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

Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: "The Dark Side of ECKankar" - And More!

Expand Messages
  • etznab@aol.com
    I think a lot of people can overlook this stuff, thinking that whatever Paul Twitchell said/wrote must be the truth. Some people just might not care. Well,
    Message 1 of 24 , Sep 17, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      I think a lot of people can overlook this stuff, thinking that whatever
      Paul Twitchell said/wrote must be the truth. Some people just might not
      care. Well, it's reasonable to suspect this talent - for promotion,
      even when it means making things up, stretching the truth, or just
      plain spinning lies - was used to "create" the Eckankar mythos.

      myth

      1830, from Gk. mythos "speech, thought, story, myth," of unknown origin.

      Myths are "stories about divine beings, generally arranged in a
      coherent system; they are revered as true and sacred; they are endorsed
      by rulers and priests; and closely linked to religion. Once this link
      is broken, and the actors in the story are not regarded as gods but as
      human heroes, giants or fairies, it is no longer a myth but a folktale.
      Where the central actor is divine but the story is trivial ... the
      result is religious legend, not myth." [J. Simpson & S. Roud,
      "Dictionary of English Folklore," Oxford, 2000, p.254]

      General sense of "untrue story, rumor" is from 1840.

      http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=mythos&searchmode=none

      In other words, amid all the compilations and recycled material, etc.,
      context has been changed (in various places) when it comes to source. I
      wonder, could Paul Twitchell have created "Eckankar" and at the same
      time given the source for all of his material? I noticed Kirpal Singh
      and others were very good at citing references and sharing what
      quote/saying came from who. So if Paul Twitchell ever chose to use
      passages and paragraphs from books, Did he always feel obligated to
      provide that information?

      As a promoter, I suspect the person wants to give credit to whatever
      they're promoting and not give more credit to "other products" instead.
      It makes sense (to me) that Paul Twitchell would "paint the name
      Eckankar" over so much material he had read (in so many words). Not
      only this, but it even appears probable that Paul Twitchell took
      liberty to respell and redefine words according to fit them in a new,
      and growing, Eckankar philosophy. Not only words, but names too!

      How extensive the promotion and PR campaign that created contemporary
      Eckankar teaching? In so many ways, it seems this is the part that
      doesn't agree with people. Not unless they knew from the beginning that
      information was not necessarily accurate and in some places embellished.

      embellish

      mid-14c., "to render beautiful," from O.Fr. embelliss-, stem of
      embellir "make beautiful, ornament," from em- (see en- (1)) + bel
      "beautiful," from L. bellus (see bene-). Meaning "dress up (a
      narration) with fictitious matter" is from mid-15c. Related:
      Embellished; embellishing.

      http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=embellished&searchmode=none

      Reading through early Eckankar books I think common sense might tell a
      person that parts of the material was embellished. At the same time I
      also think people could naturally so much want the material to be true
      that they allow imagination to "make it so" and overrule common sense.

      Ever observe what happens when you're part of a group where countless
      individuals believe in things - through imagination - that aren't
      necessarily true? I mean, when you're one of the unbelievers and part
      of the minority who question whether so many imagined things are true?


      -----Original Message-----
      From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
      <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sat, Sep 17, 2011 2:14 am
      Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: "The Dark Side of ECKankar" -
      And More!

       
      Hello Etznab and All,
      This tells how Paul Twitchell
      was His Own Drum Beater:

      http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html

      What's interesting is that at age 27 (1935)
      Twitchell was saying that he had been
      to India (supposedly at age 15 to meet
      Rebazar for the first time, DOBTLEM).
      However, Klemp points out that Twitchell
      was doing another self-promotion, and
      was lying in order to get into Who's Who
      in Kentucky. Klemp states that Twitchell
      had never been all that far from home
      at age 27. Klemp seems to have stepped
      into a big pile of Twits mess. HK's
      statement contradicts what Twitchell
      revealed in Difficulties of Becoming the
      Living ECK Master circa July, 1971. This
      1971 date is, supposedly, long after Twitchell
      (the Mahanta) was was no longer "exaggerating"
      and "twisting facts." However, as Klemp
      has pointed out Twitchell was still lying
      and promoting his con up until his untimely
      and death in September, 1971.

