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

Re: Twitchell, Premananda, & Kirpal Singh

Expand Messages
  • Sharon
    ... Yep - but don t feel foolish about it. I think it s called cognitive dissonance. When you re head s really spinning and you re going all cross-eyed and
    Message 1 of 10 , Oct 25, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      > I feel like a foolish ping pong ball some-
      > times. All the while wondering why I put
      > myself through this back and forth game.
      >
      > Has anybody here ever felt that way?
      >
      > Etznab


      Yep - but don't feel foolish about it. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. When you're head's really spinning and you're going all cross-eyed and ga-ga, get away from all this, wipe it from your mind, go take a walk in the beautiful Autumn woods, hug a tree, puppies, or babies, rent a few good comedy videos....try to do some "normal" things with "normal" people.

      Oh, I just saw "Marley & Me" - wow, what a great movie! Not your usual bad-pet fluff. I was very impressed.

      I'm not one of those concrete-facts, linear-thinking timeline people. I'm more abstract, circular, and intuitive/instinctive. Good grief, I have enough trouble keeping track of today is!! In fact, just a few days ago I had *no* idea what the date was, so I clicked on the computer calendar because it would be highlighted, well, what a shock, for awhile I really thought my computer calendar must be a week off!!

      In spite of that, in the beginning, there was just a whole heck of a lot of Twitch's "facts" that just didn't seem right, they didn't seem to agree with each other, and didn't seem to "fit". And I had so many "inner nudges"....why the heck didn't I listen? Like, when he'd write about being in India...something whispered that nope, he was NOT in India. And lots of other stuff. I stifled. I told myself that it was the Kal. There were enough simple stolen truths there to keep me hooked, and I gave ekult and its phony "master" credit for my own experiences. I *wanted* to believe!!

      Hey, I appreciate your posting the intro to "DM", I haven't looked at my eckstuff for so many years....but how can anyone be mistaken about what Twitch wrote there? Plain and simple, he said Reb was DICTATING it!!!!

      Okay, this is a bad metaphor but it's what I just thought of. If I took a sip of grape koolaid and it tasted like almonds, I wouldn't want or need to finish it, to "prove" it's arsenic. When I finally really looked at Lane's material, and the plagiarism examples, I didn't have to go get my own copy of "Path of the Masters" and see for myself. I woke up rather quickly.

      So, for me, I didn't have to go over every little detail. Twitch was a liar & con artist. *Nothing* he wrote has the least little bit of credibility. And Doug Marman doesn't have much credibility with me, either. I saw enough of him when I was an eckist, and he's downright creepy and slimy. Twitch, well - he was sort of a good-natured con artist.

      BTW, I forget exactly what, but awhile back I read something Roy Evans had said and I thought wait a minute, that's not true...I may have been wrong, but even if it's something "anti-eck", you can't always totally believe some of those old stories, take them with a grain of salt, even if they're saying what you'd like to hear.

      Anyway, I've been getting my lazy behind moving a bit more recently, it's quite likely I'll soon be unpacking the eckstuff, I'll put a bit more extra effort into finding "Intro", which I'm sure I have. Oh - another thing I started some years back that I'm sure is going to reveal a lot, is transcribing old Twitch-tapes. I've heard he messed up on them a lot, even forgetting his phony master-names, etc.

      Okay, gotta run!

      Hugs,

      Sharon
    • etznab@aol.com
      Prometheus, I think I can see your point now about the moot part. Those were good questions, too. From what I could tell. Compiling words from books and
      Message 2 of 10 , Oct 25, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Prometheus,

        I think I can see your point now
        about the "moot" part.

        Those were good questions, too.
        From what I could tell.

        Compiling words from books and
        claiming they came from Masters
        and people by other names is the
        part I often wondered about. Was
        that common back in the 60s? In
        the guru movement? I don't know.
        However, maintaining the words
        are unique to Eckankar & others
        are all somehow offshoots of it?
        I think that is quite a stretch - in
        some instances.

        My guess is that fiction was inter-
        woven into the fabric of so many
        teachings and that this - probably
        more than anything else - is what
        makes for the uniqueness.

        The combination of fiction and fact
        is not so much the problem, IMO.
        The problem is with not being able
        to tell the difference! Some times
        fiction is taken to be fact and fact
        taken to be fiction, something that
        can create a real mess.

