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

Eckanker: 12/2005 H.I. Letter #3 ... Do As I Say Not As I Do

Expand Messages
  • prometheus_973
    This is where Klemp talks about Not using Ifs Ands and Buts within the Eck community and forgets to follow his own advice in: the Letter of Light, The
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 31, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      This is where Klemp talks about Not using "Ifs" "Ands" and "Buts"
      within the Eck community and forgets to follow his own advice in:
      the Letter of Light, The Mystic World, or this H.I. Letter! Or,
      perhaps Klemp is just all talk and is mentioning this quote from
      Kant to sound well read and intelligent like G.W. Bush his hero. The
      bigger question is why are these words okay for public use and Not
      for Eckists (other than Klemp)? LOL!

      [HK] "Next, I need to translate those images into today's language.
      That's why much of my writing is simple. It leaves less room for
      misinterpreting and makes translating into other languages easier."

      [Me] The Shariyats Do Not use "simple" language and they are
      the "Holy Books" of Eckankar and are offered to the foreign public.
      Is Klemp thinking about simplifying them? It is not so much the
      language that HK uses as to the content. Klemp must be reading these
      posts for him to be so defensive about this and needing to explain
      himself.

      [HK] "I take care to translate the images from the ECK to human
      language as accurately as possible. They flow through directly in a
      burst."

      [Me] How does something "flow" in a "burst?" It would help if Klemp
      (the Mahanta) would use the correct choice of words! Perhaps he
      should have said that, They "come" through directly in a burst or
      that They "appear" or "manifest" directly in a burst. These sound
      better, make more sense, and are more accurate!

      [HK] "Many are sharing their ideas from the mental arena, and it
      uplifts people. I look at the ideas and thoughts of philosophers."

      [Me] Really! I though that all of these past ideas and thoughts were
      below the consciousness of the current Eck teachings! If the
      consciousness of Twitchell is lower that today's Mahanta
      Consciousness what about the past thoughts and ideas of non-Masters
      or even non-Living (in a physical body) Eck Masters?! What about the
      consciousness of the Shariyats?

      [HK] "One thing that strikes me about Immanuel Kant was something he
      said that acts out an appreciation for life, which shows gratitude
      in experssion. He said, no ifs, ands, or buts. By that he meant.
      make your statements clean and clear."

      [Me] The B.S. meter is starting to rise higher! Question: Why does
      Klemp view Kant's opinions so highly? I don't!

      [HK] "Suppose one, for example, says to a student, 'Study hard if
      you want to make your degree.' Kant says, forget the stuff at the
      end. Say just, 'Study hard.'

      [Me] I think that the "if" is just giving emphasis and focus to the
      point being made... Study hard for that degree. Actually, some
      people don't even have to "Study hard." Both comments are simply
      opinion and is probably based on past experience and observation.

      [HK] "When someone says but, its a nail in the coffin of invention.
      A constant stream of contradictions shuts off creativity and a gift
      that may be offered. And when someone says but, he's stopped
      listening. So be aware when using if. And especially when using but,
      because it's limiting. Move straight ahead. It throws a condition
      under your feet that is a trip wire."

      [Me] Trip wire? Nice military jargon Klemp! Is this keeping it
      simple and helping to translate your words into other languages? LOL!

      [HK] "This is pretty much for ourselves, because in dealing with
      others, you may need to use if, and, or but."

      [Me] So, Eckists should Not use "if" in order to give emphasis to a
      topic with one another, however, it's okay to use "if" with the
      public! And, Eckists should Not use "but" with one another because
      Klemp says that it is used with "contradictions" and "shuts off
      creativity and a gift that may be offered. However, "but" is okay
      for public use!

      [HK] "And is better because it doesn't limit and is a building
      block."

      [Me] So why mention "and" in the first place? Oh, I know! Kant
      mentioned "and," thus, HK would have to leave this out of
      his "philosophical" quote otherwise. Not too clever!

