Rebazar: An Implanted Memory ?
Doug
> On Jul 14, 10:09 pm, Doug <d.mar...@littleknownpubs.com> wrote:
>
> Pondering something.
>
> When one is presented with the paradox of two
> different beliefs - based on physical records - as
> with the recorded words of Rebazar Tarzs and a
> number of other Eck Masters replacing recorded
> and illustrated identities (names) in some of the
> earlier works - written by the same author - which
> should be considered the accurate account?
>
> What I'm trying to say is, how does the author
> of so many words - recorded by Paul Twitchell -
> suddenly change into another person?
>
> This does not usually happen on the physical
> plane - not that I am aware of - where one person
> changes into another person, though the words
> attributed to both of them stay the same.
>
> It seems like a paradox, an enigma, etc., as
> if the truth must be determined by the observer.
>
> Does anyone else see a paradox or enigma
> here?
>
> Etznab
This paradox, for me, disappears once I realize that the real author
is Paul. He is not just recording, he is writing.
Think of inspirations you have had that have led you to do something
or create something. In our modern world, the creator takes full
credit for the creation. But we know that every author and artist has
been helped and influenced by many inner and outer sources.
Paul wanted to show this in his writing, so he did it by portraying
his books as dialogues with his Master. But these are inner
experiences he is describing here that are much subtler than they
might seem. So, these are his spiritual revelations that he is
recording. In other words, these words are really his words and in our
modern day we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
credit to the inner Master.
See what I mean?
Doug.
Etznab
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
These are your quoted paragraphs and my
comments about them.
"This paradox, for me, disappears once I realize
that the real author is Paul. He is not just recording,
he is writing."
And about witnessing the physical body of
Rebazar Tarzs? Speaking to him? Visiting in
his flesh body Paul Twitchell in his apartment?
"Think of inspirations you have had that have led
you to do something or create something. In our
modern world, the creator takes full credit for the
creation. But we know that every author and artist
has been helped and influenced by many inner and
outer sources."
Yes, I've considered Rebazar Tarzs from an
inspirational perspective. That way one need
not have a physical record for substantiation.
Not a physical record of a physical body by
the same name.
Rebazar Tarzs, however, has been portrayed
as more than "inspiration" from one's Master.
Rebazar Tarzs has been depicted in pictures
and portraits, both on and in Eckankar books
and even in illustrated versions of The Tiger's
Fang, etc.
Rebazar Tarzs has not spoken the words
that Paul Twitchell recorded? and that this
Eck Master said that he [Paul] should write
down? Many words of which can be found in
the books written by Julian Johnson and/or
other people by other names?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Julian Johnson
did not take down the words of Rebazar Tarzs
did he? I am thinking that the last name of his
master was Singh. I could be wrong. And I am
under the impression that Julian Johnson was
told by his Master what words to write down as
well.
I would be curious to know if you imagine or
suspect that Julian Johnson was "inspired" by
Rebazar Tarzs, Doug.
Rebazar Tarzs is more than inspiration, it would
seem. As it was Rebazar Tarzs who stepped in as
Living Eck Master between the time of Paul Twitchell
and Darwin Gross. This, to me, could not have been
the inspiration of, or some written words by Paul - as
Rebazar Tarzs filling in as LEM took place AFTER
the death [translation] of Paul Twitchell.
What I am saying here is that Rebazar Tarzs
appears to be living in the physical even after Paul
Twitchell is not.
"Living Eck Master" implies someone living in the
physical body. So this would go to support the fact
that Rebazar Tarzs is more than so many words by
Paul Twitchell - no matter where he got those words
from!!!!!!!!!
"Paul wanted to show this in his writing, so he did it by
portraying his books as dialogues with his Master. But
these are inner experiences he is describing here that
are much subtler than they might seem. So, these are
his spiritual revelations that he is recording. In other words,
these words are really his words and in our modern day
we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
credit to the inner Master."
The physical body of a Living Eck Master, to me,
is not really so subtle.
The physical body of a Living Eck Master, to me,
is not really an inner experience.
The physical body of a Living Eck Master, to me,
is not the words of Paul Twitchell after Paul Twitchell
is dead.
"See what I mean?"
Not exactly, Doug.
I am looking at the physical history of Rebazar
Tarzs and other Eck Masters as illustrated in the
Eckankar books and the writings of Paul Twitchell
(and others who allegedly quote Paul Twitchell).
I am looking for more than the words of a past
Eck Master alone, but for physical records that
can clarify so many apparently contradictory or
insubstantial (physically substantial) personal
beliefs and/or accounts.
This is just me. I don't need to be convinced
that Paul Twitchell, Darwin Gross or that Harold
Klemp were/are "REAL" people.
I am looking at history for other Eck Masters
mentioned in the writings. The ones who could
have a physical history independent from those
whom they might inspire (or have inspired).
In my opinion.
Etznab
Etznab
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
OK, to be fair, I can see what you mean, generally.
This is different, however, from what appears to be
the recorded Eckankar history for an Eck Master with
an actual LIVING physical body to match.
In my own research I have considered many of the
same perspectives which you illustrated for Rebazar
Tarzs. However, I still see a paradox and are looking
still for the actual context of "real" in connection with
Rebazar Tarzs.
Within the realm of imagination one can change any
amount of actual historical fact. I have seen this when
looking at a timeline for world history and what people
have to say, or believe actually happened.
I see two different contexts here. One being belief
and imagination apart from actual fact, where people
are free to make up whatever they so choose. Which,
BTW, can inspire or influence millions to imagine or
believe accordingly. On the other hand, I see context
of actual fact, or what really happened within the laws
of scientific fact that are not in dispute or based upon
abstract theory.
Etznab
Doug
Your comment that I responded to was about the problem you have with
seeing Paul change his attribution from saying it was Kirpal to saying
it was Rebazar in his writings.
That was how I understood the issue you were explaining. That is what
I was responding to.
My point is that the problem goes away once we realize that everything
Paul wrote were his words. He was writing it. These were not the words
of Rebazar or Kirpal. They were his words.
So, I'm not sure I follow how this has anything to do with Paul
witnessing the physical body of Rebazar and speaking with him.
>
> "Think of inspirations you have had that have led
> you to do something or create something. In our
> modern world, the creator takes full credit for the
> creation. But we know that every author and artist
> has been helped and influenced by many inner and
> outer sources."
>
> Yes, I've considered Rebazar Tarzs from an
> inspirational perspective. That way one need
> not have a physical record for substantiation.
> Not a physical record of a physical body by
> the same name.
>
> Rebazar Tarzs, however, has been portrayed
> as more than "inspiration" from one's Master.
> Rebazar Tarzs has been depicted in pictures
> and portraits, both on and in Eckankar books
> and even in illustrated versions of The Tiger's
> Fang, etc.
I can see that you've missed my point. I am not trying to discuss
whether Rebazar is real or not. I am discussing the concern you raised
about how Paul could change the name from Kirpal to Rebazar.
My point was that Paul was the author, not Kirpal or Rebazar. Once we
realize that Paul was the actual author, then it doesn't seem strange
at all that he would think he could rewrite his own words however he
thought best.
>
> Rebazar Tarzs has not spoken the words
> that Paul Twitchell recorded? and that this
> Eck Master said that he [Paul] should write
> down? Many words of which can be found in
> the books written by Julian Johnson and/or
> other people by other names?
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but Julian Johnson
> did not take down the words of Rebazar Tarzs
> did he? I am thinking that the last name of his
> master was Singh. I could be wrong. And I am
> under the impression that Julian Johnson was
> told by his Master what words to write down as
> well.
I think you are still talking about something completely different to
what I was saying.
Paul's books were written by Paul. They were his words that he chose
and assembled. Julian Johnson wrote his own book. Julian chose his
words and assembled them.
Who inspired Julian and who inspired Paul might be interesting, but
Julian and Paul are still the authors. They both drew from their
teachers, but it was still their book and they wrote it, not their
teachers.
>
> I would be curious to know if you imagine or
> suspect that Julian Johnson was "inspired" by
> Rebazar Tarzs, Doug.
He may have been, but I don't see how that would change anything.
Both Julian and Paul were probably inspired by God as well, but how
does this change anything?
It is not who inspires us that matters, but what we do with it.
>
> Rebazar Tarzs is more than inspiration, it would
> seem. As it was Rebazar Tarzs who stepped in as
> Living Eck Master between the time of Paul Twitchell
> and Darwin Gross. This, to me, could not have been
> the inspiration of, or some written words by Paul - as
> Rebazar Tarzs filling in as LEM took place AFTER
> the death [translation] of Paul Twitchell.
I've heard people say this before about Rebazar stepping in after Paul
died, but quite frankly this just seems to be a myth stated by those
who didn't know how else to explain that period of time. I offer a
different explanation in my book.
>
> What I am saying here is that Rebazar Tarzs
> appears to be living in the physical even after Paul
> Twitchell is not.
You mean there are stories about Rebazar living after Paul left this
world.
>
> "Living Eck Master" implies someone living in the
> physical body. So this would go to support the fact
> that Rebazar Tarzs is more than so many words by
> Paul Twitchell - no matter where he got those words
> from!!!!!!!!!
If a myth can imply something.
>
> "Paul wanted to show this in his writing, so he did it by
> portraying his books as dialogues with his Master. But
> these are inner experiences he is describing here that
> are much subtler than they might seem. So, these are
> his spiritual revelations that he is recording. In other words,
> these words are really his words and in our modern day
> we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
> credit to the inner Master."
>
> The physical body of a Living Eck Master, to me,
> is not really so subtle.
>
> The physical body of a Living Eck Master, to me,
> is not really an inner experience.
