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

Reply to Mish

Expand Messages
  • makiztor
    Mish, it was roughly ten years ago when I started to go deeper at researching the history (etymology) of words. Mish wrote: Regarding the shariyat and reading
    Message 1 of 7 , Nov 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Mish, it was roughly ten years ago when I started to go deeper at
      researching the history (etymology) of words.

      Mish wrote:

      Regarding the shariyat and reading it word by word in order to
      understand its meaning, the difficulty comes from Twitchell's
      plagiarizing and altering other people's thoughts and adapting these
      to his own private philosophy, while taking them out of context to
      do so.

      Etznab responds: I believe it is human nature to do just this. That
      to an extent everybody is prone to plagiarize, adapt to their own
      philosophy, and take out of context what we consider to be other
      peoples thoughts and words. Follow the records to history and you see
      this all the time. Especially religious history!

      Mish wrote:

      Therefore, IMO, this Echo or Sound Current is not the same as Heaven
      (or the Ocean of Love and Mercy). This is the accurate eckankar dogma,
      while your explanation of this is of your own creation and not that of
      eckankar.

      In an earlier post Mish wrote:

      "I understand that Living Echo means heaven while Living God means
      earth. This is what you are saying?"

      Responding to that earlier post Etznab wrote:

      NO. NO. NO. First of all, "Living God" may not be referring to an
      adjective and a noun. But one is a verb. The word "Living". [....]

      *********

      We can debate "my" Eckankar vs. "your" Eckankar for eternity. I see
      this happening all the time at church. Eckankar church! Everybody has
      there own Eckankar is the saying. So what is wrong with "my" creation
      vs. Eckankar? Because if you are talking about the outer recorded
      history, the literal creations of Eckankar [1965-2006] have not, and/or
      are not 100% credible. Not to mention accurate - according to actual
      history. Would you not tend to agree?

      When you say that I mentioned "you didn't get it" my impression then
      was that you were equating "Living Echo" with Heaven.

      After I speak, the issue becomes an echo. What tends to issue out of
      people's mouths is not the same as what it was inside. There is even a
      point before the issue reaches the vocal cords and later gets modified
      by the teeth, the tongue, and the mouth. If you want, I believe we can
      even go further "inside" than this by including the impressions on
      spirit made by the emotional and mental bodies before an "issue" even
      reaches the human brain. I know. More riddles.

      It was probably a misunderstanding what I am having to respond to
      here. If that is not the case, then bring it back at me.

      Etznab
    • mishmisha9
      Hello, Etznab! Thanks for your reply. The thing about Twitchell s plagiarisms is that few people copy word for word the writings of others and then sign their
      Message 2 of 7 , Nov 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello, Etznab!

        Thanks for your reply. The thing about Twitchell's plagiarisms is
        that few people copy word for word the writings of others and then
        sign their name to it and owning it. It becomes a bigger issue when
        it becomes a business, plagiarizing the words of others, as in the
        case of James Frey and "A Million Little Pieces." I think Twitchell
        thought he could get away with his con because the Internet was not
        in existence and the scrutiny of such behavior was not so easy as it
        is today.

        Regarding man made religions, well, yes, they are full of
        plagiarisms and untruths, much like eckankar. If one is not
        embracing any religion, it doesn't really impact one's spirituality
        what "religious" con men did way back in history, beyond just
        knowing that it historically trails to the beginning of the
        creations of the man made religions. Just because many are doing or
        have done unethical or deceptive things in the name of their
        religion, it doesn't excuse it happening or make it right. As a
        parent, I never allowed my children to believe because everyone is
        doing this or that it is okay--of course, I was protecting them from
        following the herd and trying to help them instill discernment and
        responsibility.

        I do agree that there are inherent misunderstandings in the
        dialogue, but that is a normal process in discussing anything with
        anyone. I run into this on a daily basis just navigating around in
        the world and interacting with others. It is good to try to make our
        thoughts and communications as clear as we can.