      Prometheus

      etznab@...> wrote:
      >
      > Almost didn't see this response because the e-mail bounced.
      >
      > Umm ... about the self-promotion, whatever, people can read about
      some of the history here.
      >
      > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html
      >
      > Check out 4th paragraph of article entitled: Paul's Seal of
      Approval.
      >
      > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
      "prometheus_973" <prometheus_973@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hello Etznab and All,
      > > It is interesting that Twitchell
      > > has his Rebazar character (the
      > > "Master" who initiated him)
      > > indicate that there were 8 Planes
      > > just as Radhasomi and Ruhani
      > > Satsang have listed in "The Path
      > > of the Masters." Since Kirpal
      > > Singh, of Ruhani Satsang, was
      > > Paul's real life Master for ten years
      > > it's no wonder that this dogma was
      > > influential in the design of Eckankar.
      > >
      > > Of course, Twitchell was constantly
      > > tweaking, revising, and masking his
      > > religious con as time went by.
      > >
      > > The Anami Lok (10th Plane where
      > > "Sugmad" resides) didn't appear until
      > > later. Did Rebazar simply forget to
      > > mention this as well as the "Mahanta?"
      > > Did RT think that Paul needed to be
      > > spoon-fed and wasn't ready for this
      > > advanced "spiritual" info? No, not really.
      > > According to Twitchell he had been
      > > given the 12th and "final initiation"
      > > (to become LEM) back in 1951 by
      > > Rebazar while on his "2nd" visit to
      > > India. See, the timeline is off for this
      > > ekplanation to be taken seriously as
      > > well.
      > >
      > > Therefore, there is no rational excuse
      > > for these inconsistencies except to
      > > admit that the "rascal" Twitchell was,
      > > once again, "exaggerating" and "twisting
      > > facts" as even Klemp has described
      > > and said of him. Klemp, years ago,
      > > had to admit that Twitchell was a self-
      > > promoter and did or said whatever
      > > he needed to do ("By Any Means Necessary")
      > > in order to get Eckankar off the ground.
      > >
      > > This is why Klemp, at first, had a
      > > difficult job of explaining Twitchell's
      > > inconsistencies and needed to keep
      > > Eckists confused, busy, and off-balance.
      > > Now, Eckists are so brainwashed that
      > > Klemp can say whatever in his simple
      > > minded redundant versions of feel-good
      > > New Age spirituality.
      > >
      > >
      > > Prometheus
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > etznab wrote:
      > >
      > > One of Paul Twitchell's first reported journey's with Rebazar
      Tarzs
      > > mentioned eight planes, much like the Radhasoami scheme.
      Check the
      > > index section for Ocean of Love and Mercy in Dialogues with
      the Master.
      > >
      > > The Ocean of Love and Mercy was associated with the nameless
      region,
      > > [p. 170] and Nameless World [p.188]. In the chapter called
      THE FACE OF
      > > GOD, 6th paragraph, Paul Twitchell has Rebazar Tarzs saying:
      [Quoting]
      > > "You are in the nameless world. The light you see is the
      light of
      > > God so vastly brilliant in all its glory that human eyes
      could not look
      > > upon it. You are now the perfect atom, for this is the Ocean
      of Love
      > > and Mercy, the true home of the SUGMAD where all Souls return
      in time."
      > > (Dialogues with the Master,by Paul Twitchell, p. 191)
      > >
      > > Moreover, at bottom of p. 193 [SUGMAD speaking?] "Ye are in
      the House
      > > of the SUGMAD. The abode of abodes. The highest of heavens.
      Ye cannot
      > > go higher, and here ye, Soul, having become at-one-ment with
      my divine
      > > self, return to Its true self, ever ready with Its work in
      the divine
      > > cause!"
      > >
      > > Chapter sixteen (The Cosmic Worlds) of Dialogues with the
      Master, has
      > > Rebazar Tarzs saying about the various planes [quoting
      snippet]:
      > >
      > > "First, It becomes united with the very essence of Sat Nam in
      a
      > > mystic sense, and so becomes one with IT, partaking of all ITS
      > > attributes. It then advances to the three remaining regions.