>
> The physical body of a Living Eck Master, to me,
> is not the words of Paul Twitchell after Paul Twitchell
> is dead.
>
> "See what I mean?"
>
> Not exactly, Doug.
Well, I don't see what you mean, either, since you seem to be reading
what I wrote as if I was talking about something completely different.
Or perhaps I missed what you were originally saying, so you are now
missing my comment. It's hard to say.
But if you read my comments again, you will see that your comments
don't make any sense. Somehow we are not communicating here.
>
> I am looking at the physical history of Rebazar
> Tarzs and other Eck Masters as illustrated in the
> Eckankar books and the writings of Paul Twitchell
> (and others who allegedly quote Paul Twitchell).
>
> I am looking for more than the words of a past
> Eck Master alone, but for physical records that
> can clarify so many apparently contradictory or
> insubstantial (physically substantial) personal
> beliefs and/or accounts.
>
> This is just me. I don't need to be convinced
> that Paul Twitchell, Darwin Gross or that Harold
> Klemp were/are "REAL" people.
>
> I am looking at history for other Eck Masters
> mentioned in the writings. The ones who could
> have a physical history independent from those
> whom they might inspire (or have inspired).
And some of those Eck Masters we can find historical records of, and
some we can't.
Rebazar is one that we can't.
Why is this Paul's problem? It seems to me that this is something
bothering you, not Paul, which would make it your problem, not Paul's.
Doesn't it?
Doug.
>
> In my opinion.
>
> Etznab
Doug
If Paul was describing a Master he had met through spiritual
experiences, why is it so important to you to find a "real" connection
with him?
>
> Within the realm of imagination one can change any
> amount of actual historical fact. I have seen this when
> looking at a timeline for world history and what people
> have to say, or believe actually happened.
But this is exactly what you are trying to do as well. Rebazar was
experienced by Paul spiritually, according to his descriptions. Yes,
he had those experiences at certain points in Paul's life, but those
were still Paul's experiences he was describing.
>
> I see two different contexts here. One being belief
> and imagination apart from actual fact, where people
> are free to make up whatever they so choose. Which,
> BTW, can inspire or influence millions to imagine or
> believe accordingly. On the other hand, I see context
> of actual fact, or what really happened within the laws
> of scientific fact that are not in dispute or based upon
> abstract theory.
I see the point you are making, but it doesn't fit for me, since Paul
was writing about spiritual experiences. It is you (as others before
you) who are trying to treat Rebazar as something historical and
physical.
Paul also wrote about God. Does this mean that you need to find
historical records of God, or Paul's writings about God are
meaningless?
As Paul said many times, he was writing in the field of consciousness.
You won't find any physical records of consciousness. Scientists even
after hundreds of years have not yet figured out how to measure or
detect consciousness, so you certainly aren't going to find any
physical records of it. But this doesn't mean we can't talk about it
or write about it. It doesn't mean consciousness isn't real.
Yet, you think it is important to find physical records. I don't see
why.
I can see that someone put this bug in your ear and you are now
accepting it, but why don't you just take the bug out? Why are you
keeping it in your ear? What's the point?
Doug.
>
> Etznab
Etznab
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
When Paul Twitchell quoted Rebazar Tarzs,
even to the effect of using quotation marks, I
agree that Paul wrote the words. However, the
illustrations appear to imply he was recounting
the words of someone else.
If I were to quote Doug Marman, does it mean
that I am quoting my words? Not yours?
See what I mean?
Etznab
Etznab
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
Are you saying to me that, in your opinion,
Rebazar Tarzs was not an actual historical
living person? That when Paul described his
physical body (Rebazar Tarzs) and wrote the
words spoken to him by Rebazar Tarzs, that
Paul was not actually witnessing a physical
body?
Are we trying to dismiss with the idea of
Rebazar Tarzs ever having had a physical
body? Is this the Eckankar that I hear you
describing to me, Doug?
Etznab
Etznab
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
You wrote:
"You mean there are stories about Rebazar
living after Paul left this world."
Yes. In the 1998 Eckankar Lexicon. Under the
heading: Rebazar Tarzs.
".... said to be over five hundred years old,
Rebazar Tarzs lives in a hut in the HINDU
KUSH mountains and appears to many as
he helps the present LIVING ECK MASTER
in the works of Eckankar. ...."
One could say this definition was written
by Paul Twitchell. When read in the context
of 1998, however, the meaning of "present"
Living Eck Master changes. It changes from
Paul Twitchell to Harold Klemp.
This is a "story" about Rebazar Tarzs as
I see it. And before it says anything about
appearing to many, the definition describes
Rebazar Tarzs as living in a hut in the Hindu
Kush mountains.
For a person new to Eckankar looking at
that portion of the definition, IMO it looks
like Rebazar is living still. If this were not
the case, wouldn't Harold Klemp have said
something different?
The sentence contains the words "said
to be" and in my opinion qualify the story
about Rebazar Tarzs.
The words "said to be" do not absolutely
equate with the actual truth, IMO. At least
not in every instance where they are used.
Paul Twitchell said a lot of things. And I
believe it's fair to say people said things to
Paul. That people said things to the people
who said things to Paul. Etc., etc.
People are always saying things. And a
large portion of what is said with regard to
history comes from the grape vine. Stories
handed down through time - a lot of which
have been changed from their originals and
are NOT the actual truth.
I'm not totally insensitive to where you
are coming from, Doug. What I have been
doing - in many instances - is asking some
questions in order to clarify actual history
aside from "he said, she said", or so many
people and what they believe to be the case
(myself included).
Kirpal Singh was a real living person. If
Paul Twitchell described having experiences
with him - later attributing them to Rebazar
Tarzs ... this is a paradox, in my opinion. I
say this, Doug, because I am assuming that
both (Kirpal Singh & Rebazar Tarzs) were real
living people.
I'm not sure I hear what you said about
this topic. Are you implying that neither of
them are real when it comes to Paul and
his "spiritual" experiences of them? That it
was not they who spoke to Paul Twitchell,
but it was Paul Twitchell speaking to him-
self after having been inspired (somehow)
by them?
Logically speaking, and after looking at
the historical facts, it might appear that in-
deed, yes Eckankar was the words of Paul
Twitchell.
Perhaps a problem is that Paul Twitchell
is no longer living here with us. So the new
description for, and the actual history here
on this planet for the outer teachings have
to come, quite naturally, from the words of
somebody else. This is the challenge that
I think historians are faced with, because
Paul Twitchell and his writings are not any
longer the final word as if he were now the
present Living Eck Master. He is not.
At the same time, Paul Twitchell and his
"history" of Eckankar (the way that he wrote
about it) survives in the memories of several
people. In this sense, perhaps Paul Twitchell
does "live" - what he wrote to some extent,
at least.
And if Paul was wrong about anything, and/
or if people interpret Paul and his words in the
wrong way, then it would mean that so many
people have to change their cherished beliefs.
Who is going to speak for Paul Twitchell
though, and explain to everyone else what
he meant by every recorded word making
up so much of the history of the outer Eck
teachings?
Perhaps a better question is, "If Paul
Twitchell described Eckankar according
to spiritual experiences and inspiration,
then who is to say the rest of us are in
any way less for doing the same?
We can just forget about the physical
history of who said what about what did
happen and when for everyone else and
just go with our own inspiration and our
own spiritual experiences. We could be
described as each our own path to God
vs. the path to God of someone else.
We and us being those who choose
to (or now already) see it like that.
We could call Eckankar a religion with
much the same trappings as organizied
religions in general and describe dogma
as imperfect words written in an imperfect
world. Say that the greater truth is really
on the inner and that each person can
find so much of it the outer teachings
will pale in comparison. We being those
who might see it (the truth) like that.
Not expecting answers to any of the
questions I was inspired to ask. I might
have only been talking to myself.
Etznab
Doug
Etznab,
I am not trying to define anything. I am simply observing.
What Paul describes is experiencing Rebazar as if he was with him
physically, but it is quite clear that these are not an ordinary
physical experiences. Rebazar doesn't drive up in a car and ring the
doorbell, etc. Most of the experiences are when Paul journeys out of
his body to meet Rebazar. In some cases, Paul is visited by Rebazar in
his apartment.
I would call these spiritual experiences. What would you call them?
This is like the problem that I've heard researchers raise about out
of body experiences: Are they really experiencing the physical world
or something else? To me the answer is that they are having a
spiritual experience. It is not their physical senses that are
engaged, even though it may seem that way in the experience.
This is the same as someone meeting someone in a dream. Is that a
physical meeting? I would say no, it was a dream experience, even
though they might give you every single detail of what the person was
wearing and what it felt like to shake their hand, etc.
As far as I know, all of Paul's experiences with Rebazar were
spiritual encounters. If this is true, where does this physical,
historical aspect of Rebazar enter into it?
You tell me.
Doug.
Dennis
> One could say this definition was written
> by Paul Twitchell. When read in the context
> of 1998, however, the meaning of "present"
> Living Eck Master changes. It changes from
> Paul Twitchell to Harold Klemp.
Actually it changes from Paul Twitchell to Darwin Gross to Harold Klemp.
Your argument would hold water is Harold specifically stated that "he" was
in direct contact with Rebazar Tarz. I can't pretend to be an expert on the
modern day Eckankar, but to my memory, I don't really Harold ever telling
the world exactly "who" his master was. (Passes student-to-master). We know
that Darwin claimed that he got it through (from) Rebazar, but who did
Harold get it from (Darwin)?
Anyway, Paul's favorite expression was "razzmatazz" (raz-ma-taz); which has
a similar meaning to our modern expression "if you can't dazzle them with
brilliance, baffle them with bullshit". Notice any similarity to a certain
Eck Master?
