PT's Eckankar was originally Ekankar (without the "c")
- Hello Etznab and All,
Twitchell used "The Path of the Masters" as his
main resource to create his ECKankar. It's true
that there are other actual spellings rather than
the one that Twitchell misrepresented, altered,
Westernized, and then copyrighted.
However, the two spellings given in "The Path
of the Masters" (Ekankar and Ekonkar) are closest
to the end result. The word "EKANKAR" is especially
close, in spelling and meaning, to "ECKANKAR"
and this fact (amongst many others) gives us
more proof that Twitchell did indeed use "The
Path of the Masters" as his blueprint for EcKANKAR.
Thus, ECKankar has no lineage to invisible and
unavailable 500 year old Masters like Rebazar Tarzs.
Almost everything that Twitchell created is linked
to the Ruhani Satsang and Radhasoami teachings
(of EKankar) and these teachings are connected to
and goes back to the teachings of Guru Nanack.
BTW, let's not forget that "EK" is also used by
PT and HK. Thus we have ECK and EK, or ECKankar
In Klemp's ECKankar Lexicon, on page 64, "EK"
is defined as being the 'ek-marg' and "a mystic
state" and that this "practice was revived in the
midtwentieth [sic] century by the American savant
Interesting, that Klemp referred to Twitchell, (the
971st Mahanta/LEM) as a "savant" and nowhere as
an EK/ECK Master, or as the Mahanta or LEM!
p.s. On page 65 of HK's EK Lexicon are these
terms: "ekacitta, ekaggata, ekam adwaitam."
p.p.s. I noticed that on page 15 of HK's EK Lexicon
that the term "ASURATI LOK" is defined and yet it's
Not listed on the "Worlds of ECK" (God Worlds Chart)
on page 232. However, In the "Glossary of Foreign
Terms" in "The Path of the Masters" I noticed a
similar term. "ASURA.--A demon. ASURA LOK, the
region of demons. In the oldest portions of the
Rig Veda, Asura is used for the supreme spirit.
Now suras means gods, while asuras means demons,
enemies of God." Klemp must be one of these asuras!
Yes, Twitchell took Eastern words and Eastern
Religious Sects (religions) and Westernized them
to make them his own copyrights and trademarks!
Twitchell used the 1939 Copyright of "The Path of
the Masters" as his guide in order to create Eckankar.
In the "Glossary of Foreign Terms" (from "The Path
of the Masters") is this term and definition:
"Ekonkar.--The one supreme all-inclusive God."
On page 283 (Eleventh edition of "The Path of the Masters")
are these comments:
"In the literature of the Saints, God is expressed by
many words, such as Swami, Ekankar, Nirankar, Radha-
swami, Akal, Nirala, Anami, Agam, Alakh, Sat Purush,
Prabhu, Prabhswami, Hari Roy, Akshar, Parameshwar,
Akshar Purush, etc."
[Notice how many of these words can be found in P.T.'s
EK Dictionary and H.K.'s EK Lexicon and some with only
slight changes in spelling! Check it out for yourself!]
Notice that both Swami and Ekankar are words used
for God, as well as, Anami, Agam, and Sat Purush.
On page 283 (Eleventh edition of "The Path of the Masters")
is this same spelling and definition:
"Ekankar means the 'One oneness,' the body of oneness."
On page 284 are these comments about Ekankar:
"The whole universe is considered as ONE, the true
Ekankar. There is perfect oneness in the universe,
which is also co-existent with God, infinite, unlimited.
Hence the Soami is Nirankar, i.e. formless. As such
he is without personality, hence without name."
Interesting that this "infinite, unlimited" and "formless
God.. without personality or name" that "he" isn't without
Anyway, it's plain to see that Twit added the letter
"c" in order to make "Eckankar" into a copyrighted
term! This is just one common technique that con
artists and scammers (who counterfeit the works
of others) use.
Thus, Ekankar became Eckankar! Catch-22!
First of all, please don't take my emotionals in this reply
I just looked through my posts regarding the native Hindi speaker
from northern India whom I know. I thought that I posted my
discussion with her regarding "Ik onkaar/Ek Ong Kar. It appears that
I didn't although in my original post about the "Madison Avenue
approach to Eckankar" I briefly mention a clarification
regarding "Ik" being a Hindi word, wheres "Ek/Eck" being more likely
the Punjabi spelling. The problem is that I apparently never made a
really detailed original post about this.
So I am backtracking and telling you what happened when this lady
from Northern India (A brilliant individual I might add.) first told
me about "Ik onkaar." This was back in December, 2008 as I was in the
final stages of leaving Eckankar.
Here is a link to "ik onkaar" on Wikipedia:
"Ik Onkar (Roman transliteration Ik Onkar) means one God and is a
central tenet of Sikh religious philosophy."
"Ik Onkar is the first phrase in the Mul Mantra meaning "there is
only one God". It is found in the Gurmukhi language and is a
combination of two characters: the numeral Ik (one) and the first
letter of the word Onkar (God) - which happens to be the first letter
of the Gurmukhi script with a specially adapted vowel symbol, and is
derived from Sanskrit."
My acquaintance from Northern India told me that "ik onkaar/ek ong
kar" is THE central tenant of Sikhism, not "a central tenet" as this
Wikipedia article suggests. Another mistake in this Wikipedia article
is that Gurmukhi is a script, not a language.