      > > "Next is Alakh Lok, presided over by the Alakh Purusha, and
      after
      > > this is Agam Lok, presided over by Agam Purusha. Finally Soul
      reaches
      > > the end of Its journey, the region of the nameless ONE, or
      the SUGMAD,
      > > the supreme LORD of all that exists."
      > >
      > > http://www.mirrorh.com/dwtm.html
      > >
      > > Later on, in The Far Country, Rebazar Tarzs changes the
      description
      > > slightly:
      > >
      > > "First, the Tuza becomes united with the very essence of the
      Sat Nam in
      > > a mystical sense, and so, becomes a part of Him, partaking in
      all Sat
      > > Nam's marvelous attributes. Then the Tuza advances to the
      three
      > > remaining known planes.
      > >
      > > "First is the Alakh Lok, presided over by the Alakh Purusha,
      and
      > > after this is the Agam Lok plane presided over by the Agam
      Purusha, or
      > > lord. Finally Soul reaches the end of Its journey, the region
      of the
      > > nameless One, Advaita, the formless, that which is the first
      you know
      > > about the SUGMAD, the feeling or the understanding of the
      Divine.
      > >
      > > "Eventually you come to the SUGMAD in the vast worlds above."
      > >
      > > http://www.mirrorh.com/tfctfc.html
      > >
      > > Here again (Introduction to Eckankar), the subject is
      illustrated (by
      > > Paul Twitchell) slightly different.
      > >
      > > "Beyond this plane is the Alakh Lok plane, and then the Agam
      Lok.
      > > Finally after a succession of many planes, Soul reaches the
      end of its
      > > journey, the region of the nameless One, or the SUGMAD, the
      supreme
      > > lord of all that exists."
      > >
      > > http://www.mirrorh.com/itecpwPage2.html
      > >
      > > The earliest scheme of planes appears to indicate Sat Lok,
      Alak Lok,
      > > Agam Lok & Anami Lok - the latter apparently associated with
      Ocean of
      > > Love & Mercy. Strangely though, someone saw fit to slip
      mention of
      > > Hukikat Lok into p. 111 of Dialogues with the Master.
      > >
      > > In any case, notice how Dialogues with the Master,
      Introduction to
      > > Eckankar and The Far Country tend to describe the planes
      similarly, and
      > > in similar order. Notice also, how similar are certain
      sections from
      > > The Far Country with The Path of the Masters. Example:
      > >
      > > "In the literature of the sacred, this divine formless spirit
      is
      > > expressed by many names, such as, ECKANKAR, Nirankar, Akal,
      Nirala,
      > > Anami, Agam, Alakh, Sat Purush, Prabhu, Prabhswami, Akashar,
      > > Paramakshar, Purusha." - The Far Country
      > >
      > > http://www.mirrorh.com/tfctfc.html
      > >
      > > "In the literature of the saints, God is expressed by many
      words, such
      > > as Soami, Ekankar, Nirankar, Radha Soami, Akal, Nirala,
      Anami, Agam,
      > > Alakh, Sat Purush, Prabhu, Prabhswami, Hari Rai, Akshar,
      Parameshwar,
      > > Akshar Purush, etc." - The Path of the Masters
      > >
      > > http://www.mirrorh.com/potmnots.html
      > >
      > > Notice how the words Soami, Radha Soami & Hari Rai are absent
      from the
      > > Eckankar version. And where the Eckankar version has ECKANKAR
      vs.
      > > Ekankar. The remarkable thing about this is how Julian
      Johnson's book,
      > > The Path of the Masters, preceded Paul Twitchell's book, The
      Far
      > > Country, by at least three decades!
      > >
      > > Apparently then, Eckankar changed the spelling of a word,
      trademarked
      > > it, and later published it in a book. I believe this is
      somehow more
      > > than a paraphrase.
      > >
      >
    • prometheus_973
      Hello Etznab and All, It s true that most Eckists have turned a blind eye towards their religion. However, it s done via Klemp s subtle and not so subtle
      Message 2 of 24 , Sep 17, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Etznab and All,
        It's true that most Eckists have
        turned a blind eye towards their
        religion. However, it's done via
        Klemp's subtle and not so subtle
        intimidation tactics such as:

        Going to the "inner" to have
        one's questions answered...
        this is what the more "advanced"
        and "enlightened" Eckists do.

