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

Trademark Law and Copyright Law

Expand Messages
  • jonathanjohns96
    Trademark Law and Copyright Law Credit to an anonymous attorney on the radio About ten years ago I heard a radio program where a trademark/copyright attorney
    Message 1 of 13 , Jan 23, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Trademark Law and Copyright Law

      Credit to an anonymous attorney on the radio
      About ten years ago I heard a radio program where a
      trademark/copyright attorney was explaining trademark law. He used
      the McDonalds Corporation in his examples explaining trademark law.
      He did a masterful job of explaining trademark law to the listening
      audience in 15 minutes. My discussion of trademark law is based on
      what he said. I want to give him full credit to him for his ideas
      while taking full responsibility for what I am presenting to you. It
      obviously isn't in its original form in large part due to my lack of
      remembering something from ten years ago, but also due the fact that
      I am not an attorney.

      Introduction
      First of all, trademark law and copyright law are two completely
      different things. Trademark law covers unique symbols or other
      objects associated with a business. Copyright law covers mostly
      written material, or things such as collections of photos on a CD, or
      music, or movies. Using McDonalds as a business, their trademarked
      items would be the golden arches, Ronald McDonald, the Hamburglar,
      the name "Big Mac," and obviously the name "McDonalds itself.
      Copywritten items at McDonalds could include the text on their menu,
      or at training manual for their employees that was written
      specifically for their employees.

      Trademark Law
      The "golden arches" of McDonalds are trademarked. The clown "Ronald
      McDonald" is trademarked. The name "Big Mac" is also trademarked. The
      purpose of a trademark is to protect the unique characteristics of
      your business from being "stolen" from someone else, with them
      setting up their own business, usually the same type of business. So
      trademarks protect the McDonalds Corporation from someone else
      setting up a restaurant with golden arches, a clown, a hamburger
      thief, a "Big Mac," etc.

      So if I set up a hamburger joint and I have a clown out front waving
      to people driving by would McDonalds be able to successfully sue me?
      If the clown looked exactly like Ronald McDonald, the answer is
      definitely "Yes." But if he looked nothing similar to Ronald
      McDonald, McDonalds would probably have a tough time winning the
      case, and probably wouldn't even bother unless there were other
      things which were similar to McDonalds. McDonalds doesn't have a
      trademark on all clowns, just ones that look like Ronald McDonald.

      My next example shows that since McDonalds has trademarks on many
      things, if someone copied a lot of things from McDonalds, but changed
      them greatly, they could sill get successfully sued. So if I set up a
      hamburger joint and I have a clown that looks nothing like Ronald
      McDonald, blue arches outside that are square-shaped, not rounded, a
      beef-based sandwich called a "Large Mike," and a "Hamburger Thief"
      that looks nothing like McDonalds' Hamburglar. I think McDonalds
      would win their suit because the four trademarks taken as a whole
      would indicate that I am stealing the McDonalds concept. I simply did
      a lot to camouflage of things and changing things around. In this
      case, it wouldn't matter if I called my restaurant "Joe's Place."
      There are still enough things similar enough to McDonalds for them to
      successfully sue me.

      Another thing to consider is "What if my business isn't even a
      restaurant? Let's say I open a day care center. Let's say I have a
      large clown painted on the front door that looks a whole like Ronald
      McDonald. If the resemblance to Ronald McDonald is too great,
      McDonalds could sue me.

      My last example is "What if I open an auto repair shop and call
      it "McDonalds?" I don't think McDonalds could successfully sue me.
      but if I had any kind of clown out front waving to cars going down
      the street, I can almost guarantee that McDonalds' attorneys would be
      all over me. Why? Because they gotta protect their trademarks. It is
      what makes their business unique and identifiable to customers
      as "McDonalds."

      Part of any trademark is its uniqueness. When McDonalds acquired
      their trademark for Ronald McDonald they had to prove to the
      trademark office that his likeness was unique. Generally speaking, if
      you want to get a trademark for something in your business, make the
      item as unique as possible. If its an emblem or logo, make it unique.
      It makes it easier for you in court if you have to sue someone.

      Copyright Law
      As I stated at the beginning of this essay, copyright law covers
      mostly written material, or things such as collections of photos on a
      CD, or music, or movies. It covers original works of art or written
      material. It protects the original artist from others stealing their
      creations.

      I don't really know much about copyright law. I know that it expires
      after 70 years. So it is now perfectly legal for people to copy songs
      from 1938 and before. However, this "70 year rule" doesn't apply to
      people who have a lot of money to spend to protect their copyright.
      There was a situation a few years ago where a large corporation known
      for their abuse of mice, ducks, and other animals by forcing them to
      star in movies as cartoon characters. The copyright on some of their
      mice stars expired, so they just went to congress, slipped large
      amounts of money under politician's doors there, and they were given
      a special extension on their copyrights so they could continue to
      make gobs of money off the public. As we used to say in
      Eckankar "they became a law unto themselves."

      Another interesting thing about copyright law is that, unlike a
      trademark, you don't have to file for it. Let's say the Lutheran
      church ladies get together and make a collection of recipes. They get
      a hundred or so, make 50 copies, and put a cover page on it stating
      that it was compiled by a particular Lutheran church. They then
      distribute it for free or for a fee. Believe it or not, this book
      would automatically be covered by copyright law. They fact that they
      put the booklet together and then distributed it qualifies it for
      copyright law. It doesn't even have to be in a fancy binding. But if
      another church sues them, claiming that the Lutherans stole their
      cookbook, then the Lutherans would have been wise to have paid the
      Copyright Office for an actual copyright. At any rate, if you make up
      a booklet of any kind it is always a good idea to put a date on it.
      So if you have a legitimate original creation, you are better off
      paying for an actual copyright.

      How this applies to Darwin Gross
      Many times I have been on the Internet reading about Darwin Gross. I
      used to always read offhanded comments like "Darwin got in trouble
      with Eckankar over copyrights." One of the reasons I wrote this essay
      on trademark and copyright law is that I wanted to attempt to clarify
      this situation.

      If Darwin Gross used Eckankar's trademarked terms such as Eckankar or
      Eck, then he was in violation of trademark law. However, in my
      opinion, this violation would only occur if Gross had started his own
      religion and especially if he then used these terms with their
      similar meanings in Eckankar.

      On the other hand if Darwin Gross copied written material from
      Eckankar's books, then he was in violation of copyright law.
    • prometheus_973
      Hello Jonathan, I must say that if a McDonalds Garage had a clown standing in front of their business that they couldn t be sued, unless, the clown looked
      Message 2 of 13 , Jan 23, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Jonathan,
        I must say that if a McDonalds Garage had
        a clown standing in front of their business
        that they couldn't be sued, unless, the clown
        looked exactly like Ronald McDonald. I use
        to date a clown. All clowns have a registered
        look.

        It's true that Darwin did have trouble with
        trademarks and that's why he had to change
        some things around like using the Ancient Order
        of the Bourchakoun instead of the Ancient Order
        of Vairagi Adepts.

        Prometheus

        jonathanjohns wrote:

        Trademark Law and Copyright Law

        Credit to an anonymous attorney on the radio
        About ten years ago I heard a radio program where a
        trademark/copyright attorney was explaining trademark law. He used
        the McDonalds Corporation in his examples explaining trademark law.
        He did a masterful job of explaining trademark law to the listening
        audience in 15 minutes. My discussion of trademark law is based on
        what he said. I want to give him full credit to him for his ideas
        while taking full responsibility for what I am presenting to you. It
        obviously isn't in its original form in large part due to my lack of
        remembering something from ten years ago, but also due the fact that
        I am not an attorney.

        Introduction
        First of all, trademark law and copyright law are two completely
        different things. Trademark law covers unique symbols or other
        objects associated with a business. Copyright law covers mostly
        written material, or things such as collections of photos on a CD, or
        music, or movies. Using McDonalds as a business, their trademarked
        items would be the golden arches, Ronald McDonald, the Hamburglar,
        the name "Big Mac," and obviously the name "McDonalds itself.
        Copywritten items at McDonalds could include the text on their menu,
        or at training manual for their employees that was written
        specifically for their employees.

        Trademark Law
        The "golden arches" of McDonalds are trademarked. The clown "Ronald
        McDonald" is trademarked. The name "Big Mac" is also trademarked. The
        purpose of a trademark is to protect the unique characteristics of
        your business from being "stolen" from someone else, with them
        setting up their own business, usually the same type of business. So
        trademarks protect the McDonalds Corporation from someone else
        setting up a restaurant with golden arches, a clown, a hamburger
        thief, a "Big Mac," etc.

        So if I set up a hamburger joint and I have a clown out front waving
        to people driving by would McDonalds be able to successfully sue me?
        If the clown looked exactly like Ronald McDonald, the answer is
        definitely "Yes." But if he looked nothing similar to Ronald
        McDonald, McDonalds would probably have a tough time winning the
        case, and probably wouldn't even bother unless there were other
        things which were similar to McDonalds. McDonalds doesn't have a
        trademark on all clowns, just ones that look like Ronald McDonald.

        My next example shows that since McDonalds has trademarks on many
        things, if someone copied a lot of things from McDonalds, but changed
        them greatly, they could sill get successfully sued. So if I set up a
        hamburger joint and I have a clown that looks nothing like Ronald
        McDonald, blue arches outside that are square-shaped, not rounded, a
        beef-based sandwich called a "Large Mike," and a "Hamburger Thief"
        that looks nothing like McDonalds' Hamburglar. I think McDonalds
        would win their suit because the four trademarks taken as a whole
        would indicate that I am stealing the McDonalds concept. I simply did
        a lot to camouflage of things and changing things around. In this
        case, it wouldn't matter if I called my restaurant "Joe's Place."
        There are still enough things similar enough to McDonalds for them to
        successfully sue me.

        Another thing to consider is "What if my business isn't even a
        restaurant? Let's say I open a day care center. Let's say I have a
        large clown painted on the front door that looks a whole like Ronald
        McDonald. If the resemblance to Ronald McDonald is too great,
        McDonalds could sue me.