        You certainly have some interesting perspectives. I appreciate your
        sharing and being open-minded to the group here, and I'm trying to
        do the same with your posts as well, even if it seems we are most
        likely at odds. It's okay because we are entitled to our differing
        perspectives that are certainly based on our individual experiences
        and where we are at this particular time in the way we are viewing
        them.

        Well, I need to take a break from the discussion so if you post a
        reply and if I don't reply or acknowledge it, it just means I'm
        resting from this discussion!

        Thanks,
        Mish


        --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "makiztor"
        <etznab@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Mish, it was roughly ten years ago when I started to go deeper
        at
        > researching the history (etymology) of words.
        >
        > Mish wrote:
        >
        > Regarding the shariyat and reading it word by word in order to
        > understand its meaning, the difficulty comes from Twitchell's
        > plagiarizing and altering other people's thoughts and adapting
        these
        > to his own private philosophy, while taking them out of context to
        > do so.
        >
        > Etznab responds: I believe it is human nature to do just this.
        That
        > to an extent everybody is prone to plagiarize, adapt to their own
        > philosophy, and take out of context what we consider to be other
        > peoples thoughts and words. Follow the records to history and you
        see
        > this all the time. Especially religious history!
        >
        > Mish wrote:
        >
        > Therefore, IMO, this Echo or Sound Current is not the same as
        Heaven
        > (or the Ocean of Love and Mercy). This is the accurate eckankar
        dogma,
        > while your explanation of this is of your own creation and not
        that of
        > eckankar.
        >
        > In an earlier post Mish wrote:
        >
        > "I understand that Living Echo means heaven while Living God
        means
        > earth. This is what you are saying?"
        >
        > Responding to that earlier post Etznab wrote:
        >
        > NO. NO. NO. First of all, "Living God" may not be referring to
        an
        > adjective and a noun. But one is a verb. The word "Living". [....]
        >
        > *********
        >
        > We can debate "my" Eckankar vs. "your" Eckankar for eternity. I
        see
        > this happening all the time at church. Eckankar church! Everybody
        has
        > there own Eckankar is the saying. So what is wrong with "my"
        creation
        > vs. Eckankar? Because if you are talking about the outer recorded
        > history, the literal creations of Eckankar [1965-2006] have not,
        and/or
        > are not 100% credible. Not to mention accurate - according to
        actual
        > history. Would you not tend to agree?
        >
        > When you say that I mentioned "you didn't get it" my impression
        then
        > was that you were equating "Living Echo" with Heaven.
        >
        > After I speak, the issue becomes an echo. What tends to issue
        out of
        > people's mouths is not the same as what it was inside. There is
        even a
        > point before the issue reaches the vocal cords and later gets
        modified
        > by the teeth, the tongue, and the mouth. If you want, I believe we
        can
        > even go further "inside" than this by including the impressions on
        > spirit made by the emotional and mental bodies before an "issue"
        even
        > reaches the human brain. I know. More riddles.
        >
        > It was probably a misunderstanding what I am having to respond
        to
        > here. If that is not the case, then bring it back at me.
        >
        > Etznab
        >
      • etznab@aol.com
        In a message dated 11/1/06 4:41:06 PM Central Standard Time, ... Etznab: I see what you are saying here Mish, and I won t say that I disagree. My only
        Message 3 of 7 , Nov 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 11/1/06 4:41:06 PM Central Standard Time, mishmisha9@... writes:


          Just because many are doing or have done unethical or deceptive things in the name of their religion, it doesn't excuse it happening or make it right.


          Etznab: I see what you are saying here Mish, and I won't say that I disagree. My only consolation has been to look for answers and the reasons why people do things.
          It doesn't change what has been done, but it lets me see how things are connected to other things. I am not trying to be apologetic for any religion by saying this. I would not dig or continue to dig so deeply into history if it was not something that I wanted to better understand.
             I can empathize with you and others to an extent. I am being fair and honest by saying this because I may not know a lot about what you have come across and found. And if I did then I would probably empathize more.
             In the future I will try not to mention the E-word in my posts, but instead try to approach these topics from another direction. And I know that you and Prometheus have suggested that I look at more of the posts on this board and that it will help me to understand where you're coming from.
             You are not the only one who might need a rest from this discussion, or something like that. I can hardly take it anymore myself. If I were not temporarily layed off and between assignments (you were right Liz) then I wouldn't have had the stamina to post and respond as much as I did.