      [HK] Yet, IF someone's trying to make plans for you, then you may
      need to say, 'But I don't want to." They have no right to make your
      plans." [My caps]

      [Me] Notice the "IF" that Klemp just used! For Pete's sake (not you
      Peter! LOL!) Klemp can't even get through his own article before
      contradicting himself. I guess that nothing applies to him as it
      does to everyone else. HK must be above the law! Not really! This
      just goes to show how much of a control freak he really is, and, how
      much his words can be trusted! They can't! <sigh>

      Prometheus
    • prometheus_973
      revised: This is where Klemp talks about Not using Ifs Ands and Buts within the Eck community and forgets to follow his own advice in: the Letter of
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 31, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        revised:
        This is where Klemp talks about Not using "Ifs" "Ands" and "Buts"
        within the Eck community and forgets to follow his own advice in:
        the Letter of Light, The Mystic World, in this H.I. Letter or when
        addressing Eckists in "Those Wonderful Eck Masters (pg.211)!" Klemp
        is just all talk and is mentioning this quote from Kant to sound
        well read and intelligent, like G.W. Bush, who is Klemp's hero and
        fellow deceiver. The bigger question is why are these words okay for
        public use and Not for Eckists (other than Klemp)? LOL!

        [HK] "Next, I need to translate those images into today's language.
        That's why much of my writing is simple. It leaves less room for
        misinterpreting and makes translating into other languages easier."

        [Me] The Shariyats Do Not use "simple" language and they are
        the "Holy Books" of Eckankar and are offered to the foreign public.
        Is Klemp thinking about simplifying them? It is not so much the
        language that HK uses as to the content. Klemp must be reading these
        posts for him to be so defensive about this and needing to explain
        himself.

        [HK] "I take care to translate the images from the ECK to human
        language as accurately as possible. They flow through directly in a
        burst."

        [Me] How does something "flow" in a "burst?" It would help if Klemp
        (the Mahanta) would use the correct choice of words! Perhaps he
        should have said that, They "come" through directly in a burst or
        that They "appear" or "manifest" directly in a burst. These sound
        better, make more sense, and are more accurate!

        [HK] "Many are sharing their ideas from the mental arena, and it
        uplifts people. I look at the ideas and thoughts of philosophers."

        [Me] Really! I though that all of these past ideas and thoughts were
        below the consciousness of the current Eck teachings! If the
        consciousness of Twitchell is lower that today's Mahanta
        Consciousness what about the past thoughts and ideas of non-Masters
        or even non-Living (in a physical body) Eck Masters?! What about the
        consciousness of the Shariyats?

        [HK] "One thing that strikes me about Immanuel Kant was something he
        said that acts out an appreciation for life, which shows gratitude
        in expression. He said, no ifs, ands, or buts. By that he meant.
        make your statements clean and clear."

        revised:
        [Me] The B.S. meter is starting to rise higher! Question: Why does
        Klemp view Kant's opinions so highly? I don't! Besides, where's the
        gratitude by Not using these words Only to Eckists? Or at all? Weird
        Harold!!!

        [HK] "Suppose one, for example, says to a student, 'Study hard if
        you want to make your degree.' Kant says, forget the stuff at the
        end. Say just, 'Study hard.'

        revised:
        [Me] I think that the "if" is just giving emphasis and focus to the
        point being made... Study hard "if" you want that degree. The "if"
        helps to bring ones attention back to the overall goal. Otherwise
        the "study hard" just doesn't have the same impact. Where's Kant
        when you need him? Actually, some people don't even have to "Study
        hard." Both comments are simply Kant's opinions. Kant's comments
        don't have any more validity than yours or mine! SOUL=SOUL... right?!
        Wake up little Harry! Hello! By the way, you Eckies maight want to
        just say, Blessings! Instead of the longer version. LOL!

        [HK] "When someone says BUT, its a nail in the coffin of invention.
        A constant stream of CONTRADICTIONS shuts off creativity and a gift
        that may be offered. And WHEN SOMEONE SAYS BUT, HE'S STOPPED
        LISTENING. So be aware when using IF. And especially when using BUT,
        because IT'S LIMITING. Move straight ahead. It throws a condition
        under your feet that is a trip wire." [My caps]

        [Me] Trip wire? Nice military jargon Klemp! Is this keeping it
        simple and helping to translate your words into other languages? LOL!