        I think it incumbent on people who
        follow & preach religion to know the
        difference between fiction and fact.
        This includes myself, and is why I
        have sought to clarify and be able
        to tell the difference. Not everybody
        I communicate with agree on which
        is which. That leaves a lot of room
        for personal investigation & research.
        IMO.

        Etznab





        -----Original Message-----
        From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
        To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Sun, Oct 25, 2009 2:40 pm
        Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Twitchell, Premananda, &
        Kirpal Singh

         






        Hello Etznab,

        When I say it's all "moot" I meant

        this about the back-and-forth

        discussion about PT's plagiarism

        and lies. It's a proven fact that

        Twitchell was a liar and a plagiarist

        who created his own Mastership,

        masters, and religion regardless

        of the spin that Klemp and Marman

        or their groupies/goonies put on

        it. They can twist things around

        and attempt to confuse the issues

        as much as possible but they can't

        deny the Radhasoami/Ruhani Satsang

        dogma that Twitchell made his own

        via Eckankar.



        Klemp's damage control claim was/is

        that Twit took the best and/or highest

        truth from all religions in order to

        create Eckankar. Thus, HK describes

        Twitchell as being a "complier." On

        the surface the plagiarisms are made

        to seem that Twit did us all a big favor

        and saved us years of research time.

        Apparently, Paul, an unethical sci-fi

        writer, was the best person to "compile"

        this religious "truth" for us. However,

        how is it that Eckankar is so "ancient"

        when it needed "compiled" by PT?

        And, why didn't Rebazar "compile"

        these truth teachings for Eckankar

        in 500 years? What was he doing

        all this time... drinking yak milk?



        However, even if Eckankar was

        true (which it isn't) this would

        still mean that, at the most,

        ECKankar is a hodge-podge

        of 4th Mental Plane Religious

        beliefs. According to Klemp's

        own definition in his Autobiography

        (pg.385) all religions are of either

        the 2nd or 4th Plane. Thus, the

        "compiled" teachings of Eckankar

        are 4th Mental Plane at best, and

        come under the same influence

        of the KAL (i.e. Satan or the Devil)!



        Therefore, how can the EK teachings

        that Twit "compiled" really be the

        highest... just because he says so!

        Why is that?



        Thus, Paul had to make himself

        more than he was in order to be

        believed and followed. This is why

        he created the invisible and

        imaginary Rebazar. Now everyone

        had the opportunity to see him

        in their dreams and this gave Paul's

        teachings more believability.



        Except, no one could have dreams

        with Rebazar that out-did PT's.

        Thus, Twitchell gave himself the

        highest initiation possible via RT.

        And, this made PT the only "designated

        person" who could perform more

        cherished initiations. This is why

        Klemp Does Not allow any chela

        to dream of holding the Rod of

        ECK Power. All of these "Rod" dreams

        are forbidden to have, or to speak

        of, unless, a chela wants to be

        demoted.



        Also, PT's "compiling" process was

        both limited and bias. Twit used

        libraries and borrowed a limited

        selection of books with the opinions

        and edited translations of others.

        Twitchell was, also, influenced by

        Sant Mat since he was an off-and-

        on disciple of Kirpal Singh for ten

        years. This is why PT told his followers

        to choose one path or the other

        and that one can't have one foot

        in one canoe and the other foot

        in another canoe.



        And, let's take a second look at

        the uniqueness and importance

        of having a "living" Master (for a

        chela's lifetime) and how Eckankar's

        "living (eck) Master" differs from

        Twitchell's Ruhani Satsang Master

        Kirpal Singh. There really is no

        measurable difference or that of

        having a living Pope! All of these

        religious teachings are limited to

        the lower planes, and the Mental/

        Etheric Plane's imagination. Besides,

        why doesn't Eckankar take their

        "Soul equals Soul" concept seriously?

        Why is one so much "higher" and

        so much more important that they

        can judge the consciousness of

        others?



        Prometheus





        etznab wrote:

        >

        > So, what's left to figure out? It's all

        > rather moot anyway... right!

        >

        > Prometheus,

        >

        > Umm, maybe not so much moot for me.

        > I still hear about Eck legends, myths &

        > other stories as if they are literally true.

