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

Re: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Ford Johnson's HCS vs Eckankar - What Ford doesn't do

Expand Messages
  • etznab@aol.com
    I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that he is open to change and evolution of ideas as well as admitting to, hmm, maybe that part wasn t so good or a
    Message 1 of 6 , Sep 18, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that he is open to change
      and evolution of ideas as well as admitting to,"hmm, maybe that part
      wasn't so good or a mistake". Otherwise, it's just more dogma like.

      Noneckster,

      Not totally sure what you meant there. However, "hu"
      with an "m" is closer to sounding like "aum", or "om".

      Someplace in the writings by Paul Twitchell the word
      "AUM", or "OM" appears where, now, in the modern
      version, is the word "HU".

      I have the quotes someplace, and I think they were
      also posted at E.S.A.

      Another place (also in quotes at E.S.A.) Paul makes
      mention of the sound "hum", I believe, and some of
      the words he used to chant.

      Someone could follow up on this, if that is even what
      you were referring to. I wasn't sure the context, what
      you meant by: "hmm, maybe that part wasn't so good
      or a mistake". I assumed you meant "hu" with an "m".

      In any case (even if you were talking about something
      else) it brings up an interesting subject, IMO, looking
      for the history (etymology) of "hu" and "aum".

      Etznab

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Non <eckchains@...>
      To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Fri, Sep 17, 2010 1:08 am
      Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Ford Johnson's HCS vs
      Eckankar - What Ford doesn't do

       
      It's been a while since I read the whole book, but I do recall feeling
      that the first half of the book was the best, and his discussion of
      religion in general. He also showed how the original India version,
      Rhada Soami was not much better or even the Sufi version from which
      most of the plagiarism came from. He does however, seem to believe that
      eckists would not leave eckankar unless they had something to take its
      place, and so he did try to have a big Seminar in Las Vegas and monthly
      on line spiritual meetings in which they would chant HUM instead of HU.
      Actually, now that I look at what I just wrote, maybe we should just go
      to an ek function and chant HMM? several times in rhythm and
      inflection, about 3 seconds apart. Just doing that makes me feel good
      and I can feel it remove any eckieguilt leftover. : ) LOL

      The problem as I see it, is that there is still too much in the
      direction of spiritual grandiosity. We create all that happens to us,
      no exceptions, and there just isn't enough of the kind of spirituality
      of Compassion. It's still very New Age, IMO.

      I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that he is open to change
      and evolution of ideas as well as admitting to,"hmm, maybe that part
      wasn't so good or a mistake". Otherwise, it's just more dogma like.

      I'm still waiting for a Spirituality that includes a real sense of the
      Scientific Method. Think of how many Chemists who literally gave their
      lives, because their experiment blew up in their face, yet the periodic
      table is a pretty amazing thing. To some it may be boring, but if you
      take your time and get into newer theories about quantum theory and
      that scientists can actually take pictures of atoms and electrons,
      etc., well, just think about the fact that you cannot read this email
      without the technology utilized by chemists. And even there, they are
      willing to admit that their theories are just that, and creativity and
      change in thinking and ideas may take that technology to new levels
      that solve problems world wide, including Global Warming, that I doubt
      will be solved by positive thinking it away.

      noneckster ; )