        revised:
        Here are HK's quotes to chelas in TWEM pg.211: "BUT IF he chooses to
        hang on to shopworn karmic debts due to, say, AN INABILITY TO
        CONTROL SOME MENTAL PASSION or HABIT LIKE ANGER then HIS SPIRITUAL
        MOMENTUM STOPS." So, Klemp is using "contradictions" himself by
        using "But if!" Perhaps this is because "an inability to control
        some mental passion" like jumping off a bridge! LOL! Here's more
        from TWEM page 211 (thanks Jackie!): "BUT such an attitude changes
        nothing. The individual is a LOSER and will continue to be a LOSER
        until he adopts the practices of a WINNER." And, don't ever forget
        Klemp's angry and negative comments to that TEMPORARY POSTAL CLERK
        in the 09/2003 H.I. Letter! Klemp always said that he wasn't much of
        a listener! Yet, he points out that ESAs should be! Another
        contradiction!

        [HK] "This is pretty much for ourselves, because in dealing with
        others, you may need to use if, and, or but."

        [Me] So, Eckists should Not use "if" in order to give emphasis to a
        topic with one another, however, it's okay to use "if" with the
        public! And, Eckists should Not use "but" with one another because
        Klemp says that it is used with "contradictions" and "shuts off
        creativity and a gift that may be offered." However, "but" is okay
        for public use!

        [HK] "And is better because it doesn't limit and is a building
        block."

        [Me] So why mention "and" in the first place? Oh, I know! Kant
        mentioned "and," thus, HK would have to leave this out of
        his "philosophical" quote otherwise. Not too clever!

        [HK] Yet, IF someone's trying to make plans for you, then you may
        need to say, 'But I don't want to.' They have no right to make your
        plans." [My caps]

        revised:
        [Me] Notice the "IF" that Klemp just used! For Pete's sake (not you
        Peter! LOL!) Klemp can't even get through his own article before
        contradicting himself. I guess that nothing applies to him as it
        does to everyone else. HK must be above the law! Not really! This
        just goes to show how much of a control freak he really is, and, how
        his words or motives can't be trusted <sigh>

        Klemp now contradicts himself again when he says "YOU MAY NEED TO
        SAY, 'BUT I DON'T WANT TO.' Why not just say, I DON'T WANT TO! Just
        be direct like Kant is saying! Klemp is losing what few marbles he
        has left! Like I said before- G.W. and HK have a lot in common!
        <smile>

        Prometheus
      • ctecvie
        Prometheus, ... *** This is really fun! It s incredible how much they fuss with the translations into other languages! The talks are not translated at all
        Message 3 of 8 , Feb 5, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Prometheus,

          ---snip--->

          >[HK] "Next, I need to translate those images into today's language.
          > That's why much of my writing is simple. It leaves less room for
          > misinterpreting and makes translating into other languages easier."

          *** This is really fun! It's incredible how much they fuss with the
          translations into other languages! The talks are not translated at
          all except at the event itself, even if native speakers of a certain
          language offer to make a translation available to those who don't
          speak English. And eckists are forbidden to make private
          translations! I could understand it if they wanted to make official
          translations of tapes or videos into other languages and sell them
          to the audience. But no! There are simply *no* translations of
          talks! So, it's ridiculous that HK speaks of "making translations
          easier". Of course the books are translated as are the Mystic Worlds
          (but there, you have to make a separate order and a separate payment
          to have them - and they often come 4 months later than the original
          mystic world!).

          ---snip---

          > [HK] "I take care to translate the images from the ECK to human
          > language as accurately as possible. They flow through directly in
          >a
          > burst."

          *** Don't we all have our own images? Isn't everyone capable to
          translate them into human language? Why use HK's translations if we
          have our own? But well, of course eckists need their mahanta, their
          saviour to do it! LOL!

          ---snip---

          > [HK] "Many are sharing their ideas from the mental arena, and it
          > uplifts people. I look at the ideas and thoughts of philosophers."

          ***Wow! Hear, hear! I've always thought that "mental" is a gross
          word in eckankar! LOL!

          ---snip---

          > [HK] "One thing that strikes me about Immanuel Kant was something
          >he
          > said that acts out an appreciation for life, which shows gratitude
          > in expression. He said, no ifs, ands, or buts. By that he meant.
          > make your statements clean and clear."