        My last example is "What if I open an auto repair shop and call
        it "McDonalds?" I don't think McDonalds could successfully sue me.
        but if I had any kind of clown out front waving to cars going down
        the street, I can almost guarantee that McDonalds' attorneys would be
        all over me. Why? Because they gotta protect their trademarks. It is
        what makes their business unique and identifiable to customers
        as "McDonalds."

        Part of any trademark is its uniqueness. When McDonalds acquired
        their trademark for Ronald McDonald they had to prove to the
        trademark office that his likeness was unique. Generally speaking, if
        you want to get a trademark for something in your business, make the
        item as unique as possible. If its an emblem or logo, make it unique.
        It makes it easier for you in court if you have to sue someone.

        Copyright Law
        As I stated at the beginning of this essay, copyright law covers
        mostly written material, or things such as collections of photos on a
        CD, or music, or movies. It covers original works of art or written
        material. It protects the original artist from others stealing their
        creations.

        I don't really know much about copyright law. I know that it expires
        after 70 years. So it is now perfectly legal for people to copy songs
        from 1938 and before. However, this "70 year rule" doesn't apply to
        people who have a lot of money to spend to protect their copyright.
        There was a situation a few years ago where a large corporation known
        for their abuse of mice, ducks, and other animals by forcing them to
        star in movies as cartoon characters. The copyright on some of their
        mice stars expired, so they just went to congress, slipped large
        amounts of money under politician's doors there, and they were given
        a special extension on their copyrights so they could continue to
        make gobs of money off the public. As we used to say in
        Eckankar "they became a law unto themselves."

        Another interesting thing about copyright law is that, unlike a
        trademark, you don't have to file for it. Let's say the Lutheran
        church ladies get together and make a collection of recipes. They get
        a hundred or so, make 50 copies, and put a cover page on it stating
        that it was compiled by a particular Lutheran church. They then
        distribute it for free or for a fee. Believe it or not, this book
        would automatically be covered by copyright law. They fact that they
        put the booklet together and then distributed it qualifies it for
        copyright law. It doesn't even have to be in a fancy binding. But if
        another church sues them, claiming that the Lutherans stole their
        cookbook, then the Lutherans would have been wise to have paid the
        Copyright Office for an actual copyright. At any rate, if you make up
        a booklet of any kind it is always a good idea to put a date on it.
        So if you have a legitimate original creation, you are better off
        paying for an actual copyright.

        How this applies to Darwin Gross
        Many times I have been on the Internet reading about Darwin Gross. I
        used to always read offhanded comments like "Darwin got in trouble
        with Eckankar over copyrights." One of the reasons I wrote this essay
        on trademark and copyright law is that I wanted to attempt to clarify
        this situation.

        If Darwin Gross used Eckankar's trademarked terms such as Eckankar or
        Eck, then he was in violation of trademark law. However, in my
        opinion, this violation would only occur if Gross had started his own
        religion and especially if he then used these terms with their
        similar meanings in Eckankar.

        On the other hand if Darwin Gross copied written material from
        Eckankar's books, then he was in violation of copyright law.
      • jonathanjohns96
        Eckankar s trademarked words (Sanskrit and Hindi words) (This has been sitting on my hard drive for ten days. I thought I might as well post it) Typical
        Message 3 of 13 , Jan 24, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Eckankar's trademarked words (Sanskrit and Hindi words)
          (This has been sitting on my hard drive for ten days. I thought I
          might as well post it)

          Typical Eckankar's trademarks are: ECKANKAR, ECK, EK, MAHANTA, SOUL
          TRAVEL, AND VAIRAGI.

          Let's look at these four:
          ECKANKAR
          ECK
          EK
          MAHANTA

          One of the core beliefs of Hinduism is "Ik Onkaar" which means "One
          God." Hindus describe this God as omnipresent, universal, etc. It's
          the same as Eckankar's supreme God which they call "Sugmad." Hinduism
          has an honorific title known as "Mahatma," as in "Mahatma Ghandi." So
          is pretty obvious that Eckankar's four trademarked words ECKANKAR,
          ECK, EK, and MAHANTA were all taken directly from Hinduism.

          In order for a business (like Eckankar) to get a trademark, it has to
          be unique and original. So I think that Eckankar's trademarks for
          ECKANKAR, ECK, EK, and MAHANTA are invalid in the first place. They
          should have never have been granted them.

          What would Eckankar have to say about this? They claim that Eck/Ek
          means "one," but that it comes from Pali, the ancient version of
          Kymer or modern-day Cambodian. Eckankar claims that "onkaar"
          means "path." They claim that the honorific title of "Mahanta" in
          Eckankar is unique to Eckankar and originated with them.

          So summarizing, here are the four terms and their true origin:

          ECKANKAR: From the Hindi word "Ik Onkaar" which means "One God"
          ECK: From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
          EK: From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
          MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used in India as
          in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is Sanskrit for "great soul."

          Changing from "Mahatma" to "Mahanta" require only that two letters be
          reversed and an "m" in Mahatma being replaced by an "n." Plus, they
          are both honorific titles for a religious person! It seems to me that
          claiming that Eckankar stole the word "Mahanta" from "Mahatma" would
          hold up in any court of law.

          Regarding Eckankar's contention that Eck/Ek means "one" in Pali, I
          can confirm that this is true. Pali is the ancient version of Kymer
          (modern-day Cambodian), just as Sanskrit is to Hindi, and Latin is to
          Italian. The problem with Eckankar's assertion that Pali is the
          origin for Eck/Ek is that the whole phrase "Ik Onkaar" matches up
          with the core belief of Hinduism: "Ik Onkaar."

          Also, I estimate that there are at least twenty, and perhaps more,
          words in Eckankar that come directly from Hinduism. And not only do
          they come from Hinduism, they have almost the exact same meaning in
          Eckankar that they have in Hinduism. Below are a few examples. I have
          also included a few general words from India that correspond to some
          words in Eckankar's glossary.

          akashic - Sanskrit for "sky, space, or aether [sic]"
          atma: Latin for "soul." Has its origins in Sanskrit.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akasha

          darshan - From the word "darsana" which is Sanskrit for "sight." In
          Hinduism and Sikhism, it refers to receiving the master's blessing by
          touching his feet.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darsana

          dharma - Sanskrit word which means "righteous duty" or any righteous
          path. This is a common concept throughout Indian philosophy.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma

          Eckankar - From the Hindi word "Ik Onkaar" which means "One God" This
          is a central tenant in the Hindu teachings. It is also THE central
          tenant in Sikhism, a direct offshoot of Hinduism.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ik_Onkaar
          Type in "onkar" or "onkaar" at http://www.wordanywhere.com/ for Hindi
          to English translation.

          Eck - From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
          Type in "ek" or "ik" at http://www.wordanywhere.com/ for Hindi to
          English translation.

          Ek - From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
          Type in "ek" or "ik" at http://www.wordanywhere.com/ for Hindi to
          English translation.

          Gopal Das - Given name and surname in the Hindi language. Famous
          Indian from Rajasthan in India.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Gopal_Das

          jivan mukti - From the Sanskrit words "jiva" and "mukta." This is
          someone in the Advaida philosophy of Hinduism, who has attained
          nirvikalpa samadhi, the realization of the self.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jivanmukta

          karma - Sanskrit word. In Indian religions, it refers to actions or
          deeds that cause the entire cycle of cause and effect.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma

          Mahanta: From the word "Mahatma," an honorific title for a religious
          person in India, for example, Mahatma Ghandi. "Mahatma" is Sanskrit
          for "great soul." It is similar in usage to the modern Christian
          term "Saint."

          Naranjan - Given name among Sikhs in India. (I found one Internet
          result for this)

          maya - Sanskrit word for "illusion."
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

          Prajapati - Sanskrit for "Lord of Creatures." In Hinduism, Prajapati
          is a deity presiding over procreation and is the "protector of life."
          As of 2008, Eckankar still recognizes Prajapati as an Eck Master.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prajapati

          sarup - Given name among Sikhs in India. (I found one Internet result
          for this)

          shabda - From the Sanskrit word "shabd." It is Sanskrit for "sound,
          speech."
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabd

          shakti - From the Sanskrit word "shak" which means "to be able."
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakti

          Sri - A Sanskrit title of veneration.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri

          If I spent another five hours of time on the Internet, I could
          probably double the size of this list. Also, please note that I
          didn't use a Sanskrit to English translator. The Sanskrit words which
          I found at Wikipedia are so common in usage in India that they were
          listed as entries an Wikipedia.

          I didn't actually going into explaining Eckankar's use of these
          words, but if you are currently a member or are a former member, you
          know. You've seen all of these in the Eckankar wiritings and you know
          how similar the Hindui meangs are to the meanings in Eckankar.

          So my final point is this, since Eckankar has this many Skanskrit
          words with their corresponding meanings in Hinduism, how can Eckankar
          claim that the word "Eckankar" doesn't come from the words "Ik
          Onkaar" in Hinduism? Their assertion that the word Eck/Ek comes from
          the language Pali (Cambodia/Khymer) is hogwash.

          Paul Twitchell's main teacher Kirpal Singh was a Sikh, not a Hindu,
          but Sikhism probably uses most of the same Sanskrit words and
          meanings as Hindus. The main difference is that Sikhism removed the
          worship of the Hindu deities, but kept the worship of "Ik Onkaar" the
          one, omnipresent, universal God of Hinduism.
        • prometheus_973
          Hello Jonathan, This is a very good summary. And, while Mahanta isn t the highest title it does seem to be used as a title of respect and honor. With Klemp,
          Message 4 of 13 , Jan 25, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello Jonathan,
            This is a very good summary. And, while
            "Mahanta" isn't the highest title it does seem
            to be used as a title of respect and honor.
            With Klemp, there seems to more "honor"
            associated to the title.

            MAHANTA means "monastery head." The
            Mah part of MAHanta is the same as with
            MAHatma, but there is a difference between
            ATMA and ANTA.

            ATMA, of course, means Spirit or Soul. Thus,
            I would think that Mah means "great," but
            ANTA (as in MahANTA) is not Soul or Spirit.

            However, it could mean "leader" such as the
            leader, or the great leader (head) of a monastery.
            I'm certain that the Monastery Head (Mahanta)
            had other titles of honor, respect, and rank
            within the hierarchy such as Sri and/or Swami
            as well.