        Using the Buddha quote of, "Is
        it true, is it necessary, is it kind"
        this I ask myself before I speak
        my mind.

        HK writing articles and giving
        talks on the negativity of gossip
        and how it hinders one's "spiritual"
        growth.

        Also, there's the unspoken knowledge
        that those who ask too many questions,
        especially "wrong" questions, will get
        Eckists Black Listed on initiations or
        to have them slowed down 3-5 years
        (on average) longer than normal.

        Plus, Eckankar's Higher Initiates
        (5-7) are a very passive group
        and don't want to question the
        foundation of their religion because
        things are going okay so why rock
        the boat? Being an H.I. is an ego
        trip and a security blanket too.

        And, let's face it, most Eckists don't
        have the time or inclination to research
        the old, P.T., Eckankar texts. They've
        read it all before so why go back and
        read it with new eyes and a changed
        consciousness? However, it does make
        one wonder why they've allowed them-
        selves to be shackled to HK's dogma
        when it's all based upon Twitchell's
        "compilation."

        In PT's Eckankar Dictionary, Shariyat
        One and HK's First Lexicon, they
        tell about the first "root race" called
        the "POLARIANS." Klemp must agree
        with Twitchell on this dogmatic information
        since he put it into his own Eckankar
        Lexicon.

        But, do Eckists really believe in the
        Old Testament Christian Myth about
        the Garden of Eden? Actually, no,
        they don't! I've even read where
        they've made fun of this. How ironic!
        Twitchell not only states that the
        Garden of Eden existed but gives
        his own (revised) names of those
        present. In the ECK version Adam
        becomes "Adom" and Eve becomes
        "Ede" (like in Eden) This is, of course,
        a clear picture of how Twitchell created
        Eckankar. He took certain words,
        names, and information changed
        the text and letters around, or added
        and omitted letters, and made the
        info his own.

        What's really funny is that in defense
        of Twitchell Klemp has claimed that
        Paul "compiled" only the highest teachings
        from around the world in order to
        create the highest "spiritual" teaching
        anywhere and at anytime. Why then,
        did Twitchell use the Garden of Eden
        myth, and create Adom and Ede?
        Is this supposed to be the actual
        account while the Christian version
        is less accurate. This is how Eckists
        rationalize and explain everything
        (the truth) away. ECK is a facsimile
        and everything else is a copy. But
        this shows that all religions are
        distorted and inaccurate copies.

        It really should be embarrassing,
        for Eckists, since this information
        is listed in their first Holy Book
        under Polarian race (check the
        index for the page number).

        Plus, let's face it. This Garden
        of Eden myth is a non-evolutionary
        belief. It was devised during
        a time of ignorance and pre-science
        in order to give a religious explanation
        for creation. And, it's been revised
        even by early Christianity because
        Lillith was supposed to have been
        Adam's first mate who was created
        equally with him.

        Later, the creation myth story was
        changed so that Eve was created
        from Adam's rib in order to make
        her subservient to him... as Eckists
        are to subservient to Klemp. Thus,
        no female LEMs and even Mahantas
        are permitted due to some hokey
        negative atom ekplanation.


        But, Eckists are in denial of the truth
        as they continue to pretend they
        are advanced Souls. The mind is
        very powerful and that's why Eckankar
        appears to work for Eckists. The
        mind will give one the dreams
        and "signs" that are programmed
        into it via suggestion and expectation.
        However, isn't this the modus
        operandi of all religions? If one
        just Googles "miracles" one can
        see examples of faith and belief
        that would put any Eckist to shame.

