Belief Systems
Etznab
To be frank, I think that at some point Paul T.
felt "compelled" to entertain the belief systems
of others. Even catering to them, to that effect.
He was certainly qualified and capable in those
departments.
To the contrary, in the "beginning" it looks to
me like Paul was intent on sharing much of the
knowledge he learned from abroad. Especially,
(it looks to me) like he wanted to share the art
of "Soul Travel". There was definitely a growing
appetite in the 60s for something beyond ortho-
dox western teachings.
However, I suspect there were many others
who wanted to take Paul Twitchell, along with
what he knew, and make that into a spiritual
teaching. To make that into a corporation and
a religion even. In other words, people wanted
to "celebrate" and make something big out of
it.
Many organized religions have manifested by
a similar route. IMHO. They are not the product
of the "founder" exclusively.
Moreover, whether it's an actor, a songwriter,
a scientist or politician, anybody and anything
that "moves" the minds and imaginations of
others on a large, or growing scale, I have seen
certain forces wanting to capitalize on it. Forces
wanting to control it even.
All of this has to be taken into consideration
about "belief systems", IMO.
Etznab
Rich
Reductionist 'beliefs', musing Eckankar being about money and power, misses
the forest for the trees. IME they create a myth about Eckankar and Paul.
It's clear to me that, if anything, Paul's spiritual path was the
_antithesis_ of catering to others beliefs.
I agree that there are "others[like you] who want to take Paul Twitchell,
along with what he knew, and make that into" your focus on linking
historical possibilities, religion and business based on myth and
plagiarism. As Doug pointed out 'modern sensibilities reject spiritual
thinking'. They can be a roadblock because, for instance, they dismiss
people living for hundreds of years. The quantum leap in spiritual growth is
to move in a state of consciousness beyond the illusion of a "methodical,
logical and reasoned approach" to the path. While there will always be
people who want to control and make the organization it into something else,
Eckankar's belief system has always been first and foremost about personal
experience. Of course one is free to focus on Dutch Elm disease, leaf
spot(pun intended), rusts, and root rot, yet overall the forest is vibrantly
sustained by the ECK.
` o
|
~/|
_/ |\
/ | \
-/ | \
_/____|___\_
Rich~~~~(__________/~~~~Sailing the CyberSea~~~~~
Sean
You've Got To Have It
To Have Good Communication!
.
Presented by
Martin High School
Counseling & Guidance Dept.
"Good communication skills are required at all stages of life; set the stage
for the rest of your life."
.
"There are three types of communication skills, expressive skills,
listening skills, and skills for managing the overall process of
communication."
.
Poor communication is at the root of a large number of organizational
problems.
.
"Communicating with employees is more than just giving instructions for the
day. The way information is communicated has a direct impact on work
performance.
.
Employees look to the leaders in an organization to set the tone & culture
within the work environment.
.
Open lines of communication improve productivity and retention.
Aggressiveness
.whether direct or indirect, results in a put-down of the other person,
making them feel hurt, defensive & humiliated
.does not take the other person's goals or feeling into account
.only the aggressor's goals are met
.often generates bitterness & frustration that later returns as resistance &
dissension
.intimidates, demeans & degrades another person
"Rich" <dead...@inorbit.com> wrote in message
news:h96bd...@news5.newsguy.com...
Etznab
Rich,
It looked, to me, like you read too much of
your own beliefs into what I illustrated.
You read Doug's book? The Whole Truth?
Don't you recall Patti mentioning how others
wanted to do things that Paul Twitchell didn't
personally agree with?
One of my points was that I thought it quite
the oversight to imagine Eckankar Inc. being
exclusively the result of decisions made by
Paul Twitchell alone.
And at the end of my initial post when the
words "certain forces wanting to capitalize"
appeared, I was not specific. In fact, it was
illustrated as a very broad and general des-
cription. I did not apply that phenonema to
the growing religion of Eckankar exclusively.
A basic point was that "forces" in the world
exist that monitor, censor and even seek to
control "belief systems". Especially those
which include a large number of people, or
those which have potential to influence the
group consciousness on a large (or grow-
ing) scale.
Looking at the history and evolution for
Eckankar organization over the past forty
(and more) years I believe one has to con-
sider a host of "belief systems" that came
to shape the outer structure.
I don't think it fair to pin everything on a
single person. The spiritual leader. There
are many other factors and people which
have contributed. Some of the teachings
even borrowed from other "paths" anterior
to contemporary Eckankar.