Perhaps it's a reach.
Etznab
Doug,
Good response Doug. "Spiritual" experiences. Yes,
I agree that appeaars to make more sense. Thanks.
Etznab
Sean
"Etznab" <etz...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1185847398.1...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 30, 1:12 am, Doug <d.mar...@littleknownpubs.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 28, 5:26 pm, Etznab <etz...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
SNIP
>>
>> As far as I know, all of Paul's experiences with Rebazar were
>> spiritual encounters. If this is true, where does this physical,
>> historical aspect of Rebazar enter into it?
>>
>> You tell me.
>>
>> Doug.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Doug,
>
> Good response Doug. "Spiritual" experiences. Yes,
> I agree that appeaars to make more sense. Thanks.
>
> Etznab
>
Hi Etznab,
I have enjoyed reading your questions, queries and comments here, and I'm
sure others have as well.
fwiw I spent a bit of time last year going thru an old book, Dialogues With
the Master, which I hadn't read before. I found it very helpful in various
ways. A few things came to mind as you've gone thru your dialogue with doug.
anyway, I'd like to quote a few things from that book which seemed relevant,
at least to me.
from the Introduction:
Dialogues With the Master are a series of spiritual discourses which were
taken down when Rebazar Tarzs, the ageless emissary for ECKANKAR in the
world today, appeared to me nightly in his light body for practically one
year and dictated them.
From the back cover:
The contents of this book was the first real study of the works of ECKANKAR
which I did a number of years ago.
[ written circa 1956, published 1970 ]
--
The spiritual experiences which he made possible for me and the teachings
were a painful growth but nevertheless it was all necessary.
--
The purpose of putting this manuscript into book form, according to Rebazar
tarzs, was to advance the cause of ECKANKAR in this world, to bring it out
of the invisible worlds, where it was known only to a few, so that anyone
could have access to eternal light and truths.
---------------------------------
from the first page ...:
RT: I want you to take down the following words as part of a discourse to
give the world. You will act as a channel for this message. Are you ready?
Man is an individual being. Each person is a cosmic world unto himself, and
therefore, must consider himself in two lights: his relationship to the
outer world, commonly called the objective; and his relationship to the
inner world, known as the subjective.
Because man is complex and deeply involved in his cosmic mechanics, it is a
psychological fact that he must go deep into his nature to analyze himself
through introspection and spiritual techniques.
---
and ...
The mind, which is under the influence of the senses, rules our outer lives
in an egotistical way. But man, directed by the Light of Soul, gives us a
life of joyous well-being. This is a spiritual truth, for the Soul recieves
Its guidance from God, the All-Knowing!.
and ...
The living ECK Master is a messenger of God. He simplifies all introspective
techniques and puts the spiritual power at work in our lives and directs the
mind to the Soul.
FROM page 214
"Illusion or maya is the cunning cloud of glamour [ also known as vanity ]
which the negative power has set to trap Soul and hold it prisoner in his
empire. The world of illusion will have a downward pull on the senses of
Soul to enslave it. This is all under the law of karma or cause and effect.
"All you do in this world with physical action is the indifferent pure
phenomenal reflexes of the ECK transcendential essence; that is the self not
only of yourself but of all things. Do you understand this?
"The one and only self is made to seem multiple by the deluding force of
your own inborn ignorance.
"Indeed, in highest truth, an elephant is non-real. Nevertheless, you and I
are as non-real as that elephant. Everything is God, the infinite, pure and
real, boundless and beyond the pairs of opposities, devoid of
differentiating qualities.
"This is the final meaning of all wisdom."
-------------------------------
from page 215
"God is the sole reality. That divine one may be found in everything,
unaffected by suffering or any fault. Everyone, including you and me is ITS
abode, every form is an obscuring figuration within that acting activator we
call the ECK.
-----
"The object of showing you the illusion of life is to give you the
difference between the universal principles and limited knowledge.
"The flow of the God-power is a tide and ebb flow. It operates in both
directions. If you perceive this great truth you are one with the spirit.
You will never recognise your power, force, life or every one as being
separate from the source of God's attribute. You are never apart from it in
thought and action. You recognise no barriers to the illimitability of your
supply. While cognizant of your individuality, you do not concieve of
yourself as a unit and act in accord with that acceptance.
"Man is a center, the center in the body of God. Where is the center?
Everywhere. So as long as you continue to think in unity the center
projected into a line of extension is connected with the primal power. "
---------
"Illusion springs from false beliefs, thoughts, ideas, fertilized by the
emotions and made so real the effects produced are factual to your man's
limited interpretation. That emotions play a large part in creating a belief
in these three illusions is contributtory to the idea the great illusion is
factual."
\
end quotes
---------------------------
thanks sean
Rich
"Sean" <huc...@blah.com> wrote
from the Introduction:
From the back cover:
---------------------------------
life of joyous well-being. This is a spiritual truth, for the Soul receives
Its guidance from God, the All-Knowing!.
and ...
The living ECK Master is a messenger of God. He simplifies all introspective
techniques and puts the spiritual power at work in our lives and directs the
mind to the Soul.
FROM page 214
"Illusion or maya is the cunning cloud of glamour [ also known as vanity ]
which the negative power has set to trap Soul and hold it prisoner in his
empire. The world of illusion will have a downward pull on the senses of
Soul to enslave it. This is all under the law of karma or cause and effect.
"All you do in this world with physical action is the indifferent pure
phenomenal reflexes of the ECK transcendental essence; that is the self not
only of yourself but of all things. Do you understand this?
"The one and only self is made to seem multiple by the deluding force of
your own inborn ignorance.
"Indeed, in highest truth, an elephant is non-real. Nevertheless, you and I
are as non-real as that elephant. Everything is God, the infinite, pure and
real, boundless and beyond the pairs of opposites, devoid of
differentiating qualities.
"This is the final meaning of all wisdom."
-------------------------------
from page 215
"God is the sole reality. That divine one may be found in everything,
unaffected by suffering or any fault. Everyone, including you and me is ITS
abode, every form is an obscuring figuration within that acting activator we
call the ECK.
-----
"The object of showing you the illusion of life is to give you the
difference between the universal principles and limited knowledge.
"The flow of the God-power is a tide and ebb flow. It operates in both
directions. If you perceive this great truth you are one with the spirit.
You will never recognize your power, force, life or every one as being
separate from the source of God's attribute. You are never apart from it in
thought and action. You recognize no barriers to the illimitability of your
supply. While cognizant of your individuality, you do not conceive of
yourself as a unit and act in accord with that acceptance.
"Man is a center, the center in the body of God. Where is the center?
Everywhere. So as long as you continue to think in unity the center
projected into a line of extension is connected with the primal power. "
---------
"Illusion springs from false beliefs, thoughts, ideas, fertilized by the
emotions and made so real the effects produced are factual to your man's
limited interpretation. That emotions play a large part in creating a
belief in these three illusions is contributory to the idea the great
illusion is factual."
Thanks Sean! Great quotes.
That's the perception I focused on when I was growing up in ECK. There were
not many other books to read then. Things have changed on the path since
then, yet those remain as unchanged Truth to me.
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
Rich
"Sean" <huc...@blah.com> wrote
> from the Introduction:
> Dialogues With the Master are a series of spiritual discourses which were
> taken down when Rebazar Tarzs, the ageless emissary for ECKANKAR in the
> world today, appeared to me nightly in his light body for practically one
> year and dictated them.
>
> From the back cover:
> The contents of this book was the first real study of the works of
> ECKANKAR > which I did a number of years ago.
>
> [ written circa 1956, published 1970 ]
'56? Before "The Tigers Fang"? ('57 as I recall)
I've never seen a list of Paul's works listed in order of the time they were
written. Anyone have one or know timeline? Etznab?
Sean
"Rich" <dead...@inorbit.com> wrote in message
news:f8plo...@news4.newsguy.com...
>
> "Sean" <huc...@blah.com> wrote
>
>> from the Introduction:
>> Dialogues With the Master are a series of spiritual discourses which were
>> taken down when Rebazar Tarzs, the ageless emissary for ECKANKAR in the
>> world today, appeared to me nightly in his light body for practically one
>> year and dictated them.
>>
>> From the back cover:
>> The contents of this book was the first real study of the works of
>> ECKANKAR > which I did a number of years ago.
>>
>> [ written circa 1956, published 1970 ]
>
> '56? Before "The Tigers Fang"? ('57 as I recall)
>
> I've never seen a list of Paul's works listed in order of the time they
> were written. Anyone have one or know timeline? Etznab?
>
iT WAS MENTIONED IN pAUL'S INTRODUCTION IN MY COPY OF "Dialogues" Rich.....
7th printing 1979
ooops caps sorry ...
" this occurred while living in the nations 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."
then ...
" He concluded his series of talks that year by taking me on the spiritual
journey recorded in my book "The Tiger's Fang". "
as i understand it, 1957 was when he wrote the tiger's fang, therefore I
assume 1956 is when he did or started the manuscript for Dialogues .. which
took a year or so.
cheers
Rich
"Sean" <huc...@blah.com> wrote in message
news:46b0f047$0$22253$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Etznab
> "Sean" <huca...@blah.com> wrote
Rich,
On the Eckankar "Trivia" Timeline that I keep
for reference, most of Paul's books and the times
when they were "published" I have compiled.
All you have to do is find the books and look
at when they first came out.
As far as when written, I would say that I only
have that information partially. Much of it thanks
to Doug Marman's research.
However, aside from Paul's manuscripts and
published works, I have filled the timeline in with
lots of other data. For example, where did Paul
Twitchell live, and when (according to various
sources). The accounts of Paul's Masters and
when they appeared to him as well.
