So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?

[Henosis Sage]

So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?

Come on, spill the beans, and do provide hard direct evidence or personal feedback to support your beliefs.

And please do try and explain one day how come Paul Twitchell never actually told anyone anything RT ever " said to him " expect that which he had already seen written in someone else's book which he mis-used & deceitfully copied into his own "manuscripts"?

Surely it would have been easier for Twitchell to present to Kirpal Singh and to Gail and to Eckists what it was Twitchell had really recorded in his dream diaries / post inner experiences journals of what Rebazar and Gopal and Fubbi etc had " really shared " with him instead of all this copied guff from hundreds upon hundreds of misc books plays novels discourses religious texts be they fiction and non-fiction?

It sure was a complicated time wasting intensive and ultimately to be exposed way around creating a so-called " new philosophy" out of nothing but nothingness and half a lifetime of abject poverty & isolated loneliness reading some books...... and typing up your favourite quotes and bits on your weary typewriter and shoving it into a manila folder for a few decades before dusting it off and saying Rebazar Tarzs said it instead, yeah?

Isn't it a bit weird or curious how Darwin Gross, Michael Turner (here) and Harold Klemp, Doug Marman, Patti Simpson et al and dozens upon dozens of a.r.e. commenters kind of never ever said anything about their own great personal experiences with dear old Rebazar? Or any of the others?

Absolutely it is.

[Ben Douglass]

Post by Henosis Sage
So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?
Come on, spill the beans, and do provide hard direct evidence or personal feedback to support your beliefs.
And please do try and explain one day how come Paul Twitchell never actually told anyone anything RT ever " said to him " expect that which he had already seen written in someone else's book which he mis-used & deceitfully copied into his own "manuscripts"?
Surely it would have been easier for Twitchell to present to Kirpal Singh and to Gail and to Eckists what it was Twitchell had really recorded in his dream diaries / post inner experiences journals of what Rebazar and Gopal and Fubbi etc had " really shared " with him instead of all this copied guff from hundreds upon hundreds of misc books plays novels discourses religious texts be they fiction and non-fiction?
It sure was a complicated time wasting intensive and ultimately to be exposed way around creating a so-called " new philosophy" out of nothing but nothingness and half a lifetime of abject poverty & isolated loneliness reading some books...... and typing up your favourite quotes and bits on your weary typewriter and shoving it into a manila folder for a few decades before dusting it off and saying Rebazar Tarzs said it instead, yeah?
Isn't it a bit weird or curious how Darwin Gross, Michael Turner (here) and Harold Klemp, Doug Marman, Patti Simpson et al and dozens upon dozens of a.r.e. commenters kind of never ever said anything about their own great personal experiences with dear old Rebazar? Or any of the others?
Absolutely it is.

It has always been my assertion that Rebazar Tarzs was simply a *template* created by Paul so folks would have something to focus their hopes, dreams and desires on. It's awfully hard to have a personal experience with a *template*. ;)

[Henosis Sage]

Post by Ben Douglass

Post by Henosis Sage
So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?
Come on, spill the beans, and do provide hard direct evidence or personal feedback to support your beliefs.
And please do try and explain one day how come Paul Twitchell never actually told anyone anything RT ever " said to him " expect that which he had already seen written in someone else's book which he mis-used & deceitfully copied into his own "manuscripts"?
Surely it would have been easier for Twitchell to present to Kirpal Singh and to Gail and to Eckists what it was Twitchell had really recorded in his dream diaries / post inner experiences journals of what Rebazar and Gopal and Fubbi etc had " really shared " with him instead of all this copied guff from hundreds upon hundreds of misc books plays novels discourses religious texts be they fiction and non-fiction?
It sure was a complicated time wasting intensive and ultimately to be exposed way around creating a so-called " new philosophy" out of nothing but nothingness and half a lifetime of abject poverty & isolated loneliness reading some books...... and typing up your favourite quotes and bits on your weary typewriter and shoving it into a manila folder for a few decades before dusting it off and saying Rebazar Tarzs said it instead, yeah?
Isn't it a bit weird or curious how Darwin Gross, Michael Turner (here) and Harold Klemp, Doug Marman, Patti Simpson et al and dozens upon dozens of a.r.e. commenters kind of never ever said anything about their own great personal experiences with dear old Rebazar? Or any of the others?
Absolutely it is.