Etznab
Number Harmonics
I agree Rich
Flute of God ... The whole notion about "Wrong Thinking" is stated as being
the real cause of Paul starting Eckankar. He opposed the nonsense that was
fraught in the halls of academia and religious institutions specifically
because the dogma and waffle set up Wrong Thinking in the minds of
followers.
It's all there in the earliest books.
Obviously, Paul worked with existing structures to get his message out, but
his WHOLE message was about breaking down false beliefs and discovering raw
and natural truth for yourself. Soul Travel was but one vehicle he used in
this regard.
Eckankar is about releasing you from your personal belief system. he way to
do this, Paul stated, was to work with the Universal Truth ... To be a
Co-Cowrker with God. It's extremely simple, and the message has not changed.
It is not at all involved with capitalising on whatever, but in helping
people find their own way home to God.
It's about working with the divine and letting the divine work with you.
That's it.
In ECK
Michael
>
>
Rich
> Rich,
>
> It looked, to me, like you read too much of
> your own beliefs into what I illustrated.
I read it in the context of your whole body of work here, as well as the
specific things I pointed out. That said, it seems you are avoiding what I
was saying.
> You read Doug's book? The Whole Truth?
> Don't you recall Patti mentioning how others
> wanted to do things that Paul Twitchell didn't
> personally agree with?
Yes, and that was my point. You appear to be one of those who wants things
different. Hundreds, maybe thousand of posts here on your research striving
to find if the teachings can be a linear history. Analyzing how you imagine
Paul et al were motivated, thinking, and constructed this path. Trying to
find or create associations to a whole assortment of seemingly unrelated
things. Obsessing over and over and over about the existence of Rebazar
Tarzs, generally erring on the side that Paul concocted him.
> One of my points was that I thought it quite
> the oversight to imagine Eckankar Inc. being
> exclusively the result of decisions made by
> Paul Twitchell alone.
Who's oversight? Name one person... See, that's not a real issue. Never was.
No one has ever claimed that. It seems it's a point you made up. That's
kinda what I'm getting at. Why concoct scenarios like that as if they are a
problem? It's like I said, it creates a myth.
> And at the end of my initial post when the
> words "certain forces wanting to capitalize"
> appeared, I was not specific. In fact, it was
> illustrated as a very broad and general des-
> cription. I did not apply that phenonema to
> the growing religion of Eckankar exclusively.
> A basic point was that "forces" in the world
> exist that monitor, censor and even seek to
> control "belief systems". Especially those
> which include a large number of people, or
> those which have potential to influence the
> group consciousness on a large (or grow-
> ing) scale.
Whatever. Feel free to back away... That was not what I was responding to.
> Looking at the history and evolution for
> Eckankar organization over the past forty
> (and more) years I believe one has to con-
> sider a host of "belief systems" that came
> to shape the outer structure.
Yes, I know. At the risk of repeating: Modern sensibilities rejecting
spiritual thinking with a methodical, logical and reasoned approach.
I don't think it fair to pin everything on a
> single person. The spiritual leader. There
> are many other factors and people which
> have contributed.
That is a strawman argument. It's a false point of contention you're
fermenting.
> Some of the teachings
> even borrowed from other "paths" anterior
> to contemporary Eckankar.
I always wonder why you tend to dodge away from what you write when
challenged? And then, not even address what I wrote in my response? My
disagreement with you was your alluding to Eckankar being influenced by
others capitalizing on and controlling it, to Paul catering to others
beliefs, and Eckankar's belief system being something other than about
personal experience first and foremost.
I've been re-watching the outstanding Discovery Channel 'Plant Earth'
series. Last night I saw the one devoted to trees. All the science available
now on the variety, different ecosystems, growth cycles, evolution and
symbiotic relationships presents an amazing lifetime of study. Yet, I'd
prefer just simply having the direct experience of Being in the splendor of
a forest.
Rich
>>
>
> I agree Rich
>
> Flute of God ... The whole notion about "Wrong Thinking" is stated as
> being the real cause of Paul starting Eckankar. He opposed the
> nonsense that was fraught in the halls of academia and religious
> institutions specifically because the dogma and waffle set up Wrong
> Thinking in the minds of followers.
>
> It's all there in the earliest books.
>
> Obviously, Paul worked with existing structures to get his message
> out, but his WHOLE message was about breaking down false beliefs and
> discovering raw and natural truth for yourself. Soul Travel was but
> one vehicle he used in this regard.
>
> Eckankar is about releasing you from your personal belief system. he
> way to do this, Paul stated, was to work with the Universal Truth ...