If you or anyone else finds a site that lists books
by author and the date (day or month of the year)
when they were published, please let me know. I
have the years, but not the months or days that
each book came out (with the possible exception
of some of the early manuscripts).
Etznab
Rich
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
"Etznab" <etz...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1186015988.9...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Etznab
> "Rich" <deadm...@inorbit.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f8plo...@news4.newsguy.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Sean" <huca...@blah.com> wrote
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sean,
Following are some bits of timeline trivia I compiled
for the time period in question (along with some other
trivia, etc.), and for later dates:
1950
"In 1950, Paul Twitchell and his wife, Camille Ballowe,
joined the Self-Revelation Church of Absolute Monism
in Washington, D.C."
[Based on: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 2]
1951
"[....] My sole purpose was to find the elusive Tibetan
lama, known as Rebazar Tarzs, of whom I had heard
much from the late Sudar Singh at Allahabad. [....] It
was a hot summer afternoon in 1951. [....]"
[Based on: ECKANKAR, Compiled Writings Volume
1, Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail T. Gross),
p. 32]
1952
"[....] Therefore, when Scientology started, in 1952, Paul
was already proficient at out-of-body projection and was
trying to help others learn these techniques. This is completely
contrary to David's [David Lane's] story. David's perspective
started from the assumption that Paul's teaching was merely
a rip-off of Sant Mat, which Paul did not run across until 1955,
along with a splattering of what Paul learned from Swami
Premananda in the early 50's. [....]"
[Based on: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 11]
1955
"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]
"[....] For a few years Paul was a member of Swami Pre-
mananda's church in Washington, D.C. When that asso-
ciation ended, he came in contact with the works of Kirpal
Singh, who was based in India at the time. Paul had some
experiences in which Kirpal Singh came to him in his room.
They began to correspond. When Paul wrote to tell Kirpal
Singh about the series of discourses he was working on,
Kirpal Singh replied: 'Let's see what you have. Perhaps we
can use them.' [....]"
[Based on: Article (Struggle for mastership) @
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html]
1956
"Paul [Paul Twitchell] wrote Dialogues With The Master
around 1956, from the references I have seen, but didn't
publish it until 1970. Paul also wrote The Flute of God in
1959, but didn't put it into print until 1966, in the Orion
Magazine series. This pattern is similar to Paul's writing
of The Far Country in 1963, which wasn't published until
1970."
[Based on: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 6]
"[....] David writes [should be illustrated in italics]:
It was around this time (1956/1957) that Twitchell told
Betty Shifflet and Wave Sanderson (both initiates of Kirpal
Singh) at a dinner date that Master Kirpal Singh had appeared
in his Nuri Sarup (light body) over the weekend and dictated
some of the book to him. In this regard, Kirpal Singh comments:
[end italics text]
"Paul Twitchell used to write to me every week, 'Master
came and sat down on the chair and dictated his teachings
to me.' He published them in the Tiger's Fang." [....]"
[http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch._Two.htm]
"In late 1956 or early 1957 Paul had the experience
that is recorded in The Tiger's Fang. [....]"
[Based on: Article (Touching the Face of God) @
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html#trail]
1957
"Most of my philosophy is expounded in my works
'The Tiger's Fang,' written in 1957, an expose of
travel through the planes of other worlds, and 'The
Flute of God,' written in 1959."
[Based on: ECKANKAR, Compiled Writings, Vol. 1
(Copyright 1975 by Gail T. Gross), by Paul Twitchell,
p. 50]
"[....] Paul also wrote in his article 'The God Eaters,'
that appeared in the Psychic Observer, November 1964:
Master Kirpal Singh spoke briefly of these matters
when he took me through the several invisible worlds in
1957. The story of this trip has been recorded in my book
"The Tiger's Fang."
"It is obvious from these and other quotes, that Paul
was quite open about his relationship with Kirpal Singh.
For some reason, however, by 1966 this had changed,
and Paul felt it important enough to delete any references
he made to Kirpal Singh in his writings. According to David
[David Lane], the breakdown between Paul and Kirpal
began in 1963, after Paul sent his book, The Tiger's Fang,
to Kirpal Singh, in Delhi, India. Kirpal Singh didn't approve
of the book, although he didn't tell Paul this for many years.
[....]"
[http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch._Two.htm]
[....] David also finds a key source for Paul's early
quotes from the first published version of "The Flute
of God," printed in installments in Orion Magazine
from late 1965 to 1967. The first few chapters mention
the names of Kirpal Singh and Sawan Singh a number
of times. However, by the time the text was published
in book form, in 1970, every reference to Kirpal Singh,
Sawan Singh and Swami Premananda had been re-
placed by the names of the ECK Masters. In even a few
cases, some of the early quotes that Paul had originally
credited to Jesus were changed to Gopal Das or another
ECK Master. Here are a few of the most interesting of
these quotes [see link]: [....]
[http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch_Five.htm]
Late 1950s(?)
" 'Well, I've always been a Cliff-Hanger, I guess; but
yes, this was before I took roots on the West Coast
in the late 1950's' "
[Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE (ISBN 0-914766-11-2),
by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p. 62]
"While Paul Twitchell was undergoing the transition
from Cliff-Hanger to spiritual adept, the Tibetan master
of Eckankar, Rebazar Tarzs, appeared in the soul body
to administer a series of lessons to Paulji in his home in
Seattle, Washington."
[Based on: IN MY SOUL I AM FREE (ISBN 0-914766-11-2),
by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p. 62]
1959 (?)
"[....] 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 immediately
returned home to Paducah, Kentucky, and stayed with her for
the final two months of her life. [....]"
[Based on: Harold Klemp - See: Part Two, Research on
Paul's Life]
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisSearch.html
"[....] By this time Paul's marriage was on the rocks.
(He and Camille would later divorce in about 1961.) Paul
then [1959] left Washington for England, saying he had
grown tired of the whole artificial scene and especially
the social consciousness which was prevalent at that
time. Paul as the Cliff Hanger was now coming forth.
He began to reassert himself as the rugged individual
who had suffered a lot, simply because he wouldn't
take life the way society dished it out.
"When he had been in England for about six months,
news came to Paul that his sister, Kay-Dee, was dying.
He went back to Paducah, Kentucky, and remained there
for the final two months of her life. Paul loved his sister
very much, and her death left a great vacuum in his life.
"He returned to Washington, D.C., long enough to sell off
some things he had left in storage and then headed for San
Francisco. At a stop in Des Moines, Iowa, he met a young
lady named Edith who convinced him to come with her
to Seattle, Washington, instead. And so Paul, a flesh-and-
blood man, not a god who suddenly appeared from the
mountain highlands, went to Seattle.
"The ECK will draw us along in the way that is needed,
many times through the power of Its love as It manifests
through another human being. It will take us here and there,
and if we are willing to go, It will always take us higher.
"In Seattle, through his contacts in the newspaper
business, Paul got a job with the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
One year was about all he could stand. But he had a way out.
According to his correspondence, two of his books, including
one written back in 1945 entitled To Walk Alone, sold to
a major Hollywood studio.
"All of a sudden his personal letters began to reflect life
on easy street. He was now able to quit his job and travel.
And travel he did. First he went down to Acapulco, back
up through San Francisco, then on to Canada to visit a few
Scientology friends who were staying at a ranch, followed
by a swing across the southern part of the United States.
After stops in Houston and Dallas, he went back to Washington,
D.C., and even made a return trip to England.
"Paul was the original rebel. He had money for a while, but
after spending it or lending it, he didn't have it for long. But he
was very confident in his ability-if he did it once, he could
do it again.
"The first indications of his future position as a spiritual
leader came in 1961. A young lady, aware of his vast
knowledge of Eastern religions, wrote him a letter expressing
her desire to know more. Paul responded in November of
that year by sending her his manuscript of The Tiger's
Fang. He cautioned her not to read it too fast, but apparently
this lady got quite caught up, either with his writings or Paul
himself.
"She began to make a nuisance of herself, often banging
on his door while he was busy writing, entertaining guests,
or in contemplation. Paul handled it by writing her a letter.
He explained that her unexpected pounding on his door
was very disruptive. When he was in a deep trance or in
contemplation, he said it hurt his body to be forced back
so abruptly. To soften the blow of his blunt request for
privacy, he sent her a bottle of champagne.
"Ever the diplomat, Paul was very kind to people who
deserved it. But at times he also displayed a sharp
tongue and a readiness to defend himself against those
who attacked him."
[Based on Article: (The Cliff-Hanger Period) @
http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/man.html#training]
1962
1st Letter to Gail / Paul Twitchell - December 6th,
1962: ["Last" Letter to Gail: March 16th, 1965]
*********
1964
"We were married in 1964 in San Francisco, and
shortly afterwards Rebazar Tarzs began to appear
and give me intensive instructions. He had been
appearing regularly in the latter fifties, but he said
that those sessions had only been designed to
prepare me for the exhaustive drills which now faced
me. I was told to move south, to choose San Diego
for our home.
"One day Gail and I were strolling around San
Francisco's Chinatown, and we wandered into an
old Chinese temple. There a priest told me that I
would be moving to San Diego soon and would start
my life's work in ECK. [....]"
[IN MY SOUL I AM FREE (ISBN 0-914766-11-2),
by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), pp. 64-65]
" 'I went to San Francisco in late November of '64
and left her in Seattle. Then I couldn't stand it there
without her, so I drove back to her home near South
Bend, Washington, and married her [01/07/64].