            The term "Mahanta" is used on page vi of the
            Introduction to: "The Holy Science" by Swami
            Sri Yukteswar (copyright 1949) of the Self-
            Realization Fellowship (Yogoda Satsanga Society
            of India). And, it states that Sri Yukteswar "was
            later formally initiated into the Swami Order
            by the Mahanta (monastery head) of Buddha
            Gaya, Bihar..." Swami Sri Yukteswar belonged
            to the 'Giri' (Mountain Branch) of the Swami
            Order.

            I wonder if this makes Swami Sri Yukteswar
            an ECK Master since he was Initiated into the
            Swami Order by the Mahanta? What initiation
            level would that be? According to the EK Lexicon
            a Swami is: "The all-pervading lord." (pg. 204)


            Jonathan wrote:
            MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used
            in India as in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is
            Sanskrit for "great soul."


            It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
            so many words. It seems like this is a typical
            M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
            think that main stream religions have a need
            to do this because they use "common language"
            versus private "members only" jargon.

            However, this jargon cover-up is just the tip of
            the iceberg. EK Vahanas (Missionaries) are trained
            to be dishonest by avoiding and omitting certain
            information. But, such is the case with Mormon
            missionaries too!

            For example: ECK Vahanas, conveniently, omit
            that ECKankar sees the "God" of all other religions
            as being OF the 2nd or 4th Plane. This means (in
            ECK terms) that this "GOD" (regardless of name)
            that all other religions, in the entire world, worships
            and prays to is actually the KAL (i.e. Satan, the Devil)!
            All of this can be found (and verified) in the Shariyat-
            Ki-Sugmad Book 2 (Index) and in Klemp's "Autobiography
            of a Modern Prophet" on page 385.

            Prometheus


            jonathanjohns wrote:

            Eckankar's trademarked words (Sanskrit and Hindi words)
            (This has been sitting on my hard drive for ten days. I thought I
            might as well post it)

            Typical Eckankar's trademarks are: ECKANKAR, ECK, EK, MAHANTA, SOUL
            TRAVEL, AND VAIRAGI.

            Let's look at these four:
            ECKANKAR
            ECK
            EK
            MAHANTA

            One of the core beliefs of Hinduism is "Ik Onkaar" which means "One
            God." Hindus describe this God as omnipresent, universal, etc. It's
            the same as Eckankar's supreme God which they call "Sugmad." Hinduism
            has an honorific title known as "Mahatma," as in "Mahatma Ghandi." So
            is pretty obvious that Eckankar's four trademarked words ECKANKAR,
            ECK, EK, and MAHANTA were all taken directly from Hinduism.

            In order for a business (like Eckankar) to get a trademark, it has to
            be unique and original. So I think that Eckankar's trademarks for
            ECKANKAR, ECK, EK, and MAHANTA are invalid in the first place. They
            should have never have been granted them.

            What would Eckankar have to say about this? They claim that Eck/Ek
            means "one," but that it comes from Pali, the ancient version of
            Kymer or modern-day Cambodian. Eckankar claims that "onkaar"
            means "path." They claim that the honorific title of "Mahanta" in
            Eckankar is unique to Eckankar and originated with them.

            So summarizing, here are the four terms and their true origin:

            ECKANKAR: From the Hindi word "Ik Onkaar" which means "One God"
            ECK: From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
            EK: From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
            MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used in India as
            in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is Sanskrit for "great soul."

            Changing from "Mahatma" to "Mahanta" require only that two letters be
            reversed and an "m" in Mahatma being replaced by an "n." Plus, they
            are both honorific titles for a religious person! It seems to me that
            claiming that Eckankar stole the word "Mahanta" from "Mahatma" would
            hold up in any court of law.

            Regarding Eckankar's contention that Eck/Ek means "one" in Pali, I
            can confirm that this is true. Pali is the ancient version of Kymer
            (modern-day Cambodian), just as Sanskrit is to Hindi, and Latin is to
            Italian. The problem with Eckankar's assertion that Pali is the
            origin for Eck/Ek is that the whole phrase "Ik Onkaar" matches up
            with the core belief of Hinduism: "Ik Onkaar."

            Also, I estimate that there are at least twenty, and perhaps more,
            words in Eckankar that come directly from Hinduism. And not only do
            they come from Hinduism, they have almost the exact same meaning in
            Eckankar that they have in Hinduism. Below are a few examples. I have
            also included a few general words from India that correspond to some
            words in Eckankar's glossary.

            akashic - Sanskrit for "sky, space, or aether [sic]"
            atma: Latin for "soul." Has its origins in Sanskrit.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akasha

            darshan - From the word "darsana" which is Sanskrit for "sight." In
            Hinduism and Sikhism, it refers to receiving the master's blessing by
            touching his feet.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darsana

            dharma - Sanskrit word which means "righteous duty" or any righteous
            path. This is a common concept throughout Indian philosophy.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma

            Eckankar - From the Hindi word "Ik Onkaar" which means "One God" This
            is a central tenant in the Hindu teachings. It is also THE central
            tenant in Sikhism, a direct offshoot of Hinduism.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ik_Onkaar
            Type in "onkar" or "onkaar" at http://www.wordanywhere.com/ for Hindi
            to English translation.

            Eck - From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
            Type in "ek" or "ik" at http://www.wordanywhere.com/ for Hindi to
            English translation.

            Ek - From the Hindi word "Ik" which means "One"
            Type in "ek" or "ik" at http://www.wordanywhere.com/ for Hindi to
            English translation.

            Gopal Das - Given name and surname in the Hindi language. Famous
            Indian from Rajasthan in India.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swami_Gopal_Das

            jivan mukti - From the Sanskrit words "jiva" and "mukta." This is
            someone in the Advaida philosophy of Hinduism, who has attained
            nirvikalpa samadhi, the realization of the self.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jivanmukta

            karma - Sanskrit word. In Indian religions, it refers to actions or
            deeds that cause the entire cycle of cause and effect.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma

            Mahanta: From the word "Mahatma," an honorific title for a religious
            person in India, for example, Mahatma Ghandi. "Mahatma" is Sanskrit
            for "great soul." It is similar in usage to the modern Christian
            term "Saint."

            Naranjan - Given name among Sikhs in India. (I found one Internet
            result for this)

            maya - Sanskrit word for "illusion."
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

            Prajapati - Sanskrit for "Lord of Creatures." In Hinduism, Prajapati
            is a deity presiding over procreation and is the "protector of life."
            As of 2008, Eckankar still recognizes Prajapati as an Eck Master.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prajapati

            sarup - Given name among Sikhs in India. (I found one Internet result
            for this)

            shabda - From the Sanskrit word "shabd." It is Sanskrit for "sound,
            speech."
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabd

            shakti - From the Sanskrit word "shak" which means "to be able."
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakti

            Sri - A Sanskrit title of veneration.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri

            If I spent another five hours of time on the Internet, I could
            probably double the size of this list. Also, please note that I
            didn't use a Sanskrit to English translator. The Sanskrit words which
            I found at Wikipedia are so common in usage in India that they were
            listed as entries an Wikipedia.

            I didn't actually going into explaining Eckankar's use of these
            words, but if you are currently a member or are a former member, you
            know. You've seen all of these in the Eckankar wiritings and you know
            how similar the Hindui meangs are to the meanings in Eckankar.

            So my final point is this, since Eckankar has this many Skanskrit
            words with their corresponding meanings in Hinduism, how can Eckankar
            claim that the word "Eckankar" doesn't come from the words "Ik
            Onkaar" in Hinduism? Their assertion that the word Eck/Ek comes from
            the language Pali (Cambodia/Khymer) is hogwash.

            Paul Twitchell's main teacher Kirpal Singh was a Sikh, not a Hindu,
            but Sikhism probably uses most of the same Sanskrit words and
            meanings as Hindus. The main difference is that Sikhism removed the
            worship of the Hindu deities, but kept the worship of "Ik Onkaar" the
            one, omnipresent, universal God of Hinduism.
          • jonathanjohns96
            Prometheus, ... I think that when you said copyrighted you should have said trademarked. But I agree that tradmarking things is something characteristic of
            Message 5 of 13 , Jan 25, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Prometheus,

              I would like to highlight the following paragraph that you wrote:

              > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
              > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
              > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
              > think that main stream religions have a need
              > to do this because they use "common language"
              > versus private "members only" jargon.

              I think that when you said "copyrighted" you should have
              said "trademarked." But I agree that tradmarking things is something
              characteristic of cults. I was listening to the radio a few months
              ago and they were talking about how Scientology was trying to
              trademark the "unique" sound used in one of their techniques. My
              interpretation as to why cults do this is simply to protect their
              cash cow. It's the same reason that McDonalds or any business
              trademarks things, and as a business they are certainly entitled to
              protect their business that they worked hard to develope. But I think
              religions are intrinsically different, or at least should be. If a
              religion is trademarking words or techniques then they are acting
              more like a business than a religion. And that is exactly what we see
              in Eckankar and Scientology. If the Roman Catholic Church had
              trademarked "Jesus Christ" the Protestant Reformation would have
              never happenned. Eckankar's trademarks are in fact stifling freedom
              of religion by preventing people from leaving Eckankar and starting
              their own version of it. In case anyone is wondering I have no desire
              to do that, but I believe that people should be able to do it if they
              choose to.


              Prometheus wrote:

              Hello Jonathan,
              This is a very good summary. And, while
              "Mahanta" isn't the highest title it does seem
              to be used as a title of respect and honor.
              With Klemp, there seems to more "honor"
              associated to the title.

              MAHANTA means "monastery head." The
              Mah part of MAHanta is the same as with
              MAHatma, but there is a difference between
              ATMA and ANTA.

              ATMA, of course, means Spirit or Soul. Thus,
              I would think that Mah means "great," but
              ANTA (as in MahANTA) is not Soul or Spirit.

              However, it could mean "leader" such as the
              leader, or the great leader (head) of a monastery.
              I'm certain that the Monastery Head (Mahanta)
              had other titles of honor, respect, and rank
              within the hierarchy such as Sri and/or Swami
              as well.