          *** So, Big Harry, start doing that! LOL!

          > [HK] "Suppose one, for example, says to a student, 'Study hard if
          > you want to make your degree.' Kant says, forget the stuff at the
          > end. Say just, 'Study hard.'
          >
          > revised:
          > [Me] I think that the "if" is just giving emphasis and focus to
          >the
          > point being made... Study hard "if" you want that degree. The "if"
          > helps to bring ones attention back to the overall goal. Otherwise
          > the "study hard" just doesn't have the same impact. Where's Kant
          > when you need him? Actually, some people don't even have to "Study
          > hard." Both comments are simply Kant's opinions. Kant's comments
          > don't have any more validity than yours or mine! SOUL=SOUL...
          _right?!

          *** Of course the "if" makes the goal much more transparent and
          easier to grasp. But not for little Harry it seems! He seems to have
          got it wrong! LOL!

          Ingrid
        • prometheus_973
          [HK] Next, I need to translate those images into today s language. That s why much of my writing is simple. It leaves less room for misinterpreting and makes
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 7, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            [HK] "Next, I need to translate those images into today's language.
            That's why much of my writing is simple. It leaves less room for
            misinterpreting and makes translating into other languages easier."

            [HK] "I take care to translate the images from the ECK to human
            language as accurately as possible. They flow through directly in a
            burst."

            [HK] "Many are sharing their ideas from the mental arena, and it
            uplifts people. I look at the ideas and thoughts of philosophers."

            The following is from The Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad Books 1&2 page 200.

            [PT] "Man insists upon talk and exposition but the ECK cannot be put
            into words... The problem here, however, is that a spoken language
            is the expression of the Kal... Philosophy and wordly religion
            describe the Sugmad in negative language... Actually, there is no
            vocabulary that can express the truth of the existence of Reality...
            This is the problem of language: it exists only on the mental realm
            to express itself vocally to the external world."

            Therefore, anything spoken or written is of the Kal! This includes
            all that Klemp says or writes! Why then would Eckists defend "words"
            that are all Kalistic, unless, they too are agents of the Kal?

            This reminded me of something Klemp says in his Autobiography on
            page 331. "As I had been pounding out the account on my typewriter,
            a great spiritual energy was released that ran head-on against the
            normal, everyday vibrations of Las Vegas. This caused a terrible
            collision between the ECK and Kal forces. The positive and negative
            energies... This is my handiwork, I thought, not a little in awe."

            Amazing, since Klemp was just a Second Initiate (and LEM in training)
            at the time! However, since Twitch has stated that all that is
            spoken or written is of the Kal then I can see how more of Klemp's
            negativity from writing his book added to the storm! Does he also
            take credit for Hurricane Katrina from doing more writing?

            Here's a tidbit that could cover the Q & A portion of the Letter of
            Light and The Mystic World and certainly addresses the Vahana
            mission in general.

            [PT] "Anyone asking about ECK does not know ECK. Although one may
            hear about ECK he does not really know about ECK. There is no such
            thing as asking about ECK. There is no such thing as answering such
            questions."

            Get the point? There's more!

            [PT] "To ask a question that cannot be answered is vain, and to
            answer a question that cannot be answered is unreal."

            I wonder if Klemp has read this before?

            [PT] "And anyone who meets the vain with the unreal is one who has
            no physical perception of the universe; no mental or spiritual
            perception of the origin of existence." [page 259]

            Here's more:
            [PT] "The extrovertive mystic is generally one who finds all things
            identical--such as grass being the same as stone--although each is
            different. Mostly these extroverts are the poets, metaphysicians,
            and religious writers." [page 203]

            Isn't Klemp a religious writer? Yes he is! Eckankar is the Religion
            of the L & S of God and Klemp writes about his religion! Therefore,
            Klemp could very easily fall into this category of EXTROVERTIVE
            MYSTIC since he is a "religious writer."

            NOW TWITCH CONTRADICTS HIMSELF AS HE CONTINUES:

            [PT] "What they are saying is a complete PARADOX, in fact
            contradictory. But PARADOX is one of the common characteristics of
            mysticism. PARADOXES arise because the chela is dealing with the
            elements of psychic power, better known as the Kal force. THE KAL
            DEALS IN MYSTERY and PARADOX, for everything in its universe
            consists of dichotomies." [page 203, my caps]

            Now, let's go to page 475 where Twitch is talking about the Tenth
            Circle of Initiation.