"The first year was rough, but we made it. She
worked and I wrote discourses on Eckankar. The
next year [1965?] we moved from San Francisco
to San Diego, where Gail went to work in a small
city library. Gail now [1965?] believed that it was
time for me to bring out ECK, just as the ECK
masters had been telling me. I had promised
Gail that she might go back to college and
complete her education when I went to ECK
full-time, so she is a student [1968?] once
again.' "
[IN MY SOUL I AM FREE (ISBN 0-914766-11-2),
by Brad Steiger (Copyright 1968?), p. 66 -
my brackets -check dates for accuracy]
1965
"Last" Letter to Gail: March 16th, 1965 - See:
Letters to Gail, Volume III, p. 266.
1967
"Copyright 1967 (ISBN: 0-914766-51-1): The Tiger's Fang,
by Paul Twitchell. 2nd Printing: 1968. 3rd Printing: 1972.
4th Printing: 1974. 5th Printing: 1975. 6th Printing: 1977.
7th Printing: 1978. 8th Printing: 1979."
1968
"Copyright 1968: The Key to ECKANKAR, by Paul
Twitchell. 4th Printing: 1985."
1969
"Copyright 1969: The Flute of God, by Paul Twitchell.
Tenth Printing: 1988."
"Copyright 1969: ECKANKAR, The Key to Secret
Worlds, by Paul Twitchell. Second Edition 1987,
3rd printing 2001."
1970
"Copyright 1970: The Drums of ECK, by Paul
Twitchell. 2nd Printing: 1972. 3rd Printing: 1975.
4th Printing: 1978."
"Copyright 1970: Stranger by the River, by Paul
Twitchell. 3rd Edition: 1987."
"Copyright 1970: Dialogues With The Master,
by Paul Twitchell. 9th Printing: 1987."
"Copyright 1970: The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad,
Book One, by Paul Twitchell. Second Edition:
1987. Third Printing: 1997."
1971
"Original copyright 1971: The Far Country, by
Paul Twitchell. Copyright transferred to
ECKANKAR in 1982. Eighth Printing: 1983."
"Copyright 1971: The Spiritual Notebook, by
Paul Twitchell. Copyright transferred to
ECKANKAR in 1979. 10th Printing: 1983."
"Copyright 1971: The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad,
Book Two, by Paul Twitchell. Second Edition:
1988."
1972
"Copyright 1972: The ECK-Vidya, Ancient Science
of Prophecy, by Paul Twitchell [Died: 1971].
Copyright 1972 [First Printing] by Gail Twitchell.
Sixth Printing: 1982."
1973
"Copyright 1973: ECKANKAR Dictionary, by
Paul Twitchell [Died: 1971]. 6th Printing: 1986."
"Copyright 1973: Letters to Gail, Volume I,
by Paul Twitchell [Died: 1971]. 5th Printing: 1983."
1974
"Copyright 1974: The Talons Of Time, by Paul
Twitchell [Died:1971]. 3rd Printing: 1987."
1975
"ECKANKAR: ILLUMINATED WAY LETTERS
1966-1971, by Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975
by Gail Twitchell Gross)"
"ECKANKAR, Compiled Writings, Vol. 1, by
Paul Twitchell (Copyright 1975 by Gail T. Gross)"
1977
"Copyright 1977: Letters to Gail, Volume II, by
Paul Twitchell [d.1971]. 4th Printing: 1986."
1980
"Copyright 1980: The Wind of Change, by Harold
Klemp. Fourth Printing: 1987."
1990
"Copyright 1990: Letters to Gail, Volume III, by
Paul Twitchell [d. 1971]."
*********
Sorry for the length, typos, and/or any incorrect
data. However, perhaps some of this information
can be used for future reference.
Etznab
Sean
> On Aug 1, 3:42 pm, "Sean" <huca...@blah.com> wrote:
>> "Rich" <deadm...@inorbit.com> wrote in message
>
> Sean,
>
> Following are some bits of timeline trivia I compiled
> for the time period in question (along with some other
> trivia, etc.), and for later dates:
>
Hi Mr Etznab, ;-)
Thanks for that.
I think it was about 3 years ago that I found your "timeline" website whilst
doing some searches. I saved many pages and put it into my favourites more
than once. I thought it was excellent, then and now. Great idea, and I
really liked the 'choices' of the various things and subject matters that
were included. Made me smile.
So it is a pleasure to finally meet 'cyberly' the author & master compliler
of that website information! <smile>
Well done and much appreciated. I found your site very useful ... and
accurate too boot! A rarity in cyberspace that's for sure. A great reference
site. Keep it up mate. I admire your approach and hard work immensely. ;-)
cheers SEAN
Doug
You might want to add the book, Introduction to ECKANKAR, to your
list. Paul had this first published in 1966. It was a 60 page booklet,
really, which was incorporated later into the Compiled Writings.
This was the only book Paul had available until the Tiger's Fang. in
1967. But sales really started picking up in 1968 after Brad Steiger's
book was published.
I thought you might want to add this to your list.
The new book has a lot of new information about Paul's earlier life.
Doug.
> [Based on: Article (Struggle for mastership) @http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/writings.html]
>
> 1956
>
> "Paul [Paul Twitchell] wrote Dialogues With The Master
> around 1956, from the references I have seen, but didn't
> publish it until 1970. Paul also wrote The Flute of God in
> 1959, but didn't put it into print until 1966, in the Orion
> Magazine series. This pattern is similar to Paul's writing
> of The Far Country in 1963, which wasn't published until
> 1970."
>
> [Based on: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 6]
>
> "[....] David writes [should be illustrated in italics]:
>
> It was around this time (1956/1957) that Twitchell told
> Betty Shifflet and Wave Sanderson (both initiates of Kirpal
> Singh) at a dinner date that Master Kirpal Singh had appeared
> in his Nuri Sarup (light body) over the weekend and dictated
> some of the book to him. In this regard, Kirpal Singh comments:
>
> [end italics text]
>
> "Paul Twitchell used to write to me every week, 'Master
> came and sat down on the chair and dictated his teachings
> to me.' He published them in the Tiger's Fang." [....]"
>
> [http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch._Two.htm]
>
> "In late 1956 or early 1957 Paul had the experience
> that is recorded in The Tiger's Fang. [....]"
>
> [Based on: Article (Touching the Face of God) @http://www.eckankar.org/Masters/Peddar/hisStory.html#trail]
> up ...
>
> read more ยป
Etznab
>
> read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
Thanks for sharing that about the book
Introduction to Eckankar published in 1966.
I don't believe that I had such information
up until the time you mentioned it.
I was familiar with Key to Eckankar as
one of the earlier books, and that one was
published in 1968.
Introduction to Eckankar? I want to tell
myself that I've seen that book, but I am
not absolutely sure at this point. Maybe
its the name for a title by the same name
that I'm thinking of.
Rebazar Tarzs, I do believe, did appear
in the book Key to Eckankar. I don't know
that the word Mahanta did.
In the book, Introduction to Eckankar,
(published in 1966) can you (or anyone
who has read it) tell me if Rebazar Tarzs
or the word Mahanta was illustrated in it?
I've got so many books in this room
wanting for shelf space, and I really do
hope to find the one that you mentioned.
Thanks again for mentioning that one.
It rings a bell, but I don't know that I have
it. Neither was it (until now) recorded on
my timeline.
Etznab
Doug
Rebazar is mentioned in many of the articles in Introduction to
ECKANKAR, but no illustrations of him.
I don't see any mention of the term, Mahanta. I believe that Paul
first introduced the term, Mahanta, in January 1969.
The booklet is composed of about a dozen short articles, most of which
had been published beforehand.
Doug.
Etznab
>
> read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
Oh, OK. Thanks Doug - for sharing that.
Somehow I think I can remember seeing
that book, although I can't locate it. It helps
that you shared what you know about it.
Etznab
Etznab
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
In a very recent book about Eck Masters (think it's
called: Those Wonderful Eck Masters). There is one
whole chapter devoted to Rebazar Tarzs.
In effect (according to my understanding of it) it gave
the impression that Rebazar Tarzs is still living in the
same body that he occupied so many years ago when
he was the Living Eck Master (during the Middle Ages?)
The chapter also mentions the date when he was
born and the name of the place where he was born.
Additionally it talked about how Rebazar was the
"Torch Bearer" that took the "Rod of Eck" at the time
between one Living Eck Master and another, until
October 22nd when it would be passed to the next
Master. These are my quotation marks and none of
this is necessarily the same words from the book.
However, they should be sufficient words, IMO, to
explain what (in effect) was said about this one Eck
Master.
It also reinforces my contention that Rebazar
Tarzs stepped in as Living Eck Master between
the time of Darwin Gross and Harold Klemp. At
least this is the "paradigm" that I am looking at
and my understanding of what is said in the outer
Eck teachings on this matter.
There are several reasons that I am looking for
"actual history" for Rebazar Tarzs, and it is mostly
for clarity because I have heard so many different
opinions (dogma) and beliefs.
You mentioned something about Paul Twitchell
being inspired. Something to that effect. Another
time you asked if I really thought Paul Twitchell
was communicating with Rebazar Tarzs in the
book Stranger by the River. It was something
along those lines, but I would have to find the
thread and post in order to get your exact
meaning. It seemed at the time, however,
that you were asking if I really believed
Rebazar Tarzs was a real person there
in the flesh talking with Paul beside a
river in India. Yes I did, Doug.
Etznab
Etznab
> > > experiences he is describing here that are much subtler than they
> > > might seem. So, these are his spiritual revelations that he is
> > > recording. In other words, these words are really his words and in our
> > > modern day we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
> > > credit to the innerMaster.
>
> > > See what I mean?
>
> > > Doug.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Doug,
>
> > OK, to be fair, I can see what you mean, generally.