              The term "Mahanta" is used on page vi of the
              Introduction to: "The Holy Science" by Swami
              Sri Yukteswar (copyright 1949) of the Self-
              Realization Fellowship (Yogoda Satsanga Society
              of India). And, it states that Sri Yukteswar "was
              later formally initiated into the Swami Order
              by the Mahanta (monastery head) of Buddha
              Gaya, Bihar..." Swami Sri Yukteswar belonged
              to the 'Giri' (Mountain Branch) of the Swami
              Order.

              I wonder if this makes Swami Sri Yukteswar
              an ECK Master since he was Initiated into the
              Swami Order by the Mahanta? What initiation
              level would that be? According to the EK Lexicon
              a Swami is: "The all-pervading lord." (pg. 204)


              Jonathan wrote:
              MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used
              in India as in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is
              Sanskrit for "great soul."


              It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
              so many words. It seems like this is a typical
              M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
              think that main stream religions have a need
              to do this because they use "common language"
              versus private "members only" jargon.

              However, this jargon cover-up is just the tip of
              the iceberg. EK Vahanas (Missionaries) are trained
              to be dishonest by avoiding and omitting certain
              information. But, such is the case with Mormon
              missionaries too!

              For example: ECK Vahanas, conveniently, omit
              that ECKankar sees the "God" of all other religions
              as being OF the 2nd or 4th Plane. This means (in
              ECK terms) that this "GOD" (regardless of name)
              that all other religions, in the entire world, worships
              and prays to is actually the KAL (i.e. Satan, the Devil)!
              All of this can be found (and verified) in the Shariyat-
              Ki-Sugmad Book 2 (Index) and in Klemp's "Autobiography
              of a Modern Prophet" on page 385.

              Prometheus
            • etznab18
              The word mahanta appears several times here. And it doesn t appear (to me) to look very different from mahatma . I m not saying I think they are the same
              Message 6 of 13 , Jan 3, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                The word "mahanta" appears several times here. And it doesn't appear (to me) to look very different from "mahatma". I'm not saying I think they are the same though.

                http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html

                I've been curious for some time though if the word "mahanta" has any historical connection to the words "maha" ("great) and "ananta" ("endless") combined. That would render it closer to what the oldest
                apparent Hindu definitions appear to be. IMO.

                Of course, the word "mahanta" shows up with a variety of apparent meanings throughout the evolution of Eckankar teachings and dogma over the years. Nowadays, seemingly analogous with an inner higher state of consciousness potentially existing with everyone (like a form of "Higher Self"), but which many people seem to believe can "belong" only to the "Living Master" of Eckankar. Or, only to one Living Eck Master (IOW, one person) at a time. I can't say I agree with that.

                So far I haven't been able to conclusively determine whether "maha" and "ananta" had anything to do with the Hindu meaning of "mahanta".
                Whether, or not, by sandhi the latter formed by way of the former.
                I think it possible though, since the Sanskrit word "anta" (Tamil "antam") basically means "end". Maha + anta ("great end", "limit") doesn't necessarily look (to me) like the best description for unlimited consciousness. Maha + ananta ("endless), however, does.
                (I'm just speculating here. That's all.)

                Ananta, besides meaning "endless" was a name for one of the primal beings of creation. Another name being Sesha. Both were symbolically identified with "serpents", I believe.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesha

                And these "symbols" are apparently related to Naryana, with Purusha and with the idea of a primal being. Example:

                "Narayana is also identified as the original man, Purusha."

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana

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

                It's not easy (for me at this time) finding the etymology, or how the word "mahanta" came to be. I mean how it formed prior to Eckankar, prior to the Vedas, etc. It will take more searching probably, because - from what I've seen so far - a lot of sites give various definitions for "mahanta" but they fail to give detailed etymology. Not to mention the history of the word from when it first appeared.

                If anybody does come across etymology for "mahanta" I would like to take a look at it. Meanwhile, I'll be looking for any maha + ananta connection. See if there's anything of substance to report.

                Etznab


                --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@...> wrote:
                >
                > Prometheus,
                >
                > I would like to highlight the following paragraph that you wrote:
                >
                > > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
                > > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
                > > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
                > > think that main stream religions have a need
                > > to do this because they use "common language"
                > > versus private "members only" jargon.
                >
                > I think that when you said "copyrighted" you should have
                > said "trademarked." But I agree that tradmarking things is something
                > characteristic of cults. I was listening to the radio a few months
                > ago and they were talking about how Scientology was trying to
                > trademark the "unique" sound used in one of their techniques. My
                > interpretation as to why cults do this is simply to protect their
                > cash cow. It's the same reason that McDonalds or any business
                > trademarks things, and as a business they are certainly entitled to
                > protect their business that they worked hard to develope. But I think
                > religions are intrinsically different, or at least should be. If a
                > religion is trademarking words or techniques then they are acting
                > more like a business than a religion. And that is exactly what we see
                > in Eckankar and Scientology. If the Roman Catholic Church had
                > trademarked "Jesus Christ" the Protestant Reformation would have
                > never happenned. Eckankar's trademarks are in fact stifling freedom
                > of religion by preventing people from leaving Eckankar and starting
                > their own version of it. In case anyone is wondering I have no desire
                > to do that, but I believe that people should be able to do it if they
                > choose to.
                >
                >
                > Prometheus wrote:
                >
                > Hello Jonathan,
                > This is a very good summary. And, while
                > "Mahanta" isn't the highest title it does seem
                > to be used as a title of respect and honor.
                > With Klemp, there seems to more "honor"
                > associated to the title.
                >
                > MAHANTA means "monastery head." The
                > Mah part of MAHanta is the same as with
                > MAHatma, but there is a difference between
                > ATMA and ANTA.
                >
                > ATMA, of course, means Spirit or Soul. Thus,
                > I would think that Mah means "great," but
                > ANTA (as in MahANTA) is not Soul or Spirit.
                >
                > However, it could mean "leader" such as the
                > leader, or the great leader (head) of a monastery.
                > I'm certain that the Monastery Head (Mahanta)
                > had other titles of honor, respect, and rank
                > within the hierarchy such as Sri and/or Swami
                > as well.
                >
                > The term "Mahanta" is used on page vi of the
                > Introduction to: "The Holy Science" by Swami
                > Sri Yukteswar (copyright 1949) of the Self-
                > Realization Fellowship (Yogoda Satsanga Society
                > of India). And, it states that Sri Yukteswar "was
                > later formally initiated into the Swami Order
                > by the Mahanta (monastery head) of Buddha
                > Gaya, Bihar..." Swami Sri Yukteswar belonged
                > to the 'Giri' (Mountain Branch) of the Swami
                > Order.
                >
                > I wonder if this makes Swami Sri Yukteswar
                > an ECK Master since he was Initiated into the
                > Swami Order by the Mahanta? What initiation
                > level would that be? According to the EK Lexicon
                > a Swami is: "The all-pervading lord." (pg. 204)
                >
                >
                > Jonathan wrote:
                > MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used
                > in India as in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is
                > Sanskrit for "great soul."
                >
                >
                > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
                > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
                > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
                > think that main stream religions have a need
                > to do this because they use "common language"
                > versus private "members only" jargon.
                >
                > However, this jargon cover-up is just the tip of
                > the iceberg. EK Vahanas (Missionaries) are trained
                > to be dishonest by avoiding and omitting certain
                > information. But, such is the case with Mormon
                > missionaries too!
                >
                > For example: ECK Vahanas, conveniently, omit
                > that ECKankar sees the "God" of all other religions
                > as being OF the 2nd or 4th Plane. This means (in
                > ECK terms) that this "GOD" (regardless of name)
                > that all other religions, in the entire world, worships
                > and prays to is actually the KAL (i.e. Satan, the Devil)!
                > All of this can be found (and verified) in the Shariyat-
                > Ki-Sugmad Book 2 (Index) and in Klemp's "Autobiography
                > of a Modern Prophet" on page 385.
                >
                > Prometheus
                >
              • prometheus_973
                Or, Mahanta could mean monastery head as is stated on page vi of The Holy Science by Swami Sri Yukteswar of the Self-Realization Fellowship. The U.S.
                Message 7 of 13 , Jan 3, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                  head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                  Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                  of the Self-Realization Fellowship.

                  The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                  Yukteswar gave these insights from
                  his talks prior to even 1936.