> To be a Co-Cowrker with God. It's extremely simple, and the message
> has not changed. It is not at all involved with capitalising on
> whatever, but in helping people find their own way home to God.
>
> It's about working with the divine and letting the divine work with
> you. That's it.
Righto. It's the KISS principle. I'm wondering if there is a word or phrase
that indicates the opposite of occam's razor?
Sean
> Righto. It's the KISS principle. I'm wondering if there is a word or
> phrase that indicates the opposite of occam's razor?
>
To a Pataphysist like Rich -- would it be an ancient block of petrified
wood?
------------------------------------------
"Of several acceptable explanations [for a phenomenon], the most accurate
and well-ordered theory of explanation is preferable, provided that it does
NOT contradict the observed facts."
It's not uncommon for people to overlook the last part of the above Occam's
Razor definition.
Anti-Razor's
"The variety of beings should not rashly be diminished."
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
"God created the most varied and populous of possible worlds."
"Entities must not be reduced to the point of inadequacy"
and
"It is vain to do with fewer what requires more".
"Pataphysics seeks no less than to view each event in the universe as
completely unique, subject to no laws but its own."
and for the anally retentive MPD'd
'No set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some
human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however
complicated.'
Thank you
Sorry for the *bluntness* , and the pun was intended
So glad you are here! :)
Etznab
The literal definition for dementia is "no mind". Are you sure
you want to lose yours?
Etznab
Etznab
Rich,
You wrote:
"The quantum leap in spiritual growth is to move
in a state of consciousness beyond the illusion
of a "methodical, logical and reasoned approach"
to the path.
And when I wrote,
"Looking at the history and evolution for
Eckankar organization over the past forty
(and more) years I believe one has to con-
sider a host of "belief systems" that came
to shape the outer structure."
you wrote:
"Yes, I know. At the risk of repeating: Modern
sensibilities rejecting spiritual thinking with a
methodical, logical and reasoned approach."
What do you have against a "methodical,
logical and reasoned approach"? Or is it the
illusion of such? In that case I agree.
I saw how you mentioned spiritual thinking.
Does this mean people who use their minds
are not thinking spiritually?
The mind can be an instrument and vehicle
for spirit. IMHO. Just like the emotional and
physical body can, too. If this were not the
case I don't believe people would have ever
stressed need for a master in the physical
body.
Imagine that Harold Klemp , or any of the
living masters had dementia. It might mean
they could think spiritually, but when there
are memory problems it becomes harder to
communicate to others.
I am not saying any of the masters had,
or have, dementia. However, when it comes
to documented history for Rebazar Tarzs, I
think it happens that people choose to have
a form of "selective amnesia" and don't want
to remember at times.
I'm not being specific and saying who. I'm
not saying it's Eck Masters. I'm not saying
it's the same as dementia. The term I used
here was "selective amnesia".
Etznab
Rich
Huh?? What a bizarre non-response to my points. How sad...
Rich
> Rich,
>
> You wrote:
>
> "The quantum leap in spiritual growth is to move
> in a state of consciousness beyond the illusion
> of a "methodical, logical and reasoned approach"
> to the path.
>
> And when I wrote,
>
> "Looking at the history and evolution for
> Eckankar organization over the past forty
> (and more) years I believe one has to con-
> sider a host of "belief systems" that came
> to shape the outer structure."
>
> you wrote:
>
> "Yes, I know. At the risk of repeating: Modern
> sensibilities rejecting spiritual thinking with a
> methodical, logical and reasoned approach."
>
> What do you have against a "methodical,
> logical and reasoned approach"?
It appears that what we are trying to convey to you is really not getting
through at all.
I have nothing against it. I enjoy it. It's just that it's a dead end on the
spiritual path when it exclude ones spiritual perception. IME the more one
persists with it, the farther the sidetrack. Good lessons there though.
> Or is it the
> illusion of such? In that case I agree.
See above.
> I saw how you mentioned spiritual thinking.
> Does this mean people who use their minds
> are not thinking spiritually?
Nope. I'm afraid you're not even close to grasping the issue. Those were
Doug's words I was quoting BTW.
> The mind can be an instrument and vehicle
> for spirit. IMHO.
And it can be a terrible master...
"One must keep the mind like that of a small child looking with interest at
a toy. It is the ECKist's attitude that the mind is hardly anything more
than a machine, or like a child which sometimes becomes unruly and wants
attention at once or it will create a disturbance. All one must learn to do
is to handle the mind as he would a small child. Less trouble is had with
the mind when under such supervision.