            [PT] "Life is given only by the Sugmad, and it is found that when
            one goes into this plane he must have true direction. It is the way
            to the Godhead, yet it is not the way, and it is this PARADOX that
            brings about true wisdom for those concerned in the Tenth Circle, or
            the Anami Lok plane." [my caps]

            Twitch can't have it both ways and neither can Klemp! Perhaps HK
            just needs to do an update of Twitch's Shariyats and make some
            corrections. Or, maybe Klemp needs to write his own Holy Books, or
            maybe HK should just quit writing anything since it is all of the
            Kal! But, then again, books do make money and feeds the ego. (IMO) I
            don't see this being discontinued... do you? <smile>

            Prometheus
          • mishmisha9
            ... wrote: Twitch can t have it both ways and neither can Klemp! Perhaps HK just needs to do an update of Twitch s Shariyats and make some
            Message 5 of 8 , Feb 8, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "prometheus_973"
              <prometheus_973@...> wrote:

              Twitch can't have it both ways and neither can Klemp! Perhaps HK
              just needs to do an update of Twitch's Shariyats and make some
              corrections. Or, maybe Klemp needs to write his own Holy Books, or
              maybe HK should just quit writing anything since it is all of the
              Kal! But, then again, books do make money and feeds the ego. (IMO) I
              don't see this being discontinued... do you? <smile>

              Prometheus
              >

              Hi, All!

              I don't believe that Klemp will do an update or corrections of
              Twitchell's Shariyats. Klemp, IMO, does not intend to complete
              Volume III of the Shariyat either. It probably is just too difficult
              for him to do so. I mean he can't copy it from other religious
              sources for fear of being found out. I don't think he is getting
              that Inner Guidance to write it either, or he would--that's my
              opinion!

              From "Those Wonderful ECK Masters," Klemp tells this story of a
              chela's dream concerning (pages 168-169) "the third section of the
              holy Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad:"

              "As she did her spiritual exercises one day, Eve found herself with
              the Mahanta and in full consciousness at a Golden Wisdom Temple.
              She'd risen to the soft white cloud with the Mahanta as in the past.
              However, this time there was a surprise of sorts for they'd arrived
              at a kind of mosque with a golden roof. An ECK Master with a beard
              greeted them at the door. (It was Rami Nuri) . . . .
              The party of three--the Mahanta, Eve, and Rami Nuri--made their way
              down a long hall, with Rami Nuri in the lead. They continued along a
              main corridor until an aisle branched off to the left. And there it
              was, the third section of the holy Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad.
              The holy wisdom of God!
              Eve had expected to find sacred text greet her eyes, but it
              intrigued her to find not a single visible word in the whole volume.
              Not one word. But there was something: a beautiful, strong light
              surged from its pages, taking her breath away. And that was all Eve
              could remember of this remarkable experience."

              So, the third volume of the holy Shariyat contains no words at all;
              there's just light emitting from its pages. How convenient for
              Harold! LOL!

              Well, for those eckists who want to believe in these teachings, this
              little story, so much like the fairy tale of the king with no
              clothes, will answer the question of why there is no written
              Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, volume III. It, then, becomes very easy for
              these steadfast believers to imagine volume III's existence as
              nothing more than light shining from blank pages. After all, Harold
              supports this chela's dream when he does not deny its validity. It
              seems that anyone can fill in the blank pages by using their own
              vivid imaginations! Therefore, if you can write your own Shariyat,
              why not be your own mahanta! : )

              Mish
            • prometheus_973
              Hi Mish, I re-read HK s account of this Spiritual Exercise of Eve s where she was in full consciousness at a Golden Wisdom Temple with him. I wonder why
              Message 6 of 8 , Feb 10, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Mish,
                I re-read HK's account of this Spiritual Exercise of Eve's where she
                was in "full consciousness at a Golden Wisdom Temple" with him. I
                wonder why Klemp had to point out that it was "Rami Nuri" that
                greeted them since she was in "full consciousness?" Does
                Klemp's "full consciousness" comment mean that Eve is also an Eck
                Master?