                  Prometheus

                  etznab@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > The word "mahanta" appears several times here. And it doesn't appear (to me) to look very different from "mahatma". I'm not saying I think they are the same though.
                  >
                  > http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html
                  >
                  > I've been curious for some time though if the word "mahanta" has any historical connection to the words "maha" ("great) and "ananta" ("endless") combined. That would render it closer to what the oldest
                  > apparent Hindu definitions appear to be. IMO.
                  >
                  > Of course, the word "mahanta" shows up with a variety of apparent meanings throughout the evolution of Eckankar teachings and dogma over the years. Nowadays, seemingly analogous with an inner higher state of consciousness potentially existing with everyone (like a form of "Higher Self"), but which many people seem to believe can "belong" only to the "Living Master" of Eckankar. Or, only to one Living Eck Master (IOW, one person) at a time. I can't say I agree with that.
                  >
                  > So far I haven't been able to conclusively determine whether "maha" and "ananta" had anything to do with the Hindu meaning of "mahanta".
                  > Whether, or not, by sandhi the latter formed by way of the former.
                  > I think it possible though, since the Sanskrit word "anta" (Tamil "antam") basically means "end". Maha + anta ("great end", "limit") doesn't necessarily look (to me) like the best description for unlimited consciousness. Maha + ananta ("endless), however, does.
                  > (I'm just speculating here. That's all.)
                  >
                  > Ananta, besides meaning "endless" was a name for one of the primal beings of creation. Another name being Sesha. Both were symbolically identified with "serpents", I believe.
                  >
                  > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesha
                  >
                  > And these "symbols" are apparently related to Naryana, with Purusha and with the idea of a primal being. Example:
                  >
                  > "Narayana is also identified as the original man, Purusha."
                  >
                  > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana
                  >
                  > *************************************
                  >
                  > It's not easy (for me at this time) finding the etymology, or how the word "mahanta" came to be. I mean how it formed prior to Eckankar, prior to the Vedas, etc. It will take more searching probably, because - from what I've seen so far - a lot of sites give various definitions for "mahanta" but they fail to give detailed etymology. Not to mention the history of the word from when it first appeared.
                  >
                  > If anybody does come across etymology for "mahanta" I would like to take a look at it. Meanwhile, I'll be looking for any maha + ananta connection. See if there's anything of substance to report.
                  >
                  > Etznab
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Prometheus,
                  > >
                  > > I would like to highlight the following paragraph that you wrote:
                  > >
                  > > > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
                  > > > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
                  > > > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
                  > > > think that main stream religions have a need
                  > > > to do this because they use "common language"
                  > > > versus private "members only" jargon.
                  > >
                  > > I think that when you said "copyrighted" you should have
                  > > said "trademarked." But I agree that tradmarking things is something
                  > > characteristic of cults. I was listening to the radio a few months
                  > > ago and they were talking about how Scientology was trying to
                  > > trademark the "unique" sound used in one of their techniques. My
                  > > interpretation as to why cults do this is simply to protect their
                  > > cash cow. It's the same reason that McDonalds or any business
                  > > trademarks things, and as a business they are certainly entitled to
                  > > protect their business that they worked hard to develope. But I think
                  > > religions are intrinsically different, or at least should be. If a
                  > > religion is trademarking words or techniques then they are acting
                  > > more like a business than a religion. And that is exactly what we see
                  > > in Eckankar and Scientology. If the Roman Catholic Church had
                  > > trademarked "Jesus Christ" the Protestant Reformation would have
                  > > never happenned. Eckankar's trademarks are in fact stifling freedom
                  > > of religion by preventing people from leaving Eckankar and starting
                  > > their own version of it. In case anyone is wondering I have no desire
                  > > to do that, but I believe that people should be able to do it if they
                  > > choose to.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Prometheus wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Hello Jonathan,
                  > > This is a very good summary. And, while
                  > > "Mahanta" isn't the highest title it does seem
                  > > to be used as a title of respect and honor.
                  > > With Klemp, there seems to more "honor"
                  > > associated to the title.
                  > >
                  > > MAHANTA means "monastery head." The
                  > > Mah part of MAHanta is the same as with
                  > > MAHatma, but there is a difference between
                  > > ATMA and ANTA.
                  > >
                  > > ATMA, of course, means Spirit or Soul. Thus,
                  > > I would think that Mah means "great," but
                  > > ANTA (as in MahANTA) is not Soul or Spirit.
                  > >
                  > > However, it could mean "leader" such as the
                  > > leader, or the great leader (head) of a monastery.
                  > > I'm certain that the Monastery Head (Mahanta)
                  > > had other titles of honor, respect, and rank
                  > > within the hierarchy such as Sri and/or Swami
                  > > as well.
                  > >
                  > > The term "Mahanta" is used on page vi of the
                  > > Introduction to: "The Holy Science" by Swami
                  > > Sri Yukteswar (copyright 1949) of the Self-
                  > > Realization Fellowship (Yogoda Satsanga Society
                  > > of India). And, it states that Sri Yukteswar "was
                  > > later formally initiated into the Swami Order
                  > > by the Mahanta (monastery head) of Buddha
                  > > Gaya, Bihar..." Swami Sri Yukteswar belonged
                  > > to the 'Giri' (Mountain Branch) of the Swami
                  > > Order.
                  > >
                  > > I wonder if this makes Swami Sri Yukteswar
                  > > an ECK Master since he was Initiated into the
                  > > Swami Order by the Mahanta? What initiation
                  > > level would that be? According to the EK Lexicon
                  > > a Swami is: "The all-pervading lord." (pg. 204)
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Jonathan wrote:
                  > > MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used
                  > > in India as in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is
                  > > Sanskrit for "great soul."
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
                  > > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
                  > > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
                  > > think that main stream religions have a need
                  > > to do this because they use "common language"
                  > > versus private "members only" jargon.
                  > >
                  > > However, this jargon cover-up is just the tip of
                  > > the iceberg. EK Vahanas (Missionaries) are trained
                  > > to be dishonest by avoiding and omitting certain
                  > > information. But, such is the case with Mormon
                  > > missionaries too!
                  > >
                  > > For example: ECK Vahanas, conveniently, omit
                  > > that ECKankar sees the "God" of all other religions
                  > > as being OF the 2nd or 4th Plane. This means (in
                  > > ECK terms) that this "GOD" (regardless of name)
                  > > that all other religions, in the entire world, worships
                  > > and prays to is actually the KAL (i.e. Satan, the Devil)!
                  > > All of this can be found (and verified) in the Shariyat-
                  > > Ki-Sugmad Book 2 (Index) and in Klemp's "Autobiography
                  > > of a Modern Prophet" on page 385.
                  > >
                  > > Prometheus
                  > >
                  >
                • etznab@aol.com
                  Yeah, I think you re probably right that it has something to do with a monastery. ... From: prometheus_973 To:
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jan 4, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yeah, I think you're probably right that it has something to do with a
                    monastery.

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                    To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Mon, Jan 3, 2011 11:27 pm
                    Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked words
                    (Sanskrit and Hindi words)

                     
                    Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                    head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                    Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                    of the Self-Realization Fellowship.

                    The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                    Yukteswar gave these insights from
                    his talks prior to even 1936.

                    Prometheus

                    etznab@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    > The word "mahanta" appears several times here. And it doesn't
                    appear (to me) to look very different from "mahatma". I'm not saying I
                    think they are the same though.
                    >
                    > http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html
                    >
                    > I've been curious for some time though if the word "mahanta" has
                    any historical connection to the words "maha" ("great) and "ananta"
                    ("endless") combined. That would render it closer to what the oldest
                    > apparent Hindu definitions appear to be. IMO.
                    >
                    > Of course, the word "mahanta" shows up with a variety of apparent
                    meanings throughout the evolution of Eckankar teachings and dogma over
                    the years. Nowadays, seemingly analogous with an inner higher state of
                    consciousness potentially existing with everyone (like a form of
                    "Higher Self"), but which many people seem to believe can "belong" only
                    to the "Living Master" of Eckankar. Or, only to one Living Eck Master
                    (IOW, one person) at a time. I can't say I agree with that.
                    >
                    > So far I haven't been able to conclusively determine whether
                    "maha" and "ananta" had anything to do with the Hindu meaning of
                    "mahanta".
                    > Whether, or not, by sandhi the latter formed by way of the former.
                    > I think it possible though, since the Sanskrit word "anta" (Tamil
                    "antam") basically means "end". Maha + anta ("great end", "limit")
                    doesn't necessarily look (to me) like the best description for
                    unlimited consciousness. Maha + ananta ("endless), however, does.
                    > (I'm just speculating here. That's all.)
                    >
                    > Ananta, besides meaning "endless" was a name for one of the primal
                    beings of creation. Another name being Sesha. Both were symbolically
                    identified with "serpents", I believe.
                    >
                    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sesha
                    >
                    > And these "symbols" are apparently related to Naryana, with
                    Purusha and with the idea of a primal being. Example:
                    >
                    > "Narayana is also identified as the original man, Purusha."
                    >
                    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana
                    >
                    > *************************************
                    >
                    > It's not easy (for me at this time) finding the etymology, or how
                    the word "mahanta" came to be. I mean how it formed prior to Eckankar,
                    prior to the Vedas, etc. It will take more searching probably, because
                    - from what I've seen so far - a lot of sites give various definitions
                    for "mahanta" but they fail to give detailed etymology. Not to mention
                    the history of the word from when it first appeared.
                    >
                    > If anybody does come across etymology for "mahanta" I would like
                    to take a look at it. Meanwhile, I'll be looking for any maha + ananta
                    connection. See if there's anything of substance to report.
                    >
                    > Etznab
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
                    "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Prometheus,
                    > >
                    > > I would like to highlight the following paragraph that you
                    wrote:
                    > >
                    > > > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
                    > > > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
                    > > > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
                    > > > think that main stream religions have a need
                    > > > to do this because they use "common language"
                    > > > versus private "members only" jargon.
                    > >
                    > > I think that when you said "copyrighted" you should have
                    > > said "trademarked." But I agree that tradmarking things is
                    something
                    > > characteristic of cults. I was listening to the radio a few
                    months
                    > > ago and they were talking about how Scientology was trying to
                    > > trademark the "unique" sound used in one of their techniques.
                    My
                    > > interpretation as to why cults do this is simply to protect
                    their
                    > > cash cow. It's the same reason that McDonalds or any business
                    > > trademarks things, and as a business they are certainly
                    entitled to
                    > > protect their business that they worked hard to develope. But
                    I think
                    > > religions are intrinsically different, or at least should be.
                    If a
                    > > religion is trademarking words or techniques then they are
                    acting
                    > > more like a business than a religion. And that is exactly
                    what we see
                    > > in Eckankar and Scientology. If the Roman Catholic Church had
                    > > trademarked "Jesus Christ" the Protestant Reformation would
                    have
                    > > never happenned. Eckankar's trademarks are in fact stifling
                    freedom
                    > > of religion by preventing people from leaving Eckankar and
                    starting
                    > > their own version of it. In case anyone is wondering I have
                    no desire
                    > > to do that, but I believe that people should be able to do it
                    if they
                    > > choose to.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Prometheus wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Hello Jonathan,
                    > > This is a very good summary. And, while
                    > > "Mahanta" isn't the highest title it does seem
                    > > to be used as a title of respect and honor.
                    > > With Klemp, there seems to more "honor"
                    > > associated to the title.
                    > >
                    > > MAHANTA means "monastery head." The
                    > > Mah part of MAHanta is the same as with
                    > > MAHatma, but there is a difference between
                    > > ATMA and ANTA.
                    > >
                    > > ATMA, of course, means Spirit or Soul. Thus,
                    > > I would think that Mah means "great," but
                    > > ANTA (as in MahANTA) is not Soul or Spirit.
                    > >
                    > > However, it could mean "leader" such as the
                    > > leader, or the great leader (head) of a monastery.
                    > > I'm certain that the Monastery Head (Mahanta)
                    > > had other titles of honor, respect, and rank
                    > > within the hierarchy such as Sri and/or Swami
                    > > as well.
                    > >
                    > > The term "Mahanta" is used on page vi of the
                    > > Introduction to: "The Holy Science" by Swami
                    > > Sri Yukteswar (copyright 1949) of the Self-
                    > > Realization Fellowship (Yogoda Satsanga Society
                    > > of India). And, it states that Sri Yukteswar "was
                    > > later formally initiated into the Swami Order
                    > > by the Mahanta (monastery head) of Buddha
                    > > Gaya, Bihar..." Swami Sri Yukteswar belonged
                    > > to the 'Giri' (Mountain Branch) of the Swami
                    > > Order.
                    > >
                    > > I wonder if this makes Swami Sri Yukteswar
                    > > an ECK Master since he was Initiated into the
                    > > Swami Order by the Mahanta? What initiation
                    > > level would that be? According to the EK Lexicon
                    > > a Swami is: "The all-pervading lord." (pg. 204)
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Jonathan wrote:
                    > > MAHANTA: It comes from an honorific title used
                    > > in India as in "Mahatma Ghandi." "Mahatma" is
                    > > Sanskrit for "great soul."
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > It is interesting why ECKankar has copyrighted
                    > > so many words. It seems like this is a typical
                    > > M.O. (Method of Operation) for cults. I don't
                    > > think that main stream religions have a need
                    > > to do this because they use "common language"
                    > > versus private "members only" jargon.
                    > >
                    > > However, this jargon cover-up is just the tip of
                    > > the iceberg. EK Vahanas (Missionaries) are trained
                    > > to be dishonest by avoiding and omitting certain
                    > > information. But, such is the case with Mormon
                    > > missionaries too!
                    > >
                    > > For example: ECK Vahanas, conveniently, omit
                    > > that ECKankar sees the "God" of all other religions
                    > > as being OF the 2nd or 4th Plane. This means (in
                    > > ECK terms) that this "GOD" (regardless of name)
                    > > that all other religions, in the entire world, worships
                    > > and prays to is actually the KAL (i.e. Satan, the Devil)!
                    > > All of this can be found (and verified) in the Shariyat-
                    > > Ki-Sugmad Book 2 (Index) and in Klemp's "Autobiography
                    > > of a Modern Prophet" on page 385.
                    > >
                    > > Prometheus
                    > >
                    >
                  • prometheus_973
                    Hello Etznab, I looked at the information on the site you gave and couldn t find the same info in my copy of the Bhagavatam.
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jan 4, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hello Etznab,
                      I looked at the information on
                      the site you gave and couldn't
                      find the same info in my copy
                      of the Bhagavatam.