      --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96"
      <jonathanjohns96@...> wrote:
      >
      > I thought that I would add another comment on Ford's book.
      >
      > I am a former 29 year member of Eckankar. Yes, Ford was the top
      speaker at Eckankar seminars for many many years. But eventually he saw
      through Eckankar's lies and fabrications and felt it was his
      responsibility to write a book correcting all the unintentional lies he
      had been telling people while a member. Of course, when that happened,
      members of Eckankar turned on him and said he was an agent for the Kal
      (devil), was based on the mental plane only (not spiritual), and was
      interested in getting rich by writing an expose about Eckankar. I know
      what they said because I was still a member. Funny how these same
      people were praising him the day before he left Eckankar. Yet he was
      the same heart-based individual after he left Eckankar as before he
      left.
      >
      > Also, there is no anger coming from Ford in his book. Stating that
      it is there is a tactic that members of Eckankar use to discredit Ford.
      I read the book; there is no anger coming from Ford. I strongly suspect
      that the anger is being generated by the Eckists themselves who read
      the book, and they lack the ability to differentiate things properly.
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
      "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
      > >
      > > All,
      > >
      > > I was over at Amazon.com reading some of the reviews for Ford
      Johnson's book Confessions Of A Godseeker. A person wrote a review that
      I pretty much agreed with, but at the end stated that Ford wanted to
      make his own spiritual movement like Eckankar's. Whether they literally
      meant that Ford's Higher Consciousness Society resembled Eckankar is
      something I am not sure of. while it is true that a lot of HCS does
      resemble Eckankar, it also resembles the religions that Eckankar was
      based on. Regardless, there a lot of very important differences between
      Eckankar and Ford's group.
      > >
      > > I tried to post a follow-up comment on Amazon, but I
      couldn't. So I decided to put it here. Everything between the two
      dashed line is my comment which I would have posted over there.
      > >
      > > - - - - - - - - - -
      > > Ford did start his own "Higher Cosciousness Society" as he
      calls it, and it didn't impress me either. But your saying "his own
      spiritual movement like Eckankar" is a bit wrong. Let me explain what
      Ford DIDN'T do in his Higher Consciousness Society. These are all
      things that Eckankar DOES DO.
      > >
      > > Ford
      > > (1) did not copy other's writings and then claim them as his
      own
      > > (2) did not say "I am God realized. Follow me."
      > > (3) did not say "Sing HU and visualize me."
      > > (4) did not say "Give me your problems. I will solve them for
      you when you are sleeping at night."
      > > (5) did not say "If you leave my group, you will suffer in
      astral Hells until you accept me again."
      > > (6) does not promise that if you follow his routine that you
      will never have to suffer through another incarnation on Earth
      > > (7) does not insist that his way is better than everybody
      else's,
      > > (8) does not say that every religion in the world sprung out
      of his Higher Consciousness Society.
      > > (9) does not charge a membership fee of over $120 a year
      > > (10) does not spend a ton of money advertising his group. I
      don't think he advertizes his group at all.
      > > (11) does not have an "initiation routine" set up in order to
      keep his members preoccupied with something that has no intrinsic
      meaning or value.
      > >
      > > At the end of your comment, you also state that Eckankar's
      techniques are better than Ford's. I don't use either, but even if you
      are correct, what price do people have to pay to use Eckankar's
      techniques? You have to sign your life over to the present leader of
      Eckankar. You have to accept him as you savior. You have to promise to
      dedicate your life to him (that happened to me during my second
      initiation). Ford doesn't require anything like that.
      > > - - - - - - - - - -
      > >
      > > Everybody can feel free to add any additional differences.
      > >
      >
    • prometheus_973
      Hello All, I have read where Paul would talk about and teach chanting OM and AUM ( Difficulties? ) years before he taught about HU, although, Hu is mentioned
      Message 2 of 6 , Sep 18, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello All,
        I have read where Paul would talk about
        and teach chanting OM and AUM ("Difficulties?")
        years before he taught about HU, although,
        "Hu" is mentioned in "The Path of the Masters"
        which was PT's main resource book.

        I've also read somewhere in a PT book(?),
        and heard some ECKists, pronounce HU as
        "WHO." However, I forget where I read about
        that pronunciation. In retrospect it was odd
        that these EKists were using this old pronunciation
        from what was probably an obscure out-of-
        print book of PT's (I'm guessing) from long
        ago. They seemed so loyal and star struck
        to/with Klemp, but then again, HK has called
        them by name and pointed them out while
        he was on stage and has printed some of
        their simple and sometimes embellished
        stories.

        Of course these same or similar experiences
        and stories citing minor miracles and interventions
        have been told by Christians as well. I think
        that some Eckists just want/need attention
        and to stand out from the crowd because
        they have strong egos and they want to express
        their individuality. This is also why many
        older/long time ECKists rebel against and
        exhibit passive/aggressive behaviour toward
        the RESAs (police/guardians) and the ESC
        Guidelines.