        > I still see the words of other authors att-

        > ributed to Eck Masters. If I don't believe

        > everything as literally true then I need a

        > place to express that.

        >

        > The things we talk about here are not so

        > much openly discussed in my Eck com-

        > munity. In fact, I would be afraid to talk

        > about and / or ask about there many of

        > the topics and questions I talk about, or

        > ask here.

        >

        > It's been beneficial having the resources

        > of E.S.A. and other places on the Net to

        > draw from. Because I think people want

        > to talk about and discuss certain things,

        > what might not feel comfortable talking,

        > about and asking in church.

        >

        > I don't think it's all made up, the research

        > & findings by David Lane and Ford Johnson.

        > I think a lot of their research is factual. At

        > the same time, I think, some Eckists they

        > only have to hear the name David Lane or

        > Ford Johnson and it's all they want to hear.

        > The same with E.S.A. and other sites that

        > are critical of Eckankar. I understand the

        > reason for animosity when a person feels

        > their religion is being attacked. Especially

        > when kids read about it.

        >

        > Of course, some times it gets personal in

        > both directions on BBs and the like, but

        > facts are facts and they shouldn't change

        > according to who is mentioning them. It

        > should be OK to talk about Paul's writings

        > on Eckankar history and other things, IMO.

        > Not only here, but in church as well. After-

        > all, if you can't discuss dogma and history

        > at church ... where can you?

        >

        > Umm... maybe that's why I continue to

        > follow these BBs. If I felt comfortable in

        > church discussing such things and had

        > others sincerely interested in researching

        > and discussing them I'd probably not be

        > spending so much time reading E.S.A.

        > and other places.

        >

        > When I commented about that plagiarism

        > site and all the quotes, somebody wrote

        > to me and (in so many words) expressed

        > it was all a bunch of bunk and David L. is

        > full of crap.

        >

        > Hmm... I felt the same way about David

        > Lane once. Wouldn't even read his stuff.

        > At the same time I really didn't know the

        > person. And I certainly hadn't researched

        > and checked out his information for myself.

        > Instead I believed the rumors I had heard.

        > In other words I was pre-judiced.

        >

        > At one time I remember a saying that the

        > Eck masters love a person who wants to

        > have proof. Something along those lines.

        > So now I've asked about proof for reality

        > of Rebazar Tarzs & Paul Twitchell's visit

        > to meet him in India. I've asked it here &

        > at A.R.E.

        >

        > Here I see it's not necessarily true all of

        > what Paul Twitchell wrote. However, the

        > other places I mentioned these things it

        > seems like I'm missing something. That

        > in some way it's still true what Paul said.

        > That's my impression, for the most part.

        >

        > I feel like a foolish ping pong ball some-

        > times. All the while wondering why I put

        > myself through this back and forth game.

        >

        > Has anybody here ever felt that way?

        >

        > Etznab



        Hi Etznab,

        Paul never was in India or Paris, France

        prior to late 1960's or 1970. When PT

        talks of going to India it was just after

        his visit with his step or half or real

        sister when she was studying art in

        Paris (Kentucky). Thus this trip to India

        was a lie.



        As for the letter to the Swami Premananda

        follower... Paul was flip-flopping and unsure

        of himself. He was probably broke and

        needed a place to stay.



        It also seems like this Premananda thing

        was before he met Gail and closer to the

        time that he was with his first wife while

        at the ashram. Didn't PT go to Florida to

        heal after his ashram fight?



        Paul obviously changed his mind about

        Kirpal since he had Gail initiated by him

        and since he was communicating with

        Kirpal concerning The Tiger's Fang. After

        all, it seems Paul had dedicated the book

        to him before their falling out. And, it

        seems that this was a rather positive

        and inspiring ten year (1955-1965)

        spiritual experience for Paul.



        BTW- Kirpal created his own sect called

        Ruhani Satsang and this is what Paul

        followed versus Radhasoami. As far as

        I know the only main difference

        between the two sects are the two living

        Masters each follow. Perhaps this is how

        PT got the idea of creating his own sect.

        Of course, Paul, also, had L. Ron as an

        example of a Westerner creating a New

        Age religion.



