Re: Sailing the cyber seas searching for Sudar Singhs - Teaser
Doug
> Sailing the cyber seas searching for Sudar Singhs - Teaser
>
> Hiya all,
>
> I feel it is time for a change of pace. :)
>
> I started with this Post Title back in early January. I don;t know how
> your year is going, but has been pretty full on. Whilst I have been
> able to pull a lot together on this little essay, it is still a ways
> from being completed.
>
> I just don't see the point of putting out another thread of
> unanswerable questions. That Merry Go Round has some very worn out
> bearings imho. <wink> So this is but a teaser, because i have so much
> on my plate at present to deal with I know I am not going to get this
> item completed and ready for a real discussion in February as I had
> hoped.
>
> You see, one of the things I feel about Paul is that he was very much
> the "trickster" .. and in a very good way overall. Sure there are some
> odd twists and turns in how Paul presented things way back 45 to 40
> years ago now. That's a long time yeah?
>
> But this I know, whilst much may not line up squarely with all the
> ducks in a row so it's al nice and simple and easy .. this wasn't
> really Paul's way it seems. I have always wondered why he called
> Eckankar the "easy way" because in so many respects, it is far from
> easy at times, right? <smile>
>
> My gut feeling has been for a very long time now is that when it comes
> to Sudar Singh, in his own special and unique way, I believe Paul was
> very much speaking "truth". So when the book, Those Wonderful ECK
> Masters came out, I was genuinely surprised to see that Sudar Singh
> was still a missing mystery.
>
> What's a bigger mystery to me is the reactions that some people get
> here when raising this issue, as if the default position must always
> be assumed in the negative that one believes that Sudar Singh was just
> a cover, and not really what Paul painted "him" to be. And yet then
> again I also have a very strong feeling that at the same time, there
> are multiple teachers that Paul bundled under this name over the years
> before he departed.
>
> This is where the notion i raised last year about "framing" comes into
> play. On a.r.e., as soon as someone mentions "history", conflicting
> stories, changing years, and the like there's a default position that
> it is juts another compliant, when in fact it's a simple outcome of
> some pretty key questions that have not been adeqately resolved to
> anyone's real satisfaction.
>
> These questions are not about the veracity of the teaching itself, and
> yet people assume that it is. This pattern is well grooved into the
> psyche of what we know of as a.r.e. I don;t think it needs to be like
> this anymore. I don;t think when someone comes into this palce and
> mentions the word "history" that it is necessary to mention the name
> David Lane anymore.
>
> Why? Because really, David has nothing to do with this issue at all.
> Not one jot! And he never has. This is nothing but solely [ or
> Soully ] an Eckankar issue for ECKists to work out, not any imaginary
> "detractors" [ I mean like where are they anyway??? They sure aren't
> here!!! ]. And not ex-members, which is a much less offensive term
> to use, and not David Lane, and not Ford Johnson, not anyone except
> Eckankar as a distinct group of people.
>
> No decent scientist worth his salt, no seeker inquiring in the working
> of life on earth can go very far of they haven't worked out a working
> hypothesis of something they feel may be true. For 45 years now,
> Eckists have been subtley trained to bury any genuine inquiry into
> Sudar Singh true identity as a living person ..... as the answer is
> always the same .. there isn't one!
>
> Well have rejected this pre-disposition, and because i happen think
> that Paul was fundamentally and good honest man, with an unusual bent
> all the same, I actually think he wasn't that silly to just repeatedly
> tell the world about someone, that simply did not exist.
>
> Well if people ant to frame this issue but reverting to a pre-belief
> that well, Sudar wasn't really a person, but a simple cover aka
> name .. then why on earth would anyone bother looking for real
> evidence of the guy? But this is where we are at. Seems to me people
> would love to know that Sudar Singh was a real person, with a true
> name, who lived and breathed as Paul claimed that he did.
