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

Re: From a.r.e.: Change yourself and move ahead

Expand Messages
  • mishmisha9
    Hi, Ingrid! Thanks for reposting G. Peck s critical analysis of other former eckists. It seems that Garland is clueless while thinking he knows more than
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 11, 2006
      Hi, Ingrid!

      Thanks for reposting G. Peck's critical analysis of other former
      eckists. It seems that Garland is clueless while thinking he knows
      more than others.

      What I'd like to know is why in the hECK is pECK defending ECK? I
      couldn't help noticing the "eck" in Peck! I would imagine that has
      grabbed Peck for a long time! lol?

      It seems that pECK should do what he is preaching to other ex-
      eckists--he should change himself and move ahead. For beginners, I
      suggest that he come down off the lofty pedestal he has climbed up
      on, and act like a normal human being, instead of remaining the
      arrogant pretenser he displays to those he likes to judge with
      criticisms! Maybe he needs to establish his own following so he can
      feel better about himself. He seems to be begging for personal
      attention . . . or maybe he just needs a life! : )


      Tianyue's response to Peck on A.R.E. is excellent, but it seems that
      Peck has not bothered to consider these remarks. Prometheus does a
      good job here as well. The way G. Peck continues to repeat his
      message over and over, I have come to believe that he speaks but
      doesn't listen to anyone but himself. I bet he doesn't even bother
      to read what others reply to him as it is obvious his mind is
      snapped shut (closed) to other's ideas. And that is why he is the
      one stuck and will remain stuck, perhaps until the end of all time!

      Mish


      --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "ctecvie"
      <ctecvie@...> wrote:

      Hi all,

      this is a very good response by Tianyue to G. Peck's notorious
      talkdowns :-). Enjoy!

      Ingrid
      >

      *********************************************************************

      Re: Change Yourself And Move Ahead
      by "tianyue" <tianyue@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 23, 2006 at 07:30 PM


      Garland C. Peck wrote:
      Taking into consideration all the topics and discussions that
      one can get into, one fact remains. ..... You must do it for
      yourself !

      Karma, often being an overused excuse and blanket statement to
      cover every condition. Instead of looking bad by openly stating, I
      have no Idea what's going on it's easier to blame karma. For those
      who have accepted the concepts of reincarnation, karma is unfinished
      business brought along from a past life and perhaps some of what we
      face is due to past transgressions. Clearly to some extent we are
      responsible for the life we have created for ourselves from past
      behavior.

      What about the greed and weakness that we are facing in this
      life. How easily we blindly turn our lives over to another, and
      then cry that they took advantage .... Of course they took
      advantage, " you allowed them to. "People are on a pedestal because
      you put them there. Has anyone since leaving Eckankar, honestly
      taken a look at themselves and asked what about me made this
      possible ..... and what do I have to change to prevent it from
      happening again.

      The emotional, mental and physical states that allowed so many
      to fall into a trap have remained unchanged and thus it can be
      guaranteed that it will happen again. The weakness, misunderstanding
      and lack of self responsibility will demand a repetition of the
      experience. Is anyone saying, since Eckankar I've strengthen my
      views on self-reliance or is everyone still blaming Harold Klemp. Is
      anyone saying since leaving Eckankar I've learned to better manage
      my money or is everyone still blaming Harold Klemp for taking from
      them in the past. Is anyone saying since leaving Eckankar I've
      learned to correct an emotional need for approval and can now stand
      on my own or is everyone still blaming Harold Klemp for misguiding
      them.

      Has anyone having left Eckankar have truly taken the time to
      look at "themselves " and ask what about me made this possible.
      Nothing can or will change unless people are willing to start with
      themselves, with their own limitations. Life is not about Eckankar
      it's about yourself and what you choose to do with what you have.

      Correct your own weaknesses, face your own misconceptions and take
      the necessary step to improve yourselves. What ever condition at the
      time that made Eckankar part of your life will of itself create a
      similar condition .... only you can change this.

      No one is going to live your life for you, but they surely will take
      advantage of it if you given the conditions to do so.

      Change your life conditions and move ahead OR leave them as they are
      and stay where you.


      Tianyue replied this way to Garland:
      Most, if not all the people I know who have left Eckankar have
      asked themselves what made them susceptible to becoming fooled by
      Eckankar and Paul Twitchell. What on earth ever made you think
      former members don't contemplate such issues? From my conversations
      with many of such people, I'd say it is possibly the first thought
      that occurs to them after they realize they've been duped. I've not
      met one who doesn't take personal responsibility for falling into
      the trap. Your assumption is a sweeping generalization about former
      members. How many former members do you personally know well? I know
      several, and not one of them fits the description you give.

      Most former members are very empowered from the experience, from
      what I've seen. Most are not likely to make the same error of being
      too trusting again. Most have learned enormously from the
      experience, and are much more savy and wise about spirituality than
      they were before.

      But taking responsibility doesn't mean the responsiblity is
      absolute, as if all responsibility were limited to just former
      members. While there is often some responsibility for things that
      happen on both sides of any issue, the responsiblity is not always
      equally distributed, by any means.

      For example, it could be said that the employees of Enron who lost
      their pensions should have been wiser, perhaps, in their trust of
      the corporation they worked for, and should have negotiated for
      better safeguards of their futures. They could have put the funds in
      a trust that was offlimits to corporate officials and bankruptcy
      laws. But they trusted, and now they are penniless. Does this excuse
      Enron officials from wrongdoing?

      It would be ridiculous to blame the employees for the mess, even if
      they might have been better negotiators with union contracts and
      agreements. This is why the Enron execs are being prosecuted. To
      suggest blaming the employees would be absurd. Even if the notion
      they could have looked out for themselves a little better is somehow
      remotely true, no one has been so callous as to blame them. Would
      you say it was all their fault and accuse them of being too
      trusting? Would you not hold the execs accountable?

      Also, taking personal responsibility may include the
      responsibility to voice opinions that might be of use to others. For
      example, the Enron employees could set up a foundation to advise
      others of ways to protect themselves from corporate theft. Of
      course, those who defend eckankar would like this sort of civic
      responsibility to be forgotten, and they clamor for silence from
      those who have awakened from the delusion of eckankar's antics. This
      is, ironically, asking the former members to shirk the
      responsibility of expressing to the community what they have
      discovered. Thus, it is clear that responsibility is being defined
      rather selectively by those who accuse eckankar critics of lacking
      responsibility.

      Think about this, Garland: Eckankar filed a lawsuit against David
      Lane to seek legal protection from Lane's actions. This is the
      ultimate legal recourse for a victim: To appeal to the justice
      system for justice. So, it is clear eckankar officials saw eckankar
      as a victim in need of legal protection from the courts. Otherwise,
      why seek help from courts?

      It seems there is some hypocrisy underlying the notion that
      eckankar former members don't accept responsibility in having been
      duped, even as eckankar is seen as a victim by its own officials.
      Why didn't the eckankar officials just let karma take care of
      things? Wasn't it eckankar's karma to have Lane write his book?
      After all, we're talking about self responsibility, aren't we? Does
      eckankar and its leaders accept responsibility for their actions, or
      not? Do they accept that what happens to eckankar is eckankar's
      responsibility?

      Interesting...the way these things get so twisted in peoples minds.

      Tianyue
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.