          Etznab 
        • skardicus
          ... Unless you find the eck-xit sign and go through the door I see ... As my dim memory serves me multiple translation/regurgitations of eck-think were
          Message 4 of 7 , Nov 3, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "makiztor"
            <etznab@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > We can debate "my" Eckankar vs. "your" Eckankar for eternity.

            Unless you find the "eck-xit" sign and go through the door


            I see
            > this happening all the time at church. Eckankar church! Everybody has
            > there own Eckankar is the saying. So what is wrong with "my" creation
            > vs. Eckankar?

            As my dim memory serves me multiple translation/regurgitations of
            eck-think were seldom discouraged as long as you didn't get "off
            message". Message = what you were required to believe to be validated
            by the engineers.


            > Because if you are talking about the outer recorded
            > history, the literal creations of Eckankar [1965-2006] have not, and/or
            > are not 100% credible. Not to mention accurate - according to actual
            > history. Would you not tend to agree?

            For me this is a secondary item to focus on for those who needed some
            evidence to achieve escape velocity from the "Religion". Though it's
            the material that is most debated/discussed because we can all
            reference it. To me, the eck books, tapes, seminars are slieights of
            hand (lowly parlor trick) - I prefer to watch the magician himself -
            ask questions like "Qui Bono" (Who Benefits).

            I probably met with Harry 8-10 times in my hey-day. Up close,
            personal, chit-chatty, not just some briefy "Hi Baraka Bashad" Even
            introduced him once onstage one Saturday night. Lets look at Harry
            through time:

            This first video reminds me of the Harry that I knew:

            http://newharry.notlong.com

            This second one is almost spooky:

            http://newharry1.notlong.com

            Probably my most profound memory of Harry was at a DC Seminar in ...85
            I think. The hub-ub of Darwin Gross was still causing pain for some
            eckists that didn't understand even a little bit how THEIR master (he
            was my first "eck master")had been quicked out of the club.

            It was Q&A time "Ask the Master" for the audience (bet they don't do
            that anymore). This woman gets up and a microphone is brought to her.
            She asks something like this "Is there some kind of retirement plan
            for past LEMs? Will we (eckankar and eck-money) take care of them?"
            Now I don't know about you readers out there but hub-ub or not -
            sounds like this woman had a charitable concern about a human being
            that was once proclaimed God-of-Eckankar and eckists flocked to, pray
            to, etc.

            Harry's response was this: "I wondered when you first stood up why I
            could not see your light. Now I know why. Your light is out. Sit
            down. Your light is out." I was 20 years old when he said this.
            Made quite an impression. I was sitting with about 15 of my friends
            and we all looked at each other with "what the fuck!?" eyes. The
            woman was my then-alive Grandma's age.

            Now - just have to wonder - if I was god-on-earth and could step into
            the ocean of love and mercy at will, held the rod of power and so on -
            would I berate an old lady - or flex my God-Muscles and heal her mind
            if she was damaged goods? I'm kind of thinking since I used my
            God-Muscles earlier that year to dump my wife and turn my hot-blonde
            secretary into my new hot-smoking wife - I'm feeling pretty good - I'd
            probably heal her.

            And not to resurrect dirty religious relics of America's past but
            banging your secretary just sounds a little too much like James Baker
            to me.

            Slieght-of-hand is WHERE the magician wants your attention. Ignore
            that purple corporate hostile take-over looming behind him.

            So for me - I think we are all responsible for our triumphs and
            mistakes be that an action, inaction, word, misspeak, poor
            translation, etc. If someone frequently mis-delivers their thoughts
            in terms of what they say then either they are poorly trained or
            misleading.

            In my opinion - if you are a leader then "poor training" isn't a
            wieghty excuse.