        Therefore, why do Eckists not
        see the truth? Is it that they
        have tied up their camels, to
        a fraudent belief, and now, trust
        in a make believe God/Mahanta...
        Klemp? It is the Easy Way!

        Prometheus




        etznab@... wrote:
        I think a lot of people can overlook this stuff, thinking that whatever
        Paul Twitchell said/wrote must be the truth. Some people just might not
        care. Well, it's reasonable to suspect this talent - for promotion,
        even when it means making things up, stretching the truth, or just
        plain spinning lies - was used to "create" the Eckankar mythos.

        myth

        1830, from Gk. mythos "speech, thought, story, myth," of unknown origin.

        Myths are "stories about divine beings, generally arranged in a
        coherent system; they are revered as true and sacred; they are endorsed
        by rulers and priests; and closely linked to religion. Once this link
        is broken, and the actors in the story are not regarded as gods but as
        human heroes, giants or fairies, it is no longer a myth but a folktale.
        Where the central actor is divine but the story is trivial ... the
        result is religious legend, not myth." [J. Simpson & S. Roud,
        "Dictionary of English Folklore," Oxford, 2000, p.254]

        General sense of "untrue story, rumor" is from 1840.

        http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=mythos&searchmode=\
        \
        none

        In other words, amid all the compilations and recycled material, etc.,
        context has been changed (in various places) when it comes to source. I
        wonder, could Paul Twitchell have created "Eckankar" and at the same
        time given the source for all of his material? I noticed Kirpal Singh
        and others were very good at citing references and sharing what
        quote/saying came from who. So if Paul Twitchell ever chose to use
        passages and paragraphs from books, Did he always feel obligated to
        provide that information?

        As a promoter, I suspect the person wants to give credit to whatever
        they're promoting and not give more credit to "other products" instead.
        It makes sense (to me) that Paul Twitchell would "paint the name
        Eckankar" over so much material he had read (in so many words). Not
        only this, but it even appears probable that Paul Twitchell took
        liberty to respell and redefine words according to fit them in a new,
        and growing, Eckankar philosophy. Not only words, but names too!

        How extensive the promotion and PR campaign that created contemporary
        Eckankar teaching? In so many ways, it seems this is the part that
        doesn't agree with people. Not unless they knew from the beginning that
        information was not necessarily accurate and in some places embellished.

        embellish

        mid-14c., "to render beautiful," from O.Fr. embelliss-, stem of
        embellir "make beautiful, ornament," from em- (see en- (1)) + bel
        "beautiful," from L. bellus (see bene-). Meaning "dress up (a
        narration) with fictitious matter" is from mid-15c. Related:
        Embellished; embellishing.

        http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=embellished&search\
        \
        mode=none

        Reading through early Eckankar books I think common sense might tell a
        person that parts of the material was embellished. At the same time I
        also think people could naturally so much want the material to be true
        that they allow imagination to "make it so" and overrule common sense.

        Ever observe what happens when you're part of a group where countless
        individuals believe in things - through imagination - that aren't
        necessarily true? I mean, when you're one of the unbelievers and part
        of the minority who question whether so many imagined things are true?


        -----Original Message-----
        From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
        To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous
        <EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sat, Sep 17, 2011 2:14 am
        Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: "The Dark Side of ECKankar" -
        And More!

        Â
        Hello Etznab and All,
        This tells how Paul Twitchell
        was His Own Drum Beater:

        http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html

        What's interesting is that at age 27 (1935)
        Twitchell was saying that he had been
        to India (supposedly at age 15 to meet
        Rebazar for the first time, DOBTLEM).
        However, Klemp points out that Twitchell
        was doing another self-promotion, and
        was lying in order to get into Who's Who
        in Kentucky. Klemp states that Twitchell
        had never been all that far from home
        at age 27. Klemp seems to have stepped
        into a big pile of Twits mess. HK's
        statement contradicts what Twitchell
        revealed in Difficulties of Becoming the
        Living ECK Master circa July, 1971. This
        1971 date is, supposedly, long after Twitchell
        (the Mahanta) was was no longer "exaggerating"
        and "twisting facts." However, as Klemp
        has pointed out Twitchell was still lying
        and promoting his con up until his untimely
        and death in September, 1971.