It has always been my assertion that Rebazar Tarzs was simply a *template* created by Paul so folks would have something to focus their hopes, dreams and desires on. It's awfully hard to have a personal experience with a *template*. ;)

Hi, that sounds like a good way to put it. :-) thx for the comment.

[fife]

Post by Ben Douglass

Post by Henosis Sage
So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?
Come on, spill the beans, and do provide hard direct evidence or personal feedback to support your beliefs.
And please do try and explain one day how come Paul Twitchell never actually told anyone anything RT ever " said to him " expect that which he had already seen written in someone else's book which he mis-used & deceitfully copied into his own "manuscripts"?
Surely it would have been easier for Twitchell to present to Kirpal Singh and to Gail and to Eckists what it was Twitchell had really recorded in his dream diaries / post inner experiences journals of what Rebazar and Gopal and Fubbi etc had " really shared " with him instead of all this copied guff from hundreds upon hundreds of misc books plays novels discourses religious texts be they fiction and non-fiction?
It sure was a complicated time wasting intensive and ultimately to be exposed way around creating a so-called " new philosophy" out of nothing but nothingness and half a lifetime of abject poverty & isolated loneliness reading some books...... and typing up your favourite quotes and bits on your weary typewriter and shoving it into a manila folder for a few decades before dusting it off and saying Rebazar Tarzs said it instead, yeah?
Isn't it a bit weird or curious how Darwin Gross, Michael Turner (here) and Harold Klemp, Doug Marman, Patti Simpson et al and dozens upon dozens of a.r.e. commenters kind of never ever said anything about their own great personal experiences with dear old Rebazar? Or any of the others?
Absolutely it is.

It has always been my assertion that Rebazar Tarzs was simply a *template* created by Paul so folks would have something to focus their hopes, dreams and desires on. It's awfully hard to have a personal experience with a *template*. ;)

Ben:
Sure, a mental construct. That's exactly how a con game (confidence game) works. You tell someone a story they can believe or want to believe and once you have their confidence it's not just confidence in the story but you as the storyteller. And you can work with that. Expand it. Build it up. Add more characters, more events, nick ideas from whoever you want to nick them from, structure from other, already established paths...

In the end, what have you got? A fabric but it's like cheesecloth. Woven by someone bullshitting their way through philosophy and psychology and not in a particularly gifted way.

But as a belief? All you have to do is give someone something they want to believe and if they believe it, it's a belief. It's their belief. Fact or fiction, it doesn't matter. If they believe it, it's their belief.

Belief
Mental construct
Perception
Sensation
Formation

All someone has to do is start someone off and they'll fill in all these blanks themself, measure all their experiences accordingly, or by listening to the sound current - all their storyteller's stories.

The idea of "the five skandhas" has been around for a long, long time. And why is it still around? Because it's the core of the human ego.

Modern psychology just started to wake up to these five in the 1980's. It calls them "The Big Five" but it doesn't know what it's dealing with yet, how to talk about this phenomenon, what it's about, or how to describe it. It's not about personality. It's the core of human ego, i.e. belief, mental construct, perception, sensation, formation.

[wernertrp]

Post by fife

Post by Ben Douglass

Post by Henosis Sage
So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?
Come on, spill the beans, and do provide hard direct evidence or personal feedback to support your beliefs.
And please do try and explain one day how come Paul Twitchell never actually told anyone anything RT ever " said to him " expect that which he had already seen written in someone else's book which he mis-used & deceitfully copied into his own "manuscripts"?
Surely it would have been easier for Twitchell to present to Kirpal Singh and to Gail and to Eckists what it was Twitchell had really recorded in his dream diaries / post inner experiences journals of what Rebazar and Gopal and Fubbi etc had " really shared " with him instead of all this copied guff from hundreds upon hundreds of misc books plays novels discourses religious texts be they fiction and non-fiction?
It sure was a complicated time wasting intensive and ultimately to be exposed way around creating a so-called " new philosophy" out of nothing but nothingness and half a lifetime of abject poverty & isolated loneliness reading some books...... and typing up your favourite quotes and bits on your weary typewriter and shoving it into a manila folder for a few decades before dusting it off and saying Rebazar Tarzs said it instead, yeah?
Isn't it a bit weird or curious how Darwin Gross, Michael Turner (here) and Harold Klemp, Doug Marman, Patti Simpson et al and dozens upon dozens of a.r.e. commenters kind of never ever said anything about their own great personal experiences with dear old Rebazar? Or any of the others?
Absolutely it is.