        Actually, all of this "history" is merely

        showing the lies and misdirection Paul

        told and used about Paris and India and

        the meeting with Rebazar and of Sudar

        etc., etc.



        And, we know that Paul had read and

        copied passages from The Path of the

        Masters and used this Sant Mat living

        Master dogma to create Eckankar.



        So, what's left to figure out? It's all

        rather moot anyway... right!



        Prometheus

        p.s. "Sudar" never "visited" Twit...

        this was Kirpal Singh. Sudar was

        a fictional character like Rebazar.



        etznab wrote:



        Wanted to ask a question about the book

        Introduction to ECKANKAR - one of the 1st

        Eckankar books (1966) before The Tiger's

        Fang in 1967.



        It has to do with something that came up

        on an A.R.E. thread by Doug Marman called:

        New info on Paul from the 1950's.



        http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.eckankar/browse_thread/thread/812cfe\

        \

        39e60f15b3?hl=en#



        Doug mentioned about the note:



        "He apparently wrote this letter to a

        follower of Swami Premananda and talked

        about moving back onto church grounds."



        ***



        I suspect Kriya Yoga was not Radhasoami

        & Paul was painting his new guru Kirpal

        Singh in an unfavorable color to impress

        the Premananda people. That's my guess.



        Anyhow, my question is not about why he

        (Paul) wrote about Kirpal Singh in the

        letter the way he did. My question has

        to do with the year when Paul Twitchell

        claimed to have met Rebazar Tarzs in the

        book Introduction to ECKANKAR. The same

        info might be in the Compiled Writings

        book, but I haven't found the quote yet.



        In my last post on the A.R.E. thread I

        quoted the Introduction from Dialogues

        With The Master. The second paragraph

        read:



        This occurred while living in the nation's

        capital. I had been in India for a month or

        so prior to his first appearance. During

        this visit I was fortunate to meet him in

        Darjeeling, as explained in my book "An

        Introduction to ECKANKAR."



        This is talking about when Rebazar Tarzs

        reportedly first appeared to dictate the

        book Dialogues With The Master. IMO.



        The writing of that manuscript appears to

        have been 1956 - the year after Paul met,

        or was initiated by Kirpal Singh in 1955.



        The fourth paragraph from the Intro. read:



        The DIALOGUES in this book are as close as

        possible to the original words he spoke

        during his nightly visits to give me

        advanced training in the secret science of

        ECKANKAR. He concluded his series of talks

        that year by taking me on the spiritual

        journey recorded in my book "The Tiger's

        Fang."



        It looked (to me) like The Tiger's Fang

        journey happened in the same year as

        dictation for Dialogues. I don't know.

        What I want to find out is the part of

        the "story" where Paul says he was in

        India prior to Rebazar's alleged dict-

        ation of that book.



        Paul says



        "I had been in India for a month or so

        prior to his first appearance."



        and the location he calls Darjeeling.



        (Maybe I can page search that word on my

        timeline?)



        "Paul first met Rebazar Tarzs in 1951 in

        the foothills of the Himalayas near Darj-

        eeling. [Harold Klemp]



        http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html#training



        Once again, the timeline doesn't appear to

        fit. Neither does Paul's alleged time in

        India - up until 1959 - when the failing

        health of sister brought him home. There

        was a trip to England somewhere amid all

        of this too. I think Harold elaborated on

        Paul's travels once.



        "[....] In about 1959, Paul left Washington,

        D.C., and moved to England. Six months later

        he found out that his sister Kay-Dee (Kate)

        was dying of an incurable illness. He immed-

        iately returned home to Paducah, Kentucky,

        and stayed with her for the final two months

        of her life. [....]"



        [Based on: Article (Research on Paul's Life)



        http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisSearch.html#training



        Excerpted from Cloak of Consciousness, Mahanta

        Transcripts, Book 5



        Here is how Paul Twitchell apparently put it:



        "After I withdrew from a Yoga retreat in 1955,

        I went off to India for a spell. Following this

        I settled in England to write another book, but

        the death of my half-sister brought me home."



        [Based on: ECKANKAR, Compiled Writings Volume 1,

        Paul Twitchell - Copyright 1975 by Gail T. Gross,

        p. 144]



        BTW, The Tiger's Fang (2nd page of chapter

        one) has Paul laying down in a hotel room

        in Srinagar. Afterward he reportedly awoke

        in the Soul Body - and the story begins.