>
> But only one in a million seems to be able to articulate such a
> question, and pursue it. In Dougs research into Paul, and the way he
> framed much of his research around one David lane, it looks to me that
> the truth or falsehood of Sudar Singh as a master was alwasy being
> pushed aside completely and never addressed seriously. And yet here we
> are now looking upon Doug's book TWT as if it is a pseudo complete
> Biography on Paul.
>
> What sort of Biography is it if Sudar Singh is ignored. For after
> Rebazar tarz, Sudar singh is the next most consistent player in this
> whole story of paul twitchell and his journey to becoming a teacher,
> the Living ECK master.
>
> So I decided as a part of my recent change to look into the whole
> history of Paul's life, with a clean slate, that I will come at this
> from the frame of *assuming* that Paul was actually totally genuine,
> and that for reasons as yet unknown to me or anyone i know, Sudar
> Singh was instead shrouded in mystery by Paul. Yet Paul never ever
> really spent much time getting into who Sudar Singh was nor exactly
> how the person, this master helped Paul. All we have is crumbs to go
> with.
>
> And if I or anyone else suggested hey, I have met him on the inner, he
> is real, well who would believe me? And why should they anyway.
>
> Even if it was Doug suggesting he knew who Sudar Singh was and that he
> is real, why would anyone just default to accepting Doug's view just
> because he said so. This isn;t what Paul spoke about and taught, and
> it isn;t what Sri Harold teachers either. is it? <vbg>
>
> So Etznab mentioned this the other day ... and this maybe one of the
> starting points to thinking about and pondering quietly where to look
> for Sudar Singh ... Harold didn;t know in 1985, and i have not never
> heard anymore about him.
>
> Well i have tracked a few things down which pretty well just fell into
> my lap. But there are a couple of key evidences I need to confirm, and
> this might take a week [ not this week] or another years. It depends
> because it will be out of my control. There is either something there
> to find, or there isn't. I don't think it will take forever, nor needs
> to. And if there is nothing to discover, then so what? Nothing has
> changed, nothing is any different than it is already.
>
> This where we are right now, imho.
>
> So here's a few teasers of some info on this topic. Some may have been
> mentioned already, and may a 100 times, i don't know exactly. I am not
> a computer.
>
> Etznab has mentioned recently something that he hadn't really noticed
> before, or at least didn't remember noticing before. And yet this
> subject is of great interest to him, as you all know by now,
> yes? :-)
>
> [ no guarantees this is error free either ok ]
>
> SUDAR SINGH -- misc items Jan 2010
>
> July 8th 1963 Letter from LTG Vol 2
>
> "I have a book in my collection called the Sar Bachan written by
> Sardar Seva Singh, which is the teachings of the Sound Current, and
> acts as practically my Bible !!"
>
> This books details are::
> Swamiji Maharaj, The Sar Bachan: The Yoga of the Sound Current
> translated by Sardar Sewa Singh. Beas, India: Radha Swami Sat Sang,
> 1955.
>
> Funny thing is I didn't recall it either! But I did re-discover
> it. :-)
>
> btw did you know that Kirpal Singh used the term -| Ekankar |- , as a
> single word in his writings in the 1950's?
>
> Paul mentioned in a book .. details another time, that Sudar Singh had
> an ashram in Allahabad. That it was nearby an "army barracks". That it
> was on the Old Canteen Road.
>
> Doug mentions this in TWT but that he thinks Paul could have been
> muddled with the names, which he often did, not changed them on
> purpose, just got muddled with spellings and pronunciations. Did you
> know, or remember that Paul would get Camille in the the 40's and
> later to "proof-read" his writings to fix up all his spelling and
> other minor mistakes?
>
> Well as Doug suggested there isn't a Old canteen Road .. well actually
> there is but it is down in south India, near Chenai if i recall
> rightly.
>
> But in Allahabad, there is, or there was an Canning Road? Lord Canning
> was a British Military Governor, of some note who was responsible for
> putting down one of the biggest rebellions in the military there under
> the control of the East India Company. Would you believe that about
> 3-4 months ago, there was an old movie on TV about this that we saw.