            Skard

            >
            > When you say that I mentioned "you didn't get it" my impression then
            > was that you were equating "Living Echo" with Heaven.
            >
            > After I speak, the issue becomes an echo. What tends to issue out of
            > people's mouths is not the same as what it was inside. There is even a
            > point before the issue reaches the vocal cords and later gets modified
            > by the teeth, the tongue, and the mouth. If you want, I believe we can
            > even go further "inside" than this by including the impressions on
            > spirit made by the emotional and mental bodies before an "issue" even
            > reaches the human brain. I know. More riddles.
            >
            > It was probably a misunderstanding what I am having to respond to
            > here. If that is not the case, then bring it back at me.
            >
            > Etznab
            >
          • prometheus_973
            skardicus wrote: I probably met with Harry 8-10 times in my hey-day. Up close, personal, chit-chatty, not just some briefy Hi Baraka Bashad Even introduced
            Message 5 of 7 , Nov 3, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              skardicus wrote:
              I probably met with Harry 8-10 times in my hey-day. Up close,
              personal, chit-chatty, not just some briefy "Hi Baraka Bashad" Even
              introduced him once onstage one Saturday night. Lets look at Harry
              through time:

              *ME: I did have a 2-3 minute conversation with HK once, but would
              normally just chat with Bob Lawton who was in charge of Harry's
              security and entourage. Sometimes a few of us would meet up with
              them later after his talk. I had lunch with Marge once (I know - big
              deal!). It's funny how different Eck leaders have their own
              groupies. Jerry Leonard was even seen as a guru to some Eckists! LOL!

              This first video reminds me of the Harry that I knew:

              http://newharry.notlong.com

              *ME: [I gave this video clip a One Star rating]: )

              This second one is almost spooky:

              http://newharry1.notlong.com

              *ME: [I also gave this clip a One Star rating. Yes, it is sort of
              spooky! His Lights are out!]: ))

              Probably my most profound memory of Harry was at a DC Seminar
              in ...85 I think. The hub-ub of Darwin Gross was still causing pain
              for some eckists that didn't understand even a little bit how THEIR
              master (he was my first "eck master")had been quicked out of the
              club.

              It was Q&A time "Ask the Master" for the audience (bet they don't do
              that anymore). This woman gets up and a microphone is brought to her.
              She asks something like this "Is there some kind of retirement plan
              for past LEMs? Will we (eckankar and eck-money) take care of them?"

              *ME: Yes! I remember her! She was sitting in the right-hand section
              about 10 rows back and I think that she was wearing a blue dress.

              Now I don't know about you readers out there but hub-ub or not -
              sounds like this woman had a charitable concern about a human being
              that was once proclaimed God-of-Eckankar and eckists flocked to, pray
              to, etc.

              Harry's response was this: "I wondered when you first stood up why I
              could not see your light. Now I know why. Your light is out. Sit
              down. Your light is out." I was 20 years old when he said this.
              Made quite an impression. I was sitting with about 15 of my friends
              and we all looked at each other with "what the fuck!?" eyes. The
              woman was my then-alive Grandma's age.

              *ME: I know what you mean! Why I stayed in Eckankar after hearing
              this unloving and mean spirited response, by Klemp, is beyond me! I
              guess that I rationalized away any common sense. What you see and
              hear is what you get, but Eckists seem to imagine that there is more
              good behind his mask.

              Now - just have to wonder - if I was god-on-earth and could step into
              the ocean of love and mercy at will, held the rod of power and so
              on - would I berate an old lady - or flex my God-Muscles and heal
              her mind if she was damaged goods? I'm kind of thinking since I used
              my God-Muscles earlier that year to dump my wife and turn my hot-
              blonde secretary into my new hot-smoking wife - I'm feeling pretty
              good - I'd probably heal her.

              *ME: Right! Why didn't Klemp send her some Love and healing Eck
              energy from the Mahanta Consciousness! Actually, Klemp was the one
              who asked if anyone had any questions. If HK can't handle the heat
              then he should stay out of the kitchen! It is no wonder that Eckists
              are afraid to ask tough questions anymore. He's conditioned Eckists
              to become silent whimps.