        There was something about Darjeeling from

        the Compiled Writings. I don't know if it's

        the same reference in Into to Eckankar.



        "[....] Sudar Singh often spoke of Rebazar

        Tarzs, a Tibetan saint, whom he said was

        reputed to be over five hundred years old,

        and was at the time living in the foothills

        between Darjeeling and Gangtock somewhere,

        but presently has a small abode in the Hindu

        Kush mountains on the Afghanistan-Kashmir

        frontier, near Tibet. [....]"



        [Based on: ECKANKAR, Compiled Writings Volume

        1, Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail T.

        Gross), p. 32]



        *****************************************



        I know that post was "all over the place"

        and not very much to the point. To simplify

        it, I'm looking at the "stories" told by

        Paul Twitchell, Harold Klemp, Doug Marman &

        others in order to establish a credible

        timeline that appears to jive with reality

        and not fiction.



        Etznab



        P.S. My "hunch" is that most of the people

        (including Sudar & Kirpal Singh) who came

        to visit Paul Twitchell were possibly just

        his imagination, his dreams, or his higher

        self taking various forms. Not the "bodies"

        of those he claimed came to visit.
      • etznab@aol.com
        Sharon, Thanks for the advice about taking time out to do something normal. That is good advice. Some days I will go almost the whole day without going online,
        Message 3 of 10 , Oct 25, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Sharon,

          Thanks for the advice about taking time
          out to do something normal. That is good
          advice. Some days I will go almost the
          whole day without going online, without
          checking my e-mail or visiting A.R.E. I
          find it helps (me) to take a break from
          time to time. (I just hate it though when
          the e-mail builds up from missing just
          one day :)

          Etznab

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Sharon <brighttigress@...>
          To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Sun, Oct 25, 2009 2:43 pm
          Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Twitchell, Premananda, &
          Kirpal Singh

           






          > I feel like a foolish ping pong ball some-

          > times. All the while wondering why I put

          > myself through this back and forth game.

          >

          > Has anybody here ever felt that way?

          >

          > Etznab



          Yep - but don't feel foolish about it. I think it's called cognitive
          dissonance. When you're head's really spinning and you're going all
          cross-eyed and ga-ga, get away from all this, wipe it from your mind,
          go take a walk in the beautiful Autumn woods, hug a tree, puppies, or
          babies, rent a few good comedy videos....try to do some "normal" things
          with "normal" people.



          Oh, I just saw "Marley & Me" - wow, what a great movie! Not your usual
          bad-pet fluff. I was very impressed.



          I'm not one of those concrete-facts, linear-thinking timeline people.
          I'm more abstract, circular, and intuitive/instinctive. Good grief, I
          have enough trouble keeping track of today is!! In fact, just a few
          days ago I had *no* idea what the date was, so I clicked on the
          computer calendar because it would be highlighted, well, what a shock,
          for awhile I really thought my computer calendar must be a week off!!



          In spite of that, in the beginning, there was just a whole heck of a
          lot of Twitch's "facts" that just didn't seem right, they didn't seem
          to agree with each other, and didn't seem to "fit". And I had so many
          "inner nudges"....why the heck didn't I listen? Like, when he'd write
          about being in India...something whispered that nope, he was NOT in
          India. And lots of other stuff. I stifled. I told myself that it was
          the Kal. There were enough simple stolen truths there to keep me
          hooked, and I gave ekult and its phony "master" credit for my own
          experiences. I *wanted* to believe!!



          Hey, I appreciate your posting the intro to "DM", I haven't looked at
          my eckstuff for so many years....but how can anyone be mistaken about
          what Twitch wrote there? Plain and simple, he said Reb was DICTATING
          it!!!!



          Okay, this is a bad metaphor but it's what I just thought of. If I
          took a sip of grape koolaid and it tasted like almonds, I wouldn't want
          or need to finish it, to "prove" it's arsenic. When I finally really
          looked at Lane's material, and the plagiarism examples, I didn't have
          to go get my own copy of "Path of the Masters" and see for myself. I
          woke up rather quickly.