        Prometheus

        --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, etznab@... wrote:
        >
        > I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that he is open to change
        > and evolution of ideas as well as admitting to,"hmm, maybe that part
        > wasn't so good or a mistake". Otherwise, it's just more dogma like.
        >
        > Noneckster,
        >
        > Not totally sure what you meant there. However, "hu"
        > with an "m" is closer to sounding like "aum", or "om".
        >
        > Someplace in the writings by Paul Twitchell the word
        > "AUM", or "OM" appears where, now, in the modern
        > version, is the word "HU".
        >
        > I have the quotes someplace, and I think they were
        > also posted at E.S.A.
        >
        > Another place (also in quotes at E.S.A.) Paul makes
        > mention of the sound "hum", I believe, and some of
        > the words he used to chant.
        >
        > Someone could follow up on this, if that is even what
        > you were referring to. I wasn't sure the context, what
        > you meant by: "hmm, maybe that part wasn't so good
        > or a mistake". I assumed you meant "hu" with an "m".
        >
        > In any case (even if you were talking about something
        > else) it brings up an interesting subject, IMO, looking
        > for the history (etymology) of "hu" and "aum".
        >
        > Etznab
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Non <eckchains@...>
        > To: EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Fri, Sep 17, 2010 1:08 am
        > Subject: [EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous] Re: Ford Johnson's HCS vs
        > Eckankar - What Ford doesn't do
        >
        >  
        > It's been a while since I read the whole book, but I do recall feeling
        > that the first half of the book was the best, and his discussion of
        > religion in general. He also showed how the original India version,
        > Rhada Soami was not much better or even the Sufi version from which
        > most of the plagiarism came from. He does however, seem to believe that
        > eckists would not leave eckankar unless they had something to take its
        > place, and so he did try to have a big Seminar in Las Vegas and monthly
        > on line spiritual meetings in which they would chant HUM instead of HU.
        > Actually, now that I look at what I just wrote, maybe we should just go
        > to an ek function and chant HMM? several times in rhythm and
        > inflection, about 3 seconds apart. Just doing that makes me feel good
        > and I can feel it remove any eckieguilt leftover. : ) LOL
        >
        > The problem as I see it, is that there is still too much in the
        > direction of spiritual grandiosity. We create all that happens to us,
        > no exceptions, and there just isn't enough of the kind of spirituality
        > of Compassion. It's still very New Age, IMO.
        >
        > I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that he is open to change
        > and evolution of ideas as well as admitting to,"hmm, maybe that part
        > wasn't so good or a mistake". Otherwise, it's just more dogma like.
        >
        > I'm still waiting for a Spirituality that includes a real sense of the
        > Scientific Method. Think of how many Chemists who literally gave their
        > lives, because their experiment blew up in their face, yet the periodic
        > table is a pretty amazing thing. To some it may be boring, but if you
        > take your time and get into newer theories about quantum theory and
        > that scientists can actually take pictures of atoms and electrons,
        > etc., well, just think about the fact that you cannot read this email
        > without the technology utilized by chemists. And even there, they are
        > willing to admit that their theories are just that, and creativity and
        > change in thinking and ideas may take that technology to new levels
        > that solve problems world wide, including Global Warming, that I doubt
        > will be solved by positive thinking it away.
        >
        > noneckster ; )
        >
        > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com, "jonathanjohns96"
        > jonathanjohns96@ wrote:
        > >
        > > I thought that I would add another comment on Ford's book.
        > >
        > > I am a former 29 year member of Eckankar. Yes, Ford was the top
        > speaker at Eckankar seminars for many many years. But eventually he saw
        > through Eckankar's lies and fabrications and felt it was his
        > responsibility to write a book correcting all the unintentional lies he
        > had been telling people while a member. Of course, when that happened,
        > members of Eckankar turned on him and said he was an agent for the Kal
        > (devil), was based on the mental plane only (not spiritual), and was
        > interested in getting rich by writing an expose about Eckankar. I know
        > what they said because I was still a member. Funny how these same
        > people were praising him the day before he left Eckankar. Yet he was
        > the same heart-based individual after he left Eckankar as before he
        > left.
        > >
        > > Also, there is no anger coming from Ford in his book. Stating that
        > it is there is a tactic that members of Eckankar use to discredit Ford.
        > I read the book; there is no anger coming from Ford. I strongly suspect
        > that the anger is being generated by the Eckists themselves who read
        > the book, and they lack the ability to differentiate things properly.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In EckankarSurvivorsAnonymous@yahoogroups.com,
        > "jonathanjohns96" <jonathanjohns96@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > All,
        > > >
        > > > I was over at Amazon.com reading some of the reviews for Ford
        > Johnson's book Confessions Of A Godseeker. A person wrote a review that
        > I pretty much agreed with, but at the end stated that Ford wanted to
        > make his own spiritual movement like Eckankar's. Whether they literally
        > meant that Ford's Higher Consciousness Society resembled Eckankar is
        > something I am not sure of. while it is true that a lot of HCS does
        > resemble Eckankar, it also resembles the religions that Eckankar was
        > based on. Regardless, there a lot of very important differences between
        > Eckankar and Ford's group.
        > > >
        > > > I tried to post a follow-up comment on Amazon, but I
        > couldn't. So I decided to put it here. Everything between the two
        > dashed line is my comment which I would have posted over there.
        > > >
        > > > - - - - - - - - - -
        > > > Ford did start his own "Higher Cosciousness Society" as he
        > calls it, and it didn't impress me either. But your saying "his own
        > spiritual movement like Eckankar" is a bit wrong. Let me explain what
        > Ford DIDN'T do in his Higher Consciousness Society. These are all
        > things that Eckankar DOES DO.
        > > >
        > > > Ford
        > > > (1) did not copy other's writings and then claim them as his
        > own
        > > > (2) did not say "I am God realized. Follow me."
        > > > (3) did not say "Sing HU and visualize me."
        > > > (4) did not say "Give me your problems. I will solve them for
        > you when you are sleeping at night."
        > > > (5) did not say "If you leave my group, you will suffer in
        > astral Hells until you accept me again."
        > > > (6) does not promise that if you follow his routine that you
        > will never have to suffer through another incarnation on Earth
        > > > (7) does not insist that his way is better than everybody
        > else's,
        > > > (8) does not say that every religion in the world sprung out
        > of his Higher Consciousness Society.
        > > > (9) does not charge a membership fee of over $120 a year
        > > > (10) does not spend a ton of money advertising his group. I
        > don't think he advertizes his group at all.
        > > > (11) does not have an "initiation routine" set up in order to
        > keep his members preoccupied with something that has no intrinsic
        > meaning or value.
        > > >
        > > > At the end of your comment, you also state that Eckankar's
        > techniques are better than Ford's. I don't use either, but even if you
        > are correct, what price do people have to pay to use Eckankar's
        > techniques? You have to sign your life over to the present leader of
        > Eckankar. You have to accept him as you savior. You have to promise to
        > dedicate your life to him (that happened to me during my second
        > initiation). Ford doesn't require anything like that.
        > > > - - - - - - - - - -
        > > >
        > > > Everybody can feel free to add any additional differences.
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.