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

Paul Twitchell is to Kirpal Singh as Graham Forsyth is to Harold Klemp

Expand Messages
  • prometheus_973
    Hello All, I just read a post by David Lane on the A.R.E. site. Lane posted some interesting information that he reposted from the Radhasoami group site which
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 21, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello All,

      I just read a post by David Lane on the A.R.E. site. Lane posted
      some interesting information that he reposted from the Radhasoami
      group site which had to do with Paul Twitchell and Kirpal Singh's
      physical son Darshan.

      A disciple of Kirpal's quotes him and "His" take on the inner
      experiences of Twitchell. He says of Twitchell:

      "One of His oldest Western disciples [Paul Twitchell] had published
      a series of books, without getting Master's permission, in which he
      recounted his inner experiences in great detail. According to the
      books, he had in fact reached Sach Khand... It was evident that the
      disciple was maintaining that he had permission from the Master
      within to publish the books, and that (according to him) the Master
      within had withstood the repetition of the five charged names. But
      Master made it very clear that there was some deep and serious error
      here: not only had He not given permission for the books he
      published, but the disciple was most decidedly not in Sach Khand...
      He said, 'I quite fully admit that the Master did take him in His
      lap and showed him some of the inner treasures, that's right; but he
      misused what had been given to him and it turned sour.'"

      So, what we have here is a correlation between two "Masters" and two
      disciples. The disciples, Paul Twitchell and Graham Forsyth both had
      inner experiences and both used charged words to verify the validity
      of their experiences. And, the angry and negative reactions by both
      Kirpal and Klemp seem to parallel one another! It seems that one's
      inner experiences don't mean a thing unless the outer "Master"
      confirns them! Quite a Catch-22 isn't it?!

      Here's a quote from "The Path of the Masters" to put Twitchell's
      claims into perspective and from Kirpal's P.O.V.:

      "As said in a preceding paragraph in the technical terminology of
      this science, a Saint or a Master is one who has reached the fifth
      region called Sach Khand, there being eight great planes in all. A
      Sat Guru is a Saint who has been appointed by the Supreme Lord to
      perform the duties of giving Nam or Initiation and to lead the
      disciples back to their home in Sach Khand. He is the executive
      officer of the Supreme Guru."

      This is why Twitchell, in the beginning, had the goal of the Fifth
      Initiation only for his disciples! The background information
      from "Path" continues:

      "A Param Sant or Supreme saint is one who has advanced to the
      highest possible degree, the supreme region of pure spirit. These
      several degrees can be obtained only by hard work and individual
      development."

      For Eckists this amounts to thousands of hours of Vahana work and a
      lot of boot licking, keeping silent, and acting happy! More
      from "Path:"

      "In this book the terms: Master, Sat Guru and Saint will be used
      synonymously, but meaning in all cases, one who has gained the
      exalted status of Saint, rising to the fifth region by his own
      efforts with the aid of his Guru."

      Well, I can see why Kirpal had a problem with Twitchell's claims. By
      claiming of having going to the fifth region or plane (Sach Khand)
      Twitchell was also claiming that he was now a or the "Master, Sat
      Guru and Saint," but this was the title of Paul's Master Kirpal
      Singh! And Kirpal claims that Twitchell could not have truly had
      these experiences. Who was right... Paul or Kirpal... Klemp or
      Graham? If Paul was correct then why couldn't Graham be correct?
      And, was Kirpal and Klemp mistaken? More from "Path:"

      "If the student is to gain any proper understanding of this
      teaching, he must keep this fact always in mind. A Saint as the word
      is used in this book, has absolutely no reference to a canonical
      saint of the church. Such saints are made by decree of the Pope,
      while the real Saints develop into Saints by their own hard work
      under the directions of their Gurus, and by their help. There is no
      other way to become real Saints."

      It seems that Kirpal thought Twitchell needed more hard work,
      direction, and help from Him to achieve his goals. Or, maybe
      Twitchell thought his work to achieve inner experiences was with the
      direction and help of his outer/inner Master... Kirpal Singh! I can
      see why there was confusion when one thing is said here and another
      thing is said or suggested somewhere else! Klemp did the same to
      Graham and Owens as Kirpal did to Twitchell. [Ironically, John
      Rogers-Hinkle and Twitchell had a similar fall out].

      Here's just a little bit more background from "The Path of the
      Masters:"

      "3. SAT DESH, THE HIGHEST REGION

      Beginning now from above, and going downwards, we come to Sat Desh
      (Sat, true, and desh, country). Many other names have been applied
      to it, such as Nij-Dham, Sat Lok, Mukam Haq and Sach Khand. These
      names are usually applied to the lowest section of Sat Desh, but
      occasionally to the entire grand division."

      In the Eckankar Lexicon on page 147 is the following definition for
      Nij-Dham: "The Far Country; region of pure Spirit; Sat Desha, true
      country; another name for Sach Khand, Sat Lok. See also Mukam Taq."
      Notice how "Mukam Haq" was changed to "Mukam Taq." This is just one
      more example of a Twitchell "modus operandi" to make Eckankar
      different from anything else, (exclusive) and the highest spiritual
      teaching anywhere!

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