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

8160Re: Unscrambling the pieces

Expand Messages
  • al_radzik
    Sep 18, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Very interesting! So you actually played along with Darji!I too am a musician and you're so right about timing. Our old drummer had a tendency to slow down in mid-song and it drove me crazy!That's why he's our old drummer.
      Did you happen to catch the debate with Darwin and some Christian evangelist on You Tube? Darwin comes off as a complete fool. Sometimes the Christian guy does too but in comparison, Darji just sits there like a hog staring at a wristwatch.
      I can see how Paul was attracting people to his Soul Travel. You've got to remember that timing is everything. It was 1965 and Paul had already been well read on Eastern matters with the likes of the famous 50's yogi Premananda. The Beatles went to India and the subculture of the mid 60's was in full swing. (All You Need Is Love). We were protesting everything and tearing down our parent's values and ethics. Whatever they were all about, we were going to do the opposite.
      Paul, Guru Maharaji, Baba Ram Dass, ISKCON and a host of westernized Easterners were proliferating and we were clamoring for the exotic teachings of Krishna and the Vedic Scriptures. In lieu of Christianity, we were finding refuge and "knowledge" in ashrams and communes. Unfortunately, we all grew up and became capitalists which put us square in the mess we are in today. Woodstock sucked. Free love was bullshit. Drugs destroyed our roots and we became "free spirits" with no absolutes. We are all older now but we never grew up.
      Good to hear from someone who's been there from the beginning. Keep postin' pardner!