The individual mind is a part of the Universal Mind, or Kal power, which is
that force that rules the lower universes. It is the psychic power and is
not to be considered anything more than an inferior force.(...)It gives only
temporary relief and must be avoided at all cost by the ECKist who wants the
true reality of the SUGMAD."
- Paul Twitchell SKS II pg.93
Am I wrong in assuming that you want that true reality?
"The initiate of the Fourth Circle is the Chiad. It is here that he realizes
that the five passions of the mind are the enemy that must be overcome. The
function of this realm is thought, and the evolution of intelligence is his
greatest gain. But it must always be remembered that this is not the final
answer to life as so many believe. If man depends upon thought alone he will
be most unhappy, because thought and intelligence only lead to unhappiness.
Mind, consciousness, and intelligence are the ruling factors upon this
plane. The outward manifestation of these three is thought, which so often
becomes confused when trying to analyze the works of ECK, or what could be
called the chewing of the mental processes on some parts of the ECK works."
- Paul Twitchell SKS II pg.235-6
Since subtlety seems lost on you, I'll be blunt. You are a chewer, big-time.
> Just like the emotional and
> physical body can, too. If this were not the
> case I don't believe people would have ever
> stressed need for a master in the physical
> body.
>
> Imagine that Harold Klemp , or any of the
> living masters had dementia. It might mean
> they could think spiritually, but when there
> are memory problems it becomes harder to
> communicate to others.
>
> I am not saying any of the masters had,
> or have, dementia. However, when it comes
> to documented history for Rebazar Tarzs, I
> think it happens that people choose to have
> a form of "selective amnesia" and don't want
> to remember at times.
>
> I'm not being specific and saying who. I'm
> not saying it's Eck Masters. I'm not saying
> it's the same as dementia. The term I used
> here was "selective amnesia".
>
> Etznab
Forget it... or chew on your hypothetical scenarios, your choice.
A jaw clenched tight in the dirt on the ground is facing away from any
quantum leap.
Opposite of the physical world food, the more chewing on the works of ECK
the more the spiritual indigestion.
Number Harmonics
The opposite to Occam's Razor?
Well for A.R. E. there is only one possible candidate...
Lurk's Cludgel
lol
Michael
>
Ken
>
> I am not saying any of the masters had,
> or have, dementia. However, when it comes
> to documented history for Rebazar Tarzs, I
> think it happens that people choose to have
> a form of "selective amnesia" and don't want
> to remember at times.
>
> I'm not being specific and saying who. I'm
> not saying it's Eck Masters. I'm not saying
> it's the same as dementia. The term I used
> here was "selective amnesia".
>
> Etznab
On a lighter note, I'd say that anyone who demands physical proof of
Rebazar Tarzs has documentia.
--
Ken
Etznab
Ken,
Creative and funny! I like that :)
Etznab
Rich
>> phrase that indicates the opposite of occam's razor?
>
>
> The opposite to Occam's Razor?
>
> Well for A.R. E. there is only one possible candidate...
>
> Lurk's Cludgel
>
> lol
Hahaha... yeah Lurk. One of the masters at making up complex scenarios,
from simple statements.
What's a Cludgel?
Sean
"Ken" <K...@NowHere.net> wrote in message
news:iN2dnZw-CfcYFSfX...@supernews.com...
On a direct note:
Is anyone demanding physical proof of Rebazar Tarzs? If so who, and why do
you believe this to be so?
On a direct side-note:
Does anyone seriously believe that Doug Marman suffered from Documentia when
he spent several years of his life researching PHYSICAL RECORDS of the
historical events, the historical activities, and BIRTH CERTIFICATE/S of one
Paul Twitchell?
On a really really serious hard assed note: Why is OK for Sri Harold to
speak about the IMPORTANCE of an accurate historical record of Eckankar for
the future benefit of Eckists, of correcting the RECORD and cleaning up the
*mess* left by Paul Twitchell regarding his physical written works, but when
Etznab puts out a simple enquiry about the physcial existence of Rebazar
tarzs as a Living ECK master and Mahanta of HIS time in years past it is
seen as yet another opportunity to RIDICULE, INSULT and PUBLICLY ABUSE ???
Anyone aware enough and big enough and honest enough to address these
questions -- even inside their OWN HEART???
Have any of the Prison Wardens here actually read the book The Whole Truth
IN FULL ??
Anyone, besides Me, and Doug?
Etznab
Sean,
I thought you added some valid points to this thread.