> The issue was about the British using pig fat to cover the rounds for
> protection in storage. Out of this event came the British Raj.
>
> Well on the banks of the Ganges there is a old Fort right on the
> banks .. the exact same place that the biggest mehla blah blah is held
> [ sorry late and tired.]
>
> Next to the Fort is a memorial to Lord Canning -- still difficulty in
> tracking down exactly which road is Canning Road .. as Google Maps
> road and street names are from up-to-date as say NYC.
>
> So far so good .. what Paul has suggested in various books about how
> things were on the ground there in Allahabad, near to where Sudar
> Singh's ashram, is lining up as accurate -- so far.
>
> I am awaiting more info, and have more work to do on this, but won't
> get to it for at least 2-3 weeks now. This of course won't be able to
> determine if Paul truly went there, but there is something going on
> here that I never knew about, or thought to look at before.
>
> And lo and behold I have found a spiritual teacher of some note that
> did in fact have an ashram in Allahabad, which was abandoned, so the
> story goes by about 1948, or soon beforehand.
>
> tsk tsk, now don't rush at this asking too many questions, lest you
> start sounding like you may think it is possible.
>
> I wonder of this particular guru also used the term Ekankar, [ no C ]
> like Sant Kirpal Singh did, a decade or so later?
>
> I have more searching to do, more confirmations to confirm, and am
> waiting on answers to an email, and i need to send out some other
> emails to India before i can go much further.
>
> And hey, maybe there is nothing to it .. but so far, it is looking
> very promising that there may well be a master that fits Paul's
> description of being there in the 20's or the 30's.
>
> My conjectures, my working hypothesis at present are saying that maybe
> Sudar Singh the "name" is what it appears to be ..... a Literary
> device yes, BUT a cover name for more than ONE individual even BEFORE
> Kirpal's name and others were changed to Sudar Singh in Eckankar texts
> by Paul himself.
>
> eg used by Paul as a name for the Master who appeared to him when 8
> years old
> and used later for anyone connected with Shabd Yoga eg Shiv Dayal
> Singh, or Sardar Sewa Singh ... and used it as Kirpal Singh too.
>
> Hazrut Inayat Khan who visted the USA in 1910/11 originally also
> started an ashram in France
> with Inayat Khan maybe being connected with Paul's father IF the
> *stories* are true about him being Initiated by Sudar Singh in England
> circa 1905 [ even though Khan didn't get there untill 1912-13 --- he
> was there in England (again), from 1914 - 1920 during WW1
> IN France 1920 to 1926 with big summer ashram plus international
> travelling too.
>
> This ashram is in Surrenses, on the west bank of the Seine, amazing co-
> incidence? Wishful thinking? maybe, maybe not. I went to England in
> 1912 from America, and there I saw the difference between England and
> America.http://wahiduddin.net/mv2/bio/Autobiography_2.htm
>
> But Inayat Khan never had an Ashram in India. he returned home to
> India in early 1926, and died a few months later .. he never stopped
> teaching and sharing though.
>
> Paul writes : 'whilst renewing my physical bonds with Sudar Singh'
>
> Using the word "renewing" would seem to indicate this visit was at
> least a second visit with Sudar Singh.
>
> Paul clearly states [or leads one to believe] that both he and Kaydee
> met Sudar Singh in Paris France when she was there studying art in an
> art school. Paul speaks about not getting on with her "left bank
> freinds" .. which sounds about right for conservative Paul from
> Kentucky at that time.
>
> Also in 1951 Paul clearly indicates Sudar Singh is now deceased. At
> another place paul [ or juts darwin mentions that Rebazar tarzs was
> the Master who gave Paul his Second Initiation. The first being given
> by Sudar Singh in the dream state, as well as physcially meeting him
> [ as described in the books at least].
>
> So this would have to be the first time ... he says he was 16 years
> old which makes it around the summer of 1925 by my reckoning, if the
> basic story is true even if not entirely accurate.