          So, for me, I didn't have to go over every little detail. Twitch was a
          liar & con artist. *Nothing* he wrote has the least little bit of
          credibility. And Doug Marman doesn't have much credibility with me,
          either. I saw enough of him when I was an eckist, and he's downright
          creepy and slimy. Twitch, well - he was sort of a good-natured con
          artist.



          BTW, I forget exactly what, but awhile back I read something Roy Evans
          had said and I thought wait a minute, that's not true...I may have been
          wrong, but even if it's something "anti-eck", you can't always totally
          believe some of those old stories, take them with a grain of salt, even
          if they're saying what you'd like to hear.



          Anyway, I've been getting my lazy behind moving a bit more recently,
          it's quite likely I'll soon be unpacking the eckstuff, I'll put a bit
          more extra effort into finding "Intro", which I'm sure I have. Oh -
          another thing I started some years back that I'm sure is going to
          reveal a lot, is transcribing old Twitch-tapes. I've heard he messed
          up on them a lot, even forgetting his phony master-names, etc.



          Okay, gotta run!



          Hugs,



          Sharon

























          =
        • prometheus_973
          Hello Etznab and All, One also has to take into account that Paul stretched the truth often. He needed to feel important and have others view him with respect.
          Message 4 of 10 , Oct 25, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello Etznab and All,
            One also has to take into account
            that Paul stretched the truth often.
            He needed to feel important and
            have others view him with respect.

            Have you ever known a liar or a
            narcissist? I have and it's easy for
            them to embellish the truth.

            I was talking to a guy recently
            about a professional athlete that
            we both liked. I use to live near
            him and would go to see him
            play often. I could have easily
            exaggerated and said that I had
            met him or this and that, but
            I didn't have the need to make
            this person envy me or to make
            myself feel important by becoming
            a liar. For some people it can
            become a fine line... truth or
            fiction.

            And, the best lies always have
            some basis of truth while
            becoming an indistinguishable
            blend of both. This is what
            Twitchell did (a blend) so that
            his lies would be harder to
            disprove completely and would/
            could produce some doubt and
            confusion involving facts and
            the whole truth of the situation
            etc. Besides, religion is mostly
            a subjective experience that can
            neither be proven nor disproven.
            Can the existence of God be
            proven or disproven? No! Not
            really!

            Anyway, that's, also, why mixing in
            some myth helps too. Myth gives
            a sense of history and a long complex
            timeline. Thus, we have the "Polarians"
            and the EK Garden of Eden with Adom
            and Ede.

            I think that Paul rationalized and
            saw lying as making sport or joking
            when he told/wrote stories by twisting
            facts, and exaggerating the truth.
            Thus, it was all in good hearted
            fun and who did he hurt... nobody/
            everybody? Except, early on he made
            fools of those who believed him
            by retelling his stories to others
            who knew better and had more
            common sense.

            Later, after inventing Eckankar
            PT fooled more and more people.
            Again, who did he hurt? He hurt
            those who trusted him and believed
            that what he said was true, and he
            took their money just like Klemp
            does! And, more importantly, PT
            & HK cause real harm by delaying
            Soul on Its Journey to Truth.

            Or, on the other hand, Eckankar
            can be seen as a means of separating
            the wheat from the chaff. One could
            see Eckankar as a "test" for Soul
            just as other religions are a test.

            When one wakes up to the Truth
            and sees that all religions are lies
            Soul can then start to become Free!
            Thus, the lies of religion are needed
            as a KAL "test/trap" of purification
            for Soul. Being able to see Truth
            and beyond religious beliefs is a
            "test" while religions are, themselves,
            traps. Mentally and emotionally
            weak people tend to need religion
            and the weaker they are the stronger
            is their religious belief. Also, those
            Eckists who see themselves as "spiritually
            evolved" aren't as long as they cling
            to religious dogma like Eckankar's.
            They are forever tied to lower plane
            teachings that require an active
            imagination and delusion to make
            it work.

            Prometheus

            etznab wrote:
            Prometheus,

            I think I can see your point now
            about the "moot" part.

            Those were good questions, too.
            From what I could tell.

            Compiling words from books and
            claiming they came from Masters
            and people by other names is the
            part I often wondered about. Was
            that common back in the 60s? In
            the guru movement? I don't know.
            However, maintaining the words
            are unique to Eckankar & others
            are all somehow offshoots of it?
            I think that is quite a stretch - in
            some instances.