                      http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html

                      It did look like this site used various
                      spellings for "great soul." I wonder if
                      this was in error or lost in translation.
                      Mahanta and Mahatma and whatever
                      could be interchangeable to a degree.
                      They can all, basically, mean, more or
                      less, "great soul." After all, a person
                      chosen to be a "monastery head" was,
                      also, considered to be a "great soul."
                      Mahanta was just the specific job title,
                      and, thus, is not unique to Eckanakar.


                      Prometheus

                      etznab@... wrote:

                      Yeah, I think you're probably right
                      that it has something to do with a
                      monastery.

                      prometheus wrote:
                      > Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                      > head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                      > Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                      > of the Self-Realization Fellowship.
                      >
                      > The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                      > Yukteswar gave these insights from
                      > his talks prior to even 1936.
                      >
                      > Prometheus
                      >
                    • etznab@aol.com
                      I ve tried to determine the etymology for mahanta and so far are uncertain. However, the first part of the word maha seems to have an apparent etymology.
                      Message 10 of 13 , Jan 5, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I've tried to determine the etymology for "mahanta" and so far are
                        uncertain. However, the first part of the word "maha" seems to have an
                        apparent etymology.

                        For example: PIE *mag- "to knead, mix, make".

                        http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=make&searchmode=none

                        The general definition "great" appears to be the definition for a
                        number of words, where instead of "h" you can find a "g" (mega), etc.

                        I have an etymology book which illustrates many words linked to a
                        similar root. They are not all spelled with the same letters, however.

                        Another example is PIE *magh- "to be able, to have power"

                        http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=magic&searchmode=none

                        The root idea for the Sanskrit prefix maha ("great") appears (to me
                        right now) linked to the ability to "make" things, basically. Mixing is
                        a part of making things. And a monastery would require much in the way
                        of "making", "mixing", etc. to build it. Magus and Magi may derive from
                        a similar root.

                        Take a look at (part of) this definition for Sanskrit "mahat":

                        mahat - mfn. (orig. pr. p. of 1. %{mah} ; strong form, %{mahAnt} f.
                        %{mahatI4}; in ep. often %{mahat} for %{mahAntam}; ibc. mostly %{mahA}
                        q.v.) great (in space, time, quantity or degree) i.e. large, big, huge,
                        ample, extensive, long, abundant, numerous, considerable, important,
                        high, eminent RV. [....]"

                        http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/tamil/recherche

                        See the words great, large, big, huge, important, high & eminent?
                        Monasteries share some of those characteristics too. Physically.

                        The "anta" part of "mahanta" appears to have a number of meanings in
                        Sanskrit. I'm not so sure which one applies in the case with a word
                        like "mahanta". Example:

                        anta - m. end, limit, boundary, term; end of a texture; end,
                        conclusion; end of life, death, destruction (in these latter senses
                        some times neut.); a final syllable, termination; last word of a
                        compound; pause, settlement, definite ascertainment, certainty; whole
                        amount; border, outskirt (e.g. %{grAmA7nte}, in the outskirts of the
                        village); nearness, proximity, presence; inner part, inside; condition,
                        nature; (%{e}) loc. c. in the end, at last; in the inside; (%{am}) ind.
                        as far as (ifc. e.g. %{udakA7ntam}, as far as the water); (mfn.), near,
                        handsome, agreeable L. [cf. Goth. {andeis}, Theme {andja}; Germ.
                        {Ende}; Eng. {end}: with %{anta} are also compared the Gk. $ , $; Lat.
                        {ante}; the Goth. {anda} in &13046[42 ,3] {anda-vaurd} , &c.; and the
                        Germ. {ent} e.g. in {entsagen}].

                        http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/tamil/index.html

                        "Head of a monastery" is one definition for mahanta. "Supreme
                        devotee" another. And then in another place I've seen the phrase
                        "mahanta guru" being an "outer" guru (master) vs. an inner one. So
                        there are so many definitions for "mahanta" and these are not even
                        including the modern Eckankar ones. To determine the older original
                        meaning in Sanskrit, or Indo European I think one has to look at how it
                        was first used. I've found this problematic though, when relying on so
                        many definitions from so many web sites.

                        Have you ever searched for the word "mahanta"? When I search for it,
                        Eckankar website links appear in the top hits. Then there's people's
                        names that contain "mahanta". Looking for a history of the word takes a
                        little more searching. Search Wikipedia for "mahanta" and a page for
                        ECK Master comes up. So Wiki doesn't even appear to have a page for
                        "mahanta" except the one associated with Eckankar. This should tell you
                        something.

                        What it tells me is that one might be hard pressed finding a history
                        for the word "mahanta" other than what is defined by Eckankar and by
                        groups of other spiritual paths. Even then, meanings vary.

                        When was the word "mahanta" first coined? would be my question. And
                        whatever the date, surely it appeared long before it was mentioned by
                        Paul Twitchell, or Eckankar. I think the word can be found in the Rig
                        Veda - not that it's necessarily saying much though. Because one thing
                        about words over time - as I've observed - is many times the meanings
                        and spelling change. With more time the meanings are liable to change
                        the most.

                        So if "mahanta" existed some thousands of years ago, the popular
                        meanings today "could" (I'm not saying they all necessarily do.) be
                        different from long ago. If even slightly.

                        Etznab



                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                        To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Tue, Jan 4, 2011 8:12 pm
                        Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked words
                        (Sanskrit and Hindi words)

                         
                        Hello Etznab,
                        I looked at the information on
                        the site you gave and couldn't
                        find the same info in my copy
                        of the Bhagavatam.

                        http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html

                        It did look like this site used various
                        spellings for "great soul." I wonder if
                        this was in error or lost in translation.
                        Mahanta and Mahatma and whatever
                        could be interchangeable to a degree.
                        They can all, basically, mean, more or
                        less, "great soul." After all, a person
                        chosen to be a "monastery head" was,
                        also, considered to be a "great soul."
                        Mahanta was just the specific job title,
                        and, thus, is not unique to Eckanakar.

                        Prometheus

                        etznab@... wrote:

                        Yeah, I think you're probably right
                        that it has something to do with a
                        monastery.