>
> Paul has also reported that *it has been said* that Sudar Singh may
> have been 100-105 years old when he passed away ... making a DOB circa
> 1845 +/-5 years. But of course, it is just a "it's been reported"
> report, then it comes with some doubt - at least taken "literally"
> untill proven otherwise. Still that one comment could be a good hint
> nevertheless. :-)
>
> As always there's confusion. let's leave it here for now, OK.
>
> and cheers .. Sean
Sean,
Lots of interesting stuff.
I had run across the Canning Road connection. I thought I mentioned
this in my book.
I also pointed out that Sudarshan Singh lived near the Canning Road,
as it turns out. He lived there because the Sant Sat Guru for the
Radhasoami parent faith was also living there up until the mid 1930's.
Then he moved back to Soamibagh.
I ran across an article about this. That was an enticing connection,
although there is no record that Sudarshan Singh ever lived outside of
India. He died around the end of 1936, if I remember correctly.
The term Ekankar is in The Path of The Masters, but the term
originates with Guru Nanak, as Paul mentions in one of his audio
tapes. Kirpal was simply referring to a term he grew up with as a Sikh
child. My guess is that even if Paul may have first seen it in JJ's
book, or Kirpal may have even mentioned it, it would not have stood
out as a significant term until he read about Guru Nanak. It was a
centerpiece term for Nanak. It was like the term Sugmad is for
Eckists.
One of these days I'll share a new english translation I've been
working on from the Sukhmani in the Guru Granth Sahib which will amaze
you at its connections with the teachings of Eckankar.
The term Sardar is a term of respect. That's not actually his name.
His name is Sewa Singh, or sometimes spelled Seva Singh. I've seen
Sawan Singh sometimes addressed as Sardar Sawan Singh. This is
certainly close to Sudar Singh.
As I mentioned before, I didn't know about HIK's ashram in Paris.
That's fascinating.
I'm interested to hear more the guru you've found in the Allahabad
area.
Thanks.
Doug.
Etznab
mentions in one of his audio tapes. [....]"
Doug,
Is that one of the audio tapes available to the public?
And if so, do you remember what year? I have some
tapes and want to see if I have that one.
Even if you only answer the first question that will be
helpful. I find the Paul Twitchell audio tapes fascinating.
And thanks for sharing about the Sardar part and how
Sawan was sometimes addressed as that.
Etznab
Doug
> few months, as i had forgotten, not registered that as important when
> reading your book at the time.
>
> You mentioned the Old Canteen Road at the same time that I had been
> searching for it online. If you didn't say what you did at the time,
> and I didn't follow-up on replies to me, I would have missed it for
> years possibly.
>
> I already had some ideas worth pursuing, but this one bit of info led
> to much more and I found an unexpected path around and back to the
> original idea/possibility, iow I found another unexpected
> confirmation.
>
> Not only that but it also showed that if one was fully conversant with
> the area of Allahabad, to Benares, and Agra, the people there, and
> the different events of history there .. then what Paul says in these
> lite throw away lines can actually stack up as being quite possibly
> true. But on the surface, it may be meaningless and unconnected to
> anything.
>
> To give the place some perspective in distances the 3 places would
> sort of fit into an area of Fort Lauderdale to Miami thru to
> Homestead and onto the Keys of Florida. Like a flatish triangle. They
> are sort of far apart, and yet not that far really once you were at
> one place the other two cities were directly connected by main roads
> and rail. iow do-able for travel in India during the Raj period.
>
> sorry, raving again ...
>
> > I also pointed out that Sudarshan Singh lived near the Canning Road,
> > as it turns out. He lived there because the Sant Sat Guru for the
> > Radhasoami parent faith was also living there up until the mid 1930's.
> > Then he moved back to Soamibagh.
>
>
> > I ran across an article about this. That was an enticing connection,
> > although there is no record that Sudarshan Singh ever lived outside of
> > India. He died around the end of 1936, if I remember correctly.
>
>
> > The term Ekankar is in The Path of The Masters, but the term
> > originates with Guru Nanak, as Paul mentions in one of his audio
> > tapes. Kirpal was simply referring to a term he grew up with as a Sikh
> > child.