                Aren't there supposed to be 12 Shariyats! If this was the "third
                section" then this experience took place on the Causal Plane...
                right?! But wait! The Eckankar Lexicon on page 172 has Rami Nuri
                (the letter M appears on his forehead) guarding the Shariyat One on
                the physical plane and on Venus!

                So, why couldn't Eve read this Shariyat? I guess Eckists are
                expected to fill in the blanks with their imaginations and Not look
                at details. Klemp should have started the story with, Once upon a
                time! Rami Nuri does Not guard the "third section" of the Shariyat
                according to the Eckankar LexiCon. Details, details! Then again,
                Klemp can change anything and anyone around as he sees fit... right!
                He's got the power! And Eckists need to trust him because they would
                have nothing otherwise. Except, they are still Soul and have their
                own power as their own Mahanta or Whatever. Rami Nuri was actually
                Eve's Higher Self! Eckists don't need the mahanta middle man to come
                between them and GOD/SUGMAD. Really! This is why there are so many
                contradictions. Eckankar is made-up, distorted, and borrowed to give
                the top few incomes and to give its followers hope (and
                distractions) as do other religions. Except, with Eckankar, paid
                membership is mandatory! LOL!

                Prometheus

                mishmisha wrote:

                Hi, All!

                I don't believe that Klemp will do an update or corrections of
                Twitchell's Shariyats. Klemp, IMO, does not intend to complete
                Volume III of the Shariyat either. It probably is just too difficult
                for him to do so. I mean he can't copy it from other religious
                sources for fear of being found out. I don't think he is getting
                that Inner Guidance to write it either, or he would--that's my
                opinion!

                From "Those Wonderful ECK Masters," Klemp tells this story of a
                chela's dream concerning (pages 168-169) "the third section of the
                holy Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad:"

                "As she did her spiritual exercises one day, Eve found herself with
                the Mahanta and in full consciousness at a Golden Wisdom Temple.
                She'd risen to the soft white cloud with the Mahanta as in the past.
                However, this time there was a surprise of sorts for they'd arrived
                at a kind of mosque with a golden roof. An ECK Master with a beard
                greeted them at the door. (It was Rami Nuri) . . . . The party of
                three--the Mahanta, Eve, and Rami Nuri--made their way down a long
                hall, with Rami Nuri in the lead. They continued along a main
                corridor until an aisle branched off to the left. And there it was,
                the third section of the holy Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad. The holy wisdom of
                God! Eve had expected to find sacred text greet her eyes, but it
                intrigued her to find not a single visible word in the whole volume.
                Not one word. But there was something: a beautiful, strong light
                surged from its pages, taking her breath away. And that was all Eve
                could remember of this remarkable experience."

                So, the third volume of the holy Shariyat contains no words at all;
                there's just light emitting from its pages. How convenient for
                Harold! LOL!

                Well, for those eckists who want to believe in these teachings, this
                little story, so much like the fairy tale of the king with no
                clothes, will answer the question of why there is no written
                Shariyat-Ki-Sugmad, volume III. It, then, becomes very easy for
                these steadfast believers to imagine volume III's existence as
                nothing more than light shining from blank pages. After all, Harold
                supports this chela's dream when he does not deny its validity. It
                seems that anyone can fill in the blank pages by using their own
                vivid imaginations! Therefore, if you can write your own Shariyat,
                why not be your own mahanta! : )

                Mish
              • Elizabeth
                ... volume. Not one word. But there was something: a beautiful, strong light surged from its pages, taking her breath away. And that was all Eve could remember
                Message 7 of 8 , Feb 23, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "mishmisha9"
                  <mishmisha9@...> wrote:
                  > Eve had expected to find sacred text greet her eyes, but it
                  > intrigued her to find not a single visible word in the whole
                  volume. Not one word. But there was something: a beautiful, strong
                  light surged from its pages, taking her breath away. And that was all
                  Eve could remember of this remarkable experience."
                  >
                  > So, the third volume of the holy Shariyat contains no words at all;
                  > there's just light emitting from its pages. How convenient for
                  > Harold! LOL!


                  Actually Mish, I saw this in a movie but can't recall the name of it
                  right now. Came out about 10 or more years ago. My children and I
                  watched it together. I'm pretty sure it was a Children's type movie
                  on *lessons*. I'll have to ask them if they recall the name when they
                  get home from school. And it wasn't the fairy tale of the king with
                  no clothes.... Gosh I hate those brain farts!