        Prometheus

        etznab@...> wrote:
        >
        > Almost didn't see this response because the e-mail bounced.
        >
        > Umm ... about the self-promotion, whatever, people can read about
        some of the history here.
        >
        > http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html
        >
        > Check out 4th paragraph of article entitled: Paul's Seal of
        Approval.
        >
        > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
        "prometheus_973" <prometheus_973@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Hello Etznab and All,
        > > It is interesting that Twitchell
        > > has his Rebazar character (the
        > > "Master" who initiated him)
        > > indicate that there were 8 Planes
        > > just as Radhasomi and Ruhani
        > > Satsang have listed in "The Path
        > > of the Masters." Since Kirpal
        > > Singh, of Ruhani Satsang, was
        > > Paul's real life Master for ten years
        > > it's no wonder that this dogma was
        > > influential in the design of Eckankar.
        > >
        > > Of course, Twitchell was constantly
        > > tweaking, revising, and masking his
        > > religious con as time went by.
        > >
        > > The Anami Lok (10th Plane where
        > > "Sugmad" resides) didn't appear until
        > > later. Did Rebazar simply forget to
        > > mention this as well as the "Mahanta?"
        > > Did RT think that Paul needed to be
        > > spoon-fed and wasn't ready for this
        > > advanced "spiritual" info? No, not really.
        > > According to Twitchell he had been
        > > given the 12th and "final initiation"
        > > (to become LEM) back in 1951 by
        > > Rebazar while on his "2nd" visit to
        > > India. See, the timeline is off for this
        > > ekplanation to be taken seriously as
        > > well.
        > >
        > > Therefore, there is no rational excuse
        > > for these inconsistencies except to
        > > admit that the "rascal" Twitchell was,
        > > once again, "exaggerating" and "twisting
        > > facts" as even Klemp has described
        > > and said of him. Klemp, years ago,
        > > had to admit that Twitchell was a self-
        > > promoter and did or said whatever
        > > he needed to do ("By Any Means Necessary")
        > > in order to get Eckankar off the ground.
        > >
        > > This is why Klemp, at first, had a
        > > difficult job of explaining Twitchell's
        > > inconsistencies and needed to keep
        > > Eckists confused, busy, and off-balance.
        > > Now, Eckists are so brainwashed that
        > > Klemp can say whatever in his simple
        > > minded redundant versions of feel-good
        > > New Age spirituality.
        > >
        > >
        > > Prometheus
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > etznab wrote:
        > >
        > > One of Paul Twitchell's first reported journey's with Rebazar
        Tarzs
        > > mentioned eight planes, much like the Radhasoami scheme.
        Check the
        > > index section for Ocean of Love and Mercy in Dialogues with
        the Master.
        > >
        > > The Ocean of Love and Mercy was associated with the nameless
        region,
        > > [p. 170] and Nameless World [p.188]. In the chapter called
        THE FACE OF
        > > GOD, 6th paragraph, Paul Twitchell has Rebazar Tarzs saying:
        [Quoting]
        > > "You are in the nameless world. The light you see is the
        light of
        > > God so vastly brilliant in all its glory that human eyes
        could not look
        > > upon it. You are now the perfect atom, for this is the Ocean
        of Love
        > > and Mercy, the true home of the SUGMAD where all Souls return
        in time."
        > > (Dialogues with the Master,by Paul Twitchell, p. 191)
        > >
        > > Moreover, at bottom of p. 193 [SUGMAD speaking?] "Ye are in
        the House
        > > of the SUGMAD. The abode of abodes. The highest of heavens.
        Ye cannot
        > > go higher, and here ye, Soul, having become at-one-ment with
        my divine
        > > self, return to Its true self, ever ready with Its work in
        the divine
        > > cause!"
        > >
        > > Chapter sixteen (The Cosmic Worlds) of Dialogues with the
        Master, has