>
> as a Sikh, the went off to learn about Eckankar when he got to be
> around 20 years old.
>
> .Anyway, I'm a little confused here. Wasn't nanak's term Ek Onkar ???
> two words, different spelling. Does he also use the one word phrase of
> Ekankar too -- have you seen this and do you have a url / ref?
>
> My point is this however, for whatever reason Kirpal chose to use is
> beside the point that he WAS using it as early as 1955 in HIS own
> talks and writings, and more than once in a while. And yes, he spoke
> of it in connection with Sar Barchan I think ... as well as Guru
> Nanak's writings, and the Guru Granth.
>
> ?I am also confused as it "looks to me" that Nanak is a key source,
> originator, earlier guru that later was a key aspect of what
> *informed* the the ideas in the creation of Radhasoami by Soamiji and
> Salig Ram ... as wel as the writings of the Sar Barchan. iow at that
> time a modern renewal of what came out thru nanak and kabir in the
> 1500's
>
> Or this an over-simplification or just wrong .... ?? It sure looks
> this way when read *their* RS websites today. All Sant Mat branches
> also seems to have quite and affection for Sufism, eg Hafez, and
> Rumi.
>
> Which book, no which early article, is it that Paul says his saints
> are Kabir, Nanak, and Hafez???
>
> My guess is that even if Paul may have first seen it in JJ's
>
> > book, or Kirpal may have even mentioned it, it would not have stood
> > out as a significant term until he read about Guru Nanak. It was a
> > centerpiece term for Nanak. It was like the term Sugmad is for
> > Eckists.
>
> chelas Doug, when Paul was a chela of Ruhani. -- am pretty sure, ..
> there is so much available on what Kirpal said, I think they even
> recorded him asking someone to pass the salt at dinner. :)
>
> > One of these days I'll share a new english translation I've been
> > working on from the Sukhmani in the Guru Granth Sahib which will amaze
> > you at its connections with the teachings of Eckankar.
>
> that. ;) .
>
> > The term Sardar is a term of respect. That's not actually his name.
> > His name is Sewa Singh, or sometimes spelled Seva Singh. I've seen
> > Sawan Singh sometimes addressed as Sardar Sawan Singh. This is
> > certainly close to Sudar Singh.
>
> > As I mentioned before, I didn't know about HIK's ashram in Paris.
> > That's fascinating.
>
> > I'm interested to hear more the guru you've found in the Allahabad
> > area.
>
> > Thanks.
>
> > Doug.
>
> just "up the road" from Allahabad; had an ashram there. Before that he
> was based in Benares. An expert in English Lit, and Persian and Hindi
> -- he was behind the scenes as other Gurus came along after Shiv
> dayal Singh passed away .. from there he moved to Allahabad area ...
> not sure but my guess at present is very late 1890's or before 1905ish
> --- but much later moved permanently to Agra, and his old ashram was
> abandoned -- much dramas still ongoing with RS branches and legal
> matters.
>
> But he never left India either, nor did he have an ashram in Paris
> France [ or kentucky ]. Sawan Singh first recognised him as a Guru and
> then broke away on his own circa 1909 or shortly afterwards. [ again
> memory don;t quote me ]
> =====
> eg
>
> The Supreme Being, assuming the first Guru Swarup as Soamiji Maharaj,
> brought in this creation several of His Nij Anshas (Emanations).,
> viz., Radhaji Maharaj, Huzur Maharaj, Maharaj Saheb, Buaji Saheba and
> Babuji Maharaj. They constituted the main props of the unique seminary
> established in this part of the creation for the reformation,
> regeneration and redemption of souls. It is due to the presence, in
> this creation, of the Nij Anshas, Sants, Sadhs and true devotees, that
> the work of salvation started by Soamiji Maharaj has continued after
> Him. Otherwise, instead of responding to the love and attraction of
> the Supreme Being, the men of the world would revolt and cause all
> sorts of trouble and impediment in the way of spiritual progress.