                        prometheus wrote:
                        > Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                        > head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                        > Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                        > of the Self-Realization Fellowship.
                        >
                        > The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                        > Yukteswar gave these insights from
                        > his talks prior to even 1936.
                        >
                        > Prometheus
                        >
                      • dianastanley43
                        ... Just a side note. Darwin asked a gal from canada,that was living in menlo, to try and find some historical references to the masters,events that Paul
                        Message 11 of 13 , Jan 5, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > I've tried to determine the etymology for "mahanta" and so far are
                          > uncertain. However, the first part of the word "maha" seems to have an
                          > apparent etymology.
                          >
                          > For example: PIE *mag- "to knead, mix, make".
                          >
                          > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=make&searchmode=none
                          >
                          > The general definition "great" appears to be the definition for a
                          > number of words, where instead of "h" you can find a "g" (mega), etc.
                          >
                          > I have an etymology book which illustrates many words linked to a
                          > similar root. They are not all spelled with the same letters, however.
                          >
                          > Another example is PIE *magh- "to be able, to have power"
                          >
                          > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=magic&searchmode=none
                          >
                          > The root idea for the Sanskrit prefix maha ("great") appears (to me
                          > right now) linked to the ability to "make" things, basically. Mixing is
                          > a part of making things. And a monastery would require much in the way
                          > of "making", "mixing", etc. to build it. Magus and Magi may derive from
                          > a similar root.
                          >
                          > Take a look at (part of) this definition for Sanskrit "mahat":
                          >
                          > mahat - mfn. (orig. pr. p. of 1. %{mah} ; strong form, %{mahAnt} f.
                          > %{mahatI4}; in ep. often %{mahat} for %{mahAntam}; ibc. mostly %{mahA}
                          > q.v.) great (in space, time, quantity or degree) i.e. large, big, huge,
                          > ample, extensive, long, abundant, numerous, considerable, important,
                          > high, eminent RV. [....]"
                          >
                          > http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/tamil/recherche
                          >
                          > See the words great, large, big, huge, important, high & eminent?
                          > Monasteries share some of those characteristics too. Physically.
                          >
                          > The "anta" part of "mahanta" appears to have a number of meanings in
                          > Sanskrit. I'm not so sure which one applies in the case with a word
                          > like "mahanta". Example:
                          >
                          > anta - m. end, limit, boundary, term; end of a texture; end,
                          > conclusion; end of life, death, destruction (in these latter senses
                          > some times neut.); a final syllable, termination; last word of a
                          > compound; pause, settlement, definite ascertainment, certainty; whole
                          > amount; border, outskirt (e.g. %{grAmA7nte}, in the outskirts of the
                          > village); nearness, proximity, presence; inner part, inside; condition,
                          > nature; (%{e}) loc. c. in the end, at last; in the inside; (%{am}) ind.
                          > as far as (ifc. e.g. %{udakA7ntam}, as far as the water); (mfn.), near,
                          > handsome, agreeable L. [cf. Goth. {andeis}, Theme {andja}; Germ.
                          > {Ende}; Eng. {end}: with %{anta} are also compared the Gk. $ , $; Lat.
                          > {ante}; the Goth. {anda} in &13046[42 ,3] {anda-vaurd} , &c.; and the
                          > Germ. {ent} e.g. in {entsagen}].
                          >
                          > http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/tamil/index.html
                          >
                          > "Head of a monastery" is one definition for mahanta. "Supreme
                          > devotee" another. And then in another place I've seen the phrase
                          > "mahanta guru" being an "outer" guru (master) vs. an inner one. So
                          > there are so many definitions for "mahanta" and these are not even
                          > including the modern Eckankar ones. To determine the older original
                          > meaning in Sanskrit, or Indo European I think one has to look at how it
                          > was first used. I've found this problematic though, when relying on so
                          > many definitions from so many web sites.
                          >
                          > Have you ever searched for the word "mahanta"? When I search for it,
                          > Eckankar website links appear in the top hits. Then there's people's
                          > names that contain "mahanta". Looking for a history of the word takes a
                          > little more searching. Search Wikipedia for "mahanta" and a page for
                          > ECK Master comes up. So Wiki doesn't even appear to have a page for
                          > "mahanta" except the one associated with Eckankar. This should tell you
                          > something.
                          >
                          > What it tells me is that one might be hard pressed finding a history
                          > for the word "mahanta" other than what is defined by Eckankar and by
                          > groups of other spiritual paths. Even then, meanings vary.
                          >
                          > When was the word "mahanta" first coined? would be my question. And
                          > whatever the date, surely it appeared long before it was mentioned by
                          > Paul Twitchell, or Eckankar. I think the word can be found in the Rig
                          > Veda - not that it's necessarily saying much though. Because one thing
                          > about words over time - as I've observed - is many times the meanings
                          > and spelling change. With more time the meanings are liable to change
                          > the most.
                          >
                          > So if "mahanta" existed some thousands of years ago, the popular
                          > meanings today "could" (I'm not saying they all necessarily do.) be
                          > different from long ago. If even slightly.
                          >
                          > Etznab
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > -----Original Message-----
                          > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                          > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: Tue, Jan 4, 2011 8:12 pm
                          > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked words
                          > (Sanskrit and Hindi words)
                          >
                          >  
                          > Hello Etznab,
                          > I looked at the information on
                          > the site you gave and couldn't
                          > find the same info in my copy
                          > of the Bhagavatam.
                          >
                          > http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html
                          >
                          > It did look like this site used various
                          > spellings for "great soul." I wonder if
                          > this was in error or lost in translation.
                          > Mahanta and Mahatma and whatever
                          > could be interchangeable to a degree.
                          > They can all, basically, mean, more or
                          > less, "great soul." After all, a person
                          > chosen to be a "monastery head" was,
                          > also, considered to be a "great soul."
                          > Mahanta was just the specific job title,
                          > and, thus, is not unique to Eckanakar.
                          >
                          > Prometheus
                          >
                          > etznab@ wrote:
                          >
                          > Yeah, I think you're probably right
                          > that it has something to do with a
                          > monastery.
                          >
                          > prometheus wrote:
                          > > Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                          > > head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                          > > Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                          > > of the Self-Realization Fellowship.
                          > >
                          > > The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                          > > Yukteswar gave these insights from
                          > > his talks prior to even 1936.
                          > >
                          > > Prometheus
                          > >
                          >
                          Just a side note. Darwin asked a gal from canada,that was living in menlo, to try and find some historical references to the masters,events that Paul described., She tried but could'nt find anything. I think at that time people were wondering if certain things were true.,Of course everyone knew Rumi that was the only real person that could be found. Paul had made him an Eck master.
                          Everything else he made up. Shows you how desperate Darwin was to find something to validate Pauls writings.
                          Diana
                        • etznab@aol.com
                          Do you remember around what year that was? ... From: dianastanley43 To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, Jan 5,
                          Message 12 of 13 , Jan 5, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Do you remember around what year that was?

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: dianastanley43 <dianastanley43@...>
                            To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Wed, Jan 5, 2011 5:25 pm
                            Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked words
                            (Sanskrit and Hindi words)

                             