      Alf

      --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@...> wrote:
      >
      > Dear Alf,
      >
      > I suppose that I would call myself of the "old school" if I had to say one way or the other; definitely, I am NOT of the Harold Klemp "new school". 
      >
      > You say that Darwin was like a televangelist, and that is an interesting analogy.  And how he ascended to the Mahantaship, and what he did when he got there, as I understand it, had its own share of hush-hush scandals.  And you are probably right about him not being such a great musician, and I should know.  I was one of the flute players in the orchestra, backing up Darwin as he sang his ECK songs.  Although the songs themselves are great, Darwin had a notoriously bad sense of timing when it came to performing them onstage.  We would always be looking up at Darwin to try to get our clues from him as to where he was going with a phrase, and when, in order to synch our playing with his delivery.  Being relatively young and naive then, I just figured that he must just be so ecstatically blissed out, and lost in the Ocean of Love and Mercy that such mundane matters as musical timing were irrelevant, or not important to him from his lofty, exalted
      > perspective. 
      >
      > What confused and bugged me about the two masters period was that these two supposedly God Realized beings, or co-Mahantas, were demonstrating that they were obviously NOT free of certain human foibles like egotism and attachment.  Darwin did not want to let go of his captive audience, especially as a musician, so he tried to hog as much time as he could at Eckankar seminars playing to his adoring crowd of Eckfans.  This caused friction and problems with the Harold Klemp faction, who I believe were trying to look for a way, an opportune moment, to oust Darwin from the organization anyway.  And they finally did.
      >
      > I never said that Twitch had absolute, or a hundred percent, integrity.  The whole plagiarism thing came as a big shock to me, too as I found Path of the Masters, and started comparing it with Eckankar: Key to Secret Worlds.  But, relatively speaking, Twitch had more integrity than Klemp. 
      >
      > I hope that this explains things better.
      >
      > David
      >
      > --- On Sun, 9/18/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
      >
      > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
      > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
      > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Sunday, September 18, 2011, 7:20 AM
      >
      > Interesting. So you are from the "old school"? Do you retain a belief in the basic tenets of Eckankar as taught by Paul? I agree that Harold is a miserable mahanta and would agree that Paul did have some integrity but I believe when Darwin came on board, that's where the path started falling apart. He was like one of those cheating televangelists from what I recall. He also fancied himself as a musician. I can tell you from a professional standpoint, he was absolutely horrible.<GG>
      > I don't believe Eckankar is a dangerous cult because we are all responsible for what we believe and the psychic karma they threaten you with if you leave is the same bunk that got you there in the first place. If you are an old time Eckist, doesn't it follow that there should always be a mahanta on the Earth? What is it about the Darwin/Klemp transition that bothers you? Show me where the unbroken lineage of Eck masters exists throughout the ages as Paul proposed. How do you handle the plagiarism? This was all during Twitchell's reign as you know.
      > alf
      >
      > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, David Osborn <panfluteman2000@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Dear Alf,
      > >
      > > Call Twitch a charlatan or what you will, but I feel that he had more integrity than Klemp.  That worship temple in Chanhassen, MN - that was Harold's idea, NOT Twitch's!  Twitch would have never gone for it.  In fact, he never even called Eckankar a religion, because he didn't want to fall into all the trappings and stereotypes about religion, anyway.  He also wanted Eckankar to be self supporting, and not hide under the non profit tax umbrella.  This whole idea of bowing down and worshipping that Harold was into, I feel was basically foreign to him.  You see, I got into Eckankar right before Paul's passing, and was involved in it when Darwin was the LEM.  I was really wierded out by the whole Darwin - Harold two masters thing, which soon generated into a feud and a debacle, and instinctively didn't like the changes that I saw Harold put into place, so I left.  I was not really an Eckist, or at least not for very long, anyway, under Harold,
      > so,
      > >  I haven't really experienced what you all have been through.  I suppose that I was from a totally different era when it came to ECK.
      > >
      > > My the Eckless Blessings Be!
      > > David
      > >
      > > --- On Sat, 9/17/11, al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
      > >
      > > From: al_radzik <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Subject: [eckankartruth] Re: Unscrambling the pieces
      > > To: eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com
      > > Date: Saturday, September 17, 2011, 7:58 PM
      > >
      > > Etznab,
      > >
      > > I don't see how Paul's birthday argument plays out in the big picture. Nobody knew exactly when Jesus was born or died or for that matter what he did for 30 years. All I know is that in the last three years of his life he had managed to vibrate his teachings to epic proportions into what is now known as Christianity.
      > > If you step back and look at Twitch's record, he was more of a charlatan than a messenger from God. There exists NO proof of Eckankar nor its 900 + masters before 1965. Eckankar purports to be the primary uplink of all religions but has no historical proof to make itself known in sacred texts from anywhere in the world. If Eckists don't like to talk about the facts it is because there are none. Eckankar is a self-absorbing religion where you make up your own private Idaho out of a thin framework they provide. For example, God (or sugmad) is taught to be impersonal and you are a part of that Divine spark. If that's the case, why do they come to "WORSHIP" at the temple in Chanhassen? Worship is defined as reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage. Eckankar is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. The plagiarisms are enough (unto themselves) to turn anyone with common sense away and look elsewhere.
      > > I was always stunned by the fierce anger and resentment they had towards naysayers back in the old a.r.e. days. IF they were truly enlightened, they should not have been so vindictive and condescending towards non-believers. By virtue of their own belief system, it would make sense that they would detach themselves from such confrontations and simply chant HU and be God loving soul travelers but many chose to express themselves as bratty, undisciplined little children. 
      > > My intention is to not rain on your parade but I have seen you as a tireless poster both in a.r.e. and here in eckankartruth. You seem to be welcome in both because I detect a sincerity in you to know the truth. It just makes me wonder why it's taking so long for you to make up your mind. That's all.
      > >
      > > Alf
      > >
      > >  
      > >
      > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=68
      > > >
      > > > http://www.thetruth-seeker.com/scanindexsubAcss.aspx?indexID=67
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In eckankartruth@yahoogroups.com, "etznab18" <etznab@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > OK. Well, it doesn't take long to copy and paste. Here is the message I tried to send the first time. This was my response to your post.
      > > > >
      > > > > *********
      > > > >
      > > > > It's a good question, Alf. My perspective on Eckankar is not what it used to be.
      > > > > 
      > > > > Yes, I've read some of the early a.r.e. posts. Also, a lot of David Lane and Ford Johnson's research. What's in it for me? For one thing, I look forward to hearing Eckists admit the truth and to sharing what truth I can with others about the history of Paul Twitchell and evolution of Eckankar teachings. I would rather do this than turn my back and allow so many fairy tales to continue and grow. So I like to research Eckankar and other religions when time permits.
      > > > > 
      > > > > One unfortunate thing, however, is I don't have access to Paul Twitchell's files and early manuscripts.
      > > > > 
      > > > > People can say what they want - Eckists, or whoever - but in the end the truth is what will prevail, in my opinion. As it is now, I think a lot of David & Ford's findings are unpopular with Eckists generally because some people just don't want to talk about facts. I think if more people did talk about facts, more Eckists would include those facts as part of the Eckankar teachings.
      > > > > 
      > > > > For example, I believe the facts show that Paul Twitchell used two different birth dates for his two marriages and neither one (1912 & 1922) appear to be correct when compared to the 1910 Census. Birth date is one of the most primal pieces of information recorded about a person's life. The fact that Paul Twitchell used more than one tells me he was not beyond making things up. This, coupled with the things he did to promote his name ever since a young man, only adds to all the other stories I've heard. 
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
    • Show all 21 messages in this topic