Heaven and Earth or what seems to
happen in between. If you understood nothing but this, it would be
unnecessary to read any further. At least, this was the intention of
both of my posts. Simply to describe the dynamic relationship
between one end of creation and another."
This paragraph seemed to sum up your message, but when I noted it
thus, you said, I didn't get it! But just regarding this paragraph
and the way you have constructed it, "the title Living Echo vs.
Living God was to illustrate the dynamic relationship between Heaven
and Earth . . .," it does imply that you are discussing Heaven and
Earth in those terms. When you say, if you understand nothing but
this, it is unnecessary to read any further, well, I thought that
was your meaning--literally. Your meaning, not mine! The use of
metaphors only confuse your meanings and thoughts it seems.
Thanks for the poetry. I can understand that you find it easier to
compose poetry than prose. It takes a particular talent to be
poetic. I love poetry but can't compose poems myself. I just
appreciate it and those who do. Of course, there are poets and there
are poets . . . : )
Anyway, not to beat anything into the ground, I would suggest that
you read the archieved posts here so that you can better understand
the dynamics of this site and what has gone before. It will help you
to understand us better and maybe not assume what we know or don't.
Liz, thanks for reposting the Michael J. Fox blog from my yahoo 360!
He sums it up well when he says "I learned from experience and took
notes,"--that pretty much explains how each of us evolve into
our "faith." One painting is worth a thousand words and actions
speak louder than words, but words do echo and their content
(meanings) do echo--as well as Etznab has tried to explain.