>
> > This is different, however, from what appears to be
> > the recorded Eckankar history for an EckMasterwith
> > an actual LIVING physical body to match.
>
> > In my own research I have considered many of the
> > same perspectives which you illustrated for Rebazar
> > Tarzs. However, I still see a paradox and are looking
> > still for the actual context of "real" in connection with
> > Rebazar Tarzs.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
I still haven't found the message where I thought
you asked whether I believed Rebazar Tarzs was
real (or really there, whatever) according to some
dialogue between them (Paul & Rebazar) illustrated
in one of the books. I thought it was Stranger by
the River, but I am not sure (don't remember the
specifics). It could be in this thread somewhere,
though I want to say it was probably a couple
months back. Truth is, I can't remember. So, in
this case I'm sorry to have mentioned it without
being able to quote the details.
From the "Show quoted text -" at top of this
what I am responding to now, you wrote:
"I see the point you are making, but it doesn't
fit for me, since Paul was writing about spiritual
experiences. It is you (as others before you) who
are trying to treat Rebazar as something historical
and physical."
My question is "Do you believe the illustrated
section about Rebazar Tarzs in the book Those
Wonderful Eck Masters tried to treat Rebazar
Tarzs as historical and physical?
There is the question in that book about who
is Rebazar Tarzs. It mentions the date he was
born, the place where he was born, that he is
still living in the same body, and that he steps
in between one Living Eck Master and another.
Again, I have to ask if the most recent book
about Rebazar Tarzs tries to treat him as real
and historical. Not to mention, physical.
Some of the language used to describe this
appears to be by the authors and not quotes
by Paul. I will have to give the benefit of the
doubt though. If this description of Rebazar
were based on what Paul said, then I want to
ask myself what are the chances it amounts
to "hand-me-down information," dogma, even
opinion?
From the same article (see quoted text)
you wrote:
"Yet, you think it is important to find physical
records. I don't see why.
"I can see that someone put this bug in your
ear and you are now accepting it, but why don't
you just take the bug out? Why are you keeping
it in your ear? What's the point?"
Well, the point is that I am attempting to
establish the actual historical "context" for
Rebazar Tarzs.
What is the point? The point is that I
have between a word dictionary and a
world history timeline seen so much
myth, legend, fable and fiction instead
of fact that it is sickening!
If all of history were clarified into the
proper "context" as to whether it were
opinion, vs. actual fact this would give
the reader freedom of choice what to
and what not to believe.
What I am saying is that when it is
spelled out that history happened in
such and such a way, and when the
form of illustration presents it as the
actual fact, then people don't have
the choice to think differently, or to
look for alternative accounts unless
they risk going against the grain of
established popular history and the
consequences that could follow.
My point is that if somebody is
handing me dogma, opinion, myth,
legend, fable or even fiction then
I think they should do me the favor
and clarify it in that context. In
other words, if the actual truth is
not known - or can't be shown,
for whatever reason - then admit
it and spell it out like that. This
way I know that I am free to keep
on searching and that I don't need
to depend on others to provide the
facts as if nothing more can be
learned than their own limited
understanding and illustrations.
Harold Klemp does in one
instance say something like
"according to Eck Legend"
(don't know if exact quotes -
in that case they are my
quotes) when giving data
about Rebazar Tarzs. And
I admire that he did that.
(If he, in fact, were the
author of those words.
I assume it was he.)
Etznab
Etznab
> > > > > experiences he is describing here that are much subtler than they
> > > > > might seem. So, these are his spiritual revelations that he is
> > > > > recording. In other words, these words are really his words and in our
> > > > > modern day we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
> > > > > credit to the innerMaster.
>
> > > > > See what I mean?
>
> > > > > Doug.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Doug,
>
> > > > OK, to be fair, I can see what you mean, generally.
>
> > > > This is different, however, from what appears to be
> > > > the recorded Eckankar history for an EckMasterwith
> > > > an actual LIVING physical body to match.
>
> > > > In my own research I have considered many of the
> > > > same perspectives which you illustrated for Rebazar
> > > > Tarzs. However, I still see a paradox and are looking
> > > > still for the actual context of "real" in connection with
> > > > Rebazar Tarzs.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
You wrote:
"As far as I know, all of Paul's experiences with
Rebazar were spiritual encounters. If this is true,
where does this physical, historical aspect of
Rebazar enter into it?"
In the book, Those Wonderful ECk Masters.
Chapter on Rebazar Tarzs, for one. IMO.
Etznab
Doug
Okay, I see where you're coming from.
I haven't read the new book you are referring to, so I hadn't heard
about someone giving out the date and year and location of Rebazar's
birth. Did they say where this information came from? Was this from an
inner source or an outer source?
If from an outer source, then it should be verifiable. If from an
inner source, then this means it came out of an inner experience.
I agree it is nice to know exactly what all of this means and it would
be nice to know Paul's history better.
For me, the answer is simply that I don't know any more about the
outer history of Rebazar and I have never seen any way of verifying
who Rebazar is except through inner experience.
So, I don't know how else to help you on this search. If you turn up
anything interesting, I would love to know about it.
Doug.
Etznab
Doug,
Would like to try and answer a question from your
response.
"Did they say where this information came from?
Was this from an inner source or an outer source?"
My impression was that "this" was from Harold
Klemp, the Mahanta, the Living Eck Master giving
an account about "who is" Rebazar Tarzs.
You asked: "Was this from an inner source or
an outer source?"
Doug. What does that have to do with whether
or not a person was born and living in a physical
body on planet Earth now?
Do you imagine that the reference was for a
Rebazar Tarzs living on some planet Earth on
the inner? In some kind of parallel dimension?
(I'm kidding.)
My understanding was that the name for his
birth place was a location on Earth.
I don't believe this is new information.
Etznab
Etznab
> > > experiences he is describing here that are much subtler than they
> > > might seem. So, these are his spiritual revelations that he is
> > > recording. In other words, these words are really his words and in our
> > > modern day we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
> > > credit to the inner Master.
>
> > > See what I mean?
>
> > > Doug.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Doug,
>
> > comments about them.
>
> > "This paradox, for me, disappears once I realize
> > that the real author is Paul. He is not just recording,
> > he is writing."
>
> > Rebazar Tarzs? Speaking to him? Visiting in
> > his flesh body Paul Twitchell in his apartment?
>
> seeing Paul change his attribution from saying it was Kirpal to saying
> it was Rebazar in his writings.
>
> That was how I understood the issue you were explaining. That is what
> I was responding to.
>
> My point is that the problem goes away once we realize that everything
> Paul wrote were his words. He was writing it. These were not the words
> of Rebazar or Kirpal. They were his words.
>
> So, I'm not sure I follow how this has anything to do with Paul
> witnessing the physical body of Rebazar and speaking with him.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > you to do something or create something. In our
> > modern world, the creator takes full credit for the
> > creation. But we know that every author and artist
> > has been helped and influenced by many inner and
> > outer sources."
>
> > these are inner experiences he is describing here that
> > are much subtler than they might seem. So, these are
> > his spiritual revelations that he is recording. In other words,
> > these words are really his words and in our modern day
> > we would give him all the credit. But he chose to give
> Doesn't it?
>
> Doug.
>
>
>
>
>
> > In my opinion.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Doug,
I was eight years old in 1971 when Paul Twitchell died.
It was not until about 15 years later (around 1986) when
I first first found an ECK Center and started reading many
Eckankar books. I was living in Tacoma Washington at
the time.
However, in your book (The Whole Truth) you mention
having worked at Eckankar's headquarters "from the
early to late 1970s." That you were the ninth employee
in 1973.
This year in a response to one of my posts you wrote:
"I've heard people say this before about Rebazar stepping
in after Paul died, but quite frankly this just seems to be a
myth stated by those who didn't know how else to explain
that period of time. I offer a different explanation in my book."
My question is "Do you know who stated what (to you)
seems to be a myth? Do you know who wrote the article
"Paulji Translates"?
Etznab
Etznab
>
> > This is different, however, from what appears to be
> > the recorded Eckankar history for an Eck Master with
> > an actual LIVING physical body to match.
>
> > In my own research I have considered many of the
> > same perspectives which you illustrated for Rebazar
> > Tarzs. However, I still see a paradox and are looking
> > still for the actual context of "real" in connection with
> > Rebazar Tarzs.
>
> accepting it, but why don't you just take thebugout? Why are you
> keeping it inyourear? What's the point?
>
> Doug.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Etznab- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
<snip>
I see the point you are making, but it doesn't fit for me, since Paul
was writing about spiritual experiences. It is you (as others before
you) who are trying to treat Rebazar as something historical and
physical.
Paul also wrote about God. Does this mean that you need to find
historical records of God, or Paul's writings about God are
meaningless?
As Paul said many times, he was writing in the field of
consciousness.
You won't find any physical records of consciousness. Scientists even
after hundreds of years have not yet figured out how to measure or
detect consciousness, so you certainly aren't going to find any
physical records of it. But this doesn't mean we can't talk about it
or write about it. It doesn't mean consciousness isn't real.
Yet, you think it is important to find physical records. I don't see
why.
I can see that someone put this bug in your ear and you are now
accepting it, but why don't you just take the bug out? Why are you
keeping it in your ear? What's the point?
Doug.
<snip>
You can see that someone put a bug in my ear?
I think that you were, and that you are now, Doug,
closer to more of the people who wrote, or edited
much of the Eckankar history that I myself didn't
even begin to read about until around 1986-1987.
Maybe I would like to know about the physical
records more. And about the history aside from
whether or not actually true.
I like to study history and how it's presented
over time. Especially changes that are made
and why. In my opinion, it helps to teach me
about the people who are writing it, along with
the culture and the times in which they live, etc.