                            --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > I've tried to determine the etymology for "mahanta" and so far
                            are
                            > uncertain. However, the first part of the word "maha" seems to
                            have an
                            > apparent etymology.
                            >
                            > For example: PIE *mag- "to knead, mix, make".
                            >
                            > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=make&searchmode=none
                            >
                            > The general definition "great" appears to be the definition
                            for a
                            > number of words, where instead of "h" you can find a "g" (mega),
                            etc.
                            >
                            > I have an etymology book which illustrates many words linked
                            to a
                            > similar root. They are not all spelled with the same letters,
                            however.
                            >
                            > Another example is PIE *magh- "to be able, to have power"
                            >
                            >
                            http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=magic&searchmode=none
                            >
                            > The root idea for the Sanskrit prefix maha ("great") appears
                            (to me
                            > right now) linked to the ability to "make" things, basically.
                            Mixing is
                            > a part of making things. And a monastery would require much in the
                            way
                            > of "making", "mixing", etc. to build it. Magus and Magi may derive
                            from
                            > a similar root.
                            >
                            > Take a look at (part of) this definition for Sanskrit "mahat":
                            >
                            > mahat - mfn. (orig. pr. p. of 1. %{mah} ; strong form, %{mahAnt}
                            f.
                            > %{mahatI4}; in ep. often %{mahat} for %{mahAntam}; ibc. mostly
                            %{mahA}
                            > q.v.) great (in space, time, quantity or degree) i.e. large, big,
                            huge,
                            > ample, extensive, long, abundant, numerous, considerable,
                            important,
                            > high, eminent RV. [....]"
                            >
                            > http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/tamil/recherche
                            >
                            > See the words great, large, big, huge, important, high &
                            eminent?
                            > Monasteries share some of those characteristics too. Physically.
                            >
                            > The "anta" part of "mahanta" appears to have a number of
                            meanings in
                            > Sanskrit. I'm not so sure which one applies in the case with a
                            word
                            > like "mahanta". Example:
                            >
                            > anta - m. end, limit, boundary, term; end of a texture; end,
                            > conclusion; end of life, death, destruction (in these latter
                            senses
                            > some times neut.); a final syllable, termination; last word of a
                            > compound; pause, settlement, definite ascertainment, certainty;
                            whole
                            > amount; border, outskirt (e.g. %{grAmA7nte}, in the outskirts of
                            the
                            > village); nearness, proximity, presence; inner part, inside;
                            condition,
                            > nature; (%{e}) loc. c. in the end, at last; in the inside; (%{am})
                            ind.
                            > as far as (ifc. e.g. %{udakA7ntam}, as far as the water); (mfn.),
                            near,
                            > handsome, agreeable L. [cf. Goth. {andeis}, Theme {andja}; Germ.
                            > {Ende}; Eng. {end}: with %{anta} are also compared the Gk. $ , $;
                            Lat.
                            > {ante}; the Goth. {anda} in &13046[42 ,3] {anda-vaurd} , &c.; and
                            the
                            > Germ. {ent} e.g. in {entsagen}].
                            >
                            >
                            http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/tamil/index.html
                            >
                            > "Head of a monastery" is one definition for mahanta. "Supreme
                            > devotee" another. And then in another place I've seen the phrase
                            > "mahanta guru" being an "outer" guru (master) vs. an inner one. So
                            > there are so many definitions for "mahanta" and these are not even
                            > including the modern Eckankar ones. To determine the older
                            original
                            > meaning in Sanskrit, or Indo European I think one has to look at
                            how it
                            > was first used. I've found this problematic though, when relying
                            on so
                            > many definitions from so many web sites.
                            >
                            > Have you ever searched for the word "mahanta"? When I search
                            for it,
                            > Eckankar website links appear in the top hits. Then there's
                            people's
                            > names that contain "mahanta". Looking for a history of the word
                            takes a
                            > little more searching. Search Wikipedia for "mahanta" and a page
                            for
                            > ECK Master comes up. So Wiki doesn't even appear to have a page
                            for
                            > "mahanta" except the one associated with Eckankar. This should
                            tell you
                            > something.
                            >
                            > What it tells me is that one might be hard pressed finding a
                            history
                            > for the word "mahanta" other than what is defined by Eckankar and
                            by
                            > groups of other spiritual paths. Even then, meanings vary.
                            >
                            > When was the word "mahanta" first coined? would be my
                            question. And
                            > whatever the date, surely it appeared long before it was mentioned
                            by
                            > Paul Twitchell, or Eckankar. I think the word can be found in the
                            Rig
                            > Veda - not that it's necessarily saying much though. Because one
                            thing
                            > about words over time - as I've observed - is many times the
                            meanings
                            > and spelling change. With more time the meanings are liable to
                            change
                            > the most.
                            >
                            > So if "mahanta" existed some thousands of years ago, the
                            popular
                            > meanings today "could" (I'm not saying they all necessarily do.)
                            be
                            > different from long ago. If even slightly.
                            >
                            > Etznab
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > -----Original Message-----
                            > From: prometheus_973 <prometheus_973@...>
                            > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Tue, Jan 4, 2011 8:12 pm
                            > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked
                            words
                            > (Sanskrit and Hindi words)
                            >
                            >  
                            > Hello Etznab,
                            > I looked at the information on
                            > the site you gave and couldn't
                            > find the same info in my copy
                            > of the Bhagavatam.
                            >
                            > http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html
                            >
                            > It did look like this site used various
                            > spellings for "great soul." I wonder if
                            > this was in error or lost in translation.
                            > Mahanta and Mahatma and whatever
                            > could be interchangeable to a degree.
                            > They can all, basically, mean, more or
                            > less, "great soul." After all, a person
                            > chosen to be a "monastery head" was,
                            > also, considered to be a "great soul."
                            > Mahanta was just the specific job title,
                            > and, thus, is not unique to Eckanakar.
                            >
                            > Prometheus
                            >
                            > etznab@ wrote:
                            >
                            > Yeah, I think you're probably right
                            > that it has something to do with a
                            > monastery.
                            >
                            > prometheus wrote:
                            > > Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                            > > head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                            > > Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                            > > of the Self-Realization Fellowship.
                            > >
                            > > The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                            > > Yukteswar gave these insights from
                            > > his talks prior to even 1936.
                            > >
                            > > Prometheus
                            > >
                            >
                            Just a side note. Darwin asked a gal from canada,that was living
                            in menlo, to try and find some historical references to the
                            masters,events that Paul described., She tried but could'nt find
                            anything. I think at that time people were wondering if certain things
                            were true.,Of course everyone knew Rumi that was the only real person
                            that could be found. Paul had made him an Eck master.
                            Everything else he made up. Shows you how desperate Darwin was to find
                            something to validate Pauls writings.
                            Diana
                          • dianastanley43
                            ... Diana
                            Message 13 of 13 , Jan 5, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > Do you remember around what year that was?
                              > I don't remember but it was when he was pretty new as the master.
                              Diana
                              > -----Original Message-----
                              > From: dianastanley43 <dianastanley43@...>
                              > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                              > Sent: Wed, Jan 5, 2011 5:25 pm
                              > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked words
                              > (Sanskrit and Hindi words)
                              >
                              >  
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@ wrote:
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > I've tried to determine the etymology for "mahanta" and so far
                              > are
                              > > uncertain. However, the first part of the word "maha" seems to
                              > have an
                              > > apparent etymology.
                              > >
                              > > For example: PIE *mag- "to knead, mix, make".
                              > >
                              > > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=make&searchmode=none
                              > >
                              > > The general definition "great" appears to be the definition
                              > for a
                              > > number of words, where instead of "h" you can find a "g" (mega),
                              > etc.
                              > >
                              > > I have an etymology book which illustrates many words linked
                              > to a
                              > > similar root. They are not all spelled with the same letters,
                              > however.
                              > >
                              > > Another example is PIE *magh- "to be able, to have power"
                              > >
                              > >
                              > http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=magic&searchmode=none
                              > >
                              > > The root idea for the Sanskrit prefix maha ("great") appears
                              > (to me
                              > > right now) linked to the ability to "make" things, basically.
                              > Mixing is
                              > > a part of making things. And a monastery would require much in the
                              > way
                              > > of "making", "mixing", etc. to build it. Magus and Magi may derive
                              > from
                              > > a similar root.
                              > >
                              > > Take a look at (part of) this definition for Sanskrit "mahat":
                              > >
                              > > mahat - mfn. (orig. pr. p. of 1. %{mah} ; strong form, %{mahAnt}
                              > f.
                              > > %{mahatI4}; in ep. often %{mahat} for %{mahAntam}; ibc. mostly
                              > %{mahA}
                              > > q.v.) great (in space, time, quantity or degree) i.e. large, big,
                              > huge,
                              > > ample, extensive, long, abundant, numerous, considerable,
                              > important,
                              > > high, eminent RV. [....]"
                              > >
                              > > http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/tamil/recherche
                              > >
                              > > See the words great, large, big, huge, important, high &
                              > eminent?
                              > > Monasteries share some of those characteristics too. Physically.
                              > >
                              > > The "anta" part of "mahanta" appears to have a number of
                              > meanings in
                              > > Sanskrit. I'm not so sure which one applies in the case with a
                              > word
                              > > like "mahanta". Example:
                              > >
                              > > anta - m. end, limit, boundary, term; end of a texture; end,
                              > > conclusion; end of life, death, destruction (in these latter
                              > senses
                              > > some times neut.); a final syllable, termination; last word of a
                              > > compound; pause, settlement, definite ascertainment, certainty;
                              > whole
                              > > amount; border, outskirt (e.g. %{grAmA7nte}, in the outskirts of
                              > the
                              > > village); nearness, proximity, presence; inner part, inside;
                              > condition,
                              > > nature; (%{e}) loc. c. in the end, at last; in the inside; (%{am})
                              > ind.
                              > > as far as (ifc. e.g. %{udakA7ntam}, as far as the water); (mfn.),
                              > near,
                              > > handsome, agreeable L. [cf. Goth. {andeis}, Theme {andja}; Germ.
                              > > {Ende}; Eng. {end}: with %{anta} are also compared the Gk. $ , $;
                              > Lat.
                              > > {ante}; the Goth. {anda} in &13046[42 ,3] {anda-vaurd} , &c.; and
                              > the
                              > > Germ. {ent} e.g. in {entsagen}].
                              > >
                              > >
                              > http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/tamil/index.html
                              > >
                              > > "Head of a monastery" is one definition for mahanta. "Supreme
                              > > devotee" another. And then in another place I've seen the phrase
                              > > "mahanta guru" being an "outer" guru (master) vs. an inner one. So
                              > > there are so many definitions for "mahanta" and these are not even
                              > > including the modern Eckankar ones. To determine the older
                              > original
                              > > meaning in Sanskrit, or Indo European I think one has to look at
                              > how it
                              > > was first used. I've found this problematic though, when relying
                              > on so
                              > > many definitions from so many web sites.
                              > >
                              > > Have you ever searched for the word "mahanta"? When I search
                              > for it,
                              > > Eckankar website links appear in the top hits. Then there's
                              > people's
                              > > names that contain "mahanta". Looking for a history of the word
                              > takes a
                              > > little more searching. Search Wikipedia for "mahanta" and a page
                              > for
                              > > ECK Master comes up. So Wiki doesn't even appear to have a page
                              > for
                              > > "mahanta" except the one associated with Eckankar. This should
                              > tell you
                              > > something.
                              > >
                              > > What it tells me is that one might be hard pressed finding a
                              > history
                              > > for the word "mahanta" other than what is defined by Eckankar and
                              > by
                              > > groups of other spiritual paths. Even then, meanings vary.
                              > >
                              > > When was the word "mahanta" first coined? would be my
                              > question. And
                              > > whatever the date, surely it appeared long before it was mentioned
                              > by
                              > > Paul Twitchell, or Eckankar. I think the word can be found in the
                              > Rig
                              > > Veda - not that it's necessarily saying much though. Because one
                              > thing
                              > > about words over time - as I've observed - is many times the
                              > meanings
                              > > and spelling change. With more time the meanings are liable to
                              > change
                              > > the most.
                              > >
                              > > So if "mahanta" existed some thousands of years ago, the
                              > popular
                              > > meanings today "could" (I'm not saying they all necessarily do.)
                              > be
                              > > different from long ago. If even slightly.
                              > >
                              > > Etznab
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > -----Original Message-----
                              > > From: prometheus_973 prometheus_973@
                              > > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
                              > > Sent: Tue, Jan 4, 2011 8:12 pm
                              > > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Eckankar's trademarked
                              > words
                              > > (Sanskrit and Hindi words)
                              > >
                              > >  
                              > > Hello Etznab,
                              > > I looked at the information on
                              > > the site you gave and couldn't
                              > > find the same info in my copy
                              > > of the Bhagavatam.
                              > >
                              > > http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Bhagavatam/text/Bhagavatam/424.html
                              > >
                              > > It did look like this site used various
                              > > spellings for "great soul." I wonder if
                              > > this was in error or lost in translation.
                              > > Mahanta and Mahatma and whatever
                              > > could be interchangeable to a degree.
                              > > They can all, basically, mean, more or
                              > > less, "great soul." After all, a person
                              > > chosen to be a "monastery head" was,
                              > > also, considered to be a "great soul."
                              > > Mahanta was just the specific job title,
                              > > and, thus, is not unique to Eckanakar.
                              > >
                              > > Prometheus
                              > >
                              > > etznab@ wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Yeah, I think you're probably right
                              > > that it has something to do with a
                              > > monastery.
                              > >
                              > > prometheus wrote:
                              > > > Or, Mahanta could mean "monastery
                              > > > head" as is stated on page vi of "The
                              > > > Holy Science" by Swami Sri Yukteswar
                              > > > of the Self-Realization Fellowship.
                              > > >
                              > > > The U.S. copyright is 1949 but Sri
                              > > > Yukteswar gave these insights from
                              > > > his talks prior to even 1936.
                              > > >
                              > > > Prometheus
                              > > >
                              > >
                              > Just a side note. Darwin asked a gal from canada,that was living
                              > in menlo, to try and find some historical references to the
                              > masters,events that Paul described., She tried but could'nt find
                              > anything. I think at that time people were wondering if certain things
                              > were true.,Of course everyone knew Rumi that was the only real person
                              > that could be found. Paul had made him an Eck master.
                              > Everything else he made up. Shows you how desperate Darwin was to find
                              > something to validate Pauls writings.
                              > Diana
                              >
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.