It has always been my assertion that Rebazar Tarzs was simply a *template* created by Paul so folks would have something to focus their hopes, dreams and desires on. It's awfully hard to have a personal experience with a *template*. ;)

Sure, a mental construct. That's exactly how a con game (confidence game) works. You tell someone a story they can believe or want to believe and once you have their confidence it's not just confidence in the story but you as the storyteller. And you can work with that. Expand it. Build it up. Add more characters, more events, nick ideas from whoever you want to nick them from, structure from other, already established paths...
In the end, what have you got? A fabric but it's like cheesecloth. Woven by someone bullshitting their way through philosophy and psychology and not in a particularly gifted way.
But as a belief? All you have to do is give someone something they want to believe and if they believe it, it's a belief. It's their belief. Fact or fiction, it doesn't matter. If they believe it, it's their belief.
Belief
Mental construct
Perception
Sensation
Formation
All someone has to do is start someone off and they'll fill in all these blanks themself, measure all their experiences accordingly, or by listening to the sound current - all their storyteller's stories.
The idea of "the five skandhas" has been around for a long, long time. And why is it still around? Because it's the core of the human ego.
Modern psychology just started to wake up to these five in the 1980's. It calls them "The Big Five" but it doesn't know what it's dealing with yet, how to talk about this phenomenon, what it's about, or how to describe it. It's not about personality. It's the core of human ego, i.e. belief, mental construct, perception, sensation, formation.

[wernertrp]

Post by fife

Post by Ben Douglass

Post by Henosis Sage
So is Rebazar Tarzs really a made up fake 500 year old master or was he really real?
Come on, spill the beans, and do provide hard direct evidence or personal feedback to support your beliefs.
And please do try and explain one day how come Paul Twitchell never actually told anyone anything RT ever " said to him " expect that which he had already seen written in someone else's book which he mis-used & deceitfully copied into his own "manuscripts"?
Surely it would have been easier for Twitchell to present to Kirpal Singh and to Gail and to Eckists what it was Twitchell had really recorded in his dream diaries / post inner experiences journals of what Rebazar and Gopal and Fubbi etc had " really shared " with him instead of all this copied guff from hundreds upon hundreds of misc books plays novels discourses religious texts be they fiction and non-fiction?
It sure was a complicated time wasting intensive and ultimately to be exposed way around creating a so-called " new philosophy" out of nothing but nothingness and half a lifetime of abject poverty & isolated loneliness reading some books...... and typing up your favourite quotes and bits on your weary typewriter and shoving it into a manila folder for a few decades before dusting it off and saying Rebazar Tarzs said it instead, yeah?
Isn't it a bit weird or curious how Darwin Gross, Michael Turner (here) and Harold Klemp, Doug Marman, Patti Simpson et al and dozens upon dozens of a.r.e. commenters kind of never ever said anything about their own great personal experiences with dear old Rebazar? Or any of the others?
Absolutely it is.

It has always been my assertion that Rebazar Tarzs was simply a *template* created by Paul so folks would have something to focus their hopes, dreams and desires on. It's awfully hard to have a personal experience with a *template*. ;)

Sure, a mental construct. That's exactly how a con game (confidence game) works. You tell someone a story they can believe or want to believe and once you have their confidence it's not just confidence in the story but you as the storyteller. And you can work with that. Expand it. Build it up. Add more characters, more events, nick ideas from whoever you want to nick them from, structure from other, already established paths...
In the end, what have you got? A fabric but it's like cheesecloth. Woven by someone bullshitting their way through philosophy and psychology and not in a particularly gifted way.
But as a belief? All you have to do is give someone something they want to believe and if they believe it, it's a belief. It's their belief. Fact or fiction, it doesn't matter. If they believe it, it's their belief.
Belief
Mental construct
Perception
Sensation
Formation
All someone has to do is start someone off and they'll fill in all these blanks themself, measure all their experiences accordingly, or by listening to the sound current - all their storyteller's stories.
The idea of "the five skandhas" has been around for a long, long time. And why is it still around? Because it's the core of the human ego.
Modern psychology just started to wake up to these five in the 1980's. It calls them "The Big Five" but it doesn't know what it's dealing with yet, how to talk about this phenomenon, what it's about, or how to describe it. It's not about personality. It's the core of human ego, i.e. belief, mental construct, perception, sensation, formation.

Today I will strip down the age of Rebzar to 90 years.
(good will)
First correction.