And I was thinking something similar, just didn't know
the best example to use and get the point across.
Etznab
Number Harmonics
Opps CUDGEL
A big wooden lump that giants generally tote about when saying "Fe Fi Fo
Fum"
noun 1. a short, thick stick used as a weapon; club.
-verb (used with object) 2. to strike with a cudgel; beat.
-Idioms3. cudgel one's brains, to try to comprehend or remember: I cudgeled
my brains to recall her name.
4. take up the cudgels, to come to the defense or aid of someone or
something.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Origin:
bef. 900; ME cuggel, OE cycgel; akin to G Kugel ball
Send in the typo demons to get me!
But curiously, I have spelt it that way for years, and never realised I was
living in error. Your question has prompted a rearrangement of synapses.
M
Number Harmonics
"Ken" <K...@NowHere.net> wrote in message
news:iN2dnZw-CfcYFSfX...@supernews.com...
I understand why people ask questions, look for ways to solve the puzzle
box, etc. The real question is what is useful, and what is likely to reap
worthwhile results. More a Law of Economy than anything else.
Endless questions can develop a tendancy to create a lift all of their own.
They are a little like the curved wing of a plane that as inertia grows, the
natural resistance of the surroundings give it bouyancy. Nothing wrong with
the wing, it is doing what it is supposed to do, but it doesn't alter the
fact of the air that supports it, no matter how much of it the wing cuts
through.
The only use of the wing beyond it's mechanical function is that it serves
to carry what it supports to a given destination
Questions regarding the existence of Rebazar: The easy solution is to meet
the guy. That has to be the destination, and I can't help but get the sense
in Rich's question that this ISN'T the goal. I may be wrong, of course.
If you don't have the right goal in mind, what use are the questions?
(IMHO)
Michael
Number Harmonics
I was at a writers workshop, and no kidding, when asked what the greatest
single thing that helped a person's writing might be, a fellow in a
wheelchair said right away:
"I lost my mind... I lost it, and it never came back. Best thing that ever
happened to me!"
And another guy jumps up, saying "I lost mine as well!!! But mine came back
and I am trying to lose it again."
The facilitator looked quietly ahead, and said "Thank you SO much for
sharing"
LMAO
Michael
>
>
Sean
"Etznab" <etz...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c2d5c80b-c627-4df3...@u36g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
Sean,
Etznab
----------------------------------------------
Sean replies:
Well, you Etznab, are always welcome.
I appreciate your opinion that some points I added was VALID to the thread.
Thanks so much for the positive feedback.
Cheers Sean
Sean
"Number Harmonics" <numberh...@spam.aapt.net.au> wrote in message
news:h9ed85$jqc$2...@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
"may be wrong" ???
"may" ???
Well is it OBVIOUS ... or is it not?
I'm wondering what does the *H* in imho actually is supposed to mean?
HAUGHTY maybe?
Sean
>
Michael Wallace commented that :
"..... never realised I was living in error."
WHAT ???
It hasn't been obvious?
WOW
Sean
>
> It appears that what we are trying to convey to you is really not getting
> through at all.
>
Just who is WE ???
Another example of Bright-Future falsely believing they are defending one's
Religious Freedoms and Free Speech or MPD ie Multiple Personality Disordered
?
He's Speaking! Are We Listening?
Yet we pay little attention to this silent non-verbal communication. Why? I
suspect we're looking for ways to conceal our underlying motives. Simply
saying what we think or want is too confrontational, too direct. The use of
words makes it easier to convince someone-or deceive them.
This may be why we've lost faith in our intuition. The German co-founder of
Gestalt therapy, Fritz Perls, taught himself to focus on the non-verbal
sphere because it's the only arena in which self-deception is nearly
impossible. Take our eyes, for example, which we call the "windows on our
soul." Our eyes reflect everything happening inside us. A glance is worth
more than a thousand words. And we all know how awkward it can be to have a
conversation with someone who constantly looks away. But isn't it equally
uncomfortable to look your boss in the eye?
The deaf interpret non-verbal communication more consciously than do the
hearing. That explains why silent communication with deaf people is more
honest and intimate. The intensity is determined by the degree to which
thoughts and emotions are conveyed with every fibre of our bodies. The deaf
do this a little better than the hearing. As one woman put it: "Since I
became deaf, I listen much better."
In silent communication you're quickly aware whether or not you click with
the other person. There's no point in not saying honestly what you think or
feel, because the other person will pick up on it.