This is also a practicle way, IMO, for getting to
know what my ancestors actually knew, and
also a way for looking at what they did not so
much know, but rather what they based on
legend, myth and stories, etc., handed down
over time.
Etznab
Etznab
>
> 1956
>
> "Paul [Paul Twitchell] wrote Dialogues With The Master
> around 1956, from the references I have seen, but didn't
> publish it until 1970. Paul also wrote The Flute of God in
> 1959, but didn't put it into print until 1966, in the Orion
> Magazine series. This pattern is similar to Paul's writing
> of The Far Country in 1963, which wasn't published until
> 1970."
>
> [Based on: Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap. 6]
>
> "[....] David writes [should be illustrated in italics]:
>
> It was around this time (1956/1957) that Twitchell told
> Betty Shifflet and Wave Sanderson (both initiates of Kirpal
> Singh) at a dinner date that Master Kirpal Singh had appeared
> in his Nuri Sarup (light body) over the weekend and dictated
> some of the book to him. In this regard, Kirpal Singh comments:
>
> [end italics text]
>
> "Paul Twitchell used to write to me every week, 'Master
> came and sat down on the chair and dictated his teachings
> to me.' He published them in the Tiger's Fang." [....]"
>
> [http://www.littleknownpubs.com/Dialog_Ch._Two.htm]
>
> "In late 1956 or early 1957 Paul had the experience
> that is recorded in The Tiger's Fang. [....]"
>
>
> read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
One small correction to the list of books.
I had previously listed the original copyright date
for The Far Country as 1971. This is the information
illustrated in the 8th Printing, 1983 version. Here the
copyright is attributed to Eckankar.
Be that as it may, the 3rd printing, 1972 version
of The Far Country illustrates a 1970 "Copyright",
by Paul Twitchell. The word "Copyright" here in this
case was illustrated in italics.
So, the correction is that I am not sure about
the actual copyright date for The Far Country.
Whether it was 1970 or 1971. For that matter,
whether the book was actually published before
or after Paul Translated. My educated guess
would be that it came out before he died.
Does anybody know exactly when the actual
The Far Country was first published? Day, month,
or year? I am not sure what the reference to a
1970 "Copyright" is about.
Etznab
Sean
Location and Use of the Card Catalog
The Copyright Card Catalog is located on the fourth floor (LM-459) of the
James Madison Memorial Building of the Library of Congress. The public may
use the catalog, which is staffed by a Copyright Office employee, between
8:30 am and 5:00 pm eastern time, Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. A researcher should initially request Circular 22, How to
Investigate the Copyright Status of a Work, from the bibliographer.
Alternatively, a researcher may ask the Copyright Office to conduct a search
of the copyright records. Upon payment of a fee* per hour, the Office will
conduct a search and provide a factual, noninterpretive report. These
searches may be initiated by consulting the bibliographer on duty, using the
online Search Request Estimate form on the Copyright Office website at
www.copyright.gov/forms/search_estimate.html , or writing to the Office at:
Library of Congress
Copyright Office
Reference and Bibliography Section
101 Independence Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20559-6000
Fax: (202) 252-3485
Tel: (202) 707-6850
Searches will be done in turn as received.
All remittances should be in the form of drafts (that is, checks, money
orders, or bank drafts) payable to Register of Copyrights. Do not send cash.
Drafts must be redeemable without service or exchange fee through a U.S.
institution, must be payable in U.S. dollars, and must be imprinted with
American Banking Association routing numbers.
*NOTE: Copyright Office fees are subject to change. For current fees, please
check the Copyright Office website, write the Copyright Office, or call
(202) 707-3000.
from http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ23.html#location
--------------------------------------
This issue has come up before etznab, To get such info prior to 1978 one
needed to pay a fee to extract the info, or go to the Office itself.
David Lane said that he had requested a search done for "The Path of the
Masters" a cpl years ago, but as yet we have no reply from him here.
That issue had to do with when The Far Country was published and registered,
was TPOTM still covered by US copyright, or, had it actually expired.
cheers
Doug
Etznab,
The Far Country was first published in 1970. I have a first edition
copy, plus I remember seeing notices when it came out in The Mystic
World in 1970.
The Far Country went into a second printing in 1971, and a third
printing in 1972. It was a fairly popular book.
I don't know the exact month in 1970. I'd have to dig through my
archives to find that, but I know it was in 1970.
Doug.
Doug
Etznab,
No, I don't know.
I wouldn't be surprised if Patti had written this, as you suggested,
since she was the one laying out The Mystic World back then. But I
don't know. One of these days if I have a chance, I will ask her.
I'm not sure who started this idea. I know that Paul never mentioned
anything about it. I believe that Darwin also said something along
these lines. However, as you may have seen in my book, I believe it is
not uncommon for there to be a period of time after one Master leaves
and the next Master becomes revealed. That doesn't mean there is no
Master, it just means that the next Master does not always become
known right away.
Doug.
Etznab
Doug,
Thanks for confirming that, Doug. I also discovered the second
printing was 1971.
Took the time to read it through from cover to cover recently. I
would say that book, along with L.T.G. (Vol. One & Two) helped
me to see more about where you might have been coming from,
in your own book.
Haven't started on L.T.G. Vol. Three yet, but I did take time to
skim through it a bit (not that I haven't ever read it before). I was
somewhat struck by the number of times that the name Sudar
Singh appeared (a little thrown off) and the way Paul spoke to
Gail about him. In some instances, it sounded to me like this
was somebody contemporary with them. Someone still living.
I wonderd if it were actually Kirpal Singh being referred to.
At any rate, guess I'll have to go on what else I got out of it.
I think these L.T.G. volumes are great reference, since they
cover the years just prior to Paul Twitchell becoming a "Living
Eck Master" of Eckankar.
Etznab
Doug
Etznab,
I know you are trying to keep some of this information for your time-
line, so I thought I would mention that as I was recently going
through my old Mystic Worlds to help someone else track down some
information, I noticed that Stranger By the River was published around
mid-1969. That surprised me to see it for sale that early.
I went back to my copies of Stranger by the River and they all say
1970 as the first published date.
So, I thought you'd be interested to see that it was actually
published in 1969. The Anitya was also published later in 1969.
In 1970, The Way of Dharma, The Drums of ECK, Dialogues With the
Master, The Far Country and The Flute of God were all published.
The Mystic World said that the first Shariyat was going to be
available at the World Wide seminar that year, but I don't know if it
came out in time or not. Shariyat Book I shows 1971 as a first
publication date.
I thought you'd find this of interest.
Doug.
Etznab
Doug,
Thanks for the clarification and information.
I also read recently something about Eckankar and
non-profit status in 1969. I can't remember if Harold
wrote that it went non-profit or that Paul's lawyers had
urged him to do it then. (I want to say that is when it
went non-profit. Not sure.).
With the exception of L.T.G. (1st letter), I believe it
was 1969 when the "MAHANTA" term was published
as well. I'll have to check the accuracy of that.
Etznab
Rich
"Doug" <d.ma...@littleknownpubs.com> wrote
Etznab,
I know you are trying to keep some of this information for your time-
line, so I thought I would mention that as I was recently going
through my old Mystic Worlds to help someone else track down some
information, I noticed that Stranger By the River was published around
mid-1969. That surprised me to see it for sale that early.
I went back to my copies of Stranger by the River and they all say
1970 as the first published date.
So, I thought you'd be interested to see that it was actually
published in 1969. The Anitya was also published later in 1969.
In 1970, The Way of Dharma, The Drums of ECK, Dialogues With the
Master, The Far Country and The Flute of God were all published.
The Mystic World said that the first Shariyat was going to be
available at the World Wide seminar that year, but I don't know if it
came out in time or not. Shariyat Book I shows 1971 as a first
publication date.
I thought you'd find this of interest.
Doug.
Rich:
FWIW I have many first releases.
My Stranger by the River that says (c)1969 By
The Illuminated Way Press
A SKS I that I have says "Copyright 1970 by Paul Twitchell"
A SKS II "Copyright 1971 by Paul Twitchell".
Booklets:
Introduction to Eckankar 1966
All About ECK 1968
The Key to Eckankakr 1968
What a tremendous volume of writing he put out in a short time.
I remember how much excitement there was as each new book was released. I'd
go to Phil and Dorothy Liggett's house outside of Chicago. Their basement
was the 'Midwest Eckankar Center' where books could be bought as they were
newly delivered. I did a lot of reading in those early years, gobbled
everything up.
Dennis
>> As Paul said many times, he was writing in the field of consciousness.
>> You won't find any physical records of consciousness. Scientists even
>> after hundreds of years have not yet figured out how to measure or
>> detect consciousness, so you certainly aren't going to find any
>> physical records of it. But this doesn't mean we can't talk about it
>> or write about it. It doesn't mean consciousness isn't real.
"I think, therefore, I am."
Seriously, would not a good measure of consciousness lie in an IQ test; a
psychometric test of intelligence?
> Maybe I would like to know about the physical
> records more. And about the history aside from
> whether or not actually true.
The problem is, of course, that Paul originally wrote about Kirpal Singh,
and then later, using the exact same wording, stated that it came from
Rebazar. It's the very physical records themselves that are so damning.
Which is the truth? Rebazar who has no physical evidence to support his
existence, or Kirpal who was a teacher to millions?
Each in the honesty of their own heart, must draw their own conclusions.
Etznab
> "Etznab" <etz...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> On Jul 28, 5:26 pm, Etznab <etz...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
>
>
> >>
> >> As far as I know, all of Paul's experiences with Rebazar were
> >> spiritual encounters. If this is true, where does this physical,
> >> historical aspect of Rebazar enter into it?
