Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: EK Levels of Con. & Initiation... No Virgin ...

Expand Messages
  • prometheus_973
    Hi Etznab and All, From what I read I didn t see any disclaimer. Twitchell seems to brag about the Shariyat coming from the highest source of truth down
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 8, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Etznab and All,
      From what I read I didn't see any disclaimer.
      Twitchell seems to brag about the Shariyat
      coming from the highest source of truth down
      through all time. Most seekers who become
      ECKists want to hear the things PT had to say.
      Then again, many young people want to believe
      in Harry Potter too.

      If Twitchell did say what you claim then maybe
      this attempt at honesty was to, perhaps, clear
      his conscience while, also, giving the reader fair
      warning that many things they were about to read
      were fictional and myth and Not really gospel. This
      way Twitchell washes his hands of any guilt and
      karma related to his trickery. But, then again, it's
      a win/win for everyone. Twitchell has a vocation
      and money and gets to be a big shot back home
      and can feel important for once by giving misfits
      and outcasts some hope. This is the "win" part
      for ECKists... those "high" initiation numbers
      and the expansion of their imaginations and egos
      to protect them from the Truth... that they can't handle!

      However, the Virgin Birth story (myth) is one that
      Twitchell tells of himself. He was born on a riverboat
      and there were blue flowers (of the Mahanta) near his
      mother who was a Virgin (like Jesus' mother the Virgin
      Mary). And PT was later found floating on the Mississippi
      River (like Moses).

      I'm rather surprised that ECKANKAR (since Twitchell)
      hasn't celebrated Paul's "Virgin" Birth instead of just
      his birth on Oct. 22.

      As with the Christian Bible ECKists are told the Shariyat
      is the Highest Truth, therefore, why would ECKists
      question anything contained in this source of truth?
      Thus, the Virgin Birth requirement for the Mahanta
      must be true... making Klemp a fraud.


      etznab wrote:
      > In the Intro. to the Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, Book One,
      > Paul Twitchell included the words "legends", "stories",
      > "allegories" & "fables" concerning the writing. At least,
      > that appeared in the 1997 version. The Shariyat, Book
      > One, includes the section on "virgin birth".
      > What is missing, in my opinion, are the indicators
      > about what is legend, story, allegory, or fable, etc. It
      > might seem that part would have to be determined by
      > the reader. There might be some, but I doubt that very
      > many Eckists would argue Harold Klemp was "born of
      > a virgin".
      > Personally, I don't believe the "virgin birth" subject
      > is a literal truth. I would call it something else. Also,
      > I'd suspect that Paul Twitchell and others "borrowed"
      > from "existing beliefs" when putting together history
      > for the teachings. Afterall, The Far Country, by Paul
      > Twitchell, is not the only Eckankar book with text &
      > sections similar to teachings that were already then
      > in existence, or in print. A number of teachings one
      > can find in other books by other authors - like Julian
      > Johnson, etc. - show up in numerous places through-
      > out the Eckankar literature. Including the Shariyat-Ki-
      > Sugmad!
      > Knowing this, it has become evident to me that the
      > outer teachings known as Eckankar are not all novel
      > ideas created by Paul Twitchell. Some are borrowed,
      > IMO.
      > As for much of the legends and myths, personally
      > I'd suspect that some of them were "borrowed" too. I
      > don't know exactly where the "virgin birth" idea came
      > from, but having looked at a lot of religious history &
      > world mythology I know that "virgin birth" it's not a
      > completely novel idea.
      > I remember the first time I read about the HU and
      > the way it was described by that Sufi guy. Also, the
      > way it was described in some places by both Julian
      > Johnson and Paul Twitchell. If you gave the text and
      > didn't mention the name Hazrat Inayat Kahn, most
      > people new to Eckankar could probably claim that
      > part of the description (see link) came from Paul
      > Twitchell when, in fact, part of the description was
      > already in existence in at least two different places.
      > This is what I meant by "borrowed" from teachings
      > already in existence.
      > Scroll down to the 10th paragraph on this link and
      > tell me if that sounds at all familiar to what you read
      > in Eckankar.
      > http://wahiduddin.net/mv2/II/II_8.htm
      > Etznab
      > **************
      > It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money &
      > Finance.
      > (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.