                  > After all, Harold
                  > supports this chela's dream when he does not deny its validity. It
                  > seems that anyone can fill in the blank pages by using their own
                  > vivid imaginations! Therefore, if you can write your own Shariyat,
                  > why not be your own mahanta! : )
                  >


                  LOL, I was saying this during the last several years of my
                  membership. At the last HI retreats I attended, I questioned other
                  HI's during a round table "why can't we write our own discourses when
                  the eckankrap ones dry up..." and shared that I HAD started doing
                  just that!

                  Yes, eventually we do come to realise we are our own Mahanta /
                  Master/ etc. Sadly Harold will never encourage this in his fake
                  teachings!
                • prometheus_973
                  Hello All, Quarterly H.I. Letter articles are current instructions for H.I.s. This one contains the instructions to improve communication within the ECK
                  Message 8 of 8 , Apr 5, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello All,
                    Quarterly H.I. Letter articles are current instructions
                    for H.I.s. This one contains the instructions to improve
                    communication within the ECK community. However,
                    Klemp never follows his own advice. Twitchell,
                    too, uses 'BUT' often in the Shariyat... Klemp does, as
                    well, in his current books.

                    However, what's incredible is that Klemp continues
                    to use "BUT" in his Members Only articles still today!

                    Klemp states that using 'BUT' is "limiting" and shows
                    you've stopped "listening" and produces a constant
                    stream of "contradictions."

                    What a hypocrite! Or, is Klemp just oblivious! Either way it
                    shows that he is Not a "Master" of anything, except, deceit
                    and trickery (an agent of Kal), and is Unconscious of
                    even his own (Mental Plane) words. How can HK, therefore,
                    be higher in consciousness than a 3rd Initiate when he hasn't
                    mastered the 4th Plane?!


                    Prometheus wrote:

                    [ME]:
                    > This is where Klemp talks about Not using "Ifs" "Ands" and "Buts"
                    > within the Eck community and forgets to follow his own advice in:
                    > the Letter of Light, The Mystic World, in this H.I. Letter or when
                    > addressing Eckists in "Those Wonderful Eck Masters (pg.211)!" Klemp
                    > is just all talk and is mentioning this quote from Kant to sound
                    > well read and intelligent, like G.W. Bush, who is Klemp's hero and
                    > fellow deceiver. The bigger question is why are these words okay for
                    > public use and Not for Eckists (other than Klemp)? LOL!


                    > [HK] "Next, I need to translate those images into today's language.
                    > That's why much of my writing is simple. It leaves less room for
                    > misinterpreting and makes translating into other languages easier."


                    > [Me] The Shariyats Do Not use "simple" language and they are
                    > the "Holy Books" of Eckankar and are offered to the foreign public.
                    > Is Klemp thinking about simplifying them? It is not so much the
                    > language that HK uses as to the content. Klemp must be reading these
                    > posts for him to be so defensive about this and needing to explain
                    > himself.


                    > [HK] "I take care to translate the images from the ECK to human
                    > language as accurately as possible. They flow through directly in a
                    > burst."


                    > [Me] How does something "flow" in a "burst?" It would help if Klemp
                    > (the Mahanta) would use the correct choice of words! Perhaps he
                    > should have said that, They "come" through directly in a burst or
                    > that They "appear" or "manifest" directly in a burst. These sound
                    > better, make more sense, and are more accurate!


                    > [HK] "Many are sharing their ideas from the mental arena, and it
                    > uplifts people. I look at the ideas and thoughts of philosophers."


                    > [Me] Really! I though that all of these past ideas and thoughts were
                    > below the consciousness of the current Eck teachings! If the
                    > consciousness of Twitchell is lower that today's Mahanta
                    > Consciousness what about the past thoughts and ideas of non-Masters
                    > or even non-Living (in a physical body) Eck Masters?! What about the
                    > consciousness of the Shariyats?


                    > [HK] "One thing that strikes me about Immanuel Kant was something he
                    > said that acts out an appreciation for life, which shows gratitude
                    > in expression. He said, no ifs, ands, or buts. By that he meant.
                    > make your statements clean and clear."