> >>
> >> You tell me.
> >>
> >> - Show quoted text -
> >
> >
> > Good response Doug. "Spiritual" experiences. Yes,
> > I agree that appeaars to make more sense. Thanks.
> >
> > Etznab
> >
>
>
> Hi Etznab,
>
> I have enjoyed reading your questions, queries and comments here, and I'm
> sure others have as well.
>
> fwiw I spent a bit of time last year going thru an old book, Dialogues With
> the Master, which I hadn't read before. I found it very helpful in various
> ways. A few things came to mind as you've gone thru your dialogue with doug.
> anyway, I'd like to quote a few things from that book which seemed relevant,
> at least to me.
> from the Introduction:
> Dialogues With the Master are a series of spiritual discourses which were
> taken down when Rebazar Tarzs, the ageless emissary for ECKANKAR in the
> world today, appeared to me nightly in his light body for practically one
> year and dictated them.
>
> From the back cover:
> The contents of this book was the first real study of the works of ECKANKAR
> which I did a number of years ago.
>
> [ written circa 1956, published 1970 ]
>
> The spiritual experiences which he made possible for me and the teachings
> were a painful growth but nevertheless it was all necessary.
>
> --
> The purpose of putting this manuscript into book form, according to Rebazar
> tarzs, was to advance the cause of ECKANKAR in this world, to bring it out
> of the invisible worlds, where it was known only to a few, so that anyone
> could have access to eternal light and truths.
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> from the first page ...:
>
> RT: I want you to take down the following words as part of a discourse to
> give the world. You will act as a channel for this message. Are you ready?
>
> Man is an individual being. Each person is a cosmic world unto himself, and
> therefore, must consider himself in two lights: his relationship to the
> outer world, commonly called the objective; and his relationship to the
> inner world, known as the subjective.
>
> Because man is complex and deeply involved in his cosmic mechanics, it is a
> psychological fact that he must go deep into his nature to analyze himself
> through introspection and spiritual techniques.
> ---
> and ...
>
> The mind, which is under the influence of the senses, rules our outer lives
> in an egotistical way. But man, directed by the Light of Soul, gives us a
> life of joyous well-being. This is a spiritual truth, for the Soul recieves
> Its guidance from God, the All-Knowing!.
>
> and ...
>
> The living ECK Master is a messenger of God. He simplifies all introspective
> techniques and puts the spiritual power at work in our lives and directs the
> mind to the Soul.
>
>
> FROM page 214
>
> "Illusion or maya is the cunning cloud of glamour [ also known as vanity ]
> which the negative power has set to trap Soul and hold it prisoner in his
> empire. The world of illusion will have a downward pull on the senses of
> Soul to enslave it. This is all under the law of karma or cause and effect.
>
> "All you do in this world with physical action is the indifferent pure
> phenomenal reflexes of the ECK transcendential essence; that is the self not
> only of yourself but of all things. Do you understand this?
>
> "The one and only self is made to seem multiple by the deluding force of
> your own inborn ignorance.
>
> "Indeed, in highest truth, an elephant is non-real. Nevertheless, you and I
> are as non-real as that elephant. Everything is God, the infinite, pure and
> real, boundless and beyond the pairs of opposities, devoid of
> differentiating qualities.
>
> "This is the final meaning of all wisdom."
> -------------------------------
>
> from page 215
>
> "God is the sole reality. That divine one may be found in everything,
> unaffected by suffering or any fault. Everyone, including you and me is ITS
> abode, every form is an obscuring figuration within that acting activator we
> call the ECK.
> -----
>
> "The object of showing you the illusion of life is to give you the
> difference between the universal principles and limited knowledge.
>
> "The flow of the God-power is a tide and ebb flow. It operates in both
> directions. If you perceive this great truth you are one with the spirit.
> You will never recognise your power, force, life or every one as being
> separate from the source of God's attribute. You are never apart from it in
> thought and action. You recognise no barriers to the illimitability of your
> supply. While cognizant of your individuality, you do not concieve of
> yourself as a unit and act in accord with that acceptance.
>
> "Man is a center, the center in the body of God. Where is the center?
> Everywhere. So as long as you continue to think in unity the center
> projected into a line of extension is connected with the primal power. "
>
> ---------
>
> "Illusion springs from false beliefs, thoughts, ideas, fertilized by the
> emotions and made so real the effects produced are factual to your man's
> limited interpretation. That emotions play a large part in creating a belief
> in these three illusions is contributtory to the idea the great illusion is
> factual."
> \
> end quotes
> ---------------------------
>
> thanks sean
From the back cover of Dialogues With The Master, by Paul Twitchell, Copyright 1970, Eighth Printing 1983.
"The purpose of putting this manuscript into book form, according to Rebazar
Tarzs, was to advance the cause of ECKANKAR in this world, to bring it out
of the invisible worlds, where it was known only to a few, so that anyone
could have access to eternal light and truths."
Can anybody determine where in the book Rebazar Tarzs said something like that? I don't have an online copy, so I can't go and do a quick keyword search.
Earlier I tried doing a Google search, using keywords "bring it out of the invisible" and found the following quote:
11. The law is that Thought is an active vital form of dynamic energy which has the power to correlate with its object and bring it out of the invisible substance from which all things are created into the visible or objective world. This is the law by which, and through which, all things come into manifestation; it is the Master Key by which you are admitted into the Secret Place of the Most High and are "given dominion over all things." With an understanding of this law you may "decree a thing and it shall be established unto thee."
http://www.sacred-texts.com/nth/mks/mks13.htm
That was just a little curious ... so I checked something. Evidently, there are similarities between Rebazar Tarzs and part of that book by Haanel. Example:
C.H.
17. The law is, that thought will correlate with its object and bring forth in the material world the correspondence of the thing thought or produced in the mental world. We then discern the absolute necessity of seeing that every thought has the inherent germ of truth in order that the law of growth will bring into manifestation good, for good alone can confer any permanent power.
18. The principle which gives the thought the dynamic power to correlate with its object, and therefore to master every adverse human experience, is the law of attraction, which is another name for love. This is an eternal and fundamental principle, inherent in all things, in every system of Philosophy, in every Religion and in every Science. There is no getting away from the law of love. It is feeling that imparts vitality to thought. Feeling is desire, and desire is love. Thought impregnated with love becomes invincible.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/nth/mks/mks15.htm
R.T.
"Simplified, the mechanics of love is this: Thought is a channel of emotions and is carried by the law of vibration, the same as light or electricity. It is given vitality by the emotions through the law of love; it takes form and expression by the law of growth; it is a product of Soul, and hence it is divine, spiritual and creative in nature.
"Now I tell you this. That the principle which gives thought the dynamic power to correlate with its object, and therefore to master every adverse human experience, is love. This is an eternal and fundamental principle, inherent in all things, in every system of philosophy, in every religion, and in every science. There is no getting away from love. It is feeling that imparts vitality to thought. Feeling is desire and desire is love.
"If you are impregnated with love you become invincible."
[Rebazar Tarzs in Dialogues With The Master, by Paul Twitchell, Ninth Printing - 1987, p. 140 [THE DESIRE OF SOUL]
Still looking for where Rebazar Tarzs - in DWTM - talked about Eckankar in the context of "to bring it out of the invisible worlds".
Back in 1969 when Paul Twitchell was asked where he got information for the Shariyat ... I believe his answer was along the lines of:
"I translate it out of the invisible to you." - Audio cassette 4106 - side two
[See: 3rd Worldwide Seminar, Los Angeles, CA - October 30th-November 2nd, 1969: Audio cassette 4106 (Copyright 1975) - Side One: "The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad" Plus some questions and answers / Side Two: "The Way of the Initiate". - The above excerpt applies to side two.]
That was 1969, mind you. And when Dialogues With The Master came out in 1970 - at least the 1983 version - it had on the back cover:
"The purpose of putting this manuscript into book form, according to Rebazar
Tarzs, was to advance the cause of ECKANKAR in this world, to bring it out
of the invisible worlds, where it was known only to a few, so that anyone
could have access to eternal light and truths."
Taking a closer look at that quote, I wonder specifically ... What was being brought out of the invisible? The reason I ask is on account of how much similar (and word for word) material appears after comparing Rebazar Tarzs and Charles Haanel. Here is a reference to Haanel's book:
The Master Key System, by Charles F. Haanel, [1919], at sacred-texts.com. The earliest date for Dialogues With The Master (the manuscript) that I know of is 1956.
Let me just say this ... if Paul Twitchell took words out of books IN THE PHYSICAL (verbatim in some places and paraphrased in others) and changed the author's name to that of an Eck Master ... Does that constitute OUT OF THE INVISIBLE? And / or if he did something similar for The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad?
Here is another way of putting it. If I plagiarize and paraphrase another person's work ... use the exact same words in some places, and change them slightly in others ... if I claim that the information came to me from somebody else ... and from the invisible ... Does that mean I am free to do this with any other person's written works? or the published written teachings from other religions?
It seems to be a habit now where so many alleged masters are claiming Rebazar Tarzs as a Guru / Master belonging to their own unique spiritual paths. It is not only Eckankar, but (I believe) A.T.O.M., Dhunami and Akatha as well - to name just a few. And then there is Duane Heppner's book The Adventures of Rebazar Tarzs: The Greatest Love Story Ever (Google eBook)
I want to ask: Is all of this coming out of the invisible? Or is it really coming out of books ... where people just decided to change a few things?
Etznab
And the writings of other paths similar with, but getting published after Eckankar in 1965? Can it be said those are coming from, or being translated from out of the invisible too?
These are questions. Not statements.