>
> Babuji Maharaj was the last of the Nij Anshas who came in the time of
> Soamiji Maharaj. His life on earth coincided practically with the
> growth of Radhasoami Satsang established in 1861, the year of his
> birth. His association with the Satsang was the longest of all. So
> with His departure at the ripe age of 88, closed the biggest chapter
> in the history of Radhasoami Satsang. And after Him there is left no
> body who had known Soamiji Maharaj and His Satsang and had witnessed
> the great Leella and Belias (pleasure and enjoyment of Sant's company,
> acts of grace and mercy of Sants) of Soamiji Maharaj's days. It is
> natural therefore, that while reading about the life of Babuji Maharaj
> we feel that we are glancing through the history of Radhasoami Satsang
> as well.
>
> ====
>
> passed away in 1949 - personally helped Julian Johnson with his work
> if translations that Sawan Singh had directed him to do, and who asked
> for help from Agra as Sawan's *breakaway* group had very very little
> in English texts to publish/share, and even less quality people for
> translating accurately. So the Agra group, [ not necessarily the
> place] then under the leadership and with the translating and language
> experience of Babuji Maharaj, at age 70 years young dug deep and
> helped out our old mate from Kentucky .. DOCTOR Julian Johnson
> throughout the 1930's. :)
>
> .. just a taste .. :)
Nice taste.
Did you find a report that Julian Johnson was personally helped by
Babuji Maharaj, the last Soamibagh Guru? That would be fascinating.
As for Ek Onkar and Ekankar, yes those are the same original word just
translated differently. It can also show up as Ikankar, Ek Ongkar, and
many others. I've seen it spelled tons of different ways, but they are
all the same original word. How do I know? Because I've seen Kirpal's
translation of Guru Nanak's JapJi, the most famous section from the
Guru Granth Sahib. This was the original part of the holy book and was
written by Guru Nanak.
Kirpal's version spells it as Ekankar. Other groups, as I've said,
spell it Ek Onkar, Ikankar, and many other forms.
The fascinting thing about this is that Guru Nanak's original term
isn't a word that existing in the language he was writing. The
language is called Gurmukhi, which is now a part of the Punjabi
language. However, the term Ekankar is made up of two symbols. First
is Ek, which is the numeral 1, which means One. The second, however,
is not a letter or symbol that existed before. However, it is similar
to the first letter of the Gurmukhi alphabet, called Oora, and is
pronounced Oh. However, Guru Nanak added an extension to it, as if to
say it goes on forever, or something like Ohhhhhhh. So, the correct
pronounciation would be something like Ek Ohhhhh.
It was long after Nanak that this became interpreted as Ek Onkar,
simply because they could not fathom what he was saying, so they
decided to define it in terms they understood. This happened over
generations. But Nanak was clear that the name of God was not supposed
to be spoken. It was intended only a symbol of God and nothing more.
Not pronounced, but just pictured.
This symbol is at the very opening of the Guru Granth Sahib, the
opening of Nanak's JapJi, and it is at the opening of the Sukhmani.
So, that's why I say this came from Nanak.
Paul in his 1966 talk said that Eckankar was a mispelling of Ekankar,
which means the one all-inclusiveness of God. That's generally the
interpretation of what Ek Onkar means.
However, I think your point is that Paul could very well have run
across this first while reading or studying with Kirpal. I think
that's highly likely. Although I would be surprised if Paul hadn't
read about the Sikhs before then, since he was so well read on
spiritual teachings around the world.
While Sant Mat is generally considered to have started with Kabir,
even though there were Sants teaching before then, the term Ekankar
was not used by any of them until Guru Nanak. He really made this his
symbol for his teaching, similar to the ECK symbol. There is an
amazing parallel here on many levels.
Thanks.
Doug.
Doug
Etznab,
It was from Paul's talk called: Names, Places and Sounds in the
Discourses, and from the best I can tell it was recorded in 1966. This
wasn't from a public talk. He recorded this in his home to answer some
chelas questions about what these terms meant. It was his first
glossary, you might say, but it was very interesting the way he went
into it.