              And not to resurrect dirty religious relics of America's past but
              banging your secretary just sounds a little too much like James Baker
              to me.

              *ME: Yes, Joan (Cross) was taking trips with HK for quite awhile.
              When did they get married? Does she have any children from her
              previous marriage? Is her ex-husband and/or children Eckists?
              Inquiring minds want to know. Or, are these too, like Eckankar
              finances, a secret?

              Prometheus
            • mishmisha9
              ... wrote: I probably met with Harry 8-10 times in my hey-day. Up close, personal, chit-chatty, not just some briefy Hi Baraka Bashad
              Message 6 of 7 , Nov 4, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "skardicus"
                <skardicus@...> wrote:
                <snip>
                I probably met with Harry 8-10 times in my hey-day. Up close,
                personal, chit-chatty, not just some briefy "Hi Baraka Bashad" Even
                introduced him once onstage one Saturday night. Lets look at Harry
                through time:

                <snip>

                Probably my most profound memory of Harry was at a DC Seminar
                in ...85 I think. The hub-ub of Darwin Gross was still causing pain
                for some eckists that didn't understand even a little bit how THEIR
                master (he was my first "eck master")had been quicked out of the
                club.

                It was Q&A time "Ask the Master" for the audience (bet they don't do
                that anymore). This woman gets up and a microphone is brought to
                her. She asks something like this "Is there some kind of retirement
                plan for past LEMs? Will we (eckankar and eck-money) take care of
                them?" Now I don't know about you readers out there but hub-ub or
                not - sounds like this woman had a charitable concern about a human
                being that was once proclaimed God-of-Eckankar and eckists flocked
                to, pray to, etc.

                Harry's response was this: "I wondered when you first stood up why I
                could not see your light. Now I know why. Your light is out. Sit
                down. Your light is out." I was 20 years old when he said this.
                Made quite an impression. I was sitting with about 15 of my friends
                and we all looked at each other with "what the fuck!?" eyes. The
                woman was my then-alive Grandma's age.

                Now - just have to wonder - if I was god-on-earth and could step into
                the ocean of love and mercy at will, held the rod of power and so
                on - would I berate an old lady - or flex my God-Muscles and heal
                her mind f she was damaged goods? I'm kind of thinking since I used
                my God-Muscles earlier that year to dump my wife and turn my hot-
                blonde secretary into my new hot-smoking wife - I'm feeling pretty
                good - I'd probably heal her.

                And not to resurrect dirty religious relics of America's past but
                banging your secretary just sounds a little too much like James Baker
                to me.

                Slieght-of-hand is WHERE the magician wants your attention. Ignore
                that purple corporate hostile take-over looming behind him.

                So for me - I think we are all responsible for our triumphs and
                mistakes be that an action, inaction, word, misspeak, poor
                translation, etc. If someone frequently mis-delivers their thoughts
                in terms of what they say then either they are poorly trained or
                misleading.

                In my opinion - if you are a leader then "poor training" isn't a
                wieghty excuse.

                Skard
                >

                Hi, Skard and All!

                I had heard this story from someone else and I might have read
                a "toned" down version of it in one of HK's transcripts. I wish I
                hadn'tossed all those books! : )

                The sad thing is this is not an isolated incidence of Klemp's
                cruelty toward his chelas and/or others. The temporary postal worker
                story (09-2003 H.I. Letter) has become a classic. If you look again
                at what Klemp has shared in his autobiographies, there are more
                indicators of the dark side of the eck leader's personality which
                demonstrate he has not learned well what he preaches about Divine
                Love.

                Mish
              • ctecvie
                Hello Mish, ... **** It s in Ford Johnson s book Confessions of a God Seeker , as well. Ingrid
                Message 7 of 7 , Nov 5, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hello Mish,

                  > Hi, Skard and All!
                  >
                  > I had heard this story from someone else and I might have read
                  > a "toned" down version of it in one of HK's transcripts. I wish I
                  > hadn'tossed all those books! : )

                  **** It's in Ford Johnson's book "Confessions of a God Seeker", as
                  well.
                  Ingrid
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.