The "Mul Mantra" on Wikipedia explains this fact more acurately.
"The Mul Mantar [sic: should be "Mantra"] (Punjab) is the most
important concept within the Guru Granth Sahib, and is considered the
basis of Sikh theology; a position that is emphasized by its
appearance as the first composition written in the Granth. It is said
that the Mul Mantar was the first composition of Guru Nanak."
So this quote from Wikipedia more accurately shows that "ik onkaar/ek
ong kar" is the most important tenant in Sikhism. It also states that
Mul Mantra is a Punjabi word. Why are the words "Mul Mantra" from the
Punjabi language? Because 99% of Sikhs:
1. Live in the state of The Punjab in India.
2. They speak the Punjabi language.
3. Most of the men wear turbans.
4. Almost all of them have the surname "Singh."
(Just find a photo of the current prime minister of India.)
(Or look up Kirpal Singh in Wikipedia)
(Or go to a website for Kirpla Singh's free talks. You will find that
his talks are in English, Hindi, and Punjabi.)
I need to get back to my acquaintance from India. When I asked her
about "ik onkaar/ek ong kar" I did not show her the transliterated
form ("ik onkaar/ek ong kar" is the transliterated form). I went to
Wordanywhere.com, typed in the hindi word "ik" and found the "Indian"
script. I copied the "Indian" script for Ik into a graphic file. I
then did the same for the Hindi word "onkaar." I then combined these
two script "characters" into one graphic file and showed it to her.
She pronounced it and told me that this means "one God" and that it
is a central tenant in Hinduism (Please note that she
said "Hinduism," not Sikhism!). I wrote down "Ek ankar" and she
corrected me saying "It should be spelled "ik." She added "And the
second word is spelled "onkaar." And then added "Ek" is more the
spelling in the Punjabi language. She also went onto explain about
Sikhism saying that "Ek ong kar" (the Punjabi spelling) means the
same thing in Sikhism and Hinduism, but is THE central tenant in
Sikhism. FRom her point of view as a devout Hindu, she described "One
God" as meaning "the universal, omnipresent, universal God."
(Eckankar's Sugmad) She explained that both Hindus and Sikhs
worship "ik onkaar/ek ong kar", but Hindus also worship the Hindu
deities, Sikhs don't. One of the main differences that occurred when
Sikhism split off from Hinduism is that they removed the Hindu
deities from their religion.
I hope this explains it. I would strongly encourage you to print out
the "Indian" script of "One God" find a Hindu ir a Sikh, and ask them
what it means. It think it will be a real eye opener for you.
How anybody can read this post and not conclude that Ek Ong Kar
doesn't point squarely to Sikhism and Kirpal Singh who is
automatically a Sikh based solel on his surname, is beyond my
Thanks for bringing this up, because I know I posted bits and pieces
of this, but certainly not a detailed version explaining my complete
interaction with her.
>I was somewhat surprised to look at definitions in the
Eckankar dictionary, not only for Eckankar, but I found
definitions for "EK" and "ECK" as well. The two latter words
seemed to have similar themes in the definition. The word
"Ecstasies" connected with the definition for "EK" appears
to suggest the Greek root "ek" which does not appear to
>Now I am wondering, based on those definitions, whether
the beginning of the word "Eckankar" has to do with the
idea of "one".
>Here is what some have claimed was Guru Nanak's remarks:
>"If there is one God, then there is
only His way to attain Him, not another.
One must follow that way and reject the
other. Worship not him who is born only
to die, but Him who is eternal and is
contained in the whole universe."
>Also on the same link:
>"There are worlds and more worlds below
them and there are a hundred thousand skies
over them. No one has been able to find the
limits and boundaries of God. If there be
any account of God, than alone the mortal
can write the same; but Gods account does
not finish and the mortal himself dies while
still writing. Nanak says that one should
call Him great, and God Himself knows His
own self." (Japji)
>A beginning of Japji I have seen has:
>Ek onkar satnam karta purakhu which according
to one report means:
>"The One Reality, the True Name, the
Eternal and Creative Source of all,
>(Dialogue in the Age of Criticism, Chap.12)
>Another source gives:
>"Ek Onkar Satnam Karta Purush Nirbhau
Virvair Akal Murat, Ajuni Saibhang
>The English rendering would approximate to:
>There is One and only One God who is
transcendent as well as immanent. True
and Eternal Name. Creator and Person.
Without Fear and without Enmity. Timeless
Form, Unborn, Self-existent. Realized by
>By the time Paul Twitchell mentioned
"Eckankar" in 1963 the definition from
his Cliff Hanger article included:
>"....This zany character is called the vanguard
of a new religion entitled "Eckankar," a
Hindu word meaning Union with God.
>Here Paul makes it appear as a Hindu
word meaning Union with God. Later, the
definition would take on other meanings
like "co-worker with God", it seems.
>I still imagine that earlier idea of
"one" should be in the definition some-
where. I think it might be hinted at in
>"Everyone has there own Eckankar."
>I wonder if this could suggest every-
one has their own "corporation sole" too?
In a manner of speaking. That the head of
"Eckankar" for evey one individual is ultimately
their own personal experience and not
necessarily the experiences of others.
Perhaps I shouldn't have to wonder.