                    > [Me] The B.S. meter is starting to rise higher! Question: Why does
                    > Klemp view Kant's opinions so highly? I don't! Besides, where's the
                    > gratitude by Not using these words Only to Eckists? Or at all? Weird
                    > Harold!!!


                    > [HK] "Suppose on
                    e, for example, says to a student, 'Study hard if
                    > you want to make your degree.' Kant says, forget the stuff at the
                    > end. Say just, 'Study hard.'


                    > [Me] I think that the "if" is just giving emphasis and focus to the
                    > point being made... Study hard "if" you want that degree. The "if"
                    > helps to bring ones attention back to the overall goal. Otherwise
                    > the "study hard" just doesn't have the same impact. Where's Kant
                    > when you need him? Actually, some people don't even have to "Study
                    > hard." Both comments are simply Kant's opinions. Kant's comments
                    > don't have any more validity than yours or mine! SOUL=SOUL... right?!
                    > Wake up little Harry! Hello! By the way, you Eckies maight want to
                    > just say, Blessings! Instead of the longer version. LOL!


                    > [HK] "When someone says BUT, its a nail in the coffin of invention.
                    > A constant stream of CONTRADICTIONS shuts off creativity and a gift
                    > that may be offered. And WHEN SOMEONE SAYS BUT, HE'S STOPPED
                    > LISTENING. So be aware when using IF. And especially when using BUT,
                    > because IT'S LIMITING. Move straight ahead. It throws a condition
                    > under your feet that is a trip wire." [My caps]


                    > [Me] Trip wire? Nice military jargon Klemp! Is this keeping it
                    > simple and helping to translate your words into other languages? LOL!

                    > Here are HK's quotes to chelas in TWEM pg.211: "BUT IF he chooses to
                    > hang on to shopworn karmic debts due to, say, AN INABILITY TO
                    > CONTROL SOME MENTAL PASSION or HABIT LIKE ANGER then HIS SPIRITUAL
                    > MOMENTUM STOPS." So, Klemp is using "contradictions" himself by
                    > using "But if!" Perhaps this is because "an inability to control
                    > some mental passion" like jumping off a bridge! LOL! Here's more
                    > from TWEM page 211 (thanks Jackie!): "BUT such an attitude changes
                    > nothing. The individual is a LOSER and will continue to be a LOSER
                    > until he adopts the practices of a WINNER." And, don't ever forget
                    > Klemp's angry and negative comments to that TEMPORARY POSTAL CLERK
                    > in the 09/2003 H.I. Letter! Klemp always said that he wasn't much of
                    > a listener! Yet, he points out that ESAs should be! Another
                    > contradiction!


                    > [HK] "This is pretty much for ourselves, because in dealing with
                    > others, you may need to use if, and, or but."


                    > [Me] So, Eckists should Not use "if" in order to give emphasis to a
                    > topic with one another, however, it's okay to use "if" with the
                    > public! And, Eckists should Not use "but" with one another because
                    > Klemp says that it is used with "contradictions" and "shuts off
                    > creativity and a gift that may be offered." However, "but" is okay
                    > for public use!


                    > [HK] "And is better because it doesn't limit and is a building
                    > block."


                    > [Me] So why mention "and" in the first place? Oh, I know! Kant
                    > mentioned "and," thus, HK would have to leave this out of
                    > his "philosophical" quote otherwise. Not too clever!


                    > [HK] Yet, IF someone's trying to make plans for you, then you may
                    > need to say, 'But I don't want to.' They have no right to make your
                    > plans." [My caps]


                    > [Me] Notice the "IF" that Klemp just used! For Pete's sake (not you
                    > Peter! LOL!) Klemp can't even get through his own article before
                    > contradicting himself. I guess that nothing applies to him as it
                    > does to everyone else. HK must be above the law! Not really! This
                    > just goes to show how much of a control freak he really is, and, how
                    > his words or motives can't be trusted <sigh>

                    > Klemp now contradicts himself again when he says "YOU MAY NEED TO
                    > SAY, 'BUT I DON'T WANT TO.' Why not just say, I DON'T WANT TO! Just
                    > be direct like Kant is saying! Klemp is losing what few marbles he
                    > has left! Like I said before- G.W. and HK have a lot in common!
                    > <smile>
                    >
                    Prometheus
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.