            My guess is that fiction was inter-
            woven into the fabric of so many
            teachings and that this - probably
            more than anything else - is what
            makes for the uniqueness.

            The combination of fiction and fact
            is not so much the problem, IMO.
            The problem is with not being able
            to tell the difference! Some times
            fiction is taken to be fact and fact
            taken to be fiction, something that
            can create a real mess.

            I think it incumbent on people who
            follow & preach religion to know the
            difference between fiction and fact.
            This includes myself, and is why I
            have sought to clarify and be able
            to tell the difference. Not everybody
            I communicate with agree on which
            is which. That leaves a lot of room
            for personal investigation & research.
            IMO.

            Etznab


            Prometheus wrote:

            Hello Etznab,

            When I say it's all "moot" I meant

            this about the back-and-forth

            discussion about PT's plagiarism

            and lies. It's a proven fact that

            Twitchell was a liar and a plagiarist

            who created his own Mastership,

            masters, and religion regardless

            of the spin that Klemp and Marman

            or their groupies/goonies put on

            it. They can twist things around

            and attempt to confuse the issues

            as much as possible but they can't

            deny the Radhasoami/Ruhani Satsang

            dogma that Twitchell made his own

            via Eckankar.



            Klemp's damage control claim was/is

            that Twit took the best and/or highest

            truth from all religions in order to

            create Eckankar. Thus, HK describes

            Twitchell as being a "complier." On

            the surface the plagiarisms are made

            to seem that Twit did us all a big favor

            and saved us years of research time.

            Apparently, Paul, an unethical sci-fi

            writer, was the best person to "compile"

            this religious "truth" for us. However,

            how is it that Eckankar is so "ancient"

            when it needed "compiled" by PT?

            And, why didn't Rebazar "compile"

            these truth teachings for Eckankar

            in 500 years? What was he doing

            all this time... drinking yak milk?



            However, even if Eckankar was

            true (which it isn't) this would

            still mean that, at the most,

            ECKankar is a hodge-podge

            of 4th Mental Plane Religious

            beliefs. According to Klemp's

            own definition in his Autobiography

            (pg.385) all religions are of either

            the 2nd or 4th Plane. Thus, the

            "compiled" teachings of Eckankar

            are 4th Mental Plane at best, and

            come under the same influence

            of the KAL (i.e. Satan or the Devil)!



            Therefore, how can the EK teachings

            that Twit "compiled" really be the

            highest... just because he says so!

            Why is that?



            Thus, Paul had to make himself

            more than he was in order to be

            believed and followed. This is why

            he created the invisible and

            imaginary Rebazar. Now everyone

            had the opportunity to see him

            in their dreams and this gave Paul's

            teachings more believability.



            Except, no one could have dreams

            with Rebazar that out-did PT's.

            Thus, Twitchell gave himself the

            highest initiation possible via RT.

            And, this made PT the only "designated

            person" who could perform more

            cherished initiations. This is why

            Klemp Does Not allow any chela

            to dream of holding the Rod of

            ECK Power. All of these "Rod" dreams

            are forbidden to have, or to speak

            of, unless, a chela wants to be

            demoted.



            Also, PT's "compiling" process was

            both limited and bias. Twit used

            libraries and borrowed a limited

            selection of books with the opinions

            and edited translations of others.

            Twitchell was, also, influenced by

            Sant Mat since he was an off-and-

            on disciple of Kirpal Singh for ten

            years. This is why PT told his followers

            to choose one path or the other

            and that one can't have one foot

            in one canoe and the other foot

            in another canoe.



            And, let's take a second look at

            the uniqueness and importance

            of having a "living" Master (for a

            chela's lifetime) and how Eckankar's

            "living (eck) Master" differs from

            Twitchell's Ruhani Satsang Master

            Kirpal Singh. There really is no

            measurable difference or that of

            having a living Pope! All of these

            religious teachings are limited to

            the lower planes, and the Mental/

            Etheric Plane's imagination. Besides,

            why doesn't Eckankar take their

            "Soul equals Soul" concept seriously?

            Why is one so much "higher" and

            so much more important that they

            can judge the consciousness of

            others?



            Prometheus
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.