Doug.
Etznab
Doug,
When you say "The second" [part] Are you referring to "onkar",
"ankar", etc.? I have to be curious because what you illustrate
is not something I have come across. What is the source that
I can read it myself? Or, is the source your imagination?
Let me ask this another way. Were you suggesting the "onkar"
had earlier read Ohhhhhhh?
And this is because the second part (which is not a symbol?)
is similar to the first letter of the Gurmukhi alphabet, called
Oora?
Who's rationalization is that? What someone told you? What
you read in a book? Here is the line I think you referred to:
Ek onkar satnam karta purakhu
How is the second word supposed to read? In your opinion?
It wasn't clear to me what you were saying. Where does this
Ohhhhhh belong?
Etznab
Etznab
Good thing someone like you is around to share this history. Thanks.
Etznab
Etznab
> btw. Babuji was then the official guru of agra, during the 30's ..
> adding things various things together and i think it's pretty accuarte
> how put it before. Babuji was an expert TLinguist and wrote in 4 or 5
> key ancient languages from sanskrit to Gurmukhi .. so he read the
> original Jap Ji or others texts in it's origuinal language ... then re-
> wrote it into a more modern Indian dialect ...
>
> My GUESS is he was focused almost full-time on this work in benares
> from post grad 22 years old to his early 40's at least ..... before
> hitting Guru status around 50 y/old ..... 1909 ... my guess then is he
> set up an ashram in Allahabad post 1900 but before say 1914 which he
> ran and lived at [ travelling often to Agra and back/to benares] until
> circumstances forced him by old age, health and the dramas re RS/
> parent faith took their toll.
>
> It's seems common for HI's of RS to set up teaching schools where ever
> they could ... so for Babuji to set up an ashram at Allahabah is not
> unusual. There was another chap [ someone like Sudarshan Singh ] who
> set up an ashram in Benares; but that doesn't mean they were masters,
> only offically appointed as Initiators under the then current
> Master. .
>
> eg at one point Sawan was an Approved Initiator for Agra parent faith
> in the late 1890's I think ..
>
> Does this system sound familiar at all ?? :)
>
> My reading of history tells me he was only a visitor to Agra .. he
> wasn't based there until later in life 60's or after 70 years old. ===
> late 1930's
>
> look i would have saved this where it is ... and it will show up one
> day; and will end up on the PTHS somewhere .. but if you asked for it
> now, I wouldn't know where to look. LOL
>
> anyway the important aspect is that there is a lineage for Kirpals and
> Sawans and Julian Johnson writings back to babuji, and others before
> him .... also I am starting to realise the huge diferences the
> translations and the interpretations are over time .. and how things
> move apart, or appear to be in conflict.
>
> cheers and thansks sean
>
> the rest sounds great .. it;s wasted in this place though, imho ....> As for Ek Onkar and Ekankar, yes those are the same original word just
"anyway the important aspect is that there is a lineage
for Kirpals and Sawans and Julian Johnson writings
back to babuji, and others before him .... also I am
starting to realise the huge diferences the translations
and the interpretations are over time .. and how things
move apart, or appear to be in conflict."
Totally agree! Some very good points and observations
there. IMHO.
Etznab
Kinpa
nah, there is no such thing as waste.... :o) >>>>>>>
.> As for Ek Onkar and Ekankar, yes those are the same original word
Kinpa
> On Mar 5, 1:17 pm, Kinpa <tsharp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > nah, there is no such thing as waste.... :o) >>>>>>>
>
> last part by Doug happens they fly off into cyberland and barely ever
> get to be seen or heard of again. that's all i meant, and well it
> would be a good thing for such 'gems" to remain accessible such as via
> dialogues or his SD sites ...
>
> yes yes, and I know I could do it myself, yes of course instead of
> just having a whinge about it. :)
or you could urge others to do it as well (as you have done) i guess
it all works out either way~! :o )