        > > Rebazar Tarzs saying about the various planes [quoting
        snippet]:
        > >
        > > "First, It becomes united with the very essence of Sat Nam in
        a
        > > mystic sense, and so becomes one with IT, partaking of all ITS
        > > attributes. It then advances to the three remaining regions.
        > > "Next is Alakh Lok, presided over by the Alakh Purusha, and
        after
        > > this is Agam Lok, presided over by Agam Purusha. Finally Soul
        reaches
        > > the end of Its journey, the region of the nameless ONE, or
        the SUGMAD,
        > > the supreme LORD of all that exists."
        > >
        > > http://www.mirrorh.com/dwtm.html
        > >
        > > Later on, in The Far Country, Rebazar Tarzs changes the
        description
        > > slightly:
        > >
        > > "First, the Tuza becomes united with the very essence of the
        Sat Nam in
        > > a mystical sense, and so, becomes a part of Him, partaking in
        all Sat
        > > Nam's marvelous attributes. Then the Tuza advances to the
        three
        > > remaining known planes.
        > >
        > > "First is the Alakh Lok, presided over by the Alakh Purusha,
        and
        > > after this is the Agam Lok plane presided over by the Agam
        Purusha, or
        > > lord. Finally Soul reaches the end of Its journey, the region
        of the
        > > nameless One, Advaita, the formless, that which is the first
        you know
        > > about the SUGMAD, the feeling or the understanding of the
        Divine.
        > >
        > > "Eventually you come to the SUGMAD in the vast worlds above."
        > >
        > > http://www.mirrorh.com/tfctfc.html
        > >
        > > Here again (Introduction to Eckankar), the subject is
        illustrated (by
        > > Paul Twitchell) slightly different.
        > >
        > > "Beyond this plane is the Alakh Lok plane, and then the Agam
        Lok.
        > > Finally after a succession of many planes, Soul reaches the
        end of its
        > > journey, the region of the nameless One, or the SUGMAD, the
        supreme
        > > lord of all that exists."
        > >
        > > http://www.mirrorh.com/itecpwPage2.html
        > >
        > > The earliest scheme of planes appears to indicate Sat Lok,
        Alak Lok,
        > > Agam Lok & Anami Lok - the latter apparently associated with
        Ocean of
        > > Love & Mercy. Strangely though, someone saw fit to slip
        mention of
        > > Hukikat Lok into p. 111 of Dialogues with the Master.
        > >
        > > In any case, notice how Dialogues with the Master,
        Introduction to
        > > Eckankar and The Far Country tend to describe the planes
        similarly, and
        > > in similar order. Notice also, how similar are certain
        sections from
        > > The Far Country with The Path of the Masters. Example:
        > >
        > > "In the literature of the sacred, this divine formless spirit
        is
        > > expressed by many names, such as, ECKANKAR, Nirankar, Akal,
        Nirala,
        > > Anami, Agam, Alakh, Sat Purush, Prabhu, Prabhswami, Akashar,
        > > Paramakshar, Purusha." - The Far Country
        > >
        > > http://www.mirrorh.com/tfctfc.html
        > >
        > > "In the literature of the saints, God is expressed by many
        words, such
        > > as Soami, Ekankar, Nirankar, Radha Soami, Akal, Nirala,
        Anami, Agam,
        > > Alakh, Sat Purush, Prabhu, Prabhswami, Hari Rai, Akshar,
        Parameshwar,
        > > Akshar Purush, etc." - The Path of the Masters
        > >
        > > http://www.mirrorh.com/potmnots.html
        > >
        > > Notice how the words Soami, Radha Soami & Hari Rai are absent
        from the
        > > Eckankar version. And where the Eckankar version has ECKANKAR
        vs.
        > > Ekankar. The remarkable thing about this is how Julian
        Johnson's book,
        > > The Path of the Masters, preceded Paul Twitchell's book, The
        Far
        > > Country, by at least three decades!
        > >
        > > Apparently then, Eckankar changed the spelling of a word,
        trademarked
        > > it, and later published it in a book. I believe this is
        somehow more
        > > than a paraphrase.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.