Let's become more aware of our body language, and allow open and candid
communication with our eyes. Just try looking at someone for a change. This
would certainly make things more peaceful.
http://www.michelleinc.com/blog_tools_tips/say_what_you_mean_communication_without_saying_a_word
Sean
>
Belated congratulations Micahel on achieving the outer 5th.
As Sri Harold has said on the Sept 19th calendar -- "The experiences of Life
teach Truth."
Etznab
"When one knows that he always walks the path of
ECKANKAR, in the loneliness of his vision, perhaps
with a few companions who have similar visions, then
he will learn not to identify with creeds, books, dogmas,
wives, husbands, or with the ECK Masters; for identific-
ation with such things is only a far premise.
"The identification must come in the form of identifying
or creating, or experiencing experience itself. Identific-
ation with the experience itself, either through reading,
hearing, studying, or conversation, is done by identifying
with the vision of others. To identify with the visions, with
the insight of all things, all truths, all experiences, and
all minds (positive, negative, and balanced) - all must be
focused into a single stream of thought."
The Key to ECKANKAR, p. 34-35.
*************************************************************
Combining that section with the number of times the
book mentioned the "paradigm" of only "ONE BEING",
I was pleasantly surprised.
From going over it last night, I got the impression it
was important for realization of something by BEING
IT. Not necessarily by "following the leader".
Most of the quotes I illustrated recently come from
early Eckankar writings by Paul Twitchell.
This was a response to thread and not necessarily
a reply to Eck Master Michael only. It was a reply to
all.
Glad you're (ALL) here :)
Etznab
Sean
Touche Sri Etznabie Ji Ji Ji
"Etznab" <etz...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:0dc95956-1268-4f41...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Number Harmonics
"Etznab" <etz...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:0dc95956-1268-4f41...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
*************************************************************
Etznab
..............................
That's a nice offset to the question of questions, Rich.
And I agree ... The whole question of what we identify with is central to
any grasp of truth we find. The leading of questions to a point of discovery
is all part of the process of Identity, and again, I agree ... In the end it
has to be part of our being to really grasp it.
Did you ever read Robert Heinlan? In his book "Stranger in a Strange Land"
he puts forward the notion of "Grok" ... This is to totally grasp something
by making it your total experience as well as your intellectual and
emotional grasp on it. It derives from the notion of Gestalt.
All of this comes to the simple notions:
One: What does it mean to ME?
Two: How USEFUL is it?
Endless oceans of notions are a perpetual calendar of events, but when the
target is set to a point on the compass, all the winds and factors of the
sea come into play as part of the journey. Question One leads to Identity,
Question Two leads to Purpose.
One of the most basic points of Paul's entire focus was to do with finding
PURPOSE. It seems to me that the real point of obtaining experience is to
discover purpose. So in a sense, as I see things, we are sailing on the
Cosmic Sea (Insert Sailing Ship Graphic) in quest of the purpose as to why
we are sailing on the Cosmic Sea.
And for me it came to a perfect loop. In truth, I was pretty much floating
until the day I met Rebazar in person. That meeting nailed me down in a way
I cannot describe ... By experiencing the power of his beingness, I was
given a set point on my inner compass to aim towards.
For myself: It is not following the leader, so much, as seeking to grasp
what the leader IS within ourselves.
Much Love
Michael
Etznab
Michael,
I haven't read that book author, though I think I can see
your point.
About meeting Rebazar Tarzs in person, was it the ex-
perience with the candle? (I'm not sure if it was you who
mentioned the experience with a candle once.)
Etznab
Etznab
Really liked that last (last two) sentence.
Thanks.
Number Harmonics
Michael,
Etznab
............
No Candle, Rich
He walked in to my room one night.
Though I had asked for this, fact is, just him being there pushed every fear
button I owned and I ended up not eating for 6 weeks, and having fruit and
some bread for another 6 weeks after that.
From my experience, I know the guy is real.
Michael
SDA
>
>
> From my experience, I know the guy is real.
>
> Michael
>
That's interesting.
But does that specifically address the queries that Etznab specifically
raised in the RT thread ???
Um, NO it doesn't.
Obviously everyone would already know that Etznab has had experiences with
RT .... because he has said so more than once .... BUT that wasn't what his
enquiry was all about.
God is real but he never had a drivers licence nor voted in an election
..... is there something wrong with you that you do not realise what the man
has asked?
Like it is OBVIOUS Michael -- DOH !!! -- take the LOG out thine eye my dear
and READ what he actually asked - this time around in three separate
threads.
<shrug>